The psychological ramifications of viewing the Creator and the Created relationship?
Posted by admin | Filed under Philosophy
Was having an interesting conversation with a devout christian and was wondering what are the psychological ramifications of viewing creation’s relationship with god as
The Creator and the Created being seperat, I.E. The divine created man, You have the divine being, then you have us who were created by the power.
compared to
The creator and created are one in the same, I.E. All existence, all creatures, are simply different manifistations of divinity.
November 22nd, 2009 at 6:52 am
I got confused…. this is a bit confusing….
I prefer to believe and submit myself to God… my soul and my life… then live life and die…. and then see Heaven. ‘
Simple and realistic
November 23rd, 2009 at 10:22 pm
The creator and the created are the same. All the matter in the universe is the true God. Nature or the created is the form God takes because it is the form we believe God to have. God is physically everything and true nothingness. Nature is physically nothing and true everything. These two entities work together to define/balance existence itself. This makes both science and religion correct, both religious and atheist the same. Basically God, no matter who you are or what you call God, is the undefined dreamer and nature is the defined dream. In the end, we are all just stardust.
November 27th, 2009 at 8:25 am
I don’t think any way we view the Divine Creator or Creation would carry any great significance as to whether “it” is separate from us or a part of us. Would that designation change anything?
Divinity is, was, will ever be.
The Creator created and continues creating….
Creation is divine and eternal.
The Divine is within all that was created and is being created ad infinitum.
It’s only within the mind of man, I’d say, that we have this need to identify and label individual parts of a whole of something or some concept, to help only us, to grasp what it is we are attempting to put into words to explain, perhaps, that for which there are no words…………………………………………………………………………………..
November 28th, 2009 at 5:00 pm
Your question goes to the root of the division in Christianity.
One school describes God as all encompassing; a God without body parts or passions, large enough to fill the universe and yet small enough to dwell in your heart. This originated in about the first 4 hundred years after Christ. And was a philosophy developed by the Greek schools at the time and accepted by the Council of Nicea in Rome.
This is totally incomprehensible to me so psycologically it leaves me confused. I can’t accept it because God says he is not a God of confusion.
The other school teaches that God, and Christ and the Holy Ghost are three seperate, and distinct beings. God and Christ having ressurected and immortal bodies, the Holy Ghost being a personage of spirit.
Now if God is a physical being, and I am created in his image. And, he says I am his son. Psychologically this gives me a great boost. I am created by an all powerful God, who claims me as his son and He also claims that it is, “His work and Glory to bring to pass the Eternal Life and Exaltation of Man.” I’m therefore no accident of evolution, and my life has purpose and meaning. And more importantly it gives me greater direction in keeping his commandments and working to return and live with him (not in, around, and part of nothing) again.
November 29th, 2009 at 11:34 am
It leads to a feeling of being separate from nature – hence the huge trouble the planet is in now.