Theos-Talk Archives (September 1995 Message tl00859)

Daniel K.:

>Let me try to explain who God is.

You mean: Let me try to explain my idea of God, what I
mean by that word.

>If as a man I can imagine who God is and I come up with
>a God who is the Master of all of Colorado. He is the Great
>Ruler of Colorado. And yet another determines that his
>Great God is the God of the North American Continent, then
>the second man's God is superior than the one I imagined.

>If you carry the progression to its logical end you end up with
>a God that is OMNIPOTENT, OMNIPRESENT, and OMNISCIENT.

You assumtion is that with each increasing scale in size, the
ruler of that larger world or universe comes closer to God, and
eventually, if you get big enough, you have the topmost guy.

I would find two problems with this. First, I would say that
there cannot be a *biggest*, because however big you may pick,
there is always something bigger. The number of scales is infinite,
so there cannot be a "top" in this direction.

The other problem I have with this idea is that at any particular
level the rulership is a single being, rather than a class of
beings or archangles (Dhyani-Chohans). I would disagree with the
rulership being from a singular being.

>There is no other God more anything than this God.

If you pick a scale or size and a particular world that exists at
that scale, there is a genuine spiritual rulership. There are
definite spiritual laws of nature that cannot be escaped, along
with spiritual beings that oversee the functioning of the rest
of life in that world.

>The God of Gods.

Chief node of a particular subtree, in a tree which has no
root node, because there are always higher nodes.

>Also I think that it is more powerful to be a personal God that
>desires relationship with His creation than one that is not.

The divine seeks expression in outer life, through us and
all creatures, as fully as we are capable. We have a very
personal relationship, a much closer relationship than we
would have *with an external being.* The relationship is
one of *identity*. We are that divinity itself in our inmost
natures, and cannot be separated from it, though we may at
times turn our backs on it and forget it's there.

>If this God as described above does not exist, then man's
>imagination is greater than the actual God.

We set the limites on what we can know. As we grow in
learning, grow in our ability to think for ourselves, the
limits expand and we know more and more.

>This is a strange conclusion. That the created is greater
>than the Creator.

Each of us is that creator, we co-create the universe, and
that creation arises out of our innate divinity. The creatures
are less than the creators. That is, our external personal
selves do not do justice to the potential that exists deep
within us.

>Intrestingly enough...the bible declares GODS omni's and
>He is very personal.

For a particular world, it is possible to be "omni" to it,
if you have spiritually transcended it, and operate from
a higher perspective, from the standpoint of a being in
a higher world.

>The bible declares that He is unchangeable and that He existed
>before all that is Created. It also declares that He is self-sufficient.

For our particular world, our personalities are mortal and
perish. There is a part of us that is *relatively* unchangeable
and exists long before this world. It is *relatively* self-sufficient.

>Yet all of creation changes and is reliant.

>From one perspective, from one scale, we have the changeable and
corruptible. From a higher perspective, from the next scale of being,
we have the relatively changeless and incorruptible. We rise from
level to level, attaining relative perfection, but never absolute
perfection, because absolute perfection does not exist.

>Again the greater God being revealed.
>If your God is less than the Most High God then you are
>worshipping a lesser God.

Pick a "most high" and I'll pick a "yet higher". You're just looking
in the wrong direction for "most high". It is not bigger, more powerful,
higher in a physical sense. It is rather behind and outside of all things.

>And obviously the God that exists is greater than the one that
>does not.

The divinity that *is*, yet does not "exist", is highest.

>Yet regarding matters of the heart...many follow a
>God that does not nor never will exist.

The root of all does not exist, because it transcends all attributes and
measurements. Any attempt to describe it or to give qualities to it,
however grand, only do it shame. It is unknowable to the mind because all
words hide rather than reveal its face. And it is a living part of all that
lives, inseparable from even the lowest in life.

-- Eldon