Is God essentially Creator?

[Noxot]

You have to find a better metaphor than "cysts of God." I'm not saying it's inappropriate. It's just that it reeks. It abuses the reader so that whatever else you say is forgotten for the stench.

haha I was actually referencing a saint that said this. other Saints have said similar things, they're often self-depreciating. I kind of regret making a few post here because I had been reading some rene guenon who basically has a bias against the West in general and I kind of regurgitated some of his sentiments though he made some good points, he also was biased and wrong as well.

sadly I already forgot the terminology for what "relations" means >.< the one thing I hate about philosophy in general is that they end up using words that mean a specific thing other than the general usage of the term or they make up new words entirely and you don't know what the heck people are talking about unless you have read three of their books.

 

[Noxot]

I'm thinking we have been given more than you realize, in Scripture.

Also, logic too, reason, does apply, you know. .

yes, rational animals partake of the logos as origen stated. the problem is that we have a measure of logic that can't always add up to the fullness of the Divine logos. this is why participation in the Holy Spirit is important since it makes us holy and more receptive to Divine Grace. the Devil Himself is a rational being, but his reason is not God's reason.

 

[Noxot]

There is that narrow path that leads to life that few find, it is more difficult with ones mind switched off.

I would say it's easier to know God without our mind because Christian mystics say that where understanding cannot enter, love does. of course after a while minds can somewhat catch up, but God is always going to be incomprehensible due to his infinite nature which means that we will infinitely enjoy him.

 

[public hermit]

haha I was actually referencing a saint that said this. other Saints have said similar things, they're often self-depreciating. I kind of regret making a few post here because I had been reading some rene guenon who basically has a bias against the West in general and I kind of regurgitated some of his sentiments though he made some good points, he also was biased and wrong as well

Interesting. I am not familiar with Guenon, but just pulled up a page to learn a bit. For what it's worth, I have found your comments on here intriguing and thought provoking, so don't stop on my account.

relations" means >.< the one thing I hate about philosophy in general is that they end up using words that mean a specific thing other than the general usage of the term or they make up new words entirely and you don't know what the heck people are talking about unless you have read three of their books.

This is true. I appreciate when a philosopher takes the consideration to define their terms. Current writers in the analytic tradition generally do, I've noticed. Well, it wouldn't be analytical if they didn't.

It's too bad I didn't foresee the trouble "relation" would cause when I wrote the OP. In hindsight, it should have been obvious and I should have made a clarification. That's what I get for pulling my head out of a book and immediately writing a post. My head was still in that context, so to speak.

 

[Noxot]

Interesting. I am not familiar with Guenon, but just pulled up a page to learn a bit. For what it's worth, I have found your comments on here intriguing and thought provoking, so don't stop on my account.



This is true. I appreciate when a philosopher takes the consideration to define their terms. Current writers in the analytic tradition generally do, I've noticed. Well, it wouldn't be analytical if they didn't.

It's too bad I didn't foresee the trouble "relation" would cause when I wrote the OP. In hindsight, it should have been obvious and I should have made a clarification. That's what I get for pulling my head out of a book and immediately writing a post. My head was still in that context, so to speak.

i have read a few things from him. he gives some interesting insights from time to time though I found parts of symbolism of the Cross to be boring though other parts were interesting. it's not even mostly about Christianity or the Cross of Christ like I thought it was going to be, just talkin about the cross as an important symbol in general.

at the bottom of this page you can download PDFs of his books for free if you become interested in him. Rene Guenon english pdf : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

the symbolic world, which seems to be an Eastern Orthodox website, recently made an article about one of his books that was interesting.

Guénon and the Solidification of the World - The Symbolic World

 

[Noxot]

here is a thought I had.

if everything is real in potentiality then everything does not have to be real in actuality. father God seems closer to potentiality and son God seems closer to actuality. origen said that all partake of the father because they exist. rational and i suppose willful beings such as humans partake of the son because he is the logos. those descriptions seem to be two different aspects of reality. one seems to be "pure or raw existence" and the other "what existence is doing" or perhaps "how existence is relating"? I guess the Holy Spirit would be "existence that is good" or "good reality".