Two Creators

[ThirtyThree]

What if there are two creators? One which is omnimax, without beginning or end and the other which had a beginning and experiences omni attributes while seated in a "throne of power"? Also, this throne can be taken by any supernal mighty enough to take it. The being seated there is given the ability through the throne to create out of "nothing", that is, through their consciousness into reality. To separate and make physical from the non physical. Also, the one in the throne need not be moral or otherwise.

Finally, the omnimax is impersonal, neither moral or non moral, and ultimately unknowable. This being I see from a Classical Theist perspective. The one in the throne, I view from a Theistic Personalist perspective.

Thoughts?

 

[LuisDantas]

I take it that the omnimax is also essentially amoral? The whole model, in fact, seems to be rather amoralistic.

Also, I'm not sure the omnimax deity can be demonstrated to exist at all under these constraints imposed by the model.

 

[ThirtyThree]

I take it that the omnimax is also essentially amoral? The whole model, in fact, seems to be rather amoralistic.

Also, I'm not sure the omnimax deity can be demonstrated to exist at all under these constraints imposed by the model.

No, omnimax is impersonal. It is neither moral or non moral. Morality does not even apply to it. It would be neither good or evil. It is non judging.

 

[LuisDantas]

Not to split hairs, but that sure translates into amorality, even lack of sentience, to me.

 

[viole]

What if there are two creators? One which is omnimax, without beginning or end and the other which had a beginning and experiences omni attributes while seated in a "throne of power"? Also, this throne can be taken by any supernal mighty enough to take it. The being seated there is given the ability through the throne to create out of "nothing", that is, through their consciousness into reality. To separate and make physical from the non physical. Also, the one in the throne need not be moral or otherwise.

Finally, the omnimax is impersonal, neither moral or non moral, and ultimately unknowable. This being I see from a Classical Theist perspective. The one in the throne, I view from a Theistic Personalist perspective.

Thoughts?

Who created the one who began to exist?

Ciao

- viole

 

[DanielR]

isn't that basically Gnosticism?

 

[ThirtyThree]

Who created the one who began to exist?

Ciao

- viole

That one always existed, hence the term eternal. Without beginning or end. The other is a supernal, a celestial being with a beginning.

 

[ThirtyThree]

isn't that basically Gnosticism?

Is it? Please provide a reference?

 

[viole]

That one always existed, hence the term eternal. Without beginning or end. The other is a supernal, a celestial being with a beginning.

So, nobody created the second. Despite He having had a beginning.

Correct?

Ciao

- viole

 

[ThirtyThree]

So, nobody created the second. Despite He having had a beginning.

Correct?

Ciao

- viole

The one in the throne can be any supernal. It could be Zeus, for example. The first one in the throne would have to have been created by omnimax. Right?

 

[viole]

The one in the throne can be any supernal. It could be Zeus, for example. The first one in the throne would have to have been created by omnimax. Right?

This is not an answer to my question.

My question is: who created the god that had a beginning?

[nothing/the eternal one/I don't know]

Ciao

- viole

 

[ThirtyThree]

This is not an answer to my question.

My question is: who created the god that had a beginning?

[nothing/the eternal one/I don't know]

Ciao

- viole

There have been multiple supernals who have been in the throne through history, in my opinion. The first supernal however was directly created by the omnimax. So, the first supernal "god" with a beginning was created by omnimax.

 

[viole]

There have been multiple supernals who have been in the throne through history, in my opinion. The first supernal however was directly created by the omnimax. So, the first supernal "god" with a beginning was created by omnimax.

Alright. There is always one boss, after all.

Ciao

- viole

 

[ThirtyThree]

Alright. There is always one boss, after all.

Ciao

- viole

I assume the first supernal created the other supernals, just like how the omnimax created him. Eventually, he was deposed, just like how Saturn deposed his father Uranus and Jupiter deposed Saturn.

The history of supernals is one of deep conflict, after all. The Olympians replaced the Titans and possibly the hybrid supernals have replaced the supernals, at least as far as ruling on the throne is concerned.

 

[viole]

I assume the first supernal created the other supernals, just like how the omnimax created him. Eventually, he was deposed, just like how Saturn deposed his father Uranus and Jupiter deposed Saturn.

The history of supernals is one of deep conflict, after all. The Olympians replaced the Titans and possibly the hybrid supernals have replaced the supernals.

True, but if there are only two, at any time, then some of them must have being fired, so to speak.

Ciao

- viole

 

[muhammad_isa]

Alright. There is always one boss, after all.

Ciao

- viole

Yes .. and that's Almighty God

[ dieu, jehovah, allah, dio, gott ]

 

[ThirtyThree]

True, but if there are only two, at any time, then some of them must have being fired, so to speak.

Ciao

- viole

The supernal in the throne gets deposed and the victor gets the throne. The omnimax always remains the omnimax.

 

[DanielR]

Is it? Please provide a reference?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnosticism

Monad (or Bythos, Pleroma) vs. Demiurg

 

[ThirtyThree]

Yes .. and that's Almighty God

[ dieu, jehovah, allah, dio, gott ]

You mean, Christ might be the supernal in the throne?

 

[viole]

The supernal in the throne gets deposed and the victor gets the throne. The omnimax always remains the omnimax.

Are there limits to what the supenatural on the throne can create or do?

Ciao

- viole