Re: Betreft: Re: Steg's wonderful .sig (and a question)
From: | andrew <hobbit@...> |
Date: | Wednesday, November 10, 1999, 3:45 |
Am 11/09 09:27 Irina Rempt-Drijfhout yscrifef:
> Valdyan people have high moral standards, and one of the main themes
> of the culture is the struggle between good and evil (where evil is
> defined as defying the Creator and setting up for oneself). That is
> perhaps my way to "dedicate it to Jesus" - though in context I can
> only say that I dedicate it to God the Creator, that is, the Father
> rather than the Son; but that's a distinction without a difference
> unless it becomes a really involved theological discussion and this
> is not the place for that.
>
Aaaah. I understand that. When I was younger I saw no wrong in
believing that other religions led people to God beside Christianity.
Now as I grow older I find myself returning more to this way of
thinking. The Son becomes the way that Christians choose to approach
the Divine Reality. If they could cross worlds a Christian might say to
a Valdyan, God is three in one, to which a Valdyan might reply, the Gods
are seven (unless, of course, I have got the numbers wrong:) I might
have to address this issue on the conculture list, relating to the
project I am currently working on.
> > The
> > alternative interpretation to being subcreators in the image of God, is
> > being subcreators in the image of Lucifer, what we do is in defiance of
> > God's created order, we rebel and try to do better, and equally face the
> > risk of falling.
>
> But Lucifer never created anything - at least not in orthodox (note
> the lowercase initial) doctrine. He just took what was already there,
> what God had already created, and warped it to his purposes. Being a
> creature himself, he couldn't create anything *new* except with the
> support of God, which he didn't accept. The point - as Tolkien
> understood very well - is that subcreation can *only* be done in the
> image of God (whether one acknowledges that or not; you can't help
> being an icon of God), or you'll destroy rather than create.
>
I will say Aaaah here again. Andrew is enlightened by Irina again. The
word that stood out is 'icon'. I have one of Christos Pantokrator and I
want to get more. We can create in the image of God because we are
living 'icons'. I think I can understand that.
> > I can say I create because I created in the image of the
> > Creator, but I exist in a state of grace in which the Creator allows me
> > to be free to imagine and create.
>
Oops! there's a mistake here. I meant to say 'I can't say....' But I
don't think that this does any violence to Irina's reply:
> Exactly.
>
> > I'll stop now. I'm not sure if my argument still makes sense to me
> > either - and it's time to make tea! I'm getting hungry!
>
> Well, it makes sense to me - I think I'll go and make some tea :-)
I made stir-fried slivers of schnitzel cooked with vegetables in a black
bean sauce served on rice. It was very nice. I'll buy that sachet
again!
- andrew.
--
Andrew Smith, Intheologus hobbit@earthlight.co.nz
"Death is an evil; the gods have so judged it;
had it been good, they would die."
- Sappho of Lesbos.