Which is easier to imagine? Total extinction or total creation? Things not-being-there we experience daily – constantly. We know by evidence of the senses that we’ve lost things (some things forever).  We can’t know everything-at-once, infinitely forming. We don’t have the perceptual equipment. Since extinction is imaginable, and absolute creation is unimaginable, I put creation as supreme (in the sense of more than human – more than anything, more in fact than everything).


If creation, in its supremacy, is realized in perpetual coming into being, then it is untenable that creation would find a personal (willed) satisfaction in taking things away.  Any thing, in light of infinite creation, is infinitely small; the specific is never less than specific (a sparrow’s fall, etc.) – but even the biggest thing we can imagine has no relative scale to infinity.


In thinking about genocide and God’s will, God can’t be taking satisfaction in destruction – God (of Love Supreme, or science) couldn’t destroy enough for satisfaction. “Lebanon would not suffice for fuel, nor its animals be enough for holocausts.” Necessarily invisible, absolute creation is constant in all things, and passing-into-nothing vanishes in our imaginative archive (any archive is like a magician’s box – it is where things go to disappear).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *