’The cosmology devised by our ancient predecessors describes a transmuting ether that spawns the material world … With such a cosmology, there is no need to postulate a creator separate from the creation. The divine may be viewed as one with the creation, encompassing both visible and invisible realms. Rather than conceiving of the act of creation as a specific event long past, the ancient physics suggests that the physical world is sustained on an on-going basis, with matter and energy being continuously created.’ (Dr. Paul A. LaViolette in ‘Genesis of the Cosmos’)
‘Being has no coming-into-being and no destruction, for it is whole of limb, without motion, and without end. And it never Was, nor Will Be, because It Is now, a Whole altogether, One, continuous; for what creation of it will you look for? … Nor shall I allow you to speak or think of it as springing from Not-Being for it is neither expressible nor thinkable that What-Is-Not Is. Also what necessity impelled it, if it did spring from Nothing, to be produced later or earlier? … The decision on these matters depends on the following: IT IS, or IT IS NOT. It is therefore decided – as is inevitable – (that one must) ignore the one way as unthinkable and inexpressible and take the other as the way of Being and Reality! (Parmenides, quoted by LaViolette)
If an ever-existing transmuting ether is responsible for the universe we experience, and for all the possible universes defined as included in the Cosmos, is there a place for a Creator? Or, is there an implicit Creator or God who is integrated with this background ether?
In the event, could mankind cope with the idea of a creator god lacking form, and of an associated substance? I have known a couple born into the Christian culture who prefer such a creator god. Or, does it matter what form our Creator takes?