The Likeness of God is to Create not Consume

Tim Knight from Slope of Hope's picture


The following post written by Bruno de Landevoisin on February 2nd, 2014, first appeared on The Slope of Hope.  I implore you to spend a few minutes taking it in, as it's the real deal and well worth the read.

The astonishingly mesmerizing supernatural image pictured above is of the Temple of Poseidon in Greece, off the cliffs of Sounion, facing the Mediterranean sea.  My friends, If that sight does not take you outside of yourself and onto something else, I’m not sure anything will.  Trust me on this, as I have had the good fortune to have actually been there myself, and it is indeed spectacular.

The Likeness of God is to Create not Consume.  Ingenuity and innovation are hallmarks of our human creativity. Curiously, those marvelous characteristics unique to mankind, which have delivered the most astoundingly advanced technological productivity gains ever conceived, are now fast displacing a multitude of relatively menial jobs previously attended to by human beings, who having been anchored to unsatisfying and unfulfilling laborious routines, were less able to enjoy the free time and space certainly required to become more creative enlightened beings themselves.

Surely, the simple answer to our current macro economic dilemma, namely low growth with vanishing jobs, is to once again call upon our God given human ingenuity and innovation, so as to quite simply redesign and rearrange the furniture in our grand house more adeptly.  If we so choose, we can freely create more, we can joyously labor less, and we no longer must be slaves to the degradation of excess consumption.  See how that works?

A word of caution, getting there will not be plain sailing and rather tempestuous I’m afraid.  Change will be vigorously opposed and resolutely resisted, particularly by those who have attained much power, privilege and affluence, as they have been conditioned to measure and value their own success, sense of significance and acquired tenure in the presently established order of society. They will understandably do all in their power to defend and cling onto an organized societal system and set of values, where they have clear vested interests and which has seemingly served them so well, no matter how obviously clear it is that the world around them is increasingly becoming unglued before our very eyes. The desperation of the QE monetary policy dependency itself, is but a misguided manifestation of the dangerous hubris and arrogance that puts forth and fiercely holds on to an obtuse refusal to acknowledge and accept the reality of the inevitable change in the winds that is now howling so vociferously upon us.

Purposely degrading this Nation’s hard earned reserve currency status, which was so honorably passed on to us by previous generations who built this great country from the ground up with their virtuous and industrious blood, sweat and tears, only to then implement a disgraceful monetary policy that deliberately steals from future unborn generations in order to facilitate living standards beyond our means, so as to sustain an unearned, undeserved and unprincipled culture of grotesque illegitimate debt financed over-consumption, can only be characterized as a deplorable unconscionable abomination of Biblical proportion.

We physically finite mortals just so happen to inhabit a physically limited globe also made up of finite resources, inevitably, the days of unlimited growth and excess mass consumption must be expeditiously put behind us. To artificially sustain this decadent overindulgence via unsustainable debt financing is absurdly short sighted lunacy which borders on sheer insanity. Either we adapt or we die, same as it ever was.

This free choice which has been divinely granted to us is entirely ours to make.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Grin Bagel's picture

If one has experienced the sense of assimulation that is a response to forgiveness,acceptance or unrequited love, then perhaps one has been as god

mayhem_korner's picture



I agree with the thesis of the article generally, but some of the mechanics/characterizations I view differently.

We are not made in the likeness of God.  Adam was.  We are made in the likeness of Adam, which subsequent to the fall is only partially in the likeness of God.  We cannot create, not in the manner God can create; we our asked to be responsible stewards of what has been created.  Because of our fallen nature, it is not our inclination to be good stewards, but rather to hoard and be wasteful in order to please ourselves.  There are consequences to such behavior, both as individuals and more broadly.

johny2's picture

Which of us can say that he/she is more free, more beautiful, more brave or more wise than the bird living in a nest on the tree overlooking the ocean?


Creativity of humans is to build a tribe out of which some get more and others less. And this disparity in share of tribes income has gone a long way since we came down from the trees. In fact it seems that rather to me that with all the creativity in the universe available, humans will stay exactly as they are, and their lives will be more or less exactly as they deserve. 

I have an idea as to why are we tolerated though. The life from this planet wants to expand to other planets. So it needs some species that will go there and leave some bacteria there. We MAY have done that already have, so out usefulness may have run out. 

Bruno de Landevoisin's picture

No one suggested that human beings are some how superior to other living beings, only that the human capacities of ingenuity and innovation are evidently formidable and thus capable of tremendous creative achievements in the likeness of God. The question at hand is whether or not those powerful human attributes are applied for the common good.

johny2's picture

the article itself says that the creativity is the important trait, while I believe that there are other traits more important, that we need to have to be something more than we are today. My point was that creativity itself has changed a little the value of living a life. In fact being a monkey may have been preferable way. Courage, Forgivenes spring to my mind, as the likeness of the God we want to have.

Bruno de Landevoisin's picture



God is often sighted as the "Creator".  When man himself excercises his own creativity, he is acting in the likeness of God.  The answer my friends is Creativity.



johny2's picture

I believe in God because it is obviously there, rather than because I understand anything about it, or believe some stories told over the centuries. Creativity is good, but to be used wisely, there are many other more important virtues humans need to work on. 

Comte d'herblay's picture

Any post that contains the word 'god' in it, does not deserve the thoughts of those who view it.

These points carry far more weight without intoning a non-existent entity that is a figment of a frightened cavewoman's imagination, overwhelmed by the fact of her existence and too arrogant to accept that existence as nothing but an accident. 

Bruno de Landevoisin's picture

You choose to be an accident, I look towards divinity.

To each his own.............

Either way, it has zero bearing on the principle thesis behind this magnificent essay........

You're desperate need to interject your personal take on the merits of divinity into this particular discussion is of little to no interest.

blow me

Comte d'herblay's picture

Once again, the desperate accuse the other of being desperate. Lame. ONLY the desperate believe that there is a god.  

The personal (and religion is as personal as one's politics) take was interjected by the poster; had they kept their remarks in the confines of the real meat in the essay, there would have been no need to attempt to dislodge it from the post.

Zero bearing is what god has to do with it.

I didn't CHOOSE anything.  I am one of 380,000,000 sperm that happened to get thru that wall. 379,999,999 did not make it.  If i'm no accident then there is no such thing, and considering you too as 1 of 380,000,000, makes us both monumentally accidental. 2 in 760,000,000.  That's as chancy as a state lottery. 

No thanks, I'm a male lesbian.


Bruno de Landevoisin's picture

The many different conceptions of God, and competing claims as to God's characteristics, aims, and actions, has led to the development of ideas of Omnitheism, Pandeism, or a Perennial philosophy, wherein it is supposed that there is one underlying theological truth, of which all religions express a partial understanding, and as to which "the devout in the various great world religions are in fact worshipping that one God, but through different, overlapping concepts or mental images of him.

blow me

mayhem_korner's picture



Thanks for putting on full display the narrow-mindedness of the militant atheist - scouring the pages to simply parachute in and object to the use of God anywhere and in any form, yet unable to offer anything substantive on the topic presented.

Atheism is a religion, too.  If you believe it valid, you shouldn't discredit yourself so quickly.

sarahsloverlance's picture

Interesting.  You who must narrrow your own mind to 'believe' rather than 'know', accuse the other of doing so.  A non-religion, is now deconstructed to be a religion in the post modern world.  Neat debate tactic, but nevertheless a puny tactic.

God does not exist.  Your paltry education as to how a 'god'  came to be at all, is a reflection of a tunnel vision that has afflicted the dumb, the fearful, the opportunist, and the sheep. Nearly 7 billion of them to go by those who actually believe in an after life, existence after death in other than what remains after carbon.

I'm not here to comment about the belief system of organized religionists, that's for another time.

My point is that the validity of the rest of the thesis about creation is well made without any reference at all to a non-existent entity, totally superfluous, and discredits the poster who also believes in poppycock.


mayhem_korner's picture



Where in my comment did I say anything about what I believe?  Isn't it possible, based solely on my comment, that I am an atheist too and simply displeased with comte d'herbalay's "take-no-prisoners" approach?  Why is it that you read into my comments what I believe when I did not state anything that would tell you what I believe?

Answer: because you, too, are militant in what you think ought to be the truth.

Comte d'herblay's picture

I just have a greater foundation in evolution than you do.  Being militant in promoting the truth isn't essentially offputting or wrong.

The necessity to invent a higher power, a Supreme Being came from cavewoman's voices which she heard in her paranoid, neurotic head. Nothing more and nothing less.

But I digress.  

The salient points of the essay are very well made.  They would not have tripped me up to dispute the author's premise about god being a necessary to arrive at them.

mayhem_korner's picture



Evolution is a myth, mon ami.  Completely debunked.  In case you were wondering...

Peter Pan's picture

Belief cannot be a forced thing, nor does it have to be proven because it is purely personal to each one of us.

If you love a woman you don't need to prove that fact to a third party. It is simply a matter between you and the woman in question.

Love of God is much the same.


Comte d'herblay's picture

They are not.

A woman exists, can be touched, seen, kissed, and otherwise react to or cause reactions in the senses.

god does not exist: cannot be touched, seen, heard, smelled or otherwise dealt with in any sentient way.  To liken them is extremely naive. 

Big difference. Not the same, even remotely.

weburke's picture

well Lance, solve this one, no one can go from success to success to success in life. just by random chance alone someone should be able to. Even those rich enough to avoid vast numbers of problems cannot escape problems. no one is missed.


CJHames's picture

I am often amazed at the number of people who know God doesn't exist simply because they say He doesn't exist. If you could only do that for us regarding ALL of our current politicians, then you might have some folks believing the craziness you're selling.

ebear's picture

The main question is not whether God exists or not.

The main question is:

What are the ones that DO BELIEVE going to do about those that don't?

Thus far the record isn't very encouraging.

Comte d'herblay's picture

Politicians prove that they exist, ad nauseum.  Just look at the clinton-rodham's; THEY appear eternal.  

There is no proof at all that god exists 

Ghordius's picture

can you prove that there is no Deity? with a logical, falsifiable theory and an experiment that can be replicated? that's a fan of true science asking, which exists only through the application of the scientific method

meanwhile I can prove that there are militant atheists, and their lack of tolerance is very visible

Tolerance to the tolerant

ebear's picture

"can you prove that there is no Deity? with a logical, falsifiable theory and an experiment that can be replicated? that's a fan of true science asking,"

I think you're a little confused there, science fan.  It's the person making the claim that bears the burden of proof.   Just like in a Court of Law.  That's how science works.

Far from science making the claim, the admission that it can't be done is a basic feature of ALL religions.   It's called FAITH, which is to say, belief without proof.   Seriously, if there were absolute concrete proof of God's existence, you'd think we'd have ALL heard about it by now, no? 

Therefore, as a scientist, I say (one again) unto you:

can you prove that there IS a Deity? with a logical, falsifiable theory and an experiment that can be replicated?

Bring it.

johny2's picture

can an ant prove with logical falsifiable theory and experiment that there is sun? 


I have knowledge that there is something that connects everything and we are part of it, as is everything else. What it is and what it does is beyond my capability to understand. 

The religion is a human creation, and the best one I have seen is of the menonites, who at least believe in pacifism. 

ebear's picture

Pure sophistry.

The fact that you beieve something doesn't make it so, and it certainly doesn't constitute "knowledge."

People believe all sorts of things.  The trouble starts when they force those beliefs on others, including and especially children.

ebear's picture

"Tolerance to the tolerant"


Death to Extremists!!!

Comte d'herblay's picture

Being intolerant- militant, is not in itself indicative of being wrong about anything.

A negative cannot be proven, and you know that. And "god" is about as universally a negative as ever there is, was, or will be. 


Dr. Sandi's picture

Let's all just be agnostic instead. To believe in not believing is the first step to truth.

ebear's picture

"This free choice which has been divinely granted to us is entirely ours to make."

If it was granted, then it's not really a "free" choice, is it?

mayhem_korner's picture

If it was granted, then it's not really a "free" choice, is it?


One of the better-worded contradictions I've seen.  How else is something free other than it being granted/given as a gift?

Atheism seems to stumble on the notion of God's grace being a gift, something only to be accepted, impossible to be earned.

ebear's picture

"How else is something free other than it being granted/given as a gift?"

To grant something is to allow, to give permission.  The implication is that it can also be withheld.

I don't need "permission" (divine or secular) to pursue life, liberty and happiness.  That is my natural state, as it is for all creatures.   To suggest that "divinity" somehow "allowed" that to be, as opposed to it being an integral part of divine nature seems to me the contradition here.


And just how am I an atheist?   Because I don't accept your version of divinity?   You might want to consult your elders on this, but I believe the correct term in your religion is Heretic.

Like this guy:


skistroni's picture

What part of "free" do you not understand? Do you see anything forcing humans to give up their right to choose, apart from other fellow humans? 

ebear's picture

Exactly my point.   Nothing's stopping us.  So why keep insisting that there's something there?

ebear's picture

"Trust me on this, as I have had the good fortune to have actually been there myself, and it is indeed spectacular"

Looks shopped.  I mean, it's hard to tell anymore, right?

John_Coltrane's picture

No, I've seen the temple too when I visited Greece in my youth (you know when they had the drachma and life in Greece was actually fun and inexpensive for both tourists and Greeks).  Looking out at the Agean Sea from the temple is just as spectacular as this image.  The blue colors of sky and sea are just amazing.

I agree with Henry Miller that Greece is one of the most beautiful places on earth.  Here's to stoicism-invented in Greece. 

Peter Pan's picture

I believe it was Henry Miller that said that whenever Americans leave a place they leave their rubbish behind whereas wherever Greeks leave from they leave behind a hole (i.e. a loss). He of course did write those words at a time that things were different for Greece and Greeks. And as for the Americans we might today replace the word rubbish with the word destruction.

There is still a great unrealised potential in the American soul that is in danger of being lost through the wanton consumption and destruction we have witnessed.

Americans are capable of much more if only their leaders gave them a chance.


skistroni's picture

Maybe it's shopped, but that might be the only way to capture the grace of the thing itself in a picture. If you've been there, it's much more awe inspiring. Pictures can barely capture essences. 

Peter Pan's picture

Skistroni, I agree.

Taking a picture by camera means that nature has been "chopped"and not "shopped".

If you ain't there to see it, it's like trying to fill your stomach by smelling the food only.

ebear's picture

Actually, it was meant as a joke.

Bruno de Landevoisin's picture

no sir...................the real deal, 100% magic.................

steveo77's picture

Good word Mr Knight, lead the way....

Bruno de Landevoisin's picture

The gentleman who penned this particular piece goes by the name

Bruno de Landevoisin.........................



Peter Pan's picture

I came across this piece some time ago which seems to echo this piece..

Bruno de Landevoisin's picture



This has got to be one the most brilliant essays I have ever read on the Hedge................just absolutely fantastic!



Liberty2012's picture

Well said. Thank you!

Soul Glow's picture

They built buildings we can't build with today's technology.  Really tells us something.

kaiserhoff's picture

Great image, Tim. Thank you.  I'm a fanatic reader, and it always amazes me how little we have advanced past classical Greece.

I was once religious, but at 17 I read the Bible, all of it, and that cured me.

The problem, I fear, is that it is easier to steal than to create.  Easier to destroy than to build.  It is the arsonists edge.

I wish there were a cure for that, but technology seems to make it worse.  Inspiration helps, as do children, and grand children.

There will be a future, whether we like it or not.  May all the gods bless.