Universal Religious Congregation - (C.R.U.)
Social Network Icono Twitter Icono Facebook


The thought of the “existence of God”, it also determines the being's implication: Imago Dei.

In the religion the "image" carries out an essential and non sustituting paper, because it is the sensitive representation of the knowledge of the transcendental one.

 The divine thing is not captured immediately, but only through the knowledge of the world and in fact as something totally different to the world. The general image that can be formed of God starting from the world, everywhere and in all times, independent of the culture grade, of the special conditions, of such an individual's peculiarity or collective, that is given to know God, that is the image of abstract universality of the divine thing.

The Religious Panorama on the other hand, shows us that the natural images of God exist conditioning by history, that although they are original in a divine aspect and more rich as soon as more analogical they are with the concrete beings, in each case they receive a shade giving an unilateral idea of the divine thing, that there were not two concepts of God that are completely identical. Alone the synthesis of all the images of God, as soon as they are correct in their non repeating originality, it could provide the full knowledge of God that can gain by entreaty of the creation. Similar synthesis has not existed historically neither it can exist because all they are anointed of the psychic thing. While in the western religious thought the concept of a personal god is frequent, in China it is not and rather it is worshipped the nature like work of God.

As the analogical image of God is conditioned by the man's respective world, it can overflow in extension and depth like it happens in the Christianity, that which makes necessary to impose limits to avoid that the divinity is not more than a pure emanation and objectivity of desires or human ideas.

In the conceptualization of the divine thing as personal being, serious difficulties are presented to the natural knowledge of the pure personality of God when it is sought to determine it for that of the man, because the spiritual personal understanding of the good things of health, as wealth, power, happiness becomes for him something material and selfish. The psychology and the criminology teach us that the human being is good but he has tendency to the perversity and the instinctive irrational performance.

The natural religious knowledge, like in general all human knowledge, is really a mixture of truth and error that they cannot always be delimited. The man, indeed, he has always wanted to have an alive God, which means a concrete God, not only in active relationship with the world and with the being in general, but with his world and his own existence. However, it arises here the danger to which succumbs the man so much more unthinking as more intra-mundane character he gives to the divinity, of applying too much univocally to the divine thing the human and intra-mundane relationships and categories. The divinity  becomes this way more accessible and the relationship with him more felt, being filled efficiently the lagoons that left the philosophical and general knowledge of God; but all this happens to coast of the truth and of the dignity of the divinity.

 If the natural religious conceptions are so blended of truth and  error just as they are manifested in the humanity's history, where will it finally be the criterion to distinguish the one of the other one? This has taken to the Christian anthropological conception of the guilty man that he should be mutilated.

¿If the conviction that the divinity possesses an inexhaustible wealth exists, how with a finite knowledge can  capture all it?

¿How with the finite knowledge is achieved the knowledge of the infinity?

Although it is certain that there is not anything as conditional as the respective personal images of God and that is not possible the synthesis in a single natural and concrete image, is also certain that between bigger number of original and particular images exists, it results a richer and more concrete conceptualization that according to its analogical expression among the particular beings and the real image that can be formed of God, it allows in turn to reestablish categories, then the images will be more correct as the more they correspond in force, to an up-to-date cosmology that they are equally appropriate with the evolution of the religious thought. Since God is at the same time the most concrete being and the richest, it is natural that his images are distinguished to each other more than those of any intramundane finite reality. On the other hand no other knowledge demands so rich group vision, hence otherwise it is in danger of being an extremely unilateral idea of God.

Another aspect to consider is the situation of the image that is an analogical knowledge of God, through the Cosmovision of the finite beings. Therefore the particular image should not enter in contradiction with the abstract image because the general categories must carry out in an own and concrete way in each natural image of God again. The image that more it comes closer to that of abstract universality it turns out to be phenomenally the realest, without losing of view that has always gotten the attention, that the image of God has always been conditioned by the man's respective world, which is limited so his knowledge of God too, but its depth and intensity also depend of how taking of his own world the features of the reality that he also attributes to the divine thing. But God is the totally other one, to which should not resemble each other too much with the world; because certainly, here it is the source of many theological errors present in the religious confessions.

If the man judges of the importance of the things of the world every time according to his interests and his intimate attitude, until the point of omits certain aspects of the reality, this same must have repercussion in its knowledge of God, also for this reason the imagine that a man is formed of God is extremely instructive to know his interior.

When trying to show exceedingly a natural imagine of the divinity there is a serious responsibility, because his reputation cannot take a risk in the unnecessary intent of the immersion of God in the mundane context as a theological impossibility. This way, the traditional theology has an auto-problem of hermeneutic type that itself has been created and is its own unconditional obedience to the word of the supposed revelation, that can have caught in an idolatrous cult to a particular significance that this word took.

Inside the natural religious knowledge it in any event can establish a hierarchical series among the religions for reason of their spiritual level. They are not to each other equivalent. The norm to order them offers it the knowledge of the values. But in that knowledge it has great importance the man's attitude when being endowed with spirit, mind and body, it extends his human sphere to the transcendent thing and it endows the divinity with psychic life. If the universal conception of God is that of a pure spirit, the psychic thing when joins the body with the spirit is anointed of sensibility and poisons and puts an end to God.

Here it arises, by the way, the great difficulty that most of the religions have not been able to overcome. That means to be person that the man only knows it for his own human sphere, for his treatment with the other men. But the human personal being is limited and bound to the infrapersonal life of the body. Of the individual's last posture depends in the grade of clear conscience he has of the personal and spiritual as an own sphere inside the group of his experiences like a concomitant psychic phenomenon. According to this, the personality that attributes to the divinity will go accompanied by more or smaller psychic doses. Now then, by psychic means the gods are the chained to the mundane thing and, the same thing so the man, they are not already totally independent. This way, they already are not able to be creative of the world like before was said; they are only attributed their formation starting of a preexistence matter. This preexistence is required by its linkage at the world and its distance of the pure personal being.

But, as the mundane powers are multiple, it necessarily happens a multiplicity of gods, whose hierarchy of their religious creeds is function from the psychic grade imprinted to the deities.
 This human attitude toward the divine thing is explainable because the spiritual and psychic powers for their mysterious nature, they are not allowed to manage neither to exercise influence on them to the way like they are the things of the world to put them to our service.

On one hand is the image of general and of abstract universality of God like unique principle and pure spirit that as a rule it lacks true effectiveness because it does not have the smallest relationship with the man's real life. On the other hand the natural and analogical images of God are presented that sprout of the concrete experience in a historical conditional world, formed in base of concrete things that when they are in contact with the divine natural images, in more or smaller grade they are psychic affected.

We should always have present that we build the divine knowledge thinking of a being made to our image and likeness so that the natural, analogical, and concrete images be of our mundane utility, but these images are not necessarily based neither they correspond to the reality, they are virtual images of our blurry, historical, conditional, and mystic mirror.
 Now it is the moment to come up to the Message, to see the true archetype image of the transcendent thing, among the contradictory of the generality and of abstract universality and the natural and analogical, where the reality is exempt of the psychic thing, as new Paradigm for the Supreme Being.