The figure of the Creator God occupies a contested and generative locus within the depth-psychology corpus, traversing theological orthodoxy, Gnostic counter-tradition, Jungian psychological myth, and comparative religion. The corpus does not present a univocal doctrine but rather a spectrum of positions in productive tension. At one pole, the patristic inheritance—represented by John of Damascus, Gregory Palamas, and the Philokalia translators—articulates a Creator who is supra-essential, acting without being acted upon, whose creative energy is uncreated and distinct from his essence. At another pole, Jung and his school (Edinger, von Franz) radically psychologize the Creator God: the Jungian hypothesis posits a Creator who may be unconscious of itself, requiring human consciousness as the medium through which it achieves self-realization. This yields the provocative inversion whereby ‘consciousness emerges out of the creature and becomes creator.’ The Gnostic traditions, mediated through Jonas and King, introduce the demiurgic Creator as an inferior or ignorant deity, sharply distinguished from the true transcendent God—a split that depth psychology inherits and transforms. Corbin’s Sufi-inflected reading adds a third vector: Creation as perpetual theophanic Imagination, renewed from instant to instant. Armstrong’s historical survey traces the Creator concept from biblical monotheism through Platonic emanation to Newtonian mechanics, exposing how each epoch reconstitutes the term’s meaning. The central tension—whether the Creator is omniscient, unconscious, morally unified, or internally divided—makes this term a fault line through the entire library.