[
Replying to post 1 by Justin108]
I personally think that Teds (thus I am supposing, also the PCE) understanding of the way things are is closer to the presumed truth about the 'why' of our existence and position therein, than a lot of other doctrines of Christendom, and spirituality in general.
Given the nature of the universe, it is obvious that if there is a GOD creator of said universe, then the universe is - in relation to human consciousness, a prison designed for the purpose of keeping evil altogether in one place where it can only harm itself AND that it is obviously also for the purpose of giving opportunity for the rehabilitation of evil in that evil (like good) can only be made real through the actions of consciousness, and thus there is the potential for evil to transforms itself into good expression if it so chooses, even in the face of evil opposition.
The expression "put them (criminals) on an island and let them sort it out for themselves" springs to mind, but on a cosmic scale.
However, as is pointed out often enough, the said creator of this particular universe must be seen to be intimately connected with the responsibility of the affects of evil through conscious beings against conscious beings, in creating the opportunity for evil to come into reality through the expression of evil action - and this is where the separation of good beings from evil beings and its subsequent conflict arises.
So, can it be said that good beings who incarcerate evil beings on 'an island, for them to sort it out for themselves' is of itself an act of good?
If we look at how that is being sorted out through apparently 'good' societies incarcerating bad individuals in prisons, hardly many would argue that this is an evil act, for what else can be done with them?
In relation to a creator GOD though, when the assumption is that the GOD didn't need to create opportunity for evil to arise in the first instance, and even if there was no choice but to risk that in order to have conscious self aware beings able to make their own choices rather than simply be 'robots' (as has been argued) then why place those beings within an environment which allows for that possibility to arise in the first place?
So there are two major challenges to this doctrine.
If the creator being is itself (himself) unable to be evil (as doctrines of Christendom collectively claim) then why did he make beings which were able to be evil, rather than design the consciousnesses in line with his own consciousnes, so that they too were not able to be evil?
Is the GOD not able to be evil because it is a 'robot'?
Or,
Is the GOD not able to be evil because the environment that it has for itself is one in which prevents him from being able to be evil?
If that is the case, then why did the GOD create any other environment in which any conscious being placed therein could have the ability to choose to be evil, or even have no choice in the matter at all? (Depending on the type of environment.)
{And, if any being placed into such an environment was able to resist all temptation to be evil despite the environment, would that being not be better than the GOD who created said environment but wouldn't go there himself, preferring to remain in the 'heaven' environment, free from any possible temptation to commit evil in the first instance?}
Part of the confusion surrounding these concepts to do with the biblical idea of GOD, is that it was first understood/presented to be something which could bring good or evil upon the heads of those who chose to obey him or not.
This concept meant that the GOD was both good and evil, or had a light side and a dark side, and depending on how the individual behaved determined which side of that GODs nature responded.
This changed at the advent of the popularization of Christianity and GOD was separated into two distinct beings, one called 'GOD' and the other called 'DEVIL' and these beings were separate entities, rather than aspects of the same entity.
Perhaps Roman theology had a lot to do with that? Certainly Christendom can be traced back to the Roman source, and many Jews will confirm that for them, the whole idea of Christianity has taken their own cultural and religious belief systems and screwed with them in order to bring - not less confusion - but more confusion, but having said as much, this is not to say that the idea of a GOD being both good and evil, depending on the behavior of the humans, meant that the choice to behave in an evil manner was pertinent or even ordinarily acceptable. It was the choice to behave in a good manner which was the only acceptable one.
However, somewhere along the linear time-line between the advent of the expansion of human awareness and Jesus, ideas of what were supposed as good, where proved to be evil, and picking up stones to hurl in order to deal with the problem of sin, was a seen as product of sin itself.
If indeed the GOD of this creation has a dark and a light side, then wisdom would say that it is best to encourage the light side and discourage the dark side.
So in effect, GOD and DEVIL are the same being in relation to the creator of this universe, and have been separated into distinct beings in order that the choice is crystal clear - the darkness in the GOD, has to be transformed into light, and the universe is adequate for that task.
We are all aspects of that GOD, and our choices determine which way that wind blows, which is why there is also more to it than just this one life-time experience, because the process necessary for this to happen has to involve - not only the prior universe, but this one as well, and not only this one, but the next.
It is, a huge task. We are specifically dealing with an evil entity (of which human beings are all - without exception, aspects of) becoming a good entity, and the entity is something which created this universe, so just in that, *we can understand why the different stages of this rehabilitation process are necessarily complicated and exceptional long as well.
*Well, when I say 'we' I mean that potentially. For now, it is 'me'.
To get more of a gist of what I am saying in all this, I have written about it in my thread in the Members Notes section of the forum,
here is the link to that.
In closing, some have already read what I think about consciousness in relation to this reality, and have argued that a creator GOD is not necessary in order for this universe to exist. That is all well and good, however, it is an assumption which cannot be known as truth, and can only be presumed, and I don't personally think it is pertinent to presume that such is actually the case.
If it turns out to be the case, fine. But if it turns out not to be the case, then former assumptions and presumptions on the matter will mean nothing at all,and useless for that, and I am not one who wishes to hand-wave the possibility away as being 'unnecessary' just because it suits. It doesn't suit my personality.
If I err, then I do so on the side of caution.
