Submitted by Dr. How on
If He wanted to, God could end the suffering, shelter the homeless, enrich the poor, and feed the hungry ...
Personally I think that the true Creator is beyond all this, and that there were various sub forces (alien factions mostly) who were behind a lot of the fighting recounted in religions and myth. I mean the nuking of Sodom and Gomorrah isn’t the action of a transcendental infinite being. Doesn’t fit. But the actions of an alien faction with weaponry, yes definitely. The description of angels and ‘sons of man’ / ‘sons of god’ is more fitting of humanoid aliens.
I believe in angels, and consider them nonphysical autonomous intelligences that enforce the divine guidelines. But there were also aliens mistaken for them. After all, the ancients had no conception for the difference between angels and aliens, or demons and aliens, so they put everything into those categories it seems. Same with the jinn, which is more accurate in some ways but aliens / transdimensionals is still more accurate in my view.
As for the Creator stopping all the suffering, I think it boils down to infinite perspective + infinite patience + infinite compassion = infinite seeming cruelty if the Creator knows that it all ends well and that whatever’s happening right now isn’t as big a deal in the long run. Further, I think the Creator would delegate the tasks of intervention to angels and positive aliens and other beings, because the Creator doesn’t need the experience to grow, rather by delegating it the Creator allows other beings to grow from the experience of helping and deciding. Therefore I think the blame goes more to angels and such if some seeming injustice goes unpunished.
I mean the fact that intervention does occur (stories of people’s lives being saved in mysterious ways) shows that things can go wrong that do require intervention. So if they intervene there, then why not elsewhere? I would say that’s due to the way in which the divine guidelines apply to that particular situation. Something like karma or pre-chosen learning lesson. I mean, say you’re some overconfident soul and want to experience Earth, and say that from age 15-20 you want no help because you can do it all on your own, and they ask are you sure because life on Earth can be real tough, and you say yeah of course I’m pumped up lets do it, and so in you go and then you turn 15 and life falls apart and by 18 you wonder where the hell God is why you’ve been forsaken. I think this kind of thing happens a lot.
I also factor in the idea of spiritless humans, that some people have no spirit, no higher self, thus no destiny, no protection. They live by the law of the jungle and the law of chance. Where was God when the cow that made our hamburger was slaughtered? Where was God when that squirrel got run over by a car? Well that’s the law of the jungle for you. I don’t believe everything can be micromanaged and prevented, because that would reduce a lot of the novelty and freewill in this world.
The problem really is freewill though. You can’t have freewill without the possibility of choosing to go against divinity / spirit. Yes, there are consequences to doing so, but here within linear time (where time separates action and reaction) you can indeed violate someone’s freewill or have yours violated. Yes you may get compensated later on, but for now you got screwed over. Evil is a side effect of freewill, an unfortunate condition for allowing its existence. And so yes you do have forces who have chosen darkness, who violate freewill, and who for the moment get away with it. For that to be prevented in the first place, is to prevent the exercising of freewill, which defeats the very purpose of creation.
From what I’ve seen, the divine laws are absolute and correct and just, but they play out on longer time spans and take into account more variables than are immediately obvious to us, and there will be cases where the equation says a person suffers and nothing will be done about it.
I don’t think it’s that God has a master plan other than the grand experiment to allow individualized beings with freewill to interact within a constrained environment. I do think however, that if freewill is misused to the point that it actually undoes the purpose of this experiment (let’s say, one being tries to enslave all others, hence reducing freewill to just one being, the rest being mind controlled extensions), then major intervention occurs. Also, intervention would be proportional to the crime.
So let’s say that negative aliens come across Earth and infiltrate it covertly and use disinformation to deceive a lot of people. What is the proportional response? Positive aliens or positive souls coming to Earth to work covertly and use real information to enlighten as much people as possible. That’s proportional. What’s not proportional is some mega weapon being used to immediately incinerate every alien and person with malicious intent. Why? Because that would be a last resort if nothing else worked and the whole experiment is about to go up in smoke anyway.
So it’s not like God intentionally intends everything that happens because it serves a master plan; I think God sets up the original conditions and let Creation do its thing, and then inspires the positive-leaning forces within the Creation to intervene where they feel fit. This means there is always flux, change, balance turning to imbalance and back, cycling, and thus growth, experience, and novelty. There are imperfections and imbalances and violations that arise, and then a proportional response which takes time to fulfill since time is what we’re about … action —> reaction takes time.
Generally I’d say that freewill makes it so that not everything is clear cut (in the sense of “what happened to her, she deserved it because it’s all part of a plan”) — since freewill allows for violations of freewill. On the other hand, metaphysical laws and dynamics of the soul and how destiny / incarnations work gives some order to it as well, so that there are indeed cases where things are planned or guided for a higher purpose.
There’s the concept of risk or gamble or game that balances these two things. For example, if a person does not experience a situation, let’s say he or she doesn’t learn or grow or change circumstances all that much. So some kind of catalyst is needed. So if there are any protective positive forces, they might step back and allow negative forces, who are always chomping at the bit to wreak havoc or feed, to initiate a bad situation. This creates a gamble situation where, depending on how the person handles it, either the person becomes weaker due to the attack, or the person acquires the learning / growth / change that otherwise would not have been possible. So in order to gain, there is risk of pain and setback. The situation as a whole is allowed/planned and serves a higher purpose, but that purpose is not guaranteed since freewill allows it still to go off the rails.
Therefore some things in life are not 100% guaranteed good where you can just sit back and let it happen, or 100% a negatively orchestrated attack without any redeeming values. It’s more a wager placed that leads to positive if you put up the good fight, or loss if you give in and do something irrational and self-destructive. This is how I would describe 9/10 of my life experiences. Whenever I encounter an obstacle, I tell myself there may be a hidden door here leading to the reward if only I think outside the box and don’t let myself take the obvious course of reacting to it in a negative and unhelpful manner.
Tom Montalk
- 421 reads