Explaining the origin of irredeemable, never-incarnated, demonic spirits

Following from yesterday's discussion; I shall put forward here an explanation for those beings who are traditionally regarded as demons in orthodox Christian theology:

The definition of which is that they are spirit-beings, that have never incarnated, and which are eternally committed to evil such that they cannot be redeemed or saved. 

There are several other kinds of being that might be termed "demons"* - and these might include currently-incarnated beings, or beings that have previously been incarnated and died (analogous to evil ghosts)...

But here I am focusing on beings that have always been spirits - and I am trying to understand and explain how any being might be outwith the scope of the salvation of Jesus Christ.   

I will first outline my metaphysical assumptions: those who want to cut straight to the explanation of demons will find this after the break: indicated +++

My metaphysical understanding of reality is that it comprises beings in relationships; and that beings have attributes such that they are alive, conscious (to some degree), purposive, self-sustaining and so forth. 

Beings are eternal, always have existed - including before creation.

All beings are unique: that is important. Some Christians (perhaps influenced by oneness spiritualty) assume that all Men are originally equal, and diverge - and then spiritually develop and converge towards becoming very similar, or even identical. 

But in contrast I assume that all beings began as unique (and un-cooperative) and God's plan of salvation is a matter of progressively achieving harmony. At first a partly-imposed and temporary harmony, but a process that is completed by the Second Creation, of Heaven; where each resurrected being has chosen to be remade such as to live wholly from-love, and harmony between unalike beings is then innate and spontaneous**.

That is: living-beings are the primary unit of reality; and "beings" include humans, animals, plants, as well as what are usually considered to be "mineral" entities and materials. 

Everything primary in reality is thus either itself a being, or part of a being. 

A further assumption is that all beings were originally spirits. 

Only later, and only for some beings, there may be incarnation into some material form. 

Many spirits have never been incarnated.  

Originally (before creation) beings may have been aware of each other, to varying degrees, and with varying attitudes - but each being is assumed to have been autonomous, separate, pursuing its own goals. 

Before creation, reality was a "chaos" of beings. 

Divine creation happened when God's love became the means of "coordinating" or harmonizing these already-existing beings. 

However, to become a part of divine creation, a being must first be capable of love; then secondly a being-capable-of-love must choose to live by, or from, this love.

(Because it is love that harmonizes the disparate beings, and this harmonization is creation.)

Hence the formulation "God is love", and the great commandments to love God and fellow Men - which can be interpreted to make the choice to embrace the loving purpose of God as ideal, and to aspire to live wholly from love of other beings. 

+++

Now I will explain the origin of demons:

All beings are unique. To participate in creation, a being must be capable of love; but not all beings are capable of love. 

A love-incapable being happens to be constituted that way. Such a being will not be part of creation, and cannot ever become a part of creation. 

Demons are here regarded as spirits that are incapable of love. 

For a being to be saved or redeemed includes death and resurrection such as to live entirely from love. 

It follows that any being constitutionally incapable of love, cannot undergo salvation, indeed, such a being cannot even want salvation.

Some love-incapable beings might remain passive, detached from creation. But demons are assumed to be those love-incapable beings who have chosen to oppose creation - for various motives. 

For instance; demons may aim to exploit creation, or may seek to destroy it. They may be motivated by their own pleasure, by negative resentment, or sheer spiteful desire to inflict suffering. Or mixture of motivation; and demonic motivations may change over time. 

But although capable of changing their behaviours; a love-incapable demon can never become part of creation, and can never seek or attain salvation through following Jesus Christ. 

The above scheme may explain the occurrence of those demons - traditionally-defined: demons that are spirits, have never incarnated, and are eternally outwith even the possibility of salvation. 

*(And some of these are capable of choosing salvation.)

**(An analogy is that the first creation is like a State ruled by a loving creator God with a mixture of coercion and consent; while the Second Creation is a perfectly loving family.) 

A big danger is that we will "find" whatever we "seek"

There seems to be a fundamental problem in life, that while passive, assimilative compliance leads (in our society and world) to disaster and damnation -- on the other hand, there is a very big problem when we consciously and conscientiously seek a specific thing. 

This both in physical material terms (as when people pursue a career plan, or a plan to find a lover or spouse) - and also spiritually. 

It seems that many people (including some of the greatest spiritual exemplars) have deceived themselves and fallen into error by exerting their considerable powers by devising strategies to discover and attain some very particular thing. 

Many people seek specific knowledge - and seek it by long-term efforts: the long monastic training by prayer, liturgy, meditation, labour; years of ascetic striving by desert-dwelling hermits; the prolonged initiation of mystery religions, spiritual science, ritual magic (alchemy, astrology, divinations etc). 

The resulting gross divergence in outcomes, results, beliefs, dogmas, rules and laws, practices and compulsions - is evidence that the process was one originating in the defective wilfulness of fundamentally-incapable beings. 

The big problem of all such spiritual effort; is that people do find what they seek - yet what they seek is something that has been decided by their conscious personality-mind, and implemented by the mundane will-power. 

Such people think they know what they need, and they suppose that they know what is good for "other people" and for "the world"...

And mostly by the transformations of themselves that happen because of their sustained and willed efforts; they find... what they seek, only only what they seek... Find this by various combinations of enhanced abilities, diminished intuitive discernment... of actual-finding with self-deception. 

Ultimately Life (at least for a follower of Jesus) ought to be about loving relationships with other people, other beings, with God and Jesus and others... and the creativity that arises from such loving relationships. 

Life is therefore, ultimately, NOT about changing other people for (what we regard as) the better - that is attempted manipulation - which is a psychopathic and selfish thing, even when justified by altruistic theories. 

Relationships are ultimately NOT about us knowing just what others most need, nor about planning other people's lives (For Their Own Good) - whether materially or spiritually. 

Life is ultimately NOT about making a better world for everybody by knowledge, skill and determination exercised over time... 

Because we really have no idea of what that better world actually is - and the attempt to devise and impose a better world lead to propaganda and coercion - justified by "the common good" (and always by "the end justifies the means" thinking). 

The fact that this stuff is inevitable (and to a significant extent) in our mortal world, is because this is not Heaven; and our world is permeated with evil and undercut by entropy. 

But even if inevitable to a degree, this kind of will-directed strategizing should not be our ideal - yet it is, unfortunately, presented as the ideal by most religions and spiritual systems! 

We cannot know what is good in any degree of specific detail; even less can we know how to act and arrange things to "make" good.

To pretend otherwise leads to great and general harm, including (and primarily) harm to Our-Selves. 

But we do know enough of such matters to be able to live well-enough to develop spiritually and attain salvation - after which, as eternal resurrected beings in Heaven; we can get on with participating in the world of divine creation. 

But not before. 

We cannot have it by wanting it; because:

What we want (in our mortal selves and world) is not really IT.    

In theology, it impresses me to find evidence of active thinking - rather than defensive parroting

Its a sad, but inevitable, fact that almost all of Christian theology - is merely defensive parroting. 

Which is to say that the discourse is just people expounding arguments and evidences they have learned from sources approved by the church to which they have chosen to affiliate. 

It is awareness of this parroting quality (on one or both sides) that may produce that sense of frustration at lack of engagement, of unseriousness, of insincerity - or even cowardice; which has been so off-putting to so many modern people who are considering becoming Christians, or who are expressing genuine (not merely expedient) doubts about aspects of their church or Christianity generally.

I suppose there must have been some people who were actively thinking about Jesus Christ and Christianity at some point in history! Indeed, I suppose that the letters of Paul are evidence of this kind of grappling. 

But there has been in Christianity, and very early, and for most (not all) of subsequent history - probably as in most other religions - a strong tendency to draw a line under this thinking for oneself - and a switch to stating (dogmatically) that this primary engagement has been done, the results are in - and the answers are as follows...

From which point the idea is that good Christians need to understand and believe, to learn and rehearse, and to parrot. 

At which point there is no point in talking to them! Arguments are futile! Debate is simulated!

Unless - that is - you are merely curious about such people; or if your goal is to become like them, and be guided in all your fundamental life understandings, motivations and choices - by an institution. Which is, evidently, still a popular aspiration - although almost-never actually achieved.   

  **

Further Note: I have often myself engaged in this defensive parroting! So I know it by inner experience. 

For instance, in medicine, doctors explanations are of this kind, because the doctor has never himself been through the background to medical facts and claims, but is merely repeating what he has been taught or otherwise learned. 

And, of course, most enquiries and dissenting directed at doctors is (almost inevitably) itself shallow and ignorant, or selfish or manipulative... and is not motivated by a genuine desire for discovering truth. 

But Not Always! And then it is maddening to have one's one direct enjoyment met with parroting merely!

At other times, after becoming a Christian, I sometimes found myself in the same situation. I accepted the truth of some external claim - but did not really know it for myself or from primary experience - and indeed such experience tended to refute the external claim, but I deferred to authority on the basis that cleverer and better informed people than myself had been deemed to have sorted-this-out long ago. 

It was really when I - almost against my will - was nigh-compelled to dig deeper and deeper towards the most fundamental aspects of Christianity; that I began to find it ever more obvious that this would Not be how God would set-things-up! 

I mean; I began to feel clear and sure that God would Not create us and the world; such that we were supposed to pick some particular social institution (a church), then adopt an attitude of obedient service and trusting credulity to that institution. 

That would be an absurdly unreliable, fragile, contingent way to plan a system for the salvation of Mankind!  

At around this point, I began to notice when I was parroting about Christianity, and to dislike myself for doing it; and instead felt a necessity to discover the truths by my own thinking and spiritual experience.

And to regard such personal engagement as the bottom line for my understanding of reality - rather than regarding Christian faith as deference-to and parroting-of any particular external source. 

*

Another Note: Why has it become necessary (at least, I would say so) for us actively to think about theology; when in the past it seemed to be not just adequate but often desirable to parrot good authorities? 

My short answer is that we Now live in a totalitarian atheist-materialist world, where all institutions (including all churches) are part of a multi-linked-bureaucratic system that is intrinsically evil: by which I mean intrinsically in-opposition-to God, divine creation and salvation. This was Not the case in the past; and churches were (at least, in some times and places) overall in-harmony-with The Good; such that obedience to the church was sufficient - and probably the safest path.

(Furthermore, In the past nearly-all Men were communal, and substantially lived in a group-consciousness; such that individual and agentic thinking was rare and difficult; whereas now it is the spontaneous default - and indeed difficult to escape, even when we desire to immerse in a shared consciousness.)   

If it isn't how the best (and ideal) families work - then it isn't how God works

So much false, distorted, and misleading information in and around Christianity, and human attention and abilities are so limited, that we need ways of swiftly recognizing and disposing-of clear wrongness (regardless of the vast volumes are teaching and commentary that affirm the wrongness).

Because of human inattention and inability; the most effective way of disguising and perpetuating wrongness, is by combining complexity and abstraction - therefore our best antidote is to keep things personal and direct. 

Christians have the great advantage that Jesus made it clear (in the teachings and recorded behaviour of the close-friend eye-witness account of the Fourth Gospel "John") that we should think of God's relationships with Men, in terms of a family. 

Since nearly everybody has sufficient experience, backed by innate knowledge and instincts, to know how an ideal family ought to behave; then we can evaluate statements/ assertions about God and divine purpose by this family comparison. 

Such a comparison disposes of a great deal of common (mainstream, official, and traditional) assertion about the basis structure of the plan of salvation for Mankind in context of the spiritual war of this world. 

In particular, we can infer that salvation is not really "a plan" - at least, not if a "plan" is the kind of thing that is used by a national military leader in order to win a war. 

The proper analogue of "victory" in the war of this world ought to be (not one nation defeating another, but) the salvation of an individual person: which is their transformation into resurrected eternal life in Heaven. 

This fits with what Christian-committed parents wish for each and every one of their beloved children. 

Such parents are Not seeking a spiritual "group-victory", analogous to the material victory of a tribe or nation; because such a victory would reasonably (and necessarily) require the spiritual sacrifice of one or (almost certainly) many of their beloved children in order that the family-as-a-whole might defeat then enemy, and triumph in some (hoped-to-be) overall way.  

However; loving families don't aspire to work by such "spiritual sacrifices"; they do not consign one or more children to damnation (perhaps hell) in order that the others, or the group-as-a-whole might be saved. 

No!... instead, ideally loving families would seek always for the best - spiritually - for each and all members. 

The family conceptualized as a group is of secondary concern, and the "unit" of family is derived from the individual members and their mutual love.  

The family analogy reveals the wicked ultimate consequences of talk on the lines that God has "already won" the spiritual war of this world; and/or the common assumption that salvation is groupish - of tribes, nations, Mankind.

Such talk is analogous to saying that a nation has "already" won a war, despite that fighting continues and thousands are still dying and being hurt and maimed. 

Such a statement makes sense on in terms of the the primacy of nation; but when individual beloved persons are primary, then a war is "won" only person by person.

And a war continues uncertain for as long as there are any persons whose spiritual destiny is not decided. 

So, in following Christ; the only "victory" is the salvation of particular persons, and such victory is actually an eternal transformation of that person's nature - and this is not an end-point for him, or the world; but a new beginning.

Life itself, family life (where the persons involved are all eternal beings), is the unending participation of each individual in ongoing divine creation. 

And divine creation is an aspect of love; the consequence of love, the purpose of love - which is why the ideal family is so exact an analogy. 

Divine creation is not of its nature "winnable". Creation is to be lived; and lived well; with each individual who chooses resurrection making his own unique contribution towards its open-ended and ever-lasting growth.    

Spiritual Systems, such as churches, used to be net-helpful, but now block spiritual contact

We live in a world of systems - of interlinked formal institutions, organizations, corporations etc - so this is a fact of life... "inevitable", at least at present. 

But these modern systems - or indeed the overall System - is scientistic, physicalist, materialist in its assumptions; and leaves-out the reality of the spirit at the level of our thinking. 

Systems thinking just-is mundane in its nature; and mundane thinking has no space for God or Jesus Christ (except falsely, as supposed means to materialist and this-worldly ends). 

This means that what would have been regarded in the past as spiritual, supernatural, divine knowledge and experiences; are nowadays excluded. The world of spirit is not noticed, or it is explained-away as the product of immaturity, stupidity, gullibility, manipulations and lying, or mental illness. 

In the past it was accepted that religion meant a church; and church meant a system by which the spiritual was achieved. The church was very complex; and consisted of approved knowledge - facts and interpretations; and narrative, symbolism, and rituals etc... 

Each Christian got from his church a strategy for life - almost a blueprint... What to do and what to expect from doing it. 

There was a plan, methods, and procedures: a causality of do this, and that will be the result. 

A church was a Spiritual System. 

But Men changed, human consciousness changed, and the world changed. 

From the later 1700s in England and Germany, people began to notice: Church Systems had ceased to lead to the spirit - the cause and effect of do-this and get-that was broken.

And this experience, or insight, or reality; spread throughout the West, and the world. 

And, from this point, the System of a church would overall and normally serve to block spiritual contact and experiences, instead of helping them. 

Because the churches maintained all or most of their canonical information, procedures and interpretations - but these had lost their positive and beneficial effect of leading to the spirit. 

Leaving (increasingly) empty forms and structures and actions - that were nonetheless asserted to be essential. 

Instead of providing a plan-of-action leading to the spirit; the churches (inevitably, by their nature as social institutions) retained a pre-determined, objectified, materialist framework - into-which all possible individual spiritual experience must be "slotted". 

And having been slotted-into the already-existing church System, spiritual experience was thereby linked with the other social systems (politics, law, economics, science etc) - which total-system explained it away as not-really-real (perhaps with the church-added spin of being due to some sin such as spiritual pride, disobedience etc).

By their very existence as social institutions and therefore, necessarily, part of The System (aka globalist, leftist, totalitarianism) - the Christian churches went from (often) doing net-spiritual-good, to constituting a barrier, perhaps a blockage, to the individual Christians ability directly to experience spiritual reality.

So long as Modern men remain primarily committed to System, God cannot get at us.

Because whatever God does to contact or guide us; we can - and usually will - explain it away.  

And the churches are complicit in this reality-distortion. 

Of course, the churches often assert that outside their walls lies chaos at best, and unopposed demonic control as most likely. 

Yet all of these are within the walls of the churches, and often dominant; operating at the level of what makes any church an institution in the world as it now is. 

The churches are on average and predominantly this-worldly in orientation, and mundane in discourse.

The spirit is allowed only if confined to predetermined slots in a dysfunctional (because no longer spiritual) System.  

Christians must therefore (and I think the "must" is justified) have faith that God can and will operate outwith churches and by a direct and personal relationship with each Christian.

So long as God is honestly sought...

And have faith that Jesus Christ's gift of resurrected eternal Heavenly life is available to every person who genuinely desires and actively-seeks it - (ultimately) regardless of human institutions, and of the circumstances of mortal life on earth.  

We should have faith (confirmable by personal spiritual knowledge) that God the Creator, our loving Father, will have set up the world so that salvation is available and possible always and everywhere, and for everybody. 

What are the causes of the developmental change ("evolution") in human consciousness throughout history?

A clear statement description of the way that human consciousness has changed throughout recorded history (and inferred from pre-history) is something I associate with Rudolf Steiner and his later follower Owen Barfield; who both explained it in terms of each human being having undergone multiple reincarnations. The changing nature of consciousness was therefore assumed to be caused by the accumulated experience and learning - hence maturity - of the reincarnating spirit. 

Ultimately, the underlying cause of these assumed multi-reincarnational changes was tacitly assumed to be the divine will; which sought to provide multiple and additive experiences to spirits. 

This was supposed to operate by a process that starts with pure (immaterial) spirit beings, leads down into denser and denser incarnations (such as ourselves), and ultimately (as its highest goal) leads back up to purely spiritual existence. 

But I do not share these assumptions about reincarnation. 

More importantly I regard Jesus Christ as having provided Man with the opportunity of resurrected human life in Heaven - which is a permanent state of embodied incarnation. 

In short: as of 2025 (and for nearly 2000 years) God does not want us to reincarnate after death - but instead to follow Jesus Christ to resurrected eternal life in heaven. 

Thus, for me, the objective of spiritual development is not a "spiritual being"; but instead a resurrected and embodied Man, of which the model was the resurrected Jesus.    

However, since I regard the evolutionary development of Mankind as a reality, but reject the Steiner/ Barfield explanation; I feel a need to explain this in terms of causality. I believe that there are several interacting causes, working at different levels. What follows is my current understanding. 

1. God's plan

At the deepest level of causation; I believe that God (our Heavenly Parents) desires that divine creation should lead first to divine children, and then towards the idea of "divine adults" - God seeks to encourage childlike children to develop into grown-up friends. 

(Much as it is usual (but with significant exceptions) to expect and hope that our own mortal children will not remain immature and childlike; but will grow-up to make the choice to become "best friends" with their parents.) 

In other words; divine creation is structured towards the generation of God's children - such as we now are; and that we children should be enabled and encouraged to "grow up" further, in order to mature towards becoming beings of the same kind and level as our Heavenly Parents. 

In yet other words; God desires that we would (through time) choose to develop towards becoming fully divine, fully loving, creators - and then to participate in the eternal work of divine creation. It was Jesus Christ who first achieved this, and who made it possible for others to follow Him in this. 

The goal is that our Heavenly Parents should cease to be the only beings at their level of divinity, but should build a continually growing family of grown-up children of God (together with the extended family of those beloved children who - whether by spiritual nature or current-choice - remain spiritually "immature": i.e. not full-creators.  

2. Incarnation of progressively more mature spirits

One of the ways that God influences the direction of creation, is through the nature of pre-mortal spirits that are incarnated into mortal life on earth. 

My impression is that when the earliest-known Men were first incarnated, their consciousness was more like that of young children. And incrementally throughout history, progressively more-grown-up spirits were incarnated; who tended to mature towards what we would now recognize as more adult modes of consciousness. 

So, at present and overall, spirits are incarnated that spontaneously mature to a kind of spiritual adolescence - beyond which further maturation depends on various individual factors, including personal will and choices. 

(I suspect that while spiritual maturation from childhood to adolescence is mostly spontaneous and involuntary; maturation beyond spiritual adolescence can only ever be attained by active alignment with God's nature and creative will, and by personal choice - the choice to live only by love.)

Maturity is most obviously revealed in terms of thinking and self-awareness... Modern Men are aware of our-selves and the distinction from the world and others; and we live subjectively in our stream of conscious thoughts - in ways that did not happen (or only in rare individuals) in the past. 

3. Metaphysical assumptions and ideology

Due to the nature of the human society into-which modern humans are born (which is partly a consequence of past and present choices by other people; under the influence of demonic beings) - modern Men assume that ultimate reality is dead (unalive), material (not spiritual); and operates solely by physical-mechanical causes or non-causally/ chaotically (ie. "randomly").  

I believe that these bottom-line assumptions concerning reality have a profound and malign effect on modern Man's consciousness.

What this typical modern metaphysics does to our consciousness; is to transform self-awareness into a false conviction of inescapable existential alienation - the implicit yet wrong belief that we are alone in our thinking, which is merely subjective: detached from reality. 

And this leads onto the typically modern mind-set of existential despair; variously countered by the attempt to overwhelm it with hedonism, and/or to obliterate thinking by such means as constant distraction by powerful stimuli, strong emotions, intoxication, and the like. 

In sum: an element in the changing of consciousness is the prevalent ideology of our times. And in more general terms, it would be expected that metaphysics, theology, and ideology would often (although not necessarily) tend to shape human consciousness in particular directions - which is, of course, exploited as much as possible by the purposive powers of supernatural evil. 

4. Direct spiritual contact between people, and other beings

I believe that there is potentially a direct (mind-to-mind, as it were) contact between living people, between the living and some of those who have died, and other beings. 

Insofar as this happens (for instance, among those people in mutually-loving relationships) among people whose consciousness's are changing for the reasons described above; this is the basis for shaping, perhaps amplifying or instead reversing, changes in consciousness that may be directional through time.

Put differently; we each inhabit a very selective thought-world - one that changes throughout our lives, and includes new, different, other-minds (alive, dead, or potentially not human). 

This, then, is another reason for changes in consciousness.  

5. The comfort and guidance of the Holy Ghost

The Holy Ghost is a potential source of comfort and guidance for those who follow Jesus, and this contact naturally affects a human consciousness and its development through time. 

Such interaction with the Holy Ghost has the nature of a chosen, mutual, and specific relationship between one spiritual Being and another. 

Which means that I disagree with those who conceptualize the Holy Ghost as providing some kind of blanket effect on Mankind, or any particular group of people. 

(I also disagree with those who regard the evolution of consciousness as driven by any kind of quasi-physics-like influence on the planet and its inhabitants... I mean those who see the maturation of consciousness as driven by an externally-applied influence - such as increasing frequency or vibrational level; or some kind of transformation of spiritual force, or an increase in spiritual energy; or indeed by astrological change.)

  

 

As a general comment - I think it is probably necessary to emphasize (to myself, if not other others!) that the causal mechanisms that contribute to the developmental evolution of human consciousness, are all aimed at the individual human spirit. 

I am increasingly sure that God does not, and never has, operated primarily at the level of human groups. 

We ought therefore to try and stop thinking habitually about Men In The Mass; when it comes to understanding fundamental spiritual matters.

 

The false-impression that God is concerned primarily with the salvation of particular tribes or particular churches; was I think an (inevitable) artefact of an earlier stage of human consciousness; among Men who (inevitably - but with some few exceptions) experienced reality in this groupish way.

That is to say: The earlier we go in history, the more groupish was human consciousness - and individuals were not, and did not feel nor aspire to be, detached from the "group mind". 

But as of Now - things are very different. From adolescence onward, modern people are spontaneously detached from the group mind, and must therefore be influence and controlled ("micro-managed") by multiple and constantly-applied external and perceptual inputs - laws, rules, propaganda etc.)  

Nowadays, such groupishness in considering Christian theology is simply an error - but no longer an inevitable error; being instead the consequence of (for example) false metaphysics, wishful thinking, despair, dreadful fear - or a simple paucity of alternative ideas.  

Therefore; we should understand the evolution of consciousness as the averaged outcome of our innate (inborn) spiritual-nature; with a multitude of individual human choices; concerning the outcomes of individually-tailored ("bespoke") interactions between each individual person with God and the Holy Ghost. 

 

All in The Wanting

I am of the opinion that if it was possible and desirable for everything to be made better for everybody in this world, then God would have done it already - indeed divine creation would never have had evil, entropy and death in the first place. 

As it is - people have innate evil. As well as having positively sinful impulses; people have a tendency to behave in order to seek short-term gratification and avoidance of suffering or misery instead of doing what they know to be virtuous. 

Furthermore, people are made worse, often much worse, by their environment; by other people; and the many and pervasive negative, sin-encouraging influences, indoctrinations, distractions, lies, manipulations, value-inversions and so forth - which have become worse in recent decades, and are still getting worse.

Since I believe that nothing positively good can be done forcibly, by compulsion (not by God, nor anyone else); what is a way out from this situation of too-bad people in a too-bad world?

The way out must be wanted and chosen by each individual person, and it must be an active choice since people cannot be coercively "made better" without their active cooperation. 

And since the way out much be chosen and active, then this entails that those who do not choose, or who not cooperate in the process, will be "left behind". The way out is not for those who don't want and/or don't want voluntarily to collaborate in their self-remaking. 

Such was (and is) the situation confronted by Jesus Christ in devising a plan for our salvation - that is a plan for us to escape from the intrinsic problems of our lives in this world. 

The plan must work for innately evil people who live in a sin-inducing environment, people who are prone to prefer the expedient and short term and are constantly tempted by a worsening environment - and who are (I think observably) themselves getting worse... 

By my understanding, properly understood; Christianity is exactly a religion for such people as we actually are, in a world as it actually is...

Providing a hopeful future and a way out to something better; that is available and attainable by anyone who wants it - and who is prepared (when the time comes, after death) to cooperate with being made fit for it. 

Salvation transcends our-selves and the world; no matter how bad these have become. 

It is all in The Wanting. 

 

Supposing you are God, setting-up the world for Men's salvation...

Supposing you are God, setting-up the world for Men's salvation, then how would you devise things? 

You must take into full account that each man has "free will", agency; and also that modern Western adults are cut-off from the spontaneous knowledge of the spiritual and supernatural, and belief in the divine, of earlier times. 

This means that Men must actively decide to seek and engage with God.

Given such constraints; what would be the best way to engage with modern, Western adults?   

Would it be via the mediation of one true church, or even via several valid churches (as churches actually are) - I think not. That would be an exceedingly bad way of providing for Mans salvation. Church is intrinsically indirect, and subject to corruption. 

What, then, about relying upon a sacred scripture, such as the Bible? Again - this would be a highly suboptimal plan; given that there are multiple translated and distorted texts, the sheer difficulties of the texts; and the variability of textual interpretation. Scripture, like church, is both indirect and corruptible.

Or perhaps by relying upon a True tradition, that Men would absorb unconsciously? I think not - traditions are too easily, and too often, subverted - even inverted. 

What about logic and reason? Setting-up a world so Men can work-out their place and role by philosophy, by dialectic? Well, obviously, that would only be possible for a small minority of specially-gifted Men in particularly advantageous situations - and these sages would then need to transmit their conclusions by Church, Scripture or Tradition - and we have already seen how these are inadequate.   

It seems clear that the best and most reliable way to set-up this world for the salvation of all Men, of all kinds and circumstances, to cover all contingencies - would be to provide Men with direct knowledge of God; by a communication that was un-mediated - as some kind of wordless/conceptual telepathy or thought-sharing; and provide all Men with sufficient ability to access this knowledge. 

The Legend of Lucifer

The legend has it that Lucifer* was the "brightest" of angels, and/yet the first to "fall"... What does this mean?

It might mean that - of the pre-mortal spiritual Beings - Lucifer was the "highest". But highest in what? I would say consciousness. And higher meaning most God-like, most like The Creator. 

The legend would then mean that the Being with most God-like consciousness (i.e. Lucifer) was the first Being to oppose God's creative plans. 

Consciousness, awareness, agency, freedom... These are divine attributes; but do not bring with them a commitment to Good - Good being a commitment to Love, to divine creation based upon love. 

Men of the modern world are on the one hand higher in consciousness than Men of the past - capable of greater agency and freedom; on the other hand Men are more evil Now than they were. 

An analogy is children and adults - adults are (on average) higher in consciousness than children, and also adults are (on average) more evil than children.  

Goodness is a choice, and those Beings higher in consciousness must choose evil - but the point is that they must choose; which is why they so often choose wrong. Children, on the other hand, are born with considerable innate goodness (spiritual connections, realism, common sense) and this makes them more spontaneously, passively, unconsciously good. 

So perhaps Lucifer was the first angel who was capable of conscious and active choice, and needed to decide whether to commit to love and join-with the divine plan of salvation - but as a matter of fact chose to reject and oppose it.  

Modern Men are similar to this primal situation in that (probably due to our pre-mortal natures) we seem to have been incarnated wit the tendency to attain higher (literally more God-lie) consciousness than Men of the past; and/but this brings with it the necessity of conscious, active and personal choice with respect to fundamental matters that less-conscious Men of the past simply accepted without awareness. 

The majority of Modern men seem to have replicated the basic choice of Lucifer; but they could have done otherwise, just as Lucifer could have done otherwise. 

Our world is full of Men who are "higher" in terms of awareness, agency, freedom and other divine attributes; yet choose to use these divine attributes to reject God's creative project. 

Higher consciousness is intrinsically Good - it is growing-up, it is God-like - it is a direction God desires than Men should move. 

We are more adult, grown-up in terms of consciousness; but like most adults this does not make us "better" morally (and in terms of values generally) than the less-conscious children we once were. 

Our situation is that (in essence) we need consciously and freely to choose what (less conscious, less free) young children are born with innately and "automatically". 

The adult is potentially better (i.e. more God-like) than a child, exactly because he is able to choose, indeed must choose - and is more responsible. 

This could be expressed that God wants "colleagues" in divine creation, co-creators, or grown-up brothers and sisters - because thus may creation best be expanded and enriched. And creation "works" by Love - it is Love that harmonizes creation, and Love that ensures the direction of creation is Good. 

So there is consciousness and there is Love - and the challenge (which seems most to have been failed) is for Men (as many Men as possible) to choose Love as the fundamental principle, to choose divine creation, to choose to ally with God. 

+++

*"Lucifer" was probably the original Devil, the first leader of the anti-God faction; but I suspect he no longer holds that position. That "job" is perpetually contested, and has perhaps had several or many occupants. 

The spirit world, and what to do about it?

There is the physical or material world inhabited by incarnated mortal Beings (i.e. the only world acknowledged as real by the modern mainstream ideology). This contains a mixture of good and evil, some Beings on the side of God and divine creation; other Beings opposed to this - and all mortal Beings are some mixture of these motivations. The material world is subject to entropy - subject to change, decay, disease, degeneration, and death - the irrevocable dissolution of physical forms. 

Then there is the Divine World - "inhabited" by God, the ascended Jesus Christ/ The Holy Ghost. And also - since the work of Jesus Christ, the divine world is inhabited by the denizens of Heaven - resurrected Men (and, presumably, other Beings). It is a realm entirely of Good, that is to say that all is motivated by love. It is also an eternal realm, without entropy. 

But there is another realm: the underworld/ dream-world realm of spirit Beings. 

The spirit world. 

For ancients, this was the realm of dreams, the place where souls went after death (perhaps being reincarnated from there). 

A wide range of Beings have been supposed to inhabit this "psychic" realm: gods, angels, demons, nature spirits, chthonic monsters, ghosts, non-human sentient spirits of many kinds and degrees.

Like the physical realm the "underworld" is mixed; with Beings that contain both good and evil motives - and including Beings affiliated to the agenda of evil. 

However; this realm, like the physical realm, will also be "visited" by the wholly-good denizens of the Divine Realm.  

The spirit realm is like the physical world in being also subject to entropy - in that, although spirits do not "die" in the way that physical Beings die; they are subject to destructive change - to degeneration, disease, loss of self... 

The spirit world is a fact of life. It is "all around" us, always, and wherever we happen to be; and has influences. 

This means the spirit world is (like the physical world) differentiated, heterogeneous, varied by time and place.

Thus the spirit world (whether we are aware of it or not) will affect us - somewhat like geography, climate, seasons and weather affect us. At some times and/or some situations the spirit world will be benign and helpful, maybe enjoyable. 

But in other circumstances, the spirit world will be net hostile, fear- or misery-inducing perhaps, or having evil influences - therefore hostile in specific ways.  

The striking fact of modern life for Men - including most, not all, Christians - is that we have all-but lost any spontaneous consciousness of the spirit realm. We live "in" it, but unaware, typically denying its reality. 

It is as if we wandered from the Arctic to the Sahara, while unaware of the differences, and taking no account of them in our lives. 

This is part of our alienation: modern Man is cut-off from a multitude of relationships with the world. These relationships are potentially bad and good both, as with the physical world: but most importantly they are real and unavoidable. 

The consequence is that we "miss" the spiritual realm - and (even if unconsciously) we know that our experience and knowledge of reality is incomplete. We are, to that extent, maimed. 

Further: this situation is made worse by many Christians, who regard the spirit realm as nothing but a threat, a spiritual danger, the domain of demonic temptation - that must be avoided. They regard the underworld as at best inessential, at worst a constant threat. 

More moderately, but with the same result; Christians regard the spirit world as an "optional extra" for life; something that we do not need, and is therefore best avoided because of its spiritual hazards. 

This is one way in which mainstream, orthodox, traditional Christianity has not just failed to meet the challenge of modernity; but has indeed worsened the situation. 

But suppose that we do - as a matter of fact - both need the spirit world, just as we need the physical world; and anyway cannot avoid it - even when we want to? 

We may fence ourselves in - but we cannot fence the spirit world out. We can only make ourselves unaware of it, and explain away its effects. 

What then?

Well, in my judgment there are no really good models from the past, that work for this present among Western people, no good models concerning how we ought to regard and relate-to the spirit world.  

There are, of course, plenty of people who - even nowadays - are aware of the spirit world in some way - "clairvoyants" or "psychics" of many kinds. Maybe they have visions of spirits, converse with spirits; and seek-out such contacts. 

The problem is that these are mostly Not wise or knowledgeable people. They are often silly, or motivated badly. By my evaluations; their knowledge (apparently derived from contacts with spirits) is unreliable, and often incoherent nonsense, or rather blatant self-gratifying fantasy. 

They often seem to be seeking spirits to help them gain worldly gratifications (health, sex, power status - the usual stuff). 

Or, on the other side, they seem to be seeking to surrender to the world of spirits, to be overpowered and controlled by the spirits they encounter. Self-annihilation... Not good.  

At any rate, the "fruits" are often bad - in that a majority of those who are (or claim to be) in contact with the spirit world are (to me) unimpressive, and usually have taken the side of evil in the spiritual wars. But then again, so have most self-identified "Christians", and those of other religions! 

(There is no "safe" path to salvation and theosis that can be objectively described or externally imposed - and the greatest danger is for those who believe there is.)   

To me, "the Spiritual" are mostly unimpressive... and yet not always! 

While - like all mortal Men - mixed-Beings who are prone to errors and being misled; there have been some people (and in the "modern" era) such as William Blake, Rudolf Steiner, Dion Fortune, and Gareth Knight - who seem in important ways to have benefitted from their contact with the spirit realms. These I like, respect and admire. 

Nonetheless, we cannot assume that any of these people are themselves a model for other people differently constituted, and belonging to later generations, whose consciousness is different. Nor (whatever they may have claimed) can we assume that such past-exemplars were able to describe a general model by which other people can (or should) attain a positive relation with the spirit world. 

In particular; I am increasingly convinced that past attempts (and maybe successes) in positively affecting human society (e.g. nations, or relations between nations) are not possible here-and-now - due to the change in human consciousness. 

Those same changes that have made spontaneous spirit awareness so rare, have also enhanced the potential human spiritual autonomy and individual agency. Past human consciousness was social, pooled, in ways that is no longer the case. 

Our situation is different. What was effective and good then, is often feeble and harmful now.  

As so often nowadays, external influences are overwhelmingly likely to be bad; so we need to (and should) rely on our personal judgment and take spiritual responsibility for our choices. 

My own notions are as follows:

We should be aware that there is a spirit world of Beings, that it is real and important. 

And, on general principles in this era, we should strive to become aware of whatever is real; so, in some fashion, it is good to become conscious of the spirit world as it is affecting us "here-and-now"; and where possible be prepared to act on the implications of that effect. 

(Maybe avoiding situations in which the spirit world is exerting a malign influence - or continuing a life-path that seems to be sustained by that which is good in the spirit world.)  

What about developing personal relationships with specific spirit Beings? 

Well; many spirit Beings are benign; and some of these are likely to have a positive and personal interest in ourselves. 

For instance, there may be deceased and resurrected relatives or close friends whom we loved, or willing "spiritual mentors".  And such Beings may be in spiritual-proximity ("near") to us in the spirit world, and maybe be actively-desirous of aiding us in particular ways. 

My best guess is that such potential relationships with spirit Beings, are good and perhaps necessary. 

How to develop such relationships, while avoiding deceptions and temptations, and shallow or wishful thinking; is, in principle, a problem not different from the same question about our social relations among human beings in the physical realm. 

We cannot plan a good human-social life in the physical world - and rules or blueprints for good relationships are a misguided or malign attempt to subordinate the personal soul to inhuman materialistic-bureaucratic thought processes. Same for the spirit world. 

What is needed is realistic assumptions about the nature and purpose of life, then a secure rooting in personal intuition and responsibility - with a willingness to recognize and repent our errors.

Since, as Christians; we know that we inhabit a divine creation within-which we have a personal destiny; and that we are God's children capable of valid judgment, and that the guidance of the Holy Ghost is always available when required...

Knowing all this, and if our attitudes can also be grounded in such knowledge; there is every reason to suppose that we will be able to navigate the spirit realm in such a way as will benefit us spiritually - now and in the context of eternity.  

Man's creative freedom is part-of God's "plan of creation" - not an impediment

If we consider God's Plan of Creation; the usual descriptions are extremely "top-down" - and have the form of a plan of God's, with each Individual Man's proper role being to choose-to-follow that plan.

This kind of description implies a negative view of Man's free agency, or at most an ultra-restricted understanding; because (at root) there is only one predetermined answer to the question of "what should I do?" to fulfill God's hopes; and therefore Man's freedom becomes little more than the ability to choose wrongly! 

Thus if we take a top-down view of God's creation; with Goodness and truth coming from above; Man is assumed to have an essentially negative potential. Men can fail to do what is needed, what they ought to do; but Men cannot succeed creatively. 

(Because God is omnipotent and created everything-from-nothing; Men can add nothing that could could not otherwise be provided by God.) 

Therefore, by traditional Christian theology; Men are not supposed to have the potential to participate positively in creation. 

Furthermore - because of the idea of Original Sin - Men will have at least a very strong tendency to do evil; which understanding points either towards each Man's withdrawal and contemplation; or else points towards an attitude of self-negation and obedience. 

Obedience to... well, whatever is generally supposed to constitute religious authority (e.g. church leadership, scripture, tradition etc). 

If God is regarded as analogous to an absolute monarch, with a complex and detailed "blueprint" for our betterment, we are at-best God's servants - and each Man's job is to choose to obey God's comprehensive instructions, follow the plan in all respects (even though we do not and cannot comprehend it) - and then (so the theory goes) things will work-out in accordance with divine intentions. 

Such views may have been normal in the past, and were very-probably correct for Mankind, as Mankind was constituted in the past - when individuals regarded themselves as only semi-differentiated from their social group: their clan, people, nation etc. 

Yet ultimately, and now that we primarily self-experience as individuals; I would say that this traditional understanding has become a profoundly anti-Christian understanding. 

(That is: What was right and inevitable then, has become wrong and avoidable now.)

Indeed; a religion based-on obedience and the self-image of a servant (in its effect) leaves-out the work of Jesus Christ; consequently it seems much closer to a purely-monotheistic (e.g. Jewish or Islamic) understanding of Man's role and destiny. 

(To me, that is almost-exactly what A Lot of "modern but trad." Christians seem to be yearning for: I mean, their religion is a version of ancient Judaism, or Islam, in deep essentials - with a superficial top-dressing of Christianized language, and a Jesus that does nothing essential.) 

A Christian understanding should instead (surely?) take into account that this is a universe where Jesus is also divine, and Men are each - like Jesus - sons or daughters of God; and therefore one in which Men can follow Jesus to divine status. 

My understanding of God's creation is much more participatory - a "joint-project" of God and Men - and has a necessary and positive creative role for all Men who are capable of conceptualizing it. Here's how I see things: 

Creation relies-upon Man's freedom for its success. Our creative contributions are vital elements to The Plan; although none are indispensable. 

The set-up is such that we are intended to participate and add-to creation; and every-thing we do in that line is a plus. 

(Despite that the plan continues even if we do nothing to help it.) 

This is because the Plan of Creation is not really a "plan" as such, it is not like a blueprint aiming at a fixed and specific outcome; but creation is instead something that God sets-up and sustains; and this creation is inhabited by Beings (such as Men) each with agency. 

Not by accident do Men have agency!

Ongoing creation is continually being re-shaped - taking into account the creative activates of Beings. 

God's creative intentions are quite simple in their general direction: God desires as many as possible Men (an other beings) to choose salvation - that is, to choose resurrection into Heaven after death. That means, ultimately, to choose and commit to live By Love - wholly and eternally.  

And also, as a consequence of this attitude, during this mortal life; God desires that as many Men (and other Beings) as possible, should join-with the work of creation, participate in creation, whenever possible - which is done by thinking and acting from our deepest, real, potentially-eternal "selves" in harmony with divine creation.

If it is to be genuinely creative, then all thinking and acting from our eternal selves will be in harmony with divine creation - if it is not in harmony with God's creation then real-self-thinking is something that is either without effect, happening only "inside" us; or it acts against divine creation - is evil. 

That possibility is, presumably, where the fear of creativity, and the mistaken attempt to avoid it, comes-from. But avoiding creativity is not a "safe option": there are no safe options. 

Here-and-now, with Man as He is; we must be creative and participatory with divine creation, if we are to avoid assimilation to the world-dominating Agenda of Evil.  

In this mortal life; such creative participation is something we can only do relatively-briefly, and in a modest fashion; but it is-happening whenever we are living from our True Selves (not our superficial personalities) in a state of conscious commitment to Love of God and Fellow Men. 

(i.e. The two Great Commandments.) 

Every time this happens, creation is enriched (and permanently); and we also learn from such experiences what it is to live in Heaven - which experience can be a strong (perhaps decisive) encouragement to choose salvation: Because; only to those who follow Jesus Christ to resurrection can such loving, creative participation become full and everlasting. 

Mostly; in this mortal life, entropy and evil are what kill Men - God's creation sustains us alive, for His purposes

I hope the title is largely self-explanatory. 

In this mortal state we all live in an entropic world, among many evil Beings; the tendency towards death is endemic, omnipresent, cumulative - and therefore we will always die, sooner or later. 

What sustains us alive in face of this constant tendency to change, corruption, disintegration, degeneration and disease - is that we are each a part of God's creation. 

Thus life is a continuing and moment-by-moment divine gift of God; continual, that is, for so long as God sustains it - until God's creation is overwhelmed by evil acts, or inevitably/ eventually by entropy. 

In a basic and overall sense, therefore, it is not God that kills us; and also we may be killed against God's plan for us, against personal divine destiny (especially when acutely overwhelmed by evil intent). 

However; while we live, it is God that is keeping-us-alive. 

Yet God may withdraw His creative sustenance; and then we will soon die from evil or entropy. 

God is keeping us alive for His divine, creative purposes; including the hope that we will choose salvation when we die (and thereby escape both entropy and evil, by entering the second creation); and will learn the spiritual lessons that would most benefit us while we live.  

Those who have been sustained alive for unusually long periods, into extreme old age; might therefore assume that this is for the purpose of our divine destiny; either in hope we shall chose salvation, or in hope that we will learn some-thing God regards as important for us. 

The difference between old-fashioned discernment, and Romantic Christianity

There is a sense in which all Christians have always practiced "discernment". 

That is, Christians could only seldom - and never continuously - live in complete and perfect obedience to The Church (whatever that church might be). Because the situations of life are specific, while rules are general; and because there was always a degree (sometimes a very large degree) of disunity (or at least ambiguity) among the statements and instructions of church authorities. 

So people might not know exactly what to do, and would need to make up their own minds; or people would have to decide who to obey when contradictory instructions were given - and so forth. 

But this kind of discernment acknowledged that ultimately - legitimate authority lay externally from each Man - in the church - mediated by the church, not the individual person; and that therefore discernment was being used to discover the true nature of that authority. 

The core purpose of ancient unity was a life of obedience. 

This ancient kind of discernment was essentially passive and partly unconscious - indeed, it had something of the quality of an 'unfortunate necessity'. Ideally, as little discernment as possible would be necessary in life - because church guidance was clear and unified, and people would be naturally obedient. 

And when life did not change much from one generation to another: such an ideal could be approached closely. 

Indeed, the ideal of ancient discernment was to forget itself, and to assume that the Christian life was a life of simple obedience to the church; unchanging and clear guidance for in navigating-through the recurrent, repeating, problems of human life. 

At all costs, awareness of the discernment of individual persons was not supposed to extend to a sense of active responsibility for one's salvation and conducting life. The desired discernment was externally-directed, towards discovering the true-source of guidance within the church - and was not striving to be self-aware.   

The consciousnesses of modern Men are differently constituted; and this affects both laymen and priests, those within and outside the churches: all churches.

Overwhelmingly; Modern Man experiences himself (whether he likes it or not) as starting from the situation of being cut-off from the institutions of his society. His condition is one of alienation.

He no longer takes institutions for granted, can no longer un-consciously follow their guidance, can no longer actually-be passive and obedient merely. 

This alienation, cut-offness, is now simply taken for granted as the basis of our society, in multiple forms of discourse. It does not need arguing - it is just assumed as a situation, as a problem. 

Life is experienced as choices; and these choices impinge on consciousness - we choose and are aware that we choose. 

Such awareness permeates modern discourse - it is the subject matter of the vast bulk of modern stories and narratives - such that we simply take it for granted. Yet to experience life as multiple choices is recent, modern; and was not an aspect of ancient human life (except maybe for a very few exceptional individuals). 

What this modern consciousness means is that the ancient discernment is not possible. 

I would also argue that ancient discernment is not desirable either; that ancient discernment is now "not a good thing" - but the fact of its impossibility is one reason why striving for it is not desirable.

But what we have nowadays instead of ancient discernment is self-blinding and dishonesty. In other words people who claim to be anciently-discerning are actually obscuring their own acts of conscious discernment (perhaps by not-thinking, by distraction, by projection...) - or else they know they are consciously discerning but lie about the fact - maybe for exploitative, maybe for manipulative reasons.   

At the very least; ancient discernment is nowadays something chosen, rather than something spontaneous; it is something we are aware or doing (or, more often, as aspiring to do) rather than something so natural that it Just Happens. 

What Romantic Christianity does is to recognize the change in consciousness; and to assume (from an understanding of world history, and the nature of the divine plan) that this change was of-God. 

In other words; modern man's consciousness is different because (and in so far as) God wants it that way - for our own good, for the good of our actual, specific souls; as these were incarnated into this mortal life. 

God wants for us to make conscious choices, and to know we are doing so: and to take responsibility for doing so! 

God does not want for us not-to-think, to distract or suppress awareness; to pretend that 'nothing has happened' and that the religious life Now is the same as for a Catholic peasant in the Christian-permeated (no-alternatives) societies of the Middle Ages. 

God does not want us to be dishonest with ourselves or with others - even (especially!) when this dishonesty is self-justified as a "necessary lie" for the public good... Does not want that we try and pretend that our Christian life can be, or is; one of 'simple obedience' to a church whose ultimate goodness and authority should simply be taken for granted. 

Surely? God wants for us to be honest: therefore wants us to be honest about our situation - and honest that it is what it is. 

Nowadays discernment is far more necessary, more frequent; and far more conscious - than ever in the past; and this Just Has overturned the earlier ideal of the Christian life as being one of passive, unconscious, self-forgetful obedience to an external institution - A Church.  

We now actually-have (like it or not) an active role in chiseling-out our own path through life. We are aware of being personally responsible for many discernments about which we could, in the past, have been unconscious. 

Our situation is what it is, our discernment ought to be active, we should take full responsibility for the necessary and frequent choices of Christian living, and we should strive-for, and explicitly acknowledge, the fullest-possible consciousness of all this! 

That is perhaps one fundamental assumption of "Romantic Christianity": deliberately taking conscious and personal responsibility for that which - in the past - were often matters of obedience to an external (ideal) institution.  

The Creator's POV: God, Jesus, and the overcoming of entropy

'We will come', said Imrahil; and they parted with courteous words. 

'That is a fair lord and a great captain of men,' said Legolas. 'If Gondor has such men still in these days of fading, great must have been its glory in the days of its rising'. 

'And doubtless the good stone-work is the older and was wrought in the first building,' said Gimli. 'It is ever so with the things that Men begin: there is a frost in Spring, or a blight in Summer, and they fail of their promise.' 

'Yet seldom do they fail of their seed,' said Legolas. 'And that will lie in the dust and rot to spring up again in times and places unlooked-for. The deeds of Men will outlast us, Gimli.' 

'And yet come to naught in the end but might-have-beens, I guess,' said the Dwarf. 

'To that the Elves know not the answer,' said Legolas.

The Lord of the Rings, by JRR Tolkien

I have always found the above to be a particularly deep and resonant passage; and so do many others. 

At one level, the difference between short-lived, distractible but procreative Men; and the Elves and Dwarves who are (especially Elves) potentially relatively longaevus - seems to be profound. Elves and Dwarves are both capable of greater works of arts and crafts, better able to work on long 'projects' without losing interest...

Yet this is only a relative difference, and sooner or later, all the achievements - all the 'stone work' - of Middle Earth, will decay, and be destroyed. 

The rate of change can be diminished by better work, by steadier and more focused effort - but, it seems, only by a 'slowing' of existence. 

Dwarves and Elves have a longer time horizon, but this goes-with a lower rate of procreation, a lesser focus on reproduction - which stands-for and is symptomatic-of a tendency towards desiring to slow life, trying to hold-things static, attempting to prevent decay by 'crystallizing' achievement... 

But, this has a price; being bound-up with a tendency against life.  

Men, by comparison, are more alive, do more stuff (good and bad, careful and slapdash); just keep on trying different things; bounce-back after defeats and start again - have kids, rebuild the ruins, make another new civilization... 

But Men never seem to get very far with anything they attempt; and they each soon die, and their best civilizations are brief. 

So; in this mortal world, in all we know of this material universe, entropy will always win in the end - whether sooner or later; it will prevail. 

If we imaginatively identify with the perspective of God the Creator, take his Point of View (POV); then this continual dismantling of creation by entropy is unsatisfactory. 

Of course, we (as God) can keep-on creating forever and without limit; yet this is always going to be a matter of patching-together repairs and not a restoration to a pre-entropic state. We can continually compensate for the damage of entropy - a bridge collapses, so we build a new one; a Man dies and another is born - yet whatever we do, entropy accumulates. 

More familiarly for Christians, a closely analogous situation occurs with Sin (which may be understood as an aspect of entropy). God can compensate for the effect of Sin, can repair the consequences, can provide the world with help from Angels and Saints... but, nonetheless, Sin accumulates. 

The way out from this unsatisfactory situation was for God to create another and secondary world from this-one; by using this-one. 

In other words: God's creative plan was two-stage (which is why Jesus was necessary - for the second stage). 

While the first creation is mandatory; the second creation is discretionary: optional, opt-in, for those who choose it. 

The second creation is a 'world' without entropy, a world in which the tendency for destruction and sin has been left-behind. 

I am talking about Heaven, of course. 

And Heaven did not arise until after Jesus Christ.

The reason that Jesus Christ is an essential aspect of salvation; is that He was what made it possible for Heaven to exist, for Heaven to be populated... 

To put it bluntly; God the primary creator needed Jesus Christ in order to make possible the second - and final - creation that is Heaven. 

Jesus Christ came from within the prime creation, lived within the world of entropy - and died; but did so in perfect alignment with the values, aims, love, of God the prime creator. 

In other (more familiar) words; Jesus was a mortal Man who was fully divine. Mortal in body and by living in the primary creation, divine in terms of wholly Good and on the side of God; knowing and being in complete-harmony-with God's creative plans.

Thus Jesus was unique: nobody-else could have done the job (not even God the prime creator) because Jesus knew - experientially, from living fully in both worlds - 'how' to guide Men from this primary and entropic-mortal creation to the secondary and eternal-immortal creation that is Heaven.

       

Can "the planet earth" choose to be damned (or saved)?

I have developed the metaphysical assumption that reality consists of Beings in relationships; this is a version of the spontaneous ('animistic') assumptions of 'all' young children and (so far as is known) hunter-gatherers - including our ancestors. 

I assume that this is an essentially true way of understanding reality which is why it was and is innate, 'built-into' Men - by God. 

Beings are therefore regarded as the ultimate, fundamental, metaphysically primary units of reality; Beings that are alive, with attributes such as consciousness, and purpose.  

In other words: there are ultimately no 'things' (or, more exactly, no knowable things - because chaos is not knowable - it can only be a label for uncreated stuff, including the primordial background state). Ultimately; there is no 'it' - but only 'him' or 'her' (or some other linguistic term that refers to Beings). 

This seems to mean that the spiritual war of this world includes all Beings, not just us human Beings; but animals, plants, and features of what we refer to as the 'mineral' world - sea, sky, and aspects of the earth - and the earth herself. 

And as usual, as with humans, there are Beings within Beings - just as we contain innumerable cells that are beings - for instance the white blood cells which roam our blood and lymph, consuming germs and debris, that are very similar to amoebae. 

And we Men, as individual Beings, are also biologically (and spiritually) 'social animals', with a 'Beingness' of some kinds of human groups, that is difficult to conceptualize yet also traditionally regarded as true; and which seems to exist above the individual level.    

One among many aspects of this situation is that all Beings have an analogous choice to that of Men, of whether to accepts the salvation made possible by Jesus Christ. Whether, that is, to choose resurrection into Heaven.

(Or not - and thus by default [whether actively or passively] to choose... something else.) 

I assume all Beings are - in their very different ways, due to their different qualities and degrees of consciousness - able to choose resurrection - or not. 

And this would apply to that Being which is 'the planet earth'. 

That there is indeed some such Being as 'planet earth', I am assuming on the basis that it seems to be spontaneous knowledge, and a feature of many cultures of many kinds through history. 

This earth will therefore - like you and me - at some point need to make an eternal commitment to Heaven - if the earth is to become immortal, everlasting... resurrected. 

And resurrection entails death; death is the only portal to eternal life of individual Beings. 

So, in order to become part of heavenly Life Eternal; the earth (as a Being) would first need to die; and must then choose - by an eternal commitment - to be resurrected. 

The death of the earth seems 'inevitable', given entropy; which seems to apply to all material stuff in this reality. And then, after death; will the earth choose to be resurrected? 

It seems to me that the earth will not have made this eternally-binding choice to 'discard' all sin and corruption and become everlasting; until after she actually has made this final commitment; because in this mortal and entropic material world, nothing is or can be eternal - including not our choices.

Our choices are open to change, to revision, until they are final choices; which happens only after death: when the spirit has separated from the (dead) body.  

In conclusion; we cannot know in advance whether the planet earth as a Being will, or will not, be part of Heaven; because that final choice has not yet been made by the Being that is Earth. 

This means that the question is still open; and we can be sure that Satan will be trying to influence the choice of Earth; such that she will reject Heaven; and by using broadly the same kind of methods that Satan uses against Men, to induce Men to reject Heaven.

How might this be working? Well, since the modern era (developing from circa 1500 in The West), and even more since the industrial revolution; Men have been set against Earth. Men's assumptions include that the Earth is Not a Being, that 'it' is dead, and can therefore be manipulated and explained as desired. 

The Earth is not even despised; but is regarded as outside of the drama of creation, because unalive. 

Atheists do this, Christians do this, modern environmentalists do this... 

Environmentalists - in particular - have reduced the living earth to an abstract concept called 'the environment'; which is broken down into a multitude of dead sub-concepts derived from science. 

Indeed - at present - the environment is in practice being reduced to mathematical models concerned with Carbon Dioxide; and everything else is ignored or subjugated to these models and their implications. 

In sum; there are many, many reasons why the planet earth might have developed the same kind of sinful, negative, sins that beset modern Man: I mean such sins as fear, resentment and despair. 

We might suppose that such negative attitudes could lead the modern (here-and-now) earth towards the same kind of attitudes to God, divine creation and Heaven as beset modern Men; and might lead to the same salvation-rejecting attitudes as are characteristic of so many modern Men. 

Indeed, it may be that when Christians (or anybody else - but I am addressing Christians in particular) make assumptions about what Will Happen to the planet earth; by acting as-if the earth had no say in the matter, they may be making matters worse! 

When Christians assume that the planet earth Will Be resurrected into the New Jerusalem - that Heaven Will Be on some version of this earth - are they actually taking-for-grated that the living-conscious earth will do exactly what human beings want earth to do, and thereby treating the earth as unalive, just 'a thing' which exists for the convenience of Men?

Just as if we were to assume that we knew for sure whether some particular human being would necessarily ultimately choose or reject salvation and resurrection; because that outcome is part of our own plans. 

To speak 'anthropomorphically' (which may not be far from the literal truth); when we think, speak and behave concerning the earth as an 'it' consisting of 'things' - the earth knows about this! and presumably does not like it, and may develop negative attitudes in consequence - and yet we continue and increase this way of not-relating to the earth. 

(How many of the troubles of Men with 'natural disasters' that we put down to 'bad luck' are actually a direct consequence of the way we regard the earth as a dead it and an unalive thing - and the same for Beings composing, and dwelling on, the earth? Some of the troubles, for sure.)

If we really dwell in this reality as Beings among Beings; then such matters are of fundamental importance: I mean recognizing the agency of other Beings, and recognizing that each Just Is responsible for his or her own salvation. 

It is so easy for us modern Men to fall-into the evil practice of regarding 'the universe' as a 'machine' - and this is wrong even when what is being-assumed is 'a machine for salvation'. 

We are not components in a mechanism, or elements in a determined-plan - and neither is the planet earth! 

We are all Beings, engaged in a free quest, located in a world which is engaged in spiritual war; a vital aspect of which is relationships. 

And one primary principle of such relationships is that we recognize each other as Beings - not as things. 

Conversely; it is a plank of the devil's program of damnation, that Men cease to do this; and instead habitually (and by conviction) regard 'the environment', animals, plants and other Men - as things instead of Beings.

Making Men into things, and he/ she into 'it'; is the malign intent behind such core evil-strategies as bureaucracy, totalitarianism, transhumanism, 'Artificial Intelligence', the transagenda, and the incremental and coercive computerization and digitalization of Life. 

Beings are not necessarily-determined, nor are they random. Instead; Beings have natures (dispositions), and purposes, can learn, make choices - and until they have made eternal choices, their fate cannot be known in advance.

To think and talk otherwise, is choosing to become a component part of the agenda of evil. 

Note added: On re-reading the above, I find it rather unsatisfactorily expressed; and I think this is because I am preaching something I cannot practice - although I want to! For instance, I found several examples (which I needed to edit out) in which I had used 'it/ its' about the planet earth! Nonetheless; this merely emphasizes how deep and pervasive is this 'objectivizing' and dead-ly way of thinking. It has even permeated what most adults (and indeed older children) regard as 'common sense' - so that it strikes most people as dumb or insane to acknowledge the livingness and consciousness of the universe and its true-components. I myself had to be driven to this conclusion (metaphorically 'kicking and screaming') via theoretical biology, and the attempt to define 'life', discuss the 'origins' of 'life', understand the nature of creativity - and indeed to map the proper boundaries of biology... All of which attempts I found to be impossible without the artificial drawing of boundaries that seemed too-obviously arbitrary. When confronted by the dilemma that - therefore - everything must either be alive, or else unalive. (In reductionist scientific terms; all of reality is either 'biology' or physics.) I felt intuitively compelled to assume the truth of the former - given that the idea that all of reality is ultimately physics (or maybe abstract mathematics), has underpinned the assumptions that have led Western Civilization to where we are now. That life consists in irreducible and primary Beings, arose from noticing the abstract - and again artificial - nature of any other conceptualization of biology/ life/ creation.  

Explaining demonic spirits and the damned souls; as the consequence of choices related to love, mortal incarnate life/ entropy/ death, and resurrection

We must die in order to be remade - to be resurrected. 

This is salvation. 

Damnation is the other choice: to reject salvation. 

We must be resurrected to enter that state called Heaven*; because for Heaven to be 'heavenly' - all within it must have-been remade, wholly-good - without disposition to evil. 

Or, to enter Heaven, we must make a permanent commitment to repent and repudiate all sin - all evil, all that opposes divine harmony - and the way that this permanent commitment is made is by resurrection -- in which all that is Good (God-harmonious) in us is retained; while all that is not is left-behind and discarded.

Such a permanent commitment is made from love; and therefore must freely be chosen - cannot be compelled; and can only be made by those capable of love who choose to make love their eternal foundational principle. 

(Only thus can Heaven be a place that is wholly Good (a place without any evil-motivation) and also wholly-free - inhabited by beings with divine powers of creation; who will always and spontaneously use their godly-powers harmoniously with God and other Heavenly beings.)  

The need for death is true for men and women - and for all other beings. 

Which is why this incarnated mortal life on earth is dominated by entropy: because every-"thing" must die, if there is to be a possibility of resurrection. 

In other words: If every being on earth is to have a chance of attaining and choosing Heaven - they all must die, sooner or later. 

Pre-mortal spirit life, although wholly-good, is very imperfect - especially in terms of freedom, of agency. 

The harmony and goodness of pre-mortal life is dependent on the passivity and obedience of spirits; because pre-mortal beings are not innately wholly good (in the way that God is wholly-good, or resurrected beings are wholly good). 

Because pre-mortal spirits are not-wholly-good, the harmony of goodness in pre-mortal life is attained top-down, by the direction and control of God. 

In effect, so far as pre-mortal spirit life goes; God is the wholly-good parents of a mixed bunch of children - some mostly-good, some mostly-evil - none wholly good. It is only by the obedience of these children that goodness prevails. 

But pre-mortal spirits mature, they grow-up, they change... Sooner or later, they get to a point where they must throw-off the passive goodness of obedience to parental authority and control. 

Then these pre-mortal spirits have a choice...

Either the spirits can incarnate on earth - some time afterwards to die, and make the choice of resurrection, or not. 

(This is God's plan - because God wishes to make and inhabit Heaven with resurrected (incarnated everlasting) beings, who have have by their choice of resurrection made an eternal commitment to live in harmony with divine creation.)

Or else those pre-mortal spirits who do not want to die and be resurrected; or who simply do not want to die - and those who reject the divine plan for an harmonious Heaven of free-beings who have chosen to be remade without evil... 

These spirits can escape their previous state of obedience to divine goodness, and enter the sphere of earth while still spirits - and therefore immortal. 

These are the demons. 

(This explains why demons are spirits - not embodied; and why they are immortal. They are spirits because they have refused temporary mortal incarnation, and are immortal because they are spirits, and unaffected by 'entropy'.)

If the pre-mortal spirits choose mortal life on earth, they must choose temporary incarnation and death (as necessary pre-requisites for resurrection); but if they reject this package, then such spirits have rejected even the possibility of Heaven.

This is why all demons are evil, and why demons are worse than incarnated Men - because demons, by their rejection of mortal incarnation, have all chosen to reject the possibility of that death which makes salvation possible. 

(If demons changed their minds and repented, and wished to prepare for the choice of Heaven; they would need first to incarnate and die. Whether this this is possible or ever actually happens I do not know.) 

So - demons have rejected the passive ('secondhand') good of pre-mortal spirit life under the parental influence of God; and they have also rejected that mortal life on earth which is a necessary stage to prepare for remaking-by-resurrection, and Heaven.   

The ruling principle of creation (that which makes creation cohere) is love; and love is the reason why the dead choose resurrection and heaven.  

The essential reason why demons have rejected mortal incarnation, and why some dead mortal Men reject the offer of resurrection into Heaven and instead choose damnation; is that demons and the damned are either incapable of love, or have rejected love as the basis of life and chosen... something else.    

Differently phrased: Demons are those never-incarnated beings who have rejected living under the domination of entropy (i.e. mortal earthly life); and by doing so rejected God's plan of salvation. 

The damned are those who chose to live and die as mortal incarnate Men on earth, and have become dis-carnated beings (i.e. souls severed from their bodies); and who die and then reject resurrection and Heaven; instead choosing some other fate.

*Note: Why our final God-destined state-of-being is embodied, incarnate - rather than spirits - is a topic I have considered elsewhere.   

Against luck and chance as explanations for life

It is necessary for Christians to eschew the common practice of attributing the ups and (especially) downs of life to the luck (good or bad) and chance (favourable or adverse). 

To believe in luck or chance as explanations, is to deny God's shaping of this world and our lives by creation - it is therefore, indirectly, a denial of faith. 

Yet this eschewal of luck itself requires some explanation; because this reality in which we dwell originated in purposeless, meaningless chaos; and this mortal life is 'ruled by entropy' such that change, degeneration, corruption and death are unavoidable - and it is from-this entropic-chaos that Jesus delivered us by resurrection to eternal life. 

Therefore, in this mortal world 'stuff happens', and much of this is out-with God's creative intent... 

But that which happens from entropy, does so without meaning, and is not knowable. All that we know - all 'events' - are known because this is God's creation. 

By the time we recognize any-thing (as an entity, as a phenomenon) it 'already' has meaning, and that meaning has-been shaped by God's creating. 

In other words, we cannot know chaos - but can only know only creation; and therefore chance is never the explanation for whatever we know, whatever we have noticed. 

What this means is that we should suppose that whatever happens in our lives has-been shaped by God - and therefore is a part-of God's overall plan of salvation and theosis. 

This does not mean that every-thing has specific, definable, meaning or purpose when considered in isolation and detached from the stream or arc of our lives; but instead that we should eschew the false and lazy attribution of events to 'randomness' - and realize that what we, personally, need to seek is to learn from 'whatever happens'. 

Such learning is, indeed, our primary duty in confronting the life of this world. Learning from all aspects: up or down, good or bad, favourable or adverse... 

This 'learning' is always our duty (as Christians); whereas, by contrast, 'doing something useful about the world' - i.e. ameliorating the evils of the human condition, is a contingent matter; variably dependent upon many and diverse factors - and seldom possible in practice.  

In sum: we are here to learn, always; but the business of actually, genuinely, positively-re-shaping and improving the situation of this mortal world - whether of our own well-being, or that of fellow men...

Well, this is a rare bonus in our mortal lives - and inevitably very secondary to our duty.

(In Heaven, of course, things will be very different! And actually, genuinely, positively-re-shaping and improving the situation of our lives and the lives of all Beings, by participation in divine creation, becomes our inwardly-desired and joyfully-embraced main-work!)

All Institutional Systems - and Intellectual Systems - are having the Life drained from them

It seems to me that all Systems - whether they are intellectual systems such as mainstream-ideology, religions and theology, church doctrines, philosophies, or the ever-multiplying New Age spiritual systems that purport to replace these - are continually being drained of Life. 

The fact that there is a now a single interconnected nearly-global system (The System) of the international, national; and also the functional (mass media, law, health, education, science, military etc) institutional bureaucracies - actually confirms my contention that the life has been drained from systems. 

Because The System is not merely life-less, but life-consuming. 

The System - and indeed all systems - subordinate and consume not just humans, but animals, plants and mineral planet/ weather/ climate itself - assimilating Life to System requirements and imperatives. 

And, strictly, The System is not even a true system; because it is parasitic rather than self-regenerating.

(Systems, like organisms, are defined as being substantially autonomous, self-perpetuating, self-reproducing. Whereas some parasites are not, since they depend to various degrees on a host. They would be defined as either sub-systemic parts-of other true-systems, as with symbiosis; or else destructive of true-systems.) 

In other words The System as a whole, predates upon its constituent systems; destroying their autonomy (i.e. their very nature as systems) and extracting their energies. 

Thus The System is consuming itself; and actually shrinking - which is why the trend globally has been to destroy nations, agricultural and industrial productivity, and - increasingly - human/ animal/ plant life and the actual structures of 'the environment'. 

Consider how 'the environment' - which is a top-down defined and actively-managed abstract concept; has replaced the freedom, self-sustenance, and independence of real 'nature' - such that theoretical-'environmentalism' - in all its major manifestations - is in practice always destructive of actual-nature.  

As Christians; we can experience for ourselves how the System aspects of our religion (doctrines and dogmas, rituals and practices, symbolism and structures...) are continually-collapsing: continually losing their power and effectiveness - and it has, so far, been impossible to stop (let alone reverse) this trend. 

Traditions are subject to this trend of collapse, but so are all attempts to re-found and innovate new systems of Christianity.

Any apparent success turns out to be at the expense of Christianity as a whole - and short-lived.

This is happening, I believe, because of changes in human nature - especially of human consciousness; because of a divinely-driven development which is a part of God's plan of salvation and theosis.

Systems that worked well with earlier, and different - kinds of people, now don't work as well - or don't work at all. 

(This seems to apply to all types of Christianity, in the West.)

In so far as Christian systems remain - they are increasingly material and mundane - and less and less spiritual. Thus the power of systems positively to transform Man has now all-but gone (and where it remains is, as I said, continually ebbing). 

Consequently, those who remain inside the Christian (or other religious) systems, and who are actively committed to the systems, have become indistinguishable from the secular in those fundamental respects that matter to The System.   

Whether we like it or not (and many Christians do not like it at all, and resist as strongly as they can) positive support from systems is continually disappearing. One may think he has found a supportive niche - but the chances are high that this niche is already dwindling, will not last for long - and will become assimilated to the general pattern of collapse.

Sooner or later, and in the end;  I believe all Christians will have system-help stripped-away - and be thrown-back onto an individual relationship with the divine and creation. 

He will then need to discover how best to survive, and thrive, on such a basis - or else become drawn onto the non-Christian - which is in practice anti-Christian -  side, in the spiritual war of this mortal world. 

The choice is between joining the self-destroying ideology of The System; or developing for oneself a faith rooted out-with that System.

Note added: One whose faith is rooted out-with The System and its sub-manifestations (including System-linked churches) - can safely make good use of the remnant Good within the waning niches of once-real Christian churches. But if he has rooted his faith within any institutional manifestation of Christianity; then I predict that - sooner or later - his faith will be in-trouble: either becoming Christian-in-name-only and dishonestly corrupted to the side of System evil while in denial; or having faith lost altogether and by disillusion and despair coming to a direct affirmation of System ideology.