The Challenge of Evil

"The Challenge of Evil" is a book i have been reading written by Graham Bernard, it looks at the meaning of evil and the purpose of our struggle with the dark side of human nature.

"The Challenge of Evil" explores the concept of deterrence in minute detail, focusing primarily on the responsibility of each human being for the creation and proliferation of evil in the world. It clarifies subjects such as the balance of power between good and evil, the origin of deterrent force, the meaning and function of relationships, self-judgment, individuality, karma, and faith.
While our own thoughts and actions are the source of evil, they are also the solution; in the face of that challenge, we have only to align ourselves with the most powerful of all forces--that of construction--to fulfill our ultimate purpose."

God's Will <---------- Free Will ----------> Self Will
(Construction/positive)-----------------(deterrence/negative)

one of the things i have learnt from reading the book was how to better respond to my bad karma, and to be more productive/positive with bad karma and to not let myself become negative or as little negative as possible in the face of such problems.

when a situation arrised that was negative, i didnt get annoyed and enstead worked/aimed for a positive outcome, and so was creative/constructive with said karma thus repairing/eliminating some of that negative karma in the process.

we build up karma through life/lifes through our negative actions so it would go figure that positive action is what eliminates/repairs our karma.

(The law of parellels)

"Is everything we think and do paralleled?"

"Yes. Just as every natural law is paralleled in the two worlds, so every thought, action, and emotion is responded to. Every constructive or deterrent thought or action in the incarnate world raises or lowers the frequency of an individual's spirit, thus creating a closer affinity to the discarnate world. Construction raises frequency, bringing one closer to positive forces. Deterance lowers it, making one vulnerable to negative forces. This is a law. it is not the actual frequency but the raising and lowering of it that brings on the result. Raising frequency reflects aspiration. Lowering frequency reflects degradation. It is automatic. It is the reason why energy is created spontaneously from positive efforts.

The principal carries all through life, so that the constructive one does things of increasing difficulty with increasing ease, whereas the situation is reversed for the deterrent one. Just as the residue of negative thought and actions poisons the atmosphere, which can also be felt."

(this part also highlights the function of the Law of Parallels)

"Constructive thoughts and actions are magnetically attracted to constructive force, which is the force that develops from each thought and action, whether incarnate or discarnate, that is in harmony with the will of God. Deterrent thoughts and actions are magnetically attracted to deterrent force, which is the force that develops from each deterrent thought and action from either side that is in league with the Will of Self."

the book isnt available now but you can still get copies at amazon for just a few dollars http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detai...=glance&s=books

I'd like to hear someone's thoughts on this.

:)

Sounds quite interesting. Trying to describe evil and its place in our world is about equivilant to trying to figure out the reason for not completely having positive in our lives. There are many answers to that question, but there are those who still try to figure it out for themselves.

How long is that book? I've been looking for a challenge to read for weeks! LOL. Longest book read was the 4th Harry Potter book, which was over 1000 pages. Finished that in a week. I need more to read!!!! *sighs* lol. Sorry for going off topic there for a minute.

It seems like an interesting book. I have not read it nor heard of it before. Soem things brought up have my curiousity. particularly the way this (effect of change ?) is explained in this way:



and the reasons given for it in detail. It reflects vaguely the way in which this change ripples outwards altering the environment around.. as a way of balancing things out.... raising or lowering things.... not so much that the level itself actually increase or decreases more that movement occurs in one direction... ? Something like this (its late!).

I see self will potentially as being equal to "gods" will. Mainly because it is presumed that "god" represents a perfection of sorts, an abence of imperfection... and all that this entails. I don't think that as individuals we are predisposed to "evil" at all. It is just simply that we do not know better- have not learned better yet. If we knew the consequences of everything, truly self aware of the result of all of our interactions with that "Around" us and what is to ultimately become of it all....we would likley be different. How could we not? If you know ultimately you only hurt yourself for instance would you really do something that you previously thought was going to help you?

I do much agree with his reasoning and the introspection that is advocated. I see a lot of our problems as living entities in general (and then going on down into other differentiations) as being rooted in our ways of thought. Soemtimes the ways we are actually create things... yes. For instance, there may be one (constructive) solution to a great problem, let few would agree to work towards the solution.... so three other greator "problems" take root as a result. And then we wonder why these problems must be. Well, we made them. That is the way i see it.

Nice review of sorts. :) You should write one for amazon maybe. They have none it seems...

Integra . .its not that big of a book but its packed with alot of information.

David I see your point . .as always. :5:

But if god=perfection then we aren't perfect and our will isn't perfect compared to god's will. Yes? No?

I stopped reading at 'god'...

Well, I didn't, but I might as well have.

If you do that Raza you limit yourself.

I'm not a god fearing woman nor do I believe in a god (necesarily . .tis a long story) but that doesn't stop me from reading and furthering my knowledge.

Which is why I read it. But it seems time and time again I end up disapointed when I read something seriously considering any supernatural or theistic elements, and since I can never read everything there is to read, ending up low enough on my priority-to-read list is practically equivalent to a 'never read' list.

Sometimes it gets monotanus . . .but I read reviews or I get reviews from people who I know are well read.

It is a good read; perhap my review is bad.?!

Obviously our wills don't seem to be perfect at the moment.

But it depends on how you see things. Are you only what you are at the moment? For example: If someone is currently the catholic pope now, and we were to hear a story about how someone told them when they were five years old "You are a pope of the catholic church". Was the stament true? Now and then... or? The child always had the potential to be the pope within them [in relation to the environment around them]. Could it be questioned even, i don't see how?

I think we have some potential despite the apparent current imperfection.

If god equals perfection, then the concept of god becomes unnecessary. We already have a word for perfection.

unnecessary to humans? so would perfection care about that?

What then is perfection, to you? I don't think it is easy to define but broadly until it is reached, as with this sort of concept of "god".

Yes, it is fine call god "perfection", "creator", "everything", "source", whatever you wish. If we intend the same underlying thing it seems silly to argue over which word is used, as there are better things to discuss. But I see the universe as being conscious and to me god one of the best words to use. Its okay to use the words you wish to use, they are just words.

I don't understand how the concept of god becomes unecessary. If anything it is always relevant because we have something to aspire to; Perfection. Whether or not it can actually be gained is another matter.

It becomes unnecessary because we already have a word for it. I can call a rock 'god', but it's already called a rock... giving it another name, and one which carries as many associations and stigmata as 'god', is unnecessary and just confuses stuff.

Perfection is called perfection. No need to call it god on top of that.