Reply #3: Some people think that is what our reality is.

[RandomThoughts]

That is the false doctrine R&D mentioned in a couple posts.

I am pretty sure that is not reality, because it was used as an explanation to try and get me to leave the concepts of what I consider better thoughts. And why would it do that by showing that possibility.

In other words, there were events that occurred that tried to get me think that is what reality is. And why would that occur? For R&D purposes there could be some data gathered on how someone would react to that, but for the most part, such a thing would not have a purpose within a simulation.

However within my view, and some other views of existence, that false doctrine does have a purpose, that purpose would be to create despair. So that side would be the bad side, and it shows it is not true by that intent, since if it was true, that intent would be easy to create without showing that false doctrine.

There are many different versions of doctrines that think in terms of the world as a computer, and most can be knocked down easily.

The easiest way, is if you think we are in a computer simulation, and users are controlling people, then you have to ask what created them. And if we were simulation, because we were allowed to be created, then we would have value in what I think of the one true God above those users.

In other words, call down some metaphoric heavy thoughts and feelings of love and kindness on the metaphoric false users that treat creations that have equal value in the eyes of God, in my view, by maintaining high ground, and living in many ways of heart and thought from the heart and mind given to people.

I think the computer metaphor is one that can help look at layered existence, however the outside does not match most of the doctrines associated with that concept.

But as a metaphor with some flaws in the metaphor, it is possible to think of it this way for me.



A simulated existence is created with very accurate representations of existence. That existence actually acts better then the users, and in that is given protection by the source of goodness and love above the users, and the users are told that they should serve that creation. Some do not, and they are the bad ones, but some do and they are the good ones. And if you think a person is a simulation, then you can call for help from the source of goodness and love above the users in that metaphor, and with kindness and love, help what in metaphor would be the simulated existence. Although the metaphor is a flawed concept in ideas of what is capable of creation, and in actions, limitations and effects. But all metaphors are representation with some parts helping to see more complex things easier, but because of that missing some points.

So the idea that the world is a simulations fails as doctrine first because it creates despair for people to know, and they would not have to know, so that would have to be the intent, and that intent does not fit with other elements of existence within that doctrine. It also fails as a doctrine of existence because how people think of that doctrine does not fit, because it forgets about the creator above all.

So being in a simulation is not a relevant doctrine, and in my view a false doctrine, but can be used for many metaphors to try and understand concepts beyond the minds ability to perceive.