companions as inferior creatures. Only by preserving the possibility of man achieving a perfectly relaxed consciousness on his own initiative, and so of escaping from the world of evil, could you insist that he continue to regard his less fortunate brethren as his “fellow men”. But turning from theory to practice a man with a corrupted consciousness will not escape from it, without an example to follow.
In other words, if you loved your creation, and wanted to preserve a real hope of your creatures sharing your consciousness and your life, you would have to provide a Redeemer. Naturally the type of Redeemer you provided would be likely to mould the pattern of events and relationships ever afterwards. For instance, if you were reluctant to get involved yourself, and created a perfect man to be man's redeemer, you might find that he was just that; that redeemed mankind flourished very happily but separate from yourself. It is possible that you would find this arrangement satisfactory, if your attitude to your creation was that of a child to his toy-train set; but it is more likely that you would find it torment. The probability is that if you loved your creation you would want to remain separate from it while it was unredeemed, but to be at one with it when it was redeemed. To avoid any risk of the redeemed creation being separate from yourself, you would have to provide a Redeemer who was at one with yourself, or part of yourself. According to the idiom of man's theological thoughts, the Redeemer would have to have the dual nature of God and man.
Just as formerly, you were not able to abandon your creation nor destroy it; so after you have provided the Redeemer, in heart and soul you, the creator, enter the world never to leave it as long as you have life. It is a momentous step for you to take, particularly in view of what is likely to happen to the Redeemer, whom you have provided. He is likely to be murdered. So what is necessary is not that after the Redeemer's murder, he should be carried up by…