Jump to content


Photo

The Urantia Book & The New Age


  • Please log in to reply
61 replies to this topic

#21 -Scott-

-Scott-

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,023 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada
  • Interests:Camping, Hiking, Soccer, Movies, Games,

Posted 26 February 2013 - 08:54 PM

I think it is safe for us to evaluate other religions and in fact it is helpful in our discussion of the u.b. IMO there is actually a lot more danger in just accepting everything as spiritually useful information. The u.b often evaluates aspects of other religions, often times those evaluations are not positive so I think its safe to say we are supposed to use that information to help us. All the writings in the u.b that deal with mysticism and talk about the mystic state IMO are directly tied into the core of many new-age beliefs.

I think the key is to be as wise as a serpent about this stuff and as harmful as a dove :).

Edited by -Scott-, 26 February 2013 - 08:56 PM.

If one man craves freedom -- liberty -- he must remember that all other men long for the same freedom

#22 Bradly aka/fanofVan

Bradly aka/fanofVan

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 793 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Midwest USA
  • Interests:Gardening, sustainable agriculture/micro-farming, history, philosophy, behavioral psych, economics (quit laughing), the blues, learning from children.

Posted 27 February 2013 - 09:14 AM

Absonite - I look forward to your "funnel" of similarities that are shared by the so-called new ageisms and feel you're off to a good start. Yes, the reality of religious experience is unique to each, even more so with the "mix and match" bunch who combine multiples of disciplines or philosophies, combining them in unique recipes. As you suggest, the differences do not eliminate the similarities, eh?

For my part, I find it incredibly interesting how our world has changed its view since Gutenberg and the rise of so many branches of christianity over the past 3 centuries and Houdini and Sadler's time saw the New Age blossoming as people became more and more dissatisfied with any institutionalization of personal religion. I wonder about the effect of literacy and education as a driver of this. We used to "need" the priests and preachers and doctrines when we could not read, study, and find our own ways. This "individualization" of religious experience was set loose and grows still. Why? How? We are told the Spirit of Truth restates the gospel of Jesus to every generation in new and expanding ways relevant to that generation and the hypocracies and failures of our institutions, especially religious, keep encouraging this experimentation of practices individually and in smaller groups. Unfortunately for truth seekers, smaller is not always better regarding fraud, hypocracy, or well intended diversions which often disappoint. There is no easy way to change nor any way to change oneself that is both simple and supports our prejudices and preferences. Takes work.

I am not familiar with most of the authors you cite but I am concerned that a book author is considered anything more than a dim reflection of any movements or affiliations of practice. What I do know about many such is that the person is elevated, as you said, and are designed to make the person feel better about themselves and find happiness for themselves. Not an unworthy venture but not truly religious in any sense. The self help gurus are not, in my mind, New Age practices for true truthseekers hoping to change their world and their priorities and practices and perspectives on the soul or Source and Center, are not satisfied with psychological education but seek transformation. Perhaps this could be a further refinement of your thread here. Which are transformative disciplines and which are undisciplined beliefs promising to feel better about ourself? And what's the difference in metaphysical butterflies and students of truth seeking? Maybe just time and action leading to unification of philosophy and faith results....regardless of the path taken? This is my belief....the path does not lead where the student will not go....but effort and intent bring results on every path?
Peace be upon you."

#23 Absonite

Absonite

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 344 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Studying the cosmotheosophy (the cosmology, theology, and philosophy) taught by the Urantia Book.

Posted 27 February 2013 - 10:06 AM

Bradly - I have repeatedly noticed that some people who prefer to use a particular approach to religious and/or spiritual living often accuse others' approaches as merely fluffy feel good philosophies. And after sincere and careful examination of those philosophies, I really only very rarely found such accusations to be accurate. I've even been told that the UB offers nothing more than a warm and fuzzy feel good philosophy that refuses to face the hard core fact of hell and what needs to be done to be saved! (and just from that, I suspect that you probably can correctly guess the religious approach of the people who have made that groundless accusation)

From what I have studied about New Ageism and experienced with New Agers of the general philosophical bent I have outlined earlier in this thread - the overwhelmingly majority of them are sincere and honest about their desire to know and commune with Deity, and transform how they conduct their lives in loving, peaceful, and joyous relationship with others and the cosmos. Now sure, there are a bunch of charlatans out there running around, posturing and posing and pretending to be what they're not, claiming to have some sort of spiritual super powers, and putting on disgraceful performances that simultaneously border on both the comedic and the tragic. However, such people can be found walking every spiritual pathway. And to use an example of what I mean that will hit home about that: we have just such a notorious example of such an individual associated with the teachings of the UB, stationed in Arizona, putting on a shameful show of proclaiming to be Gabriel! I dismiss all such pompous foolishness as just that: foolishness. And just as I encourage people who stumble across Anthony Delevin's "performance art" not to judge the teachings of the UB according to his example, I strive to be careful not to take any single New Age teacher putting on a show and erroneously generalize that one's foolishness as indicative (and as authoritative) for New Ageism.

However, as I mentioned before, a general gist can be discerned from a sampling of what several major authors of that philosophy consistently teach. And there is something to it that does indeed resonate with an aspect of the general gist of the teachings offered by the UB.

The cosmology of New Ageism is similar (not the same: just similar in a certain kind of general gist) to teachings of the UB. The universe frame of the UB also differentiates reality into gradations (cosmic levels, psychic circles, Adjutant spirit-circuits, Morontia Worlds, Master Universe locations, etc...). Higher is associated with inner, and lower is associated with outer. And progress from the outer to the inner - from the lower to the higher - is referenced as ascension, as well as further explained as a growth process which one progressively engages with the goal of becoming less physical and more spiritual.

That is a commonality of approach that both UB readers and New Agers share: the desire to have a frame of reference in which to orient perspective, think, and motivate progressive growth. And, believe it or not, based upon the New Agers with whom I have spoken that is one of the core reasons that many New Agers who read the UB keep coming back to it again and again over the years - because the UB undeniably offers the most comprehensive, comprehensible, internally consistent, and satisfying cosmological map available. The grandeur of the Master and Grand Universe, the astonishing architecture and dynamic interactions of things and beings - all concentrically coordinated and regulated by various entities in the service of God, is almost inevitably recognized as beautiful, true, and good. As I have said before: what the UB offers makes the other cosmologies seem profoundly pale in comparison. And the UB cosmology also provides a profound sense of intense satisfaction to New Agers - once they start getting it, once they get past the often challenging language of the UB (and other philosophical differences), and really start to consider and think within it.

That commonality of approach is a very good point to start having sincere discussions with New Agers about what the UB offers, because it lets them notice a much more expansive, wonderfully detailed, and inspiring adventurous map for the ascension process of growth from physical identification to spiritual identification.

Edited by Absonite, 27 February 2013 - 10:11 AM.


#24 -Scott-

-Scott-

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,023 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada
  • Interests:Camping, Hiking, Soccer, Movies, Games,

Posted 27 February 2013 - 10:30 AM

What I find interesting though, is that many mystics seem to experience something in common and that is a profound sense of unity. They seem to blur reality together when they get a sense of unity IMO. We know that spirit is unity so I think what they are actually experiencing is just some mental illusion or mirage of what spiritual reality is. Though to say new-agers are the only mystics would be a lie. I have stated that I don't believe that I have had any many personal religious experiences so I am sure that I have had many of my own mystic illusions. Of coarse Jesus never had any mystic illusion or psychic delusion.
If one man craves freedom -- liberty -- he must remember that all other men long for the same freedom

#25 Absonite

Absonite

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 344 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Studying the cosmotheosophy (the cosmology, theology, and philosophy) taught by the Urantia Book.

Posted 27 February 2013 - 10:56 AM

Why exactly is the profound sense of unity that non-UB readers experience a "mental illusion or mirage of what spiritual reality is"?

Edited by Absonite, 27 February 2013 - 10:56 AM.


#26 -Scott-

-Scott-

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,023 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada
  • Interests:Camping, Hiking, Soccer, Movies, Games,

Posted 27 February 2013 - 11:34 AM

Why exactly is the profound sense of unity that non-UB readers experience a "mental illusion or mirage of what spiritual reality is"?


An attempt to experience spirit. Spirit is unity. Our mind can run wild with imaginative thoughts of spirit, even when we are not actually experiencing it. We can confuse those daydreams of spirit as genuine religous experience IMO. It just makes sense IMO that if we get carried away with our imaginative thoughts of a unity substance that our tendancy to view reality will just be from a unity perspective where we blur everything together.

Edited by -Scott-, 27 February 2013 - 11:46 AM.

If one man craves freedom -- liberty -- he must remember that all other men long for the same freedom

#27 Bradly aka/fanofVan

Bradly aka/fanofVan

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 793 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Midwest USA
  • Interests:Gardening, sustainable agriculture/micro-farming, history, philosophy, behavioral psych, economics (quit laughing), the blues, learning from children.

Posted 27 February 2013 - 12:17 PM

Is it not the thirst and the hunger that leads all to Him? May all who seek, find. No matter where and how they look for Him.

(1570.5) 140:3.4 “Happy are they who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be filled.

(1861.2) 170:2.20 Jesus taught that, by faith, the believer enters the kingdom now. In the various discourses he taught that two things are essential to faith-entrance into the kingdom:


(1861.3) 170:2.21 1. Faith, sincerity. To come as a little child, to receive the bestowal of sonship as a gift; to submit to the doing of the Father’s will without questioning and in the full confidence and genuine trustfulness of the Father’s wisdom; to come into the kingdom free from prejudice and preconception; to be open-minded and teachable like an unspoiled child.
(1861.4) 170:2.22 2. Truth hunger. The thirst for righteousness, a change of mind, the acquirement of the motive to be like God and to find God.

(381.2) 34:6.8 It is the presence of the divine Spirit, the water of life, that prevents the consuming thirst of mortal discontent and that indescribable hunger of the unspiritualized human mind. Spirit-motivated beings “never thirst, for this spiritual water shall be in them a well of satisfaction springing up into life everlasting.” Such divinely watered souls are all but independent of material environment as regards the joys of living and the satisfactions of earthly existence. They are spiritually illuminated and refreshed, morally strengthened and endowed.

(1119.5) 102:1.6 The indwelling Thought Adjuster unfailingly arouses in man’s soul a true and searching hunger for perfection together with a far-reaching curiosity which can be adequately satisfied only by communion with God, the divine source of that Adjuster. The hungry soul of man refuses to be satisfied with anything less than the personal realization of the living God. Whatever more God may be than a high and perfect moral personality, he cannot, in our hungry and finite concept, be anything less.

(1133.2) 103:4.2 When primitive man felt that his communion with God had been interrupted, he resorted to sacrifice of some kind in an effort to make atonement, to restore friendly relationship. The hunger and thirst for righteousness leads to the discovery of truth, and truth augments ideals, and this creates new problems for the individual religionists, for our ideals tend to grow by geometrical progression, while our ability to live up to them is enhanced only by arithmetical progression.
Peace be upon you."

#28 Absonite

Absonite

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 344 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Studying the cosmotheosophy (the cosmology, theology, and philosophy) taught by the Urantia Book.

Posted 27 February 2013 - 03:24 PM

Exactly, Bradly

For those reasons you have illuminated with those quotes, I do my best not to denigrate people who approach God using a New Age perspective. However, that does not mean I do not have intense issues with what I recognize as the pantheistic core of that approach. And that's where discussion enters some rough rapids, because there are many little whirlpools and rocks admist that philosophical whitewater rafting that can make communication-navigation ultra difficult.

Difficult, but not impossible.

The chief navigational challenge is language. The lexicon of terms, and their refined (and often very specific) meanings that the UB offers for discussing situations is as much of a hindrance (for talking about topics with others who do not know the lingo) as it is a help (for UB readers thinking in, and striving to live according to, the UB universe frame).

And, of course, we know that we have to start from the top, which brings us right to conversations about the meaning and usage of the word God.

When a New Ager is asked what that word (God) means to them, a philosophical collision can occur - because there is a recurring penchant for New Ageism to portray God as impersonal, rather than as personal. And after banging against that wall in many conversations over many years, I finally noticed a door that often enables us to do more than holler at each other through the bricks: the fact that a person only can love another person (2:6.8)

I have not met any New Agers who are not interested in love, and who also do not yearn to improve their understanding of love, as well as learn how loving to relate with other people.

I have learned the wisdom of sharing that fact (that a person only can love another person), and of making the key distinction between relationships (which involve people-persons) and interactions (which involve either people with non-personal things, or involve things with other things). Then I use that understanding to point back at God, and suggest that God therefore must be a person (The Infinite Person) - simply because we (who are people) can indeed lovingly relate with God who also (and always) lovingly relates with us.

And that approach usually provides a New Ager who tends to consider God as impersonal a means to begin considering God as personal, which in turn opens the way for further discussion about what the UB teaches such that (far more often than not) the ensuing conversation makes impactful and visceral spiritual sense.

Edited by Absonite, 27 February 2013 - 03:39 PM.


#29 Bradly aka/fanofVan

Bradly aka/fanofVan

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 793 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Midwest USA
  • Interests:Gardening, sustainable agriculture/micro-farming, history, philosophy, behavioral psych, economics (quit laughing), the blues, learning from children.

Posted 27 February 2013 - 04:55 PM

There is much truth in what you say. I would add that because many New Agers have rejected institutional religion (as I did), the very word religion can be easily misconstrued by such. For the Revelation does not define religion or religious experience by collective-practice or leadership or creed/dogma. Religion is personal or it is nothing at all. So, these brothers and sisters seeking meaning, values, and connections to spirit often resent and resist their quest and truth seeking as religious at all....spiritual, yes...religious no. But we know every effort to hear, find, or follow Father is indeed a religious experience....and this is true of those who follow a group, congragation, or institutional leadership in their personal religious experience AND those who reject that form and function AND UBers - all.

Nigel and you point out this communication difficulty. Many are now saying they are not religious but they are spiritual in surveys of beliefs and affiliations. Like you, I don't think it difficult to "personalize" Father when this distinction is recognized and honored and the terms are shared in definition. Can one be spiritual and not religious? I used to think so but not anymore. Can one be religious and not be spiritual? A more interesting question, eh? What is the motive? What is intended by the self-defined "religious" who follows ceremony by rote to avoid damnation but remains surly, selfish, and with little regard for their fellows? To unify these two terms into a simple description of "seeking" connection to God and spirit individually and personally would build a solid bridge of unity I believe.

It is my belief that ALL seekers seek that which we have described within the Revelation when once it is learned....so many truths already discovered in mind and by seeking and acting confirmed therein with everything "new" to mind easily integrated and contextualized from so many perspectives. Thank you Absonite. Looking forward to your work and your words.

B)
Peace be upon you."

#30 -Scott-

-Scott-

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,023 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Canada
  • Interests:Camping, Hiking, Soccer, Movies, Games,

Posted 27 February 2013 - 07:44 PM

Jesus talked about the pitfalls of other religions, so I am sure if he can have that conversation so can we. We have the u.b to help us differentiate between what is true and what is false at least generally speaking. I also think that is one of the benefits of study groups. That conversation can happen freely without worry amongst fellow readers.

I have always payed extra attention to the parts in the u.b that may relate to new-age. I have always tried to understand how mysticism and new-age stuff fits with the u.b and at first I thought it was only those new-age people who were prone to falling into the pitfalls of mysticism but the more I have studied this topic the more I have came to realize that I actually have fallen into many of these pitfalls as well. After reading the u.b a bunch of times I figured that I was well on my way to experiencing "true religion" but I have come to found out that I haven't actually experienced that yet and my so-called religious experiences are actually more like mystic meditations. So some times we can eat some serious humble pie the more we dig into this stuff. I know I have.

IMO the only way to experience True Religion is through the utilization of those 3 innate cosmic intuitions. Which it is sad to record that so few human beings are....(16:6.9) and I do not consider myself one of the "few" that are.

Edited by -Scott-, 27 February 2013 - 08:03 PM.

If one man craves freedom -- liberty -- he must remember that all other men long for the same freedom

#31 Absonite

Absonite

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 344 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Studying the cosmotheosophy (the cosmology, theology, and philosophy) taught by the Urantia Book.

Posted 28 February 2013 - 03:47 AM

When one understands that people who profess to be "spiritual, not religious" mean that they pursue a personal approach - instead of following the dogma, and participating in the ceremonies, of a group's institutionalized approach - then suddenly what they're talking about becomes clear.

Many New Age authors emphasize the difference between being religious and being spiritual according to that basic way. When New Agers (and others) make that proclamation, or ask me about the issue in the form of questions, I start with clarifying that, for me, being religious is the pursuit of a profound personal relationship with God - and being spiritual is the process for how I make that pursuit happen.

Now, that basic explanation that I provide is not what they expect to hear, because for them religion is about group institutionalization, not personal relationship. The very next statement or question from them almost always is about that. They either tell me that they're not into following priests or preachers or ministers etc... Or they ask me if I belong, or go, to church - because that's the essence of their problem (group institutionalization). Often, in the same breath, they ask me if I am a Christian, or they make a comment about how they are not Christians.

These days, I have been answering those questions by saying, "I'm a Christian, not a Churchian. I'm into Christianity, not Churchianity - if you know what I mean." And I have not met a single one who fails to get my point, because it addresses the core of their issue that took them to the place of phrasing it as being "spiritual, not religious". My response leads them to ask me more questions because suddenly they're intrigued.

A few still go on to make pronouncements that basically present the situation as "spirtuality is good, religion is bad" - and I use such opportunities to clarify more of what I mean (and what the UB teaches) about true religion.


So an important point for UB readers to keep in mind about all this is to remember that New Agers are not talking about religion and being religious according to what the UB explains about religion. The similarity here (again, not ignoring any differences) is that both New Agers and UB readers pursue a personal path to communion with God.

And again, just to hammer it home, I am NOT saying here that UB readers are New Agers, or that the UB is a New Age book because of that.

Edited by Absonite, 28 February 2013 - 04:57 AM.


#32 MB Melody

MB Melody

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 42 posts

Posted 28 February 2013 - 07:15 AM

Hello friends,

‘Absonite’ has shared a positive outreach approach to the recurring New Ager penchant for portraying God “as impersonal, rather than as personal.” which emphasizes “the fact that a person only can love another person (2:6.8)”.

I have learned the wisdom of sharing that fact (that a person only can love another person), and of making the key distinction between relationships (which involve people-persons) and interactions (which involve either people with non-personal things, or involve things with other things). Then I use that understanding to point back at God, and suggest that God therefore must be a person (The Infinite Person) - simply because we (who are people) can indeed lovingly relate with God who also (and always) lovingly relates with us.

And that approach usually provides a New Ager who tends to consider God as impersonal a means to begin considering God as personal, which in turn opens the way for further discussion about what the UB teaches such that (far more often than not) the ensuing conversation makes impactful and visceral spiritual sense.


Imo, this avenue can be profitably widened with consideration of the truths elaborated by:
(1:5.2), (102:1.6), & (161:1.11) which portray that “God” cannot be “anything less” than a Person.

In good spirit,
MBM

#33 Bradly aka/fanofVan

Bradly aka/fanofVan

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 793 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Midwest USA
  • Interests:Gardening, sustainable agriculture/micro-farming, history, philosophy, behavioral psych, economics (quit laughing), the blues, learning from children.

Posted 28 February 2013 - 08:32 AM

Friend Melody says well and I think leads to other points of context for consideration: the New Age seeker (and I'll expand that definition here somewhat - all who have rejected institutionalized religions for another, more personal, and often more "radical" expression of spirit and spiritization over the past few centuries - the great rise of this New Age may have been 20th century but not its birth) has inherent and innate needs that want fulfillment. These include a "belonging" - while they are (and I was) fiercely independant in one way, they also yearn for fellowship, confirmation, and growth. And despite any pantheism "patterns" of thinking, they reject mechanical accident as the Source and Center and thirst for a personalized relationship with spirit, if not Diety. Now, one might ask (as MB suggests) "what" is the source of spirit? And cosmic unification and order? The "we are all one" belief that many such share is a step toward the Fatherhood of God through the Fellowship of Humanity.

It seems they are half way there. They reject the accident of creation but do not yet embrace the personal creation...but do believe there is some"thing" greater than physics at work in the universe, eh? (Please forgive this generalization for many, myself included, did not reject Father as person when rejecting the institutions so many New Agers DO believe in a personal God too.) It is interesting to inquire as to the source of personality and love and the I AM within each mind, if not bestowed BY mind/personality itself. From whence comes this ME? Upon reflection, is it not interesting to consider that since Newton, Gutenberg, and Luther, there has been a growing individualization of religious experience and expression and this blossoming of New Age rejection of institutionalization exploding in the 20th century was intersected by the Revelation a half century before the world wide web? Here are all these religionists (whether they claim such or not) scattered, if you will, by the winds of the New Age and what have we now to bring them into fellowship with truth, beauty, goodness, purpose, and plan by Revelation, a shared text of terms, explainations, and demonstrations of the Cosmos.

While we may each experience the truth uniquely and individually, I believe any New Ager would agree there is only one and can be only one unifying reality....just no one agrees what that is....but it does exist in mind to all.....they/we reject what we do not believe and we'd like to think our view is the clearest but the lack of agreement is itself disconcerting and so the search continues. May it lead some to the Revelation and all to Father.

Edited by Bradly aka/fanofVan, 28 February 2013 - 08:35 AM.

Peace be upon you."

#34 Bradly aka/fanofVan

Bradly aka/fanofVan

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 793 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Midwest USA
  • Interests:Gardening, sustainable agriculture/micro-farming, history, philosophy, behavioral psych, economics (quit laughing), the blues, learning from children.

Posted 28 February 2013 - 08:52 AM

A Thought to Ponder from The Urantia Book






"Economic necessities tie man up with reality, and personal religious experience brings this same man face to face with the eternal realities of an ever-expanding and progressing cosmic citizenship."

(1093.3) 99:7.5




Urantia Book Teachings







"Now, mistake not, my Father will ever respond to the faintest flicker of faith."

Jesus, The Urantia Book, (1733.5) 155:6.17
Peace be upon you."

#35 Alina

Alina

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,393 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:UNIVERSO
  • Interests:*

Posted 28 February 2013 - 01:34 PM

Hello all!

According to what I've been wondering, the New Age religion takes the meaning of religion, respecting the concept from its roots (from the Latin religare or re-legere) which means gather, unite what is separate, but Gather what? - Say it's finding the relationship between the lower and the higher self, it would be for us, seek unification with Spirit Thought Adjuster. Joining our material mind, with the Spirit resides in us, Ajustador Thought.
The term religion is used by them, but in this sense is not as commonly accepted as if it were synonymous with religion or need an institution as intermediary. No, in that I totally agree. We speak of a personal religion, and means that, as Jesus taught us, the Religion of the Spirit ...
Then, according to new concepts, there is no difference between saying religious or spiritual. It is the same.Surely, when people ask they respond that they are spiritual but not religious, so there is no confusion of people who do not know.
Moreover, it is understandable that people link a religion with a prescribed institution or dogma. It is the heritage of the centuries! that is not actualized.
For me, when the UB uses the term religion, if not specified, refers to the religion of the spirit, a personal religion.
Also, I think you noticed that in the UB. appears a new term: religionist.

Personal religion is the religion of the Spirit:

(1729.6) 155:5.11 The religion of the spirit means effort, struggle, conflict, faith, determination, love, loyalty, and progress...

(1729.7) 155:5.12 And Jesus went on to say: “At Jerusalem the religious leaders have formulated the various doctrines of their traditional teachers and the prophets of other days into an established system of intellectual beliefs, a religion of authority. The appeal of all such religions is largely to the mind. And now are we about to enter upon a deadly conflict with such a religion since we will so shortly begin the bold proclamation of a new religion — a religion which is not a religion in the present-day meaning of that word, a religion that makes its chief appeal to the divine spirit of my Father which resides in the mind of man; a religion which shall derive its authority from the fruits of its acceptance that will so certainly appear in the personal experience of all who really and truly become believers in the truths of this higher spiritual communion.”

(1730.6) 155:6.2... . My Father is no respecter of races or generations in that the word of truth is vouchsafed one age and withheld from another. Commit not the folly of calling that divine which is wholly human, and fail not to discern the words of truth which come not through the traditional oracles of supposed inspiration.

(1100.4) 100:6.2 The accepted supreme value of the religionist may be base or even false, but it is nevertheless religious. A religion is genuine to just the extent that the value which is held to be supreme is truly a cosmic reality of genuine spiritual worth.


I'm more interested in addressing the issue from the coincidence, it seems more constructive.No since the differences, because the difference will always be reconciled, later... :)


Greetings,

Alina
***

Edited by Alina, 28 February 2013 - 03:06 PM.


#36 Absonite

Absonite

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 344 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Studying the cosmotheosophy (the cosmology, theology, and philosophy) taught by the Urantia Book.

Posted 28 February 2013 - 04:31 PM

The pantheistic perspective of New Ageism is an intense issue.

I have only been able to make progress with it by asking New Agers to be honest about whether or not using it really works for them - with specific regard for improving the quality of their relationships and the success of their endeavors. I mean right down to the proverbial brass tacks of daily living. I ask them what pantheism does for them, other than provide a titillating thrill of enacting what, for many religions, is the top taboo: proclaiming oneself to be God. I ask them to explain to me what the exact benefit actually is.

The answers I have received have been diverse - and have shared a commonality of motivation which arises through the course of further questions. That commonality of motivation is a fear of suffering from surrendering to authoritarian rule, regardless of how perfect, loving, joyous, peaceful, etc... the authority is said to be.

At first, I was surprised by that common admission.

Yet, as I continued examining it over time, I began to notice that it was not something exclusively unique to New Agers. Save for a relative few - most people share that fear directly due to how people who wield power over them during their lives have abused it. In life, we can always strive, and to a great degree can eventually arrive, at various positions where we are least effected by such abuses of power - alleviating that fear. However, when it comes to religion and spirituality which poses an Infinite Authority, the way they seem to have found for alleviating that fear is pantheistically to proclaim that they are that Authority - to put themselves in the highest, the deepest, cosmic position possible that cannot be superseded by any other. And thus the one position they can claim from which no authority can exercise power abuse over them. Of course, the lure is sweetened with the notorious affirmations that once they become Awakened, Enlightened, Ascended, etc... and thus "remembers who they who really are" - then they ostensibly can create whatever they want through miraculous manifestation using Deific abilities.

This is a nut that is hard to explain in a way that does the problem justice - and is even harder to crack - because the fear is often tied up with issues involving control, the fulfillment of physical survival needs, psychological traumas from coping with the vicissitudes of harsh life circumstances, and other challenges particular to each individual.

The most that I have been able to do through conversation is meet them on the level of that commonality where I acknowledge my own fears, and tell them about how what I have learned from the UB (as well as from the perpetual prompting of inner guidance) has alleviated it - without having to go to the extreme position of futilely attempting to put myself in the position of God to find relief. I encourage personal relationship with God on the inside (Fragment) as a method for being able to understand that God on the outside (in whom we live, move, and have our being - and focalized in various ways and places [Michaels, Paradise, etc...]) - is not like the threatening power mongers here on Urantia.

I keep striving to find ways to encourage them to find the motivation from personal relationship within that will enable them to step through the door in the proverbial wall.

And I have been increasingly learning that the most I can do beyond conversation is consistently to demonstrate how one can live and relate without joining them on the other side.

Edited by Absonite, 01 March 2013 - 03:52 AM.


#37 Rick Warren

Rick Warren

    Rick Warren

  • Administrators
  • PipPip
  • 9,923 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

Posted 28 February 2013 - 05:07 PM

Best of luck, Absonite. I like to ask: Is the creator of personality not a person? The Person?

#38 Bradly aka/fanofVan

Bradly aka/fanofVan

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 793 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Midwest USA
  • Interests:Gardening, sustainable agriculture/micro-farming, history, philosophy, behavioral psych, economics (quit laughing), the blues, learning from children.

Posted 28 February 2013 - 06:06 PM

Absonite - I trust you will maintain the thrust of your point here and not allow my tangents to distract, but I'd comment on a couple of issues here.

First; my own experience as example (and your most recent post above) would suggest that many belief systems are the result of an elimination process and a rejection process complicating the package of "current" beliefs - similar to the vocabulary/context issue already discussed. It many cases it is the baby going out the window with the proverbial bath water, no? I mean to say that if the pope says this (or your preacher or your father) then it must be false since so much they said is false (truly and actually false). It is less an embrace of something found than it is a rejection of anything supported or endorsed by a particular person, position of authority, or institution that has been rejected first. A wise one once said, "Just because a fool says the earth is round....don't make it flat." Some come to believe that which is not disbelieved already and can become less an embrace of new truth and more like a game of musical chairs, with fewer and fewer choices to embrace.

Next; as a child of fundamentalist christianity I was taught I can and should have a personal relationship with God (A Closer Walk With Thee - And He walks with me and He talks to me and tells me I am His own...) but I never encountered anything like the TA or God infusion of mind. Father was my source but He resided "up in heaven". So even such a one as I did not know, could not even fathom, that Father dwelt within....even Jesusonian christians know of soul but not TA. This is profoundly important and profoundly different, no?

Next, as our Master illustrated for all to come after, it is not up to any to conflict with much if we are to gain traction or influence with any other. As Sister Alina has stated, we must begin such conversations in the ernest pursuit of commonalities and not differences. Especially so for us. Why? Because, as a child I was taught to not only fear for my own survival but I was responsible for the survival of others. When one is gripped by such fear from such beliefs, it is so hard to act without fear....unless replaced by superiority or ego assurance. This is a dreadful place to be and a valid reason for "rejection" of the "baby" in the bathwater. So, any presentation of Father to such a rejector is likely to be rejected as well....at least by many.

Finally, the Revelation says that parenthood is a pattern example of the greater reality and that one's paternity pattern can open or shut the mind to our Heavenly Parents. If we do not have good human examples of fatherhood and motherhood, we will not be attracted by the Fatherhood, even if we embrace the brotherhood. And then there is the "apparent" sexism of the whole sexualized presentation of the bible and the UB - you know why I say apparent, yes? While the UB decries all forms of sexism and teaches the planet cannot and will not progress beyond a certain point for so long as it exists, there is a presentation of greater patterns within the lesser, mortal power of man over woman is a painful reality to get beyond for some. Certainly not all, or any who take time in-text to drill deeper into the issues. I'm married to a strong woman (and come from a long line of them too) who is a FEM activist but she has no problems with the reality and truths presented in our Revelation.

I am very pleased to read your last statement and I concur: "And I have been increasingly learning that the most I can do beyond conversation is consistently to demonstrate how one can live and relate without joining them on the other side."
Peace be upon you."

#39 Absonite

Absonite

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 344 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Studying the cosmotheosophy (the cosmology, theology, and philosophy) taught by the Urantia Book.

Posted 28 February 2013 - 06:49 PM

@Rick


Let's take on that question in another thread!

I will see if I can find an appropriate one here on the Forum and get to it there - because that question is loaded in a way that causes a scattershot of answers that could very easily stray from points here.



@Bradly


Yes.

It really does come down being "burned once, twice shy". One way or another, most people have been badly burned by those who are in positions of authority over us. That experience often results with concluding that all authorities similarly will burn us. Religions offer not merely an authority, but The Authority of authorities - God. And the degree of the burn from past experiences determines the degree of the shy. The shyness is founded on a fear of being burned again. And just as there always is someone (or a group of someones) in daily experience that tell us to trust the authorities in our lives, because they insistently claim those authorities don't want to hurt us and are really doing what's in our best interest, even if doesn't seem like that from our perspectives - there is always a teacher, a preacher, a revelator who is telling us that The Authority doesn't want to hurt us and is really doing what's in our best interest, even if it doesn't seem like that from our perspective. The extrapolation is very easy - and the consequence from having been burned is an unwillingness to trust God (to the degree that God is presented and represented similarly to whatever authority it was in our respective lives who burned us). Ironies of ironies - some religions also tell us that if we don't obediently do what The Authority wants, then we will burn... forever!

In daily life, we can move on, arrange our circumstances, acquire the means by which we avoid authorities that are likely to burn us. But when it comes to religion, well, there's no real way to do that when presented with a universe frame that is essentially authoritarian (as most religious universe frames are)...

... unless one decides to become (which in the New Age case is going through the process of Awakening to the realization of being) The Authority - and that is what pantheism (and pantheistic based spiritual pathways) essentially is about doing.


You are right about pursuing similarities. I began outlining what to me seems to be the New Age position. And pointed out some similarites and methods for finding common ground. I also am pointing out differences as well - and sharing my perspective about them (as in these last few posts) because both the similarities and the differences are important. Neither can be ignored for the other without missing the connection (in the case of the similarities) or allowing a snowball to roll off the edge ... and later wondering why an avalanche flattened the town (in the case of differences).

Edited by Absonite, 28 February 2013 - 07:14 PM.


#40 Raymond

Raymond

    Poster

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 177 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Akron,Ohio - USA
  • Interests:Reading, Golf, Cooking.

Posted 28 February 2013 - 07:20 PM

The more we study and learn by experience - the more we are confronted by inner conflicts and moral strugglings. Not sure about protestantism - though I do see it breaking away for a more personal relationship with God than the Catholicism. The river of truth that flows through most established religions is also recognized by the UB. Because of this later teaching, I have become more eclectic than ever before. I feel that these new discoveries are aided by my Thought Adjuster and that my soul is progressing.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users