Jump to content
Urantia Book Forum, conversations with other readers
Uncle Vinny

Near-Death Experiences: References

Recommended Posts

I agree Old Soul. But why wait until mansonia and after? We have the capability for personality intercourse right now, in that we are Adjuster indwelt. We are capable of the developing intellectual and spiritual communion by way of cooperating with the Adjuster. Isn't it ironic that it takes a pre-personal entity to teach us how to be real persons?

 

109:4.1 The higher forms of intelligent intercommunication between human beings are greatly helped by the indwelling Adjusters. Animals do have fellow feelings, but they do not communicate concepts to each other; they can express emotions but not ideas and ideals.
Neither do men of animal origin experience a high type of intellectual intercourse or spiritual communion with their fellows until the Thought Adjusters have been bestowed
, albeit, when such evolutionary creatures develop speech, they are on the highroad to receiving Adjusters.

 

109:4.2 Animals do, in a crude way, communicate with each other, but there is little or no personality in such primitive contact.
Adjusters are not personality; they are prepersonal beings. But they do hail from the source of personality, and their presence does augment the qualitative manifestations of human personality
; especially is this true if the Adjuster has had previous experience.

 

Absolutely! I am not waiting. I have personality intercourse as often as I can, sometimes without my conscious effort. But, what I was driving at, in light of the talk of dating, nights out with an Adamite and Jerusem partying, is the finality of my focus: UNION (which could happen before mansonia).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why aren't more people interested in having personality intercourse? The personality circuit was brought up on another thread and interest in it just died on the vine. I'm wondering why that is so, or why not the spirit gravity circuit for that matter. Why is there no interest in that? It's just strange, odd and peculiar. But it's time, don't you think? The material age is almost over and we are on the brink of a new awakening.

 

The Pope just gave a talk in Sulmona, Italy where he said, "In modern society, it seems that every space, every moment must be filled with initiatives, activities, sounds. Often there isn't even the time to listen. Let's not fear the silence inside and outside of us." I thought those were amazing words and the world should hear them if it only had the interest to listen.

 

Maybe the world is just more interested in dating, whatever that is nowadays . . . just guessing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Why aren't more people interested in having personality intercourse? The personality circuit was brought up on another thread and interest in it just died on the vine. I'm wondering why that is so, or why not the spirit gravity circuit for that matter. Why is there no interest in that? It's just strange, odd and peculiar. But it's time, don't you think? The material age is almost over and we are on the brink of a new awakening."

 

Yes! I have thought it is time for 35 years and only very few seem to be responding to the gravity of the spirit which continues to draw those who are willing. I think it could be a matter of consciousness distraction. People are too distracted by not just material things, but religious matters (the religion of the mind) and they don't spend time alone with God. Remember how often Jesus would go aside alone with God to commune with Him? People aren't doing that. And if they are going aside, they are more alone with their prayers of wanting this and that rather than actually seeking an intimate personality intercourse with the Father. There is too much "noise". Not enough stillness. Too much doing, not enough being. Too much distraction.

 

On a positive note, I think all of that may be about to change. I think there is definitely a new awakening in the process and will accelerate over the next few years.

 

 

"The Pope just gave a talk in Sulmona, Italy where he said, "In modern society, it seems that every space, every moment must be filled with initiatives, activities, sounds. Often there isn't even the time to listen. Let's not fear the silence inside and outside of us." I thought those were amazing words and the world should hear them if it only had the interest to listen."

 

That may be part of the problem: FEAR of the SILENCE. The world will not hear those words unless the Spirit of Truth prepares them. Those who will hear are the ones who will no longer be fearful of the God inside of them and they will make time to listen.

 

 

"Maybe the world is just more interested in dating, whatever that is nowadays . . . just guessing."

 

I hear that!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes! I have thought it is time for 35 years and only very few seem to be responding to the gravity of the spirit which continues to draw those who are willing. I think it could be a matter of consciousness distraction. People are too distracted by not just material things, but religious matters (the religion of the mind) and they don't spend time alone with God.

 

195:6.7   The mechanistic naturalism of some supposedly educated men and the thoughtless secularism of the man in the street are both exclusively concerned with things; they are barren of all real values, sanctions, and satisfactions of a spiritual nature, as well as being devoid of faith, hope, and eternal assurances.
One of the great troubles with modern life is that man thinks he is too busy to find time for spiritual meditation and religious devotion.

 

Devotion is the key word here, the take home message for us all. Many think that devotion means caring for, falling in love with, showing admiration for, or enthusiasm over something they think is real. Devotion, when it comes to the spirit, actually means loyalty, faithfulness, constancy and consistency of commitment. Folks today are too busy for consistency of commitment.

 

Instead, most people today are primarily devoted to their material lives, and while some of that may be good, particularly if it means being devoted to people rather than things, it is often a distraction. Being devoted to your spouse, your family, your friends and neighbors is a good thing, but being devoted to a job, a cause, a political agenda is not so important. Today, there are people who have confused the meaning of devotion and have converted religion into a way of life that actually excludes the spirit, replacing it instead with nature, health, physical beauty, outward acts of social concern, and endless causes designed to save the world rather than their own souls. I'm seriously concerned that the concept and importance of the soul and the willingness for devoted loyalty to the spirit is being tragically ignored by the average person. It may not be their fault if they are relying on organized religion, a political party or other social organization to show them the way. Social institutions are only good at producing social fruit. Where are the spiritual fruits to come from?

 

A study in the UK last year revealed that 53% of the population believe in an afterlife, 55% believe in heaven and 70% believe in the human soul. If that is true, what do these people think the soul is all about if not all of them consider it to be something exquisitely important as well as eternal? I'm guessing that for most folks the soul has become nothing more than the moral conscience and of course, morals generally lead to social causes rather than to true religion. Morality may be supermaterial, but it is subspiritual. As the following quote establishes, morality is the bridge between animal and human types of functioning, whereas the soul is the bridge between the human and spiritual levels of functioning.

 

p2096:1 196:3.22 Morality is the essential pre-existent soil of personal God-consciousness, the personal realization of the Adjuster's inner presence, but such
morality is not the source of religious experience
and the resultant spiritual insight. The moral nature is superanimal but subspiritual. Morality is equivalent to the recognition of duty, the realization of the existence of right and wrong.
The moral zone intervenes between the animal and the human types of mind as morontia functions between the material and the spiritual spheres of personality attainment.

 

Remember how often Jesus would go aside alone with God to commune with Him? People aren't doing that. And if they are going aside, they are more alone with their prayers of wanting this and that rather than actually seeking an intimate personality intercourse with the Father. There is too much "noise". Not enough stillness. Too much doing, not enough being. Too much distraction.

 

Amen to that! How can people think it is important to devote time to God when they don't know who he is? How can they become devoted to their souls if they don't know what a soul is? How can people become devoted to persons, rather than things; and more importantly, how can they learn to be devoted to persons other than themselves, especially the "other-than-self" who lives within them, the potential for their own personality? So, the emphasis first has to be away from things to persons and then from persons to the one true person whom we can know better than anyone else, God himself within.

 

16:9.4 But you cannot become so absolutely certain of a fellow being's reality as you can of the reality of the presence of God that lives within you.

 

102:4.3 Man very early becomes conscious that he is not alone in the world or the universe. There develops a natural spontaneous self-consciousness of other-mindness in the environment of selfhood.
Faith translates this natural experience into religion, the recognition of God as the reality—source, nature, and destiny—of other-mindness.
But such a knowledge of God is ever and always a reality of personal experience. If God were not a personality, he could not become a living part of the real religious experience of a human personality.

 

p.1228:03 Everything nonspiritual in human experience, excepting personality, is a means to an end.
Every true relationship of mortal man with other persons--human or divine--is an end in itself.
And such fellowship with the personality of Deity is the eternal goal of universe ascension.

 

p196:3 16:9.7 Unselfishness, aside from parental instinct, is not altogether natural; other persons are not naturally loved or socially served. It requires the enlightenment of reason, morality, and the urge of religion, God-knowingness, to generate an unselfish and altruistic social order.
Man's own personality awareness, self-consciousness, is also directly dependent on this very fact of innate other-awareness, this innate ability to recognize and grasp the reality of other personality, ranging from the
human to the divine
.

 

On a positive note, I think all of that may be about to change. I think there is definitely a new awakening in the process and will accelerate over the next few years.

 

I don't know if there is a coming awakening or not, but I am certain that the one thing people need to wake up to is this very simple quote which says that the way to let the mind of Christ (or God) be in us is the same way that we learn to accept other people's ideas and opinions as our own. We listen to TV pundits all the time and adopt their way of thinking. Why don't we listen to the still, small voice within us and adopt his way of thinking? It's really kind of easy.

 

102:4.1 Because of the presence in your minds of the Thought Adjuster, it is no more of a mystery for you to know the mind of God than for you to be sure of the consciousness of knowing any other mind, human or superhuman. Religion and social consciousness have this in common: They are predicated on the consciousness of other-mindness.
The technique whereby you can accept another's idea as yours is the same whereby you may "let the mind which was in Christ be also in you."

 

That may be part of the problem: FEAR of the SILENCE. The world will not hear those words unless the Spirit of Truth prepares them. Those who will hear are the ones who will no longer be fearful of the God inside of them and they will make time to listen.

 

Fear period! Fear of intimacy, fear of being loved, fear of being ridiculed by others, fear of becoming a navel gazer, fear of being lost in daydreams, fear of one's own mind, fear of the unknown, fear of having to sacrifice something, fear of inadequacy, fear of being forced to face one's "issues", fear of finding out one's secret evils, fear of discovering one's true self . . . the list is endless . . . and the excuses exhausting.

 

48.5.8 One of the purposes of the morontia career is to effect the permanent eradication from the mortal survivors of such animal vestigial traits as
procrastination, equivocation, insincerity, problem avoidance, unfairness, and ease seeking.
The mansonia life early teaches the young morontia pupils that postponement is in no sense avoidance. After the life in the flesh, time is no longer available as a technique of dodging situations or of circumventing disagreeable obligations.

 

p.1802:03 Almost every human being has some one thing which is held on to as a
pet evil
, and which the entrance into the kingdom of heaven requires as a part of the price of admission.

 

The problem, as I see it, is that so many people cite this following quote to say that social works are as good as devoted meditation, while completely ignoring the words "loving" and "unselfish". These spiritual characteristics cannot be obtained by merely doing good works; and, without these spiritual characteristics, good works can only produce social fruit. Spiritual fruits require a relationship with Deity which is the source of those loving and unselfish characteristics. It means that a balance between the two is required, but a relationship with the Father must precede one's comprehension of what is necessary in order to have a loving and unselfish relationship with one's brother in the first place. The flow is circular; it begins with the inner life and flows outward. The flow is then maintained by devoted meditation and facilitated by loving service. The spiritual life requires both nourishment and exercise.

 

p.1000:02 The contact of the mortal mind with its indwelling Adjuster, while often favored by devoted meditation, is more frequently facilitated by wholehearted and
loving
service in
unselfish
ministry to one's fellow creatures.

 

196:11
You become conscious of man as your creature brother because you are already conscious of God as your Creator Father.
Fatherhood is the relationship out of which we reason ourselves into the recognition of brotherhood. And Fatherhood becomes, or may become, a universe reality to all moral creatures because the Father has himself bestowed personality upon all such beings and has encircuited them within the grasp of the universal personality circuit. We worship God, first, because
he is
, then, because
he is in us
, and last, because
we are in him
.

 

91.7.2 Jesus often took his apostles away by themselves for short periods to engage in meditation and prayer, but for the most part he kept them in service-contact with the multitudes.
The soul of man requires spiritual exercise as well as spiritual nourishment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bonita:

"Today, there are people who have confused the meaning of devotion and have converted religion into a way of life that actually excludes the spirit, replacing it instead with nature, health, physical beauty, outward acts of social concern, and endless causes designed to save the world rather than their own souls. I'm seriously concerned that the concept and importance of the soul and the willingness for devoted loyalty to the spirit is being tragically ignored by the average person."

The religion of the mind has always excluded the spirit. Devotion must, of a necessity, be born out of the religion of the spirit, which is the result of a consistent and conscious (maybe somewhat unconscious) seeking of that intimate, personal and experiential relationship with God: personality intercourse.

 

The average person will not experience God in such a conscious and substantive way as to cause them to be the devoted soul we wish to in everyone. It takes time and the evolution of the mind /soul being transformed and renewed by the spirit, drawing continuously upon our perceptions and receptivity to that intercourse.

 

"Where are the spiritual fruits to come from?"

 

The spiritual fruits must come from those who have experienced that transformation to the point that they allow the spirit to manifest those fruits spontaneously through them. They are the ones who, by choice, through this transforming renewal of the spirit-mind, by the spirit, have devoted themselves to Him.

 

"How can people think it is important to devote time to God when they don't know who he is? How can they become devoted to their souls if they don't know what a soul is?.... So, the emphasis first has to be away from things to persons and then from persons to the one true person whom we can know better than anyone else, God himself within."

 

Actually, we must first find God within before we can truly learn to be devoted to others. When we experience God as He is, where He is, we cannot possible be less loving, devoted and caring towards others.

 

"It means that a balance between the two is required, but a relationship with the Father must precede one's comprehension of what is necessary in order to have a loving and unselfish relationship with one's brother in the first place. The flow is circular; it begins with the inner life and flows outward. The flow is then maintained by devoted meditation and facilitated by loving service. The spiritual life requires both nourishment and exercise."

 

The Golden rule, the command of Jesus to love one another is possible only if we truly love God (otherwise it is selfish and borne out of social skills and may be good for society, but with no lasting spirit value).

 

 

Finding God, truly finding God experientially and not just on the pages of a book, will change that.

 

"Fear period! Fear of intimacy, fear of being loved, fear of being ridiculed by others, fear of becoming a navel gazer, fear of being lost in daydreams, fear of one's own mind, fear of the unknown, fear of having to sacrifice something, fear of inadequacy, fear of being forced to face one's "issues", fear of finding out one's secret evils, fear of discovering one's true self . . . the list is endless . . . and the excuses exhausting."

Exactly! Fear can only be eradicated by love and trust, and that in our relationship with the Father: personality intercourse.

Edited by Old Soul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Golden rule, the command of Jesus to love one another is possible only if we truly love God (otherwise it is selfish and borne out of social skills and may be good for society, but with no lasting spirit value).

 

This is as good a time as any to review what Jesus taught us concerning the golden rule. It's important to remember that he was giving this lecture to first century Jews. Oddly enough, the golden rule is not one of the commandments given in either Exodus or Deuteronomy. However, an oral teaching of the rabbis of the time was, "Do not unto one's fellow what is hateful to oneself." This teaching is a negative approach, in other words, what not to do. Jesus taught a positive approach which was new and transcended the Jewish law of the time.

 

159.5.13 And he converted the negative golden rule into a positive admonition of human fairness.

 

p1585:3 140:10.5 The golden rule as restated by Jesus demands active social contact; the older negative rule could be obeyed in isolation. Jesus stripped morality of all rules and ceremonies and elevated it to majestic levels of spiritual thinking and truly righteous living.

 

Hence, Jesus gives us six progressive ways to comprehend the meaning of the rule with the majestic level of spiritual thinking and true religious living as the acme of fulfilling its mandate.

 

147:4.3-4.9 Let me now teach you concerning the differing levels of meaning attached to the interpretation of this rule of living, this admonition to `do to others that which you desire others to do to you':

1. The level of the flesh. Such a purely selfish and lustful interpretation would be well exemplified by the supposition of your question.

2. The level of the feelings. This plane is one level higher than that of the flesh and implies that sympathy and pity would enhance one's interpretation of this rule of living.

3. The level of mind. Now come into action the reason of mind and the intelligence of experience. Good judgment dictates that such a rule of living should be interpreted in consonance with the highest idealism embodied in the nobility of profound self-respect.

4. The level of brotherly love. Still higher is discovered the level of unselfish devotion to the welfare of one's fellows. On this higher plane of wholehearted social service growing out of the consciousness of the fatherhood of God and the consequent recognition of the brotherhood of man, there is discovered a new and far more beautiful interpretation of this basic rule of life.

5. The moral level. And then when you attain
true philosophic levels of interpretation
, when you have real insight into the rightness and wrongness of things, when you perceive the eternal fitness of human relationships, you will begin to view such a problem of interpretation as you would imagine a high-minded, idealistic, wise, and impartial third person would so view and interpret such an injunction as applied to your personal problems of adjustment to your life situations.

6. The spiritual level. And then last, but greatest of all, we attain the level of spirit insight and spiritual interpretation which impels us to recognize in this rule of life the divine command to treat all men as we conceive God would treat them. That is the universe ideal of human relationships. And this is your attitude toward all such problems when your supreme desire is ever to do the Father's will. I would, therefore, that you should do to all men that which you know I would do to them in like circumstances."

Nothing Jesus had said to the apostles up to this time had ever more astonished them. They continued to discuss the Master's words long after he had retired. While Nathaniel was slow to recover from his supposition that Jesus had misunderstood the spirit of his question, the others were more than thankful that their philosophic fellow apostle had had the courage to ask such a thought-provoking question.

 

So many people I know who profess to be ultra spiritual and devoted to the Jesusonian approach to religious living have actually not made it past the levels of feelings or mind when it comes to loving others. There are those who have a high level of idealism and self respect but cannot allow themselves to break away from cultural norms and actually move to the next level of spiritual freedom. TUB explains these people, even with giant intellects, who fall short of true philosophic levels mentioned in number 5 above, the moral level:

 

101.7.4 The great difference between a religious and a nonreligious philosophy of living consists in the nature and level of recognized values and in the object of loyalties. There are four phases in the evolution of religious philosophy: Such an experience may become merely conformative, resigned to submission to tradition and authority. Or it may be satisfied with slight attainments, just enough to stabilize the daily living, and therefore becomes early arrested on such an adventitious level. Such mortals believe in letting well enough alone.
A third group progress to the level of logical intellectuality but there stagnate in consequence of cultural slavery. It is indeed pitiful to behold giant intellects held so securely within the cruel grasp of cultural bondage.
It is equally pathetic to observe those who trade their cultural bondage for the materialistic fetters of a science, falsely so called. The fourth level of philosophy attains freedom from all conventional and traditional handicaps and dares to think, act, and live honestly, loyally, fearlessly, and truthfully.

 

So, if someone should ask, "If you are so spiritually advanced, why are you so hard on your fellows?" Meaning, why aren't you following the golden rule? I would point out that someone daring to live honestly, loyally, fearlessly and truthfully might appear to be harsh to someone who understands the golden rule according to the level of feelings. In my opinion, it is almost impossible to break through to people functioning on these levels until they are able to trade their cultural bondage for reflective thinking, or meditative thought, which, it is sad to say, so few willingly engage.

 

16:6.9   The experience of living never fails to develop these three cosmic intuitions; they are constitutive in the self-consciousness of reflective thinking. But it is sad to record that so few persons on Urantia take delight in cultivating these qualities of courageous and independent cosmic thinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is as good a time as any to review what Jesus taught us concerning the golden rule. It's important to remember that he was giving this lecture to first century Jews. Oddly enough, the golden rule is not one of the commandments given in either Exodus or Deuteronomy. However, an oral teaching of the rabbis of the time was, "Do not unto one's fellow what is hateful to oneself." This teaching is a negative approach, in other words, what not to do. Jesus taught a positive approach which was new and transcended the Jewish law of the time.

 

First, I must say that I am aware that The Golden Rule and the command of Jesus are two different teachings. Maybe I should have put "and" between "The Golden Rule [and] the command of Jesus to love one another."

 

Secondly, although I know what The UB says about The Golden Rule, I see it as a positive approach .... "DO unto others as you would have them DO unto you".... to active social contact rather than a negative "DO NOT." This positive approach, to DO, falls within the command that Jesus gave to LOVE one another and to love your neighbor as yourself. (Actually, I have always seen the command to love your neighbor as yourself as being the same thing as the Golden Rule.

 

I was saying that, either one cannot be done before one loves God first. We may be able to be nice to one another, but to love one another as He loved us, or love our neighbor as we love ourselves, is just not possible without truly loving God first.

 

I know I will get disagreements with this, but I don't see altruism as the same as love. It may be "unselfish" regard for or devotion to the welfare of others, but it is not necessarily Love. It is just unselfish. You can do unselfish things for people and not love them. Jesus was emphasizing love not altruism.

 

 

I guess I'm talking about:

 

  • 4. The level of brotherly love. Still higher is discovered the level of unselfish devotion to the welfare of one's fellows. On this higher plane of wholehearted social service growing out of the consciousness of the fatherhood of God and the consequent recognition of the brotherhood of man, there is discovered a new and far more beautiful interpretation of this basic rule of life.

Anyway, thanks Bonita.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
First, I must say that I am aware that The Golden Rule and the command of Jesus are two different teachings. Maybe I should have put "and" between "The Golden Rule [and] the command of Jesus to love one another."

 

Sorry for giving the impression that you don't know the difference. Not at all, I'm sure you do. All I was trying to do is continue the conversation and add some new ideas.

 

Secondly, although I know what The UB says about The Golden Rule, I see it as a positive approach .... "DO unto others as you would have them DO unto you".... to active social contact rather than a negative "DO NOT." This positive approach, to DO, falls within the command that Jesus gave to LOVE one another and to love your neighbor as yourself. (Actually, I have always seen the command to love your neighbor as yourself as being the same thing as the Golden Rule.

 

But didn't Jesus upstep that rule to love one another as I love you? So, it went from, "do not do anything to others that is hateful to yourself", to "do unto others as you would have them do unto you", to finally, "love one another as God loves you, or as Jesus loves you". I agree that you can't love anyone like God or Jesus loves you unless you know how God or Jesus loves you. It doesn't make much sense otherwise. You have to know how God would treat people before you can treat them like he does. So, I think we agree; we are saying the same thing.

 

I know I will get disagreements with this, but I don't see altruism as the same as love. It may be "unselfish" regard for or devotion to the welfare of others, but it is not necessarily Love. It is just unselfish. You can do unselfish things for people and not love them. Jesus was emphasizing love not altruism.

 

I think he was emphasizing both. Altruism comes from the spirit within us and it is manifested as selfless service to others. I do think that love is more than altruism though, much more. Altruism is just one of the many characteristics of love; it is more like a spiritual fruit in my opinion.

 

3.5.7 2. Is altruism— service of one’s fellows — desirable? Then must life experience provide for encountering situations of social inequality.

84.7.28 The family is the fundamental unit of fraternity in which parents and children learn those lessons of
patience, altruism, tolerance, and forbearance
which are so essential to the realization of brotherhood among all men.

102.3.6 Knowledge leads to placing men, to originating social strata and castes.
Religion leads to serving men, thus creating ethics and altruism. Wisdom leads to the higher and better fellowship of both ideas
and one’s fellows. Revelation liberates men and starts them out on the eternal adventure.

103.5.1 The early evolutionary mind gives origin to a feeling of social duty and moral obligation derived chiefly from emotional fear.
The more positive urge of social service and the idealism of altruism are derived from the direct impulse of the divine spirit indwelling the human mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like this, and word semantics do indeed become involved. Seems altruism is a philosophical term which embodies a satisfaction from helping others, whereas "love" in the spiritual sense seems to be much more, i.e. embodying the satisfaction of emotional, intellectual and most other needs when giving or receiving. Love is a BIG word. I'm not trying to be a wordsmith, just agreeing with others herein who are sensing the differences. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I like this, and word semantics do indeed become involved. Seems altruism is a philosophical term which embodies a satisfaction from helping others, whereas "love" in the spiritual sense seems to be much more, i.e. embodying the satisfaction of emotional, intellectual and most other needs when giving or receiving. Love is a BIG word. I'm not trying to be a wordsmith, just agreeing with others herein who are sensing the differences. :rolleyes:

 

Since we are being wordsmiths, I would have to disagree with the use of the word satisfaction.

 

The dictionary definition of the word satisfaction is: fulfillment of one's wishes, expectations or needs, or the pleasure derived from this.

 

Satisfaction implies that there is an element of concern about the self and what the self is going to get in return for altruism or love. If one is trying to fulfill one's self with acts of altruism and love, then by definition they are not acts of altruism or love. I think TUB is pretty clear that true altruism and true love have no self in them. These acts are supposed to be self-less. Which means if one is gaining satisfaction from doing them, then the emphasis is still on the self, and the acts are nothing more than "feel good about myself do-goodism", or social fruit, thus functioning on levels 1-3 of the golden rule. Selflessness means no thought of one's self at all is involved in the act of giving, serving and loving.

 

140.5.5 He first talked about those who were poor in spirit, hungered after righteousness, endured meekness, and who were pure in heart.
Such spirit-discerning mortals could be expected to attain such levels of
divine selflessness
as to be able to attempt the amazing exercise of fatherly affection;
that even as mourners they would be empowered to show mercy, promote peace, and endure persecutions, and throughout all of these trying situations to
love even unlovely mankind
with a fatherly love. A father’s affection can attain levels of devotion that immeasurably transcend a brother’s affection.

 

Jesus taught that this type of fatherly love for others is the highest level of the golden rule, #6, the spiritual level.

 

6. The spiritual level. And then last, but greatest of all, we attain the level of spirit insight and spiritual interpretation which impels us to recognize in this rule of life the divine command to
treat all men as we conceive God would treat them.
That is the universe ideal of human relationships. And this is your attitude toward all such problems when your supreme desire is ever to do the Father's will. I would, therefore, that you should do to all men that which you know I would do to them in like circumstances. p.1651:04

 

Jesus himself was the incarnation of selflessness and self forgetfulness. And, he has given us his spirit so that we may attain the same heights he did as a human being.

 

196.0.9 The Master’s entire life was consistently conditioned by this living faith, this sublime religious experience. This spiritual attitude wholly dominated his thinking and feeling, his believing and praying, his teaching and preaching. This personal faith of a son in the certainty and security of the guidance and protection of the heavenly Father imparted to his unique life a profound endowment of spiritual reality. And yet, despite this very deep consciousness of close relationship with divinity, this Galilean, God’s Galilean, when addressed as Good Teacher, instantly replied, “Why do you call me good?”
When we stand confronted by such splendid
self-forgetfulness
, we begin to understand how the Universal Father found it possible so fully to manifest himself to him
and reveal himself through him to the mortals of the realms.

 

194.3.19 The coming of the Spirit of Truth purifies the human heart and leads the recipient to formulate a life purpose single to the will of God and the welfare of men.
The material spirit of selfishness has been swallowed up in this new
spiritual bestowal of selflessness
. Pentecost, then and now, signifies that the Jesus of history has become the divine Son of living experience. The joy of this outpoured spirit, when it is consciously experienced in human life, is a tonic for health, a stimulus for mind, and an unfailing energy for the soul.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Since we are being wordsmiths, I would have to disagree with the use of the word satisfaction.

 

The dictionary definition of the word satisfaction is: fulfillment of one's wishes, expectations or needs, or the pleasure derived from this.

 

Satisfaction implies that there is an element of concern about the self and what the self is going to get in return for altruism or love. If one is trying to fulfill one's self with acts of altruism and love, then by definition they are not acts of altruism or love.

 

 

I don't want to seem disagreeable, since I just said "we agree", but I think there may be such a thing as feeling satisfaction at seeing someone else's needs being met and that would be an unselfish, spontaneous reaction. Feeling pleasure would not have to be a selfish thing either. It, too, could be an unselfish reaction to someone else's good "fortune" (I don't care for that word).

 

TUB says:

 

  • 5:5.7 Mortal man secures three great satisfactions from religious experience, even in the days of his temporal sojourn on earth:
    1. 5:5.8 Intellectually he acquires the satisfactions of a more unified human consciousness.
    2. 5:5.9 Philosophically he enjoys the substantiation of his ideals of moral values.
    3. 5:5.10 Spiritually he thrives in the experience of divine companionship, in the spiritual satisfactions of true worship.

 

  • 28:6.8 You should realize that there is a great reward of personal satisfaction in being first just, next fair, then patient, then kind. And then, on that foundation, if you choose and have it in your heart, you can take the next step and really show mercy; but you cannot exhibit mercy in and of itself. These steps must be traversed; otherwise there can be no genuine mercy. There may be patronage, condescension, or charity — even pity — but not mercy. True mercy comes only as the beautiful climax to these preceding adjuncts to group understanding, mutual appreciation, fraternal fellowship, spiritual communion, and divine harmony.

So, it seems that satisfaction is not necessarily a result of a selfish act, but then like I said, altruism is an unselfish act. It may be that the Thought Adjuster has something to do with urging the act of altruism but I don't see that necessarily as an act of "love". I have done (a few) altruistic acts in my life and I can't say that I "loved" the person I helped. I did it out of compassion or just plain seeing that they needed help. It was a service, but it was neither selfish nor self-satisfaction seeking. It was satisfying, for sure, but in the sense that they had their needs met, not because that it made me feel good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have read in TUB that worship helps the worshiper (not an exact quote), so maybe I should have used a word other than satisfaction, even tho' Old Soul gave 5.5.10 "spiritual satisfactions of true worship". I do agree that love between humans is something that can be both given, received and mutual, without satisfaction being involved, and even God's love and love for God can be felt, but there is something within the human resulting from all love that I don't have a word for, except it is felt. Maybe "sensation"? TUB probably defines love somewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All very excellent points Old Soul. I think that much depends on motive, whether or not satisfaction is gained from the fulfillment of someone else's expectations or the fulfillment of one's own expectations or the fulfillment of what you think the other person's expectations are (which can be wrong).

 

The original meaning of the word satisfaction had to do with religious penance and doing good deeds to win favor with God or in order to make amends for going against God's will. In early Christian theology it had to do with the atonement doctrine. The earliest use of the word "satisfacere" is as the last part of religious penance after the acts of contrition and confession.

 

When looking at this quote below, note that the satisfaction part comes from being just, fair, patient and kind. But we are asked to go beyond mere satisfaction and take the next step, otherwise the satisfaction is derived from being patronizing and charitable. I remember reading that for the first time thinking that charitable doesn't seem to belong with condescension and pity, but there it is . . . and for a reason, it's only a step to true altruism.

 

28:6.8 You should realize that there is a great reward of personal satisfaction in being first just, next fair, then patient, then kind. And then, on that foundation, if you choose and have it in your heart, you can take the next step and really show mercy; but you cannot exhibit mercy in and of itself. These steps must be traversed; otherwise there can be no genuine mercy. There may be patronage, condescension, or charity — even pity — but not mercy. True mercy comes only as the beautiful climax to these preceding adjuncts to group understanding, mutual appreciation, fraternal fellowship, spiritual communion, and divine harmony.

 

My other point about satisfaction is that if we agree that altruism is a form of goodness, what do you suppose Jesus meant when he said the following:

 

140.8.26 Jesus always insisted that true goodness
must be
unconscious, in bestowing charity not allowing the left hand to know what the right hand does.

 

Jesus said that true goodness must be unconscious. It seems to me if a good deed is conscious, it is not true because the mere act of being conscious produces a conscious motive behind it. Therefore wouldn't the satisfaction gained from a truly good and unconscious (therefore selfless and completely self-forgetting) altruistic act also be unconscious? What is the result of unconscious satisfaction? Spiritual fruits.

 

What we should see are spiritual fruits growing in the life of a person who is satisfied unconsciously because he/she is being nurtured by spiritual communion with the very source of the urge to be altruistic and loving in the first place. Which is the same as saying, "I will that your will be done". The self steps aside and allows the Father to live the mortal life, as he wills, in partnership. The satisfaction comes from this experience, the joy of doing the Father's will with him rather than on one's own alone. The joy is in the partnership, not in the good deed. So often, the really important good deeds we do, we are not even conscious of. And they are the true ones because there can be absolutely no element of self-satisfaction as a motive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which reminds me about forgiveness, which might even precipitate all of the above if it was required to precede altruism - and the range of mind/emotional decisions/feelings expands. Remember how the early followers of Jesus after the Resurrection lived communally and spent everything, and got assistance from Damascus? They were attempting to achieve brotherhood status which didn't work. They must have run this entire range of mind/emotions in just trying.

 

So, no wonder this path of following Jesus to Father/God as humans is a long process even when we want to do so, as so many we deal with do not follow these precepts, while we also must follow our survival instincts. Living Faith is our mainstay for keeping our eyes on the treasure in heaven.

 

When Jesus was making his major decisions in the mountains after his Baptism, his reasoning always seemed to end with deciding to grind it out when doing the Father's will, knowing that such a long tedious process is the Father's way, ultimately the best way.

Edited by Teobeck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Which reminds me about forgiveness, which might even precipitate all of the above if it was required to precede altruism - and the range of mind/emotional decisions/feelings expands. Remember how the early followers of Jesus after the Resurrection lived communally and spent everything, and got assistance from Damascus? They were attempting to achieve brotherhood status which didn't work. They must have run this entire range of mind/emotions in just trying.

 

That's because they had a stereotypical plan of action based upon their religious culture which taught them that religious communities live in common. The unfortunate thing about that is they assumed that the plan of action which worked well for the Nazarenes and Essenes would also work well for them. Also, they may have assumed that the plan that worked for Jesus' apostles would also work for his disciples. None of these assumptions or plans of action were validated, hence had to be validated or invalidated by trying to live them. Remember that TUB says that, "Happiness ensues from the recognition of truth because it can be acted out; it can be lived. Disappointment and sorrow attend upon error because, not being a reality, it cannot be realized in experience." (42:07)

 

101.7.1 7. An idea is only a theoretical plan for action, while a positive decision is a validated plan of action. A stereotype is a plan of action accepted without validation. The materials out of which to build a personal philosophy of religion are derived from both the inner and the environmental experience of the individual. The social status, economic conditions, educational opportunities, moral trends, institutional influences, political developments, racial tendencies, and the religious teachings of one’s time and place all become factors in the formulation of a personal philosophy of religion.

 

We are meant to slog through this life, beginning with idea-decisions then laboring to transform our idea-decisions into what works best according to our very highest ideals. I'm always amazed at how ordinary the lives were of the most holy people who have graced this planet, yet their spirits were great and that is what is slowly transforming this world.

 

101.6.7 Revelation teaches mortal man that, to start such a magnificent and intriguing adventure through space by means of the progression of time, he should begin by the organization of knowledge into idea-decisions; next, mandate wisdom to labor unremittingly at its noble task of transforming self-possessed ideas into increasingly practical but nonetheless supernal ideals, even those concepts which are so reasonable as ideas and so logical as ideals that the Adjuster dares so to combine and spiritize them as to render them available for such association in the finite mind as will constitute them the actual human complement thus made ready for the action of the Truth Spirit of the Sons, the time-space manifestations of Paradise truth — universal truth.
The co-ordination of idea-decisions, logical ideals, and divine truth constitutes the possession of a righteous character,
the prerequisite for mortal admission to the ever-expanding and increasingly spiritual realities of the morontia worlds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
By Bonita

We are meant to slog through this life, beginning with idea-decisions then laboring to transform our idea-decisions into what works best according to our very highest ideals. I'm always amazed at how ordinary the lives were of the most holy people who have graced this planet, yet their spirits were great and that is what is slowly transforming this world.

 

No truer words have I ever heard. And, we only know of the ones that we have read or heard about, so imagine how many more there were.

 

And then 101.6.7 explains your above statement so well.

 

It's nice to see someone acknowledge the "slog" that goes into the transformation of our ideas into our ideals. The older I get, the more I'm in the spirit and the more I realize:

 

From Bonita and TUB

The materials out of which to build a personal philosophy of religion are derived from both the inner and the environmental experience of the individual. The social status, economic conditions, educational opportunities, moral trends, institutional influences, political developments, racial tendencies, and the religious teachings of one’s time and place all become factors in the formulation of a personal philosophy of religion.

Edited by Teobeck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As evidence of the hard and ordinary slog we all have to go through, take a look at the last person we know of who fused with his Adjuster, Elijah. I've often wondered what it was about him that enabled him to reach such heights of personality reality. It's easy to make excuses for Enoch in that he was so close to his Adamic inheritance, but Elijah lived in relatively more modern times in terms of race endowments, 873-843 B.C..

 

Elijah was a nobody from a little podunk town in Gilead in the northern kingdom of what we know as Israel. Apparently he kept himself busy running around busting up statues and shrines to Baal. Baal was a god of the land and its fertility. The Baalites were realtors who went about buying up land thereby enlarging the landowning class which was corrupt and decadent. Elijah went on a crusade against them, standing up for the little country folk, and in the process did much to separate politics and religion by promoting the teachings of Yahweh over the rituals of Baal. But most of the time he spent running around demolishing altars and idols, which is pretty ordinary, yet raucous stuff and not what I picture a person who is about to fuse doing! And what about Jesus, who quietly built ordinary fishing boats right up until he came to that point in his life where he would have fused if he wasn't the Creator of a universe? Both of them just slogged through, doing a days work for the kingdom . . . real, honest work for real, holy people.

 

97.2.1 Elijah restored to the northern kingdom a concept of God comparable with that held in the days of Samuel.
Elijah had little opportunity to present an advanced concept of God; he was kept busy, as Samuel had been before him, overthrowing the altars of Baal and demolishing the idols of false gods. And he carried forward his reforms in the face of the opposition of an idolatrous monarch; his task was even more gigantic and difficult than that which Samuel had faced.

 

97.3.6 Elijah shifted the Yahweh-Baal controversy from the land issue to the religious aspect of Hebrew and Canaanite ideologies. When Ahab murdered the Naboths in the intrigue to get possession of their land,
Elijah made a moral issue out of the olden land mores and launched his vigorous campaign against the Baalites.
This was also a fight of the country folk against domination by the cities. It was chiefly under Elijah that Yahweh became Elohim. The prophet began as an agrarian reformer and ended up by exalting Deity. Baals were many, Yahweh was one — monotheism won over polytheism.

 

This quote occurred to me as an afterthought:

 

100.1.4 Loyal persons are growing persons, and growth is an impressive and inspiring reality.
Live loyally
today — grow — and tomorrow will attend to itself. The quickest way for a tadpole to become a frog is to
live loyally
each moment as a tadpole.
Edited by Bonita

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's because they had a stereotypical plan of action based upon their religious culture which taught them that religious communities live in common. The unfortunate thing about that is they assumed that the plan of action which worked well for the Nazarenes and Essenes would also work well for them. Also, they may have assumed that the plan that worked for Jesus' apostles would also work for his disciples. None of these assumptions or plans of action were validated, hence had to be validated or invalidated by trying to live them. Remember that TUB says that, "Happiness ensues from the recognition of truth because it can be acted out; it can be lived. Disappointment and sorrow attend upon error because, not being a reality, it cannot be realized in experience." (42:07)

 

101.7.1 7. An idea is only a theoretical plan for action, while a positive decision is a validated plan of action. A stereotype is a plan of action accepted without validation. The materials out of which to build a personal philosophy of religion are derived from both the inner and the environmental experience of the individual. The social status, economic conditions, educational opportunities, moral trends, institutional influences, political developments, racial tendencies, and the religious teachings of one’s time and place all become factors in the formulation of a personal philosophy of religion.

 

We are meant to slog through this life, beginning with idea-decisions then laboring to transform our idea-decisions into what works best according to our very highest ideals. I'm always amazed at how ordinary the lives were of the most holy people who have graced this planet, yet their spirits were great and that is what is slowly transforming this world.

 

101.6.7 Revelation teaches mortal man that, to start such a magnificent and intriguing adventure through space by means of the progression of time, he should begin by the organization of knowledge into idea-decisions; next, mandate wisdom to labor unremittingly at its noble task of transforming self-possessed ideas into increasingly practical but nonetheless supernal ideals, even those concepts which are so reasonable as ideas and so logical as ideals that the Adjuster dares so to combine and spiritize them as to render them available for such association in the finite mind as will constitute them the actual human complement thus made ready for the action of the Truth Spirit of the Sons, the time-space manifestations of Paradise truth — universal truth.
The co-ordination of idea-decisions, logical ideals, and divine truth constitutes the possession of a righteous character,
the prerequisite for mortal admission to the ever-expanding and increasingly spiritual realities of the morontia worlds.

 

 

Of course, communal living doesn't work long term. But every decade or so we have a new group try it again. A lot of Christian groups have tried it. The hippies tried it in San Francisco and it failed. Jonestown. Communal living destroys the family institution, which the UB says is a no-no. Speaking of slogging through life and making wrong turns sometimes, think of all the crazy stuff we try once. Seemed like a good idea at the time. Of course, we see the folly of it afterward. Hindsight is 20/20. Jesus didn't even teach baptism yet his apostles couldn't let it go. Us humans just really really like baptism. And as hard as Jesus tried to get us off prayer forms, we insisted on prayer forms. I was just watching a documentary about the historical events of the 1970's. Remember the primal scream groups? How funny is that today? We humans try some crazy stuff and then just as quickly abandon it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Vinny,

 

 

 

Incidentally, in my own experiences, thinking with my soul while out of body, was an entirely different experience which I can't fully describe. I didn't know exactly what was going on in my physical mind because in one episode, I actually asked if I could re-enter my body to know what "she" was thinking. I actually referred to my body as if it were another person that I happen to know and love, which is why I believe what it says in TUB that the soul is not conscious of the material mind until it evolves to a certain point. The soul has a separate consciousness. It was kinda creepy, but I went in, felt it and then went out again to go back to the lesson I was being taught. My soul felt responsible for my material self, material mind included; but, I had clearly transferred the seat of my identity to my soul. (This was a profound experience, really too deep for words, accompanied by that great light which others have described. Nevertheless, it felt natural and did not create fanaticism in me, only supreme joy.)

 

 

 

Thinking with my soul wasn't that much different from thinking with my material mind, just extra-dimensional, much lighter with remarkably more freeom and more intense joy and determination to be part of the divine adventure. I still had concerns and spiritual puzzlements though; I was keenly aware that I was being taught and had a lot to learn. I was struck with my own ignorance, but felt tremendous love and support. There were problems to solve and I knew that eventually I would solve them; I was really pumped about it. In one episode, I met someone I know, and in two others I met strangers, but none of them were mortals I've met on earth or dead people; all of them were divine beings. I'm afraid to tell you any more for fear that I'll sound like a nut case, but those experiences were genuine, which is why I believe people who talk about their near death experiences. If they are just illusions, they are illusions which change peoples' lives for the better, and that's hard to explain without including the divine. I've never heard of anyone coming back from a near death experience to go on and live a deliberately sinful life.

 

Thanks. You have great insight.

I've read many NDE reports, and I've seen that quite a bit, where the soul refers to the human

body something temporary, outside of the real Self.

 

I've had dreams like that - where I see myself, and looking from the outside, I appear

to be asleep.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest rich.sachs

other books and resources speak of such things but tub, for some reason, is careful not to validate or even talk about any of these types of experiences, like near death experiences. tub virtually refutes everything outside of death results in resurrection on a mansion world. 150:3.5 3. The spirits of the dead do not come back to communicate with their families or their onetime friends among the living.

 

me personally, i think there's a lot more to it on an imperfect world like uranta than what tub says. on a world long settled in light and life, in eternity then, for any sphere, it could be as cut-and-dry as one life, one morontia life, and tub is revelation and concerns itself with eternal truth, principally.

 

I'm looking for quotations from the UB on aspects of the Near-Death Experience.

 

My favorite so far is in paper 167, The Talk on Angels, which describes their role in transporting the soul

of man to the "spiritual abodes."

 

I'm wondering if there are other sections that might shed light on the mechanics of the NDE.

The most prominent events that might be referred to in the UB relating to NDEs:

 

1. Seeing a light

2. Having an out-of-body experience

3. Strong emotional tone

4. Expanded knowledge

5. Landscape or City

6 Presence of deceased persons

 

For example, the description of the Mansion Worlds tie in to #5.

Thanks in advance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

 

I guess this thread has been resurrected....

While NDE's may or may not be well identified or explained in TUB, NDE's are very much personal experiences and in those become truth to the individual....

I myself, have had one some 15 years ago now or so. The feeling with this experience is describable but somehow I think I could never fully relate these with what I actually felt.

When this happened to me, I had been recently diagnosed with asthma.... and at this time was very severe and uncontrolled. My 2nd home was the hospital (so much so that most ER and EMT's knew me on a first name basis come to find out years later by an EMT that I am used as an "example" to other new paramedics! LOL)

Anywho.... one night, had an asthma attack...took a seizure...heart stopped...paramedic revived me....

This is my event that started my own personal religious experiences...growth and path.

What I "saw" - illuminous white/blue light off in the distance. What I felt: love, comfort, joy, happiness (absolutely an amazing feeling all at once). What I just knew at the time: It was not my time (for reasons unknown then) It was like a form of telepathy to communicate this and this is why I didn't gravitate toward the light.

I don't like talking about this much because when I reflect back on it and relive it, it still brings tears to my eyes and how I want to feel what I felt then every day, but have to be patient b/c well..it just still isn't my time...*sigh*

Edited by FTFSGRL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...