THE URANTIAL ARCHIVE
Consisting of 10 Parts
From December 14,1992 Through February25, 1994
12 Dec 1993
Mr. Rogers” neighborhood
Subject: Mr. Rogers” neighborhood
?Greetings. Now for some sappy insights. Darth Kantor has run Byron off the list. Well, Byron was always sensitive to personal attacks. It”s a shame, but I can see his point. Why engage with someone who jumped out of a bomb shelter to be the attack dog of the purists? With David”s background and attitude maybe we should nickname him “Archie Bunker”. Now that”s not too spirit led of me, I”ll have to admit, but it is late and I guess having an otherwise milktoast persona on this Urantial (according to David) leads me to redefine my personality on here.
I thought Olfana”s lesson on cheerfulness was great. Unlike Byron, I like the bashing – laugh about it all the time. And I have been more and more cheerful the more I have been able to focus on the long perspective – that we are children of God and headed back to him on paths that rise before us. The teaching mission has enriched my own life and I have been less worried about life”s problems, about critics, about how things will turn out. I think the stillness practice has had a major impact on my attitude. If you aren”t trying it, give that to yourself for Christmas. I have also been more inclined to listen to those I encounter and to try and provide whatever encouragement to them that I can. To plant a seed with them if possible.
Again, I can recommend this as a New Year”s resolution for those who aren”t trying it. Whether this is the “correcting time” as is the position of the TM, or not, it is never too early to spread good cheer and love to all you meet. I guess it is a little frustrating to only have words to deal with on this bulletin board when what the teaching mission encourages is action. Standing in line at the supermarket action. Dealing with others action. Action at work, with friends, in everyday encounters action. What was so surprising to me was that it isn”t that your daily life changes so much, but that the way your perceive it changes. Mundane activities become challenges to see how you can shine the Father”s light and, therefore, they become exhilarating. The everyday becomes important. Your family becomes more important. The secretaries, janitors, bosses and runners become more important. Each day becomes a gift. I often pray that I be able to keep all this in the forefront of my mind so that I don”t lapse into the old ways. But I do lapse. But more and more I can keep the Father by my side for longer periods. That”s where the stillness helps, along with the weekly encouragements of our celestial teacher, Will. I wish those of you who have only read the words of the teachers could (or would) visit a group to see the interactions between the members and to experience the meeting. That is really how you should evaluate this phenomenon rather than just reading the messages or taking any other purely intellectual approach to it. In fact I challenge David Kantor to fly to Tallahassee, stay with me and go to one of our meetings. It would make me feel better about his criticisms if he had at least come by to see the people who are involved. I told Marvin Gardner the same thing. He wasn”t interested. Not only David. I make that offer to anyone who is on this list with the only proviso that you must read some of Will”s transcripts before you come just so you can get a flavor for what has been said during the last 2+ years. If that is too far away, there are groups near you, I am sure. E-mail me and I will put you in touch with one closer to you, if you like. Well, this is the Christmas season. People are open to thoughts of spiritual matters. Let”s get out there and plant seeds. No intellectual stuff, just spread love and good cheer. And remember, all you have to do is plant the seed. The Father will take care of the rest. Jeez, we get to do the easy part. Just do it!
12 Dec 1993 ??Stephen Finlan ?????TM in the PM
Subject: TM in the PM
?You mention how you and others have made spiritual gains since taking part in the TM:
?>What matters to me is answering the call to service… >I was ready and waiting to do some of these things with people. >[But] we didn”t manage to do the things that we are now doing… >What then was the catalyst?
?Obviously, if there are spiritual fruits, there was some spiritual catalyst. I tend to think it is just the normal catalyst that always tries to move us: our Thought Adjusters.
?(I say *just* the highest known spiritual reality!)
?Just as I find it easy to criticize the TM on philosophic grounds, I find it impossible to criticize the spiritual fruits that are undoubtedly shown in the lives of many participants. The TM is currently the outward tool or procedure that you use. We would have other methods, if the movement had evolved a lively and committed religious fellowship, but selfish individualism and philosophic dishonesty prevented that from happening.
?I call for a responsible approach to “religious collectivism” 1087:6. But how to combine this rational mentality with religious creativity and feeling? We humans go out of balance so quickly, leaning towards one and not the other.
12 Dec 1993 ??fx618@AOL.COM ????????So long good Brother…
Subject: So long good Brother…
?Byron, good brother:
?I have spent much less energy with Urantial of late, because of a similar conclusion– Urantial is one of the least productive (spirit) pursuits upon my personal plate of “things to do for the Father”, and I find my duty to my light-seeking brothers and sisters in other areas much more commanding and spirit-productive than my interest in stimulating my own mind and building my intellectual muscles. or striving with those already on a path towards Deity realization.
?While the UM has languished partly as a result of the meager distribution of the book, I have come to the personal conclusion in the last year that another major factor is the control of the UM by philosophers not by religionists in the past decades–persons more interested in their own intellectual pursuits (like I was) than in spreading the love and life and light of the Masters teaching among others by the living of it.
?I spent an entire decade pursuing the intellectual path of the UB and during that time, I confess in retrospect that my ability to spread the book and teachings amongst my brothers and sisters was token and meager.
?Yeah, I did the occasional token service, but I did not live it and breathe it hour by hour, day by day. It was not my all-consuming interest. I am now ashamed of those selfish years, the hundreds of missed opportunities.
?In the last 3-4 months, inspired by the TM, I”ve been personally involved in spreading the book amongst more souls than I had in the entire previous ten years! Book purchases in my county of the UB is up 500-1000%, solely because of our local TM inspired efforts. Yet, I”m told by the foundation that the TM is distracting people from reading the book! Its” the Father, stupid!
?Maybe there”s some truth to the Foundation”s, but reading the book and inhaling intellectual food is secondary to living the Master”s truth and the fragrance of the spirit-led loving personality is tenfold more attractive and inspiring to the common man than the cleverness of the logician. The Master taught us this, his personal and private ministry was strikingly lacking in logical and philosophical proof, while drenched in admonitions to faith realization.
?The TM and “the Philosophers of the UM” will always be at a loggerhead, because the method of proofs are uniquely different. Logic is the path of the philosopher, whereas the Master said faith is the path of those truly born of spirit. The Master insisted that we must enter the kingdom by faith to be spirit-born, spirit led and his exemplary life was one of loving service as a man among common men. He is my pattern of existence.
?If someone truly embraced the arguments against the TM being put forth by such TM antagonists as David K., then they would under the same application of rigorous logic and consistency also have to reject the analogous apostles” experience with the Masters presence on this planet 2,000 years ago as an invalid religious experience.
?Where was the politically-correct philosophical context in that event? Was the apostles experience with Jesus made less real by the lack of intellectual proofs which the apostles surely did not mire themselves within? (And if they had, I can hear the Master scolding them for their selfishness, when their was so much of the Father”s work to do).
?The failure of TM participants to “properly address the issues” is because the experience of faith-realization as I suggested earlier uses a differnet algortihm (faith vs logic) and frankly most of us in the TM are being trained (as Jesus trained the apostles) to not waste our precious time and energy with those who have not “ears to hear nor eyes to see”, or with those who already are on a path of righteousness and truth.
?I hope to continue as one of your companions in this wonderful opportunity the Master has laid before us to accelrate our ability to live lives of loving service.
13 Dec 1993 ??Stephen Finlan ?????Thea”s letter
Subject: Thea”s letter
?You ask if I can explain the timing of the startup of the TM. When a need is felt by a large number of people, “solutions” present themselves. This happens in all realms of life. When political needs are great, movements emerge that offer an answer. Popular sentiment throws up popular movements– usually unconsciously, in the case of religion.
?Some psychological/spiritual need causes the outbreak of visions of the Virgin Mary. Hard-pressed soldiers who have battlefield visions of their national god, are another example. In both these cases, the fact that more than one person “sees” the vision is cited as proof of its veracity.
?***Alert Alert: religious speculation*** Here is what I think is happening (I regret that I am forced to use hyphenated nouns): The soul and mind endeavor to meet the personality need. The soul is creative, and can *picturize* spiritual value-meanings for the mind-personality to use. If the soul is involved, the Thought Adjuster will endeavor to spiritualize this picturization. If it was purely a mind- product, the Thought Adjuster will stay out of it, and the vision will lack spiritual fragrance.
?In most cases, a moving religious experiences does involve soul and T.A. efforts (that is probably the *definition* of valid religious experience), but they still remain human products and more or less flawed. Here”s where critically corrective philosophy needs to function. Or else don”t even try to figure it out, but also make no claims about its source.
14 Dec 1993 ??David Kantor ?????A weak behind
Subject: A weak behind
?More than a week behind, but…
?Thank you for your posts of last week — I apologize for being so far behind in responding. Please take my responses as strictly my own views and subject to change.
?>”excellent qualitative expression” has to be transformed >into action. It has to be implemented…. Do you agree that >”excellent qualitative expressions” can not exist by >themselves? Isn”t interaction with other personalities >absolutely necessary?
?I agree — the expression exists only in action, in process.
?>I found in the charismatics faith and group cohesion. I did >not find “excellent qualitative expression.” But this did not >stop me from valuing their expressions of faith even though >it is fear based and doubt is forbidden. I loved the “group >cohesion” even though the consensus process was mostly >dictatorial….I found more love & faith than in the all the >ego driven, Urantia reading groups I visited.
?I guess I would have to ask you what you are looking for in a religious experience — what is it you want? What is the purpose of your religion? Is it to have a meaningful social experience? Is it to have a particular type of neurological experience? Is it to provide a foundation for understanding the rest of your life? Is it to provide the insights and conceptual tools necessary to help transform this world from a place of suffering to the garden of souls which it was intended to be? If you can clearly state what your objective is, then you can evaluate your religious formulations in terms of how successful your religious experience is in enabling you to meet these objectives. This is likely — hopefully — to be different for each of us.
?>TM is an expression of faith
?To me, the term “expression of faith” is meaningless and valueless without a concommitant understanding of what the object of that faith is. It may be a stone, an icon, a psychological delusion, a spiritual illusion or the ultimate goodness of God. The TM is an expression of faith in what?
?>Like Transcendental Meditation, there is a philosophy behind >it that some would like to call an articulation, religion or >theology.
?If there is, no one”s explained it to me.
?>Perhaps like TM number 1, this TM number 2 should claim to be >a process, rather than a philosophy or religion.
?Philosophy should be derived from reflection on process and should in turn inform and shape process, but by no definition of the term of which I”m aware could it be considered the process itself. I should also point out that what you call “TM number 1” has an extensive philosophical context as well as a lot of scientific evidence as to the value of the process which it advocates in addition to the physiology by which it takes place. The two are as different as night and day.
?>Many religions use the TM technique of believing that there >are non-visible beings out there anxious to help us. Some >Catholics call this “personal revelation.” The new age >movement is a collage of these techniques applied to many >”qualitative expressions.” Personally I would just like to >apply these techniques to the best “qualitative expression” >that I have stumbled across .. the UB.
?The “technique of believing” is a curious phrase. Finnie has quite appropriately pointed out the creative nature of consciousness. As with faith, I find the concept of belief meaningless and valueless without a concommitant understanding of the object of the belief. The “technique of belief” has been widely used by a variety of shamans, charlatans and hypnotists and sundry demagogues — belief is a powerful shaper of psychological experience, so powerful in fact, that constant questioning and examining our beliefs becomes, imo, an extremely important part of our growth. Belief in what? What are the criteria by which you evaluate the object of your belief? Are you truly discovering foundational elements of the cosmos or are you validating illusions? How do you determine the difference? The answers to these questions are an important start at a personal philosophy of religion.
?>What is your objective in linking [the ticking time bomb of >modern agriculture] to an opinion of TM?
?This was in reference to Theas bottom line of defense on the TM. When she gets frustrated at her inability to offer a sound philosophic view, she simply goes into a confessional mode wherein she says how wonderful the TM has been and how it has enriched her life, etc. I”m simply saying that that is not necessarily a reasonable criteria by which to measure the universe value of something — one could say the same thing about modern agriculture, ie. because it works so well and makes our lives so much more easy it is therefore good and ought to be continued. I”m simply saying that the logic of her argument doesn”t hold up — it”s shortsighted and makes immediate experiential returns its sole criteria for validation.
?>TM is a classic religious illusion. But your statement >devalues all religious illusions.
?Yes; I think we should be constantly seeking the truth and reality behind our ever-present illusions.
?>Are you going to walk up to someone talking in tongues and >say they are suffering from a religious delusion? Are you >going to tell thousands of people who saw the virgin Mary >they suffered a religious delusion?
?Of course not. And I don”t really care how you or Byron or anyone else cares to experience God. But when you use The Urantia Book to justify or rationalize certain practices or ideas, you should be able to clearly explain to other students of the same text the basis upon which you are making such claims. And if other long-time students of the text voice an opposing view, you should be willing to engage in a responsible effort to attempt to resolve the difference in viewpoints. So far, TM adherents have chosen the dogmatic position of saying that their interpretation is superior by virtue of their special experience and therefore they are not required to engage in responsible debate. So far, I have seen only three responses from TMers to criticism of their position: 1. Withdraw from the confrontation. 2. Moralize about how “unspiritual” it is to question someone elses beliefs. 3. Provide a psuedo-philosophic defense which falls apart with any minimal response.
?>The real question is what is important.
?What are you saying here? Are you saying that what is important is that which has the highest value? I would say that in the TM debate, what is important is to distinguish between phenomena created by our own psychological tendencies and the presence of God which we know can be found within us. In my experience, this is not an easy nor straight-forward task, and probably not a task which can be said to be complete until we fuse with our adjusters. This is our big challenge — discovering the presence of God within us and learning how to cooperate with that presence. This is a big deal — it”s hard work and will require the mansion world experience to complete. Imo, implied in this task is a continually growing degree of awareness of our own psychological natures and tendencies. Only when we are intellectually self-conscious to a fairly significant degree can we begin the task of identifying those components of consciousness which have origin in our own processes and those which may have origin in the work of our spiritual benefactors. And as we continue in this task of growth, we must develop reliable test mechanisms for evaluating phenomena — this is a life-long task and even then we will probably only reach a very elementary level of attainment before we depart for mansonia number 1.
?>I am willing to embrace TM and suffer the consequences of >its illusions.
?Such a course of action is certainly a choice which is yours to make.
?>What I have come to believe is that the difference between >illusion and reality is a much finer line than most people >acknowledge.
?I agree. The criteria and methods by which one evaluates whether an experience is an illusion or reality become very important. TM adherents appear to abandon all responsiblity for such evaluations and assume the Spirit of Truth is going to do all the hard work for them. Imo, learning to make such evaluations is one of the primary tasks of our lives at this stage of the game, a task which TM adherents seem all too willing to give up to their “teachers.” What is it that Dostoevsky says in “The Grand Inquisitor” about this — he makes the point that Jesus came to give people spiritual freedom, but that when confronted with the terror of that freedom, people will always opt out for miracle, mystery and authority. Nowhere in the UM have I seen this so clearly as in the TM with its mysterious miracles of “celestial contact” and the authority of its “teachers.”
?>Our illusions can create reality.
?Yes, but is this desirable? Is this intended as a defense of the illusions of the TM?
?>What is reality?….Is it an illusion or rational thinking to >try out the “qualitative expression” that we can create a bit >reality?
?>From my reading of the UB I would have to say that there are so many phases and aspects of reality that I could not even begin to address your first question. As for the second, yes — there are phases of reality which we create. Every decision we make which results in action of some sort is creating or modifying the reality which we and others live in. Therefore morality becomes an increasingly significant issue as we progress in our ability to modify and create reality. This is serious business — not just a fun little game. What kind of reality are we creating? How much thought do we give to the repercussions of our choices? How will they affect others? Are we creating reality only for ourselves, or are we considering the needs of our brothers and sisters around the planet as we choose and act? Are we learning to continually expand the “big picture” relative to which we make our choices? Isn”t this constant expansion of the frame of reference in which we choose the essence of wisdom?
?>I find ample evidence supporting TM in the UB. I have posted >such evidence as have others.
?I”ve seen nothing but isolated quotes taken out of context. The more quotes used, the more speculative the writing becomes — see Bob Slagles “Welcome to Change” for an example of such writing based only on personal speculation. This is a classic example of using The Urantia Book to justify a position which one has already decided to take as opposed to first reading the book and formulating a view based on the text itself.
?>Can not an illusion or reality be constructed on top of any >set of words? Can not any numbers or facts be re-arranged to >support any conclusion?
?Yes; witness the TM.
?>I can find only two reasons for quoting the UB: personal >inspiration and marketing.
?I”m not sure I understood the paragraphs which followed the above. Are you saying this because you deplore “quote wars?” If TMers are going to claim that the model of reality which they”re projecting is consistent with that projected by the UB, they need to be willing to have their claims evaluated by the text itself.
?>But David, you are claiming to understand the whole Urantia >Book.
?I don”t recall making such a claim. I did say that the book needs to be considered as a whole. In the section on the remembrance supper it”s pointed out that Jesus always was careful to *suggest* his meanings and that he often taught in such a manner as to prevent the crystalization of his ideas into set formulations. I think the authors of the UB follow this same philosophy to a certain degree. Specific topics are presented from different viewpoints so that when you take all of them together, the result is a continued asking of deeper questions and often a significant contact with transcendent truth which cannot be captured with mere words.
?One may defend a particular model of spirit contact by selecting a few quotes, but when all the quotes related to the topic are assembled and considered together, a significantly different model may emerge. I maintain my position that TMers can only defend their position by having a very superficial understanding of the model of reality delineated by the UB. Part of this problem arises from individuals using the book only for spiritual inspiration rather than also as a tool for expanding the intellectual frame of reference within which one experiences that spiritual inspiration. Attempting to increase spiritual content while failing to simultaneously increase conceptual capacity can only result in serious problems attempting to manage the psychological mess that one can thus easily create.
?>You are raising the issue of who is more qualified to >interpret the Urantia Book.
?This is not true. I am simply saying that it must be interpreted with some integrity and responsiblity by each individual who reads it if it is not to lead to psychological difficulty.
?>If the book inspires us, who cares?
?It”s one thing to be inspired by the book. It”s another thing to go around telling people that space people are inside your head giving you messages and that The Urantia Book validates this notion.
?>The UB is a diving board that I want to leap off of into the >pool of life.
?If you”re not careful you may find that it”s an abyss rather than a pool. At any rate, it might be wise to be sure you know something about swimming before jumping in.
?>The UB is full of building blocks that we can combine in just >about any way that suits our fancy.
?Such a view of the UB is not consistent with anything I understand about it.
?>Doesn”t the Teaching Mission publish everything and expose >itself to as much criticism as possible?
?I don”t know that anyone listens to the criticism it generates, but it certainly is exposed. (Apparently much of it is heavily editied before initial exposure simply to get rid of the most embarrassing material.)
?>I seek out people who think like me.
?Are you looking for reinforcement of your existing views, or stimulation to growth and change? It sounds like you just want to be cozy.
?I wrote: >>The concept that thoughts are entities which originate >>outside the neural circuitry from a multitude of sources >>which the self must then sort out is not based on the model >>of mortal mind which emerges from the UB, nor is it based >>on anything which has any foundation in the models of mind >>held by contemporary psychology or neurology.
?You responded: >Where did the Urantia Book come from then? How will I form a >relationship or fuse with my Thought Adjuster? Now I am >really confused.
?Remember that the UB is an *epochal revelation*. The mechanism by which it appeared has been well reviewed hereon and does not seem to have been a process which could easily be duplicated.
?Remember also, that the Thought Adjuster is a *pre-personal presence* — it is not a personal entity with which we can have a personal experience. My take on this is that the Adjuster presence is a part of our subjectivity — we cannot objectify it and relate to it; we relate *with* it. It is an intimate part of our being. Also, the Adjuster *indwells* the mortal mind — it does not exist as an outside influence. Because the Adjuster presence is a shared part of our subjectivity, we most closely approach consciousness of the Adjuster in the act of worship.
?>Do we start from personal experiences of religion and then >approach “excellent qualitative expression” through >consensus?
?Participating in an informed community of seekers certainly seems like a good way to evaluate the nature of ones experience. However, if they all think alike, the community is not going to be of much use beyond generating a warm fuzzy coziness.
?>What I mean by “personal experiences of religion” are our >attempts to believe or not believe that there is a God…
?Do you really equate personal religion with “attempts to believe?”
?Scott, I appreciate the exchange.
?Carry on, all.
14 Dec 1993 ??Thea Hardy ??????Re: A weak behind
Subject: Re: A weak behind In-Reply-To: [199312142201.OAA07977@CSOS.ORST.EDU]
?Behind, yes. Weak, yes, perhaps… Ah, dear man, you do not seem to get it that the problem people have with you is not necessarily your ideas, nor that you seek clarification and philosophical rigor, but that your tone remains consistently unloving! Nothing that you say will really penetrate beyond those who already agree with you as long as your tone is as it is. If we disagree with you, we are simply intellectually unequipped, unable to come up with the philosophically correct arguments. The issue of correct as to fact and wrong as to the truth does not seem to have entered your mind, however much you exemplify it. We cannot all perhaps match your intelligence and knowledge, but we can, I think I dare to say, match your degree of love shown to your fellows on this list.
?What do you say about those who heard Jesus first announce his mission in the temple? A third thought him crazy, beside himself, a third were too intellectually proud to accept him, and a third believed him _even though they did not understand_. (Emphasis mine) Faith seeks to believe what it cannot necessarily understand. You would have us understand, and philosophically at that, before we believe. You appear to have not yet forsaken the limits of philosophy for religion, which goes beyond. I know more than one of you may hop on me for that one, but those of you who read the book still astound me sometimes in terms of your positions. Where did Jesus ever say that we had to have a flawless, or close thereto, philosophy before we had a valid religion? He said love God and love your neighbors as yourself. It is interesting, useful, etc to know more. But it is not essential. And those who find it less essential (I am not necessarily one, despite what you consider appearances to the contrary) are our equals, every one. You give an appearance of intellectual elitism and arrogance that is repeatedly inescapable. And yet no matter how many of us speak to you of this, you do not acknowledge it. Certainly not in any less than convoluted way. I have no intention of permitting your less than tasteful way of presenting your opinions of those of us with whom you do not agree to persuade me to leave Urantial. I don”t see what you are saying as important enough to do that. I enjoy Urantial for the real discussions that occur here, where we each learn from one another in an exchange of equal respect regardless of our differing intellectual and educational abilities. I don”t really perceive you as part of that discussion, but rather a peripheral element.
?I have learned over time to forgive you for your remarks about me, David, but I do regret that we cannot really share more. You have much to offer; I well know that. And in many ways, as your Russian Report indicates as only one small example. But your lack of respect for those with whom you differ closes the doors of possibility of real sharing in depth, and I regret it because I do truly believe you are very much worth knowing.
14 Dec 1993 ??Thea Hardy ??????Of traveling and full mailboxe
Subject: Of traveling and full mailboxes… In-Reply-To: [199312150335.TAA21973@CSOS.ORST.EDU]
?A parting quote I found interesting in terms of the TM. For those who say it could not happen…
?” After his elevation to settled sovereignty in a local universe a Paradise Michael is in full control of all other Sons of God functioning in his domain, and he may freely rule in accordance with his concept of the needs of his realms. A Master Son may at will vary the order of the spiritual adjudication and evolutionary adjustment of the inhabited planets. And such Sons do make and carry out the plans of their own choosing in all matters of special planetary needs, in particular regarding the worlds of their creature sojourn and still more concerning the realm of terminal bestowal, the planet of incarnation in the likeness of mortal flesh.”
?Page 241 c
?Interesting, eh. I wonder what it means and why it is in the book. To me what it means is that the so-called claims of the TM are indeed in line with the possibilities and even likelihoods of how local universes are actually run by Master Sons. I had not noticed this, but I certainly found it interesting when I happened on it today.
?I look forward to a barrage upon my return. (Presuming I don”t get a chance to check my mailbox tomorrow before I depart.)
?I will miss all of you, even for a few days!! It is lively around here and you are all a part of my daily life. Enjoy!!
15 Dec 1993 ??Philip Calabrese ?????Attacking the barren spiritual
Subject: Attacking the barren spiritual landscape with rain
?Now for the “attack”: There is an difference between searching questions and honest criticism (of the TM) on the one hand versus cynical put-downs on the other hand. Some of David Kantor”s remarks seem to fall in the latter category. I know, David, that you are very concerned about the TM”s influence on the Urantia Movement, and perhaps you think that driving the channelers out of the movement or otherwise isolating them or discrediting them or demonstrating their supposed lack of rationality is good. But I would again remind everyone (especially TM non-believers) of how Jesus handled the “strange trance prophet Kermet” who came into one of the teaching camps. Instead of attacking or isolating Kermet (as his apostles strongly recommended and unsuccessfully attempted on their own) Jesus gave Kermet complete and open access to the camp, much to the consternation of the apostles and other “orthodox” believers. In that context it took only a week before Kermet left, taking with him only a “few unstable minds”.
?So, if the TM is what you say it is David, and you could be quite right, then by giving it open access and full expression, the stable people will soon see it for what it is, and your attacks are counterproductive (else Jesus would have allowed his followers to eject Kermet from camp.) If on the other hand, there are some important facts and truth in the TM, then you are attacking genuine religious expression, albeit imperfect and evolutionary. Perhaps the TMers are right on everything except the TM being revelatory religion. Whatever their supposed delusions, intellectual put-downs can”t be the right way to help the situation, and I ask you to please to desist.
15 Dec 1993 ??fx618@AOL.COM ????????The Anti-Logic Of The Most Pro
Subject: The Anti-Logic Of The Most Proud
?Can any brothers or sisters (especially David K.) who disagrees that the TM is what it purports to be: authentic contact with unseen celestial beings please explain the following conundrum? My little 2-lobed brain is stumped?
?1. I believe that a book called the Uranitia book is the highest revelation of truth on the planet.
?2. I acknowledge [the history of the UB is clear on this] that this book came into being by Unseen celestial beings CHANNELING spiritual truth thru a human medium via voice transmission.
?3. The TM weirdos claim that Unseen celestial beings are CHANNELING spiritual truth thru a human medium via voice transmission.
?4. How on earth does one reject the TM claim as bogus without invalidating the very method by which one claims that the UB is authentic?
?Please enlighten me, bro Jesse.
15 Dec 1993 ??fx618@AOL.COM ????????Behold the Man
Subject: Behold the Man
?As a lover of the lucid and profound truths of the UB AND as a witness to the power of love-action and transformation of the TM my biased vote is that David K. (like Kermit) be free to be as “nasty as he wanna be” (wasn”t that an rap album?) toward the TM.
?It brings into being the opportunity to realize the Masters” advice that you can ascertain the workings of a spirit-led life amongst your brothers by the appearance or lack of fruits.
?Aside from any verbal arguments pro or anti-TM, there exists the unspoken argument: the attitude of each person in their treatment and reaction to their fellows: the gentle or not-so gentle voice that lies between the words. The non-verbal argument of Jesus” authenticity was the simple statement “Behold the man.”
?David”s consistent personal bitterness (is understandable to me within the context of his history as a TR channeling the apocalyptic words of a celestial for the FOG affair)–he is trying to save his brothers in the TM from the hell he must have surely endured in the fallout; if those are his intentions I love him for that.
?Persistent negative attacks on his TM brothers and sisters on Urantial who for the most part turn their cheeks, puts into clear relief a most powerful argument for the reality and ability of the TM to transform, uplift and empower beings evolving toward morontial goals to react with discipline and in love under duress.
?Beyond the powers of intellect, which are largely genetic inheritance, spirit-led personalities by default must weigh most heavily the spirit fruits of those in theie environment as true testimony of the relative and actual functional working of a spirit-taught life.
?In a strange way I am thankful for the opportunity David presents to exercise this discipline within the comfort of a group I believe do me no real harm, who are traveling together on the first leg of a wondrous journey.
15 Dec 1993 ??Fred Harris ????????TM Abraham
Subject: TM Abraham
?Greetings, friends. David Kantor is an interesting guy. I think Jesse has hit on a good point. David is attempting to alert all of us to the problems he has encountered in celestial communications. And I, too, appreciate that. The lesson I have learned is to avoid any belief in predictions. How can they be when we know that God gave each of us the absolute right to free will? And I have really enjoyed a lot of David”s posts, especially his comments and observations on his trip to Russia with Steve Drier. I also liked the two Islamic (I think) posts, one on “this life is a bridge, don”t build your house on a bridge” (one of my favorite UB stories is the bridge at Siddon) and the one about the apostles asking Jesus to rain down fire on the town that refused to put them up for the night. Wonderful stuff. I know that David is absolutedly sincere in his posts and I appreciate that. I must also agree with Jesse that his sometimes meanspirited attitude is really an opportunity to turn the other cheek and show the fruits of our paths. Be they TM or not. So I say, let David say what he wants in the manner he choses. If he shows the fruits of the spirit, then he will cause others to appreciate his position. And he may be right that, by attacking the TM, he is onto a politically incorrect position. But that tells me that belief in the TM is a little more widespread than some would have us believe. And I believe that it is growing. Because I think the truth of its messages is clear and the experience of those involved is transforming and it shows. I would still like to again tender an offer to David or any of you to come visit us. I have an extra bedroom in my house and would love to have you. I will even take you out to see my bridge where I nightly talk to the Father. It would be fun.
?In a continuing attempt to further define what the Teaching Misssion is all about I offer another example of the description of the mission, this time from the Sarasota Florida group.
?”You, now, have been enlisted into this incredible time for service at the beginning of what is known to us as the “Correcting Time”. Your mission is a simple one. Conduct your lives in such a way with joyful countenance radiating the light of God. This will be so attractive to those who are willing to serve this mission and do the will to the Father that they will seek you out and ask you from whence this light comes. Your message is a simple one. The same good news that Christ Michael delivered almost 2000 years ago. Know by faith that your eternal Creator Father exists and you each are His spiritual children, here on Urantia. Thus, you then become brothers and sisters in spirit, living to elevate each other with your love and service to one another manifesting thereby the ultimate purpose of the creation, to love one another.” Abraham, 7/23/92, Sarasota group.
?Stand by as I search the archives of teacher lessons for still more descriptions from many different teachers and locations.
16 Dec 1993 ??fx618@AOL.COM ????????Re: Yikes
Subject: Re: Yikes
?Steve: >>>I”ve got a yikes: Jesse asking what”s the difference between the “channeled” UB and the TM, implying they must stand or fall together. Two quick answers to Jesse”s question: the discretion in which the UB transmission was handled, as opposed to the “who wants to go next” of the TM. But more important, is the internal complexity yet harmony of the UB material. No comparison.[[[[
?Why the quotation marks around “channeled”, do you have doubt as whether it was actually channeled. I thought we all agree that the UB came about by channeling? Does anyone on Urantial disagree that the UB is channeled?
?I am always surprised as to how much those who declare they never read the transcripts nor ever attend meetings know so much about the goings ons within the TM. How does one arrive at such clear judgement and intimate knowledge of phenomena with which one has little to no experience or contact?
?Yes, you have made a qualitative personal judgement as to the veracity of the TM and your criteria for the veracity of channeled material is a) the technique by which it is disseminated and b) the internal complexity yet harmonious quality of it. SO, if the TM or ANY channeled material was a) more discrete in its presentation and b) more complex and still harmonious then can we assume that such channeled material would then be comparable or closer to the UB in quality? Yes?
?2) Since the bestowal of Jesus was a) definitely not discrete and his message was b) defintely not internally complex then by this criteria for truth you must have sufficent doubt as to whether this phenomena of his appearance was in fact real or at best low quality stuff. Or is there something more about the Jesus phenomena that does makes it real to you? If so, what is it?
16 Dec 1993 ??fx618@AOL.COM ????????Hypocrisy Is Repugnant to the
Subject: Hypocrisy Is Repugnant to the Truthseeker
?For years and years the party line was: “Oh! DON”T worry about the origin of the book (the fact that it was channeled), the book stands on its own as the highest truth on this planet. DO let your spirit of truth validate it!” I have said this many times, have you?
?Now those same people say about the TM: “Oh! DO worry about the origin of the TM material, and DON”T let the spirit of truth be your sole validation.”
?Anybody see what”s wrong with this?
?And now, the foundation announces: “Those of you who are involved in “channeling” cannot join the IUA, yet those same members of the Foundation are intimately involved in upholding and disseminating a channeled book!
?Anybody see what”s wrong with this?
?Friends there is nothing more destructive, more undermining in the long term than this attitude which is clearly one of ultimate hypocrisy. The more the TM is attacked and disowned, the more this breech of hypocrisy comes into relief. The phenomena of an organization and movement who pledge their allegiance to a channeled book claiming that all other channeling is invalid will have profound implications for future UM growth. Outsiders to the book will make quick judgement on those who read the book as well as the content. Hypocrisy is poisonous.
?Intolerance practised by those who preach tolerance will if continued undermine the credibility of the UB by turning away those potential new readers, those truthseekers who can smell this hypocrisy a mile away. Leaders and all supporters of the UB are really rolling the dice here regarding the long term viability of the UM to attract new memebers…
16 Dec 1993 ??Stephen Finlan ?????Re: Yikes
Subject: Re: Yikes
?The bestowal life of a Paradise Son is in an entirely different category from *anything* else. It is certainly not to be compared with messages from invisible beings. The bestowal life is God *living a human life*, and a revelation *to* God of what the Son of Man can be like. It is distinguished by its spiritual quality and its life-values. A bestowal life becomes “the greatest story ever told,” a story that speaks to us on conscious and unconscious levels. A bestowal Son does not make an intellectual revelation, but provides spiritual truths that humans need to use when they pursue truth, or any values.
?It is crucial that I answer this question first, because these principles are more important than anything else you and I can discuss. Also, I think we would not disagree on that level. Now I will go on to areas where we might disagree.
?I am frustrated by your tendency to mix together different realms, to compare TM, UB, and Jesus, as though these can all be judged by the same criteria. Unless we learn to separate these and see how differently they need to be approached, there can be no profitable discussion.
?I hesitate to call the UB channeled because that associates it with spiritualistic channeling practices. I don”t know much about the method of the UB”s transmission, and don”t *need* to know. Its proof, for me, is in its *content* (which includes what it says about its transmission). I have read at least seven TRs, and there is nothing to persuade me that this is anything other than human religious creativity, comparable to spiritualism or to “prophecy” in the Pentecostal church.
?I am not saying that all revelations must be complex like the UB; I am saying there is always some profound excellence to any revelation, and I don”t see any in the TM. I do see religious living associated with the TM, and I have some humility and respect about others” religious values. But revelation-claims must stand up philosophically, and these don”t. It”s just a slightly sweeter version of the old Bruce-ananda cult. The U movement in Bay Area has seen a lot of this stuff.
?I judge the channeling on its content, more than its method. To lump together UB and TM as both being channeled, and therefore comparable, is like lumping together Danielle Steele and Shakespeare. The more you focus on an alleged similarity of transmission (which can be neither proven nor disproven) the more you diminish the cruciality of *content*.
?The only reason I mentioned the revelators” discretion regarding the transmission of the papers, is that it is just one of many signs of *excellence*. Today, when a person picks up the UB he has to evaluate it on its content. There is little distraction towards transmission method, which is bound to be misunderstood by humans anyway.
16 Dec 1993 ??David Kantor ?????Goodby for now
Subject: Goodby for now
?It”s obvious that my continued harping on the “teaching mission” is simply disorienting and alienating new friends while annoying old ones. My position on it has nothing to do with fear or deep pain as Thea and Byron have projected, but rather with disappointment and sadness. My “tone,” which Thea has duly roasted in the able glow of her afterburners is perhaps indicative of a certain degree of social immaturity, but not a consciously chosen tool of discourse.
?Lacking the spiritual graciousness of Dick Prince, the enviable magnanimity of Phil, the patient tolerance of Matthew or Dan”s good humor (Dan, your posts have consistently been the most delightful and informative writing I have seen come out of the movement), my only option is to simply leave the list. I feel that to stay and remain silent would be to give tacit approval to a spiritually fradulent and intellectually bankrupt sham which I cannot in good conscience do.
?To the best of my understanding of just what we”re involved in here on this planet, the cutting edge of the fifth epochal revelation is certainly not in the psychologically murky back-waters of movements like the “teaching mission,” as its proponents would like to believe. The seriously threatened cultural institutions of family, church, industry, science, education, politics and economics do not need more radical diversity and pluralism. Neither does civilization have the means nor the time with which to evolve alternatives. The essential institutions of human civilization are in extremely serious need of mechanisms by which their highest values can be identified, stabilized and conserved as the planet proceeds through the transformation to which we are witness. These are the values upon which each of us stands, regardless of our beliefs, and upon which we peer out at the cosmos. If we lose sight of these values and fail to support the only means presently available for their propagation, we will succeed only in compounding the human suffering and tragedy which have plagued this planet for countless generations. Future generations will then be confronted with the tedious task of once again re-discovering and rebuilding the very foundations which make spiritual culture — true civilization — a viable potential.
?To use The Urantia Book for the development of highly speculative personal metaphysical systems which further alienate readers from the crucial points of cultural contact appears to me as a development of potential evil which runs counter to the integrative and stabilizing purposes for which I believe the revelation was placed on the planet in the first place. Surprisingly few readers of The Urantia Book seem to be taking this task seriously and instead appear all too willing to escape to the isolated comfort of religious daydreams or cozy communities of like-minded individuals.
?The interaction hereon has been stimulating and informative, my friends; I know we”ll all cross paths many times and will enjoy the opportunity to deepen our friendship when we do. In the meantime I”m going to join brother Byron in retirement for a while. Flight Deck? Calling the Captain of the good ship Urantial! Michael (Dr. Jack) Million, please disconnect my life support system….
16 Dec 1993 ??Matthew Rapaport ?????????????distinctions, perceptions, and
Subject: distinctions, perceptions, and possibilities
?Just a few quick observations…
?Jesse… You are blurring over so many distinctions it”s difficult to know if you are serious or not…
?The subject that “channeled” the UB was unconscious at the time. When he awoke, he was utterly unaware of what transpired, and perhaps even more importantly, was *unconcerned* with it. He had no emotional or intellectual involvement. In fact the UB mentions this and points out that it was one of the reasons this was such a good subject.
?By contrast the TRs are very much involved, both emotionally and intellectually, in marked contrast to what the UB authors sought out in their “ideal subject”. This leads the TM to a double jeapordy! That is even if the TM sources really are Divine (issue 1), there is still the matter of what the TM admits is a significant amount of “filtering” or “interpretation” on the part of the TRs (problem 2).
?None of this has ought to do with the Jesus bestowal. Dispite the simplicity of Jesus”s *basic* message (the same message as the UB and the TM), Jesus lived a relatively complex and stressful life (at least by the standards of his time), and did so with a degree of harmony and balance never before (or since) achieved. Also he taught many things to his advanced pupils, he wasn”t limited to repeating F-O-G-B-O-M over and over again…
?I don”t know about anyone else, but my criticism of the TM comes after both having read lots of transcripts, *and* having attended a TR session! I”ve gone into that before.
16 Dec 1993 ??Tom Alexander ???Re: free will, choice, and rev
Subject: Re: free will, choice, and revelation In-Reply-To: [199312162137.NAA08509@CSOS.ORST.EDU]
?*MY* interpretation of the bottom line of the tm is this: Just try and worship the Father more. Just try and worship Michael more. Just try and get in touch with your thought adjuster more. And be thankful more that our creators love us so much that they will forgive us for any veering off track of the Father”s will. If all of this is bad, please tell me what is good.
?I *AM NOT* claiming a more direct connection to God or that I am going to reach Paradise before anyone else or that if someone doesn”t believe the same things that I do their spiritual life is somehow lesser than mine.
?I really want to know what the critics” main objections are. If this turns out to be a gigantic hoax how will the UM be damaged when thousands of people in hundreds of groups are saying they feel their spiritual and everyday lives have been uplifted. How will it be damaged if those thousands of people have daily worshiped God and it has become a daily habit of worshiping God? We are told by several of the critics that we are “jumping off a cliff into an abyss.” Rhetoric like that infers that our spiritual lives are in jeopardy. You fear that we are so deluded that we will act like robots when the teachers suddenly change gears and tell us to jump off a cliff somewhere. Your rhetoric shows that you think we are not intelligent enough or we are not grown up entough to know what is real. In fact, many of the critics think we are out of touch with reality. Or that we have no brains at all; re: the oatmeal for brains comment.
?I can withstand criticism. I can withstand even nasty, down and dirty criticism. I work every day as writer/publisher/political activist were I get down and dirty with the best of them. I seek out Urantial with the hope that by the higher spiritual concepts that we all know and somewhat agree upon, the criticism can be made without the arrogance and self-righteousness and pompousness that has been displayed here over the past months.
?I have to admit, I hid my keyboard the past few days to control my urge to respond to the virulent comments made by the recently departed champion **
16 Dec 1993 ??Tom Alexander ???Cont. of garbled last post
Subject: Cont. of garbled last post In-Reply-To: [199312162137.NAA08509@CSOS.ORST.EDU]
?continued from my previous post earlier today— which may have been totally garbled in transmission:
?departed champion of the urantia federation of mind/mud wrestling competition. His departure will free up alot of lurking minds who either didn”t want to be part of an attack on what they said or an equally sharp rebuttal to the attack.
?I think with David”s departure we will see much more dialogue and yes criticism. But it will be criticism with a heart instead of a spear.
?I still would like to know what the fear is if the tm is like the critics say, the delude workings of our mind”s imagination. What is wrong with me seeking to get closer to the Father, Michael and my thought adjuster? This is my bottom line involvement in the tm.
17 Dec 1993 ??fx618@AOL.COM ????????Yikes: the Pursuit of Truth
Subject: Yikes: the Pursuit of Truth
?Stephen F and Matthew:
?No, I am not joking, I am sincerely seeking to enlarge my understanding of the negative point of view towards the TM.
?My intention is not to persuade you in any way to embrace the TM,. Apparently both of you have considered it and rejected it. Your paths of will-choice are sacred and I respect this. But, declarations that the TM is bogus as a religious experience of another person is anti-thetical to what the TM AND the UB teach us about the respect for personal religious experience.
?Further, I fail to have read anything that proves that the TM is illogical at this point in time. I seek your help in enlarging this viewpoint. So far, you”ve presented the following arguments:
?POINT ONE: The lack of “internal complexity” and “”secret/discrete” origins invalidates the TM.
?My reference to Jesus” bestowal was to provide evidence that a revelation of truth whether thru private or public ministry does not have to have the elements of “internal complexity” nor “”secret/discrete” origins (as Stephen proposed) to be filled with spiritual enlightenment.
?My evidence for this is that Jesus”s spiritual message (despite the complexity of his personal life at times) was very simple: “That God is our true spirit Father, and that we are therefore brothers and sisters in spirit. ” and was disclosed publically among thousands of people.
?The lack of complexity in this message, or the lack of intellectual high-mindedness needed to grasp this message has no relation to its spiritual value. IN fact, I would speculate that there is a spirit value associated with the ability of a spirit truth to be in fact grasped by a broader range of personality.
?Stephen says: “A bestowal Son does not make an intellectual revelation, but provides spiritual truths that humans need to use when they pursue truth, or any values”
?Yes, I agree with you and my experience with the TM is exactly so, it has provided very little in intellectual revelation but is spirit-truth based. Your statement reinforces the analogous character between the TM and Jesus” bestowal. And it would follow that the TM as an alleged extension of Michael?s bestowal would have this same quality. It logically does.
?Just focusing on the character of the revelation (spirit based not intellectual) and looking at its texture, simple truths vs complex, I see this as quite analogous. My point was that if one proposes that the TM is bogus because it lacks the elements of “internal complexity” and “secretive/discreet” origins does not wash, the same argument could be used to claim that Jesus” bestowal was bogus OR to possibly elevate some of the esoteric metaphysical stuff which has those two elements Stephen suggests to that of revelation.
?POINT TWO: The process of channeling invalidates the TM.
?Stephen: “I hesitate to call the UB channeled because that associates it with spiritualistic channeling practices.” Whether one chooses to acknowledge the origins of the UB or not, the fact appears to be that the UB is a beautifully bound set of transcripts delivered by a channeler in Chicago. We can choose to ignore this fact and gloss over it because we believe this to be the 5th Epochal Revelation of Truth on this planet which somehow transmutes the fact of its origin. Sorry, but this does not change the factual origin of the material.
?Therefore, anyone who believes in the veracity of the UB, has an a priori belief that spirit-truth can emanate from the process of channeling–explicitly a process whereby an unseen celestial being transmits thought thru the mind and vocal centers of a human transmitter/receiver.. This is the phenomena that Urantians hold to be the origins of the book.
?This is exactly the process the TM uses. Is this illogical?
?The TM is not meant to be an intellectual revelation, that was the UB. It cannot compete in that realm, nor does it intend to. It is, like Jesus bestowal (as Stephen points out) meant to be a spirit truth based revelation.
?I would certainly agree that have not heard anyone propose that the TM material is a substitute or equivalent in any way to the massive volume of channeled transcripts of intellectual truth and spiritual truth encompassed by our beloved big blue.
?POINT THREE: “Oh but the Chicago channeler was different he was “unconscious” but TM channelers are conscious therefore his “stuff” is the right “stuff”.
?This seems rather superficial and a grasping for straws. It may mean that the quality of the channeled UBook material is more pure, (I agree!) but certainly does not disprove the value of the TM stuff or make it to any degree illogical that it has spiritual value.
?And as Stephen suggests there is a difference between intellectual revelation and spirt truth revelation, which leads one to specialty that if Stephen is correct and I believe he is, then the method for truth evaluation may be different think it is too.
?POINT FOUR: The TM transcripts are invalid because they are not wholly pure, they are tainted by humans.
?Matthew proposes that the TRs are conscious therefore they have interjected themselves into the material. I wholeheartedly agree with Matthew. This certainly happens because of the imperfection of the TRs, they are human. This does not mean that the material taken as a whole is devoid of value because there are some flecks of impurity.
?I was in a very authentic POW camp in the Rockies, held prisoner anticipating my imminent assignment to Vietnam prepared for the likelihood of being shot doing in Vietnam and taken prisoner. IN this camp, I spent 24 hours digging a hole in hard ground with bare fingers with others the size of a septic tank after the hole was finished, the Chinese commandant told us we had dug it in the wrong place, so we had to fill it back up. All the while there was a pot boiling with white rice which was filled with flies and parts of worms. The day before, I spent pressed into a fetal position in a too small black box in the Summer sun. To a very starving, tired man, I can assure you the small portion of rice at the end of that ordeal was quite good despite the flies.
?Why the preoccupation with snow-white purity? we are all big boys and girls we can make our own judgements amongst the TM material as to what holds value and what does not. If we hold ourselves to the standard of snow-whiteness then we could if we were stoic and rigorous end up like an acquaintance of mine who regretfully threw out the entire book because of the science discrepancies “like the Mercury rotation problem”.
?I think it naive to assume that the UB with human involvement is unerring, perfect. It was after all a project that enjoined human participation. After all Sadler was not a God, he was a human and while not the writer, he probably exercised certain editorial powers or was left to make certain judgements. Surely he was not an automaton, exercising no judgements, surely the celestials did not tell him what move to make and decision to make evry minute of the day. And he did a great job! Maybe he chose to leave some of the race comments in, maybe some of it was his call. Who cares? Its damn good anyway. I”m a starving man I dont need perfect, so are many others.
?POINT FIVE: The TM does not stand up to intellectual rigor and proof. It does not meet philosophical standards.
?Stephen says: “I don”t know much about the method of the UB”s transmission, and don”t *need* to know. Its proof, for me, is in its *content*”
?I agree with you wholeheartedly, and If the Master”s bestowal is qualitatively different than the UB revelation (intellectual vs spirt truth) as Stephhen suggests then we cannot demand that spirt realities be measured by the same algorithm of proof that intellectual realities should. Our tool to do so–logic, is utterly inadequate to measure such qualities as mercy, love, goodness. Our book admonishes us as to this limitation as well.
?How many times does the Master have to tell us: We measure the appearance of spirit truth by the presence of the fruits of the spirit in the lives of those who embrace such truth. The Master was defining a different algorithm of spirit-truth evaluation for those sons and daughters who are spirt-led, spirt-taught.
?Stephen says: ” I do see religious living associated with the TM.” Yes Stephen, this is my point I too have seen much bearing of spiritual fruit in myself and in many others. I can only ask my brothers and sisters on Urantial and in the larger UM why this is not good enough?
?If we see this happening (growth or religious living on others) shouldn”t we as enlightened brothers encourage that progress? Not belittle it, not declare this experience that our brothers are having is delusion? Would the Master say, “Yeah, yeah, I see you are beginning to lead religious lives BUT your lack of philosophical consistency is alarming?” Would he really say that? Come on, guys–get real. Come on down off of that philosophical pedestal, the airs getting thin up there.
?I have attempted to earnestly listen and examine your philosophical arguments on philosophical grounds as an experiment toward understanding. Yet none of these philosophical arguments seem to hold much water to me?
?No argument put forward so far proves on philosophical grounds that the TM is illogical at this point in Urantia history. If there IS one I have missed it, please restate it.
?My one additional request (if you”ll indulge me) is this: I agree that intellectual truth should be supported by philosophy and logic but IF spirit truth can only be proven by philosphical logic argument then it would follow that FAITH would always be pre-empted by the existence of logic as proof therefore how can FAITH ever be truly exercised as a power in human experience?
?I believe the impasse between the logicians and philosophers and the TM is the failure to mutually perceive and respect that there is a differential between intellectual and spirit truth revelation. I am thankful Stephen introduced this concept into the dialogue. If his suggestion is accurate and I second it, it is probable that the tools for evaluation are accordingly different as well.
?If we can all realize this is THE fundamental issue, we can work harmoniously respecting our varied paths acknowledging the validity of all personal religious experience. We are all workers in the kingdom using different tools, experiencing different levels of deity realization and reality discovery.
17 Dec 1993 ??Stephen Finlan ?????Revelation
?Jesse: I”m glad we made the distinction between spiritual and spiritual/intellectual revelation.
?You say that the TM fits more in the category of spiritual revelation (with the life of Jesus) than in that of intellectual/spiritual revelation (like the UB). You want the spiritual fruits to be the main consideration. I agree we must be respectful of people”s spiritual values.
?But the TM makes more than purely spiritual claims. Transmitting messages from Melchizedeks, finaliters, student visitors, Christ Michael–these are big revelatory/intellectual claims (not to mention the spiritual implications), and they borrow from the UB”s intellectual framework.
?When a Melchizedek Son speaks, I listen. He has an intellectual authority which I recognize. If somebody says a Melchizedek is speaking through his mouth, I have to listen and decide whether I need to place myself in the position of pupil. Revelatory claims are intellectual/spiritual claims, and they have to be assessed.
?A revelatory claim is an _authority_ claim, and must be accepted or rejected.
?For these reasons, the TM cannot be placed in the same category as the bestowal life of Jesus — NOTHING can be placed in the same category as a Paradise bestowal except another Paradise bestowal life. The TM must be subject to intellectual as well as spiritual criticism.
?The high level of error in the TM indicates that it is human religion, not revelation. We all get Thought Adjuster revelation but we mingle it with our soul-images and our mind-limitations. That”s fine; just don”t call it the Voice of Melchizedek.
?I want to qualify what I said about the complexity of Jesus” teachings. While his central message was simple, his teachings about sin (1660), religion (1728f), science and truth (1641-2), required mental work on the part of his hearers. And people had to use their minds to make a decision about _his_ revelation claims, too.
17 Dec 1993 ??Tom Alexander ???Revering UB & TM
Subject: Revering UB & TM In-Reply-To: [199312172201.OAA28875@CSOS.ORST.EDU]
?I wholly agree with Jim that many people are revering either/and the UB or TM. They literally are mere tools to lift the lid off a vast universe of experiential knowledge. We are here on Urantia to experience everything: the weird, the wacky, truth, beauty, goodness and the divine. Some people do go off the deep end when they experience any one or all of the above experiences.
?The only person who you can control and be respposible for is you. When a peerson starts to apply this fact to other people, friction is the result.
17 Dec 1993 ??Philip Calabrese ?????On UB-TM criticism
Subject: On UB-TM criticism
?Steve Finlan: Yes to say that the TM may be right on everything except that it is “revelation” is a big “except”. But it points out that the real difference between the TM critics and adherents is that the adherents sometimes insist that the TM is “revelatory”. That is exactly why I have based my case for the TM not being revelatory upon on the “excellence level” of the UB versus the TM, not on its complexity or its being channeled. (There doesn”t seem to be much hay to gather in that direction.)
?But I have no problem with anyone holding that the TM contains much truth, and that it has led people to spiritual growth. Intellectual correctness is not essential for spiritual growth! On the other hand, I don”t see how to really separate spirit from mind. There is never spirit without mind or mind without spirit as far as I can see.
?So, I value discernment. Being right is good; but being right and also being gracious is better. I was just putting them in the proper order of importance. I dare say being wrong and gracious is better than being right and ungracious.
?My only problem with David K”s critique of the TM is it”s tone and tendency to use sarcastic, hurtful invective rather than straightforward statements of opinion or fact without rancor. To tell someone that oatmeal is coming out of his head is likely to hurt the person”s feelings, and that is not IMO conducive to their seeing the merit of one”s argument since they are already flinching from the word-lashing. The likely result will be to harden the defenses and to delay the supposed change of mind that the critiquer desires. Were David K”s criticisms expressed in that mode, then I would have nothing to say against them. But I would again recall how Jesus gave the trance prophet Kermet (sp?) free access to his students and teachers rather than attacking his errors, etc. as his followers would have liked. Why did Jesus do this? Was there truth in what Kermet said, but also mixed in with his human delusions? I wish David could just make his case without the sarcasm. After all, these are spiritual kin who are sincere even if possibly deluded. So what. The apostles thought Jesus was coming back in their generation and preached accordingly.
18 Dec 1993 ??Fred Harris ????????Various replies
Subject: Various replies
?A few comments to some of the excellent discussions that are going on at this time on this list.
?David Kantor – Sorry to see him go, even though he was pretty mean spirited in his denunciation of the Teaching Mission. But he had a lot of interesting things to say as well. Too bad he doesn”t see that his meaness is counterproductive and intolerant. He doesn”t mean any harm, I”m convinced. He is just trying to forcefully state his case. I”ll miss him, but then again I won”t. You know what I mean?
?Jim McNelly – is correct when he says that you can”t use the UB, the TM or any other thing as a barrier to the personal relationship each must cultivate with the Father. That is the bottom line. The rest is just a path that some use to get there. But there are many paths.
?Jesse & Finny – You guys have a good discussion going. My two cents worth: (1) Both the UB and the TM are (or were) delivered in a funky manner. The unconscious vs. conscious argument is bogus. If you disagree, try it out on any non UB person and see if they see any difference – they will think both are weird. And they will be correct. (2) Both the UB and the TM encourage a personal relationship with the Father. Both encourage taking time each day to talk and listen to the Father (the TM in its “stillness” practices, the UB where it talks of Jesus meditating daily – see especially the Rodan papers on p. 1774). Both teach of the brotherhood of man – we are all children of God. Both encourage us to take the highest path. Doesn”t the UB teach us to find the best in all other religions and philosophies? Sure it does. Try that out on the TM and you will see tremendous similarities in the TM and the UB. (3) Despite some people”s position, I believe that the fruits will show if the TM is on target. I have seen such fruits. Others describe them as well. (4) As Todd Moody points out, it isn”t so much your philosophy or beliefs but the action that comes from them that is important. This is a basic premise of the TM. It is time to put the intellectual concepts in the UB into action. That is the best method of conveying them. (5) I believe that in order to change this world, the message that is to be presented must be simple and it cannot be tied to any book or TM experience. The people of this world will not be changed by having the UB dropped on their heads. It is too complicated and we have all discussed the many barriers to others accepting it. Todd is an anomoly. Most people wouldn”t read ten pages of it, especially if they started from the front and read it front to back. Believe me I know. So do all of you who have tried to interest others in the book. Therefore, the complexities of the UB will have to be boiled down to the basics if it is to change the world. Many people have complained that the TM lessons are too simple and basic, but that is the beauty of them. They are designed for the people, not the intellectual UB readers. That is why they are so widely read and why so many people find truth in them. There is something to be said for the rapid spread of the TM. It can”t be a total sham if all these people are interested in it in so many different places with so many different teachers. Something is happening. No one can dispute that. (6) There are no gurus in the TM. There are nut cases. I think that can be said about the UB movement and society in general as well. Jim McNelly”s friend who visited the IC93 conference confirmed that. By the way, I didn”t see or smell any ganja at the conference. Maybe that is a testament to my early bedtime and advancing age than to anything else. But back to my point. This is not an organization that has a charismatic leader. I haven”t heard or read any transcripts where teachers tell people what to do – not that people don”t ask – they do, all the time. But teachers (correctly) aren”t in the business of running anyone”s life. That would interfere with free will. Another reason predictions should be ignored (and they aren”t made much anymore, as far as I can tell). (7) It all comes down to what sparks someone to walk the highest path. If the TM does, fine. If the Bible does, great. If the UB does, go with it. If you find truth in many places and have the judgment to pick it out – I think you are on the right track. But what do I know?
18 Dec 1993 ??fx618@AOL.COM ????????Re: Hypocrisy Is Repugnant to
Subject: Re: Hypocrisy Is Repugnant to
?Thanks for your comment Jim:
?I am indiferrent to these organizations as far as my personal involvement with them. My main concern is that I have spent much time amongst the New Agers who are a very sincere group of truthseekers who among other strong beliefs do believe generally in 1) reincarnation and 2) the validity of channeling. Regardless of how we feel about these topics THEY FEEL strongly about them. They have to accept the UB within their personal context of belief., and we should be sensitive to that, the Master always considered the personal religious history of the individual.
?They have been among the most responsive groups to attracting new readers to the book, when asked the origin of the book and I respond it was “originally channeled but judge the material on its own right” their response has generally been “ok, fine” The origin is no big deal to them.
?The Christian OTOH, especially the born-again Christian will often respond to the question of origin “Oh its channeled, channeling is a satan-inspired!” End of conversation.
?BUT once they ”New Agers” discover the outright and formal rejection of the “channeling fringe” within the UM they will recoil (my speculation) at this hypocrisy, before they know the complete details. They won”t have the years of reading to secure their tethers to the book and I would predict quick rejection because they are very sensitive to the hypocrisy issue.
?The spread of the UB as a revelation has to occur within the context of current religous beliefs, the New Age sector of truthseekers is very receptive to the book, my concern is that formal rejection of channeling by any UB-based organization and informal intolerance of it in such forums as Urantial will turn these newcomers away.
?The TM may have arrived in part because of these trend in the UM: The philosopers want to talk the book to death amongst themselves; the Christians reject it because of its Satanic ties to channeling; and now the New Agers are formally told to stay away; and informally told the have oatmeal for brains if they buy into the concept of channeling by a group who base their belief system on a bound set of channeled transcripts.
?I”ve full confidence in the Father”s and the Masters” plan for this planet, I just see this as a strategic item that is not only handled badly by those who make the formal decisions, but is promulgated by the intolerance of channeling on such forums as Urantial, Compuserve etc, where new agers are checking it out.
18 Dec 1993 ??Thea Hardy ??????Re: Phil on TM Attack
Subject: Re: Phil on TM Attack In-Reply-To: [199312160627.WAA14810@CSOS.ORST.EDU]
?The content of your note to Phil reminds me of Michael”s statement to be wise as serpents and gentle as doves. Discernment and graciousness separated from each other result in extremes. Yes. We do need truth as well as love – and for that matter, beauty ain”t half bad, either. But when all truth short of the Father is relative, it is sometimes tough to discern what is what, as the apostles certainly struggled with. The UB presents us with rather a selection of methods for getting at the truth. I know that for myself, I try to apply as many methods as possible as often as possible through the entire process of my life, spiritual and otherwise. It is difficult and time-consuming sometimes, and requires a lot of personal effort, to continue to do so. But to my mind it is indeed necessary. I no more want to lead people over the cliff than I want to go over it myself. OTOH, I also do not be one who does not follow when Michael says “Follow me”. This is not an easy path; no path taken with an attempt at continued integrity and sincerity is. Yet I keep trying.
?Thanks for your comments for it is true that graciousness alone is not enough, tho had I to choose between love and discernment, I would choose love. Fortunately, we do not have to choose.
18 Dec 1993 ??Stephen Finlan ?????Gracious Me
Subject: Gracious Me
?Should I leave the TM discussion where it is? We”ve reached a point where Jim and others have eloquently pointed out the primacy of truth-experience; that the Book or TM can be turned into a crutch, if you let it. Are these the last words on this subject? Has the Universal Censor spoken? Or may I question the consensus?
?Jesse, you say: >intolerance of [the TM] in such forums as Urantial >will turn these newcomers away.
?First of all, criticism is not the same as _intolerance_.
?Jesse, you say that followers of a channeled book ought to respect the TM because it claims to be transmitted by the same method. Respect on the basis of the _claim itself_, not on the basis of its content. Well, let”s extend that to everybody. Shamans, witches, and Santerria practitioners make the same claims. Equal air-time for Pleiadeans!
?Look, I live in San Francisco. I”m as polite as the next person, when someone tells me that she talks to nature-sprites. Still, within the Urantia movement, we ought to be able to challenge these claims.
?There is a difference between practicing your own religion (which may include dramatizing your intuitions of how spirit-contact happens), but when you claim that you are getting messages from a Melchizedek, you are making an authority-claim. I challenged (on other grounds) the claims of the Foundation and Brotherhood. Now I challenge these revelation-claims, the ones I”ve encountered so far.
?Graciously, of course.
?Still, you make an extremely pertinent point when you say: >The spread of the UB as a revelation has to occur within the >context of current religous beliefs, the New Age sector of >truthseekers is very receptive to the book.
?When revelations blend with evolutionary religion, there will always be philosophic adaptation to the viewpoint of evolution. But do we have to go so far over into the crop-circlers camp?
?I can”t do any better than affirm what Thea said: >be wise as serpents and gentle as doves. Discernment and >graciousness separated from each other result in extremes.
?Fred”s point can help us here: >in order to change this world, the message that is to be >presented must be simple and it cannot be tied to any book >or TM experience… UB will have to be boiled down to basics
?The basics are the gospel, faith-affirmation. This does shine through sometimes in the TM, but also in many books and personal outreach activities. But the spirit of vividness (the secret of human success) is currently with the TM.
?Phil: the Book doesn”t say that Jesus told his apostles not to confront Kirmeth”s errors, only that he stopped them from driving him away “rather roughly.” (1666)
18 Dec 1993 ??Thea Hardy ??????Re: Gracious Me
Subject: Re: Gracious Me In-Reply-To: [199312190243.SAA15496@CSOS.ORST.EDU]
?I didn”t respond to something in Jesse”s most recent post, but your post provoked me to do so. I personally have my own problems with the New Age side of the equation in things. As you say, tho not in these words, if channeled the UB, etc be, there is channeling and channeling… If we say that everything channeled is cool. Well, guys, that means Sedona, and a whoooooole lot of others stuff that I myself could not sit still for for one minute. Nope. It will never be that easy. Discernment, more discernment, and increasingly pesky difficult challenging discernment, appears to be the order of the day. Sigh. I had really hoped it would be easier. Even after reading that fat blue book for 23 years and _knowing_ that it talked in there about fattening on disappointment and enthusing over apparent difficulties etc…
?Also, I want you to know that I spent months agonizing over exactly the issues that everyone who has trouble with the TM raises on here. It drove me nuts as I tried to test it and turn it and toss it. My very first response, for you Finnie since you were not here to hear me talk about it, was anger. Oh, no! I said, another FOG!! But I read transcripts. I was still angry. But I prayed. And I argued in my mind and I went over and over and over. But small things began to change and happen. ANd then I had to go over it all again to prove to myself that nothing had really happened. It was hard, Finnie. It still is. There are many of us in the TM who did not come to it by going, “Oooo, that is just so cool; I believe it all right now!!” I still am not 100% sure what it is exactly (nor am I 100% sure how the UB got here, considering that human nature could guarentee less than full honesty about that from our human sources…), but I am more sure daily of its fruits in my life and that of others. I know David didn”t like that test. But every test that I can find in the UB, it appears to meet. I am not one who makes claims for the TM. I see it as a call to increased love. And that is what counts. I read my UB more than ever and understand it better than ever. It is still and will remain the philosophic, ethical, aesthetic, spiritual core of my life, aside from my personal experience, which is first and foremost. Just know that not all of us just rolled into the hay at the first glance…
21 Dec 1993 ??Jeff Keys ?????????Re: TM Welmek
Subject: Re: TM Welmek
?> Regarding the suggestion that we don”t attribute a quote to a >teacher and let it rise or fall on its content, I have struggled with >this very issue from time to time. Since most of the teachers are not >”famous” as in mentioned in the UB, I have continued to post their >names and their locations so as to impart the wide scale spread of >this phenomenon. I won”t post famous celestials” names in the future >but will post the location, if that is an acceptable compromise. What >do you think?
?If you are referring to my comment, it was more rhetorical than it was a request. The idea was more along the line of “What would the Teaching Mission be like if the *teachers* did not identify themselves by name?” Would that change how people in the TM felt about it? Would it lose any perceived value? Would different people be attracted to it, or attracted for different reasons? Wuld the critics view it in a different light?
?Since they do in fact give their names, if you are going to post excerpts, I think you should continue to attribute the messages by name.
?I have responses to others on ice due to various forms of busyness and a keyboard that gives 0-5 “o””s as a random function when the key is pressed.
22 Dec 1993 ??Philip Calabrese ?????The TM, the UB and the foaming
Subject: The TM, the UB and the foaming mouth
?By the way, although the UB says that it was itself channeled, it also says that most of what passes as divine inspiration is just coming from the deep mind of the channeler and is hardly the words of God. So, TMers, beware. Better (as the UB says) to error on the side of attributing divine messages to the unconscious mind then to elevate the products of the human mind to the level of God”s leadings and messages. The implied claim of authority (as Jeff Keys points out) when attributing messages to superhuman sources becomes a problem for everyone, whether to believe or not, rather than allowing everyone to just appreciate the message content without regard to source.
22 Dec 1993 ??Tom Alexander ???Fear
Subject: Fear In-Reply-To: [199312230331.TAA13599@CSOS.ORST.EDU]
?Our group has a pair of seraphim as group teachers. They are Martadawn and Martadew. At last Friday”s (12/17/93) study group our teacher Martadawn acknowledged the anguish and frustration I was having on the Internet with critics of the teaching mission with this opening lesson on fear which is unedited and verbatim:
?Tonight I wish to touch somewhat on the topic of fear. As you are discovering or are aware of, that fear often or generally affects how someone approachs religion or the concept of God. For instance, some religions base fear as the only way to discover the Father, you must first fear Him. Our purpose is to try to have you recognize your fears. Some fears you cannot remove because they are part of the nature of man, the animal of man. But some fears are created when you were a child, instilled at a small age. These fears are what we will try to aid each of you in overcoming so you will have a greater insight to your spiritual self.
?Fear in a religion is often created to control the religion. To control the multitude, a chosen selected few, install a fear in the multitude. There are those who are intellectually sound to recognize this fear and to discredit it or choose to not acknowledge it in their own personal lives. To recognize this fear is to overcome what this fear will limit you in.
?Eventually we wish to instill that God is of love and that fear is not the way to approach him but as a loving father to a loving child. This is how each of you approach the Father for you have discovered fear is not necessary, that fear only limits your accessibility. It is our hope that your examples of love, the brotherhood of love, the example of the Father”s love to you expressed through you to others, that this will bring people about to ask questions as to why you are so different from them and this will eventually open up possiblities that they will discover that there is no need to fear the Father but to embrace Him in His love for them as well as their love for Him.
?Fear has such a large topic, is there any specific fear you wish to discuss?
?Q: Why do highly intellectual and highly knowledgeable people in the Urantia movement fear the teaching mission so much to the point that they say it is going to damage and destroy civilization.
?Martadawn: The damage that the mission will have is upon them who fear the mission. It will change their outlook of life, their comfort of what they intellectually feel should be the world. Their intellectual concept of what the world should be is not conceivable because it is riddle with actuality and not enough faith. The one who wishes to intellectually dominate a group of people, this intellectual one has in his or her mind a perfect way the world should be run, should worship the Father, should run their system of government. This takes away free will choice of those who will be under this dominance. Those who feel that the world is as it should be now are afraid of what the world will become. They are afraid that there will people who will be able to intellectually, philosophically, and spiritually dominate them because the three create the one instead of the intellectual being the strong point. This again is where you must approach their fear. I say to you, this does not mean to you individually but to all of us spiritually on our side as well as mortals. Arguing only instills their fear even more that they intellectually are not in control. This is again based on a fear. Fear of unknown. Fear of if they are wrong, of acceptance. There are many fears based on this. Fear of being proven wrong is a great one. Arguing with someone who feels they are intellectually superior only instills in them the need to be right. Even if they are wrong they will not accept the fact that they are wrong, they can only be right because of their intellectuality. The fear of being proven wrong is very strong.
?Q.: What is the best way to overcome this fear?
?Martadawn: For us to work on them.
?Q.: What about those of us in this room who may have some of those fears?
?Martadawn: Do you mean you have the fear of being proved wrong?
?Q: I am not sure I know what my fears are necessarily, I know that I have them and that may be one of them. I don”t think it overwhelms me but at times it may affect me in a way that prohibits my evolution.
?Martadawn: There are so many of different types of fear that run amuck on your world. There are fears of being wrong, there are fears of being right, they should counter act each other but this does not always happen. There are fears of decision making, there are fears of acting on your decisions, there are so many levels of fear. There are some who fear putting on the right shoe before the left shoe. The intellectual side has based their information on what they consider factual information. To have this factual information attacked such as some individuals feel the mission will attack their intellectual beliefs, what they are comfortable in, this fear is a strong fear and to argue against this fear of theirs, to argue against their intellectual knowledge that has based this fear will only result in alienating them and distance them from the mission. To approach them in the Father”s love and to acknowledge their fear and to say this is basically how you feel, please respect my will and my decision to believe as I feel. If they cannot accept this and attack this they are crossing over your free will and this is something that they must eventually acknowledge which will not happen immediately. To point out please do not cross my will and I will not cross your choice of free will. If they are intellectually acceptable of the free will they should stop attacking other free wills. This must also be approached on our side. We have a larger intellectual staff that can approach them to give them concepts that they cannot deny.
?Q.: They also say we take bits and pieces of the Urantia Book to support the teaching mission rather than the whole work of the Urantia Book. They say the whole work of the Book shows that things like this are the work of the human imagination.
?Martadawn: It is also saddening to see this happening. For to say you take pieces out of context of the Urantia Book is not true. If they were to really study the Urantia Book, the teaching mission is of the Urantia Book. The Urantia Book was given to you from many individuals on our side, spirit intellectuals who have observed your world, been a part of your world. This book was to enlighten you as to what you will become and experience in your career, your ascending career. This book was brought to enlighten your world; to take it out of context is not possible. You may state certain parts of it but that does not mean it is distorted. It is the individual who will do the distorting. The words in the Urantia Book speak for itself. This is what they fear, they fear the mission will distort what they believe the Urantia Book states. They are not looking at the book as it is truly stated. This is what you consider the bandwagon effect. There is so much more. This book was created for your level at the moment, where your conceptual minds can perceive. There is even more information. This book was given to a time that was searching for more than the bible and even the book of Mormon could give.
?I am really going to try and not to argue with the critics anymore. It just feeds fuel to their fire. If you reject what I believe that is fine, I am not twisting your arm or mouse wire. I post this totally in the spirit of sharing. From my heart I can honestly say I do not fear if I am wrong! I have learned to make it a daily habit of worshiping the Father as often as I can. And if my so called deluded imagination spurned me on to do it, then that is great. Just understand I am not trying to convert critics to my point of view, rather share my point of view, and if you disagree I can live with that.
23 Dec 1993 ??Scott Foerster ???????Re: Fear
Subject: Re: Fear In-Reply-To: [199312230609.AA24056@nfs1.digex.net]
?What a lesson! I had about 10 pages to post to battle David K but he left. And now I don”t feel like posting them. Reading through what I was going to post, I basically sit on the ground crying, pleading, saying beat me, whip me. I know I am not worthy of your attention. And then David comes back, beats me and shoots himself in the foot at the same time.
?The point of the lesson is that my postings were not constructive. They only forced David deeper into the ugly cave of fear. I apologize. Will not happen again. Looking back this has been a pattern throughout my entire life. College waterpolo, this guy on our team was 6”4″, could bench press 400 lbs, was smashing me into the wall of the pool … this is illegal .. he would have been called for a foul. But Coach had left to answer the phone. I ribbed him with my elbows. He went berserk. I went to the bottom of the pool (shallow end .. about 4 feet). He started jumping up and down, trying to hurt me … coach came out and threw him out of practice. He didn”t learn a lesson, he just hated me thereafter.
?Yup the light bulb just went on. Thanks. Keeping posting that stuff where it comes from.
28 Dec 1993 ??Thea Hardy ??????Cheap modems and TM list
Subject: Cheap modems and TM list In-Reply-To: [199312281656.IAA00924@CSOS.ORST.EDU]
?Just a note to mention that you can get a decent 14.4 modem for $99 from Mac Warehouse mail order that works on all platforms. A number of us have been satisfied with them.
?Also, just a note… the current TM mail list has decided to do the slow growth bit and not go on the new UBookNet for the time being. Just as Urantial started out gradually until MM and all got the hang of things, we are also starting out in such a way. I am sure the time will come when we branch out, but some of us with business histories know that early over-expansion can cause problems. I am sure UBookNet will provide a TM alternative. Ours is only one small list of many that will likely come into existence.
?Headed to the beach for a few days soon; will miss the gang!
29 Dec 1993 ??Jim Mcnelly ??????TM list
Subject: TM list In-Reply-To: [m0pElOu-0000zLC@gcbbgw.granite.mn.org]
?Urantial to All – Tuesday, December 28th: Discussing: TM list
?U>Also, just a note… the current TM mail list has decided to do the slow >growth bit and not go on the new UBookNet for the time being.
?Since Thea went “public” with this note, here are the facts of the matter.
?When the TM list was made a “list” (like Urantial), our BBS software requires that it be addressed to a “conference” on our network, rather than sent to the subscriber as E-mail. Unlike Urantial, however, and other conferences like 2,000 UseNet Conferences, the TML conference is “private”, not public. No persons other than those authorized by Thea would ever have access to their private list.
?At this point, I am the only subscriber to TML who uses UBookNet and would be the only authorized reader of the conference. At this time, any person who would wish to receive TML, and would choose the UBookNet option as their mail “post-office”, would still have to receive permission to join the TML conference from its Listserver. Basically, the TML conference “belongs” to its listserver, not UBookNet.
?To my surprise, I was notified that the moving of my TML mail from E-mail to a conference, even a private conference with the authorized readers determined by the TML listserver, constituted “fast growth”. My name was “removed” from TML because our software had to move the list to a private conference. This means that any other subscribers to TML who also log on through UBookNet would also be unable to receive the TMList.
?This same subscriber (I suppose) could subscribe to TML through Compuserve, Delphi, Prodigy or any of a dozen of other private networks that access Internet. But UBookNet, the one service created as a general purpose E-post office and library for Urantia Book readers has been locked out, and followers of the TM are consequently barred from reading TM mail if they join UBookNet.
?I was content to explain the matter in private mail to Scott and Thea until Thea went public with the note on Urantial claiming that UBookNet was “fast growth” and my name was removed from the TMlist.
?I do not claim to practice TM meditative imagery or state that I contact any spirit beings in a manner consistent with the TM paradigm. I have, however, supported the TM meditative process and any individual”s right to reflect and pray in the symbology of their choosing without recrimination from the Fellowship. I enjoy the TM readings and have listened to the early Woods Cross tapes from the beginning of their distribution. Many close friends are either “receivers” or are active in TM groups, and I chat with them on a regular basis.
?I know that the TM movement is sensitive to criticism, and I respect their desire for private conferences. But if I am being barred from receiving copies of the TM list, I would like to know the *real* reason, because I am certain that it is not just a technicality of the software on our computer. Moving of my TM mail from e-mail to a private conference is certainly not “fast growth”. If persons friendly to the TM movement such as myself are being distanced from the phenomenon, then I am concerned that the TM is on the verge of isolating itself and it causes me to reflect upon some of the concerns expressed by Bob Blackstock and David Kantor.
?I regret that Thea went public on Urantial with her position on UBookNet which required this response in public.
29 Dec 1993 ??Scott Foerster ???????tml list service
Subject: tml list service
?Back in Oct. or Nov. I started up a unix mailing list called “TML”. It worked for probably a week and then went down for a week. Then it came up for a week and then went down for a month. Currently it is up. But there is no community, no flurry of messages like here on Urantial. Probably 40 messages have been sent, mostly test messages.
?Currently, I have not: a) researched to see if TML is used as the name for any other mail list through the directories, archie, gopher, internet resource guide books. I am concerned that TML is being spoken of so frequently here in a public forum. I might get in trouble for choosing this name. b) There is no way to automatically SUBSCRIBE to TML or to SIGNOFF in a manner similar to URANTIAL. I have to manually enter the names into an ASCII list on a SUN computer in Greenbelt Maryland. Thea agreed to correspond with those interested in joining the list .. send their names to me and I would add them. But I travel a lot, and don”t currently have internet access when traveling thus this is difficult. c) There is no way for you to query the list to see who it is you are joining .., I don”t have an automated method for logging files so messages sent to the list are not recorded somewhere. I am working on it, but folks this is hard work. d) There is no way for you download a file of previous conversations like Urantial.
?Without boring you with the technical details, please understand that Michael Million needs to be blessed everyday for creating and maintaining Urantial. Everyday I appreciate what he has done more and more.
?When I first thought of setting up a mail list, I read all I could. Downloaded all the advice guides for setting up a mail list. I composed a list of questions .. trying not to prejudge the nature and characteristics of the list at all. These questions turned into a task list, .. things that need to get done in order to have a successful list. These tasks are mixture of technical and user services. I needed a partner. Isn”t the obvious choice Thea? She agreed. So we took the initiative, formed a team and are struggling to get this list up. I work on the technical end if it almost every day.
?Our goal is to start small and grow. But what is the point in joining a list where not everyone receives messages (this happened last week .. still trying to chase that one down), where messages bounce, where the SUN people tell me that the problem is the ASCII list of internet addresses, where the SUN people tell me it is up, I send messages to it, receive a reply and nobody else does? Do you want to get involved in this mess? Write Thea.
?Jim has been part of this and I appreciate it. I don”t think he saw all the chaos or the problems. Thea and I have been trying to stablize the list, probably not communicating to everyone exactly what is going on enough. So perhaps Jim, you did not know the list was down for a month .. period .. did not work .. received messages sent them to me but nobody else .. for the rest of you it is working now (last time I checked.)
?Jim is starting up a service called “UBookNet” and I have volunteered to help out. My philosophy is to make one change at a time, to make one step forward at a time, to solve one problem at a time. Currently I am working on archiving the TML list”s messages .. reinventing the wheel. Jim wants to link TML up to a Granite City BBS Conference and thus join “UBookNet.” I am scared. There were problems hooking the Granite City BBS Conference up to Urantial. Michael Million gets on line and celebrates everytime he establishes a new connection. I have not gone through this. I want to listen to the experience of you Jim, Michael and others so that I don”t make the same mistakes.
?As I understand it, Jim was going to get into trouble with his internet access service “Granite City” if the TML list continued to send messages to his personal E-Mail address. Instead he wanted the messages sent to a Grantie City BBS Conference. He at one point says this Conference is his own “private” mail box and at another point claims it is part of “UBookNet.” This is just too much for me to figure out at the moment.
?Jim, if you want back on the Teaching Mission list with your personal private mail box address, I would be happy to do this. I am uncomfortable with TML being mentioned here within Urantial, embrassed that some of you might try to use it with expectations set here inside such a remarkable, reliable, active list service. I am scared that somebody else might be using the initials TML for another purpose someplace in the world.
?What a glorious universe, in that it is personal and progressive, not merely mechanical or even passively perfect.
29 Dec 1993 ??fx618@AOL.COM ????????Re: TM list
Subject: Re: TM list
?I think there must be a lack of communication here. The purpose of the TM List is IMO the following:
?1) To provide a circuit of communication in which those involved with the TM can share their experiences, many of them personal and intimate, within an atmosphere whichs is:
?a) not acrimonius but nurturing and b) secure in the sense that a personal post is less likely to be copied and pasted and later used out of context as cannon fodder by someone like Martin Gardner nor used a a target for viscious drive-by shootings like those of David Kantor. and c) respects our brothers and sisters on Urantial who are antagonistic to the TM by not dominating their byte time with postings they wish not to have.
?It is self-evident that Freedom of expression is limited or enhanced by the individuals perception of the repercussions of that expression.
?2) The TM is not one single corporeal body, IT is not sensitive to criticism. Your conclusion, Jim, may be an over generalization — kin to saying the UM at large is reluctant to push book sales extrapolated form the actions of the Foundation.
?Individuals may in fact be sensitive to it, or what is mistaken for sensitivity (refusal to engage in critical discussion) may be in actuality a reluctance to waste time striving with those who are already on a secure path to the Father or with those who are perceived as totally unreceptive to its potential as a reality. Or simply the frustration of defending or proving the personal experiences of faith-action in the arena of material logic?
?Byron B. was certainly not sensitive to criticism. I tried in earnest to respond to Matthew R. and to Stephen F. criticisms in a series of posts an Urantial and respect their views very much. Urantial is a forum in which UB students have a right to criticize the TM, this is IMO the proper forum for this to take place. It (Urantial) is not the optimum forum for TM postings in which private and intimate experiences are shared relative to the TM.
?> a private conference with the authorized readers determined by the TML listserver[
?Jim, if this is what you were suggesting this seems wholly compatible with paragraph 1) above. I see nothing wrong with this at all. What the TM listers do not want is a totally open list which becomes a shooting target for antagonists. Urantial already provides a forum for critical engagement, the TM list need not duplicate that function. I think there has been a misunderstanding, but I cannot speak for Thea.
29 Dec 1993 ??David Kantor ?????Not Lurking
Subject: Not Lurking
?Well, so much for discipline — I couldn”t stay away. Tom Alexander”s nearly incoherent posting of Dec 22 (which bounced back to me via private correspondence) attributed to “teachers” was too much. So we”ve got people attempting to use the UB to justify their drug dependancies, their self-induced hallucinations, their apocalyptic fears — truly pathetic given the real pain and suffering going on in a world which is crying for a coherent presentation of the gospel of Jesus…
29 Dec 1993 ??Thea Hardy ??????Re: TM list
Subject: Re: TM list In-Reply-To: [199312291550.HAA09027@CSOS.ORST.EDU]
?My position on UBooknet is that it is a great idea and a wonderful thing. I hope it is a rousing success and that others will follow. My remark was simply to say that this little TM list would not be part of UBooknet as listed. But we are just a small group of people in the mission who wish to talk about a few things as privately as possible. Because we have a non-gopherable little list, that is more than usually possible. I think that there will be other and much more widely disseminated TM lists to come, and would encourage any and all of you who are interested to please start them. There is plenty of room for a number of agendas. I would like to see them all met.
?I don”t think that there is any question of your interest in fast growth, Jim. You have made that clear. And you have every right possible to that position. I am just as conservative about the spread of the book as I am about this TM list, alas. It is just my position. I am sorry it has become a personal thing; I never intended it to be. I just do hope that we all have room to let each other do things in different ways. You will probably accomplish more with your bold approach than I do with my timid one. Perhaps some time I will come to see this. To me, you may appear pushy. To you, I may appear a stick-in-the-mud. Is there any way we can come to mutual respect on this? I hope so.
?I wish tremendous success to you and Christine with the UBookNet and I would encourage everyone on here with the computer capabilities that work with it to give it a try. It promises to be not only great fun, but perhaps of wonderful long-term service. Our little list is just a tiny flash in the pan, and makes no attempt to be a professional network. I applaud your efforts, and your knowledge and ability that permit you to create such a thing.
29 Dec 1993 ??fx618@AOL.COM ????????Heeessss baaaaacckkkk…….
Subject: Heeessss baaaaacckkkk…….
?I knew you were back just by reading the message, no one else would insult so many in such few words, we call this the Kantor drive-bys.
?David, would the Master have announced his return by calling his good brothers and sisters “pathetic and incoherent?” Is this the gospel of Jesus! Are we reading the same book?
?One outstanding quality of our Creator brother is that he saw the goodness and greatness and potential in all of us. Do you disagree with this?
?Your actions betray you. One can have a consummate ability to comprehend the gospel intellectually, but if one cannot execute it amongst and in daily ordinary situations with common men and women via the powers of love then the intellectual grasp is nothing more than dust in the wind.
29 Dec 1993 ??David Kantor ?????Quick Note to Jesse
Subject: Quick Note to Jesse
?Just a quick note. Please re-read my post. I did not call anyone “pathetic” as you have accused. Neither did I call anyone “incoherent.” I used the term “nearly incoherent” to refer to such high quality gems of TM wisdom in Tom”s post as:
?”Their intellectual concept of what the world should be is not conceivable because it is riddle with actuality and not enough faith.”
?”They are afraid that there will people who will be able to intellectually, philosophically, and spirituall dominate them because the three create the one instead of the intellectual being the strong point.”
?”To have this factual information attacked such as some individuals feel the mission will attack their intellectual beliefs, what they are comfortable in, this fear is a strong fear and to argue against this fear of theirs, to argue against their intellectual knowledge that has based this fear will only result in alienating them and distance them from the mission.”
?”If they cannot accept this and attack this they are crossing over your free will and this is something that they must eventually acknowledge which will not happen immediately. To point out please do not cross my will and I will not cross your choice of free will.”
?”This book was brought to enlighten your world; to take it out of context is not possible. You may state certain parts of it but that does not mean it is distorted.”
?”This book was created for your level at the moment where your conceptual minds can perceive.”
?Are you really impressed and uplifted by such statements?
29 Dec 1993 ??Scott Foerster ???????DavidK, Whats up?
Subject: DavidK, Whats up? In-Reply-To: [199312300055.AA05534@nfs1.digex.net]
?My slightly offbalance father-in-law was woken by my kids practicing the piano. His first thought was … Scott”s kids are nuts playing rotten music in the early morning hours like this. So he walked into the living room and clapped madly when ever they stopped practicing. When this didn”t work, he started singing loudly. My wife sent a good deal of time trying to convince my tather-in-law that practicing in the morning was the best technique for getting kids into a regular grove .. and that the music is not rotten. My wife and I hear excellent music, not rotten music when the kids practice. We encourage them to practice. The teaching mission is about practicing, not finished product.
?Perhaps someday the teaching mission will produce a finished product that can truely meet your quality standards. But perhaps not .. it is a process not a truth generation machine. The words left over are, by themselves, useful only if you put yourself in the position of needing love and being ready to receive love. The words are useful, only if you are trying to learn how to be kind, only if you have spent time trying to comfort a hurting person. It is during these moments that English sentence structure usually falls apart anyway.
?Besides, if you truely can respect the “many paths to the father” concept, then the goal is to build your own path .. not tear down all the other paths being created right? So what are you working on David?
29 Dec 1993 ??Thea Hardy ??????Re: DavidK, Whats up?
Subject: Re: DavidK, Whats up? In-Reply-To: [199312300200.SAA26193@CSOS.ORST.EDU]
?Scott, your message about “rotten music” being rejected was poignant. I grew up being told that mistakes were something to feel shame over. You and others on this list have watched on occasion when I fell all over myself trying to apologize for mistakes. It is an awful, squirmy feeling. Yet the book says we need not pore over our limitations, but only recognize when we have failed and resolve to work to do better. That simple recognition does not require shame and self-hatred. But I was taught to do that, and most of the people I know were taught it, too. And many of them, now that they have children, have found themselves struggling to be patient with their children”s natural imperfections.
?I applaud you and your wife for your understanding that you can”t get there except by what it takes to get there … a lot of practice that falls far short of perfection. We are all still children in this universe. And we do each have a unique path. Short of our love of the Father and each other, just about everything else has its differences. This is what presents us with endless opportunities to learn tolerance. And it isn”t easy for any of us, children that we truly are.
?I hope that we can learn to support each others journeys and be tolerant of each others mistakes as together we seek the Father. I fail often to do so. But I will keep trying. We never know when we will need a hand up, and it is always useful to try to offer a hand-up when we see that it might be useful. That is part of being in a teach-and-learn universe.
?David, I apologize to you if words that I said before your earlier departure seemed harsh. If I could rephrase what I meant in its essence, it would be to ask you to give us a hand up when you see us appear to be failing. Offer us some assistance and loving support and suggestions, just as you would with your kids. And although my words may have come out harsh, I was only trying my best to do the same.
?I agree that Urantial is a great place to discuss ideas. I would hope that it is also a place to practice what we have learned from that big blue book we all love. Most of us could probably learn to be kinder. And over time, most of us probably will. I am not talking here about pussy-footing around issues. We must be free to say what we believe. But there are things to pan – like lack of sincerity – and things that require different handling – like sincere attempts, however mistaken. I hope we can all learn to discern the difference. (A lifetime task)
30 Dec 1993 ??Tom Alexander ???Re: Not Lurking
Subject: Re: Not Lurking In-Reply-To: [199312292118.NAA16988@CSOS.ORST.EDU]
?Oh what an honor! To be pilloried in the first post of the robust return of the ye ol” arrogant one! Why it leaves me, ah, ah, pathetically incoherent and speechless. Now I am pissed Santa didn”t bring me that bullet proof vest I saw at the Sharper Image.
30 Dec 1993 ??Sysop ??????????Re: TM list
Subject: Re: TM list In-Reply-To: [m0pF8MP-0000zIC@gcbbgw.granite.mn.org]
?Urantial@Uafsysb.Uark.Edu to All On December 29, 1992 Discussing: Re: TM list
?U>My position on UBooknet is that it is a great idea and a wonderful U>thing. I hope it is a rousing success and that others will follow. My U>remark was simply to say that this little TM list would not be part of U>UBooknet as listed. But we are just a small group of people in the U>mission who wish to talk about a few things as privately as possible. U>Because we have a non-gopherable little list, that is more than usually ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
?Hi Thea! Happy Holidays!
?We are totally NON-GOPHER ABLE and NON-FTPable and NON-Telnetable AND NON-RLoginable. I hope you have a chanch to read my other message posted tonight. I thank you for you positive thoughts for UBookNet! I KNOW it will be a success!
?U>perhaps of wonderful long-term service. Our little list is just a tiny U>flash in the pan, and makes no attempt to be a professional network. I U>applaud your efforts, and your knowledge and ability that permit you to U>create such a thing.
?I don”t agree…. your “little” list is part of our foundation of UBookNet as is the Urantia List. Without the two of you, it will just not be the same [sigh]. Anyway…. I do understand and hope that soon you will see how much we can be of a service to both YOU and Urantia AND other lists (each one private and individual as they can be made). Thank you and I wish you well in your endeavors.
30 Dec 1993 ??Sysop ??????????tml list service
Subject: tml list service In-Reply-To: [m0pF3qx-0000zIC@gcbbgw.granite.mn.org]
?Urantial@Uafsysb.Uark.Edu to All On December 29, 1992 Discussing: tml list service
?U>As I understand it, Jim was going to get into trouble with his U>internet access service “Granite City” if the TML list continued to send U>messages to his personal E-Mail address. Instead he wanted the messages U>sent to a Grantie City BBS Conference. He at one point says this U>Conference is his own “private” mail box and at another point claims it is U>part of “UBookNet.” This is just too much for me to figure out at the
?Hey Scott! Happy Holidays!
?Jim was NOT going to get into trouble. I have requested from all the users on my “our” service to NOT subscribe to any mailing lists. In fact I have them locked out so that you can”t add a mailing list to your email box. If a user requires (or wants) a list, they send me a message with the the name and address of the list and the list owners email address. I then send a message to that list and request that granite.whatever name be added to their list. I then (depending on the list and what the list owner has said I make it public (for all to enjoy) or private (for only that user or users) to enjoy. So, based on my policy, I asked you and Thea to remove Jims” name from the list and put in Granite.tml instead….. that is what started this whole shebang.
?To be honest…. I”m now done with it and I apologize to all on Urantia and you those on the TM List. I will no longer talk about this subject as I respect your right to run your list the way you want. I do understand why you want it private.
?Take care and remember…. I care!
2 Jan 1994 ????MR RICK P GILES ?????????Elyon”s Christmas message
Subject: Elyon”s Christmas message
?Hi all, I”m Rick Giles. I”m new in these parts of virtual reality. Some of you know me though the Prodigy BB. Others through non-virtual forms of acquaintence. I will dispell any curiosty: I am a UB reader. Found the book in 1973. I”ve started and attended UB study groups for the last twenty years, the Santa Cruz group in Ca, a Sebastopol group, tho not the one B. Sagle hosts now. And now the Coeur d”Alene, Id and Spokane, Wa groups. I have enjoyed the proximity of “teachers”. They have alot to teach if one is sensitive and receptive. Now that I”m hung with the rest, let me post our group teacher”s Christmas message:
?December 25, 1993 Elyon: *Good evening, my friends. I am Elyon. I am pleased to be here celebrating with you the day of con- siderable significance to many of you on this planet. I am always excited by the opportunity to provide the service I have been enlisted to offer you, and when you welcome my presence I respond. It is a remarkable event to have bestowed upon you one of the caliber of a Creator Son. You have bene- fitted greatly from the revelation of our sovereign ruler during his sojourn here in the attainment of his supremacy status. Though your world acknowledges the significance of his presence few among you, and I count you as those, recognize the universal importance of his coming. Prior to this spectacular occurrence Nebadon was a different realm than it is today. It has begun an unfolding which, until now, was in a sense prohibited, for Michael had chosen to limit his power until he discovered directly the perspective of his children in his incarnations. Now, having full knowl- edge of life at all levels, he is enacting measures necessary to propel this universe into a new era. It is an exciting prospect for all, even up to the headquar- ters, for it is new to us. The rules have changed. It has been but a short while since the ascension of Mi- chael. It is an adjustment we are making. We welcome you into this knowledge and encourage you in the out- working of his new purpose. The eras of distortion have closed. There will be no more rebellion. I”m sure this is a relief to those of you who have grappled so long with the consequences of such. But now as Michael is “king of the hill” many, in fact all, recognize the value that he embodies. There is no longer confusion among administrators as to who this Creator is. We will no longer witness pandemonium. There is but one task to accomplish; and that is the mastery of your own center, will. Here lies the only element of error left in Nebadon. You each have the responsibility to uplift yourself through soul growth in order to provide your universe with the increased attainment of its goal: light and life. This does not mean that where you are now is incorrect. Your attainment here is precisely what your master desires, and I convey this to you authorized by him. You are, nonetheless, always encouraged to pur- sue, to grapple with, the as yet unattained levels that really are not that far away. It is a freedom of choice that you make. I have been through a multitude of experiences that would baffle you. I wish that I could convey to you the adventures that are just ahead. They are thril- ling from the perspective of ones like yourself, in body. I look back and treasure the moments but realize that these are but the beginning of the great vista before me. I perceive the attainment of superuniverse status as would be likened to your attempt to stand at the edge of a great canyon and touch the other side. It has become quite comfortable being a mid-phase morontia being. I rather like this. Yet it is not long before I will step out to that unrealized realm beyond Michael. There is no way to attain this status without fully dedicating oneself to the manifestation of spirit di- rectly at the level where you are, and I am now statio- ned. You long for the realities that are perceived as attainable in the afterlife, and you will have these. They are to be received by you through dealing face to face with what is presented to you now while material. The morontia realm must be attained by mortals through living the material life. Your makeup requires experi- ence here as well as there. It is not the design of Michael for you to be an angel. They were born moront- ia, you are born material, and it is for you to absorb and experience this reality. If this were not true, the master would not have been born among you. He took this life of flesh very seriously and embraced it as the great opportunity in his career to discover God at the borders of the realities of personality.
2 Jan 1994 ????Fred Harris ????????Re: Elyon”s Christmas message
Subject: Re: Elyon”s Christmas message In-Reply-To: [199401030123.AA11124@freenet2.scri.fsu.edu]; from “MR RICK P GILES” at Jan 2, 94 8:22 pm
?Welcome to Urantial, Rick. For those of you who don”t know Rick, he was on Prodigy when the brotherly love of those on the BB was tested to the max and Rick stood in there and took the heat without giving it back. He would unhesitatingly respond to mean spirited attacks with loving responses. Of course we all had our moments, but Rick was a shining example of loving your neighbor. Rick”s wife, Barb, is a real sweetheart and I hope she will jump in from time to time. Welcome to you both. Thanks for the Christmas message. You may also want to join the Teaching Mission sublist. Talk to Thea about hopping on that list as well. Hope you enjoy Urantial. You will see some o faces and meet some new folks, but everyone on here is a sincere seeker so you should have fun. Again, welcome.
8 Jan 1994 ????Karl Anderson ????”anonymous teacher mission mes
Subject: “anonymous teacher mission messages”
?Sorry if I”m being obtuse, and sorrier still if this has been hashed over already, but….
?What exactly *is* this stuff that we”re reading? And what does it have to do with the Urantia Book???
?[if you”ve gone over this ad nauseum before, could someone send me an email so I can catch up? ”cause I”m feeling pretty clueless with this anonymous teacher stuff….thanx!]
9 Jan 1994 ????Fred Harris ????????TM Listening Pt.2
Subject: TM Listening Pt.2
?Good morning. We continue with our anonymous teacher lessons, this time a followup to yesterday”s topic of listening. Karl has asked what this is all about. Good question. That is what we want to know as well. Without getting into a long, drawn out history of the teaching mission, suffice it to say that there are many Urantia Book reader groups around the country who are reporting being taught by celestial teachers through members of their groups who can suddenly communicate with these supernals. The teachers consistently report that the Lucifer trial has ended and Lucifer has been adjudicated (he lost). Subsequent to that adjudication the circuits have allegedly been reopened and this planet is in a Correcting Time. Michael has allegedly sent a host of celestials, including ascending former mortals still within this local universe, to teach mortals to go out and be conduits for the Father”s love. Of course, many people dispute this. Many say it is not so. For some time now I have taken the position that each person should be made aware of these claims and should determine for themselves whether these teachings are valid. While the fruits will show, the teachings themselves are what I can best share on this virtual discussion. Therefore I have been posting excerpts of teacher lessons from locations as far away as Hawaii to California, Indiana, Florida, Tennessee, Idaho, Utah, Oregon, Iowa, Texas, etc. And I have been quoting the name of the teacher and the date of the lesson for those who may want to look up the entire lesson. I also postulated that a demonstration that the messages were consistently requesting that we put the teachings of the Urantia Book into our daily lives and that they were not isolated to one person or location would also be a bit of information that would be relevant to the individual determination of the veracity of the phenomenon. I don”t hide the fact that I am a strong supporter of the teaching mission and have seen the transformation of people who have endeavored to daily try and walk the highest path at the urging of the teachers. However recently there have been calls for anonymity so that the messages could be evaluated by their substance instead of their alleged author. I have been attempting to accomodate that reasonable request recently. I will add that if anyone is interested in the source of any of these anonymous quotes, email me and I will be glad to provide it to you. I will, at the request of one person, also list the source on the teaching mission list, which is a separate list for those who want to talk exclusively about the teaching mission. So that is the “short” answer, Karl. You are probably sorry you asked. But, hey, be glad I didn”t try the “long” version on you. If you want it we had better do it by phone. On your nickel.
9 Jan 1994 ????Joyce Veisz ???????Re: “anonymous teacher mission
Subject: Re: “anonymous teacher mission messages” In-Reply-To: [199401090042.AA06066@freenet2.scri.fsu.edu]
?They”re talking about the Teaching Mission; an offshoot of the UM. If someone else doesn”t answer all of your questions, ask me again and I”ll tell you all I know! I belong to the Tallahassee TM, and am currently one of the TR”s (transmitters) for the group. I figure someone, probably many others will enlighten you, and I”ve already been on this machine almost my limit!
9 Jan 1994 ????Philip Calabrese ?????Excellent messages
Subject: Excellent messages
?——- Dear Loggers,
?Thanks everyone for putting up all these more or less “excellent” tracts.
?Fred, I am inclined to agree with Todd, that your recent “somewhat longer message” was “excellent”. While I can not say that I believe the Teaching Mission (the TM) is exactly what it says it is, neither am I afraid to remember and appreciate various passages you put up. True ideas use many channels through which to flow. The honest mind is humble before the truth since only truth is a mental reality.
?Todd, I found the first of your two candidates for “excellence” much better than the second, but neither seemed to have the “presence” of Fred”s post mentioned above. I completely agree with the intellectual content of the first post though.
11 Jan 1994 ???Jeff Keys ?????????Re: Excellent messages
Subject: Re: Excellent messages
?I agree with Todd and Phil that Fred”s post on Listening is excellent. I agree with Phil regarding Todd”s first passage showing excellence. I also thought Todd”s second passage was pretty good at least. Its metaphor of becoming a continuous sacrifice to Divine Reality seems targeted for an audience with a different perspective than mine, and the opening phrases about not surviving in the form we are in now is too open-ended for me to really grasp. It raises questions about ”other forms” that we may find ourselves in and what God or Divine Reality”s role in such a survival would be. But its general thrust is insightful and truth-containing. I don”t see a denial of existential deity in either, though not much of a role for it is carved out.
13 Jan 1994 ???Catherine E. Folsom ?Belief and faith
Subject: Belief and faith
?Todd , David, and all interested parties,
?Here”s an idea from the UB about moving from belief to faith.
?” Belief has attained the level of faith when it motivates life and shapes the mode of living. ” (page 1114)
17 Jan 1994 ???Catherine E. Folsom ?Re: Twenty-Seven Cents
Subject: Re: Twenty-Seven Cents In-Reply-To: [199401161033.AA06805@freenet2.scri.fsu.edu]; from “Thea Hardy” at Jan 16, 94 2:32 am
?Your post on not putting yourself above others, not being in line for the good things resonated strongly with me. I also was taught not to put myself ahead of others in any way. In fact, I was supposed to deprecate myself, my life, my accomplishmemts, so that I would be less than others and therefore not conceited, egotistical, etc. One of the main obstacles to accepting God”s/Michael”s love was/is the belief I did not deserve it. If I believed this then I was saying I was deserving of a wondrous thing ( my battered victim self reasoned ). And claiming anything for yourself is an absolute NO-NO in the world of a co-dependent.
?Prior to the TM I had achieved some insight into my ” unworthiness ” in reading ” Healing the Shame that Binds You” by John Bradshaw; ” Beyond Co-dependency ” by Melodie Beattie; and ” You Just Don”t Understand ” by Deborah Tannen. This last book is wonderfully helpful in learning how/why men and women talk so differently.
?By now I have come to see this ” unworthiness ” to receive the good things in life as mistaken programming, old tapes, and dysfunctional role playing….all of which I am working on. The TM brought Michael”s love to a personal level for me. I perceived that the head games I played on myself in relationships were an obstacle in accepting the personalized love from Michael that the TM offered. I have been reading the UB since 1981 but never personalized what I read about God”s love. So I have made the most progress in personal insights since the advent of the TM.
?This is a partial, even if wordy, response to your request for input. Hope it is helpful.
18 Jan 1994 ???Jim Mcnelly ??????Re: Twenty-Seven Cents
Subject: Re: Twenty-Seven Cents In-Reply-To: [m0pM1rc-0000zaC@gcbbgw.granite.mn.org]
?Thea to All – Tuesday, January 18th: Discussing: Re: Twenty-Seven Cents
?U>THanks for your words. >And yet I lose that sense over and over. I am in awe of those of >you who say that you have felt that presence ever since.
?Thea, I have not said that I feel the presence the same ever since. I get glimpses occasionally, and true “extrasensory” feelings perhaps every three or so years, and then only briefly, like remembering a good friend.
?U>When you say that it is willingness, I have to say it must be something >more than willingness, for I have that in abundance. To me, the barrier >appears to be an unwillingness not to accept God, but to accept myself >fully and sustainedly as that faith child.
?I think we are talking about several different levels of experience. The conversion experience I am relating to I can only describe as the “first Jubilee” when the decision to survive is sealed. This is different, as I see it, from the Christian type conversion experience of accepting Jesus as lord. It is also different from the inherent goodness of just plain *being*. Either conversion experience is irrelevant to the survival of death process, which will occur it seems regardless of our level of attainment, assuming that we desire it.
?My notes months ago affirming the importance of *being human* and not being preoccupied with the metaphysical are a recognition of the righteousness of the person who lives and serves quietly and without fanfare. I salute the father who works hard at a simple job to house and feed his children more than the mystic who lives as a social parasite while seeking extraordinary visions.
?The points I made on the “New Prince”s Staff” are regarding earth workers like the volunteers with Van who built the original Garden of Eden. They are troopers, gardeners, and dedicated workers who seek not the illuminated and ecstatic mountain tops but the experiential valleys. The runners of the Zebedee corps, or the women”s corps ministers in the Bethsaida infirmary were “Prince”s staff” caliber in my opinion.
?I consider myself to have been “inflicted” with a religious experience. Its greatest value was in the releasing me from forever seeking such an experience again. My perception is that the intensity of my quest was actually a desire for a short cut, for immediacy of the feeling of the presence of God, and a disbelief that being human was God”s will. Much of my life since, believe it or not, has been a quest for normalcy and humanness. While I strive to spread the Urantia Book and its teachings, my service work is intensely material.
?Too many people I have known, particularly Urantia Book readers, seem to be missing the point that the presence of God is experienced in ordinary service, not in extraordinary attainment. I try to *prevent* the sensation of being continually in the presence of God as a *non human* reality. The presence of God is a distraction in most cases as it interferes with the evolutionary level of the person I am interacting with. God”s presence, in my religious philosophy, is something to be striven for as a future unattainable, put in the back of the mind, and forgotten about.
?Seeking for God as an extraordinary experience, I now see, is a sign of a lack of faith that He is already functioning fully in the material world of humans. I look for him in my son”s moral awakening, my daughter”s selectivity of friends, in a client”s choice for excellence, in a neighbor”s inquisitiveness, in the random acts of art and beauty in normal life. Heaven on earth is a transformation of our perspective, not in an elimination of the human. God”s will on earth is the perfection of the human, incomplete and error prone as the human condition is.
?I will miss being human and living on the most isolated world in the universe when I am no longer on earth in a physical body. Oh sure, life after death will be fun I am sure, but I know that I will forever long for service on the edge and in the cultural trenches, the isolated worlds of time. I am afraid that morontia citizens will be hanging around trying to be spiritual and cosmic, hardly getting anything really accomplished while there are people suffering and hungry on the worlds of space. Send me to an earth where I can do some good and drink a fine ale once in a while!
?Oh, Thea! Listen to yourself! Lighten up! Don”t be so hard on yourself. Life is but a day”s work, do it well…. Fret not about your spiritual status. Everything is fine. Putz around in the garden, work a soup line, start a community co-op, teach composting, help parents learn to read, work on the basics. It is soul satisfying work, working with real people with real problems, and helping even a little.
?> ashamed – that there is something wrong with me that I cannot accept > God”s love. Maybe that seems convoluted, but there you have it.
?Gads what has our culture done that it has so many of us worried about our status with God!
18 Jan 1994 ???Joyce Veisz ???????Re: Earthquake
Subject: Re: Earthquake In-Reply-To: [199401181951.AA00273@freenet2.scri.fsu.edu]
?The third thought I was struck with was the understanding that the Teaching Mission and those active members within its embraces, are facillitators of much of the attitudinal change currently active among our people. The teachers have told us they are working with, not just the Urantia book readers, but with other groups of like-minded people, as well as with a multitude of individuals, many of which, are not even -aware- that they are being worked with!
18 Jan 1994 ???Fred Harris ????????TM Where is it Headed?
Subject: TM Where is it Headed?
?Hello folks. Have you ever wondered what the Teaching Mission”s long term goals are? The teachers say it is to first transform individuals, then to have the individuals live lives that exemplify the message of Jesus. In so doing that, it will lead us into the ages of light and life. Hard to believe, eh? But how else are we going to do it? I have thought about this and really don”t have a better way, although this way – one person at a time – surely seems like a long route. But then, I think, maybe the exponential growth of the attitude will be such that it doesn”t take as long as you might otherwise hypothesize. I have also decided that I can”t worry about the world, I have to try and change myself before step two could begin. And, believe me, I have a long way to go in that arena.
20 Jan 1994 ???T. Moody ???????Re: Difference?
Subject: Re: Difference? In-Reply-To: [9401201544.AA24814@sjuphil.sju.edu] from “Joyce Veisz” at Jan 20, 94 10:30:09 am
?> You know, my reaction is also quite varied, but the thing that is so > wonderful, is that the more one reads, the more one”s attitude toward any > one concept, continues to change. It”s like a fabric being woven that the > weaver has the ability to change the pattern almost at will! For me, much > of what changes my attitude, are the continuing insights, and the > resonating feelings that are brought to the surface as a result of my > Spirit of Truth working within me.
?The important thing for me is to set aside the parts that I can”t make sense of rather than rush headlong to a judgment. This is hard for me because my academic training inclines me to be rather pitbullish with texts. But it”s an important lesson.
?> You say you now belong to a study group; does this group have a teacher, > or does the group have a separate meeting for the TM, as we do here in > Tallahassee?
?There”s no TM component. When I asked if people were involved in the Teaching Mission, no one had heard of it, although they had of course heard of channeling going on. No one in the group seems particularly keen on the idea. It”s just a small group that meets on Wednesday evenings to read and discuss the UB. There are usually about a half dozen of us. This is about 35 miles south of Philadelphia. Oddly, there is *no* organized study group in the city, although there used to be, a few years back.
?> Re: reincarnation….I read a lot of books that seemed to give pretty > concrete evidence for the “fact” of reincarnation, but taken from a UB > context, couldn”t the memories people have alluding to a past life, simply > be the memories that our Adjuster has from -His- past lives? You know, > they don”t all reside within individuals that have the potential of being > Adjuster fused, or what about the possibility that we may -all- have the > ability to connect with some universal consciousness, and -that- is where > the information comes from that has us -believing- that we have indeed, > lived on this planet before?
?In some cases, the past life memories start to be reported by children as young as one and a half years old. According to the UB, kids this young are not yet indwelt by a TA. The universal consciousness theory is, of course, possible, rather like the “akashic record” that Theosophy talks about. The trouble is, these people don”t appear to be connecting with universal consciousness, but just the experiences of a particular person. Another point is the rare but documented type of case in which the past life memories are accompanied by birthmarks that mimic the mortal wounds of the remembered past life.
?There are lots of books about reincarnation, but relatively few that approach the subject from a rigorous evidential perspective. One that does is Robert Alameder”s _Death and Personal Survival_, published by Rowman and Littlefield. I was very surprised to find this book, incidentally. I”ve known of Alameder”s work in mainstream areas such as epistemology and philosophy of science and medical ethics; he”s pretty well known in these areas. For him to publish a book in this “fringe” area is a considerable professional risk.
?> Well, gotta go, it”s almost time to be at the soup kitchen; it is, I have > to admit, one of the highlights of my week!
?Well I have to go change a diaper. Cheers.
25 Jan 1994 ???David Kantor ?????Midweek catchup
Subject: Midweek catchup
?Hello, Loggers, as paper 100 sweeps the nominations…
?Greetings to the many new folks blessing this list…
?>You know how a contractor can come out and bolt your house to the foundation? >Maybe they bolt the tectonic plates together. I can see it now– Arnold >Scwarzenegger in “Retrofitter XVI” starring as a rehabilitated Lanonandek >with this massive air gun…
?Yes, this has good possibilities, Jeff…I hope it”s at least as post-apocalyptic as “Blade Runner”…The big one has already hit and geologists have discovered irrefutable evidence that an even bigger one is imminent. Arnold must contend with massive shifting tectonic plates, potential sudden magma intrusions, and perhaps the discovery of evidence of a lost civilization on the surface of one of the plates now deep within the planet. Perhaps Team Bonzai will contribute an oscillating over-thruster enabling Arnold to get down there through solid matter…call Stephen Spielberg, quick! Dust off the costumes for the worms of Dune…
?>My observation is that with respect to reincarnation the UB >completely *ignores* the higher interpretation, giving no hint that >there even is one.
?But Todd, don”t you think there is a radical difference between the UB idea of the ascension plan as opposed to reincarnation — all theories of reincarnation which I have encountered seem to be oriented around the payment of some karmic debt by the incarnated soul. The UB delineates a system of *education*, of moving the soul from civilization to civilization for the purpose of fostering and developing the potentials of personality as well as the potentials for cosmic socialization. Here is another unique aspect of the UB view — that of socialization and the evolution of Supremacy. Although this possibility is hinted at in the very concept of a Bodhisattva, I have never seen it developed. As far as I can tell, the advanced concepts of cosmic socialization which are described in the UB are quite unique. Remember that in Havona alone there are 1 billion perfect spheres each with an entirely different civilization through which we pass for the purpose of discovering and activating the unknown potentials of our personalities. Even Buddhistic concepts of the “pure land” seem to be devoid of the appreciation of the potential sublimity of an advanced civilization…
?> What I read there has lead me to the conclusion that the UB was >”Channeled”!
?Mara, you”ll find a substantial divergence of opinion hereon and elsewhere about the “channeling” issue and in the end will probably need to develop some means of determining for yourself just what is going on here. I have been reading for nearly 30 years and have been fairly involved in the social and political aspects of the readership at various times during that period. I have (and have had) personal friendships with individuals involved in getting the book here including two of the contact commissioners. I am of the opinion that the book was not “channeled” in any sense of the current use of that term.
?I have very little regard for the fad of “channeling” which is currently in vogue amongst a small minority of Urantia Book readers. As far as I”m concerned, “channeling” is a phenomenon which occurs as a result of spiritual realities being reflected into the mind wherein the reflections are mistaken for reality. It”s as if the first dawn light of the spirit illuminates the archetypes in the unconscious and the person sees and identifies with these dimly illuminated archetypes rather than continuing the quest for the source of the light which is causing the illumination.
?It is interesting that many well-established esoteric traditions contain very explicit warnings about this domain of consciousness and the dangers it poses for the unwary pilgrim. This is true of both Hinduism and Buddhism. In Tibetian Buddhism this illusory domain of reality is referred to as the “Bardo” which contains the realm of the peaceful dieties.
?Christianity seems to avoid dealing with such details by simply warning us about esoteric traditions. It is a serious problem for individual growth, because once the “eye of the mind” becomes fixed on these forms, it is very difficult to break loose from the ensuing enchantment. It gets even more difficult when a social community springs up comprised of individuals who have made the same assessment and who are beginning to establish social identities for themselves in their communities based on their relationships with these images. At that point it becomes impossible to extricate oneself without precipitating a major psychological crisis because one”s identity has become so dependent upon the illusion.
?The UB leapfrogs this issue by giving us a comprehensively new model of mind and the means by which spirit interacts with that mind. When this model is considered in its entirety, phenomenon such as “channeling” becomes increasingly improbable.
?At any rate, welcome aboard!
?Stefan, I continue to enjoy your posts on various cosmological topics. Thank you for your contribution.
?>Couldn”t these people that believe they have existed here before, be >tapping into the universal unconscious?
?What do you mean by “universal unconscious?”
?>I must admit that it does seem to make more sense, that these gut feelings >are probably more closely related to the movement to the adjutant mind >spirits.
?I think the down side of this is that these mind spirits are not spiritualized; they exist in order to make possible the functions of mind upon the foundation of a biochemical nervous system. I don”t think that the spirit of intuition and the spirit of understanding know or care anything about truth. It is up to us to spiritualize these mind functions. I think the integrated functioning of these mind spirits creates a functional illusion of selfhood not unlike the ego in Freud”s model of the psyche.
?Here these mind spirits are only concerned with providing a local degree of conceptual integrity within the mind experience of each individual. The conceptual formulations which we derive as a result of their functioning cannot be relied upon to accurately reflect to us the nature of any reality outside that of our own sensory experience — they facilitate the associative process in specific ways which provide us with a foundation for rationality — but they do not lead us into a consciousness of truth. Only as we integrate those meanings and values illuminated by our spiritual benefactors into the associative loop do we begin to construct an approach to truth and to reality. It is easy to mistake the internal equilibrium which these mind spirits attempt to foster for a clear view of reality, simply because it”s comfortable — it”s relatively free from conflict and feels good. But I believe we are challenged to transform this inner state by constantly exposing it to the illumination of the adjuster and the Spirit of Truth and then acting on what has been revealed.
25 Jan 1994 ???fx618@AOL.COM ????????UB Origins, ACIM and Dancing
Subject: UB Origins, ACIM and Dancing
?When talking to someone about the books origins i color the description which is most likely to be accepted by the potential recipient without straying from the denying the truth as I know it:
?The point is to create max probability of receptivity while being forthright. What is the difference between denying the books channeled origin (the thru put) vs. the Foundations denial of its superhuman origins (the input)? Its both a denial of process.
?To insinuate that the book just appeared and pretend it wasn”t by superhuman channeling thru a human medium is to deny the wonderful service provided by Sadler and the early Forumites, they took these wonderful transcripts and thru joint interaction with the superhuman sources collated them into a beautiful bound volume which is the greatest book this planet has ever known, they are our pioneers and I am grateful to them.
?I believe its channeled origins are part of its destiny in becoming embraced by the explosion in new age truth seekers and rise in interest in angels, I don”t care who or what group gets the book, i just want it in the most number of hands possible where the thought adjuster and seraphim can do their thing.
?The ACIM is a channeled book, yet nobody really cares, nor spends time dickering about it–they simply love the book! (and by the way I have never read the whole thing, nor am I an active proponent of it, but I have read such ACIM secondary works as Return to Love and The SPirit in Business)
?The ACIM IMO pales in comparison to the UB, but I take my hat off to them because without even a collective effort just a few who embrace that book have in a few short years made the book nationally known, thru such best sellers as Return to Love and other secondary works, they have pallets of Course in Miracles at COSTCO! Good for them!
?and this accomplishment has spread nothing but the Father”s goodness to those who have read ACIM or these wonderful secondary works. They have spread much light. Maybe its not even the best or purest truth like the UB, but by gosh people are scarfing it up like hungry souls at a beggar”s banquet and I”m happy as can be for ”em all, it makes me feel like dancing–its light and truth good brothers and sisters!
?As for the UB, No other group (new agers that is) IMO is more receptive to it. They”re ready for it, Our local efforts to spread the book has been 600% more effective among this targeted population than any other group. Amongst Christians the book is so bright in truth that it is a bit overwhelming compared to the lean pickings in the Bible they have been living on.
?Amongst the intellectual crowd it is either totally rejected becasue of the science errors or it is embraced yet the service concepts never seem to transform into the evangelical zeal necessary to spread the book beyond the confines of the comfort of small intellectual group discussion (as the MAster said: “perfection thru service” )
?P. 1780–If you are not a positive and missionary evangel of your religion, then you are self-deceived in that what you call a religion is only a traditional belief or a mere system of intellectual philosophy.
?If it is a new ager, then i say it is channeled and they usually say “oh, and are immediately receptive.” then let the books do its thing.
?If it is a person, interetsd in angels i say, this has the most complete description of the angelic corp you will ever find!
?If it is a reincarnationist, i say, this book has a wonderful take on a process similar to reincarnation called incarnation, whereby we humans incarnate as morontia beings and then incarnate as spirt beings. Its kinda like reincarnation only you go inward instead of in a circle. You gotta talk their lingo.
?If it is a christian, then instead of channeling I gloss over the origins, but if still asked describe the actual process as I understand it to have occured quickly followed by just read some of the Jesus papers. I am then asked direclty if it is channeled, i have no other choice no other choice but to say yes. and plead for them to read a Jesus paper. If those papers don”t get the Chritstian then you can forget it, their truth recepetor is on hold, they”re not ready! To say yes the book is channeled OH BUT this is not like other channeling this one is REAL SPECIAL i can assure you is meaningless and comes of as hypocrisy (yeah they”ve heard that one before!, every channeler is THE REAL channeler! right)
?If it is an intellectual (science, philosophical orientation) I show them the science philosophical parts of the book and attempt to gloss over the channelded origins. If I am then asked direclty if it is channeled, i have no other choice no other choice but to say yes, and plead for them to read a science or philosophical paper.
?**The point is to not talk about your viewpoint but rather thru selfless action to discover theirs then link the book to their level of receptivity. Its kinda like dancing.
?But maybe the best way of all, is simply to in all thought and deed large and small to spread the Father”s love and the fragrance of that action is an argument that causes all others to pale.
25 Jan 1994 ???Philip Calabrese ?????UB Science
Subject: UB Science In-Reply-To: Your message of Tue Jan 25 15:58:45 1994
?David K, nice to see your comments here again. I find it hard to grasp your distinction between what the adjutant mind spirits present to the human mind and what other spirit influences present, especially your idea that the former don”t present “truth”. It is hard for me to understand how the adjutants can make a purely intellectual or purely material-intellectual presentation to the human personality. It seems to me that the TM (& other) channelers may well have a lot of the “truth” but perhaps not very many of the “facts”. So you might have it the other way around David. Otherwise, we would be reading good science from TMers but bad religion, rather than the other way around, like we have been getting.
26 Jan 1994 ???Fred Harris ????????TM Urantia Book
Subject: TM Urantia Book
?Greetings. As promised, in light of the creek not rising, I have chosen an excerpt from the Teaching Mission lessons which relates to the Urantia Book, the circuits opening, the Bible and other texts. I found it interesting. See what you think.
?”Question: I want to know the relationship between this new opening of the circuits that is causing the celestial teachers to come down and the Urantia Book. If there had been no Urantia Book, would we have no celestial teachers? Are the two tied together? Where does the Bible come into all of this? Have we discarded it? Can you tie this together for me?
?”Answer: The Urantia Book is a kind of cosmology. It is basic factual information about the mechanisms of the creation, the Father”s personal ministry and His efforts to blanket His creation with specific orders of creatures. His assigned duty is to perfectly respond to the necessities required by ascending creatures such as yourselves in order to make proper spiritual progress so as to ultimately meet one-to-one with the Paradise Father. I recommend that you read in the Book sections on the different mansion worlds. Pay attention to the facts described therein, comparing the levels of instruction which are provided in each of the different worlds. The worlds are but schools from which souls graduate one to the next and the next, to the next. This is a pattern of progress just as you yourself have gone from teacher to teacher, from knowledge to yet more knowledge.
?”The Urantia Book contains a range and a selection of teachings drawn from different mansion worlds which are thought to be understandable by a cross section of people on your planet.
?”The Urantia Book is a tool. It is an inspired tool. It is a Michael tool. It is a gift from us to you. It is just the kind of gift that we make you. You have to do a lot of work, but we believe that it is worthwhile. We do not say that the Urantia Book replaces some other book. We will say that it supplements other books. We will say that the section on the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth qualifies as a restatement of the Christian religion although I …. I should properly say a restatement of the religion of Jesus of Nazareth. Christianity, as presently constituted, has buried within it seeds of the religion of Jesus, but they are buried under the crust of dogma and doctrine. His living gospel has been stifled in general so we do not say the Urantia Book replaces the Christian Bible, the text of Hindus, and there are thousands of cuneiform tablets untranslated. The Urantia Book is not a replacement. It is a gift. I do not wish this book to be used as the Christian Bible has been used as a test of faith or a test of knowledge or as a tool of domination. It is just a gift. It is not necessary in the present ministry to revelation and expansion of the Father”s personal interaction with His children on the material world. The Urantia Book has been a useful introduction and is a great assistance to us in our efforts for at least we do not have the burden of educating people to a completely new set of terminology.
?”The Father”s ministry cannot be stopped. It is like evolution. Once unleashed, it cannot be stopped. It is central to do what the Father needs. Our mission is only to illuminate His concern and His activity to assist those who are interested in direct one-to-one communication with the Father fragment which we believe is possible for all.
?”Circuits are communication channels for the Father”s servants and only have indirect bearing upon the situation of the humans alive on the material world. Whether circuits exist or not has no bearing whatsoever on the mechanism and the ministry of the indwelling Adjusters. The circuits allow me to communicate with my counselors and my colleagues and our instruction team. They allow the counselors to communicate with Michael. I do not know exactly how circuits work between Michael and the Father. I believe that they are there, but I am not capable of experiencing it so I cannot say with certainty.
?”The circuits are in place for the use of the Father”s servants, but you, as His children, always have a direct access to the Father. That is what the stillness is about. We encourage you to daily practice at a minimum of ten minutes a day. When you are ready, two ten minutes sessions a day. That is how He upholds His creation.”
?I hope you have enjoyed this foray into a side topic. Tomorrow I will try to resume our regular lesson subjects. From time to time I may again try to spice this up with topics of interest that are not directly applicable to our personal relationship with the Father. Even so, the teachers manage to get in a gentle reminder to seek the stillness. And so it goes.
28 Jan 1994 ???Fred Harris ????????TM Children
Subject: TM Children
?Greetings. We today turn to a lesson on children. Chris has inquired about what is the TM. At the risk of boring those who have heard this spiel ad nauseum, let me give Chris a short course explanation. Chris, there are those among the UB readers on this BB and elsewhere who believe that Lucifer”s trial is over and Lucifer has been adjudicated (he lost). This adjudication has permitted the circuits to be reconnected to this planet (and to all those rebellion planets). They also believe that the Father has stirred and Michael is intent upon moving this planet into the ages of light and life. Part of the method for assisting in this process, according to proponents, is the arrival of celestial teachers who are themselves ascending beings within our local universe. These teachers are presently teaching groups all over the country (and world). We are aware of over 100 active groups and the teachers tell us that there are more (there is one in the San Diego area, I believe). This is what we refer to as the “Teaching Mission” or “TM” for short. The lessons I have been posting are excerpts from a variety of the teachers. I have been posting them on an anonymous basis at the suggestion of some of the members of this BB. There is no book. There are a lot of transcripts. None of them are for sale. They are all available for free or, for the cost of xeroxing. There are no copyrights. There are those people who believe that the Teaching Mission is not really what it purports to be. Despite those beliefs, those people have been gracious enough to permit postings of excerpts of the teacher lessons so that people on this BB can decide for themselves whether the substance of the lessons resonate with them or help them in any way. Either way is okay with me. There are many paths to the Father. The TM is only one. I like it. If you do, great. If you have another path, have at it. If you would like transcripts, let me know and I will provide them to you. In the interim, I hope you enjoy the posts. Thank you for you interest.
29 Jan 1994 ???David Kantor ?????Partial Catchup
Subject: Partial Catchup
?Just a quick partial catchup…
?>Universal unconscious really has no discernible meaning. The writer (was it >Joyce?) may have meant–if she did not mean collective unconscious–universal >conscious or universal mind.
?I wasn”t trying to be semantically obtuse here, merely wanting to know what concept the writer is working with which is being identified by these terms.
?>Actually the Urantia Book describes the mindscape as having many conduits to >universal conscious existing anywhere in the Supreme and from every stage; so >a tap into universal conscious could occur at any self conscious mind >level–from the Adjutant to the Adjuster and from the earliest protoplasmic >memory (and even patterns of memory) in to the Cosmic Mind and on to the >Conjoint Actor and out to the Universal Absolute.
?>In the massive currents of the stream of consciousness anyone of us could >find any number of things and interpret any of them inaccurately.
?To what “massive currents of the stream of consciousness” are you referring? While there are mind circuits, spirit circuits and other “circuits”, my take on consciousness is that it is a function of activity which occurs at nodes where these various forces intersect.
?Phil says: >I find it hard to grasp your distinction between what the adjutant >mind spirits present to the human mind and what other spirit >influences present, especially your idea that the former don”t >present “truth”. It is hard for me to understand how the adjutants >can make a purely intellectual or purely material-intellectual >presentation to the human personality.
?I don”t think the adjutant mind spirits *present* anything at all to the human mind. They appear to me as existential realities somewhat analogous to the presence of physical gravity. They do not appear to have volition and they are not personal. They seem to me to simply be spirit “presences” which exert a steady influence on our neurological processes resulting in modes of thought which can be identified with the names of these spirits — intuition, counsel, courage etc.
?I don”t think they care (or have the ability to care) about the relative truth of the conclusions which any given mind reaches as a result of their ministry. Their purpose is merely to make possible rational thought processes. If the Spirits of Understanding or Intuition (or any of the others for that matter) had the ability to lead us to truth, why would we have any need for revelation or the other ministries which *are* focused on our growth and development?
?Note the statement on page 66 which implies that without the presence of the adjusters we would slowly revert to a biologically determined level of human culture. On an isolated planet like this, the adjusters are our only means of spirit contact.
?The way in which the adjutants help us to stabilize thought processes into rational patterns seems not unlike the way in which the “ego” in Freud”s model functions to integrate the psyche. The ego doesn”t care anything about the integration of the individual into a social system or the cosmos — it is only concerned with establishing enough equilibrium within the psyche to allow the individual to function. If there is a lot of repressed pain from early life in that psyche, the ego will cause the individual to interpret present stimuli in such a manner as to compensate for the earlier depravation and thus achieve a state of relative equilibrium. In various forms of schizophrenia and psychosis we can see just how far the ego can go to establish such equilibrium.
?I think the adjutants are just as unconcerned. They are strictly functional and it is up to us to learn how to develop the potentials they make available to us. The point of this is that when someone says that they are relying on these mind spirits to provide them with a solid foundation in the cosmos, such persons leave themselves wide open to domination by their own thought processes. Only through active involvement with these adjutants, specifically by integrating the meanings and values which are derived from adjuster ministry with the tendencies which the adjutants create, do we really grow spiritually. I would also have to speculate here that the patterns with which we implement this relationship become a part of the soul, “the joint creation of the adjuster and the mortal mind.”
?>It seems to me that the TM (& other) channelers may well have a lot >of the “truth” but perhaps not very many of the “facts”. So you >might have it the other way around David.
?I beg to differ, not seeing that “TM and other channelers” have any corner on “truth” at all. We live in a culture which, with it”s long tradition of priesthoods, scholars, scientists and public spokespersons, seems to equate truth with the formulation of linguistic constructs which may correspond to some small aspect of “the truth.” I think that truth has to do with integration, not with the formulation of concepts. The kind of illusions which “TM and other channelers” must maintain in order to pursue their trade should be indication enough to you that they are very distant from any real grasp of “truth.”
?Let me give you an example of what I am trying to get at. Years ago, I worked in a mental hospital. I had a patient on my ward who had killed his mother with an axe. Among other things, he regularly got messages from Jesus, the Virgin Mary, William Shakespeare and Adolf Hitler. Now the messages that he got from Jesus and Mary were really quite good and judged on strictly their ideational content divorced from the context in which they appeared, they could have been seen as reflective of some real truth in life. But what is the reality of this situation? Do we value these few words more than the individual and the context in which they appeared? Do we take them for our own use and ignore the fact that this individual has some very serious problems integrating himself into life and the cosmos? Do we defend this individual”s status as a result of the product of a few moments of lucidity? Would you say that such an individual has a good grasp of “truth” even though his “facts” might be a little off?
?Likewise, with “TM and other channelers” do we simply look at the ideas they generate which might be reflective of some truth and then ignore the illusions, the social isolation and the potential psychological and spiritual dangers which are a part of the context in which these ideas appear? Haven”t we yet learned anything about the dangers of knowingly combining truth and error, good and evil?
?Todd writes: >Do you really want to say that the UB was not channeled, or that most >(or all) of what passes for channeling lately is not authentic?
?And Jesse: >I have believed for years that the account in Sadler”s book, “Mind at >Mischief” in the Appendix of a spiritual phenomena was the original medium >thru which the UB was”channeled”
?>If this is not accurate, then someone please correct me, I have believed this >for years. If it is accurate, then how was this phenomenon differentiated >from channeling?
?Note that where the U papers are concerned, the speaking of the subject was done while the subject was in a deep sleep. In other words, the subject was not conscious to affect the content of the communications. My understanding is that the speaking of the subject was just for administrative tasks and that The Urantia Papers themselves showed up already written on paper which Christy then typed.
29 Jan 1994 ???Fred Harris ????????TM Children\\\\Chris
Subject: TM Children\\\\Chris
?Greetings again friends and neighbors. Hello Leland, good to have you back! Scott – I didn”t start reading the UB until I was 35.
?Chris asked what the TM is all about. I know that we have explained this to the list before, but I ask those of you who have heard this to bear with me.
?Chris, there are a group of UB readers who believe that the Lucifer trial is over and that Lucifer has been adjudicated. He lost. As a result of that loss, the Father has stirred and Michael has ordered that the quarantine to which the rebellious planets have been subject to be lifted and the circuits be reconnected. This group of people believe that celestial teachers, supervised by Machiventa Melchizedek in the service of Michael, have been sent to this planet to teach receptive mortals and to start the process of bringing this planet into the ages of light and life. It will obviously take awhile. The teachers call this period the Correcting Time. There are over 100 known groups under celestial instruction. In fact, I believe that there is a group near San Diego with a teacher. Teachers have indicated that they are available for any who desire them. Truth is, however, that not everyone can “hear” them. But quite a few can. I never have.
?”TM” stands for “teaching mission”. The lessons I have been posting are from different teachers in different locations, all with the same message – to incorporate the teachings of the UB into our lives and to shine forth the Father”s light. I have been posting the excerpts without indicating the teacher, date or location at the request of some of the people on this bulletin board so that they can consider the substance of the message rather than being influenced by the supposed celestial source of the messages. A valid point.
?There are people in the UB reader family who do not believe that the teacher mission is for real. They have, however, been gracious enough to permit excerpts of the lessons to be posted on this bulletin board so that people can read them and decide for themselves whether or not what purports to be celestial information is true or not. It is not important for me whether you believe it to be true. I believe it and try to live my life in accordance with my highest concepts of truth, beauty and goodness. You can do that without believing in celestial teachers, of course. There are many paths to the Father.
?So, Chris, there is no book. There is no fee. There are quite a few transcripts and they are available to you or anyone else who desires a copy – for free or at the cost of copying. There are no copyrights to worry about. So that is the story. The short version. If you want to know more, let me know. In the interim, I would like to post another short lesson that I like a lot. It has to do with children. I have two, 8 & 10 years old. They are the light of my life. For all who have children or love children, I think you will find this next lesson of interest.
?”One cannot expect the schools, the churches, or any other organization to do the job of raising children. The family unit is the basic unit, the basic block of society. And it must be given strength and nourishment. A family cannot grow in values and self respect and respect for one another and true love for one another when there is not time given to it. A relationship between a man and a wife in a marriage is only as good as the time and the quality of time given. And so it is with the family as well.
?”As these young adolescents are coming of age, you who have the responsibility for them or the responsibility of bringing about education must help instill those qualities that will help preserve the spirit and integrity and firm foundation of human life. Those of you who are able to, have input into educational programs that will help foster child rearing practices based on the understanding that a child must grow into his or her potential. And this growth is based on love freely given, love that gives to the child an environment in which they can feel secure, in which they can learn and grow and become. There is much work that needs to be done in these areas.
?”There is a very real need for proper education of those who will be the future parents on this plane, so that they can do a fitting job in raising their children, so that potentials can be reached. On this plane, sadly, many of the capabilities and potentials that you could achieve in this lifetime must be thwarted and wait until morontia life. This planet, if it is to move into light and life, must come into a consensus of giving to the children of today those foundations necessary for them to progress. The understanding of who they are, their self concept, must be very well nurtured in those formative years.
?”When a child knows he or she is loved, when a child knows he or she is capable of self worth, then does the child walk down the path of life in the knowledge that they can do, can become, and are capable of much. And with this knowledge are they ever more open to spiritual growth. You know, my friends, when you are full of confidence yourself, how much more open you are. If you can give to the children this confidence from the very beginning then their inner being will be open and ready for the calling. They will know the First Source and Center much more readily, much more easily. Do you see?”
30 Jan 1994 ???Philip Calabrese ?????Re: Partial Catchup
Subject: Re: Partial Catchup In-Reply-To: Your message of Sat Jan 29 14:03:14 1994
?——- Loggers all,
?David K writes in response to my last post:
?>I don”t think the adjutant mind spirits *present* anything at all to >the human mind. They appear to me as existential realities somewhat >analogous to the presence of physical gravity. They do not appear to >have volition and they are not personal. They seem to me to simply >be spirit “presences” which exert a steady influence on our >neurological processes resulting in modes of thought which can be >identified with the names of these spirits — intuition, counsel, >courage etc.
?I think that the “neurological processes” that you assume are already there are really due to the adjutant mind spirits; such “processes” are already “modes of thought”.
?>I don”t think they care (or have the ability to care) about the >relative truth of the conclusions which any given mind reaches as a >result of their ministry. Their purpose is merely to make possible >rational thought processes. If the Spirits of Understanding or >Intuition (or any of the others for that matter) had the ability to >lead us to truth, why would we have any need for revelation or the >other ministries which *are* focused on our growth and development?
?Well, there are levels and depths of spiritual truth.
?>Note the statement on page 66 which implies that without the presence >of the adjusters we would slowly revert to a biologically determined >level of human culture. On an isolated planet like this, the >adjusters are our only means of spirit contact.
?Yes, without the adjusters we would revert. But even the biology is evolutionary and already includes spiritual elements. I don”t see how you can conclude that the adjusters are the only means of spirit contact on earth. Spirit is a big word.
?>The way in which the adjutants help us to stabilize thought processes >into rational patterns seems not unlike the way in which the “ego” in >Freud”s model functions to integrate the psyche. The ego doesn”t >care anything about the integration of the individual into a social >system or the cosmos — it is only concerned with establishing enough >equilibrium within the psyche to allow the individual to function. >If there is a lot of repressed pain from early life in that psyche, >the ego will cause the individual to interpret present stimuli in >such a manner as to compensate for the earlier depravation and thus >achieve a state of relative equilibrium. In various forms of >schizophrenia and psychosis we can see just how far the ego can go to >establish such equilibrium.
?Again, where did the “thought patterns” come from except from the adjutants? It seems to me that the ability to “interpret present stimuli” is again due to the adjutants, who seem to operate on the most fundamental (and primitive) levels of mind-spirit.
?>>It seems to me that the TM (& other) channelers may well have a lot >>of the “truth” but perhaps not very many of the “facts”. So you >>might have it the other way around David.
?>I beg to differ, not seeing that “TM and other channelers” have any >corner on “truth” at all. We live in a culture which, with it”s long >tradition of priesthoods, scholars, scientists and public >spokespersons, seems to equate truth with the formulation of >linguistic constructs which may correspond to some small aspect of >”the truth.” I think that truth has to do with integration, not with >the formulation of concepts. The kind of illusions which “TM and >other channelers” must maintain in order to pursue their trade should >be indication enough to you that they are very distant from any real >grasp of “truth.”
?Well, first of all, I did not say that the TMers had any corner on truth. I was saying that their religion was better than their science.
?As for the “kind of illusions” that the TM and other channelers “must maintain in order to pursue their trade”, (Ouch! What trade?), I don”t think that prevents them from having truth at all. These illusions could well be the superstitious or erroneous aspects of their otherwise valid apprehension of truth. After all, the Apostles had a number of very erroneous illusions about 1) Jesus, 2) His second coming, 3) the end of the world 4) their place in the celestial hierarchy, and a host of other things, even the gospel that Jesus was teaching them to preach! Yet would you be saying that the Apostles did not have “any real grasp of truth”?
?Rather, it seems to me that they did (save Judas) grasp the inexpressible spiritual truths that Jesus was teaching and living but they had all sorts of intellectual mis-impressions perhaps not unlike people now-a-days who believe in the TM channelers. Remember all those people talking in tongues? Paul had to tell them not to all talk at the same time! Someone should interpret. Now we might think that they were all fooling themselves. But would we conclude that they had no grasp of truth to speak of? I think not. Finally, we know that Jesus picked out truth in the scriptures that was right next to real garbage! He did not shrink from appropriating the good in someone”s writings while disregarding the erroneous. So why should we reject all that is a TM message just because we may reject parts as delusions of the author. I accept some of Paul”s writing but not all. Some is very good and some is very bad. I can tell the difference.
?>Let me give you an example of what I am trying to get at. Years ago, >I worked in a mental hospital. I had a patient on my ward who had >killed his mother with an axe. Among other things, he regularly got >messages from Jesus, the Virgin Mary, William Shakespeare and Adolf >Hitler. Now the messages that he got from Jesus and Mary were really >quite good and judged on strictly their ideational content divorced >from the context in which they appeared, they could have been seen as >reflective of some real truth in life. But what is the reality of >this situation? Do we value these few words more than the individual >and the context in which they appeared? Do we take them for our own >use and ignore the fact that this individual has some very serious >problems integrating himself into life and the cosmos? Do we defend >this individual”s status as a result of the product of a few moments >of lucidity? Would you say that such an individual has a good grasp >of “truth” even though his “facts” might be a little off?
?Well, there is a matter of degree here too. But yes, I think I might make use of whatever comes along, from whatever source, since it carries its own validity if it corresponds to reality of some kind.
?>Likewise, with “TM and other channelers” do we simply look at the >ideas they generate which might be reflective of some truth and then >ignore the illusions, the social isolation and the potential >psychological and spiritual dangers which are a part of the context >in which these ideas appear? Haven”t we yet learned anything about >the dangers of knowingly combining truth and error, good and evil?
?I am talking about separating the truth from the error, good from the evil, by recognizing one versus the other. There are times when it might be better to ignore the illusions (& delusions) and accentuate the truth. Jesus was not adverse at times to allowing his Apostles and others to go on thinking something that wasn”t literally true. He apparently thought other things were even more important and the truth would sort itself out later.
?After all, there is some truth (spiritual truth) in every person”s religion, something to learn from each one, be they TMer, UBer, or XYZer. Much of what these people “believe” may be quite wrong factually – scientifically and literally, but much also can be spiritually true.
30 Jan 1994 ???MR JIM C REYNOLDS JR ??As You Were Saying
Subject: As You Were Saying
?I just finished re-reading the more than 300 posts I have collected from this forum in the past two weeks. The following are excerpts from seven of them, I love you all –
?1. All revelations are colored by the leading human receptors of its initial proclomation. But it”s the divine plan that human ambassadors carry the message of salvation to their fellows.
?2. In the massive currents of the stream of consciousness anyone of us could find any number of things and interpret them inaccurately. it is impractical to try to speculate generalities here.
?3. I don”t think it is spiritually debilitating for a person to believe that he or she is here to learn lessons, and to be therefore attentive to learning opportunities that this lifetime appears to present, and to hope to move on to higher lessons in subsequent lives.
?4. But maybe the best way of all, is simply to in all thought and deed, large and small, to spread the Father”s love. And the fragrance of that action is an argument that causes all others to pale.
?5. Also, as I progress in my universe career, even yet on this planet, I try to turn back and help those who have not had the advantages to also catch these glimpses, to help them in every way I can understand that they are truly children of God, my brothers and sisters, and that they are truly loved. I often fail, yet I try to do this. It is not enough to push on ahead, to learn. We also need to turn back and give a hand to those coming up, to teach. I really like this teach and learn universe, and some of the best learning I get is from thsoe that I try to teach. In the end, they always end up teaching me something. I think that perhaps that is part of the point.
?6. Celebrate tomorrow and the moment based on the past as if it were your last, as the future unfolds uncharted with your cleverly disguised map. We are all unique. Thank God.
?7. Seeking for God as an extraordinary experience, I now see, is a sign of a lack of faith that he is already functioning fully in the material world of humans. I look for him in my son”s moral awakening, my daughter”s selectivity of friends, in a client”s choice for excellence, in a neighbor”s inquisitiveness, in the random acts of art and beauty in normal life. Heaven on earth is a transformation of our perspective, not in an elimination of the human. God”s will on earth is the perfection of the human, incomplete and error prone as the human condition is.
?And now for a humble observation.
?It would seem to me, from reading these words, that the will of the Father is finding expression in the lives of his children. Words are the keys that unlock the doors to the innermost confines of our being, wherein once entered we are graced and humbled by the very voice of our Father, speaking lovingly to each of us, in ways that we ourselves can ultimately understand. Words, such as these i”ve reprinted, delivered to others in sincerity and love are the representatives of our faith in those lessons that our Father has given us in the solitude of our own being.
?I am a better man for living on a planet with individuals such as you.
30 Jan 1994 ???Wayne Ferrier ?????Re: Partial Catchup
Subject: Re: Partial Catchup
?>>To what “massive currents of the stream of conscious” are you referring? While there are mind circuits, spirit circuits and other “circuits”, my take on consciousness is that it is a function of activity which occurs at nodes where these forces intersect.
?I used “stream of conscious” both poetically and in its classical sense as James used the term and then loosely expanded it to apply to any number of tributaries in the Universal Mind Circuit.
?In light that the UB apparently gives no opinion on the exact meaning of the word “conscious” what you say is rather interesting. I insist that some sort of protoconscious exists about the will and this protoconscious is selective. Therefore I”m not positioned to consider this activity occurring outside of selected nodes. I also determine that pure states of mind, matter and spirit are distinct, since we both agree, I suppose, in the existence of the Trinity and both of us assume that each Trinity member is unique one from the other and each member of that Trinity is conscious; it is within finite minds in the Supreme where nodes would have the most significance. Eh?
?But anyhow this is quite interesting this node action idea whether it be conscious or some other thing; I look forward to your future expounding on this subject.
30 Jan 1994 ???T. Moody ???????Re: Partial Catchup
Subject: Re: Partial Catchup In-Reply-To: [9401292159.AA15062@sjuphil.sju.edu] from “David Kantor” at Jan 29, 94 02:03:08 pm
?David Kantor writes: > Note that where the U papers are concerned, the speaking of the > subject was done while the subject was in a deep sleep. In other > words, the subject was not conscious to affect the content of the > communications. My understanding is that the speaking of the subject > was just for administrative tasks and that The Urantia Papers > themselves showed up already written on paper which Christy then > typed.
?That”s very interesting. Is this information recorded somewhere in the UB itself, or is it what the Contact Commission told the world? Why is it not in the little paper on origins that the Fellowship sends out?
30 Jan 1994 ???T. Moody ???????The Fact of Experience
Subject: The Fact of Experience
?One of the peaks of this roller-coaster ride of reading the UB was, for me, the following passage from paper 102:
?Because of the presence in your minds of the Thought Adjuster, it is not 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. They 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.”
?I presume that the latter part is a Biblical quotation, but I don”t know Bible well enough to identify it.
?For one thing, this passage *nails* an idea that I was trying to express to Matthew a few weeks back, which I had found in the writings of the philosopher John Wisdom. But my resonance to this passage is more than simply recognizing an idea that I have seen elsewhere. It is the specific placement and timing of the passage in the context of the book. In these few sentences, what appears to be a wide conceptual gap is bridged: the gap between religious experience and the knowledge that we are all portals of consciousness.
?Incidentally, the idea that mind is in part something that we tune into, as opposed to an epiphenomenon of the brain, was expressed by none other that William James in one of his lesser-known papers. I”ll dig up the reference if anyone is interested.
?Anyway, this one was a definite Morontia Moment for me.
30 Jan 1994 ???Jim Mcnelly ??????Re: Partial Catchup
Subject: Re: Partial Catchup In-Reply-To: [m0pQiDc-0000zIC@gcbbgw.granite.mn.org]
?Subject: Re: Partial Catchup
?U>David Kantor writes: >> Note that where the U papers are concerned, the speaking of the >> subject was done while the subject was in a deep sleep. In other >> words, the subject was not conscious to affect the content of the >> communications. My understanding is that the speaking of the subject >> was just for administrative tasks and that The Urantia Papers >> themselves showed up already written on paper which Christy then >> typed.
?U>That”s very interesting. Is this information recorded somewhere in the >UB itself, or is it what the Contact Commission told the world? Why is >it not in the little paper on origins that the Fellowship sends out?
?This discussion strikes to the heart of my fundamental problem with the Urantia Movement Organizations, Foundation, Brotherhood, Fellowship, Teaching Mission, and the Family of God. They have all relied heavily upon an apocrypha of supposed messages that have value ostensibly because of their authoritative source, rather than their inherent truth or the process which led to their conclusion.
?In the 1980”s, I got increasingly disturbed by definitive statements like, “in the the early years we were told,…..” “according to the Midwayer messages, xxxxxx”, ” and so and so spirit being said such and such”.
?After a while, watching the zombies walking around afraid to breathe lest a Midwayer lock them into jail, I decided that *ALL* the early messages were equestrian feces and that not a single one was to be taken at any value greater than the inherent words themselves. As such, I dislodged from my religious paradigms the automatic knee jerk acceptance of the following apocryphal truisms.
?1. The world is not ready for the Urantia Book 2. We first need 1,000s of Study Groups 3. We need to attract persons of means 4. Wait for the battle for man”s liberty to be won 5. The Book must be kept secret 6. Refrigerate your batteries 7. The Foundation Know”s best 8. So and so is in league with Caligastia 9. The circles and marks are to be protected 10. Be wary of individuals who seek to use the Book for selfish purposes 11. So and so was a Reservist/Contact Person
?In my process of self-liberation from the notion that there were *any* authoritative messages from anyone, I found such a clarity of perspective that I can no longer openly support any cause that claims as its authority extra planetary or superhuman authority. To me, the religion resulting from the Urantia Papers is intensely personal and has no ecclesiastical or “divine right of Kings” sort of authority.
?For David Kantor to jump in and claim that the “subject was in a deep sleep” with such authority, is tragic evidence to me that he has yet to liberate himself from the notion of hierarchical authority and credibility for his religious model. This statement is the very thing that he has been haranguing the Teaching Mission believers for over the past year, belief in supernatural authority and history as a reference point for debate.
?Is it true David, that your argument comes down to “your sources” are more believable than the “apostate sources”. I urge you David, and others, to detach yourselves from any notion of supreme authority of “source”, and enter into the refreshing world of internal verification of truth as a result of personal experience.
?This, I believe most sincerely, is the ground floor from which the true religion of Jesus will evolve. Not from ecclesiastical authority. Not from material “proof” of the authenticity of The Urantia Book. Not from a belief that a celestial is speaking with so and so, but from your actual relationship with God as a result from a real religious experience.
?There is no authority but the truth itself, and that truth is within, not because Christy said so in November 11, 1961 or it was in Doc Sadler”s appendix of the “Mind at Mischief” 1929, or some trance person claimed they were channeling a Finaliter or a Celestial. Nor because the Table of Contents of The Urantia Book says that papers were written by such and such beings. When the supposed divine origin of the authorship of the Urantia Book is challenged, as you can bet it will be, believers had better be grounded in living faith, not mere belief.
?Just read the words and make up your own minds, but find the truth based on the words themselves, not because of their supposed origin. It is time to toss out all the supposed “contact commission” mysteries and start all over. I wish none of them had ever been made public.
30 Jan 1994 ???Dennis Brodsky ???Re: The Fact of Experience
Subject: Re: The Fact of Experience
?”They 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.”
?If I remember correctly Dan Massey gave a talk for about an hour and a half on the same quote at Lake Forest in 92. I don”t know how it affected everyone else but for myself it was like paper #197 of the Urantia Book. I think I have a copy on tape and in print if anyone is interested as I”m sure Dan has as well as Bro O Man Library. I think the title of the talk was “Who say you I am?” and I believe it was also reprinted in the Journal or Bulletin of The Brotherhood or The Study Group Herald.
?I would personally be interested in Wm James essay you are mentioning.
?>Anyway, this one was a definite Morontia Moment for me…Todd
?I”m sure this post of yours was a real morontia moment for about everyone reading this list.
31 Jan 1994 ???Fred Harris ????????TM Build Bridges Not Barriers
Subject: TM Build Bridges Not Barriers
?Greetings. The following is a lesson regarding the building of bridges rather than the breaking down of barriers. This teaching mission and, for that matter, the activity of UB readers and other seekers, is hard enough to incorporate into your lives and influence others without the creation of barriers. I have found that the mention of the UB can be a barrier, the mention of any theological doctrine can be a barrier, the mention of God can be a barrier. The mission is to shine forth the Father”s love without butting our heads against barriers. That”s why we had the listening exercise. We are trying to see where a person is coming from. We approach people from where they stand. I hope you enjoy the lesson.
?”The purpose of this mission is not to proselytize the words which are written in the Urantia Book, although we obviously embrace and wholeheartedly incorporate the entire set of teachings presented in the Urantia Book, still those teachings expressed in that book are not to be invoked by you or anyone else as a justification for your own conclusions and your own presentations to your brothers and sisters. While we are always willing in the teacher mission to speak reverently of Michael and his role, the simple fact is that the mention of the life and death of the man proves a barrier. We are not here to overcome barriers. We are here for bridging. We need only erect enough of a structure to go across.
?”We have also observed the use of the teachings of the book as a method for people, individually and in groups, to maintain a kind of thought discipline over their brothers and sisters and that is why in this teaching mission we have little to say about the rivalries and disagreements between different groups charged with the dissemination or preservation of the Urantia Book teaching. It is not relevant to our mission. It is not irrelevant to our mission. We are here bridging the gaps between people. That means no doctrines, no teachings, no credos, no tests, no money, no taxes, no requirements [pause] other than you people gathered here tonight dealing wholeheartedly and openly with your brothers and sisters of the material life whenever and however you encounter them as if Jesus of Nazareth was standing by your side and by your every thought, word and deed indicating that you understand the full import of his teachings and that you do this, not for the aggrandizement of yourselves, but as a conduit for the Heavenly Father”s love to flow through you unfiltered, unchecked to the person with whom you are engaged. And, lastly, that you do these things with appropriate reverence for the activities upon which you are engaged. That is all we ask.
?”You do not need to know even the name of the book. There are no holy words which you or anyone else must utter. There are no correct thoughts. There are no correct actions. There is only service. And when you do these things, do them in memory of the love of God which has been freely shared with you and with all your brothers and sisters. Freely has it been given to you, freely shall you distribute it, in kind, untampered. Pure and undiluted.
?”I think that all of us see now, that we have embarked on a project which will consume great time. It is a project that will outlast your individual lives, at least. The lives which we recognize in the flesh. You will be working on this project in the afterlife. The afterlife is not about self absorption, the afterlife is about service. This is what we do.”
?It has been a wonderful day for me, filled with love and service. I helped coach my daughter”s soccer team this morning. This afternoon was devoted to service. Lots of fun. Hope your day went well.
31 Jan 1994 ???Dennis Brodsky ???Re: The Fact of Experience
Subject: Re: The Fact of Experience
?>This business of letting the mind that was in Christ be in me seems to me to be linked to the Spirit of Truth,…
?Thea, as you will recall the “gift” that a creator son leaves behind *IS* The Spirit of Truth.
?-Paper 002 [Pg 33] All our efforts to enlarge the human concept of God would be well-nigh futile except for the fact that the mortal mind is indwelt by the bestowed Adjuster of the Universal Father and is pervaded by the Truth Spirit of the Creator Son. Depending, therefore, on the presence of these divine spirits within the heart of man for assistance in the enlargement of the concept of God, I cheerfully undertake the execution of my mandate to attempt the further portrayal of the natur e of God to the mind of man.
?-Paper 020 [Pg 230] Upon the completion of a Creator Son”s final bestowal the Spirit of Truth previously sent into all Avonal-bestowal worlds of that local universe changes in nature, becoming more literally the spirit of the sovereign Michael. This phenomenon takes place concurrently with the liberation of the Spirit of Truth for service on the Michael-mortal-bestowal p lanet.
?-Paper 034 [Pg 377] There are three distinct spirit circuits in the local universe of Nebadon:
?1. The bestowal spirit of the Creator Son, the Comforter, the Spirit of Truth.
?2. The spirit circuit of the Divine Minister, the Holy Spirit.
?3. The intelligence-ministry circuit, including th e more or less unified activities but diverse functioning of the seven adjutant mind-spirits.
?-Paper 194 [Pg 2062] The Spirit of Truth is concerned primarily with the revelation of the Father”s spirit nature and the Son”s moral character. The Creator Son, in the flesh, revealed God to men; the Spirit of Truth, in the heart, reveals the Creator Son to men.
31 Jan 1994 ???Jim Mcnelly ??????More on Proof
Subject: More on Proof In-Reply-To: [m0pQi1d-0000zIC@gcbbgw.granite.mn.org]
?Subject: More on Proof
?I accidentally “deleted” this file when sending it the other day. I”ll try again.
?More on “proofs” of religious authority, and a call for reliance *solely* upon personal religious experience. Here is a thought thread for tonight”s study group.
?Sorry for the intensity, but I am getting rather tired of supposed authority of words due to their source, rather than their value. So look to the value of these words, not the source, lest we fall into the “infallible word of God = scripture” error.
?Page-1124 Convictions about God may be arrived at through wise reasoning, but the individual becomes God-knowing only by faith, through personal experience. In much that pertains to life, probability must be reckoned with, but when contacting with cosmic reality, certainty may be experienced when such meanings and values are approached by living faith. The God-knowing soul dares to say, “I know,” even when this knowledge of God is questioned by the unbeliever who denies such certitude because it is not wholly supported by intellectual logic. To every such doubter the believer only replies, “How do you know that I do not know?
?Page-1140 The certainty of the God-knowing religionist should not be disturbed by the uncertainty of the doubting materialist; rather should the uncertainty of the unbeliever be mightily challenged by the profound faith and unshakable certainty of the experiential believer.
?Page-1106 Reason is the proof of science, faith the proof of religion, logic the proof of philosophy, but revelation is validated only by human experience. Science yields knowledge; religion yields happiness; philosophy yields unity; revelation confirms the experiential harmony of this triune approach to universal reality.
?Page-1119 God is so all real and absolute that no material sign of proof or no demonstration of so-called miracle may be offered in testimony of his reality. Always will we know him because we trust him, and our belief in him is wholly based on our personal participation in the divine manifestations of his infinite reality.
?Page-1128 But religion is never enhanced by an appeal to the so-called miraculous. The quest for miracles is a harking back to the primitive religions of magic. True religion has nothing to do with alleged miracles, and never does revealed religion point to miracles as proof of authority. Religion is ever and always rooted and grounded in personal experience. And your highest religion, the life of Jesus, was just such a personal experience: man, mortal man, seeking God and finding him to the fullness during one short life in the flesh, while in the same human experience there appeared God seeking man and finding him to the full satisfaction of the perfect soul of infinite supremacy. And that is religion, even the highest yet revealed in the universe of NebadonDthe earth life of Jesus of Nazareth.
?Page-1733 But do not make the mistake of trying to prove to other men that you have found God; you cannot consciously produce such valid proof, albeit there are two positive and powerful demonstrations of the fact that you are God-knowing, and they are: 1. The fruits of the spirit of God showing forth in your daily routine life. 2. The fact that your entire life plan furnishes positive proof that you have unreservedly risked everything you are and have on the adventure of survival after death in the pursuit of the hope of finding the God of eternity, whose presence you have foretasted in time.
1 Feb 1994 ????Fred Harris ????????Re: TM Children\\\\Chris
Subject: Re: TM Children\\\\Chris In-Reply-To: [199401311854.AA07024@freenet2.scri.fsu.edu]; from “Jose G. Espinoza” at Jan 31, 94 10:41 am
?Jose, with respect to the adjudication of Lucifer, it is believed that it occurred in the early 1980s. Tell us about your dream and how that fits into that time frame or if it fits into that time frame.
2 Feb 1994 ????fx618@AOL.COM ????????Re: Adjudication/Isolation
Subject: Re: Adjudication/Isolation
?Dates, names, events and forecasts are difficult for transmitters to pin down, as these impinge upon material fact potentials, whereas their forte and function is on the transmittal of spiritual meanings limited by the transmitter”s capacity for concept & vocabulary.
?These types of transmissions (those of material fact) I personally consider speculative, whereas the spirit-focused transmissions have no time dependence and can be of high religious value.
?With that said, the speculative date of the adjudication that I am familkiar with is 1984 + or -.
?Post adjudication one would speculate what was cut off would be reversed, therfore the circuits would be reinstated. Also that there would be increased reactiveness to the celestial activites ongoing.
?As far as increase in personal contact (aside from the ongoing leadings of the speraphim and TA which were certainly were not wholly restricted by the mandate of isolation ) there has always been ongoing incidences of celestial contact even during isolation such as:
?the prophets and seers of Isreal and other religious movements (wherein lie the main body of documented contact ) are all incidences of either communciation with celestial entities or TA/seraphim communication/inspiration; the celestial contacts and interactions of surrounding Jesus as human; the celestial contact responsible for the UB and other miscellaneous works of revelation and inspiration.
?Therfore, I would argue that interaction with celestial beings has always been a potential even during our isolation; what has been restricted is most likely:
?1) our ability to access the circuits which were our main outbound communications other than certain spirit-energies which by virtue of spirit-gravity-pull has always been able to escape/circumvent mandates of isolation and 2) the execution of more broader based programs of celestial contact which would demand ciruit access (possibly involving celestials who are not native to our sphere, Urantia)
?Although, regarding #2: Sadler in Mind at Mischief referring to the original channeling human personality said that the “the communications…are made by a vast order of alleged beings who claim to come from OTHER planets to VISIT this world…” Which would tend to support the possibility that interaction and ocntact with non-native celestials is a possibility even during isolation.
?Regarding your vivid dream: Some speculations to consider: sometimes one can have a limited consciousness of circle attainment ceremonies, these are generally associated with some memory of contact with beings (seraphim) who either emanate or “cover” you with an incredible blue light. This (probably) occurs most often during sleep, and for many these momentous spirit transactions go unnoticed.
?There are other types of contact of course, most notably presentations by thought adjuster of mostly non-verbal varities which occur often during sleep when the mind currents are more stable. They can often lead to “vivid dreams”. There are no doubt many other types, but i believe these to be some of the most common …
?The TM alleges to be actual contact with celestial volunteers from other spheres, this has precedent and possibility; my personal experience has been highly rewarding although it is admittedly not for everyone, and it demands many transactions in the currency of faith.
3 Feb 1994 ????David Kantor ?????Midweek Contact
Subject: Midweek Contact
?>I used to think of it as sort of part of the Akashic Records; now >maybe, in light of the UB, it”s really part of the evolving Supreme? >I have this sort of nebulous understanding that somewhere out there, >is a record of all of our spoken words as well as those things simply >-thought-; can a person somehow tap into this source, do you think?
?Neither anything I have read from contemporary understandings of the universe in our culture nor anything I have read from the UB indicates *anything* which could serve as a storage medium for such a huge amount of data. Since countless individuals have their own subjective models of the universe and their experience thereof, this amount of data would be at least the size and complexity of the universe itself multiplied by the number of conscious entities in it. (Hmmmmm…any relation to the “many universes” concept from quantum physics?)
?The idea of the Akashic Records implies an objective set of meanings which describe all past transactions in reality. I”m not sure such an objective set of evaluations is possible. Apparently even on Paradise there is great diversity of opinion and interpretation about many things.
?>You know David, next to a mind like yours, and so many others here on this >list, I feel -really- dumb. So if my questions reflect my intellectual >standing, I can only hope you will consider the source and be gentle >with me.
?My mind is not particularly good — it is more like a herd of wild horses which I long ago gave up on taming. However, I still operate under the assumption that someday it will be possible to organize them into a coordinated team. I too feel quite intimidated putting my ideas out here because there are individuals subscribing to this list who are far more knowledgable and competent than I. But we”ve got to participate as we are and in terms of who we are, don”t we? Besides, let”s not overvalue intellectual constructs; I think we”re far more likely to find ourselves close to God working in a soup kitchen or changing diapers than in a library or manipulating a word processor.
?Matthew, I enjoyed your thoughts on “disconfirmation” of the UB. In addition to an alien invasion, what if Jesus showed up and didn”t know anything about it? Another disconfirmer would be if an individual showed up with enough consciousness of a past life to confirm that they were someone I had known who had died and been reincarnated.
?>Chris asked what the TM is all about. Chris, there are a group of UB >readers who believe that the Lucifer trial is over and that Lucifer >has been adjudicated. He lost. As a result of that loss, the Father >has stirred and Michael has ordered that the quarantine to which the >rebellious planets have been subject to be lifted and the circuits be >reconnected. This group of people believe that celestial teachers, >supervised by Machiventa Melchizedek in the service of Michael, have >been sent to this planet to teach receptive mortals and to start the >process of bringing this planet into the ages of light and life. It >will obviously take awhile. The teachers call this period the >Correcting Time.
?Chris, I would like to once again post my contention that *none* of the above claims of TM adherents have any substantiation in the text of The Urantia Book. In addition, substantial arguments *from* The Urantia Book have been offered indicating that the above claims have a very low probability of being valid, but such arguments have never been addressed by TM adherents.
?The only defense I have seen offered by TM adherents is a classic “begging-the-question” fallacy of circular argument, that is, one must accept their conclusion as a basic premise in support of their argument.
?In addition, there is substantial historical indication that such phenomenon are a normal psychological occurrance during times of major religious transition and spiritual upheaval. (Two classic examples are the Christian communities of the first 3 centuries and various communities which developed in the aftermath of the Reformation in the 16th century.)
?Initially, TM adherents got messages about all sorts of things including actual appearances of “celestials.” When a number of these supposed events passed without happening TMers gradually stopped posting such messages and instead have confined themselves to relatively non-controversial platitudes.
?>I think that the “neurological processes” that you assume are already >there are really due to the adjutant mind spirits; such “processes” >are already “modes of thought”.
?I”m not prepared to argue this any further — it”s an area of active interest and study and I think we have a long way to go to fully understand the radically new ontological perspective which I believe the UB offers us. I think this is a major part of the revelation. The revelation seems to substantially address the questions of who we are, what we are and the nature of our destiny. I think it essentially provides a gentle but radical redefinition of what it means to be human and to be involved in human communities.
?>Well, there are levels and depths of spiritual truth.
?Yes. I recently noticed the “four levels of the realization of values” on page 68 which has stimulated a lot of thought.
?>I don”t see how you can conclude that the adjusters are the only >means of spirit contact on earth. Spirit is a big word.
?Yeah, I was wrong on this. I was thinking that the Adjuster *mediates* all spirit contact for us, serving as a bridge between the mortal mind and the spirit world. However, I notice that Angelic ministry is apparently independent of the TA. Page 2062 gives a list of the 7 higher spirit influences which eventually minister to mortals and page 1681 notes our “only means of communion with the spirit world.” Does the Adjuster perhaps “unify” this ministry for us? I”m thinking of the comment that to our perception diversified spirit ministry appears as one.
?>Again, where did the “thought patterns” come from except from the >adjutants? It seems to me that the ability to “interpret present >stimuli” is again due to the adjutants, who seem to operate on the >most fundamental (and primitive) levels of mind-spirit.
?But do the adjutants supply us with meanings? I don”t think so. I think they simply influence the way in which we organize meanings and values. Are you postulating something akin to Plato”s “forms” here? I”ve encountered some students of the UB who hold that the patterns of perfection on the Havona worlds are somehow available to us for the synthesis of ideals, but I”m not clear on this. The precise mechanism by which the adjutants interact with our biochemistry remains a mystery to me and I would appreciate any insight anyone might have. I assume we can unravel it…
?>Much of what these people “believe” may be quite wrong factually – >scientifically and literally, but much also can be spiritually true.
?I appreciated the argument you offered for this point although I am still uncomfortable with it. Part of my discomfort is that I am not solely concerned with the spiritual position of the individual. I am deeply concerned about the state of the planet on which we find ourselves living. (this following is only my personal take on things even though I may phrase it as objectively valid) Given what I know about epochal revelation, I conclude that the UB is something of an emergency undertaking, or at least somewhat unusual.
?What”s the emergency? I think it is at least in part this: Western civilization has been developing for over 2,000 years on a foundation which consists on the morality derived from Judeo-Christian religious ideas. Today those ideas are under serious (and justifiable) assault. As the cosmology of these religions comes to be seen more and more in its cultural relativity and psycho-historical context, it begins to lose it”s value as a stimulus for moral development.
?I find the qoute on page 2075 which says that “A lasting social system without a morality predicated on spiritual realities can no more be maintained than could the solar system without gravity.” to be somewhat prophetic and quite harrowing. The social system we enjoy in the US was designed by religious fanatics and idealists and to a large extent was based on the idea that the individual would exercise sufficient moral restraint on his own behavior to provide a context for true social freedom. Witness the attempt in Russia to establish a US-style democracy without the same cultural foundation of religious morality. Witness the deterioration of our own culture which appears to be paralleling the loss of our own grasp of essential spiritual realities — witness the return to tribal forms of human association (gangs) in many of our urban areas where this breakdown is proceeding most rapidly. This is a *very* serious situation indeed to which we bear witness on a daily basis.
?What are our options? The anarchy in Bosnia? The totalitarianism that we see in China and in many third world countries? I believe that if the moral foundations derived from Judeo-Christian sources is lost, the planet will be in for a long period of dark ages while it slowly recovers this essential foundation. I don”t see that the rapid spread of fundamentalist sects of Islam can compensate for this and the rush for diminishing natural resources can only complicate the problem.
?No, I think there is a definite plan in place for the development of consciousness and social integration on this planet. We can perhaps get a sense of what this plan is if we can identify specific threads of development running through the epochal revelations. I think it is our duty to try to understand this plan and see to it that our efforts support it, or at least do not detract from it.
?This danger of serious social breakdown during the present transition I believe to be one of the primary factors in the presentation of the UB at the present time, and is the reason why I believe that the primary purpose of the UB is the prevention of transitional breakdown, the preservation and further development of the moral foundations of human interaction through the revitalization of the Judeo-Christian heritage. This book retells all the essential stories in a contemporary context and puts us back in touch with the source of those moral values essential for the preservation of civilization. I”m sure others would disagree with this assessment and Dan may go non-linear on it, but it”s my best take.
?The “teaching mission” directly feeds the forces of dis-integration, not the forces of unity. It begins with the dis-integration of the individual psyche which is essential for the phenomenon of channeling to take place. It proceeds with the dis-integration of the individual from the greater society and the formation of relatively isolated groups who share a view of reality which is far removed from what is normative in the surrounding culture. The dis-integration continues on to higher levels with the further removal of these individuals from the religious institutions of our day through their acceptance of practices which are widely regarded as indicative of serious psycho/social pathologies. The TM dis-integration continues with it”s complete isolation from even the most basic psychological, philosophic, religious or scientific thought of our day.
?So I remain of the mind that it is a serious error to reinforce this retrograde religious movement in any way, regardless if there are some aspects of it which might seem useful. To the best of my thinking, it is a serious error which runs counter to Michael”s plan for our world which I see unfolding in history and whose nature I find articulated in the UB.
?>That”s very interesting. Is this information recorded somewhere in the >UB itself, or is it what the Contact Commission told the world? Why is >it not in the little paper on origins that the Fellowship sends out?
?According to a source I judge as reliable, Dr. Sadler wrote a paper explaining all this stuff which Christy was supposed to publish after he died. According to this source, Martin forced her to scrub the plans for reasons that are not apparent.
?Part of the problem is that all who particpated in getting the book here took an oath of secrecy. It could even be the case that the information I have is just a ruse designed to redirect our attention and keep the true nature of the event unknown, although I don”t think this is the case. But it does remain merely speculative at best, and I don”t think anyone would be wise to make an “official” view of such speculation.
?Contrary to Jim McNelly”s take on my post, I am not linking anything to any apocraphyl authoritative source. I was merely posting my best understanding of the facts involved in a historic situation in response to your comment. Jim, I share your abhorrence of referencing apocraphyl information as a means of extending political power in the movement.
?By the way, it was Paul who said “let that mind be in you which was in Christ Jesus” — check out Philippians 2:5. Verses 5 thru 11 are quite beautiful.
3 Feb 1994 ????Thea Hardy ??????Re: Midweek Contact
Subject: Re: Midweek Contact In-Reply-To: [199402031903.LAA09428@CSOS.ORST.EDU]
?David, I loved your additions to the “disconfirmations” list! Yes, those would certainly make one pause, eh.
?On the subject of patterns of thought… to muddy the waters a bit, what about the role of the personality, which is pattern-involved, in terms of thought? Does it literally alter the patterns of unfoldment of the mind? In other words, does the personality affect the literal arrangement of synaptic development in relation to genetic inheritance as affected by the adjutant mind circuits? What is the relationship here; how does it work together, if at all? If personality is a strong part of what we are known by, then its patterns would seem to be implicate in the very structuring of our brains as we develop. Naturally there is the genetic underlayment, and the effects, whatever they may be, of the adjutants. Personally, I think that the personality patterns are very important here, seeing how important personality is in the universe.
?I will not comment on your beliefs as to the retrogressive nature of the TM except to say that I disagree, and that time will tell. Your interpretation of transmitting requiring dis-integration does not fit with my experience or observations. But we have done our bit of going round and round about the TM and I agree to disagree.
3 Feb 1994 ????Thea Hardy ??????Re: Transcendence
Subject: Re: Transcendence In-Reply-To: [199402032004.MAA11950@CSOS.ORST.EDU]
?I think of the absorption into the cosmic mind as the way a person who has decided not to survive merges back into the Supreme. For myself, I find the UB form of individual survival more intensely personal. I admit it, I prefer the concept, which is not proof!
4 Feb 1994 ????Fred Harris ????????Re: Midweek Contact
Subject: Re: Midweek Contact In-Reply-To: [199402031903.AA22502@freenet2.scri.fsu.edu]; from “David Kantor” at Feb 3, 94 11:03 am
?Hello David. I read with interest the rules of engagement posted by Jim McNelly and I reflected upon the position that it is not proper etiquette to ignore another”s argument against your position. I hadn”t really thought about that and I note that you complain about those who believe in the teaching mission exhibiting that very behavior. I guess that I could never see much benefit to getting into logical arguments about something that could really only be experienced so I didn”t engage. I am basically still of that mind, but I thought I would take a shot at responding to your statements about the teaching mission. > > Chris, I would like to once again post my contention that *none* of > the above claims of TM adherents have any substantiation in the text > of The Urantia Book. In addition, substantial arguments *from* The > Urantia Book have been offered indicating that the above claims have > a very low probability of being valid, but such arguments have never > been addressed by TM adherents. > You know I have always been amused at the Bible scholars who throw around quotes from the Bible to justify whatever position that they might seek to advance. Many times the people who would use Bible quotes would be on diametrically opposite sides but each could find support for their positions in the Bible. The fact of the matter is that both TM supporters and detractors have quoted from the UB to support their positions. Neither have seemed persuasive to me. Besides this seems to fall within the “Quoting from Authority” fallacy that was mentioned in Jim”s post.
?> The only defense I have seen offered by TM adherents is a classic > “begging-the-question” fallacy of circular argument, that is, one > must accept their conclusion as a basic premise in support of their > argument. > I don”t really understand what you mean here. I know that you have had trouble with the argument sometimes made that you must look to the fruits of the activity, but that is my answer. If the fruits of the TM are good, what difference does it make if the teachers are not real? And the fruits that I have witnessed are good and the TM grows. And there is no charismatic leader. So why are so many people interested? Are they all deluded? I would argue that they are not.
?> In addition, there is substantial historical indication that such > phenomenon are a normal psychological occurrance during times of > major religious transition and spiritual upheaval. (Two classic > examples are the Christian communities of the first 3 centuries and > various communities which developed in the aftermath of the > Reformation in the 16th century.) > This argument begs the question. It analogizes the teaching mission to other reformation movements (come to think of it, I kind of like that analogy, although I don”t think that the situations are wholly analogous) without directly speaking to the actual lessons that are being delivered. I say forget the method of delivery and tell me what it is that is being taught that you find to be objectionable. I have recently been posting anonymous teacher lessons to focus readers on the substance rather than the supposed source of the lessons. So let”s talk about the substance.
?> Initially, TM adherents got messages about all sorts of things > including actual appearances of “celestials.” When a number of these > supposed events passed without happening TMers gradually stopped > posting such messages and instead have confined themselves to > relatively non-controversial platitudes.
?Let me be the first to say that there have been absolutely wrong messages, and most of them have been of a predictive nature. The lessons are not gospel. You must read them with discernment, just as you would with anything you consider. This is a slippery process and one fraught with the possibility of error, yet having said that, I believe that the true message is coming through loud and clear and it is a good one. A personal relationship with the Father. Becoming a conduit for His love. Tolerance for different paths. Small acts of kindness. Reaching out to people you meet and touching them from where they stand. Providing selfless service. The message is clear and, in my view, absolutely true. At least it rings true to me.
?> The revelation seems to substantially address the questions of who we > are, what we are and the nature of our destiny. I think it essentially > provides a gentle but radical redefinition of what it means to be > human and to be involved in human communities.
?I agree and would argue that the teaching mission is an attempt to get us to incorporate the Urantia Book teachings (especially those in Part IV) into our daily lives.
?> Part of my discomfort is that I am not > solely concerned with the spiritual position of the individual. I am > deeply concerned about the state of the planet on which we find > ourselves living. (this following is only my personal take on things > even though I may phrase it as objectively valid) Given what I know > about epochal revelation, I conclude that the UB is something of an > emergency undertaking, or at least somewhat unusual.
?Perhaps it is the foundation for a worldwide effort to transform this planet and bring it quickly into light and life. Perhaps it was presented with the understanding that as soon as Lucifer was adjudicated that Michael”s bestowal planet would be targeted to become an example of a transformation that could be accomplished with the Father”s love. Perhaps the teaching mission is the next step. Perhaps not. It doesn”t matter. It is the living of Michael”s teachings that is, in my view, what is important. Certainly the UB won”t be widely read or, if read, accepted to influence the world unless those who see truth therein will live their lives to reflect that truth.
?> > What”s the emergency?
?There are so many. Spiritual, moral, environmental, social, technological, medical, legal. Face it, we are in need of upliftment in all areas. And it has reached emergency status in many of the areas. Also perhaps the closing arguments in the Lucifer trial were about to begin and the Ancients of Days were about to begin deliberating. There could be a lot of reasons for the delivery of the Urantia Book.
?> What are our options?
?I have come to believe that the only way to change this world is through small acts of kindness. One person at a time. This must be a grassroots effort. Everyone needs to pitch in, especially those who have the knowledge of the UB. With that knowledge comes responsibility. You can no longer go forward living your lives as you have before. It is time to become a force for good. It is a time to shine forth the Father”s love in every encounter every day for the rest of your material life. This planet will change. It won”t happen overnight. Each of us must do our part. The time is now. This is a call for volunteers.
?> No, I think there is a definite plan in place for the development of > consciousness and social integration on this planet. We can perhaps > get a sense of what this plan is if we can identify specific threads > of development running through the epochal revelations. I think it > is our duty to try to understand this plan and see to it that our > efforts support it, or at least do not detract from it.
?Yes, I believe that the Father has a plan and it is in motion.
?> This danger of serious social breakdown during the present transition > I believe to be one of the primary factors in the presentation of the > UB at the present time, and is the reason why I believe that the > primary purpose of the UB is the prevention of transitional > breakdown, the preservation and further development of the moral > foundations of human interaction through the revitalization of the > Judeo-Christian heritage. This book retells all the essential > stories in a contemporary context and puts us back in touch with the > source of those moral values essential for the preservation of > civilization. I”m sure others would disagree with this assessment > and Dan may go non-linear on it, but it”s my best take.
?I think that the Urantia Book is a revelation. I don”t think it can “prevent transitional breakdown”, etc. without the people who believe it to begin to live it. Period. For reasons that we have all debated on this bulletin board, the Urantia Book has something objectionable for everyone. It will present a barrier to most people. But its teachings, lived by those who believe the UB are such that they are unobjectionable. Kindness, love and service are going to build bridges. That is how the UB will “prevent transitional breakdown”. If that is what you mean, I agree. The Book cannot do it alone.
?> > The “teaching mission” directly feeds the forces of dis-integration, > not the forces of unity.
?That has not been my experience. I would again extend to you, David, and, for that matter, to anyone to visit our group here in Tallahassee or a TM group near you. See what you see. Report back. I will even offer to pick you up at the airport, let you stay at my home and take you to a meeting. Words are not sufficient to describe the unity that has occurred in our group since the teaching mission started there two and a half years ago. It must be experienced.
?It begins with the dis-integration of the > individual psyche which is essential for the phenomenon of channeling > to take place.
?This statement is not borne out by the facts. Thea commented on this and she is able to receive. I”m not, yet I know many people who are able to receive communications and I haven”t seen any disintegration of the individual psyche.
?It proceeds with the dis-integration of the > individual from the greater society and the formation of relatively > isolated groups who share a view of reality which is far removed from > what is normative in the surrounding culture.
?No doubt that people who read the UB share a “view of reality which is far removed from what is normative in the surrounding culture” and so it is also with the teaching mission, which uses the UB as its foundation. And I don”t apologize for this view which is outside that which is commonly held. As you have noted the commonly held beliefs of this society and world have gotten us to the brink of destruction. We need to turn this around and begin the walk toward light and life.
?With respect to the first part of your above statement, the teaching mission does not encourage isolation. It teaches that we are each to step out in faith and try to influence all whom we chance to meet. There is no isolation, all are welcome to come visit, read the lessons, go out into the public shining forth the Father”s light. It is actively encouraging each of us to widen our contacts with those we see and meet.
?> The dis-integration > continues on to higher levels with the further removal of these > individuals from the religious institutions of our day
?No one is encouraged by the teaching mission to leave any religious institutions. In fact, the teachers ask that we continue to do what we have been doing, but with a new attitude. An attitude of service. To point out the best in the institutions that we attend and encourage them to expand on those higher concepts. All of this is to be done primarily throught our actions and behavior.
?> through their > acceptance of practices which are widely regarded as indicative of > serious psycho/social pathologies.
?This is a bandwagon fallacy. Because something is “widely regarded” as anything is really saying that most people think “a” therefore because you think “b” you are wrong. I don”t buy that. “Serious psycho/social pathologies” is also an ad hominem abusive fallacy, ie the people are crazy therefore the message must be wrong. I also reject that as incorrect.
?> The TM dis-integration continues > with it”s complete isolation from even the most basic psychological, > philosophic, religious or scientific thought of our day.
?This is the broad brush mischaracterization which is difficult to respond to because it is so vague. Suffice it to say that the substance of the teaching mission lessons can be found on this bulletin board on a daily basis. Perhaps they can be best summarized by the phrase “Love your brethren as the Father would love them.” If that is not in accordance with the “thought of our day” then I submit that the “thought of the day” needs to be changed. And that is the purpose of the teaching mission. An attitude adjustment to a planet.
?> > So I remain of the mind that it is a serious error to reinforce this > retrograde religious movement in any way, regardless if there are > some aspects of it which might seem useful.
?If what you are saying is that you would not incorporate some of what you admit might seem useful about the teaching mission into your life because it might encourage the teaching mission, then I would say to you not to worry about it. Go ahead and give it a try. You don”t have to tell anyone. Just do it. What can it hurt? By the way “retrograde religious movement” is not only unnecessarily derogatory but it is also not accurate. This is not a religious movement. The teaching mission is a spiritual mission and ministry. There are no churches (except the world around you). There are not membership requirements (except to walk the highest path). There are no contributions requested or accepted, except your personal service to those you encounter. It is about your personal relationship with the Father. It is a personal growth vehicle. It is strictly voluntary.
?> To the best of my > thinking, it is a serious error which runs counter to Michael”s plan > for our world which I see unfolding in history and whose nature I > find articulated in the UB.
?This being your personal opinion, I respect it. It is not my opinion, but that is what makes horseraces, a difference of opinion. I hope my responses have been such that they explained my position without being disrespectful of yours. There are many paths. I hope you will try some of what the teaching mission asks and, truth be known, I know that you are anyway. Not because of the teaching mission but because you have read the Urantia Book and it is hard for me to believe that anyone who reads that book will not be transformed by the experience. But it is time to exhibit that knowledge consistently, daily and to all comers.
?Well, I”ve got to go before this freenet bounces me. I don”t have time to erase the rest of your post. Sorry to those who pay by the byte. Love to all
4 Feb 1994 ????Joyce Veisz ???????Re: Midweek Contact
Subject: Re: Midweek Contact In-Reply-To: [199402031903.AA22502@freenet2.scri.fsu.edu]
?Good morning, David,
?I just read your post of yesterday, the third. David, I have never known any other person (and although I can not really say, I know you, I believe I am at least on my way to understanding you, at least somewhat) that could cause such a dichotomy of feelings within me.
?I was at once warmed by your, by what I felt was a very loving post to me; then blown away, in your total put-down of the TM, and those that subscribe to a belief in it.
?I do love you David, and I think I”m beginning to understand your inner pain; at least when I try to put myself in the shoes you wore in the past so many years ago, I know how I would have felt; I would have been devastated, as I believe you were.
?So, while I can understand your reticence in accepting what is happening all over our planet as a result of teacher contact, I find it more difficult to understand your need to attempt to turn others off in such a vitriolic fashion.
?Please forgive me David if I ever make the mistake of causing you pain through my written words; believe me when I say that will -never- be my intention. I would like very much to have the opportunity to get to know the real you; why do I instinctively have the feeling that this has not happened via the written words you have posted?
?I thank you for the glimmer of the real David you gave me this morning when I read the part beginning “My mind is not particularly good…” and ending, “I think we”re far more likely to find ourselves close to God working in a soup kitchen or changing diapers than in a library or manipulating a word processor.”
?Speaking of the soup kitchen, yesterday was my regular day to help out, only I was also going to cook, so I had to be there as close to 8 am as I could. Well, I got up at 6, had a cup of coffee, did my time of silence, took my shower, and helped my husband up (he”s a quadraplegic, so requires a little of my time), ran out the door to get to the kitchen on time. Only to find that the beans I was going to use to make a bean and sausage soup had been stolen! God, help them, they must have really been hungry! Well, we”ll try the bean soup again next Thursday. So, we had oddles of noodles, cold cut sandwiches, a coleslaw that we “winged” a dressing for, and cookies; not too bad, it was certainly filling.
?About a month ago, I began collecting clothing to distribute and ended up with a car full of baby items, including a stroller, high chair, crib, etc. So I stopped by the Good News Ministries, where the soup kitchen is, and asked them if they ever had anyone stop in asking for baby items, they said no, never. I got in my car and as I was about to leave the parking lot, the fella a t the desk came running out bringing with him a young lady (very pregnant) who just happened to stop by just then, asking for baby items; she was due any day, and didn”t have any of the baby things she needed! God does move in wondrous ways, doesn”t He?
?Love to you David,
4 Feb 1994 ????Philip Calabrese ?????Re: Hoax hypothesis looking ba
Subject: Re: Hoax hypothesis looking bad In-Reply-To: Your message of Fri Feb 4 08:03:46 1994
??David, I”ve read your response to my comments on the TMers and will try to answer, but not now, except to say that your concerns, while to some degree justified, also seem somewhat overblown to me. It is a matter of degree. There is a lot more internal and external criticism, for instance, of the TM movement than there ever was (except at the end) in or out of FOG (Family of God) when Vern Grimsley was leading that organization. (Right?) I don”t such uniformity in the TM. Perhaps this is “dis-integrating” on the part of the TM, but again, your criticism of the TM as a “dis-integrating” influence seems over stated to me. I can only recall the great concern that the Apostles and some followers expressed when Jesus let Kermeth, the “strange trance prophet” have free access to the Teaching Camp.
?Perhaps it would help if you would try to explain the difference between my examples from the early church and the TM now rather than just reiterating your concerns. Can you come at it from a different perspective? Tell me how these times and the way that Jesus handled them were different (if they really were) than now. Otherwise, you seem to be just repeating the same expressions of concern.
4 Feb 1994 ????Christopher_a._Yandall@ELECTRICITI.COM ???????Re: Midweek Contact
Subject: Re: Midweek Contact
?Dear Fred and Jim,
?When I first asked for a description of the TM, I had no idea what grounds I was about to tread. Suffice it to say, the description discussions have been really enlightening. From my rudimentary understanding of what has transpired with the TM, I gather it has been an ”experience” for all. As time passes, assessments, understanding, beliefs from what we all have read will evolvein into a better understanding. From what I initially understand, it sounds like the TM had attempted to take the center stage with a ”performance” now gaining interpretation and choosing of sides. But, it looks like from Fred”s discussion here that his defense of the TM is evolving daily as a spirtutual reception of the message in group form is evolving. Since I haven”t taken the time to visit this phenomena, I cannot make heads or tails of how I really feel about it. Those in the past marked as the chosen deliverers of the word have always been held with due skepticism and rightly so. But on the other hand, those who firmly and genuinely believe in the ”words” of the UB and understand them with intent to act have my support to express their findings daily. That”s what makes this UB bbs a delight. I look forward to reading every single postive and negative post as possible. I”m just tickled pink to see so much discussion on the UB. I devour as much as I can and try to digest through the week. (by the way Jim, why don”t you write your goods offline and send your posts as an attachement. If you can”t. look into an INTERNET service. I pay 50 bucks a year and get 2 hours a day unlimited messages). I look forward to hitting a TM soon but will ask for Phil”s guidance if I ever(I will!) show up for a Tuesday meeting.
?Anyways, keep the goods flying. There is a reason why the new Evangelical churches are succeeding with their followings. They appear to be acting in unity to reach those high spirtual notes by simply asking for the notes to hear .TM”ers are going for it. I have more hope in TM”ers than traditionalists/fundamentalists.
?Thea, you vibrate an very maternal spiritual ring in your posts. Please remember me in your spiritual awakenings when you bridge the physical and divine.
?For now, please write and describe what is evolving here in my opinion to be a montainous effort to set people free from their material bondage. You are all so incredibly precious. As I stand at the waters edge seeing a new transformation of love and faith, it is not hard for me to share my love for all when I leave my keyboard and monitor supercharged.
4 Feb 1994 ????Stephen Finlan ?????Moral Values
Subject: Moral Values
?What a great paragraph!
?>I believe that the primary purpose of the UB is the prevention of >transitional breakdown, the preservation and further development >of the moral foundations of human interaction through the >revitalization of the Judeo-Christian heritage. This book retells >all the essential stories in a contemporary context and puts us >back in touch with the source of those moral values essential for >the preservation of civilization.
?David, you”ve verbalized what I”ve been feeling for quite a while. I”ve had a lot of dealings with Christian circles lately, particularly liberal congregations and academic circles, and I find that they are really adrift, philosophically. They no longer belief in the historicity of the gospels; even non-miraculous stories are deconstructed, described as pious fictions. The eagerness to deconstruct the Bible reflects more than just the discovery of textual alteration, it reflects a loss of faith as well. The whole former structure of values has collapsed.
?So yeah, we need to “revitalize.” Christianity can benefit from the influx of ideas which we can bring; and we can benefit from the connection to history, to culture, which they have.
?The UB is a systematic augmentation of the Bible (among other things). It fleshes out the gospels, affirms the prophetic mission, exposes “spurious” (838) and “fictitious” (1072) parts, and answers the needs of a wholehearted Christian enquiry.
5 Feb 1994 ????David Kantor ?????weekend musings
Subject: weekend musings
?Good weekend, Friends…
??>Nonetheless, an ad-hoc coalition of “transmitters” seems like too >volatile of a matrix on which to cement our beliefs. It certainly >will not fly with society at large…
?I couldn”t agree more.
?>On the subject of patterns of thought… to muddy the waters a bit, what >about the role of the personality, which is pattern-involved, in terms of >thought? Does it literally alter the patterns of unfoldment of the >mind? In other words, does the personality affect the literal >arrangement of synaptic development in relation to genetic inheritance as >affected by the adjutant mind circuits? What is the relationship here; >how does it work together, if at all? If personality is a strong part of >what we are known by, then its patterns would seem to be implicate in the >very structuring of our brains as we develop. Naturally there is the >genetic underlayment, and the effects, whatever they may be, of the >adjutants. Personally, I think that the personality patterns are very >important here, seeing how important personality is in the universe.
?Why on earth are you asking me, a mere mortal, such questions when you supposedly have direct access to “celestial teachers?” Why don”t you ask them, and if they actually give answers which are not an evasion of the questions or a reason why they can”t or won”t answer them, post them here and let us compare their responses with the models developed in the UB. This could serve as a good basis for a deeper investigation and study.
?Fred, its been interesting to watch your self-promotion to TM priesthood evolving hereon. A few months ago you were starting your posts with, “Here are some excerpts from some of the teachers…” Now you are regularly using, “Here is our lesson for today…” Is the destiny of the TM really the development of a neo-sacerdotalism? (Don”t you just *love* the English language?)
5 Feb 1994 ????Matthew Rapaport ?????????????something that came my way
Subject: something that came my way
?Hello all… I”ve stumbled upon something new I hadn”t seen before. It seems a new organization emerging in the Colorado area is calling itself the Invisible Fellowship of Urantia Book Readers. They have mailed me a little magazine which contains nothing so much as a collection of some interesting secondary material, along with some profiles of individuals in the UM who (in the editor”s opinion I suppose) have contributed mightily, and yet remain reletively unknown to us.
?Among other things, there is a “childrens guide to the UB”, a tape by Meridith Sprunger on the “Origins of the UB” (and he was about the closest living person right now to it), a collection of ideas for study groups, a book about the Invisible Fellowship (Larry Mullins), and a little book entitled REINCARNATION, THE URANTIA BOOK, AND THE MEANING OF LIFE.
?This last appears to be an analysis of some interpretations of REINCARNATION that might be harmonized with the UB and perhaps some examination of their origins. I”m not sure, and I don”t know how good it is, but you can inquire about all of it by writing to:
?The Invisible Fellowship Box. 19135 Boulder CO 80308
?Prices of the things I”ve mentioned follow (incl. postage):
?Video on origins $22.50 Young Child”s Guide to the UB $12.50 Reincarnation book $ 8.95 L. Mullins Invis. F. book $ 6.50
?All items appear to be free for postage ($2.50)
?Todd… Did you ever get that collection on philosophy I sent you?
?Take care all…
5 Feb 1994 ????Thea Hardy ??????Re: Midweek Contact
Subject: Re: Midweek Contact In-Reply-To: [199402050009.QAA29704@CSOS.ORST.EDU]
?I loved your description of us resting on the neuronic, dendritic forest and reaching out! I found it touching. I do not forget that we do this whole thing through the medium of mind which requires the material support of the brain. I believe that the personality affects that structure, although other aspects naturally enter in. I think that aside from the gift of the adjuster, the personality is the most important gift we receive. To my mind, it is what truly makes us who we are in that special individual way, and able to unify and express creatively. I see the aspect of personality as pattern as extremely important, and think that we do not talk enough about pattern in the universe and its relevance in general. I do not believe that pattern recognition is merely an adjutant function of lower order. Indeed, the adjutants may support it, but I believe that it goes on higher and higher until we start to understand the ultimate patterns of the Father”s love. I even can see circuitry as pattern – the way we are bound together in love in the growing Supreme. This developing fascination with pattern, which I usually perceive in metaphoric form, has been growing of late and I am so interested in the way it is at once “simple” and complex… the way those things work together.
5 Feb 1994 ????Thea Hardy ??????Re: weekend musings
Subject: Re: weekend musings In-Reply-To: [199402051803.KAA28321@CSOS.ORST.EDU]
?Awful sorry. I had been interested by your posts and was wanting to discuss the subject. I guess I will talk to others who are interested. I don”t think that having teachers around obviates the necessity to exercise our own brains. At least not for me. I can find much of what you say interesting and of worth even though we disagree about the TM.
5 Feb 1994 ????MR JIM C REYNOLDS JR ??Eliminating the Negative
Subject: Eliminating the Negative
?For the last few days I have felt impressed to search for a way to broach a subject. It is one that I feel is near the very center of the problems that we as “mere mortals” have, here on this world. A problem I find that exists in communicating with each other in a positive and productive way.
?I would like to thank David Kantor (THANK YOU DAVID KANTOR) for giving me the opening that I was looking for. –
?David made the following comments in a post I received today, 2/5/94.
?In response to a question from Thea –
?>Why on earth are you asking me, a mere mortal, such questions when >you supposedly have direct access to “celestial teachers?” Why don”t >you ask them, and if they actually give answers which are not an >evasion of the questions or a reason why they can”t or won”t answer >them, post them here and let us compare their responses with the >models developed in the UB. This could serve as a good basis for a >deeper investigation and study.
?And then he continued with these words for Fred –
?>Fred, its been interesting to watch your self-promotion to TM priesthood >evolving hereon. A few months ago you were starting your posts with, >”Here are some excerpts from some of the teachers…” Now you are >regularly using, “Here is our lesson for today…” Is the destiny of >the TM really the development of a neo-sacerdotalism? (Don”t you just >*love* the English language.)
?And now With Love to All –
?What is the positive side of negative reaction? Exactly at what point does criticism help? At what point is sarcasm illustrative of a higher truth? Exactly when is it our responsibility to point out to another the error that we find in something that they believe? And to what end do we speak our words of derision? To change their beliefs? Or, to reinforce ours?
?Does our faith grow through destroying anothers? Do we become stronger in life by consuming others? Or, do we become stronger in life by uplifting those around us? Is your truest desire to be “taller” than your fellow man? Or would you be more content to find yourself on an equal footing with him? Exactly which one of the fruits of the spirit is superiority? Are we truly capable of being all-knowing about all manners in which God may choose to reach out to his children? Are we capable of discerning anothers error in spiritual matters? Can we be so complete in our ability to know what God may or may not do, be doing, or have done, that we can speak with authority on the subject to the point of ridiculing those things which do not meet our own personal criteria as true acts of God? Is our Father so limited in function, that he can only perform in a manner in which we perscribe?
?Why do the Jews still look for a Messiah? In what manner did Jesus lack? What error did Jesus commit that prohibited his own people from believing that he was the Messiah? Why is it that God can”t get it right? Why can”t he do things the way we know that he should? What is wrong with him? Does he not realize that we, as “mere mortal” creatures, expect that he should do this, and do that? Should do all things as WE are able to define them, so that they should elevate our beliefs.
?My friends, to what end shall we go to shove our God, our Lord and Sovereign Jesus, to what end shall we go to shape them into the mold that is acceptable to us? At which point did the table turn, so that God should be in need of our assistance? At which point did it become our duty to point out to another the will of God for their life? The proper belief for their salvation? When did our human feelings take authority over the Spirit of Truth?
?If the words that we speak were numbers, so that positive words were added, and negative words were subtracted, what would be the final total of all that we have said? Would we find that we had really said anything at all? And what becomes of us, if the negative words are of greater total than the positive words?
?If the best thought that I can have about the belief of another results in negative feelings for myself, then why do I bother to think it? And if the highest compliment that I can pay to my Father is to show my disdain for the beliefs of another who is his child, then what glory shall I bring to his name?
?Can we not eliminate the negative in our life by refusing to give time to that which we believe to be negative? And if we steer clear from those actions, those words, which we deem to be negative, then what will be the end result of the time that we spend? Will we not be left with nothing but positive actions? With positive words?
?I submit to you my friends, my brothers and sisters, that the only thing that keeps this planet from attaining a status of light and life, is our individual inability to grasp the positive aspects of life and to maintain this level of righteousness which is so necessary for its culmination. There is no better day than this day to move forward, to progress in our thoughts, in our deeds, in our words.
5 Feb 1994 ????Fred Harris ????????Re: weekend musings
Subject: Re: weekend musings In-Reply-To: [199402051803.AA17720@freenet2.scri.fsu.edu]; from “David Kantor” at Feb 5, 94 10:03 am
?David Kantor writes: > > Fred, its been interesting to watch your self-promotion to TM priesthood > evolving hereon.
?Bow down when you address me, mere mortal.
?All seriousness aside, when I was growing up in the Catholic church I did aspire to being a priest. Then I read the fine print, got the hormone rages and that took care of that.
?> A few months ago you were starting your posts with, > “Here are some excerpts from some of the teachers…”
?Yes but certain folks felt that we should look to the substance of the lessons instead of the alleged author, so we have doing the anonymous posting thing of late. By the way, when are you going to comment on the substance of the messages?
?> Now you are > regularly using, “Here is our lesson for today…”
?I assumed that those who read that phrase would understand that I was not asserting personal authorship over the material that followed, thus the message is in quotes. My text is not in quotes. If this is creating a problem for you, I will gladly explicitly give credit to the teacher, without naming him or her. Consider it done.
?> Is the destiny of > the TM really the development of a neo-sacerdotalism? (Don”t you just > *love* the English language?)
?I wasn”t sure that “neo-sacerdotalism” was the English language, but I looked it up (“the belief that priests act as mediators between God and man”) – sounds a lot like the Catholic church as a matter of fact. We don”t use that term much in these parts. Anyway I know that you are just trying to get my goat. Busted, dude! Of course I”m no priest. Not even a saint yet, although my application has been in for quite some time now. Was an Eagle scout though. Is that close enough?
?The Teaching Mission is about a personal relationship with the Father. No intermediaries are required.
?Call me with your flight schedule.
6 Feb 1994 ????fx618@AOL.COM ????????Re: weekend musings
Subject: Re: weekend musings
?Among the fruits of the spirit are:
?undying hope, courageous loyalty, forgiving tolerance
?Without David K on Urantial, those involved in the TM would get far less practice.
6 Feb 1994 ????Joyce Veisz ???????Re: weekend musings
Subject: Re: weekend musings In-Reply-To: [199402060654.AA23058@freenet2.scri.fsu.edu]
?I agree with you that David does us all a service when he responds to any posts, and esp. when he ititiates one.
?You know, the longer I”m involved with the TM, and with those who include themselves among the membership, the more certain I am it isn”t important whether a person accepts it or not. The only -real- item of import, is whether or not we accept the Fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man.
?Anyone accepting the UB, already -does- that; and David is, I am sure a very firm advocate of those beliefs.
?But I also believe that Fred does all of us a very big service when he posts his uplifting messages from the “teachers”. I find it a wonderful way to begin my day; how could anyone object, when the essence of the message is Love?
?So, thank you David and thank you Fred!
7 Feb 1994 ????Joyce Veisz ???????Re: TM Smile on you Brother[D
Subject: Re: TM Smile on you Brother[D In-Reply-To: [199402071330.AA08746@freenet2.scri.fsu.edu]; from “Fred Harris” at Feb 7, 94 6:51 am
?On Feb. 3, David said, “No, I think there is a definite plan in place for the development of consciousness and social integration on this planet.”
?I agree with you David, we differ however, on point of view, as I believe a very big part of that plan is the Teaching Mission, itself. We are being taught temperance and understanding at a very grass roots level – person to person – each one of us is learning how to allow ourselves to become a conduit through which the love of the Father may manifest. We are told that there is a real energy (love) transference, from one individual, acting as the conduit, to the opposite person, or that person to whom we are being led to open ourselves. This opening – this connection – the Father in me to the Father in you, needs but a fraction of a second to connect – to effect. The fruits of this connection may show up now, or at a much later time – but we are told the “transformation -is- occurring”.
?David said, “The “teaching mission” directly feeds the forces of dis-integration, not the forces of unity.”
?I disagree most heartily with that statement. I have personally witnessed among these individuals, more love, not just for each other, but for people in general, than I have in any other group of people I”ve been associated with, including all of the churches I”ve belonged to during my life.
?I would like, at this point, to address David”s reference to “channeling”. I do not believe that those of us who are able to act as transmitters for the teachers -are- channeling. I believe that is why the teachers themselves refer to us as reciever/transmitters. We are -not- in even a light trance – it is simply a relaxed state – I could, at any time, answer a question that was addressed to me specifically; were I in a “trance”, I don”t think I would be able to do that. The method utilized for the reception of celestial teachings, I believe , is more akin to tuning into a radio frequency. If a person were to be in a “real” meditative state, they would have gone much too deep to be able to make the connection. Many of the beginning TR”s begin this process of connecting with teachers, completely unaware of the fact. They begin by simply feeling compelled to sit with paper and pen – usually the writing comes very quickly – so quickly, that one really does not have time to “think” about what is being written.
?Addressing this idea of dis-integration, from once again, a personal level – I find myself doing things – service oriented kinds of things – that I would not have even considered doing, less than a year ago. My life style has changed dramatically – for instance, I used to watch the soaps, as well as movies during the day and evening – not only do I nolonger watch soaps, I hardly ever turn on the television. I used to live to shop – now I can”t be bothered – I”d rather spend my time collecting clothing for others – I used to enjoy a glass of wine in the evening – now it simply never occurs to me – not that there would be anything wrong, if I did, my point is that so many of the things I used to feel were important, simply nolonger hold any interest for me. I guess what I am really trying to say is that -I- have changed. This change is a direct result of the Teaching Mission – it has changed, not just how I view myself, but to a greater degree, how I view myself in relation to my brothers and sisters. In the past, I could intellectualize that the black family living around the corner, or the crack baby in “Frenchtown”, were all part of my family, under the Fatherhood of God – the UB taught me this more than any other source, but until my association with the TM, it was simply that, an intellectual understanding. Now, I know they are my brothers and sisters, I -feel- the connection on an emotional level as well. It is this connection that compells me to go out into my community and -touch- as many lives as I can – give the Father access – through me, acting as His conduit – to my brothers ans sisters.
?I know this mission is working – I see its effects everyday – one day you too will awaken and realize that the world -is- changing – the spiritual climate is warming – we will one day be a planet settled in Light and Life – but for now, today, we are just beginning.
?Thank you for allowing me to open my heart to you.
?I remain, your sister, in Christ,
7 Feb 1994 ????Wayne Ferrier ?????Telecomm (?) AND other stuff
Subject: Telecomm (?) AND other stuff
?Thea: I agree that pattern is not studied enough in our movement. The traditionalist have compared and contrasted some ideas with those of Christianity and done not much else. Maybe this is one of the reasons why the TM has appeared; to compensate for the frustrations left where the traditionist have fallen short? I don”t know.
7 Feb 1994 ????Michael Reynolds ??Opinions
?Greetings to all my fellow electronic Urantians! I would like to address a couple of discussions I have watched going on here. One concerns the theorizing about the authorship of the Urantia papers. The other involves the Teaching Mission. Please bear in mind that the thoughts I share are my own and do not, necessarily, reflect the opinions of the Creators and Administers of a far-flung universe, nor do they, necessarily, relect the guidance of my own Thought Adjuster. (I hope that is a good enough disclaimer!)
?The URANTIA Book is intended to stand on its own in terms of its validity; otherwise, any human credit would have clearly been given within the papers. We are accustomed to basing our opinions of objects and information on the individual(s) involved in its creation and/or distribution. For example: it may not matter how good a particular car is; if the salesperson has a negative attitude, we might not purchase the car from them. Or, perhaps a sermon in church is quite powerful and meaningful. If the pastor does not apply it in their own life, the message may not be well received. (I know this from personal experience!)
?I have read messages in which William S. Sadler Sr. is described as being not totally in line with the philosophies presented in The URANTIA Book. Suppose it were proven that he had a major part in the content of the book. Would the validity of the book possibly be impaired? I believe it would—but not to me; I will get to that later. It might be devasting to some for them to discover that this precious book was mostly written by a mere mortal with various flaws in their ego. How would it affect the apparent truth contained in the book? Would faith be challenged?
?The URANTIA Book is a true work of love and devotion! Its messages are uplifting, comforting, encouraging, and enriching. What does it matter if part, or all of it, is authored by man? Focus on the content, not the source! Perhaps there may be some technical flaws due to human origin. That does not need to decrease the spiritual nourishment on which we are sustained. Who really cares how long “matchless” was a part of one”s vocabulary, or whether Andromeda is indeed one million light years away? Is that going to have any effect on the splendor of our Creator”s life as a man on Urantia?
?As for the Teaching Mission. I have said before that I believe there are many paths to God. There will be many opportunities to explore different interests on the Mansion Worlds, and beyond. I am sure there are opportunities while still on Urantia. There are many ways of thinking, and many ways to God. If there were not, there would be no need for personality. There are probably two main requirements to succeed in our Paradise Walk: We must go by Michael on Salvington, and we must have a whole-hearted dedication to serving the Will of God. I am sure that Urantia is being bombarded by an abundance of assistance, if we simply pay attention. We may be cut off from the interplanetary circuits, but I do not believe we were ever informed that assistance of a more personal nature were not possible, or permitted. There are a host of beings here who are concerned with our survival. Is our mortal intellect so advanced that we can reliably conclude what is truly “right” or “wrong” concerning how this assistance is given? If we are able to utilize the Spirit of Truth, perhaps we can discern in our hearts what is “right” for us. However, given that we are blessed with personality and other unique natures, it might be necessary for some to experience life in ways which are different from others. And do not forget that our Thought Adjusters are not concerned with making our life easy. They would rather it be rugged in order to offer us more chances for supreme decisions and intensive growth.
?My fellow Urantians, we have been blessed with a wonderful chance to grow in the light of intense challenges. I believe we need to focus on the glorious messages contained in The URANTIA Book, instead of how much human intervention there may have been. I also believe we need to learn to work together as a team to help usher in the next era, instead of attempting to uncover faults we think others in our family are committing. I believe this is what Jesus meant by “unity, not conformity.” We need to focus on God and what we believe His Will is for us. He is the closest friend we can ever possibly have. With Him, we can face anything and nothing can get us down! In the words of Jesus, “Trouble will invigorate you; disppointment will spur you on; difficulties will challenge you; and obstacles will stimulate you.” If this is true, how much more gratifying will it be if we can join together?
8 Feb 1994 ????Thea Hardy ??????Re: weekend musings
Subject: Re: weekend musings In-Reply-To: [199402080627.WAA03955@CSOS.ORST.EDU]
?On Tue, 8 Feb 1994, Dennis Brodsky wrote:
?> All of this back and forth about the TM brings to mind a quote from the UB > itself. > > -Paper 048 [Pg 557] > > 28. The argumentative defense of any proposition is inversely proportional to > the truth contained. > Hey, Dennis, that must mean that both sides are wrong… hehe!
8 Feb 1994 ????Michael Reynolds ??Opinions
?> I am seeking truth over “right for me”. How can one be sure any of > these books we read: Bible, UBook, etc….is right? We can”t…we > can “only” believe. I hate “only” believing. I want to know.
?Having to base our “truth” on our “beliefs” is what being an Agondonter is all about! I *feel* that what I believe is enough “truth” for me. I am sure that when we graduate to the Mansion Worlds, we will have a chance to see some “truth” with our own (new) eyes.
?…and a note to ALL:
?Speaking of “truth” versus “belief”, I am wondering if anyone else has watched TBN (Trinity Broadcasting Network) lately. A few of the leaders of the various ministries which support this network are putting their reputations on the line by saying that they received a “divine message” that “… God is going to start cleansing the world of evil beginning on June 9th.” The message began with one man and was later “confirmed” independently from several others; meaning that they had not heard about what he had learned, and “heard” it for themselves, with the same date.
?And, if I understand correctly, the Teaching Mission has, apparently, stated that the Lucifer adjudication ended some time ago. According to The URANTIA Book, the planetary circuits are supposed to be restored following the adjudication, causing the quarantine to be lifted. I am not prepared to state whether I believe this, but it is very interesting.
?The “New Age” community has been talking for years about our planet going into a transition, with talks of “higher dimensional vibrations”, “Heaven on Earth”, and the planet “turning into light”, or “a star.”
?Many people want to *SEE* the truth, instead of just believe in it. Are we, possibly, getting close to a point where we shall see real, tangible evidence of “truth”? I am interested in learning about what you think about all this. In the meantime, I will continue to go on believing in what I feel is the “truth.”
9 Feb 1994 ????Fred Harris ????????TM Adversity
Subject: TM Adversity
?Greetings. Tonight, after thinking about Dennis” adversity and about how we all have adversity from time to time I thought I would dig into the TM archives and see what the teachers have to say about adversity in our lives. I hope this is of some help.
?”Adversity creates or, rather, requires action. This reaction builds strength and stamina in character. Each person experiences adversity for this purpose. If life were easy and blissful, decisions, hard decisions, would not be forced to be made. These essential decisions must be made in order for there to be soul strengthening. In the parable of the sower, we see that some seeds sprout readily and grow tall quickly soon to be withered in the sun, not having the requisite strength, fortitude, to withstand vicissitude. Each person is like a plant. The good gardener, the good Thought Adjuster who directs the tilling of the soil, the fertilization of your roots, the rain to fall, the wind to blow and the sun to shine. All of this is done through the action of angels, among others, and He sees to it that this beloved child receives what is needful for the best growth of the soul. Adversity, even calamity, can be part of the nurturing process. The blessing of these seeming calamities may only be seen through hindsight and are not apparent to the growing seed-child.
?”The good parent ensures proper medicine for any illness, proper exercise to grow, to maintain robust health. Each child requires differing remedies and different exercise. By exercise, I am referring to robust life activity, mental and physical. In order to meet the challenges of life, each person must have experienced a certain hardship factor and be knowing that that past hardship has been overcome, strengthens the mind/soul for a future hardship or mind conflict which must also be grappled with.
?”This “can do” attitude is important and cannot develop without having done. Therefore adversity, both small and great, evolves us all and must be overcome and grappled with individually in order to build a strong and reliable soul.”
?It is always darkest before dawn. For those of you suffering adversity, especially Dennis, keep your head up and have faith that all will be for the best as you struggle with your adversity.
10 Feb 1994 ???Stephen Finlan ?????Joyce on Revelation
Subject: Joyce on Revelation
?Joyce, You used the UB quote which distinguishes between auto revelation from the Adjuster, and epochal revelation originating from some celestial group (1109), and you said “as in the current TM” –but you didn”t indicate whether you think the TM is auto revelation or epochal revelation. Do you really think TM is epochal rev, same as the other five?
10 Feb 1994 ???Joyce Veisz ???????Re: Joyce on Revelation
Subject: Re: Joyce on Revelation In-Reply-To: [199402102117.AA08647@freenet2.scri.fsu.edu]
?I think the TM, is the second phase of the fifth epochal revelation. Maybe to call it revelation in the the same light as the UB, would not be correct, but as an adjunct, yes, I definitely think it is that.
?We are being taught by celestials to -live- the religion of Jesus.
?Each lesson building on the previous lesson; wherein we are the actors; we make the lesson “come to life”.
?Before I joined the TM, the UB was simply an intellectual pastime; a book I enjoyed reading and one that gave me a much more comprehensise understanding of where I am and where I”m going.
?The TM shows me daily, how to get there, from where I am today.
10 Feb 1994 ???T. Moody ???????Re: Lobes and Hemispheres
Subject: Re: Lobes and Hemispheres In-Reply-To: [9402102213.AA24170@sjuphil.sju.edu] from “Wayne Ferrier” at Feb 10, 94 05:22:35 pm
?Wayne writes: > Which reminds me Todd: I think it was you who made mention on the grapevine > that Sadler had experienced auditory hallucinations. I atteneded an abnormal > psych lecture five or so years ago concerning this unusual type of > hallucination and was interested to learn that through brain scans someone > (don”t remember who) had tracked the imaginary friend of five year old > subjects. Universal to this age group it is common for five year olds to have > auditories; the communications supposedely came in from the right hemisphere, > crossed the bridge to the left and made a beeline for the temporal lobe. Ah, > music to my ears!
?It is Leo Elliott”s hypothesis that Sadler experienced something akin to channeling or automatic writing; I don”t know that either involves what one would call auditory hallucinations. But your comments remind me again of Julian Jaynes”s book _The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind_. The bicameral mind is a state believed by Jaynes to have been typical in humans until about 3,000 years ago. The bicameral person is permanently in a condition similar to that of the child that you describe: a simple being whose “thinking” is experienced as hallucinated voices. Eventually, consciousness became more integrated, except in a few atavistic individuals who continued to hear the voices, and who became known as prophets because of it. Prophets or oracles.
?Jaynes”s view is that much of the content of religion is a kind of nostalgia for bicameral existence, when our lives were guided by voices. Failing that, we settle for texts, especially texts that tell us that the inner guide is still with us, if we could only listen more carefully. And if the texts themselves are produced by something like a bicameral process, so much the better.
?Do I believe this? Well, it”s an audacious hypothesis, and I like that. If I didn”t, I wouldn”t read the UB.
10 Feb 1994 ???Leonard D Massey ????????????Re: Results and gossip from we
Subject: Re: Results and gossip from weekend General Council meeting
?I have no idea if the rumor is true or not. It was not presented as a source of spiritual inspiration, like the (now highly evolved) TM, but rather as a source of administrative guidance to the Trustees in their work of whatever they do now… It is, therefore, not directly competitive with the TM and allows them to claim divine authority to denounce the TM without getting bogged down in the paradox you outline. On the other hand, were I to announce that I have begun to channel for the Perfector of Wisdom and s/he says the Foundation is all wet, that would be an interesting discussion to chase around the barn…
?Frankly, I think the Trustees are already operating on the same level as Sedona. (Now that”s an offensive remark!)
11 Feb 1994 ???David Kantor ?????Another week…
Subject: Another week…
?>I can only recall the great concern that the Apostles and some >followers expressed when Jesus let Kermeth, the “strange trance >prophet” have free access to the Teaching Camp.
?This incident with Kermeth may or may not be a reasonable comparison — others have presented it too. Certainly Jesus” response here must be considered but I would draw a distinction between this situation and the one with the tm. I would share Jesus” reaction to someone who perhaps showed up at a conference pushing the Course in Miracles. But with the tm we have individuals who are propagating some seriously distorted inferences from material contained in the UB and should be called upon to more critically assess and defend their conclusions. It seems to me that Jesus was always quick to clarify and correct misperceptions of his teachings — consider his response to the Apostle”s questions which revealed their shallow understanding of his discussion of the golden rule. I don”t think you can use the situation with Kermeth as a prototypical example of Jesus” method of dealing with error without also considering such incidents as the last temple discourse and his driving the money changers out of the temple.
?>Perhaps it would help if you would try to explain the difference >between my examples from the early church and the tm now rather than >just reiterating your concerns.
?OK; It seems to me that the situation in the time of Jesus was very different than that of the early church. 70 AD brought a radical set of changes to the culture in which the 4th epochal revelation was planted. Consider the state of the “target culture” for the 4th epochal revelation and compare it with that of the fifth epochal revelation.
?My take is that the culture in which Jesus functioned was fairly homogenous and that one of the primary tasks was breaking up the log jam which was resulting from rigid adherence to the “law” and to established ritual.
?In many ways the target culture for the 5th epochal revelation is radically different from this in that here it is *centrifugal* forces which are threatening to disrupt civilization and we are in need of integration and unity — a very different situation.
?Imo, the events of 70 AD and the Bar Kochba revolt brought about a situation which was more akin to that which we experience today by forcing Christianity out of the safe shelter of Hebrew culture into the chaos and diversity of the Hellenistic world. The result is that our situation is in many ways similar to that of the early church but quite unlike that of the times of Jesus.
?Neither do the revelators fail to point out the importance of the well-formulated arguments presented at Nicea in the 4th century — their attitude towards Arius certainly does not parallel that of Jesus towards Kermeth.
?>I guess that I could never see much benefit to getting into logical >arguments about something that could really only be experienced so I >didn”t engage.
?I have not taken issue with the experience itself, only with the interpretation of the experience offered by the channelers. It is apparent that channelers are having some sort of inner experience which is outside the domain of what we would consider to be normative. The only question which I feel needs addressing is simply whether this experience represents a real contact with objective universe realities or is merely an illusion created by the human mind.
?There are some channelers who claim to be readers of The Urantia Book who maintain that these presentations are the work of “celestial teachers.” What is the basis upon which such a claim is made? By what means do you reach the conclusion that this claim constitutes a valid assessment of the phenomena?
?Surely you went through a reflective process of some sort to reach the position you now hold. Did you consider all possible explanations for the phenomenon and then make a choice among them?
?It seems to me that the channeling experience itself is the only “evidence” which we have to consider in looking at this matter. How does this “evidence” lead to the conclusion that the source of the phenomenon is “celestial teachers?”
?This same “evidence” could lead to many other conclusions based on accumulated data in the fields of psychology, sociology, religion as well as The Urantia Book. Again, channelers have failed to explain how the experience of channeling leads to the conclusion that “celestial teachers” are talking through them.
?>You know I have always been amused at the Bible scholars who throw >around quotes from the Bible to justify whatever position that they >might seek to advance. Many times the people who would use Bible >quotes would be on diametrically opposite sides but each could find >support for their positions in the Bible.
?There is a big difference between throwing around quotes to justify one”s position and the attempt to find the truth of a matter by studying a text which one believes to be from a source of superhuman insight. Supposedly this forum is for the purpose of studying The Urantia Book and thereby coming to a better understanding of the models of reality which it describes.
?>The fact of the matter is that both tm supporters and detractors have >quoted from the UB to support their positions. Neither have seemed >persuasive to me.
?This is not completely true, Fred. If you will go back over the records of these interactions you will find that teaching mission adherents have offered quotes in defense of their position but when these quotes were subsequently illuminated in the fuller context of the models of reality they describe, which showed tm claims to be obviously impossible, tm adherents quickly blasted the use of quotes and dropped the discussion.
?>Besides this seems to fall within the “Quoting from Authority” >fallacy that was mentioned in Jim”s post.
?Give Jim a little space for his compulsive iconoclasism. The “Quoting from Authority” fallacy is only a fallacy when the authority being quoted is not acceptable to the parties of the discussion due to irrelevance or to some question of it”s integrity. Note that the use of accepted authorities is the standard form for establishing a basis for an academic argument. The important thing here is that when an authority is quoted, the person doing the quoting has a responsibility to maintain the context of the original author.
?>I know that you have had trouble with the argument sometimes made >that you must look to the fruits of the activity, but that is my >answer. If the fruits of the tm are good, what difference does it >make if the teachers are not real?
?This argument seems to confuse what The Urantia Book describes as “the fruits of the spirit” with the “fruits” of a human religious formulation. To equate the “fruits” of the tm or any other religious or philosophical method/practice with the “fruits of the spirit” seems to blur the distinction between something with is a repercussion of the spiritual life and something which is a repercussion of human social structures. One of the big attractions of Hitler”s Youth Corps was the comraderie, the sense of shared mission and the resulting social cohesiveness. To say that these social “fruits” validated the premises upon which the group was established would be a serious error and yet this is precisely what you are asking us to do with the tm.
?In my experience, I have encountered the “fruits of the spirit” manifesting in the lives of individuals from many different religious persuasions. I have also frequently encountered the erroneous assumption that these spiritual fruits validate the religious formulations by which the individual understands the nature of his/her relationship with God. Understand the cause and effect relationship here — the effect is the appearance of the “fruits of the spirit” and the cause is the individual”s spiritual quest and commitment. The cause is not a particular intellectual formulation of the *nature* of the quest and commitment. And let me point out that in spite of its anti-intellectual stance, tm claims are really nothing more than such intellectual formulations *about* the nature of the experience of its devotees.
?>So why are so many people interested?
?An elementary text in social psychology would give you some very coherent answers to this question.
?>Are they all deluded? I would argue that they are not.
?What argument would you offer which would show us not? I can give you some very good arguments based on solid research and historical precedence which would lead to the conclusion that they indeed *are* all deluded.
?>I say forget the method of delivery and tell me what it is that is >being taught that you find to be objectionable. I have recently been >posting anonymous teacher lessons to focus readers on the substance >rather than the supposed source of the lessons. So let”s talk about >the substance.
?I”m probably not a good one to comment on the “substance” (or lack thereof) of the “messages” — I continue to find them quite mediocre when compared with other such materials. I am somewhat baffled by the fact that supposedly serious readers of the UB are finding them to be of such high value and can only conclude that these individuals are not particularly well-read in the area of religious and theological literature. It reminds me of when we used to get really stoned and would sit and be awed by the universe we observed in the rainbow colors of an oil slick on a mud puddle.
?There”s nothing I can see in any of these “messages” which is new or which in any way illuminates anything we already know. As far as I can tell, they are run-of-the-mill channeled messages not unlike those which I can find cluttering the shelves in my local new-age bookstore. They certainly don”t come close to the quality of the material in The Urantia Book, or even such work as that of Key Keyes, Edgar Cayce, Buba Free John, or some of the material coming from the pop psychology and self-help authors. The “messages” pale in comparison with the writings of people like Paramahansa Yogananda or the Hindu poet Abindranath Tagore. So what”s so special about these messages? I”ve seen nothing in them that merits any special attention.
?But this is only my personal opinion about the quality of the messages. Let”s consider your argument which I take to be “The channelers can be justified if you overlook all the claims made by them and just consider the content of the messages.”
?I previously used the illustration of modern agriculture which can be fully justified by considering the number of people who are being saved from starvation and malnutrition. However, when one enlarges the picture and we see the destruction of top soil, the pollution of air and groundwater and the depletion of natural resources which such an approach creates, it begins to be seen in a different light. I could provide many such examples of something which seems good only when viewed from a narrowly focused set of values and which is seen as actually destructive when the context is expanded. The construction of nuclear power plants has been justified by just such a partial benefits assessment. I see the channeling in this way — if the context in which the phenomenon is understood is expanded, there are many negative elements which begin to appear, not the least of which is the potential for religious demagoguery.
?You are asking me to ignore many factors involved in the channeling and to make my evaluation on the merits of only one aspect of it. You are asking me to judge the truth of a whole on the basis of what you perceive to be the truth of a small part while asking me to ignore the greatest percentage of the information available with which I can evaluate the situation — does this strike you as a position of integrity, one which is likely to lead to a better apprehension of the truth?
?By your own admission, the “messages” have contained both truth and error and yet I have seen no clear method described for sorting out this material (although some channelers seem to be relying on what they understand to be the action of the spirit of truth to relieve them from the responsibility of developing their ability to discern truth from error). How do you reconcile this admitted content of error with such statements from the UB as, “What heaven appoints is without error…” or Jesus” statement that “There can be no peace between truth and error?” On page 1109 we find that “the authoritative elimination of error” is one of the primary purposes of epochal revelation. Note that this does not say “the spread of a diffuse mix of truth and error which you can sort out for yourselves” which is precisely what you are telling me the channeled messages are.
?>I believe that the true message is coming through loud and clear and >it is a good one. A personal relationship with the Father. Becoming >a conduit for His love. Tolerance for different paths. Small acts >of kindness. Reaching out to people you meet and touching them from >where they stand. Providing selfless service. The message is clear >and, in my view, absolutely true. At least it rings true to me.
?Again, Fred, the fact that individuals are writing commentary on the above topics does not lead to the conclusion that the source of the material is “celestial teachers.” You keep dodging this issue by a variety of artifices and yet the existence of the “celestial teachers” is what you are proclaiming and the experience of communing with them is what you are inviting others to participate in, yet you have offered no basis whatsoever for the validity of such a claim. As I have said before, there are many other explanations for the channeling phenomena which you are apparently ignoring without providing any explanation for doing so.
?>It is the living of Michael”s teachings that is, in my view, what is >important. Certainly the UB won”t be widely read or, if read, >accepted to influence the world unless those who see truth therein >will live their lives to reflect that truth.
?While I certainly agree with the above, I again fail to see where it supports your contention that “celestial teachers” are speaking to us through channelers. The conceptual basis of the “teaching mission” as far as I can see from your posts, continues to be a diffuse collage of relatively unrelated, unsubstantiated claims which you attempt to justify with high ideals which you”ve derived from The Urantia Book — where”s the integrity in this? Where”s the honest quest for truth?
?>I have come to believe that the only way to change this world is >through small acts of kindness. One person at a time. This must be a >grassroots effort. Everyone needs to pitch in, especially those who >have the knowledge of the UB. With that knowledge comes >responsibility. You can no longer go forward living your lives as you >have before. It is time to become a force for good. It is a time to >shine forth the Father”s love in every encounter every day for the >rest of your material life. This planet will change. It won”t happen >overnight. Each of us must do our part. The time is now. This is a >call for volunteers.
?I agree wholeheartedly with you here too, Fred, but again, this doesn”t have anything to do with channeling. If you could go forth with these ideals and as the UB says, “dare to depend solely upon Jesus and his incomparable teachings,” I could only applaud your efforts. But when you continue to espouse the spiritualistic channeling practices of the “teaching mission” I can”t take you seriously. If you truly believed what you are saying above, why would you then encumber yourself with unnecessary spiritualistic baggage which can only undermine your best efforts and your highest ideals when you go to present them to the world?
?>>It begins with the dis-integration of the >>individual psyche which is essential for the phenomenon of channeling >>to take place.
?>This statement is not borne out by the facts. Thea commented on >this and she is able to receive. I”m not, yet I know many people who >are able to receive communications and I haven”t seen any >disintegration of the individual psyche.
?Note that I used dis-integration to clearly denote something affecting integration rather than an “explosion” of some sort. The dis-integration to which I referred is the necessary compartmentalization of the psyche without which channeling could not be possible. Much literature and no small amount of research from the field of psychology would indicate that such compartmentalization is not only undesirable but symptomatic of a serious underlying disorder. It certainly is not consistent with the call I find in the UB to be about the business of integrating and unifying our inner experience. I”ve worked personally with a number of schizophrenic and psychotic individuals, not one of whom was able to recognize their own dysfunction. The fact that “Thea commented on this and is able to receive” tells us nothing other than that Thea believes her experience is not delusional. Would we expect any channeler to believe otherwise? Again, this is *testimony* and not an *argument*.
?You state that the “teaching mission” is based on the UB — please clarify this and state just what it is in the UB upon which the tm is based. Please also tell us what leads you to accept the conclusion that “celestial teachers” are channeling information through mortals in the manner which you have described.
?>With respect to the first part of your above statement, the >teaching mission does not encourage isolation.
?While the tm may not overtly encourage isolation, the premises upon which it is based will more than likely result in isolation because they are so far removed from what is known about reality in the culture you are supposedly going to uplift. You”ve already seen individuals flee urantial to tml because they wanted to communicate without people drawing attention to their illusions and fallacious assumptions. This is what I mean by isolation. Take a look at the general social status of channelers — are they well integrated into a variety of human communities such as family, church, professional organizations, community organizations, political lobbying groups, etc., or are they relatively socially isolated?
?>No one is encouraged by the teaching mission to leave any religious >institutions. In fact, the teachers ask that we continue to do what >we have been doing, but with a new attitude. An attitude of service. >To point out the best in the institutions that we attend and >encourage them to expand on those higher concepts. All of this is to >be done primarily throught our actions and behavior.
?Again, all of these high sounding ideals are like fancy wallpaper covering a basically rotten framework. The Urantia Book provides a coherent framework based on the investment our culture already has in the Judeo-Christian symbol set.
?If all you”re really concerned about is the spread of the message, of what additional value to the world are the precepts of the “teaching mission” beyond what is provided in the UB? Imo the conceptual packaging of the message in the UB is far superior to that attempted by the tm — why attempt to propagate them with such an inferior conceptual vehicle?
?>> through their >> acceptance of practices which are widely regarded as indicative of >> serious psycho/social pathologies.
?>This is a bandwagon fallacy. Because something is “widely regarded” >as anything is really saying that most people think “a” therefore >because you think “b” you are wrong. I don”t buy that.
?In spite of the fact that the logic in my argument may indeed be an example of a “bandwagon fallacy” it nevertheless is descriptive of a mode of response pervasive in our culture. The UB does a good job of packaging all the teachings we need within the context of acceptability to main-line Judeo-Christian thought. The thing which is so elegant about the UB as an epochal revelation is that it expands but works within the existing paradigm — it does not take a renunciate position requiring us to accept a radically new world view. I think we need to consider this very carefully.
?The planetary situation is fragile, time is precious; social, political, moral, economic and environmental deterioration is occurring all around us at an alarming rate. We need to carefully interject this new truth contained within the fifth epochal revelation into the cultural mainstream as quietly and effectively as possible so as not to do further damage and cause additional suffering before its healing effect can start working. The basic gospel of the Kingdom which you have articulated can be well formulated and spread in this context. Again, learning to rely “solely on Jesus and his incomparable teachings” strikes me as the best possible course both for our individual personal salvation and for any attempt to serve and uplift the planet on which we find ourselves.
?>”Serious psycho/social pathologies” is also an ad hominem abusive >fallacy, ie the people are crazy therefore the message must be wrong. >I also reject that as incorrect.
?I think you”re blurring the distinction of just what constitutes an “ad hominem abusive fallacy.” Such a fallacy is the pointing to some quality of an individual and using that quality as a basis for rejecting their argument. I would assume that, as a laywer, you would have an appreciation for the big difference between an *argument* set forth by an individual and *testimony* offered by an individual. In considering the claims of the tm we are forced to deal with *testimony* simply because no tenable arguments have yet been put forth in support of tm claims. Thus I have no choice but to consider the background and character of the person offering such claims. Isn”t establishing the credibility of a witness a critical matter in a legal proceeding?
?If a known liar is giving testimony we must take that quality of the person into consideration when considering what he/she is saying. So far no solid arguments have been offered in support of channeling — only testimony. Therefore I would maintain that the possibility that channeling may well be representative of “serious psycho/social pathologies” is a valid and important element in considering the testimony of channelers.
?You are asking us to look beyond arguments to the testimony and experience of individuals but then you also want us to not consider the nature of the individuals reporting the experience. Where”s the integrity in this, or do you feel that consistency is as irrelevant to the tm position as intellectual integrity? If you have a specific argument to offer in support of channeling, please post it and let”s consider it. If you want us to only focus on the testimony of individuals, I”m going to be very picky about the individual whose testimony I am willing to believe accurately represents reality.
?Incicentally, it”s interesting to observe how Byron, Thea, Jesse and many others and now Joyce, divert attention away from issues I raise by pointing to some characteristic of my person, in these cases my supposed pain. The amount of inner pain which I may or may not have should in no way impinge on the integrity of the arguments which I have offered to support my view that the tm is nothing more than a creation of the imagination of its adherents. What about the issues, folks? Why haven”t any of you followed up on the issues? Why do you think your position is so special that it transcends any need to be rationally integrated with the rest of human thought? Is the posting of projected fantasies about my supposed pain the best response you can make to the issues I”ve raised? If people took the time to inquire of someone who knows me personally they would find that such projections of my supposed pain are indeed nothing more than their own fantasies.
?>> The tm dis-integration continues >> with it”s complete isolation from even the most basic psychological, >> philosophic, religious or scientific thought of our day.
?> I don”t know what you mean by this…
?OK. Let me be more specific. The tm is isolated and dis-integrated from the best psychological thought of the past century in that it refuses to either consider or offer a counter argument to views of channeling based on current understandings of psychology which would place channeling phenomena in a class of social pathologies with well-established antecedents in early childhood abuse. The tm simply assumes that it transcends such considerations and fails to provide any reconciliation with well-established data which would refute it”s claims.
?The tm is isolated and dis-integrated from virtually all philosophic and religious thought of our day in that it fails to establish viable conceptual links between it”s foundational tenents and the views commonly accepted in today”s world by such disciplines. Likewise is it guilty of gross equivocation in it”s use of Judeo-Christian symbols as well as those taken from The Urantia Book.
?The tm is isolated from the basic scientific views and thought of our day in that it refuses to employ (or tell us why it should not employ) established methodologies for establishing the truth or untruth of the phenomena which it is attempting to tell us is a reality. Indeed, the tm seems to refute the use of any defined methodology whatsoever — consider this in light of what the UB says about the value of the scientific method and rational insight as essential tools for the development of the inner life.
?It”s isolated, Fred, and dis-integrated from just about everything in the world except the psyches of its adherents. I challenge you to show me how it is rationally connected and integrated with these essential foundational domains of human experience.
?>By the way “retrograde religious movement” is not only unnecessarily >derogatory but it is also not accurate. This is not a religious >movement. The teaching mission is a spiritual mission and ministry.
?Aren”t you again blurring distinctions here, Fred? Once any individual formulates a thought about his/her spiritual experience, a religion is born. When you are telling people to practice the “stillness” you are propagating a religious practice. When you are telling people that the rebellion is over and that “celestial teachers” have arrived on the planet to teach and heal, you are propagating a religious dogma. You are, by definition, propagating a religious movement. I consider this movement retrograde because it has as its central participational ritual and prime referent a spiritualistic practice which harkens back to centuries past and seeks to abandon individual responsiblity for intellectual integrity to the authority of “teachers” and channelers and the beneficence of a mis-conceived Spirit of Truth.
?>It [the tm] is about your personal relationship with the Father.
?I don”t think this is true either, Fred. Based on what appears hereon as well as in other places, the emphasis seems to be more on whose study group has what teacher and which t/r is providing the most spiritually relevant material, whose messages confirm someone else”s messages and a healthy measure of mutual reinforcemnt. While I have seen many transcripts posted, we virtually never see any discussions about the material itself. Always are the discussions about the movement and the channeling phenomena. No, based on my observations I would say that in spite of all the rhetoric to the contrary, the tm is *not* about our personal relationship with the Father but is more about participating in something special, something secret and exciting, about being a part of a chosen group. It is about imagining that one is a part of the reserve corps and being involved in a social network which reinforces these religious fantasies.
?Fred, thanks for taking the time to share your personal thoughts on these issues. I look forward to your response and to continued association with you as we each do our best to make maximum use of our few short years here for the Father”s purposes.
11 Feb 1994 ???Wayne Ferrier ?????Brain Domain and Stuff
Subject: Brain Domain and Stuff
?I fall under the school that believes that the right brain is an exceptional tuning capacitor for various domain of free quanta. I believe that just as the Seraphim, mentioned in the UB, act as a time-space shield for novice personality in the domain of the power range so the right brain acts as a buffer against the onslought of sensory overload in the mindscape.
?I believe that the left is less partial to hedonistic inclination, too busy shuttling data, using acetylcholine channels as if they are buses during processing. I believe the dopamine channels of the reticular formation are the most interesting candidates for tracking material-creatural evolutionary origin-of-consciousness. The emergence of me. Ahhhh! [ :
?The UB says we were designed with the two brain type and this allows us to function more imaginatively then the one brain type; I don”t believe that the bicameral mind broke down so much as it is in a phase right now. I”d like to study its effect on the social arena of world population now that we have the field of complexity as an added tool. Am I there yet? No way. But thanks for mentioning Jaynes, now that I look back on it the lecturer was into audacious theorems and he did mention Jaynes.
11 Feb 1994 ???Thea Hardy ??????Comments to David K.
Subject: Comments to David K. In-Reply-To: [199402111809.KAA21732@CSOS.ORST.EDU]
?If you criticize tm adherents on psychological grounds, it is probably not invalid or unjust for them to criticize your positions on psychological grounds either. I notice that there are no agreed upon “rules of engagement”, no common definitions of things like “truth”, etc, etc. Without things of this sort, no argument is going to be effective. You have chosen to believe that your experience was delusional, and hence so must ours be. I can understand this argument, but it is not particularly valid. I also have yet to meet an uncompartmentalized person. And what does one make of the superconscious as a compartment? Perhaps you would feel more comfortable if the TM claimed that the messages came from the superconscious. For all I know, maybe they do. Personally, I don”t expect absolute truth from the UB. Or from anything short of the Father. And I don”t expect it from the tm experience, of which much takes place at the time of transmissions, where non-verbal aspects do enter in. If you want absolute truth on this planet, you are SOL for the most part. Sometimes it appears as though you believe that you somehow have it, yet I know that you do not believe that at all. What would happen if you just tried forgiving us for our apparent delusion and loved us anyway? Kind of doing like Michael did – pointing out what is correct in our position and expanding on it. When you first began taking me to task for the TM all those months ago, it was difficult for me. I really tried to have a relationship with you. I did not see that our differences were as important as our commonalities. I cared about you then, and I care about you now. But I have been forbidden approach because I believe something that you do not agree with. And there is nothing I can do about it. Except continue to love you. And I do.
?I think that there is no way you could possibly put up such an amount of words in such a tone unless there were not a part of you that believes in the tm to some degree, or longs to. You know what it was like to receive messages. It is hard to accept these messages and have to admit to the human error. It would be easier to blame the error on delusion. But I am not comfortable doing that. I know with everything in me that something is going on here that is deeply the will of the Father. You can say that I am beside myself, but I trust in the Father and in my enhanced experience with him. I am one of those people who was rational enough to a fault such that this would not have been expected. But I have had to face and sort through this entire experience with more depth than anything I have yet done in my life. I am watching my entire life come together and make meaning. I am watching the lives of associates do the same thing. I would have to deny everything I know of truth, beauty and goodness to deny this experience. It might be more comfortable to do that, because this TM has brought nothing but endless challenges. And in facing them, I have learned courage I never had. I have learned to turn to the Father in ways I never did. I have found self-respect, a clarity of mind, a freedom of creative expression, a depth of conceptual grasp, a life! I am not going to turn away from all the best things of my life.
?TO him who has ears, let him hear. My experience is not open to the judgment of any but Him who made me. I may receive it, but I need not be moved by it. Let it be said by any that I am beside myself. What I know is that I am beside my Master. I serve him and I will continue to serve him. And I am learning to fear not.
?Peace, David. You cannot change this. Intellectual arguments are not the core of that big blue book”s meanings.
11 Feb 1994 ???David Kantor ?????PS to Thea
Subject: PS to Thea
?Your response entitled “Response to David K” while heard and appreciated, is a classic example of tm responses to criticism — you have utterly failed to respond to a single issue which I raised and have instead responded emotionally to me as a person and played to the sentiments of the folks here on the list.
?While I agree that “intellectual arguments are not the core of that big blue book”s meanings,” that big blue book does say on page 69 that “No matter how valid (real) religious experience is, it must be willing to subject itself to intelligent criticism and reasonable philosophic interpretation…”
?As far as I can see, the tm has utterly failed to meet this minimal requirement, clearly revealing its intellectual bankruptcy. You seem to be completely satisfied with such a choice, which is fine with me. I appreciate your candor in admitting as much.
?This is not a personal matter and I am well aware that you are not your thoughts. Likewise do I recognize a deep love of God in your writing and assume that perhaps your inner experience transcends your desire to intellectualize it. I simply feel that if tmers are going to make public claims about their experience that they have a responsibility to Michael, to the planet, and to all of us to be very careful about the formulations of ritual and dogma which they set in motion. I simply find this lack of concern at a time of such great planetary crisis and opportunity to be disturbing.
End Part 9