© 1993 Ken Glasziou
© 1993 ANZURA, Australia & New Zealand Urantia Association
Ken Glasziou, Maleny, Queensland
According to The URANTIA Book, the Adamic default was more disastrous for us than the Lucifer rebellion. The reason — we missed out on having our genes upgraded, we have a gross deficiency of the violet race genes. These would have made us taller and increased the duration of our lives, but neither attribute has any obvious deleterious repercussions. The big loss seems to have been our potential for spiritual growth (UB 34:7.4).
The book tells us that this loss can be at least partially negated:
“Jesus showed mankind the new way of mortal living whereby human beings may very largely escape the dire consequences of the Caligastia rebellion and most effectively compensate for the deprivations resulting from the Adamic default.” (UB 34:7.6)
The ‘way’ that Jesus showed us was, of course, his life and the way he lived. The book tells us:
“To follow Jesus means to personally share his religious faith and to enter into the spirit of the Master’s life of unselfish service for man. One of the most important things in human living is to find out what Jesus believed, to discover his ideals, and to strive for the achievement of his exalted life purpose. Of all human knowledge, that which is of greatest value is to know the religious life of Jesus and how he lived it.” (UB 196:1.3)
Apparently the apostle Philip was especially lacking in spirituality and needed some extra instruction. After the resurrected Jesus had told Philip that eventually he would be blessed with spiritual vision and do great work, he gave Philip this admonition:
“In the meantime, become as a little child in the kingdom of the spirit and permit me, as the spirit of the new teacher, to lead you forward in the spiritual kingdom. And in this way will I be able to do much for you which I was not able to accomplish when I sojourned with you as a mortal of the realm.” (UB 181:2.20)
Philip’s spiritual vision would come only after he received the Spirit of Truth.
Since Pentecost, the bringing of the gift of spiritual vision has been a major function of the Spirit of Truth. But the book reminds us that the Spirit of Truth does not make us conscious of himself. Rather, he increases our consciousness of Jesus (UB 194:2.4). How can we enhance that consciousness?
An insight into the answer to this question is provided by Charles M. Sheldon in a book entitled ‘In His Steps’ that has a place on the list of the top ten best selling books for all time.
It was first published in 1895 and is set in the U.S.A. in a typical industrialized city for that time. The industrial revolution had bifurcated society into a large, povertystricken, slum-dwelling, whisky-drinking working class, living in sin and squalor, and a smaller, church-going, wealthy upper class living in self-righteous isolation. An unusual incident induced the minister from one of the wealthiest churches in the city to commit himself for a whole year to live his life with all of his actions based upon what he believed Jesus would do in the same circumstances. Many parishioners felt challenged to do the same. Other church congregations followed suit. The result was that, in a multitude of different situations, people were asking themselves, “What would Jesus have done”. The book tells the story of their experiences.
Many modern readers will wonder how this book ever became a best seller. Its description of the social conditions and the attitudes within society in 1895 seem unrealistic — even naive. But maybe this is only so because enough people really did respond to the challenge to change society by asking themselves that vital question “What would Jesus do ?” Far fetched! Perhaps not — after all, the book is a best seller of all time.
Following the receipt of first news in Australia of the split between the Urantia Brotherhood and the Urantia Foundation, pressure was exerted on many of us to make a stand for one side or the other. For reasons unknown to me, in discussion I insisted on applying the criterion “What would Jesus have done?” to information about the actions of both parties — with unfavourable results for both. I was told by some (including a Foundation trustee) that this cannot be done in the real world. Initially, the same response was given by the majority of church-goers described in Sheldon’s book. But later, they discovered otherwise.
What would Jesus really have done in the circumstances of the myriad of problems that have confronted members of the Urantia movement over the last half century? Just for the asking, the Spirit of Truth is available to make us conscious of what Jesus’ attitude would be — and to grant us spiritual vision.
Some of the movement’s problems appear to have their origin in the concept that the morality of any action is determined by its underlying motive, an attitude that quickly deteriorates into the Machiavellian dictum that “the end justifies the means”. Historians have been able to show that many altruistically-based projects for the betterment of human society have come to grief when the use of unworthy means was assumed to be justified on the basis of the ends being worthy.
Among the fallen were the ambitions of Machiavelli for the unification of Italy, and the reconstruction of society by idealistic socialists and communists. Currently we see the foundering of many movements that have adopted the Machiavellian dictum. In the last century, the Marx-Engels manifesto made that concept its official policy for the world revolution of the working classes. This movement originated in response to the pressure of appalling social injustice. Starting from the highly worthy motive “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need” it finally degenerated into the bestiality of the Stalin regime, and the communist regimes in, for example, Rumania and Red China.
Historians have been able to show that many altruistically-based projects for the betterment of human society have come to grief when the use of unworthy means was assumed to be justified on the basis of the ends being worthy.
The adoption of the principle of the end justifies the means in the Urantia movement is evident as early as 1955 in documents in the files of the Executive Committee of the URANTIA Brotherhood. One such document states: “We have been instructed to remain silent concerning aught we may know about the origin of The URANTIA Book throughout the remainder of our lives”. Then, discussing another document in preparation that would cite only those passages in the book itself that comment on origin, the authors recommend “that we blast as unfactual any other statements which may be made by any person”. Though the motive may have been praiseworthy, the recommendation was to tell lies.
Then there was the deceit concerning the obtaining and maintaining of the copyright and trademarks, the deceit associated with unwarranted textual alterations made to the book, the lies being told and unethical practices being used in a current court case — all justified by supposedly worthy motives. It seems that the use of unworthy means to gain what are deemed to be worthy ends acts like a malignant cancer generating evil in a geometrical progression.
What would Jesus have done? Quite frankly, if such acts were really authorized by celestial authority then I personally would have no desire to proceed to the mansion worlds and beyond. But I do not believe that my soul is in the slightest danger. I simply refuse to believe that any kind of improper action could have had divine authorization — regardless of the supposed worthiness of the motive.
“What would Jesus have done?” Let’s take another look in The URANTIA Book for guidance. When the soldiers came to arrest Jesus at Gethsemene, all the disciples except John ran for cover. Hiding among the olive trees as Jesus is led away, I can imagine myself being in Peter’s position and thinking to myself: “How can I help my beloved Master — what can I do? Nothing — except to follow at a distance that ensures I am not observed. But better get rid of this sword — incriminating evidence.”
“I follow to the gate of the palace of Annas. John sees me at the entrance. He knows the girl at the gate and tells her to let me into the courtyard. She does so but then she comes and asks me if I am one of Jesus’ disciples when she knows full well that I am. What could I do? So I deny it. Then she wants to torment me and asks again so everyone can hear. I deny it with much swearing and cursing to emphasize my point. Later another servant puts it to me and again I have to pretend not to know Jesus, to deny him. I couldn’t do anything else, could I? But I wish I had not been forced to use that bad language in denying him.”
I have often given serious thought to what I really would have done in Peter’s place. To be honest, I think if I had been Peter, I would have done much the same. I probably would have convinced myself that my motive was the highest — to help Jesus. I could not have done that by hiding like a coward among the olive trees. And if I had declared myself in that courtyard, I would have been arrested. What good would that have achieved? So I did what was expedient — nothing wrong with that.
Then I see Jesus as he is led away. “Oh, my God! Why did Jesus look at me like that? Doesn’t the end sometimes justify the means?” (UB 184:2.8)
The book says:
“It requires a great and noble character, having started out wrong, to turn about and go right. All too often one’s own mind tends to justify continuance in the path of error when once it is entered upon.” (UB 184:2.12)
It is inconceivable that the Spirit of Truth would guide us to deliberately embrace unworthy means to attain a goal. Eve tried it and reaped both rebuke and genetic disaster for the rest of us. Because of that, our inherent potential for spiritual growth and spiritual vision is extremely limited.
If we are to overcome our genetic deficiencies it seems that we have two things to do. We need to know the life of Jesus. We can get that from the book. At the same time we need to get in closer touch with the Spirit of Truth. Having realized these objectives, is there a better way to put them into effect than that recommended in Sheldon’s book? That is to ask: “What would Jesus have done?” Then doing it.