© 1985 Maureen Cragg, Debra York, David Glass, James Johnson
© 1985 The Urantia Book Fellowship (formerly Urantia Brotherhood)
While it is not the practice of The JOURNAL to print letters, the article which follows is written in that form to convey its meaning in a personally powerful way. Thanks from all of us for a very important reminder. The Editors.
Dear Brother:
It’s always good to hear from you. I like to know what’s going on at home and at the office.
But is life not more than comings and goings and resolutions and documents? Tell me, how is your sister in California? Is she being healed from her distress?
You know I’m always interested in your theological studies — it is an interest which you and I share. But you did not tell me how reading that last book affected you for good, or to what application it might be useful. Please understand me, brother, I don’t think that I’m stupid. It’s just that I don’t always have time to dig through a monument I treatise before I know what it’s FOR.
The family in this area is struggling as usual-each one individually to get by. In fact, cousin Harvey is still not speaking to Cousin Irving. Tell me, brother, in your communications with our other cousins and brothers, have any shared with you a similar problem-lack of leadership or even lack of relationship — that you might be able to apply to our situation here? Our Creator Son patiently supported all kinds of persons through many kinds of troubles. If there were just some way we could do that for each other more, in spite of our differing locations, we could truly lighten each other’s loads.
— Maureen Cragg
Arlington, Virginia
We gratefully acknowledge the thoughtful responses to the questions we posed in previous issues of The JOURNAL. We would like to share those which follow with you. The Editors
Some of the obvious problems that occur when humans personalize or humanize their concept of God is to give human attributes to Him. Since we as humans feel anger, righteous indignation, fear, jealousy, hatred, and all manner of negative emotions, we picture God reacting to us in a similar manner. Also, it has been proved by psychologists that human beings tend to relate to God, their Heavenly Father, in the same way they relate to their earthly fathers. Since God is given a male connotation, we relate to him as though he were a male figure. So if an individual had a challenging relationship with men, particularly an earthly father, or if one found that he or she could not depend on him, or had a lack of trust in him, then it would be likely to transfer these same negative feelings of distrust, etc., to a relationship with the Heavenly Father. Very often this creates barriers to allowing a close personal relationship to develop between the person and the Heavenly Father because there is so much fear involved. If we instead understand that God is neither male nor female, and does not have our negative human reactions, this will help eliminate the fear and blockages we put up unconsciously.
—Debra York
Memphis, Tennessee
I must admit that I have been stopped by this usual diction before. The use of the term, “stupid,” seemed to me a little out of character for our unseen friends who, ordinarily, are so tactful and loving when referring to our state of lowly existence, limited intellectual endowments, and finite spirit comprehension. Part of what is “stupid” about mechanizing the concept of the First Source and Center must be, I think, in reference to what our friends have written in other parts of The URANTIA Book. For example, they tell us that the very ability of a human to suggest or construct a universal mechanistic philosophy of reality is already, self-evidently, and demonstrably performing an intellectual exercise which itself transcends the abilities, if any, of inanimate nature of totally mechanized world-view. We have all noticed how this obvious statement has escaped many of the physical nature students and theorizers of the 19th and early 20th centuries.
Even today, the book following another by the same author, Fred Alan Wolf, is entitled Star Wave and it is an attempt to explain mental functions and consciousness itself in terms of physical mechanics. Wolf’s earlier book, Taking the Quantum Leap, had won the Pulitzer Prize in non-fiction and was an explanation of the nature of quantum mechanics. Now this field of quantum theory is enshrouded in more mystery than ever relatively, but its central idea is that conscious examiners of nature distort and disorder physical reality in the very act of attempting to observe it. Thus, mechanistic philosophy is still with us.
— David Glass
Fort Worth. Texas
To meet the religious challenge of this age it would first seem appropriate to distinguish between a religious and non-religious philosophy of living — the difference being in the nature of level of recognized values and in the object of loyalties, as pointed out by a Melchizedek: “There are four phases in the evolution of religious philosophy: Such as experience may become merely conformative, resigned to submission to tradition and authority. Or it may be satisfied with slight attainments, just enough to stabilize the daily living, and therefore becomes early arrested on such an adventitious level. Such mortals believe in letting well enough alone. A third group progress to the level of logical intellectuality but there stagnate in consequence of cultural slavery. It is indeed pitiful to behold giant intellects held so securely within the cruel grasp of cultural bondage. It is equally pathetic to observe those who trade their cultural bondage for the materialistic fetters of a science, falsely so called. The fourth level of philosophy attains freedom from all conventional and traditional handicaps and dares to think, act, and live honestly, loyally, fearlessly, and truthfully.” (UB 101:7.4) The last sentence of this quote directly relates to the original question with regard to the construction of a “…new and appealing philosophy of living…” (UB 2:7.10). Both quotes use the verb dare which implies that the religous teachers of this age must have sufficient. courage to implement this fourth level of philosophy.
— James (JJ) Johnson
Saudi Arabia
Your responses to the questions posed in past issues have been wonderful — thoughtful, insightful — and we hope they have been of use to Journal readers, While we will keep publishing writings generated from past questions, here’s another one to keep your mental energies stimulated. A Divine Counselor, writing in Paper 5 about God’s relation to the individual, says:
“The material self has personality and identity, temporal identity; the pre-personal spirit Adjuster also has identity, eternal identity, This material personality and this spirit prepersonality are capable of so uniting their creative attributes as to bring into existence the surviving identity of the immortal soul.” (UB 5:6.7)
Question
How are these creative attributes actually united?
“When we are tempted to magnify our self-importance, if we stop to contemplate the infinity of the greatness and grandeur of our Makers, our own self-glorification becomes sublimely ridiculous, even verging on the humorous. One of the functions of humor is to help all of us take ourselves less seriously. Humor is the divine antidote for exaltation of ego.” (UB 48:4.15)