Evolution Of Thinking
I want to repeat that it does not bother me if anyone here disagrees with me or sincerely challenges me so long as the motive is pure and we keep the conversation on a friendly level.
The group has provided me with enough material for a book of late so I will try and hone down my post to some essence and hope to cover more details and questions later.
I found a reader’s comments interesting. His thinking seemed to go something like this.
A lot of what I teach has been verified through his soul which causes him to give a lot of weight to things I teach that he has not received verification on. He has concluded that if I teach a thing to be true it is because I have seen (or at least think I see) the principles thereof through the soul. He therefore takes the attitude that if I give out something that runs contrary to what he has believed in the past that he should not give in to the natural impulse of immediate rejection. Instead, he gives it some weight and tries to see where the teaching leads him.
So what should one do if he has found a lot of value in many of my teachings and then is hit by something that throws him for a loop? What if my words oppose a belief one has deemed sacred and true throughout his life? Should he immediately oppose me and seek to set me straight? This of course will be the line of action for one who has not received soul verification on any of my teachings. But if he has received such verification on some things what then?
Perhaps it would help to describe what I do. When an earned authority makes a statement contrary to my belief system the natural man within me immediately rejects it. When I feel this rejection, I pause and then listen to the earned authority and the natural man within duke it out and examine the results. I then tell the natural man to hold his peace and ask myself this question. This teacher has been proven right on many occasions; is it possible he is correct on this one also? Is it possible that my long-held belief is an illusion and I have not seen correctly?
After asking this question I then would seek to make sure I understand the teacher correctly. Maybe I am misunderstanding him and we do not disagree after all. Or maybe we do disagree and I do not understand his insights or full reasoning around the subject. Maybe if I understood how he is seeing things I would change my mind.
At this point, if the teacher is available, before even voicing disagreement I would ask questions of clarification. I would make sure I accurately understand how he thinks on the subject and his reasons for such thinking. Then when it becomes obvious that the teaching is in definite conflict with my strong belief, I may challenge him and see how he responds to my reasoning.
For instance, my post about creating money backed by labor went against the belief of many and I was asked where this idea came from?
The evolution of my thinking on money began back in the Seventies when I was still a member and strong supporter of the Mormon Church. The doctrine of the church is that the U.S. Constitution is inspired of God. The church does not see the Constitution as infallible but its creation was motivated through the will of God. Therefore, whatever is literally in the Constitution carries a lot of weight with the LDS, particularly the portion of the members who take the revelations and teachings of Joseph Smith seriously.
I was first jarred into thinking about money when, around this time period, I came across conspiracy minded people and writings in and out of the church who saw the Constitution as being close to infallible.
I was quoted Article I, Section 8, Clause 5 of The Constitution that states that Congress has the “power to coin money” and furthermore Article I, Section 10, Clause 1 specifies that “No State shall … coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debt.”
Then I was told that there was a conspiracy of evil bankers who created the Federal Reserve and took us off the gold standard. The thinking of these people was pretty universal in believing that we should return to the gold standard.
My thinking of the time was that if the gold and silver standards were in the Constitution yes, we should abide by them and they must represent a correct principle since the Constitution was inspired.
I was open to conspiracy thinking at the time but not convinced that the bankers or shadow government were such all-powerful manipulators as these people believed.
Then one day I was talking to an older friend in the church who was somewhat fringe in his thinking and a local outcast. He told me the story of Lincoln’s greenbacks and then explained to me how Lincoln took power away from the bankers by issuing interest free money. He then said that if you figure the interest saved by the greenbacks since that time the savings amounted to many billions. He then told me that Lincoln was killed because he defied the bankers in issuing the greenbacks.
I found this interesting, but in listening I also heard a message from my soul. It told me that there was truth to be had in contemplating the greenbacks.
This was a time period when I was contemplating many things that was out of the box that lead to me getting kicked out of the church in 1978. By that time I had no sacred cows. I was born again with a clean slate and the church, the scriptures, the Constitution were all suspect as being fallible and must be reexamined, not based on interpretation of outer authorities, but by the inner authority of the soul. From 1970 to 1980 I changed my mind on many things and sometime in the latter Seventies I formulated my views on money, not from any particular writer but merely what made sense to my mind and soul.
Note: A full explanation of the Greenback and the possible creation of something similar today can be found in my book – Fixing America – available on Amazon.
“There are three kinds of men. The ones that learn by readin’. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.” — Will Rogers
PS: Actually, there is a fourth kind that learns through the language of the soul — the language of principles.
Feb 26, 2008
JJ’s Amazon page HERE
Check out JJ’s Facebook Group HERE
Follow JJ on Twitter @JosephJDewey HERE
Check out JJ’s videos on TikTok HERE