2010 April-Dec – Page 9

UFOs

March 1, 2010December 28, 2010 Joseph Dewey

This entry is part 47 of 62 in the series 2010

Posted Oct 5, 2010
I see there has been a revived interest in UFOs and aliens here and Alex has posted a link to an unusual book on the subject.

One problem we have on this subject is that very few principles are involved when discussing it and we’re left to speculate as to whether or not data is true.

Outside of receiving a revelation from God how is one to know whether or not data is true, especially if the data is in the realm of that which is possible?

Let us say that someone says that there are 100 planets within 20 light years on which there is life. How can anyone know for sure if this is true unless some very superior life form reveals it? And then if someone claims to have such a revelation from a superior life form how do we know if he is telling the truth or delusional?

We do not. But one thing we do know is this. Two contradictory statements cannot both be true. Either there is life on Mars or there is not. Either there are planets around Sirius or there is not. Either I am sitting in my chair typing this or I am not.

There are numerous writings out there on aliens and UFOs and many of them are in contraction of each other. This tells us that most of them are not correct along with the possibility that all of them are fabricated or illusionary.
So when we examine any writing or philosophy we look for harmony. We look for teachings that do not contradict that which we know to be true.

We also look for teachings that are in harmony with that which we internally sense to be true that seem to comply with true principles.

Logically, then what are some common concepts about aliens that comply with true principles and logic? There are several.

The universe is a very big place so statistically there has to be life on other planets. What percentage of solar systems have human like life is difficult to guess. Most scientists think it will be less than one out of a thousand. Some think it could be one out of 100,000. A handful think we could be alone in the universe.
Since it is most logical to assume that there is life on other planets it is also logical to assume that some of that life has been around for a very long time and evolved to a point that they would seem to be gods to us.

It is logical to assume that some of them have developed spacecraft. But according to the accepted laws of physics nothing physical can go faster than light. Therefore any transporting from one star to another would have to be in a non physical craft that can go faster than light.

In fact, one may logically assume that advanced beings would not even need a craft to transport themselves for they could move from star to star in a spiritual body and change places with other advanced souls on other worlds. If you were an advanced soul you may be contacted by someone from Acturus who wants to switch bodies with you so he can check out the earth. You agree and after the switch you find yourself on the planet Zercon circling around the sun Arcturus while the other guy is trying things out in your body on earth.

I took a look at the posted book “Intelligent Design.” It has some interesting things. Unfortunately, it has a lot of data that no one can prove one way or another. Even if the guy made the whole thing up some parts will be true and others false. But, the guy claimed to get his information from the Elohiym. So the truth is this. Either he did receive revelation from the Elohiym, or he did not.

Then there is another possibility and that is he received information from someone claiming to be of the Elohiym, but is an imposter.

I took a look at the book looking for clues and a number of red flags went up. Here are some.

(1) Almost all the Biblical history is explained in terms of alien interaction when virtually none of known provable history has such a connection. This doesn’t seem logical.

A lot of the things in the book have been written in other sources. For instance I first read the theory that the tower of Babel was an attempted spaceship in the writings of the Christian minister Herbert W. Armstrong. I read it in the Sixties and I think he wrote it in the Fifties.

This is of course, a possibility, but who knows unless one gets a revelation on it.

(2) Powerful claim of authority. He claims to be the Jesus of this era and was conceived by the same father in the same manner that Jesus was. This says to “follow me because of who I am” rather than what I teach.

(3) He says that Mankind is “a disease of the universe.”

This opposes my teaching that humans are the soul of the universe and will ultimately be a healing and great creative force. Which teaching feels best to your internal self?

He does correctly point out that we are in danger of nuclear war but thinks the chances are great that we will destroy ourselves completely. I think some of humanity will survive no matter what happens and they will eventually learn their lessons.

(4) He says there is no God, but only advanced humans. He doesn’t realize there is One Great Life permeating the universe.

(5) There are a number of things that defy logic. For instance he says that the Elohiym live on a giant solar system one light year from earth and the planet they live on is 44 billion miles from their sun.

The problem is there are no suns within four light years of the earth. Someone asked about this and he gives a convoluted answer that makes no sense.

Here’s another thing. If their planet is 44 billion miles from their sun this puts it farther away from their sun than is Pluto from ours. Pluto is so far away that the temperature is 390 degrees below zero. Their sun would have to be gigantic indeed to warm a planet that far away up to seventy degrees or higher. If such a sun was a light year away it would be brighter than the moon is in the sky. Since we do not see a star in the sky that is brighter than the moon then obviously there is no such giant star one light year away, or even ten light years away.

Here is my thinking on Aliens and UFOs. Internally I sense that I am to not concern myself with them as they will not be interfering with the affairs of humanity or influence anything that I will be attempting to do. If humanity ever gets to the point where they may completely annihilate themselves extra terrestrial forces may step in. Otherwise, we are on our own – with assistance of higher lives native to the earth.

Rob says:
You teach repeatedly about, and are such a staunch supporter of respecting free-will. Have you no stance on the topic of aliens violating human free-will on a regular basis by abducting and performing experiments on them? How can you say the aliens “will not be interfering with the affairs of humanity” when they already do? How can these aliens be so evolved yet treat humans like lab rats?

Your thoughts?

JJ
If what I’ve read about alien abductions is true then they do appear to be in violation of free will and of my teachings. If all the accounts of alien abductions are true then a lot of them seem to lack compassion and do not appear to be on the same side as the Brotherhood of Light.

The problem here is that I do not believe most of them are true physical contacts. I think the vast majority of them come from two causes.

(1) The contacting of thought forms. It’s interesting that a huge percentage of these contacts happen as the person is awakened from sleep. It’s probable that many of these were not fully awake and saw thought forms in a quasi dream state.

(2) Contacts from beings from a non physical etheric plane. Some of these who may not be linked to the Brotherhood of Light. They may have the technology to raise the vibration of an abductee to their level so they can deal with him as though it was a physical relationship on the earth.

There are several principles to consider here. First, remember that the Principle of Freedom does not mean there will be freedom in all circumstances, but it supports maximum freedom for the whole. Therefore the burglar does not have freedom to invade your home because if he is free to do this the whole is diminished.

Another principle is that there is a time, purpose and exception for everything.

Now let us suppose that the aliens see that our direction will wipe out the human race and they may be able to save us if they perform a few experiments on abductees. In this case, temporarily taking away the freedom of several abductees will greatly enhance the freedom of the whole.

I’m not saying this is the case but if the stories are true then these beings may have a justifiable reason for what they are doing that will bring more freedom than it takes away. After all, they have superior technology, but haven’t invaded us.

It is also possible that some of these are at an ordinary state of evolution and just experimenting with us as we experiment on animals. There are many possibilities here.

It is interesting to note that a hypnotic regression is far from being proof that a contact was made. Most hypnotic subjects want to please the hypnotist and if the slightest hint is given that an alien needs to be produced then many subjects will comply. It takes a savvy hypnotist to tell the difference between real recall and falsified memories.

On a different note I happen to know the daughter of Kenneth Arnold, the first person to get major publicity from a UFO sighting. She says that he had several encounters and his full story has never been told but the various family members cannot agree on how to proceed. He got very close to one of the craft and was able to see the portals to the inside.

I never said there were not sightings before Kenneth Arnold but his was the first that brought the attention of the phenomenon to the world. After 1947 the number of sightings greatly increased.
Copyright 2010 by J J Dewey

The Second Key

March 1, 2010December 28, 2010 Joseph Dewey

This entry is part 48 of 62 in the series 2010

Posted Oct 8, 2010
Dan:
If the freedom of the whole is enhanced, abridgment of the freedoms (free-will) of individuals is just?

If so, then there are no inviolable “rights” specifically apportioned to man by God (Natural Law) and the conception that many staunch “constitutionalists” seem to have that certain unalienable rights are “set in stone”, i.e. defined a priori by God from eternity as unassailable, is incorrect.

JJ
This is a good point to bring up. To understand this as it should be the Second Key of Judgment must be brought into the equation. The use of judgment is difficult for the majority because they want black and white answers, teachings and directions.

To the black and white traditionalist the unalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is set in stone. They are God-given and that is it. End of discussion.

The words of Thomas Jefferson are very inspiring and true on the level that he meant to communicate them. Within ourselves we all feel a sense of a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. But from a larger angle of vision these right have often been violated. Sometimes they are violated for the good of the whole and sometimes for selfish purposes.

For instance, during World War II our soldiers had to take the lives of many Nazis so the freedom of the whole could be enhanced. Many of those Germans fighting for Hitler were living the best life they knew how just as you and I are, but they were caught in a terrible situation. In that situation their right to life was not unalienable and their lives were taken so the quality of the life for the billions could be enhanced.

Now let us look at Chairman Mao who felt that it was fine to sacrifice up to half his people to achieve his goals. Fortunately, he did not go that far but around 70,000,000 Chinese were starved to death, sacrificed in war or murdered by him. It seemed to such souls that they had no right to either life, or liberty or the pursuit of happiness.

Yes, outwardly that’s the way it seemed but inwardly it is different. Inwardly it seems that we should have these rights and that God has implanted that feeling within us. Because we have this basic desire within us the words of Jefferson register very strongly and their overall truth is recognized.

It’s a good thing that Jefferson wasn’t trying to be technically correct or he would have written:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident most of the time, that all men are created equal except for various circumstances and some are better looking than others, some are healthier, wiser and richer. They are basically endowed by their Creator with certain Rights that are true most of the time, that among these are Life, except when someone takes it, Liberty, except when imprisoned and the pursuit of Happiness when there are not forbidding obstacles in the way.”

You have to admit that the way the Declaration was actually wondered is a whole lot more inspiring than the technical truth.
Copyright 2010 by J J Dewey

Beginnings and Endings

March 1, 2010June 28, 2017 Joseph Dewey

This entry is part 49 of 62 in the series 2010

Posted Oct 12, 2010
Justin poses some deep thoughts:
There’s been this question nagging on my mind lately and I just can’t shake it. I pose the question here because I believe you all are the only ones who would understand it well enough to give satisfying answers. I apologize that it is potentially a very gloomy subject.

It begins with a principle JJ teaches, along the lines of “anything that has a beginning must have an ending.” Well, all of the memories we create in life have a beginning. Does this mean that we will eventually forget all of our experiences? All of our leaps forward in progress have a beginning. Does this mean that we will eventually lose all our progress?

Taking the idea to its logical conclusion, it would seem that at some distant point in the future, everything will come to an end (except for God’s reflections themselves, created outside of time). Then it will be as if none of this ever happened. There would not even be a record of it anywhere.

My question to you is: Is the above an accurate assessment of our reality? Because if it is, then what’s the point of anything? Is there a better way of seeing “the big picture”? Right now it appears to me that we go through this practically endless struggle for the sole purpose of staving off God’s boredom for a time.

I would be very grateful if someone could demonstrate that my thinking is off on this one.

JJ
A book could probably be written on this subject but I’ll attempt to give a few thoughts to the group.

You write:
“All of the memories we create in life have a beginning. Does this mean that we will eventually forget all of our experiences?”

JJ
All form has a beginning and an end. Therefore that which is recorded in form will eventually reach a time that the recording instrument will lose its form and the recording will cease. This means that the memories in the body will be lost to the body.

Actually, this happens at death.

BUT…

Our memories are also recorded in higher parts of ourselves clear up to our Monads. The Monad doesn’t have form in the regular dense, as it is a point (singularity) in divine space. All of our history in this universe is stored in the various monads. If scientists are correct about the age of the universe this would mean that there are recordings going back over 14 billion years.

But even in this creation of seven, the universe is recreated many times before it becomes a part of the universe of eight. Therefore, there were many universes before this one. How far back does the record go?

If there is no end to the recording principle it means that it has always been in existence. If there was no beginning to recording as there is no beginning to the creation process then it is possible that the records of events and memories will never be lost.

It is definitely true that memories are lost temporarily even in the short run. When we are reborn on the earth we start with a blank slate, having lost all the memories of many lives. Fortunately, these memories are retrievable.

But even when we do not have an exact record of our past we do take with us a knowing which is more important than memory. When you meet a person from a past life relationship you may not have a memory of him or her, but you will have a knowing. They will seem familiar and a sensitive soul can know them well enough to pick up where they left off.

What does have a beginning and an end is the importance of specific memories. At the time one goes through an event he may think that the period was so significant that he will never want to lose it. But sometimes the importance passes in a year, sometimes ten years, sometimes a lifetime and sometimes many lifetimes. But there will come a time that current situations will far overshadow the distant past so much that the desire to return and review it will be virtually zero.

I remember back in high school I liked to buy expensive pens, but every time I bought one I would lose it in a few days. This used to drive me crazy and I often thought that when I entered the next world the first thing I was going to do was to review my life to see where the dickens those pens disappeared to.

That was very important to me back then. But now, fifty years later, my interest in this is close to zero.

What is important to us changes over time. What you see as a cherished or important memory now may not be important at all a thousand years from now and may not be seen as worthy of retrieving.

The important thing to realize is that all memories are a record of cause and effect and cause and effect is eternal without beginning and end. As I said before, there is no such thing as a first cause because cause and effect always has been in existence.

Losing my pens created effects that influenced other effects and then those effects influenced still other effects ad infinitum. This is perhaps the most important aspect of memories never completely fading out of existence.

Do you remember what you dreamed two nights ago?

Probably not and you probably never will. However, the dream seemed important to you when you were in it and it had an effect upon you that still influences you in subtle ways.

Justin asks:
All of our leaps forward in progress have a beginning. Does this mean that we will eventually lose all our progress?

JJ
There is a beginning and end to each leap but not the leaping itself. As monads bearing the quality of intelligence we have always been in intelligent motion of some kind.

If you decide to learn the multiplication tables there is a beginning and end to your endeavor. When you learn them all then you are done or at an end. Then if you become dependent on using a computer or calculator you may even reach an end in using the tables you memorized.

The same thing happens if you learn Spanish. Once you learn so much of it you reach an end to your learning. When the whole world invents a new language and no one speaks Spanish anymore then even your use of this will be at an end.

The scriptures say that the course of God is one eternal round. How many circles can be placed around the surface of a globe? The number is without limit. There is no end to the eternal rounds.

Technically there is one thing that has a beginning but no end and that is numbers. They start at zero, or one and go on without end. There is no such thing as an ultimate number.

BUT… there is always a number that is a present end point. There may be a beginning number to anything you do and there is a number to how many times you have done it, but there is no ultimate number to the number of times you can do a thing.

We are on the course of eternal lives. There is a beginning and end to each life or experience, but as eternal beings we can always go back and experience a new life. There is a number to everything we do but never an ending limiting number.

Justin:
Taking the idea to its logical conclusion, it would seem that at some distant point in the future, everything will come to an end (except for God’s reflections themselves, created outside of time). Then it will be as if none of this ever happened. There would not even be a record of it anywhere.

JJ
All your past makes you what you are in the Now. This includes your past that you have forgotten and seems as if it never was. If you are like most people you remember nothing that happened for the first two years of your life. It is as if it never happened. You never think of those two years and they have no meaning to your conscious mind. But cause and effect is eternal and during those two years there were many causes and effects that made a huge contribution to what you are in the now.

There will come a time that everything that is important to us now will not be important to our waking consciousness but the influence will always be with us helping to shape use throughout the eternities.

Justin:
…what’s the point of anything? Is there a better way of seeing “the big picture”? Right now it appears to me that we go through this practically endless struggle for the sole purpose of staving off God’s boredom for a time.

JJ
The scripture says that “man is that he might have joy.” You can’t really have much joy or happiness if you are bored to death. Joy, happiness and fulfillment come from work and activity that we enjoy. The is no enjoyment in boredom.

Between creations we all participate in preparing the new creation by designing the levels involved that the thrill of entertainment will be so great that joy will be the word to describe the feeling of accomplishment involved.

We are one with God so it is not an outside god that we are seeking to relieve from boredom, but ourselves.

And what is boredom? It is a lack of activity toward something of interest. And what is the ultimate lack of activity?

It is death.

And what is activity?

Life.

And what is the ultimate activity?

Eternal lives.

May it be so.

Index for Older Archives in the Process of Updating

Index for Recent Posts

Easy Access to All the Writings

Log on to Freeread Here

For Free Book go HERE and other books HERE

JJ’s Amazon page HERE

Gather with JJ on Facebook HERE

More Like Football

March 1, 2010December 28, 2010 Joseph Dewey

This entry is part 50 of 62 in the series 2010

Posted Oct 13, 2010
Rob writes:
If we collectively participate in the levels/parameters of a new, future creation then how is boredom held at bay since we are already intimately familiar with the creation?

When I used to be an avid video game player, the excitement came from not knowing what the designers had in store for me. New and surprising challenges and rewards awaited behind every corner. But once I mastered all the challenges it no longer held any interest. I don’t think I would have much fun playing a video game that I designed myself. The interest came from someone else being able to out-imagine myself.

So then, what fun is it to play the ultimate game of Life in a Universe designed by me?

JJ
Our situation does not closely corresponds to the creator of a video game for several reasons.

(1) A video game is created by a small number of people, often just one person.

The universe is created by many trillions of lives which gives it many more variables, built in intelligence and interest than a video game. You were far from being alone in creation and design.

(2) The video game creator programs every detail of the game and always knows what will happen next.

Note that I use the wording “between creations.” There are many creations. When the universe was created the One Great Life of which we are a part had a knowledge of past universes and sought to create one more interesting and conducive to joy than existed with the previous one.

We had to start out with incredibly small building blocks and organize until we arrived where we are now. Making a goal to go to the moon with all its unknowns more closely corresponds to what we have done than a video game though many parts of life has game elements. We did not know all the details in advance of proceeding with creation.

Other creations we are involved in are that of solar systems, planet earth, the human race and our individual life. As we go from the universal to the particular in creation we as individuals have more of an impact on creation. The creation that is most like a video game is our individual life which we did plan out as much as possible. But… even though many lives are highly planned they rarely turn out as planned and the player has to make many adjustments.

(3) The video game creator, if he chooses to play, is aware of all the rules and knows exactly how the game works.

On the other hand, we are born with no memory and do not have a clue as to what is really going on. You may have planned for certain things to materialize in your life but you have no memory of it so when these events arrive you approach them as if some random event or maybe an outside god contrived them. Then other things happen that were unplanned by anyone.

I can see that if one invented a video game and knew all the details of it that it may not be that much fun to play but life is more like a game of football. Let us say that I invented football in a past life and in this life have forgotten that fact. Would this mean that I wouldn’t enjoy it now?

No. On the contrary, I can enjoy it as much or more than anyone.

And speaking of football I have to brag about Boise State, which is rated as the number three team in the nation. We went unbeaten last year and ended with a Fiesta bowl win. We were denied the national championship playoff because we are not a BCS team with the big leagues.

This year we are unbeaten again so far and the powers that be hope we will lose a game because public opinion will be so much in our favor that they will be forced to let us play for the national championship. They do not want to give the national championship to a backwoods place like Boise, Idaho.

So, if we do make it to the national championship game we’ll make football history.

Eve if I invented football in a past life or know the rules in this one I find it exciting to follow my home team and will shout with joy if they win the BCS title.

(Note: We lost one game so we missed the big playoff. We did win our bowl game in Las Vegas though)

Eternal Principles

March 1, 2010December 29, 2010 Joseph Dewey

This entry is part 51 of 62 in the series 2010

Posted Oct 14, 2010
Ruth asks:
If God did not create Principles and Laws then how do they just manifest during creation? They are either a part of the One God/Intelligence or they are not?
…if God did not create principles and laws, then who did?

JJ
Good question.

Core principles are not created. They just are without beginning and without end.

Let us take cause and effect for example. When would God create such a thing? Without cause and effect there could exist no God and no life in universe. Wherever there is life there already exists cause and effect because the essence of life is decision and decision cannot exist unless cause ad effect is already in existence.

Let us take the principles of math as manifest in 2+2=4. Did either man or God create these numbers or do they just eternally exist?

The numbers just are, eternally. No one created them. All a life can do is name them and use them.

A scripture says something interesting on this topic:

And if ye shall say there is no law, ye shall also say there is no sin. If ye shall say there is no sin, ye shall also say there is no righteousness. And if there be no righteousness there be no happiness. And if there be no righteousness nor happiness there be no punishment nor misery. And if these things are not there is no God. And if there is no God we are not, neither the earth; for there could have been no creation of things, neither to act (cause) nor to be acted upon (effect); wherefore, all things must have vanished away. II Nephi 2:13

In other words, if there is no cause and effect then there would be no God, no creation – there would be nothing.

Look at it this way. You are reflection of God. As a reflection of God did you create cause and effect? In other words, did you cause, cause?

No.

You merely find yourself in the midst of cause and effect and work with this principle toward what you hope is a good end.

Rob:
What you wrote to Ruth below is a very curious statement to me. It sounds like you’re saying Cause/Effect transcend the One Great Life. Is that what you’re saying, or is it more like one of those triangular concepts like Decision-Attention-Consciousness where one can’t exist without the other?

JJ
Intelligence is an aspect of cause and effect which means that all life – Gods, devils and angels evolve through cause and effect. Before God had consciousness there was cause and effect which interplay could be called elementary intelligence. God and you and I exist be-CAUSE. We consciously realize we are participating with cause and this brings forth life and decision. We either exist in a state of Being Cause or Becoming Cause.

There is no first or last Cause or Effect.

Jason quotes me from the 2007 Gathering:
We are approaching a time when the two great energies are meeting with each other. I am not going to go into the details of the energies because much of what is good today, people are calling evil. A lot of that which is evil, people are calling good. So even if I were to spell it out in this room there would be much disagreement, people over here would say this good and people over there would say no, this is good.

Then he asks:
Well, now this is just teasing us… you’ve got to share now! 🙂 So, can you go into some of the details now?

JJ
We had kind of a mixed group at the gathering and I didn’t want to cause any disturbance in the good atmosphere we had there.

It takes the second key of judgment to discern the true good and evil at play in the various situations and ideologies.

For instance, a large segment of society think that capitalism is good and socialism is evil and the other half think the opposite.

Good and evil can manifest within each system. The problem is that we seek to identify good and evil through labels rather than principles and when this happens illusion and distortion enter in.

Evil can manifest in capitalism when people become selfish and only think of their own advancement and do not have enough empathy for the disadvantaged to help them.

Good manifests in capitalism when abundance is created, jobs are provided and a natural assistance to the many is provided.

Evil manifests in socialism when force is used to further its goals, even goals that sound benevolent. Forcing people to do good has created the greatest of evils in our history. Every tyrant has tried to force his people to do his version of good.

Now where judgment enters in is the fact that any nation under law has to use some force. One could technically argue that forcing people to not steal is forcing them to do good.

Where is the dividing line between good and evil in the use of force?

The dividing line is the principle of freedom. To insure good prevails one must always go in the direction of maximum freedom. Force can be used to prevent theft because theft takes away more freedom than it gives.

Social programs can be good if they are not forced. Insurance, for example draws from the may for the common good and operates through free will. On the other hand, when government takes money by force to finance benevolent sounding programs then the social program becomes evil because it operates contrary to the principle of maximum freedom.

Thus universal health care through stealing money to pay for it is an evil.

What those who support theft to do good do not realize is that all their social ideals can be realized through free will and the result will be much higher quality and efficiency.

If I had thus picked on various social programs that operate by the power of force contrary to the principle of freedom I’m sure I would have offended some.

LWK writes:
The evil you describe above is not some particular symptom of capitalism. It has existed from before recorded history. If anything real capitalism has done a lot to discourage that sort of evil. The reason is not hard to understand if people will drop their prejudices.

JJ
I think we are on the same page with capitalism and free enterprise but my point is that evil can manifest in any system. There can be no system produced that will cause people to do good all the time. They all open the door to abuse. The only real cure for the evil that men do lies in our spiritual evolution. Eventually we as a human race will learn to treat all people with kindness.

For example, we all agree that freedom is a much better situation than slavery. But does this mean that there are no problems associated with greater freedom? No. There are problems.

I remember reading an article about a study done about 40 years or so after the Civil War. They interviewed a significant number of slave survivors and asked them to compare their situation where they are now free with being a slave and an amazing number of them thought they were better off being a slave.

Freedom, free enterprise, capitalism and other endeavors that moved us forward can all be used toward a good end provided our consciousness meets the need. If it doesn’t then we can use the advantages toward a negative end.

A person can use freedom to abuse his fellow men and take advantage of them.

Another can succeed through capitalism and because of his success assume that anyone who has not done what he has is just lazy and has no empathy for those who are having a difficult financial time.

Overall the good that comes from freedom and endeavors that use this principle is more abundant than lack of freedom and the evil that comes from it is much less than slavery but problems will occur within any system that we create. Humans are not perfect and freedom allows certain evils to surface that restriction does not. But such evils must eventually surface and be subdued, harnessed and redirected toward that which is the good, the beautiful and the true through free will. On the other hand, when government takes money by force to finance benevolent sounding programs then the social program becomes evil because it operates contrary to the principle of maximum freedom.

Thus universal health care through stealing money to pay for it is an evil.

What those who support theft to do good do not realize is that all their social ideals can be realized through free will and the result will be much higher quality and efficiency.

If I had thus picked on various social programs that operate by the power of force contrary to the principle of freedom I’m sure I would have offended some.
Copyright 2010 by J J Dewey

True Faith

March 1, 2010December 29, 2010 Joseph Dewey

This entry is part 52 of 62 in the series 2010

Posted Oct 17, 2010
Dan asked this some time ago:
JJ, you have expounded upon the conventional definition of true faith giving this improved definition: “proving a thing true or false by evidence, argument, reason or experiment and through the guidance of your inner authority”, just as 1Thes 5:21 admonishes us to “test all things”.

But in applying true faith as you have defined it, specifically in the context of discerning the truth/falsehood of a matter (for instance whether XYZ is a true principle or not), how could pre-judging XYZ as true (or false) according to my desire and trying to maintain an unshakeable conviction/belief (the conventional definition of “faith”) in it’s truth (or falsehood) in advance of testing it possibly be anything but a hindrance to correct judgment/discernment of (the truth of) XYZ?

JJ
With true faith you do not pre-judge a thing to be true, or perhaps I should say one does not make any rigid judgment. It’s more like the guy at the carnival who guesses your weight. He doesn’t know but he makes his best guess. But he doesn’t leave it at that or assume he is correct. He gives his estimate a test by having you get on the scales and when the number of pounds appears then you know. His estimate may have been right on, close or far off. But if he was correct then we have a rough example of faith for that which he thought to be true was proven to be true.

Let me give another example that brings us closer to true faith.

Let us say that Jim, Bob and John are all inventors and have all created household items that they think many people will want to buy and if they just had enough money to start production and buy some infomercials that they could make lots of money. They all believe hey could succeed and believe they have faith. But do they?

Then an investor comes along and fulfills their dreams and finances them. Here are the results:

Jim’s toilet paper with jokes printed on the sheets didn’t cut the mustard and lost money.

Bob’s improved hamburger grill about broke even.

But John’s barbecue sauce was a big hit and customers couldn’t get enough of it.

Did Jim have true faith? No. He had a belief, but a false one. He didn’t have true faith because he could not manifest his belief.

Bob didn’t lose money. Did he have faith?

No. He was closer to true faith, but he also fell short of manifesting his belief.

Did John have true faith?

Yes. He calculated that his sauce would be a hit and make money and his actions manifested and proved his belief.

Most people mistakenly think faith is an unfounded belief, but according to the Biblical Greek an unfunded belief is not faith, but blasphemy.

Only beliefs which are provable as being true can manifest faith.

If you believe in miracles but die without ever experiencing one then you die with a belief only and no true faith in this area.

But, if you believe in miracles and proceed to manifest them in your life then you have demonstrated true faith.

You gave some good quotes from the archives on faith. I’ll repeat them here.

JJ [archives]: “What’s interesting about that is when you look up the Greek word for “faith” which is PISTOS it means the same thing. […] It basically means to formulate something in your mind and focus upon it until you prove whether it is true or false. So if you have faith in God, according to the way it is used in the Greek, it means you’ll prove to yourself whether or not there is a God.” – https://freeread.com/archives/4611.php

JJ [archives]: “Proclaiming a belief does not make it true.” – https://freeread.com/archives/1157.php

JJ [archives]: “Without the testing of a belief that belief cannot be turned into a real experience, and without a real experience the truth cannot be fully known and the seeker cannot be truly free.” – https://freeread.com/archives/1156.php

JJ [archives]: “The final test of the validity of a belief is whether or not the belief can be demonstrated.” – https://freeread.com/archives/1236.php

JJ [archives]: “An open-minded person needs logic and facts to convince him. A mere statement of belief by another person will mean little to him.” – https://freeread.com/archives/447.php

JJ [archives]: “When has blind belief or blind faith ever brought more benefit to humanity than the reasonable course of action? Never. There is not one example in history.” – https://freeread.com/archives/655.php

JJ [archives]: “The word “faith” is not really a belief but it is a state of mind that is aligned with Purpose that can override all the influences on the physical world even to the production of great miracles including the overcoming of death.” – https://freeread.com/archives/4250.php

JJ [archives]: “When the disciple becomes one with the mind of God and discerns Purpose then true faith can manifest. Purpose does not have to be believed to manifest faith, but accepted.” – https://freeread.com/archives/2737.php

JJ [archives]: “When you know then no faith is needed. Faith is a means to discover truth so you can know.” – https://freeread.com/archives/2914.php

JJ [archives]: “True faith is always logical …” – https://freeread.com/archives/3778.php

JJ [archives]: “In the New Testament faith comes from PISTIS, which is derived from the root word PEITHO which basically means ‘to prove a thing true or false by evidence, argument, reason or experiment and through the guidance of your inner authority.'” – https://freeread.com/archives/4398.php

JJ [archives]: “If a teaching or principle is true, faith will prove it. If a teaching or supposed principle is false, true faith will prove them false and lead to the true.” – https://freeread.com/archives/4398.php

JJ [archives]: “… many of the people Jesus healed were simple folk who didn’t apply much reasoning, but just believed and were healed. Isn’t faith then just a simple belief? […] If all faith was or is a simple belief, then why is it that most of the things that people believe in do not materialize? Some people believe they will be healed and are healed. Others also believe and are not healed. Did the second just not believe strong enough? I’ve seen some pretty strong believers not get that they want. […] Even so it is with the simple folk who Jesus healed. They must press the right button of faith or it just will not work. […] Again, the meaning I gave for faith is “to prove a thing true or false by evidence, argument, reason or experiment and through the guidance of your inner authority.” Timothy believed a spiritual healing was possible and sought to prove the truth of this through experiment, through reason, through evidence and through guidance from his inner authority.

Even though the first three healers did not work for him he believed that a healer with the correct knowledge could help him. By faith he proved his belief to be true when he met Jesus.

He did not give up on proving his belief to be true and when it was proven true he, at that moment, realized he was exercising true faith.

If a teaching or principle is true, faith will prove it. If a teaching or supposed principle is false, true faith will prove them false and lead to the true.” – https://freeread.com/archives/4398.php

JJ [archives]: “Those who boast of great religious faith remind me a lot of a neophyte in a multilevel marketing program. When entering the program they are pumped full of zeal by various distributors. I have met many of those individuals who think they are going to make a million dollars or so in the next year and they have unshakable faith that this will happen. But sooner or later hard facts and reality hits them […]

So the born again full-fledged gospel believing Bible thumping proselyter who does not want to apply works will want to change the subject when his faith is put to the test. If he reads his Bible perhaps this scripture will glare him in the face: “He that trusteth in his own heart is a fool.” Psalms 28:26 Those with unworkable faith merely trust in their heart, or their feelings, which is not faith at all. “Faith” comes from the Greek PISTIS and literally means: “a mental conviction one has proven true by argument or reason”. Thus if one has faith he will go to heaven he should be able to justify it by logical argumentation. One will notice that Paul, a big believer in faith, spent much of his time in logical argumentation.

The book of Hebrews gives an expanded definition: “Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” Heb 11:1 We can again find that the Greek will give us a much clearer translation here. “Substance” comes from HUPOSTASIS and in modern translations it is usually rendered “assurance” or “confidence” but in reality one English word cannot do it justice. It more literally means “That state of mind which supports an idea through a sustained effort.” “Evidence” comes from ELEGECHOS which means “to prove a matter true or false”. The word indicates that faith establishes the true reality. Thus a clearer translation of the preceding verse would be: “Now faith is having that state of mind which sustains that which is hoped for and reveals the truth of those things we do not see.” This definition corresponds much better with the root meaning of the Greek PISTIS which is translated faith.

If we have faith, we can sustain an idea until it is proven true or false. It is never a blind unreasoning belief.

The correct definition of faith should make the word more acceptable to the more enlightened and intelligent persons who were previously repulsed to using it. We see that Edison, for instance, had great faith. He sustained the idea of the light bulb until he proved its validity by making it a physical reality. When faith is sustained on a true principle a physical manifestation occurs. “Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed.” Heb 11:2 We are also told, “But without faith, it is impossible to please Him” (God). Heb 11:6 Unless we can sustain an idea or conviction and prove it by argument or externalization we cannot please God.

By this scriptural definition of faith I know of very few pious religious people who have any semblance of faith, but ironically, there are numerous non-religious people who have it.

If those who claim to have faith do not actually have it, then what do they have? After searching through numerous words in the Biblical Greek the closest I can find to match what is commonly miscalled “faith” is BLASPHEMOS which in the English means “blasphemer”.. BLASPHEMOS literally means “to hinder by stating an unfounded, rumored’, or unreasonable statement”. Interestingly, most of those who claim to have faith cannot support their belief with any logical foundation or reasoning, but merely repeat what they have been taught, therefore, instead of having faith they are committing blasphemy.” – https://freeread.com/archives/2176.php

Dan writes:
So true faith requires 1) testing that which one believes and 2) manifestation of that thing – or it is not true “faith”.

1. Does it matter how one arrives at that initial “best guess” or belief?

JJ
Good question – one I was hoping you would ask as a full realization of faith requires this be answered.

Yes, it does matter how the initial belief was arrived at.

As they say, a stopped clock is right twice a day. If you have a watch stopped at 5 o’clock and someone asks you the time at that hour do you deserve any credit for being right?

No. You were just lucky.

Even so there are some who have a belief in a thing and it is just pure luck that their belief turns out to be correct.

Did such a person have true faith?

No.

True faith requites that the seeker first tune into the source of all truth, the Spirit within.

But faith is more than a matter of just tuning in, getting a clear message and then going for it. When the seeker first attempts this, the truth is not clear. The Still Small Voice is competing with the roar of many other voices, accumulated from ages past, that speak very loud and make the true voice extremely difficult to hear and understand.

Still, when the birth of the Inner Christ commences, a new voice seems to be heard, however faint. The seeker is not sure if he imagined it or not. He must test it out. When he applies various tests and discovers the voice was true he has exercised true faith.

But… the quest is far from over. The next time he may be deceived by a competing voice from the past. This is why he must test the message and apply. If the message proves to be true then he proves his faith.

Time and time again the disciple must test his faith and each time the loud voices of the past quiet down a bit and the true voice becomes a little clearer. In the quest the seeker becomes the disciple who becomes a master who is one with God and becomes the Voice. He and the Word of God are one.

Dan:
So, in regard to the search for the truth of a particular teaching – take reincarnation for instance. True faith in this teaching cannot really be expressed until/unless one achieves continuity of consciousness because there is no way to test/prove it for oneself until then, correct?

JJ
The seeker may prove a truth like reincarnation or some other teaching in a number of ways. I had many proofs of reincarnation before I proved it solidly to myself.

Here was my first encounter with this truth as mentioned in my previous writings:

The first person I regressed to a previous life was a young lady. I was quite surprised at the ease and familiarity with which she went back. She recalled a life over one hundred years ago in the North east of England and began speaking in an English accent recounting events from that life. Anyone listening would have been amazed at the accent coming from one who had never been to England in this life. However, I was particularly startled because I had spent several years in Britain and most of it in the area she described.

Anyone who travels England becomes acutely aware that most of England does not speak the “Queen’s English”, but there are numerous dialects. There can be a noticeable accent change in a distance of fifty miles. However, there is a marked difference between the way the people in the North and South of England speak. I believe it is a greater difference than the accent change between the North and South of the United States.

What amazed me is that this young lady said she had lived in the northeastern part of England and her accent exactly duplicated the dialect in that area. We must take into consideration that the Northeast British accent is much more difficult to imitate than the Queen’s English which is usually used by movie stars.

In America one rarely hears a North British accent over the media and I was 99% sure that the female involved had never even once heard a North Englander speak – at least in this life.

Another time I was attending a church party and decided to liven it up somewhat. I told the group that I could take people back to any point in their lives, even the day of birth, and have them re call it. People seemed interested in this and the first volunteer was a newly married lady whose husband was out shopping for some snacks for us.

I not only took her back to her youth, but before the entire non believing crowd I took her back into three past lives. In two of them she knew her current husband. One life was back in prehistoric times when they had no names and the other was in the days of the Roman Empire. She said she was married to a Roman senator named Marcus Aurelius who was later killed in a battle.

The details she gave certainly awed everyone there, but the best was still to come. When her husband came home everyone insisted that I take him back also. He was a good subject and regressed to prehistoric times and described the same surroundings that his wife had. But then, amazingly, he went back to the days of the Roman Empire and said his name was Marcus Aurelius, a Roman senator who was killed in Battle.

Everyone was so stunned at this that they began to doubt their belief in the church and I found myself being the one to reassure them that the church was correct and not to let this bother them for I still felt that there must be some logical explanation besides reincarnation. Even this and other amazing regressions did not make me cast aside my church’s doctrine in the one mortal life.
End quote

Finally, I was hit with even stronger proof that forced me to consider it. It was at that point I went within and for the first time began to get a sense from the inner voice about its truth and implications. I then began to have faith that it was true and since then proof after proof has come to me to verify this turning faith into knowledge.

LWK writes:
I presume that since JJ said this particular Marcus Aurelius was a Senator who died in battle he was not talking about the much more famous Marcus Aurelius who was an Emperor of the Roman Empire (and did not die in battle).

JJ
You are right Larry. this person was not the famous emperor but evidently someone named after him – similar to Martin Luther King being named after Martin Luther.

Often when someone identifies themselves with a famous name the reason is because he lived in the same time period in a past life and admired the person so the name comes up in his consciousness more than his own name in a past life. I ruled this out as being the case though because both the husband and wife produced the same name and background independently.

Ruth:
Just out of interest, what was this husband and wife doing in their current lifetime?

JJ
I think they were gong to college at the time. The recognized each other when they first met and decided to get married after a few weeks.

Blayne writes:
Anyone with an open mind who spends a little time researching Dr Stevenson’s
life work will be convinced of reincarnation if they doubted it before.

JJ
You are right there Blayne. His work is very convincing and I’m surprised even atheists do not take note. in fact I used some of his material in one of the chapters of my book – Eternal Lives.

Blayne:
Also you do not need to be hypnotized to be regressed. JJ does not hypnotize you when he helps people go back you are in complete control.

JJ
In my youth I experimented with hypnosis and determined that it was not good to use it repeatedly on people – that it affects their will and self determination. A deep hypnosis state should be used very sparingly – maybe to retrieve important information. Instead I use guided meditation. It is not as potent but harmless as far as I can tell.
Copyright 2010 by J J Dewey

Evidence of Reincarnation

March 1, 2010December 29, 2010 Joseph Dewey

This entry is part 53 of 62 in the series 2010

Posted Oct 19, 2010
Alex writes:
Strictly speaking, regressive hypnosis can not prove reincarnation. It proves that a person under hypnosis is able to reproduce or play back some information, which this person can not consciously know. Indeed, the person becomes sort of a VCR, and the medium can rewind the tape to any point.

However, it does not prove that the events described by a hypnotized person are related to THIS PERSON’s previous life. Admit it, it can be a fragment of anyone else’s life as well. It can be a random snapshot of some events, like a video tape randomly picked up from the store and inserted into the “VCR”.

JJ
First, let me state that my accounts of regression provided interesting evidence, but did not prove reincarnation to me.

The evidence through regression had little effect on me but the inner voice took over and spoke to me. This caused me to seek for even more proof. The real kicker for me was the discovery of the handwriting of a person’s past life and finding it to be a match so close that it was beyond the laws of probability that they could not be the same entity. (This person was not me, by the way. My handwriting has changed a lot in this life let alone multiple lives so I would not be a good subject).

After this discovery I figured that if reincarnation were really true that proof of it should be in the scriptures. I didn’t recall reading anything about it in the several times I read them but this time I decided to start at the beginning and read them all the way through as if I had never read them before.

When I did this I was amazed indeed. As I read through the Bible as well as the LDS scriptures I found hundreds of scriptures that could only be true if reincarnation was a fact. I was beside myself that these went over my head in the past. It is amazing how much truth a belief system can hide from a person.

Since this time I have had confirmation of the truth of reincarnation on a regular basis.

Alex says that a person regressed can tune into the mind of the past life of someone other than yourself. This is possible and I’ve had someone do this before but when the person is directed to recall his own past lives why would he recall someone else’s’?

Evidence that one normally returns to his own past lives and not that of random minds floating in the ethers is this. I have returned numerous people to past lives after a space of time has elapsed. In each case where the person had good recall he went back to the same past lives. If he was tuning into one of billions of other entities one would think he would go back to different entities in the same time period.

I already recited some pretty powerful evidence from regression. Now I’ll give you one more that rules out tuning into the memories of another.

After I separated from my first wife I figured that I would soon meet another person from my past lives and would marry her. I knew who she was and felt within myself that she should be arriving soon and kept an eye out for her. She finally did arrive but about a year later than I expected. I asked her why she did not show up earlier as she moved here from Indiana.

She told me that at the time I was expecting her that she received a message to move to Idaho, but she ignored it until it became too strong to resist.

When she moved here one of the first guys she met was my good friend Wayne. I first learned of her through my nephew Curtis who came to me one day and said:

“Guess what? Wayne’s got a new girlfriend and this one is actually good looking. He wants us to have lunch and meet her.”

We met them at the Sizzler and I was pleased to see that Wayne found someone who was both nice looking and intelligent.

Nothing unusual registered with me until Wayne gave me a call the next day. He said his girlfriend (named Brenda) was very impressed with what I had to say and thought I had a lot of knowledge. She wanted me to teach her.

I told him I thought that was unusual since she was his girlfriend. But he said this was fine with him and insisted I give her a call.

I gave her a call and we talked for a couple hours. After I hung up I knew this was the person I had been waiting for. I visited her several times and answered all her questions.

I found out why she wanted to contact me. She said that when we all had lunch together that she saw a blue light around my head and thought this was some kind of sign. After teaching her a couple times I received a spiritual confirmation of who she was and that I was to marry her. But then I decided to take it a step further. I asked her if I could regress her. I wanted to see if she would go back and give me the name that would prove who she was.

She was a good subject and went back in full consciousness. She not only gave me the name I was looking for but other information that she couldn’t have known from this life.

After this I approached Wayne (who was still dating her) and gave him this information and asked him if he would give me permission to pursue her romantically. In an act of great friendship he stepped aside and actually encouraged me onward.

We were married for four years and even though it didn’t last what we had was meant to be to consummate a relationship began in a past life.
Copyright 2010 by J J Dewey

Relationships

March 1, 2010December 29, 2010 Joseph Dewey

This entry is part 54 of 62 in the series 2010

Posted Oct 20, 2010
Ruth writes:
I am interested to know that as you had to consummate the relationship in this lifetime, then for what particular reason? Especially when you didn’t stay together for a really long time?

JJ
I could write a book on those four years we spent together but will probably never tell the full story. In using the word “consummate” I did not mean to imply that the relationship was over forever as we meet people we both love and hate again and again in different capacities from life to life. Your spouse in one life may be your child or parent – or best friend in another. By consummate, I meant that we fulfilled what we could in this life.

I anticipate that my second wife, Brenda, will reappear in a future life as a student and become involved in whatever work I will be doing.

Because my first wife rejected my higher teachings in this life I doubt if she will be a student of mine in the next life but she could very well show up in some capacity.

The Spirit told me that I should do everything in my power to keep Brenda pointed toward the work I was to do and she could become a great help in helping to accomplish great things.

When I first met her she was going through bankruptcy and was in bad shape financially and showed no sign of having power to free my hands so I could concentrate on the spiritual work. She was willing to give it a try however.

The first thing we did as we began our relationship was – I taught her how to sell signs and we took off together to see America. We spent three months traveling all over the country and had a great time with kind of a working vacation.

Then after this period of time we almost had too much of a good thing and headed back home. Brenda then got a job wit a small computer chip company called Micron. This eventually grew to be one of the largest in the world. She started out on minimum wage and worked up to management, but became frustrated and wanted to quit and work with me in real estate. I thought this would be great, but then we thought there may be a possibility that Micron would offer her extra money to stay.

At that time however, Micron stock was at an all time low and most people thought it was going to go under and no one was getting a raise.

But, I said to her that because she had knowledge of quality circles that no one else in the company did, that I though there was a good chance they would double her salary to entice her stay. I told her to go to Joe Parkinson (president) and tell him she would stay if he doubled her salary.

They basically took the deal, but deep inside I wished they had not because I sensed trouble and felt our relationship would have survived if we had gone into real estate together.

We decided the money and security was too good to pass up and she would now make enough so I could quit real estate and do the spiritual work.

As I organized a local group who should be one of my first students but my future wife, Artie.

Anyway, the big raise and increase of status changed Brenda and from that point on she seemed to lose faith in me and the work and seemed resentful that she was the main wage earner.

This also made it difficult for me to focus on the group work I was attempting. Friction increased and her faith in me continued to drop to the point she threatened to leave me on a regular basis. Each time she did the Spirit told me to work with her and several times she received an inner confirmation that brought back her support for a season.

But we went two steps back and only one forward and when we finally reached a very fragile point the inner voice spoke to me and said: “Do not worry. If Brenda doesn’t work out, Artie will help you.”

We reached an impasse a short time later and I left her and moved on with a relationship with Artie who became my present wife.

We’ve been married over 22 years now and she still has faith in me. After all we’ve been through she deserves a place in the New Jerusalem.

But the real work is yet to begin and that beginning is finally near. I am now waiting for the inner voice to announce, “It is time.”

Handling Difficulties

March 1, 2010December 29, 2010 Joseph Dewey

This entry is part 55 of 62 in the series 2010

Posted Oct 21, 2010
Blayne writes:
I feel like I have been living The Immortal for for the past month or so. As I have been trying to work on my log home it seems one adversity after another has come my way, it reminded me of Joe going from one seemingly impossible task to the next.. I wondered how I was going to get the roof on, I had no help and it was slow going till my neighbor came up helped me out of the blue loaned me equipment etc.

I even tried to hire some help but no one was interested then a fellow log home builder called and I hired him (even though I couldn’t afford it). So with the 3 of us we got the structural roof on and papered so it can weather the winter but it still needs a sleeper roof with insulation and the metal etc. I was feeling pretty good about that then my truck broke and a few days later my car broke. Then within a day I was driving my wife to the airport and her car broke, all within one week. And the next night my son called and his car had over heated… Needless to say I was beside myself wondering what the heck was going on…

So I have spent the last week working on cars and we had to buy one so we at least had two running cars as My wife’s car is shot the engine threw a rod meaning it needs to be replaced or rebuilt (not cheap). Now I am broke but we have two cars at least. I haven’t even had a chance to work on the truck but It is just the alternator so I can fix that.

JJ
After having gone through a number of life experiences where my bad luck seemed to defy the laws of probability, I feel for you. If it is any comfort I might add that in my experience, sooner or later, things normalize and then even some good fortune presents itself.

It does seem though that the good fortune is usually earned by the sweat of your brow whereas bad fortune can sometimes come like an unannounced tsunami.

Alex writes:
Can regressive hypnosis cause or trigger certain events in future? – Is it any good for everyone, indiscriminately to have access to past lives information? Can it cause damage? Is it always better not to know something one is not supposed to know?

JJ
Each of us has been through many past lives. Some have been pleasant and some not so pleasant. I have found that people are much more likely and willing to visit and explore the more pleasant lives than the painful ones.

Also with a difficult life a person is more willing to recall the good times than the bad times. This is not a black and white rule though for I have had subjects return to very painful times.

It is interesting that returning and reliving painful experiences in past lives can alleviate current physical problems. This is one of the correct things taught by Scientology.

I think I told you the story about a lady who had terrible neck pain in this life. I regressed her and she relived an experience where she was beheaded. After going through this her neck pain disappeared and never came back.

Returning to past lives can therefore at times be helpful rather than a hindrance – but not always. Sometimes past memories can be a distraction in the present and this is one reason we forget so we can forge a new path without the past holding us back.

In this life a terrible mistake can paralyze us so we do nothing but feel sorry for ourselves. But when such a person dies and is reborn with a blank slate he no longer has that memory to hold him back.

Overall I haven’t seen much that can be considered bad results from taking people back. Even when people discover something uncomfortable it usually doesn’t settle with them as strongly as a memory in this life. For instance, if you harm someone in this life you may feel guilt over it, but harm done in a past life is seen more from the viewpoint of the observer and permanent guilt is not likely to resurface.

There is some risk in anything we do so if you decide to be regressed first check your internal barometer and see if taking such an action feels right.
Copyright 2010 by J J Dewey

Who’s Who

March 1, 2010December 29, 2010 Joseph Dewey

This entry is part 56 of 62 in the series 2010

Posted Oct 26, 2010
I’ve been out of town for a couple days but gad to see that the group continues to talk about interesting subjects.

Sterling writes;
“Stan and his rebellious host will thus prove to have become the direct Saviors and Creators of divine man. Thus Satan, once he ceases to be viewed in the superstitious spirit of the church, grows into the grandiose image. It is Satan who is the God of our planet, and the only God.” — H.P. Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine

Is she being facetious, quoting another paradigm, or is she speaking her truth?

JJ
First, let me point out that this quote is a compilation of phrases pieced together to create a negative effect.

Dan did a great job of research on this and I am placing this at the end of my post for reference.

Secondly, as Dan pointed out, a lot of that which is included in the writings of HPB are quotes from others. In her writings she will give a large variety of quotes that take the reader all over the place and oftentimes one quote is not in agreement with another but she throws them in as possibilities stimulating thinking out of the box.

She will often throw out this idea for consideration: What if that which we thought was good is really evil and the evil is really good?

She presents provocative thinking by making us think on:

What if the serpent was really a good guy in attempting to bring the knowledge of good and evil to Adam and Eve?

What if Jehovah was really Satan by ordering the death penalty for the smallest of infractions?

Then he ordered Israelites to take the land of Canaan by force even though it did not belong to them.

He ordered men, woman and children of their enemies to be put to death.

He approved of slavery.

HPB legitimately posits that this seems to be more like the work of what we now see as a devil rather than God.

She doesn’t have any problem with Jesus being on the side of light and love but presents the idea that the Jehovah of the Jews was really Satan and Jesus rebelled against him and ascended in consciousness to his Father in Heaven, which was not Jehovah but a more benevolent force or entity.

It is interesting that the writings of Alice A. Bailey often do not support or ignores many of HPB’s more controversial teachings. Here Jehovah is not called Satan but neither are orthodox teachings supported. DK says that Jehovah is not the highest God but created from the soul of the Jewish people and thus his laws are geared toward the Jewish mindset at that time in history.

DK doesn’t talk about the being who made the initial encounter with Moses which could have been a different entity.

Overall, I do not get nearly as much light from HPB as I do from the Bailey writings. A lot of her writings are obscure quotes that she has dug up and thrown at us without much explanation on her part. I have come across a lot of things in her writings with which I either disagree or think the presentation is slanted or incomplete.

I personally am unconcerned about who is good and who is evil in the far past. Instead I am much more concerned about “What” is good and what is evil.

If there is a choice between more freedom for the whole or less then I always go with the more freedom and anyone who stands in the way of this is the true adversary in my opinion. It matters not what name or title that is applied to them.

Here is Dan’s research on some of HPB’s controversial statements:

Dan: I came across this “quote” several years ago and did a little research. Quite simply put, HPB did not write it at all.

If you really want to know what she thought about Satan (I guarantee it is just as eye-popping to most as the quote is 🙂 see:

http://www.blavatsky.net/magazine/theosophy/ww/additional/christianity/SatanTheEvilSpirit.html

http://www.blavatsky.net/magazine/theosophy/ww/additional/christianity/SatanCosmicReflectGod.html

http://www.blavatsky.net/magazine/theosophy/ww/additional/christianity/Satan-Jehovah.html

http://www.blavatsky.net/magazine/theosophy/ww/additional/christianity/Satan-Lucifer.html

This HPB “quote” you refer to above is a false one that has been scattered far and wide across the ‘net. The most HONEST form in which I have found this “quote is this:

“[O]ne of the most hidden secrets…involves the so called fall of Angels. Satan and his rebellious host…will thus prove to have…become the direct Saviors and Creators of divine man …. Thus Satan, once he ceases to be viewed in the superstitious spirit of the church, grows into the grandiose image…It is Satan who is the God of our planet and the only God. [The last line sits on a page headed ‘Holy Satan.’] Satan [or Lucifer] represents…the Centrifugal Energy of the Universe…this ever-living symbol of self-sacrifice for the intellectual independence of humanity.” -H.P. Blavatsky, The Secret Doctrine, pg. 215, 216, 220, 245, 225, 533

The author of this quote (yes AUTHOR) at LEAST put ellipses (…) where s/he left out LARGE sections of text (some pieces appear in different books altogether :-). If you will look at the page attributions, you will also see that some chunks are out of sequence, and in 2 chunks HPB was actually quoting some other author 🙂

Below I have copied the sections from which the quote was excerpted and then pasted back together to look as though one continuous quote.

Inside each quote I have capitalized the phrases that were STOLEN in order to MANUFACTURE the “quote” Sterling refers to above.

[beginquote] (c) “There were many wars” refers to several struggles of adjustment, spiritual, cosmical, and astronomical, but chiefly to the mystery of the evolution of man as he is now. Powers—pure Essences—”that were told to create” is a sentence that relates to a mystery explained, as already said, elsewhere. It is not only ONE OF THE MOST HIDDEN SECRETS of Nature—that of generation, over whose solution the Embryologists have vainly put their heads together—but likewise a divine function that INVOLVES that other religious, or rather dogmatic, mystery, the “FALL” OF THE ANGELS, as it is called. SATAN AND HIS REBELLIOUS HOST WOULD THUS PROVE, when the meaning of the allegory is explained, TO HAVE refused to create physical man, only to BECOME THE DIRECT SAVIOURS AND THE CREATORS OF “DIVINE MAN.” The symbolical teaching is more than mystical and religious, it is purely scientific, as will be seen later on. For, instead of remaining a mere blind, functioning medium, impelled and guided by fathomless LAW, the “rebellious” Angel claimed and enforced his right of independent judgment and will, his right of free-agency and responsibility, since man and angel are alike under Karmic Law.* [endquote] The Secret Doctrine, Vol I, pg 194-195

[beginquote] In Volume II. of Isis (p. 183 et seq.) the philosophical systems of the Gnostics and the primitive Jewish Christians, the Nazarenes and the Ebionites, are fully considered. They show the views held in those days—outside the circle of Mosaic Jews—about Jehovah. He was identified by all the Gnostics with the evil, rather than with the good principle. For them, he was Ilda-Baoth, “the son of Darkness,” whose mother, Sophia Achamoth, was the daughter of Sophia, the Divine Wisdom (the female Holy Ghost of the early Christians)—Akâsa; † while Sophia Achamoth personified the lower Astral Light or Ether. Ilda-Baoth, ‡ or Jehovah, is simply one of the Elohim, the seven creative Spirits, and one of the lower Sephiroth. He produces from himself seven other Gods, “Stellar Spirits” (or the lunar ancestors *), for they are all the same. † They are all in his own image (the “Spirits of the Face”), and the reflections one of the other, and have become darker and more material as they successively receded from their originator. They also inhabit seven regions disposed like a ladder, as its rungs slope up and down the scale of spirit and matter. ‡ With Pagans and Christians, with Hindus and Chaldeans, with the Greek as with the Roman Catholics—with a slight variation of the texts in their interpretations—they all were the Genii of the seven planets, as of the seven planetary spheres of our septenary chain, of which Earth is the lowest. (See Isis, Vol. II. p. 186.) This connects the “Stellar” and “Lunar” Spirits with the higher planetary Angels and the Saptarishis (the seven Rishis of the Stars) of the Hindus—as subordinate Angels (Messengers) to these “Rishis,” the emanations, on the descending scale, of the former. Such, in the opinion of the philosophical Gnostics, were the God and the Archangels now worshipped by the Christians! The “Fallen Angels” and the legend of the “War in Heaven” is thus purely pagan in its origin and comes from India via Persia and Chaldea. The only reference to it in the Christian canon is found in Revelations xii., as quoted a few pages back. THUS “SATAN,” ONCE HE CEASES TO BE VIEWED IN THE SUPERSTITIOUS, dogmatic, unphilosophical SPIRIT OF THE CHURCHes, GROWS INTO THE GRANDIOSE IMAGE of one who made of terrestrial a divine MAN; who gave him, throughout the long cycle of Maha-kalpa the law of the Spirit of Life, and made him free from the Sin of Ignorance, hence of death. (See the Section On Satan in Part II. Vol. II.) [endquote] The Secret Doctrine, Vol I, pg 198

[beginquote] The true esoteric view about “Satan,” the opinion held on this subject by the whole philosophic antiquity, is admirably brought out in an appendix, entitled “The Secret of Satan,” to the second edition of Dr. A. Kingsford’s “Perfect Way.” No better and clearer indication of the truth could be offered to the intelligent reader, and it is therefore quoted here at some length: — […] Therefore, as continued in the APPENDIX: […] IT IS “SATAN WHO IS THE GOD OF OUR PLANET AND THE ONLY GOD,” and this without any allusive metaphor to its wickedness and depravity. For he is one with the Logos, “the first son, eldest of the gods,” in the order of microcosmic (divine) evolution; Saturn (Satan), astronomically, “is the seventh and last in the order of macrocosmic emanation, being the circumference of the kingdom of which Phœbus (the light of wisdom, also the Sun) is the centre.” The Gnostics were right, then, in calling the Jewish god “an angel of matter,” or he who breathed (conscious) life into Adam, and he whose planet was Saturn. [endquote] The Secret Doctrine, Vol II, pg 233-235

[beginquote] For, to quote from an able article by one who, confusing the planes of existence and consciousness, fell a victim to it: — “SATAN, OR LUCIFER, REPRESENTS the active, or, as M. Jules Baissac calls it, THE ‘CENTRIFUGAL ENERGY OF THE UNIVERSE’ in a cosmic sense. He is Fire, Light, Life, Struggle, Effort, Thought, Consciousness, Progress, Civilization, Liberty, Independence. At the same time he is pain, which is the Re-action of the pleasure of action, and death — which is the revolution of life — Satan, burning in his own hell, produced by the fury of his own momentum …” [endquote] The Secret Doctrine, Vol II, pg 244-245

[beginquote] The “Old Dragon” and Satan, now become singly and collectively the symbol of, and the theological term for, the “Fallen Angel,” is not so described either in the original Kabala (the Chaldean “Book of Numbers”) or in the modern. For the most learned, if not the greatest of modern Kabalists, namely Eliphas Levi, describes Satan in the following glowing terms: — “It is that Angel who was proud enough to believe himself God; brave enough to buy his independence at the price of eternal suffering and torture; beautiful enough to have adored himself in full divine light; strong enough to reign in darkness amidst agony, and to have built himself a throne on his inextinguishable pyre. It is the Satan of the Republican and heretical Milton. . . . . the prince of anarchy, served by a hierarchy of pure Spirits (! ! ) . . . . “(Histoire de la Magie, 16-17) This description — one which reconciles so cunningly theological dogma and the Kabalistic allegory, and even contrives to include a political compliment in its phraseology — is, when read in the right spirit, quite correct.

Yes, indeed; it is this grandest of ideals, THIS EVER-LIVING SYMBOL — nay apotheosis — OF SELF-SACRIFICE FOR THE INTELLECTUAL INDEPENDENCE OF HUMANITY; this ever active Energy protesting against Static Inertia — the principle to which Self-assertion is a crime, and Thought and the Light of Knowledge odious. It is — as Eliphas says with unparalleled justice and irony — “this pretended hero of tenebrous eternities, who, slanderously charged with ugliness, is decorated with horns and claws, which would fit far better his implacable tormentor — it is he who has been finally transformed into a serpent — the red Dragon.” But Eliphas Levi was yet too subservient to his Roman Catholic authorities; one may add, too jesuitical, to confess that this devil was mankind, and never had any existence on earth outside of that mankind.*

In this, Christian theology, although following slavishly in the steps of Paganism, was only true to its own time-honoured policy. It had to isolate itself, and to assert its authority. Hence it could not do better than turn every pagan deity into a devil. Every bright sun-god of antiquity — a glorious deity by day, and its own opponent and adversary by night, named the Dragon of Wisdom, because it was supposed to contain the germs of night and day — has now been turned into the antithetical shadow of God, and has become Satan on the sole and unsupported authority of despotic human dogma. After which all these producers of light and shadow, all the Sun and the Moon Gods, were cursed, and thus the one God chosen out of the many, and Satan, were both anthropomorphised. But theology seems to have lost sight of the human capacity for discriminating and finally analysing all that is artificially forced upon its reverence. History shows in every race and even tribe, especially in the Semitic nations, the natural impulse to exalt its own tribal deity above all others to the hegemony of the gods; and proves that the God of the Israelites was such a tribal God, and no more, even though the Christian Church, following the lead of the “chosen” people, is pleased to enforce the worship of that one particular deity, and to anathematize all the others. Whether originally a conscious or an unconscious blunder, nevertheless, it was one. Jehovah has ever been in antiquity only “a god among other Gods,” (lxxxii. Psalm). The Lord appears to Abraham, and while saying, “I am the Almighty God,” yet adds, “I will establish my covenant to be a God unto thee” (Abraham), and unto his seed after him (Gen. xvii. 7) — not unto Aryan Europeans.

* What devil could be possessed of more cunning, craft and cruelty than the “Whitechapel murderer” “Jack the Ripper” of 1888, whose unparalleled blood-thirsty and cool wickedness led him to slaughter and mutilate in cold blood seven unfortunate and otherwise innocent women! One has but to read the daily papers to find in those wife and child-beating, drunken brutes (husbands and fathers!), a small percentage of whom is daily brought before the courts, the complete personifications of the devils of Christian Hell! of the gods; and proves that the God of the Israelites was such a tribal God, and no more, even though the Christian Church, following the lead of the “chosen” people, is pleased to enforce the worship of that one particular deity, and to anathematize all the others. Whether originally a conscious or an unconscious blunder, nevertheless, it was one. Jehovah has ever been in antiquity only “a god among other Gods,” (lxxxii. Psalm). The Lord appears to Abraham, and while saying, “I am the Almighty God,” yet adds, “I will establish my covenant to be a God unto thee” (Abraham), and unto his seed after him (Gen. xvii. 7) — not unto Aryan Europeans. [endquote] The Secret Doctrine, Vol II, pg 506-508

Here is another quote I found: (JJ)

There is at present no need to touch upon the mystic and manifold meaning of the name Jehovah in its abstract sense, one independent of the Deity falsely called by that name. It was a blind created purposely by the Rabbins, a secret preserved by them with ten-fold care after the Christians had despoiled them of this God-name which was their own property.(3) But the following statement is made. The personage who is named in the first four chapters of Genesis variously as “God,” the “Lord God,” and “Lord” simply, is not one and the same person; certainly it is not Jehovah. There are three distinct classes or groups of the Elohim called Sephiroth in the Kabala, Jehovah appearing only in chapter iv., in the first verse of which he is named Cain, and in the last transformed into mankind — male and female, Jah-veh.(4) The “Serpent,” moreover, is not Satan, but the bright Angel, one of the Elohim clothed in radiance and glory, who, promising the woman that if they ate of the forbidden fruit “ye shall not surely die,” kept his promise, and made man immortal in his incorruptible nature. He is the Iao of the mysteries, the chief of the Androgyne creators of men. Chapter 3 contains (esoterically) the withdrawal of the veil of ignorance that closed the perceptions of the Angelic Man, made in the image of the “Boneless” gods, and the opening of his consciousness to his real nature: thus showing the bright Angel (Lucifer) in the light of a giver of Immortality, and as the “Enlightener”; while the real Fall into generation and matter is to be sought in chapter 4. There, Jehovah-Cain, the male part of Adam the dual man, having separated himself from Eve, creates in her “Abel,” the first natural woman, and sheds the Virgin blood. Now Cain, being shown identical with Jehovah, on the authority of the correct reading of verse 1 (chapter 4, Genesis), in the original Hebrew text; and the Rabbins teaching that “Kin (Cain), the Evil, was the Son of Eve by Samael, the devil who took Adam’s place”; and the Talmud adding that “the evil Spirit, and Samael, the angel of Death, are the same,” it becomes easy to see that Jehovah (mankind, or “Jah-hovah”) and Satan (therefore the tempting Serpent) are one and the same in every particular. There is no Devil, no Evil, outside of mankind to produce a Devil. Evil is a necessity in, and one of the supporters of the manifested universe. It is a necessity for progress and evolution, as night is necessary for the production of Day, and Death for that of Life — that man may live for ever.
The Secret Doctrine, Vol 2, Page 388