Strange Doctrine

This entry is part 1 of 62 in the series 2010

Posted June 16, 2010
Duke asks:
And what do you make of the alleged revelation that initiated all of this? It’s an interesting document. For a while I thought Brigham had manufactured it because the tone is so different, but far as I can tell the historical evidence doesn’t support that hypothesis.

The story is that Emma was so enraged with the revelation of plural marriage that she burned the written revelation. Interestingly there are conflicting accounts on this. One says that Joseph asked her to burn it. Another says they burned it together and still another says that Joseph burned it himself because he thought the principle would be misused and destroy the church.

It is said the Joseph’s scribe William Clayton preserved a copy of the revelation, but others say there was no copy and it was reconstructed from memory.

It didn’t surface again until Brigham Young published it in Salt Lake City in 1852, 8 years after Joseph’s death.

Unfortunately we do not have access to the original copy of the revelation. The chances are very high that it was worded somewhat different than the published text we have today.

There is a lot of evidence that Joseph was conflicted over the principle. Here is what I think happened.

Shortly after he started the church with a goal to “restore all things” he read about the numerous polygamists in the Old Testament – those men considered great prophets such as Abraham, Isaac Jacob, Moses, David Solomon and others.

He wondered if there was some type of principle around this that needed to be restored. He sought a revelation and seemed to get a few things around it but wasn’t satisfied with what he received. Something seemed to be missing.

Then within a short time he found that there were many attractive females who adored him and as he became friends and eventually close to a number of them the idea of plural marriage became much more attractive and he began to ask himself where the boundaries were. Did the old prophets get the wife’s permission? Could they take any woman they considered attractive? Was anything permissible if all were in agreement and there was no betrayal?

I’m sure Joseph considered this statement by Jesus:
“And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven.” Matt 8:11

If polygamists such as Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, were in the kingdom of heaven then why couldn’t he, a prophet in his own age, also take extra wives and yet also enter the kingdom?

This thought lowered his normally high defenses and the more he became attracted to certain females the more he felt obligated to create a doctrine in his mind to make plural relationships acceptable to his conscience.

He finally concluded that he would be innocent of sin if he merely followed in the footsteps of the ancient prophets. He then had several women sealed to him and had sex with them.

This caused a euphoria on one hand and a consternation on the other that he had betrayed his wife. He felt at first that he would not need his wife’s permission but then concluded it was wrong to do it without it. This realization causes him later on to attempt to get Emma’s cooperation. He had sex wit some females but nothing like is imagined by his enemies for he was very conflicted about where the line of right and wrong was in the matter. This is why DNA tests have not found a child fathered by him outside of Emma.

This whole thing opened a Pandora’s box that he did not anticipate. Word of his activities leaked out to church leaders and they wanted an explanation.

He couldn’t just tell then that he was experimenting, trying to find the principle behind the whole thing so he had to formulate a doctrine around it and explain it as part of a “new and everlasting covenant”.

Immediate almost everyone wanted in on the deal.

Now Joseph was planning on keeping the whole idea private until he had clearly formulated what was right and wrong but now he was forced to present it to his inner circle as one of those mysteries for which the world was not ready.

As time passed and he saw how his brethren were misusing the principle – using it for gratification and unjust authority – he tried to refine the principle. Any revisions did not seem to have a positive effect. In addition he and his brethren were forced to lie to save the church from possible destruction. This gnawed at his soul. Finally, shortly before his death he concluded that there was something inspired about multiple relationships but multiple sex partners overall was destructive to the spirit of the church and needed to be stopped.

He then made the statement that after the Nauvoo temple was completed that he was going to set the church in order.

Unfortunately, he was killed before the temple was finished.

It is thought in some circles that some church leaders who wanted polygamy to continue without restrictions were in on a plot to kill Joseph because they knew he planned to virtually eliminate or drastically curtail the practice.

It is interesting as to how much mystery there is behind the life of Joseph Smith when compared to other famous men in his time.
Copyright 2010 by J J Dewey

Oil and Revelation

This entry is part 2 of 62 in the series 2010

Posted June 23, 2010
Maryellen writes:
In revelations it talks about seal judgments, trumpet judgments and bowls of wrath along with the third of the sea being filled with blood…….(maybe oil) indicating the End Times. Can anyone comment on what these things might mean?
I’m doing a little inside experiment with a good friend who interprets the bible literally.

As I’ve said the Book of Revelations will never have an exact literal interpretation but the most correct meaning is that is describes the progress of the disciple from the birth of Christ in the heart to becoming a Christ himself. I have written that there will be incidents that will be close correspondents to the book and will make many think the whole thing is coming to pass but then a complete correspondence will be missing.

Below is a section from my book, “The Unveiling” interpreting the scripture you mention.

The Mountain of Fire
“And the second angel sounded, and as it were a great mountain burning with fire was cast into the sea: and the third part of the sea became blood; And the third part of the creatures which were in the sea, and had life, died; and the third part of the ships were destroyed.” Rev 8:8-9

First we had destruction on land (including trees and grass) and now we have destruction of the sea, which includes fish (and other creatures with life or soul) and ships.

So what is the difference between the earth and the sea?

The earth represents the slight rising of consciousness acquired by those who seek meaning in life though religion and philosophy. As we said, the trees represent the powerful authorities and the grass the followers, but all are reaching above sea level in search of the kingdom of heaven.

The sea represents the rest of humanity. Just like three quarters of the surface of the earth is covered with the seas even so is most of humanity not that interested in the meaning of life, spirituality, philosophy and religion.

The average person just wants to merge with the masses, not get noticed for his beliefs and live his life. He is a drop of water in the sea of human beings that never stand out or get their 15 minutes of fame.

On another level the earth represents the conscious self of humanity and the sea the subconscious. Those who search for meaning and are exploring consciousness are represented by earth. Those who do not, but retreat away from contemplation to be led by instinct and emotion are the masses who have little purpose and are driven as the waves of the sea.

The creatures who had life (or “soul” Greek) are the leaders and reasonably successful among the non spiritual masses and have no spiritual agenda themselves but just want the good life. These are midlevel leaders in politics, business, finance, education, the arts etc.

The ships represent the rich and famous who sail above the crowd and are enjoying their 15 minutes of fame.

So what was the great mountain burning with fire burning (apparently from heaven) that was cast into the sea?

A mountain signifies high consciousness or a kingdom. In the case of the disciple (or disciples) who tread the path of the Christ this mountain from heaven represents a work of light and love, or the consciousness of Christ manifested among men. It burns with the fire of the Holy Spirit.

The Son of man, who is the Son of God, has seen a vision of the will of God and he seeks to bring this high consciousness and divine ideas (mountain from heaven) to not only the seekers and the religious, but to make it available to all the masses of people, the high and low.

When the divine idea gains weight, as a mountain, he plunges it into the sea of people where the fire continues to burn even amidst the great waters. When such contact is made with the masses (waters) they turn to blood.

One third of those who are touched by the higher consciousness are never the same turn from colorless water to passionate red.

Jesus said that people will either be for or against him. Even so, those effected by the Christ Consciousness among the masses will be black or white and passionately for or against the ideas and ideals promoted by the disciple.

Look at the current beliefs of the masses. They are either passionately for or against abortion, for or against the death penalty, for or against public prayer etc. This black and white attitude extends to all their beliefs.

The instilling of the waters (common people) with passion (red blood) causes a third of the life in the sea to die and the ships on the surface to be destroyed. The leaders, the rich the famous lose their hold on the masses when they come to life and start examining the pros and cons of the various teachings that filter down to them.

If a leader, a teacher, a rich man or a movie star voices an opinion different from the passion of the people it will be as if their ship that sails upon the sea of people is destroyed.

The Star from Heaven
“And the third angel sounded, and there fell a great star from heaven, burning as it were a lamp, and it fell upon the third part of the rivers, and upon the fountains of waters; And the name of the star is called Wormwood: and the third part of the waters became wormwood; and many men died of the waters, because they were made bitter.” Rev 8:10-11

Some read this and believe it means an asteroid will hit the earth before the end of times while others have made the connection that “Chernobyl” is a Russian word for the wormwood plant. Many Bible believers think the third angel sounded when the nuclear disaster occurred at the Chernobyl nuclear plant.

Fortunately, an asteroid is not likely in the near future and the correspondence between the Chernobyl disaster and Revelation does not match up. For one thing, a third part of the rivers did not become polluted and there is little literal connection between any past drinking of radioactive waters and death.

The scripture makes much more sense when spiritual symbology is used.

With the second angel a great mountain (kingdom of God – higher consciousness) fell upon the seas (masses of people).

This time a great star burning like a lamp falls upon the rivers and fountains (springs) of waters. This sounds like a great falling star that lights up the whole sky.

So, what does a star mean in this context?

Earlier we said that stars represent fixed beliefs and the stars falling to the earth represent shattered belief systems that were thought to never change, like a fixed star.

This time instead of stars plural we have one great star falling. To understand this fully we have to add another element of meaning.

A star can also refer to an avatar, a great teacher or leader who will shatter belief systems. This meaning is indicated in the Book of Revelation itself:

The seven stars are the angels (messengers) of the seven churches (belief systems): and the seven candlesticks which thousawest are the seven churches. Rev 1:20

“And unto the angel of the church in Sardis write; These things saith he that hath the seven Spirits of God, and the seven stars.” Rev 3:1

Here we see that a star is a messenger representing a spiritual philosophy (church) and also one of the seven spirits before the throne of God. By extension this would also represent the seven chakras as they manifest internally.

A great and fiery star fell from heaven. What does this mean? The meaning has several levels but the same principle manifests throughout.

The disciple recently opened the seventh seal and peered into heaven and beheld a strange silence for half an hour. In the silence he perceived the will of God as never before and became on fire about bringing that which is in heaven to the earth.

If we correspond the star to a spiritual teacher then we have a great messenger (star) ablaze with the light of knowledge concerning the will of God falling upon a third of the rivers and springs.

What do the rivers and springs represent? These give life to the trees (aspiring teachers) and the grass (spiritual followers). The rivers and the streams thus represent the knowledge and love of God, which feeds the people and stimulates their spiritual life.

As the next manifestation of the will of God falls from heaven (source of revelation) to add to the sources of knowledge on the earth a great disturbance happens. When the new knowledge is presented many do not like what they hear. The new doctrine is as bitter as wormwood to them. They are like the people in Jesus’ home town. When he tried to teach them they rushed upon him, grabbed him and tried to throw him over a cliff.

What he said was a bitter pill (wormwood) for them to swallow, for the star (Jesus) that fell into their fountains of knowledge shook their belief system (fixed star).

“…and many men died of the waters, because they were made bitter.”

Many refuse to be nourished by the new and living waters and without this nourishment they dry up and die spiritually.
Copyright 2010 by J J Dewey

Many Paths

This entry is part 3 of 62 in the series 2010

Posted July 3, 2010
Some have been wondering things about the boy from my mission story who may be a future prophet. Let me go through several things that have been brought up.

(1) If he was supposed to translate the plates does this mean the job will go undone or that someone else will do it?

The answer is that Mrs. Sherlock said that someone else besides him will translate the plates but her son would be a prophet. She didn’t say specifically that he would have anything to do with the Sealed Portion but because that was a major part of her revelation it seemed probable he would be assisting or promoting it or something to that effect.

(2) Why was the family supposed to join the church when its light is not that great? How would that have benefited the child?
First, let us look at the probable outcome of the Sherlocks had they joined the church. It is most likely I would have stayed in communication with them and because of the prophecy relating to their child I would have started a communication with him and would have continued it. I would have shared my discoveries of greater light outside the church as well as the details of my excommunication. Then I would have shared all my writings with him. If he had a reasonable degree of light he would have embraced the teachings and perhaps would have been a point of light in England. He may not have been a prophet in the orthodox sense but may have indeed been a teacher of light and truth, which is basically what a prophet is.

There are other possibilities. He may have risen to a high leadership position in the church and then came to higher realizations and worked on reforming the church. This would have probably gotten him thrown out but such an effort from a high authority would have had a great effect. He may have defended me at the time of my excommunication trial

(3) If the child was supposed to be a prophet wouldn’t he be so no matter what?

Those with a higher angle of vision can see that there will be different probable outcomes for the same entity from different circumstances.

For instance, the church, with all of its faults, did much to cause me to seek higher spiritual knowledge in a way that may not have happened without it. It’s possible that those who see from a higher angle of vision saw that the church was a stepping stone that this individual needed in order to have maximum achievement.

His mother saw that he would most likely be a prophet if he joined the church, but that also does not mean that he will not be one because of her decision. She bought some temporary co-existence with her rejection but because of free will the child could still fulfill his highest destiny.

At present the child would be about 50 years old. Maybe we will see him surface and maybe not.
Copyright 2010 by J J Dewey

Setting the Record Straight

This entry is part 4 of 62 in the series 2010

Posted July 7, 2010

John C writes:
I enjoyed being the senior companion and delighted in taking responsibility, but unlike what JJ seemed to communicate, I did not take glory in “being in charge of the work”. The one in change of the work was always the Lord, and we merely sought direction at his hand.

I hope no one else got this extremely distorted idea of how I think. If I projected the idea that I was taking “glory” in being in charge I would like to hear feedback on this.

I wanted to be in charge because I saw how to get the job done that wasn’t being done. I never seek to be in charge just to be in charge or for the sake of my own glory. If someone else can do a job well then I am happy to let them go and do not seek to replace them. The only areas where I seek to be in charge are those where I believe the job is not being adequately served in the present or if no one is doing useful work in an area of my interest.

By your reasoning here Jesus was seeking glory to himself because he sought to lead the apostles because no one else was qualified or available.

Would you think a Spanish teacher is seeking glory because he seeks to be in charge of his own class because he can speak and teach Spanish better than the students?

Personal glory has absolutely nothing to do with someone will a skill seeking to use it if the ego is placed aside.

JJ Quote
“For instance, I am writing this account from memory as I did not keep a journal.”

John C
That is pretty amazing, but I do get the impression that part of these stories, while interesting, is fictional.

The whole story is true and no part of it is made up. Some of the dialog may not be exact but it all accurately represents what happened. If I present any fiction I will state it as such.

John C
I am with you to this point, but I am sensing the impression from this and your other writings that you believe are the only person who has ever thought about intelligence, and the only one capable of writing a book about it.

Wow, John what have you been smoking today? I know a lot of people have written and thought about intelligence and never claimed a corner on the market. I do think I could present a unique perspective, but so do thousands of other people who write books on various subjects. That is why they write books. No one wants to clone material from others when they write.

John C
There is a hell of a lot of stuff in this life that we are supposed to learn and discover. Wouldn’t it be a lot more fun if we were all free to learn and explore and experiment, and then share this information with each other without some thinking that they are entitled to do all the learning and experimenting, and others thinking that the best they have to hope for is experiencing life second-hand?

So you think that others here are not “free to learn and explore and experiment, and then share…”

You seem to be pretty free to do this just as you are now doing. Where do you get such an idea???

Then you think some (namely me) are entitled to do all the learning, experimenting and sharing.

I think you need to examine your belief system to see why you would come up with such an accusation. There may be an aspect of yourself you are not seeing.

You seem to be trying to say that I should just step aside as a teacher and turn the Keys into a free-for-all forum like most of the other sites.

If I want to learn Spanish, for example, the last thing I want to do is get together with a group that doesn’t know any more than me and learn as a group. I want to get a teacher who really knows the subject and can actually pronounce the words correctly. I can learn much faster from one expert than from a thousand amateurs in an encounter group.

There are certain things I know and I throw them out here and people can accept or reject them. I’m not participating in this group for group therapy.

Now this does not mean that the Spanish teacher cannot learn something from his students, but that is not why he is teaching the class and neither are the students there to teach the teacher. Neither are the wise teachers or the wise students interested in learning Spanish together without a workable agenda.

JJ Quote:
“Now I was in charge …”

John C
I took this attitude for a couple of weeks with my first junior, but he soon put me in my place. It was after that that I learn how to work cooperatively.

Quoting me out of context does make it sound like I may have been ego driven. Let us quote me in context then I will comment:

‘Now I was in charge we set out the best way possible to establish a good pool of people to teach.”

The point of the statement is this. Before I was in charge I was led by an Elder who had very little interest in the actual work of prospecting. He wanted to spend all possible time visiting with members and flirting with the girls.

The point I was making was that now that I was in charge we could get back to the nitty gritty work. The statement had nothing to do with the attitude of: “Oh, boy!! Now I am in charge I can boss someone around and do not have to listen to them.”

None of my juniors had to put me in place or felt the need for it and I gave them all the latitude and input possible. I think they all have fond memories of working with me, even my atheist companion.

John C
Speaking for myself, I don’t have much of a problem for what your mind (not your brain) turns out, but you seem to project the attitude that you are better, more “capable”, more in tune, more intelligent, more perceptive, and have more significant insights and experiences than anybody else around you. You have elected yourself to be their teacher, when they are not necessarily looking for a teacher, but to just be a friend and a co-worker.

Actually, I did not elect myself as the teacher. Rick Audette started this forum and asked me to come on it and teach. I didn’t really want to at the time but he persisted and I finally acquiesced. At first I thought I would only post now and then but the members wanted everything I could give them and more so I decided to take the job.

This is a class, John, and not designed as a free for all. All are welcome but if any come here wanting a group encounter session then they will just become frustrated as you seem to be.

There are plenty of forums out there where there is no specific teacher that is available for this need.

I make no claims of being more capable or enlighten than anyone else. The only claim I make is that I have teachings available and if they are helpful then participants should stay. If not then maybe some other forum would fill their needs better.

John C
In your posts about the Book of Revelations, and the Name of Christ, you mentioned the idea of a person standing on the higher ground, and lifting other up to where you are, BUT only when the other person ASKED for help.

I know that “the way” is strait and narrow, but not so narrow that we can only walk down it single file, with you in the lead. How about trying to walk it side by side?

Because that is not the way it works. The method of the Christ principle works like a great chain. The one person on higher ground pulls others up to where he is.

Let us say we are climbing a mountain together and I am a level higher. What makes more sense? For me to go down to where you are and reclimb together or for me to just reach forth my hand and pull you up?

Reaching down and pulling you up is much more efficient.

Whenever a teacher knows something that the student does not and he shares that knowledge it is like reaching forth his hand and pulling the guy up. Except it isn’t always single file. Sometimes a teacher can pull up hundreds, thousands or more.

This moving forward together and teaching each other sounds good, but when you really want to learn and move ahead with any speed you find someone who knows what he is talking about that is capable of actually seeing and understanding things you do not see and understand.

There are things I see and understand and I am willing to share most of these things and do not desire to relearn them in a group endeavor. Anyone who has pertinent information to share that is on topic is free to share for group benefit.

On the other hand, there are many things I do not know. For these things I seek out an expert who will lift me to higher ground.

In fact, that is what I plan on doing after I finish this post – that is I am taking an online course from an expert and will seek to be taken to higher ground myself. I have no desire to learn this course by sharing with a bunch of beginners that know no more than I do.
Copyright 2010 by J J Dewey

Spiritual Manifestations

This entry is part 5 of 62 in the series 2010

Posted July 10, 2010

I thought I’d make a few comments on a couple of things brought up lately.

First I’d like to express appreciation to Blayne for posting his letter giving us some of his hard earned reflections.

I remember when I first had an encounter with Blayne I just about wrote him off as he seemed very head strong and difficult to work with. Then Susan wrote me and told me that this was not the Blayne she knew that he was really a great guy and I should be patient for he would be a great asset if he ever joined with us.

I kind of kept that thought in the corner of my mind and looked for opportunities to agree rather than disagree and finally we did find points of agreement and from that point on he became a good friend.

Blayne talks about going through a dark night of the soul where spiritual consciousness and events seemed far away and he started to doubt all things, even things he previously experienced and knew with reasonable certainty they were true.

I think a lot of people identified with this because we all go through cycles. Just as there is a night and day on this planet there are various degrees of nights and days as far as spiritual light goes.

The interesting thing is that all are subject to these cycles, even the Christ himself. The only advantage the greater lives have is they understand the cycles and know the feelings associated with the night period are temporary and can steer their way through them better than we can.

During the night cycle it will often seem that nothing much spiritual is happening and perhaps one did imagine spiritual events in the past. But if these cycles are understood we can use them to our benefit. They are a good time for reflection and to absorb that which we have already taken in. Proper absorption through reflection will bring an increase of wisdom for the new cycle.

Blayne said he did a lot of reflection during this period so in the end he most likely benefited from it.

Another comment made was around the numerous spiritual experiences that I am relating. Some wonder why they happen more to some than others.

The short answer to this is energy follows thought. If a person just places a small amount of attention on the soul and spirit then he will only draw a small amount of energy in this direction and most of the energy in his life will be centered on day to day living, getting ahead, family, friends, education, home etc.

On the other hand, those who dedicate their lives to the spiritual side and focus a large amount of energy on it will have many more spiritual experiences.

Almost as important as a general focus toward spirit is a focused direction. Those who throw their attention shotgun style will not draw nearly as many valuable experiences as those who focus their energy with purpose and direction.

Let us take an example from my last post. The woman with pernicious anemia received healing blessings before I showed up and when we blessed her we received the same results as those before us.

Instead of just accepting those results as did the others I didn’t take no for an answer and sought the reason she was not responding. After receiving an impression of the reason we then changed direction, refocused and tried again with success.

How many complain that they have no spiritual experiences in their lives and then just continue doing what they are do with no change in direction?

If one desires spiritual experiences he must ask , “What do I need to do? What change of direction must I take? Do I have enough thought focused on the side of the Spirit?”

It is interesting to note that I had many more spiritual experiences during the two years I spent on my mission than the next two years that followed that I spent back in college.

Why was this? Because energy follows thought and during my mission I focused much more thought on the spiritual side than I did when I returned to college.

When all things are taken into consideration, all have equal opportunity to share in the vast realms of spiritual energy.
Copyright 2010 by J J Dewey

To Get Rich – or Not

This entry is part 6 of 62 in the series 2010

Posted July 10, 2010

Ruth asks:

Did you ever know the Secret within this book (Think & Grow Rich)? If so, why did you not use it to
become rich?

Just wondering……..

I could have gotten rich several times, but the thing I lacked in that direction was the placing of sustained focused attention on it. Instead, my sustained focused attention is on spiritual matters which does not leave enough left over to insure physical riches.

It may eventually happen that I will attain some material success in connection with my teachings or writings but that will be a side effect.

Would I better serve humanity being a Tony Robbins telling everyone how to get rich or being me and attempting to inspire spiritual evolution and walking in the paths of the soul?

The answer will be obvious in 100 years.
Copyright 2010 by J J Dewey

Morya School Attitudes

This entry is part 7 of 62 in the series 2010

Morya School Attitudes
Posted July 10, 2010

Way to dig in there Larry with the Morya School.

You will find that over 90% of New Agers as well as DK readers are quite liberal and are unaware that DK supported a number of conservative issues.

Among them are

(1) The use of nuclear energy for power
(2) The dropping of the atomic bombs on Japan.
(3) He was against the inclusion of totalitarian states within the UN or giving them any power.
(4) He put a lot of emphasis on freedom.
(5) He was against totalitarian states
(6) He supported a strong defense and showed a willingness to go to war for the cause of freedom.

He was against orthodox liberals in a number of ways;
(1) He was against compromising with totalitarian dictators.
(2) He thought the peace at any price people were dismally mislead.
(3) He said nothing in support of big government as we have it today.

He did condemn capitalists who accumulated large amounts of wealth and used it for political power. What liberal DK readers overlook is that the most wealthy people in the country now are Democrats, not Republicans – men such as Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Waren Buffet and many others. The liberals are in bed with the big money power brokers as much or more than the conservatives whereas the conservatives support the small business people and are supported by them. These were not condemned by DK.

Another point is that the big corporations do not have the power they had when DK did his writings. A company like McDonalds could have never been successfully sued by a woman who merely spilled hot coffee on her and the car companies were rarely liable for car crashes. BP could have gotten away with spilling oil to their hearts content.

DK does promote some liberal views, but they are common sense ones much unlike many of the liberals of today. Nowhere does he say we need to be taxed to death and then spend ourselves into oblivion. This process is the hallmark of modern liberal thinking.
Copyright 2010 by J J Dewey

Spiritual Direction

This entry is part 8 of 62 in the series 2010

Posted July 15, 2010
Comments on Chapter 25 of Mission Experiences at:

John C
There’s an old cruel joke about “lady missionaries” being unattractive.

There may be a seed of truth in that as many females who go on missions are those who haven’t yet been taken yet. But not all females who go on a mission do so because they cannot find a man. Both Rhea and Diane were attractive passionate females.

It’s funny though. I have met a number of females I found attractive 40-50 years ago and now some of them have really lost that luster. On the other hand one female that I graduated with who was overweight and ignored by the guys looks great at reunions. I sometimes wonder what Rhea and Diane look like now.

JJ Quote”
For the first time since I knew her she became visibly upset and started to cry and asked me to leave. I was reluctant to leave her when she was feeling so hurt and tried to sooth things over but she just became more upset and ordered me out. She said our relationship was over and didn’t want to see me again. She shoved me out the door.

John C
Wasn’t she the one that the Spirit told her that she herself would answer your question?

No. That was Diane. I started going with Rhea right after this.

John C
Somebody who could turn on a dime like that from being madly in love with you to shoving you out the door strikes me as somebody who is mentally unstable. Good thing you didn’t marry her.

I do not think she was mentally unstable at all as she was very stable and composed in the rest of our relationship. Actually “shove” was perhaps the wrong word. Perhaps should have said, “ushered me out the door.” She was the type of person who would lose control only once in a while in exceptional circumstances.

Also, I might note that I seem to have a talent to bring rage to the surface in close relationships with females. I always try to be as nice as possible but think it has something to do with rays and vibration.

Artie, my current wife, to her credit has her astral body under reasonable control and she has never let rage surface in our relationship. However, I might add that my life may be in danger if she ever discovered that I was unfaithful. She never plays the role of victim.

John C
I’m sure we are all dying to know what happens next.

But I, and perhaps others, are curious to know why you think God told you that you would receive the answer through a 3rd party? Is there a principle behind this?

That’s not what happened. I already receive an answer twice and was not looking for another. The first was the one I wrote about that caused me to hop on a plane and go to England. Then after I got there and spent some time with Margaret I discovered we were not a good match and decided not to marry her. I figured that God approved of her for a wife but the choice was up to me. I started planning my trip home.

Then I received a powerful answer beyond my ability to describe that left no doubt of how important that it was that I marry her. Even after this I was reluctant to yield and told God I would marry her if Bob said she was the one in his vision. If she wasn’t then I wouldn’t marry her.

To this the answer came back, “It’s a deal.”

I thought I had an escape clause because Margaret was not tall.

I thus went to Bob not to find out the will of God for I already knew it. I went there to get out of marrying someone with whom I was not compatible.

John C
Is it perhaps because you were too emotionally attached to the outcome that you weren’t thinking clearly enough to receive it directly from the Spirit?

As I said I had already received the answer. I just didn’t like what I received and was not emotionally attached to the answer at all, but emotionally repelled by it.

Duke Writes:
At the time of these events, were you so clear about the sources of these different voices in your head as here portrayed in your retrospective narrative?

Yes, clear as a bell. I couldn’t have been more sure.

The reason I ask is, to me that’s the most interesting part of the story, perhaps because following “inner voices” is something that has not worked out very well for me, nor has giving heed to someone else’s “revelations” on my behalf. I could give a retrospective narrative of certain parts of my life and with the benefit of hindsight label my various inner voices as coming from various sources, and such labels would be very different from the ones I assigned at the time of the experience. So I am curious about how clear it was to you when you were in the middle of it.

In this instance the higher will was very clear but there has been many other times where it was not. In any case where we can make the decision ourselves we will not be told the direction and we must use our minds to decide. If we use our emotions the direction will generally be incorrect.

Then there are times where we do receive something but it is subject to wrong interpretation. For instance, I had the dream about Diane correctly revealing that I would see her again before she left. I thought this must have been a sign that she was the one for me but I was wrong. I do think I had a past life connection with her though and that partially explains the spiritual feeling I had in the dream

Also, any suggestions on how to reliably judge between one inner voice and another? Or is uncertainty on the subject simply inevitable until one attains “soul contact”?

Yes, there will usually be uncertainty until soul contact is achieved. I say “usually” because some receive a strong emotional feeling and are falsely certain that they have heard from God.

When true contact is achieved then as the person increases in sensitivity the difference between high emotional feeling and the Spirit will become very clear.

The biggest difference between true soul contact and personality energy is true contact originates in the inner core of your being whereas personality contact starts at the outer emotional level and works its way inward.

All who want true contact must place attention on it for energy follows thought. A breakthrough will be obtained when the directed energy reaches critical mass.
Copyright 2010 by J J Dewey

Timelines and Clarifications

This entry is part 9 of 62 in the series 2010

Posted July 18, 2010

Comments on Chapter 27 of Mission Experiences at:

John C writes:

I’m trying to put together a time line. You first arrived in England in 1964. You were born in February 1945, so you must have been right around 19 when you came to England, the standard age for LDS missionaries. (I didn’t go until I was 20 because I wanted to work a year and earn some money.)

For a standard English-speaking mission, you would have been over there 2 years, which would have made you 21, in the year 1966.

So far so good

John C
You then came back to America, and didn’t return to England until sometime in the middle of 1970.

I returned in October 1970.

John C
So, you were then about 25. So you were able to survive the peer pressure from the church to get married for 4 and a half years without giving in to it. Though you dated several girls, such as Rhea and sent pictures of them to Bob in England. Is that right?

Correct and yes, there was a lot of pressure to get married quickly after a mission in those days.  I had a lot of people asking me when I was going to get hitched. I dated quite a few interesting girls but none of them garnered approval from within. Rhea was the one that really captivated me though.

John C
But, you remained a faithful member of the Church, yet learned how to regress people back to the past. And nobody in the church had a problem with that?

I had always done a number of activities that many considered questionable.  You might recall my account about hypnotizing people in the church when I was 16 and being called in by the Bishop.

John C
But later on, when your nephew circulated some essays you wrote, the church brought you up on charges and excommunicated you.

That was different because it was a challenge to the church’s authority.

John C
You mentioned that you used regression techniques borrowed from L Ron Hubbard, but you also mentioned that your first contact with Scientology was on a visit to Salt Lake City with your nephew Curtis, which I presume was much later in your life. So, if the methods you used with your friend Bob weren’t from Scientology, I’m wondering where you learned them, living in Boise, Idaho in the 60’s.

That trip to Salt Lake was not my first contact with Scientology.  Shortly before returning to England I had already studied it.   Of course, there was no center in Boise, but I studied their books and at that time was very enthused about it.

In fact this produced one of the points of friction between us.  I took her to visit the Saint Hill Center in London and she thought it was a bunch of hockey and thought I was wasting my time investigating this and the many other avenues I found interesting.

John C
Also, I’m wondering how it was that Bob, who seems to be a good and faithful member of the church, was willing to let you regress him like that. It sounds unusual, though anything is possible, I suppose. I guess you were able to convince him that it was OK and consistent with the Gospel?

Bob was not your typical member but was his own man.  That was one of the things I liked about him.  You may recall that he also defied tradition and went around healing members by himself with no companion.

John C
This sounds like sometime in the future. And you were there with Margaret, not your current wife. Does this mean you are supposed to get back together in the future? Or, are you going to have plural wives? 🙂

I thought someone would pick up on that – and yes this definitely deals with the future and not the past.

I have found that many true visions reveal some core truth of importance, but many of the details do not exactly come to pass as they are usually built on the receivers thoughts created from his belief system.

It is remotely possible I could have Margaret for a wife in the future and any time in the future the choice will have to be mine so she would have to be quite a different person than she is now.

John C
I hope we find out why Margaret was so important for your mission. Obviously, the marriage ended in divorce because you have mentioned that you are on your third marriage.

I’ll cover some of this as the story continues.

John C
So you then brought Margaret back to the states and married her? Is this the wife that you had seven children with? All of whom you delivered at home? So, allowing time to return to America and to plan the marriage, let’s guess that you two got married in 1971.

We got married in England September 1970, It seems like it was the 29th.

Then assuming that your seven children came at the rapid rate of 1 per year and there were no twins, your last child was born about 1978? Wasn’t that about the time you and Curtis were excommunicated?

I was married to her until 1982.  We didn’t divorce right after I was excommunicated.  She thought I was going to be like Paul and have a startling conversion and come back to the faith.  It wasn’t til then that the Spirit released me from my commitment, something I never expected to happen.

John C

So, by 1978 when you were excommunicated and when you wrote “Eternal Lives” and the first draft of “Infallible Authority”, if I understand correctly from reading your posts (Posts 1417, 1676, 2140), and also the year you believe that the Avatar of Synthesis started working with the Christ and humanity (Post 2115). You owned a successful real estate business and were fully engaged in new age teaching and practices, which your wife did not support…

Yes, this was a key period in my life and I have not yet told the whole story.

Copyright 2010 by J J Dewey

Group Fast

This entry is part 10 of 62 in the series 2010

Posted July 20, 2010

My Friends,

I am encouraged that the group wishes to do more for the work and are collectively considering fasting and praying for greater results.

It is too bad that some conflict has arisen that has distracted the group from spiritual purpose involved.

Conflict in a grass roots situation is not surprising as there is not a designated leader and without this several divergent voices generally arise with different ideas. Then the group wanting to maintain goodwill is reluctant to throw support behind anyone, but just wishes they could move forward smoothly.

What to do.

It does look like Blayne was the first to bring up the idea of a group fast (message 46745) so I’m inclined to suggest he be in charge – so long as he has group support.  So Blayne will pick the day and the purpose and the rest of the group who want to participate will give him their ideas. He can always ask for a group vote if there is conflict.

Of course, each individual is free to ignore the group fast and use his own approach or no approach.

In directing the energies of a fast, less is more.  I have had successful fasts when I directed my attention to one-pointed results.

Blayne writes:
And then you know me my mind takes off and thinks ok if in this life then what criteria has to happen in the next fifteen years to get things moving?

Large numbers of people must be reached with some of the key teachings.  A book, a webpage, facebook, youtube, a radio show, TV show, movie or something that reaches the masses must take place.

There are several reasons a breakthrough hasn’t happened yet.

(1) The consciousness of the people does not express a great enough desire for the Path or higher knowledge.

(2) Many disciples who could help have descended further into materialism, ego, illusion and discouragement than expected. They are more interested in following their own will rather than doing useful work for a cause greater than self.

(3) There are cycles of opportunity.  For the past three years I have been in a night cycle rather than the day and have thus been more in a receiving mode than sending.  I have been attempting to take advantage of this by filling my mind with as many ideas and useful information as possible so the next sending cycle will be more successful.

(4) Even the Higher Lives are somewhat limited by cycles and definitely work with them. If the time is not right for them to make a move then there is nothing we can do to influence them to do it.

That said it is true that all of us want something to happen as soon as possible.  What can we do?

(1) First and foremost prepare yourself.  Study not only my writings but anything of value that feels right to your soul.  Try and get at least an hour’s study time in each day.

(2) Start a local group.  It could be either metaphysical or political.  Both are needed and enlightenment is surely lacking in both departments.  If interested go to the archives and do a search for “Synthesis Group”.  That should bring up some of my suggestions for creating a group.

One thing I might add here.  We went to a party last weekend where friends hosted a musician in their backyard. Everyone brought pot luck in food and beverages and we had a great turn out that was a lot of fun.  This would be a good way to start a local group, but instead of a musician you have a speaker introducing a course of learning. Then if you have any musical talent available that could only help.

(3) Make some posts here.  Many do not realize that their posting here helps give life to ideas.

(4) Give book one of the Immortal to your friends.  I have printed copies of book one as well as the audio that I will send free copies to all living in the U.S. who want them.

(5) Ask yourself, what more can I do than I am doing now?

(6) Be patient and don’t lose faith.  The work will leap forward at the right time and place.

Do we need complete economic melt down before people will turn to more spiritual mindedness?

Unless we have a gathering place available a complete economic breakdown would do more harm than good, possibly opening the door to a dictatorship.

However, a strong economic downturn can force people to dwell more on the spirit and the essentials of life.  It is possible that a little more squeeze on the people will create opportunity that was not there before.

Copyright 2010 by J J Dewey