Series: 2010

Eternal Principles

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

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

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

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.”

Copyright 2010 by J J Dewey

Handling Difficulties

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

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

Many Books

Joseph Dewey
This entry is part 60 of 62 in the series 2010

Posted Nov 21, 2010
Stephen brings up an interesting question, which is basically this.

Why do we need to have more than one life, or many lives?  Wouldn’t it be better to just have one really good or interesting life and get it over with?  For example, a good book is interesting if read at a good clip, but if one went through it at the rate of a crawl it would become boring.  Therefore, it seems reasonable that we should go through life experiences in this world quickly rather than slowly over hundreds of lives.

First, let me point out that the analogy here is somewhat incomplete.  Our whole existence on the material plane is not like a book, but each life is like a book.  Consider this.  How many of us would be satisfied to read only one book and then never pick up another one?  The reader will have a burning desire to move on to other books, especially if the last book was a good one.

Many lives does not mean stretching one story for a much linger period, but it means that each of us lives through many stories. Some of the stories are interesting and some are so so, just like books we read in real life.

It is true that we live many lives before we become enlightened but that doesn’t mean that those lives are without meaning.  Many such lives are very interesting and provide a wealth of experience to savor during the great pralaya.  When enlightenment is achieved the life just takes another turn and new things fascinate the pilgrim as he continues his journey.

There are many more good arguments for reincarnation than against it.

One of the best ones is that without it those who die as children would forever be denied the knowledge of what it is like to live a full life.

Then those who do live full length lives die feeling that many desires have not been fulfilled and many accomplishments have not been achieved.

Here is a mystery revealed for you to ponder on.  We do not have rebirth in the universe because God designed it that way.  It exists because it is the only way for creation to be and the life therein to grow and develop. God and his reflections have to accept this principle as they participate in creation.

We have before us eternal lives on eternal worlds – worlds and universes without end.  One life in some static finished situation for eternity would drive us crazy. Who wants to read The Wizard of Oz again and again forever, even though it is a good book?  The only way to continue on the path of joy is to be born again and enter again and again a new kingdom of God with new challenges and a new story to write for ourselves.

Copyright 2010 by J J Dewey

Why Are We Here?

Joseph Dewey
This entry is part 58 of 62 in the series 2010

Posted Nov 12, 2010
Dennis writes:
I have a hard time believing in “The Dark Brothers”. As I get older I find I am not believing everything I’m taught or told anymore.

JJ
It is certainly not good to believe anyone just because they teach a thing but finding and observing people who work in darkness is an easy thing to do.
I’ve had a lot of people tell me that they do not believe in dark brothers, but to them I say – look around. What do you see with your own eyes? There are people shrouded in darkness all over. Take Kim Jong Il, for instance, who allows no freedom in his country of North Korea and will imprison or execute anyone who shows a peep of independence. Then Hitler, Stalin and Mao are other obvious examples. These murdered and tortured many millions.

The auras of people, which can be seen with a little training, show a great difference in light. Some people are actually surrounded with literal darkness and others are bright and radiant.
I have seen the truth of this scripture:

“But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness!” Matt 6:23

If there are workers of darkness on this side of the veil then they must also exist on the other side as noted in the scriptures.

“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.” Eph 6:12

“High places” is not an accurate translation as it comes from the Greek EPOURANIOS which means “heavenly or celestial realms.”

So here Paul was telling us that we fight against enemies in the heavenly or spiritual realms as well as “rulers of the darkness of this world.”

Dennis:
I read Max Skousen’s works before I discovered you, JJ. Max’s main teaching is, We were God’s in the pre-existence and we are here to learn what it’s like not to be God. I really believe that.

JJ
I’ve heard this teaching a lot, not only from the LDS but also many new agers and it has never made sense to me. If this was our purpose then our next step should be to become an insect so we could live a life that is not human to discover what it is like to not be human.

Ask yourself – being a human – do you want to become an insect so you can see how good you now have things? Yet many believe we were once Gods and were further above humans than we are the insects and we came down here just to discover an appreciation for being gods.

I do not need to become an insect to discover how much better it is to be a human, neither do I need to become a human to discover how great it is to be a god.

The real joy for all life comes from growth and accomplishment and as we grow from one point of consciousness to another there is joy.

We were one with God in the beginning as we are technically one with him now but we came here for growth, experience and joy rather than to just gain an appreciation of what we were in the past.

Dennis:
However, Max did not believe in reincarnation. Then I read your book, Eternal Lives and that made sense. If I’m not mistaken, I got from your book that we started our progression on some lower life and in each life thereafter, we made progression upward until we come unto this life. Maybe we all lived evil previous lives like Hitler, or Sadam Hussain and observed those lives like Max taught.

But we progressed up. Paul says in Colossians Chapter one that the mystery is, Christ in you the hope of glory. In that same chapter it says that Christ reconciles all things unto himself. Sometime in eternity Christ reconciled me, a thing, unto himself.

JJ
We all have within us the soul, a link with God, which is the Christ Principle so technically this is true.

Dennis:
Therefore I do not believe that God creates failures like the dark brothers. Right now I do not believe that one can get so low that one can not repent and come back sometime in eternity.

JJ
Yet God created Hitler and he was a big failure.

We are reflections of god so if we want to understand God we must examine ourselves. Are the creations of humans perfect?

No.

Do our creations need a lot of work to become perfect?

Yes.

Are God’s creations perfect?

No. There is not a perfect planet, moon, human, dog or crystal.

We are not here to obtain joy from being perfect but by accomplishment.

The word perfect in the Greek when referring to god and Jesus means to finish a work. Perfect as religion uses it today’s was a word embraced by the Pharisees.

Dennis:
The reason I have these questions is when I had my baptism of fire experience I was shown two main teachings. The first was that Christ loves me a rude and crude person not matter what. He forgave me all my sins. The second was that all people are perfect and that salvation is free and cannot be earned. Therefore I am not to judge anyone.

JJ
It’s quite possible you received a correct impression but are not seeing the whole picture. Our souls that link us to God are relatively perfect, but we have free will and can sever that link if we so choose. Once this is done then the life of God is lost and the entity has to lose his progression and start over again in the far future.

But even the dark brothers will eventually progress back to oneness with god so one can say that in the end of the great cycle of cycles that relative perfection will be attained by all.

Then a new cycle shall begin and we will create even greater problems to solve so our intelligence can expand even more.

Dennis:
How do I deal with both your teachings, Max’s teachings and the spirit’s teachings which seem to have 3 different teachings?

JJ
Don’t worry about what either Max or I say. Just go with what feels right with the spirit within. If you are pure in heart and in error the error will be discovered and corrected.

Copyright 2010 by J J Dewey

Preparation

Joseph Dewey
This entry is part 59 of 62 in the series 2010

Posted Nov 17, 2010
Blaine writes:
So my question to you JJ (and others) is how do we give others hope that it won’t be the end of the world and to look to a bright new future? It won’t be without some pain however how do we make it into a positive when we do feel the pain?

JJ
Before the Y2K scare and then the Planet X I received a number of voices of concern and I assured them that no major calamity was forthcoming.  At that time my concern was so low that I stored no food and made no emergency preparations for calamities.

This time around I am not so confident as this tremendous borrowing we are doing is driving us over a financial cliff unless something is done.  No matter how you look at the current situation the fact is that we are going to have some tough times to endure. At best we will have a couple years of high unemployment and tough financial times and at worst we could have a collapse of the currency not only here but in many parts of the world with China being the only major nation holding things together.

Unfortunately, I cannot give you the hope that things will be easy, but I will offer this hope.  Even though things may get tough the pure in heart will make the best of the situation and  those who live by the highest they know will reap many rewards of the spirit.

The world is not going to end and whatever happens will serve to teach us important lessons that will serve to put a more workable system in place – maybe not immediately but after the dust settles.

I do not believe we are approaching apocalyptic conditions for if we were a way of escape and a gathering place would be prepared.  I think we are just headed for more tough times and should do our best to prepare.  Now’s a good time to store up some extra food and get some emergency heat ready.  If a wood or pellet stove is not practical for you get a propane heater that is safe for indoor use.  A back up generator is also a good idea and propane is better than gas because it stores indefinitely.

That said I think we are going to pull through this awkward situation we are in and learn some lessons from it.

As far as doomsday thinking goes this has been around since I remember and the doomsdayers have always been wrong. Unfortunately, our economy faces a real threat this time but if leaders arise and point us the right direction the nation can be revived and thrive again.

The time of opportunity for the lights to create great change has not quite arrived but the day is no so far off.  The hard times are making people more open for the messages to come.
Copyright 2010 by J J Dewey