posted on Sep, 28 2005 @ 10:21 AM
DDay and frayed1
You both are expressing the fear of being misled and bearing the personal consequences of a blunder in choices you would not otherwise make if you
knew the truth of the situation.
The old belief systems are going to be disrupted, but because they have been such a part of our culture for millennia, they will not die a peaceful
death. I respect your beliefs and why you may fear.
Let me tell you about an interesting situation that happened with somebody that should have been able to discern the truth of these new revelations
but could not. I have to tell some history first.
In 1942, as some of you may know, a psychologist in Chicago, birthplace of the text that foretold these possibilities of today, invited a screenplay
writer to the inner circle of the production of the Urantia Book.
The screenplay writer was a Mr. Sherman, Harold Sherman. Mr. Sherman and his wife were permitted to join the inner workings and deliberations as the
text was being brought down from on high. They kept an extensive diary (now being published in 6 parts, called The Sherman Diaries), which has been,
in hindsight, an amazing insight into this period of the text history. In this diary, as the information continued to pour out, Sherman felt that the
psychologist who had organized the process around which the book was produced, was too controlling of the situation, and asked that a more democratic
method and ledaership be adopted to facilitate the book's production.
What ensued when a petition was circulted, soon became known as the "Sherman Rebellion", and it was dealt with summarily by the psyhcologist by
cutting the Shermans off from the social acceptance they had received in the inner sanctum group. Being quite stubborn about their rights, the
Shermans insisted on attending anyway, but eventually left about 5 years later in utter disgust with the Chicago experience.
Sherman continued to publish and write, and in the 1970's he wrote a book called, "What To Believe?", now out of print.
In this book as an insider to the production of one of the major revelations this planet has received, he reverted to a virulent criticism of the text
and the psychologist in particular. But the important illustration of this story is that even a privileged participation in the production of
entirely new information will fail with some people just because they are either so bought into another belief system, or because they entertain
personal attitudes that get in the way of a detached evaluation of new information.
Sherman hit on the very thing, and the situation that bothers DDay and frayed1. In the face of personal conflicts about new information, how does one
determine factual truth about something so new there are no traditions to fall back on to suggest it was done before?
Sherman believed in the paranormal, he had some very exciting experiences with out-of-body and projection and long-distance viewing. (see the diaries
for details) But he could not, intellectually fold what was not directly experienced in the written text. He knew he had participated in something
unusual, but his mind was not at ease about what to believe about it.
What Sherman and all of us experience at one time or another is doubt and then the fear that creeps in with doubt to undermine our ability to proceed
to make a decision.
The subject of revelation is a huge one, but what Sherman experienced, and some of us do today, is one of the drawbacks of revelation. Revelation is
not prediction; that's prophecy. Revelation is new information that appears without the ties to known evolutionary progress. Revelation of the
kind you may see in the text of the Urantia Book is meant to re-establish the record about things man has forgotten in his development. It also
educates the mind that more possibilities exist in the humanities and sciences than could be imagined in the current state of development of our
But it all comes back to the mind. The intellect is not capable of spiritual proof. That is where the source of doubt arises, because mind is not
designed to make decisions like this. Sherman was a writer and intellect predisposed to having things run his way when he wanted to prove that a
story he wrote was good, or an experience he walked, felt, or touched was obviously true to his intellect. But when it comes to concepts that have
not been thought of before and where there is no direct touch with their experience, the intellect can go no further.
This is why I have gone to some trouble to write about the personality. It is not intellect, but uses the intellect to help decide truth. If the
personality only uses the intellect, where there are spiritual overtones as in this case, the intellect can not assure the personality the answer to
the question one way or another.
However, the personality has other options and places to ask for self determination of truth.
The mind tie to the intellect is fast and automatic. When you ask the intellect, "What's this?", it will answer with or without finality. But
when we ask our spiritual selves, "What this?", we are asking, not for fact, but for truth and truth can be so large of an area to consider in the
decision that it takes longer for the personality to hear it and process it.
Why is the personality the important ingredient in the determination of truth? Well, for one thing, it is the only part of us that has the power of
choice. The intellect does not have that; it is the personality who determines if something is to be pursued or left alone. The mind does not
reflect on anything without the power of the personality to command mind to reflect on an array of choices to be made.
In we humans, the choice to follow the truth wherever it may lead, is through the self-verification process the personality is capable of. The
personality can "know" what the intellect can not find. So, what is going on, I presume with all that are entertaining questions about the
antichrist and so on, is that your individual personal natures are still in the process of self-verification and doubts will remain until that is
Can the personality fail to verify after reflection? Yes, it can. There may not be enough spiritual attunement available for the personality to make
contact with the information of spirit to cause such a failure. Mind may interefere with the reflective process to the point that the mind attempts
to make decisions, which is impossible, but the personality may believe it has no alternative, and supports the intellect's concerns.
There is a third element in verification. We know now that truth is not subject to outside determination in ourselves. Some believe that doctrine is
truth and accept it without verification assuming it has been proven by earlier generations. However, that process leads to the default of learning
the personal truth of any belief.
That third element is the influence that lies above the personality in the superconsciousness of its being. I am referring to each individual's
personal spiritual endowment, the actual indwelling of high spirit in the circuits of the mind at the highest levels and beyond conscious articulation
of its input. However, the spiritual indwelling is not hampered by the lack of conscious discernment of Him. The personality is so designed that it
can receive the indwelling's input and the personality often makes decisions based on this rather than the indetermination of the intellect.
I think all of us, at one time or another, have said, "It is against my better judgment, but I will do it anyhow." This is may be the best
illustration of the two systems at work. Ideally, the mind and the personality have their respective parts to play; however, there are times like
these we are in, when it is very hard to balance decisions between the two systems.
I can only recommend to you all that time be allowed to permit these systems of decision find their level, where ever that is within each of you, and
then follow the decision to know, or not know, the truth of the present spiritual situation. There is no harm in walking away if that is the only
choice you feel you have.
What is true is subject to an inside process to verify knowing truth. One can persuade us that something is true, but if it is not verified soon, the
doubts of the intellect will creep in. No one else can verify truth for us; we must FEEL it, not just think it. We are evolved beings, imperfect
beings, and while we have the tools to work out what is true in some ways, the process is not perfect in every case to make every decision correctly
from the perspective of the truth.
Physical facts are fairly uniform, but truth is a living and flexible factor in the philosophy of the universe. Evolving personalities are only
partially wise and relatively true in their communications. They can be certain only as far as their personal experience extends. That which
apparently may be wholly true in one place may be only relatively true in another segment of creation.
Hopefully, parts of what I have had to say in this post, speak to you to help you understand the process you are asked to undergo when reading about
the portending spiritual changes for our planet. I personally can only point to the direction we are heading, and it is entirely up to you to decide
how right I am.