Preview: a read-only copy of the forum. To post or reply, use the current forum.

"The Book belongs to the era immediately to follow…."

242 posts · 12 participants · started Jan 20, 2015, 5:30 PM

BonitaParticipant
Jan 29, 2015, 3:15 PM

Mara wrote: I think religion is the unseen heart of the present ideological struggle.

Well, isn’t religion at the heart of everything? The UB says to take religion and set it aside as something apart from the rest of life is a NO GO.

102:6.1 To isolate part of life and call it religion is to disintegrate life and to distort religion. And this is just why the God of worship claims all allegiance or none.

In terms of ideological struggles, I think it’s about the morality of living as a social being. True religion does not function apart from the individual (160:4.1); it is first an inner or personal adjustment, and then it becomes a matter of social service or group adjustment (99:5.1). That being said, religion may have its roots in morality, but morality is basically human in origin. It’s superanimal but subspiritual. Religion may be at the heart of social change, but it should not be directly concerned with it. (Which is one reason why I can’t tolerate sitting in church pews today. The sermons are all about social issues and not about having a personal relationship with God.)

99:0.2 But religion should not be directly concerned either with the creation of new social orders or with the preservation of old ones. True religion does oppose violence as a technique of social evolution, but it does not oppose the intelligent efforts of society to adapt its usages and adjust its institutions to new economic conditions and cultural requirements.
nelsongParticipant
Jan 27, 2015, 10:23 PM
I will start a thread if you both promise me to post on it. Deal?

_____________________________________________

deal
MaraParticipant
Jan 29, 2015, 5:35 PM

Bonita wrote: 99:0.2 But religion should not be directly concerned either with the creation of new social orders or with the preservation of old ones. True religion does oppose violence as a technique of social evolution, but it does not oppose the intelligent efforts of society to adapt its usages and adjust its institutions to new economic conditions and cultural requirements.

I don’t know that much about other parts of the world where religion is wrapped up in the governance of nations. These ideologies are problematic, because religious interpretations inform the cultures where religion and governance are melded. The rule of law is interpreted by the rules of religion. Or should I say the rules of religion dictate the interpretation and application of law – religious law.. And I agree with you that sermons about social issues, rather than fellow-shipping with like-minded believers for personal spiritual satisfaction and inspiration, does not sit well with me. I don’t approve of overtly, publicly, mixing religion with social issues through the promulgations of religious leadership in any religion.

99:2:1 Institutional religion cannot afford inspiration and provide leadership in this impending world-wide social reconstruction and economic reorganization because it has unfortunately become more or less of an organic part of the social order and the economic system which is destined to undergo reconstruction. Only the real religion of personal spiritual experience can function helpfully and creatively in the present crisis of civilization.

I think this is a pretty big struggle, made more so by the marvels of modern technologies.
emanny3003Blocked
Jan 27, 2015, 10:38 PM

Bonita wrote:

Alright, you two. I will start a thread if you both promise me to post on it. Deal?

ME TOO!!!
BradlyParticipant
Jan 29, 2015, 5:54 PM
Mara wrote:

I think religion is the unseen heart of the present ideological struggle.

My opinion is that the ideological struggle is the historical polarization by the churches and science, both of which make false claims to religionists and society in general; that science proves there is no god and religion proves the fiction of science – both sides of this ideological struggle have prevented the harmonization of the truth by the people of the world. The new pope recently said that science and religious faith are no longer incompatible and that God is not a “magician” and that physics are but the tools of creationism.

Would not this be an epochal ideological struggle? More and more people are and have already (I did by age 13) harmonized this reality but the institutions have yet to, now especially so secular science. Science with God and Religion with Science….think about that.

"Live loyally today—grow—and tomorrow will attend to itself. The quickest way for a tadpole to become a frog is to live loyally each moment as a tadpole."
MaraParticipant
Jan 29, 2015, 1:09 AM

Bonita wrote:

My point was that the definition of the word ideology is as follows:

ideology |ˌīdēˈäləjē, ˌidē-|noun1 ( pl. ideologies ) a system of ideas and ideals, esp. one that forms the basis of economic or political theory and policy

I think when they speak of ideological struggles, they are speaking about the economic and political theories that influence civilization as a whole. Religion is personal and involves the individual which then affects the whole, but that would be an individual struggle. They were talking about epochal struggles, or so I think.

The definition does not exclude a system of ideas and ideals of religious theories. I suppose the anti-religion theorists would have their system of ideas and ideals too. Is that possible? Something speculated about or theorized about without proof for the purpose of explaining facts or events or phenomena? Man-made religious theory? Secularism. Finding like-minded people who interpret so-called religious books similarly? Emphasizing only the parts of their sacred book that bolsters their theory? And promulgating that theory? That interpretation?

The underpinning of both political and economic theory, not to mention a theory of religion by way of explaining what religion is or isn’t, pertains to one’s personal religious philosophy- one’s faith or one’s lack of faith. And to me that is what the big struggle is about – the confusions of religions in this day and age, the confusions relating to political matters as well as economic matters. Economic confusions seem to me to be a subset of political ones.

I think religion is the unseen heart of the present ideological struggle.
BonitaParticipant
Jan 29, 2015, 5:55 PM

Mara wrote: I think this is a pretty big struggle, made more so by the marvels of modern technologies.

I think modern technologies have the potential for making things better in the long run. It doesn’t matter what we humans do, some idiot will find a way to use it for destruction on some level. Fortunately, and on the whole, the more positive uses of new discoveries triumph in the end. I don’t think that’s an accident because the entire universe is geared toward balance and unity, the positive seems to naturally rise to the top and the slag to the bottom.

The UB gives us many examples of how things that seem impossibly evil can be used for good. I’m confident that this is how the Most Highs rule in the hearts of men, by constantly urging us to rise to the top. Considering the big evil of the last generation, the A bomb. It was awful, awful, awful, and still is. But nuclear energy is a big winner and it has helped the people of this planet immeasurably. Of course it’s not the final answer to our energy woes, but it was a positive outcome of an idea which was designed for negative use.

As to the problems of theocracies, I agree. At times I think those struggles are entirely reactionary, a refusal to progress or a fear of progressing. Probably the latter. Holding onto sacred traditions is comforting, but that ship has left port. Sooner or later they will have to come to terms with that. The issue is: do we mollycoddle those who hold onto the past, or yank it away? Personally, I think revolution is not the way to go and evolution is better. The problem with evolution though, is that it’s messy, very messy. I’ve always liked the idea of the big stick though. Just the threat of it can keep kids in line, but we’re not really dealing with kids here. And when they’re thought to be treated as children, they only radicalize more. Oh wait . . . that is just like kids . . . rethinking here.
MaraParticipant
Jan 29, 2015, 7:28 PM

Bradly wrote: My opinion is that the ideological struggle is the historical polarization by the churches and science, both of which make false claims to religionists and society in general; that science proves there is no god and religion proves the fiction of science – both sides of this ideological struggle have prevented the harmonization of the truth by the people of the world.

Worldwide, so many peoples are struggling with self-maintenance issues, survival on a day-to-day basis. (I’m not talking about poverty. The poor will always be with us. So said Jesus.) In these struggles they don’t have time to ponder the polarization you mention. The emotion of fear is prevalent everywhere, even in civilized countries. Other than activists who might also be people worried about their daily bread, people are keeping their head down and mouth shut to keep body and soul together. Religious leaders, tribal leaders, government leaders help or hinder their people, relative to the issue of morality, as Bonita suggests. Morality pertains to the individual and these various leaders demonstrate their moral values as leaders functioning in the system of ideas and ideals that form the basis of their ideology.

16:9:5 Civilizations are unstable because they are not cosmic; they are not innate in the individuals of the races. They must be nurtured by the combined contributions of the constitutive factors of man — science, morality, and religion. Civilizations come and go, but science, morality, and religion always survive the crash.
BonitaParticipant
Jan 29, 2015, 8:26 PM
Interesting quote Mara. 16:9.5 says that civilizations must be nurtured by science, morality and religion. Usually they write about science, philosophy and religion. Do you think morality and philosophy are akin? It is written (see below) that many modern people are directionally lost and need to form a new philosophy of living. Perhaps the new philosophy of living is the ideological struggle of our age.

2:7.10 The religious challenge of this age is to those farseeing and forward-looking men and women of spiritual insight who will dare to construct a new and appealing philosophy of living out of the enlarged and exquisitely integrated modern concepts of cosmic truth, universe beauty, and divine goodness. Such a new and righteous vision of morality will attract all that is good in the mind of man and challenge that which is best in the human soul. Truth, beauty, and goodness are divine realities, and as man ascends the scale of spiritual living, these supreme qualities of the Eternal become increasingly co-ordinated and unified in God, who is love.

100:5.1 The world is filled with lost souls, not lost in the theologic sense but lost in the directional meaning, wandering about in confusion among the isms and cults of a frustrated philosophic era. Too few have learned how to install a philosophy of living in the place of religious authority. (The symbols of socialized religion are not to be despised as channels of growth, albeit the river bed is not the river.)
BradlyParticipant
Jan 29, 2015, 11:01 PM
Bonita wrote:

Perhaps the new philosophy of living is the ideological struggle of our age.

I agree. And it seems to me that one cannot nor never develop an effective philosophy of living when they place God and science in opposition. First we feared God and then science proclaimed there is none. A universe that is created and managed by the power of love and results in all of us being family seems to harmonize reality and eliminate the apparent conflicts previously positioned as obstacle to any unifying philosophy for living. Reality alignment must accompany this idealogical struggle for truth to emerge from it I think.

"Live loyally today—grow—and tomorrow will attend to itself. The quickest way for a tadpole to become a frog is to live loyally each moment as a tadpole."
MaraParticipant
Jan 30, 2015, 1:43 AM

Bonita wrote: Do you think morality and philosophy are akin?

I do. Morality is indigenous to the human personality. 16:7:1 Moral intuition is a component of human mind endowment – superanimal and evolutionary, but subspiritual. The Book says, “All men recognize the morality of this universal human urge to be unselfish and altruistic.”103:5:3 Can altruism be snuffed out by one’s philosophy? Can a secular philosophy override altruism? One’s philosophy might include God, or not. Jesus said, “. . . the morality of any act is determined by the individual’s motive.” 140:10:5

To me philosophy has to do with what you think is the meaning of life – the interpretation of the whole enchilada. It’s a personal thing and evident only when you get to talking with people and get to know them. One’s philosophy is based on one’s worldview. I notice people who say they believe so-and-so and then go out and behave antithetically. It is jarring to be acquainted with people who seem to live a double standard.
emanny3003Blocked
Jan 30, 2015, 2:13 AM

Mara wrote:

I notice people who say they believe so-and-so and then go out and behave antithetically. It is jarring to be acquainted with people who seem to live a double standard.

This is called hypocrisy, and these people are hypocrites.
nelsongParticipant
Jan 30, 2015, 5:59 AM
Thinking about thread title it takes me to the paper on Dalmatia and Hap and his school for revealed religion.

the era to come as presented to the early humans by Hap was the comming uplifter as the goal of evolutionary growth.

see any parallels here?
emanny3003Blocked
Jan 30, 2015, 2:31 PM

nelsong wrote:

see any parallels here?

No. Humans will no further evolve physically. The Spirit ministries are all in place. No more will be given you. You have all that you need and more. What remains is your acceptance and use of these gifts. Get going.
BonitaParticipant
Jan 30, 2015, 3:19 PM

Bradly wrote: A universe that is created and managed by the power of love and results in all of us being family seems to harmonize reality and eliminate the apparent conflicts previously positioned as obstacle to any unifying philosophy for living.

Yeah, it does. But then there’s this:

159:3.7 Forewarn all believers regarding the fringe of conflict which must be traversed by all who pass from the life as it is lived in the flesh to the higher life as it is lived in the spirit. To those who live quite wholly within either realm, there is little conflict or confusion, but all are doomed to experience more or less uncertainty during the times of transition between the two levels of living. In entering the kingdom, you cannot escape its responsibilities or avoid its obligations, but remember: The gospel yoke is easy and the burden of truth is light.

I think this is why they call it a struggle. We’re all doomed to experience uncertainty during transition from one level to another. Those who don’t want to be on the boat at all, or those who want the boat to turn around and head back to the sheltered bays of tradition are the ones fighting the current of the open seas and destined to experience the most conflict . . . at least that’s how I see it.
BonitaParticipant
Jan 30, 2015, 3:35 PM

Mara wrote: I do. Morality is indigenous to the human personality. 16:7:1 Moral intuition is a component of human mind endowment – superanimal and evolutionary, but subspiritual.

I agree. We are told that as our personal religion evolves, ethics becomes the philosophy of morals; and this, I think, is because the evolution of personal religion naturally becomes social as one attempts to live to the highest standards of the golden rule. Likewise, such a philosophy of living naturally results in a greater discipline of self because the one would not expect to treat others any differently than one would treat oneself.

Mara wrote: Can a secular philosophy override altruism? One’s philosophy might include God, or not.

I think this goes back to a discussion we had years ago about social fruits. I think some secular philosophies actually redefine altruism to suit their given ideology. Humanism is one of those philosophies.

102:7.4 True, many apparently religious traits can grow out of nonreligious roots. Man can, intellectually, deny God and yet be morally good, loyal, filial, honest, and even idealistic. Man may graft many purely humanistic branches onto his basic spiritual nature and thus apparently prove his contentions in behalf of a godless religion, but such an experience is devoid of survival values, God-knowingness and God-ascension. In such a mortal experience only social fruits are forthcoming, not spiritual. The graft determines the nature of the fruit, notwithstanding that the living sustenance is drawn from the roots of original divine endowment of both mind and spirit.
emanny3003Blocked
Feb 1, 2015, 2:21 PM
135:6.8 John conducted classes for his disciples, in the course of which he instructed them in the details of their new life and endeavored to answer their many questions. He counseled the teachers to instruct in the spirit as well as the letter of the law. He instructed the rich to feed the poor; to the tax gatherers he said: “Extort no more than that which is assigned you.” To the soldiers he said: “Do no violence and exact nothing wrongfully—be content with your wages.” While he counseled all: “Make ready for the end of the age—the kingdom of heaven is at hand.”
BonitaParticipant
Feb 1, 2015, 2:36 PM
Mara had asked if a secular philosophy can undo altruism and then I brought up humanism as an example of redefined altruism. True altruism comes from God, the Adjuster (103:5.1) Humanists think altruism comes from humans. It seems to me that if we allow altruism to only rise to a human ideal, it will never satisfy anybody’s real needs. And when real needs are left unsatisfied, you find people searching high and low for something that will fulfill them, hence the intoxicatingly bizarre culture we currently are suffering with.

195:8.3 At the time of this revelation, the prevailing intellectual and philosophical climate of both European and American life is decidedly secular — humanistic.
nelsongParticipant
Feb 1, 2015, 2:54 PM
A possible future superhuman facelift was not really my point.
BradlyParticipant
Feb 1, 2015, 3:09 PM
nelsong wrote:

Thinking about thread title it takes me to the paper on Dalmatia and Hap and his school for revealed religion. the era to come as presented to the early humans by Hap was the coming uplifter as the goal of evolutionary growth. see any parallels here?

Hello nelson…yes indeed. I think each “era” and mortal epoch is progressed one to another by evolutionary growth with much celestial attention to both preserving each element of progress and integrating those into cultural/social standards. Epochal changes (as in mortal epochs) are an integrated aggregation of prior progress. And when things go awry they are skilled at Plan B to regain progress lost or stalled by failures experienced….much like people must do as well. I also assume that the era to come or the one after will continue our evolutionary growth to reach a point of progress where our next “uplifter” comes to Urantia, probably a Teacher Son. But I doubt that is this next era spoken of here. The UB claims it is that fulcrum tool for celestial leverage applied for those generations to come from here for the next cycle of evolutionary progress.

I think the Spirit of Truth remains the critical leavening agent for the era to follow but the Spirit will now be ministering to more and more people who are unifying science and religion, are personalizing religion more than institutionalizing it, and people with instant communication to share ideas and ideals wit access to the world’s knowledge equally and universally. Evolution accelerates and time compresses more change and more rapid change upon the people of the world. Such rapid change we are told requires a harmonizing philosophy and closer relationship to Spirit to cope and progress in the midst of what might feel more like chaos than progress to the unbeliever.

The past era, especially the last few centuries (remember the acceleration effect), have been an amazing progressive march to this time where the world’s population is connected….not yet united…..and this progression provides lots of potential for the celestials to propel us forward even faster and in new ways never before possible. Think what 3-5 generations will see change by this new tool for further evolutionary progress. Science delivers new tools for epochal progress, including bio/genetic progress, but is not in charge of the social applications and the need for truth, beauty, and goodness has never been more acute than now IMO. It is my prayer that the Spirit and the Most Highs are successful in our social transitions through these new edges of conflict to come. Of course, they will prevail sooner or later…..but there are many examples of the need for Plan B to respond to disjointed progress or strategic failures of one form or another.

Thanks nelson.

"Live loyally today—grow—and tomorrow will attend to itself. The quickest way for a tadpole to become a frog is to live loyally each moment as a tadpole."

Reply on the current forum