The Master's Parables

314 posts · 12 participants · started Feb 5, 2015, 9:48 PM

1. T

   tasParticipant
   Mar 27, 2015, 8:52 PM

   Bonita wrote:

   tas wrote: I can’t say I’d noticed that before, that he says not just that he is “the door” to the sheepfold but also “those who minister with me” are the door. 165:2.7

   We already discussed this on the previous page. Those who minister with Jesus (Spirit of Truth) are the Holy Spirit and the Thought Adjuster. Sheep cannot be the door. They go through the door. It is a reference to the attitude of mind which becomes the gateway to the soul.

   tas wrote: Perhaps not “Good Shepherd” in title, but Jesus makes reference at 165:2.6 about others becoming “true shepherds” and “undershepherds”, saying people have this capacity to the extent they are both “worthy leaders” and that they lead “flocks into green pastures and beside still waters”

   The undershepherds are the apostles, appointed and ordained by Jesus. Personally, when I come across someone who thinks he/she is an undershepherd ordained by Jesus, I walk the other way.

   Ah, I do see now that it was discussed by Teresa, Bradly and yourself, I haven’t followed the posts here much on the site the past 2 months.  I will just add my voice as one who thinks he was speaking of undershepherds and “those who minister with him” as being appeals directed to the audience of the hundred religious leaders in his presence, of which the apostles were only within range of hearing of it and not really the main audience it seems.

   “A company of over three hundred Jerusalemites, Pharisees and others, followed Jesus north to Pella when he hastened away from the jurisdiction of the Jewish rulers at the ending of the feast of the dedication; and it was in the presence of these Jewish teachers and leaders, as well as in the hearing of the twelve apostles, that Jesus preached the sermon on the “Good Shepherd.” After half an hour of informal discussion, speaking to a group of about one hundred, Jesus said…” 165:2.1

   My read on section 165:2 as a whole is he was asking these listeners — who already had stature in their society to think of themselves as leaders — to aspire to be true shepherds, not from the stature they had but by being servants, by feeding the flock and leading them to good waters.  If he was directing his comments only to the apostles…. his teachings on this occasion didn’t hit the mark quite as well.

   “When they heard these words, his apostles were confused” 165:2.11

   But of the rest of the audience of Jewish teachers and leaders:

   “On the morrow about half of these Jewish teachers professed belief in Jesus, and the other half in dismay returned to Jerusalem and their homes.” 165:2.12

2. B

   BradlyParticipant
   Mar 27, 2015, 9:16 PM

   I certainly agree that the main thrust of the quotes posted is that God, and now the Master’s Spirit, constantly seeks out the “lost”, even those unwilling to be found and those some might not think worthy of saving.  And the mercy ministry is for the each within the all, or flock.  Once we begin to extend from a central analogy, things begin to become stretched into distortions.

   However, there are several quotes where both “good” and “false” shepherds are spoken of.  And I find it a little odd that Peter was made the shepherd of the flock of believers and no such role lived beyond the apostles in any form.  I agree there is no mortal mouth piece for God nor any high in authority as the Master shepherd was and remains.  Is a second miler analogous to a good shepherd in a way?  Are we not to give testimony of the spirit and do not servant  leaders lead as servants?   Do we minister to the sick, lonely, lost, confused, and frightened?  Sheep do not do this for one another.

   I have far more questions than convictions in this matter…but we are here to study after all.  I should have asked about the topic rather than make a claim of understanding as such a claim should have been a confusion of ponderment.

   "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."

3. B

   BonitaParticipant
   Mar 27, 2015, 9:34 PM

   I’m under the impression that Jesus’ was teaching to his entire universe, all of his creatures.

   165:2.9 “But I have many other sheep not of this fold, and these words are true not only of this world. These other sheep also hear and know my voice, and I have promised the Father that they shall all be brought into one fold, one brotherhood of the sons of God. And then shall you all know the voice of one shepherd, the true shepherd, and shall all acknowledge the fatherhood of God.

   As to the issue of undershepherds, I think the fact that Jesus says “would be”, means that the job of undershepherd is earned.  Surely Jesus was in the process of training his apostles with the goal of having them earn the privilege of being his undershepherds after his ascension.  I suppose there are other ways to interpret the meaning of that term, but we don’t have a lot to go on.  It’s only mentioned once.  One thing we know is that an undershepherd is a spiritual leader and a true spiritual leader is a servant (171:06).

   Believing Jesus’ teachings is not necessarily synonymous with being an undershepherd/ leader/servant; belief is not faith.  Just because some of the Jewish teachers professed belief in Jesus doesn’t mean they suddenly became undershepherds.

4. B

   BonitaParticipant
   Mar 28, 2015, 3:06 PM

   Bradly wrote:  And I find it a little odd that Peter was made the shepherd of the flock of believers and no such role lived beyond the apostles in any form.

   So do you believe in apostolic succession then?  I don’t.  Jesus told Peter to be a good and true shepherd to the flock.  He also said, in the next paragraph, to be an example and inspiration to his fellow shepherds (192:2.4-5).  I interpret this to mean the group of apostles whom Jesus ordained to spread the gospel immediately after his death; this is his group of undershepherds.  Peter was just one of several.

   I do think that there have been, and will, be spiritual leaders here on earth.  But if you look at the list in the UB, they are truly few and far between.  One of the problems with the current generation of UB readers, as I see it, is that everyone thinks he/she is an apostle, and therefore an undershepherd, with the responsibility of leading the flock of UB’ers.  And what a mess that has proven to be!   It would be better to be a sheep and follow the True Shepherd, in my opinion.

   Bradly wrote:  Is a second miler analogous to a good shepherd in a way?

   A second miler is a servant, a lowly sheep following the true Shepherd.  If you wish to use the words servant and shepherd interchangeably, I think you leave yourself open to the possibility of confusion.  The phrase “in a way,” can be used to explain away a lot of things. One could stretch their imagination to make everything analogous in some kind of “way”.

   Bradly wrote:  Do we minister to the sick, lonely, lost, confused, and frightened?  Sheep do not do this for one another.

   I’m not suggesting that we humans are literal sheep, mere stupid animals.  It’s a metaphor for creatures who require a pilot light in order to be lead along the spiritual path.  As sheep, we are all lead in different ways according to our capacities and abilities, but always along the road of spiritual gravity, the way to eternal life.  Some are lead to attend to the sick, the lonely and the frightened.  But I think it’s risky to to think that we alone can lead the lost and confused.  It is the light within us that does the leading.  The fact that we are willing to follow the light ourselves serves as an example and inspiration, just as  Jesus instructed Peter to do as one of his undershepherds.

   But we have not been ordained by Jesus to be undershepherds.  We do all of the work of the kingdom as sheep and should not concern ourselves with who is a leader, who is a shepherd, who is this, that, or the other thing.  We’re all sheep and we are supposed to allow Jesus to do his own work as the Spirit of Truth, the True Shepherd.  When we minister to the sick, lonely, lost, confused and frightened, we are merely allowing Jesus to work through us.  It is HE who does the work of shepherding; we are merely sheep who say, “it is my will that your will be done.”

   194:3.1 The Creator Son, in the flesh, revealed God to men; the Spirit of Truth, in the heart, reveals the Creator Son to men. When man yields the “fruits of the spirit” in his life, he is simply showing forth the traits which the Master manifested in his own earthly life. When Jesus was on earth, he lived his life as one personality — Jesus of Nazareth. As the indwelling spirit of the “new teacher,” the Master has, since Pentecost, been able to live his life anew in the experience of every truth-taught believer.

   Bradly wrote: I have far more questions than convictions in this matter…but we are here to study after all.

   Unfortunately I do have convictions, which really annoys people, I think.  But believe it or not, I’m here to study as well.  I like to read what other people are thinking, even though I frequently disagree.  It’s obvious that people don’t like it when others disagree with them though.  I’m wondering if it’s wrong to express disagreement on a forum?  Is it better to just go along and gleefully post quotes without thinking about them openly?  I’m under the impression that is what most people desire . . . to just read and ponder pleasant thoughts, hoping to be inspired in some “way”.  If so, I think it’s time for me to retire.
5. MK

   Mark KurtzParticipant
   Mar 28, 2015, 3:20 PM

   Bonita,

   Please don’t retire.  Reading your last paragraph here, I think I may understand your expression, but would you consider that people need time to absorb concepts?  And, unless one is available each and every day to stay current, there is needed this time separation to assess and consider opinions from several participants.  At least, for my experience, I know this time feature is needed.  Some folks cannot easily take comments from others; perhaps that is their problem.  Others can take it easier and with a gracious attraction.  To read and ponder truly is what some desire!  Some people will remain quiet listeners even in small group discussions and others are vivacious talkers.

   I am one of those who appreciates your take on the UB and I want to read what you say!  We can ask, ‘Who among us is perfect?”

   Offered with kind intention.

   MK

6. N

   nelsongParticipant
   Mar 28, 2015, 4:42 PM

   Unfortunately I do have convictions, which really annoys people, I think. But believe it or not, I’m here to study as well. I like to read what other people are thinking, even though I frequently disagree. It’s obvious that people don’t like it when others disagree with them though. I’m wondering if it’s wrong to express disagreement on a forum? Is it better to just go along and gleefully post quotes without thinking about them openly? I’m under the impression that is what most people desire . . . to just read and ponder pleasant thoughts, hoping to be inspired in some “way”. If so, I think it’s time for me to retire.

   _____________________________________________________________________________________________

   Makes me think about weather it is possible to post informative opinions. When I get the feeling that someone is trying to change the way I think then I tune out. My thinking changes based on informative opinions and my personal reasoning, not an effort to change thinking if that makes any sense. Thats where I draw the line anyway.

   Again, is it possible to post a purely informative opinion. I wonder. Purely informative is likley analogous to posting UB quotes.

   Kind of gets philosophical dont it.

   Regardless, dont retire.

7. B

   BonitaParticipant
   Mar 28, 2015, 5:17 PM

   nelsong wrote: Makes me think about weather it is possible to post informative opinions.

   That would be an essay, wouldn’t it?  I’ve thought of doing that – just posting what I think along with all the quotes to back it up.  But how many people read essays?  Usually they’re long and tedious.  If people don’t have time to read, I would think that essays are out.

   And, I can tell you that I personally skip over posts that are just a long list of quotes.  I can’t think of anything more boring than that.  I like to know what people think and how they think.  I’ve already read the book dozens of times, but I haven’t read each person’s ideas.  People’s thoughts are exciting . . . (unless they’re a troll).

   I think most readers are uncomfortable with other people’s thoughts; either that, or they’re simply not interested in them.  And that’s where I’m coming down on this.  People tune out thoughts that don’t conform in some way to their own . . . like-minded thinkers . . . which brings me back to the sheep thing.  We’re all sheep and are happiest when we’re all together grazing along the still waters.

   Mark Kurtz wrote:  Reading your last paragraph here, I think I may understand your expression, but would you consider that people need time to absorb concepts?

   You mean something like three weeks or more?  I’ve been waiting three weeks to continue this thread.  I don’t know about you, but after three weeks, I’ve more or less moved on.  Mark, I do appreciate your comments, but I think those who only post quotes are the winners here. I just can’t think of anything more blasé than that though.  I can’t do it, and I don’t think essays will ever get read.  Without discussion, there’s nothing to do here.

8. M

   MaraParticipant
   Mar 28, 2015, 6:13 PM

   Bonita wrote:

   I’ve been waiting three weeks to continue this thread.

   Reminds me of this

    

   48:6:36  Even as mortals, so have these angels been father to many disappointments, and they will point out that sometimes your most disappointing disappointments have become your greatest blessings. Sometimes the planting of a seed necessitates its death, the death of your fondest hopes, before it can be reborn to bear the fruits of new life and new opportunity. And from them you will learn to suffer less through sorrow and disappointment, first, by making fewer personal plans concerning other personalities, and then, by accepting your lot when you have faithfully performed your duty.

   I think steadfastness is a virtue.   Thanks for all your great work Bonita.
9. T

   tasParticipant
   Mar 28, 2015, 6:47 PM

   Bonita wrote:

   Bradly wrote: And I find it a little odd that Peter was made the shepherd of the flock of believers and no such role lived beyond the apostles in any form.

   So do you believe in apostolic succession then? I don’t. Jesus told Peter to be a good and true shepherd to the flock. He also said, in the next paragraph, to be an example and inspiration to his fellow shepherds (192:2.4-5). I interpret this to mean the group of apostles whom Jesus ordained to spread the gospel immediately after his death; this is his group of undershepherds. Peter was just one of several.

   The connection of the word “undershepherd” as meaning “apostles” or as you put it earlier the “apostles appointed and ordained by Jesus” is an interpretation I don’t see myself.  I don’t think “undershepherd” is meant as a title or the result of an appointment or an ordination, my reading of it is that he just meant the word descriptively in speaking of those who would be leaders in kingdom work among the audience of 100+ religious teachers and leaders that he was speaking to.

   In revisiting who was considered “ordained by Jesus” according to the book, it wasn’t just the apostles but encompasses the seventy and Jesus would have even gone further and ordained more liberally if he could have:

   “That evening, after returning to the camp, Jesus visited with the Greeks, and had it not been that such a course would have greatly disturbed his apostles and many of his leading disciples, he would have ordained these twenty Greeks, even as he had the seventy.” 177:3.6

10. N

    nelsongParticipant
    Mar 28, 2015, 7:05 PM

    Thinking about this a bit more: A quote from the UB is likely more than purely informative. The revealators certainly hope to change our minds dont they?

    Maybe purely informative is more related to the facts we get from our scientific community.

    Only the person giving information knows his/her real intent, if to purely inform (if that is possible) or to persuade. I am certain sharing is somewhere in-between, no?

11. B

    BonitaParticipant
    Mar 28, 2015, 7:33 PM

    tas wrote: I don’t think “undershepherd” is meant as a title or the result of an appointment or an ordination, my reading of it is that he just meant the word descriptively in speaking of those who would be leaders in kingdom work among the audience of 100+ religious teachers and leaders that he was speaking to.

    I understand and appreciate your interpretation tas.  My point is that anyone who wants to be an undershepherd must enter the door of the sheepfold along with the True Shepherd.  That makes the undershepherd really a sheep following the True Shepherd.

    165:2.7 Every shepherd who seeks to enter the fold without me shall fail, and the sheep will not hear his voice.

    I can’t emphasize enough the fact that I’m trying to explain, that self-appointed shepherds or undershepherds, regardless of how ardently they believe they are ordained by Jesus/Michael, are really nothing more than frauds.  An undershepherd is just another sheep who chooses to hear the voice of the True Shepherd and bears the fruit that comes from the True Shepherd.  Without this, the other sheep will not hear their voice, which is a metaphor for the fruits of the spirit born by an undershepherd who hears the True Shepherd within.

    I don’t think I’m doing a very good job of explaining this, but I keep trying (steadfastness is a virtue).  The point is, that at the time of the telling of this parable, Jesus was in the flesh and only those near him could be taught by him and led by him. Undershepherds at that time would have to be ordained, on some level, by Jesus in person.  Modern people have the advantage of the Spirit of Truth.  Undershepherds today are simply those sheep who hear the voice of the True Shepherd, the Spirit of Truth, within their souls. This is why I hold to the opinion that the phrase in 165:2.7: “I, with those who minister with me, am the door,” has to do with the door within the mind that leads to the soul where the Spirit of Truth does his work.

    The Spirit of Truth stands at the door and knocks.  This is the door that opens the gateway from the material mind to the morontia soul.  The Holy Spirit is the supermind endowment, or the soul’s intellect.  She ministers with the Spirit of Truth and together they reveal the leadings of the Thought Adjuster within the soul.  These Deities, the Holy Spirit and the Thought Adjuster, are “those who minister with me,” who is today, in modern times, the Spirit of Truth.

    The Spirit of Truth is the True Shepherd.  We are his sheep.  We are capable of becoming undershepherds to the one and only True Shepherd in proportion to our capacity of receptivity and our willingness to do God’s will.  True leaders lead by example and that example is spiritual fruit and spiritual fragrance, neither of which is possible without the presence of the True Shepherd living within the soul.  No door will open, no sheep will hear or follow, unless these fruits and fragrances are evident in one’s life.

    If we want to define the word shepherd/undershepherd for modern times, then I think we can safely say that living a truth-coordinated life is sufficient.  But that is really a life of being a loyal sheep, and that is the point I’m trying to make, ever so poorly.

    155:1.5 The extent to which you have to go with your message to the people is, in a way, the measure of your failure to live the whole or righteous life, the truth-co-ordinated life .”

     

     

12. T

    tasParticipant
    Mar 28, 2015, 8:07 PM

    Bonita wrote:

    I can’t emphasize enough the fact that I’m trying to explain, that self-appointed shepherds or undershepherds, regardless of how ardently they believe they are ordained by Jesus/Michael, are really nothing more than frauds.

    I understand your wanting to call out self-appointed shepherd and undershepherds as “frauds”, but also I’d be mindful that we all are kids in the grand scheme of things, even them. Ever the optimist, I tend to think that in all endeavours, including leadership, people can do it not so well and not with the most noble intentions, however there is always room to grow. Even leaders who lead poorly or immaturely – they are kids too and, who knows which ones could learn and grow from their missteps to in time become true shepherds.

    What’s interesting is that even the apostles themselves were prone to this overreach of “ardently believing” they were more than they were, such as when they tried (and failed) to “cast out a demon”, and how even up until the end of Jesus ministry among them they had in mind status and rank and self-importance. Even for those living in his presence and hearing the words right out of his mouth, it was a struggle to such an extent that Jesus had to enact his living parable of washing their feet on the eve of his death. Living experience seem to be essential to really learning the lessons.

    The image I have in my mind of an “undershepherd” is of somebody like a neighborhood pastor of small to mid-sized church, faithfully ministering to his or her congregation (“flock”). Of course there’s other capacities of serving a “flock” aside from organized religion but that’s the type of position or status I personally envision from the word.

13. B

    BonitaParticipant
    Mar 28, 2015, 9:18 PM

    tas wrote:  Even leaders who lead poorly or immaturely – they are kids too and, who knows which ones could learn and grow from their missteps to in time become true shepherds.

    That’s my point exactly.  They are kids – sheep, not shepherds! Only when they listen to the true shepherd can they ever hope to be heard by other sheep.

    tas wrote:  The image I have in my mind of an “undershepherd” is of somebody like a neighborhood pastor of small to mid-sized church, faithfully ministering to his or her congregation (“flock”). Of course there’s other capacities of serving a “flock” aside from organized religion but that’s the type of position or status I personally envision from the word.

    I can see that, but I think those people are not really spiritual leaders, they are sheep fulfilling a social leadership role.  There’s only one true spiritual leader among us.  The Creator Son, Son of the Eternal Son, is the focus of spiritual gravity for those of us living in this universe.  Pastors, priests, popes, rabbis, imams . .  . they’re all social leaders.  The Church is a social organization centered around a spiritual brotherhood with the Spirit of Truth as the eternal focal point.  That’s not to say that these social leaders aren’t capable of  living truth-coordinated lives, thus holding their flocks together with the fruit and fragrance coming from the Spirit within them.  Some do, some don’t.  Some are sincere, stumbling sheep, some are frauds and some, unfortunately, are sincerely preaching pure evil.

    One piece of good news is that Jesus said this:

    181:2.16 In my universe and in my Father’s universe of universes, our brethren-sons are dealt with as individuals in all their spiritual relations, but in all group relationships we unfailingly provide for definite leadership. Our kingdom is a realm of order, and where two or more will creatures act in co-operation, there is always provided the authority of leadership.

     

14. MK

    Mark KurtzParticipant
    Mar 28, 2015, 9:52 PM

    Bonita, one of the great lessons I needed many years ago came from a fellow church board member who addressed a question I expressed in a board meeting 3 weeks earlier.  Gee!  I had almost forgotten the question by that time.  He took the time to meditate and consider his thoughtful answer.  He treated me kindly by giving me his precious (thinking) time.  Its OK to take three weeks to think!  Some of the most precious gems may come from people who do think and pray over questions.  This “side thread” reminds me of the value of patience, a lesson I am humbled at learning in my house!  The collective wisdom from this group is marvelous to behold!!!!

     

15. MK

    Mark KurtzParticipant
    Mar 28, 2015, 9:53 PM

    And also, I get from your remarks, Bonita, you want to hear from those who go deeper in thinking than just posting quotes!   Good!

16. B

    BonitaParticipant
    Mar 28, 2015, 10:38 PM

    Mark Kurtz wrote: Its OK to take three weeks to think!

    Sure it’s okay.  But it’s hard to have a conversation that way. If this were a read-only site, people could take forever to think, all to themselves and with themselves.  But this is a forum titled: Urantia Book General Discussions.  Maybe it should be retitled to: Urantia Book General Thinking Forum- take all the time you like. Or, Urantia Book General Discussion with Yourself Forum, no medication required. Think about it! (Obviously I’m being sardonic. Sorry.)
17. MK

    Mark KurtzParticipant
    Mar 29, 2015, 2:33 AM

    And being a bit hard on us all.  We can all tell you are fine person, a good thinker, but even in discussion, time is valuable for formulating concepts.  And, surely some of us are slower than you!  A Notre Dame professor once said philosophy is a 300 year conversation.  Maybe someone would like to comment on something you wrote a month ago.  Thats OK.

18. B

    BonitaParticipant
    Mar 29, 2015, 2:22 PM

    Mark Kurtz wrote: And being a bit hard on us all.

    Sorry to be such a pain in the butt. And thank you Mark for making me think more deeply about this.   It seems to me that I’ve been laboring under the impression that, since I started this thread and organized its presentation, I should lead the discussion.  I’ve suddenly become aware that the participants of this forum do not desire such leadership.  I don’t know why I thought I should function in that role, but clearly it was a mistake of judgment.  Silly me . . . I don’t know what I was thinking.  I feel like a fool, but it’s not the first time.

    So anyway, I made a list of the Master’s parables at the beginning of the thread and had hopes of going through them all with some discussion of each.  We still have about 12 more to go.  The topic is now open to whomever wants to do whatever moves them in whatever timeframe they feel comfortable with.
19. MK

    Mark KurtzParticipant
    Mar 29, 2015, 5:07 PM

    Well, the Master’s Parables is an excellent topic.  We ALL should realize how profoundly important are his teachings and to understand he had to resort to parables to continue his spiritual reach.  Leadership on this topic?  I think that is very OK!  But, each participant moves at each one’s pace with involvement mitigated by energy, vacations, family agenda, work, hobbies, yard work, laundry, house cleaning, neighbors, illness, sudden changes of anything,  ad infinitum!  Keep the topic there and you will attract more discussion.

    I did notice that the latest post is listed on the right within each topic.  Now we know who has been there the latest.  Keeping the topic alive will serve us all better.  You are a great thinker and I’d bet there are others who appreciate your thoughtful responses.  We’d all be wise to respect each one’s sovereignty of will, however.

    My agenda does not allow me to get in here everyday.  Sometimes I dash in and read a bit and I need to move on.

    Back to the thread.

     

     

20. M

    MaraParticipant
    Mar 29, 2015, 5:40 PM

    Mark Kurtz wrote:

    But, each participant moves at each one’s pace. . . .

    And this is so true! It’s ridiculous this even is mentioned!  But thanks Mark for saying it!

Reply on the current forum