|
by requiring Christians "to love one another as I have loved you." Few mainline Christians give much thought to the God of the Old Testament, the God of Juda-ism. Despite some apparent inconsistencies, their model for what God is really like has, as its source, the life and teachings of Jesus.
If I was pressed to criticize some feature of mainline Christianity, it would be the hierarchical structure of their organizations that divides the congregation into two sections, a professional ordained leadership and a led laity. Whatever the pro's and con's may have been in days gone by, the way the churches are presently structured is such that more often than not, attempts are made to turn the clock back rather than to accommodate a rapidly changing world society. Though this attitude is justified wherever society deviates from that which is in accord with the nature of the heavenly Father as revealed in the life of Jesus, in many instances the primary motives are more concerned with sectional interests.
I think it is probably correct to say that most of the problems of the Christian Church throughout the centuries have been due to power struggles between interest groups, and individuals within groups. As with the Romans, making scapegoats of the early Christian "cannibals" in order to achieve an unrelated purpose, so points of doctrine have been used throughout the ages as a cover for some other activity. This kind of thing is inevitable whenever ambitious, self-seeking men and women desire the "seats of honor at the banqueting tables and the chiefs seats in the synagogue." And, of course, it has quite naturally spilled over into the Urantia movement--for that is the way we humans are. Can it be avoided? I think the answer is no, at least not for perhaps hundreds of years to come. It will only cease within groups when a sufficient proportion of members undertake to completely lead their lives in accordance with the direction of the spirit forces within themselves.
It is precisely at this point that I perceive an enormous potential difference between mainline Christianity and Urantia Book followers. Despite the existence of verses in the New Testament in the Gospel of John and in the Epistles of Paul that indicate the indwelling of both the Spirit of the Father and the Spirit of the Son, the vast majority of Christians see God and Jesus as beings "out there" rather than being spirit forces within. That this is factuality has probably been worsened by the priesthood, and others, taking on the role of intercessor between man and God. Even Jesus statement that "whenever two or three are gathered together in my name, there will I be in the midst of them," though repeated weekly in many church services, still has little real meaning and, in any event, is a Jesus "over there in the corner somewhere" rather than a Jesus-within-me.
The emphasis that The Urantia Book places on the roles of the indwelling Thought Adjuster and the Spirit of Truth is, IMHO, the teaching that has the most potential to bring changes in the world. True, the cosmology of the book broadens our outlook on our roles and our purposes on this earth and, in doing so, brings meaning to what otherwise might be a fairly difficult existence. This knowledge can have a tremendously liberating effect for the individual but it is knowledge about "me and mine," whereas our knowledge of the spirit forces within ourselves, if put into effect, really does have the power to change ourselves, our neighbor and, eventually, this rebellion-racked materialistic world of ours. A millennium from now, it may even land us at a new and higher stage of the journey towards light and life. (1086)
It is also my belief that even dedicated Urantia Book readers will not get far along the road of successfully turning over their lives to their Thought Adjusters until the fact is recognized that we Urantians are a primitive, backward example of humanity with a potential for spiritual advance that is far below any "normal" world. We need to accept the failure of the Adamic upgrading program as well as the effects of the Caligastia rebellion, and, in all humility, admit our inferiority, at least to ourseves. Then we need to accept advice given us in the book, such as:
"To 'follow Jesus' means to personally share his religious faith and to enter into the spirit of the Master's life of unselfish service for man. One of the most important things in human living is to find out what Jesus believed, to discover his ideals, and to strive for the achievement of his exalted life purpose. Of all human knowledge, that which is of greatest value is to know the religious life of Jesus and how he lived it." (2090)
Knowledge of Jesus is knowledge of God, for a Creator Son is, to all intents and purposes, God to his universe, he is the vicegerant personalization of the Universal Father. (367) In case anybody has any lingering doubt, in both the New Testament and The Urantia Book, Jesus is on record as stating, "He who has seen me has seen the Father." We Urantians are quite incapable of any form of logical processing that can provide us with true knowledge of the nature of God. Such knowledge can only come to us as through revelation. We are also on the bottom rung of the evolutionary ladder as far as spiritual capacity is concerned. I have no doubt that this is why we are being told that "that which is of greatest value is to know the religious life of Jesus and how he lived it"--for to know Jesus is to know God.
Jesus' teaching was wholly concerned about love and brotherhood. His teaching about God was about love and Fatherhood. His life was a revelation of the nature of the Father. How better a way to get to know God than to get to know Jesus?
|
|
