|
This paper
sustains the same relation to the Urantia Book as the first chapter
of the Book of Genesis does to the Bible. (All quotations, unless
otherwise noted, will be from the Urantia Book)1 Both
contain answers, consistent with their own level of enlightenment,
answers to that very old philosophic question, "Why is there
something rather than nothing?" Both show the
source-relationship of deity to reality.
We may assume
with good reason that man has been curious about the origin of
reality almost since Andon and Fonta started their northward trek
993,456 years ago. But for ages he lacked the ability to provide his
own answers. It was not until 1,000 BC, that the best known work of
Vedic Literature, the Satapatha-Brahmana, appeared in India. It
contained the first "speculation of the Brahman or the Absolute
Principle" coupled with an attempt at a cosmogony.2 About
fifty years later the first Hebrew writings appeared which were
destined to be grouped with others to form the Book of Genesis. In
these works impersonal deity, The Brahman, and personal deity, God,
were linked to the origin of reality; both concepts were
anthropomorphic and possibly influenced by the residual teachings of
Melchizedek. In these works we observe a concern about a
relationship: that of the one, deity, and the many, reality.
About the middle
of the sixth century BC courageous Greek thinkers began to throw off
the yoke of mythology and to look about them in the visible world
for solutions to a problem which they also called "the one and
the many." Their tool was pure reason based upon observation;
the results became Greek philosophy, of which, Frederick Copleston
was to say, "This philosophy of the Greeks was really their own
achievement, the fruit of their vigor and freshness of mind..."3
Uninfluenced by
religion it might be called "abstract materialism" a term
suggested by Copleston.4 With its materialistic
orientation it has had a tremendous influence on the Western
individual and collective consciousness. It was modified by
Christianity, and nearly submerged in medieval scholasticism only to
emerge with new vigor sixty years ago as logical positivism. This
latter development and its consequents have done much to sterilize
British and American philosophy since then.
It has taken a
revelation, the Urantia Book, to present a clear, coherent and
self-consistent account of the origin and proliferation of reality
in which a new and enlarged concept of God is presented as
instigator. We now have a new and dynamic view of the one and of the
many, Deity and Reality.
The author of
Paper 105, a Melchizedek of Nebadon, recognizes the many
difficulties inherent in the attempt to portray the totality of
reality, all reality, to our finite minds. He says -- frankly,
"reality totality IS infinity and therefore can never be fully
comprehended by any mind that is subinifinite in concept
capacity."5 Now here is a hint; if you want to think
about infinity, just think about all the reality that you can
imagine, material, mindal, spiritual, including truth, beauty and
goodness in the domains of science, philosophy and religion, then
add the incomprehensible vastness of all that you don't know and you
will find yourself pointed in the direction of infinity.
It is doubtful
that regardless of our future development-growth we will ever
encompass infinity. "No matter how much you may grow in Father
comprehension, your mind will always be staggered by the unrevealed
infinity of the Father-I Am..."6 Don't let that
discourage you, because, the human mind has the ability to form
concept-reference frameworks in which it can think, speculate and
theorize about anything; including infinity. Otherwise, how do you
suppose philosophy, theology and other abstract systems of thought
ever came about? Our Melchizedek author is taking advantage of this
fact to present to us the idea of an infinite I AM as the source of
all reality.
Right at the
outset it is obvious that we are going to be asked to greatly expand
our current concept of God without losing any of those qualitative
characteristics we now believe he possesses. We are going to become
much more philosophically sophisticated, unless you are a Hindu.
Our Melchizedek
mentor warns us that this new expanded concept of God, called the I
Am, is very remote from everyday human understanding. So much so,
that he specifically reminds us in section one that regardless of
how much this new concept may include elements which appear
impersonal, indifferent to the human condition on the surface, that
the "I Am is in all personality meanings and values, synonymous
with the First Person of Deity, the Universal Father of all
personalities."7
So, no matter how
abstractly philosophical we may become, ever keep in mind that:
"When all is said and done, the Father idea is still the
highest human concept of God."8 And, in section two
of this paper he says, "The face which the Infinite turns
toward all universe personalities is the face of a Father, the
Universal Father of Love."9
To give us some
idea of the magnitude of the I Am who is still our Universal Father,
our Melchizedek Teacher does something quite unusual for emphasis;
he presents us with the longest statement in italics in the Urantia
Book. It reads: "Your experiential worshipful concept of the
Universal Father must always be less than your philosophic postulate
of the infinity of the First Source and Center, the I AM."10
I can see the morontia forms of Meister Eckhart, Nicholas of Cusa,
Plotinus, Jakob Boehme, Paul Tillich and all the Hindu philosophers
at a gathering on one of the mansion worlds toasting the Urantia
Revelation with the words "at last our concepts have been given
recognition."
Once more, to
keep us in perspective, and to support the timid souls among us, our
Melchizedek friend says, "Ever remember that man's
comprehension of the Universal Father is a personal
experience."11 "When we speak of the Father, we
mean God as he is understandable by his creatures high and low, but
there is much more of Deity which is not comprehensible to universe
creatures."12 It is this muchmoreness of God which
we have to deal with in this paper. Now I can well imagine some of
you beginning to groan inwardly and say, "why all of
this?"
My answer is that
the Urantia revelation presents a cosmogony which is well-nigh
limitless and it HAS to have a God bigger than itself. Secondly, the
philosophers have a true statement, "ex nihilo nihil fit,"
which means "out of nothing, nothing is made;" which
brings us right back to our original concern over the relationship
between deity and reality. This is a source relationship. The I AM
is presented in this paper as the ultimate source of all reality. As
a modern philosopher - theologian, Paul Tillich, would have said it,
"God is the ground of all being." Our Melchizedek teacher
says in this paper from his viewpoint, "When you stand in awe
of the magnitude of the master Universe, pause to consider that even
this inconceivable creation can be no more than a partial revelation
of the Infinite."13 The Infinite in totality is the
I AM.
We are given the
I AM concept in this paper because we mortals must have a starting
point for reality. If you want to have some fun with your own mind,
ask it to conjure up for you a concept of something that had no
beginning. Things without endings can easily be conceived; not so
with those without beginnings. So out of a spirit of cooperation
with the limitations of the human mind, our teacher says in effect,
"you imagine that there is such a thing as past infinity."
No problem there; it is humanly conceivable. Why? Because it can be
considered to be a thing even if it is unqualified.
Next he says,
"now as a concession to your sense of beginnings, let us
imagine that there was a hypothetical moment in this past eternity
when the only thing that existed was something that was totally
undifferentiated and ineffable." Unspeakable, in the sense that
is incapable of any description. It cannot be described. We now have
the I AM.
You and I are now
in the process of building a concept of God which contains first the
Father as we can know and love him and be loved in return; he proved
this through Jesus. But it must also be big enough to have contained
all past and present reality without exception and still big enough
to contain the potential for all future reality for all eternity
without the loss of anything of itself. Perhaps if we call it the
Absolute of Absolutes, the Ground of all Being, then we can
understand how it can bear a source-relationship to such Absolutes
as those denoted in the Urantia Book as Unqualified, Deity and
Universal Absolutes. Generally speaking, it is as much their Father
as it is ultimately ours. Literally, the I AM is, was, and will be
the ultimate source of all reality. Sections two, three and four
proceed to show how all of this was done, is being and will be done.
Looking at what
we are told has happened according to the author of Paper 105, it
might be helpful to our understanding of the hypothecated process if
we could place ourselves, in imagination, within the I AM at this
hypothetical past eternity-moment in which the magnificent volition
of the I AM is looking for the means to do what it already has
decided to do, namely: "escape the awful limitations of
infinity." Our individual ability to form reference frameworks
now comes into use.
We look about us
and in this hypothetical moment we see total nothingness; no
actualities, no potentials, not even prepotentials or prepersonals.
Yet, we intuitively know that we are in the presence of both thing
and no-thing, cause and effect, volition and response - and we sense
that something of infinite importance is about to happen. Where?
Whatever happens can happen only within the I AM itself; for at this
moment it is the only reality even if this appears as nothingness.
Forsaking our imaginative position within the I AM, let's move
outside and become rational spectators of the tremendous steps in a
process about to take place, one culmination of which is planet
Earth and all of its inhabitants, even you and I.
Now the Infinite
does nothing without first providing an absolute foundation for it.
It builds only on eternity footings, because, that which survives is
to have eternal existence. We are concerned then first with seeing
how, according to Paper 105, these eternity foundations evolve, from
whence they come and their purpose in the total scheme of reality -
the Master Universe.
We now turn again
to that hypothetical moment in eternity when the Universal Father as
the I AM makes that first move towards striking off the shackles of
infinity. "...A postulated theoretical moment of 'first'
volitional expression and 'first' repercussional reaction"
within the I AM.14 The first repercussion reaction begins
a long process which to our consciousness culminates in the universe
as we know it. All process can be broken up into stages and we are
only at stage one.
At this point,
stage one can be likened to simple cell division. First you have
one, now you have two. Here the analogy ends. Neither cell is
exactly like the other and the original cell is still intact. In
fact, all of this has taken place within the first and only cell so
we can now have three cells. The paper calls each separate cell by
different names. The original cell was and still is the Infinity,
the I AM, unchanged; one of the new cells is called "The
Infinite One" and the other new one is called "The
Infinitude," and all are different from each other.
But before we
discuss the multitude of relations which arise out of this primary
self-differentiation, let's quickly glance at what it makes
possible. Where we have three things, the possibility of
establishing seven relationships, (more easily understood as
combinations) is obvious. Simply, the I AM is now in a position to
enter into seven self-relationships within itself. And these same
self-relationships each assume their own individual identity -
ultimately as the Seven Absolutes of Infinity, which in total are
the fundamental premise of all reality; the necessary absolute
foundations upon which all reality is grounded. The paper says,
"The seven prime relationships within the I AM eternalize as
the Seven Absolutes of Infinity."15
Now, let us trace
how this came about. The primary differentiation within the I AM
into the Infinite One and the Infinitude becomes recognized as
primal Infinite Personality and primal Infinite Non-Personality - or
primal Infinite Impersonal Being - or perhaps more clearly
understood as primal Infinite THING. Now the reality of the Father-I
AM has always been in a theoretical non-dynamic state, but, now this
reality can function in a dynamic father-son relationship as the I
AM becomes father of the absolute personality, The Eternal Son, who
in turn becomes the spiritual revelation of the personality of the
Father Infinite.
This sounds
circular philosophically, except that the Universal Father is father
personality, the source, bestower and cause of personality and the
Eternal Son is absolute personality, pattern personality whose total
unity cannot be broken by the bestowal of fragments of itself. If
this seems a little difficult of understanding, remember a complete
(absolute) pattern cannot be broken up without the loss of something
of itself which in turn destroys the absolute pattern. Whereas an
Infinite source never runs dry. One other way of looking at pattern
is to consider it a unity of an infinite number of completely unique
parts, the loss of any single one, being sufficient cause for the
destruction of the original unity of the pattern itself. Pattern, by
its nature, is unchangeable. We have carried the Infinite One to
this point, let's leave him for a moment and turn our attention to
the Infinitude, the primal impersonal portion of the first
segmentation of the I AM.
The Universal
Father-I AM must now turn his attention to providing an absolute
basis and pattern for all non-personal being. While its extension is
much broader, we humans can conceive this best as energy-matter,
though that is only one phase of it. Speaking in analogy, if we, you
and I, are to become actors on a vast stage, the master universe,
the preliminaries necessary to its construction must first be
attended to.
Thus the
self-relationship which is concerned with this portion of the total
process, is the I AM as Universal Controller and cause of eternal
Paradise. As the Eternal Son is to become the pattern of all
personality realities, so "this relationship establishes the
potential of form-configuration -- and determines the master pattern
of impersonal and non spiritual relationship - the master pattern
from which all copies are made."16 Thus, the Eternal
Son and Paradise are related to each other as the relationship
sustained by the Infinite One to The Infinitude. The relationship
between personal and impersonal being.
The third
self-relationship within the I AM is that established with the Union
of I AM with the Eternal Son, in which the I AM becomes one with the
Eternal Son and is seen by subsequent appearing universes as The
Universal Creator. This union initiates the creative cycle. In this
union, the Father-I AM and the Eternal Son exist as absolute
oneness. This union insures the ultimate appearance, in a time
sense, of the Conjoint Actor and his counterpoise the Havona
creation as the culmination of the creative cycle initiated by the
union itself. The foundations for the eventual appearance of the
Triodity of Actuality and the Paradise Trinity are now laid. But,
Parenthetically, remember; both are from eternity.
It would appear
at this point that our absolute foundations are well-laid, and they
are, as far as they go. But, that is not far enough. We must have
another absolute foundation on which we may be assured that
everything that ever appears, no matter how far past or future, can
be sustained, integrated and exquisitely balanced into an
ever-growing universe of personal and impersonal beings, which will
endure for all eternity. Here the I AM is seen as self-associative,
providing the means to forever balance statics to ensure the
integration of the continuous flow of new statics constantly
emerging from potentials and at the same time, providing the means
to balance and integrate both personal and impersonal potential
realities. This means is destined to be called The Universal
Absolute. |