2000-1-20 09:57:00
I am happy to answer Sterling's post. I do not feel inclined to answer questions every day, as many are thirsty for a continuation of the teachings that are forthcoming.
My posting yesterday had nothing to do with Sterling's question. The rough draft for that writing was written some time ago and would have been posted yesterday no matter what comments or questions were going on.
Sterling writes:
"Now for my concern and my question. While I find a great deal of wonderful new insights in what you write, I also believe that you yourself are still learning and do not have a perfect paradigm of truth. I think if I were to sit down eyeball to eyeball with you ? and even now as I write this via e-mail ? that you would agree with me on that point. J.J. does not have everything figured out."
JJ: I agree. There are many things I do not know. On the other hand the Master has promised: "Ask and it shall be given, knock and it shall be open." I have found these words to be true. Time and time again in my life, that which I have asked to know has been given me. Sometimes it has not come instantly, sometimes I have had to ask and pursue over a long period of time, but always the answer comes. My most important questions have been answered and there are a few remaining that I feel will also be given when the time is right. After that I'm sure there will be more questions.
I have always stressed that the most important principle I teach is soul contact - that all of us have the Spirit of God within us that communes with us through the soul, and that all of us have equal opportunity to discover the truth through the soul.
Asking and receiving goes hand in hand with soul contact, without this an answer cannot be recognized even if it is presented with great clarity. If you ask God for an answer you may receive directly through the soul - or you may receive from some teacher - or even some synchronous fluke that jars the answer within. In any case it is only through your own soul that real truth can be recognized.
I am in the same boat as all the rest of you. If I want to know something I have to ask and receive; something I do on a regular basis. If I did not receive I would have nothing to give you that would register with your souls.
Sterling Continues: "That being said, I get the feeling that J.J. is not willing to admit when he is in error on something and reshape his paradigm accordingly. My experience so far on this list and in my private correspondence (very little relevant to this point), is that J.J. has never once admitted or acknowledged that his paradigm was even a tad inaccurate."
JJ: If you read the first 100 or so posts to this list, you will see that I went out of my way to start everyone out on the right foot as far as teachers and authority goes. It has never been my intention to present myself as infallible. I stressed with all that is in my being, that the only authority you can trust is your own soul; and if you do not receive confirmation in your heart, mind and soul, if in any way a teaching does not register, that you are not to blindly trust it. Then I stressed regularly that this included me as much or more than anyone.
My paradigm is reshaped regularly, but I do not share with the group all that goes on internally within my makeup. For one thing I would probably start boring everyone to death. Instead, I share that which I have received that I deem to be true and helpful, with the hope it will assist some on their path. Whenever I discover that I am wrong (unless it is a very inconsequential piece of data) I try and correct myself and am happy to do so publicly.
Here is an example from the archives from the period of Clinton's impeachment:
"You may find it of interest to know that one thing I told you in relation to the President and Congress was wrong for I have received a correction I need to present to you.
"I told you to visualize Light and Love descending on the President and Congress. Now who would doubt that this would be a good thing to do? Very few, which is another good reason to check with the soul rather than believing the obvious.
"But there is a danger here. When saying the Song we should only visualize Light and Love descending on people who are open to it and will use the energy for good. If we send Light and Love to anyone on the dark path, or of a low vibration, or someone who will use power contrary to the good of the whole, then the Light and Love we send will be transmuted to the lower centers and all we will do is energize the lower desires of these people.
"Many Light Workers at the beginning of World War II made the mistake of sending Light and Love to Hitler, and it only had the effect of energizing his lower self rather than making him more sensitive to the needs of others."
I discovered that this was an important error to correct and so I did it publicly on the list. I might mention that a number thought my original teaching was correct and did not go along with the correction.
As far as my whole paradigm goes, I am sure there are flaws in it, but I am attempting to follow the highest I know. I will never teach the group anything I know to be untrue. It would be difficult for me to acknowledge the flaws in my paradigm, for these are things I cannot see in the present. As soon as I see error, I attempt to remove it, and then the errors that remain are still things I cannot see and cannot tell you about.
One thing that does concern me is that perhaps a hundred years from now there will be some great teacher instructing his students and he may say something like this: "Now I am going to read a quote from JJ Dewey that is a completely bungled mass of error. Let us see if the class can spot them."
That said, I will mention that this perception that the teacher is presenting himself as beyond error, is an easy thing for students to assume. Every true teacher teaches the highest he knows and in so doing must discover knowledge higher than the highest he knows if he is to acknowledge error. Even though this may happen often on a personal basis few of the great teachers in the past have felt the need to proclaim error in their teachings.
Let us look at the greatest of teachers. Jesus, of course, never once said any of his teachings were in error. How about Moses, Isaiah, Jeremiah or the twelve apostles, or Paul? Nope. No admission there. How About the Buddha, Zoroaster, Confucius, Mohammed, Joseph Smith, Alice A. Bailey - None there as far as I can remember.
The truth is most spiritual teachers give out the highest revelation that registers with their souls and seldom does the time come that their students correct them, especially as far as principles are concerned. Any correction comes from within and since the teachers have already taught the highest they can perceive from within, a higher knowledge through the soul is usually reserved for a future life when consciousness has expanded.
Sterling: But I would bet you anything that J.J. is changing his paradigm from time to time, as a result of things people here on this list say, as well as from what ever other studying he is doing.
JJ: You would win this bet.
Sterling: In other words, the image that is subtly being portrayed here has some points in common with the relationship that the Mormon Church currently has with its prophet. He's the man, and everyone should listen to what he says, and no one should be so presumptuous as to think that they could teach the prophet something new.
JJ: I strongly disagree with this. In the Mormon and some other churches, if you know more than the big guy, or even "think" you know something he does not know, you will be thrown out. In this group, members disagree with me on a regular basis, and they are not asked to leave. Many send me information and make postings that I learn a lot from. Just the other day Glenys sent me some information on A Course in Miracles that I found enlightening.
If someone attempts to teach me something that does not register with my soul, I, of course, will not accept it. I have the same rights as members of the list do, for I admonish all to not accept what I say unless it registers likewise within for you.
Sterling: "When I was excommunicated, in part for trying to get up in LDS general (world) conference Oct.'92 to give a talk (http://www.greaterthings.com/Essays/TALK-Law&Word.htm), the high counselors sitting in on my church court ("disciplinary hearing") were absolutely flabbergasted that I would be so presumptuous as to think that I might have something more important to say (or even equally important) as The Brethren. That was nothing short of blasphemy in their mind, as the brethren are like gods to them."
JJ: You are welcome to burst into the list and take the microphone and say your piece at any time.
Sterling continues: "So now for the first time since my excommunication in '93, I am in another official classroom setting, sitting at the feet of a designated teacher. He is a very good teacher with a great deal of wisdom to impart.
"However (yes, the terrible BUT), though I feel a significant degree of respect from J.J., I do not feel that he has portrayed the attribute of being teachable or correctable.
"Perhaps my memory fails me, and he has exhibited this and I just missed it, but I don't think so.
"J.J., there are many noble souls who are participating in this classroom. Many of them could easily be in the very position you are in and conduct a very meaningful class.
"Another analogy comes to me. This one again from my experience in the Mormon church."
JJ: There are a handful of people on this list who feel I am not teachable because I have not accepted their views, but they forget that, if I am honest with myself, I must not accept their views if they do not register with my soul. I do not use an affirmative action program to determine how much I will accept the teachings of others. I use the same principle that I teach others. If someone teaches me, I run it by my soul and if positive I accept, if not I reject.
On the other hand, I believe the majority of the list sees me as quite open and flexible in my approach, especially those who have caught a glimpse of the Oneness Principle. I am not here to show the group how much I have to learn (even though I have much to learn). Instead, I am here to impart that which I have been given and this, I hope, to continue to the best of my ability.
You are very correct in saying that "there are many noble souls who are participating in this classroom. Many of them could easily be in the very position you are in and conduct a very meaningful class." Part of my mission is to duplicate myself so others will start groups and lists like this one and even "greater things."
John W has broken off and is now doing on his list what I am doing here, but with a different twist - maybe a better one. He is up to 5000 hits a week, far more than we have here. Do I feel humiliated that he is doing well? No, because we are one in purpose and are both going the same direction with the same goals. Anyone from the group is welcome to check out this fellow teacher at: http://disc.server.com/Indices/72212.html
Glenys has started a study group in her area and has the great privilege of teaching face to face, a thing I am unable to do at present. Others that I have not mentioned are making plans to teach and serve.
Dozens of you make postings that stir me greatly and I can see that, if you should decide to do so, you can go forth and teach and stir the souls of men just as I have been privilege to do in a very small degree. I also sense that many of you feel a need for preparation and want to learn all you can for now to prepare for things to come. Each of you are here because of something that spoke to you from within and this is what I encourage you to follow no mater where it leads.
Sterling: "So yes, you may be the teacher of this group, but I would submit that you are not the only one with sufficient stature and background and spiritual maturity to be able to hold that position."
JJ: Being a teacher as I am in this group is not a position like those you mention in the church. In the church when a position is filled then it is just full. No one else can have it until there is a vacancy. Even then one cannot volunteer, but must wait to be appointed by an authority. On the other hand, my "position" is open to all. John W has already assumed my position and is now doing what I am doing to his heart's content.
Paul gives the principle to be followed by spiritual teachers: "Yea, so have I strived to preach the gospel, not where Christ was named, lest I should build upon another man's foundation." (Rom 15:20) In other words, Paul was saying that he did not seek to build a church and set himself up as a teacher, where the teachings of Christ were already established by another teacher, or he would be unproductively building "upon another man's foundation."
I do not plan on jumping in to John's forum and telling everyone that it is time for John to move aside because I am now here.
Even so here. This list is a forum, put together by Rick, dedicated to my teachings. The foundation thus was created by Rick and me working together and if another man were to build on this foundation it would probably be out of sync. If a teacher wants to be in sync with his students and his soul he must initiate on a foundation that registers within him and then gather around himself like-minded souls.
Sterling: "J.J. you need to be able to learn from your students and admit when you are wrong at times, for you are wrong in some points of your paradigm. You don't have the whole elephant figured out yet. You need the input of the trunk specialist and the tail specialist and the gonad specialist to be able to more fully piece this puzzle together."
JJ: My very first post in the archives was on the student teacher relationship.
Anyone interested in my views on the subject can go there and read this. I greatly value each person on this list as a part of the whole. I sincerely hope that members see this aspect in me.
Sterling: To an extent, are you not doing the same thing as you accused Annalee? Are you not using an illusion (true or not, it is an Illusion because it is purposely not clarified) to create an awe factor around which you can gain significantly more clout as someone who should be listened to? It seems to me that you have monopolized on this mystery, milking it for all it is worth.
JJ: The data indicated that Annalee was promoting something that was not true, as being true. If this was correct then this was indeed a lie. Norman supplied additional data that indicated this may not be true.
For the sake of discussion let us just say that Annalee claimed to be translated when she was not. This is not comparable to my writing a book which I present clearly as a combination of truth and fiction. Instead it would be comparable to me teaching a falsehood to this group as being true and knowing that such a thing is not true. It would be comparable to me saying that John is living with us in our spare bedroom and telling me what to write each evening, when he is not.
I do believe that this may be the first book written and published as fictionalized that is so believable that some readers actually complain that that I did something wrong in making it sound too true. Where is there another book published as fiction where the author is accused of promoting a lie?
I have said many times that the book is a combination of truth and fiction as far as the story goes. Thus I could only be lying if it was 100% true or 100% false. If it is really a combination of fact and fiction then I am telling the truth. I have indeed created a mystery, but creating a mystery through a work of fiction is no more sin than the Blair Witch Project is.
The scriptures declare: "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter." (Proverbs 25:2) I do conceal some things, but if it is indeed the glory of God to do such a thing then I am in good company. It is the honour of kings (and the Keysters) to search out the matter. There are more clues in the book than you realize.
In the past some disciples have failed in their missions because they bored their students into oblivion. The value of a work of fiction is that it creates a mystery; everyone is attracted to a good mystery. Whether you think I am right or wrong in the way the book is written and promoted (with part of the true facts concealed), you must admit that this list and this gathering would not even exist without The Immortal.
If I did not make it clear that this is a fictionalized book, the sales would be much greater than they are. If I was a true deceiver I could have much more gain by promoting it as non-fiction. When the bookstores ask me the category of the book, and I say fiction, they will often refuse to carry it; and instead stock their shelves with many other books that claim to be non-fiction, but are fiction. The booksellers tell me that there is a big surplus of New Age fiction books and most of them sell very poorly. All I would have to do is change the category of my book and signing up booksellers would be much easier. I do believe, though, that when the book gets a little more exposure that the sales will come no matter what the category.
Sterling: "And to the extent that you are not openly admitting that you are ever wrong or that you have altered your paradigm because of what someone has said, to me is a very, very dangerous path to be on. I call upon you to humble yourself as our teacher and come down off of this manipulative throne you have created. Come mingle among us as your peers rather than as peons eating scraps from your mighty table."
JJ: Sounds good. I desire no throne and you are welcome to the same table that I eat from. You can choose your seat and I will happily serve you before I dine myself.
Sterling: However, the point I wish to make is that by his leaving this such a mystery, the Annalee effect comes into play and deception pokes in its ugly head. One lie gives rise to another. What is true? What is not? He's not admitting he's wrong even when he is. Truth cannot thrive in such an environment.
JJ: If a work is presented as fiction and that creates a mystery, I still maintain it is not a lie.
Moses took a walk one day and was never seen again. His body was never found and many of his followers believed he was translated as was Enoch. Let us assume, as the scriptures indicate, that he was translated. Was Moses being a deceptive liar by not explaining to the Israelites what really happened? Just before or after the translation he could have ended the mystery by revealing the whole story, but he did not. He emulated the glory of God and concealed some of the facts while at the same time, all that he presented as truth was true to the best of his knowledge.
My teachings to the fine people on this list are not presented as fiction, but truth from the highest vision I can ascertain. Never once have I taken anything from the book that is part of the mystery and presented it as true or used it as a lever to obtain authority. We are entering an age where the final authority within ourselves must finally be exalted upon the throne of truth, and I will declare that in all my teachings to you, which is equivalent to about a half dozen Immortal books, there is only the truth as I understand it.
By the way, my wife read through this post and insisted I was wrong on several things, and made me do some rewriting. I certainly have not convinced her of my infallibility.
Copyright 2000 by J.J. Dewey, All Rights Reserved