PR
Monjoronson Conversation #59 - Divine Justice - Sep 07, 2012 - Daniel Raphael, Colorado

Topics:

• The Escalating, Disruptive Political and Military Situations
• Equal Protection Pacts among Nations
• Refrain from Making Rash Decisions as a Nation
• Divine Justice Versus Human Justice
• Integrating Divine Law into Human Society
• Our Legal System Reflects the Morality of Our Culture
• A Proactive Moral Base
• The Problem of Terrorism
• Forming a New Type of Political Party
• Changing the World’s Culture over Time

TR:  Daniel Raphael
Moderator:  Michael McCray
September 7, 2012

Prayer:  Heavenly Father, Michael, Nebadonia, we gather again for another session with our Avonal Son and his staff.  We sincerely thank you all for everything that you have done for us, that you do and will do on our behalf.  It is our hope that our efforts co-creatively with you in this venue will further the work of the Correcting Time.  Amen.

MMc:  Monjoronson?

MONJORONSON:  One moment, please.  Let us continue and wait for this one to engage this process fully.  (Pause)  You may proceed.


The escalating, disruptive political and military situations

MMc:  The last time we were together, you spoke about the escalating, disruptive political and military situation throughout the world.  I wonder if you would like to say more about that?

MONJORONSON:  If you look at the world, your global network of nations, you find that in many areas—most areas—there is not conflict, not open hostility, but that this hostility is peculiar to particular regions of the world.  You recognize that the Middle East has great difficulties, and you also see the seething hatred and continuing animosity in the [Balkan states], Czechoslovakian area, which has now been dismembered into several nations.  You also see this in Northern Africa, and you see it elsewhere in the world.  If you simplify this further, that the many areas under conflict are either religious or economic as the basis for the conflict.  Militarism is simply a symptom of underlying disquiet or tension.  Therefore, when you see militarism, you must look deeper at what is the motivation for using militarism.  You see now, the conflict in economics and resources between China and the Philippines and Japan, over islands and territories, which are not clearly defined as being owned or under the control of any one particular nation.  Therefore, these island places are contested.  That is an economic example.  You will eventually see much greater, many more military excursions by China as it seeks to expand its resources.  In many ways, it is deeply wealthy in material and geophysical resources, but in many ways it is very undernourished for supporting the huge population it has.  It will be making excursions elsewhere.  You have still yet to see the conflict that was predicted in the revelation between the “Bear and the Dragon;” this has yet to come into completion.

The area in the Middle East’s tension is mostly religious, cultural, of that nature.  It will eventually express itself in terms of economics as well, when the oil industry is replaced by other energy sources.  As those populations further exceed the capacity of their landmass to support the people, there will be great difficulties there.  As these stressors of the geophysical nature occur in volcanism and tectonics—earthquakes and so on—to cause great problems, many resources will be diverted to those catastrophes, those cataclysms.  This will create difficulties in nations’ budgets, as you are seeing now, and that there must be a diminishment of military budgets for extensive overseas [deployments] and what they call “foreign-bound military resources,” where nations send their armies and navies to great distances, and these will be withdrawn.

I am trying to paint you a picture of the vectors of influence that are coming to closer convergence in the near future—the near future meaning the time [from] now to a point at the end of the decade, where these will all converge and create a tremendously difficult era in your world, not just this nation but the world.  When that occurs, the obligations, the network of relationships between nations will weaken, and it will be much like holding a netted bag of oranges suspended from the ceiling, and as time goes by the netting weakens and soon all the oranges fall to the floor.  This is what will occur in some of those regions of great difficulty, that the restraints that are in place voluntarily by nations will be weakened, and you will see military excursions into other nations, very similarly as you saw during the era of colonialism in the world, where there was a sense of entitlement to others’ resources because they had the technology and the power to do so.

It is not that your world will experience another world war, but you will have a world that is in chaos.  That is why it is so vitally important that nations withhold themselves from acting out or acting to get involved in those skirmishes and those difficulties, as they will be drawn in, and drawn in, and drawn in to the point where they too, become an enemy.  We are not speaking of isolationism, but we are speaking of very rational, cautious withholding of power and influence that may jeopardize the stability of the whole community of nations.  It will be necessary in the future that nations that withdraw or withhold themselves act and provide sort of a cultural pillar, an immoveable anchor, one of those mighty piers to which a mighty, great ship ties up to at the dock, and is held fast and secure.  There must be a voice of reason when all else and all others are screaming in panic.  That is why we are working so diligently on a universal process that is applicable to all people, of all cultures, of all nations, and all political orientations that is useful to bring about stability.  You can forget about social sustainability during the next few years, but work towards social stability.  The same process that will bring about social sustainability will first bring about social stability, then social peace, and then eventually social sustainability.  It is an evolutionary development that will occur, and does occur [for] all nations, even when nations are so disintegrated and so powerless that they have no other option but to become sustainable.


Equal protection pacts among nations

MMc:  The United States and Europe are involved in equal protection pacts, such as NATO.  Those types of pacts during World War I basically pulled Russia and England and France and Germany into a war that basically began in the Balkans.  Will we be dealing with a situation where we will have to be restrained from getting involved in those mutual protection pacts again, to the point where we are forced into war?

MONJORONSON:  No, my friend, it is far more complicated than that, as the decisions that are made now will affect the future.  One of the most stabilizing decisions to be made recently was the willingness of the European banks to buy unlimited amounts of debt of those nations that are greatly in difficulty—Spain, Portugal, Italy and Greece, for example.  That eventually will delay “paying the piper” until later, but it is a wise decision to make now.  What you are asking about is dependent upon many, many, many decisions that will be made before that one.  That is a conclusion; it is almost a conclusionary statement or question that asks to draw an answer of a conclusion, which could be contested—and it will be contested through the development of all the events that precede it.

It may sound as though I am talking in circles, but we see through that whole process, that the first events precede the last, and that therefore we do not wish to make any conclusions now, as there are many decisions that need to be made by you and the nations before that conclusion will become evident.  I apologize that I am not able to make or provide a more clear answer, which I definitely could, but it is not advisable to do so at this time.

MMc:  I believe I understand what you are trying to say to us.  The situation is up in the air, but you are definitely advising us to hold back and use our brains, rather than react in a nature…


Refrain from making rash decisions as a nation

MONJORONSON:  Yes, the advice I am giving you—and when I say “you,” I mean your national government—is that discretion now will allow you tremendously greater latitude of decisions and options in the future.  Making rash decisions now, knee-jerk responses now of might and power, will create an untenable and unsurvivable future more quickly, or sooner than later.  So discretion at this time, by this nation and other powerful nations is vital to having options for better peaceful settlements in the future.


Divine justice versus human justice

MMc:  A friend from Russia writes us saying that he has been contemplating for years, the difference between divine justice and divine law and human justice and human law.  The first question is:  Could you express and enhance the explanation of divine justice, please?

MONJORONSON:  Yes, I would be glad to.  Divine justice is the same as the other side of divine mercy, both in the divinity of [the] universe involves the divine management of a huge universe, over a huge amount of time.  Divine justice takes that into account on the personal level, and on the universal level, in simplified terms.  In such a case, it may appear to be unjust to the individual that events occur as they do and are developed and treated as they are by God.  In the long-term of universe management, divine justice must take into account the smaller and the larger realms of existence.  The individual must be able to see justice in their own right; had they a large enough Godlike perspective, they could see justice in the universal dimension as well.

It is important that when one considers divine justice, that one also and simultaneously, considers divine mercy, for one without the other does not provide a good synergism to the management of the universe.  Individuals must be able to see the mercy that is the long-term, [the] overarching wisdom of those decisions of justice, to make them understandable and to be able to appreciate those decisions.  When one understands divine mercy, they also come to appreciate that there is someone in charge, that the universe does work for good, and that long-term difficult trends then become highly productive and beneficial.  The divinity of the management of the universe is no small project; it is no small development, but one that is inherent in its creation, from its very beginning throughout all its duration and to the ends.  Of course, we know that in the eventuality of time that this seventh-stage of the universe will become complete.  Then there will be the era of jubilation, that of completion, then divine mercy and divine justice become one.

MMc:  Can you compare divine justice with human justice that we now have?  With human justice as it will be expressed in our future?

MONJORONSON:  You really are asking two questions, and yes, I “can” answer that question.  (Chuckling.)  The first is that no, there is no comparison between divine justice and earthly justice now, but that there will be a comparable comparison to be made in the future.  This will be attendant to the development of the era of light and life, the development of social sustainability, such that your earthly justice is a component to the social sustainability of the world.  It will still, however, be limited because it is mortal and material in nature.  It will not be able to encompass the morontial or the spiritual or the eternal.  Therefore, the comparison will be highly limited even in the future as your world develops and becomes socially sustainable.  Do you understand?


Integrating divine law into human society

MMc:  Yes.  I know you’ve touched on this, but I want ask the question anyway:  How can we integrate divine law into the life of human society?

MONJORONSON:  This can be incorporated only slowly, and it is accomplished with the long-time development and evolution of your societies and your social processes as they strive to become more divine.  It is a stretch to use that word in this context, but as individuals—meaning leaders and authorities who mete out justice, and who write the laws for justice—do so in the terms of the overarching divine perspective, then it can be integrated.  As you are listening to me, you know that I am struggling with words to develop the concepts in your minds to understand what I am saying.  You are really asking a huge question that is almost beyond your comprehension in its totality.  Even a partial understanding would be difficult; therefore, the simplification of my answer needs to be brief.  When you come into higher mindedness to appreciate the connection between yourself and your Thought Adjuster, then you can apply those concepts of justice to your society.

MMc:  I understand that there is a… it is simple to ask the question:  How can we express the essence of divine law in our human society, but it is very difficult for us to contemplate exactly what divine law is, so how it would be integrated into our society becomes a very difficult thing to explain.  I can certainly understand that, and I thank you for trying.  (Monjoronson:  You are most welcome.)

The human legal system is based on the principle of punishment.  What conceptual changes do you suggest we make in our legal system to bring it more in line with the divine system?


Our legal system reflects the morality of our culture

MONJORONSON:  Your legal system that you have now, reflects the morality of your culture.  That morality is one of hindsight, meaning that the realm of punishment is a form of justice to correct injuries that occurred in the past.  The huge difficulty with this is that it is not proactive.  Neither your morality nor your justice is a proactive justice or morality that urges the individual to make right decisions for proactive reasons for the individual or their family or community.  It is a morality of hindsight, it is retrospective; it is not forward-looking or forward-thinking.  Generally in your society, when they think of doing “good,” they think of business as usual, and when they think in terms of the morality, they think in terms of not getting caught if they do violate the ethics and morality and laws of a society.  This is quite debilitating to a society that is in the process of growing.  How does it grow?  Does it mature?  Does it become older?  Did it become more progressive and productive as a society?  Using this old form of morality and justice, does not provide that.

You must move into the acceptance of a proactive morality, one that urges people to do right for a reason, with very obvious positive outcomes that contribute to the welfare of the individual and of society.  We are in the process of one of our subordinates who is working with this one in writing the book that we entitle—at the present—“Morality for a Sustainable Civilization.”  Civilizations, nations, societies, communities, cities, counties, families and individuals are actually hindering their progress as spiritual, emotional and social beings, by not having a morality that urges them to make decisions that contribute to the good of themselves and others.  When you have the combined decision-making power of several billion people who are making several decisions every day, they make a contribution to their life and those of others in a positive way, [thus] you will end up with a very developmentally maturing society and civilization.  Your civilization now is not only stagnating, but morally it is moving backwards.  It does not have the moral foundation to move forward.  When we speak of your culture as being technically advanced, as many worlds that are much more peaceful, we are saying that you are truly out of balance, that you need and must devise a new morality of personal behavior, of social behavior and international behavior—those three levels—that make huge contributions to the future.


A proactive moral base

MMc:   So, we need to change our whole moral base so we are looking at this in a proactive sense?

MONJORONSON:  Yes, very definitely.

The problem of terrorism

MMc:  Monjoronson, our friend states that terrorism is a problem.  He sees terrorists as fighting for justice, as they understand it.  He then asked, “What are the ways that we can resolve the terrorism problem?”

MONJORONSON:  There is nettlesome reality to self-willed beings on worlds as this, even on worlds that are approaching the days of light and life, and that is there are always troublemakers, there are always those who are “fighting the system,” those who are always questioning or challenging authority whether by rhetorical questions, confrontational questions, or from passive/aggressive sabotage.  These individuals will come forward in any world.  However, when you have a world such as Urantia, which is grossly overpopulated and which is grossly undeveloped in its capacity to be self-sustaining socially, then there are many people who are easily manipulated and influenced by media, by their dominant culture, and by authority figures and those people in power.  Even when individuals willingly create acts of terrorism without being paid for it, without being given some meaningful compensation, they are doing so because they have chosen to do so from the meager options that they have been enlightened with during the era of their life.

Some people on your world see terrorism as a way of doing business, that the sacrifices and the loss of life of individuals is worthwhile to the larger cause.  When you have that, and you have individuals who feel that their lives are meaningless in any context, then giving their life for some cause—even when they are convinced by those in power who are manipulating them—becomes an option to do so.  There truly is no stopping the terrorism on your world at this time, until there is a diminishment of population and an increase in the quality of life.  Where you see terrorism, you see that the three core values of social sustainability are not operating.  A most dangerous creature on your planet is a person with nothing to lose.  Options for action then become innumerable, death becomes just another meaningless activity that they choose to do one day of their life, the last day of their life.  Until the quality of life and living becomes worthwhile and meaningful for individuals, then there will be many hundreds of thousands, millions of people with meaningless lives, who are willing to sacrifice their lives in acts of terrorism or acts of benevolence.  The choice is theirs.  When the worldview of individuals is not benevolent, but all they see is desperation and torment, then death becomes really quite a likable option.

Forming a new type of political party

MMc:  Our friend says he has thought about a new type of political party that will struggle for justice, righteousness and the highest morality according to divine rules, a party that can be above any human religion, a party that will be able to collect every religion under its wing and non-believers as well.  He asks what you think of the creation and functioning of this party.  He would be interested in your opinion.

MONJORONSON:  We think you will do quite well at this if there is a Melchizedek in charge.  Until there is a divine being, one of celestial eminence, such as a Melchizedek or a Lanonandek in charge of these projects, then you can trust that there will be mischief by the humans who will be in charge.  Until those leaders are well balanced, and that the needs of their ego and their personality have come into balance, and have come into completion and wholeness so that they see only benevolence and good as a perfect option for this political party, then until that time, you will have great difficulty.  It is not so much the organization, but the individuals who dominate the operation and process of that organization, that develop the culture and effectiveness of the organization.  Until that time, you will continue to have difficulties with domination, control and authority, which will subvert any of the best and highest ideals of any organization, for their own personal individual ends.

MMc:  I think that brings to a conclusion the questions I have for today.  Do you have any closing words for us?

Changing the world’s culture over time

MONJORONSON:  My response to that last question may seem cynical, yet, on the other hand, it is quite trustworthy in its description of the possibilities of the perfect political party that you speak of.  You are truly speaking of an evolved party that will exist in the future.  You may even find that there are no partisan politics at that time, as the interests are common to all, and that it is simply an interpretation of how to achieve those right ends.  When you have two or more parties in opposition to each other, then you end up with social and political stagnation.  The political organizing processes that you have are a reflection of many cultural developments, many of which cannot change until there are new social inventions brought to existence, such as this morality.  Social programs that strive to move towards social sustainability, an educational process that begins even before early childhood, with the parents of children to teach these individuals how to live sustainably with other individuals, what decisions to make and actions to take that actually make a contribution to others.  This is a new culture.

What we are striving to do with you now, during this era, and into the next 20-50 years is to completely change the world culture to one that is moving towards social sustainability, where there is a morality of decision-making by each individual that makes a contribution to the whole, as well as to that individual.  This is a much different way of thinking than exists now.  Now, even in groups that are moving in the same direction, [as the UB/TM/MM groups] there are vehement arguments between groups about the means of moving ahead.  Yet, in fact, you have so much in common that you should be cheering each other on!  Know that we are working in every one of these aspects and factions of your beliefs, to help all of you move towards the light, towards enlightenment, towards an ascendant career that is highly productive.  Do not worry about what the others are doing or what they believe; simply take care of your own garden and tend it well.

MMc:  Thank you very much, Monjoronson.

MONJORONSON:  You are most welcome.

END