Course: Psychology 459, Spring 2007, Generation 26
Instructor: Dr. Leon James
Introduction to Theistic Psychology  at  www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/theistic/ch1.htm
My Home Page:  www.soc.hawaii.edu/leon/459s2007/hatch/hatch-home.htm
Class Home Page:  www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy26/classhome-g26.htm
Instructions for this Report:  www.soc.hawaii.edu/leonj/leonj/leonpsy26/459-g26-weekly.htm

Exploring Theistic Psychology
by William Isaac Hatch
Report 5: 1.5.1-1.7

I am answering Questions :11.1, 11.2, 11.4, 11.9, 13.1, 13.3, 13.5, 13.9

Question 11.1:

(a) Summarize Section 1.5.1 "Students Speak Out on Swedenborg."
(b) Contrast the ideas of students in the History of Psychology earlier classes vs. the ideas of students later in theistic psychology. What is the difference in attitude and content?
(c) Give your impressions and conclusions of how students are doing in studying and accepting theistic psychology.
(d) Relate your conclusions to your own study of theistic psychology thus far. How do you fit or relate?

Answer 11.1:

(a) Summarize Section 1.5.1 "Students Speak Out on Swedenborg."

Speaking Out on Swedenborg:

In the section 1.5.1 “Students Speak Out on Swedenborg” we first read a brief summary of Dr. Leon James’ history with Swedenborg. We learn how he discovered Swedenborg’s writings in the library and quickly found himself engrossed. This is interesting to read about because it is the beginning of something greater that we all have the privilege to study today in this class. I loved reading how Dr. James began the process of refining the works of Swedenborg and studying more into the Sacred Scripture to create the basic principles of Theistic Psychology. In 1.5.1 we read another brief description of the Theistic Psychology principles and then we move on to see the responses of student first being introduced to this great science.

We first get to read responses from a very early on generation of Dr. James’ classes from students who where actually in his History of Psychology class. This was before there was a Theistic Psychology class so Dr. James had only slightly touched on the topic with them before he posed a question for a response. The students of this early generation where asked the question; “Should the Swedenborg writings be included in the history of Psychology?” I was surprised at the response that Dr. James got to this question 13 of the students said yes and 10 said no. I would have thought that fewer people would say yes because of the lack of experience they had with the material. I would have expected people to be in the negative and so be against the idea.

Next in section 1.5.1 we read responses from students of newer generations that actually took Dr. James’ Theistic Psychology class. Many students from these newer generations had positive responses to Theistic Psychology as a science and the acceptance of it as a valid study in Psychology. I think that this comes with the now comprehensively constructed rational truths of Theistic Psychology that are so hard to ignore. I am not surprised by this result because as a rational person I see Theistic as a valid rational science that should be accepted. I believe that as more students take this course the idea of Theistic Psychology will spread and hopefully one day have a mainstream following, in which place I guess Dr. James might become Reverend James.

(b) Contrast the ideas of students in the History of Psychology earlier classes vs. the ideas of students later in theistic psychology. What is the difference in attitude and content?

Similarities and Differences in Responses:

There where some similarities and differences between the responses of older generations of classes and newer generation responses to the idea of Theistic Psychology as a valid science. Many of the people in the older generation whom said that they thought it should be part of Psychology history seemed to do begrudgingly. More of the students in the newer generation seemed to really embrace Theistic Psychology and seemed to be spiritually uplifted. I believe that the students of Dr. James’ History of Psychology class could see the logic of Swedenborg’s writings being part of psychology history but I think that student form the newer generation had more comprehensive grasps on the subject because they had more time to accept the positive bias and had Theistic Psychology to guide them.

I believe the refined concepts of Swedenborg’s writings as put together and extrapolated on in Theistic Psychology really help with study this topic. Dr. James has done an exceptional job of finding the and breaking down the rational truths of God that where first revealed by Swedenborg. I think anytime you have a structured study of something that involves an entire course then you will have a better understanding of the subject matter. This is why the responses are much more in-depth and thought out in the newer generations.

(c) Give your impressions and conclusions of how students are doing in studying and accepting theistic psychology.

Student Progress:

I believe that many students are doing as well as might be expected. This is not an easy subject matter by any means; I mean we are being asked to learn the keys to understanding the Divine Speech of the Divine Being so that we can live our immortal life in the heavens of our minds. This is not like Psy 100 and I think that students are doing well. Also we have to understand that this is going against everything that many of us have been taught our whole lives, even for the very religious students. It is hard to retrain your self to think a whole new way; and I know that it is logical but it is a big transition and I feel as though people are doing ok. I also like to see that people are actually able to let go of their negative bias and embrace the positive bias if not only to increase the benefit of this class.

(d) Relate your conclusions to your own study of theistic psychology thus far. How do you fit or relate?

I believe that I fit in here nicely. I thin that I am really starting to understand the concepts of Theistic Psychology and it is really making sense to me and fast. Enjoyment of reading the weekly readings is increasing for me as I start to understand more and more. I am really getting enthusiastic about Theistic Psychology and would love to continue learning more after this class. I feel as though I could be on that could spread the words of Theistic Psychology with the right training and I know I am going to enthusiastically suggest this class to other students.

Question 11.2:

(a) Section 1.5.1.2 "The Negative Bias in Science" presents an extensive quote by a negative bias mode psychologist (Bering). Analyze what he says.
(b) Make a conclusion in the light of what you already know from the positive bias perspective in theistic psychology.
(c) How would your other professors this semester relate to the idea presented in this class that nontheistic psychology assumes the negative bias in science? Would you predict that they agree that it is a bias or not?

Answer 11.2:

(a) Section 1.5.1.2 "The Negative Bias in Science" presents an extensive quote by a negative bias mode psychologist (Bering). Analyze what he says.

Interesting But Hard to Believe:

I read the quote from Bering in the section “The Negative Bias” and he is definitely in the negative bias of science, he goes to great lengths to argue his idea of our beliefs in immortality, intelligent design and every other “supernatural” event as being functions of cognitive errors. He believes that our ideas of religion and everything related have bases in how our minds have developed through natural selection in response to simulation constraints. He has classified our religious beliefs as evolved protection against anxieties of the unknown. He believes that this cognitive construct that has developed has given us the false idea that how we act matter out side our selves and our societies. He is basically taking a Darwinian approach to explaining beliefs in supernatural occurrences. He is saying that peoples beliefs in God is based in nothing more than what causes physical variations in bird species from isolated island to isolated island. This is an ultimate negative bias stance in science that relates directly to the function of God in society.

Bering wrote this article in response to a very pervasive current idea of socio factors being the bases of our “false” beliefs and this shows us how pervasive the negative bias is in science. It is interesting that in the field of psychology at large there are conflicting ideas that are both trying disprove religion and not any comparisons with actual Sacred Scripture or religious reasoning. This is a perfect example of how the negative bias of science is so dominate in the field and how we are only taught to not believe in the existence of God.

\

(b) Make a conclusion in the light of what you already know from the positive bias perspective in theistic psychology.

My Conclusion on Bering:

From what I have learned in Theistic Psychology this does not make a whole lot of sense to me. In this article Bering outs so much emphasis on the development of the natural mind and completely ignores any concept of a spiritual mind. Bering offers no explanation for where these thoughts and feeling that we have actually come from only a vague description of a template of cognitive mysticism which helps relieve mortality anxiety. This is not rational to me because our thoughts and feeling exist outside the physical brain and Bering’s explanations are tied to a concept of physical adaptation in response to environmental pressures and still give no adequate expression of the origin of these thoughts and feelings.

In Theistic Psychology we have learned the origins of these ideas and that is from the spiritual substance radiating from the Spiritual Substance. Our basic concept of right and wrong come from Divine Speech and our concept of God comes from Divine Speech through Sacred Scripture. I think that Bering is trying to come up with some way to explain our thoughts of God and because he is living in the negative bias he is missing the most rational explanation… THAT GOD EXISTS! I think that this is an interesting interpretation, but like much of what I have been taught from the negative bias it falls short of an adequate rational explanation. This is the major problem with the negative bias it does not have any explanation for the origins of the results of these physical brain function and falls short of being convincing in any way. Thank God for Theistic Psychology.

(c) How would your other professors this semester relate to the idea presented in this class that nontheistic psychology assumes the negative bias in science? Would you predict that they agree that it is a bias or not?

My Teachers and Negative Bias:

I think that I have some fairly open minded teachers this semester but I think that they are too stuck in their own negative bias and to proud to admit that it is a bias. I don’t think that they would relate well to what we have learned because they have spent so much time in their own ways of thinking that they see it as the only correct way. I hate saying this with out first talking to them but I really don’t think that they are being biased in anyway. I would hope they would be open to it but I can’t say for sure they would be.

Question 11.4:

(a) Section 1.5.1.3 also contains a "narrative account" in which there is a discussion with angels about what people on earth know about heaven and hell. What is your impression of this?
(b) Give an interpretation of the account as best you can at this point in your study of theistic psychology.

Answer 11.4:

(a) Section 1.5.1.3 also contains a "narrative account" in which there is a discussion with angels about what people on earth know about heaven and hell. What is your impression of this?

Our Thoughts on Heaven and Hell:

In the narrative between Swedenborg and the angels Swedenborg explains what has been going on with the people of earth. The angels are interested in the peoples knowledge and Swedenborg tells them that God has revealed truths about the afterlife, how we appear there, and the truth of Heaven and Hell and the idea of correspondence between all the is natural and all that is spiritual. The angels are surprised at the information that the people of earth did not know and are happy that God has blessed them with this new knowledge. Then Swedenborg lets the angels know about the difficulty he was having in getting people to accept these truths. The angels send down a paper with the truths on it to a group of intelligent and religious men on earth. The men on earth do not accept what the paper says and try to destroy it but God swoops it back up before they can.

In section 1.5.1.3 the “narrative account” in which Swedenborg has a discussion with angels about what people on earth know about heaven and hell there is some very illuminating information. First thing that I noticed is how in this narrative you can really see the difference in state of minds of angels and people on earth. The angels have little knowledge of what people know on earth and this shows how they have minds at a higher level then ours and than have forgotten natural world things after second death. We can also see the true heavenly nature of their minds as they express much affection for people of earth and want people of earth to realize the truths of heaven and hell.

I get the impression too that the people of earth have only understanding of literal sense of the Sacred Scripture. This narrative shows how people do not understand the correspondences of the Sacred Scripture and do not have a real understanding of heaven and hell. The people of earth do not understand the fact that we live in our mental heavens and hell as the angels do and that we are still material people in the mental world and not some spirit. I get the impression that the angels are greatly saddened by the fat that we can not embrace what God had given to them through the writings if Swedenborg. The impression that I get from reading this is also that we have not changed much either and that there are still wrong interpretations of Sacred Scripture by taking only the literal sense of Divine Speech in the natural world. I also think that now days the pervasive negative bias in science would sadden the angels because they want to see us become spiritually enlightened.

Swedenborg tries to get people to understand the information the God gives to us but there is much resistance. The men that do not accept the paper with the truths of the afterlife have selfish prospects in religious and seem to want to uphold their own perceived spirituality over the Truth. This is why the men tried to destroy the word of God.

(b) Give an interpretation of the account as best you can at this point in your study of theistic psychology

My Interpretation:

I am still a novice in Theistic Psychology but I will give my best interpretation of the account. In this account I think we see how people live in their sensuous minds and ideas of existence. People have become very materialistic and only see God and the Sacred Scripture from their natural minds in the natural world. People take the literal sense of Sacred Scripture in the natural world and do not see the correspondences in the Sacred Scripture that reveals the true intent of Divine Speech. I think that people have a very mystical interpretation of God and have a hard time seeing Sacred Scripture rationally and scientifically and this is why they have such a hard time accepting the revelations of Swedenborg.

Question 11.9:

(a) Discuss your perceptions of how other students in this class (G26) are adjusting intellectually to the positive bias perspective.
(b) Read some of their reports. Do the reports show the same thing as the class discussions?
(c) How do you stand relative to others?

Answer 11.9:

(a) Discuss your perceptions of how other students in this class (G26) are adjusting intellectually to the positive bias perspective.

Adjusting to Theistic Psychology:

My perception of the other students in the class is that some are adjusting intellectually to the positive bias perspective a little better than others are. I think the fist and most important part is to be able to be in the positive bias in our thinking and I think this is the hardest part. I know I had a very hard time with this and I’m sure others did too because this goes against everything we have been taught so far in our classes. I do really see progress in the way people accept the positive bias and it is good to see that people really made a good effort.

I also think that many people in the class are doing a good job of learning the basic ideas of Theistic Psychology. The discussions in class have really started get better and I think that people are starting to integrate all the knowledge that we have learned in to a cohesive concept of Theistic Psychology. Theistic Psychology is something that is going to take much more than one semester to master and we are really giving it an honest attempt for the most part. There are probably some people that are just laughing of the concepts but I think the majority has been very mature in trying to change our perspectives and really consider the subject matter.

(b) Read some of their reports. Do the reports show the same thing as the class discussions?

Expressing the Concepts:

I have read quite a few of the papers written by other students in our class and have been impressed. I think that many of the papers are very well written and seem very conscious to what we are discussing in class. Other students are using examples that Dr. James gave in class and have progressively written better papers. There are some that are a little of the mark and maybe missing some key points but at least they seem to have a very serious tone in the writing. I believe that this is a product of the professors’ passion and understanding of what we are learning. I think that people are really starting to share that passion in their papers and are starting to develop a good understanding of Theistic Psychology. This is great to see that there are so many people in the class that are showing interest in the subject and are really on the way to having good understanding of Theistic Psychology.

(c) How do you stand relative to others?

Where I am with Theistic Psychology:

I think that I am doing pretty well at altering my ideas and concepts of the world to fit with Theistic Psychology. I have been able to change my thinking to fit the positive bias this semester and it is now starting to permeate all aspects of my life. I think that I have found some sort of a renewed spirituality that is based in this rational science that Dr. James has developed fro us from the writings of Swedenborg and extensive research of Sacred Scripture. I feel like I have really embraced the whole idea and only want to learn more. I may be off the mark sometimes in my comprehension but I think that my willingness to learn more about Theistic Psychology will drive me forward and help me really learn more.

I believe that I have developed a pretty good understanding of Theistic Psychology for my limited exposure to the science and I am ready to learn more. I believe that I have been able to grasp the concepts of things like substantive dualism and our eternal minds and the discrete layers that make up our eternal minds. I believe I have put the effort in trying to really understand the process of Divine Speech moving thru the discrete layers of our minds and into everything in existence. It is really exhilarating finding something that makes more sense to me than other ways of thinking of God, and I am truly excited that I have found a science that can answer the questions that I have wondered about for so long and that it can do it rationally.

Question 13.1:

(a) List between 3 and 5 criteria that theistic psychology should have if it is going to make it as a science in the future.
(b) Briefly explain each.
(c) Then give your assessment as to how theistic psychology as you know it, stacks up against these criteria.

Answer 13.1:

(a) List between 3 and 5 criteria that theistic psychology should have if it is going to make it as a science in the future.

Criteria for Being a Science:

There are certain criteria that we need to apply to Theistic Psychology to find out if it is workable scientific theory for the future. The criteria are as follow:

1. Organicity 2. Objective Reality 3.Operational Definition 4.Empiricism 5.Usefulness

These are the criteria that I am going to define and then apply to Theistic Psychology to determine if it is valid as a science.

(b) Briefly explain each.

Meanings of the Criteria:

Organicity: This is the criteria that the proposed theory must be biologically grounded. This means that there must be biological bases to the theory which express an idea about function of a structure, medium or substance. This is talking about be descriptive of the mental function having an organic bases. This is what separates psychology and philosophy.

Objective Reality: The theory of the system in question must be able to be objectively observed and verifiable by others. This is stating that the findings must be able to be observed and categorized and the findings need to be able to replicate.

Operational Definition: There must be steps for measuring and validating the existence and quantity of something. This means that there needs to be instructions for quantitatively measuring the findings of a theory.

Empiricism: Every step of the explanation or theory must be capable of being understood and verified by the person’s own experience or self-witnessing observation. This is where people must be able to understand the steps in the theory and be able to experience these things themselves as outside observers.

Usefulness: This is where the theory must be worthwhile. It need to be pertinent to the population in general, but also must be useful. In this we see that there is no point in study something that is useless in application so it is not a valid form of psychology or science.

(c) Then give your assessment as to how theistic psychology as you know it, stacks up against these criteria.

Does Theistic Psychology Stack Up:

Theistic Psychology does meet the criteria of organicity. Swedenborg described the existence of dualism as form and function of human biology. Swedenborg described a complete psychobiology that occurred with our natural world anatomy. We have learned about the cognitive and affective organs of our mental mind and how they correspond to our natural body. We learned that the immortal mind operates the highest function of our structure and this is where our thoughts and feelings manifest. Most important Swedenborg also described the fuel for our engine and the origin of all biological matter which is the light and warmth from the Spiritual Sun. This shows that Theistic Psychology really stacks up as far as organicity.

Swedenborg was the only person who could live in the mental world and the natural world while he was alive but Theistic Psychology still fits Objective Reality. Swedenborg was a well respected scientist at the time and made objective observations and wrote what he saw and learned. This will easily be able to be verified by others when they are resuscitated. Also you can already see the validity of the “laws of correspondence” just by studying them and Sacred Scripture.

Swedenborg was a great mind who pioneered modern psychology and was also an engineer and instrument maker. This means that he understood the importance of measurement. Swedenborg did have operational definitions for all the laws of correspondences often using equivalence formulae to measure these things. This shows that Swedenborg had sound operational definitions in his writings.

This is a great part of Swedenborgs' theory that it is supposed to be understood because that is the ultimate existence. I have been taking this class for only one semester, I have understood his theory, and I am not a scientist. I think that Swedenborg’s theory is easier to understand and much more rational than most of the other theories out there. Swedenborg wanted us to understand and learn from his theories so we could live in the heavens of our minds. So yes, Swedenborgs’ theories have empiricism. Also they definitely are useful. What is more useful than understanding our own immortality in the mental-world? This theory helps us understand how to extract the word of God properly from the Sacred Scripture so that we can know His true will. This theory of Swedenborg answers the questions of existence, which I consider pretty dang useful.

As you can see Swedenborg’ theory easily meets all the criteria for being a science. This is why it is rational for Theistic Psychology to be part of science. We study about other theories that don’t stack up as well as Swedenborg's theory and I think that it is just a shame that we don’t see this in the history books of psychology.

Question 13.3:

(a) What is the organic basis of human thoughts, emotions, and feelings?
(b) Contrast this with the negative bias psychology which "reduces" thoughts and feelings to electricity and chemistry in the neurons of the brain.
(c) What is your view on this controversy?

Answer 13.3:

(a)What is the organic basis of human thoughts, emotions, and feelings?

Organic Basis of Human Thoughts, Emotions and Feelings:

Theistic Psychology gives a very complete and continuous idea of the origins of our thoughts, feelings and emotions. This basis starts at the highest point of existence and that is the perfect love and wisdom of God which is the light and warmth that radiates from the Spiritual Sun. This spiritual substance is the matter that creates everything in existence this is the basis of Gods omniscience. This is how we know anything and how we feel anything and this spiritual substance comes to us down through discrete layers.

As the spiritual substance radiates out it cools and becomes more and more condensed. In actuality the substance that radiates out from the spiritual sun is cognitive and affective and as it cools it then becomes rays of the natural sun. This then becomes the matter that transcends to our natural brains and becomes the electrical impulses of our natural brain. This is the fact of the matter that is the base of everything that is in the natural world but it is in actuality the spiritual substance from the Spiritual Sun or the mind of God, and is the building block of everything.

The light and warmth of God is what transcends the discrete layers of our mind and enters our affective and cognitive organs. As we receive the spiritual substance we are receiving Gods Divine Speech. This spiritual substance is how we think and feel emotion. This is the bases of our mental operations and it is all from God. This is why it is so important to remember that we have our own thoughts and feelings and emotions but they are all from God, meaning we are constantly receiving this substance from God and the Divine Speech.

(b) Contrast this with the negative bias psychology which "reduces" thoughts and feelings to electricity and chemistry in the neurons of the brain.

The Negative Bias Explanation of Thoughts and Feelings:

In the negative bias they have a very different idea of the origins of thoughts, feelings, and emotions. Psychologists in the negative bias see our thoughts and emotions as electro-chemical reactions in the brain. They say that our thoughts and feeling are generated by the chemical influxes that come from synaptic exchanges from neuron to neuron in the natural brain. This is kind of correct because we already know that the matter from the natural sun which is the condensed cognitive and affective substance from the Spiritual Sun causes these electrical impulses in the natural brain. But the difference is those psychologists explain it as originating and ending in our natural brains and explain the resulting emotions and thoughts as epiphenomenon.

Scientists in the negative bias really don’t have a complete theory on thoughts and feelings. Theistic psychology has an origin and perfect explanation for the existence of our thoughts and emotions in which God is the originator of everything including our thoughts and feelings. Scientists in the negative bias just explain our thoughts and feelings as epiphenomenon and move on to dissect rats brains for more structural information without a real understanding of the actual function of our being. The major difference is that the negative biased scientists are thinking in a monistic theory while we know the answer to lie in a dualistic theory of our minds. The Theistic Psychology theory has a more complete answer but the negative bias in science still trudges on paying no head to the logic of the positive bias.

(d) What is your view on this controversy?

What I Think:

I really think that the negative bias in science can not answer all the questions I have, and that is why I have chosen the positive bias as my new study. There is no logic in saying that electro-chemical impulses in the brain somehow create our thoughts and feelings. Just because you see a spike on an EKG doesn’t mean that you have found the source of what I taste when I eat ice-cream, that is just absurd. I like the fact that Theistic Psychology can give me an answer that is rational and complete. I am not satisfied to think of my thoughts and emotions to be epiphenomenon which is not a proper explanation.

The thing is that the negative bias is containing their thoughts strictly to the natural world where we know we can not explain these things fully. They are thinking of our minds in the sense of time-space and confining their findings to that of the restrictions of the natural physical world, but we know that this is not the answer. We are born into eternity as dual citizens and to look solely at our temporary physical brain for answers is absurd.

Question 13.5:

(a) How do you react to the idea in Section 1.6.8 that "Sacred Scripture Is the Source of Scientific Revelations"?
(b) Explain the importance of the distinction between the literal sense of Sacred Scripture (religion) and its correspondential sense (theistic psychology).

My Reaction:

I react very positively towards the idea from section 1.6.8 that “Sacred Scripture Is the Source of Scientific Revelations.” I think that this is the most important idea in the world and that we need to embrace to be able to understand and find these revelations. We can find scientific revelation through the correspondences in Sacred Scripture. We learn from the writings of Swedenborg that we are part of a dual world and that our understanding of God and the world lies in discrete layers. The celestial mind is the highest understanding of the world and after that there is our spiritual mind and then down to our rational level of the mind then comes the natural level of the mind and last the corporeal level. Each of theses levels represent a different level of understanding of God and the world and as we move up in levels we have scientific revelations.

In our physical body we can only think in our natural minds but we can still move higher in our understanding of Divine Speech through the study of the correspondences of Sacred Scripture. The lowest level of knowledge of correspondences is in our natural corporeal mind this is what the Old Testament was written in. The next level of understanding of correspondences is in the natural-sensuous mind which is what the New Testament was written in. The highest level of understanding is the natural rational level of the mind and is what we can gain from the writings of Swedenborg. These levels of the natural mind show the evolution of the species through historical events. This is how Sacred Scripture is the source of Scientific Revelations; each Sacred Scripture represents a new level of understanding of correspondences and thus a higher understanding of the Divine Speech which is the most important source of scientific fact.

I think that this is great to read. I already know that it is the most important to understand Divine Speech through correspondences an it shows the perfect love of God that He has given us the means to be able to understand correspondences at least in the natural mind. I feel so liberated now that I know that the most important scientific fact lies in the Divine Speech and that we can understand these truths through the correspondences. This is a very moving time for me because I can now see the truths of our species and the science of the universe I thin that it just amazing. I really feel apart of something now that is great and pure.

(b) Explain the importance of the distinction between the literal sense of Sacred Scripture (religion) and its correspondential sense (theistic psychology).

The Importance of the Distinction:

It is very important to know the difference of the literal sense of Sacred Scripture and the correspondential sense. We can find good messages from the literal sense of Sacred Scripture but we can only go higher in our natural consciousness by studying correspondences. The literal sense of the Sacred Scripture is the natural version of Divine Speech because we could not understand direct speech from God so little of it is actually the Words of God. We need to find the scientific representations of Divine Speech through correspondences to find the real truths. This is why God gave Swedenborg the ability to live at a celestial level so that we could realize the correspondences in our negative bias filled world. This is the most important idea that is differentiating Theistic Psychology from religion.

Question 13.9:

(a) Why is it important for God to talk to or communicate with human beings?
(b) What does God intend to talk to us about? Why?
(c) How does God talk to us or communicate with us?
(d) Is there anything relevant you'd like to say about your relationship to your conscience and to Sacred Scripture?

Answer 13.9:

(a) Why is it important for God to talk to or communicate with human beings?

The Importance of God Communicating with Us:

It is very important for God to talk or communicate with us because we need to have rational belief in Him and we can gain this from God speaking to us. We are at the lowest level of consciousness in the physical world and we need to be kept on the right path. God is the beginning of everything and through His communication the universe exists. We need communication with God to communicate with us so we have an understanding to some degree of His universal laws. Through communication from God we get our conscience and we have what is essential to become more spiritually enlightened. We can increase our consciousness through understanding correspondences and move higher in our enlightenment to higher levels in our mind. God communicates to us in the different Sacred Scripture so that we have the tools to understand His Truth. By communicating with us God allows us to receive His perfect love and wisdom.

(b) What does God intend to talk to us about? Why?

What God is Saying?

God talks to us about His universal laws and about how to live our lives in a good way so that we can live in the heavens of our minds. God is perfect love so He wants us to be successful in combat against our hellish traits so that we can work towards being spiritually enlightened. There is a purpose that God has and He gives us the tools to try and realize this purpose. He wants us to come to a more spiritually rational and complete acceptance of Him and His Truths and this is why he communicates to us. It would not make sense for God to not give us any rational way of understanding Him and His laws if He is perfectly loving. This would not be rational to think that God would create us and leave us in the dark. God communicates with us because He wants us to live in His light and warmth and He has to communicate to us to keep us from the irrational negative biases and selfish interpretations of His truth.

(c) How does God talk to us or communicate with us?

How God Communicates with Us:

The first way God communicates with us is indirectly through a constant stream of the Spiritual substance. This is what forms our conscience and gives a basic understanding of what is good. This is a constant communication that He has with us that is His warmth and light. This is the very basic way that God communicates with us and this comes down through the discrete layers of our minds to our natural mind. We are born with this understanding and this stays with us but we still need to maintain it and recognize it as Divine and not of our control. We need to accept God as the omniscience.

God also communicates with us through Divine Speech in the natural language Sacred Scripture. This is where we can find a higher understanding of God. We need to study the correspondences of the Sacred Scripture to move higher in our spiritual consciousness. This is what comes in the form of the Old and New Testaments and the writings of Emmanuel Swedenborg. These correspondences that we are learning about from Dr. James in Theistic Psychology are most important in understanding the communication from God.

(e) Is there anything relevant you'd like to say about your relationship to your conscience and to Sacred Scripture?

My Conscience and Sacred Scripture:

I would like to say that in the past I have lived in opposition of my conscience from time to time and I know that this is bad. Now that I have taken this class I am going to try and fight the temptations that I have failed to before. I am going to work hard to try and combat my hellish thoughts to the end. I am also going to become more educated in Sacred Scripture and correspondences held within them so that I can realize my heavenly mind and live in accordance with God and accept Him as the all powerful. I now realize my potential and want o live the right life and study the correspondences in Sacred Scripture.