I am here, Jesus:
I shall write my message to you on one of the most puzzling
passages in the gospel of Matthew that confronts every student of
the New Testament, and that is the subject of divorce as Matthew
is supposed to have written it
.
All I can say is that Matthew did write the passage on
divorce, but with certain differences that render the meaning and
interpretation entirely different.
In the first place, divorce
itself, while not evil, merely gives recognition to a state that
arises from an evil condition between two souls that are
suffering from evil spirits or from the evil desires that beset
these souls, and which cause such inharmony between them that
they cannot endure each other's company and they desire to part.
Now such an act of divorce, as I have said, simply recognizes
such inharmony of soul as a reality, and it is not the solution
to the problem of marriage which is beset by the difficulties
caused by the actions of the evil souls.
The solution is not
divorce, but removal of the evil that afflicts the souls, and
such evil can only be removed by a great effort on the part of
the individuals in question, the exercise of their natural love,
or better still, by the Divine Love entering into the souls of
the marriage partners and thus causing the elimination of those
evils afflicting their souls.
And with the elimination of these
evils the souls regain their pristine purity and harmony is
regained in the marriage state.
It is for this reason that I did not approve of divorce,
whereas Moses had to tolerate it because the Divine Love was
unknown at the time of Moses and he therefore had to condone a
situation which arose from the hardness of men's hearts and here
in referring to Moses' law I referred to man's use of the bill of
divorcement rather than that of the woman, who at this time was
subjected to man's domination in things of conjugal status, and
he was the aggressor much more often than the woman.
When I
appeared in Palestine to commence my ministry, it was possible
for mankind to receive the Divine Love through the Holy Spirit
and men with faith in my doctrine that the Kingdom of God was at
hand, could, by applying my teachings, receive the Divine Love
and obtain that transformation of their souls that would obviate
the necessity of divorce through the transformation of their soul
condition from one of evil to that of pure angels, with nothing
but natural and divine love for the marriage the marriage
partner.
At the least, the Divine Love operating in the souls of
mortals could render these souls so free from evil as to make
marriage harmonious.
When I spoke then of divorce in a way that showed that
separation from a woman and marriage to another merely caused the
man to commit adultery, and the man who married the woman thus
put away, to also commit adultery, I meant to picture a condition
of sin in an otherwise perfect condition of soul.
In the state of
the Jewish
nation at the time, the action of divorce was a
necessary evil and I had no intention of decreeing that divorce
as had been granted by the law of Moses should be eliminated, for
conditions affecting husband and wife were even worse in my day
than in the time of Moses and the consequent use of my word as a
law to be observed by Christians in later times was not my
intention at all, since I was simply stating an ideal.
Furthermore, I never said that a woman should
be divorced on the
grounds of adultery, as the New Testament puts it, for
this phrase "Except for adultery" was inserted later by
a writer who, in accordance with later views, took a very harsh
attitude towards marital sinners.
This attitude does not
represent my true ideas on the subject, for my real attitude
towards the adulterous wife is very clearly demonstrated by the
passage in John which portrays my words to the Jews who brought
an erring wife before me; and these words were that she should be
forgiven because no accuser, and that included the offended
husband, was without sin.
All sinners, if repenting of their sins in good faith, could
come before the Heavenly Father in trust in His Love and Mercy
and this includes not only the thief and the murderer but the
adulteress as well.
So you see how well meaning but misguided
writers who had no conception of my real teachings put an
entirely different interpretation upon my sayings and actually
put words into my mouth that I never said; and this defiling of
my teachings has brought untold woe to mankind for many hundreds
of years and has caused the writer terrible years of torture in
the hells for his well-meaning insertions.
I would like to state that divorce is admissible where it
terminates a state of fornication in the eyes of God even though
a marriage is observed by man and that is when both partners
married for other considerations except love, which is the only
true justification for marriage; and where there are children,
the divorce between such couples simply causes more hell on earth
for parents and children and is one of the greatest causes of
unhappiness on earth.
Hence, couples should under all conditions
seek to work out a solution for themselves and their children if
this is at all possible through the exercise of their natural
love and the purification of their souls, but as I have said
before, through acknowledging that God is our heavenly Father and
that He seeks to help mortals, if mortals will only turn to Him
and seek His help with all the earnestness of their souls, into
which the Divine Love can then be conveyed with its consequent
elimination of evil from these souls and their transformation in
the Divine Essence.
Into this most important phase of man's existence as in all
the others, the Divine Love will bring peace and happiness and
harmony and will result in the avoidance of the terrible hells
reserved for man whose soul is damaged by his evil desires and
inclinations.
I will continue with the New Testament and its truths and
falsities, and I want to talk to you about the Divine Love in one
of the passages concerning the rich young man who appeared to me
and asked me how he could obtain salvation for his soul and the
way the New Testament describes this meeting between us leads the
reader to assume that my great message to mankind was nothing
more than the ten commandments, for several of the most important
ones concerning man's love of God are omitted completely and only
those dealings with man's relationship to other men are given.
When the young man declared to me that he had obeyed all of these
commandments and that he wished to know what else he had to obey
or what else he had to do to merit salvation, I told him to give
away all his property, become poor and to follow me.
Well, this makes a very nice story in the New Testament and is
one that is usually read with interest and accepted by all who
understand that the ten commandments given to the children of
Israel by Moses were in reality the laws of God pertaining to the
moral code.
But, they do not realize that if that were all that I
had come to Palestine to teach, then there was no need of Jesus,
for Moses had already given these commandments and I could do
nothing more than to confirm what Moses had already proclaimed.
As a matter of fact, I did teach the laws of Moses because
they lead to the pure but not divine angelic state which can be
reached through obedience to the moral code, but my mission, as
you know, was to teach not the law, but Grace.
That is to say,
freedom from sin, not by obedience to law, but through the
transformation of the soul through the Divine Love's being
conveyed into that soul through the Holy Spirit.
That is
precisely what I taught the rich young boy who appeared to me in
order to learn the way to salvation, for the love of man to man
and love to the Father do not lead to salvation in the sense that
they give man immortality and At-onement with the Father.
I
therefore taught the young man the New Gospel of Grace and the
Divine Love, which was superior to loving God and reverencing God
in the prescribed way, as found in the first three commandments
of Moses, and later writers of the gospel,
in their
copying and recopying, could not understand my allusions to and
teaching of the Divine Love superior to the laws of love to God,
which was, as one might say, a very part of their being, and they
gradually eliminated all references to this teaching as well as
to those Mosaic commandments requiring love of man to God, for
one could not be stricken out without the other, and allowing the Gospels to deal merely with the relationship of man to man and
avoidance of sin through material possessions and desire for them.
And thus, it was that once again my teachings were nullified by
these copyists in the most important aspect of my mission -- the
announcement of the glad tidings of the rebestowal of the gift of
Divine Love and the resultant decrease in the ability of man to
understand my true mission.
One of the things which should be kept in mind, however, in
the reading of the passage in Mark and Luke is that there is
absolutely no reference to the vicarious atonement through my
blood on the cross as the means of salvation when the direct
question was put by the rich young man, and I point to this
omission as a proof positive that the entire conception of the
vicarious atonement was a much later conception and never formed
part of the original writings of my disciples, but was an
afterthought that took form and shape when the teachings of the
New Birth had been eliminated and a new conception of salvation
was introduced in a way to conciliate the old Jews, and they made
me the sacrifice that would cleanse the sins of mankind through
the shedding of my blood.
You know that I have dealt at length
with this subject before and so have my disciples in their
message through Mr. Padgett but I have deemed it appropriate to
refer to it again in connection with a definite incident related
in the New Testament and to emphasize its falsity.
Jesus of the Bible
and
Master of the Celestial Heavens