ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTEENTH DIALOGUE

October 12, 1999

Peter: Yesterday afternoon I received two questions from Boris Bella of Slovakia. His first question relates to Your interaction with a very sinful woman, as recorded in Luke 7:36-50 and to Your relationship with women in general; and his second question relates to Your Parable of the Lost Son, likewise recorded in Luke 15:11-32. He would like to know if there is any relevance of those two events to our present spiritual needs or if there is any message in them which could be applied to our current situation within the frame of the currently ongoing shift and its here- and-now phase. Of course, as always, before answering these questions, perhaps You have something to add or elaborate upon anything at all that You feel we need to know or to have a better understanding about.

The Lord Jesus Christ: Thank you, Peter, for asking Me to talk first before going into answering Boris’ questions. We do need to elaborate upon or explore a little further the issues of relatedness amongst you — My representatives, as well as your relations toward other individuals on your planet, who are not in the category of being My representatives, as well as everywhere else. In other words, we need to further discuss the topics raised in Dialogs 113 and 114.

In analyzing what was said in those two Dialogs about the attributes of kindness, tolerance, respect and appreciation, it could be easily concluded that they should be applied indiscriminately to an all-inclusive aspect of the overall personality and individuality of anyone with whom you come in contact in your everyday encounters at all levels of your activities. It would be an error in judgment to come to such an inappropriate conclusion.

Two aspects exist in understanding the issue of application of these attributes in your everyday life and how, in your interaction, you approach anyone who comes across your field of vision. The first aspect relates to the definition of the terms ‘kindness,’ ‘tolerance,’ ‘respect’ and ‘appreciation’ and what they really mean and signify. The second aspect relates to the need of distinguishing between anyone’s individuality, uniqueness and difference and his/her deeds, actions, outputs and productivity or productions. In other words, you need to look upon two issues as related to any individual: First, you need to learn to be kind, tolerant, respectful and appreciative of each individual’s individuality, uniqueness and difference, the way his/her personality makeup is structured; and second, you need to learn to properly assess his/her productions, outputs, deeds and actions. These two important issues as related to anyone need to be carefully analyzed and assessed in order to distinguish between them and how the mentioned attributes should be applied to each one separately.

In the first situation, as you are dealing with individuality, uniqueness and difference of each individual and how he/she appears in his/her structural personality makeup, it is necessary to take a stance of unconditional kindness, tolerance, respect and appreciation. As mentioned many times before, each individual, the way he/she is structured and is in his/her own ‘I am,’ stands in front of Me in his/her own uniqueness, individuality and difference. No matter how he/she appears to you in his/her outward manifestation, he/she is fulfilling the purpose for which he/she was either created or was permitted to be fabricated, respectively. In either case he/she is fulfilling the purpose for which he/she chose to be and to exist or to pseudo-be and pseudo-exist. It is in this context and understanding that you need to show your unconditional kindness, tolerance, respect and appreciation to any individual in question.

On the other hand, what would be your attitude toward the deeds, actions, outputs and productivity or productions of any such individual? In order to properly answer this question, we need to first define what the considered attributes mean or signify. In the conceptualization of the meaning of each discussed term, how could they be understood and practically applied?

Let us take them one by one. What do you really understand by the word ‘kindness’ or being kind to someone or something? In our conceptualization ‘kindness’ means the ability to show someone our unconditional warm and positive feelings which convey to the individual in question our recognition for his/her need to be himself/herself in his/her true essence and substance or in his/her unique ‘I am.’ We kindly accept his/her ‘I am’ the way it is without any strings attached. On the other hand, if I am kind to someone and if that someone in his/her deeds, actions, outputs and productivity is not what is required from the nature of any situation in which that individual functions, my kindness requires from me to bring this to his/her attention so that he/she is given an opportunity to rectify that situation and to begin to function more congruently to the requirement of that situation. Should he/she refuse to respond to this aspect of your kindness, your kindness requires removing him/her from that situation because otherwise, his/her continuous unproductive output could not only hurt the process of production itself and impede the proper function of everyone involved in that production, but, ultimately, it could hurt the individual in question himself/herself. By the factor of not removing him/her from the situation in question, you would be reinforcing and enabling him/her in his/her unproductive, futile, incompetent and damaging functioning. At the same time, you would be contributing to the poor productivity of others involved in any such function because they would be hampered and interfered with by such individual’s ineptness as related to that specific function.

So, as you see from this description, kindness doesn’t necessarily mean to let people continue in doing something which they cannot do at all properly or which they do in an inefficient and incompetent way. True kindness doesn’t want anyone to be in a position in which they cannot function properly for some of their own reasons or for the reason that they are trying to do something for which they have very little, or no propensity at all.

The next term which needs clarification is — tolerance. How do we conceptualize ‘tolerance?’ Tolerance can also be conceived as a relatively quantitative measure in a sense that it can have many levels. Take, for example, such clinical terms as tolerance for pain or frustration tolerance level. How far or to what degree are you able to tolerate something or, in our case, someone, as related to the topic of this Dialog? In our conceptualization ‘tolerance’ means or signifies our ability to unconditionally bear with anyone’s individuality, uniqueness and difference without any expectations or projections of our own desires, wishes and thoughts of how that individual should be in his/her own ‘I am.’ In other words, we fully and completely tolerate that individual the way he/she is in his/her own individuality, uniqueness and difference. In this respect our tolerance has no boundaries.

On the other hand, the degree of our tolerance of any individual’s deeds, actions, outputs, productions or productivity is determined by the factor of his/her contribution in a positive and constructive manner to any function which is undertaken for common good and use for all. We give many opportunities to each individual to learn, to improve, to progress and to be more productive, constructive, creative and useful in any life endeavors. If that individual’s output and productivity is not what is required from the function of any situation, the result of which may adversely influence the works of many people, in that case, it is the duty of our kindness, love and wisdom to remove such an individual from the situation and function in question. By doing that, we offer the individual in question an opportunity to get engaged in some other function in which he/she could become competently productive, constructive, creative and useful, thus contributing his/her own unique input for the benefit of all as well as for his/her own benefit. Should we continue to endlessly tolerate his/her ineptness in this respect, we are not only damaging the others involved in any such function but we are ultimately reinforcing and enabling that individual’s inappropriate deeds, actions, outputs and productions. By doing that, we are depriving that individual of any other opportunities in which he/she could function much more appropriately and usefully.

The next term that we need to clarify is — respect. In our conceptualization of this term, ‘respect’ means or signifies our unconditional recognition of the fact that every individual is a universe unto himself/herself. That universe is inherently different, unique, and highly individual. It stands in its own right as someone who occupies his/her own state, process, place and time with a very specific and needed purpose in mind. Due to this fact, we unconditionally respect every individual’s individuality, uniqueness and difference. Because we do have this unconditional respect toward these most important and significant factors which make each individual what he/she is, we desire nothing more than giving all opportunities to that individual to manifest, to actualize, to realize and to put to a good use his/her individuality, uniqueness and difference. Should we see that the individual in question finds himself/herself in any situation or function or activities which impede or are incongruent with the specific structure of his/her individuality, uniqueness and difference, as well as to his/her overall abilities, from the deep and unconditional respect to his/her unique and different individuality, we bring this factor to his/her attention. If he/she accepts it, he/she will improve in his/her outputs and productivity. If not, because of our deep and unconditional respect for him/her, we remove him/her from any such function, thus, giving him/her an opportunity to find himself/herself something in which he/she could function more congruently with his/her abilities in this respect. Whether he/she takes that opportunity, is no longer our concern. The choices are his/hers. So are the consequences. Our duty in this respect, from the position of our unconditional respect for his/her individuality, is to bring to his/her attention all available choices. Once we do that, at that point our duty ends.

And finally, let us take up the term ‘appreciation.’ In our conceptualization of this term, ‘appreciation’ means or signifies our deep feeling and recognition that every individual is infinitely unique and different in his/her individuality and that because of this factor of individuality, uniqueness and difference, he/she stands amongst all and everything as someone who can never be replicated, duplicated or be exactly the same as anyone else. In such a factor is reflected My unique element or particle which was imparted on him/her with a very well- defined purpose. Because of that, our unconditional appreciation is fully extended to the need to have someone like that individual because without his/her being and existence something important would be missing from the totality of being and existence as well as pseudo-being and pseudo-existence. This factor equally applies to individuals who are negative and are in the negative state as well as to all humans. They all have unique functions, states, processes and placements and they all play important roles in the scheme of events which take place in My Creation and pseudo-creation. Therefore, we likewise appreciate them very much in their own individualities, uniquenesses and differences and for the reasons why they were permitted to come to their own adverse fruition.

However, because we respect them and appreciate them and we acknowledge the fact that they are who they are, nevertheless, if their deeds, actions, productions or productivity are hurtful, harmful and damaging not only to all others but also to themselves, because of our deep appreciation of who they are, we bring these facts to their attention and, by that act, we give them many opportunities to amend their ways. If they agree, then we did our job of appreciation the way we were supposed to do. If they don’t take heed, and continue in their unproductive, hurtful and harmful function, in that case, the duty of our appreciation requires from us to remove them from such a function or situation, giving them a choice and opportunity to find themselves some other function in which they might exhibit more congruent output and productivity congruent with the nature of that new function. Otherwise, should we continue to put up with any such ineptness on the part of the individual in question, we would only reinforce and enable his/her inappropriateness, hurtfulness and harmfulness in that situation. In that case we would fail in our showing proper appreciation for his/her individuality, uniqueness and difference.

So, as you clearly see from this explanation, it is one thing to be kind, tolerant, respectful and appreciative of everyone’s individuality, uniqueness and difference, and it is an entirely different thing to have the same attitude toward their deeds, actions, outputs and productivity. It is very important and crucial that you learn to clearly distinguish between these two factors. The wisdom of this situation requires from you to make such a distinction. Otherwise, you could end up supporting the negative state, by tolerating something which should not be tolerated not only for your own sake or for the sake of everyone in the positive state but, most importantly, for the sake of all those who are in such a negative predicament.

Take, for example, someone whose deeds, actions, outputs and productivity are evil, negative, bad, wrong, hurtful, harmful, dangerous and generally useless. The wisdom of your kindness, tolerance, respect and appreciation would require from you to totally and completely disagree with or reject or dissociate yourself from such deeds, actions, outputs and attitudes in general. If you were to define kindness, tolerance, respect and appreciation in a manner which doesn’t distinguish between individuality, uniqueness and difference on one side and deeds, actions, products and outputs on the other side, then, in that case, you would be supportive of the negative state because only the negative state can be that way. On the other hand, if you clearly disagree or reject such deeds, etc., for the sake of all, as well as for the sake of the individual who would exhibit such deeds, etc., you would be showing him/her true kindness, tolerance, respect and appreciation because you know very well that such deeds are destroying or, at least, undermining the proper manifestation and function of that individual’s true individuality, uniqueness and difference. After all, through such deeds, actions, outputs and products, the negative state is trying to defy the concept and manifestation of the individualities, uniquenesses and differences.

Do you remember, Peter, two cases of your secretaries, who worked with you while you were employed in the place of your employment a few years ago? Or with Manfred’s secretary with whom he has to deal at the present time because of her ineptness and incompetence as far as her quality of work, output and productivity are concerned? In your case, you had to stop assigning them any work because they either didn’t complete it within the required time or, if they did, the work was done in such an incompetent and impossible manner that you had to redo it all over again, wasting your precious time. What was your attitude toward them at that time? Although you supported the decision of their superiors to let them go, nevertheless, you maintained a kind, tolerant, respectful and appreciative attitude toward their individualities, uniquenesses and differences and at the same time, fully disagreeing with and rejecting the impossible quality of their work, output and productivity. By your support of letting them go, you clearly were distinguishing between their individualities, uniquenesses and differences and their deeds, actions, outputs and productivity. And Manfred is advised to do the same things after consulting personally with Me about the best possible way to proceed in this respect. And this is the way it is supposed to be. This is the right and proper spiritual way which stems from true love and wisdom and their attributes of kindness, tolerance, respect and appreciation the way they are defined, understood and practiced in the positive state.

Due to the fact that you are My true representatives, and due to the fact that as such you function from the position of the positive state, and ultimately from My Own Position, you are advised to adopt this method of relatedness as reflected in the nature of all relationships in the positive state. Your role in this respect is to bring into the pseudo-life of humans on planet Zero this mode and manner of functioning, behavior and attitude. By doing that, you’ll build a proper foundation on which impossible and despicable ways of humans’ mutual relatedness will be eventually eliminated and replaced with the way of purely positive nature as described above.

And this is all that I wanted to clarify for all of you this morning, Peter.

Peter: Thank You so much for this very necessary and meaningful clarification. May we proceed now with Boris’ questions and Your answers to them?

The Lord Jesus Christ: You may, Peter, you most certainly may. In responding to his two questions, as related to the events recorded in Luke, I will be paraphrasing the mentioned texts. Let us take the story of the sinful woman first. After that, we’ll discuss the Parable of the Prodigal or the Lost Son.

As you remember, at one time I was invited by a certain Pharisee for dinner. Here is described an attempt by someone who thinks that he possesses the proper knowledge of truth and all the mysteries of the hierarchy of the spiritual organization of life, to share that knowledge and understanding with Someone Who is the very Absolute Source of Truth and all Knowledge and Mysteries in Himself/Herself and by Himself/Herself — Me, The Lord Jesus Christ. This factor is described by the Pharisee’s invitation to share his food with Me. Food, in this connotation, means sharing all spiritual values. The reason I accepted his invitation was in the fact that it was necessary to show him the true reality of the nature of the positive state as well as of My True Nature the way it really was behind the scene and not as it appeared on the scene as represented by the Pharisee’s perception of that reality.

So, as this sharing was going on, represented here by eating our food, a woman in the city who was a sinner, knowing that I was in the Pharisee’s house, brought an alabaster flask of fragrant oil, and stood at My feet behind Me, weeping; and she began to wash My feet with her tears, and wiped them with the hair of her head; and she kissed My feet and anointed them with the fragrant oil.

A profound spiritual mystery and correspondences are contained in this scene. A woman in the city, in the connotation of the discussed event, signifies the original state of all those who possessed proper knowledge and understanding of all spiritual correspondences and mysteries of the life-making process. ‘A woman’ in this connotation means three things: One, it is a body of knowledge and understanding; two, it is a deep love for having proper knowledge and understanding. That she was in the city signifies that she was in the practical application of that knowledge and understanding. ‘City’ means application and practice because living requires a place where you can live and practice. Three, a woman signifies also one’s own true nature. Only from the position of the knowledge of who you are and what your purpose in life is can you apprehend any other true knowledge. However, most importantly, only from the position of your own nature, represented here by the woman in question, can you approach Me for whatever reasons. A situation is described here which indicates or shows the proper way of approaching Me.

That she was a sinner signifies that the knowledge and understanding of spiritual correspondences, and everything else, were utilized by those who had them for activation of the negative state. To do so, means to sin or to be a sinner. That she brought an alabaster flask of fragrant oil with her denotes the possession of a very small but very precious remnant of the most elevated good. An alabaster flask signifies a very small remnant. Fragrant oil represents the good of love and love of good which was retained in everyone who participated in the activation of the negative state. The mystery of this depiction is in the fact, mentioned many times before, that no one can be absolutely evil or have something which could be conceived as absolutely false. As no absolute evil exists, so does no absolute falsity exist. What you have to understand in this respect, is that if someone would be pure evil and in pure falsity without even the minutest remnants of something stemming from good and truth, or love and wisdom, that one couldn’t survive or live for a fraction of a second. This fact is giving you a very clear indication that everyone who lives in evils and falsities, can and may live there only and only because they contain within themselves some elements of good and truth and love and wisdom. That they don’t recognize or acknowledge this to be the source of their life, is an entirely different story. Because of that, they are designated as sinners or dead.

However, at one point in time, they will recognize this fact and acknowledge that they can be anything or anyone at all only and only for the reason of having those minutest remnants within them which I placed into them Myself. Because they are all from Me, I am in them at all times, enabling their possessors to have their own life and living. This fact is described by the woman in question who knew that I was in the Pharisee’s house. Her knowledge denotes the recognition that I am in everyone, in their most private within, designated here by the Pharisee’s house. That it was the Pharisee’s house signifies that I am also in those who think and believe that they have the proper knowledge of good and truth, and all other spiritual principles, but who, in fact, are only in appearances of such knowledge.

That the woman brought with herself an alabaster flask of fragrant oil means that only from the position of those remnants could/can one approach Me no matter how great a sinner one might be. That she stood behind Me at My feet weeping signifies that anything negative and sinful was/is not part of and had/has nothing to do with the true nature of the Positive State or My True Absolute Nature. It was/is separated from and was/is behind Me at all times. That she stood at My feet signifies the point of contact where the negative state may make such contact without being annihilated in the process. Feet, in the connotation of this text, correspond to My Most External Degree of My External Mind from which the physical dimension was created. It was in the most external degree of that dimension from which the negative state was fabricated. Thus, in some sense, My feet, or the most external region of My External Mind, have some affinity to the negative state in the sense that contact is possible with the negative state at that level, provided that anyone who approaches Me for such a contact brings with herself/himself his/her true nature — the woman, who possesses the remnants of love and good — the fragrant oil, — and is willing to acknowledge that I am the source of that love and good.

That the woman was weeping signifies that one’s true nature recognizes from where his/her problems spring and that without Me one has no chance to live or to be alive. Weeping is the first step in recognizing the source of one’s problems and the need to get rid of them. Remember, problems are sins and sins are problems. That she began to wash My feet with her tears, and wiped them with the hair of her head signifies sharing with Me of her most precious and most internal possessions represented here by tears which are very personal and individual. That she wiped them with her hair denotes that it was done from the most internal power of her love. Hair signifies one’s personal spiritual power and energy which enables one to function as one’s own individuality, uniqueness and difference. But because it was a woman who shared with Me her personal spiritual power and energy through the process of wiping My feet as she was washing them, means that only from the position of the feminine principle, which is the principle of love and goodness, can any such act have meaningful and useful significance.

That the woman kissed My feet and anointed them with the fragrant oil signifies acknowledgment and acceptance of My Human Divine and Divine Human, ascribing to it the true power from which I can initiate salvation of all the so-called sinners represented here by her. Kissing My feet denotes acceptance of the human aspects of My Nature. Anointing them with the fragrant oil means that salvation can come only by the factor that I made My Divine Human and subsequently I made My Human Divine. But it also means that from My feet, that is to say, from the human portion of My Nature, which are being washed with her tears and wiped with her hair and kissed and anointed with the fragrant oil, My New Nature will derive, after it is purified from all evils and falsities with which the typical human nature was/is imbued. She washed them with her tears, meaning washing My human aspects with the fact of acknowledgment that I don’t possess anything of negative and evil nature and that anything negative in the human aspects of My nature is being eliminated by the purity of My love and goodness which is being mutually shared with everyone who approaches Me in My New Nature. In this respect, the entire scene with the woman indicates that no matter how evil and negative one may be, if one acknowledges My New Nature, meaning kissing My feet and anointing them with the remnants of his/her love and good, from that position I can save them without any reservation. So, in essence, this scene foresees the acquirement of My New Nature which will replace My Old Nature and which will become the only source of everyone’s salvation and liberation from the negative state and from the negative aspects of the human nature.

Due to the fact that the woman in the city also denotes the factor of residing in the false doctrinal and dogmatic pseudo-knowledge, coming from the city and acknowledging and accepting My New Nature, represented here by My feet and what the woman was doing to them, also signifies that only by the means of My New Revelation which reveals the facts about My New Nature and everything related to the true spiritual principles, that is to say, by the means of My Nature and of the ideas of My New Revelation which are integrally connected to My New Nature, is the only way one can be converted to the positive state, no matter how much one sinned/sins or how great one’s sins were/are. To indicate this fact, at the end of this event, I said, ‘Therefore I say to you, her sins, which are many, are forgiven, for she loved much.’ And at the very end, ‘Your sins are forgiven.’ This is how liberation and salvation from the negative state was/is made possible. And the woman in question, by her recognition, acknowledgment, acceptance and internalization of this fact, represented this most important factor. Through and by her behavior, and what she did to Me, she illustrated and demonstrated the way out of the negative state. You can say that she was the very first one who accomplished this goal, thanks to the spiritual symbolization of which her behavior represented at that time. By putting the most important emphasis on My Human, which was symbolized by My feet, and which became the catalyst for acquirement of My New Nature, she, in fact, was the very first one who was saved and liberated from the negative state by the means of My New Nature from the standpoint of its non-time and non-space conceptualization. In other words, she was saved, from the standpoint of the time-space conceptualization, by My Future New Nature.

The rest of the events, as related to the Pharisee’s reaction to the entire scene, correspond to those individuals who think that they have the proper knowledge and the proper means but who are trying to devise a different way for liberation and salvation of all, totally disregarding the only possible way — Me and My Absolute New Nature. This is the reason why they look with contempt on all others, the so-called sinners, considering themselves to be righteous and godly, while, in fact, by rejecting Me and My way, by not doing what the woman was doing to Me through her symbolical depiction, they put themselves into a position of exclusion, for the time being, from participation in the life of the positive state. The woman’s behavior and action can be considered a most beautiful depiction, illustration and demonstration of the ways and means for getting out of the negative state. By having faith in My Divine Human and Human Divine, that is to say, by having faith in My Future New Nature and what all It will accomplish and produce, she was saved from the negative state. This is the reason I said to her, ‘Your faith has saved you. Go in peace.’ To repeat again, there is no other way out of the negative state. And this is what that event, described in Luke, really signifies, among some other things related to the woman’s personal life as well as to the Pharisee’s situation.

However, there is another important spiritual aspect related to the representation of the woman in question. This woman was called a sinner. What kinds of sins was she committing? They all related to her sexual involvements with men. This is the issue of relatedness. As you know, you can relate to others on many levels of involvement. Sexuality, however, was defined as an all-inclusive sharing from the position of one’s femininity to the position of one’s masculinity and from the position of one’s masculinity to the position of one’s femininity. The quality of any such involvement is determined by one’s intentional and motivational factors with which such an involvement and sharing take place. As you know, one of the most important purposes of Creation and everyone positioned in it, is to share what one has and what one is from the position of his/her and her/his own individuality, uniqueness and difference. The fundamental goal, meaning and purpose of sexuality in this respect, among many other things, is to be an avenue or a means for such an intimate sharing to take place. The importance of such sharing can be found in the fact that the only way one can properly manifest and share the unique, different and very much individual element or particle of My Absolute Individual, Unique and Different Nature, which was imparted on each individual in his/her relative condition, is by sharing what one has and what one is with all others. This is how various aspects, elements and particles of My Absolute Nature are being shared amongst all sentient entities. This is also the way I convey Myself to all in My Creation. Sexuality in this respect plays the central role in the process of this sharing.

The quality, the content and appropriateness of that sharing is determined by the purpose for which such sharing takes place. From what position is any sharing being initiated? What does it take into consideration? Who and how is anyone involved in the process of such sharing? The purity and sinless-ness of any such sharing is determined by the factor of My personal involvement in any such act. It is also determined by the motivational and intentional factors of any such sharing. In the case of the woman in question, her approach to such a sharing was from love to men and from the need to give that love to everyone who approached her for that purpose.

However, the problem with her love in this respect was that it lacked wisdom. She was sharing her femininity, uniqueness, individuality and difference without any regard for the source of them — Me. Instead she was doing it from herself, by herself and of herself, excluding My presence in any of her acts. Because of that, her behavior in that area was considered to be sinful. Nevertheless, she did it from love without any other ulterior reasons. Due to this fact she became eligible for unconditional mercy and forgiveness once she recognized the problems with her mode of sharing, and once she became aware that only I could rectify that situation for her by her acceptance of My Absolute Divinity and of My Future New Nature. So she brought her individuality, uniqueness and difference, and everything she contained in the goodness of her heart, mind and personality, to Me, recognizing who was their source. By doing that, she nullified any negative or sinful connotation of her behavior, actions, outputs and productivity. This is the reason I said to the Pharisee that her sins, which were many, were forgiven, for she loved much. Also, this is the reason why I didn’t say to her to go and sin no more. If you are with Me, and if you do everything in your life, no matter what it is, from Me, with Me, through Me, of Me and for Me, and if you do it from the position of your own individuality, uniqueness and difference, recognizing and accepting their true Source — Me, you can never go wrong. By that factor, any possible sinful or wrong connotation of any of your actions is out of the question. Because I don’t contain any sin, that is to say, anything negative, evil or false, whatever is done with, from, by, of and for Me, cannot be sinful, evil, negative, or wrong.

The woman in question, and her interaction with Me and My interaction with her, clearly illustrated and demonstrated these important factors to all in Creation and pseudo-creation.

From the above explanation you may derive the meaning of that event to your present situation as My representatives on planet Zero. As you know, it is not by coincidence that this event was brought to your attention at this particular time. For some time now you have been aware of the situation which exists on planet Zero amongst all religious and other pseudo-spiritual movements. An all-out effort is made to discredit My True New Nature. The way it is done is by rejecting My Divinity or that I made My Human Divine, which functioned as the main means for changing My Nature in an absolute sense. The reason why this is done by the forces of the negative state, is so that they could prevent their followers, members and minions from being liberated and saved from the pseudo-life in the negative state. If you take into consideration the fact, mentioned many times before, that the only way that anyone can be converted to the positive state is by the means of My New Absolute Nature and thus, by the means of My New Revelation, in which My New Nature is fully present and is contained — in its very Ideas which are constantly being renewed and regenerated — then, in that case, if you accept the false teachings about Me and about My Nature which are propagated by all those numerous religions and pseudo-spiritual movements, you can never get out of the negative state. And this is exactly what the forces of the negative state, particularly and most pronouncedly the renegades, are after. This is how they hope to continue in the pseudo-life of the negative state ad infinitum.

Your role in this respect is to carry the ideas of My New Nature, of My New Revelation and of the principles of the all-exclusive sharing in your lives, hearts and practices, becoming their pillars and shining lights which herald this good news and glad tidings of My New Nature and of My New Revelation to all interested. You do it by the mode and way of your lives and living and by the mode and way you relate to each other and everyone else in the manner as described in these Dialogs and in the entirety of My New Revelation. You reflect the way for salvation and liberation of everyone in the negative state by the examples of your own life and as depicted by the woman in question who approached Me for that purpose during My life on your planet.

At this point of this Dialog, we may briefly touch upon My relationship with women during My stay on planet Zero. If you carefully analyze the way I related to anyone, you will notice that by the entirety of My behavior, I completely and totally equalized the importance of men and women. Because of that, although the Gospels didn’t record too much about it, I was constantly surrounded, listened to and was involved at all levels of My Absolute Masculinity and My Absolute Femininity equally, both with men and women. By doing that, I was refuting and rejecting the accursed, degrading and less valuable position which women, and femininity in general, had at that time, as well as which they would have following My departure from planet Zero. Notice, please, that many of the most important spiritual-philosophical discussions I had were with women. The first person to whom I appeared after My resurrection was a woman. It is not by coincidence that Luke, in his Gospel, following the recorded event with the woman in question, begins his next Chapter, Chapter 8, with the proclamation that many women were with Me, serving Me and providing for Me from their substance, that is to say, from their femininity. All these facts pointed out the vital and crucial importance of the need for equalization of all principles of femininity and masculinity and masculinity and femininity. In their equalization, unity, oneness, integration, harmony and mutual sharing is the fullness of My presence and the fullness of life of the positive state and its true nature. Remember My words denoting that I gave you My example? The way I treated others, especially women, by that example of Mine, you are to treat each other, and especially women, if you are a man. In doing that, you follow My example, and in doing that, you are manifesting on your sinful, wicked and violent planet the proper life, the life of the positive state and, ultimately, My New Absolute Nature.

My involvement with Mary Magdalena, to which Boris’ question alluded, has already been discussed in the Third Dialog of the First Volume. Nothing more can be said about it at this time.

And this brings us to the second question and its answers — the Parable of the Lost or Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11-32). There are at least two symbolical depictions in this parable. In the first instance, it symbolically describes the activation of the negative state and its outcome. In the second instance, it describes various levels of relatedness that can and may happen between someone who considers himself/herself positive and someone who is considered to be negative or spiritually dead.

‘A certain man’ in this connotation depicts the Creator — Me. That he had two sons signifies two qualities of Creation — Love and Wisdom, Good and Truth, Positive Works and Faith and Masculinity and Femininity. A setup is being described here for separation, split and disunion of these two essential and substantial qualities for the purpose of activation of the negative state, or of that other type of life in order to test a hypothesis if that life could have the same quality, meaning and outcome as the life of the positive state. That it was the youngest son who came to his father and asked him to give him his portion of inheritance, depicts the factor that the masculine principle wants to be separated from the feminine one. The reason he was the younger one was in the fact that love, or femininity, precedes and gives birth to wisdom or masculinity. Although in a non-time non-space connotation, and in My Absolute State and Process, these fundamental attributes or qualities occur simultaneously and synchronously; in their application to the time- space continuum and to the sentient mind, they appear as though one precedes the other in the same manner as the birth of twins in which one member of the couple comes out of the mother’s womb first, immediately followed by the other one. The one who follows will be considered the younger one although they both equally, and at the same time, developed in their mother’s womb. So, in this sense, because love precedes and gives birth to wisdom, or in this connotation, femininity precedes masculinity, it was the masculine aspect which demanded his portion of inheritance so that he could split from his femininity and My Absolute State. This split is denoted by the man dividing his livelihood to his younger son. ‘The livelihood’ in this connotation signifies one portion of the creative material which was taken out of the totality of all creative material and used for fabrication of the Zone of Displacement.

After this was done, the young man, or in the true sense to what he corresponds — that contingent of the original positive state that agreed to activate the negative state for the reason and purpose which was revealed in Dialogs 89 and 90 of the First Volume, and in My New Revelation in general — split from the rest of Creation and went to a far country. ‘A far country’ in this connotation is the Zone of Displacement and the negative state. In that country he wasted all his possessions with prodigal living. Once you activate the negative state, and once you become an integral part of its pseudo-life, whatever you had from the positive state, is being wasted and replaced with everything opposite to it. In the moment you spend all of it, nothing remains in you which could support the true spiritual life which is enabling your being alive and living. In that moment, after complete depletion of anything positive and good within you, you begin to experience hunger. However, by the factor of rejection of anything positive and good, you induce famine in the entirety of the Zone of Displacement. ‘Famine’ in this connotation denotes lack of any good and truth which feeds life, any life, making it alive and living. It is at this point that everyone in the negative state becomes spiritually dead. So, at this point of your escapades in the negative state, you have no recourse but to join yourself to the very substance of its nature, represented here by a citizen of that country, and begin to feed swine — all evils of the negative state. ‘To feed swine’ means to disseminate evils.

As this son was getting hungrier and hungrier, he would gladly fill his stomach with the pods that swine ate, but no one gave him anything. The pods by which swine were fed signify the most external elements of evils and falsities by which the pseudo-life of the negative state is sustained. But because the pseudo-life of the negative state is based on non-sharing and non-reciprocating, nothing in it is available to anyone for such sharing. This is the reason why no one was giving him anything.

At one point in time, as the negative state exhausts its usefulness and has nothing more to offer for learning, its inhabitants will come to the realization that the pseudo-life of their negative state leads nowhere and that it is completely depleted of everything that it thought it had. And not only that, but the realization will come that it has absolutely nothing, that it is not even alive in the true sense of that word. It is at this point that the answer to the question about the nature of that other type of life, as compared with the original life, becomes fully and exhaustively clear in everyone’s mind with the realization that only the original life, in all its inexhaustible richness and content, is the only true life which can be lived and that no other life has any sense. Not only doesn’t it have any sense, but it cannot be considered the true life in any of its aspects. This fact is described by the younger son’s awareness or recall of how it was to live in his father’s house — in My positive state. And not only that, but he realized that by activating the negative state, he sinned, and therefore, is no longer worthy to be called My son. This realization is a prerequisite for salvation and liberation of everyone from the non-life or the dead life of the negative state. It makes all in the negative state eligible for My unconditional mercy and forgiveness and for bringing them back into the positive state by the process of their resurrection, transformation and reendowment with the true life of the positive state.

The second level of the meaning of this parable relates to those who were the agents of the positive state and those who fell away from being them. The issue here is from what position you relate to all others. In this case, an illustration is being offered about what happens if one relates to any situation from the position of one’s human nature or from the position of considering oneself more important, more deserving and more valuable than anyone else, and not from the position of one’s true nature, that is to say, from Me. Because you have something that no one else has, in your particular case, because, as My true representatives, you have My New Revelation and everything that it contains in all its three sources, you may fall into a spiritual arrogance, by that factor considering yourself more deserving, more needed, more valuable and more everything than those who don’t have it.

So, if you see someone who comes back to Me and who is treated equally with you, and who is treated with great delight, gladness and happiness, — after all, there is more joy in Heaven over one sinner converting to the positive state than over one hundred righteous individuals, or in our case, My representatives — from your typical human position, you could become angry and feel neglected. This parable is a warning against anything like that ever happening in your life and in your attitude about yourself and how you relate to others. It emphasizes the need to see things and to relate to everyone the way I do, as depicted by the father’s behavior toward the younger son and his response to the older son.

In your case, as My representatives on planet Zero, your role is to illustrate and demonstrate in your relationships, behaviors and attitudes to yourself and all others, as well as amongst yourselves, that type which was depicted by the father of those two sons. In other words, you are to illustrate and demonstrate by your own life My way, the way I behave and act toward all, everywhere and everywhen. By doing that, you are fulfilling your mission and assignment being in the role of My true representatives. And this is all that needs to be said about the meaning of this Parable at this time. At this point, Peter, I would recommend to finish it for today. Have a nice day and a good time with our Manfred. Go in peace.

Peter: Thank You so much for this beautiful explanation.

Source: DIALOGUES WITH THE LORD JESUS ​​CHRIST PART 2.

INTRODUCTION | SPIRITUALITY | CONTACTS | MAIN SITEMAP | BACK