1 I'd now like to relate my issues with Roy Masters and the Foundation of Human Understanding, which I view as The New Church of the Reformed (n11:79). And so alludes to Revelation chapter 13, which speaks of the beast out of the sea and the false prophet. And in Swedenborg's Apocalypse Revealed, he says these correspond to the Church of the Reformed: the beast out of the sea signifying the laity, and the false prophet signifying the clergy. And here, I'm drawing a parallel to the staff-members at the FHU, or clergy, which is the false prophet. And although I deem Roy Masters a part of this, with much of the blasphemy initiated through him, I don't disagree with him as much as with the three David's (n62) who have worked there. The spark of originality remains with Roy, and is much less callous than it is sincere.
2 As for the Five Earls of Roy and Seven Principals of David in chapter 4 (n4:6; n6:62; n61), I'm referring to the numbers 1 through 12: the Five Roy's corresponding to the numbers 1 through 5, and the Seven Davids corresponding to the numbers 6 through 12. And to the three David's at the FHU I've ascribed the numbers 8, 9 and 10. To the first David, who is Roy's son-in-law, I've ascribed the number 8. He's the person who is/was in charge of Tall Timber Ranch in Selma, Oregon. To the second David, Roy's son, I've ascribed the number 9, who I believe was in charge of both Tall Timber Ranch and the FHU headquarters in Grants Pass, before filling in for his father on the radio. And to the third David, I've ascribed the number 10, who was later put in charge of the FHU headquarters. This is the David I wrote the letter to in chapter 8 (n1). While all three are the staff members I'm referring to in chapter 9 (n8).
3 Thus in Revelation 13:18 it refers to the false prophet by the number 666. Which is interesting for the name David is signified by the number 6: in the way the Star of David has six points. And when describing the Church of Philadelphia, the 6th church, Revelation 3:7 says: "These things saith he . . . that hath the key of David. . ." and so shows a connection between David and the number 6. The name David also means beloved, a quality describing the bride to be (6) (n4:66), much as the New Jerusalem, the Lord's bride, is called the City of David. Swedenborg also says the number 666 signifies the triplication of 6i.e., 6-6-6. And, since there were three David's working at the FHU, it's easy to see the correlation.
4 But before anyone gets too alarmed, especially those who call yourselves Christians, I'm reminding you that 666 refers specifically to the Reformation: which began with Martin Luther and later became the Protestant Churchyour church! More than anything, the book of Revelation refers to The Reformation. And so what I say about the Foundation of Human Understanding, only echoes what occurred back then. In fact it's an improvement! But there are still falsities associated which need to be addressed.
5 While for a time I wondered if 666 applied specifically to Roy Masters or noteven more so with Martin Luther. And though he was responsible for the Reformation, I believe its negative connotation applied more to what came later. When Swedenborg describes Martin Luther in The True Christian Religion (number 796), it sounds very much like Roy Masters. I wondered about this for at least two years, before I received an answer in January 1993on Martin Luther King's birthday! And when substituting a chapter for a month, and verse for a day in Revelation 13:18 (n6:90,95), his birthday, which was observed on January 18th, corresponds to chapter 13, verse 18: where the number 666 is revealed! And so it seems this number is all-inclusive of the Reformation. And while I'm not bad-mouthing Martin Luther King, it's clear he belongs to the same church; and indeed, compares to a modern-day reformisteven a second Martin Luther.
6 I initially intended to discuss these issues at length, but since so much is covered in the preceding chapters (n4:65), I decided it wasn't required. Besides I didn't write this book expressly to bad-mouth these people. And, as I view Roy Masters as very astute (n11:62; n19:20), my disagreement isn't so much a matter of what, as it is to what degree: the example of the pendulum in Prudence (5) (n4:56) probably best describing it. The issues are listed below and will briefly be discussed. While in the latter half of the chapter, in King Lycurgus (n36), I relate the experience I had with David at Tall Timber Ranch, and some related ideas.
7 "And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard [falsity], and his feet were as the feet of a bear [ignorance], and his mouth as the mouth of a lion [power]: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority." Revelation 13:2 Sound like Roy's all out war against sin? (n11:62-63). Indeed his whole campaign is levied upon the backs of the people, the leopard, while speaking from such a prowess, the lion, that no one can refute. And he has the audacity to stand up and say Americans are a bunch of ignoramuses, the bear (n9:17) and, that these are the Soviet States of America! in accord with Russia, the Great Bear? Yet as Swedenborg explains, man is nothing but evil, and the Devil is none other than man himself (n11). Careful with that axe Roy! Or, would that be King Lycurgus? (n50).
1) No one has to die
2) The Devil is an alien
3) The imagination is off-limits
4) It's wrong to dream
5) The intellect is off-limits
6) Pleasure is to be shunned
7) Women should be passionless
8) Sexuality is weakness
9) Man needs to transcend his sexuality
10) Women aren't supposed to enjoy sex
9 Although it sounds unusual, this refers to the resurrection. And it's the premise by which Roy bases most of his beliefs: that there is a God in heaven who grants eternal life to those who are faithful. I don't disagree with this so much as with the criteria that decides who is faithful. And according to Roy, he claims only those who die as martyrs, or have been translated from the body to the spirit, while still alive, are eligible: for example, Enoch and Elijah. And there are biblical references, like the one he quotes from John 11:25-26, where Jesus says: "I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. . ."
10 It's a compelling argument, especially if you weren't already disposed to religion. And in context with the Bible, Roy makes it plausible. But because it requires a Spartan stringency, it smacks more of jumping through hoops, as if this were all it entailed. Yet the resurrection occurs after we die, nor at some future date, as many Christians believe (n1:12). Then, depending on our life in the world, we're prepared for either heaven or hell, and we receive eternal lifeor damnation! Notwithstanding, there is a lot more leeway than generally believed, for even the heathen are received into heaven! This is thoroughly detailed in Emanuel Swedenborg's work, Heaven and Hell.
11 This idea is propagated not only by Roy Masters, but by most of Christendom, and it's an outright lie! For the Devil is none other than man himself! as Swedenborg explains in Heaven and Hell. That isn't to say there is no hell and a Devil that resides there, but we have to understand it's all about the spirit of man gone to hell. Indeed, there are lots of devils in hell! And if we choose to believe the Devil exists, it's through our ignorance that we give him the wrong power, of supernatural entityor alienequal to God but the opposite. Thus when confronting this myself through Roy's program (n11:134), I nearly freaked out, for the Devil had all the power and, as I didn't understand what I was dealing with, a spirit not unlike myself, I had no recourse. Remember the Minotaur? (n12:38). It's not an uncommon reaction.
12 Being a central theme of Roy's, where he calls the Devil the not you or, alien identity, it entails the whole complexity of his beliefseluding the Devil! Yet he challenges you to confront him, but then ties your hands behind your back so you can't escape. Whereby polarizing your experience to give it a high contrast, between good and evil. It then requires the utmost care and discipline, and stringency, to hold him at bayand austerity! And if you can't handle it, you're drawn ever closer, through fear, into the Labyrinth. But the Devil is man! And we need not look any further than this in ourselves.
13 As the Golden Rule says, "Do unto others as you'd have them do unto you." Which Roy violates whenever he employs his brutal measures over the Devil: by banging people over the head with his ideas and causing them to sit there looking at it, at their anger if nothing else. This would be acceptable if the Devil were not human! Which is who he claims to be confronting, or exposing people to. Yet as Jesus tells us to forgive our enemies, then we must forgive the Devil.
14 Granted there is a heaven and hell, where spirits dwell, angels and devils, and the Devil does have power over us. Which requires we be judicious and moral. But by knowing his identity, we can give up all the mental gymnastics, and stop struggling with our hands tied behind our backand flee the Labyrinth!
15 According to Roy, the imagination is no man's land, and this is where the Devil resides. Which has its merits, for we're speaking of the seat of the ego: and through our daydreams we preoccupy ourselves with glory and illusions of grandeur, and enforce our pride. As they say, "An idle mind is the Devil's workshop." And through his meditation technique (n4:60), Roy introduces you to your imagination and thought processes, and teaches you how to disconnect: and become objective.
16 On the other hand, when speaking of transcendental meditation, which is essentially the opposite and promotes the mind's imagery, Roy has nothing but bad things to say. He says it's a form of escapism and is very dangerous. Indeed it has its merits, but he also claims his technique is dangerous! And under the prescribed criteria, it is! Thus we seem to be speaking of two extremes: objectivity versus subjectivity (n4:107). Shouldn't we promote their balance instead?
17 And so we are left believing these images are empty fantasies. But I say something more tangible is possible if we first understand the nature of spiritual cause-and-effect: i.e., true correspondences (n4:18). Then the imagination becomes a very useful tool. After all, if any credence is to be given to religion, who was addressing the prophets in their minds? But like the analogy I give of the development of TV in Prudence (5) (n4:61), the black and white TV had to come first, before the advent of color TV, and this was Roy's task.
18 Most of us aren't aware of it, but we come in direct contact with the spiritual world when we dream. And being a more fluid realm, where we don't spend enough time, and aren't accustomed to it, we rarely become conscious. But then there are the times when our dreams become very real, and we're hard-pressed to explain why? Swedenborg says the soul is resuscitated three days after death.
19 According to Roy our dreams are danger zone one. And being the extension of our imagination, where insanity lurks, you become fully immersedor, baptized. It then becomes the total escape, and you are apt to encounter the Devil or one of his evil host, who do their utmost to possess you. And, once convinced, or sensitized, when you realize you're dreaming, you are gripped with fear when you ask: "Where is the Devil?" This is what happened to me (n11:134), and it almost always resulted in conflict: at first I would flee, before a struggle ensued, and I would have to wrench myself awake, not unlike sleep paralysis, as it happened night after night. Then, if I was too tired before going to bedexhausted and/or upsetone of these spirits would overpower me, and possess me.
20 So in Roy's view of what's normal, it's wrong to dream. Indeed, because of the effectiveness of his meditation, he rarely dreams. He's also a light sleeper. But where does he go when he dies? Of course he speaks of dying as a martyr, or being translated (n9). But he still becomes a part of the spiritual world. Will he just become a part of someone else's fantasy?
21 Like the imagination, Roy says the Devil resides in the intellect, or our thinking process. And, by spending too much time caught up in our minds, with knowledge and unsubstantiated facts, it becomes a distraction, and tends only to serve our pride. And here we say, "All brains and no common sense." Either way, when we overindulge in the imagination or the intellect, it's called neurosis, which is symptomatic of addiction and, can be ascribed to the Devil, remotely. But when we balance the two out, and don't overindulge in either, we are less prone to become fixated or, as Roy would say, hypnotized. It then becomes barely distinguishable, almost as if we were engaged in neither. This I'm afraid is where Roy gets the idea, and promotes their mutual exclusion.
22 Thus we're speaking of a state of imbalance, where the solution isn't so much a matter of their removal, but their integration. And while I'm not sure this is Roy's ultimate goal, it's one thing he tends to focus on, and it's a side effect of the meditation. So, by shunning the thinking and feeling process, he shuns humanity, and promotes sterility (n11:61) instead of fertility or, integration. Any wonder why he claims God intended for man to be asexual? (n9:22). One thing that illustrates their integration occurs when you shine the three primary colors of light, red, yellow and blue, on the same spot. The colors magically disappear, and all you see is white light. It doesn't mean they've been removed, just integrated. And yet with Roy, the opposite appears to be the case, i.e., no light at all, for he accentuates the negative!
23 Speaking of getting everything back to front, it's curious how the name Dennis (n8:22) spelled backwards is sinned. And, that the number 49, in accord with the name Dennis (n8:23), becomes 94, which corresponds to Joyce (10) and, to the colors black (9) and white (4) (n4:77; n6:54). Thus in order to maintain their objectivity, signified by Joyce and the number 10 (n4:95; n8:10), they focus on the negative first, i.e., black before white. And, when looking at someone like me they say: "This man has sinned," and it rarely goes beyond that.
24 Because we are afraid of looking bad, which is born out of insecurity or selfishness, we give ourselves over to peer pressure. We align ourselves emotionally, through our feelings, but with a lack of understanding. This is a mistake, for it's a false allegiance, with no true correspondences. Thus we make a display of our emotions, which often comes across as loud and insincere or, self-serving. So in the process of fooling ourselves, we clearly show how blind and suggestible we areespecially to authority!
25 Given that, it's easy to see Roy's distinction. And because people develop in lopsided ways, they are easily led by their emotions and their behavior is reinforced. Such is the nature of addiction. While Roy says it smacks of pride and ego, and this is how the Devil gains control over us. As a result, we need to focus on our pleasure faculties and continue to moderate and reduce them, and extinguish them? However, by shunning our emotions, we become callous and sterile.
26 So, why should we deny ourselves pleasure when it's legitimate? The key here is not to force ourselves into something we don't understand, and not become contrived. Then by keeping our feelings and pleasures in context, it becomes a true correspondenceof good to truthwhich, coexist. We then become as little children, and retain our innocence. As Jesus says: "Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven." Matthew 18:3 Indeed, a little child's life is full of joy and pleasure!
27 Women, by nature are more emotional than men, and are therefore more pleasure oriented. And so they become a temptation to men: to become more emotional. And as it leads a man out of his senseshere we are back to the Garden of Eden Genesis 3:17a man should place constraints on his woman, so she becomes more and more passionless. And ultimately, if he's effective, she becomes very much like him. How boring! (n33).
28 But if that's her nature, why fool around with it? I like to say the FHU Fouls Her Up. And similar to what I said above, the key to maintaining a healthy emotional state, is to provide a suitable environment for keeping it in bounds. This is the husband's role, in accord with the truth, who maintains the exterior aspect of the relationship, and protects his family from the outside world. Indeed this is something the FHU is very good at. Unfortunately the husband's role gets magnified, while the woman's role gets lost, and amounts to a glorified masculine will (n4:61).
29 And here I view the FHU as the hull of a seed, or walnut shell, as mentioned in chapter 11 (n307), which is designed to protect the seed and repel the assaults from the outside world. And I see them with this big bag of nutsthe truthwhich they guard jealously, but neither plant nor eat. And they hold them up for display and pronounce them the very ideals of religion but, failing to realize the shells were meant to be discarded, the inside withers away: ". . .behold, the devil shall cast some of you into prison; and ye shall have tribulation ten days. . ." Revelation 2:10 But as soon as a seed falls to the ground, and gets assaulted by the microbes in the soil, the hull breaks and gives way to something truly spiritual.
30 Because we're speaking of the ultimate experience between a man and a woman (n7:1), hence the ultimate pleasure, sex becomes highly suspect. For if pleasure is to be shunned, sex must be at the top of the list. But with the ultimate joy being the birth of a child, how could it be so morose? And as it seems our purpose is to perpetuate the human race, why shouldn't it be pleasurable? "Be fruitful, and multiply! . . ." Genesis 9:1 And when we view the human body, nude and at the peak of its form, we find it very appealing; everything about it is sexual. Whereby the whole of nature is geared towards sexual reproduction, and we as humans, having evolved further, should be endowed with a similar but higher proclivity (n4:88). This is the role eroticism plays (n7:6-9).
31 On the other hand, Roy says eroticism is carnal lust. And being the very antithesis of marriage, whoredomwith its express use of sex, and all its forbidden aspectsbecomes most profane. But why can't we have a happy sex life? That's like saying we shouldn't be given a driver's license because irresponsible people drive cars and kill people! Therefore it's our intent, that determines if we are totally selfish or, mutually responsive; while eroticism focuses on the quality of the experience. And so from the standpoint of whoredom, we are not to judge others, as Swedenborg says. For which reason he says prostitution should be legalized, in Conjugal Love, as it provides an outlet for the unmarried man, who wouldn't otherwise have the opportunity to marry.
32 Because Adam wasn't born of woman, Roy equates sex with original sin, and says it gives rise to our weakness (n9:27-28). Thus as a man approaches the state of Adam's fall, while in the process of becoming spiritual, he needs to transcend his sexuality. Of course the book of Genesis gives only scant detail here; indeed it's open to a lot of speculation. The only reference it gives to the woman is that Adam hearkened to the voice of his wife. Genesis 3:17 Roy also draws reference from The Forgotten Books of Eden, which gives more insight into the matter, but it doesn't expressly say sex is original sin. Besides, as well meaning as the author may have been, who's to determine its authenticity?
33 As it gives rise to the beast in man, Roy says sex needs to be brought within constraints; indeed its wild aspect does. And when referring to the war of the sexes, he says the proliferation of sex promotes hell on earth (n9:22), which has its merits. But what's really implied is that a man should overcome his aggression towards his wife, and refrain from taking liberties. Besides, what are men and women to do? Hold hands throughout eternity? Or would even that be too suggestive? Surely this doesn't imply what it means to be spiritual! Thus given all I've said, it sheds enough doubt on Roy's doctrine, to suggest he's given himself over to conjecture. Or it at least requires some deliberation before affirming what he has to say.
34 With his burning desire evidence of original sin, which a man should give upeventuallythe woman needs to assume a less passionate role with sex. As a result, there's little room for her own fulfillment. And initially, because a man's advances are typically outward and aggressive, she exhibits little interest; for she has to bear the burden, i.e., pregnancy. This is where Roy makes the distinction. But as she continues to receive undue attention from the beast, she begins to feel a sense of power, which she misconstrues as worshipof her divinity. And if allowed to continue, the man becomes more of a beast, while she becomes more seductivei.e., sex and violence. While the forces can become so strong, that transference takes place: where the woman is so overwhelmed that she assumes the role of the man, and the man is so overwhelmed that he assumes the role of the woman. From whence the seeds of homosexuality are implanted. Perhaps we should keep the politics out!
35 This is not a pleasant sight, and it does happen. But as sexuality itself is the medium, it's only evidence of misguided inclinations. Thus when a woman senses a man's concern is genuineor, she's tricked like aboveshe's encouraged to participate emotionally. And with the human body highly sensitive to touch, why they're called sins of the flesh, a woman can exact a lot of pleasure from the experience. And with a higher threshold of sensitivity than a man, why I equate her with the man's penis (n7:30), she has the capacity to experience it more completely. As a result, it's not as critical for her to experience orgasm (n7:39), which Roy views as the ultimate disgrace: i.e., she may become wild and unruly. But so long as it's contained within context of the joy and love in the relationship, it shouldn't be ruled out.