The Urantia Book is a twentieth century text and as such, government, politics, and social issues play a significant role in the book’s overall presentation, including its 800-page narrative of the life and teachings of Jesus. We find frequent commentary attributed to Jesus on the role of government in society, and how a dedicated religionist should and should not encounter the political arena. Further, the very teachings of Jesus can inspire political action, and while Jesus personally avoided the political realm for reasons addressed below, there are values central to his teachings that can inform our government and politics.
Jesus’ Pre-existence
The Urantia Book reveals Jesus of Nazareth as Michael of Nebadon, our Creator Son of an unfinished local universe that currently consists of nearly four million inhabited worlds similar to ours. This fact is central to understanding his behavior and mission while on earth, particularly in his relationship with earthly politics and government.
Michael has assigned to him a Paradise brother, Immanuel, who advises him as he creates and administers his local universe. Prior to leaving the heavenly realm to incarnate as the infant of his earthly parents, Joseph and Mary, he received several admonitions from this elder brother, including:
3. In your relations to the social order we advise that you confine your efforts largely to spiritual regeneration and intellectual emancipation. Avoid all entanglements with the economic structure and the political commitments of your day. More especially devote yourself to living the ideal religious life on Urantia.
4. Under no circumstances and not even in the least detail, should you interfere with the normal and orderly progressive evolution of the Urantia races. But this prohibition must not be interpreted as limiting your efforts to leave behind you on Urantia an enduring and improved system of positive religious ethics. As a dispensational Son you are granted certain privileges pertaining to the advancement of the spiritual and religious status of the world peoples. 120:3.4-5 (1329.5-6)
Even without this admonition, Jesus would have likely followed these directives. He enters our history and avoids clearcut political stances because our opinions shift as our mores evolve. A stance regarded as progressive and liberating in one generation may be stifling and oppressive in a later one, as he says to his apostles:
I have not come to legislate but to enlighten. I have come not to reform the kingdoms of this world but rather to establish the kingdom of heaven. It is not the will of the Father that I should yield to the temptation to teach you rules of government, trade, or social behavior, which, while they might be good for today, would be far from suitable for the society of another age. I am on earth solely to comfort the minds, liberate the spirits, and save the souls of men. 140:6.6 (1576.6)
But this did not prevent Jesus from speaking clearly to economic and social inequities, nor behaving as a principled citizen of his community, nation, world, and universe.
Non-violence
Throughout the book’s narrative of his life, Jesus is unequivocally non-violent, beginning with this description of him as a nine-year-old:
Perhaps his most unusual and outstanding trait was his unwillingness to fight for his rights. Since he was such a well-developed lad for his age, it seemed strange to his playfellows that he was disinclined to defend himself even from injustice or when subjected to personal abuse. As it happened, he did not suffer much on account of this trait because of the friendship of Jacob, a neighbor boy, who…made it his business to see that no one was permitted to impose upon Jesus because of his aversion to physical combat. Several times older and uncouth youths attacked Jesus…but they always suffered swift and certain retribution at the hands of his self-appointed champion and ever-ready defender, Jacob the stone mason’s son. 124:2.4 (1368.6)
The book describes an extensive two-year journey Jesus undertook in his late twenties, accompanied by an Indian merchant, Gonod, and his son, Ganid. After an incident in which Jesus restrained a bullying youth from brutally attacking a younger victim, Jesus stopped Ganid from punitively thrashing the bully. A conversation about Jesus’ stance on non-violence ensued, particularly why Jesus intervened when Ganid sought to punish the bully:
Jesus said:
Mercy ministry is always the work of the individual, but justice punishment is the function of the social, governmental, or universe administrative groups. As an individual I am beholden to show mercy; I must go to the rescue of the assaulted lad, and in all consistency I may employ sufficient force to restrain the aggressor. And that is just what I did. I achieved the deliverance of the assaulted lad; that was the end of mercy ministry. Then I forcibly detained the aggressor a sufficient length of time to enable the weaker party to the dispute to make his escape, after which I withdrew from the affair. 133:1.2 (1469.1)
Jesus then goes on to cite the public, not private role in exacting punishment:
Ganid, mercy may be lavish, but justice is precise. Cannot you discern that no two persons are likely to agree as to the punishment which would satisfy the demands of justice? One would impose forty lashes, another twenty, while still another would advise solitary confinement as a just punishment. Can you not see that on this world such responsibilities had better rest upon the group or be administered by chosen representatives of the group? 133:1.2 (1469.1)
This concept of justice being a group function, not an individual one is stressed repeatedly throughout The Urantia Book.
The apex of Jesus’ non-violent stance is vividly framed in his arrest and crucifixion, and certainly makes a striking impression on practically anyone observing his behavior in those final hours of his earth life, even to his vast local universe:
On millions of inhabited worlds, tens of trillions of evolving creatures who may have been tempted to give up the moral struggle and abandon the good fight of faith, have taken one more look at Jesus on the cross and then have forged on ahead, inspired by the sight of God’s laying down his incarnate life in devotion to the unselfish service of man. 188:5.5 (2018.4)
But Jesus’ non-violence was a personal stance, and curiously, he did not impose this upon his followers. Before the crucifixion, Simon Zelotes and Simon Peter had more than one hundred swords delivered to their camp. Jesus was aware of this, and made this statement in an effort to enlighten them:
Jesus called Andrew and said:
Awaken your brethren! I have something to say to them.” Jesus knew about the swords and which of his apostles had received and were wearing these weapons, but he never disclosed to them that he knew such things…Jesus said: “I have taught you much that is needful for this time, but I would now warn you not to put your trust in the uncertainties of the flesh nor in the frailties of man’s defense against the trials and testing which lie ahead of us. I have called you apart here by yourselves that I may once more plainly tell you that we are going up to Jerusalem, where you know the Son of Man has already been condemned to death. 171:4.2 (1871.4)
Other than this admonishment, Jesus did not intervene in the apostles’ keeping of weapons. His only statement in The Urantia Book explicitly related to arms occurs when Peter draws his weapon during Jesus’ arrest, and Jesus states specifically to Peter, “he who lives by the sword will die by the sword.” But his refusal to forbid his apostles to have arms was not a tacit approval of violence, but rather his complete respect of each apostle’s individual will, even to make a bad decision. However, he did make it clear that the kingdom of heaven would not be taken by violent force:
…neither should you employ the physical forces of earthly governments, whose rulers may sometime become believers, in the work of furthering the mission of the spiritual kingdom. 178:1.3 (1929.4)
Despite this admonition, Jesus did make it clear that the civil government must sometimes employ force “for the maintenance of social order and in the execution of justice”:
Jesus had great difficulty in getting them to understand his personal practice of nonresistance. He absolutely refused to defend himself, and it appeared to the apostles that he would be pleased if they would pursue the same policy. He taught them not to resist evil, not to combat injustice or injury, but he did not teach passive tolerance of wrongdoing. And he made it plain on this afternoon that he approved of the social punishment of evildoers and criminals, and that the civil government must sometimes employ force for the maintenance of social order and in the execution of justice. 140:8.4 (1579.6)
This stance on civil order is further illustrated in the book’s commentary on the episode of the “cleansing of the temple.” Jesus’ part in the episode was non-violent. When he began to teach in the temple on the Monday morning before the crucifixion, the noisy commerce, a violent argument between a money changer and a customer, and the ridiculing of a simple Galilean all “combined to produce one of those strange and periodic uprisings of indignant emotion in the soul of Jesus.” Jesus stepped down from the teaching platform, drove a herd of bullocks from the temple and opened pens holding animals, which “electrified the assembled pilgrims” who overturned the tables of the money-changers and in “less than five minutes all commerce had been swept from the temple.” But the commentary on this episode is emphatic about Jesus’ attitude on taking action when necessary:
This cleansing of the temple discloses the Master’s attitude toward commercializing the practices of religion as well as his detestation of all forms of unfairness and profiteering at the expense of the poor and the unlearned. This episode also demonstrates that Jesus did not look with approval upon the refusal to employ force to protect the majority of any given human group against the unfair and enslaving practices of unjust minorities who may be able to entrench themselves behind political, financial, or ecclesiastical power. Shrewd, wicked, and designing men are not to be permitted to organize themselves for the exploitation and oppression of those who, because of their idealism, are not disposed to resort to force for self-protection or for the furtherance of their laudable life projects. 173:1.11 (1891.1)
This last statement is especially pointed in that there are times in which it is appropriate to use force. But The Urantia Book makes a clear distinction between force used by civil government for maintaining social order and using violence to force change:
And here is the great test of idealism: Can an advanced society maintain that military preparedness which renders it secure from all attack by its war-loving neighbors without yielding to the temptation to employ this military strength in offensive operations against other peoples for purposes of selfish gain or national aggrandizement? National survival demands preparedness, and religious idealism alone can prevent the prostitution of preparedness into aggression. Only love, brotherhood, can prevent the strong from oppressing the weak. 71:4.17 (804.17)
Wealth and the Profit Motive
In The Urantia Book Jesus’ sympathy for the “common people” and the poor is clear. Many familiar accounts from the biblical gospels are retold and affirmed, such as the observation of the widow who offers two mites to the treasury, and Jesus’ admonitions to the Sanhedrin about their abuses. But the text also makes a distinction about people regardless of economic position:
Jesus blessed the poor because they were usually sincere and pious; he condemned the rich because they were usually wanton and irreligious. He would equally condemn the irreligious pauper and commend the consecrated and worshipful man of wealth. 196:2.8 (2093.2)
Jesus involuntarily experienced poverty. Taking on the role of family leadership with his mother Mary after the death of Joseph, Jesus learned both empathy for the poor and a sense of personal responsibility which carried into his ministry. He always sought to empower people to improve their own condition (e.g. “The Young Man Who Was Afraid” 130:6.1), but was at the same time mindful of societal inequities:
4. Economic attitude. Jesus worked, lived, and traded in the world as he found it. He was not an economic reformer, although he did frequently call attention to the injustice of the unequal distribution of wealth. But he did not offer any suggestions by way of remedy. He made it plain to the three [Peter, James, and John] that, while his apostles were not to hold property, he was not preaching against wealth and property, merely its unequal and unfair distribution. He recognized the need for social justice and industrial fairness, but he offered no rules for their attainment. 140:8.15 (1581.2)
One instance in which we gain detailed insight into Jesus’ thoughts on wealth is in his advice to the wealthy man (Counseling the Rich Man 132:5). Jesus makes it clear to the man that this is personal advice in response to the wealthy man’s request to know how he should view his own wealth, not everyone’s money. But its inclusion in the text distinctly offers Jesus’ view of the ethics of wealth. It includes Jesus’ attitude toward earned and unearned wealth, inherited wealth, extorted wealth, restitution, wealth from natural resources, wealth from personal labor, and equity. Item by item, fairness to self and others and responsibility to one’s community and world are constantly in balance, as well as offering restitution in the instance of extorted, or unfairly gained wealth.
The question becomes: how do we, as a society, make decisions about the redistribution of wealth? In all matters, Jesus left moral decisions up to each individual, but he also stated certain decisions should be made by the group. He respected both. So where’s the dividing line?
Part III of The Urantia Book makes clear statements about capitalism and profit-motivated economics, not espousing any economic system over another, but advocating the positive injunction of service motivation:
Present-day profit-motivated economics is doomed unless profit motives can be augmented by service motives. Ruthless competition based on narrow-minded self-interest is ultimately destructive of even those things which it seeks to maintain. Exclusive and self-serving profit motivation is incompatible with Christian ideals—much more incompatible with the teachings of Jesus. 71:6.1 (805.5)
The text further equates the exclusive profit motive with fear in religion, but also places profit-motivated capitalism as a part of the evolution of civilization:
In economics, profit motivation is to service motivation what fear is to love in religion. But the profit motive must not be suddenly destroyed or removed; it keeps many otherwise slothful mortals hard at work. It is not necessary, however, that this social energy arouser be forever selfish in its objectives. 71:6.2 (805.6)
Perhaps the book’s most succinct statement on capitalism and evolution occurs in the paper “Primitive Human Institutions”:
Though capital has tended to liberate man, it has greatly complicated his social and industrial organization. The abuse of capital by unfair capitalists does not destroy the fact that it is the basis of modern industrial society. Through capital and invention the present generation enjoys a higher degree of freedom than any that ever preceded it on earth. This is placed on record as a fact and not in justification of the many misuses of capital by thoughtless and selfish custodians. 69:5.15 (777.3)
This is echoed in the paper “The Development of the State,” that profit-motivated economics is not an ideal, and must eventually give way to a higher order of service orientation:
The profit motive of economic activities is altogether base and wholly unworthy of an advanced order of society; nevertheless, it is an indispensable factor throughout the earlier phases of civilization. Profit motivation must not be taken away from men until they have firmly possessed themselves of superior types of nonprofit motives for economic striving and social serving—the transcendent urges of superlative wisdom, intriguing brotherhood, and excellency of spiritual attainment. 71:6.3 (805.7)
This brings us to another key component of understanding government in The Urantia Book. The text continually places much of human behavior in the context of evolution. War, slavery, animal sacrifice, and other human behaviors and conditions, while repugnant and eventually unworthy of a civilized society, are shown as progressions, even improvements on previous modes of being. Capitalism is no exception. It may be a bridge to a higher order of civilization, but to quote from another instance in which Jesus referred to a bridge, “you may pass over it, but you should not think to build a dwelling place upon it” (156:2.1).
Sex Equality and Gender
Jesus was conscious of, and disturbed by, the sex discrimination he observed in his youth and challenged this social injustice as an adult. As a pre-teen traveling for his first Jerusalem Passover, an unusually large group of Nazareth women joined the pilgrimage after Jesus insisted his mother accompany him (he “virtually refused to go unless his mother accompanied him”). When the women separated from the men at the temple, the women going up to the women’s gallery, he was “thoroughly indignant” at the “unjust discrimination” (125:1.1). As a young adult he stood up to abuse suffered by women and was particularly sympathetic to women who had entered prostitution, as seen in his treatment of the two women he encountered with Ganid in Rome and more famously, in his deep friendship with Mary Magdalene.
Jesus’ most specific act to advance the equality of men and women was his establishment of the women’s evangelistic corps, authorizing them “to effect their own organization:”
It was most astounding in that day, when women were not even allowed on the main floor of the synagogue (being confined to the women’s gallery), to behold them being recognized as authorized teachers of the new gospel of the kingdom. The charge which Jesus gave these ten women as he set them apart for gospel teaching and ministry was the emancipation proclamation which set free all women and for all time; no more was man to look upon woman as his spiritual inferior. 150.1 (1679.3)
Gender equality is core to The Urantia Book and occurs repeatedly:
Sex equality prevails on all advanced worlds; male and female are equal in mind endowment and spiritual status. We do not regard a planet as having emerged from barbarism so long as one sex seeks to tyrannize over the other 49:4.1 (564.6)
Democracy
There are several instances in which Jesus made unilateral decisions for the apostles, such as where and when they traveled, his creation of the women’s corps of apostles just referenced, and certainly his authoritative statements on spirituality. But relinquishing control was intrinsic to his management of the apostles, most likely to ensure their future self-management after he was gone.
Jesus personally chose four apostles, Andrew, Peter, James, and John. The four of them encouraged Philip and Nathaniel to join, and those two received the well-known directive from Jesus, “Follow me.” Once he had assembled these first six apostles, he directed each one to go choose at their personal discretion six other apostles. In this manner, Andrew, Philip, James Zebedee, John Zebedee, Peter, and Nathaniel respectively selected Matthew, Thomas, James Alpheus, Judas Alpheus, Simon Zelotes, and Judas Iscariot. Jesus accepted each one unconditionally, although to Thomas and Judas Iscariot he said:
“Thomas, you lack faith; nevertheless, I receive you. Follow me.” To Judas Iscariot the Master said: “Judas, we are all of one flesh, and as I receive you into our midst, I pray that you will always be loyal to your Galilean brethren. Follow me.” 138:5.1 (1542.2)
Jesus continually encouraged each of his followers to develop his or her own personal relationship with God. But how they organized themselves as religionists was a group matter. Jesus stressed a democratic path to consensus, and in matters of group organization Jesus left them to their own deliberations.
In one instance, the twenty-four apostles of Jesus and John the Baptist (who at this point had been executed) met together to determine their co-existence: how their ministries would overlap, agreeing on a form of prayer, baptism of new believers, instruction of new believers, and other concerns.
Jesus approved of their coming together, but “steadfastly refused to participate in their discussions.” In fact, he withdrew for two weeks. The men were confused as to how to proceed. But during those two weeks this mixed assembly of determined individuals “learned to differ, to debate, to contend, to pray, and to compromise, and throughout it all to remain sympathetic with the other person’s viewpoint, and to maintain at least some degree of tolerance for honest opinions.” Upon returning Jesus simply said, “These then are your conclusions, and I shall help you each to carry out the spirit of your united decisions.” (144:6, 1624-1625)
It’s significant that Jesus in this and many other instances relinquished power and control to the group, encouraging debate, compromise, and consensus—a reflection of his divine management style and an overall affirmation of the democratic process:
I am the representative of the Father to the individual, not to the group. If you are in personal difficulty in your relations with God, come to me, and I will hear you and counsel you in the solution of your problem. But when you enter upon the co-ordination of divergent human interpretations of religious questions and upon the socialization of religion, you are destined to solve all such problems by your own decisions. Albeit, I am ever sympathetic and always interested, and when you arrive at your conclusions touching these matters of nonspiritual import, provided you are all agreed, then I pledge in advance my full approval and hearty co-operation. 144:6.3 (1624.14)
In other words, issues of politics and government devolve to human groups. Justice is clearly demarcated in The Urantia Book as a group function, never an individual decision. This notion is carried out throughout the universe, that “no one of the Paradise Deities fosters the administration of justice. Justice is never a personal attitude; it is always a plural function” (10:6.2).
In this spirit it follows that the text comes out specifically against dictatorships, that societies must prevent “control by ambitious and would-be dictators” (70:12.11).
Simultaneously, the book cautions against the “dangers of democracy” (71:2):
- Glorification of mediocrity.
- Choice of base and ignorant rulers.
- Failure to recognize the basic facts of social evolution.
- Danger of universal suffrage in the hands of uneducated and indolent majorities.
- Slavery to public opinion; the majority is not always right.
Key to these pitfalls is ignorance. Uneducated, indifferent people electing base, ignorant and probably poorly-educated but power-hungry individuals, will compromise the noble aims of self-government, democracy.
Democracy is favored throughout The Urantia Book as an ideal, but not an absolute ideal, that “popular elections may not always decide things rightly, but they represent the right way even to do a wrong thing” (71:2.8).
Government
Paper 134, “The Transition Years,” describes that a few years prior to his public ministry, Jesus visited a region in present-day Iran and spent time at an island on Lake Urmia where there “was located a large building—a lecture amphitheater—dedicated to the ‘spirit of religion.’” Here Jesus engaged in discussions and lectures on religion and the real-world application of religious teachings. The writers of this narrative inform us that these speeches at Urmia have been revised to be more applicable to the twentieth century mind, to “present day world conditions.” Three secondary midwayers restated Jesus’ pronouncements and “were edited by the Melchizedek chairman of the revelatory commission” (134:3.8). Assuming this is truly the spirit of Jesus’ teachings at Lake Urmia, here is perhaps his most central ideal of government:
The rule of the Most Highs, the overcontrollers of political evolution, is a rule designed to foster the greatest good to the greatest number of all men and for the greatest length of time. 134:5.4 (1488.2)
This is a political ideal of prodigious inclusion and long-term sustainability. It crosses borders and transcends sectarianism. The central ideas from the Urmia statements––that are likely indicative of Jesus’ teachings on government––include (134:4-6):
- The brotherhood of man is founded on the fatherhood of God.
- God the Father divinely loves his children, all of them.
- The family is the initial political unit, followed by clans, tribes, and nations.
- The “final consummation of political growth” is “the government of all mankind, by all mankind, and for all mankind.
- Local and national governments are essential for governing local and national affairs, but nationalism is a barrier to world peace.
- There is no such thing as a ‘chosen people.’
- Lasting peace and liberty for all people is only possible through “the political sovereignty of representative mankind government”—world government.
Certainly, the idea of world government is a long-term goal, sobered by a thought stated earlier in The Urantia Book that our current “social order will not settle down complacently for a millennium” (99:1.1). But it is the revelators’ stated goal for our world, one to be taken seriously, and which should inform our political outlook. Effecting and expanding international relationships and governments, rather than limiting them, is a key ideal throughout the book.
A final incident in which Jesus spoke directly with his followers regarding government and politics was on the Thursday morning before his arrest. This topic was the sole focus of this last discussion. Here Jesus specifically drew the distinction between worldly government and the spiritual kingdom. He first made clear that the kingdoms of this world “may often find it necessary to employ physical force in the execution of their laws and for the maintenance of order,” but that “in the kingdom of heaven true believers will not resort to the employment of physical force.” He did add the caveat that this “does not nullify the right of social groups of believers to maintain order in their ranks and administer discipline upon unruly and unworthy members.” Further, he specifically stated that there “is nothing incompatible between sonship in the spiritual kingdom and citizenship in the secular or civil government,” that there cannot be any disagreement between these two requirements “unless it should develop that a Caesar presumes to usurp the prerogatives of God and demand that spiritual homage and supreme worship be rendered to him.” In such circumstance he added that in “such a case you shall worship only God while you seek to enlighten such misguided earthly rulers and in this way lead them also to the recognition of the Father in heaven.” He then reiterated that: “You shall not render spiritual worship to earthly rulers; neither should you employ the physical forces of earthly governments, whose rulers may sometime become believers, in the work of furthering the mission of the spiritual kingdom” (178:1.3 emphasis added).
Jesus continued by saying that one’s sonship in the kingdom “should assist you in becoming the ideal citizens of the kingdoms of this world since brotherhood and service are the cornerstones of the gospel of the kingdom.” He added that, in fact, involvement in civil society is critical, because “these material-minded sons in darkness will never know of your spiritual light of truth unless you draw very near them with that unselfish social service which is the natural outgrowth of the bearing of the fruits of the spirit in the life experience of each individual believer.”
As mortal and material men, you are indeed citizens of the earthly kingdoms, and you should be good citizens, all the better for having become reborn spirit sons of the heavenly kingdom. As faith-enlightened and spirit-liberated sons of the kingdom of heaven, you face a double responsibility of duty to man and duty to God while you voluntarily assume a third and sacred obligation: service to the brotherhood of God-knowing believers. 178:1.5 (1930.2)
Jesus’ Transcendence of Politics
In essence, Jesus looked at every individual he encountered as his own child. In this regard, one can say nationality, religion, race and social status mattered little to him. This explains his sympathetic interaction with the Roman captain who had an ailing servant, and his ministry in Samaria to the very descendants of people who had taken the homes and property of the Jews and enslaved them centuries earlier in Babylon. Political tension must have been acute even among his apostles: Matthew had been a customs collector for the Romans, and Simon Zelotes had advocated violent overthrow of the Romans.
As much as each of us want Jesus to be in our individual “political camps,” we can assume from his behavior here 2000 years ago that he would likely not take political stances any more today than he did then:
And if Jesus were on earth today, living his life in the flesh, he would be a great disappointment to the majority of good men and women for the simple reason that he would not take sides in present-day political, social, or economic disputes. He would remain grandly aloof while teaching you how to perfect your inner spiritual life so as to render you manyfold more competent to attack the solution of your purely human problems. 140:8.17 (1581.4)
The key operative statement here is “render you manyfold more competent to attack the solution of your purely human problems.”
We are not meant to be “grandly aloof.” That’s his position, for reasons stated throughout this article.
As Urantia Book students, we must be politically involved. We must be on top of the multiple issues confronting us and be actively involved in choosing intelligent, competent leaders (or even being those elected leaders) to ensure we effect “the greatest good to the greatest number of all [people] and for the greatest length of time.”
The planetary goal in The Urantia Book is light and life, a time in which our human accomplishments are “blended, associated, and co-ordinated in cosmic unity and unselfish service” (50:5.10). This will be the result of a deep spiritual transformation within each individual. But it will also be the result of our intelligent development of societal structures that result from our political engagement and the governments we develop.
In other words, light and life will come through one transformed soul at a time—and one informed vote at a time.
RICHARD JERNIGAN is a filmmaker who has worked at a national education company as a video director for over 25 years. He has produced and directed several Urantia Book-inspired productions and is a former Associate Trustee of Urantia Foundation. A student of The Urantia Book since 1977, he is a proud grandfather times three, and currently resides in Chambersville, Texas.