Methinkus to Agnosticus On The Reality of God

Methinkus is having a conversation with Agnosticus about the reality of God. Agnosticus is not convinced that there is such a thing as God and wants Methinkus to explain the understanding or revelation that led him to believe.

I am still not personally convinced Methinkus, how have you come to the conclusion that there is a God or Creator? What proof or explanation can you give me so that I may see the one you refer to as God to be a reality.

Well, Agnosticus, I must preface my explanation with a statement: to the educated man, all things must have a beginning save only the ONE UNCAUSED--the primeval cause of causes. And though this may seem a bold statement to some, would you not agree that it is so.

Yes it is a bold statement but, I do agree.

Let us next look at the fact that we, mankind, are self realized. As my good friend says "I think - therefore I am." Following that path of thought, let us now understand the connection of mans mind and through its deductive activity, our recognition of self.

Just as the sculptor beginning a new work must visualize in his mind what it is he is trying to sculpt and see it in the slab of marble first, and the carpenter who designed the beautiful chairs we now sit in visualized them in his mind before they could be also, would you not agree that this is the normal process of man's ability to create?

Yes. We must first conceive an idea before it can be put into form or action.

Exactly Agnosticus, it was this discovery that led me to follow through in the process of the same realization of Divinity and the inevitable delineation of Divine mind and Divine energy that led to the necessity of our being.

The necessity of our being, why do you say necessity Methinkus?

Agnosticus, do you not agree that in perfection there is no experience?

Yes, I suppose that is true.

Well, Agnosticus, Source - or God - or the UnCaused is perfect, and because of that perfection even though complete, there was no experience. So in order to have experience vicariously, He had to divest Himself of all activities (save the initial cause) involved in the manifestation of that experience in order to participate in it. God then witnessed the probable shattering of Himself into unique facets of his own personality and set them in existential motion. This induced a time space condition and made room in the Absoluteness of perfection for the evolving existential facet of His being. Therefore we were the necessary and inevitable outcome of his desire to have experience.

Yes, I suppose I could agree with you on that also.

Ok, then in that agreement you must concede that all of man's reality, the reality witnessed by mind, must have been conceived by ultimate mind. Contained in that conception lies the world of forms, the pattern of everything that could be is just waiting for our recognition of it. This is part of the grand scheme, and the impetus to dare to conceive through the recognition of form, the source of all form.

Now, bear with me and try to understand further, let us imagine that when God first became self aware he said at the moment of recognition, as you or I might have said under the same circumstances, - "I am!" (Methinkus said expressing in motion and expression, complete amazement) but God being the source of all recognition, simultaneously witnessed that observation and simultaneously with that, confirmed the observation of the observation - simply = I am, - You are, - Yes.

The confirmation of the observation of the observation is the reflection of the Divine Trinity - Father, Son, Spirit or thesis, antithesis, synthesis. From that eluded to, but non-existent point, came the recognition of the possibility of all that is - the world of forms was then manifested simultaneously. And beyond that there are too many between God and man to divest and explain, and my attempt to do so would only boggle and confuse this initial and fragile understanding you are just grasping.

Yes that is true Methinkus, I believe I am beginning to understand the down stepping of personality and mind and the basis for the necessity of our existence.

Then Agnosticus, would you not agree that this concept of God is a philosophic concession which we must make because of the time-bound, space-fettered, finite mind of man, and because of the impossibility of creature comprehension of those eternity existences--nonbeginning, nonending realities and relationships? 1

I believe I can agree with you on this Methinkus, but let us sit here just a moment while I catch my breath and equilibrium of mind.

Certainly Agnosticus, but let me make one more observation for you, since we are persons, we must invariably recognize in God - the source of person-ality and acknowledge that he is the Father of personality and the Father of all that is. At the same time we will conceptualize this philosophic value-level as the I AM - the Father, and also instructing all creatures that the Eternal Son and the Infinite Spirit are coeternal with the Father; in other words, that there never was a time when the I AM was not the Father of the Son and, with him, of the Spirit.

Agnosticus, I would have to say that much of the confusion in all orders of beings, high and low, in their efforts to discover the Father-Infinite, the only hindrance is their limitations of comprehension. The absolute primacy of the Universal Father is not apparent on subinfinite levels; therefore is it probable that only the Eternal Son and the Infinite Spirit truly know the Father as an infinity; but to all other personalities, such as the likes of man, this entire concept represents the exercise of individual faith. 2

Ahh that it does Methinkus. But now that I am able to grasp the source of your faith I have to further question the motive of our Father when I look at the state of mankind today, so far from that perfection center of love and see it through the evil, pain, suffering and imperfection of society. Why must man live in such an imperfect state if he is the child of a perfect Father?

That is somewhat explainable Agnosticus but again I must preface my explanation with the statement that - in the formula of all experience, free will is paramount - and it is that free will of man which has created such a state. It is only the free-will of man that can eliminate the source of his confused state.

Consider this.

The uncertainties of life and the vicissitudes of existence do not in any manner contradict the
concept of the universal sovereignty of God. All evolutionary creature life is beset by certain

Agnosticus, is courage--strength of character--desirable?

Why yes.

Then must man be reared in an environment which necessitates grappling with hardships and reacting to disappointments.

Yes, I suppose he must.

Is altruism--service of one's fellows--desirable?

Yes again.

Then must life experience provide for encountering situations of social inequality.

Is hope--the grandeur of trust--desirable?


Then human existence must constantly be confronted with insecurities and recurrent uncertainties.

Is faith--the supreme assertion of human thought--desirable?


Then must the mind of man find itself in that troublesome predicament where it ever knows less than it can believe.

Definitely yes to that.

Is the love of truth and the willingness to go wherever it leads, desirable?

Of course.

Then must man grow up in a world where error is present and falsehood always possible.

Unfortunately yes again.

Is idealism--the approaching concept of the divine--desirable?


Then must man struggle in an environment of relative goodness and beauty, surroundings stimulative of the irrepressible reach for better things.

Is loyalty--devotion to highest duty--desirable?


Then must man carry on amid the possibilities of betrayal and desertion. The valor of devotion to duty consists in the implied danger of default.

Yes truly.

Is unselfishness--the spirit of self-forgetfulness--desirable?


Then must mortal man live face to face with the incessant clamoring of an inescapable self for recognition and honor. Man could not dynamically choose the divine life if there were no self-life to forsake. Man could never lay saving hold on righteousness if there were no potential evil to exalt and differentiate the good by contrast.

Yes, I see Methinkus.

And finally, is pleasure--the satisfaction of happiness--desirable?

Yes finally yes.

Then must man live in a world where the alternative of pain and the likelihood of suffering are ever-present experiential possibilities.

Do you see now Agnosticus the wherewithal of my faith, source of my happiness and cause of my freedom? Can you not now understand that my relationship with God, my Father, is a personal one, and that personal relationship with Him is just beginning. Through the infinity of God our Father the immortality of personality is possible. It is the ultimate adventure of man to find his Father God. And it is the leap of faith that bridges the gulf between the physical self and spiritual self that takes over that adventure at death.

I must finally concede that man first worships God because he Is great. As his knowledge evolves he worships God because he discovers a part of God in himself. And lastly he worships God because he is in God. He is an immortal co-creator in the personalization of the Supremacy of God.


(The italicized portions of this paper are direct quotes from The Urantia Book)
1. Foreword, Pg 6.3
2. Foreword, Pg 6.5
3. Paper 1, Pg 52 "Nine Inevitablities"

Copyright © 1992-2024 Suzanne M Kelly