The Late Great Urantia Revelation

freelight said:

Hi Caino,

If I may add,....I touched on this in post #2877, sharing 2 older threads on the Jesus-myth issue and reiterating that the UB does not hold a mythicist view about Jesus, but builds upon the reality of Jesus as attested by the biblical record (NT), so it would be difficult for a die-hard believer in the UB to accept that Jesus is a fictional/mythological figure or he would have to take Part 4 of the papers as 'religious fiction', but this might compromise the integrity of the revelators. - so it may be a 'shaky' area for some. I suspect it might for you as you consider the possibilities. The whole UB would be 'questionable' actually since the 'theology' is based on an underlying biblical foundation, even with its imperfections.

If Jesus is a mythological figure (maybe built up upon an actual man named Jesus that lived, but his story embellished, or the character of Jesus being built from other historical figures of that period like Apollonius of Tyana) this puts the Christian fundies here in a predicament, since even if only scraps of evidence exist for said person (the 'evidence' debatable)...it still comes back to faith. It would be 'faith' as well for a UB enthusiast in 'trusting' the record.

It would make Aimiel's belief in Jesus just as 'valid' as his caricature of 'Jebus', since both are religious fictional characters. - the 'charade' would be likened to a 'game of mirrors'.

In any case,....if Jesus is historical or not,....his teachings are still open to testing, if they have true ethical value, moral truth and real meaning for us. On this level, it might not matter if the 'messenger' was 'historical' or not, since the message of the 'personality' is of primary importance (although some would still debate this, and feel 'proof' of the messenger as an actual historical entity is integral to the dispensation of the message or revelation).



pj

Click to expand...

Goods points, the teaching wasn't new as you well know, many of the passages and quotes could be found among other religious teachings through history, etc......................Blessings, Zeke.

substance, nature and form......

substance, nature and form......

Zeke said:

Myriads of labels. One possibility, The natural birth three months short of a full season leaves one seeking out those final three to be fully birthed above and below, nine, a conscience being, three, being body, mind, and spirit being in perfect balance above,and below, all twelve firing in perfect harmony in the head, or Jerusalem, where the temple is being built into a new man.

Blessing, Zeke.

Click to expand...

The human body (the temple pattern) holds many wonderful analogies as these are translated in various forms in the physical world. We could explore these in a thread on 'occult science' or 'metaphysics' as they directly relate to 'Religion' and our interpretation of 'reality'. We could also explore the idiom that "man is the mirror of God". - this of course would come under fire on numerous levels, yet the facts of nature prove their validity, as "Nature is in a limited sense the physical habit of God." (to quote the UB). The physical dimension and tangible reality is the medium thru which we experience and intuit the invisible realm of essence and ideas, further born of the finest substance of which all forms are composed. One eternal, universal, infinite divine Principle prevails, whether it is personalized or not, since it must be by nature the origin of everything.

Anyways, you may get back to me via PM if you have some ideas of a new thread-project.



pj

Actually Dr. Simon Greenleaf found that there is more evidence in Scripture proving Jesus' life, death and resurrection than for ANYONE in antiquity. His book is available for free on Kindle if I remember right. It is titled: "Testimony of the Evangelists."

Posted from the TOL App!

Taking time to do the research

Taking time to do the research

Aimiel said:

Actually Dr. Simon Greenleaf found that there is more evidence in Scripture proving Jesus' life, death and resurrection than for ANYONE in antiquity. His book is available for free on Kindle if I remember right. It is titled: "Testimony of the Evangelists."

Posted from the TOL App!

Click to expand...

As shared, the UB attests to the historical personality of Jesus, since the entire revelation culminates in the bestowal of Jesus as our Creator-Son, so the 'incarnation' is of course of utmost significance. Part 4 of the papers is one of the most complete records of Jesus known to exist (covering every year of his life and more).

For response to the UB being a 'hoax', researchers can investigate this to their own satisfaction here & here. The UB as a consistent cosmological and epochal revelation stands on its own, as it confirms and reveals more about who Jesus is within the universal hierarchy. The 2 links above with their information deal DIRECTLY with the various 'hoax' claims against the papers. They also offer suggestions on how to properly criticize the papers. -

Suggestions on How to Effectively Criticize The Urantia Book

Read the book first. Your opinion is meaningless unless you're able to demonstrate that you have an understanding of the subject.
Critics, tell us who you are and why your opinion is valuable. What are your credentials? Does the critic have an agenda? A bone to pick? Bias is usually the foundation for criticism. Give your bias right up front so we'll know the comparisons that are meaningful to you.

Anybody can say anything about something. Does this critic have meaningful credentials? Why should the reader believe them? Did they cover the first two points?

It is difficult to convince anyone of the truth of The Urantia Book - especially those who insist on sharing their comments without having actually read the book. In most, if not all of these charges against The Urantia Book, that appears to be the case.

In the years to come, when The Urantia Book makes significant inroads into the established institutions of religion and science, we can expect more-and more severe-criticism of the teachings.


- source

Click to expand...

Until you actually take the advice above (reading these articles completely, open-mindedly) in order to properly critique the papers, your biased analysis will be partial and imperfect. The UB is actually quite wonderful,...there's a lot to explore, consider, no matter what reservations one might have for certain parts (as I do, since I find some parts more interesting or valid than others),...there's plenty for stimulating dialogue.


pj

Zeke said:

I guess it also depends on who you believe was being persecuted, was it the roman historical version, or the mystical one since the foundation of the world! I haven't see enough actual proof to make a solid assertion on Peter or the rest.

The silence of the period speak loudest, Religious factoids, hear-say or maybe implied, don't satisfy me.

But that is my opinion, you believe for reasons of your own, we disagree on the historical Jesus so I realize that puts me at odds with the thread, so maybe I should just bow out, your plate is full enough dealing with the dirty birds leaving their dropping every where.


Blessings, Zeke.

Click to expand...

There once was a skeptic who had become so skeptical that he became skeptical of his skepticism.

I was just curious how sincere skeptics deal with those immediate followers of the mythical figure.

The silence of the Jews, who killed Jesus, doesn't surprise me at all, see Ikhnaton and what happened to his advanced teachings and his new capitol after he died. They literally tried to erase him from history.

Healthy scepticism, honest angnosticism and 'personal gnosis' as the crown jewel....

Healthy scepticism, honest angnosticism and 'personal gnosis' as the crown jewel....

Caino said:

There once was a skeptic who had become so skeptical that he became skeptical of his skepticism.

Click to expand...

At which point he took an 'agnostic' position as 'default' - there is a safe refuge on that level, since one is completely honest with the fact they don't know one way or another. A 'thing' is either 'unknown' or 'unknowable',...unless or until some knowledge of such arises. Otherwise, one may accept some 'knowledge', 'fact' or 'assertion' and deem it reliable knowledge yet could still be wrong or misguided by that knowledge, hence a better condition to hold is to be ever 'asking, seeking and knocking',....continually in 're-search' mode, honestly investigating all things, ever being OPEN to learn.

My previous post and resource links HOLD for those interested to consider the facts and proposals of the UB for themselves, for an honest evaluation of such would be logical if they want to find out the truth of the papers for themselves, otherwise their criticism is biased, imperfect, uninformed. The UB is only one impressive work among others as 'God' is ever transmitting his Light within the fullness of His omnipresence, so that any variables are due to the refracting elements and conditions within the various mirrors that reflect His Light. - The 'mediums' receiving His Light condition, attenuate and distort the purity of that light on varying levels, yet we have the light coming thru, and that is what matters to be recognized.

A theosophist studies all paths, considers all schools, evaluates all aspects of a 'thing', and takes the 'truth' where it can be found, and continually subjects it to testing, until its true value is realized, and its practical application can be proved by personal experience. There is no other way.



pj

freelight said:

Until you actually take the advice above (reading these articles completely, open-mindedly) in order to properly critique the papers, your biased analysis will be partial and imperfect.

Click to expand...

Agreed. But, until you actually read The Holy Scriptures completely and open-mindedly, in order to find God, your biased analysis will be partial and imperfect.

Open to learn.......

Open to learn.......

Aimiel said:

Agreed. But, until you actually read The Holy Scriptures completely and open-mindedly, in order to find God, your biased analysis will be partial and imperfect.

Click to expand...

I've read a good share of the Bible over the course of my religious-journey, as well as expounded and done commentaries on such....and am always open to learn new truths, since revelation is progressive. - you cant use this 'gesture' turning it back on me, since the entire Bible is not the subject here, and even among bible-believing Christians, there are many different 'interpretations' and 'theological perspectives', they all using the same books. So, that doesn't pan out really.

This thread is about the Urantia Papers. My last post to you and the 2 articles (here & here) take on the usual 'criticisms' (point by point) by learned devotees of the papers (the latter address was written by Dr. William Sadler himself). If you want a well-grounded, detailed and sound 'addressing' of such, you'll read the 2 articles.

If you're not interested in reading such objectively to understand the logics, reasoning and support for the papers and already have made up your mind (holding to the same opinion you have of it from the beginning) then there's not much more I can do to help after 194 pages of discussion so far. :idunno:

Its a 'dead-end', 'stalemate'. Whats the point?

The thread does exist however for those interested in the papers to see what they are about, and to take advantage of those of us 'versed' in the teachings, their principles, 'terms', 'meanings' and 'values', and how such relates to all schools of knowledge, for that's what a student of 'life' naturally does, hes always expanding his consciousness to learn. Those who value my views, thoughts and insights on these related subjects can glean thereby...as one can take it or leave it.

All to me is an adventure and exploration of consciousness. Consciousness is all there is.The 'Spirit' of 'God' comes and goes as it pleases,....for no one knows where it comes from or where it goes, but its presence is 'heard' and its effects are recognizable.




pj

freelight said:

I've read a good share of the Bible...

Click to expand...

That's all well and good, but if you were to seek and search for God with all of your heart: you would find Him. He promised that you would, and He has never lied.

Jeremiah 29:13
And ye shall seek me, and find me, when ye shall search for me with all your heart.

If you're not interested in reading such objectively to understand the logics, reasoning and support for the papers and already have made up your mind (holding to the same opinion you have of it from the beginning) then there's not much more I can do to help after 194 pages of discussion so far.

Click to expand...

I don't expect you or any half-baked demon giving someone goosebumps and dictating an entire monologue can persuade me that Truth is lies. This much is true.

Its a 'dead-end', 'stalemate'. Whats the point?

Click to expand...

I'm not trying to learn that fiction has any Truth in it, I'm trying to point out what lies are in the UB, since it is all lies.

The thread does exist however for those interested in the papers to see what they are about, and to take advantage of those of us 'versed' in the teachings, their principles, 'terms', 'meanings' and 'values', and how such relates to all schools of knowledge, for that's what a student of 'life' naturally does, hes always expanding his consciousness to learn.

Click to expand...

The best-laid plans of mice and men.

Those who value my views, thoughts and insights on these related subjects can glean thereby...as one can take it or leave it.

Click to expand...

God feels the same way about His Holy Word.

All to me is an adventure and exploration of consciousness.

Click to expand...

We are un-conscious of most Truth, which is why God spoke His Word to the prophets.

Consciousness is all there is.

Click to expand...

Christ is all there is, the rest are just thieves and robbers.

freelight said:

Consciousness is all there is.

Click to expand...

All the contents of the esoteric landfill boil down to this bare and very false assertion.

YHWH is a divine essence as Spirit with a Logos, which is His consciousness.

Soul cannot attain or ascend unto Spirit. All esotericists are pursuing a godhood they cannot ever have.

Jesusonian Gospel.......

Jesusonian Gospel.......

Zeke said:

Goods points, the teaching wasn't new as you well know, many of the passages and quotes could be found among other religious teachings through history, etc......................Blessings, Zeke.

Click to expand...

Some of the basic principles yes, such as the 'golden rule' being 'universal'. The gospel of Jesus expounded in the UB is fundamentally a 'spiritualist' gospel, grounded in the 'Fatherhood of God & Brotherhood of Man',...which it calls "Jesusonian" rather than "Christian", since the later category has been subject to the theologizing and misrepresentation of a Pauline form of Christianity emphasizing a 'religion' about Jesus, rather than modelling the religion of Jesus. - we would note the difference, since Jesus calls us into a living fellowship as sons of God, with him to live the 'faith' that he lived and lives, one of moment to moment loyalty to God's will. This is the Jesusonian gospel emphasis, a social-gospel of love for 'God' and service to others.

An excellent resource on the Urantia view of Jesus is the 'Jesusanity' site Here which covers the 'Jesusonian' view and how it is to expand and renew the true teachings of Jesus in the New Era.




pj

freelight said:

The gospel of Jesus expounded in the UB is fundamentally a 'spiritualist' gospel...

Click to expand...

BUZZ... it's still your turn, please guess again...

Galatians 1:8
But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

No guessing required........

No guessing required........

Aimiel said:

BUZZ... it's still your turn, please guess again...

Galatians 1:8
But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

Click to expand...

The gospel of Jesus stands which upholds the fundamental principle of the 'Fatherhood of God & Brotherhood of Man'. I'm not playing a game here, but expounding precepts integral to the UB, as well as Christianity and Spiritualism.

My use of the term 'spiritualist' indicates generally the 'spiritual' view of life in contrast to a 'materialist' view of life. Also, if we include the philosophy of classical or traditional 'Spiritualism', we find that the 'Fatherhood of God & Brotherhood of Man' are fundamental principles held by all 'spiritualists'. (7 principles of Spiritualism).

Quoting Paul's personal claim and 'boast' does nothing to discount the UB or any other book for that matter, but only enforces the exclusive belief of Paul himself, exalting his 'gospel' above all others and 'cursing' anyone that doesn't agree with it. We've exposed Paul elsewhere here.


pj

freelight said:

The gospel of Jesus stands which upholds the fundamental principle of the 'Fatherhood of God & Brotherhood of Man'. I'm not playing a game here, but expounding precepts integral to the UB, as well as Christianity and Spiritualism.

My use of the term 'spiritualist' indicates generally the 'spiritual' view of life in contrast to a 'materialist' view of life. Also, if we include the philosophy of classical or traditional 'Spiritualism', we find that the 'Fatherhood of God & Brotherhood of Man' are fundamental principles held by all 'spiritualists'. (7 principles of Spiritualism).

Quoting Paul's personal claim and 'boast' does nothing to discount the UB or any other book for that matter, but only enforces the exclusive belief of Paul himself, exalting his 'gospel' above all others and 'cursing' anyone that doesn't agree with it. We've exposed Paul elsewhere here.


pj

Click to expand...

Paul taught a different gospel anyway. It was a compromise intended to satisfy Gentile beliefs and sell Paul’s new religion about the risen Christ to the Greco-Roman world. It replaces the old gospel of Jesus that Paul never knew.

3+ years before primitive religious people tried to kill Jesus, Jesus taught the gospel of salvation by faith. But the new Christian religion, created by impulsive Peter and Roman Paul, needed Jesus as a sacrifice to satisfy preexisting adoptive Pagan theological beliefs of the Gentile audience.

Primitive Christianity needs a sacrificed Jesus as a centerpiece to its theoretical salvation.

The salvation of the original gospel was real, experience-able and personally available to each believer who surrenders and puts their sincere faith in God.

The original gospel of Jesus is distinctive; it is different than both Judaism and Christianity.

There is only ONE Gospel.

John 6:53
Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.

If you don't understand Jesus to be preaching The Gospel of salvation through His sacrifice, you don't understand The Gospel. Paul preached exactly what Christ taught, but simply explained it to those who didn't understand it. Obviously you're still not getting it. Until you're born again, you never will.

Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

Sons of God.......

Sons of God.......

Aimiel said:

There is only ONE Gospel.

Click to expand...

According to the UB, yes....Jesus expounds this 'good news' quite extensively in Part 4. - its 'center-piece' is not a vicarious blood-atonement, but is a gospel rooted in 'faith' in the 'Fatherhood of God & Brotherhood of Man', a living dynamic of loving service and ministry to one's fellow man, whereby he shares and grows in spiritual progress and perfection.

John 6:53
Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.

Click to expand...

Jesus likens the 'eating of flesh' to the reception of the 'bread of heaven' (figurative) -

153:2.12 “I am this bread of life. Your fathers ate manna in the wilderness and are dead. But this bread which comes down from God, if a man eats thereof, he shall never die in spirit. I repeat, I am this living bread, and every soul who attains the realization of this united nature of God and man shall live forever. And this bread of life which I give to all who will receive is my own living and combined nature. The Father in the Son and the Son one with the Father — that is my life-giving revelation to the world and my saving gift to all nations.” (here we see the 'incarnation' or 'bestowal' mission of the Creator-Son is most significant as the revelation of 'God' being shared with the world.)

Click to expand...

'Flesh' and 'Blood' are figurative symbols -

153:3.2 One of the visiting Pharisees, mounting a lampstand, shouted out this question: “You tell us that you are the bread of life. How can you give us your flesh to eat or your blood to drink? What avail is your teaching if it cannot be carried out?” And Jesus answered this question, saying: “I did not teach you that my flesh is the bread of life nor that my blood is the water thereof. But I did say that my life in the flesh is a bestowal of the bread of heaven. The fact of the Word of God bestowed in the flesh and the phenomenon of the Son of Man subject to the will of God, constitute a reality of experience which is equivalent to the divine sustenance. You cannot eat my flesh nor can you drink my blood, but you can become one in spirit with me even as I am one in spirit with the Father. You can be nourished by the eternal word of God, which is indeed the bread of life, and which has been bestowed in the likeness of mortal flesh; and you can be watered in soul by the divine spirit, which is truly the water of life. The Father has sent me into the world to show how he desires to indwell and direct all men; and I have so lived this life in the flesh as to inspire all men likewise ever to seek to know and do the will of the indwelling heavenly Father.”

Click to expand...

- Paper 153

Note: that this reference to 'receiving his blood' is only 'symbolic' of receiving the 'life-substance', and not being a 'ransom' or 'vicarious atonement' of some kind. - all these 'elements' are represented as forms of 'sustenance'.

If you don't understand Jesus to be preaching The Gospel of salvation through His sacrifice, you don't understand The Gospel.

Click to expand...

Well,....its Paul that is emphasizing a blood-atonement, and such Pauline concepts were later reflected into the gospels. Granted that 'blood-sacrifice' was practiced in the OT as a form of 'atonement', humans were never sacrificed, neither is the Jewish Messiah ever taught to be a blood-sacrifice. The true 'sacrifice' is the 'self-surrender' of each soul to 'God', that alone is essential.

Paul preached exactly what Christ taught, but simply explained it to those who didn't understand it. Obviously you're still not getting it. Until you're born again, you never will.

Click to expand...

There's more involved here on a variety of levels. Jesus and Paul taught differently at many levels. Paul never met Jesus except as a 'voice' and a 'light', and does not even quote a saying of Jesus from the gospels records, except for an obscure mention of one saying, and the 'Eucharist' ritual. He also never mentioned a 'virgin birth'.

Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

Click to expand...

Yep,...being 'born from above' is symbolic of a regeneration from above ('spiritual' or 'heavenly'), so it naturally is 'essential' to have this 'inspiration' or 'birthing' to see into the spiritual nature of things, since by the 'Spirit' we discern spiritual things.


pj

freelight said:

According to the UB, yes....Jesus expounds this 'good news' quite extensively in Part 4. - its 'center-piece' is not a vicarious blood-atonement, but is a gospel rooted in 'faith' in the 'Fatherhood of God & Brotherhood of Man', a living dynamic of loving service and ministry to one's fellow man, whereby he shares and grows in spiritual progress and perfection.

Click to expand...

The Holy Scriptures teach us that Christ is the centerpiece. He is our only hope of salvation. Jesus taught that there was nothing good in men, except: God. We can ONLY ever be made perfect by His Blood. Without It, we are judged.

Jesus likens the 'eating of flesh' to the reception of the 'bread of heaven' (figurative)

Click to expand...

He said that if we don't drink His Blood we have no life in us. I have His Life in me. You don't, since you reject His Flesh and His Blood.

John 6:53
Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.

'Flesh' and 'Blood' are figurative symbols

Click to expand...

Yes, but if you don't partake of the elements, considering His Body and His Blood in so doing, you have no part in Him.

Note: that this reference to 'receiving his blood' is only 'symbolic' of receiving the 'life-substance', and not being a 'ransom' or 'vicarious atonement' of some kind. - all these 'elements' are represented as forms of 'sustenance'.

Click to expand...

Jesus said otherwise:

Matthew 20:28
Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.

You're just not getting very much out of The Bible, are you?

The true 'sacrifice' is the 'self-surrender' of each soul to 'God', that alone is essential.

Click to expand...

It is a part of salvation, yes, but The Blood is even more essential. It is meaningless without His Blood cleansing our sin.

Yep,...being 'born from above' is symbolic of a regeneration from above ('spiritual' or 'heavenly'), so it naturally is 'essential' to have this 'inspiration' or 'birthing' to see into the spiritual nature of things, since by the 'Spirit' we discern spiritual things.

Click to expand...

What do you mean: "We," ? You aren't born-again. You're not even a professing Christian. To be born again one must believe God's Word and surrender to Jesus, not to Jebus.

Caino said:

There once was a skeptic who had become so skeptical that he became skeptical of his skepticism.

I was just curious how sincere skeptics deal with those immediate followers of the mythical figure.

The silence of the Jews, who killed Jesus, doesn't surprise me at all, see Ikhnaton and what happened to his advanced teachings and his new capitol after he died. They literally tried to erase him from history.

Click to expand...

The. Silence of the Romans who killed Jesus doesn't surprise me at all
An all his attempt to save the Jewish gold from being looted, to just be erased from history, incase anybody understood jesus attempted to stop Vatican City looting an stealing the Jewish god, an carrying the titles back to Rome where people would find themselves completely confounded understanding the. Nature of brutally destroying a Jewish man, an forgiving an forgetting his enemy looters in which, of one accord, for the glory of Rome. Joined together to conquer earth .
When Vatican City released documents in 1776, to say they owned the creation, an the whole earth.
America responded, a few months later, written in constitution,
we are all free men.
an France-did agree, as saint peter might send, the Statue of Liberty appeared. with shekels undone, seen around her sandal feet.

Nobody talked, yet everybody said, an 2001, it finally came to a head.
The words not so old, from the printing press, they were finally read.
A verse was eaten, a verse chewed, an versed read as if the word should end.

dear Walter

Charity said:

The. Silence of the Romans who killed Jesus doesn't surprise me at all
An all his attempt to save the Jewish gold from being looted, to just be erased from history, incase anybody understood jesus attempted to stop Vatican City looting an stealing the Jewish god, an carrying the titles back to Rome where people would find themselves completely confounded understanding the. Nature of brutally destroying a Jewish man, an forgiving an forgetting his enemy looters in which, of one accord, for the glory of Rome. Joined together to conquer earth .
When Vatican City released documents in 1776, to say they owned the creation, an the whole earth.
America responded, a few months later, written in constitution,
we are all free men.
an France-did agree, as saint peter might send, the Statue of Liberty appeared. with shekels undone, seen around her sandal feet.

Nobody talked, yet everybody said, an 2001, it finally came to a head.
The words not so old, from the printing press, they were finally read.
A verse was eaten, a verse chewed, an versed read as if the word should end.

dear Walter

Click to expand...

Hi Kiwi cuteness , Where did the Jews get their gold from?

"Cain" was the bastard child of the sin, Eve had sought to circumvent the biological backwardness of the fallen, populated earth as they found it by injecting her own genetic material into the gene pool, she mixed good (Gods plan for the rehabilitation of the earth) with her own ill-conceived plan (evil).

Eve found Cano (Cain’s real father) "pleasing to the eye." Cano was the leader of the Nodites outside if the garden.

After Cain killed Abel they decided it was best for Cain to leave the garden in search of his fathers people, but Cain had never been "spirit indwelt" by the fragment of God.



http://www.urantia.org/urantia-book-standardized/paper-76-second-garden?term=disdainful%20of#search-jump-result-0

(849.1) 76:2.7 The death of Abel became known to his parents when his dogs brought the flocks home without their master. To Adam and Eve, Cain was fast becoming the grim reminder of their folly, and they encouraged him in his decision to leave the garden.

(849.2) 76:2.8 Cain’s life in Mesopotamia had not been exactly happy since he was in such a peculiar way symbolic of the default. It was not that his associates were unkind to him, but he had not been unaware of their subconscious resentment of his presence. But Cain knew that, since he bore no tribal mark, he would be killed by the first neighboring tribesmen who might chance to meet him. Fear, and some remorse, led him to repent. Cain had never been indwelt by an Adjuster, had always been defiant of the family discipline and disdainful of his father’s religion. But he now went to Eve, his mother, and asked for spiritual help and guidance, and when he honestly sought divine assistance, an Adjuster indwelt him. And this Adjuster, dwelling within and looking out, gave Cain a distinct advantage of superiority which classed him with the greatly feared tribe of Adam.

(849.3) 76:2.9 And so Cain departed for the land of Nod, east of the second Eden. He became a great leader among one group of his father’s people and did, to a certain degree, fulfill the predictions of Serapatatia, for he did promote peace between this division of the Nodites and the Adamites throughout his lifetime. Cain married Remona, his distant cousin, and their first son, Enoch, became the head of the Elamite Nodites. And for hundreds of years the Elamites and the Adamites continued to be at peace.