The Late Great Urantia Revelation

Caino · May 22, 2016

patrick jane said:
Every time I see excerpts from the UB it makes me sick to my stomach

Cognitive dissonance. When the false prophets of Judaism heard Jesus speak truth about a Loving God, they had the same reaction you do. Self righteous people with the chosen people arrogance get nervous when their excuse for bigotry is undermined. They hated Jesus without a cause because they had no truth in them.

If you abided in the spirit you could then hear the spiritual truths of the UB, it would not be a threat to you. But all the things that lead to the corruption of the Sanhedrin came to contaminate the religion about Jesus.

TulipBee · May 22, 2016

Caino said:
I get your point, I told you once before, when I chose Theology Online I didn't realize it was so right wing hateful. And I have followed the reasonable request from Knight and and the mod who asked me NOT to post in the Christian areas, to keep our discussion on one thread. Then we discovered how the rules don't apply to some members. I'm on other Christian forums with mature people and honest administration.

Jesus went right into the heart of evolved Judaism to proclaim his original gospel about making the whole souled commitment to doing Gods will, aknowleging sins, changing hearts and a commitment to "go and sin no more." While the world did fall through 2 defaults of our leaders, sin is personal to each individual. Even though we are born into or inherit a fallen environment, sin is deliberate disloyalty to deity. So many old erroneous ideas contaminate actuality.

Right wing hateful vs sharing the gospel

Lets vote

patrick jane · May 22, 2016

Caino said:
Cognitive dissonance. When the false prophets of Judaism heard Jesus speak truth about a Loving God, they had the same reaction you do. Self righteous people with the chosen people arrogance get nervous when their excuse for bigotry is undermined. They hated Jesus without a cause because they had no truth in them.

If you abided in the spirit you could then hear the spiritual truths of the UB, it would not be a threat to you. But all the things that lead to the corruption of the Sanhedrin came to contaminate the religion about Jesus.

THe Ub garbage is The FURTHEST thing from a threat to me as possible. It simply makes me sick to see writings that mock the Holy bible and Jesus' name. To hell with you

Caino · May 22, 2016

patrick jane said:
THe Ub garbage is The FURTHEST thing from a threat to me as possible. It simply makes me sick to see writings that mock the Holy bible and Jesus' name. To hell with you

Yea sure, your actions don't match your words. But I also get a sick fealing when God is mocked by the Hebrews claims that their barbarism was sanctioned by God. I get a sick feeling when little kids are taught the flood story or taught God told soldiers to kill villages and take the little girls for themselves. That sounds like ISIS to me.

TulipBee · May 22, 2016

Caino said:
Cognitive dissonance. When the false prophets of Judaism heard Jesus speak truth about a Loving God, they had the same reaction you do. Self righteous people with the chosen people arrogance get nervous when their excuse for bigotry is undermined. They hated Jesus without a cause because they had no truth in them.

If you abided in the spirit you could then hear the spiritual truths of the UB, it would not be a threat to you. But all the things that lead to the corruption of the Sanhedrin came to contaminate the religion about Jesus.

Spiritual truths from ub that denies the bible being God's word? I don't think so

Caino · May 22, 2016

freelight said:
Continuing from here from Paper 118 and the problems of the Lucifer Rebellion -

So we see at the heart of all sin and iniquity is some gesture of self-assertion that is divorced from the good and integrity of divine will to which even angels of high rank were subject to become deceived by to their own demise.

Lucifer's folly was the attempt to do the nondoable, to short-circuit time in an experiential universe. Lucifer's crime was the attempted creative disenfranchisement of every personality in Satania, the unrecognized abridgment of the creature's personal participation—freewill participation—in the long evolutionary struggle to attain the status of light and life both individually and collectively. In so doing, this onetime Sovereign of your system set the temporal purpose of his own will directly athwart the eternal purpose of God's will as it is revealed in the bestowal of free will upon all personal creatures. The Lucifer rebellion thus threatened the maximum possible infringement of the freewill choice of the ascenders and servers of the system of Satania—a threat forevermore to deprive every one of these beings of the thrilling experience of contributing something personal and unique to the slowly erecting monument to experiential wisdom which will sometime exist as the perfected system of Satania. Thus does the Lucifer manifesto, masquerading in the habiliments of liberty, stand forth in the clear light of reason as a monumental threat to consummate the theft of personal liberty and to do it on a scale that has been approached only twice in all the history of Nebadon.

54:2.4 In short, what God had given men and angels Lucifer would have taken away from them, that is, the divine privilege of participating in the creation of their own destinies and of the destiny of this local system of inhabited worlds.

54:2.5 No being in all the universe has the rightful liberty to deprive any other being of true liberty, the right to love and be loved, the privilege of worshiping God and of serving his fellows."

freelight · May 22, 2016

patrick jane said:
THe Ub garbage is The FURTHEST thing from a threat to me as possible. It simply makes me sick to see writings that mock the Holy bible and Jesus' name. To hell with you

The UB does not mock the Bible or Jesus name. You speak from presuption, ignorance and misplaced bigotry. The problem is in the exclusive assumption of one religious book being the sole voice of God or final revelation of truth. In a cosmos of unfolding light, progressive revelation and evolution of consciousness...the Spirit of God(truth) is the guiding light and teacher in every individual soul and provides epochal revelations to a planet at certain periods of time commensurate with their receptivity and stage of spiritual growth. As man progresses along he evolves towards greater purity and perfection.

Gods love condemns no one to hell, but draws all to his heart to do and know his will....which is life. Your expression of hate has more to do with the ego's passion to protect or defend a dogmatic belief in one religious book or presentation of 'God' (which becomes 'idolatry') rather than accepting the universality and infinity of 'God'. Love unifies, hate destroys and divides.

freelight · May 22, 2016

TulipBee said:
Spiritual truths from ub that denies the bible being God's word? I don't think so

You are so obsessed with the Bible only that you willfully reject God's universality and infinitely diverse ways he expresses and reveals himself, confining Him to your own little theological 'box', then sanction and worship that 'box' as 'God'. God is not confined to that box, neither is that box God.

Revelation is progressive, especially on evolving worlds.

3:1.2 It is literally true that God is all and in all. But even that is not all of God. The Infinite can be finally revealed only in infinity; the cause can never be fully comprehended by an analysis of effects; the living God is immeasurably greater than the sum total of creation that has come into being as a result of the creative acts of his unfettered free will. God is revealed throughout the cosmos, but the cosmos can never contain or encompass the entirety of the infinity of God.

freelight · May 22, 2016

Exploring terms

Exploring terms

Caino said:
Lucifer's folly was the attempt to do the nondoable, to short-circuit time in an experiential universe. Lucifer's crime was the attempted creative disenfranchisement of every personality in Satania, the unrecognized abridgment of the creature's personal participation—freewill participation—in the long evolutionary struggle to attain the status of light and life both individually and collectively. In so doing, this onetime Sovereign of your system set the temporal purpose of his own will directly athwart the eternal purpose of God's will as it is revealed in the bestowal of free will upon all personal creatures. The Lucifer rebellion thus threatened the maximum possible infringement of the freewill choice of the ascenders and servers of the system of Satania—a threat forevermore to deprive every one of these beings of the thrilling experience of contributing something personal and unique to the slowly erecting monument to experiential wisdom which will sometime exist as the perfected system of Satania. Thus does the Lucifer manifesto, masquerading in the habiliments of liberty, stand forth in the clear light of reason as a monumental threat to consummate the theft of personal liberty and to do it on a scale that has been approached only twice in all the history of Nebadon.

54:2.4 In short, what God had given men and angels Lucifer would have taken away from them, that is, the divine privilege of participating in the creation of their own destinies and of the destiny of this local system of inhabited worlds.

54:2.5 No being in all the universe has the rightful liberty to deprive any other being of true liberty, the right to love and be loved, the privilege of worshiping God and of serving his fellows."

The papers give wonderful insight into the nature of sin, which is epitomized in the Lucifer rebellion. The very grant of freedom of choice carries with it the determining factor of life or death regarding eternal survival or self-destruction.

54:0.1 EVOLUTIONARY MAN FINDS it difficult fully to comprehend the significance and to grasp the meanings of evil, error, sin, and iniquity. Man is slow to perceive that contrastive perfection and imperfection produce potential evil; that conflicting truth and falsehood create confusing error; that the divine endowment of freewill choice eventuates in the divergent realms of sin and righteousness; that the persistent pursuit of divinity leads to the kingdom of God as contrasted with its continuous rejection, which leads to the domains of iniquity.

54:0.2 The Gods neither create evil nor permit sin and rebellion. Potential evil is time-existent in a universe embracing differential levels of perfection meanings and values. Sin is potential in all realms where imperfect beings are endowed with the ability to choose between good and evil. The very conflicting presence of truth and untruth, fact and falsehood, constitutes the potentiality of error. The deliberate choice of evil constitutes sin; the willful rejection of truth is error; the persistent pursuit of sin and error is iniquity.

freelight · May 22, 2016

Intellectual freedom, spiritual liberty.......

Intellectual freedom, spiritual liberty.......

Lon said:
Whatever the reason, you and I weren't there. War ethics are always different and rightly should cause problem. I don't even like talking about war atrocity, but some of it is close to home. You are no friend to a soldier if you label them "[blank]-killers." They hated having to do it. Was the sergeant evil for commanding it?

I have no problems with war in self defense or some other justified cause or circumstances (debatable), but do when innocent people, especially when women and children/infants are commanded to be slaughtered.

I simply shared some problematic cases found in the bible to counter pj's hareful reaction to the UB as being exaggerated and unfounded, unless he can specify what passages he finds displeasing instead of making a blanket assumption based on a preconception formed by an incomplete knowledge of the papers. There's alot mud slinging and spite directed towards an imaginary 'enemy' which is so time-consuming and unnecessary.

I would also remind readers if they've forgotten, the UB just happens to be at this juncture in time and space, one book among others that serves to expand consciousness Godward and extend our research of reality within a greater universal and cosmic context. In this case these particular papers serve as a great platform to inspire dialogue. I'm an eclectic spiritualist, so my interests and studies over the years extend beyond the UB, as older veterans on this forum could attest. - so it is presumptuous for some here to assume I promote the UB as the most perfect or final revelation of truth,....even the papers themselves reject such a notion. Im a student of many schools and traditions, aligned with the ancient wisdom universal to all fields of knowledge. The UB is but one significant book among many others in my vast library...which happens to be being dicussed in a thread devoted to it.

Again, the UB is but a conceptual overlay and structure from which to explore concepts, meanings and values. Unfortunately, those not familiarizing themselves with the narrative are handicapped in engaging in informative discussion, retarding any fruitful exhange. Any intelligent observer reading these dialogues may rightly discern those who are open to 'dialogue' or merely pontificate their own 'dogma' while belitting other viewpoints.

Lon · May 22, 2016

freelight said:
I have no problems with war in self defense or some other justified cause or circumstances (debatable), but do when innocent people, especially when women and children/infants are commanded to be slaughtered.

We've no idea. Hippies called Vets 'baby-killers.' They were right BUT they never bothered to understand. You too, assume innocent as well as no other viable answer. Like I said, I don't like to go into it, but research it if you've a mind. They weren't innocent women and sadly, neither were the infants. Whatever happened in Israel is beyond our information. It is easy to judge and many do it to their own demise and ill-conception. Don't be that guy.

freelight said:
I simply shared some problematic cases found in the bible to counter pj's hareful reaction to the UB as being exaggerated and unfounded, unless he can specify what passages he finds displeasing instead of making a blanket assumption based on a preconception formed by an incomplete knowledge of the papers. There's alot mud slinging and spite directed towards an imaginary 'enemy' which is so time-consuming and unnecessary.

Different: He told you why it bothered him. Listen to Patrick Jane instead of speculating.

freelight said:
I would also remind readers if they've forgotten, the UB just happens to be at this juncture in time and space, one book among others that serves to expand consciousness Godward and extend our research of reality within a greater universal and cosmic context. In this case these particular papers serve as a great platform to inspire dialogue. I'm an eclectic spiritualist, so my interests and studies over the years extend beyond the UB, as older veterans on this forum could attest. - so it is presumptuous for some here to assume I promote the UB as the most perfect or final revelation of truth,....even the papers themselves reject such a notion. Im a student of many schools and traditions, aligned with the ancient wisdom universal to all fields of knowledge. The UB is but one significant book among many others in my vast library...which happens to be being dicussed in a thread devoted to it.

Again, the UB is but a conceptual overlay and structure from which to explore concepts, meanings and values. Unfortunately, those not familiarizing themselves with the narrative are handicapped in engaging in informative discussion, retarding any fruitful exhange. Any intelligent observer reading these dialogues may rightly discern those who are open to 'dialogue' or merely pontificate their own 'dogma' while belitting other viewpoints.

:nono: It does no such thing. A class sharing various answers to a math problem is not 'expansion.' It is ever and ONLY entertaining falsehood. You won't get that because you are still searching for answers. No Christian is and I'm sure that finds you completely unaware and unfathomable. We have the answer PJ! Look to Jesus![video]https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=larry+norman+why+don%27t+you+ look+into+jesus[/video]

Caino · May 22, 2016

10. FORGIVENESS OF SIN

89:10.1 Ancient man only attained consciousness of favor with God through sacrifice. Modern man must develop new techniques of achieving the self-consciousness of salvation. The consciousness of sin persists in the mortal mind, but the thought patterns of salvation therefrom have become outworn and antiquated. The reality of the spiritual need persists, but intellectual progress has destroyed the olden ways of securing peace and consolation for mind and soul.

89:10.2 Sin must be redefined as deliberate disloyalty to Deity. There are degrees of disloyalty: the partial loyalty of indecision; the divided loyalty of confliction; the dying loyalty of indifference; and the death of loyalty exhibited in devotion to godless ideals.

89:10.3 The sense or feeling of guilt is the consciousness of the violation of the mores; it is not necessarily sin. There is no real sin in the absence of conscious disloyalty to Deity.

89:10.4 The possibility of the recognition of the sense of guilt is a badge of transcendent distinction for mankind. It does not mark man as mean but rather sets him apart as a creature of potential greatness and ever-ascending glory. Such a sense of unworthiness is the initial stimulus that should lead quickly and surely to those faith conquests which translate the mortal mind to the superb levels of moral nobility, cosmic insight, and spiritual living; thus are all the meanings of human existence changed from the temporal to the eternal, and all values are elevated from the human to the divine.

89:10.5 The confession of sin is a manful repudiation of disloyalty, but it in no wise mitigates the time-space consequences of such disloyalty. But confession—sincere recognition of the nature of sin—is essential to religious growth and spiritual progress.

89:10.6 The forgiveness of sin by Deity is the renewal of loyalty relations following a period of the human consciousness of the lapse of such relations as the consequence of conscious rebellion. The forgiveness does not have to be sought, only received as the consciousness of re-establishment of loyalty relations between the creature and the Creator. And all the loyal sons of God are happy, service-loving, and ever-progressive in the Paradise ascent.

89:10.7 [Presented by a Brilliant Evening Star]

Lon · May 22, 2016

Caino said:
10. FORGIVENESS OF SIN

89:10.1 Modern man must develop new techniques of achieving the self-consciousness of salvation. The consciousness of sin persists in the mortal mind, but the thought patterns of salvation therefrom have become outworn and antiquated. The reality of the spiritual need persists, but intellectual progress has destroyed the olden ways of securing peace and consolation for mind and soul.

Contrasts:
Gal 1:7 not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ.
Gal 1:8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.
Gal 1:9 As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.
Gal 1:10 For am I now seeking the approval of man, or of God? Or am I trying to please man? If I were still trying to please man, I would not be a servant of Christ.
Gal 1:11 For I would have you know, brothers, that the gospel that was preached by me is not man's gospel.
Gal 1:12 For I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ.

Caino said:
89:10.3 The sense or feeling of guilt is the consciousness of the violation of the mores; it is not necessarily sin. There is no real sin in the absence of conscious disloyalty to Deity.

Understand Caino! You and the U-rant-a are accursed. You are defying God very God with blasphemy. You and those who wrote the UB are against God very God.

Caino said:
89:10.4 The possibility of the recognition of the sense of guilt is a badge of transcendent distinction for mankind. It does not mark man as mean but rather sets him apart as a creature of potential greatness and ever-ascending glory. Such a sense of unworthiness is the initial stimulus that should lead quickly and surely to those faith conquests which translate the mortal mind to the superb levels of moral nobility, cosmic insight, and spiritual living; thus are all the meanings of human existence changed from the temporal to the eternal, and all values are elevated from the human to the divine.

Nothing more than man trying to pull himself up against gravity by his shoelaces :yawn:

Caino said:
89:10.6 .... And all the loyal sons of God are happy, service-loving, and ever-progressive in the Paradise ascent.

Nothing but repackaged Buddhism trying to sell Christians. :nono:

A rejection of this is to your eternal consequence:
Gal 1:7 not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ.
Gal 1:8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.
Gal 1:9 As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.
Gal 1:10 For am I now seeking the approval of man, or of God? Or am I trying to please man? If I were still trying to please man, I would not be a servant of Christ.
Gal 1:11 For I would have you know, brothers, that the gospel that was preached by me is not man's gospel.
Gal 1:12 For I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ.

Caino · May 22, 2016

Lon said:
Contrasts:
Gal 1:7 not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ.
Gal 1:8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.
Gal 1:9 As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.
Gal 1:10 For am I now seeking the approval of man, or of God? Or am I trying to please man? If I were still trying to please man, I would not be a servant of Christ.
Gal 1:11 For I would have you know, brothers, that the gospel that was preached by me is not man's gospel.
Gal 1:12 For I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ.

Understand Caino! You and the U-rant-a are accursed. You are defying God very God with blasphemy. You and those who wrote the UB are against God very God.

Nothing more than man trying to pull himself up against gravity by his shoelaces :yawn:

Nothing but repackaged Buddhism trying to sell Christians. :nono:

A rejection of this is to your eternal consequence:
Gal 1:7 not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ.
Gal 1:8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.
Gal 1:9 As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.
Gal 1:10 For am I now seeking the approval of man, or of God? Or am I trying to please man? If I were still trying to please man, I would not be a servant of Christ.
Gal 1:11 For I would have you know, brothers, that the gospel that was preached by me is not man's gospel.
Gal 1:12 For I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ.

Spare me the magic spells, Paul's threats are his own confused beliefs not having ever known Jesus. His letters are the words of Paul not the words of God.

Besides, Paul taught his own version of the gospel which was different from the original.

God is changeless, he has always been forgiving. Blood sacrifices are a product of primitive evolutionary religions around the world. Sincere repentance and faith was the religion of Jesus that he had hoped the Jews would adopt.

Lon · May 22, 2016

Caino said:
Spare me the magic spells, Paul's threats are his own confused beliefs not having ever known Jesus.

God is changeless, he has always been forgiving. Blood sacrifices are a product of primitive evolutionary religions around the world. Sincere repentance and faith was the religion of Jesus that he had hoped the Jews would adopt.

Blasphemy against God: John 3:16 and against His servant 2 Peter 3:16 "Accursed" isn't a 'spell' either

lain: It is a condition of God against that one. The God of the universe is against you.

TulipBee · May 22, 2016

freelight said:
You are so obsessed with the Bible only that you willfully reject God's universality and infinitely diverse ways he expresses and reveals himself, confining Him to your own little theological 'box', then sanction and worship that 'box' as 'God'. God is not confined to that box, neither is that box God.

Revelation is progressive, especially on evolving worlds.

I'm obsessed in reconizing the bible being God breathed. Bible only has nothing to do with it. When you attack God's word, you attack me.

freelight · May 23, 2016

Lon said:
Blasphemy against God: John 3:16

False charge. The UB wholly agrees with this passage. Only someone ignorant of its teaching would make such a claim.

and against His servant 2 Peter 3:16

2 Peter is pseudographical, and no one is necessarily against Paul'steaching, unless one is emphatically anti-Pauline. Paul's gospel is his own and differs from the original gospel of Jesus, - recognizing that is not a sin, neither is it necessary to create an imaginary enemy and assume a defensive posture based on an assumed threat which is common among some of the critics here ( they think they are under attack, again a false perception based on fear, presumption and insecurity).

Jesus didnt teach anyone to worship Paul, neither did he prophesy that a 13th apostle would arise to be added to his original 12. You may recall After Judas defected, Mattias was chosen by casting lots.

"Accursed" isn't a 'spell' either lain: It is a condition of God against that one.

That was Paul's claim, and note it was after his contention with Peter and the original apostles of Jesus that he felt the need to exalt 'his gospel' as the only valid one. He knew it was different than their gospel, a fusion of various schools plus his own visions and personal revelations. Note Paul is the one cursing, boasting, professing this and that so that his own testimony when closely scrutinized is questionable at certain points. This is why some totally reject Paul and stick with Jesus words only. Let us note the UB is not totally anti-Pauline....it recognizes his contribution to the formation of christian theology and tradition, but emphasizes Jesus original gospel of the kingdom, minus the need to adopt Judaism and its laws or customs.

See every mention of Paul in the UB here

The God of the universe is against you.

Quite the contrary, since our Heavenly Father is surely FOR us, he being infinite love. Its all this "for or against" divisional thinking that is conflicting, and posits adversarial judgments and fear, which are not characteristic of love. Love shows a better way. Why not take it?

freelight · May 23, 2016

No attacks.........

No attacks.........

TulipBee said:
I'm obsessed in reconizing the bible being God breathed. Bible only has nothing to do with it. When you attack God's word, you attack me.

It is the insistence of your belief which includes with it the sense of threat if/when you assume it is being 'attacked'. There is no 'attack' going on but in your own mind. It is the exclusive worship of your 'belief' as being solely true that causes your distress when seemingly challenged....and it is all you fall back on, since its a dogma you've invested so much in. Once you let it go, there is no longer a religious ego to protect or which could be hurt.

The fact remains, no matter what religious school or philosophical style or approach we adopt or lean towards.....we still cannot put 'God' in a box, neither assume he is limited to our terms or definitions. God is not limited by words, symbols or thoughts, but some venues or models may serve to better represent.

Lon · May 23, 2016

freelight said:
False charge. The UB wholly agrees with this passage. Only someone ignorant of its teaching would make such a claim.

Are you ignorant or a liar? Caino has often come against the gospel of Jesus Christ and especially against His work on the Cross. You too, skate around those terms. John 6 is nowhere compatible with your Urantia-propositions. As a reminder, they aren't given as the words of God either. They scriptures are.
"False charge" is the false charge here.

freelight said:
2 Peter is pseudographical

How convenient (like ALL of your quote mines).

lain:

freelight said:
and no one is necessarily against Paul's teaching, unless...

lain:

freelight said:
one is emphatically anti-Pauline

Er, already your partner is in this thread. You too, are distanced at best.

freelight said:
Paul's gospel is his own and differs from the original gospel of Jesus

MAD agrees with you. They aren't that many of them. I'm not disparaging them, but they would not support you here. I'll let them speak to this. For your and my conversation: :nono:

freelight said:
recognizing that is not a sin, neither is it necessary to create an imaginary enemy and assume a defensive posture based on an assumed threat which is common among some of the critics here

Er, lies are sins. While I may not intend to do damage, doing damage is still a 'bad' thing. Ignorance? Sure. You can't do it without a guilty conscious any longer, however. You at least know you are seen as attempting damage so are innocent no longer (more in a moment).

freelight said:
( they think they are under attack, again a false perception based on fear, presumption and insecurity).

You either build off the foundation of the Lord Jesus Christ, or you stumble from Him. Being a Mormon, you never understood Who He was. As a Urantia, you are stumbling further. For you, He IS the stone of stumbling you outright reject. He isn't just a good guru. He claimed to be God very God- YOUR God.

freelight said:
Jesus didnt teach anyone to worship Paul, neither did he prophesy that a 13th apostle would arise to be added to his original 12. You may recall After Judas defected, Mattias was chosen by casting lots.

Bad for you: Peter and the other apostles accepted him. This is a throw-over Mormon ploy. Get rid of it.

freelight said:
That was Paul's claim, and note it was after his contention with Peter and the original apostles of Jesus that he felt the need to exalt 'his gospel' as the only valid one.

Again, no. Only you and a few Hyper-Dispensationalists would buy this.
John 3:12 If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how can you believe if I tell you heavenly things?
John 3:13 No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man.
John 3:14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up,
John 3:15 that whoever believes in him may have eternal life.
John 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
John 3:17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him.

See John 12:24

freelight said:
He knew it was different than their gospel, a fusion of various schools plus his own visions and personal revelations. Note Paul is the one cursing, boasting, professing this and that so that his own testimony when closely scrutinized is questionable at certain points.

Again, only by you and a few others. It is veneer and thin at that when even Christians disagree with you. They would ONLY agree with you that his gospel is different BUT they will not agree with anything else you say and this means something quite different than what you'd like it to mean.

freelight said:
This is why some totally reject Paul and stick with Jesus words only. Let us note the UB is not totally anti-Pauline....it recognizes his contribution to the formation of christian theology and tradition, but emphasizes Jesus original gospel of the kingdom, minus the need to adopt Judaism and its laws or customs.

Way to generous for yourself. Again, I read it a LOT more than you imagine, even today in reading for counterpoints. It just doesn't and cannot measure up.

freelight said:
See every mention of Paul in the UB here

I've read a number of these already. As an aside, I hate Urantianese: "... ascendant-citizen corps; Moron- (

lain: ) -tia" DON'T you guys EVER think somebody is making fun of your very intellect when you read this!!!??? Seriously??? Sorry, I've nothing but honesty with this question. It CANNOT seriously have been said. Where do you find "U-rant" or "Moron-i/Moron-tia" In the Bible? Don't you think Bill Sadler and Joseph Smith were pulling your legs with this stuff? :idunno: I'd at LEAST think Satan was playing a game with me at that point. There is no way I could take it seriously.

Then, Paul belonging to a cult against marriage and sex???? Seriously? I hate this book. It's brain-dead stupidity.

freelight said:
Quite the contrary

THIS is where you are 100% against Paul, unlike your previous statement.

freelight said:
since our Heavenly Father is surely FOR us, he being infinite love. Its all this "for or against" divisional thinking that is conflicting, and posits adversarial judgments and fear

:nono: ALREADY & FROM inside of you. WE are the weakest link.

freelight said:
which are not characteristic of love. Love shows a better way. Why not take it?

You are TRYING to love yourself the way you are. I hate sin inside of me. You and God should hate sin inside of me too!
You are speaking against the very nature of God to suggest He should love sin. Your concept of Him, is nowhere the same as mine, either.
The UB is repackaged Buddhism, Hinduism, and other Eastern Mysticism. Ba'Hai is hardly different from the UB in that respect.

Lon · May 23, 2016

freelight said:
It is the insistence of your belief which includes with it the sense of threat if/when you assume it is being 'attacked'.

Uhmm, trying to burn down stainless steel with a lighter isn't 'attacking' persay because of how feeble it is BUT the thing that drives you to it is not innocent.

freelight said:
There is no 'attack' going on but in your own mind.

Bull, or you'd take this to some other website (and there are plenty) when asked by Knight, mods, and TOL members to do so. This is a lie.

freelight said:
It It is the exclusive worship of your 'belief' as being solely true that causes your distress when seemingly challenged....and it is all you fall back on, since its a dogma you've invested so much in. Once you let it go, there is no longer a religious ego to protect or which could be hurt.

:think: Every oddball atheist, cult member and other-sexual claims the rest of 'us' have a phobia. :nono: You misread a detest for fear. They are NOT the same thing. I don't have to be afraid of dirty diapers to not like them. I've changed enough dirty diapers, still don't like them. You? See it for what it is. This thread is the dirty diaper of TOL and well.....well, somebody has to address it. This is TOL's dirty-diaper (nearly all supposed "phobias" are rather disliked/detested/not appreciated - I don't 'appreciate' dirty diapers. They don't 'scare' me

lain: ).

freelight said:
It The fact remains, no matter what religious school or philosophical style or approach we adopt or lean towards.....we still cannot put 'God' in a box, neither assume he is limited to our terms or definitions. God is not limited by words, symbols or thoughts, but some venues or models may serve to better represent.

Yes, to the first part; no, to the second. Again, once somebody HAS the answer, there is no need whatsoever to see all the wrong answers. Not even some of them :noway:

The Late Great Urantia Revelation

BANNED

BANNED

BANNED

BANNED

BANNED

BANNED

Eclectic Theosophist

Eclectic Theosophist

Eclectic Theosophist

Eclectic Theosophist

Well-known member

BANNED

Well-known member

BANNED

Well-known member

BANNED

Eclectic Theosophist

Eclectic Theosophist

Well-known member

Well-known member