Right Divider
Body part
That's quite the evasive maneuver.
Logic like that is for two year olds.
The Late Great Urantia Revelation
- Thread starter Caino
- Start date
- Status
Logic like that is for two year olds.
An evasive maneuver?
* You never answered my questions.
* I was frank and honest, we have no indisputable proof that Jesus said those words just like there was no proof that he was Gods Son when he was on the earth. There is no indisputable proof that there is a God.
There is no need to be nasty.
Last edited:
Right Divider
Body part
Caino, I was not born yesterday. I know a redirection when I see it.
Back to the original issue: Why should anyone believe that Jesus said the thing that YOU say that He said in that previous post?
None of that other stuff that you said after I asked THIS question has anything to do with that.
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
getting to the point.....
getting to the point.....
If you knew anything about Part 4 of the papers on the life/ministry of Jesus these are 'paraphrased' accounts of his teaching, they represent the essential ideas, concepts being portrayed by the Master,....there is no claim that these are the verbatim transcripts of every jot and tittle that came out of Jesus mouth. The accounts are very descriptive and detailed about what Jesus is saying in meaning, value and precept,...which is the very point of sharing the accounts. There is nothing hidden or mysterious about this, for the point is what is being 'communicated', not its literal inerrancy or some other petty concern.
In the first 2 papers of Part 4, the secondary midwayer once assigned to the apostle Andrew, serving this commission-grant to portray the life of Jesus wrote:
See: Index Online study edition. Part 4. Papers, 120, 121....cont.
Just like in the 'Acknowledgement' in the preface of Part 1 of the revelation, the revelators fully acknowledge using human language symbols and knowledge resources to communicate the new expanded enhanced epochal revelation, resorting to superhuman or extra-terrestrial knowledge only when there was not an adequate human language-concept or 'word' appropriate or suitable to convey the idea, ideal or concept meant to be communicated.
Since it is a 'paraphrased' record, what was being pointed out by Caino, was to look at what was being communicated, if THAT was true or not. The revelators are portraying what Jesus was meaning to say. Now as to whether Jesus actually said something to this effect, or whether there is a 'God' or not (which cannot be proven in a material sense by a conventional scientific manner) is another matter. What we are looking at is what is being communicated.
pj
getting to the point.....
If you knew anything about Part 4 of the papers on the life/ministry of Jesus these are 'paraphrased' accounts of his teaching, they represent the essential ideas, concepts being portrayed by the Master,....there is no claim that these are the verbatim transcripts of every jot and tittle that came out of Jesus mouth. The accounts are very descriptive and detailed about what Jesus is saying in meaning, value and precept,...which is the very point of sharing the accounts. There is nothing hidden or mysterious about this, for the point is what is being 'communicated', not its literal inerrancy or some other petty concern.
In the first 2 papers of Part 4, the secondary midwayer once assigned to the apostle Andrew, serving this commission-grant to portray the life of Jesus wrote:
See: Index Online study edition. Part 4. Papers, 120, 121....cont.
Just like in the 'Acknowledgement' in the preface of Part 1 of the revelation, the revelators fully acknowledge using human language symbols and knowledge resources to communicate the new expanded enhanced epochal revelation, resorting to superhuman or extra-terrestrial knowledge only when there was not an adequate human language-concept or 'word' appropriate or suitable to convey the idea, ideal or concept meant to be communicated.
Since it is a 'paraphrased' record, what was being pointed out by Caino, was to look at what was being communicated, if THAT was true or not. The revelators are portraying what Jesus was meaning to say. Now as to whether Jesus actually said something to this effect, or whether there is a 'God' or not (which cannot be proven in a material sense by a conventional scientific manner) is another matter. What we are looking at is what is being communicated.
pj
Right Divider
Body part
Caino's post did NOT give any indication of ANY of what you just said. I don't have the time, not should I, to do a research paper of everyone's posts here. It is not 'paraphrasing' someone when you condense their 'essential ideas/concepts' into an ONE unmarked and quoted paragraph.
Once again, this is a lot of opinion.
<cut>
AGAIN I point out that Caino gave not the slightest hint that he was producing a 'paraphrase'. I have read the scripture and I completely disagree that "this is what Jesus was communicating".
Part 4 of the UB, which is the life of Jesus, was given to us by beings that were on the earth when Jesus was here, it does not derive any authority or extrapolation from the books of the bible.
You don't have to believe anything.
Right Divider
Body part
So you can just say anything and it's automatically true?
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
Jesus, speaks OPENLY.........
Jesus, speaks OPENLY.........
I offered my interpretation of what Caino was trying to convey, by knowing him and knowing enough of what the papers are about and what they teach. If you want to discuss the contents of the UB, then you will have to at least have read enough of the contents of the papers (per whatever subject is the focus) and research them to engage an informed intelligent discussion about their meaning, value and content. At least be an 'upgrade' above what most of the critics here have so far proved of themselves, about educating themselves of the material (which has been pretty minimal).
Its an informed intelligent opinion to help guide those interested in the discussion.
First, if you want to engage the dialogue here, educate yourself on the subject so we can relate properly and unfold a dialogue. Some here do not even have the desire or decency to read the first 5 papers (not a long read really) to understand the fundamental theology on the nature of 'God' in the papers to know what it actually teaches. They prefer ignorance and presumption over knowledge. There is noting to fear in the honest investigation of truth.
Second, Caino was simply quoting commentary from Jesus, from his discourse on true religion found here (Paper 155, section 5, verse 12) - if you want to see what Jesus teaches about the subject "in context", read it and the following section (a second discourse on true religion), for these are clear, detailed explanations. If anyone wants to know what Jesus teaches from a Urantia Paper perspective, its plain for all to read thru-out Part 4 of the papers. There is no exuse therefore for the misrepresentation, disinformation or idiocy about what is clearly explained.
pj
Jesus, speaks OPENLY.........
I offered my interpretation of what Caino was trying to convey, by knowing him and knowing enough of what the papers are about and what they teach. If you want to discuss the contents of the UB, then you will have to at least have read enough of the contents of the papers (per whatever subject is the focus) and research them to engage an informed intelligent discussion about their meaning, value and content. At least be an 'upgrade' above what most of the critics here have so far proved of themselves, about educating themselves of the material (which has been pretty minimal).
Its an informed intelligent opinion to help guide those interested in the discussion.
First, if you want to engage the dialogue here, educate yourself on the subject so we can relate properly and unfold a dialogue. Some here do not even have the desire or decency to read the first 5 papers (not a long read really) to understand the fundamental theology on the nature of 'God' in the papers to know what it actually teaches. They prefer ignorance and presumption over knowledge. There is noting to fear in the honest investigation of truth.
Second, Caino was simply quoting commentary from Jesus, from his discourse on true religion found here (Paper 155, section 5, verse 12) - if you want to see what Jesus teaches about the subject "in context", read it and the following section (a second discourse on true religion), for these are clear, detailed explanations. If anyone wants to know what Jesus teaches from a Urantia Paper perspective, its plain for all to read thru-out Part 4 of the papers. There is no exuse therefore for the misrepresentation, disinformation or idiocy about what is clearly explained.
pj
Daniel1611
New member
These different religions all want to claim Jesus and make him into someone else. They hate Jesus because he testified that their works are evil. So they make him into someone else.
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
Evaluating Jesus and his words................
Evaluating Jesus and his words................
To level the playing fiend here (on equal grounds), it could be questioned (and is so by many liberal scholars) the authenticity of the teachings of Jesus found in the gospels (recorded decades after Jesus left the scene), since we don't know if some sayings or events are religious fiction, heresay, tradition, or creative interpolations and what sayings or events are actual true accountings, let alone exact transcriptions of what Jesus actually said and taught. Again, some parts could be authentic, some 'paraphrased' and conditioned by various factors, further distorted thru 'translation' and 'creative license'.
Much of what Jesus is represented as teaching has the gospel-accounts as their foundation, confirming these records and certain events, with some corrections, enhancements and extra information, PLUS the correct portrayal of what Jesus taught about the kingdom of heaven (His gospel-message) according to them. You can take or leave it, but research and study the accounts enough to know what they say, evaluate them for whatever truth or wisdom is in the teachings themselves, and judge them in that context. Again, the honest investigation of true values, meanings or principles is a courageous and noble endeavor.
pj
Evaluating Jesus and his words................
To level the playing fiend here (on equal grounds), it could be questioned (and is so by many liberal scholars) the authenticity of the teachings of Jesus found in the gospels (recorded decades after Jesus left the scene), since we don't know if some sayings or events are religious fiction, heresay, tradition, or creative interpolations and what sayings or events are actual true accountings, let alone exact transcriptions of what Jesus actually said and taught. Again, some parts could be authentic, some 'paraphrased' and conditioned by various factors, further distorted thru 'translation' and 'creative license'.
Much of what Jesus is represented as teaching has the gospel-accounts as their foundation, confirming these records and certain events, with some corrections, enhancements and extra information, PLUS the correct portrayal of what Jesus taught about the kingdom of heaven (His gospel-message) according to them. You can take or leave it, but research and study the accounts enough to know what they say, evaluate them for whatever truth or wisdom is in the teachings themselves, and judge them in that context. Again, the honest investigation of true values, meanings or principles is a courageous and noble endeavor.
pj
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
reconsider......
reconsider......
Don't forget, you can reach 'home' without first touching 'first base' here.
The content of the UB or any other religious work is open for any to discover for themselves. Courage is a wonderful commodity. Fear not.
As far as really investigating Jesus, if he was a true historical figure or not, and then even if we have his real teachings in the gospels, or if other bits n pieces of his words could be found in non-canonical gospels, gnostic-texts, apocryphal writings, spirit-communications, modern-day channeled messages, etc...remains an open frontier.
Jesus says to take courage,...ask, seek, and knock for yourself,...test all things, do your own investigation, have 'faith' in the divine indwelling presence of Deity within, let that spirit lead and guide you.
pj
reconsider......
Don't forget, you can reach 'home' without first touching 'first base' here.
The content of the UB or any other religious work is open for any to discover for themselves. Courage is a wonderful commodity. Fear not.
As far as really investigating Jesus, if he was a true historical figure or not, and then even if we have his real teachings in the gospels, or if other bits n pieces of his words could be found in non-canonical gospels, gnostic-texts, apocryphal writings, spirit-communications, modern-day channeled messages, etc...remains an open frontier.
Jesus says to take courage,...ask, seek, and knock for yourself,...test all things, do your own investigation, have 'faith' in the divine indwelling presence of Deity within, let that spirit lead and guide you.
pj
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
criterion of proof........
criterion of proof........
~*~*~
Nice to have some creative dialogue going on, better if all parties contribute to keep it going in a positive, engaging, interesting direction tapping into new realms or dimensions, enhancing/expanding the discussion onwards. Such is making the best of the space and time here, for what it was created for - "discussion".
As touched on earlier,...we could equally ask for a bible-believer to give 'proof' that Jesus said what he did in any particular instance in the gospels. No absolute 'proof' can be given short of being an actual witness in the presence of the man Jesus as he was speaking, if you had a recording device at the ready. Otherwise, you just have reports of reports of what Jesus is 'presumed' or 'supposed' to have said and did. All you have is 'faith' in such, and are left with reason, intelligence, logic, intuition to go on in addition, again taking whatever is 'written' and making what you will of it.
The Jesus Seminar took a stab at it, and bible-buffs, scholars and laymen down thru the years,...join the club. All we can do is research, take what is written with the discretion of discernment weighing the text in the light of various factors that determine their authenticity or doubts. The same goes for the UB's account or any other work of religious-philosophical significance.
The quest for the pearl of great price is a path paved by your own vigilance and sacrifice. No one can take that journey for you but yourself.
I'm well aware and have studied other sources of Jesus teaching, from apocryphal texts, spirit-messages, ascended master messengers, channels, mediums, etc. that have claimed to be Jesus, so this is nothing new, but it still holds as important that we see 'what' is being communicated in principle,... the ethic, meaning, value, significance of it as it relates to anything. Anything Jesus says anywhere in records attributed to him is worth looking into. Only those who are truly open to learn,...continue to ask, seek and knock,...its a continuous attitude of being open to discovery, light, revelation.
~*~*~
As far as proof of God goes, well,...the UB elaborates extensively on that score from a more modern liberally accessible context, since it uses the huge mass of human knowledge already accrued by mankind in the early 20th century, including the Bible of course (as a base-format)...adding what is appropriate to augment and expand mankind's knowledge of God, the Creation and man's potential and destiny.
The Foreward alone dives into the most fundamental terms on the reality and absoluteness of 'God', even before Paper 1 on the Universal Father as the First Source and Center of all reality.
pj
criterion of proof........
~*~*~
Nice to have some creative dialogue going on, better if all parties contribute to keep it going in a positive, engaging, interesting direction tapping into new realms or dimensions, enhancing/expanding the discussion onwards. Such is making the best of the space and time here, for what it was created for - "discussion".
As touched on earlier,...we could equally ask for a bible-believer to give 'proof' that Jesus said what he did in any particular instance in the gospels. No absolute 'proof' can be given short of being an actual witness in the presence of the man Jesus as he was speaking, if you had a recording device at the ready. Otherwise, you just have reports of reports of what Jesus is 'presumed' or 'supposed' to have said and did. All you have is 'faith' in such, and are left with reason, intelligence, logic, intuition to go on in addition, again taking whatever is 'written' and making what you will of it.
The Jesus Seminar took a stab at it, and bible-buffs, scholars and laymen down thru the years,...join the club. All we can do is research, take what is written with the discretion of discernment weighing the text in the light of various factors that determine their authenticity or doubts. The same goes for the UB's account or any other work of religious-philosophical significance.
The quest for the pearl of great price is a path paved by your own vigilance and sacrifice. No one can take that journey for you but yourself.
I'm well aware and have studied other sources of Jesus teaching, from apocryphal texts, spirit-messages, ascended master messengers, channels, mediums, etc. that have claimed to be Jesus, so this is nothing new, but it still holds as important that we see 'what' is being communicated in principle,... the ethic, meaning, value, significance of it as it relates to anything. Anything Jesus says anywhere in records attributed to him is worth looking into. Only those who are truly open to learn,...continue to ask, seek and knock,...its a continuous attitude of being open to discovery, light, revelation.
~*~*~
As far as proof of God goes, well,...the UB elaborates extensively on that score from a more modern liberally accessible context, since it uses the huge mass of human knowledge already accrued by mankind in the early 20th century, including the Bible of course (as a base-format)...adding what is appropriate to augment and expand mankind's knowledge of God, the Creation and man's potential and destiny.
The Foreward alone dives into the most fundamental terms on the reality and absoluteness of 'God', even before Paper 1 on the Universal Father as the First Source and Center of all reality.
pj
No, and I don't think you really believe that I think one can say anything and that makes it "true". I quote the Urantia revelation as authoritative in the spiritual realm in the same way that a one would quote Jesus from the Bible.
It would be like Mary asking Gabriel for credentials when he appeared to her to inform her that her child was the child of promise. Going forward Mary would live by faith/trust in the encounter with the celestial being. The mother of John the Baptist would have the same experience, neither her nor Mary had any additional visitations from celestial beings.
Other than the visit of the Magi from a far away land (Ur) their was no other supernatural event for anyone else up until the wedding at Cana. Almost 30 years went by with nothing but faith in Mary and Elizabeth. Even then, when Jesus began his public teaching and it was so unusual compared to the expectations of the Jewish Messiah, Jesus' family thought he was "beside himself" crazy.
(1317.2) 119:7.6 Certain wise men of earth knew of Michael’s impending arrival. Through the contacts of one world with another, these wise men of spiritual insight learned of the forthcoming bestowal of Michael on Urantia. And the seraphim did, through the midway creatures, make announcement to a group of Chaldean priests whose leader was Ardnon. These men of God visited the newborn child in the manger. The only supernatural event associated with the birth of Jesus was this announcement to Ardnon and his associates by the seraphim of former attachment to Adam and Eve in the first garden. UB 1955*
"Only with revealed religion did autocratic and intolerant theologic egotism appear."
He is in pain. He has back pain due to the heavy loads. The unconscious mind moves heavy emotional unwanted unwelcomed feelings and parks them in other areas of the body. Over time, later, the back becomes painful. That's why the doctors can't explain fibromyalgia. Pain are caused by emotions rejected from the brian and has nowhere to go but into the back or other areas.
Pain makes him talk the way he does. He is angry at others for unexplained ailments. I just explained it.
He must cultivate the Qi to unblock stangnet areas in the body. He has blockages and can be cured, EASILY .
Zeke
Well-known member
But you're assertion that the Urantia has some authority in the spiritual realm is based on your belief that it has, Many kids see Santa and swear by it because the idea was planted in their minds by their authority figures.
And is no different than the literal assertions made by christians that the Bible is historically viable, so Right or wrong, divider has a point even though his own assertions dance to the same tune of emotional speculation that have no tangible proof, other than being another version of the same motif that plagiarized from the past ones it still points to OZ for the solution when it should point at you being the Jesus that saves you, know one else can do that for you.
That's true Zeke, no different than Christians asserting that the Bible is the authoritative "Word of God" or your assertion that your home made religion is "the truth".
I find the UB to be a better explanation than the current Bible book list. I find it's spiritual truth content to be superb. It's perfectly ok to disagree with me and the UB.
Right Divider
Body part
You seen to assume that the only one that has "done the research" is you.
The writings in MML&J about what Jesus taught were NOT written long after His death and resurrection. This is a bogus claim made by those that try to discredit the Word of God. There were many thousands of people that heard Jesus speak and there is no record any complaints about the authenticity or accuracy of these writings AT THAT TIME. This story of their late dates is just a feeble attempt to twist the facts. This UB was written many, many decades later by who knows who and we're just supposed to believe that it's true?
Since you give no evidence at all for its authenticity, I'll leave it.
Last edited:
Zeke
Well-known member
I see it as the same story line of making one dependent on something outside yourself, giving it authoritative control that belongs to you, If you are actually reaching for a state of freedom the truth is said to provide then one has to be their own master of the house.
- Status