The Late Great Urantia Revelation

[Desert Reign]

I'm surprised that this discussion has gone on now into its 100th page. It doesn't seem to have advanced at all.

I do not believe that the UB was delivered by angels speaking for God or Christ. But can I please ask do you, Caino or Paulie, regardless of what else is in the book, believe that?

If you do believe it, what have you done about it? If you don't believe it then how does the UB hold value for you?

 

[freelight]

investigate for yourself.......

investigate for yourself.......

I'm surprised that this discussion has gone on now into its 100th page. It doesn't seem to have advanced at all.

This and our other UB thread holds, and provides a resource of information and dialogue for those interested in the Urantia Papers, so they can by their own research and investigation discover the value of what is 'revealed' for themselves. - that makes for 'advancement', otherwise those ignorant and presumptuous just continue their 'rejection' of such adding no real dialogue here, as seen by particular posters here. Ignorance has no investment value.

I do not believe that the UB was delivered by angels speaking for God or Christ. But can I please ask do you, Caino or Paulie, regardless of what else is in the book, believe that?

For those not knowing, 'Paulie' is one of my nicknames ...as my first name is Paul.

I let the UB speak for itself and let readers decide for themselves if such information was given by various orders of celestials, for the material is comprehensive and substantial enough to support such claims at least to those who see the value and meaning in the entire message of the Fifth Epochal Revelation to this planet.

If you do believe it, what have you done about it? If you don't believe it then how does the UB hold value for you?

Again, It speaks for itself - its cosmology, philosophy, science, metaphysics is consistent and comprehensive as a whole, as what was given in the first half of the 20th century, using man's culminative knowledge up to those times, enhanced and added upon only where necessary or appropriate by the celestials.

The value for me is in its amazing insight in cosmology, universal order, angelic heirarchies, religious philosophy, conceptual themes regarding the divine nature and structure of the cosmos, etc. - there is something always wonderful and illuminating upon each reading which expands one's awareness of the grand universe and divine purpose of life in eternal progression.

Those who know of my liberal eclectic approach to theology recognize that I draw from many sources and schools of knowledge, art, science and philosophy, one of progressive knowledge and revelation. Truth is not static, but a living dynamic, unfolding and adapting within the forms it presents itself thru, but never subject to the forms themselves, being the essence behind such.

Essential Resources:

UB Fellowship

Introductory Articles

Christianity and the Urantia Book - The Meredith J Sprunger Essays


pj

 

[Lost Comet]

I'm surprised that this discussion has gone on now into its 100th page. It doesn't seem to have advanced at all.

I do not believe that the UB was delivered by angels speaking for God or Christ. But can I please ask do you, Caino or Paulie, regardless of what else is in the book, believe that?

If you do believe it, what have you done about it? If you don't believe it then how does the UB hold value for you?

How the message is delivered is, as far as I'm concerned, irrelevant. The UB stands or falls on its own merit.

I am of the opinion that educated men and women should mature enough to weigh the teachings in their own minds and recognize that God gives them the right, nay, the responsibility, to live and think freely according their own highest light.

 

[bucksplasher]

The UB does not specifically discus the issue of abortion any more then the Bible. The Dalamatia code of 500,000 years ago contains the following:

(751.4) 66:7.9 1. You shall not fear nor serve any God but the Father of all.

(751.5) 66:7.10 2. You shall not disobey the Father’s Son, the world’s ruler, nor show disrespect to his superhuman associates.

(751.6) 66:7.11 3. You shall not speak a lie when called before the judges of the people.

(751.7) 66:7.12 4. You shall not kill men, women, or children.

(751.8) 66:7.13 5. You shall not steal your neighbor’s goods or cattle.

(751.9) 66:7.14 6. You shall not touch your friend’s wife.

(751.10) 66:7.15 7. You shall not show disrespect to your parents or to the elders of the tribe.



Caino

But your "better" and "more enlightened" teachings must have something to say on the matter. How can you let the tradition bound inflexible Church have a more truthful teaching than UB?

I take it your "Dalamatia Code" hasn't been upgraded like the 10 commandments.

If you are using a 500,000 year-old code than it would appear the commandments are more modern. Christ's call to love is even more recent.

I think I've made my point. UB is another splinter off the Church which attempts to placate those who want to separate for better reasons than the old line Protestants.

Christ of the UB does seem to be a Protestant I'll give you that. tWINs

 

[Caino]

I'm surprised that this discussion has gone on now into its 100th page. It doesn't seem to have advanced at all.

I do not believe that the UB was delivered by angels speaking for God or Christ. But can I please ask do you, Caino or Paulie, regardless of what else is in the book, believe that?

If you do believe it, what have you done about it? If you don't believe it then how does the UB hold value for you?

Yes, I believe the Urantia Revelation like I believe in Christ.

To date, The Urantia Book is the story of everything; it enlarges reality for me.


Caino

 

[bucksplasher]

I dont see how respecting a volume of teachings that stand for the highest and best ideals of religious philosophy, morality, ethics and social progress is delusional. If thats the case, you could equally reject these same universal values and morals taught in the structure of your own tradition. You make the mistake of rejecting the form or format that truths come thru...while not respecting the ideals and principles themselves, which are the enduring value of goodness, truth and beauty. Why reject another 'form' or 'venue' which truth is shared, and enjoin it as the collective of God's revelation to man, while assuming that your own cult is the only way to God? Many might find that gesture as 'delusional'.

'God' is not limited to or wholly contained to the RCC or any human organization or denomination....but is original to all, includes all, and transcends all.


pj

Hi Freelight,

In all your synthesizing have you come to a conclusion on the act of abortion?

Has "respecting a volume of teachings that stand for the highest and best ideals of religious philosophy, morality, ethics and social progress" come to a conclusion on whether killing an innocent child is right?

tWINs

 

[Caino]

But your "better" and "more enlightened" teachings must have something to say on the matter. How can you let the tradition bound inflexible Church have a more truthful teaching than UB?

I take it your "Dalamatia Code" hasn't been upgraded like the 10 commandments.

If you are using a 500,000 year-old code than it would appear the commandments are more modern. Christ's call to love is even more recent.

I think I've made my point. UB is another splinter off the Church which attempts to placate those who want to separate for better reasons than the old line Protestants.

Christ of the UB does seem to be a Protestant I'll give you that. tWINs

You asked a question, I was aware it was a digression, a straw man, an attempt to indict the UB based on the churches "splinter" political dabbling wherein it has added to the Bible an issue that the Bible doesn’t specifically discuss outside of the injunction "thou shall not kill"

You, Bucksplasher, are no different then the legalistic, quibbling spies of the Sanhedrin who went out and engaged Jesus with issues of politics and procedure in hopes of "entrapping" him, hence aliening himself against the extra-scriptural laws of the elders.

*The 500,000 BC code of Dalimatia did evolve.

*In 39,000 BC, when Adam and Eve incarnated on the earth they enhanced the code:

​

The laws of the Garden were based on the older codes of Dalamatia and were promulgated under seven heads:

1. The laws of health and sanitation.
2. The social regulations of the Garden.
3. The code of trade and commerce.
4. The laws of fair play and competition.
5. The laws of home life.
6. The civil codes of the golden rule.
7. The seven commands of supreme moral rule.

74:7.20 The moral law of Eden was little different from the seven commandments of Dalamatia. But the Adamites taught many additional reasons for these commands; for instance, regarding the injunction against murder, the indwelling of the Thought Adjuster was presented as an additional reason for not destroying human life. They taught that “whoso sheds man’s blood by man shall his blood be shed, for in the image of God made he man.”​

* When Melchizedek arrived in 1,973 BC (to a world that was once again backsliding, a world that had long since forgotten the code of the garden and Dalimatia) he reinstituted 7 commands:

The ceremonies of the Salem worship were very simple. Every person who signed or marked the clay-tablet rolls of the Melchizedek church committed to memory, and subscribed to, the following belief:

1. I believe in El Elyon, the Most High God, the only Universal Father and Creator of all things.
2. I accept the Melchizedek covenant with the Most High, which bestows the favor of God on my faith, not on sacrifices and burnt offerings.
3. I promise to obey the seven commandments of Melchizedek and to tell the good news of this covenant with the Most High to all men.

93:4.5 And that was the whole of the creed of the Salem colony. But even such a short and simple declaration of faith was altogether too much and too advanced for the men of those days. They simply could not grasp the idea of getting divine favor for nothing—by faith. They were too deeply confirmed in the belief that man was born under forfeit to the gods. Too long and too earnestly had they sacrificed and made gifts to the priests to be able to comprehend the good news that salvation, divine favor, was a free gift to all who would believe in the Melchizedek covenant. But Abraham did believe halfheartedly, and even that was “counted for righteousness.”

93:4.6 The seven commandments promulgated by Melchizedek were patterned along the lines of the ancient Dalamatian supreme law and very much resembled the seven commands taught in the first and second Edens. These commands of the Salem religion were:

1. You shall not serve any God but the Most High Creator of heaven and earth.
2. You shall not doubt that faith is the only requirement for eternal salvation.
3. You shall not bear false witness.
4. You shall not kill.
5. You shall not steal.
6. You shall not commit adultery.
7. You shall not show disrespect for your parents and elders.

93:4.14 While no sacrifices were permitted within the colony, Melchizedek well knew how difficult it is to suddenly uproot long-established customs and accordingly had wisely offered these people the substitute of a sacrament of bread and wine for the older sacrifice of flesh and blood. It is of record, “Melchizedek, king of Salem, brought forth bread and wine.” But even this cautious innovation was not altogether successful; the various tribes all maintained auxiliary centers on the outskirts of Salem where they offered sacrifices and burnt offerings. Even Abraham resorted to this barbarous practice after his victory over Chedorlaomer; he simply did not feel quite at ease until he had offered a conventional sacrifice. And Melchizedek never did succeed in fully eradicating this proclivity to sacrifice from the religious practices of his followers, even of Abraham.​

* Moses, the reformer, enhanced the code to the 10 commandments and instituted new laws.

* Jesus rescued man from the yoke of institutional religion and set him free to have a personal relationship with the living God wherein God writes his laws on our hearts as we dedicate our lives to doing the will of God.

* The Roman Catholic Church is a "splinter" away from the religion of Jesus.



Caino

 

[Aimiel]

Those who know of my liberal eclectic approach to theology recognize that I draw from many sources and schools of knowledge, art, science and philosophy, one of progressive knowledge and revelation.

Proverbs 14:12

There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.

We aren't wise enough to outsmart an enemy who's been deceiving since he fell out of Heaven. He was able to deceive a large part of the angelic host... but you think he isn't clever enough to deceive you? You need to re-think. He's very clever and subtle. The only way to life is to trust in The One Who had His Word written down thousands of years ago and ratified it in His Own Blood. The ONLY entrance into Heaven is through Christ. The ONLY Truth about God is Christ. The ONLY eternal life is in Christ. His Blood ALONE can cleanse away sin. Without Him, there is no hope. Death and judgment are sure. So is The Blood of The Lamb. :thumb:

 

[bucksplasher]

1. You shall not serve any God but the Most High Creator of heaven and earth.
2. You shall not doubt that faith is the only requirement for eternal salvation.
3. You shall not bear false witness.
4. You shall not kill.
5. You shall not steal.
6. You shall not commit adultery.
7. You shall not show disrespect for your parents and elders.

I'll pick number 4 and figure that this would cover abortion. Would I be wrong?

I also see where in the "Old Testament" the only law of the Garden was not to eat of the "tree of knowledge pf good and evil". Do we have any idea why extra laws were added by UB?

"Jesus rescued man from the yoke of institutional religion and set him free to have a personal relationship with the living God wherein God writes his laws on our hearts as we dedicate our lives to doing the will of God".

Is it ever the "Will of God" to abort a baby?


tWINs

PS I seem to be having a difficult time getting an answer to a simple yes no question. Seems like UB is like many Protestant churches in existence today.

 

[Caino]

Heaven and Hell

Heaven and Hell

THE DEATH-SURVIVAL CONCEPT​

86:4.1 The concept of a supermaterial phase of mortal personality was born of the unconscious and purely accidental association of the occurrences of everyday life plus the ghost dream. The simultaneous dreaming about a departed chief by several members of his tribe seemed to constitute convincing evidence that the old chief had really returned in some form. It was all very real to the savage who would awaken from such dreams reeking with sweat, trembling, and screaming.

86:4.2 The dream origin of the belief in a future existence explains the tendency always to imagine unseen things in the terms of things seen. And presently this new dream-ghost-future-life concept began effectively to antidote the death fear associated with the biologic instinct of self-preservation.

86:4.3 Early man was also much concerned about his breath, especially in cold climates, where it appeared as a cloud when exhaled. The breath of life was regarded as the one phenomenon which differentiated the living and the dead. He knew the breath could leave the body, and his dreams of doing all sorts of queer things while asleep convinced him that there was something immaterial about a human being. The most primitive idea of the human soul, the ghost, was derived from the breath-dream idea-system.

86:4.4 Eventually the savage conceived of himself as a double—body and breath. The breath minus the body equaled a spirit, a ghost. While having a very definite human origin, ghosts, or spirits, were regarded as superhuman. And this belief in the existence of disembodied spirits seemed to explain the occurrence of the unusual, the extraordinary, the infrequent, and the inexplicable.

86:4.5 The primitive doctrine of survival after death was not necessarily a belief in immortality. Beings who could not count over twenty could hardly conceive of infinity and eternity; they rather thought of recurring incarnations.

86:4.6 The orange race was especially given to belief in transmigration and reincarnation. This idea of reincarnation originated in the observance of hereditary and trait resemblance of offspring to ancestors. The custom of naming children after grandparents and other ancestors was due to belief in reincarnation. Some later-day races believed that man died from three to seven times. This belief (residual from the teachings of Adam about the mansion worlds), and many other remnants of revealed religion, can be found among the otherwise absurd doctrines of twentieth-century barbarians.

86:4.7 Early man entertained no ideas of hell or future punishment. The savage looked upon the future life as just like this one, minus all ill luck. Later on, a separate destiny for good ghosts and bad ghosts—heaven and hell—was conceived. But since many primitive races believed that man entered the next life just as he left this one, they did not relish the idea of becoming old and decrepit. The aged much preferred to be killed before becoming too infirm.

86:4.8 Almost every group had a different idea regarding the destiny of the ghost soul. The Greeks believed that weak men must have weak souls; so they invented Hades as a fit place for the reception of such anemic souls; these unrobust specimens were also supposed to have shorter shadows. The early Andites thought their ghosts returned to the ancestral homelands. The Chinese and Egyptians once believed that soul and body remained together. Among the Egyptians this led to careful tomb construction and efforts at body preservation. Even modern peoples seek to arrest the decay of the dead. The Hebrews conceived that a phantom replica of the individual went down to Sheol; it could not return to the land of the living. They did make that important advance in the doctrine of the evolution of the soul.​

Caino

 

[Caino]

1. You shall not serve any God but the Most High Creator of heaven and earth.
2. You shall not doubt that faith is the only requirement for eternal salvation.
3. You shall not bear false witness.
4. You shall not kill.
5. You shall not steal.
6. You shall not commit adultery.
7. You shall not show disrespect for your parents and elders.

I'll pick number 4 and figure that this would cover abortion. Would I be wrong?

I also see where in the "Old Testament" the only law of the Garden was not to eat of the "tree of knowledge pf good and evil". Do we have any idea why extra laws were added by UB?

"Jesus rescued man from the yoke of institutional religion and set him free to have a personal relationship with the living God wherein God writes his laws on our hearts as we dedicate our lives to doing the will of God".

Is it ever the "Will of God" to abort a baby?


tWINs

PS I seem to be having a difficult time getting an answer to a simple yes no question. Seems like UB is like many Protestant churches in existence today.

Bucksplasher, you’re suffering from a deliberate resistance to the answers provided, your just being cranky and argumentative.

* The answer is that the UB simply does not address the modern day issue of abortion...............neither does the Bible!!!!!!

* Weather or not it's the will of God to abort a baby is between the mother and God, not you.

* The bible is a limited history; Genesis is only a convoluted fragment of what really happened. Your own church no longer supports the young earth creation taught by Genesis, although in the past other popes did and murdered anyone who dared to challenge their presumed authority.



Caino

 

[Aimiel]

* Weather or not it's the will of God to abort a baby is between the mother and God, not you.

I do believe that is the single most blasphemous statement I've ever read on TOL... perhaps anywhere.

 

[bucksplasher]

I do believe that is the single most blasphemous statement I've ever read on TOL... perhaps anywhere.

I guess the "new enlightenment" seems to have reverted to tribal times and probably has nothing to say about infanticide either. tWINs

 

[Caino]

I guess the "new enlightenment" seems to have reverted to tribal times and probably has nothing to say about infanticide either. tWINs

Bible:

Then God said, "Take your son, your only son, Isaac, whom you love, and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains I will tell you about." ​

God did all sorts of killing in the OT, he also directed men to do the same....supposedly? The OT God is not a very good example of how to behave. The OT God killed, men, women, children and fetuses in the most sadistic of ways. So spare me the side show by comparison. The UB reveals that the so called OT scripture is a work of man, mostly exaggerated nonsense.

Caino

 

[bucksplasher]

Bible:

Then God said, "Take your son, your only son, Isaac, whom you love, and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains I will tell you about." ​

God did all sorts of killing in the OT, he also directed men to do the same....supposedly? The OT God is not a very good example of how to behave. The OT God killed, men, women, children and fetuses in the most sadistic of ways. So spare me the side show by comparison. The UB reveals that the so called OT scripture is a work of man, mostly exaggerated nonsense.

Caino

I'm sorry the question before the house was "what does it teach...now?" A mental religion that "opens" the mind and allows better communication with God but "allows" or "encourages" people to just do what they "hear" god or gods tell them to do, to my mind has problems.

Abraham followed my God Who of course stopped him from killing his own son. I'm sure in other cases He had good reason for wiping "sin" from the earth. I'm sure He's cooking up some "just" retribution for those "killing babies."

I could be wrong.

tWINs

 

[freelight]

The UB on abortion

The UB on abortion

Hi Freelight,

In all your synthesizing have you come to a conclusion on the act of abortion?

Has "respecting a volume of teachings that stand for the highest and best ideals of religious philosophy, morality, ethics and social progress" come to a conclusion on whether killing an innocent child is right?

tWINs

Hi bucks,

I dont see how this particular issue has anything to do specifically to the contribution of the Papers to the advancing knowledge of mankind, except that it appears to be of importance to you, and your church's general 'position' on the subject. I personally favor the sanctity and preservation of life whereve possible, and that would include in general a position against 'abortion', although there might be some rare exceptions to this rule. This isnt the thread to discuss the highly controversial subject of 'abortion'. Imposing such as you have, does not in the least take away from the value of the UB at all, since abortion is not specifically addressed, neither is it in the Bible (although I recall an apocryphal passage mentions it) , - in any case, 'murder' is wrong, but again that can be an argument of 'meanings' and 'ethics'.

Imposing the subject of 'abortion' is a tactic unncecessary in our discussion of the papers here, as its already been addressed. There is only one place 'abortion' is mentioned specifically in the papers -

68:6.8 The early races often resorted to practices designed to restrict population; all primitive tribes killed deformed and sickly children. Girl babies were frequently killed before the times of wife purchase. Children were sometimes strangled at birth, but the favorite method was exposure. The father of twins usually insisted that one be killed since multiple births were believed to be caused either by magic or by infidelity. As a rule, however, twins of the same sex were spared. While these taboos on twins were once well-nigh universal, they were never a part of the Andonite mores; these peoples always regarded twins as omens of good luck.

68:6.9 Many races learned the technique of abortion, and this practice became very common after the establishment of the taboo on childbirth among the unmarried. It was long the custom for a maiden to kill her offspring, but among more civilized groups these illegitimate children became the wards of the girl's mother. Many primitive clans were virtually exterminated by the practice of both abortion and infanticide. But regardless of the dictates of the mores, very few children were ever destroyed after having once been suckled—maternal affection is too strong.

-UB Paper 68

pj

 

[Ktoyou]

I think I got that, well I think?

 

[freelight]

caricatures of 'god'......

caricatures of 'god'......

Abraham followed my God Who of course stopped him from killing his own son. I'm sure in other cases He had good reason for wiping "sin" from the earth. I'm sure He's cooking up some "just" retribution for those "killing babies."

I could be wrong.

tWINs

Depends on how much mythology or traditional assumptions you're willing to accept or incorporate into your world view or theology as far as an 'image' or 'character' of 'God' is concerned.

Each will reckon with his own thoughts, words, and actions...since such is the law of karma. The universal 'law of compensation' is built into the very fabric of this conditional existence, as long as there exists anything that can be conditioned by actions which naturally incur consequences. Every soul must deal with its own karmic accounts and resolve those on their own, with God's help of course,...since Love redeems, restores and empowers one to live in harmony with the laws that sustain life and peace.

No harm can be done by one who loves and lives in harmony with divine law.


pj

 

[Caino]

.

"Religious living is devoted living, and devoted living is creative living, original and spontaneous. New religious insights arise out of conflicts which initiate the choosing of new and better reaction habits in the place of older and inferior reaction patterns. New meanings only emerge amid conflict; and conflict persists only in the face of refusal to espouse the higher values connoted in superior meanings.

Religious perplexities are inevitable; there can be no growth without psychic conflict and spiritual agitation. The organization of a philosophic standard of living entails considerable commotion in the philosophic realms of the mind. Loyalties are not exercised in behalf of the great, the good, the true, and the noble without a struggle. Effort is attendant upon clarification of spiritual vision and enhancement of cosmic insight. And the human intellect protests against being weaned from subsisting upon the nonspiritual energies of temporal existence. The slothful animal mind rebels at the effort required to wrestle with cosmic problem solving."​

http://www.truthbook.com/index.cfm?linkID=1351#U100_4_1​

Caino

 

[Aimiel]

* The answer is that the UB simply does not address the modern day issue of abortion... neither does the Bible!

The Bible seems pretty clear to me:

Exodus 20:13
You shall not murder.