The Late Great Urantia Revelation

[dingodile]

Seems doubtful, or you would have remembered what it actually teaches, have a familiarity with its cosmology, philosophical content, theology, special terms, integrity of principles, values, meanings.

I remember quite a bit: The ascension career, the Isle of Paradise and Havona, the mansion worlds, the morontia soul, finaliters, Caligastia and the Lucifer Rebellion, trinities, triodities, and so on. But if you want to insist that I'm lying, have at it. I don't need to prove myself to you.

I see none. The content speaks for itself.

No, it really doesn't. That's the problem. No matter how much you like the content, and elevate your liking by calling it "reality response", unless you can verify it's claims for yourself (and for a large amount of the content of the Urantia Book, you can't), you must decide whether the authors are in a position to know what they claim to know. And to decide that, you must know something about them.

One thing we know for certain about the authors of the Urantia Book is that they commit plagiarism. The evidence is right there in the pages for all to see. And I will add that they commit gratuitous plagiarism. That is, the concepts expressed using plagiarized sources could just as easily be expressed without plagiarizing. I have asked more than once in this these posts whether anyone can point to any concept in the Urantia Book that couldn't be conveyed without plagiarizing. There has been no answer, and for good reason. There isn't any. Some may choose to ignore this fact; I do not. You may decide that your reality response to the book supersedes this fact; I do not.

 

[dingodile]

That's a cop-out. It's not the source you don't trust, but you own "reality response."

You don't know me; please don't presume to speak for me.

So, what I said is true: you are mindlessly and selfishly fishing for excuses to avoid seriously considering the merit the ideas it presents. If you have really read the book, one would think you would be willing to discuss the ideas with which you disagree instead of avoiding them altogether on the grounds that you "don't trust the source."

By all means add "mindless" to your list of insults, if it gives you a reality response. I think I have ample reason to abstain from further discussion.

 

[Lost Comet]

One thing we know for certain about the authors of the Urantia Book is that they commit plagiarism.

Yeah? So? Care to discuss the teachings anyway, or continue on in proving that my "insults" are statements of facts?

Unless you want to actually discuss something in a meaningful way, my accusing you of "copping-out" stands.

 

[freelight]

I have asked more than once in this these posts whether anyone can point to any concept in the Urantia Book that couldn't be conveyed without plagiarizing. There has been no answer, and for good reason. There isn't any.

Some are listed below. Your claim however that the cosmological, philosophical and religious concepts are all plagiarized is laughable, since the papers are presented as an epochal revelation,... accentuating, adding to and expanding man's knowledge-base. That is what epochal revelations do.

~*~*~

I've shared concepts that are unique to the UB -

Can you share where the revelators "plagiarized" these?

1- The Isle of Paradise being in the very center of the cosmos, the core of all creation, the divine dwelling of the Godhead
2 - the perfection creation of Havona
3- The Thought Adjuster (its unique character and relationship to the evolving soul)
4- 7 Superuniverses and undisclosed realms of outerspace with unlimited potential of endless creation.
5 - The morontial realm of existence
6 - Midwayers
7 - The vast heirarchy of cosmic beings of varying orders and description with unique names and functions; several orders of angels that have their own peculiar ministries and names as well. (these expand way beyond the 9 orders of traditional angelology).
8 - Jesus being one of many thousand Creator-Sons, not being the original Eternal Son within the Trinity, but a son of the Universal Father and Eternal Son ....those divine sons who go forth and create the local universes of space/time. The UB's Christology is different and unique as far as Creator-Sons are concerned.
9 - the unique names of our local universe, 7 sacred-worlds of the Father and various other 'locations' in space. Many or most of these names are revealed only in the UB and nowhere else as far as I know.

Part 4 of the UB also covers perhaps the largest most complete record of Jesus life and teachings.

So here we go -

Unless you can prove these concepts and other UB themes, terms and philosophical insights are all 'plagiarized'...then your above assumption holds no water.


UB Fellowship





pj

 

[freelight]

concepts and principles of value

concepts and principles of value

No, it really doesn't. That's the problem. No matter how much you like the content,

Like any other book of religious or philosophical significance or value,....the content is the vehicle in which principles or ideals are shared. Hence the 'content' counts.

and elevate your liking by calling it "reality response",

'Reality response' was from a quote from the UB posted by Lost Comet to you

unless you can verify it's claims for yourself (and for a large amount of the content of the Urantia Book, you can't),

Spiritual truths, philosophical insights, universal principles, religious precepts hold their own, and are spiritually discerned. You could equally apply your rule of 'verification' to the Bible or any other book of religious philosophy. Can you 'verify' all the claims of the bible or any other book that you believe has value? 'Verification' can be a tricky subject, biased by point of view.

you must decide whether the authors are in a position to know what they claim to know. And to decide that, you must know something about them.

Again you would have to apply that rule to your favorite or preferred religious book or inspired writing, or any book of value. In the UB's case,...all that is revealed is assumed to be real knowledge to the revelators themselves as far as terms and meanings go. The orders of beings are described who dictated the various papers so you would consider their own testimony and the content-value of their commentary. One can accept such or reject it on various grounds or take the content for what its worth.

If you find it valueless, you are free to go elsewhere.



pj

 

[dingodile]

Yeah? So? Care to discuss the teachings anyway, or continue on in proving that my "insults" are statements of facts?

Unless you want to actually discuss something in a meaningful way, my accusing you of "copping-out" stands.

I've already answered your "So?" Insults and accusations are of no interest to me.

 

[dingodile]

Some are listed below.

That's not what I asked.

Your claim however that the cosmological, philosophical and religious concepts are all plagiarized is laughable

I made no such claim.

Unless you can prove these concepts and other UB themes, terms and philosophical insights are all 'plagiarized'...then your above assumption holds no water.

What assumption?

 

[dingodile]

Spiritual truths, philosophical insights, universal principles, religious precepts hold their own, and are spiritually discerned. You could equally apply your rule of 'verification' to the Bible or any other book of religious philosophy. Can you 'verify' all the claims of the bible or any other book that you believe has value? 'Verification' can be a tricky subject, biased by point of view.

What "rule of verification"? You quoted only part of what I said, and in so doing changed the meaning completely.

 

[freelight]

What "rule of verification"? You quoted only part of what I said, and in so doing changed the meaning completely.

Thats part of the challenge of dialogue,....interpretation, context, point of view

I brought up the question as to how something is 'verified', but such would depend on the criteria and terms of what determines any kind of 'verification', however its defined or qualified,....it becomes a 'relative' point.

You said you were leaving....but continue on :think: I've addressed the subjects concerned, we've shared our opinions and what we consider to have meaning and value, from those points of view. Is there anything else you'd like to add, perhaps steering the dialogue in a positive, constructive direction that we have not covered? Or you're welcome to move along.

We've covered many subjects within the UB in this and our other UB thread, if you have an interest in expanding on those, relative to traditional/orthodox Christian theology or the over-all significance of the UB's primary message concerning the soul's eternal progression, we may ensue. Note that the spirtual values and religious principles are what are essential here, no matter what the background or context is in which all this is unfolding.



pj

 

[Lost Comet]

Dingodile is not interested in genuine discourse except, perhaps, to verify my "insults."

 

[freelight]

Dingodile is not interested in genuine discourse except, perhaps, to verify my "insults."

Thats too bad, but his perogative. The UB's content and over-all epochal message is much more transcendent.


pj

 

[freelight]

new directions.....

new directions.....

What "rule of verification"? You quoted only part of what I said, and in so doing changed the meaning completely.

A thought to consider -

(5:5.12) The experience of God-consciousness remains the same from generation to generation, but with each advancing epoch in human knowledge the philosophic concept and the theologic definitions of God must change. God-knowingness, religious consciousness, is a universe reality, but no matter how valid (real) religious experience is, it must be willing to subject itself to intelligent criticism and reasonable philosophic interpretation; it must not seek to be a thing apart in the totality of human experience.

- UB

Also, you list 'Other' as your religious affiliation, is there a current path or religious tradition/philosophy that you are studying or have an affinity with currently?


pj

 

[freelight]

perception and knowledge......

perception and knowledge......

When we filter out all the crap, we are left with just one underlying truth: "God" is the circle of infinity whose center is everywhere and circumference nowhere. Each and every one of us is, is not, and yet is that which is in all things.

Indeed, no matter what system of language-symbols, mythology, or religious concepts we entertain, 'God' remains the central or primal reality behind all that is, since 'God' is the core and final value of all existence, both actual and potential....within space and time, and beyond space and time. All 'else' is the play of consciousness, or maya.


In-joy!


pj

 

[Stuu]

Your approach to reality and analysis of science and "truth" leaves a lot to be desired. You are blinded by your own ignorant hatred for religion. The UB hasn't stolen anything, that’s the self deceiving technique of your dishonest heart which allows you to live with denying truth from any spiritual work. Frankly, much of the source material that Block is finding is from obscure, out of print books, ideas that were, for all intents and purposes, lost to the world except for there selection as part of the Urantia Book and subsequent rediscovery. I’m satisfied that the UB does not claim human source material as its own, however there are a hell of a lot of questions that I would have for the celestials along these lines.

You could stand to learn a lesson from "dingodile" in mature, civil discourse. I'm sorry that you and I cannot get beyond your childish analogies.

There's a lot about you and me in this post, and very little about the problems of theft I have outlined for you.

You can be satisfied with whatever you like. It appears you are satisfied with a very low grade of probity about sources, and satisfied with the abuse of human intellectual human endeavour.

That's a pretty selfish attitude to take towards your own species. But then christianity is characterised by selfish attitudes.

By the way, I don't ever remember quoting Block to you. I've not read his work. Why did you bring him up?

Stuart

 

[Lost Comet]

Thats too bad, but his perogative. The UB's content and over-all epochal message is much more transcendent.


pj

It is his prerogative, but is also my prerogative to call that kind of irrational skepticism "stupid, counterproductive and unbelievably selfish and trivial" even if doing so makes me :kookoo: or :troll:

 

[freelight]

Our unfolding Universe........

Our unfolding Universe........

God, Paradise and the Central Universe

Modern Astronomy and the Urantia Book

A synopsis from The Spiritual Fellowship.

Also see Encylopedia Urantia



pj

 

[dingodile]

I brought up the question as to how something is 'verified', but such would depend on the criteria and terms of what determines any kind of 'verification', however its defined or qualified,....it becomes a 'relative' point.

You said you were leaving....but continue on :think: I've addressed the subjects concerned, we've shared our opinions and what we consider to have meaning and value, from those points of view.

I continued on because you committed the straw man fallacy by criticizing claims that I never made. Maybe I shouldn't have done so.

Also, you list 'Other' as your religious affiliation, is there a current path or religious tradition/philosophy that you are studying or have an affinity with currently?

I've been down a few paths. I studied A Course In Miracles for a year or so; was actively studying the Urantia Book for about three years; practiced Siddha Yoga for a while. I'm not formally connected with anything now, although I attend church with my family. I'm trying to take a fresh look at Christianity lately.

 

[freelight]

I've been down a few paths. I studied A Course In Miracles for a year or so; was actively studying the Urantia Book for about three years; practiced Siddha Yoga for a while. I'm not formally connected with anything now, although I attend church with my family. I'm trying to take a fresh look at Christianity lately.

Awesome

I gather you've seen our ACIM Q & A thread? (I was continuing a chronological commentarial there, but havent taken it back up recently - it usually depends on what directive flow I'm in,.... where Spirit leads).


pj

 

[Lost Comet]

I, for one, am concerned only with spiritual growth.

But if if a biblical-oriented person is going to concern themselves with something as trivial as "plagiarism," they had better learn something about the Bible itself, particularly Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

 

[dingodile]

I, for one, am concerned only with spiritual growth.

I'm interested in truth. It's true that the Urantia Book I'd plagiarized. The question is: What are the implications of that?

But if if a biblical-oriented person is going to concern themselves with something as trivial as "plagiarism," they had better learn something about the Bible itself, particularly Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

I wouldn't describe myself as a biblical-oriented person. I'm unaware that the gospel authors sought copyright protection got their writings. But the authors of the Urantia Book did. So maybe they didn't regard it as trivial. If they did regard it as trivial, why did they want a copyright?