Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
MERRY DMAS

Urantia Book Poll

The UB. Made up, or inspired?   

44 members have voted

  1. 1. Is the Urantia Book fact, or fake?

    • Real channeled knowledge ?
    • Person, or people fakery?


463 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Essan

Oh dear .....

The book says the sun generates energy by combining four hydrogen atoms to form one helium atom, using carbon as a catalyst. This is a mass-to-energy conversion. Science worked out this technology in 1939. This prediction also came true.



Clearly based on the work of Eddington (1920) - we now know it's a bit more complicated than that ;) Not sure where they got the idea carbon is involved from?   Perhaps they thought the sun was made of coal?  :D 

What is clear is that whoever wrote the UB based a lot of it on scientific discoveries and theories from the 1910s and 20s - so may have had access to scientific journals from that period.  

And I love this one:
 

Quote

In the 1930s, one of science's proposed theories was that a massive body came close to the sun and tore out huge amounts of matter which later coalesced to form the planets. This theory is no longer accepted, and the best theory now says that the planets were created by the coalescence of matter adjacent to the sun at the same time the sun coalesced. The book says that the giant Angona Nebula came close to the sun and tore away lots of matter which coalesced to form the planets. This particular theory explains the additional seven-degree tilt of the sun's axis to the plane of the planets. The best science theory, above, does not explain this tilt. In this case, the book and science originally agreed, but science has changed its mind. However, agreement may return in the future. Remember that there are several hundred astronomer/ cosmologists in the world, and they reach a consensus about which theory best fits all the available scientific data; changes in this theory can occur.



Basically they admit that the UB is based on out of date theories that were popular in the 1930s, when it was written, but now wholly discredited (even more so now we know how common solar systems are)

Edited by Essan
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
danydandan
54 minutes ago, eight bits said:

(With thanks to @Habitat for the reply)

Hoaxing is an underappreciated art form. The good hoax has to be plausible enough to draw people in, but not so good that nobody ever appreciates the accomplishment. That may nor may not involve the hoax-meister being personally recognized (there is, as far as I know, no "Hoaxers Hall of Fame"), but the appreciation of artistry is what distiguishes hoax from fraud. The hoaxer wants to be caught, but not immediately.

Recall "Christians against Dinosaurs." They deliberately promoted the dead-mouse-on-the-kitchen-floor proof of their hoaxery: a photoshopped picture of a public demonstration ostensibly denouncing dinosaurs. Apparently, the really hip crowd caught the fake right away, one of the demonstrators' placards had some logo that made some "insider reference" (not being hip myself, I can't say that I ever got the reference, even after it was pointed out to me). More patient debunkers found the original picture (but then for whatever reason decided not to say where they found it - leading to a round of which picture was 'shopped?). Finally, somebody did the long slog and sourced the thing, with supporting documentation that the demonstration in the picture actually happened, with the people in the picture actually onsite.

So why did the hoaxers do that? Except for that one thing (and eventually, long afterwards, a confession from the most public face of the hoax), everything else was circumstantial. "Explanations" were offered when lesser pieces of evidence surfaced (e.g. what else was on the photobucket of another public face of the hoax - dude just didn't understand which of his pix were public; no hacking, just asking for what was in plain sight).

I think the hoaxers wanted to make fools of the believers. If somebody believes a "perfect" hoax, then they're just fraud victims. Nothing funny about that. But if "they should have known," then they're dupes - and that's a riot. Even if the dupes never know your name, you still got your jollies.

Not saying that UB is a hoax, as opposed to a fraud, or an innocently mistaken profession of faith, but you did ask why something odd might matter.

 

I'm not saying that it's a hoax nor that if it is a hoax that it doesn't matter. I was referring to the claims made within the book , stating that the contents are revelation. 

I agree with you in your above comment, however looking at the whole subject of the Urantia Book and Foundation I believe that it was initially designed as a social experiment then, the powers to be noticed the monetary gains possible from such an enterprise and it's now a Religion.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
eight bits
3 hours ago, danydandan said:

I agree with you in your above comment, however looking at the whole subject of the Urantia Book and Foundation I believe that it was initially designed as a social experiment then, the powers to be noticed the monetary gains possible from such an enterprise and it's now a Religion.

Christians against Dinosaurs persisted long enough to start a crowdfunding site. Just sayin'

https://uncertaintist.wordpress.com/2015/03/03/christians-against-dinosaurs-message-to-indiegogo/

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cormac mac airt
5 hours ago, Essan said:

Not that I am aware of.  But there is plenty in the book that has since been shown not to be true,   Almost all of the first section on the history of the world, evolution etc   Some of this was already known to be wrong at the time, but maybe not to the general public .....

Which is why the rest (that cannot be verified) is so suspect.

When someone tells you a story that contains verifiable facts, all of which are shown to be false, why would you believe anything else they say?

Because it sounds cool and makes them feel like they know what they're talking about apparently. :(

cormac

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MERRY DMAS
On 1/21/2019 at 6:26 PM, Jodie.Lynne said:

@MERRY DMAS

what, no torpedoes?

Damn the torpedoes! 

There's no one else to shoot at anyway. It's freaken circa 1500 BCE for crying out loud!

On 1/21/2019 at 9:56 PM, jmccr8 said:

Hi MERYY DMAS

Makes a guy wonder how they propelled and navigated, chanting or crystals?

jmccr8

I don't know. God did supply them with a glowing rock from an active volcano to illuminate the sub's interior.

It's all too fantastic to be false.... Right @Will Due ?????

On 1/22/2019 at 1:31 AM, Will Due said:

 

Yes. I've read somewhere years ago that it was done. With computers I think.

What I remember is that the results indicated that it was highly likely that more than one author was involved. Can't remember how many they came up with though. I think they said three or four.

The book's table of contents lists dozens I believe. I'd have to check to be sure. But there's a certain significance there I think. That dozens appear to a computer to be three or four which implies there's a universality to it. Something universal is involved.

To me that's significant because as I've already stated, groups of people working together to write different parts of a thing that covers as wide a range of topics and as diverse, as complicated (and seamlessly) as the UB does (2097 pages) is highly unlikely in my opinion to occur without some things being contradicted. You don't see this in the Urantia Book. Nowhere does it say something in one place that is contradicted in another. This has been studied and is well documented.

In the UB you have universe cosmology way beyond what has ever been postulated before. Science, philosophy, religion, history, all laid out as a foundation if you will, in preperation for the restatement of the life and teachings of Jesus.

There is an amazing cohesiveness to it all. Vividly presented. From the inception of the universe through the early times of man and Jesus to the current events of the first third of the twentieth century. To me a commitee of human authors could never accomplish this. To write it as if it were fictional. No way. No pun intended but that would be superhuman.

Even if they did, why wouldn't those folks from Chicago claim group authorship of such an unusual accomplishment? Wouldn't at least some of them come forward to do this?

All this is possible by a focus group of varied profession humans especially over a 20 year period. Yet you continue to ignore the false parts, and try to go the "alternate facts" route.

On 1/22/2019 at 1:31 AM, Will Due said:

Again, all that the Urantia Book says is like an announcement. An announcement that all is well. 

It means.....

nm8cat.jpg

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jodie.Lynne
18 minutes ago, MERRY DMAS said:

Damn the torpedoes! 

There's no one else to shoot at anyway. It's freaken circa 1500 BCE for crying out loud!

Oh Yeah? What about those "great fishes" that were wont to swallow people whole? Huh? Huh? what about them?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MERRY DMAS
1 minute ago, Jodie.Lynne said:

Oh Yeah? What about those "great fishes" that were wont to swallow people whole? Huh? Huh? what about them?

Just think "Goofy and Wilbur". Then you can figure out how they acquired food on their year long journey.

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Luis Marco

URANTIA has Never been racist, as this independent author's Report/research showed back in 2011:

Quote

'Eugenics, Race, and The Urantia Book'

http://ubannotated.com/ubthenews/Eugenics_Race_Urantia_Book/

January, 2011...

image.png.f5a3768b4455cd950504a8241c1b0229.png

Edited by Luis Marco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danydandan

Independent??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Luis Marco
2 minutes ago, danydandan said:

Independent??

yes, why, Dany¿.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danydandan
43 minutes ago, Luis Marco said:

yes, why, Dany¿.

Verify it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Luis Marco
1 hour ago, danydandan said:

Verify it!

UBannotated.com

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danydandan
12 minutes ago, Luis Marco said:

So you can't?

Because I know that chap has written about four or five books on UB propaganda. It's not independent, nor is it un-biased.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.