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 -

'What do you know about 'The Urantia Papers'?'


c.s.lewis

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Walker

I didn't ask him or you to discuss the video I just didn't watch it because there was no intro as to what it is about. I have asked questions earlier in this thread that were not addressed because I have read through parts of the UB. You say you have read it through a couple of times and you have avoided those questions as well is there a reason for that?

This sentence leads the reader to assume that you have watched the video.

Will knows that I have read portions of the UB and have asked questions that he has not addressed so to me it is a good idea for others to keep this in mind when critiquing responses. You have an alien and I have asked you in past if your alien knows of Will's aliens that have populated over 300 planets so would think that they may have interacted or have some knowledge of each other and you avoided that like many of the other questions regarding your alien and it's specific knowledge about anything

I am not condemning you but really if you can't share your input to a direct question don't make a fuss about me asking questions about whether a video will have any direct information with regards to those questions, my time has a value too.

It's not like this is the first time Will and I have had discussions about the UB so it is already understood what his opinion or bias is and not likely to affect mine in watching a video if it has anything to do with the questions I asked. You have commented about the video even if you did not watch it by taking people to task for asking about it, why didn't you watch it earbuds won't distract your wife?

Okay you have read it so why not try to answer my questions about it if you feel that confident, if you don't feel that confident about you knowledge base on the UB then don't complain about me asking. 

The video is a specific topic. i didn't watch it and i haven't commented on it, only on others' responses to it 

As to the UB, I would disagree.

Ive gone into a lot of detail about my years of connection to the cosmic consciousness and my physical experiences with its avatars.

  Ive writen about what i see  as similar in the UB  to my experiences and what i differ with.

I've had some discussions with you on this, some with Will and some with other posters 

Ive outlined my abilty to accept the idea that certain humans had a direct connection to a source which told them these things (because I  have a similar connection)  But  I retain  an open mind on the truth of that 

You would have read enough of my own postings to know what I think I know about the galaxy, it's inhabitants and  its governance 

Aar buds wont fit my computer but i could use headphones if I had any.

If I was really interested i could watch it on my tablet However I am NOT interested in UB cosmology   or biblical science 

I said earlier that, for me, faith and belief    is not dependent on knowledge. It doesn't matter if the bible gets science wrong or if the UB does.

  One either accepts it on faith or one does not. The y are NOT books of science or history,  but of belief and faith  (and some sociology and philosophy) 

I'll go back and see what questions you are referring to me, but if you would like to repeat specific questions in a simple form it would help 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Will Due said:

 

I forgot to mention that in connection with 'Atlantis' this same information in the papers also explains what the following from the Bible is all about:

 "The Nephilim were on earth in those days, and when these sons of the gods went in to the daughters of men and they bore to them, their children were the 'mighty men of old,' the 'men of renown.

 

 

I think onlooker brings in a good point without any evidence of any kind to collaborate any of these so called civilizations it is reasonable to dismiss at this point.

Atlantis claims are found in books that one finds in metaphysical bookstores, such as, The Psychic Eye, or the Bodhi Tree. 
 

I assume you are taking the UB on faith?

 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Pettytalk said:

I'm afraid I was not understood properly, and that's the risk one runs with brevity. I assumed you could also mind travel, recalling a certain challenge put to you a while back. Apparently you are not able to travel so far. So far as not having read my mind in your travels.

I recall, from my work experience, that when explosives ammunition is being manufactured, the packing of the explosive substance is conducted with the greatest care, and in an isolated bunker with as few workers as is strictly necessary, just in case something unexpected occurs. The unexpected would be an accidental source of ignition, a spark, even one caused by the discharge of any static electricity, which may have been generated and stored on the body, and then discharged, acting as the primer, and causing an unwanted explosion. To prevent the excessive generation of static electricity, appropriate safety clothing is worn which greatly reduces the generation. However, to assure further safety, only grounding shoes are worn, and other grounding apparatus are utilized when working in an area where there will be handling of the explosives, to strike a balance, one of the same potentiality, where equality prevents the flow of power, static electricity, thereby preventing any accidental bang, big or small.

If you have followed me so far, I am trying to lead you where nothing is said exist, except for an infinitesimal-sized particle of potentiality. Because there has to be a cause for an explosion to occur, even an accidental one. As they say in safety classes and seminars, or in seminaries: "accidents just don't happen by themselves, they are caused by an external source.  And why have I led you so far? What am I driving at? If you are still with me, consciously, it's as far as you can go. Unless you are able to tell where your imagination was parked, and your high flying imagination was grounded, since there was no physical universe for you to fly around in?

By any chance, were you the accidental ignition source responsible for creating the space you were wanting to explore in your future travels?

Can you believe a big time tripping hippie like Ted Nugent is now an ardent supporter of the opposite state of mind, a public musical champion endorsing the NRA, and Trumpism?   The world must be coming to an end, musically speaking.

Oh dear I have got into so much trouble for mind reading and observing other peoples activities while projecting my consciousness  that i try hard to avoid it ;) 

Hopefully i answered your question.

I have been able to project my consciousness from  earliest   memory and my mother had a similar skill 

first memories are of flying around the ceiling of my house with my parents trying to catch me.  About the age of 4 il learned to fly and over the next few years scouted out our house and the neighbourhood We had a 50 foot tv tower put up in about 1959 when i was 8 and i would sit up on the aluminium aerial in my copiousness and observe the surrounding yards  Sometime in tha t period i also learned to project through  solid objects 

I won't repat details  I've mentioned before but by the time I was a teen, i was exploring the world, then the solar system  , then using advanced technology  traveling the galaxy 

However it has qualifications and limitations  and my control is not what it was as a child and teenager 

 

BUT my consciousness is an evolved property of my brain and body.

It did not exist before i was conceived 

However, while it is slef aware it connects to a nexus known as the cosmic consciousness, which contains all the thoughts of consciousness's from  the past and across the galaxy  The yare stored like a  virtual reality library 

Second,  connection to it in the present time allows one to travel to the centre of the galaxy and to  explore and observe many words and species through the minds of other consciousness' or the comic consciousness itself. This ability will end when i die or lose my mind  but i will probably be stored and accessible in this virtual reality and contactable by future beings 

I appreciate your analogy but it doesn't apply to my experiences perhaps because I learned t while learning to walk and talk   There is no silver thread, no connection No vibrating  no effort involved. I simplygo form conscious waking state to conscious sleeping state and then project outwards.

It took some  skill and training  especially navigating a t night, but grounding doesn't relly come into it.

 I know my body is safe a t home in bed and that my consciousness faces no danger.

  It does require mental effort and discipline, and it took me a year of training before i could sustain it long enough to travel across the globe I wouldn't have been able to explore the galaxy if there was not a portal engineered just outside our galaxy for this purpose as par tof the web of minds which forms a part of the cosmic consciousness  .  

ps the world/galaxy is real and physical.

Your mind is real and physical.

However, most people only learn a limited way to connect their mind to the universe.   You can live like that, but its not a lot of fun, and most people compensate by seeking material pleasures  :) 

ps perhaps there does not have to be cause and effect.

  That may simply be an illusion of our mind caused by being trapped within a linear life  Or perhaps "nothingness" is inherently unstable and cannot sustain itself 

Edited by Mr Walker
  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Mr Walker said:

Oh dear I have got into so much trouble for mind reading and observing other peoples activities while projecting my consciousness  that i try hard to avoid it ;) 

Hopefully i answered your question.

I have been able to project my consciousness from  earliest   memory and my mother had a similar skill 

first memories are of flying around the ceiling of my house with my parents trying to catch me.  About the age of 4 il learned to fly and over the next few years scouted out our house and the neighbourhood We had a 50 foot tv tower put up in about 1959 when i was 8 and i would sit up on the aluminium aerial in my copiousness and observe the surrounding yards  Sometime in tha t period i also learned to project through  solid objects 

I won't repat details  I've mentioned before but by the time I was a teen, i was exploring the world, then the solar system  , then using advanced technology  traveling the galaxy 

However it has qualifications and limitations  and my control is not what it was as a child and teenager 

 

BUT my consciousness is an evolved property of my brain and body.

It did not exist before i was conceived 

However, while it is slef aware it connects to a nexus known as the cosmic consciousness, which contains all the thoughts of consciousness's from  the past and across the galaxy  The yare stored like a  virtual reality library 

Second,  connection to it in the present time allows one to travel to the centre of the galaxy and to  explore and observe many words and species through the minds of other consciousness' or the comic consciousness itself. This ability will end when i die or lose my mind  but i will probably be stored and accessible in this virtual reality and contactable by future beings 

I appreciate your analogy but it doesn't apply to my experiences perhaps because I learned t while learning to walk and talk   There is no silver thread, no connection No vibrating  no effort involved. I simplygo form conscious waking state to conscious sleeping state and then project outwards.

It took some  skill and training  especially navigating a t night, but grounding doesn't relly come into it.

 I know my body is safe a t home in bed and that my consciousness faces no danger.

  It does require mental effort and discipline, and it took me a year of training before i could sustain it long enough to travel across the globe I wouldn't have been able to explore the galaxy if there was not a portal engineered just outside our galaxy for this purpose as par tof the web of minds which forms a part of the cosmic consciousness  .  

ps the world/galaxy is real and physical.

Your mind is real and physical.

However, most people only learn a limited way to connect their mind to the universe.   You can live like that, but its not a lot of fun, and most people compensate by seeking material pleasures  :) 

Your imaginary mental life has nothing to do with the UB. Please respect the request of Rashore to stay on topic. 
 

You can always start your own thread. 
 

I am sure Jay can help you come up with a thread.:P
 

 

Edited by Sherapy
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 4
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, psyche101 said:

Yes, but all the stuff you said that is being verified by science or had been, isn't as I pointed out earlier.

If you're unwilling to recognise those, then you're just making stuff up out of made up stuff aren't you? 

It's quite a situation you have there. You claim to be all about truth, yet reject it when it's offered. I'm not sure how you see that as viable, let alone attempt to convince other it is.

Well said. I have no issue with Will’s choice to have faith in and follow the UB, but I had the impression he came upon some facts to support the cosmological claims he is advancing for the UB. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

Your imagination has nothing to do with the UB. Please respect the request of Rashore to stay on topic. 
 

Geez.

  Only got to rashore's post after that response.

i always work down from  the   last post i have read  responding to each in turn 

Nonetheless it was a response to a post   in the thread 

Second you don't believe it which warps your judgement You think it has to be imagination.

  My perspective ( based on my own experiences outlined in the last post )  is that t such contact is real and verifiable . It thus  goes directly and quire consciously to how i perceive the urantia papers. It is quite possible given my own experiences that these were written by a person with a similar connection to the cosmic or universal consciousness Of course icant know this tobe so. The y could be fakes     Interestingly when I began mine i was an atheist  and I've never seen this as a religious experience it is simply an expansion of human senses and abilities We often make gods of things we do not  understand  but as  far as  i know it, there are no (magical)  gods in the universe just ancient,  powerful, wise and caring, entities. 

I appreciate  that you NEVER want to hear stories of experiences like mine and that is in part why you dismiss things like the urantia papers 

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mr Walker said:

  Only got to rashore's post after that response.

i always work down from  the   last post i have read  responding to each in turn 

Nonetheless it was a response to a post   in the thread 

Second you don't believe it which warps your judgement You think it has to be imagination.

  My perspective ( based on my own experiences outlined in the last post )  is that t such contact is real and verifiable . It thus  goes directly and quire consciously to how i perceive the urantia papers. It is quite possible given my own experiences that these were written by a person with a similar connection to the cosmic or universal consciousness Of course icant know this tobe so. The y could be fakes     Interestingly when I began mine i was an atheist  and I've never seen this as a religious experience it is simply an expansion of human senses and abilities We often make gods of things we do not  understand  but as  far as  i know it, there are no (magical)  gods in the universe just ancient,  powerful, wise and caring, entities. 

I appreciate  that you NEVER want to hear stories of experiences like mine and that is in part why you dismiss things like the urantia papers 

Nobody cares about your fantasies. Keep to the thread topic or else it’ll get closed down like they always do. 

  • Thanks 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

Well said. I have no issue with Will’s choice to have faith in and follow the UB, but I had the impression he came upon some facts to support the cosmological claims he is advancing for the UB. 

He said those areas were backed by science, but they aren't. And nothing is heading in the proposed directions. 

If the start is faulty, it can't get better from there. I can see Will is going to continue to ignore the facts and believe what he wants to about science as well as the UB.

Not the best way to support a claim though. 

  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Nuclear Wessel said:

Nobody cares about your fantasies. Keep to the thread topic or else it’ll get closed down like they always do. 

dont blame me 

I was responding to a question and it IS on topic.

You see the urantia papers as fantasy because you don't believe such stuff is possible. I know it is possible and relatively common among human beings, thus i have a different  perspective on the papers  I suspect you and sherapy would like to shut down that perspective, because it is, a t the least challenging, and a t the worst, threatening, your comfort zone 

The video question was a subset of the topic which was, "What do you know about the urantia papers?"  My own experiences over my life lead me to know tha t some of them resemble what i have seen and experienced across our galaxy, and in my contact with the cosmic consciousness as a guide, protector and companion.

  I dont see it with a religious perspective, but  as a natural normal, extension of my everyday existence. Thus i dont go along with some of the religious aspects of the UB.

I suspect  they came from the perspective of the human who was the conduit.   

  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr Walker said:

  Only got to rashore's post after that response.

i always work down from  the   last post i have read  responding to each in turn 

Nonetheless it was a response to a post   in the thread 

Second you don't believe it which warps your judgement You think it has to be imagination.

  My perspective ( based on my own experiences outlined in the last post )  is that t such contact is real and verifiable . It thus  goes directly and quire consciously to how i perceive the urantia papers. It is quite possible given my own experiences that these were written by a person with a similar connection to the cosmic or universal consciousness Of course icant know this tobe so. The y could be fakes     Interestingly when I began mine i was an atheist  and I've never seen this as a religious experience it is simply an expansion of human senses and abilities We often make gods of things we do not  understand  but as  far as  i know it, there are no (magical)  gods in the universe just ancient,  powerful, wise and caring, entities. 

I appreciate  that you NEVER want to hear stories of experiences like mine and that is in part why you dismiss things like the urantia papers 

At this point, the best way  to handle this (for me) is by  reporting lit, which I have done. I will let the mods take it from here or not.
 

 

 

Moving on.

Edited by Sherapy
  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

The video is a specific topic. i didn't watch it and i haven't commented on it, only on others' responses to it 

Hi Walker

You commented none the less about why others should watch a video that you had no interest in, a comment is a comment period.

2 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

As to the UB, I would disagree.

Huh, never mind.

2 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

Ive gone into a lot of detail about my years of connection to the cosmic consciousness and my physical experiences with its avatars.

  Ive writen about what i see  as similar in the UB  to my experiences and what i differ with.

I've had some discussions with you on this, some with Will and some with other posters 

I have asked you direct questions about your alien that it would have to answer and it doesn't and you fluff over it. Not once have you been able to show your stories are based on verifiable evidence so really you talk about it because you can doesn't mean that anyone can find validity in those stories.

2 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

Ive outlined my abilty to accept the idea that certain humans had a direct connection to a source which told them these things (because I  have a similar connection)  But  I retain  an open mind on the truth of that 

Yes You gave an outstanding example of your interpretations of Buddhism just this last week and were confronted about what you didn't know so your impressions about the UB are not really informed enough to argue it.

2 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

If I was really interested i could watch it on my tablet However I am NOT interested in UB cosmology   or biblical science 

Well if your not interested then why are you arguing about people asking for a brief of what the video covers, I'm not interested in watching a video that does not address the questions that I asked.

2 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

It doesn't matter if the bible gets science wrong or if the UB does.

It does when the claim is that the UB can be scientifically proven valid.

2 hours ago, Mr Walker said:

I'll go back and see what questions you are referring to me, but if you would like to repeat specific questions in a simple form it would help 

I wasn't asking you about the UB in this thread because you are not an authority on it. There are 3 people that have said to ask them questions, I believe Luis said bring it on and I did, Halbert also got involved and said he would have to look again at his research and would get back about the questions.

 

This is the post where I made my questions quite clear.

It is said that Adam and Eve along with all the civilized lived on a peninsula on the East coast of the Mediterranean that sank and that there were thousands of miles of roads and paths. Livestock was not raised on the peninsula and was brought in by other human groups considered inferior humans that were eventually wiped out. Those humans were of colours that do not exist nor have they at any time in known history and there is absolutely no evidence that they did exist. There is no evidence of that landmass nor of the roads and paths that connected them to any region nor is there evidence of animal domestication or sites that show there were agricultural communities at that time in history in that region and it has been a well studied area by the scientific community.

So if you have an answer as to why we don't have any evidence for 

a peninsula

domestic livestock

grain cultivation

unknown human of colours that no longer exist

roads and pathways

then I would like to see you explain it within a scientific context with published research that supports your position that the events in in question about  the UB are possible.

As you can see the questions were not directed to you as you do not have the knowledge base to discuss them and did pose them to the guy that said bring it on.

Edited by jmccr8
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to pause a moment, and clarify my understanding of the thread's topic. Although the on-topic discussion so far has emphasized scientific matters, I don't see anything in the OP which restricts the discussion of the UB to its cosmology. On the contrary, I find a link to a Quora page where Luis quotes the UB to the following effect:

Quote

92:4.4 (1007.4) There have been many events of religious revelation but only five of epochal significance. These were as follows:
...
92:4.8 (1008.1) 4. Jesus of Nazareth. Christ Michael presented for the fourth time to Urantia the concept of God as the Universal Father, and this teaching has generally persisted ever since. The essence of his teaching was love and service, the loving worship which a creature son voluntarily gives in recognition of, and response to, the loving ministry of God his Father; the freewill service which such creature sons bestow upon their brethren in the joyous realization that in this service they are likewise serving God the Father.

Will, another of our UB experts, identified its teachings about Jesus as one of the three major components of the UB. Those sections about Jesus are quite extensive, and I thank Will for pointing them out to me years ago. That is the portion of the UB which I've read, based on Will's guidance and advice.

I will happily accept instruction if I have misunderstood, but to me, discussion of what the UB says about a historical Jesus and how that compares with other extant sources and related scholarship is on-topic here. Which works out well for people like me who don't know the shape of the Universe.

In that spirit, then, I'd like to comment on a small historical claim about Jesus and his followers as found in both UB and other sources, the "Empty Tomb" story. @Mr Walker has already mentioned that incident in an earlier post:

Quote

In some works he claims Christ was not a real  person, but in  "The empty tomb" he argues that the body may have been stolen or misplaced 

"He" is Dr Richard Carrier, a well-known Jesus mythicist. I am unsure which work of his Mr W finds inconsistent, however that some people as long ago as the first century opined that Jesus's body was stolen is attested by Matthew, a primary source for what people said back then. It is precisely the sort of thing an ancient historian might discuss, and there is little doubt that Dr Carrier would agree with Bart Ehrman that, if such an event occurred, then it is more likely that the tomb was found empty for natural reasons than for supernatural ones.

That Dr Carrier holds this view about the hypothetical situation doesn't contraidct his other view that the hypothesis is false.

The Urantia Book covers the time between the crucifixion and Jesus's reappearances in two papers, #188 (The time of the tomb) and #189 (The resurrection, which paper includes the discovery of the empty tomb). These can be found online here:

https://www.urantia.org/urantia-book-standardized/paper-188-time-tomb

(and then follow the link near the bottom of the page to #189)

The papers freely mix historical content in the usual sense (who said and did what, when and where) with a great deal of Urantia-specific explanation of how Jesus came back to life in a different form than before. By and large, the historical material is a familiar genre: a "harmony" of the gospels. That is, reading along, the reader can see that one bit comes from Matthew, then later, another bit comes from John, and so on.

Like all harmonies, the result is a new narrative, not found in any of the contributing sources but echoing all of them. There are also some scenes along the way whose source I do not recognize. Well, so, too, in Jesus Christ Superstar and Godspell, two other modern gospel harmonies.

The empty tomb is especially hard work for the harmonist (both JCS and G simply omit it), since the four canonical gospels tell such radically different versions of it. Mark (16:1-8) is fairly naturalistic. Matthew (28:1-10) is a supernatural extravaganza with an angel descending from heaven to invite the women and soldiers to inspect the tomb. Luke (24:1-12; referred to again at 24:22-24) is similar to Mark, but now Peter comes to verify what the women tell him. And then there's John (20:1-17), with a little bit of everything: angels, Peter and the Beloved Disciple both checking what the women say, and Mary Magdalene not recognizing Jesus at first, because of his new form.

Now, pinch yourself. This is the simplest imaginable historical fact. Some women visit a tomb, find that the corpse which interests them isn't there, meet somebody or somebodies in or around the tomb, and the women do or do not receive assistance from other friends of the deceased. And now, 1900 years later, comes the Urantia Book with yet a fifth version of the story.

The story has visibly improved and expanded in the retelling, which is suspicious for a simple incident that supposedly really happened. So, my UB expert friends:

Is there somewhere in the UB that explains how its authors know in modern times what the ancient authors plainly did not: what happened that morning in Jerusalem? (And yes, Mr W, my question is posed based on the premise that something happened, which is not a claim that anything in particular really did happem.)

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem - as I have pointed out in previous discussion about the UB - is that part of the book contains information that is verifiable (parts of cosmology and Earth history) and information that is not verifiable (Jesus etal).   

Of the verifiable parts, almost all can be shown to be incorrect.   On that basis, how should we considered the veracity of the unverifiable parts?

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi @eight bits, just my two cents!

Nothing I’ve seen claimed about UB has been anything other than a work of fiction.

The members here that have claimed anything otherwise, or that there was scientific knowledge etc. known before modern human history has never been proven or founded. 

No one has tried besides just saying that UB is a divine scripture or otherwise.

Should be easy to prove if the claims were true, but hasn’t been over years.

 

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, eight bits said:

Just to pause a moment, and clarify my understanding of the thread's topic. Although the on-topic discussion so far has emphasized scientific matters, I don't see anything in the OP which restricts the discussion of the UB to its cosmology. On the contrary, I find a link to a Quora page where Luis quotes the UB to the following effect:

Will, another of our UB experts, identified its teachings about Jesus as one of the three major components of the UB. Those sections about Jesus are quite extensive, and I thank Will for pointing them out to me years ago. That is the portion of the UB which I've read, based on Will's guidance and advice.

I will happily accept instruction if I have misunderstood, but to me, discussion of what the UB says about a historical Jesus and how that compares with other extant sources and related scholarship is on-topic here. Which works out well for people like me who don't know the shape of the Universe.

In that spirit, then, I'd like to comment on a small historical claim about Jesus and his followers as found in both UB and other sources, the "Empty Tomb" story. @Mr Walker has already mentioned that incident in an earlier post:

"He" is Dr Richard Carrier, a well-known Jesus mythicist. I am unsure which work of his Mr W finds inconsistent, however that some people as long ago as the first century opined that Jesus's body was stolen is attested by Matthew, a primary source for what people said back then. It is precisely the sort of thing an ancient historian might discuss, and there is little doubt that Dr Carrier would agree with Bart Ehrman that, if such an event occurred, then it is more likely that the tomb was found empty for natural reasons than for supernatural ones.

That Dr Carrier holds this view about the hypothetical situation doesn't contraidct his other view that the hypothesis is false.

The Urantia Book covers the time between the crucifixion and Jesus's reappearances in two papers, #188 (The time of the tomb) and #189 (The resurrection, which paper includes the discovery of the empty tomb). These can be found online here:

https://www.urantia.org/urantia-book-standardized/paper-188-time-tomb

(and then follow the link near the bottom of the page to #189)

The papers freely mix historical content in the usual sense (who said and did what, when and where) with a great deal of Urantia-specific explanation of how Jesus came back to life in a different form than before. By and large, the historical material is a familiar genre: a "harmony" of the gospels. That is, reading along, the reader can see that one bit comes from Matthew, then later, another bit comes from John, and so on.

Like all harmonies, the result is a new narrative, not found in any of the contributing sources but echoing all of them. There are also some scenes along the way whose source I do not recognize. Well, so, too, in Jesus Christ Superstar and Godspell, two other modern gospel harmonies.

The empty tomb is especially hard work for the harmonist (both JCS and G simply omit it), since the four canonical gospels tell such radically different versions of it. Mark (16:1-8) is fairly naturalistic. Matthew (28:1-10) is a supernatural extravaganza with an angel descending from heaven to invite the women and soldiers to inspect the tomb. Luke (24:1-12; referred to again at 24:22-24) is similar to Mark, but now Peter comes to verify what the women tell him. And then there's John (20:1-17), with a little bit of everything: angels, Peter and the Beloved Disciple both checking what the women say, and Mary Magdalene not recognizing Jesus at first, because of his new form.

Now, pinch yourself. This is the simplest imaginable historical fact. Some women visit a tomb, find that the corpse which interests them isn't there, meet somebody or somebodies in or around the tomb, and the women do or do not receive assistance from other friends of the deceased. And now, 1900 years later, comes the Urantia Book with yet a fifth version of the story.

The story has visibly improved and expanded in the retelling, which is suspicious for a simple incident that supposedly really happened. So, my UB expert friends:

Is there somewhere in the UB that explains how its authors know in modern times what the ancient authors plainly did not: what happened that morning in Jerusalem? (And yes, Mr W, my question is posed based on the premise that something happened, which is not a claim that anything in particular really did happem.)

Interesting, excellent post. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, eight bits said:

Is there somewhere in the UB that explains how its authors know in modern times what the ancient authors plainly did not

 

I'll point to the places in the papers where this is explained. The introduction to paper 121 states:

"ACTING under the supervision of a commission of twelve members of the United Brotherhood of Urantia Midwayers, conjointly sponsored by the presiding head of our order and the Melchizedek of record, I am the secondary midwayer of onetime attachment to the Apostle Andrew, and I am authorized to place on record the narrative of the life transactions of Jesus of Nazareth as they were observed by my order of earth creatures, and as they were subsequently partially recorded by the human subject of my temporal guardianship.

Scroll all the way down to the last three paragraphs of paper 121 for their acknowledgement.

https://www.urantia.org/urantia-book-standardized/paper-121-times-michaels-bestowal

 

 

 

Paper 77 is where information about the Midwayers is located. Familiarization with what's said there is necessary in order to understand how they can "know in modern times what the ancient authors plainly did not".

https://www.urantia.org/urantia-book-standardized/paper-77-midway-creatures

Paper 77 in several places makes references to the One Hundred, also referred to as the Prince's corporeal staff. Paper 66 provides information about them (along with some other pertinent things):

https://www.urantia.org/urantia-book-standardized/paper-66-planetary-prince-urantia

 

 

There is a lot of other relevant information scattered throughout the papers that further provides answers to your question. But I hope this will be enough to get started.

 

 

 

Edited by Will Due
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

I'll point to the places in the papers where this is explained. The introduction to paper 121 states:

"ACTING under the supervision of a commission of twelve members of the United Brotherhood of Urantia Midwayers, conjointly sponsored by the presiding head of our order and the Melchizedek of record, I am the secondary midwayer of onetime attachment to the Apostle Andrew, and I am authorized to place on record the narrative of the life transactions of Jesus of Nazareth as they were observed by my order of earth creatures, and as they were subsequently partially recorded by the human subject of my temporal guardianship.

Scroll all the way down to the last three paragraphs of paper 121 for their acknowledgement.

https://www.urantia.org/urantia-book-standardized/paper-121-times-michaels-bestowal

 

 

 

Paper 77 is where information about the Midwayers is located. Familiarization with what's said there is necessary in order to understand how they can "know in modern times what the ancient authors plainly did not".

https://www.urantia.org/urantia-book-standardized/paper-77-midway-creatures

Paper 77 in several places makes references to the One Hundred, also referred to as the Prince's corporeal staff. Paper 66 provides information about them (along with some other pertinent things):

https://www.urantia.org/urantia-book-standardized/paper-66-planetary-prince-urantia

 

 

There is a lot of other relevant information scattered throughout the papers that further provides answers to your question. But I hope this will be enough to get started.

 

 

 

Will, who are the “midwayers” what is a Melchizedek of record? 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

Will, who are the “midwayers” what is a Melchizedek of record? 

Sound like Shriners.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

Will, who are the “midwayers” 

 

in my reply to Eight earlier, find the link there to paper 77. You'll find the details about them there. For more info, see the other link to paper 66. 

 

27 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

what is a Melchizedek of record? 

 

The Melchizedek of record I'm not sure of. I'll have to dig for it. But I think he was the one who sponsored the Midwayer commission.

Information about the Melchizedeks is found in paper 35. Scroll down to section 2.

https://www.urantia.org/urantia-book-standardized/paper-35-local-universe-sons-god

 

 

Edited by Will Due
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Modern Gnosticism, secret knowledge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Will Due said:

 

in my reply to Eight earlier, find the link there to paper 77. You'll find the details about them there. For more info, see the other link to paper 66. 

 

 

The Melchizedek of record I'm not sure of. I'll have to dig for it. But I think he was the one who sponsored the Midwayer commission.

Information about the Melchizedeks is found in paper 35. Scroll down to section 2.

https://www.urantia.org/urantia-book-standardized/paper-35-local-universe-sons-god

 

 

Is it actual people or ? That is all I am asking basically. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sherapy said:

Is it actual people or ? That is all I am asking basically. 

 

Well I guess you can think of them as people yes.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

Channeled?

The only source they have is the book. They can't prove anything they say concerning it's origins or content. They simply choose to believe.

 Urantia United

 

Edited by Hammerclaw
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • This topic was locked and unlocked
  • The topic was locked
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.