The Urantia Book as a source of Truth

[McCulloch]

In another thread

for the 1 in a 100 seekers of Truth amoung them, they may read enough [of the Urantia Book, UB] to discover its wisdom. That is why I am here; to expose them to the UB's clearer vision of religion, science, and cosmology.

Implicit in that statement, is the admission from Bro Dave that the UB is a source of Truth. The questions for debate are, "In general, how is it that a source of truth in religion, science and cosmology is determined? In what way does the UB meet those criteria?"

[Bro Dave]

I'm not sure I'm following here, but if you are suggesting the UB is a piece of fluff, I can assure you, it will challenge everything you can bring to bear. If your feeling particularly mentally frisky, you might want to try a read of the Forward. Normally, I steer folks away from it, because it is really a summation of the entire book, and not the introduction that eases one into what is to follow. Then again, you may be quite happy with the marathon you are currently running, and do not need any further challenges. Either way, I can guarantee you will not become either fat or lazy in an attempt digest what the UB has to offer!



Bro Dave

I have taken you up on your offer and read the foreword of the UB. It seems to me nothing short of deliberate obfuscation in an attempt to persuade the reader that it holds some significance. The language used appears more an attempt to mystify than demystify and ( to my mind ) is comparable to dressing a lemon in sequins to disguise the fact that it's a lemon. I am aware that my take on the UB may be due entirely to my own inability to fully grasp the concepts involved owing to my seriously limited human intellect but am aware that this is also what the author intended me to believe was the case.

LOL, yeah, I had the exact same impression when I tried to read the Forward some 20 years ago. In fact, I picked at it for 14 years, before I just plain gave up! Then I started just looking at what appeared to be somewhat familiar, and gradually, as you suggested, gained sufficient vocabulary and peripheral information to allow me to begin understanding the rest. Bill Sadler, the son of Dr Sadler, did a great job of explaining the Forward. (http://urantiabook.org/archive/readers/doc606.htm)

You have my respect, however, just for plowing through that formidable bit of prose!

Bro Dave

[Bro Dave]

QED, my contention is that your "self ordering universe", is a fundamental design specification. I know you don't like that, its not "scientific". Okay, but its not a problem for me. There is so much more to life than the "gears" that make it all grind forward. If the Universe were such a "stumble forward and survive" mechanism, I suggest it would not only be a drab place to live, it would have not need for any of the subtilties like beauty and love to function. Our connection to what is referred to as spiritual is via love and those higher "vibrations", if you will. Exclude this channel of communication, and you end up with robotized Star Trek zombies.(you know the ones... I forget their name) Me?... I need butterflies and flowers, sunsets and a loving family to share it all with. And, the spiritual assurance that reaches back as I reach out to try to be more.

Bro Dave

[Curious]

LOL, yeah, I had the exact same impression when I tried to read the Forward some 20 years ago. In fact, I picked at it for 14 years, before I just plain gave up! Then I started just looking at what appeared to be somewhat familiar, and gradually, as you suggested, gained sufficient vocabulary and peripheral information to allow me to begin understanding the rest. Bill Sadler, the son of Dr Sadler, did a great job of explaining the Forward. (http://urantiabook.org/archive/readers/doc606.htm)

You have my respect, however, just for plowing through that formidable bit of prose!

Bro Dave

I had no problem with the vocabulary until I came across words which were clearly made up. As I said, where it fails to blind with science it succeeds in baffling with bullsh*t. I am not surprised that after 14 years you were still non the wiser. No offense meant Dave but after reading the foreword and a number of other passages I get the impression that the authors of this book are non too bright.

[Bro Dave]

LOL, yeah, I had the exact same impression when I tried to read the Forward some 20 years ago. In fact, I picked at it for 14 years, before I just plain gave up! Then I started just looking at what appeared to be somewhat familiar, and gradually, as you suggested, gained sufficient vocabulary and peripheral information to allow me to begin understanding the rest. Bill Sadler, the son of Dr Sadler, did a great job of explaining the Forward. (http://urantiabook.org/archive/readers/doc606.htm)

You have my respect, however, just for plowing through that formidable bit of prose!

Bro Dave

I had no problem with the vocabulary until I came across words which were clearly made up. As I said, where it fails to blind with science it succeeds in baffling with bullsh*t. I am not surprised that after 14 years you were still non the wiser. No offense meant Dave but after reading the foreword and a number of other passages I get the impression that the authors of this book are non too bright.

I also had a LOT of problems with some of the "made-up" words. It took a long time before it dawned on me, that they have to try to express such things as name, in ENGLISH, which I seriously doubt is the common universe language. Even here on Earth, there are languages with names which simply can not be translated into English. It could be argued that they should not have come so close with names like Jerusem, or Satania, but they do offer a sort of bridge... As to the intellect of the authors, well, that's a personal call. I personally was amazed at the quality and the content. But then again, they did not set out to wow us with their writing skills, just to give us a larger clear picture. For me, they succeded.
If nothing else, the papers from around 99 up around 105,(as I remember) really do give a nice history of religion, why its important, and why it always ends up failing. If we all just understood our common roots, we might have a shot at getting along, instead of shooting back!(literally and figuratively...)

Bro Dave

[Curious]

In general, how is it that a source of truth in religion, science and cosmology is determined? In what way does the UB meet those criteria?"[/size]

Well it is a subjective truth ( if such a thing exists ). Scientific truth is completely different and requires validation before it is accepted as truth. Cosmology, as a branch of science, is subject to the same validation as all other scientific theory. Most, if not all, "religious truth" is intuitive, even if scientific methods are employed, there still remains the problem of interpretation. It is possible that simply meditating upon the geometry of an egg might bring about a glimmer of understanding as to it's place in the grand scheme of things, but it is unlikely that you would be able to adequately explain why you came to such a realisation.
It is unfortunate that both sides of the argument tend to cling to their own preferred method of validation and completely ignore the other. Atheists tend to discount religion because its findings are seemingly unverifiable and unreproducible yet make little or no effort at subjective validation while the entrenched theist has a tendency to discount obvious evidence that discredits their own particular ideology.

[Curious]

...If nothing else, the papers from around 99 up around 105,(as I remember) really do give a nice history of religion, why its important, and why it always ends up failing. If we all just understood our common roots, we might have a shot at getting along, instead of shooting back!(literally and figuratively...)

Bro Dave

Don't get me wrong, I am not suggesting that the book has absolutely nothing of value to offer. If the reader is introduced to beneficial concepts and ideals previously overlooked or if the belief aids focus, then the book has some merit but people have enough difficulty telling the warp from the weft already without yet another version to confuse the pants off them.

[Bro Dave]

...If nothing else, the papers from around 99 up around 105,(as I remember) really do give a nice history of religion, why its important, and why it always ends up failing. If we all just understood our common roots, we might have a shot at getting along, instead of shooting back!(literally and figuratively...)

Bro Dave

Don't get me wrong, I am not suggesting that the book has absolutely nothing of value to offer. If the reader is introduced to beneficial concepts and ideals previously overlooked or if the belief aids focus, then the book has some merit but people have enough difficulty telling the warp from the weft already without yet another version to confuse the pants off them.

Probably the most valuble part of the UB, is part IV, The Life and Teaching of Jesus. This is the life and more importantly what and how Jesus taught. Here is a narrative given by Celelstial charged with recording every detail of his Earthly career. Eventually, the world will rediscover the religion Jesus himself practiced, and this world will literally spring forward in brotherhood and love.

Bro Dave

[McCulloch]

Probably the most valuble part of the UB, is part IV, The Life and Teaching of Jesus. This is the life and more importantly what and how Jesus taught. Here is a narrative given by Celelstial charged with recording every detail of his Earthly career. Eventually, the world will rediscover the religion Jesus himself practiced, and this world will literally spring forward in brotherhood and love.

Noble ideals.
But, for answering factual historical questions like, did Jesus exist, what did he teach, what did he do, did he really rise from death, the Urantia Book is completely useless. It is entirely a work of myth and fiction. I realize that myth is important, but it is not history nor science.

[Bro Dave]

Probably the most valuble part of the UB, is part IV, The Life and Teaching of Jesus. This is the life and more importantly what and how Jesus taught. Here is a narrative given by Celelstial charged with recording every detail of his Earthly career. Eventually, the world will rediscover the religion Jesus himself practiced, and this world will literally spring forward in brotherhood and love.

Noble ideals.
But, for answering factual historical questions like, did Jesus exist, what did he teach, what did he do, did he really rise from death, the Urantia Book is completely useless. It is entirely a work of myth and fiction. I realize that myth is important, but it is not history nor science.

That too is not fact, but one more opinion...

Bro Dave

[McCulloch]

But, for answering factual historical questions like, did Jesus exist, what did he teach, what did he do, did he really rise from death, the Urantia Book is completely useless. It is entirely a work of myth and fiction.

That too is not fact, but one more opinion...

Yet there has been no attempt to show that the Urantia Book measures up to any reasonable standards of validity. Perhaps, I should have written that the entire Urantia Book is useless to historians in persuit of historical information. They cannot possibly evaluate its validity.