-
Posts
-
I recently (accidentally) ran across a blog (antibaal.blogspot.com) that had a fairly significant rant against the UB – by a former Satanist. He is a bit far out with most of his posts but then so are similar rants from organizations such as the one run by Hank Hanegraaff. Here is a quick summary of his thinking:
Urantia Book – a guide for elitism
My investigations into the Urantia Book (UB) actually reveals what seems to be the planned mindset for the future, when I first encountered the UB I thought it to be just another new thought fad. However this is not the case, what I found was a ‘spiritual’ system that caters to a society that is beyond gnostic or even neo-gnostic and infact aims itself to the ‘post-gnostic’. I had previously stated that the UB is no less valid than the 38+ versions of the Bible and indeed this is true, because in this UB we actually have the plans for a future society which is more along the lines of setting up a new and retro ‘ancient egypt’. Have I read the UB in its entirety? No and do not especially intend to. Although the book is supposedly of a spiritual basis it has pretty much gone into a psychological indoctrination manual, the book is subjective in its writing but each paragraph has a ‘hook’ to keep you on to read the next paragraph.
.
The UB is 2097 pages long, so during the time you are reading it (which can be a year or longer) your personal circumstances can change. So what seemed nonsensical at the time of reading may suddenly seem logical later on as your circumstance changes; and what seemed logical at the time of reading may come across as nonsensical later on as your circumstance changes. The purpose of this is to keep you in a sense of confusion and lack of faith in your decisions and judgment, what you are meant to do is read the book in its entirety and once that is done begin it all over again. This is the same method used to indoctrinate fools into marxism, the same application that involves psychology along with a mythology that can change at anytime depending on your circumstance.
I will give you the information I got from UB forums from general adherants of those sites, there is no lies or propaganda I am putting forward – this is what these people genuinely believe. So I will state what they believe (*) and state the evil that can result from this belief (#).
1*. They believe that children are born without souls, infact they believe that a child does not get a soul until the ages of 5-6.
2#. This opens the door to ‘post birth abortion’ aka infanticide, it also gives a tacit approval for pedophilia.
3*. They believe that marriage is exclusively for a man and a woman in order to reproduce and that fidelity must be kept in this union, however they believe that homosexual activity is permissible for recreational sexual activity. So apart from producing children those in a marriage can only be gay.
4#. This is truly a controlled society and against the laws of nature if it ever comes to pass, such a setup can only be meant to control population. The author of the UB (William Samuel Sadler) was an eugenics proponent and indeed fanatic, as were those associated with the writing, publication and propagation of the UB.
to be continued…………………
(numbers added above)
Normally, I would not pay much attention to this stuff but then i got to thinking ….what happens when the first candidates for political office and other positions of some public trust indicate that they actively read the Book? Is there a need to defend against this stuff as it arises…..or just disregard it, knowing that the truth will win in the end?
When Jesus was accused of being in league with devils, he strongly replied as noted in (153:4.2-3). Should we at some time take the same tact to spurious allegations – with polite corrections?
Technically, he is right with No. 1 but his statement does not, of course, tell the whole story. And beyond that, what do you think of the rest of his accusations/conclusions?
what do you think of the rest of his accusations/conclusions?
This is all you have to read: Have I read the UB in its entirety? No and do not especially intend to.
Which means he’s not open to truth. It apparently confuses him.
1*. They believe that children are born without souls, infact they believe that a child does not get a soul until the ages of 5-6.
2#. This opens the door to ‘post birth abortion’ aka infanticide, it also gives a tacit approval for pedophilia.
The fact that he made this leap of logic tells me he hasn’t read anything about the role of personality and its sanctity.
Again, he refuses to read the book which explains why he is entirely confused by the little he has read which doesn’t fit into his present thought-scaffolding. Clearly he has made up his mind and refuses to open the gateway to the soul . . . which is what most satanists do. I’d say he’s not a former satanist, but rather a full blown practitioner pretending not to be. Sad for him.
Sounds like Leon……
I looked at the link from Bradly. Yes…that was the one – Leon Fortayne. His blog address is listed above.
Leon seems to be afraid of mind-control, thinking that UB readers have all been magically brainwashed by the book. But isn’t Kabbalah a form of mystical brainwashing? Why isn’t he afraid of that? Oh wait . . . I think it’s probably because he thinks he’s in control of his mystic musings. Perhaps the idea of the self remaining in control of the spirit appeals to him in some way (Lutherian principle)? I wonder if that’s why he left, because he was afraid of being mind-controlled. Yet, wasn’t he the same guy who said we should have our faith challenged? Doesn’t it work both ways? Yeah, I think he’s afraid of having his faith challenged. Funny how people so often accuse others of what they are guilty of themselves. If TUB readers are all mind-numb robots, why do they ask so many questions and have so many differing opinions?
Can anyone make sense of this:
3*. They believe that marriage is exclusively for a man and a woman in order to reproduce and that fidelity must be kept in this union, however they believe that homosexual activity is permissible for recreational sexual activity. So apart from producing children those in a marriage can only be gay.
How did he get to the part where he says those in a marriage can ONLY BE GAY??? What the hell? What am I missing? I guess that explains why I’m not married . . . I’m not gay. Need more coffee.
Login to reply to this topic.
Not registered? Sign up here.