How do we maximize our study of The Urantia Book?

[chucksmith1982]

My first post was some ideas that I’d been working on in regards to the study of the UB. I have expanded them over the years, and given our last discussion, I thought I’d revisit them. I didn’t give the ideas their own topic though, so I can’t remember where I posted them. Anyway, here is the revised version.

I’m going to post what I call a Lifetime Urantia Book Study guide below. Please feel free to comment. Also feel free to pass on these suggestions if you find them helpful in your own study.

 

According to Urantia Book history, early students asked questions and the answers were given in written form as papers. Questions were asked as a result of the previous answers, and that is how the book came to be.

At various points, the Revelators (beings from various parts of the grand universe) asked the students to go back through the papers and ask more questions. One of two things occurred as a result. Either papers were given as a result of the questions or revisions to the existing papers made.

Yet how can this be applied to a study of the book by todays’ student? Is it possible for todays’ student to use this same method in a personal study?

The answer to the question is a resounding “Yes!”

For how this may be done, see below.

Step 1. Obtain a copy of the text of The Urantia Book via internet download.

Step 2. Prepare a document for questions to be written in.

Step 3. Ignore the Foreword for the moment. This is because the early students had no Foreword.

Step 4. Start with Paper 1, Section 0. Note: for the purposes of this plan, the introductory sections of each paper will be denominated as Section 0.

Step 5. Read Section 0 of Paper 1 carefully. Every time a question is thought of, no matter how small, write it down in the prepared document.

Step 6. After completing the reading/question method of study on Section 0, (see step 5) stop.

Step 7. Go back through all of the questions that were written down in the prepared document, deleting the ones that are able to be clearly answered as a result of the reading. This has two purposes. The first one is so that it will be known which questions were answered. The second purpose is to avoid, as much as possible, asking duplicate questions.

Step 8. Repeat the process on every section of every paper of Part I. (Papers 1 through 31)

Step 9. Repeat the process on this series until as many questions have been asked and clearly answered as a result of reading each section as possible. This will mean going over this series multiple times. It will be known that study of this series is complete when it is not possible to ask and clearly answer any more questions. The reason for this has to do with the way revelations are given. A new revelation is not given until people are ready for it. Observe the way that The Urantia Papers were written. The revelators did not present more material until what was already given was thoroughly understood.

Step 10. Repeat steps 1 through 9 for Part Ii. (Papers 32 through 56)

Step 11. Repeat steps 1 through 9 for Part Iii. (Papers 57 through 119)

Step 12. Repeat steps 1 through 9 for Part Iv. (Papers 120 through 196)

Step 13. Read the Foreword. A better grasp of the Foreword will be obtained as a result of studying using the method described above because the Foreword is a guide to things not fully explained until the end of the book.

Step 14. After completing the study of The Urantia Book as outlined above, reread it in the same order as it was studied previously. (Parts I through Iv–papers 1 through 196 followed by the Foreword) The papers are to be read one per day until The Urantia Book has been read once.

Step 15. Study every topic in The Urantia Book. This will not only involve doing topical studies within The Urantia Book itself, but research outside of The Urantia Book as well.

[Bradly]

An interesting study format to be sure.  I have always been struck by the fact that the UB seems to anticipate questions for the reader in every Paper….it is a fascinating demonstration of skill of the authors to present such a presumption of inquiry sequence.

[Gene]

I’ll add this:

questions and answers happen here all the time. Careful review of  this gives me valuable information about how to approach study and research.

a memory chip implant would help.

[chucksmith1982]

I want one of those memory chips! I’d put the entire UB text on it, then I wouldn’t have to rely on an actual copy of the text in its’ various formats. I could also do away with the questions/answers document I mentioned in the plan.

Will someone try my plan out, say on Paper 1, and post their impressions here?

Thanks.

[Bonita]

chucksmith1982 wrote:

Will someone try my plan out, say on Paper 1, and post their impressions here?

Why not do it here on the forum as a group?  Walk us through each step.

chucksmith1982 wrote:

It will be known that study of this series is complete when it is not possible to ask and clearly answer any more questions.

If this is true, then study will never be complete.  As we grow in understanding, new questions appear that weren’t thought of before.  The purpose of group study is to bring as many questions to the fore as possible, and then find some more. I’ve read the book dozens of times and I keep finding new questions to ask, so I believe it’s a process that will never end, not for me at least.

[Bradly]

Indeed Bonita!!  That’s one of the other fascinating things about the skill of the authors – that each reading reveals new concepts, connections, relationships, patterns, and paradigms of perception.  Every reading becomes a new reading in many ways.  I’ve never read another work which anticipated questions, answered them, leading to further questions and when re-read puts the student through the same process all over again with additional dimensionality and perspective every time.

It’s sort of like those connect the dot pictures for kids where an image slowly emerges, but further readings seems to add color, and then dimension, and then animation, and even interaction in a way….it always remains very personal and unique to each reader as it is both understood and activated by our own experience, education, and intellect – it becomes something we engage and experience which, I think, makes every reading by every student a very personalized aggregation and integration of fact and truth.

One effect of the two issues noted above (the ability of the authors to anticipate, in sequence, the reader’s questions AND the way additional readings bring new questions and lessons/understandings) is that, eventually, the parts become a whole – the threads become cloth by the skill of the weavers/authors to deliver a functional perspective that results in both a philosophy of living and confidence in the living of that philosophy.  It goes from thread to cloth to personalized garment!!

But only if one is willing to give the time and attention such an important process of learning requires.

I agree that chuck’s study method would work on a first or a fifth reading and it would be interesting to note how one’s questions would change with every reading along the way!

[chucksmith1982]

It has been my experience that after completeing one paper (I did it in one sitting) it felt more like a meditative experience than anything I’ve done short of  and including if that makes sense, meditating itself. For all I know, this could be a form of meditation. As for there being no limit to the amount of questions that you can ask, that may not be true. There was a point, some say two times, some say three, depending on wich ub history you read, when the revelators put a stop to anymore questions.

I appreciate the opportunity to “lead a study group” if that is the right phrase here, using my method, but some of these questions may be personal. That, plus I’m not sure I’ll have time to complete such a prodject.

I actually had it in mind of this being a personal journey… However, maybe an example of my method would illustrate how it works. Imagine that we are all students of the orrigional papers. We don’t know that this will take decades, we don’t know that there will be 196 papers, plus a foreword.

One evening, out of the blue as it were, for the first time, we are presented, lets’ say, with section 0 of Paper 1. Lets’ see what happens.

The rule is simple. Go through the section asking any question that comes to mind.

Here are mine.

 

1. Who is the Universal Father?
2. What prophet is mentioned in the quote?
3. Who are the sons of God?
4. There is more than one universe?
5. What is a planetary system?
6. Is there other life out there?
7. What is the universe of universes?
8. What is an enlightened world?
9. What is a will creature?
10. I was always taught that God finds man. This seems to indicate that it is the other way round. Wich is true?
11. Where did the second quote come from?
12. What is paradise?
13. What is Urantia?
14. What is a Urantia mortal?

Sorry about the numbers. I put Q. before each question to try and stop that from happening. To continue… I will now go through the questions I wrote down, deleting the ones that can be clearly answered, not implied answers, from the document. As you will see, unless I missed something, I still have most of my questions.

1. What prophet is mentioned in the quote?
2. Who are the sons of God?
3. There is more than one universe?
4. What is a planetary system?
5. What is the universe of universes?
6. What is an enlightened world?
7. What is a will creature?
8. Where did the second quote come from?
9. What is paradise?
10. What is Urantia?
11. What is a Urantia mortal?

As I am playing the role of a first time student, who has no idea how long or how large this prodject will be, I can only hope most of, if not all of, my questions will be answered in future reading/study sessions.

One last rule. No outside sources. I know that the quotes mentioned, for example, come from the Bible. I know in a general way that at least one of them was altered, as well as where it can be found. That does not come into play here though. I know that the quotes questions will not be answered as a result of reading the book, so I’ll not mention quotations again, but remember. I’m playing the role of one who has never before seen the ub papers. I’m asking whatever comes to mind and I’ll not be satisfied with anything less than direct, clear cut answers to my questions. Example. The question about universes. The section implies it, but so far, it is not directly stated that there is more than one universe. As a first time student, I’ll hope that the question is directly answered at some point. It will stay there, in my document, until it is directly answered.

I hope the example I gave was able to illustrate my study method. As one goes deeper in the book, the questions will get deeper. Eventually, to use the way the book was presented to the forum as a guide, the questions will, if not run out, eventually get to a point where they are not directly answered by part I. That is when it is time to move on to the next part and repeat the cycle for as long as it takes. This is to continue until the entire book is gone through as many times as needed.

[Bonita]

Interesting approach.  I’m not sure if it would work for me personally.  Had I used your approach, I think I would have spent 30-40 years just on Part I.  There is some benefit to just plowing through and reading the whole thing front to back.  Jotting down questions is good, but I think answering them on the second round of reading would work better for me.

As a long time reader I still have questions though.  For instance, these are my questions for section 0:

1. Does the fact that God is a creator, controller and infinite upholder have anything to do with the Trinity?
2. Is the phrase,”You, God, are alone; there is none beside you,” have to do with the Trinity or the I AM?
3. Is intelligence defined as being able to know God, receive his affection and return it?
4. If an enlightened intellect means the ability to recognize God and worship him, is that a function of the two higher adjutant ministries?
5. Among the three goals for the children of time, what is the difference between finding the eternal God and recognizing the Universal Father?
6. What is righteous supremacy?
7. What are the finite aspects of divinity of will?
8. How do we attain perfection of personality motivation?
9. Is the divine commandment to be perfect the prime motivating factor forming the foundation of all thought within mind ministry?
10. Does the conscious denial of the innate desire for perfection result in sin?
11. Is the “God of universes” the Universal Father, the Universe Father or both?

[Gene]

Bonita wrote:

Interesting approach. I’m not sure if it would work for me personally. Had I used your approach, I think I would have spent 30-40 years just on Part I. There is some benefit to just plowing through and reading the whole thing front to back. Jotting down questions is good, but I think answering them on the second round of reading would work better for me. As a long time reader I still have questions though. For instance, these are my questions for section 0:

1. Does the fact that God is a creator, controller and infinite upholder have anything to do with the Trinity?
2. Is the phrase,”You, God, are alone; there is none beside you,” have to do with the Trinity or the I AM?
3. Is intelligence defined as being able to know God, receive his affection and return it?
4. If an enlightened intellect means the ability to recognize God and worship him, is that a function of the two higher adjutant ministries?
5. Among the three goals for the children of time, what is the difference between finding the eternal God and recognizing the Universal Father?
6. What is righteous supremacy?
7. What are the finite aspects of divinity of will?
8. How do we attain perfection of personality motivation?
9. Is the divine commandment to be perfect the prime motivating factor forming the foundation of all thought within mind ministry?
10. Does the conscious denial of the innate desire for perfection result in sin?
11. Is the “God of universes” the Universal Father, the Universe Father or both?

i had similar question as your #2 above but is it not a quote from one of the OT authors?

[Bonita]

Gene wrote:

i had similar question as your #2 above but is it not a quote from one of the OT authors?

I’m actually not sure which prophet the author is referring to since similar statements about God are in both the OT and NT, but it’s likely to be Nehemiah.  But that’s not the point of my question. The author of the paper says the statement is true. If it’s true, it doesn’t matter who said or wrote it, right?   So what exactly is it that the author is trying to say by using that quote?

[Gene]

Bonita wrote:

Gene wrote:

i had similar question as your #2 above but is it not a quote from one of the OT authors?

I’m actually not sure which prophet the author is referring to since similar statements about God are in both the OT and NT, but it’s like to be Nehemiah. But that’s not the point of my question. The author of the paper says the statement is true. If it’s true, it doesn’t matter who said or wrote it, right? So what exactly is it that the author is trying to say by using that quote?

never thought about it like that

however, I can take it the easy way and say the OT author did not understand the I Am and simply referred to just one God.

Then I would try to consider if the concept of the I am is something that requires revelation?

or the author is using the quote to expand the concept for Readers.

[Bonita]

Gene wrote:   however, I can take it the easy way and say the OT author did not understand the I Am and simply referred to just one God. Then I would try to consider if the concept of the I am is something that requires revelation? or the author is using the quote to expand the concept for Readers.

But it’s not about what the author of the quote or what he understood, it’s about the truth of the statement.  The Divine Counselor who wrote the paper says the statement is true. I don’t think we need to know what the biblical author understood or didn’t understand about it.

I do think that the concepts of the I AM and the Trinity both need revelation and the purpose of revelation is to expand meaning.  So, I’m thinking that there is some expansion of meaning to that quote available for consideration, which is why I included it in my questions.

Here’s the quote again:

“You, God, are alone; there is none beside you. You have created the heaven and the heaven of heavens, with all their hosts; you preserve and control them. By the Sons of God were the universes made. The Creator covers himself with light as with a garment and stretches out the heavens as a curtain.”

This quote is repeating what the Divine Counselor wrote: First think of God as a creator, then as a controller, and lastly as an infinite upholder.

I think this means that it is a reference to the Trinity.  But the part about God being alone with none beside him would either mean that the Trinity functions as one being, or it could mean the hypothetical solitary I AM which is primal to the Trinity.  I’m leaning toward the idea that the Trinity functions as one being since the Divine Counselor is using the quote to elaborate his instruction on how best to think of God . . .  in a trifold way.

It’s a bit pedantic, I know.  But that’s the way I study.

[Gene]

Also

God as creator controller and upholder is a description of God post I AM so the trinity is likely correct?

[Gene]

If I think about this in relation to the OT author, at his time he was likely struggling with the concept of one God, I really doubt the I Am was even remotely close to his mind, however-somewhere in TUB I believe we are told that evolutionary religion discovered a crude concept of the Trinity.

the I Am really has little significance imho

It’s an attempt to satisfy typical human philosopher probing that would question the origin of everything, including the trinity.

sincere questioning could get some sort of revelation, especially for a believer.

[chucksmith1982]

Bonita, now you see why someone leading the study might not work. Your questions are advanced as you are a long time student of the book. They are good ones though! That is why I intended this to be a personal journey, because everyone who tried to study the book in this way would have different questions depending on their level of understanding and their experience with the ub.

As for it taking decades to approach the ub this way, remember that those who actually did it this way, those who were the first students, actually did this for decades.

As for not putting the forworde first, in the histories of the ub that I read, it is stated that the foreword was given at some point after some attempt was made to write a foreword by the first students. I made some attempt also to pair up the sections of the foreword with the rellavent papers. While I was able to do this with the introductory section, I think, if memory serves, that everything mentioned in that section is fully explained by paper 15, I was unable to do the same for the other sections. So, I simply kept track of my place in the forward and as I was reading the papers, after I completed a group of them (this was determined by a natural break in the papers for example papers 1 through 10 have to do with God the trinity) I’d then go back to my place in the foreword to see what came next in the foreword. My thought was to keep an eye out for concepts in the foreword as I assumed that they’d be appearing in the same order that they were given in the foreword in the papers. This didn’t happen though. Part 1, then 2, then 3 went by. And my plan still didn’t work. It wasn’t until I completely read (all the way to the end of paper 196) the ub, that the foreword made more sence. An example is things, meanings, and values. As I recall, it is mentioned, if not first in the foreword, then relatively soon. Yet it isn’t until paper 196 that it is explained. Another example is supertime. It is early in the foreward, but not mentioned or explained until the last paper of part 3.

I then wondered how to get the most out of the foreword. After doing a further review of how the ub was given to us, I wondered what would happen if I studied the ub the same way that those who were first given the papers did. And thus this study guide was born..

As for the topical study, as I recall, a urantia book index was supposed to be in the works. Thus, my idea for topical study. I wonder if a urantia book search engine could be developed that could be installed on a computer? One wich would allow the results to only be listed in ascending (meaning front to back) order? I tried to use the foundations’ website for topical study, but the results were random, neither ascending or descending.  It was as if I’d taken the results and put them inside a hat and started drawing randomly.  The only problem would be when an update to the ub was made. If you downloaded a version of the text from the foundations’ website that was later than the search engine, would that cause conflict of some sort? I know nothing of this sort of work, so my question may not have any basis. I’d simply be worried that, for example, if the foundation had version 1 of the ub, and you installed the search engine, then a year later you went back and downloaded version 2, the engine wouldn’t work because it was designed for version 1.  Outside research? That was the next logical step. Students of the Bible research the Bible using sources other than the bible afterall. As for the final cycle of reading… There is, to my knowledge, no Urantia Book reading schedule. There is however, a lot of read the bible in a year schedules. I simply used the same order that was used for the study plan to create a Urantia Book schedule. It didn’t hurt that when I read the ub this way it made more sense to me than starting with the foreword did.

[Author]

Posts