-
Posts
-
This reply has been reported for inappropriate content.
Unless you don’t think it’s possible for the things the Urantia Book says to become or already are “doctrinal” and “dogmatic,” there is no point in discussing it further.
Got that right!
There’s the problem discussing it with you. How can you? You’re sanctimoniously never wrong about anything.
Right Iris?
Van Amadon wrote: It’s clear to me that there most certainly is Urantia Book doctrine and dogma.
Well, it’s not clear to me. Are you suggesting that there has developed a single unified way of interpreting TUB? Would you mind elaborating on exactly what you think has become doctrine and dogma? Please be specific. Using phrases like “all of it” or “none of it” is not helpful.
Van Amadon wrote: The problem is in stereotyping it, fixating it, oversimplifying it, standardizing it making it conventional.I also can’t see where TUB has become stereotyped if you mean it has become a standardized formula. That would mean everyone would be in lockstep, and that’s certainly not the case. I don’t see any rituals forming or creeds being recited. Do you? Where does this exist exactly?Obviously we are not oversimplifying TUB here on this forum because we pick it apart and study it in detail every day, and it appears that none of us have the exact same interpretation or opinion concerning it. Are you more concerned about turning TUB into a fetish? Now that has some merit and might be worth talking about.Wouldn’t the danger of stereotyping be more in line with those who are endeavoring to churchify the Revelation? There are groups out there forming creeds and doctrines around TUB, evangelizing and proselytizing to win converts to the cult. Don’t they have an oversimplified message?So, I’m inclined to think that you’re not concerned about stereotyping, fixating and standardizing as much as you’re just railing against what you’ve referred to as the “Bonitian and Bradlynian sensorship board of what the Urantia Book says you can say (UAI Forum, October 15, 2016).”Right Iris?
Hey, you finally got something right! Not Rexford but Iris. That was my first user name. Actually, not totally true. I had another flower user name on another unrelated forum once, which was actually my very, very first user name ever. I can’t even remember what year it was, so long ago. Something like 2002 maybe? Can’t recall. But it was back in those days when I was researching the Teaching Mission. (Not sure I’m allowed to mention them here.) Does anyone remember if I used Iris on the UAI forum two generations ago? I don’t think I did. I think that’s when I decided it was best to use my real name after the dust up using “adelfo” (which I used because it’s Greek for brotherhood). That didn’t go well because people thought I was a guy. When they found out the s**t hit the fan. I learned my lesson with that one. Even got an in-person visit from the administrator to “set me straight”. So, I think using your real name is the best way to go unless you’re trying to hide something, which I’m not.
There’s the problem discussing it with you. How can you? You’re sanctimoniously never wrong about anything.
I keep telling my kids that. They don’t buy it though.
This reply has been reported for inappropriate content.
You’re just playing a game aren’t you Iris. You know exactly what the revelators insinuated when they said “ingenious self-deception.”
For you to indicate that “you got that right” that you don’t think the religious concepts of the Urantia Book cannot be PERSONALLY turned into personal doctrine and dogma, like I see it presented on these forums by some all the time, puts the ingenuity of why intellectual crystallization occurs on display.
Is reading the Urantia Book “the doing of the Father’s will?”
Is riding a bike with training wheels “riding a bike?”
Van Amadon wrote:You’re just playing a game aren’t you Iris. You know exactly what the revelators insinuated when they said “ingenious self-deception.”You use the name Iris like it’s a bad thing. Irises are beautiful, a truly noble flower, which is why I chose it. It’s one of my favorites. I have several beds of them in various colors. But that aside, I do know what the revelators mean when they use the words ingenious self-deception. Isn’t that how they referred to Lucifer? Do you think I’m Lucifer? Do you think I’m evil, sinful and full of iniquity?Van Amadon wrote: For you to indicate that “you got that right” that you don’t think the religious concepts of the Urantia Book cannot be PERSONALLY turned into personal doctrine and dogma, like I see it presented on these forums by some all the time, puts the ingenuity of why intellectual crystallization occurs on display.
So I’m right. This topic is just another attempt by you to cast aspersions on those of us who take TUB study seriously. I know you don’t like me and I know you don’t like Bradly. You criticize everything we say, but I think that’s your problem, not mine or Bradly’s. I think your attempt to start what looks like a legitimate thread on a legitimate topic is actually a ruse to spew hatred towards the two of us. Now, if that isn’t nasty, I don’t know what is. Your intentions and motivations are now on public display. Let the readers decide for themselves . . .
Van Amadon wrote:Is reading the Urantia Book “the doing of the Father’s will?” Is riding a bike with training wheels “riding a bike?”
Just added that little gem to the Van/nodisms Collection. Can anyone explain it to me?
One of my favorite sayings is: The UB says what it says and does not say what it does not! A good place to begin discussing the contents is to allow the authors to speak for themselves first for they purposefully wrote what they meant and meant what they wrote. Now whether one believes what they wrote is another issue.
For those of us who have come to believe that the authors’ claims in what they wrote is true and important, then the 5th Epochal Revelation contains very important information for us to learn and come to understand and apply in our daily walk with God. If such study inspires ideals and actions which express the inner life in the daily walk, then study of the UB can certainly be an important task and choice for the believer…and to discuss it with others is a form of dissemination. Study groups (and on-line discussions groups are one form of those) remain central to dissemination and provide for the interaction of a diverse group of religionists and their personal experiences. If it is what it says, then certainly the UB needs to be spread far and wide and studied deeply and applied to life.
As no creeds or dogmas have been offered by Van/nod but merely accusations of creeds and dogmas, the question arises about the contents of the UB. Since delivered in written form, one might say the book itself has been crystalized or set in its contents. But the real student of the book soon realizes how the meanings and values of the words so presented certainly can, will, and do change based on the increasing discernment and experience of the student in the living of a believer’s life. This religious life cannot be crystalized or its not going on.
Many of us have had the experience in which reading the TUB is a different experience every time one reads it. I am on my 4th time reading cover to cover, and I am finding entirely new gems of wisdom and spiritual ‘salt’ to savor on each and every page.
Van Amadon wrote:Is reading the Urantia Book “the doing of the Father’s will?” Is riding a bike with training wheels “riding a bike?”
I prefer a uni(ty)cycle.
P1732:2, 155:6.9 The religions of authority can only divide men and set them in conscientious array against each other; the religion of the spirit will progressively draw men together and cause them to become understandingly sympathetic with one another. The religions of authority require of men uniformity in belief, but this is impossible of realization in the present state of the world. The religion of the spirit requires only unity of experience — uniformity of destiny — making full allowance for diversity of belief. The religion of the spirit requires only uniformity of insight, not uniformity of viewpoint and outlook. The religion of the spirit does not demand uniformity of intellectual views, only unity of spirit feeling. The religions of authority crystallize into lifeless creeds; the religion of the spirit grows into the increasing joy and liberty of ennobling deeds of loving service and merciful ministration.
Since delivered in written form, one might say the book itself has been crystalized or set in its contents. But the real student of the book soon realizes how the meanings and values of the words so presented certainly can, will, and do change based on the increasing discernment and experience of the student in the living of a believer’s life. This religious life cannot be crystalized or its not going on.
That’s exactly right Bradly. We have been given words. Words have meanings . . . but which meanings? How do we figure out what the words mean? I think the best approach is to internalize the words and allow the spirit influences within the soul to do the sorting and interpreting for us. If we are as we say we are, truth seekers, then we will recognize the truth within. Truth is something found in the soul. I won’t reproduce the quotes for that because I think everyone already knows it. It’s my belief that the words we read in TUB are meant to foster that inner reflection in which we exercise our spiritual insight muscles to discover, recognize, interpret and choose meanings with value . . . with truth, beauty and goodness. I believe that once those gems are discovered, they are best shared, which is what we are doing here.
May I suggest that if Enno cannot recognize truth, beauty and goodness in the meanings and values we share here, that perhaps he would be happier elsewhere? I don’t think we have to change our thinking to make him happy, do you? Don’t you think a persistent malcontent might be seriously trying to put unreal things into action? We know that truth makes us happy because it can be acted out. If you’re constantly unhappy here Enno, perhaps it’s because your way of thinking about what’s going on here is not true. Have you ever considered that?
Van Amadon wrote:You’re just playing a game aren’t you Iris. You know exactly what the revelators insinuated when they said “ingenious self-deception.”You use the name Iris like it’s a bad thing. Irises are beautiful, a truly noble flower, which is why I chose it. It’s one of my favorites. I have several beds of them in various colors. But that aside, I do know what the revelators mean when they use the words ingenious self-deception. Isn’t that how they referred to Lucifer? Do you think I’m Lucifer? Do you think I’m evil, sinful and full of iniquity?Van Amadon wrote: For you to indicate that “you got that right” that you don’t think the religious concepts of the Urantia Book cannot be PERSONALLY turned into personal doctrine and dogma, like I see it presented on these forums by some all the time, puts the ingenuity of why intellectual crystallization occurs on display.
So I’m right. This topic is just another attempt by you to cast aspersions on those of us who take TUB study seriously. I know you don’t like me and I know you don’t like Bradly. You criticize everything we say, but I think that’s your problem, not mine or Bradly’s. I think your attempt to start what looks like a legitimate thread on a legitimate topic is actually a ruse to spew hatred towards the two of us. Now, if that isn’t nasty, I don’t know what is. Your intentions and motivations are now on public display. Let the readers decide for themselves . . .
Van Amadon wrote:Is reading the Urantia Book “the doing of the Father’s will?” Is riding a bike with training wheels “riding a bike?”
Just added that little gem to the Van/nodisms Collection. Can anyone explain it to me?
old saying: doing the same thing over and over while expecting different results = insanity. Troll feeding is such a waste.
I think the best approach is to internalize the words
Totally agree with you.
I think the best approach is to internalize the words
Totally agree with you.
That’s what I meant about riding a bike.
We’re talking the same language.
Login to reply to this topic.
Not registered? Sign up here.