-
Posts
-
Well this quote is saying that this revelation is philosophical……
Not exactly. The quote is saying that revelation assists and clarifies philosophy in combining the divergent viewpoints of science and religion (103:6.9). Philosophy, by itself, is inadequate to do that. Revelation is something added to philosophy. Revelation is the superadditive component added to philosophy which enables the material mind to unify two very disparate perspectives (103:6.2; 103:6.9). Science views the world from the outside looking inward, while religion views the world from the inside looking outward (103:7.6; 103:6.2). Philosophy is supposed to connect the gap between the two by bringing the two monocular views into one binocular view. But it cannot do that without revelation.
Philosophy, by itself, is totally inept in doing that because of the lack of morontia insight (mota), therefore requiring revelation to make it happen (103:6.9). Revelation is the superadditive component, not philosophy.
Philosophy is a function of the material mind. Revelation, being truth, is a function of the supermaterial mind, which is the soul (180:5.3; 195:6.12)). Revelation is enabled by the Spirit of Truth, the source of spiritual philosophy (101:3.2), which makes it a soul phenomenon. Revelation occurs at the soul level.
What I’m saying is that philosophy is not revelational, while you’re trying to tell me that revelation is philosophical. We’re talking about two different things.
Revelation can alter the philosophy of the material mind, but its effects are spiritual, within the soul, because that is where truth is realized. Revelation is invariably spiritual (101:4.5).
The quote is saying that revelation assists and clarifies philosophy in combining the divergent viewpoints of science and religion
I am sorry but I don’t follow you. This quote is clearly saying that revelation is synthesizing religion and science INTO a logical universe philosophy. There is no way to change these words to mean something other than what it is obviously saying.
the fact that revelation does synthesize the apparently divergent sciences of nature and the theology of religion into a consistent and logical universe philosophy,
Philosophy, by itself, is totally inept in doing that because of the lack of morontia insight (mota), therefore requiring revelation to make it happen
How is philosophy inept if it is what gets man to arrive at a concept of complete reality?? That quote is not saying that Philosophy completely fails, it is saying that philosophy PARTIALLY fails, it doesn’t completely fall on its face. We may not have the superphilosophical insight of mota but we can have a cosmic consciousness. The 3 cosmic intuitions when unified in mind allow us to know how something works and functions but it is sad to record that few people use this. By the authors saying that revelation completes the viewpoint that philosophy partially fails to achieve they are basically saying the 2 are the same viewpoint. Revelation can complete the true philosophic picture because it is philosophical.
~ The Urantia Book, (101:4.4) Science deals with facts; religion is concerned only with values. Through enlightened philosophy the mind endeavors to unite the meanings of both facts and values, thereby arriving at a concept of complete reality. ~ The Urantia Book, (101:5.2)
Epochal revelations are not the only way to know reality. Many people have known reality without revelation because they cultivated a cosmic consciousness/philosophical consciousness. But I agree that revelation does assist philosophy. It definitely helps to complete a philosophic view.
What about the fact that revelation is compensating for a lack of mota insight, and mota is superphilosophical???
Scott, we’re working at this from two different ends and eventually I’m sure we’ll meet in the middle, wherever that is.
What the quote is saying is that without revelation the synthesis of science and religion cannot come to a logical universe philosophy. A logical universe philosophy is merely a stable thought structure designed to enable spiritual growth. Without revelation, philosophy cannot arrive at a logical framework with which to think about the universe. But what is the purpose of developing that framework? This is my point, one of the purposes of revelation is to uplift philosophy so the material mind can balance itself and think clearly about the universe. And thinking in a balanced way makes thoughts more amenable to adjustment by Spirit. The goal is spirit. The goal of revelation is spirit.
Philosophy is a mechanism of thought but it is not necessarily truth and it is definitely not revelation. So, the Fifth Epochal Revelation clarifies philosophy with the purpose of improving the mind for spiritual growth. The goal is spirit. My contention with this thread concerns the ends, not the means. Philosophy is the means, religion is the ends. And that is why I consider the UB to be a religious revelation, and so do the revelators as evidenced in quote 92:4.4.
Human philosophy without revelation is incapable of doing its job of providing a framework of thought conducive to spiritual growth (the goal). We are told several times that this is due to our inability to perceive mota with the material mind. But the soul, which is morontial, is capable of perceiving mota, which is why revelation is necessary. This is why they tell us that the Spirit of Truth is the gift of spiritual philosophy. The Spirit of Truth transforms human philosophy into spiritual philosophy for the soul through a process of interpretation of meaning which results in a personal revelation of truth. Without revelation, human philosophy would never rise to the level of spirit. It would swirl around in humanistic circles going nowhere.
And that is the basis of my claim that revelation is about truth and truth is about personal religious experience, making revelation a spiritual phenomenon, not a philosophical phenomenon. Philosophy is merely a mechanism to maintain mental stability so spirit can more easily dominate it. Mind strives for spirit dominance, which is at the heart of the transfer of dominance phenomenon. Philosophy, by itself, cannot accomplish this, but it can provide the framework for the spirit influences within us to do their work more successfully.
Revelation transforms philosophy but revelation is not philosophy. This is a fine point and maybe too fine for my abilities to explain. One of my purposes in bringing it up is to prevent people from believing that they’ve arrived at “the truth” once they discover a philosophy of living they think is harmonious with the universe. That is not enough. A philosophy of living must, at its heart, be a religious philosophy, one that seeks spirit not just harmony within the mind. And seeking spirit will cause people to change their philosophies over and over and over again according to their capacity for receptivity of revelation.
Sorry but I don’t agree.
Metaphysics is mans attempt at mota, mota is superphilosophical, Revelation is mans compensation for a lack of superphilosophical (mota) insight, where human philosophy partially fails is that it is unable to complete the full true philosophic picture. Revelation completes the True Philosophic picture by filling in the missing philosophic gaps. Mota joins up with our human philosophy. In the same sense that revelation joins up with human philosophy. Our human made philosophy is like the bottom half of the egg and the top half of the egg is revelation. The 2 get put together and you are left with true philosophy.
Religion yields happiness, Revelation yields unity. This book is revealing a 3-fold unity of the cosmos.
Philosophy allows us to view Deity. It takes a 3-fold unity perspective to view Deity. Deity is personalizable as God. “Deity is unity”. Without a 3-fold unity perspective we can’t see Deity. Religion views god as a personal Father, and Science a first cause. But Deity is both. Deity is the foundation of God. The foundation of the 7 absolutes of infinity is Deity. Deity is the big picture here.
(1106.6) 101:2.7 Science ends its reason-search in the hypothesis of a First Cause. Religion does not stop in its flight of faith until it is sure of a God of salvation. The discriminating study of science logically suggests the reality and existence of an Absolute. Religion believes unreservedly in the existence and reality of a God who fosters personality survival. What metaphysics fails utterly in doing, and what even philosophy fails partially in doing, revelation does; that is, affirms that this First Cause of science and religion’s God of salvation are one and the same Deity.
Why do the authors even bring up metaphysics. Its because metaphysics is our failed attempt at mota as mentioned elsewhere in the book. Mota is superphilosophical. A merely religious perspective does not give us a viewpoint of Deity because its not yielding a 3-fold unity of the cosmos. Religion in the context of a 3-fold harmony can reveal Deity because its being mixed with our scientific viewpoint and the relationship between those 2 viewpoints gives rise to a 3rd superadditive viewpoint (philosophy). Personality can function in the harmony of a 3-fold triune perspective, it will also unify that viewpoint so that we can see 3-fold reality as one whole.
. . . where human philosophy partially fails is that it is unable to complete the full true philosophic picture. Revelation completes the True Philosophic picture by filling in the missing philosophic gaps.
So, you agree that philosophy is a failure without revelation, which is exactly what I said. Glad we agree on that point. Philosophy is man’s attempt at unification of experience but it is totally inadequate without the revelation of truth which is spiritual.
Mota joins up with our human philosophy. In the same sense that revelation joins up with human philosophy.
Mota cannot join with anything on the finite material human level because it is supermaterial, morontial (111:3.2). That’s why revelation is necessary. Revelation of truth is only perceptible in the supermaterial level of mind (180:5.3).So I agree with your second sentence that human philosophy needs the help of revelation. But mota is a supermaterial soul level of philosophy, it cannot join up with our material human philosophy.
This book is revealing a 3-fold unity of the cosmos.
And that revelation is only meaningful when unified by personality through personal religious experience. Otherwise, the book would be useless, another addition to endless bookshelves of treatises on philosophy and cosmology. The cosmology in the UB is not inspired (101:4.2; 101:4.5). To become inspired it must become personal and transformed by the presence of Deity within the soul, a personal presence like the Holy Spirit and the Spirit of Truth (34:5.4). This is what makes it religious.
Without a 3-fold unity perspective we can’t see Deity.
There are a lot of people without a 3-fold unity perspective who perceive Deity. Perceiving Deity first requires the presence of Deity within the mind. The Holy Spirit is the first presence of Deity in the mind and she appears upon entry into the seventh psychic circle with the first moral decision. Seventh circlers may not necessarily appreciate a 3-fold unity perspective, being just beginners, but they are capable of God-consciousness just like a first circler (110:6.16). And that is because of the awareness of the presence of Deity in their minds, not because of cosmic consciousness. Cosmic consciousness grows; it is an evolution of consciousness made possible by the presence of Deity within the mind.
Deity is the big picture here.
Yes, you must have read my book. And that is precisely why the Fifth Epochal Revelation is religious. You can’t know Deity without having religion.
TUB: Mota joins up with our human philosophy. In the same sense that revelation joins up with human philosophy.
Bonita: Mota cannot join with anything on the finite material human level because it is supermaterial, morontial (111:3.2). That’s why revelation is necessary. Revelation of truth is only perceptible in the supermaterial level of mind (180:5.3).So I agree with your second sentence that human philosophy needs the help of revelation. But mota is a supermaterial soul level of philosophy, it cannot join up with our material human philosophy.
P556:1, 48:7.1 The lower planes of morontia mota join directly with the higher levels of human philosophy…. according to this quote the lower levels of mota join directly up with the higher levels of our human philosophy.
Yes, you must have read my book. And that is precisely why the Fifth Epochal Revelation is religious. You can’t know Deity without having religion.
But TUB is saying that Deity is more than just the personal God of religion. Its also the 1st cause of science, God is also an “It”. The “It’ and the “He” join as one. If all you do is look at the spiritual you will miss the other side. Personality doesn’t even function unless there is a 3-fold harmony so you can’t even have a True religious experience without philosophically viewing the unity of 3-fold reality. Personality cannot engage an unbalanced system. So if someone is merely spiritual and just religious they will never experience a 3-fold harmony in their mind and thus never experience True Religion.
1148.13) 104:4.14 In religious experience, creatures make contact with the God who is love, but such spiritual insight must never eclipse the intelligent recognition of the universe fact of the pattern which is Paradise.
I
P556:1, 48:7.1 The lower planes of morontia mota join directly with the higher levels of human philosophy…. according to this quote the lower levels of mota join directly up with the higher levels of our human philosophy.
I think it is important to define what is meant by the higher levels of human philosophy in this quote. The higher levels of human philosophy would be those thoughts that are in the process of being spiritized. They involve the discovery, recognition and in some measure interpretation of value prior to making the choice to actualize them as a survivable part of the soul. Even though this happens, the lower planes of morontia mota are still not comprehensible by material mind. They are in the process of becoming part of the morontia soul, a place where they can be experienced and known.
Just because the lower planes of mota join with the higher levels of philosophy doesn’t mean that mota is comprehensible by the finite, material mind. It’s important to delineate the difference in comprehension between the finite, material mind and the morontia soul. The material mind intellectualizes philosophy, the soul experiences it. Even the highest attainable philosophy of humans remains a compensation for the material mind’s inability to comprehend mota, as stated in this next quote:
103:6.15 The highest attainable philosophy of mortal man must be logically based on the reason of science, the faith of religion, and the truth insight afforded by revelation. By this union man can compensate somewhat for his failure to develop an adequate metaphysics and for his inability to comprehend the mota of the morontia.
TUB wrote: But TUB is saying that Deity is more than just the personal God of religion. Its also the 1st cause of science, God is also an “It”.The “It” part of God is a derivative and consequence of Deity (0:4.12). The “It” part of God would not exist without the personality presence of Deity coming first. Deity is the goal of personality experience and divinity is that quality of character which man potentially acquires for himself in his search for Deity. Divinity is defined as the unifying and coordinating quality of Deity, and divinity is comprehensible to the material mind as truth, beauty and goodness, experienced by personality as love, mercy and ministry (0:1.17)
Personality doesn’t even function unless there is a 3-fold harmony so you can’t even have a True religious experience without philosophically viewing the unity of 3-fold reality.
Personality functions when touched by the liberating divinity of God (5:6.6). Only the Paradise Father can gift personality (0:5.4; 5:6.4)); he decides what energy systems he desires to gift personality to. And personality becomes functional in the eyes of the universe when it chooses to be moral, that is recognizing the value of other personalities. It has nothing at all to do with the intellect or cosmic consciousness. Intelligence alone cannot explain the moral nature (16:7.1)
Personality cannot engage an unbalanced system.
Actually it’s the other way around, it’s the personality that unifies an unbalanced system. That’s why they call it a “balanced personality”. The system is naturally changing all of the time and the personality continually attempts to unify the system, to line it up with mind, spirit and personality gravity circuits. It’s not possible to have a unified 3-fold approach to reality without personality doing the unifying. The personality is the captain steering the vessel (111:1.9). All the mind can do is discover, recognize and interpret. It’s the personality that does the choosing. Maybe you’re thinking that the Adjuster cannot engage an unbalanced system . . . that is true . . . but the Adjuster is not personality.
I think you missed the point I was making. I was not saying that we are going to experience mota. I was pointing out that true revelation compensates for mota. It provides us with what mota would have gave us if we had mota insight. Mota is superphilosophy. Metaphysics is a failed philosophical attempt at mota. But revelation succeeds at what metaphysics attempts. When the authors talk about the revelation relating to mota they are invariably referring to philosophy because mota is philosophy.
You brought up a lot of other topics there but I am trying to stay just on this topic.
Again, thanks to you both for exploring this so deeply.
Another angle to include is that human philosophy evolves along with the human philosophers. Hence human philosophy, “post-Bonita”, can freely include insights she has helped bring down to earth.
Also, where Bonita uses (the word and concept) “religious“, keep in mind she refers not to that which repels so many of this generation, but to the reality of personal interaction with (i) our foster parents in Nebadon, and (ii) with the actual presence of our true Father. Whereas Chris is struggling with students who not only tend to revere him, but who also tend to see the Urantia book as a new “scripture” to which they might cling. My guess is that it is to this sort of student that Chris says (55 seconds into the tape in question):
“If you’ve been reading the book up to this point and the only thing that was really driving you onward was a desire to have a new religious text, that you could identify with, …”
I think he’s speaking to these when he then says, “the UB is not (that sort of) religious text.”
TUB wrote:
“… but it is sad to record that few people use this.”
TUB, in the interest of setting the record straight, the comment you regularly misquote actually goes like this:
(192.5, 16:6.9) “[…]. But it is sad to record that so few persons on Urantia take delight in cultivating these qualities of courageous and independent cosmic thinking.”
Anyone alive is using from 0 to 100 % of these intuitions. The revelators’ complaint is that so few of us “take delight in cultivating…“. To help you see the difference, think how many children learn to play the piano, yet how few take delight in their scales and arpeggios
PS: worth reflecting on some of the proposed Latin roots of “religious”:
“re-ligati” (re-binding), “re-eligere” (re-choosing), “re-legendo” (re-reading)
I more or less agree with you Scott, but again, I use words differently than you.When the authors talk about the revelation relating to mota they are invariably referring to philosophy because mota is philosophy.
The authors say that revelation is a substitution for mota. And mota is more than just philosophy, it is a higher form of wisdom gained by morontia experience. In order to achieve mota it’s necessary to have the experience of transmutation of material value potentials into morontial meaning actuals (soul-growing). Human philosophy can also be a form of wisdom if unified by personality in evolutionary experience, but regardless of its exposure to revelation, philosophy remains evolutionary (92:4.1).
Anyway, I want to thank you for taking part in this debate Scott. I’m thoroughly enjoying it and I hope you are too. It’s hard to get anyone to debate anymore. It seems that everyone is afraid of it for some reason. Maybe everyone prefers the warm and fuzzy love and peace stuff, I don’t know. Personally, I think reasonable debate is healthy and mentally stimulating, a stimulus for deep reflective thinking, which I appreciate.
TUB wrote:
“… but it is sad to record that few people use this.”
TUB, in the interest of setting the record straight, the comment you regularly misquote actually goes like this:
(192.5, 16:6.9) “[…]. But it is sad to record that so few persons on Urantia take delight in cultivating these qualities of courageous and independent cosmic thinking.”
Anyone alive is using from 0 to 100 % of these intuitions. The revelators’ complaint is that so few of us “take delight in cultivating…“. To help you see the difference, think how many children learn to play the piano, yet how few take delight in their scales and arpeggios
If you are not cultivating them you are not using them. Its the same thing. To not cultivate them is to not use them. The cosmic intuitions ARE “these qualities of courageous and independent cosmic thinking”. For example if someone is cultivating genuine spiritual insight they are cultivating the 3rd cosmic intuition, they are taking delight in cultivating this independent and courageous form of cosmic thinking. Everyone has these intuitions at their disposal as a gift from the Holy Spirit. All they have to do is use them/cultivate them. The authors give some hint as to why not many people are not cultivating these independent forms of courageous thinking.
(192.6)16:6.10 In the local universe mind bestowals, these three insights of the cosmic mind constitute the a priori assumptions which make it possible for man to function as a rational and self-conscious personality in the realms of science, philosophy, and religion. Stated otherwise, the recognition of the reality of these three manifestations of the Infinite is by a cosmic technique of self-revelation. Matter-energy is recognized by the mathematical logic of the senses; mind-reason intuitively knows its moral duty; spirit-faith (worship) is the religion of the reality of spiritual experience. These three basic factors in reflective thinking may be unified and co-ordinated in personality development, or they may become disproportionate and virtually unrelated in their respective functions. But when they become unified, they produce a strong character consisting in the correlation of a factual science, a moral philosophy, and a genuine religious experience. And it is these three cosmic intuitions that give objective validity, reality, to man’s experience in and with things, meanings, and values.
If they become disproportionate they function “virtually unrelated in their respective function”. When they are unified there is that 3-fold harmony. So for example if someone was just cultivating a “spiritual” consciousness they wouldn’t really be using that spiritual intuition properly because its not being unified in that 3-fold system. When all these forms of thinking get unified they all function as they are supposed to.
This is a good quote that is telling that we should never be overly spiritual in proportion to our recognition of the universe fact of pattern which is the Paradise Isle. The Paradise Isle is a Absolute of Matter. This just speaks to that 3-fold viewpoint that we need to cultivate. A philosophical consciousness is a way to view 3-fold reality. That is how to achieve this balance. A merely religious consciousness will just look at the spirit side and a overly material consciousness will just look at the scientific side. A Philosophical consciousness is co-ordinating the 2 together.
1148.13)104:4.14 In religious experience, creatures make contact with the God who is love, but such spiritual insight must never eclipse the intelligent recognition of the universe fact of the pattern which is Paradise.
Anyway, I want to thank you for taking part in this debate Scott. I’m thoroughly enjoying it and I hope you are too. It’s hard to get anyone to debate anymore. It seems that everyone is afraid of it for some reason. Maybe everyone prefers the warm and fuzzy love and peace stuff, I don’t know. Personally, I think reasonable debate is healthy and mentally stimulating, a stimulus for deep reflective thinking, which I appreciate.
No problem. I am guessing if you hadn’t of posted this topic I wouldn’t have brought it up on my own even though I have wanted to, so thanks for pushing the envelope.
This paragraph is relevant to this topic IMO. This is the first thing brought up by the authors in the forword.
.1) 0:0.1 IN THE MINDS of the mortals of Urantia — that being the name of your world — there exists great confusion respecting the meaning of such terms as God, divinity, and deity. Human beings are still more confused and uncertain about the relationships of the divine personalities designated by these numerous appellations. Because of this conceptual poverty associated with so much ideational confusion, I have been directed to formulate this introductory statement in explanation of the meanings which should be attached to certain word symbols as they may be hereinafter used in those papers which the Orvonton corps of truth revealers have been authorized to translate into the English language of Urantia.
Its because of all the ideational confusion that they are writing this revelation IMO. The “idea” part of reality is the domain of philosophy. The ideal of God is the domain of religion. The world recognizes the ideal of God but its this idea of God that we are confused about. Man is confused not in the theological sense (religious sense) the confusion is philosophical. We don’t have the right ideas about God.
100:5.1 The world is filled with lost souls, not lost in the theologic sense but lost in the directional meaning, wandering about in confusion among the isms and cults of a frustrated philosophic era. Too few have learned how to install a philosophy of living in the place of religious authority. (The symbols of socialized religion are not to be despised as channels of growth, albeit the river bed is not the river.)
Its because of all the ideational confusion that they are writing this revelation IMO.
That is the first thing listed under the value of revelation on page 1110. And they even say that revelation is designed to reduce confusion by the “authoritative elimination of error”. I think the use of the word authoritative is interesting. Four of the five items listed have to do with facts and history to eliminate erroneous thinking. The last is about illuminating the spiritual teachings of the revelation. And that is the goal, the spiritual, the whole purpose of eliminating error.
101:4.10 Presenting cosmic data in such a manner as to illuminate the spiritual teachings contained in the accompanying revelation.
Erroneous thinking is definitely a problem, but it does not stand in the way of God-consciousness. Humans have been thinking erroneously for millennia; they still are and always will be until reaching Paradise. But despite all the erroneous thinking, most people are, and have been, God-conscious on some level. So why all the fuss about correcting thinking about God? We must have reached a point where it is too difficult to move forward without it.
It’s interesting to note that not even Jesus tried to change people’s erroneous thinking, he rarely corrected misunderstandings; he left that up to the indwelling Monitor. He was a living revelation; he showed people how to live more than how to think. This revelation is more about thinking, so perhaps that is why some believe it is a philosophical revelation.
194:2.9 But these mistakes of the intellect in no way interfered with the believer’s great progress in growth in spirit.
141:7.12 He seldom paused to correct misunderstandings or to resent misrepresentation.
I agree that it is now time to achieve a higher and more true concept or idea of God. To do so requires that revelation at least reveal the errors that get in the way of discovering that concept. For the apostles it was their evolutionary religion that got in the way. For us moderns it’s more complicated now that we know so much about science, have debunked mythology, glorify psychology and no longer trust evolutionary religion. It’s a more complex issue going forward, and just clearing up a few issues is not enough. As is explained, they have to approach the problem philosophically from the top down (19:1.7), which demands that the concepts of God are reexamined, from Paradise downward, in order to avoid the four errors of philosophic technique mentioned on page 215. But the philosophic technique is NOT the technique that reveals God as a person. That is still a spiritual phenomenon.
But the philosophic technique is NOT the technique that reveals God as a person. That is still a spiritual phenomenon.
I think what happens when someone is overly spiritual is that their mind is unbalanced and they are left unable to function in the higher domain of their mind. IMO the belief that we need to be overly spiritual is a preconceived notion or prejudice that will block the ministry of the adjuster and make it nearly impossible for him to do his work. A true philosophy is still spiritual though, its just that it is also material at the same time. Its a mix of both. Its like the power-personality synthesis of the supreme. I think that a True Philosophy reveals God as a person and God as a “It” at the same time. Its just an objective hand to reach out and touch spirit with. We are not actually spirit beings.
1148.13)104:4.14 In religious experience, creatures make contact with the God who is love, but such spiritual insight must never eclipse the intelligent recognition of the universe fact of the pattern which is Paradise.
Why would the authors tell us that our spiritual insight must never eclipse the intelligent recognition of the universe fact of the pattern which is Paradise. What will happen to us if our spiritual insight does? Paradise is the Absolute of Matter. A faith grounded in factual recognition is like a rock. Its unshakable when we add material facts to our spiritual faith. A material consciousness does not have to crowd out the spiritual and vice versa. The two can be combined into one, to form a superadditive perspective.
Login to reply to this topic.
Not registered? Sign up here.