RESURRECTION HALL – Redux

Home Forums Urantia Book General Discussions RESURRECTION HALL – Redux

Viewing 15 posts - 121 through 135 (of 152 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #23107
    Richard E Warren
    Richard E Warren
    Participant

    I know what you mean about the brain cloud. I saw your question last night and couldn’t think of a single answer . . . brain was too tired, fogged up. Half-a cuppa joe this morning and all cylinders were fired up. The fog burned off and the answer seemed to be as clear as daylight. But, I’m not sure you should go on just my word alone. The peer review thing is so vital to this work, which is why I decided not to publish what I’ve written. I can’t get a peer review. No one is interested . . . but it is what it is, as they say. Carry on.

    Ah, caffeine, wish it didn’t make me jittery and leave headaches in withdrawal. Almost everyone else seems to do fine with it.

    Anyway, thanks for the ‘vital’ feedback, will carry on!

    PS. Maybe you should switch to fiction ;)

    Richard E Warren

    #23108
    Richard E Warren
    Richard E Warren
    Participant

    Question: Do you remember if the authors indicate anything about whether there . . . .

    Here are some references for your consideration.

    49:6.2 From time to time, on motion of the planetary authorities or the system rulers, special resurrections of the sleeping survivors are conducted. Such resurrections occur at least every millennium of planetary time, when not all but “many of those who sleep in the dust awake.” These special resurrections are the occasion for mobilizing special groups of ascenders for specific service in the local universe plan of mortal ascension. There are both practical reasons and sentimental associations connected with these special resurrections.
    .
    49:6.3 Throughout the earlier ages of an inhabited world, many are called to the mansion spheres at the special and the millennial resurrections, but most survivors are repersonalized at the inauguration of a new dispensation associated with the advent of a divine Son of planetary service.
    .
    52:5.5 On Urantia the establishment of this “new and living way” was a matter of fact as well as of truth. The isolation of Urantia in the Lucifer rebellion had suspended the procedure whereby mortals can pass, upon death, directly to the shores of the mansion worlds. Before the days of Christ Michael on Urantia all souls slept on until the dispensational or special millennial resurrections. Even Moses was not permitted to go over to the other side until the occasion of a special resurrection, the fallen Planetary Prince, Caligastia, contesting such a deliverance. But ever since the day of Pentecost, Urantia mortals again may proceed directly to the morontia spheres.
    .
    189:3.3 Notwithstanding that countless individuals having personal seraphic guardians and those achieving the requisite attainment of spiritual personality progress had gone on to mansonia during the ages subsequent to the times of Adam and Eve, and though there had been many special and millennial resurrections of Urantia sons, this was the third of the planetary roll calls, or complete dispensational resurrections. The first occurred at the time of the arrival of the Planetary Prince, the second during the time of Adam, and this, the third, signalized the morontia resurrection, the mortal transit, of Jesus of Nazareth.
    .
    7:10.4 After mortals have attained residence on the system headquarters, no more literal resurrections will be experienced. The morontia form granted you on departure from the mansion world career is such as will see you through to the end of the local universe experience. Changes will be made from time to time, but you will retain this same form until you bid it farewell when you emerge as first-stage spirits preparatory for transit to the superuniverse worlds of ascending culture and spirit training.
    Adam and Eve’s special resurrection:
    76:6.2 They did not long rest in the oblivion of the unconscious sleep of the mortals of the realm. On the third day after Adam’s death, the second following his reverent burial, the orders of Lanaforge, sustained by the acting Most High of Edentia and concurred in by the Union of Days on Salvington, acting for Michael, were placed in Gabriel’s hands, directing the special roll call of the distinguished survivors of the Adamic default on Urantia. And in accordance with this mandate of special resurrection, number twenty-six of the Urantia series, Adam and Eve were repersonalized and reassembled in the resurrection halls of the mansion worlds of Satania together with 1,316 of their associates in the experience of the first garden. Many other loyal souls had already been translated at the time of Adam’s arrival, which was attended by a dispensational adjudication of both the sleeping survivors and of the living qualified ascenders.
    :-)

    Thanks Mara, for gathering and presenting the germane quotes. This one is especially significant for Kala’s and Saro’s story :)

    …These special resurrections are the occasion for mobilizing special groups of ascenders for specific service in the local universe plan of mortal ascension…. 49:6.2

    .

    Richard E Warren

    #23111
    Bonita
    Bonita
    Participant

    PS. Maybe you should switch to fiction ;)

    Wish I could.  My mind doesn’t seem to work that way.  I’m not a story teller; I didn’t get that gift.  I’m a revealer of reality, just ask my kids and they’ll tell you how many times I yelled, “No, you can’t do ___, this is the real world dammit, it doesn’t work that way!”

    I’m much happier trying to explain to people why angels don’t rape, why souls don’t pre-exist, why midwayers don’t email from UFO’s, why getting in touch with your feelings won’t bring you closer to God and why Gabriel is one of the good guys.   Not to mention dealing with book bashing and church building.  That’s what makes me happy, untangling the webs people weave that separate them from reality.

    But thanks for the offer.  Carry on.

    #23113
    Avatar
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    This reply has been reported for inappropriate content.

    I’m much happier trying to explain to people why angels don’t rape, why souls don’t pre-exist, why midwayers don’t email from UFO’s, why getting in touch with your feelings won’t bring you closer to God and why Gabriel is one of the good guys. Not to mention dealing with book bashing and church building. That’s what makes me happy, untangling the webs people weave that separate them from reality.

    Bonita, if it were not for the UB, and the assumption that it is all presented as fact, and not a form of fiction, because what is presented therein, cannot be proved through the experiences of reality, without scientific conformation, would your “trying to explain” also, not be considered as affirmation of reality?  Is not the attempt to “explain”, using only the Urantia Book as proof, a form of fiction in order to “explain” the supernatural, as is presented therein?  Therefore, are you not using a form of “fiction” to “explain” – “angels”, “midwayers”, “UFO’s”, “Gabriel” and “God”, as your understanding of “reality” as your belief, or your fictional perception of “reality”?

    It would seem that what makes you happy, is telling others what you believe to be truth, as you see it, thereby being your opinion as to what you think reality is?  That would be okay, if you can validate your opinion as being the only truth as you see it, but being that others have their opinions about reality as well, makes your, so called “untangling” just another form of “webs people weave” to explain reality.  So, what I’m hearing, is that you enjoy telling other people that they are wrong in the way they think, and that makes you happy.  If this is the case, why does making others feel unhappy, make you happy?

    #23114
    Bradly
    Bradly
    Participant

    Midi – for one who calls himself “Caligastia” at TB and claims to have secret “keys” of “understanding” and, further, promotes the concept that the rebellion began on Urantia by the Life Carriers (etc.) and Lucifer is misunderstood and his story proves the lack of free will in the universe….well, all I can say is thank the Lord for those who actually know what the Revelation teaches and is willing to post, teach, share, and uphold the facts as presented in the UB for others.  Bonita allows the UB to speak for itself and is so generous with her time and scholarship – hardly worthy of your constant, repetitive whining and slander.

    Your falsehoods and dark view are well known here and at TB….not to mention your ignorance of, twisting and revision of, and/or ignoring the text.   Back off!!   = )

    Thanks Bonita for your tireless service.  Bradly  aka/fanofVan

     

    #23115
    Bonita
    Bonita
    Participant
    Bradly wrote: Thanks Bonita for your tireless service.  Bradly  aka/fanofVan

    And thank you Bradly for your persistent devotion to truth.

    Thanks too for reminding me of other poppycock I forgot to mention.  So now we have yet another piece of breathtaking poppycock.   claims that the Urantia Book is a work of fiction.  Doesn’t that just blow your mind?  Now the most recent revelation of truth in this world is not only DANGEROUS,  it’s also FICTION! Holy cow.

    92:4.9 5. The Urantia Papers. The papers, of which this is one, constitute the most recent presentation of truth to the mortals of Urantia.

     

     

     

     

    #23116
    Avatar
    nelsong
    Participant

    “telling others what you believe to be truth”

    Not even analogous to:

    “untangling the webs people weave that separate them from reality.”

    The difference is clear to me.

    #23117
    Avatar
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    Your falsehoods and dark view are well known here and at TB….not to mention your ignorance of, twisting and revision of, and/or ignoring the text.

    You certainly are entitled to your opinion, even though it would seem that you have an issue, in being able to read my posts correctly?

    Thank you for your opinion, it is much appreciated.

    #23119
    Bradly
    Bradly
    Participant

    Your falsehoods and dark view are well known here and at TB….not to mention your ignorance of, twisting and revision of, and/or ignoring the text.

    You certainly are entitled to your opinion, even though it would seem that you have an issue, in being able to read my posts correctly? Thank you for your opinion, it is much appreciated.

     

    You are welcome!  = )

     

    Like Bonita, I have learned to let the UB speak for itself.  The UB claims to be factual.  There are tens of thousands of facts revealed in the text.  Bonita does not disseminate “truth” when she so ably quotes the UB….she restates/posts those facts…and is both quite willing and quite capable of supporting her re-statements of those teachings when not posting actual text itself.  I use to play a game with others readers (and now with my wife)  called “Prove It”….a game of verifying in text what we remember from text.  It’s a useless game now almost as it use to require much research or searching in the text without index or word search…it was a learning game of recall and accuracy of recall.  I wouldn’t bet much money against Bonita’s recall of the UB…..just sayin’.  But Bonita does not rely on recall as she is happy to quote directly as a learning/teaching method of the actual contents of the UB.

    She does not twist, torment, revise, and opinionate based on “superior” understanding but talks straight and quotes straight.  The UB itself is author and authority enough for some students, who believe the book to be what it claims and from whom it claims, and to be clearly written with concepts redundantly presented in a very unified, integrated, and straightforward format of incredible literature.  It does not matter if you believe it true or fiction Midi, not to me or Bonita…but it does matter when you misstate, misrepresent, and otherwise torture the words presented.  I would advise those who think it fiction or metaphor to abandon the thing altogether for it cannot help illuminate reality to those who deny and forsake the reality presented.

    What Bonita “enjoys” is the gift given and the inspiring illumination of reality and the eternal adventures to come….and here today!!  If you feel “unhappy” about that….that would be YOUR problem for YOU to address.  So, again, get off her back and stay off!!

    Feel free to share your fears, doubts, confusions, perspective, et al, of the contents of the UB if you care to share those.  But this student body and that at TB does not require or benefit from any priestly interpretations from some special holder of the keys to tell us what the UB does not say or does not mean (especially from one who calls himself The Devil)….it says what it says and it don’t say what it don’t….it ain’t complicated.

    The UB is filled with hope and joy and promise and comfort and is a guidebook into the kingdom, the friendly universe, and life eternal.  Of course, it also claims it contains nothing vital for our souls to grow in gladness by simple faith in our loving and paternal God.  So if you think it “fiction”, then abandon it quickly and do not be distracted by it….or its believers or its students.

    Just sayin’…..  = )

    #23121
    Bonita
    Bonita
    Participant
    Bradly wrote:  So, again, get off her back and stay off!!

    Your lips to God’s ears!  Wouldn’t it be wonderful? I enjoy an honest debate of ideas, but I don’t appreciate divisiveness with the intent to condemn another’s character instead of their ideas.  I don’t mind having my ideas challenged, or condemned, but why is it always accompanied by character assassination?  Is it really necessary?

    So the new poppycock is that TUB is fiction because it deals with the supernatural.  Maybe  has landed on something there.  Because it is written by supernatural beings who share their supernatural knowledge some think it is wide open for skepticism, fabrication and revisionism, especially revisionism.   says that because the supernatural cannot be proven by science, it is fiction.  But, we know that such a conclusion is based upon only one level of thinking, the material level of causation.  There are two other levels of thinking: duty and worship (16:6.6-8). The supernatural level is recognized on the level of worship and made cognizant at the level of duty and useable when coordinated with the level of causation.  But that’s another topic, one I’ve written about extensively, and not as a work of fiction.

    Fiction is defined as writing based upon imagination and fabrication, as opposed to facts.  Now, there is a way to write fiction based upon facts, which is what Rick is doing.  However, Rick has informed us ahead of time that his work is fiction, a product of his own imagination based upon the facts presented in TUB.  And I very much appreciate his sincere dedication to getting those facts right.  It’s a delight to see, to be honest.  But my writing, also based upon a sincere dedication to facts, is not a figment of my imagination.  I do not fabricate. I do not write fiction.  If I don’t know something, I may speculate, but I announce when I’m doing that.  I present the facts and give all my reasons for arriving at my conjecture.  Therefore, my writing is based upon logic and reason rather than creative imagination.  Some find that dry and uninteresting, and that’s fine.  After all, I’m here to study the text, not revise the text.

    #23122
    Avatar
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    I present the facts and give all my reasons for arriving at my conjecture. Therefore, my writing is based upon logic and reason rather than creative imagination. Some find that dry and uninteresting, and that’s fine. After all, I’m here to study the text, not revise the text.

    To some degree I can concur but, one must remember that the UB has been introduced with information which has been noted as “opinion” from the authors and some that are presented as fact from their point of view.

    Therefore, the UB is, in my opinion, a nonfictional creation, where from the standpoint of some readers could be considered as fiction, which may be due to their beliefs or experiences, that are modified based on how the narrative has been created, or presented, assuming that the authors understand that there would be many different readers with varied intellect or intelligence.

    One of the definitions found for “fiction” is as follows: “6. Law. an allegation that a fact exists that is known not to exist, made by authority of law to bring a case within the operation of a rule of law. ”  Where in this sense, can be applied to the narration of the UB.

    However, I personally believe that the UB, is a creation of “nonfiction” because of the following definitions, which seems to apply best in my opinion:

    1 – “the branch of literature comprising works of narrative prose dealing with or offering opinions or conjectures upon facts and reality, including biography, history, and the essay (opposed to fiction and distinguished from poetry and drama ).”

    [British Dictionary definition]

    1. writing dealing with facts and events rather than imaginative narration
    2. (modifier) relating to or denoting nonfiction

    Where “modifier” has an interesting defining point, also used in the UB, as “qualifier”:

    1. (grammar) Also called qualifier. a word or phrase that qualifies the sense of another word; for example, the noun alarm is a modifier of clock in alarm clock and the phrase every day is an adverbial modifier of walks in he walks every day
    2. a person or thing that modifies

    Also, in the UB, the word “opinion(s)” is used about 85 times, and is used in many cases as qualifiers to the information presented therein to be the “opinion” of the authors, thereby not indicating facts to be presented but conjecture, therefore making the information being presented, in some cases, as an idea or fiction, based on understanding as is seen by the authors, but not necessarily to be considered as facts, but possibilities or potentials?

    As an example I present the following:

    (30.5) 1:6.6 The more completely man understands himself and appreciates the personality values of his fellows, the more he will crave to know the Original Personality, and the more earnestly such a God-knowing human will strive to become like the Original Personality. You can argue over opinions about God, but experience with him and in him exists above and beyond all human controversy and mere intellectual logic. The God-knowing man describes his spiritual experiences, not to convince unbelievers, but for the edification and mutual satisfaction of believers.

    (30.6) 1:6.7 To assume that the universe can be known, that it is intelligible, is to assume that the universe is mind made and personality managed. Man’s mind can only perceive the mind phenomena of other minds, be they human or superhuman. If man’s personality can experience the universe, there is a divine mind and an actual personality somewhere concealed in that universe.

    “To assume that” someone is as another person may see them, is based on that other persons opinion or conjecture, but for some people to make such an assumption and then to present it as fact, can be viewed as an insight into that other persons character or misunderstanding based on a limitation of intellectual spiritual reality, or ability based on experience which is focused on only a specific topic and less diverse.

     

    #23123
    Bonita
    Bonita
    Participant

     

    POPPYCOCK ALERT:  TUB is NOT introduced with information noted as opinion.  The introduction to TUB is called the Foreword and there is no opinion in it.  It is presented as fact.
    #23124
    Avatar
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    TUB is NOT introduced with information noted as opinion. The introduction to TUB is called the Foreword and there is no opinion in it. It is presented as fact.

    Based on the notation above, it is assumed that my use of a word “introduced” is a specific reference to “the Foreword” of the UB? It is not.

    To some degree I can concur but, one must remember that the UB has been introduced with information which has been noted as “opinion” from the authors and some that are presented as fact from their point of view.

    Evidently, all of the UB’s usages of the word “opinion(s)” had not been referenced, and read, in order to validate my claim, and assumed to have a different meaning from what I had written.  Is this a diverse ability to understand the written word or a presumption as to an authors intended meaning?

    The definition of “foreword” is as follows:

    ” 1. a short introductory statement in a published work, as a book, especially when written by someone other than the author.”

    It would seem that in the foreword of the UB it describes the reason for the introduction of the “Foreword”, as a method of to qualify many of the terms used in the narration which follows.  To some degree, like a glossary in some ways?

    (1.1) 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.

    Therefore, it is this type of response which I am assuming to be a misreading of a variety of text having been presented differently than the author may have intended.  However, when there is a misconception of understanding to what has been written, then why is it not presented as a query to the author rather than an implication of assumption?  Would this not constitute “study” of the context of a narration, which may have diverse implications?

    #23126
    Bradly
    Bradly
    Participant

    Midi – you bring up an excellent topic of its own for a discussion…let’s (anyone who wishes…I can’t right now) start a Topic “Conjecture in the UB”.  There’s another long thread on a prior Forum of the topic.  I always found the authors’ utilization and disclaimers inserted of “opinion”, “we think”, “conjecture”, etc. as compelling evidence of the actual facts presented.  There are tens of thousands of facts given and several hundred times (I conjecture) where the authors present information they personally do not completely understand the who, how, and why of in their presentations of facts they clearly present as such.  The number you give of the one term does not include many other wordings and forms of such conjecture.

    These clearly stated disclaimers do not in any way diminish the clear presentation of facts, history, and personalities presented.  Just because a book of facts also contains declared uncertainties and conjecture does not then make the text a book “of opinions” or “fiction”.  A very illogical and unreasonable conclusion indeed!  Still, those points of such speculation within the UB makes for a fascinating topic for us to consider.

    But why don’t we leave this topic for its purpose…Rick’s “brain trust” (hahahahaha) for considering his chosen task of fictionalizing the experience we all look forward to!!

    = )

    #23127
    Avatar
    Anonymous
    Inactive

    These clearly stated disclaimers do not in any way diminish the clear presentation of facts, history, and personalities presented. Just because a book of facts also contains declared uncertainties and conjecture does not then make the text a book “of opinions” or “fiction”. A very illogical and unreasonable conclusion indeed!

    Bradly, you are correct in your statement regarding Rick’s usage of this topic to be in conjunction with his creative endeavor however, these types of posts can be useful in a creative way, whereby in his imagination of an explanation of his understanding of the UB may also present other persons to express their imaginative understanding of the text in question as he may be using it.  Much is written on the mansion worlds or the morontia life or experience, where I would wonder why so much has been presented in the UB regarding this if it did not have a more realistic implication to our present reality.  So understanding why the UB contains “opinion” and or “conjecture” within its text may have an alternate intent as to stimulate the readers imagination of what is.

    What I have underlined in your statement above, can be considered a true statement as you understand it, and for me it is not “a book of opinion or fiction”, but there are some who may think so.  It is for those who may believe this or other presumptions as to the intent of the UB, is why I have been adamant about allowing others to voice their opinions without harsh opposition, and whenever possible to find within the text of the UB where their opinion may be valid as they understand it.  One can not study a narration of this complexity without looking at other ways of thinking, even if it goes against one’s own religious feelings or expressions.  One does not have to agree with an others opinion or conjecture, as long as they are given a chance to express it.  And if it is not understood, then present one’s own opinion in the for of a question, because you may not fully understand that persons mindset.  Only our Father can speak in absolutes, as it can be understood by every individual child, but to speak to a group of children, may require a more diverse presentation.

     

Viewing 15 posts - 121 through 135 (of 152 total)

Login to reply to this topic.

Not registered? Sign up here.