-
Posts
-
The apparent long-term purpose of The Urantia Book is to help this world advance toward the goal of Light & Life. On worlds which reach this stage, cosmology becomes one of the chief pursuits of its inhabitants.
Throughout this glorious age the chief pursuit of the ever-advancing mortals is the quest for a better understanding and a fuller realization of the comprehensible elements of Deity—truth, beauty, and goodness. This represents man’s effort to discern God in mind, matter, and spirit. And as the mortal pursues this quest, he finds himself increasingly absorbed in the experiential study of philosophy, cosmology, and divinity. (56:10.2)
The Book includes an entirely new cosmology which coordinates the material universe with God. The whole universe is organized around a plane of creation which revolves about the Eternal Isle of Paradise, the dwelling place of the Universal Father. This could not be more different from the current Big Bang concept of a completely disorganized universe with no center, no overall structure, and no place for God. The authoritative scientific consensus supports the second, while only the authority of epochal revelation supports the first.
Is this revealed concept of how the universe is dynamically organized about God on Paradise common to every cosmology on every world settled in Light & Life? Does the Book give us the basics of the cosmology of Light & Life long before our science is destined to finally discover how the universe is truly organized? What do the authors hope their revelation of this cosmology will accomplish?
Is this revealed concept of how the universe is dynamically organized about God on Paradise common to every cosmology on every world settled in Light & Life?
Certainly. I say this unequivocally, because of the information in the book pertaining to discussions on the descending Sons of God throughout creation.
7:6.2 The Eternal Son is the personal source of the adorable attributes of mercy and service which so abundantly characterize all orders of the descending Sons of God as they function throughout creation. All the divine nature, if not all the infinity of attributes, the Eternal Son unfailingly transmits to the Paradise Sons who go out from the eternal Isle to reveal his divine character to the universe of universes.Sooner or later. . .
20:5.4 During the course of the long history of an inhabited planet, many dispensational adjudications will take place, and more than one magisterial mission may occur, but ordinarily only once will a bestowal Son serve on the sphere. It is only required that each inhabited world have one bestowal Son come to live the full mortal life from birth to death. Sooner or later, regardless of spiritual status, every mortal-inhabited world is destined to become host to a Magisterial Son on a bestowal mission except the one planet in each local universe whereon a Creator Son elects to make his mortal bestowal.George Park wrote: Is this revealed concept of how the universe is dynamically organized about God on Paradise common to every cosmology on every world settled in Light & Life?
Certainly. I say this unequivocally, because of the information in the book pertaining to discussions on the descending Sons of God throughout creation.
If the Book gives us the outlines of the cosmology of Light & Life, as you say, does this imply that we are much closer to the threshold of this golden age than we ever imagined? Must centuries pass before astronomers finally begin to discover the elliptical space levels of the master universe and how they are all concentrically arranged about a universal center? Or are we given this knowledge in anticipation of some imminently impending discovery?
If the Book gives us the outlines of the cosmology of Light & Life, as you say, does this imply that we are much closer to the threshold of this golden age than we ever imagined?
The book does provide many avenues to imagine cosmological possibilities. Even now a NASA telescope recently discovered a nearby star surrounded by seven earth-like planets, as you no doubt know.
I’m not sure if you are asking about Urantia’s golden age or the master universe.
We do know Satania is not built out. (15:14.5) How old is Urantia? How many more planets are needed to build it out? I ask in order to narrow down your question.
If it’s Urantia you’re asking about, I think we tend to flatter ourselves to imagine we are closer to the threshold of Light and Life than we ever imagined.
. . . are we given this knowledge in anticipation of some imminently impending discovery?
Maybe. Or maybe it’s to reduce confusion; to eliminate error; to fill in gaps of missing knowledge and/or *earned knowledge*; to provide *cosmic data* to illuminate spiritual teachings in the revelation.
101:4.9 Truth may be but relatively inspired, even though revelation is invariably a spiritual phenomenon. While statements with reference to cosmology are never inspired, such revelations are of immense value in that they at least transiently clarify knowledge by:
(1109.7)101:4.6 1. The reduction of confusion by the authoritative elimination of error.
(1109.8)101:4.7 2. The co-ordination of known or about-to-be-known facts and observations.
(1110.1)101:4.8 3. The restoration of important bits of lost knowledge concerning epochal transactions in the distant past.
(1110.2)101:4.9 4. The supplying of information which will fill in vital missing gaps in otherwise earned knowledge.
(1110.3)101:4.10 5. Presenting cosmic data in such a manner as to illuminate the spiritual teachings contained in the accompanying revelation.
What do you suppose *earned knowledge* is?
What do you suppose *earned knowledge* is?
We learn about the decimal system in the physical universe, as noted in this reference, where we also learn that in Orvonton life patterns are configured in multiples of twelve. They inform us on Urantia there are 48: 24 pairs. The last I heard our known science confirms there are 23 pairs of chromosomes. Is this an example of earned knowledge?
36:2.11 The number ten — the decimal system — is inherent in the physical universe but not in the spiritual. The domain of life is characterized by three, seven, and twelve or by multiples and combinations of these basic numbers. There are three primal and essentially different life plans, after the order of the three Paradise Sources and Centers, and in the universe of these three basic forms of life are segregated on three different types of planets. There were, originally, twelve distinct and divine concepts of transmissible life. This number twelve, with its subdivisions and multiples, runs throughout all basic life patterns of all seven superuniverses. There are also seven architectural types of life design, fundamental arrangements of the reproducing configurations of living matter. The Orvonton life patterns are configured as twelve inheritance carriers. The differing orders of will creatures are configured as 12, 24, 48, 96, 192, 384, and 768. On Urantia there are forty-eight units of pattern control — trait determiners — in the sex cells of human reproduction.What do you suppose *earned knowledge* is?
This is a good question. The Book says the universe is organized in six concentrically arranged space levels which are revolving about Paradise, which is absolutely stationary at the center of the universe. This is a completely new and unique concept of the universe. In a real sense this cosmology gives us new knowledge about the physical organization of the universe and how it is related to God, if we believe it is true. Apparently, this new knowledge is not considered earned knowledge. We are given a new concept, a new theory, of the universe, but we must earn that scientific knowledge which will allow us to astronomically identify the actuality of the different space levels described by this new cosmology.
If this new unearned knowledge of the universe is the basic cosmology found on planets which have achieved Light & Life, why are we given this knowledge now, at this time, if we are millennia away from this goal?
The fact of God and his creation of the universes of time and space is certainly not ‘new’ information to Urantia. It has been previously presented to us by 4 prior Revelations and is presented to each mind of every generation since the Son’s Spirit was released. Perhaps the additional details are also not ‘new’ information? But was taught at Dalmatia, the Garden, by Mel’s missionaries, and by the Master. The Papers are an epochal presentation to also restore:
(1110.1)101:4.8 3. The restoration of important bits of lost knowledge concerning epochal transactions in the distant past.
I am certain the cosmology of the universe is taught in the schools for mortals on each world from the beginning. Who’s who and the relationships of them to us and us to all others is foundational education or so I believe based on the Papers. Same with history. As to physics and the sciences….surely that must be spoon fed slowly over time as the mortal mind is able to comprehend and utilize in practical ways.
As I recall the schools of Urantia established by our rulers, leaders, and their agents/representatives introduced many ‘new’ concepts and technologies in a planned and evolutionary and radiating way:
50:4.3 (575.4) In the headquarters settlement on your world every human habitation was provided with abundance of land. Although the remote tribes continued in hunting and food foraging, the students and teachers in the Prince’s schools were all agriculturists and horticulturists. The time was about equally divided between the following pursuits:
50:4.4 (575.5) 1. Physical labor. Cultivation of the soil, associated with home building and embellishment.
50:4.5 (575.6) 2. Social activities. Play performances and cultural social groupings.
50:4.6 (575.7) 3. Educational application. Individual instruction in connection with family-group teaching, supplemented by specialized class training.
50:4.7 (575.8) 4. Vocational training. Schools of marriage and homemaking, the schools of art and craft training, and the classes for the training of teachers — secular, cultural, and religious.
50:4.8 (575.9) 5. Spiritual culture. The teacher brotherhood, the enlightenment of childhood and youth groups, and the training of adopted native children as missionaries to their people.50:4.9 (575.10) A Planetary Prince is not visible to mortal beings; it is a test of faith to believe the representations of the semimaterial beings of his staff. But these schools of culture and training are well adapted to the needs of each planet, and there soon develops a keen and laudatory rivalry among the races of men in their efforts to gain entrance to these various institutions of learning.
50:4.10 (575.11) From such a world center of culture and achievement there gradually radiates to all peoples an uplifting and civilizing influence which slowly and certainly transforms the evolutionary races. Meantime the educated and spiritualized children of the surrounding peoples who have been adopted and trained in the prince’s schools are returning to their native groups and, to the best of their ability, are there establishing new and potent centers of learning and culture which they carry on according to the plan of the prince’s schools.
50:4.11 (576.1) On Urantia these plans for planetary progress and cultural advancement were well under way, proceeding most satisfactorily, when the whole enterprise was brought to a rather sudden and most inglorious end by Caligastia’s adherence to the Lucifer rebellion.
The fact of God and his creation of the universes of time and space is certainly not ‘new’ information to Urantia.
I am certain the cosmology of the universe is taught in the schools for mortals on each world from the beginning.
It is certainly true that we have long known God as the Creator of the universe, but this epochal revelation goes into much new detail about the universe God has created. It may be that these cosmologic details were taught in the school of the Planetary Prince, although I don’t recall the Book making any specific mention of this. As far as I’m aware, there is no record on this planet of the idea that there are seven superuniverses in eternal revolution about the Isle of Paradise or that there are four progressively larger space levels concentrically arranged around us. One day astronomers will discover these space levels, and then we will know exactly where Paradise is located in the universe. Nowhere else is there found the idea that the Supreme Being is physically limited to the evolving grand universe, which encompasses the central and superuniverse space levels.
Do the revelators give us all of this new information about how the universe is physically organized just to satisfy our curiosity?
Is this revealed concept of how the universe is dynamically organized about God on Paradise common to every cosmology on every world settled in Light & Life? Does the Book give us the basics of the cosmology of Light & Life long before our science is destined to finally discover how the universe is truly organized? What do the authors hope their revelation of this cosmology will accomplish?
So I’ll give perhaps the contrarian point of view, but which is how it looks to me. Mara you bring in a key section of the book, paper 101 section 4, and posted the end of it. I think it’s important to take that in context of the section as a whole, “The Limitations of Revelation”.
In terms of the book being an epochal revelation, the book is limited and circumspect in its claim. The claim is from 92:4.4:
“There have been many events of religious revelation but only five of epochal significance.”
The book is religious revelation. The word revelation is in reference to “religious truths” (101:4.2) that are to “stand on the records of the ages to come”.
To the extent there is cosmology, the book is blunt that it “is destined to be outgrown in a very short time”. The value of its cosmic data is the extent it “illuminates spiritual teachings” (101:4.10).
Section 101:4 takes a lot of care to separate the word “cosmology” from what is “revelation”:
“Any cosmology presented as a part of revealed religion is destined to be outgrown in a very short time”
“Within a few short years many of our statements regarding the physical sciences will stand in need of revision in consequence of additional scientific developments and new discoveries.”
“The cosmology of these revelations is not inspired.”
“Revelation is invariably a spiritual phenomenon.”
“Statements with reference to cosmology are never inspired”
To me, the list that you pulled in Mara from 101:4.5 should be read as applying specifically to the extent the book is revelation and not further than that:
“Truth may be but relatively inspired, even though revelation is invariably a spiritual phenomenon. While statements with reference to cosmology are never inspired, such revelations are of immense value in that they at least transiently clarify knowledge by:”
The list is about revelations in regards to spiritual phenomenon, religious truth. Many seem to look at the list as applying to these words though:
“Truth may be but relatively inspired, even though revelation is invariably a spiritual phenomenon. While statements with reference to cosmology are never inspired, such revelations are of immense value in that they at least transiently clarify knowledge by:”
I won’t go down the whole list, but just to take the first as example: “The reduction of confusion by the authoritative elimination of error.” This is the book saying that as epochal religious revelation it authoritative eliminates errors related to religious truths. To me it shouldn’t and really can’t be read — but seems often to be — that the book is claiming authoritative elimination of errors of cosmology.
Do the revelators give us all of this new information about how the universe is physically organized just to satisfy our curiosity?
Perhaps it is a bridge of knowledge presented to unify and harmonize the manmade conflicts between religion and science or creationism and evolution? I think it really helped me to conceptualize the unity of creation and how the ‘natural’ order is God’s methodology to provide for the experiential evolution of wisdom and knowledge.
Some of the most important and prominent scientists were religionists. Then came evolution which seemed to drive the ultimate wedge and conflict between science and religion….as though if one side were correct then the other must be false. We know, by the Papers, that this is an inherently flawed paradox which offers no true paradox at all.
Hello tas…..I’ve had a very interesting conversation at another study site about the meaning of “not inspired”. While my position is not in the minority over there, nonetheless there seems to be much disagreement as to the meaning. To me, if something is not inspired, then it is factual. Inspired would mean, again to me, that something is spoken or written by mortals who have been ‘inspired’ by the ministering spirits or intuition and insight, and which might indeed be lacking in factual replete-ness.
I’ve always thought no one might “clarify knowledge” by falsehood….but one might present a Chem 101 text that will indeed be “revised” by further facts in Chem 201….and then 301, etc. What is given is not inaccurate but merely less than complete?
So, I guess I disagree that the only facts are related to spirituality. However, I certainly agree that the contents (all of them) ARE designed and delivered to assist primarily with personal growth in the Spirit and the authors provide adequate factual knowledge of the universe and its creation and creator to facilitate, inspire, and propel us into the quest for God.
Don’t mean to quibble and I am really enjoying the topic! But the “not inspired” issue is perplexing…or so it is to me.
The apparent long-term purpose of The Urantia Book is to help this world advance toward the goal of Light & Life. On worlds which reach this stage, cosmology becomes one of the chief pursuits of its inhabitants.
Throughout this glorious age the chief pursuit of the ever-advancing mortals is the quest for a better understanding and a fuller realization of the comprehensible elements of Deity—truth, beauty, and goodness. This represents man’s effort to discern God in mind, matter, and spirit. And as the mortal pursues this quest, he finds himself increasingly absorbed in the experiential study of philosophy, cosmology, and divinity. (56:10.2)
It’s interesting to read further in paper 56 section 10 and see what it means by cosmology. This section of the book is about truth, beauty, and goodness. Which it correlates with experiential study of “philosophy, cosmology, and divinity”.
It is a unique definition to me, “cosmology” as pursuit of beauty:
Philosophy you somewhat grasp, and divinity you comprehend in worship, social service, and personal spiritual experience, but the pursuit of beauty—cosmology—you all too often limit to the study of man’s crude artistic endeavors. (56:10.3)
While we think in terms of “cosmology” as a study of the material universe (and which is clearly the meaning in paper 101 section 4), is there a root to the word (“cosmetology” being similar?) that means the use of “cosmology” in this section of the book is different?
A little further down (56:10.5-8), see also where it correlates “cosmologic thinking” so much with beauty and artistry:
The attainment of cosmologic levels of thought includes:
1. Curiosity. Hunger for harmony and thirst for beauty. Persistent attempts to discover new levels of harmonious cosmic relationships.
2. Aesthetic appreciation. Love of the beautiful and ever-advancing appreciation of the artistic touch of all creative manifestations on all levels of reality.
3. Ethic sensitivity. Through the realization of truth the appreciation of beauty leads to the sense of the eternal fitness of those things which impinge upon the recognition of divine goodness in Deity relations with all beings; and thus even cosmology leads to the pursuit of divine reality values—to God-consciousness.
Apologies tas…and all…I failed to provide a definition or example of what is or might be “inspired” within the UB.
I have always understood that the only inspired words within the UB are those which are bracketed by quote marks – either attributed to a specific human or unattributed to some human mind. The authors say they included over 1000 of humanity’s highest (inspired) concepts and there are some 2000 (as I recall) quotes attributed, in general, to human thoughts.
Those are what I believe are inspired words….and not any words originating with one of the authors of the Papers. In that regard, I wonder if the words of Jesus prior to baptism as the Son of Man were inspired while the Master Son of Nebadon’s words as the Son of God are not inspired by factual knowledge presented in an inspiring way?
I should have been more complete with my prior post.
“Any cosmology presented as a part of revealed religion is destined to be outgrown in a very short time”
This statement, among several others, makes it difficult to take the description of the universe in the Book seriously. Why should we spend time studying a cosmology which is most likely already outdated? The context of this sentence suggests there is value to be found in spending some effort on this.
Any cosmology presented as a part of revealed religion is destined to be outgrown in a very short time. Accordingly, future students of such a revelation are tempted to discard any element of genuine religious truth it may contain because they discover errors on the face of the associated cosmologies therein presented. (101:4.1)
While admitting the presence of errors in this new cosmology, they also say there are elements of “genuine religious truth” in it. While warning us that this cosmology is not inspired – that is, entirely true – it is nevertheless essentially true. The essential idea that the universe is organized in concentrically arranged space levels revolving about Paradise at the center of the universe would seem to be an “element of genuine religious truth.” The concepts of the Supreme Being and God the Sevenfold, as presented in the Book, certainly depend upon this essential idea.
On the other hand, if this cosmology is essentially wrong, if it contains no “genuine religious truth”, why would it have been included?
Bradly I think the topic here is definitely one where there will always be a diversity of views. I think it’s great to hear how each person sees it and approaches it from their own experiences and thought processes.
Another teaching of the book that is very important I think is that there is not coercion to believe, there isn’t sheer force of logic to make people need to accept God. The way to his objective reality is through the subjective inner experience of the Adjuster. I’ve found that to be true in my journey with the book. I can say from my science background, there isn’t anything in the book that has compelled me by logic to need to believe it. There is enough contrary to logic and evidence to me that it should be the opposite. Statements like what we are discussing here are what allow me to access the spiritual truths.
One simple relevant example I know you’re familiar with:
This far-distant nebula [Andromeda] is visible to the naked eye, and when you view it, pause to consider that the light you behold left those distant suns almost one million years ago.
The Urantia Book came about at a very particular time in history when people were just discovering the true extent of the material universe. The work that expanded our insight was by Edwin Hubble, who discovered through measuring Cepheid variable stars that the smudge in the sky known as Andromeda was in fact far too distant to be in the Milky Way. He discovered for the first time that there are external galaxies and the material universe isn’t just the Milky Way. He measured the Andromeda galaxy as being “almost one million” light years away. This was just years before The Urantia Book was indited.
That was the extent of the “earned knowledge” on this topic. What we hadn’t earned is the knowledge that there are two different populations of Cepheid variables, one brighter than the other. The authors of The Urantia Book were absolutely correct with this statement as far as I’m concerned:
Within a few short years many of our statements regarding the physical sciences will stand in need of revision in consequence of additional scientific developments and new discoveries.
Within a few short years, people earned the knowledge of greater understanding of Cepheids. This irrevocably doubled the distance estimate to Andromeda to about 2 million light years. With ever greater and greater precision, there are now at least 4 very high quality methods that all corroborate an earned knowledge that the light we see from Andromeda left about 2.5 million years ago, rather than the first crude estimate Edwin Hubble gave to us. I think there will always be readers of the book who try to explain a way to think the light from Andromeda left almost a million years ago, and others like myself that just see it as a very obvious example that “Any cosmology presented as a part of revealed religion is destined to be outgrown in a very short time.”
Login to reply to this topic.
Not registered? Sign up here.