The Late Great Urantia Revelation

[Lon]

I haven't disparaged Jesus Christ.

I understand this. You are caught up in a book that you and Freelight are responsible for on this website. The book does. It is 'antibiblical.' Moreover, you know it is. You've quoted from it against the Apostle Paul's (For one instance) testimony concerning His blood sacrifice. Scripture does say "without the shedding of blood, there is no remission of sin." Hebrews 9:22

Instead of asking "why" the amateur Psychiatrist and medical doctor made up an answer: it was barbaric!
Well, Dr. Sadler is NOT a prophet, nor even a theologian. He doesn't 'get' to rewrite the Bible.
Moreover, YOU specifically are forbidden! If it is against the Bible, YOU are instructed to be done with it, from the Bible.

Paul said if he, another, or 'even an angel' preached anything different than one gospel (which includes the Lord Jesus' shedding of blood), they were anathema/condemned.

No, Dr. Sadler was wrong, Blood is/ was necessary because 1) Genesis 2:17 The penalty for sin, is death. There is no hand-slap. Sin separates us from God. God CANNOT make the penalty go away....except exactly one way and only one way. YOUR book, and by that token, you, "Disparage" Christ and what He did on the Cross.

Dr. Sadler, (not a theologian) wouldn't know that. The UB is wrong.

2) Blood is necessary because it isn't an imposition, a punishment, it is a consequence: Sin kills us. Scripture says 'life is in the blood." This means, directly, that our earthly life is sustained with blood in our system. It akin to oil in an engine. A petrol engine has to have it. Our bodies die specifically because sin was introduced into the world ( I realize you disagree on this point).

Dr. Sadler, (not a theologian) wouldn't know that. The UB is wrong.
3) God cannot change. He cannot enter into relationship with us in sin. It isn't a 'choice' it is Who He is. There is no way past this, but one.
Psalm 5:4


Romans 6:23 is the remedy. Death, however barbaric, IS the consequence and that price had to be paid. Rejecting this IS rejecting Christ.

Dr. Sadler, not a theologian, wouldn't know that. The UB is wrong.

 

[Caino]

I understand this. You are caught up in a book that you and Freelight are responsible for on this website. The book does. It is 'antibiblical.' Moreover, you know it is. You've quoted from it against the Apostle Paul's (For one instance) testimony concerning His blood sacrifice. Scripture does say "without the shedding of blood, there is no remission of sin." Hebrews 9:22

Instead of asking "why" the amateur Psychiatrist and medical doctor made up an answer: it was barbaric!
Well, Dr. Sadler is NOT a prophet, nor even a theologian. He doesn't 'get' to rewrite the Bible.
Moreover, YOU specifically are forbidden! If it is against the Bible, YOU are instructed to be done with it, from the Bible.

Paul said if he, another, or 'even an angel' preached anything different than one gospel (which includes the Lord Jesus' shedding of blood), they were anathema/condemned.

No, Dr. Sadler was wrong, Blood is/ was necessary because 1) Genesis 2:17 The penalty for sin, is death. There is no hand-slap. Sin separates us from God. God CANNOT make the penalty go away....except exactly one way and only one way. YOUR book, and by that token, you, "Disparage" Christ and what He did on the Cross.

Dr. Sadler, (not a theologian) wouldn't know that. The UB is wrong.

2) Blood is necessary because it isn't an imposition, a punishment, it is a consequence: Sin kills us. Scripture says 'life is in the blood." This means, directly, that our earthly life is sustained with blood in our system. It akin to oil in an engine. A petrol engine has to have it. Our bodies die specifically because sin was introduced into the world ( I realize you disagree on this point).

Dr. Sadler, (not a theologian) wouldn't know that. The UB is wrong.
3) God cannot change. He cannot enter into relationship with us in sin. It isn't a 'choice' it is Who He is. There is no way past this, but one.
Psalm 5:4


Romans 6:23 is the remedy. Death, however barbaric, IS the consequence and that price had to be paid. Rejecting this IS rejecting Christ.

Dr. Sadler, not a theologian, wouldn't know that. The UB is

Sin is deliberate dysloyalty to deity.

To answer you I will represent what the UB actually says.

The UB claims that Adam and Eve were incarnate celestials who arrived from on high to replace the previous, fallen administration of the "Crafty Beast" or "Prince of this world" who himself had Joined the Lucifer rebellion roughly 200,000 years ago. Adam arrived 38,000+ years ago.

The "sin" of Eve and then Adam brought mortality specifically to them, loss of the use of the "tree of life", a real other worldly shrub which sustained celestials on such mortal missions. The sin of Eve, concocted by the beast, was mating with Cain's real mortal Father from the Nodites. Her motive was to fix things faster then they were going. Her genes introduced into the gene pool did bring more pain during labor for her descendants.

Both Adam and Eve repented and salvaged what they could before dying of old age.

The point is people conflate the sin of Adam and Eve with bringing death to the entire world. Death or translation is normal for mortal man, else the world would be very, very crowded.

Jesus disagreed with being rejected and killed which he said was the will of the devil. Yet, the Christian religion needed Jesus killed to satisfy an alternative theory that replaced the Gospel that Jesus first went to the Jews with.

Killing Jesus as a substitute sacrificial lamb obviously wasn’t what he was imploring the Jewish people to adopt.

As it is, you are looking for a way to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. Abraham did not do such things.

* Abram was faithful in the surrender of his will and life to the will of God, the agreement, the covenant.
* It should go without saying that Jesus' audience in John 8:40 was rejecting his Gospel teachings.

Blood sacrifice is a relic of evolved religions all around the world. Judaism adopted blood sacrifice from other religions, but even then they will tell you that a “repentant change of heart” is what is important.

42Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I have come here from God. I have not come on my own; God sent me. 43Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. 44You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

To the belief, claim, theory, teaching, doctrine that sin CANNOT be forgiven without the shedding of blood because somehow God CANNOT technically forgive sin without blood being shed first:

Hebrews 9:22
according to the Law, one may almost say, all things are cleansed with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.


Luke 7:48-50 48Then Jesus said to her, "Your sins are forgiven." 49The other guests began to say among themselves, "Who is this who even forgives sins?" 50Jesus said to the woman, "Your faith has saved you; go in peace."

Matthew 9:1-8 1Jesus stepped into a boat, crossed over and came to his own town. 2Some men brought to him a paralyzed man, lying on a mat. When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the man, "Take heart, son; your sins are forgiven." 3At this, some of the teachers of the law said to themselves, "This fellow is blaspheming!" 4Knowing their thoughts, Jesus said, "Why do you entertain evil thoughts in your hearts? 5Which is easier: to say, 'Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, 'Get up and walk'? 6But I want you to know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins." So he said to the paralyzed man, "Get up, take your mat and go home." 7Then the man got up and went home. 8When the crowd saw this, they were filled with awe; and they praised God, who had given such authority to man.

*salvation was by faith alone.
*forgiveness was by repentance and receiving it

Sacrifice minded former Jews “assumed” a new gospel into existence after Jesus left. The Original, pre-cross gospel was forgotten or just too difficult to accept and believe.

One purpose for the Urantia revelation is to restore the original Gospel of The Kingdom of Heaven. It also restores lost world history.

 

[Lon]

Sin is deliberate dysloyalty to deity.

To answer you I will represent what the UB actually says.

The UB claims that Adam and Eve were incarnate celestials who arrived from on high to replace the previous, fallen administration of the "Crafty Beast" or "Prince of this world" who himself had Joined the Lucifer rebellion roughly 200,000 years ago. Adam arrived 38,000+ years ago.

I don't even know how you can print this with a straight face. You ACTUALLY buy into this stuff???

The "sin" of Eve and then Adam brought mortality specifically to them, loss of the use of the "tree of life", a real other worldly shrub which sustained celestials on such mortal missions. The sin of Eve, concocted by the beast, was mating with Cain's real mortal Father from the Nodites. Her motive was to fix things faster then they were going. Her genes introduced into the gene pool did bring more pain during labor for her descendants.

This is silly. It is directionless evolution where nothing is in charge of the cosmos AND it makes God Himself, a created being by the 'Big Bang.' Do YOU realize it is humanism? It is humanistic 'rationalizations.' Remember the Apostle Paul's statement? That ANY other gospel (which he states emphatically "Is no gospel at all," is a curse to the messenger? Do YOU realize this is a curse, on you, from God??? Listen:
Galatians 1:
6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:

7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.

8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

9 As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

Caino. If/since you reject this, you not only reject all of Christianity, you are 'accursed.' The word is anathema. It means 'given for destruction.'

You either have to grasp this as from God, or call it a lie and believe your own thing and hope on a throw of the dice, gambling your life ridiculously. You CANNOT use "but the Urantia Book...!" You made IT your god. You have to stand for what YOU decided over and against anything God actually says.

Let's turn this around a moment: I too am responsible for truth and cannot 'make it up' or believe something Dr. Sadler made up. As with the example above, it is a load of junk. I'm intelligent. I CAN discern when somebody is making it up. The UB is made up. When I read the first two chapters, I found it obviously childish and contrived. Moreover, Jesus is attached to my book, the whole of it. The UB has no word from Jesus, no word from God, just twice removed 'messengers' (supposedly, it is so childish) thus I'm incredulous.

 

[Caino]

I don't even know how you can print this with a straight face. You ACTUALLY buy into this stuff???

This is silly. It is directionless evolution where nothing is in charge of the cosmos AND it makes God Himself, a created being by the 'Big Bang.' Do YOU realize it is humanism? It is humanistic 'rationalizations.' Remember the Apostle Paul's statement? That ANY other gospel (which he states emphatically "Is no gospel at all," is a curse to the messenger? Do YOU realize this is a curse, on you, from God??? Listen:
Galatians 1:
6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:

7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.

8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

9 As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

Caino. If/since you reject this, you not only reject all of Christianity, you are 'accursed.' The word is anathema. It means 'given for destruction.'

You either have to grasp this as from God, or call it a lie and believe your own thing and hope on a throw of the dice, gambling your life ridiculously. You CANNOT use "but the Urantia Book...!" You made IT your god. You have to stand for what YOU decided over and against anything God actually says.

Let's turn this around a moment: I too am responsible for truth and cannot 'make it up' or believe something Dr. Sadler made up. As with the example above, it is a load of junk. I'm intelligent. I CAN discern when somebody is making it up. The UB is made up. When I read the first two chapters, I found it obviously childish and contrived. Moreover, Jesus is attached to my book, the whole of it. The UB has no word from Jesus, no word from God, just twice removed 'messengers' (supposedly, it is so childish) thus I'm incredulous.

The teaching that God created life as we know it via the process of evolution doesn't seem strange to me at all considering the observations of science compared with YEC "faith" claims.

Genesis begins with a cast of characters that lead to far more questions than answers. Satan or the devil or Crafty Beast is already fallen in Genesis. Adam and Eve are 2 full grown adults, educated with the will of God that the devil is fully aware of. Obviously neither Satan, Adam nor Eve were created in perfection, they sinned!

Genesis says Adam and Eve ate some fruit which completely thwarted Gods plan for the world. You may accept that and be accustomed to that claim, but others may find that as odd.

Cain fears people out and away from his own, God concurs and puts a mark on Cain.

Biological consequences right there in your bible:

“I will make your pains in childbearing very severe;
with painful labor you will give birth to children.

Tree of life and eternal consequences:

He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.” 23 So the Lord God banished him from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from which he had been taken.

Some of the same elements are in the scripture.

 

[Lon]

The teaching that God created life as we know it via the process of evolution doesn't seem strange to me at all considering the observations of science compared with YEC "faith" claims.

I know. I already said you are think of Him carnally (after the flesh). God is NOT subject to His creation. You've got God and the Universe co-eternal or co-temporal (as you pick). Both are antibiblical (another thread, not this one except that you are caught in the reasoning of flesh without grasping a great need to understand the Spirit. Such is the Urantia book.

The UB claims that Adam and Eve were incarnate celestials who arrived from on high to replace the previous, fallen administration.

"Administration?" The act of running a business or political government????!!!
Where did THAT come from??? HOW can you push THAT with a straight face????

You have a thread for this nonsense. Its good that people see just a tiny bit of it here, however. This thread is about the Deity of The Lord Jesus Christ. My only point is that you deny things, the UB denies things, that make a "Christian" truly "Christian."

Genesis begins with a cast of characters that lead to far more questions than answers. Satan or the devil or Crafty Beast is already fallen in Genesis. Adam and Eve are 2 full grown adults, educated with the will of God that the devil is fully aware of. Obviously neither Satan, Adam nor Eve were created in perfection, they sinned!

Be careful of your own words: "obviously" is not scripture. It is simply rationalization. Men are fallible. Science is fallible. God is not.

Genesis says Adam and Eve ate some fruit which completely thwarted Gods plan for the world. You may accept that and be accustomed to that claim, but others may find that as odd.

Moses said it. 1) There is NO mention of "thwarted God's plans." 2) The act was the sin.

Cain fears people out and away from his own, God concurs and puts a mark on Cain.

Biological consequences right there in your bible:

“I will make your pains in childbearing very severe;
with painful labor you will give birth to children.

Tree of life and eternal consequences:

He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.” 23 So the Lord God banished him from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from which he had been taken.

Some of the same elements are in the scripture.

I don't disbelieve there are biological consequences. Man's days are limited to 120 years. Rather, we were talking about the UB and why it is problematic: It is rationalization from Dr. Sadler about things he found unpalatable with the Bible. Who cares? Who is Dr. Sadler? Even Dr. Sadler had to feign celestial because he knew nobody would listen to Dr. Sadler the MD with no theology training and no Psychiatry degree.

Most important for you: It is human rationalizing, not the words of God. There is NO question Jesus read from the O.T. with authority and as authority. There is no question that the Apostles accepted Paul as Apostle. The UB is against ESPECIALLY the teaching of the Apostle Paul. It is just this straight forward. If you never admitted it, Freelight did and even posted UB concerning the matter.

Caino: The sin of Eve, concocted by the beast, was mating with Cain's real mortal Father from the Nodites.

WHAT??????

 

[Caino]

"Administration?" The act of running a business or political government????!!!
Where did THAT come from??? HOW can you push THAT with a straight face????

“All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth."

Yes! With a straight face I can say God delegates powers and authority.

Adam and Eve had been trained and delegated powers and authority which they were found to have abused, strayed from, inserted their own will and not Gods.

The Crafty beast knew what they had been told-----> "did God really say....?"

The devil also abused the power and authority of his own high office.

The mortal mind is a tool used by the spirit born mind for discernment. God gave us brains to use; wise as serpents, harmless as doves.

To imply that religious minds and the documents they create are infallible is debunked by scripture.

Jeremiah 8:8
8:8 How can you say, “We are wise! We have the law of the Lord”? The truth is, those who teach it have used their writings to make it say what it does not really mean.

The creation story created by the Israelites was for public consumption, a comprehensive story of origins for the common man. They didn't originally claim divine inspiration.

Sadler didn't write the UB, had you read the whole thing you would realize he wasn't capable of such genius. While the author of 40 books he flatly denied being the author of the UB.

 

[Caino]

I don't disbelieve there are biological consequences. Man's days are limited to 120 years. Rather, we were talking about the UB and why it is problematic: It is rationalization from Dr. Sadler about things he found unpalatable with the Bible. Who cares? Who is Dr. Sadler? Even Dr. Sadler had to feign celestial because he knew nobody would listen to Dr. Sadler the MD with no theology training and no Psychiatry degree.

Sadler believed whole heartedly in the deity of Christ.

Sadler didn't claim to be the author of the UB, he flatly denied it even though he wrote 40 books on various topics.

Who is Dr Sadler?

"At fourteen he left home and moved to Battle Creek, Michigan where he started working at the renowned Battle Creek Sanitarium headed by Dr. John Harvey Kellogg. Here, before and after work, he attended Battle Creek College and organized a group of students to study rhetoric and Latin. During a visit to Fort Wayne, Indiana the minister of a Christian Church discovered his remarkable knowledge of the Bible and speaking ability and asked him to supply his pulpit during a two week vacation. His preaching was so effective he received many letters of commendation and the local newspaper, referring to his unusual abilities, called him "the boy preacher."

Sadler was a trained surgeon and studied under Freud. Sadler and his wife Lena studied medicine at American Medical Missionary College. He attended Moody Bible Institute and trained as an evangelist where he became an ordained minister. Dr. Sadler served as a professor in the Post Graduate School of Medicine at the University of Chicago and taught a course in Pastoral Counseling at MeCormiek Theological Seminary for twenty- five years.

The Sadler's were chosen like Abraham was chosen.

 

[Lon]

Sadler believed whole heartedly in the deity of Christ.

Sadler didn't claim to be the author of the UB, he flatly denied it even though he wrote 40 books on various topics.

It doesn't matter what he claimed. He edited the UB, he's "the guy."

The Sadler's were chosen like Abraham was chosen.

Hmmm, it'd appear even you think "he's the guy." The 'quality' of the book is substandard as literature. How in the wide world could you even think to compare such childishness with the Holy Writ? :idunno:

 

[Caino]

It doesn't matter what he claimed. He edited the UB, he's "the guy."

Hmmm, it'd appear even you think "he's the guy." The 'quality' of the book is substandard as literature. How in the wide world could you even think to compare such childishness with the Holy Writ? :idunno:

I don't think he's the guy, you made more false accusations so I set you straight.

You never addressed your other false claim that the Father technically "CANNOT" forgive sin. I used the so called "Holy Writ" to set counter that as well.


To the belief, claim, theory, teaching, doctrine that sin CANNOT be forgiven without the shedding of blood because somehow God CANNOT technically forgive sin without blood being shed first:

Hebrews 9:22
according to the Law, one may almost say, all things are cleansed with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.


Luke 7:48-50 48Then Jesus said to her, "Your sins are forgiven." 49The other guests began to say among themselves, "Who is this who even forgives sins?" 50Jesus said to the woman, "Your faith has saved you; go in peace."

Matthew 9:1-8 1Jesus stepped into a boat, crossed over and came to his own town. 2Some men brought to him a paralyzed man, lying on a mat. When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the man, "Take heart, son; your sins are forgiven." 3At this, some of the teachers of the law said to themselves, "This fellow is blaspheming!" 4Knowing their thoughts, Jesus said, "Why do you entertain evil thoughts in your hearts? 5Which is easier: to say, 'Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, 'Get up and walk'? 6But I want you to know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins." So he said to the paralyzed man, "Get up, take your mat and go home." 7Then the man got up and went home. 8When the crowd saw this, they were filled with awe; and they praised God, who had given such authority to man.

*salvation was by faith alone.
*forgiveness was by repentance and receiving it
* Paul came latter and added his atonement theory to appeal to Pagan Gentiles. It worked, Christianity was born, the compromise brought
billions to the Jesus story while the Jews continue to reject it.
*The original gospel got lost, its slumbering and dormant.

 

[Lon]

I don't think he's the guy, you made more false accusations so I set you straight.

I disagree. The way you talk about him, you also believe it.

You never addressed your other false claim that the Father technically "CANNOT" forgive sin. I used the so called "Holy Writ" to set counter that as well.

There is no false claim. Why do you WANT to be on TOL with this stuff? Do you think any intelligent person is going to be duped by Dr. Sadler like you were? It isn't going to happen. Why be on TOL? I've found a good few Urantia websites. Why here?

To the belief, claim, theory, teaching, doctrine that sin CANNOT be forgiven without the shedding of blood because somehow God CANNOT technically forgive sin without blood being shed first:

Hebrews 9:22
according to the Law, one may almost say, all things are cleansed with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.


Luke 7:48-50 48Then Jesus said to her, "Your sins are forgiven." 49The other guests began to say among themselves, "Who is this who even forgives sins?" 50Jesus said to the woman, "Your faith has saved you; go in peace."

HE was about to die. Look at what saved her: Her faith. The promise is in Christ. The Apostle Paul warns, sternly, about any other gospel.

Matthew 9:1-8 1Jesus stepped into a boat, crossed over and came to his own town. 2Some men brought to him a paralyzed man, lying on a mat. When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the man, "Take heart, son; your sins are forgiven." 3At this, some of the teachers of the law said to themselves, "This fellow is blaspheming!" 4Knowing their thoughts, Jesus said, "Why do you entertain evil thoughts in your hearts? 5Which is easier: to say, 'Your sins are forgiven,' or to say, 'Get up and walk'? 6But I want you to know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins." So he said to the paralyzed man, "Get up, take your mat and go home." 7Then the man got up and went home. 8When the crowd saw this, they were filled with awe; and they praised God, who had given such authority to man.

*salvation was by faith alone.

No, this is mixing messages. Yes our Salvation is faith alone on our part, but faith in what? That is very different.

*forgiveness was by repentance and receiving it

Repentance is the work of God. One has to be in Christ and a new creation. Simply 'business as usual' with Christ, isn't salvation. He changes a life.

* Paul came latter and added his atonement theory to appeal to Pagan Gentiles.

I know, your sad book says that. Peter, however, said everything Paul wrote was scripture.

It worked, Christianity was born, the compromise brought
billions to the Jesus story while the Jews continue to reject it.
*The original gospel got lost, its slumbering and dormant.

Rubbish. Remember Paul? The one Peter said wrote scriptures? The UB loses on every confrontation. Dr. Sadler's 'tender sensibilities' and human rationalizations about a 'God who I cannot follow' rewrote God in his image. Don't follow Dr. Sadler's god. It is a fabrication from Dr. Sadler's mind. Human-reasoned, human-rationalized, instead of wrestling rightly with difficult texts, he ignored them and over-wrote them. God does not change (the UB says so too! See how he cannot sustain the UB at that point? It is contradictory). What is the point of being on TOL if you are not open to correction? Just to preach your book without a shred of listening to the huge issues it has against the Canon? I just do not get the need to post a thread that is just a reprint of an entire book by Dr. Sadler. There is no point to it. Another problem, btw, is huge cut/pastes. You are supposed to be 'discussing' not aiming to reprint the whole book on TOL.

 

[Hilltrot]

I don't even know how you can print this with a straight face. You ACTUALLY buy into this stuff???

Actually, I see more similarities between Calvinism and the Urantia book than Calvinism and the Bible.

 

[Lon]

Actually, I see more similarities between Calvinism and the Urantia book than Calvinism and the Bible.

And the book of Mormon? Gospel of Thomas? I could see you saying "Calvinism is a bit like JW's" (not that I'd agree), but like Urantia? It leaves one wondering what else you'd draw akin to the sacred word. You are rather, imho, being un-discerning, a little less discriminate than you need to be. Food for thought -Lon

 

[Hilltrot]

And the book of Mormon? Gospel of Thomas? I could see you saying "Calvinism is a bit like JW's" (not that I'd agree), but like Urantia? It leaves one wondering what else you'd draw akin to the sacred word. You are rather, imho, being un-discerning, a little less discriminate than you need to be. Food for thought -Lon

No, no, no . . .

You misunderstood. Calvinism has nothing to do with the Jesus, the God of Abraham, Moses nor the rest of the Bible. That's why it has a lot more in common the Urantia book which also has nothing to do with the Bible.

 

[Lon]

No, no, no . . .

You misunderstood. Calvinism has nothing to do with the Jesus, the God of Abraham, Moses nor the rest of the Bible. That's why it has a lot more in common the Urantia book which also has nothing to do with the Bible.

Drive-by marginalizing? You and I can talk about Calvinism (whether I am one or not) another day. Try not to give credit to the Urantia Book just to disdain someone who believes from the Bible alone, like Calvinism or Jehovah Witnesses lest you be seen as supporting the Urantia Book.

As I say, you are being less than discerning and indiscriminate in whom you disdain and a bit inappropriate in this particular thread for the drive-by.

One of the TOL 'Thou Shalt Not's' says NOT to marginalize another in thread ESPECIALLY if you have nothing to add to the thread content. "IF" you want to compare Calvinism to Urantia in an proper presentation, please do so and spend a bit of time in studying doing it. It'd be interesting to see the attempt.

 

[Caino]

I disagree. The way you talk about him, you also believe it.

There is no false claim. Why do you WANT to be on TOL with this stuff? Do you think any intelligent person is going to be duped by Dr. Sadler like you were? It isn't going to happen. Why be on TOL? I've found a good few Urantia websites. Why here?

HE was about to die. Look at what saved her: Her faith. The promise is in Christ. The Apostle Paul warns, sternly, about any other gospel.

No, this is mixing messages. Yes our Salvation is faith alone on our part, but faith in what? That is very different.

Repentance is the work of God. One has to be in Christ and a new creation. Simply 'business as usual' with Christ, isn't salvation. He changes a life.


I know, your sad book says that. Peter, however, said everything Paul wrote was scripture.

Rubbish. Remember Paul? The one Peter said wrote scriptures? The UB loses on every confrontation. Dr. Sadler's 'tender sensibilities' and human rationalizations about a 'God who I cannot follow' rewrote God in his image. Don't follow Dr. Sadler's god. It is a fabrication from Dr. Sadler's mind. Human-reasoned, human-rationalized, instead of wrestling rightly with difficult texts, he ignored them and over-wrote them. God does not change (the UB says so too! See how he cannot sustain the UB at that point? It is contradictory). What is the point of being on TOL if you are not open to correction? Just to preach your book without a shred of listening to the huge issues it has against the Canon? I just do not get the need to post a thread that is just a reprint of an entire book by Dr. Sadler. There is no point to it. Another problem, btw, is huge cut/pastes. You are supposed to be 'discussing' not aiming to reprint the whole book on TOL.

I'm here to carry the message of the Urantia revelation to those open minded enough to receive it. Christianity is a house divided, its dyeing, its unsalvageable. You are all a bunch of waring camps, each telling the other thousands of man made sects, we are right and you are wrong!

"When theology masters religion, religion dies; it becomes a doctrine instead of a life."

Faith and the responsibility that comes with it, has always been the way of salvation. Jesus sought to return to that simple truth. The selfish atonement doctrine is an interpretation of the cross by Jews who continued to try in vain to bring Israel to their compromised version of the gospel.

Its a desperate stretch to say that Peter said everything Paul wrote was scripture, thus making Paul's words equal to Jesus. And Peter was human.


"Righteousness may be the divine thought, but love is a father's attitude. The erroneous supposition that the righteousness of God was irreconcilable with the selfless love of the heavenly Father, presupposed absence of unity in the nature of Deity and led directly to the elaboration of the atonement doctrine, which is a philosophic assault upon both the unity and the free-willness of God."

 

[Caino]

"Some day a reformation in the Christian church may strike deep enough to get back to the unadulterated religious teachings of Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith. You may preach a religion about Jesus, but, perforce, you must live the religion of Jesus. In the enthusiasm of Pentecost, Peter unintentionally inaugurated a new religion, the religion of the risen and glorified Christ. The Apostle Paul later on transformed this new gospel into Christianity, a religion embodying his own theologic views and portraying his own personal experience with the Jesus of the Damascus road. The gospel of the kingdom is founded on the personal religious experience of the Jesus of Galilee; Christianity is founded almost exclusively on the personal religious experience of the Apostle Paul. Almost the whole of the New Testament is devoted, not to the portrayal of the significant and inspiring religious life of Jesus, but to a discussion of Paul's religious experience and to a portrayal of his personal religious convictions. The only notable exceptions to this statement, aside from certain parts of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, are the Book of Hebrews and the Epistle of James. Even Peter, in his writing, only once reverted to the personal religious life of his Master. The New Testament is a superb Christian document, but it is only meagerly Jesusonian."

 

[JudgeRightly]

"Some day a reformation in the Christian church may strike deep enough to get back to the unadulterated religious teachings of Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith. You may preach a religion about Jesus, but, perforce, you must live the religion of Jesus. In the enthusiasm of Pentecost, Peter unintentionally inaugurated a new religion, the religion of the risen and glorified Christ. The Apostle Paul later on transformed this new gospel into Christianity, a religion embodying his own theologic views and portraying his own personal experience with the Jesus of the Damascus road. The gospel of the kingdom is founded on the personal religious experience of the Jesus of Galilee; Christianity is founded almost exclusively on the personal religious experience of the Apostle Paul. Almost the whole of the New Testament is devoted, not to the portrayal of the significant and inspiring religious life of Jesus, but to a discussion of Paul's religious experience and to a portrayal of his personal religious convictions. The only notable exceptions to this statement, aside from certain parts of Matthew, Mark, and Luke, are the Book of Hebrews and the Epistle of James. Even Peter, in his writing, only once reverted to the personal religious life of his Master. The New Testament is a superb Christian document, but it is only meagerly Jesusonian."

If you're going to quote something from someone, you need to cite the source.

 

[Caino]

If you're going to quote something from someone, you need to cite the source.

Its from the Urantia Book, figured people would know. The entire section of the Jesus papers were from the Midwayer Commission. They were on the earth during the times of Christ and are still here today. We have the entire life of Jesus given to us.

 

[Hilltrot]

Drive-by marginalizing? You and I can talk about Calvinism (whether I am one or not) another day. Try not to give credit to the Urantia Book just to disdain someone who believes from the Bible alone, like Calvinism or Jehovah Witnesses lest you be seen as supporting the Urantia Book.

As I say, you are being less than discerning and indiscriminate in whom you disdain and a bit inappropriate in this particular thread for the drive-by.

One of the TOL 'Thou Shalt Not's' says NOT to marginalize another in thread ESPECIALLY if you have nothing to add to the thread content. "IF" you want to compare Calvinism to Urantia in an proper presentation, please do so and spend a bit of time in studying doing it. It'd be interesting to see the attempt.

You seem to have forgotten that you asked a question. In fact, you used three question marks, so you really wanted it answered. So the content I added to the thread was an answer to your question. If you are upset with the answer, perhaps you should repent of asking the question.

I believe both Urantia, Calvinism, and Jehovah's Witnesses equally believe in the Bible alone in that they all don't. And I believe both Urantia and Calvinism believe in outlandish things. Urantia believes in Adjusters and other things which I haven't quite figured out about. But their religion seems to be based on Platonism like Calvinism is. Calvinists believe God used a grand cosmic lottery to select people to go to heaven or hell.

When I first heard Calvinist beliefs from one of my math teachers in high school, I laughed. To me, it was insanely silly. I couldn't understand, as you say it, how she could say that while keeping a straight face. How can someone scream "Allah Akbar" while flying a jumbo jet into a building while keeping a straight face. How can Mitt Romney wear his protective temple underwear while keeping a straight face.

A lot of people believe a lot of things which are "silly". Pointing out that their beliefs are unusual or silly won't succeed in convincing them of anything.

 

[Caino]

You seem to have forgotten that you asked a question. In fact, you used three question marks, so you really wanted it answered. So the content I added to the thread was an answer to your question. If you are upset with the answer, perhaps you should repent of asking the question.

I believe both Urantia, Calvinism, and Jehovah's Witnesses equally believe in the Bible alone in that they all don't. And I believe both Urantia and Calvinism believe in outlandish things. Urantia believes in Adjusters and other things which I haven't quite figured out about. But their religion seems to be based on Platonism like Calvinism is. Calvinists believe God used a grand cosmic lottery to select people to go to heaven or hell.

When I first heard Calvinist beliefs from one of my math teachers in high school, I laughed. To me, it was insanely silly. I couldn't understand, as you say it, how she could say that while keeping a straight face. How can someone scream "Allah Akbar" while flying a jumbo jet into a building while keeping a straight face. How can Mitt Romney wear his protective temple underwear while keeping a straight face.

A lot of people believe a lot of things which are "silly". Pointing out that their beliefs are unusual or silly won't succeed in convincing them of anything.

The Thought Adjusters are fragments of the Father that live within us. They are the will of God abroad in the universe. “I will put my pure spirit in thee.” They are a gift of the Universal Father that guide us if we choose to be lead.

The UB teaches that Hell is an invention of evolved religion. Primitive man believed that all souls went to the afterlife. The ones that misbehaved in this life went to a hell place for punishment.

Silly is when two parties debate about a 2000+ page book that one of the two hasn’t read.