The Late Great Urantia Revelation
- Thread starter Caino
- Start date
- Status
Zeke
Well-known member
Ok mid acts actor, but the audience cue card is always laugh when you come back on stage. And all this time you thunk you had a serious part to play in the paper saint saga you mistook for real life, some just can't escape from their actor persona and never recover from that illusion, but mercifully for the sake of the living the play is close to being cancelled for lack of interest. Fear Porn no longer sales except in the cemetery, where all paper saints find their final resting place.
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
Jesus, Immanuel, Yahshua, Yeshua, Sananda, etc.
Jesus, Immanuel, Yahshua, Yeshua, Sananda, etc.
Holding your 'version' of 'Jesus' over other 'versions' merely shows your own preferential view of him molded in that cast or 'traditional script', while other 'versions' and 'scripts' about 'Jesus' exist. "Jebus" only exists in your imagination, however assumed. You might want to consider that fact
We could even go on to say that anybodies verision of 'Jesus' is just a subjective interpretation of him anyways. So, looks like various fishies swimming around the same pond.
For the most part, if you read the UB record of Jesus life and teachings (Part 4)....its essentially the same ethical/moral religious teachings and principles as contained in the gospel and other non-canonical accounts as well concerning the kingdom of heaven. "Repent and believe in the kingdom of God" which includes a spiritual rebirth or awakening by faith of ones inherent relationship to God as Father, and we as His children. Very basic spiritualist principles, held by all fundamentally sound and realistic 'Christian' communities. Its not complicated on this ethical/practical level of serving God and others. Therefore the 'splitting hairs' on your part is unnecessary really.
Things can become more complicated of course with theological terms, cosmology, soteriology, eschatology, etc. - this is inevitable within the many schools of epistemology and theology out there. The fundamentals of true religion remain however, espoused in the law of love (loving God and others), the golden rule, and other precepts of right conduct/relationship. There you go. The rest is more or less 'accessories', 'adjuncts', 'cosmetics'.
pj
Jesus, Immanuel, Yahshua, Yeshua, Sananda, etc.
Holding your 'version' of 'Jesus' over other 'versions' merely shows your own preferential view of him molded in that cast or 'traditional script', while other 'versions' and 'scripts' about 'Jesus' exist. "Jebus" only exists in your imagination, however assumed. You might want to consider that fact
We could even go on to say that anybodies verision of 'Jesus' is just a subjective interpretation of him anyways. So, looks like various fishies swimming around the same pond.For the most part, if you read the UB record of Jesus life and teachings (Part 4)....its essentially the same ethical/moral religious teachings and principles as contained in the gospel and other non-canonical accounts as well concerning the kingdom of heaven. "Repent and believe in the kingdom of God" which includes a spiritual rebirth or awakening by faith of ones inherent relationship to God as Father, and we as His children. Very basic spiritualist principles, held by all fundamentally sound and realistic 'Christian' communities. Its not complicated on this ethical/practical level of serving God and others. Therefore the 'splitting hairs' on your part is unnecessary really.
Things can become more complicated of course with theological terms, cosmology, soteriology, eschatology, etc. - this is inevitable within the many schools of epistemology and theology out there. The fundamentals of true religion remain however, espoused in the law of love (loving God and others), the golden rule, and other precepts of right conduct/relationship. There you go. The rest is more or less 'accessories', 'adjuncts', 'cosmetics'.
pj
Aimiel
Well-known member
Yes, but there is only one Holy Bible, which The Holy Spirit agrees with, Who was It's Author.
Actually: only in YOURS, since I know for a fact that he doesn't exist. I don't imagine that demons are gods, as you seem to.
Certainly, anyone's which isn't inspired. I believe many words of prophecy, wisdom and knowledge, which I've received personally or by merely reading them in a book or online, simply because The Holy Spirit verifies their authenticity inside of me. This doesn't hold true for the UB.
Many are imaginary fishes swimming around in your head just to confuse you... One Loving Fisherman living inside of every believer in Christ as Saviour.
No, it's not, since it differs from The One and Only True Gospel of Jesus' Blood. :duh:
Without bloodshed, there is no remission of sins.
Without The Blood it's just a lot of hot air. Men trying to make themselves holy enough to be accepted by God without making use of the most valuable substance there is: His Very Blood.
Actually, I could care less. I'd much rather see you get saved and lose all those demons that have ahold of you and you go to Heaven, but if you want to stay in darkness and end up in hell, just remember it's your choice. God won't force you to accept His Truth. He wants you saved but if you love your demons, He won't force His Truth upon you.
True religion not only causes one to love God but to want to help others, also. All I've ever seen from you is trying to convince men that everything BUT Christianity is Truth. That makes you an enemy of God.
freelight
Eclectic Theosophist
'Context' is key......
'Context' is key......
I don't agree with that assessment; of course I do criticize some modern pop-culture versions or 'interpretations' of 'Christiainity', various dogmatic assumptions or exclusivity held by some, and naturally so, since my intuition of truth and universal religious values and principles are much more broad and inclusive. So goes the wonderful journey of an eclectic.
Claiming one is an 'enemy of God' is quite a stretch, but each are entitled to their own opinion. I could not deem a religious work that promotes the goodness, brotherhood, equity and justice for all men, to live together is peace, unity and cooperation to be a deception from the devil, since the principle of love and its motivations are from God, if God is love.
We're missing the forest for the trees again. Remember Jesus told his disciple who was concerned about some others doing good works in Jesus name to stop their activity, but Jesus said "let them be, for he is who is not against us, is for us".
No sincere UB reader who by faith is a theist, is against any true biblical principle or religious ethic upheld by most monotheists, since the papers are very fundamentalist concerning the main core value and truth of God and man's relationship to Him (who is a real divine Personality).
In any case, the papers speak for themselves in their own terms, in their own context. It is a logical/rational approach to this book or any other book.
pj
'Context' is key......
I don't agree with that assessment; of course I do criticize some modern pop-culture versions or 'interpretations' of 'Christiainity', various dogmatic assumptions or exclusivity held by some, and naturally so, since my intuition of truth and universal religious values and principles are much more broad and inclusive. So goes the wonderful journey of an eclectic.
Claiming one is an 'enemy of God' is quite a stretch, but each are entitled to their own opinion. I could not deem a religious work that promotes the goodness, brotherhood, equity and justice for all men, to live together is peace, unity and cooperation to be a deception from the devil, since the principle of love and its motivations are from God, if God is love.
We're missing the forest for the trees again. Remember Jesus told his disciple who was concerned about some others doing good works in Jesus name to stop their activity, but Jesus said "let them be, for he is who is not against us, is for us".
No sincere UB reader who by faith is a theist, is against any true biblical principle or religious ethic upheld by most monotheists, since the papers are very fundamentalist concerning the main core value and truth of God and man's relationship to Him (who is a real divine Personality).
In any case, the papers speak for themselves in their own terms, in their own context. It is a logical/rational approach to this book or any other book.
pj
Letsargue
New member
No it Doesn't!!!!! -- (( "Religion"!! )), What's THAT???
What does One's False christ do, except the Same Thing of everyone's "god"!!
You dug that up from some false "god" also!!
Paul, 143114
God is a living, loving Father. God is living truth, there is no book that owns God, there is no book that contains or reveals all truth. Each revelation, each imperfect book about revelation or mans comprehension of it, is relative to the times.
What did Jesus of the UB say about the scripture?
Do you recognize what Jesus is saying to be true?
Do you only believe what the institution of religion tells you is true or can your heart, your intuition guide you?
What did Jesus of the UB say about the scripture?
Do you recognize what Jesus is saying to be true?
Do you only believe what the institution of religion tells you is true or can your heart, your intuition guide you?
(1768.1) 159:4.5 “Nathaniel, never permit yourself for one moment to believe the Scripture records which tell you that the God of love directed your forefathers to go forth in battle to slay all their enemies — men, women, and children. Such records are the words of men, not very holy men, and they are not the word of God. The Scriptures always have, and always will, reflect the intellectual, moral, and spiritual status of those who create them. Have you not noted that the concepts of Yahweh grow in beauty and glory as the prophets make their records from Samuel to Isaiah? And you should remember that the Scriptures are intended for religious instruction and spiritual guidance. They are not the works of either historians or philosophers.
(1768.2) 159:4.6 “The thing most deplorable is not merely this erroneous idea of the absolute perfection of the Scripture record and the infallibility of its teachings, but rather the confusing misinterpretation of these sacred writings by the tradition-enslaved scribes and Pharisees at Jerusalem. And now will they employ both the doctrine of the inspiration of the Scriptures and their misinterpretations thereof in their determined effort to withstand these newer teachings of the gospel of the kingdom. Nathaniel, never forget, the Father does not limit the revelation of truth to any one generation or to any one people. Many earnest seekers after the truth have been, and will continue to be, confused and disheartened by these doctrines of the perfection of the Scriptures.
(1768.2) 159:4.6 “The thing most deplorable is not merely this erroneous idea of the absolute perfection of the Scripture record and the infallibility of its teachings, but rather the confusing misinterpretation of these sacred writings by the tradition-enslaved scribes and Pharisees at Jerusalem. And now will they employ both the doctrine of the inspiration of the Scriptures and their misinterpretations thereof in their determined effort to withstand these newer teachings of the gospel of the kingdom. Nathaniel, never forget, the Father does not limit the revelation of truth to any one generation or to any one people. Many earnest seekers after the truth have been, and will continue to be, confused and disheartened by these doctrines of the perfection of the Scriptures.
Aimiel
Well-known member
Jesus said that HE is The Way, The Truth and The Life. You're proving that you don't believe Him by wiping your feet in His Blood and trotting off to the nearest substitute. Jebus is NOT God. The UB only has Jebus in it. Jesus had NOTHING to do with it's origin, other than having created the angels who fell from Heaven and became demons who later inspired the UB.
....."rehabilitation"
(2018.1) 188:5.2 The cross forever shows that the attitude of Jesus toward sinners was neither condemnation nor condonation, but rather eternal and loving salvation. Jesus is truly a savior in the sense that his life and death do win men over to goodness and righteous survival. Jesus loves men so much that his love awakens the response of love in the human heart. Love is truly contagious and eternally creative. Jesus’ death on the cross exemplifies a love which is sufficiently strong and divine to forgive sin and swallow up all evil-doing. Jesus disclosed to this world a higher quality of righteousness than justice — mere technical right and wrong. Divine love does not merely forgive wrongs; it absorbs and actually destroys them. The forgiveness of love utterly transcends the forgiveness of mercy. Mercy sets the guilt of evil-doing to one side; but love destroys forever the sin and all weakness resulting therefrom. Jesus brought a new method of living to Urantia. He taught us not to resist evil but to find through him a goodness which effectually destroys evil. The forgiveness of Jesus is not condonation; it is salvation from condemnation. Salvation does not slight wrongs; it makes them right. True love does not compromise nor condone hate; it destroys it. The love of Jesus is never satisfied with mere forgiveness. The Master’s love implies rehabilitation, eternal survival. It is altogether proper to speak of salvation as redemption if you mean this eternal rehabilitation.
(2018.3) 188:5.4 The sufferings of Jesus were not confined to the crucifixion. In reality, Jesus of Nazareth spent upward of twenty-five years on the cross of a real and intense mortal existence. The real value of the cross consists in the fact that it was the supreme and final expression of his love, the completed revelation of his mercy.
Letsargue
New member
(( YES!! - "YES"!!))!!!
Jesus Did SAY That; -- BUT! - ( What did Jesus say ) HIS "WAY", the Truth, and the LIFE ARE???
Most of you Blind what ever You call Yourselves make Up Your Own definitions of Christ's "WILL", the Truth. and THE LIFE!!!
MAN!! - What "great knowledge"!!!!!! -- GUESS AGAIN!!!
Paul -- 010215
Letsargue
New member
What?
He talks normal to freelight.
The UB, released for printing in 55', doesn't say anything about ACIM which was published in 65'.
Letsargue
New member
YES WHAT!!???
What were YOU Talking About that God doesn't SAY??? -- (((( Course In Miracles / "Course In Miracles"!!!! ))))!!! - What else was you talking ABOUT???
MAN; - What a Trick to PLAY!!??
Paul, David -- 010215
What?
Letsargue
New member
(( Nothing!! ))!! - Never mind, - Forget IT: - God never mentioned it anyhow, Just YOU!!!
Paul, David -- 010215
What?
- Status