Urantia Book Forum

Urantia Book Discussion Board : Study Group
It is currently Sat Feb 17, 2018 2:11 pm +0000

All times are UTC - 7 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted:  
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 1:14 am +0000
Posts: 284
Location: India
May I request the forum members to share their opinion on this with more insights.

You may also read my recent blog article in this context:

http://rajan-c-mathew.blogspot.in/2015/07/is-satan-reality-or-myth-was-there-war.html

God Bless!

_________________
Rajan C Mathew, India.
Guide Us Father to Live according to Your Plans !
http://rajan-c-mathew.blogspot.in


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 5:02 am +0000
Posts: 392
I do not think they are the same person literally. However I do believe revelators borrow revelations from earlier epochs and refashion them to conform to spiritual realities of which they are acquainted, which they desire to reveal to us; hence, we have the 5th epochal revelation, i.e., Urantia papers.

I understand that the Michael we are introduced to by Prophet Daniel is a national prince, unlike TUB's Michael who holds a higher seat of authority (universal prince).


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 7:37 pm +0000
Posts: 193
Location: St. Francisville, LA
Hi Rajan,

From several extended discussions with members of Jehovah Witnesses who
sought my 'conversion', I discovered that they commonly believe the "prince"
Michael of the Bible and Jesus are the same individual.

It seems plausible that the Daniel quote refers to Michael of Nebadon when our
Lord's authority was as "viceregent" of our First Source (princely) prior to the certified completion
of his mortal bestowal and his attainment of "sovereign" Master Son status.

I found the JW's actually open to that possibility as I introduced them to the Urantia Papers.

Many blessings,
MBMelody

_________________
" the sons of God are the human stones which constitute this living temple of sonship"


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sat May 23, 2015 4:51 pm +0000
Posts: 70
For all the Biblical flaws, it is clear to me that they are meant to be the SAME Personage. The striking similarities between the two narratives cannot be a mere coincidence.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 1:21 pm +0000
Posts: 313
Location: London, England
I am of exactly the same opinion as urantiavista, but I just wanted to comment that I am quite surprised that you managed to come across JWs who were so open-minded as to even consider anything outside the Bible as having any chance of validity. All JWs I met would quickly turn their noses away at the mention of anything other than their beloved NWT translation of the Bible. Once I gave them a leaflet "Gospel of Jesus" (printed from the same 2-page PDF as on my website) and they quickly scanned the content (not actually reading it!) for the word "Jehovah" and not finding it anywhere returned it to me with disappointment, saying "But God's name Jehovah is not here, so how can this contain any truth???" :)

_________________
http://www.bibles.org.uk - The Living Jesus Movement


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 10, 2009 6:16 pm +0000
Posts: 495
Doug Batchelor, a leading Seventh-Day Adventist writer and speaker, thinks that Jesus and the archangel Michael are one and the same. He does not, however, think that the archangel Michael is/was an angel! Rather, he argues that the term "archangel" simply means leader or commander of angels. Thus, on this view, Michael in the OT was the pre-incarnate Jesus.
phpBB [video]

_________________
Todd


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 1:14 am +0000
Posts: 284
Location: India
I have been away from visiting this forum for some years now.
Now I am retired from my professional pre-occupations as an engineer in government service.

BTW, I was curious to know any one here had given a thought to this question I had asked.

IMHO, there is a good chance that the super human authors of TUB had kept the Biblical name of Michael with expanded information with a purpose.

How many of you think of that possibility?

_________________
Rajan C Mathew, India.
Guide Us Father to Live according to Your Plans !
http://rajan-c-mathew.blogspot.in


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 2:07 am +0000
Posts: 647
Welcome back Rajan!

It spontaneously occurs to me that the revelators may have wrapped some of their choices for names in a context that echos a morontia mota lesson. We are probably oblivious to an actual perception of morontia mota since they tell us that we lack the capability to sense mota. But perhaps the adjuster is able to translate mota into something the human senses can appreciate on certain occasions.

If we take the word Melchizedek for example, it comes from ancient Hebrew or Canaanite. The Hebrew cognate is Malki-tzedeq, meaning literally "king of righteousness" from melekh "king" and tzadaq "he was righteous" or tzaddiq "just, righteous". The Canaanite appearance of the name means “My king is [the god] Sedek” or “My king is Righteousness”. Canaan may have been the origin of the words and name.

If there is a mota content in the word Melchizedek, it may be the interesting observation that Abraham pledging obedience to a priest or god from Canaan is very remarkable since the Hebrews generally held no other people as holding to the same standards of religious living as themselves.

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Melchizedek


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 5:29 am +0000
Posts: 2055
Welcome Home to TruthBook Rajan!!!

I think the names of celestials in the O.T. originated from the Garden and Mel's Missionaries....so oral traditions over thousands of years time carried these names. So, no, I don't think the authors of the Papers are using human sourced or traditional names picked by humans but rather the other way around. There are many such names including Gabriel, Lucifer, Adam and Eve, etc. that would have similar 'origins' of all such names.

Indeed....I imagine there are many names of celestials in the UB that were once known to human kind....heroes and villains from the distant past, some of whom were turned into the gods of myth...such as Thor and others - and some lost to time to be found now, again, in the UB....including one of my personal heroes who was a well known hero to many mortals in time - Van!! Many legends surround him and the area he and Amadon inhabited for so many human generations before the Garden.

I find it interesting that some here, with the historical record we share together, might believe that mortals named these historical and real figures from distant times and the revelators adopted human names rather than those names used long before the human oral 'record', some of which made it into the Judaic scriptures. I think the UB brings such tales full circle as to origin....prior to those legends surrounding the human oral and written records of old.

I find the names to be double confirming actually....they became legends in tales over tens of thousands of years - over 1,500 generations after the Garden and 50-75 generations after Mel's missionaries before being written down for future posterity (the last 2500-3000 years).

I think the OT quotes about Michael to likely be about Michael indeed....although time and the oral tradition did also likely mix up some attributes/history of various personages and names...for example Lucifer and Satan are traditionally believed to be the same...the devil...but they are two distinct beings with Caligastia, the devil, is a third. Gabriel and Michael are consider archangels to many scholars...the Leader of Angels or the Heavenly Host; and indeed this is true, especially so for Gabriel, first born of Michael.

Reminds me of Joseph Campbell's work regarding similar mythologies and comparative religious studies from around the world - all delivered originally by the Andite adventurers and Mel's Missionaries (around the globe to every continent by those Andites after the Garden - and deep into Asia, Africa, and Europe by the MM's). More on Campbell's work:

https://www.jcf.org/

A most interesting topic...seeking for the origins of myths and fables...which contain essential elements of truth and fact in their telling and retelling over the ages of time.

8) Bradly


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 1:14 am +0000
Posts: 284
Location: India
Thanks, Riktare and FanOfVan.
Our Book is truly wonderful, had we possess the ability to digest the vast truths it contain.
Our 'biologic upgrading' is still a slow progressing process. So, many of us still do not have the required abilities to grasp higher truths.
Any way, I strongly feel Michael of the Bible and TUB is one and the same personality.
It would be good if other readers also share their thoughts in this regard.

_________________
Rajan C Mathew, India.
Guide Us Father to Live according to Your Plans !
http://rajan-c-mathew.blogspot.in


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2012 11:16 pm +0000
Posts: 319
You cannot regard Micha EL of the Bible as exactly the same as Creator Son Michael, because you must account for the experencial differentials between viceregent Creator Son and Master Creator Son which is the experiencial attainment of such individual throughout the past few millenia.

_________________
to the underlaying unity of all life
so that the voice of intuition may guide us
closer to our common keeper


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 1:14 am +0000
Posts: 284
Location: India
This is what I have learned from the Bible and the TUB which I am sharing with interested forum readers:

http://rajan-c-mathew.blogspot.in/2015/07/is-satan-reality-or-myth-was-there-war.html

You may share your thoughts.

HAPPY CHRISTMAS AND SEASON'S GREETINGS TO ALL

_________________
Rajan C Mathew, India.
Guide Us Father to Live according to Your Plans !
http://rajan-c-mathew.blogspot.in


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 8:08 am +0000
Posts: 238
Location: Ft, Myers Florida
To answer your question, Michael of Nebadon and Michael of the Bible are the same.

Michael of Nebadon is the Creator Son of God, the highest representative of God the Father in our local creation. Michael is the main Man, if you will.

In the Bible the prophet described Michael as "slaying the dragon," and we know that Jesus is the incarnate Son Michael, and we also know that Michael's authority is who Lucifer was challenging when there was "war in Heaven."

So, there you go.

_________________
Jim Watkins
SW Florida


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 13 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Registered users: Google [Bot], Yahoo [Bot]


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group