Home Urantia Book FAQ About Jesus The name of Jesus

The name of Jesus

Q: After browsing through your Urantia website for an hour or so, I feel compelled to write that your organization is merely using highly philosophical, theological, and religious language to cover up what is essentially a liberal approach to Christianity, albeit combined with speculative cosmology about the existence of so-called intelligent cosmic beings.

I believe that you should stop using the historical and revelatory Christian faith to be your launching pad for speculative and fanciful spiritual theologising....say what you really believe...your evolutionary perspective is truly at odds with historical and evangelical Christianity.

...stop using the Name of Jesus, who is the King of kings, and Lord of Lords, and not some Christ Michael incarnate on this earth, to deceive people into believing that you are leading people to the truth. The Bible is very clear in this respect in 1 John 5:12:

"He who has the Son of God (the Second Person of the Trinity, who became both God and Man at his incarnation on this earth as in John 1:14) has the life ('zoe' in Greek); he does not have the Son of God does not have the life."

A: Thank you for your post to TruthBook.com... we always appreciate hearing from those who have discovered our website. I'll reply to your comments as I read down through your note.

You've judged a book by its cover. I'll give you the benefit for having browsed our site for an hour or so; we get many appraisals of what we're all about from people who've spent far less time than that before thinking they've got the full picture and can offer meaningful criticism.

First, we are "merely" nothing, especially not a liberal approach to Christianity. What we are is a website that promotes the teachings found in one specific book and we promote those teachings because, unlike the majority of our critics, individually, without coercion, with an inquiring and open mind, we have actually read the book and made an informed decision regarding its purpose and content and meaningfulness to our lives. Once having started down that path, eventually we may choose to look for like-minded people who have also read this marvelous and tremendous book – that's how this and other Urantia websites were established.

We are not merely using highly philosophical, theological, and religious language; The Urantia Book portrays what are perhaps the highest philosophical, theological, and religious ideals ever expressed in English. To convey those concepts requires exceptional usage and you were at least aware of that aspect in what you read.

You've given us too much credit. No human or organization is responsible for the words of The Urantia Book. A human organization was responsible for getting the Urantia material printed of course but no human is connected with the material itself other than in 1955 being responsible for spelling and punctuation. Because you've spent an hour or so perusing a website rather than the months or so required to actually read the million and a half words of text of the greatest revelation disclosed to the world in over 2, 000 years, there's no way you would have recognized that The Urantia Book contains the best in human thought magnified by the wisdom of far greater intelligence than humans exhibit. There is no way we can be responsible for ceasing, as you requested, to use the historical and revelatory Christian faith as a launching pad for speculative and fanciful spiritual theologizing; that's how it's portrayed by the words of the book. If you delve deeper into this material you will understand that The Urantia Book is not promoting any organized religion, Christian, Jewish, Muslim, pagan, or New Age.

You've suggested that we're perpetrating a dishonesty, not being open or declaring in plain language what we really believe. Maybe you can explain yourself better or give an example but that's not so at all; there's no way we could be more up-front in our opinion or the material we promote.

You are absolutely correct in saying that the evolutionary perspective of The Urantia Book is truly at odds with historical and evangelical Christianity. We are not proponents of historical or evangelical Christianity nor do we portray ourselves to be. The Urantia Book is not a Christian document in the sense you're thinking of. The Urantia Book clearly teaches us the true nature and purpose of Jesus. Jesus does not belong to Christianity; it is supposed to be the other way around.

Your suggested prohibition against using the name of Jesus because The Urantia Book is not the Bible we've received before. I'll be perfectly clear: The Urantia Book is not the Bible. In stating that Jesus is not some Christ Michael incarnated on this earth you've objected to something for which you have no understanding. Obviously the Bible doesn't contain that information and so you reason that your objection is valid... what if Jesus was known as Michael before incarnating here? What if that was true? What if it is time for new wine to displace that in the old wine skins? How would you know? How will you know Truth? Certainly not by dismissing a book by its cover, or through a cursory glance.

As an example, in our exchange here, if this were 2, 000 years ago, what you've essentially done is walked by a gathering at the roadside on your way to some destination and as you passed you've caught the turn of a phrase and the whisper of an unfamiliar idea. Continuing on your way you've mulled over what you heard with a bit of humor and condescension because it didn't correlate with the orthodoxy that you had accepted as Truth. You didn't know and didn't care to know that the speaker you passed by was Jesus; on a spiritual level your brief encounter was meaningless. This is fundamentally what has happened with this one hour critique.

I could give you some masterful quotes from The Urantia Book to back up my reply to you just as you've given some great quotes from the Bible, but I won't. Students of The Urantia Book love and appreciate the Bible for what it is. Most students of The Urantia Book come to have a more profound appreciation of the Bible than they ever had before encountering what you've just stumbled upon and are trying to dismiss.

We're willing to address well thought out and measured criticism regarding the teachings of this little-known book which proclaims itself to be the fifth epochal revelation of truth to the world; it comes to us in book form. Jesus was the fourth epochal revelation of truth to the world; he was a Son of God and the son of man. However, the teachings of The Urantia Book aren't totally devoted to religion or spirituality; those are but two of its numerous revelations. There is no way you, or anyone else can criticize what has been superficially gleaned; howver, reasoned criticism from an in-depth reading will be considered. Are you willing to look deeper? Are you willing to risk discovering truth that may surpass what you already possess?

A study of The Urantia Book takes nothing away from one's knowledge of and love for the Bible, or any other true religious text. There are religious authorities among all the major religious organizations who know, study, and are enthralled by what The Urantia Book discloses. Are you willing to at least dip a few toes in to test the water? You've termed yourself another truth lover; is your love for truth strong enough that you will follow wherever it may lead, whatever may be its apparent source?

There are 197 chapters in The Urantia Book. The first 5 lay the groundwork for an enhanced spiritual connection with God. My suggestion, if you're sincere about a meaningful criticism of The Urantia Book is that you begin by reading Paper 1 and continue on to Paper 5 and then write back from a more informed point of view. I'm not suggesting that you believe anything you read but I do request that you read with an open, inquiring, and critical mind. Take notes as you read if you wish and listen to the text read aloud as you read the words... then come back here and tell me if you've learned anything and what your informed criticism is. I'll be happy to give more attention to your opinion.

Best wishes, and may God be with you.

Date published:
Author: Staff