Urantia Book Forum

Urantia Book Discussion Board : Study Group
It is currently Wed Sep 30, 2020 12:41 pm +0000

All times are UTC - 7 hours




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 360 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 24  Next
Author Message
PostPosted:  
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2012 11:16 pm +0000
Posts: 1166
Location: Nanticoke NY
Admonitions were paid by Jesus unto the consideration of his human ascenders, his neighbours and brethren. Admonitions galore, always more to consider, before any human individual would make a final decision for survival, let me say! Admonition in the form of exhortation! I.e. "I admonish you to consider," the affairs of the mind that one must attend to for one's purposes. Admonition? Even the same kind of admonition that Joseph of Nazareth paid unto Jesus while Jesus was a child.

_________________
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  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2019 5:44 am +0000
Posts: 461
Location: thailand
ok I see how this was split now and a good thread on thought adjusters etc - my take is a Creator Son is from the Almighty God - ok UB calls the Old Man Upstairs whatever - but is still the All knowing - I AM - etc and etc the real beginning and the end - the I AM and Center of all - anyway - the UB lays it all out there


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 12:11 pm +0000
Posts: 932
fanofVan wrote:
Jesus does not uphold personality.


Uphold may not be the best word, but Jesus is the defender and advocate for all his creatures, or personalities. Jesus is also the perfect revelation of the personality of the Universal Father. Jesus draws all persons to himself and transforms them. Perhaps that's what Stephen means?

(1750.4) 157:6.10 “No man in this world now sees the Father except the Son who came forth from the Father. But if the Son be lifted up, he will draw all men to himself, and whosoever believes this truth of the combined nature of the Son shall be endowed with life that is more than age-abiding.”

And perhaps by invoking Aristotle he's referring to this reference:

(1079.3) 98:2.6 Socrates and his successors, Plato and Aristotle, taught that virtue is knowledge; goodness, health of the soul; that it is better to suffer injustice than to be guilty of it, that it is wrong to return evil for evil, and that the gods are wise and good. Their cardinal virtues were: wisdom, courage, temperance, and justice.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 5:29 am +0000
Posts: 4470
Whatever Stephen means is anybody's guess as he will not respond to questions or relate anything he says to actual text preferring grandiose if falsifified inventions of his own imagination that mostly contradict the UB.

Indeed, apparently Stephen is willing and able to disregard, misstate, and contradict the Papers even when they are clearly posted here just prior to his immediate falsification of them. It's truly amazing to witness his total disregard and dissociation from what's being discussed and what has been posted.

What's up with that??

:roll:


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2012 11:16 pm +0000
Posts: 1166
Location: Nanticoke NY
Wow you are like my public defender Katroof. Except I do not mean "virtue" as espoused in the Urantia Papers, but rather Aristotle's synopsis of "human happiness" as the ultimate end for man, and the experiencial path between the means and the end, which I believe we should be able to negotiate using God's wisdom.

[From Sparknotes Aristotle Section 8: https://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/a ... /section8/ ]
"Happiness is the highest good and the end at which all our activities ultimately aim."
"Aristotle defines the supreme good (i.e. "happiness") as an activity of the rational soul in accordance with virtue. "

But when the human individual observes the process between means and the end of happiness, or "Adjuster Fustion", he is confounded; literally, he requires Revelation along the course that proceeds between present circumstance and final aim. Man even requires Fatherly guidance. And that is where Christ Michael should intercede, hopefully? What is lain between our current state of affairs and the ultimate good of the state. The one thing from the wisdom of Aristotle is that man must negotiate such path on his own, ultimately. But what about divine intervention, or Providence, I would say that Christ Michael relegates myriad forms of assistance, or may do so through the agency of the Divine Minister and the seraphim, to guide the path that leads to happiness and psychological maturation for each human individual, where there is no (discernible) rational delinneation (in times where man must choose in spite of uncertainty i.e "have faith") that instructs man on each step of the way towards the ultimate good.

In the Post-Modern inference, we may say that the Aristotlelian Aim is not necessarily a "path" but "a process" but both ideas connote the idea of psychological maturation, so there. But the thing that I like about "a path" is that one could know the steps that He took along his Journey, or at least the marquis decisions that shaped an human individual into the man God intended that one to be.

_________________
to the Underlaying Unity of All Life so that the Voice of Intuition may guide Us closer to Our Common Keeper


Last edited by SEla_Kelly on Sun Apr 28, 2019 9:18 am +0000, edited 3 times in total.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 12:11 pm +0000
Posts: 932
fanofVan wrote:
It's truly amazing to witness his total disregard and dissociation from what's being discussed and what has been posted. What's up with that??


I'm sorry to disappoint you, but I do see a connection much of the time.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 12:11 pm +0000
Posts: 932
SEla_Kelly wrote:
Except I do not mean "virtue" as espoused in the Urantia Papers, but rather Aristotle's synopsis of "human happiness" as the ultimate end for man, and the experiencial path between the means and the end, which I believe we should be able to negotiate using God's wisdom.


It is written that man's highest happiness is linked to the pursuit of worthy goals that result in spiritual progress. It is also written that happiness ensues from the recognition of truth because it can be acted out. I think that is essentially what virtue is all about, don't you?

Here is the Urantia Book's definition of virtue:

(193.5) 16.7.6  Virtue is righteousness — conformity with the cosmos. To name virtues is not to define them, but to live them is to know them. Virtue is not mere knowledge nor yet wisdom but rather the reality of progressive experience in the attainment of ascending levels of cosmic achievement. In the day-by-day life of mortal man, virtue is realized by the consistent choosing of good rather than evil, and such choosing ability is evidence of the possession of a moral nature.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 5:29 am +0000
Posts: 4470
katroofjebus wrote:
fanofVan wrote:
It's truly amazing to witness his total disregard and dissociation from what's being discussed and what has been posted. What's up with that??


I'm sorry to disappoint you, but I do see a connection much of the time.


So when I posted text which clearly states that the Father is the source, center, and upholder of personality and then Stephen immediately claims that Jesus upholds human personality, you understand him? And when he proclaims that the Infinite Spirit creates the Creator Sons as he did to begin this topic, you get the connection, eh??

So whenever he says up is down and in is out, you can explain it? Great. I look forward to your interpretive skills. Hahaha.

I am a little confused by your strict attention to detail and specificity of the text in some discussions and your support of Stephen's obvious and direct contradictions to the text no matter how badly he misstates and misrepresents the UB in his posts. I'd be interested in your interpretation of his claim here that Lucifer was doing God's will with the manifesto and rebellion.

Please spin that one.
:roll:


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 9:13 am +0000
Posts: 1109
Location: Denver CO
fanofVan, (for the second time), this is inappropriate:

Quote:
So when I posted text which clearly states that the Father is the source, center, and upholder of personality and then Stephen immediately claims that Jesus upholds human personality, you understand him? And when he proclaims that the Infinite Spirit creates the Creator Sons as he did to begin this topic, you get the connection, eh??

So whenever he says up is down and in is out, you can explain it? Great. I look forward to your interpretive skills. Hahaha.

I am a little confused by your strict attention to detail and specificity of the text in some discussions and your support of Stephen's obvious and direct contradictions to the text no matter how badly he misstates and misrepresents the UB in his posts. I'd be interested in your interpretation of his claim here that Lucifer was doing God's will with the manifesto and rebellion.


In effect, you are trying to start a discussion about - again - someone who reads the Urantia Book who does not please you, while ignoring that person altogether. And enlisting another forum member who IS communicating successfully with him, to engage with you on the subject.

Please stop.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2012 11:16 pm +0000
Posts: 1166
Location: Nanticoke NY
I know this might seem like a joke but I want to share it anyway, since it seems so relevent: https://www.hypnosisdownloads.com/blog/labelling

After Bradley's explanation, that I am very satisfied with, it should not be inappropriate to wonder at the ways that I could have been "inhibiting myself" with identity issues. The way we frame ourselves and the way others frame me, is indeed a sensitive issue. In the past, I have created self-encumbrance because willing to believe the worst in what others think of me. I want to accept all that is true, but in the consideration of Jesus we know of the Thief who repented at the moment of crucifixion, and so was unconditionally promised a new life. You can accept what is true, the responsibility thereof in the labels, and choose not be burdened by "what it means to be a _____".

It is interesting to think that if Society sees me as mentally ill, then there would be certain civil liberties restricted upon my citizenship (the right to bear arms is one possibility), and if I myself identifies as "one who is mentally ill", haha!, then I may simply be riddling my own mind with the shackles of anxiety and doubt! In any regards, I will work to gain the sincere approach, and learning from you Bradley! I do not want to be a mendicant or anything, just one who is capable of doing anything that God wills!

_________________
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  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 12:11 pm +0000
Posts: 932
fanofVan wrote:
I am a little confused by your strict attention to detail and specificity of the text in some discussions and your support of Stephen's obvious and direct contradictions to the text no matter how badly he misstates and misrepresents the UB in his posts.


One of the things that Jesus was very careful about was to prevent folks from attaching "precise interpretations and definite meanings to his words." He wanted each soul to utilize the powers of spiritual imagination in its relationship with divinity and not be hampered by orthodoxy. I may personally find it illuminating to be detail oriented, but not every personality thinks the same. Some people have active, colorful imaginations and others' are dry as dust. You may recall the apostle Philip who lacked imagination which the authors considered to be a character weakness, whereas in the case of John who had a "remarkable and creative imagination", it was considered to be a character strength. References:

(1942.3) 179:5.4 In instituting this remembrance supper, the Master, as was always his habit, resorted to parables and symbols. He employed symbols because he wanted to teach certain great spiritual truths in such a manner as to make it difficult for his successors to attach precise interpretations and definite meanings to his words. In this way he sought to prevent successive generations from crystallizing his teaching and binding down his spiritual meanings by the dead chains of tradition and dogma. In the establishment of the only ceremony or sacrament associated with his whole life mission, Jesus took great pains to suggest his meanings rather than to commit himself to precise definitions. He did not wish to destroy the individual’s concept of divine communion by establishing a precise form; neither did he desire to limit the believer’s spiritual imagination by formally cramping it. He rather sought to set man’s reborn soul free upon the joyous wings of a new and living spiritual liberty.

(1556.5) 139:5.5 The strong point about Philip was his methodical reliability; the weak point in his make-up was his utter lack of imagination, the absence of the ability to put two and two together to obtain four. He was mathematical in the abstract but not constructive in his imagination. He was almost entirely lacking in certain types of imagination.

(1554.5) 139:4.7 John was a man of few words except when his temper was aroused. He thought much but said little. As he grew older, his temper became more subdued, better controlled, but he never overcame his disinclination to talk; he never fully mastered this reticence. But he was gifted with a remarkable and creative imagination.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 5:29 am +0000
Posts: 4470
So you are claiming here in this classroom and study group of students of the Revelation that imaginative contradictions of that text are good...even preferable...and its contents then are not written intentionally or accurately nor have any specific meanings of value as written??!!

Is that what you mean to say? You think the words selected are mere orthodoxy? Horse Feathers and Poppycock!! Good grief! And Stephen's contradictions to the UB and fictitous imaginative malarky are as relevant a presentation of reality as the UB's?! Astounding claim. Something a channeler might claim who declare their interpretations, continuations, corrections, and completions of the UB have the same validity as the UB itself.

The very real danger here, by such a claim kat, is that channelers already preach that the UB is stale and outdated and subject to revision and reinterpretation and editing and rewriting. They already claim that those who disagree lack "imagination" and those who do not and do not claim to speak directly to celestials lack spirituality and kingdom status.

Now here you are claiming I lack imagination and that Stephen's imaginative contradictions and embellishments to the UB present no problem.

Preposterous. No commentary about the Revelation might ever hope to be as meaningful as the actual text I do not think.
:shock: :-&

A perfect example of the dangers presented by such posts and those who protect the poster and the proclamations, fictions, fables, and contradictions posted as a substitute for the actual teachings of fact and truth. Wow.

Upon further reflection, I am mightily stirred and disturbed by this claim. Jesus had many reasons to teach in parables...including stupifying his enemies. But he taught his Apostles with precision and detail in thoroughly explaining the parables.

The Revelation is no parable or metaphor for imaginative restatement kat, by you or anyone...neither were the parables for that matter.

Frankly it reminds me of the Manifesto also defended by he whom you defend here now. Reality is whatever we believe and say it to be. I am God. Believe whatever you can imagine. Oh dear. Jesus did not teach this...and neither does the UB.

How sad.


Last edited by fanofVan on Mon Apr 29, 2019 7:33 am +0000, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 12:11 pm +0000
Posts: 932
I'm so sorry fanofVan, but it seems you have completely misconstrued the meaning behind my words. I have nothing left to say.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 5:29 am +0000
Posts: 4470
katroofjebus wrote:
fanofVan wrote:
I am a little confused by your strict attention to detail and specificity of the text in some discussions and your support of Stephen's obvious and direct contradictions to the text no matter how badly he misstates and misrepresents the UB in his posts.


One of the things that Jesus was very careful about was to prevent folks from attaching "precise interpretations and definite meanings to his words." He wanted each soul to utilize the powers of spiritual imagination in its relationship with divinity and not be hampered by orthodoxy. I may personally find it illuminating to be detail oriented, but not every personality thinks the same. Some people have active, colorful imaginations and others' are dry as dust. You may recall the apostle Philip who lacked imagination which the authors considered to be a character weakness, whereas in the case of John who had a "remarkable and creative imagination", it was considered to be a character strength. References:

(1942.3) 179:5.4 In instituting this remembrance supper, the Master, as was always his habit, resorted to parables and symbols. He employed symbols because he wanted to teach certain great spiritual truths in such a manner as to make it difficult for his successors to attach precise interpretations and definite meanings to his words. In this way he sought to prevent successive generations from crystallizing his teaching and binding down his spiritual meanings by the dead chains of tradition and dogma. In the establishment of the only ceremony or sacrament associated with his whole life mission, Jesus took great pains to suggest his meanings rather than to commit himself to precise definitions. He did not wish to destroy the individual’s concept of divine communion by establishing a precise form; neither did he desire to limit the believer’s spiritual imagination by formally cramping it. He rather sought to set man’s reborn soul free upon the joyous wings of a new and living spiritual liberty.

(1556.5) 139:5.5 The strong point about Philip was his methodical reliability; the weak point in his make-up was his utter lack of imagination, the absence of the ability to put two and two together to obtain four. He was mathematical in the abstract but not constructive in his imagination. He was almost entirely lacking in certain types of imagination.

(1554.5) 139:4.7 John was a man of few words except when his temper was aroused. He thought much but said little. As he grew older, his temper became more subdued, better controlled, but he never overcame his disinclination to talk; he never fully mastered this reticence. But he was gifted with a remarkable and creative imagination.


fanofVan wrote:
So you are claiming here in this classroom and study group of students of the Revelation that imaginative contradictions of that text are good...even preferable...and its contents then are not written intentionally or accurately nor have any specific meanings of value as written??!!

Is that what you mean to say? You think the words selected are mere orthodoxy? Horse Feathers and Poppycock!! Good grief! And Stephen's contradictions to the UB and fictitous imaginative malarky are as relevant a presentation of reality as the UB's?! Astounding claim. Something a channeler might claim who declare their interpretations, continuations, corrections, and completions of the UB have the same validity as the UB itself.

The very real danger here, by such a claim kat, is that channelers already preach that the UB is stale and outdated and subject to revision and reinterpretation and editing and rewriting. They already claim that those who disagree lack "imagination" and those who do not and do not claim to speak directly to celestials lack spirituality and kingdom status.

Now here you are claiming I lack imagination and that Stephen's imaginative contradictions and embellishments to the UB present no problem.

Preposterous. No commentary about the Revelation might ever hope to be as meaningful as the actual text I do not think.
:shock: :-&

A perfect example of the dangers presented by such posts and those who protect the poster and the proclamations, fictions, fables, and contradictions posted as a substitute for the actual teachings of fact and truth. Wow.

Upon further reflection, I am mightily stirred and disturbed by this claim. Jesus had many reasons to teach in parables...including stupifying his enemies. But he taught his Apostles with precision and detail in thoroughly explaining the parables.

The Revelation is no parable or metaphor for imaginative restatement kat, by you or anyone...neither were the parables for that matter.

Frankly it reminds me of the Manifesto also defended by he whom you defend here now. Reality is whatever we believe and say it to be. I am God. Believe whatever you can imagine. Oh dear. Jesus did not teach this...and neither does the UB.

How sad.


katroofjebus wrote:
I'm so sorry fanofVan, but it seems you have completely misconstrued the meaning behind my words. I have nothing left to say.


I am glad to hear I do not understand your meaning. I am stupified still. Words matter. They have meaning and value and those in this Epochal Revelation were, I believe, chosen with great care with the intention of presenting reality as factually and accurately and truthfully as possible by the authors.

You appear to deny this. And thereby you appear to support those who find revisionism and updating and embellishment simply imaginative and harmless. Hardly. There are those, even here among us at TB, that have claimed that there is no such thing or need for epochal revelation because we are blessed with personal revelation. To cast doubt on the actual words written by the authors and their meaning and value, you lend support to such claims and claimants IMO.

The words written by the authors are not to be taken lightly or trifled with and no one in the history of TruthBook I have read has trifled with, misstated, misrepresented, and falsified this Revelation like Stephen has. He so easily, quickly, frequently, and imaginatively falsifies this text and you appear to say you appreciate it. And Maryjo ignores and protects it and claims even new readers can somehow, magically, discern those misrepresentations and contradictions posted so often by Stephen. HOW? His falsehoods are neither trivial nor infrequent and completely change and challenge the very meanings of concepts and the teachings in both subtle and obvious ways which are a true disservice to the Revelation and those who gather here in study of that Revelation.

I am thoroughly discouraged here.


Last edited by fanofVan on Mon Apr 29, 2019 7:42 am +0000, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2012 11:16 pm +0000
Posts: 1166
Location: Nanticoke NY
But I am telling you that I reject your suggestion that I am mentally ill; I have explained why, Bradley, whereas I am immensely greatful for the times you have wrought better thinking upon due consideration. When I offer clarification for you, it remains unacknowledged. What is more than my rational errors of logic, is my provocation. I admit that I cannot discern the true origin of Michael the Creator Son, but I know that Michael is the father of all children created in Nebadon, whether seraphim or human or even Vorondadek. We cannot compete for the affection of someone like that. You are helping me to gain spiritual and rational discernment Bradley, in more ways that I can imagine. Let me leave it at that.

In Online conversations, I have gotten into arguments in the past, where the person I was conversing with "blocked me" informationally speaking. I was able to look back on our conversation, and read the script of my own banter, in a manner that was most ridiculous. If we could look back in this respect, each of us Bradley and I would find that the contentions we have raised are issues which reflect upon our own mindsets at the time written.

It is easy to see, why a person such as John Zebedee would be so reticent. But Jesus trusted John enough to bring him along to endure his persecution, or beratement, in the home of Annas. People have had trials of a most ridiculous nature throughout Urantian History, but now we are live in a time where the inquisition is measured in terms of not only the defendant, but the prosecutor, "with every word that you write", or "con toda palavra". That is when, before Jesus, the accuser became the accused. Pontius Pilate as the Representative of Rome executed Jesus, and knowing that killing an innocent man is punishable by the same offence, did take his own life. To me, Pilate is still a man of great dignity. Where are the Judges who will hold themselves accountable to the crimes they have committed, and judge themselves before Society has the need of a trial?

_________________
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  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 360 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 24  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Registered users: Google [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