Urantia Book Forum

Urantia Book Discussion Board : Study Group
It is currently Thu Dec 05, 2019 5:46 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 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 ... 24  Next
Author Message
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 5:29 am +0000
Posts: 3952
katroofjebus wrote:


fanofVan wrote:
Maryjo...you may parse and parcel this Revelation like Stephen as you wish and claim some parts more and less important than other parts and no reader or believer here should take any part too seriously if you dare to...but what a grave error and profound evil in my opinion. At this place, a study group of the Revelation you declare we should not take too seriously or too literally the teachings of this Epocal Revelation??!! Dear Lord.


I can't say I've ever seen such chutzpah! You are saying Maryjo's efforts here are profoundly evil! I just cannot abide by that kind of slander and personal assault. And on a woman. How dare you. Have you no shame?


Evil is but error. My claim that Maryjo errs and profoundly so is hardly slander nor does my disagreement with her require any great nerve and is not a personal assault....it is a disagreement and nothing more. Shame???? And on a woman???? Weird.

And I have thanked Maryjo for her stellar efforts here both publicly and privately on many occasions and am so glad for her service here! More twisting of words and meaning by you I see. Your agenda here is gaining transparency and is showing here kat. You may wish to consider the value of reversion yourself.

:roll: :wink:


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 5:29 am +0000
Posts: 3952
katroofjebus wrote:
fanofVan wrote:
...and with Stephen who has more locked threads than all other posters combined I believe. Hmmmmm…...wonder why?


Could it be because you keep fighting and arguing with him? and that makes it very, very uncomfortable for the readers?


Nope. I haven't posted a single comment on several of Stephen's topics. And he has received plenty of disagreement by many others here over the years, not just me, and including the mods on many occasions.

Wrong again!!

:wink: :roll:


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 9:13 am +0000
Posts: 1039
Location: Denver CO
fanofVan, you simply must let go of this vendetta, and this tendency to lock horns with your fellows at every opportunity.

Again, you insist on calling out another poster by name, which is against the rules. If this person has been here for eight years (I assume you spent the time to research this), then I think it's safe to say that my predecessor - my good friend Larry Watkins - must have seen fit to make the allowances needed to overlook, or accommodate the presence of this person. Larry has only been gone for a little over one year.

I suggest you do the same, and quit this attempt to besmirch another poster this way. It will not be tolerated any longer.

And btw...A lot of times, threads are locked for just this reason - that two posters decide to start railing against one another - throwing accusations, making assumptions of evil intent, and distracting everyone else in the process. It is counterproductive. And again, it often starts by misunderstandings that, if explored in a friendly way, might be cleared up. But when one person starts assuming that someone is allied with Lucifer, that can have a tendency to ruffle feathers...you are not blameless in some of these instances. So please...quit it!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 12:11 pm +0000
Posts: 932
Oh, sorry. I see you edited your post and added all of this:

fanofVan wrote:
Remember the malarkey began when Stephen falsely claimed that anxiety was healthy and that uncertainty and anxiety were the same thing. But one is a cause (uncertainty) and one is a potential effect (anxiety). He also claimed that anxiety was desirable and healthy. He then declared that mortals would someday and somehow outgrow uncertainty and only when uncertainties are eliminated will anxiety end. Again, false. He then insulted my own sense of assurance and secure confidence in God by personal faith and denied my own religious experience as invalid. Kat jumped in to further insult me and attempt to portray Stephen's false declarations and misrepresentations as factual and truthful...which they are not.

This is not complicated.

Let us remember that Stephen has his self declared doubts. Stephen lacks and disbelieves in assurance. He declares uncertainties are temporary (which defies and contradicts the very foundation and meaning of free will - free will inherently results in uncertainties of both choices and outcomes - who does not know this? This is kindergarten level basic philosophy and not peculiar or specific to the UB). And he believes that anxiety and fear are positive and healthy. He does not believe he has an Adjuster and that not all people do, contradicting the UB while claiming to believe it. And he is fearful doubtful about his very survival.

Stephen is not new here or to the UB. His hundreds of posts and dozens of topics posted here over the years is a long record of his disagreements with the UB and the conflicts of his own cherished beliefs which contradict the Papers. This latest edition of his disagreements and disbeliefs is nothing new...indeed, it is quite consistent...predictable even. Why should this student body be endlessly subjected to Stephen's fears, doubts, and prejudices....when those directly contradict the UB we are here to study? Very strange.

:roll: 8)


First of all, your problem with Stephen is between you and Stephen. Why don't you do what Jesus told us to do as described in this reference:

(1762.5) 159:1.3 “The Father in heaven loves his children, and therefore should you learn to love one another; the Father in heaven forgives you your sins; therefore should you learn to forgive one another. [u]If your brother sins against you, go to him and with tact and patience show him his fault. And do all this between you and him alone. If he will listen to you, then have you won your brother. But if your brother will not hear you, if he persists in the error of his way, go again to him, taking with you one or two mutual friends that you may thus have two or even three witnesses to confirm your testimony and establish the fact that you have dealt justly and mercifully with your offending brother. Now if he refuses to hear your brethren, you may tell the whole story to the congregation, and then, if he refuses to hear the brotherhood, let them take such action as they deem wise; let such an unruly member become an outcast from the kingdom. While you cannot pretend to sit in judgment on the souls of your fellows, and while you may not forgive sins or otherwise presume to usurp the prerogatives of the supervisors of the heavenly hosts, at the same time, it has been committed to your hands that you should maintain temporal order in the kingdom on earth. While you may not meddle with the divine decrees concerning eternal life, you shall determine the issues of conduct as they concern the temporal welfare of the brotherhood on earth. And so, in all these matters connected with the discipline of the brotherhood, whatsoever you shall decree on earth, shall be recognized in heaven. Although you cannot determine the eternal fate of the individual, you may legislate regarding the conduct of the group, for, where two or three of you agree concerning any of these things and ask of me, it shall be done for you if your petition is not inconsistent with the will of my Father in heaven. And all this is ever true, for, where two or three believers are gathered together, there am I in the midst of them.”

Now perhaps you have already gone to him personally, as Jesus said, I don't know. The next step is to gather up some friends and approach him. Have you done that? If so, then I suppose you've now come to the "congregation" and are asking for him to become an "outcast from the kingdom". But that has not happened, has it? Justice is a group effort, and if the group doesn't agree with you, then you have a problem.

Bradly I see a lot of angst in your post, tremendous irritation, indignation and emotional distress. You claim you are not suffering from any of those things, but let me tell you this. Your constant whining about Stephen is causing other people distress, and for that reason alone perhaps you can give it a rest, as Maryjo requested? Please, give it a rest. I worry your heart can't take the stress.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 5:29 am +0000
Posts: 3952
Jim George wrote:
After reading Truthbook again, I am once again struck with the observation of mortal mindsets attempting to understand spirit reality as if it was an intellectually discovered mental concept.

True spirit reality is realized from deep within our beings and is available to each spirit indwelt mortal, learned or not, equally. The fruits of such a realization within our souls produce the character of the spirit. It is by our willingness and desire to be like this spirit, a discovery of personal faith and conviction deep within our beings, that this process of character transformation is made manifest.

Having consciously engaged this process many years ago, I am curious what motivates one to be so inclined as to create a theology; an intellectual understanding of such a revelation as The Urantia papers, as a necessary basis upon which to build one's character. In fact it seems counterproductive and counterintuitive and the constant confrontations exhibited here on Truthbook reveal mostly the character of theological persuasion versus the revelation of spirit embrace.

God in his amazing wisdom and love has always revealed to me the futility of any more than a rudimentary theology for my personal use simply because of the tendency of my mind and will to become more enamored with my thoughts, than with his. As is revealed, the experience of personal interaction with the indwelling divine spirit, the Thought Adjuster, requires an act of will, not an act of intellect.

I pray for a renewed focus here.


Greetings Jim!! Perhaps you could help us get redirected with "a renewed focus"...I hope so.

You raise some very interesting issues related to the topic of Personality-identity. Let's consider those.

You wonder above: "I am once again struck with the observation of mortal mindsets attempting to understand spirit reality as if it was an intellectually discovered mental concept."


Since the spirit reality is a fact and facts and meanings are intellectually discovered mental concepts (as I understand them) and as intellectually described and presented in the Revelation, I wonder what you mean by "attempting" to understand. I do agree we may not be able to fully appreciate and embrace the truth of this fact only by our intellectual discovery but you seem to insinuate that it is futile to attempt to learn about spirit realities by thinking even though we are taught that it is by thinking that we approach all understanding and the spirit within. Perhaps I misunderstand?

From the forward: "2. Mind. The thinking, perceiving, and feeling mechanism of the human organism. The total conscious and unconscious experience. The intelligence associated with the emotional life reaching upward through worship and wisdom to the spirit level."

16:6.9 These scientific, moral, and spiritual insights, these cosmic responses, are innate in the cosmic mind, which endows all will creatures. The experience of living never fails to develop these three cosmic intuitions; they are constitutive in the self-consciousness of reflective thinking. But it is sad to record that so few persons on Urantia take delight in cultivating these qualities of courageous and independent cosmic thinking.

16:6.10 In the local universe mind bestowals, these three insights of the cosmic mind constitute the a priori assumptions which make it possible for man to function as a rational and self-conscious personality in the realms of science, philosophy, and religion. Stated otherwise, the recognition of the reality of these three manifestations of the Infinite is by a cosmic technique of self-revelation. Matter-energy is recognized by the mathematical logic of the senses; mind-reason intuitively knows its moral duty; spirit-faith (worship) is the religion of the reality of spiritual experience. These three basic factors in reflective thinking may be unified and co-ordinated in personality development, or they may become disproportionate and virtually unrelated in their respective functions. But when they become unified, they produce a strong character consisting in the correlation of a factual science, a moral philosophy, and a genuine religious experience. And it is these three cosmic intuitions that give objective validity, reality, to man's experience in and with things, meanings, and values.

Jim, you then say: "True spirit reality is realized from deep within our beings and is available to each spirit indwelt mortal, learned or not, equally."

Is true spirit reality realized by all equally? I look forward to some text support for such an intellectual declaration of reality. It is my understanding that spirit reality realization is very specific and unique to each personality based on lots of different factors and the timing for such understanding is also completely different for each mind and soul. The seven circles are not progressed evenly or uniformly. Indeed, the Papers say that those who have achieved the highest and final circle before fusion often (or always) have a very unique set of issues still to resolve regarding their "spirit reality realization".

But I do look forward to your presentations from the UB which support your perspective to learn better thereby. Thanks.

Jim, you then say: "It is by our willingness and desire to be like this spirit, a discovery of personal faith and conviction deep within our beings, that this process of character transformation is made manifest."


Yes, I agree with this completely. Only by our willingness will we choose to believe and to act. And only by our desire will we strive and persist and seek and hear and see and discern and change. And by our willingness and our desire we will, without question and inherently and inevitably, stir a response by spirit that feeds this yearn and hunger and thirst just as certainly as a mother's breast feeds her baby!! And this relationship is transformative and results in the trust and faith of the child and the nurturing assurance of the ministering Spirit within!! Well said! The UB says this is natural. We are designed and built for it...just as is the babe and its mother!

Jim, you then say: "I am curious what motivates one to be so inclined as to create a theology; an intellectual understanding of such a revelation as The Urantia papers, as a necessary basis upon which to build one's character."


I think the UB teaches that theology is inevitable and functional and desirable...but perhaps I misunderstand your point? The whole point of the epochal revelation known as the Urantia Papers is to reduce philosophical and theological confusions and to eliminate errors in our knowledge and facts to better understand reality - all of reality!! I don't think the study of the UB is required to "build one's character". But the development of character is certainly rewarded and accelerated we are taught by accuracy of reality perspective and our living philosophy and our religious experience and progress. These are all outcomes and objectives of studying epochal revelation I think.

5:5.6 Religious experience, being essentially spiritual, can never be fully understood by the material mind; hence the function of theology, the psychology of religion. The essential doctrine of the human realization of God creates a paradox in finite comprehension. It is well-nigh impossible for human logic and finite reason to harmonize the concept of divine immanence, God within and a part of every individual, with the idea of God's transcendence, the divine domination of the universe of universes. These two essential concepts of Deity must be unified in the faith-grasp of the concept of the transcendence of a personal God and in the realization of the indwelling presence of a fragment of that God in order to justify intelligent worship and validate the hope of personality survival. The difficulties and paradoxes of religion are inherent in the fact that the realities of religion are utterly beyond the mortal capacity for intellectual comprehension.

Thus, theology!!

101:2.17 Psychology may indeed attempt to study the phenomena of religious reactions to the social environment, but never can it hope to penetrate to the real and inner motives and workings of religion. Only theology, the province of faith and the technique of revelation, can afford any sort of intelligent account of the nature and content of religious experience.

Jim, then you say: "In fact it seems counterproductive and counterintuitive and the constant confrontations exhibited here on Truthbook reveal mostly the character of theological persuasion versus the revelation of spirit embrace."

I understand it is your opinion that the students here, especially perhaps on this topic, are engaged in persuasion? Hmmm... perhaps some are. Certainly not me though. I reject the notion that we gather here to persuade others of the truth or importance of the UB or that anyone here should believe the claims of the authors. The Guidelines are very clear...we gather here to study, not to persuade or convince or convert anyone. Very inappropriate and counterproductive. Belief is too personal and must come by self conviction and truth realization. Persuasion is very inappropriate. I disagree with your contention that the confrontations here reflect such a goal but you're entitled to your opinion on the matter. For me, it is my contention that the Revelation says what it says and says it with purpose and intent and with clarity and with redundancy. I will try to persuade others of that! It says what it says! Yes sir!


Jim, then you say: "As is revealed, the experience of personal interaction with the indwelling divine spirit, the Thought Adjuster, requires an act of will, not an act of intellect. "

Actually Jim, according to the UB, it takes BOTH!!

110:1.1 Adjusters should not be thought of as living in the material brains of human beings. They are not organic parts of the physical creatures of the realms. The Thought Adjuster may more properly be envisaged as indwelling the mortal mind of man rather than as existing within the confines of a single physical organ. And indirectly and unrecognized the Adjuster is constantly communicating with the human subject, especially during those sublime experiences of the worshipful contact of mind with spirit in the superconsciousness.

110:1.2 I wish it were possible for me to help evolving mortals to achieve a better understanding and attain a fuller appreciation of the unselfish and superb work of the Adjusters living within them, who are so devoutly faithful to the task of fostering man's spiritual welfare. These Monitors are efficient ministers to the higher phases of men's minds; they are wise and experienced manipulators of the spiritual potential of the human intellect. These heavenly helpers are dedicated to the stupendous task of guiding you safely inward and upward to the celestial haven of happiness. These tireless toilers are consecrated to the future personification of the triumph of divine truth in your life everlasting. They are the watchful workers who pilot the God-conscious human mind away from the shoals of evil while expertly guiding the evolving soul of man toward the divine harbors of perfection on far-distant and eternal shores. The Adjusters are loving leaders, your safe and sure guides through the dark and uncertain mazes of your short earthly career; they are the patient teachers who so constantly urge their subjects forward in the paths of progressive perfection. They are the careful custodians of the sublime values of creature character. I wish you could love them more, co-operate with them more fully, and cherish them more affectionately.


Thanks for sharing your opinions and I do hope you might share that part of the UB that supports your claims above and help me gain more insight to your thoughts and beliefs related thereto.

8)


Last edited by fanofVan on Tue May 21, 2019 6:38 am +0000, edited 4 times in total.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 5:29 am +0000
Posts: 3952
maryjo606 wrote:
fanofVan, you simply must let go of this vendetta, and this tendency to lock horns with your fellows at every opportunity.

Again, you insist on calling out another poster by name, which is against the rules. If this person has been here for eight years (I assume you spent the time to research this), then I think it's safe to say that my predecessor - my good friend Larry Watkins - must have seen fit to make the allowances needed to overlook, or accommodate the presence of this person. Larry has only been gone for a little over one year.

I suggest you do the same, and quit this attempt to besmirch another poster this way. It will not be tolerated any longer.

And btw...A lot of times, threads are locked for just this reason - that two posters decide to start railing against one another - throwing accusations, making assumptions of evil intent, and distracting everyone else in the process. It is counterproductive. And again, it often starts by misunderstandings that, if explored in a friendly way, might be cleared up. But when one person starts assuming that someone is allied with Lucifer, that can have a tendency to ruffle feathers...you are not blameless in some of these instances. So please...quit it!


I appreciate the opportunity to discuss this Maryjo. Calling someone by their name is against the Guidelines?? Can't find that one. I have listed here claims by a specific poster made by that specific poster. I don't understand the infraction here.

Larry often directly rebuked and threatened Stephen whenever he strayed off the reservation. He did not protect Stephen's posts which contradicted the UB nor were proclamations of his beliefs and theories which violated the purpose of this study group - study of the UB - tolerated for long - lots of short topics started by Stephen here. I don't know of any instance when Larry locked any topic due to any posts of mine, thank you.

It is not my intention or agenda to besmirch Stephen in any way. He is welcome to his beliefs and metaphysics and theories whether they agree with, conflict with, or contradict the UB. My only intention here is to point out when his declarations and assumptions are in direct contradiction to the UB while he proclaims them to be from the UB when they most certainly are not.

Actually I appreciate such contrast to the UB and find it to be valuable to help us all learn from and appreciate the actual contents which so often disagree with Stephens claims.

And I have never once said or inferred that Stephen is allied with Lucifer. For Pete's sake. Dear Lord and Good Grief!! Talk about twisting!!! Stephen started a topic here, still available for review, which supports Lucifer's Manifesto and rebellion. It is a position he has also supported in other topics....like this one for example. So when someone here states their support for Lucifer and rebellion....what would you advise??

Me blameless?????? Hahahahahaha….no ma'm, not me! Thanks again for being here. Why you have a blind spot for Stephen's beliefs here I don't know....but that's not my problem. It is my hope that everyone here is sincerely interested in learning what the Revelation actually teaches and to share the wonder of discovery and the delight of the assurances God gives all who believe and trust and have faith in Him and his friendly universe!

:wink: :biggrin: :idea: :!: 8)


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 9:13 am +0000
Posts: 1039
Location: Denver CO
Look, I am not going to get into this with you. Anyone who cares to can read back over this thread and make up their own minds about what's what and who's who. This post of mine was not an invitation to discuss the issue. It was a request to you to cease and desist with the negative personal references.

If you are unhappy with me, or with the moderation of this forum, you are always free to go elsewhere. This is not YOUR personal forum or bully pulpit. You are not the gatekeeper, but a guest. Please behave accordingly.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 5:29 am +0000
Posts: 3952
maryjo606 wrote:
Look, I am not going to get into this with you. Anyone who cares to can read back over this thread and make up their own minds about what's what and who's who. This post of mine was not an invitation to discuss the issue. It was a request to you to cease and desist with the negative personal references.

If you are unhappy with me, or with the moderation of this forum, you are always free to go elsewhere. This is not YOUR personal forum or bully pulpit. You are not the gatekeeper, but a guest. Please behave accordingly.


Very well.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2019 6:11 am +0000
Posts: 29
Daniel here,
First of all and very humbly so, apologies to anyone I might offend for I am still a new reader... but...
I have found Bradly's posts; quotes and explanations, very thorough and to the point, and I thank him for his dedication. Rather than see his posts as personal attacks, I see a cleansing of the temple sort of thing. For those of us still learning to weave our way through the U.B terminologies and phrases, his breakdown is a lot of help (to me it is) and once again I thank him for the dedication.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2012 11:16 pm +0000
Posts: 1120
Location: Nanticoke NY
1. Evil and error are not the same: error refers to sin, as in the conscious erring from the universe reality.
2. Logic is built on inference. Yes it is. Especially rational truth.
3. I do not long to have an imprint on the work that I perform, but I would rather do the best work possible and leave it to people to conisder.
4. The Thought Adjusters is one of the greatest mysteries of the universe, where as the conditions of elemental material existence are not really unfamiliar.
5. I do not how it is possible to actually identify with one's thought adjuster.
6. If people have a greater truth than I have currently been able to express, then their teachings are admissible into my own considerations. I would have to respect another being more than I respect myself, a condition that is not necessarily possible.
7. I am torn as to how my words have been considered by members of this group, when only my most glaring defects are examined, but or do I appreciate the advice about the real trajectory of the human soul, in this life.

It is said that people like Enoch have lived one human life, and found and seized the opportune to gain all of the knowledge one would need to know in order to advance in the mansion spheres. I wonder if it is possible to readily advance through also the central universe kingdom. I cannot postpone some of the lessons I would need to advance readily in the mansonia, or Edentia Spheres. I want to become like the universal father. But if I have not fully garnered wisdom, then this life that I contain inside my mind, to use as I please, is not love. It cannot be considered eternal.

_________________
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
Moderator

Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 9:13 am +0000
Posts: 1039
Location: Denver CO
Dear Daniel,

Thanks so much for your input. It's good to know that you feel free to post your comments on this latest round of contention here on the Forum.

Many of the posters here are very dedicated and skilled at providing wonderful breakdowns of Urantia Book truth; I am very glad that you see the value of this. I see it, too, and I am grateful when these kinds of posts are seen and appreciated - especially by a new reader like yourself. I invite any and all to do likewise, for it is this kind of post that is most valuable. When done in a right spirit, they can be most helpful. Even arguments and disagreements can be had successfully in such an atmosphere of friendly discussion.

Nevertheless, I would remind you, and everyone, that no single person here is tasked with "cleansing the temple." I just want to make that clear, as it implies that there are some people here who need to be cleansed, and others who have the right to make that determination. These kinds of personal judgments are in the mind and heart of the beholder, and are not necessarily accurate. This is why such public efforts are frowned upon. They cause dissension and diversion. And, it is why there is moderation/management here, to help keep things on track and out of the weeds.

If one poster has a personal problem with anther poster, they are encouraged to take that sort of discussion into a private space - private messaging is available to all.

It is only when bitter contentions arise in public, due to unfortunate misunderstandings, that the management has to step in and try to restore order. This happens when the discussions take a turn into personal commentary that is seen by management as negative and inflammatory. We are not here to discuss each other, except in the most helpful and encouraging ways. We all have shortcomings, but it is not up to any one of us to call them out as a rule. It is always best to stick to the topic at hand, and learn/teach the material by friendly discourse with each other.

Again, thanks for your post, Daniel. And I hope you'll feel free to add more, when the spirit moves you...you have not offended me, or anyone else, I think. I hope you'll take my comments to you in the loving spirit with which they are intended.

maryjo


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 5:29 am +0000
Posts: 3952
SEla_Kelly wrote:
1. Evil and error are not the same: error refers to sin, as in the conscious erring from the universe reality.
2. Logic is built on inference. Yes it is. Especially rational truth.
3. I do not long to have an imprint on the work that I perform, but I would rather do the best work possible and leave it to people to conisder.
4. The Thought Adjusters is one of the greatest mysteries of the universe, where as the conditions of elemental material existence are not really unfamiliar.
5. I do not how it is possible to actually identify with one's thought adjuster.
6. If people have a greater truth than I have currently been able to express, then their teachings are admissible into my own considerations. I would have to respect another being more than I respect myself, a condition that is not necessarily possible.
7. I am torn as to how my words have been considered by members of this group, when only my most glaring defects are examined, but or do I appreciate the advice about the real trajectory of the human soul, in this life.

It is said that people like Enoch have lived one human life, and found and seized the opportune to gain all of the knowledge one would need to know in order to advance in the mansion spheres. I wonder if it is possible to readily advance through also the central universe kingdom. I cannot postpone some of the lessons I would need to advance readily in the mansonia, or Edentia Spheres. I want to become like the universal father. But if I have not fully garnered wisdom, then this life that I contain inside my mind, to use as I please, is not love. It cannot be considered eternal.


Stephen, this list of your personal beliefs includes your declaration #1, which is a direct contradiction to the UB. In case you may be interested or a newer reader might be confused by this misstatement.

Stephen says: "1. Evil and error are not the same: error refers to sin, as in the conscious erring from the universe reality."

Actually, according to the UB, evil is but error in our choices. It may be caused by immaturity, ignorance, impatience, misjudgment, poor timing or tactic or strategy, or other form of decision making. Sin is the deliberate, conscious, and knowing decision to choose wrong instead of right. Iniquity is the continuous, repetitive, and knowing choosing of wrong when right is known.

Jesus gave the best explanation for the differences between evil, sin, and iniquity....but there are plenty of others in the UB for those who care what the UB teaches.

148:4.3 (1660.2) “Evil is the unconscious or unintended transgression of the divine law, the Father’s will. Evil is likewise the measure of the imperfectness of obedience to the Father’s will.

148:4.4 (1660.3) “Sin is the conscious, knowing, and deliberate transgression of the divine law, the Father’s will. Sin is the measure of unwillingness to be divinely led and spiritually directed.

148:4.5 (1660.4) “Iniquity is the willful, determined, and persistent transgression of the divine law, the Father’s will. Iniquity is the measure of the continued rejection of the Father’s loving plan of personality survival and the Sons’ merciful ministry of salvation.

148:4.6 (1660.5) “By nature, before the rebirth of the spirit, mortal man is subject to inherent evil tendencies, but such natural imperfections of behavior are neither sin nor iniquity. Mortal man is just beginning his long ascent to the perfection of the Father in Paradise. To be imperfect or partial in natural endowment is not sinful. Man is indeed subject to evil, but he is in no sense the child of the evil one unless he has knowingly and deliberately chosen the paths of sin and the life of iniquity. Evil is inherent in the natural order of this world, but sin is an attitude of conscious rebellion which was brought to this world by those who fell from spiritual light into gross darkness.

148:4.7 (1660.6) “You are confused, Thomas, by the doctrines of the Greeks and the errors of the Persians. You do not understand the relationships of evil and sin because you view mankind as beginning on earth with a perfect Adam and rapidly degenerating, through sin, to man’s present deplorable estate. But why do you refuse to comprehend the meaning of the record which discloses how Cain, the son of Adam, went over into the land of Nod and there got himself a wife? And why do you refuse to interpret the meaning of the record which portrays the sons of God finding wives for themselves among the daughters of men?

148:4.8 (1660.7) “Men are, indeed, by nature evil, but not necessarily sinful. The new birth—the baptism of the spirit—is essential to deliverance from evil and necessary for entrance into the kingdom of heaven, but none of this detracts from the fact that man is the son of God. Neither does this inherent presence of potential evil mean that man is in some mysterious way estranged from the Father in heaven so that, as an alien, foreigner, or stepchild, he must in some manner seek for legal adoption by the Father. All such notions are born, first, of your misunderstanding of the Father and, second, of your ignorance of the origin, nature, and destiny of man.

8)


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 5:29 am +0000
Posts: 3952
wiffinzebe wrote:
Daniel here,
First of all and very humbly so, apologies to anyone I might offend for I am still a new reader... but...
I have found Bradly's posts; quotes and explanations, very thorough and to the point, and I thank him for his dedication. Rather than see his posts as personal attacks, I see a cleansing of the temple sort of thing. For those of us still learning to weave our way through the U.B terminologies and phrases, his breakdown is a lot of help (to me it is) and once again I thank him for the dedication.


Hey Daniel!!!!

Thanks for the support!!

In my zeal and enthusiasm to share the UB with other readers and sincere students, I must confess I do occasionally exhibit frustrations and even some temper time to time when I feel someone else is intentionally and purposefully misrepresenting the teachings. However, this is most unfortunate and counter productive to my own objectives of sharing and caring. It is a function of immaturity and occasional emotionalism.

I do receive lots of support, some public and more privately, for my tenacity on behalf of accuracy of representation of the contents of the UB here and two other UB on-line study groups. I am so very grateful for those voices and for your own. I appreciate the courage it takes to speak out like you did here, being so new to both the community and the Papers. Good for you!

Let me recognize your own astute perception and appreciation for the UB you have already demonstrated here. Sincere students truly seeking to learn the teachings and understand the contents of the UB while studying its many presentations of universe reality are my very reason for being here. I have met so many over the decades and enjoyed the great satisfaction of their wonder and discovery and insight and inspiration!!!!

I really look forward to your own topics and to your contributions to discussion and debate here. As Maryjo rightly points out, tone can be as important as content. I've been told by my wife that when correcting children (as children) and grandchildren, my error so often lies not so much in what I say as how I say it....tone and attitude! This is something I have addressed and still needs some work...one of those beams in my eye that needs attention from time to time.

But I am so glad you have recognized my motive is not personal or against anyone in particular but is an important classroom objective....accuracy of the presentation of the material being studied. I feel this is vital. These study groups are not established to merely share opinions but to study. And especially not for the sharing of opinions which actually contradict that which is being studied but proclaimed to represent that which is being studied. YOU GET IT!!! Bully for you and well done.

Nonetheless, I have much to learn and improve upon and immaturities I must grow up and set aside. I most gladly confess that and agree with Maryjo's rebukes to become more gracious with my tenacity!! I pray for continued improvement for I must also confess I used to be much worse in my opinionating here!!! I'm afraid its true....hahahaha! I am but a tadpole after all! Sincere but......

:wink: :biggrin: 8)


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2012 11:16 pm +0000
Posts: 1120
Location: Nanticoke NY
:? I still do not understand why you think that anxiety can be annihilated avoided or absolved. I need to insist that it is necessary and useful in understanding work and psychological issues. Anxiety cannot be removed without doing things to make your life better each day. This is important especially when you consider that my nature is not the will of God. [UB 14:4.13; 14:6.13] Looking forward to the morontial challenges, is postponing the challenges you are face now today.

Assurance or faith might be the end or the goal, but working with anxiety: confronting what is in your mind that provokes such aversion, is the means to obtain a well-rounded and mature personality, from a human experiencial approach.

26:5.5 Time is of little consequence on the Havona circles. In a limited manner it enters into the possibilities of advancement, but achievement is the final and supreme test. The very moment your superaphic associate deems you to be competent to pass inward to the next circle, you will be taken before the twelve adjutants of the seventh Circuit Spirit. Here you will be required to pass the tests of the circle determined by the superuniverse of your origin and by the system of your nativity. The divinity attainment of this circle takes place on the pilot world and consists in the spiritual recognition and realization of the Master Spirit of the ascending pilgrim's superuniverse.
I have always tried to work to overcome anxiety in myself and others. Don't try to escape from anxiety: embrace the problems you find each day and solve them, and after you can gain assurance, when the pain and anxiety has been repaired. It sounds popular to think that you have already gained the ultimate faith assurance of reality, but in my view it is better to embrace uncertainty, so as to prepare your mind for even greater potentials in the central universe, and as a post-Salvington spirit.


Changing your residence from Divinington to Ascendington sounds like a lot of work. [UB 112:7.12]

_________________
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 Mon May 20, 2019 3:23 pm +0000, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 12:11 pm +0000
Posts: 932
Another explanation of the differences between error, evil, sin and iniquity is offered by a Melchizedek who defines them this way (my synopsis):

Error is a misconception or distortion of reality which suggests a lack of intellectual keenness.
Evil is a partial realization or maladjustment to reality which suggests a deficiency of wisdom.
Sin is a purposeful, conscious resistance to reality which suggests abject spiritual poverty.
Iniquity is an open, persistent conscious defiance of recognized reality which suggests personality disintegration due to vanishing personality control.

(754.5) 67:1.4 There are many ways of looking at sin, but from the universe philosophic viewpoint sin is the attitude of a personality who is knowingly resisting cosmic reality. Error might be regarded as a misconception or distortion of reality. Evil is a partial realization of, or maladjustment to, universe realities. But sin is a purposeful resistance to divine reality — a conscious choosing to oppose spiritual progress — while iniquity consists in an open and persistent defiance of recognized reality and signifies such a degree of personality disintegration as to border on cosmic insanity.

(755.1) 67:1.5 Error suggests lack of intellectual keenness; evil, deficiency of wisdom; sin, abject spiritual poverty; but iniquity is indicative of vanishing personality control.

(755.2) 67:1.6 And when sin has so many times been chosen and so often been repeated, it may become habitual. Habitual sinners can easily become iniquitous, become wholehearted rebels against the universe and all of its divine realities. While all manner of sins may be forgiven, we doubt whether the established iniquiter would ever sincerely experience sorrow for his misdeeds or accept forgiveness for his sins.


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 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 ... 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