Adam & Laotta

.

Do you think Adam was in any way responsible for Laotta's death?

ADAM & LAOTTA.png (191.97 KiB) Viewed 5095 times

.

[color=#FFFFFF].

Yes, and I was going to bring this up: the risky procedure of all mothers who participated in Adam's plan. Other women must have known and thus risked life to conceive Adam's child, think about how only 1570 children out of 1684 were born: probably even more mothers died but that statistic is simply omitted.

So....Adam was responsible for the normal maternal death rate at birth at this time in history??

An interesting claim....by both of you! Dear Lord....

Indeed, and so after Sansa, you have to say that the woman who gave their lives to birth Adam's child did so more courageously than Laotta.

I do not appreciate to have been mocked by an inference that is so obvious. It is difficult enough to discuss, or even to mention this probability, as it is. Maybe you can say that there were procedures thereafter, that would have reduced the mortality rate, but probably you could still call it a risky procedure, greater than 50% risk of the mother's death.

76:4.2 Eve did not suffer pain in childbirth; neither did the early evolutionary races. Only the mixed races produced by the union of evolutionary man with the Nodites and later with the Adamites suffered the severe pangs of childbirth.

Those women were truly the "unblemished" pedigree upon which civilization advanced, and their sacrifice is not unlike the way that Jesus himself gave his life to the people of Jerusalem/Galilee, as "an unblemished animal", unblemished pedigree, unblemished meaning sinlessness. But more importantly than being without genetic defect or human sins, was the way that we do not need to question why such women risked their own lives in order to produce the child who was like Adam.

Maternal mortality within 6 wks. of giving birth by all causes, prior to mid 19th century where records were kept and before "modern" medicine, was 2-3% (estimated). Unusual and yet not uncommon. I doubt your 50% guess...based on what?

What a crazy question....

Because the genetic difference between Nod and the Sangik peoples was expansive, as was the difference between Adam and even the most intelligent or physically capable women of Urantia during his own times. You, Bradly, are referring to something else: mortality rates when genetic similarity is very high. Again, the paragraph I shared (76:4.2) from the Urantia book indicates the need for compatibility. The 112 Mothers AND Children who died were probably less compatible with the Adamic Life Plasm, that of the Second Source and Center. I am not a female, so I do not really understand rationally, to say that the goal of a greater offspring is worthwhile enough to risk probable death during delivery.

Last edited by SEla_Kelly on Tue Dec 17, 2019 12:32 pm +0000, edited 2 times in total.

Still making things up I see. What 112 mothers? You posted no quote about the death of any mothers. And there were no 112 deaths of any babies either. 112 children born did not live long enough to have children of their own...nothing at all to do with infant mortality. 6% of the 1,682 children born failed to survive "to maturity"...a seemingly common ratio I believe....even in the early 20th century....simple infections killed many children and teens prior to penicillin and inoculation, not to mention the accidents of time and dangers of hunting and farming and predators and war.

Good Grief.

76:4.8 (851.6) After becoming established in the second garden on the Euphrates, Adam elected to leave behind as much of his life plasm as possible to benefit the world after his death. Accordingly, Eve was made the head of a commission of twelve on race improvement, and before Adam died this commission had selected 1,682 of the highest type of women on Urantia, and these women were impregnated with the Adamic life plasm. Their children all grew up to maturity except 112, so that the world, in this way, was benefited by the addition of 1,570 superior men and women. Though these candidate mothers were selected from all the surrounding tribes and represented most of the races on earth, the majority were chosen from the highest strains of the Nodites, and they constituted the early beginnings of the mighty Andite race. These children were born and reared in the tribal surroundings of their respective mothers.

Stephen says above: "Because the genetic difference between Nod and the Sangik peoples was expansive, as was the difference between Adam and even the most intelligent or physically capable women of Urantia during his own times. You, Bradly, are referring to something else: mortality rates when genetic similarity is very high."

But these women are NOT Andonite or Sangik, either one!! They are Nodite women. And where does it say or even imply that "painful" childbirth also increases mortality risks for either babies or mothers??? Where does it say that??? There is not a single iota of text or other information which infers or suggests that "mortality rates" are any different between the two groups - whether "genetic similarity is very high" or if aboriginal stock is admixed with Violet stock or with the Prince's staff.

Where is it written that the Nodites suffered increased infant or maternal mortality?????!!!! Good Grief.

The Andites are the most resilient and progressive genetic race in Urantia's history...the fully admixed races of evolution on Urantia!! The best of the best...not the weakest by ANY definition or speculation or accusation!!



So...what was the actual result of Adam's decision here? Consider:

78:4.1 (871.7) The Andite races were the primary blends of the pure-line violet race and the Nodites plus the evolutionary peoples. In general, Andites should be thought of as having a far greater percentage of Adamic blood than the modern races. In the main, the term Andite is used to designate those peoples whose racial inheritance was from one-eighth to one-sixth violet. Modern Urantians, even the northern white races, contain much less than this percentage of the blood of Adam.

78:4.2 (871. The earliest Andite peoples took origin in the regions adjacent to Mesopotamia more than twenty-five thousand years ago and consisted of a blend of the Adamites and Nodites. The second garden was surrounded by concentric circles of diminishing violet blood, and it was on the periphery of this racial melting pot that the Andite race was born. Later on, when the migrating Adamites and Nodites entered the then fertile regions of Turkestan, they soon blended with the superior inhabitants, and the resultant race mixture extended the Andite type northward.

78:4.3 (872.1) The Andites were the best all-round human stock to appear on Urantia since the days of the pure-line violet peoples. They embraced most of the highest types of the surviving remnants of the Adamite and Nodite races and, later, some of the best strains of the yellow, blue, and green men.

Last edited by fanofVan on Wed Dec 18, 2019 11:25 am +0000, edited 3 times in total.

Those women were truly the "unblemished" pedigree upon which civilization advanced, and their sacrifice is not unlike the way that Jesus himself gave his life to the people of Jerusalem/Galilee, as "an unblemished animal", unblemished pedigree, unblemished meaning sinlessness. But more importantly than being without genetic defect or human sins, was the way that we do not need to question why such women risked their own lives in order to produce the child who was like Adam.

Unblemished??? What do you mean? Sacrifice?? You mean the great honor they volunteered for as the honored and revered tribal-selected mother of the tribe's god-child?? This great privilege and life-long honor was a sacrifice? How so??

Jesus gave his life to the Jews as an unblemished animal??? Good Grief. Dear Lord. Help Us. So Jesus was a sacrifice? And was sacrificed??

So Jesus was an unblemished animal sent here as an atonement and blood sacrifice for the Jews and these selected women were likewise unblemished animals as was Jesus and chosen as sacrifices to history to save humanity...this is your claim here.

And you claim these women were without genetic defect and/or sin?? And how do you know these things which are not so said in the text we study here??

Why would you think or claim these children were like Adam?? Adam lived for so long as a Local Universe celestial being on the Mansion Worlds and had such knowledge and experience and wisdom not available to any of these children. These children were not raised by Adam either nor were they raised in the Garden or Garden culture.

In one short paragraph posted above you have contradicted multiple basic teachings of the UB. IMO you are the most dangerous poster here EVER and the one who misrepresents and misstates and misquotes and falsifies the Papers with every post and utterance and never with any admission or regret or remorse or repentance....which proves beyond any doubt that you are here with an agenda of falsehood and disruption and deception!!

So many falsehoods in so few words...such cannot be accidental. Your perversions of the text are obvious enough. And direct violations of the Guidelines here....still....and always.

Last edited by fanofVan on Wed Dec 18, 2019 6:22 am +0000, edited 2 times in total.

.


The question wasn't intended to be accusatory, more a poll. A reader on another forum felt he was culpable. I was surprised anyone did, then asked around and found other readers do also, in some measure at least because Adam was a biologist for 15,000 years and a System renowned expert anatomist.

It seems most reasonable of all opinions, that they both realized the risk and accepted it--willingly. What do you think of that theory?



.

What risk???? Pregnancy has inherent risks! All of them...each of them. You don't think any women died in childbirth then? How about now? Weird.

I don't think Adam had a laboratory or the means to do genetic testing....if that would even help, which I doubt. Many things can go wrong with pregnancy - for either baby or mother. This is unusual??

I think the selection process was thoughtful and as painstaking as possible at the time. I think such opinions are immature and ill founded and unreasoned and seek to provoke and blame where none is appropriate or even relevant.

Please recall, the increased "risk" of painful childbirth and its associated mortality risks - if any - had already been realized and inherited by these Nodite women...they were already NOT aboriginal stock but already admixed and so for many tens of thousand of years and many thousands of generations had this female line already experienced this heightened painful childbirthing. There is NO quote which says Adam's genetics increased the birth risk in Nodite women but only that Nodite and Adamite and Andite blood mixed with pure native line blood did so....long before Adam's time and for long afterward.

Please consider that all the tribes in this area had already been "infected" or admixed by these foreign or non-aboriginal and purely evolutionary genes which were introduced to these tribes immediately after the Rebellion and long before Adam's time here.

Are we being asked to believe that Adam was indifferent to these women and the children of time? Or that his own ambition or lust somehow determined and directed this attempt to uplift the races of our world?? What had he to gain by all this?? Who challenges the motives or wisdom of this Material Son??

Just plain weird. The question as asked infers the answer is assumed and seeks agreement and verification. This whole topic should be deleted or moved to Abner's Corner in my opinion.

The question is irrelevant and provocative IMO. You gave no caveats with your post. Why not?

Last edited by fanofVan on Wed Dec 18, 2019 6:34 am +0000, edited 1 time in total.

.

If the site watchers say the topic deserves to be removed to Abner's Corner, or simply deleted I will not object or complain. But I think its an evocative question, one worthy of asking and exploring. Humanity deserves to know our true origin, history, and destiny, all about Adam and Eve's real mission and the way it was carried out. What all were the consequences of their wrong choosing? This is important and instructive, I believe.

The question was posed on another U-forum and brot several fascinating replies. It's interesting to note women readers predominated in the culpability theory. Some, but not all men, tended to question the question. A couple of men reacted with hostility, anger, and put down.

This is typical of the thoughtful responses:

Yes clearly he knew too much about biology to be ignorant of the risk. Maybe he tried to pick someone strong, but in his emotional state, he took the risk.
75:5.2 ... He loved his mate with a supermortal affection, and the thought of the possibility of a lonely vigil on Urantia without her was more than he could endure.
75:5.7 ...She learned of the rash act of Serapatatia and did not know whether her mate had in sorrow destroyed himself...

...He was well educated as to the problems with the genetic difficulties that would arise as the result of his impregnating the indigenous peoples directly instead of uplifting them genetically with his own offspring as the original plan had called for. However, that said, he must have reasoned that there were greater benefits than there were pitfalls. Also, it's possible he didn't know anything specific enough about her genetic background to determine that childbirth would kill her. But, yes, he was responsible because he wasn't supposed to do that.

.

Are you implying my replies are not "thoughtful" in comparison to those who agree with your inference?

While I am not angered by the question, I am deeply disappointed in such a shallow and thoughtless framing of the question so impregnated with implication of presumptions which are completely lacking any evidence in support of the imbedded conclusions within.

I do wonder about the greatest good for the greatest number for the longest time? Direct violet infusion or none?

And I wonder what the greater good for the greater number might imply for the lesser number and lesser good? Are costs, consequences, and collateral damage to be expected in the arena of time and imperfection?

Is Jesus to blame I wonder for the stonings and crucifixions of his Apostles by his selection of them as well? What's the difference? Please post that question for consideration by such "thoughtful" ones.

What suffering for our world and humanity these past thousand+ generations if NOT for this direct infusion?

Or for the Apostles?

You say humanity deserves to know what is true about history...but does such speculation about such an unspecified unknown lead to truth and understanding? Is it historically "true" then, according to you, that Adam is indeed to blame and responsible for Laotta's death?

Do you know what precisely killed her? Do you know for a fact that she would have survived a non-Adamic pregnancy? Would she have survived if not caravaning? Was she the only mother that did not survive such a pregnancy? Isn't that fact crucial to such speculation? How many others? Seems important to risk assessment don't you think??!! Your inference is that there were other "victims". Were there?

The context of the quote is giving birth while traveling by caravan...and that Eve likewise suffered in birth during this trip. Neither relevant fact should lead to such guilt association related to who fathered the baby of the mother who perished in childbirth.

The question posed lacks context and information for such speculative inferences of fault, guilt, and blame. A poorly framed inquiry with false presumptions and ignored context at its very core. Just my opinion.

The UB is not at all shy about consequences and responsibilities. Has anyone truly connected this consequence to Adam's decions? Nope. Inferred and implicated only. Not "thoughtful" as claimed IMO.

Last edited by fanofVan on Wed Dec 18, 2019 8:02 am +0000, edited 3 times in total.

Humanity deserves to know our true origin, history, and destiny, all about Adam and Eve's real mission and the way it was carried out. What all were the consequences of their wrong choosing? This is important and instructive, I believe.

We “deserve” to know? Rick,this needs to be seen for what it is. All such wiseacring cheapens what was a profound piece of our history. What we don't understand now will be made clear when we have new minds, new teachers.

I am not sure what difference there would be - genetically speaking - between a pregnancy caused by one of the offspring of Adam and Eve, and Adam himself. The genetics in both cases would be pure-line Violet. Wouldn't they? The only difference would be in the speed with which the distribution of the Violet race became a reality.

The default caused a lot of havoc. Given the dire nature of the situation, it seems to me that there was a need - once the damage had been done - to try and rescue the mission in some way. Adam lending his genetic life plasm in order to produce quicker distribution of the higher genetics must have seemed a reasonable recourse.

It seems to me that this topic is becoming unnecessarily incendiary and surprisingly contentious. I urge all participants to exercise restraint in their accusations and try to imagine - absent any corroborating text - what the situation might have been like all those years ago. In my view, Adam and Eve did not suddenly become totally irresponsible, but were trying to rectify in some way the fallout from their disastrous errors in judgment.

The topic will be moved to Abner's Corner - or may be completely deleted - if the tone does not improve. For now, it seems that it might lead all who see this thread to study this situation more fully and come to their own conclusions. The truth never suffers from examination.

Here are some urls:

The Default of Adam and Eve

https://truthbook.com/urantia-book/paper-75-the-default-of-adam-and-eve

The Second Garden

https://truthbook.com/urantia-book/paper-76-the-second-garden

The Violet Race

https://truthbook.com/urantia-book/paper-76-the-second-garden#U76_4_1

I appreciate and look forward to the transfer to Abner's Corner. I don't know what you mean by incindiary?

My anger was caused by and specifically directed towards Stephen's outrageous falsehoods and lies about unblemished animals and sacrificial lambs and hundreds of dead babies and mothers in childbirth. Such incindiary accusations and distortions of the UB do, regrettably, set my hair on fire!! Hahaha...my problem.

The question posed here by Rick is simply disappointing in its thoughtlessness and implications. The truth may not suffer from honest examination...but it sure suffers from its distortions and misrepresentations.

The text says the women were caravaning, either walking or riding a beast to escape imminent danger and attack and that Eve also suffered during her delivery on this trip and survived due to "superior strength" - NOT because of baby genes! The real source of the delivery risk is clearly articulated in the quote but then ignored by the question while inventing presumed risks and impositions of risk and suffering by Adam onto others. It is insulting really in its unreasoned insinuations.. Illogical.

By the way....your several points are very astute and relevant! Good tone too....!

Indeed what is the difference in risk between Adam and his direct offspring anyway? Actually that's the problem...no "risk" has been identified....except for one....the long hard journey itself...or other factors unknown and unspecified...and someone here presumes to invent a risk and make an accusation. Sad.



Thank you!!