Urantia Book Forum

Urantia Book Discussion Board : Study Group
It is currently Wed Oct 16, 2019 11:36 pm +0000

All times are UTC - 7 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted:  
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2003 8:59 pm +0000
Posts: 330
Location: North Dakota
In Christianity the term "holy" is generally taken to mean "set apart" as in "set apart by God for a specific purpose. It also means "perfect" as in that which God has made "holy" or as Paul says "not that I have been made (holy, perfect, sanctified or complete, depending on the translation) in Philippians.

I see these as attempts to establish quality differentiations. Those things which are Holy are a level of quality above those which are not and though this may infer the status of the book as holy, please read on. This quality differentiation is explained in the Urantia Book in the following quotes from the Forward.
Quote:
(3.2) 0:1.15 Deity is the source of all that which is divine. Deity is characteristically and invariably divine, but all that which is divine is not necessarily Deity, though it will be co-ordinated with Deity and will tend towards some phase of unity with Deity — spiritual, mindal, or personal.
(3.3) 0:1.16 DIVINITY is the characteristic, unifying, and co-ordinating quality of Deity.
(3.4) 0:1.17 Divinity is creature comprehensible as truth, beauty, and goodness; correlated in personality as love, mercy, and ministry; disclosed on impersonal levels as justice, power, and sovereignty.

I think it is safe to say that in many cases when we humans use the word "holy" we mean that the subject of our address is of the same quality of Godliness as is explained by the word Divinity. Divinity is the Quality of Deity. It is one of the great misconceptions of humans that we ascribe these kinds of values to things. The book teaches us that this activity is unfortunate.
Quote:
91:5.6 Prayer is the technique whereby, sooner or later, every religion becomes institutionalized. And in time prayer becomes associated with numerous secondary agencies, some helpful, others decidedly deleterious, such as priests, holy books, worship rituals, and ceremonials.
Of course the book goes on to say that we must religiously evolve out of this kind of practice. But we who have the Book must be the leaders of the new way.

Remember,
Quote:
100:3.3 In the contemplation of values you must distinguish between that which is value and that which has value.


I believe the message is that we need to move beyond these primitive concepts of religion. The "holiness" of the Urantia Book is not the question. The reality of the Fifth Epochal Revelation is in the fact that we can comprehend and actually experience the value of divinity (holiness). We do this by following the guidance of its teachings, among which is the personal experience approach of the Divine. We get to know God personally.

Blessings to all as we grow through our own personal issues knowing that we will someday stand on the shores of Paradise and laugh.

Jim


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 9:54 am +0000
Posts: 121
Greetings and shalom! I am a new reader of the Urantia Book, and a religious Jew. I've had the book in my library for a few years, but am only now getting the chance to seriously study it. Is the book holy? That depends on what constitutes holiness. Certainly the book claims to contain eternal truths, as do most sacred texts. In that sense, if you believe that the UB's claims are justified and true, then it follows that the book is as holy or moreso than other books, at least to you. I do not classify the Qur'an as holy, but 1 billion people disagree with me. The New Testament is not holy to me as a Jew, but another 1 billion people disagree. The Tanakh (the Old Testament) is holy to me. I'm not sure about the UB yet. I can say that what I've read to date helps answer a lot of questions I've always had about the origin of man. Whether its holy depends on your estimation of the veracity of it. IF it is holy, then there could be no objection to swearing on it in a court, or to take office, the way Romney used the Quad (a collection of the 4 Standard Works of the LDS Church), or Keith Ellison did with the Qur'an, or Joe Lieberman did with the Tanakh, or how many have done with the KJV. Has anyone ever tried swearing with the UB? Not so far as I know, but there could be no legal objection to doing so. So there you are.


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

Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2004 12:40 pm +0000
Posts: 2565
yaakov 8)

Welcome and shalom

I Respect Your Personal Beliefs and Opinions

Yet I Believe in What The Urantia Book Says Though,
That To take an Oath on A So Called “holy book”
''IS A a form of refined fetishism.''

'' To take an oath on a “holy book” or to swear by some object of supreme veneration is a form of refined fetishism. ''

88:1.2 The first fetishes were peculiarly marked pebbles, and “sacred stones” have ever since been sought by man; a string of beads was once a collection of sacred stones, a battery of charms. Many tribes had fetish stones, but few have survived as have the Kaaba and the Stone of Scone. Fire and water were also among the early fetishes, and fire worship, together with belief in holy water, still survives.


88:2.8 The practice of opening one of these sacred books to let the eye chance upon a passage, the following of which may determine important life decisions or projects, is nothing more nor less than arrant fetishism. To take an oath on a “holy book” or to swear by some object of supreme veneration is a form of refined fetishism.


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

Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2004 12:40 pm +0000
Posts: 2565
The Urantia Papers Say A Lot About
'' the fetish of factualized truth, fossilized truth, the iron band of so-called unchanging truth, holds one blindly in a closed circle of cold fact. One can be technically right as to fact and everlastingly wrong in the truth.''

And Much More ...

48:6.33 Law is life itself and not the rules of its conduct. Evil is a transgression of law, not a violation of the rules of conduct pertaining to life, which is the law. Falsehood is not a matter of narration technique but something premeditated as a perversion of truth. The creation of new pictures out of old facts, the restatement of parental life in the lives of offspring — these are the artistic triumphs of truth. The shadow of a hair’s turning, premeditated for an untrue purpose, the slightest twisting or perversion of that which is principle — these constitute falseness. But the fetish of factualized truth, fossilized truth, the iron band of so-called unchanging truth, holds one blindly in a closed circle of cold fact. One can be technically right as to fact and everlastingly wrong in the truth.


69:4.3 A fetish was used to stand guard over the deposits of goods for silent barter. Such market places were secure against theft; nothing would be removed except by barter or purchase; with a fetish on guard the goods were always safe. The early traders were scrupulously honest within their own tribes but regarded it as all right to cheat distant strangers. Even the early Hebrews recognized a separate code of ethics in their dealings with the gentiles.


69:6.4 Though Andon, the discoverer of fire, avoided treating it as an object of worship, many of his descendants regarded the flame as a fetish or as a spirit. They failed to reap the sanitary benefits of fire because they would not burn refuse. Primitive man feared fire and always sought to keep it in good humor, hence the sprinkling of incense. Under no circumstances would the ancients spit in a fire, nor would they ever pass between anyone and a burning fire. Even the iron pyrites and flints used in striking fire were held sacred by early mankind.


69:7.4 The dog was the first animal to be domesticated, and the difficult experience of taming it began when a certain dog, after following a hunter around all day, actually went home with him. For ages dogs were used for food, hunting, transportation, and companionship. At first dogs only howled, but later on they learned to bark. The dog’s keen sense of smell led to the notion it could see spirits, and thus arose the dog-fetish cults. The employment of watchdogs made it first possible for the whole clan to sleep at night. It then became the custom to employ watchdogs to protect the home against spirits as well as material enemies. When the dog barked, man or beast approached, but when the dog howled, spirits were near. Even now many still believe that a dog’s howling at night betokens death.


69:9.12 Water holes and wells were among the first private possessions. The whole fetish practice was utilized to guard water holes, wells, trees, crops, and honey. Following the loss of faith in the fetish, laws were evolved to protect private belongings. But game laws, the right to hunt, long preceded land laws. The American red man never understood private ownership of land; he could not comprehend the white man’s view.


70:6.4 The succession of kings was eventually regarded as supernatural, the royal blood being thought to extend back to the times of the materialized staff of Prince Caligastia. Thus kings became fetish personalities and were inordinately feared, a special form of speech being adopted for court usage. Even in recent times it was believed that the touch of kings would cure disease, and some Urantia peoples still regard their rulers as having had a divine origin.


70:6.5 The early fetish king was often kept in seclusion; he was regarded as too sacred to be viewed except on feast days and holy days. Ordinarily a representative was chosen to impersonate him, and this is the origin of prime ministers. The first cabinet officer was a food administrator; others shortly followed. Rulers soon appointed representatives to be in charge of commerce and religion; and the development of a cabinet was a direct step toward depersonalization of executive authority. These assistants of the early kings became the accepted nobility, and the king’s wife gradually rose to the dignity of queen as women came to be held in higher esteem.


85:1.3 All ancient clans and tribes had their sacred stones, and most modern peoples manifest a degree of veneration for certain types of stones — their jewels. A group of five stones was reverenced in India; in Greece it was a cluster of thirty; among the red men it was usually a circle of stones. The Romans always threw a stone into the air when invoking Jupiter. In India even to this day a stone can be used as a witness. In some regions a stone may be employed as a talisman of the law, and by its prestige an offender can be haled into court. But simple mortals do not always identify Deity with an object of reverent ceremony. Such fetishes are many times mere symbols of the real object of worship.


85:1.4 The ancients had a peculiar regard for holes in stones. Such porous rocks were supposed to be unusually efficacious in curing diseases. Ears were not perforated to carry stones, but the stones were put in to keep the ear holes open. Even in modern times superstitious persons make holes in coins. In Africa the natives make much ado over their fetish stones. In fact, among all backward tribes and peoples stones are still held in superstitious veneration. Stone worship is even now widespread over the world. The tombstone is a surviving symbol of images and idols which were carved in stone in connection with beliefs in ghosts and the spirits of departed fellow beings.


87:5.5 The Koran contains a whole chapter devoted to the evil eye and magic spells, and the Jews fully believed in them. The whole phallic cult grew up as a defense against the evil eye. The organs of reproduction were thought to be the only fetish which could render it powerless. The evil eye gave origin to the first superstitions respecting prenatal marking of children, maternal impressions, and the cult was at one time well-nigh universal.


88:0.1 THE concept of a spirit’s entering into an inanimate object, an animal, or a human being, is a very ancient and honorable belief, having prevailed since the beginning of the evolution of religion. This doctrine of spirit possession is nothing more nor less than fetishism. The savage does not necessarily worship the fetish; he very logically worships and reverences the spirit resident therein.


88:0.2 At first, the spirit of a fetish was believed to be the ghost of a dead man; later on, the higher spirits were supposed to reside in fetishes. And so the fetish cult eventually incorporated all of the primitive ideas of ghosts, souls, spirits, and demon possession.


88:1.0 1. Belief in Fetishes


88:1.1 Primitive man always wanted to make anything extraordinary into a fetish; chance therefore gave origin to many. A man is sick, something happens, and he gets well. The same thing is true of the reputation of many medicines and the chance methods of treating disease. Objects connected with dreams were likely to be converted into fetishes. Volcanoes, but not mountains, became fetishes; comets, but not stars. Early man regarded shooting stars and meteors as indicating the arrival on earth of special visiting spirits.


88:1.2 The first fetishes were peculiarly marked pebbles, and “sacred stones” have ever since been sought by man; a string of beads was once a collection of sacred stones, a battery of charms. Many tribes had fetish stones, but few have survived as have the Kaaba and the Stone of Scone. Fire and water were also among the early fetishes, and fire worship, together with belief in holy water, still survives.


88:1.3 Tree fetishes were a later development, but among some tribes the persistence of nature worship led to belief in charms indwelt by some sort of nature spirit. When plants and fruits became fetishes, they were taboo as food. The apple was among the first to fall into this category; it was never eaten by the Levantine peoples.


88:1.4 If an animal ate human flesh, it became a fetish. In this way the dog came to be the sacred animal of the Parsees. If the fetish is an animal and the ghost is permanently resident therein, then fetishism may impinge on reincarnation. In many ways the savages envied the animals; they did not feel superior to them and were often named after their favorite beasts.


88:1.5 When animals became fetishes, there ensued the taboos on eating the flesh of the fetish animal. Apes and monkeys, because of resemblance to man, early became fetish animals; later, snakes, birds, and swine were also similarly regarded. At one time the cow was a fetish, the milk being taboo while the excreta were highly esteemed. The serpent was revered in Palestine, especially by the Phoenicians, who, along with the Jews, considered it to be the mouthpiece of evil spirits. Even many moderns believe in the charm powers of reptiles. From Arabia on through India to the snake dance of the Moqui tribe of red men the serpent has been revered.


88:1.6 Certain days of the week were fetishes. For ages Friday has been regarded as an unlucky day and the number thirteen as an evil numeral. The lucky numbers three and seven came from later revelations; four was the lucky number of primitive man and was derived from the early recognition of the four points of the compass. It was held unlucky to count cattle or other possessions; the ancients always opposed the taking of a census, “numbering the people.”


88:1.7 Primitive man did not make an undue fetish out of sex; the reproductive function received only a limited amount of attention. The savage was natural minded, not obscene or prurient.


88:1.8 Saliva was a potent fetish; devils could be driven out by spitting on a person. For an elder or superior to spit on one was the highest compliment. Parts of the human body were looked upon as potential fetishes, particularly the hair and nails. The long-growing fingernails of the chiefs were highly prized, and the trimmings thereof were a powerful fetish. Belief in skull fetishes accounts for much of later-day head-hunting. The umbilical cord was a highly prized fetish; even today it is so regarded in Africa. Mankind’s first toy was a preserved umbilical cord. Set with pearls, as was often done, it was man’s first necklace.


88:1.9 Hunchbacked and crippled children were regarded as fetishes; lunatics were believed to be moon-struck. Primitive man could not distinguish between genius and insanity; idiots were either beaten to death or revered as fetish personalities. Hysteria increasingly confirmed the popular belief in witchcraft; epileptics often were priests and medicine men. Drunkenness was looked upon as a form of spirit possession; when a savage went on a spree, he put a leaf in his hair for the purpose of disavowing responsibility for his acts. Poisons and intoxicants became fetishes; they were deemed to be possessed.


88:1.10 Many people looked upon geniuses as fetish personalities possessed by a wise spirit. And these talented humans soon learned to resort to fraud and trickery for the advancement of their selfish interests. A fetish man was thought to be more than human; he was divine, even infallible. Thus did chiefs, kings, priests, prophets, and church rulers eventually wield great power and exercise unbounded authority.


88:2.0 2. Evolution of the Fetish


88:2.2 Belief in relics is an outgrowth of the ancient fetish cult. The relics of modern religions represent an attempt to rationalize the fetish of the savage and thus elevate it to a place of dignity and respectability in the modern religious systems. It is heathenish to believe in fetishes and magic but supposedly all right to accept relics and miracles.


88:2.3 The hearth — fireplace — became more or less of a fetish, a sacred spot. The shrines and temples were at first fetish places because the dead were buried there. The fetish hut of the Hebrews was elevated by Moses to that place where it harbored a superfetish, the then existent concept of the law of God. But the Israelites never gave up the peculiar Canaanite belief in the stone altar: “And this stone which I have set up as a pillar shall be God’s house.” They truly believed that the spirit of their God dwelt in such stone altars, which were in reality fetishes.


88:2.5 Moses, in the addition of the second commandment to the ancient Dalamatian moral code, made an effort to control fetish worship among the Hebrews. He carefully directed that they should make no sort of image that might become consecrated as a fetish. He made it plain, “You shall not make a graven image or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or on the earth beneath, or in the waters of the earth.” While this commandment did much to retard art among the Jews, it did lessen fetish worship. But Moses was too wise to attempt suddenly to displace the olden fetishes, and he therefore consented to the putting of certain relics alongside the law in the combined war altar and religious shrine which was the ark.


88:2.6 Words eventually became fetishes, more especially those which were regarded as God’s words; in this way the sacred books of many religions have become fetishistic prisons incarcerating the spiritual imagination of man. Moses’ very effort against fetishes became a supreme fetish; his commandment was later used to stultify art and to retard the enjoyment and adoration of the beautiful.


88:2.7 In olden times the fetish word of authority was a fear-inspiring doctrine, the most terrible of all tyrants which enslave men. A doctrinal fetish will lead mortal man to betray himself into the clutches of bigotry, fanaticism, superstition, intolerance, and the most atrocious of barbarous cruelties. Modern respect for wisdom and truth is but the recent escape from the fetish-making tendency up to the higher levels of thinking and reasoning. Concerning the accumulated fetish writings which various religionists hold as sacred books, it is not only believed that what is in the book is true, but also that every truth is contained in the book. If one of these sacred books happens to speak of the earth as being flat, then, for long generations, otherwise sane men and women will refuse to accept positive evidence that the planet is round.


88:2.9 But it does represent real evolutionary progress to advance from the fetish fear of a savage chief’s fingernail trimmings to the adoration of a superb collection of letters, laws, legends, allegories, myths, poems, and chronicles which, after all, reflect the winnowed moral wisdom of many centuries, at least up to the time and event of their being assembled as a “sacred book.”


88:2.10 To become fetishes, words had to be considered inspired, and the invocation of supposed divinely inspired writings led directly to the establishment of the authority of the church, while the evolution of civil forms led to the fruition of the authority of the state.


88:3.3 A fetish bag, a medicine bag, was a pouch containing a reputable assortment of ghost-impregnated articles, and the medicine man of old never allowed his bag, the symbol of his power, to touch the ground. Civilized peoples in the twentieth century see to it that their flags, emblems of national consciousness, likewise never touch the ground.


88:3.4 The insignia of priestly and kingly office were eventually regarded as fetishes, and the fetish of the state supreme has passed through many stages of development, from clans to tribes, from suzerainty to sovereignty, from totems to flags. Fetish kings have ruled by “divine right,” and many other forms of government have obtained. Men have also made a fetish of democracy, the exaltation and adoration of the common man’s ideas when collectively called “public opinion.” One man’s opinion, when taken by itself, is not regarded as worth much, but when many men are collectively functioning as a democracy, this same mediocre judgment is held to be the arbiter of justice and the standard of righteousness.


88:4.1 Civilized man attacks the problems of a real environment through his science; savage man attempted to solve the real problems of an illusory ghost environment by magic. Magic was the technique of manipulating the conjectured spirit environment whose machinations endlessly explained the inexplicable; it was the art of obtaining voluntary spirit co-operation and of coercing involuntary spirit aid through the use of fetishes or other and more powerful spirits.


88:5.1 Since anything connected with the body could become a fetish, the earliest magic had to do with hair and nails. Secrecy attendant upon body elimination grew up out of fear that an enemy might get possession of something derived from the body and employ it in detrimental magic; all excreta of the body were therefore carefully buried. Public spitting was refrained from because of the fear that saliva would be used in deleterious magic; spittle was always covered. Even food remnants, clothing, and ornaments could become instruments of magic. The savage never left any remnants of his meal on the table. And all this was done through fear that one’s enemies might use these things in magical rites, not from any appreciation of the hygienic value of such practices.


89:1.2 The respect which these prohibitions commanded in the mind of the savage exactly equaled his fear of the powers who were supposed to enforce them. Taboos first arose because of chance experience with ill luck; later they were proposed by chiefs and shamans — fetish men who were thought to be directed by a spirit ghost, even by a god. The fear of spirit retribution is so great in the mind of a primitive that he sometimes dies of fright when he has violated a taboo, and this dramatic episode enormously strengthens the hold of the taboo on the minds of the survivors.


89:2.1 The fear of chance and the dread of bad luck literally drove man into the invention of primitive religion as supposed insurance against these calamities. From magic and ghosts, religion evolved through spirits and fetishes to taboos. Every primitive tribe had its tree of forbidden fruit, literally the apple but figuratively consisting of a thousand branches hanging heavy with all sorts of taboos. And the forbidden tree always said, “Thou shalt not.”


90:0.1 THE evolution of religious observances progressed from placation, avoidance, exorcism, coercion, conciliation, and propitiation to sacrifice, atonement, and redemption. The technique of religious ritual passed from the forms of the primitive cult through fetishes to magic and miracles; and as ritual became more complex in response to man’s increasingly complex concept of the supermaterial realms, it was inevitably dominated by medicine men, shamans, and priests.


90:4.6 Since water was a potent fetish, it was utilized in the treatment of many ailments. For long it was believed that the spirit causing the sickness could be eliminated by sweating. Vapor baths were highly regarded; natural hot springs soon blossomed as primitive health resorts. Early man discovered that heat would relieve pain; he used sunlight, fresh animal organs, hot clay, and hot stones, and many of these methods are still employed. Rhythm was practiced in an effort to influence the spirits; the tom-toms were universal.


91:0.5 Prereligious praying was part of the mana practices of the Melanesians, the oudah beliefs of the African Pygmies, and the manitou superstitions of the North American Indians. The Baganda tribes of Africa have only recently emerged from the mana level of prayer. In this early evolutionary confusion men pray to gods — local and national — to fetishes, amulets, ghosts, rulers, and to ordinary people.


91:3.3 As it is conceived by successive generations of praying mortals, the alter ego evolves up through ghosts, fetishes, and spirits to polytheistic gods, and eventually to the One God, a divine being embodying the highest ideals and the loftiest aspirations of the praying ego. And thus does prayer function as the most potent agency of religion in the conservation of the highest values and ideals of those who pray. From the moment of the conceiving of an alter ego to the appearance of the concept of a divine and heavenly Father, prayer is always a socializing, moralizing, and spiritualizing practice.


92:1.1 The evolution of religion has been traced from early fear and ghosts down through many successive stages of development, including those efforts first to coerce and then to cajole the spirits. Tribal fetishes grew into totems and tribal gods; magic formulas became modern prayers. Circumcision, at first a sacrifice, became a hygienic procedure.


92:1.3 Religion arises as a biologic reaction of mind to spiritual beliefs and the environment; it is the last thing to perish or change in a race. Religion is society’s adjustment, in any age, to that which is mysterious. As a social institution it embraces rites, symbols, cults, scriptures, altars, shrines, and temples. Holy water, relics, fetishes, charms, vestments, bells, drums, and priesthoods are common to all religions. And it is impossible entirely to divorce purely evolved religion from either magic or sorcery.


92:6.1 Twentieth-century Urantia religions present an interesting study of the social evolution of man’s worship impulse. Many faiths have progressed very little since the days of the ghost cult. The Pygmies of Africa have no religious reactions as a class, although some of them believe slightly in a spirit environment. They are today just where primitive man was when the evolution of religion began. The basic belief of primitive religion was survival after death. The idea of worshiping a personal God indicates advanced evolutionary development, even the first stage of revelation. The Dyaks have evolved only the most primitive religious practices. The comparatively recent Eskimos and Amerinds had very meager concepts of God; they believed in ghosts and had an indefinite idea of survival of some sort after death. Present-day native Australians have only a ghost fear, dread of the dark, and a crude ancestor veneration. The Zulus are just evolving a religion of ghost fear and sacrifice. Many African tribes, except through missionary work of Christians and Mohammedans, are not yet beyond the fetish stage of religious evolution. But some groups have long held to the idea of monotheism, like the onetime Thracians, who also believed in immortality.


94:6.9 Confucius (Kung Fu-tze) was a younger contemporary of Lao in sixth-century China. Confucius based his doctrines upon the better moral traditions of the long history of the yellow race, and he was also somewhat influenced by the lingering traditions of the Salem missionaries. His chief work consisted in the compilation of the wise sayings of ancient philosophers. He was a rejected teacher during his lifetime, but his writings and teachings have ever since exerted a great influence in China and Japan. Confucius set a new pace for the shamans in that he put morality in the place of magic. But he built too well; he made a new fetish out of order and established a respect for ancestral conduct that is still venerated by the Chinese at the time of this writing.


95:7.2 Not even in China or Rome did the Melchizedek teachings fail more completely than in this desert region so very near Salem itself. Long after the majority of the peoples of the Orient and Occident had become respectively Buddhist and Christian, the desert of Arabia continued as it had for thousands of years. Each tribe worshiped its olden fetish, and many individual families had their own household gods. Long the struggle continued between Babylonian Ishtar, Hebrew Yahweh, Iranian Ahura, and Christian Father of the Lord Jesus Christ. Never was one concept able fully to displace the others.


95:7.5 There was only one factor of a tribal, racial, or national nature about the primitive and unorganized beliefs of the desert, and that was the peculiar and general respect which almost all Arabian tribes were willing to pay to a certain black stone fetish in a certain temple at Mecca. This point of common contact and reverence subsequently led to the establishment of the Islamic religion. What Yahweh, the volcano spirit, was to the Jewish Semites, the Kaaba stone became to their Arabic cousins.


96:5.5 But it was truly pitiful to watch this great mind of Moses trying to adapt his sublime concept of El Elyon, the Most High, to the comprehension of the ignorant and illiterate Hebrews. To his assembled leaders he thundered, “The Lord your God is one God; there is none beside him”; while to the mixed multitude he declared, “Who is like your God among all the gods?” Moses made a brave and partly successful stand against fetishes and idolatry, declaring, “You saw no similitude on the day that your God spoke to you at Horeb out of the midst of the fire.” He also forbade the making of images of any sort.


96:5.8 While Moses presented fleeting glimpses of a universal and beneficent Deity to the children of Israel, on the whole, their day-by-day concept of Yahweh was that of a God but little better than the tribal gods of the surrounding peoples. Their concept of God was primitive, crude, and anthropomorphic; when Moses passed on, these Bedouin tribes quickly reverted to the semibarbaric ideas of their olden gods of Horeb and the desert. The enlarged and more sublime vision of God which Moses every now and then presented to his leaders was soon lost to view, while most of the people turned to the worship of their fetish golden calves, the Palestinian herdsman’s symbol of Yahweh.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 9:54 am +0000
Posts: 121
I think the UB is right that swearing on a book is indeed refined fetishism. The only point I was making was that the legal authorities would not have a leg to stand on to oppose somebody wanting to use the UB to swear. On a purely personal level, I would prefer to swear by raising my right hand, rather than using a book. As to the holiness of the book, I think that a person who was not fetishist would treat the Tanakh no differently than any other book, and the same for the Qur'an and other books, including the UB. But it seems that all humans are still a little fetishist. For example, no Jew (including me) would carry the Tanakh into the bathroom. Would any of you read the UB while "on the throne", for example?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 6:00 pm +0000
Posts: 695
Location: Savannah GA
I would. I do. I even listen to it while riding thru the "hood". It's just a book.

That being said this "just a book" has changed my life for the better.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 8:29 pm +0000
Posts: 2441
Greetings, I think COOP provided the perfect quote that is actually in the Urantia Book that talks about not venerating a book. So it would be a paradox to believe the urantia book is holy all the while the book is telling us not to venerate any book. But in a more general sense. Lets suppose that the book is authored by cellestial beings, which I am certain it was. Does that make me feel that the book is holy? I don't think so. I think of the book as a presentation of cosmic truth, not all truth or the aboslute truth but of a co-ordination of truth that has been discovered by man. I do consider the book to be without error though. But there is a passage in TUB that states that there will be "more or less distortion of meaning" because the authors are presenting truth not fact. It does have facts in it but that is not its purpose.

I don't consider The Urantia Book or any object to be holy. The Urantia Book reveals how this is a evolutionary tendancy of man and is not necessary and helpful at all.

_________________
StrongcharactersRnotderivedfromnotdoingwrongbutratherfrom
actuallydoingrightUnselfishnesisthebadgeofhumangreatnes
Thehighestlevelsofselfrealizationareatainedbyworshipandservice
Thehapyandefectivepersonismotivatednotbyfearofwrongdoingbutby
loveofrightdoing


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 9:54 am +0000
Posts: 121
I think Boomshuka has just hit the nail on the head. I'm not sure the book is w/o error entirely, though. Mercury, for example, does NOT present one side to the Sun, as the book says it does. Then again, at its closest to the Sun, an observer on the planet would think it does, as he would at its furthest point from the Sun. Only in between would an observer be able to see the Mercurian night and day. Perhaps one of the celestials that gave us the book WAS observing at one of those times.

As for the book being holy, I think we've all been missing the point. The book is part science, part history, part philosophy, and part religion. By reading it, you are getting the equivalent of a semester's worth of classes at university. Imagine a student taking Astronomy, World History, Intro to Philosophy, and Intro to World Religion. The only textbook he would need would be The Urantia Book!

Boomshuka is right. Venerating the text is illogical. But, being a bit of a fetishist (might as well be honest), I'll care for the book at least as well as I do my Tanakh. Then again, my friends might say I have a book fetish, because I care for all books insanely well.

On another level, I want to quote one of the Ghostbusters. "This stuff is real! In the time I've been with this book, I've read s--- that'll turn you white!" Ok, its a paraphrase, but you all get my meaning. I've read enough to be able to tell that no humans could write this stuff. The internal coherance of the book across 2,097 pages alone should convince even the most die-hard skeptic. I'm not going to call it Scripture, but whatever its called, its some of the most sublime stuff I've ever read! This stuff is mind-blowing on a level I've never encountered in all my reading since I learned how to read. I mean, wow. And I'm no neophyte. Like many of you, I expect, I have an advanced degree, and still this book is holding up to rigorous analysis. What do all of you say? I am just beginning with the book, and already it is revolutionising the way I think about God, the universe, the world, and my place therein. Shalom.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 8:29 pm +0000
Posts: 2441
Quote:
I think Boomshuka has just hit the nail on the head. I'm not sure the book is w/o error entirely, though. Mercury, for example, does NOT present one side to the Sun, as the book says it does.
No the book does not say that. The book does say that there will be "More or less distortion of meaning". This is one of those cases.

Quote:
(657.5) 57:6.2 The planets nearest the sun were the first to have their revolutions slowed down by tidal friction. Such gravitational influences also contribute to the stabilization of planetary orbits while acting as a brake on the rate of planetary-axial revolution, causing a planet to revolve ever slower until axial revolution ceases, leaving one hemisphere of the planet always turned toward the sun or larger body, as is illustrated by the planet Mercury and by the moon, which always turns the same face toward Urantia.


This quote is saying that the moon always turns the same face toward Urantia. It is saying that Mercury is going through the process of tidal friction which is "causing" a planet to revolve slower and until one hemisphere always faces the sun or a larger body. Mercury is the illustration of tidal friction which will lead to this, and the moon is an example of a body that always turns the same face. The only reason people think they are saying Mercury is because of they miss-read the wording of the sentence.

_________________
StrongcharactersRnotderivedfromnotdoingwrongbutratherfrom
actuallydoingrightUnselfishnesisthebadgeofhumangreatnes
Thehighestlevelsofselfrealizationareatainedbyworshipandservice
Thehapyandefectivepersonismotivatednotbyfearofwrongdoingbutby
loveofrightdoing


Last edited by boomshuka on Wed May 15, 2013 11:12 am +0000, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 5:29 am +0000
Posts: 3743
Welcome yaakov!! A great voice and perspective for this place of sharing and learning. You will find some fraternal jousting and quibbling here....we all seek better and greater understanding of the text and its many applications in mind and upon the pilgrim's path. You say well. Looking forward to more.

I certainly agree that we may have attachments to things but no thing is holy. But truth, beauty, goodness, love, and relationships certainly are "holy" to the extent of our recognition, appreciation, and application to spirit progress. The cocreation of soul is holy but the things and moments upon which such creation happens are but rungs on the ladder of ascension....the ascent is holy but not the contraptions or conveyances of the ascent. Or so I think....


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 9:54 am +0000
Posts: 121
Greetings!
To FanofVan, it is a pleasure to meet you. I look forward to the friendly jousting of which you speak. Boomshuka, you do have a point as to how to read the sentence regarding the Moon and Mercury. It is certainly possible that it is awkward phrasing, and that you have the correct sense of the thing. On the other hand (playing the Devil's Advocate), it is also possible that I am right, and that the Celestials were referring to what things would look like on Mercury at its closest to the Sun, and at its furthest. In either case, I think that the Urantia Book may be duly found innocent of the charge of error that I presented. I am going to wander on over to some of the other topics and see what is being said there. I do look forward to visiting with you all more. Shalom.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 6:10 am +0000
Posts: 1945
yaakov ben avraham wrote:
… It is certainly possible that it is awkward phrasing …
Hi Yaakov, welcome! :) I agree with Boomshuka that TUB 57:6.2 simply states that "[tidal locking] is illustrated by the planet Mercury and by the moon, which always turns the same face toward Urantia." So the moon is tidally locked, not Mercury. It appears the revelators (subtlely) indicate that they are aware Mercury isn’t yet completely tidally locked..


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 9:54 am +0000
Posts: 121
Greetings, Bart: I am pleased to meet you.
Regarding the nature of Mercury, I seem to be outvoted. :) Nonetheless, I think the text could be read either way. Grammatically, I just think that my understanding is less forced. Be that as it may, the book is not in error. Nice to get to know you!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 6:10 am +0000
Posts: 1945
yaakov ben avraham wrote:
… I think the text could be read either way. …
No.. Grammatically it can only be read that the moon is tidally locked, not Mercury. The revelators (subtlely) use the word turns (which is a singular verb), which can refer only to the moon, not Mercury..


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

Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 1:07 pm +0000
Posts: 653
Location: northern Illinois
Been following this post and then watched the documentary film on TUB historicity over in the media forum. $1,000 worth of $5 Urantia books were purchased and distributed as gifts. Doubts most of them were ever read. The mission's not the book. God is the Holy ONE. Good movie.

TUB is revelatory and therefore limited to it's receivers' capacity to comprehend and understand it. It requires a devout interest in things spiritual and delivers nutrition for the soul of those that engage it but it isn't holy.

The book in itself can't complete its mission. It can't take the next step. The action of its readers will determine its fate. That's not to encourage miracles, wonders and snake oil book sales but hopefully being a good person who will gladly share with those who ask why.

_________________
May the God you believe in bless your life. May the life you live be a blessing to those who know you.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 30 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Registered users: Google [Bot], Google Feedfetcher


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:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group