Urantia Book Forum

Urantia Book Discussion Board : Study Group
It is currently Mon Sep 16, 2019 6:18 am +0000

All times are UTC - 7 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 135 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
Author Message
PostPosted:  
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2004 12:40 pm +0000
Posts: 2565
HIS Will BE Done ! ... Regardless ,... Correct ? :wink:


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

Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2003 8:59 pm +0000
Posts: 330
Location: North Dakota
Ya'akov I believe what Coop is saying and ever so beautifully, I might add is that it matters so very little what we think of God if we don't, and first, place our faith in him. The celestial philosophers of the universes argue, debate and analyze these issues and will probably for ever but no one ever comes to a true experiential understanding of God unless and until they believe he is and place their faith in him. In spiritual reality, knowledge comes from experience; experience does not come from knowledge.

As Coop says, God's will be done!!!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2014 5:42 am +0000
Posts: 282
Greetings Jim and Coop:

I would accept that as axiomatic, yes. Knowledge does come from experience, and not vice-versa. But, once you are ready to know, you must learn. To do otherwise is to be irresponsible in one's God-given responsibility. How does the Baltimore Catechism put it? I must love God, and honour him and know him, in this world the next, and his Son whom He has sent. Obviously as a Jew, I take exception to the Jesus bit, but the rest is good advice.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 2:07 am +0000
Posts: 923
Yaakov001 wrote:
The Argument from Ontology did this as well. Observe:

1. I can conceive of a being a greater than which cannot possibly be conceived.
2. Existence is greater than non-existence.


It seems to me that the revelators try to impart the concept of the potential for existence as critical for a more advanced understanding of the development of the cosmos and expression of The Infinite God. That supercedes proposal #2 since everything in the mind of God that has potential for existence is at least as valuable as something that already exists.

Even deity can be conceived by God and behold he has begun to fashion an experiential deity whose appearance is unrolled in time and space.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2014 5:42 am +0000
Posts: 282
Riktare wrote:
Yaakov001 wrote:
The Argument from Ontology did this as well. Observe:

1. I can conceive of a being a greater than which cannot possibly be conceived.
2. Existence is greater than non-existence.


It seems to me that the revelators try to impart the concept of the potential for existence as critical for a more advanced understanding of the development of the cosmos and expression of The Infinite God. That supercedes proposal #2 since everything in the mind of God that has potential for existence is at least as valuable as something that already exists.

Even deity can be conceived by God and behold he has begun to fashion an experiential deity whose appearance is unrolled in time and space.

As to this, I am not so sure. If God could fashion another being like unto himself, then he would have created a being a greater than which cannot possibly be conceived. He himself is ALREADY a being a greater than which cannot possibly be conceived. Two such would result in a fight to the death of one of them, I would think, leaving one of them as greater than the other.


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

Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2004 12:40 pm +0000
Posts: 2565
Well ... there Is the Evolving Supreme . 8)

Which I Dont fully understand nor can Explain.
But the UB Papers Do . :wink:

http://www.urantiabook.org/dave-holt/an ... ng-supreme


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2014 5:42 am +0000
Posts: 282
The article you suggested for reading, namely http://www.urantiabook.org/dave-holt/an ... ng-supreme was certainly of some interest. I quote the following as a springboard for discussion. Observe:

QUOTE: " Is Creation finished? Science has confirmed via pictures from space (first from the Hubble and later by more advanced telescopes) that stars are still being born, that creation is not completed.
Is God contentedly complete in the three persons of Trinity, removed or somehow outside of the Creation that is still unfolding? The statement, “God is himself still evolving” is a radical one in the context of traditional Christianity.
For those accustomed to the security of a religion of authority, a vista of imperfect, unstable, and unreliable situations arise. Disturbing to traditional religionists is the idea that if God is evolving it suggests he is not yet perfect, further leading to the implication that the previous revelations of God are only partially accurate, perhaps obsolete.
If new revelations of God are continuing to unfold, how do we assess the revelations we’ve already received in older sacred texts, the Bible, the Koran, the Torah? If they are in error, is it reasonable to continue to use them as guides to our decisions? We learn in the UB that, “in this way the sacred books of many religions have become fetishistic prisons incarcerating the spiritual imagination of man.” (88:2.6, pg. 969)" END QUOTE.

There is a lot I could say on this section, and we would be here all day. Instead I shall attempt to stay within a few salient points. One, God evolving in no way renders him less than perfect. In fact, it renders him more perfect, in a way. With God ever stretching toward a greater, larger horizon, creating more, and we have agreed either here or in another thread (I forget sometimes which conversations are going on where) that one of the innate characteristics of God is to be Omni-Teleological, to be such makes him more perfect. And if he assays to design himself to be always better, as well as the world he creates, well, I see nothing wrong with that.

How do we assess the revelations we have received in the Hebrew Bible? Is it in error? No, of course not. It is still valid insofar as it goes for its time and its place. And its spirit should always be followed. Where there is no good reason to abrogate it, its rules remain in force. Only when there is a valid reason to change the rules should they be. I have seen nothing in the UB that would make me less Kosher, less observant of Torah halacha, etc. In fact, what I have read so far has pushed me toward a better celebration of my faith. We will see.

Obviously, the Jesus Papers are going to change some of the way I think as a Jew, but probably not by much. Jesus may become more relevant to my Faith belief, but not in the Christian sense of the word. This is good. I look forward to hearing from any of you on this.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 5:21 am +0000
Posts: 939
yes God the Supreme (the Finite God) makes God the Father more perfect by freeing the latter from the existential limitations inherent in being eternal, infinite and absolute.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2014 5:42 am +0000
Posts: 282
Makalu wrote:
yes God the Supreme (the Finite God) makes God the Father more perfect by freeing the latter from the existential limitations inherent in being eternal, infinite and absolute.

Are there limitations inherent in being "eternal, infinite, and absolute"? Could not such a God render himself finite if he so chose? Or are you suggesting that this is the manner he HAS indeed chosen to do it?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 5:21 am +0000
Posts: 939
yes it's part of the plan ordained by the Father and the papers will explain all this better than i can when you get to that section (with no small amount of mysteries included lol)...but the way i understand it is yes there are limitations in absolute finality like the limitation of being changeless which doesn't allow for experiencing growth and so the Father has derived the Supreme and also has endowed the lowest of creatures with a spirit fragment of himself through which he actually makes direct contact with us.

It's not too hard to propose that infinity must also contain the possibility of the finite or that the ability to be Everything includes the ability to be less than everything...or to use a simpler (but lifeless) math analogy, the set of infinite numbers includes every possible set of finite numbers.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2014 5:42 am +0000
Posts: 282
Makalu wrote:
yes it's part of the plan ordained by the Father and the papers will explain all this better than i can when you get to that section (with no small amount of mysteries included lol)...but the way i understand it is yes there are limitations in absolute finality like the limitation of being changeless which doesn't allow for experiencing growth and so the Father has derived the Supreme and also has endowed the lowest of creatures with a spirit fragment of himself through which he actually makes direct contact with us.

That makes sense. God the Infinite is not TRULY Infinite if he cannot experience growth. Not experiencing a given thing would make him less than Infinite. And not making contact with us would likewise make him less than infinite.

Makalu wrote:
It's not too hard to propose that infinity must also contain the possibility of the finite or that the ability to be Everything includes the ability to be less than everything...or to use a simpler (but lifeless) math analogy, the set of infinite numbers includes every possible set of finite numbers.

I agree. Not being able to be finite means that you are not truly infinite. The inability to be LESS than everything means you are not TRULY everything, since LESS than everything is a part of everything, if you will. And, going with the mathematical analogy, which is a good one, the set of infinite numbers does indeed include every set of finite numbers. 1,2,3. That series of numbers is part and parcel of the set of infinite numbers, and taken in and of itself, must be a part thereof. If it cannot be taken as a part thereof, then infinite numbers are not truly so. QED.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 5:29 am +0000
Posts: 3654
Ya'akov and fellow students. A friend of mine (and of many others), Rick Warren, has been posting a study aid at the Association Forum for 5 years now called OPAD - One Page A Day. He is nearly to the last page and will complete this service project by year end. He posts one page of text every day and then offers maps, photos, quotes from the bible, and supporting reference from the UB and other texts to further illuminate the UB for students, along with some commentary by other students. I've been following daily for the last half of this project but the entire 5 years is posted for public viewing at the old Forum here (this is the link to the first paper's page):

http://urantia.invisionzone.com/index.p ... filter=all

I thought you might find such a study aid of some benefit as a sequential reading and research tool.

8)


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2014 5:42 am +0000
Posts: 282
Greetings to Brad:

Thank you for the link. I shall look at it more thoroughly later. I have saved it at my bookmark page for later viewing.

Regards,
Ya'akov


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2014 12:01 pm +0000
Posts: 141
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bureaucracy

Should not the next question be - what will bureaucracy look like when "nationalism" is eradicated ala revolution, not evolution?

This was an interesting development - methinks the Pope was annoyed because the "sins" are making THE PLAN impossible to achieve:

http://www.tampabay.com/news/religion/i ... ts/2211134


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2012 2:03 pm +0000
Posts: 528
Hi Yaakov,
Yaakov001 wrote:

That makes sense. God the Infinite is not TRULY Infinite if he cannot experience growth. Not experiencing a given thing would make him less than Infinite. And not making contact with us would likewise make him less than infinite.


Can you accept that God is changeless and absolute? Then you must accept that He is infinite. There exists perfect techniques by which The Infinite can influence the finite and the finite can influence the Infinite (share experiences) without The infinite having to change in any way and remain absolute.

These techniques are called extension and projection. We the finite are of God's imaginings. But God is not what he imagines. God extends Himself maximally in the Holy Trinity. God projects himself Infinitely in creation. But, as I have stated, God is not the object of His creation. In a movie theater, the projector never makes contact with the images on the screen but is the Source of the images. And God being the Source of the image, us, plays out His experience in an infinite way through His creatures. Now is that not just perfect!? :smile:

Regards, Louis


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 135 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 5, 6, 7, 8, 9

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Registered users: No registered users


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