Urantia Book Forum

Urantia Book Discussion Board : Study Group
It is currently Thu Sep 24, 2020 11:28 am +0000

All times are UTC - 7 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2019 11:57 pm +0000
Posts: 116
So I was excited about the UB because it acknowledges evolution and refutes the planet wide flood but now I have come across my first stumbling block.

Paper 96 acknowledges the historicity of Moses, Joshua and the Exodus. I have not read the paper in full, but searched for key words on the Urantia Foundation website. It seems to vaguely mention the Exodus and the conquest of Canaan.

One of the biggest false historical events in the Bible is the conquest of Canaan by Joshua. While I am not completely dismissive of the exodus from Egypt, I cannot accept the conquest of Canaan as historical fact.

From my research online, my understanding is that the exodus and the conquest of Canaan took place any time between 1500 BC to 1200 BC according to Biblical sources. Yet according to other sources for almost all of that period Canaan was in fact part of the Kingdom of Egypt. That means that Joshua did NOT conquer dozens of micro-nations as described in the Book of Joshua but instead either Joshua and the Israelites conquered a part of Egypt after escaping from it OR Egypt conquered Canaan AFTER the Israelites settled in the land. Which one is it and why does the Bible omit this very important bit of information?

The Urantia Book from what I'm looking at skimming over paper 96 (I'll read it when I finish reading preceding papers), is not giving me a satisfying answer.

I asked Bible believing Christians this question in another forum, but only an atheist answered me and said that the exodus and the invasion of Canaan never happened. I hope UB readers can answer my question where Christians have failed.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2008 3:03 am +0000
Posts: 2269
Location: US
William S. wrote:
So I was excited about the UB because it acknowledges evolution and refutes the planet wide flood but now I have come across my first stumbling block.

Paper 96 acknowledges the historicity of Moses, Joshua and the Exodus. I have not read the paper in full, but searched for key words on the Urantia Foundation website. It seems to vaguely mention the Exodus and the conquest of Canaan.

One of the biggest false historical events in the Bible is the conquest of Canaan by Joshua. While I am not completely dismissive of the exodus from Egypt, I cannot accept the conquest of Canaan as historical fact.

From my research online, my understanding is that the exodus and the conquest of Canaan took place any time between 1500 BC to 1200 BC according to Biblical sources. Yet according to other sources for almost all of that period Canaan was in fact part of the Kingdom of Egypt. That means that Joshua did NOT conquer dozens of micro-nations as described in the Book of Joshua but instead either Joshua and the Israelites conquered a part of Egypt after escaping from it OR Egypt conquered Canaan AFTER the Israelites settled in the land. Which one is it and why does the Bible omit this very important bit of information?

The Urantia Book from what I'm looking at skimming over paper 96 (I'll read it when I finish reading preceding papers), is not giving me a satisfying answer.

I asked Bible believing Christians this question in another forum, but only an atheist answered me and said that the exodus and the invasion of Canaan never happened. I hope UB readers can answer my question where Christians have failed.


Read on, William. The whole story of those days comes together beautifully with a comprehensive view and understanding of the Urantia Papers, which has to include the Melchizedek incarnation and its effect on Abraham's covenant. It's a fascinating, and to me, a far more plausible, history.

.

.

_________________
Richard E Warren


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 12:11 pm +0000
Posts: 932
William S. wrote:
One of the biggest false historical events in the Bible is the conquest of Canaan by Joshua. While I am not completely dismissive of the exodus from Egypt, I cannot accept the conquest of Canaan as historical fact.
The Urantia Book from what I'm looking at skimming over paper 96 (I'll read it when I finish reading preceding papers), is not giving me a satisfying answer.


I think what you're looking for is in the next paper.

(1071.6) 97:9.1 There never were twelve tribes of the Israelites — only three or four tribes settled in Palestine. The Hebrew nation came into being as the result of the union of the so-called Israelites and the Canaanites. “And the children of Israel dwelt among the Canaanites. And they took their daughters to be their wives and gave their daughters to the sons of the Canaanites.” The Hebrews never drove the Canaanites out of Palestine, notwithstanding that the priests’ record of these things unhesitatingly declared that they did.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2019 11:57 pm +0000
Posts: 116
Would a more plausible scenario go like this (and does the UB have a similar narrative):

Moses through a series of providential events leads a much smaller exodus of escaped slaves out of the more populated part of Egypt by the Nile to the frontiers of the Kingdom in Canaan/Palestine and generations later join the Canaanites in a rebellion to drive out the Egyptians.

The Mount Sinai events (and the ark of the covenant) may or may not have happened. It plays a significant part in forming the identity of the Hebrews. If they did, I'm not sure how to fit it into a plausible narrative. Possibly it happened and yet just as likely it was a story put together during the Babylonian exile.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 5:29 am +0000
Posts: 4460
A full reading of Papers 93-98 is required for proper context of the story you ask about. In brief, the story of the history of the Jews in the Old Testament is a fictional nationalistic tale created long after most of what is written about in the Old Testament, which is something well known to Judaic scholars and often not known or denied by those Christians who swallow this camel whole.

96:3.4 (1056.1) Moses endeavored to negotiate diplomatically for the freedom of his fellow Semites. He and his brother entered into a compact with the king of Egypt whereby they were granted permission peaceably to leave the valley of the Nile for the Arabian Desert. They were to receive a modest payment of money and goods in token of their long service in Egypt. The Hebrews for their part entered into an agreement to maintain friendly relations with the Pharaohs and not to join in any alliance against Egypt. But the king later saw fit to repudiate this treaty, giving as his reason the excuse that his spies had discovered disloyalty among the Bedouin slaves. He claimed they sought freedom for the purpose of going into the desert to organize the nomads against Egypt.

96:3.5 (1056.2) But Moses was not discouraged; he bided his time, and in less than a year, when the Egyptian military forces were fully occupied in resisting the simultaneous onslaughts of a strong Libyan thrust from the south and a Greek naval invasion from the north, this intrepid organizer led his compatriots out of Egypt in a spectacular night flight. This dash for liberty was carefully planned and skillfully executed. And they were successful, notwithstanding that they were hotly pursued by Pharaoh and a small body of Egyptians, who all fell before the fugitives’ defense, yielding much booty, all of which was augmented by the loot of the advancing host of escaping slaves as they marched on toward their ancestral desert home.

97:8.1 (1070.4) The custom of looking upon the record of the experiences of the Hebrews as sacred history and upon the transactions of the rest of the world as profane history is responsible for much of the confusion existing in the human mind as to the interpretation of history. And this difficulty arises because there is no secular history of the Jews. After the priests of the Babylonian exile had prepared their new record of God’s supposedly miraculous dealings with the Hebrews, the sacred history of Israel as portrayed in the Old Testament, they carefully and completely destroyed the existing records of Hebrew affairs—such books as “The Doings of the Kings of Israel” and “The Doings of the Kings of Judah,” together with several other more or less accurate records of Hebrew history.

97:8.2 (1070.5) In order to understand how the devastating pressure and the inescapable coercion of secular history so terrorized the captive and alien-ruled Jews that they attempted the complete rewriting and recasting of their history, we should briefly survey the record of their perplexing national experience. It must be remembered that the Jews failed to evolve an adequate nontheologic philosophy of life. They struggled with their original and Egyptian concept of divine rewards for righteousness coupled with dire punishments for sin. The drama of Job was something of a protest against this erroneous philosophy. The frank pessimism of Ecclesiastes was a worldly wise reaction to these overoptimistic beliefs in Providence.

97:8.3 (1071.1) But five hundred years of the overlordship of alien rulers was too much for even the patient and long-suffering Jews. The prophets and priests began to cry: “How long, O Lord, how long?” As the honest Jew searched the Scriptures, his confusion became worse confounded. An olden seer promised that God would protect and deliver his “chosen people.” Amos had threatened that God would abandon Israel unless they re-established their standards of national righteousness. The scribe of Deuteronomy had portrayed the Great Choice—as between the good and the evil, the blessing and the curse. Isaiah the first had preached a beneficent king-deliverer. Jeremiah had proclaimed an era of inner righteousness—the covenant written on the tablets of the heart. The second Isaiah talked about salvation by sacrifice and redemption. Ezekiel proclaimed deliverance through the service of devotion, and Ezra promised prosperity by adherence to the law. But in spite of all this they lingered on in bondage, and deliverance was deferred. Then Daniel presented the drama of the impending “crisis”—the smiting of the great image and the immediate establishment of the everlasting reign of righteousness, the Messianic kingdom.

Me here: Despite the fictions and fables of Jewish history, the importance of these people to our planetary religious evolution is both unique and extraordinary according to the UB. We must give credit where credit is due!

97:10.4 (1076.1) From Moses to John the Baptist there extended an unbroken line of faithful teachers who passed the monotheistic torch of light from one generation to another while they unceasingly rebuked unscrupulous rulers, denounced commercializing priests, and ever exhorted the people to adhere to the worship of the supreme Yahweh, the Lord God of Israel.

97:10.8 (1076.5) And thus the successive teachers of Israel accomplished the greatest feat in the evolution of religion ever to be effected on Urantia: the gradual but continuous transformation of the barbaric concept of the savage demon Yahweh, the jealous and cruel spirit god of the fulminating Sinai volcano, to the later exalted and supernal concept of the supreme Yahweh, creator of all things and the loving and merciful Father of all mankind. And this Hebraic concept of God was the highest human visualization of the Universal Father up to that time when it was further enlarged and so exquisitely amplified by the personal teachings and life example of his Son, Michael of Nebadon.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 12:11 pm +0000
Posts: 932
William S. wrote:
The Mount Sinai events (and the ark of the covenant) may or may not have happened. It plays a significant part in forming the identity of the Hebrews.


According to the Revelation the ark of the covenant did exist. Here are the references:

(969.3) 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.

(1073.4) 97:9.14 After the defeat of the Philistines, David gained possession of the “ark of Yahweh,” brought it to Jerusalem, and made the worship of Yahweh official for his kingdom. He next laid heavy tribute on the neighboring tribes — the Edomites, Moabites, Ammonites, and Syrians.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2019 11:57 pm +0000
Posts: 116
I will read all the papers for full context in due time. At this point though I find it difficult to believe that a grand fiction is constructed (mixed in with a few kernels of truth) in order to get closer to the greater truth that being the Universal Father. Especially when that fiction includes having the Jews have the "first seats in the kingdom" or "first blessings". That's not being anti-Semitic, that's just my objection to God picking favorites just by blood rather than character.

With the Ark of the Covenant existing according to the UB, I imagine it being build in secret somewhere in Canaan/Palestine.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2008 3:03 am +0000
Posts: 2269
Location: US
William S. wrote:
...That's not being anti-Semitic, that's just my objection to God picking favorites just by blood rather than character.


There's more than one statement that "chosen people" is a myth, even a delusion:

92:3:2 (1005.4) It has usually become tainted with that persistently mischief-making error, the chosen-people delusion.

93:5:0 (1018.6) Although it may be an error to speak of “chosen people,” it is not a mistake to refer to Abraham as a chosen individual.

Paper 97 - Evolution of the God Concept Among the Hebrews

97:4:2 (1065.5) He proclaimed much about God that had been announced by his predecessors and courageously attacked the belief in a Divine Being who would countenance sin among his so-called chosen people. ... This was a direct attack on the egoistic doctrine of the “chosen people,” and many Hebrews of those days bitterly resented it.

.

_________________
Richard E Warren


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 12:11 pm +0000
Posts: 932
One interesting thing I didn't realize about the Exodus before reading the Revelation is that the Israelites led out of Egypt by Moses were a submerged remnant of the violet race. In terms of "God picking favorites", I think it has more to do with evolution. The violet race is the most genetically advanced race.

(514.4) 45:4.14 12. Moses, the emancipator of a remnant of the submerged violet race and the instigator of the revival of the worship of the Universal Father under the name of “The God of Israel.”


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2019 11:57 pm +0000
Posts: 116
I just finished paper 96. I have learned a LOT it's hard to stay focused on my specific issue I raised in this thread.

The UB has a much more believable narrative of the exodus than the Bible. I like how it dealt with the number of Hebrews in Egypt question. Skeptics often point out how the number of Hebrews enslaved in Egypt and escaped according to the Bible was about half of the population of Egypt. Turns out Moses and the Hebrews got together with nomads outside of Egypt bolstering their number. The UB so far is silent on whether they wandered around the Sinai peninsula and the east bank of the Jordan river for 40 years. There is however a reference to their time in the wilderness being 25 years and that they lingered for an extended time on Mount Sinai where the much of the Jewish religion took shape. When they referred to the "Arabian Desert", a theory came to my head that perhaps the Hebrews spent some time in what is today Saudi Arabia rather than just the Sinai and east of the Jordan river.

I could easily also dismiss this narrative, but then I remember that all mythology is based on kernels of truth.

I found the narrative more believable but I got concerned at the narrative stating that Joshua built up a nation of warriors that eventually settled in Palestine. There is still no reference to the fact that Palestine was politically part of Egypt for most of the time between 1500-1200 BCE. So how is it that the slaves escaped only to go back into Egypt?

I hope papers 97 and 98 will give more context.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 5:21 am +0000
Posts: 992
unfortunately the papers dont give a date for moses and the exodus nor the name of a pharaoh but it gives a couple clues. first is that moses came after akhenaten who died in 1336bc (the el shaddai concept moses was raised under evolved from akhenaten's teachings and others). second clue is that the exodus happened when the pharaoh was "resisting the simultaneous onslaughts of a strong Libyan thrust from the south and a Greek naval invasion from the north."

now there's two pharaohs in egyptian history noted as having to fight both Libya and the "sea peoples"...merneptah 1213-1203bc and ramses iii 1186–1155 bc. its never been clear to anyone who exactly the sea peoples in egyptian records were but i believe merneptah was fighting the greeks by sea and ramses iii was fighting the barbarian hordes from turkistan mountains that overran the whole levant during the bronze age collapse.

so by my timeline the exodus happened during year 5 of merneptah's reign in 1208bc...wandering in the desert for 25 years i guess the papers say? so arrival in canaan/palestine around 1183bc. egyptian influence in that area ended with the battle of djahy in 1178bc so we're looking at maybe 5 years there under waning egyptian "rule". remember also that it was city states in that area that egyptian conquered and made vassals and not little villages in the mountains where it's believed the people of the exodus first settled. btw i believe that merneptah's stele telling of conquest in canaan prior to year 5 stating ""Israel has been wiped out...its seed is no more." refers to the group of semite followers of the melchizedek teachings that lived in that area at that time, and not to the bedouins of the exodus who were to soon join them and become the "jews".

EDIT: ok i found one of the "sea peoples" merneptah fought concurrent with libya (but ramses iii didnt) was "ekwesh" which hittite sources and the historian homer point to as being greece (mycenae), which would fit the papers timeline the way i've constructed it anyway lol

source link


Last edited by Makalu on Tue Jan 07, 2020 8:47 am +0000, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 5:21 am +0000
Posts: 992
oh i'll add one other thing. the papers say that the pharaoh had agreed to let moses & co. go if they agreed to not attack egyptians anywhere but then he changed his mind about letting them go. a year later they left but its possible that an informal truce between them remained and as long as they didnt attack the egyptians they didnt feel they had to fear them? maybe...maybe not...no matter


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 5:21 am +0000
Posts: 992
ok never researched the exodus before but its fun and found some clues in the bible that merneptah was the pharaoh of the exodus too:

exodus 1:11 says "So he made them answerable to officers of the public works, who laid crushing burdens on them, using them to build the store-cities of Phithom and Ramesses" and we know for a fact that the city of ramesses was built under and for ramses ii (ramses the great). the septuagent version adds the city of heliopolis, also known to be one of ramses ii public works.

so ramses ii was the pharoah of the oppression of the slaves in egypt.

now exodus 2:23: Then, after a long while, the king of Egypt died, and the cry of the Israelites, still groaning aloud in their drudgery, went up to God, who took pity on this drudgery of theirs,

and exodus 4:19: From Madian, then, the Lord bade Moses return to Egypt; all those who had threatened his life were dead. 20 So Moses took his wife and children, with his ass to carry them, and returned to Egypt...

taken together imply that the immediate successor of the pharoah of the oppression was on the throne when moses returned to egypt and soon led the people away, and the successor to ramses the great was merneptah.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2008 3:03 am +0000
Posts: 2269
Location: US
.

Hmmm... interesting discussion... Do you think this quote is saying Moses lived around 1000 BC?

...The record of the times and doings of Moses was derived from the traditions extant more than one thousand years after the death of the great leader.... 96:5:2 (1057.7)

.

_________________
Richard E Warren


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 5:21 am +0000
Posts: 992
rick warren wrote:
.

Hmmm... interesting discussion... Do you think this quote is saying Moses lived around 1000 BC?

...The record of the times and doings of Moses was derived from the traditions extant more than one thousand years after the death of the great leader.... 96:5:2 (1057.7)

.


uhm no...adding the preceding sentence to the paragraph you quoted:


Quote:
There is so little on record of the great work of Moses because the Hebrews had no written language at the time of the exodus.


i think they're referring to when the traditional oral law was written down in the mishnah aound 300ad...and possibly implying that the torah was addended? otherwise the torah being compiled during babylonian exile around 600bc would put moses at 1600ish which i think is older than any of the various estimates for moses and the exodus?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

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