Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2011 11:52 am +0000 Posts: 92
|
ubizmo wrote: pertti wrote: What strikes me is that TUB is compatible with all of them - once you look beyond the literal interpretation that some fundamentalist factions impose on their sacred texts. When you look at the real meaning behind the words, all of the religions that I know of, become genuine subsets of what TUB describes. I don't agree. There is no doubt in my mind, for example, that the atonement doctrine is not just a superficial detail in both Evangelical and Catholic Christianity. But the UB explicitly rejects that doctrine, and is therefore not compatible with these religions on just that point alone. And as I'm sure you've discovered, if you try to discuss the UB with a committed Evangelical or Catholic, the rejection of the atonement doctrine is an instant dealbreaker. The rejection of reincarnation is completely incompatible with most versions of Hinduism, Buddhism, and many New Age factions. As a UB believer, you most likely believe what the UB says about such things, which is that the world religions contain elements of earlier epochal revelations, distorted to a greater or lesser extent by human superstitions, cultural influences, and philosophical tinkering. You cannot seriously believe that this view is compatible with those other revelations.
Actually, my views are not based on what TUB says about other revelations. It is based on what I have read myself from those revelations and what I have read from TUB, and then having tried to reconcile those views in my mind.
Note that I said that "TUB is compatible with all of them". I did not say that "they all are compatible with TUB". These two are very different statements.
When I was a devoted Christian, I believed that all the other religions are wrong. Having been a Protestant, I was also absolutely certain that the Catholics had been deceived by the Devil. When I was a Neopagan, I believed that Christians had gotten it all wrong.
Now that I am trying to follow the faith of Jesus, I see that all those religions are right - considering that they see only a part of the whole picture. This was also Jesus' attitude to other religions: he always tried to find what was common and what was good in them.
The fact that TUB can include all the other religions (at least those that I know something about) but not the other way round, tells me that TUB is more worth believing than any other religion. I have always been looking for "the theory of everything" in the scope of religion and now I have found it!
As for the atonement, yes, that seems to be an insurmountable obstacle. Let's first look at what it means:
"The word atonement, which is almost the only theological term of English origin, has a curious history. The verb "atone", from the adverbial phrase "at one" (M.E. at oon), at first meant to reconcile, or make "at one"; from this it came to denote the action by which such reconciliation was effected, e.g. satisfaction for all offense or an injury. Hence, in Catholic theology, the Atonement is the Satisfaction of Christ, whereby God and the world are reconciled or made to be at one." (From http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02055a.htm )
"(a) In any view, the Atonement is founded on the Divine Incarnation. By this great mystery, the Eternal Word took to Himself the nature of man and, being both God and man, became the Mediator between God and men." (The same source)
I don't see a real contradiction with TUB there.
I see how the core of the atonement doctrine is actually "based on a true story". TUB says:
(400.3) 36:3.8 When the Life Carriers operating on a new world have once succeeded in producing a being with will, with the power of moral decision and spiritual choice, then and there their work terminates — they are through; they may manipulate the evolving life no further. From this point forward the evolution of living things must proceed in accordance with the endowment of the inherent nature and tendencies which have already been imparted to, and established in, the planetary life formulas and patterns. The Life Carriers are not permitted to experiment or to interfere with will; they are not allowed to dominate or arbitrarily influence moral creatures.
This basically means that people living now are handicapped because of some bad moral choices made by our great-great-...great-ancestors. You can think this long chain of dependencies on moral choices as "the original sin" in the sense that the Christian Churches talk about it.
Michael of Nebadon loves us and wants the best for us. As a part of His career was a bestowal to a human body. What He did on Urantia was for the benefit of the whole Nebadon. He did not save Himself from any part of what it is being a human, and in fact he got a lot more suffering than most of us get.
What we had been doing before that on this planet was to give human and animal sacrifices to please the gods. So it was natural for us to understand that Jesus was the final sacrifice. Even though that was not correct, it proved to be a misunderstanding that was very beneficial. After all, it ended human and animal sacrifice once and for all (for Christians, that is).
The part of the atonement doctrine that says that God needed a sacrifice to forgive us is incorrect. However, the reasoning back then was understandable. People felt that the gap between them and God was huge. And, in fact, this gap was something that Michael came to bridge. Not by being a sacrifice pleasing to God but through other means.
What I see is that an individual professing the Catholic religion would not actually lose anything by dropping this part of the atonement doctrine. In fact, they would gain a really loving Father, to an extent they had not earlier believed even possible.
As for the institution, the Catholic Church, however, has everything to lose. In the religion of Jesus their is no need for intermediaries between the individual and God. In fact, God is already in us. But that is also said in the Bible: Luke 17:21 "Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you." and John 10:34 "Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?"
If humans did not have any misconceptions, we would not have needed TUB. But as TUB explains the real facts (as far as we can understand them at the moment), I can now see where the misconceptions are. Having had many of them myself, I feel I have the right to say so.
Thus, I say it again: TUB is compatible with the religions that I know, to the extent I know them. I can see many misunderstandings but I can also see where they got it right, even in cases where they did not understand that themselves.
I agree with you in that people representing those other religions might not agree and I am pretty sure that the organizations behind the religions do not agree with me. After all, the organizations have everything to lose.
|
|