Urantia Book Forum

Urantia Book Discussion Board : Study Group
It is currently Wed Oct 16, 2019 11:38 pm +0000

View unanswered posts | View active topics


Board index » Main » General Urantia Book Discussion

All times are UTC - 7 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 3 of 4
  [ 48 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
  Previous topic | Next topic 
Author Message
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 5:02 am +0000
Posts: 937
Location: Brooklyn NY
This thread has nothing to do with reincarnation.

_________________
BB, the Urantian Gnostic606
Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 5:29 am +0000
Posts: 3743
No...it has to do with your opinions which contradict the UB. And it's about your personal opinion that the UB is itself merely opinion and your claim it contains "impure" revelation and your self described skepticism and the wrong placement of this and your other topics of opinion which defy and contradict the UB and your defiance of the Guidelines you keep hiding your misbehaviors behind.

Read Larry's post again BB.

:roll:

"I'm sure everyone knows that this is a Urantia Book discussion forum -- we discuss our understanding of the teachings of TUB and how they apply to us. So obviously it's not a forum for discussing the merits of our own personal philosophies -- we've had members drop in and slap their philosphies across the various topics as if their personal opinions had some weight of logic or some manner of merrit associated with them... as if they were of equal value with those of epochal revelation.

"Neither is this discussion board open to promoting personal opinion that runs contrary to the teachings of TUB -- and that's been explained in my previous post above. What is the value of a board where everyone is free to promote their own opinions about things in general or a particular philosophy of life that has no basis in the revelation and to keep running over the same topics like a gerbil on a wheel? If it's already been said, already been thrashed about and there's nothing new to be added to the mix then it's time to move on to something more currently meaningful."
Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 5:02 am +0000
Posts: 937
Location: Brooklyn NY
Unless one restricts himself to posting UB references, commentary is OPINION. ALL POSTS ON THIS BOARD ACCOMPANIED BY COMMENTARY IS ----> OPINION. If moderator deems this a skeptic post they have the authority to move it. Until then, it stays here.


:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

_________________
BB, the Urantian Gnostic606
Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 5:29 am +0000
Posts: 3743
Everything posted that is not text is indeed opinion...but not all such opinion defies and contradicts the UB we are gathered here to study. Your opinions which contradict the UB are not relevant here. Students ask questions and discuss that which the student body is gathered to study....what are those who come here to declare their own opinions instead?? This is no place to seek an audience or congregation for opinions, theories, or fables.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 5:02 am +0000
Posts: 937
Location: Brooklyn NY
Unless one restricts himself to posting UB references, commentary is OPINION. ALL POSTS ON THIS BOARD ACCOMPANIED BY COMMENTARY IS ----> OPINION

_________________
BB, the Urantian Gnostic606
Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 5:29 am +0000
Posts: 3743
Speaking of opinions BB....my own agrees with Larry's....the opinions here should relate to content in the UB and should not be related to someone's pet theories or fables or preconceptions which contradict the UB. Larry was also a literalist and as mod here required such perspective...the UB is an epochal revelation and cannot here be claimed to be false or less than factual or truthful (as you have done so regularly).

One does not need to agree with the UB in their opinions but it should always remain in mind and in context here that it is the UB being studied and shared here....not opinions which are contrary TO the UB.

So it is the very nature of opinions that determines their appropriateness here at TruthBook (or that use to be the case and the Guidelines still say so). Also those statements which misquote or misrepresent the text of the UB should be revealed and corrected because, again, we are here to study the UB and compare ALL opinions and statements and declarations and theories TO the UB. We're not here to discuss your theories BB. Or your misrepresentation of terms...like "reincarnation" and "epochal revelation" and "numerology" and "fragment" and "schizophrenia" on other threads here - who cares what your definition of reincarnation or numerology or fragmented is? Webster's and the UB's are useful and have actual meaning. Made up definitions do not. Especially those which contradict the definitions and terms provided in the UB.

From the Guidelines:

"This discussion board, as an extension of the Truthbook.com website, has one primary goal:
To be a safe place where newcomers to The Urantia Book can ask questions and explore the teachings of The Urantia Book in a communal setting.

In a sense, this forum is a Virtual Urantia Book Study Group. Specifically, it is a place for new readers to meet long-time readers. We welcome long-time readers as a valuable resource for assisting newcomers to better understand the teachings of The Urantia Book; this discussion board is provided for the benefit of long-time readers too, keeping our primary goal in mind."


Does that make sense to you? Your unwillingness to abide by the Guidelines or place your skepticism in the Skeptics Corner reveals much about your motive and agenda here. Students ask questions BB...not make declarations of contradiction to the UB....just sayin'. You say your positions are not up for debate...then what are you doing here declaring your positions for? A study group of any text or book should be focused ON the material being studied and everything unrelated to the study OF the material being studied is immaterial and distracting and will result in the failure of the study group when anything goes. The sharks and wolves and detractors and debunkers and those who wish to cast disparagements and doubts on the Revelation will show up like vultures to a feast to gorge on the corpse when made welcome enough by the hosts and mods.


There is an interesting theory on the limits of tolerance and how sufficient tolerance of some elements assure the destruction of the tolerant. There were many things the Master would NOT tolerate...and for this very reason did he teach no forms of passivity.


Either this group and site has a shared purpose and goal....or it does not. Those who have come here for years to debunk and cast stones at the Revelation and are welcomed and protected will erode the value of this site. Those who think conflict is unwelcome or without benefit know little of the UB's contents or teachings as well. For tribulation and conflict and uncertainty and turmoil are required for progress in mind and in spirit. Those wishing to create and protect Kumbayah Island will find it gets smaller and smaller according to its irrelevancy and meaning in welcoming all opinions, no matter how irrelevant to the actual subject matter of the FER.

On "conflict": https://truthbook.com/search/UBParagrap ... &start=all

This is not an "opinion" site where all opinions are equal....especially those which contradict the Revelation.


I am happy to keep contrasting your declarations and opinions to the UB text. For there is ample opportunity provided for such contrast. And seriously, if you're seeking an audience, the "trend" rate in the Skeptics Corner is far greater than here.


Bradly 8)


:biggrin: 8)
Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2017 11:14 am +0000
Posts: 174
Since I can't take the heat I'm getting out of the kitchen
Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 5:29 am +0000
Posts: 3743
What heat? Every post by you has included questions about the UB, opinions directly related to the UB, UB quotes and text for reference, and an obvious sincerity of a student OF the UB and you have made no loud declarations or theories which contradict the UB.

No worries...no heat. That only applies to those who are not here to study and share the UB but seek an audience for their pet theories and fables and new re-definitions of common terms .

:wink: 8)
Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 9:13 am +0000
Posts: 1016
Location: Denver CO
To All,

I find nothing in the original post on this thread to be offensive, or a subject for the Skeptics section. It seems an honest question, based on the poster's reading of the revelator's comments. What is wrong with discussing this here in general discussion?

Quote:

There are epochal revelations delivered by celestials in TUB founded on belief, presumption, tradition and opinion. I find it interesting and puzzling at the same time any celestial would put forward a revelation as an opinion, belief, presumption or tradition.

The following is revelation born out of opinion:

Quote:
93:10.9 (1025.5) It has long been the opinion of our order that Machiventa’s presence on the Jerusem corps of Urantia directors, the four and twenty counselors, is sufficient evidence to warrant the belief that he is destined to follow the mortals of Urantia on through the universe scheme of progression and ascension even to the Paradise Corps of the Finality...

This specific order of celestials, based on its opinion, believes Machiventa is destined to follow mortals of Urantia to the Paradise Corp of the Finality. Still the revelation is an opinion. Why do they believe Machiventa will follow them? And why expect us to accept the revelation as truth? Apparently the information to which they have access was not sufficient enough to convince them the certainty of the event.

Has anyone put thought into this issue? What are you feelings on it, if so?

_________________
BB


However, due to a lack of simple common courtesy (in my considered opinion), the thread has quickly devolved into the topic of skepticism (not the topic) and personalities, has pitted one member against another, drowned out any participation by others, and has even gone so far as to drive away one of our newest members from the thread. And I can't say that I blame him. I don't think the original post was meant to bring about such a conclusion, nor need it have done so had the topic itself been addressed and had courtesy been the rule of communication.

Again, there are ways and there are ways of approaching disagreement. One way NOT to do it is to go on the attack; this approach invites a defensive response, and off we go in the opposite direction from reasoned, thoughtful discussion. Actually, the first few exchanges were, I thought, quite good, and then suddenly the bottom dropped out ... reported posts, edited posts, he said/he said...meanwhile, the topic itself is ignored.

If you have a better idea, or want to illuminate the discussion for others, the best way to do it is with corroborating UB text and/or your own considered opinion about the TOPIC, gleaned from your own grasp of the text. I see no problem with honest doubt, and who knows? Perhaps your reasoned opinion can act as a counterbalance for others who want to form their own reasoned opinion.

Making it personal is counterproductive, as is glaringly illustrated here. Calling for a topic to be moved when this kind of thing happens is not the answer. It does not solve the issue of the dismal failure to get along with one another.

Please try to do better. I will not hesitate to lock this thread if the rancor continues.

MaryJo
Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 5:29 am +0000
Posts: 3743
I find the ideas and opinions and inferences made here by the originator to illustrate his well known and self defined and personally declared skepticism and disbelief of the Revelation and his own determination that the UB should not be read or studied literally or as book of facts and knowledge...clearly so and repeatedly on many occasions and topics recently and over the years....a difference of opinion with Maryjo who apparently finds nothing skeptical from a well known and self described skeptic.

But I am more than willing to discuss the issues raised, the ideas and opinions put forth, and the inferences which logic and reason might discover therein. So....let us continue with BB's opinions and ideas here.

BB has said or asked the following:

"There are epochal revelations delivered by celestials in TUB founded on belief, presumption, tradition and opinion."

This opening, unfortunately, misrepresents epochal revelation. For epochal revelation is not each word or sentence of the UB but is the UB itself, in total. The statement infers that epochal revelation is unreliable and not factual and the authors are uncertain in their presentations of facts and knowledge. This opinion is delivered by a reader who believes and endlessly declares the UB cannot be read, studied, or believed literally...that it is not a book of facts and knowledge of universe reality and that it includes falsehoods....as well as belief, presumption, opinion.

This entire topic is designed, IMO, to cast doubt as to the value of the UB and its contents. It is obvious to any reader how authoritative are the authors in their presentations with the inclusion and addition of some issues subject to conjecture, speculation, wonder, mystery, and unrevealed knowledge to which they are not privy or cannot comprehend...as they so specifically point out from time to time. Such reflections sometimes come with reasoned conclusions and sometimes they do not....but the facts and perspective of universe reality are declared with authority and clarity and redundancy. Only a skeptic could mistake the distinction and seek to diminish the importance of the Papers.

"And why expect us to accept the revelation as truth?"


Not skeptical, eh? Hmmmmm…… Actually, I don't think they particularly expect any of us to believe the claims made. I mean, they know some of us will and many will not and most will not take the time or find the opportunity to even read the Papers. Not so early anyway. Enough have found it and read it and believe it to create millions of copies in many languages and create organizations to connect students and study groups like TruthBook and movies and novels and art work and video games and those seeds are planted, deep and firm in lots of good soil upon Urantia. The generations to come will find the Revelation in their own time and way and the book is filled with evidence of its truthfulness and factual contents that it will become self proven to generations who will overcome such skeptics and skepticism and embrace this Epochal Revelation as we have the first 4.


Reality is indifferent to our beliefs and disbeliefs. So is epochal revelation. The Most Highs deliver progress with force and skill and inevitable outcomes no matter the individual mortal's acceptance of fact and truth. Believe it or don't...what does that matter? But I wonder what it means to constantly curry doubt and to spread one's personal skepticism at a site dedicated to the study of this Revelation of fact and truth, created by and attended by sincere students and ardent believers? I hope such wonder and speculation is not too personal?


"Pure revelation implies impure revelation, which I know is included in the corpus of revelations we call Urantia book."

Quite the declaration...and most illogical claim...and, again, skeptical by definition. There is no such implication at all. But the claim itself implies plenty....IMO. It is the continuation of years of posts and opinions here that the Revelation is unreliable and is not factual and is unbelievable. BB's perspective and written position for years now at TB. Which Maryjo finds neither relevant nor skeptical.

If allowed, I certainly disagree....politely.

"Thought Adjuster, HS and SoT sort out the mess."


Again, I ask...What mess? What is meant here? That the 5th Epochal Revelation is a "mess"? This is your opinion BB? If not, then what are you saying and meaning?

I find the defense of such blatant skepticism and obvious negative inferences and accusations against the Revelation here to be quite mysterious and profoundly disturbing. It may take me some time to adjust to the new paradigm here at TB. But I am trying. I should not take offence when the Revelation is smeared and belittled and shall endeavor to find and exhibit more patience for those ones who attend here, not to learn about the Revelation and the universe reality it presents so much as to share their own doubts and disbeliefs.


Peace and best wishes.

8)
Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2015 10:52 am +0000
Posts: 933
FanofVan wrote:
Quote:
I find the defense of such blatant skepticism and obvious negative inferences and accusations against the Revelation here to be quite mysterious and profoundly disturbing. It may take me some time to adjust to the new paradigm here at TB. But I am trying. I should not take offence when the Revelation is smeared and belittled and shall endeavor to find and exhibit more patience for those ones who attend here, not to learn about the Revelation and the universe reality it presents so much as to share their own doubts and disbeliefs.


I would like to add my voice to these sentiments. FoV is not alone in feeling this way; and I would go further to say that I very much value any discourse on this forum which reinforces truth, beauty and goodness over opinion, speculation, and fearful or negative interpretations of the 5th Epochal Revelation. I find many, though not all, of Bradly's posts to be of that nature (reinforcing truth, beauty and goodness) and even when perhaps being caught up in passionate disagreement, his posts are always well documented and factual.

I am dismayed that fact-based responses and disagreements are often discouraged or reprimanded.
Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 9:13 am +0000
Posts: 1016
Location: Denver CO
Good Morning All,

Here is an example of just what I have been trying to say for a long time. fanofVan posts this:

Quote:
I find the ideas and opinions and inferences made here by the originator to illustrate his well known and self defined and personally declared skepticism and disbelief of the Revelation and his own determination that the UB should not be read or studied literally or as book of facts and knowledge...clearly so and repeatedly on many occasions and topics recently and over the years....a difference of opinion with Maryjo who apparently finds nothing skeptical from a well known and self described skeptic.


And then, he goes on to say:

Quote:
But I am more than willing to discuss the issues raised, the ideas and opinions put forth, and the inferences which logic and reason might discover therein. So....let us continue with BB's opinions and ideas here.


Following then, is a very calm, logical, measured response to what he finds objectionable in B_B's post. All well and good...food for thought, and an opportunity for the poster to respond - hopefully without any rancor, but with an equal measure of logic and calm about the ideas raised and objected to.

In my view, the incendiary opening paragraph (and all subsequent references to poster/admin) could have been completely avoided; these statements cast aspersions on not only the poster, but on admin as not measuring up to one man's ideas of right and wrong - throwing down the gauntlet and inviting defensive rancor, rather than a discussion.

When we divert from ideas, we make thoughtful discussion very difficult. We sow seeds of doubt about EACH OTHER which makes participation difficult - especially by those who, after feeling this atmosphere, might feel unsure about their own interpretations of The Urantia Book and wary of posting - wary of incurring the wrath of other, more seasoned posters, lest their own motives for how they think will also be attacked.

For your consideration...

MaryJo
Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 5:02 am +0000
Posts: 937
Location: Brooklyn NY
Agon D. Onter wrote:


I am dismayed that fact-based responses and disagreements are often discouraged or reprimanded.



Agon,

I do not believe fact-based responses and disagreements are discouraged or reprimanded. TOS violations are, however. The moderator has listed TOS a few times on the board, recently. I believe they are listed in this one.

We all have opinions on TUB and are within our individual right to believe our opinion is superior to the next. We all may not accept TUB to the same degree or share the same understanding, but we are all students of TUB or at least study the book.

I am very thankful for this board as it allows, within boundaries, freedom of expression of one's ideas on the revelations. The problem arises when people make responses personal in nature towards one another. It is a TOS violation and warrants moderators intervene.

People need to just chill, have some decorum and tolerance for other views, and things will be right as rain.

_________________
BB, the Urantian Gnostic606
Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2014 5:02 am +0000
Posts: 937
Location: Brooklyn NY
Hello maryjo606,

I do not have an issue with defending my claims. I am a student and still learning. Admittedly, my views have changed over the years as I study more the papers and internalize their truths as I see them. Further, my views are amenable to arguments that show me otherwise. However, I have decided not to engage people determined to make discussions I initiate about "ME." When a participant repeatedly does this, then I have to conclude they have something personal with me, so it is better to avoid for the sake of peace.



maryjo606 wrote:
.... and an opportunity for the poster to respond - hopefully without any rancor, but with an equal measure of logic and calm about the ideas raised and objected to.

_________________
BB, the Urantian Gnostic606
Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted:  
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 5:29 am +0000
Posts: 3743
maryjo606 wrote:
Good Morning All,

Here is an example of just what I have been trying to say for a long time. fanofVan posts this:

Quote:
I find the ideas and opinions and inferences made here by the originator to illustrate his well known and self defined and personally declared skepticism and disbelief of the Revelation and his own determination that the UB should not be read or studied literally or as book of facts and knowledge...clearly so and repeatedly on many occasions and topics recently and over the years....a difference of opinion with Maryjo who apparently finds nothing skeptical from a well known and self described skeptic.


And then, he goes on to say:

Quote:
But I am more than willing to discuss the issues raised, the ideas and opinions put forth, and the inferences which logic and reason might discover therein. So....let us continue with BB's opinions and ideas here.


Following then, is a very calm, logical, measured response to what he finds objectionable in B_B's post. All well and good...food for thought, and an opportunity for the poster to respond - hopefully without any rancor, but with an equal measure of logic and calm about the ideas raised and objected to.

In my view, the incendiary opening paragraph (and all subsequent references to poster/admin) could have been completely avoided; these statements cast aspersions on not only the poster, but on admin as not measuring up to one man's ideas of right and wrong - throwing down the gauntlet and inviting defensive rancor, rather than a discussion.

When we divert from ideas, we make thoughtful discussion very difficult. We sow seeds of doubt about EACH OTHER which makes participation difficult - especially by those who, after feeling this atmosphere, might feel unsure about their own interpretations of The Urantia Book and wary of posting - wary of incurring the wrath of other, more seasoned posters, lest their own motives for how they think will also be attacked.

For your consideration...

MaryJo


In the hope of better understanding, please describe the words in the first paragraph you find so "incendiary". How does recognition of BB's own words describing his personal disbelief and skepticism "incendiary"? He has made such self described statements himself and here and recently. How is restating his words and description of his position considered name calling or personal or inappropriate? Please help me understand this. I made no accusations. How would anyone else describe the 3 declarations and question listed above, and bb's attitude toward the UB in this thread?
Top
 Profile Send private message  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 3 of 4
  [ 48 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Board index » Main » General Urantia Book Discussion

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:  
Switch to mobile style
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group