The Late Great Urantia Revelation

[freelight]

Jesus is a Savior but in a different sense......

Jesus is a Savior but in a different sense......

Er, it rejects the Lord Jesus Christ as Savior and rejects much of the Bible as wrong. That's a 'no dice!' in my book.

It does NOT reject Jesus as 'Savior', but defines the term differently.

It exalts Jesus as our Creator Son, who is sovereign Lord and could be called our 'Savior' as well,...but not a 'savior' by the traditional-orthodox Christian definition of such a word, being a vicarious blood sacrifice or atonement for our sins. We've already covered this, and I've done many commentaries questioning the whole blood-atonement concept here and on other threads. Since the UB presents and exalts Jesus as our Creator and Lord who bestowed himself upon our planet to reveal 'God' to us (himself and the Universal Father),...it is fundamentally pro-Jesus. Now to who Jesus is in the divine hierarchy of the Sons of God in relation to God the Universal Father (and the Paradise Trinity) is another matter, revealed differently from the traditional-orthodox concept of the Trinity. We've covered UB Christology previously.

See: Michael of Nebadon

So you see, it presents Jesus in a new light as to his status and divine Sonship as a Creator-Son, of the order of Michael (Creator Son are also called Michaels)....hence one of the titles of Jesus being 'Christ-Michael'. - this has nothing to do with the traditional identification of an arch-angel named 'Michael'. Archangels are of a different class than Creator Sons. Michael-Sons are not archangels, but Creator-Sons. They go forth and create universes which include inhabitable worlds.

For all the places 'savior' is used in the UB go here.

188:4.6 Jesus lived and died for a whole universe, not just for the races of this one world. While the mortals of the realms had salvation even before Jesus lived and died on Urantia, it is nevertheless a fact that his bestowal on this world greatly illuminated the way of salvation; his death did much to make forever plain the certainty of mortal survival after death in the flesh.

188:4.7 Though it is hardly proper to speak of Jesus as a sacrificer, a ransomer, or a redeemer, it is wholly correct to refer to him as a savior. He forever made the way of salvation (survival) more clear and certain; he did better and more surely show the way of salvation for all the mortals of all the worlds of the universe of Nebadon.

188:4.8 When once you grasp the idea of God as a true and loving Father, the only concept which Jesus ever taught, you must forthwith, in all consistency, utterly abandon all those primitive notions about God as an offended monarch, a stern and all-powerful ruler whose chief delight is to detect his subjects in wrongdoing and to see that they are adequately punished, unless some being almost equal to himself should volunteer to suffer for them, to die as a substitute and in their stead. The whole idea of ransom and atonement is incompatible with the concept of God as it was taught and exemplified by Jesus of Nazareth. The infinite love of God is not secondary to anything in the divine nature.

 

[freelight]

I agree completely.

Galatians 1:9-12 KJV As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. 10. For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ. 11. But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. 12. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

Already addressed Paul's claim,...(this passage keeps getting thrown up quite a bit)....its his own claim. By his own testimony,...the gospel of Jesus and the original apostle's gospel would be in the "accursed" category, since it is a different gospel emphasis and presentation. This is especially held by the MAD position. The differences are notable. (squabble or split hairs if you wish).

Paul only has his own claim to apostleship, which is not substantiated by any of the original apostles. 2 Peter does not hold, since its pseudographical. Peter was often in conflict with Paul. This does not discount all that Paul taught of course, he just brought his own 'spin' and personal revelations into the mix, and exalted them as the exclusive and secret truth, hidden in ages past, yet now revealed exclusively thru himself. The NT compilers included letters ascribed to Paul mixing it with its own chosen gospels and other epistles to be what is in the present form, while almost half of those letters given to be scribed by Paul are 'pseudographical'. Again, Paul had his own spin, and synthesized his own 'gospel' message from various schools of thought and his own personal experience which mostly Gentiles accepted, since most of the Jewish followers of Jesus rejected it (it having various pagan/gnostic/mystery religion elements). I think you may want to do more research on Paul. Not knocking him, as I agree with some of his universal, gnostic, allegorical concepts,..(I'm a liberal gnostic in some respects)....I just don't take his gospel as the one and only WAY to look at and INTERPRET the 'Christ-story'.

Paul poses no threat to me, and I quote him where appropriate

 

[Derf]

Paul only has his own claim to apostleship, which is not substantiated by any of the original apostles. 2 Peter does not hold, since its pseudographical. Peter was often in conflict with Paul. This does not discount all that Paul taught of course, he just brought his own 'spin' and personal revelations into the mix, and exalted them as the exclusive and secret truth, hidden in ages past, yet now revealed exclusively thru himself. The NT compilers included letters ascribed to Paul mixing it with its own chosen gospels and other epistles to be what is in the present form, while almost half of those letters given to be scribed by Paul are 'pseudographical'. Again, Paul had his own spin, and synthesized his own 'gospel' message from various schools of thought and his own personal experience which mostly Gentiles accepted, since most of the Jewish followers of Jesus rejected it (it having various pagan/gnostic/mystery religion elements). I think you may want to do more research on Paul. Not knocking him, as I agree with some of his universal, gnostic, allegorical concepts,..(I'm a liberal gnostic in some respects)....I just don't take his gospel as the one and only WAY to look at and INTERPRET the 'Christ-story'.

Paul poses no threat to me, and I quote him where appropriate

I suppose it's easy to say you're not threatened by Paul when you discount stuff you don't like as pseudepigraphal. How convenient.

Already addressed Paul's claim,...(this passage keeps getting thrown up quite a bit)....its his own claim. By his own testimony,...the gospel of Jesus and the original apostle's gospel would be in the "accursed" category, since it is a different gospel emphasis and presentation. This is especially held by the MAD position. The differences are notable. (squabble or split hairs if you wish).

Paul only has his own claim to apostleship, which is not substantiated by any of the original apostles. 2 Peter does not hold, since its pseudographical. Peter was often in conflict with Paul. This does not discount all that Paul taught of course, he just brought his own 'spin' and personal revelations into the mix, and exalted them as the exclusive and secret truth, hidden in ages past, yet now revealed exclusively thru himself. The NT compilers included letters ascribed to Paul mixing it with its own chosen gospels and other epistles to be what is in the present form, while almost half of those letters given to be scribed by Paul are 'pseudographical'. Again, Paul had his own spin, and synthesized his own 'gospel' message from various schools of thought and his own personal experience which mostly Gentiles accepted, since most of the Jewish followers of Jesus rejected it (it having various pagan/gnostic/mystery religion elements). I think you may want to do more research on Paul. Not knocking him, as I agree with some of his universal, gnostic, allegorical concepts,..(I'm a liberal gnostic in some respects)....I just don't take his gospel as the one and only WAY to look at and INTERPRET the 'Christ-story'.

Paul poses no threat to me, and I quote him where appropriate

I suppose it's easy to say you're not threatened by Paul when you discount stuff you don't like as pseudoepigraphal

 

[freelight]

I suppose it's easy to say you're not threatened by Paul when you discount stuff you don't like as pseudepigraphal. How convenient.

I just recognize the fact with other scholars and laymen that only 7 are among 'undisputed' as to being genuine Pauline writings, while the remaining 6 (excluding Hebrews) are more or less disputed. I can accept various points or principles in any given letter or epistle whether authored by Paul or whoever, but that depends on its propositions.

See: Authorship of the Pauline epistles

While here we're exploring and expounding on the UB's theology, I'm quite open and a student of other spiritual paths and traditions, since all truth and wisdom comes from one Universal Source. Since the beginning of my sojourn here on the forum, I've always been the more liberal eclectic, so those who know my own philosophical and religious proclivities are not surprised by my artful adventures of Spirit.

There are some who believe Paul is just a pseudonym for another person or combination of persons who actually wrote most of the Pauline epistles and brought them over from India,...that person would be Apollonius of Tyana,...or that of another name. Some have also assumed that Apollonius may have been the original model that the story of Jesus was framed upon. Again, this is an alternative view.

 

[journey]

Freelight,

I could care less what you believe or what the ub teaches. I've given up on you completely. I post what I do here for future readers. You and your ub are Elmer Fudd and Marvin the Martian fare. You and the ub deny the Gospel of the Grace of God, the only way to Salvation. Forget about your slick words and phrases trying to skate out of these facts. You and the ub are Anti-Christ and Anti-Christian - plain and simple. The urantia UFO cult and its materials are pure garbage, and that's putting it mildly. By the way, you won't be correcting me or teaching me anything. I don't recognize you as a source for anything useful. I hope this is clear enough.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Freelight,

I could care less what you believe or what the ub teaches. I've given up on you completely. I post what I do here for future readers. You and your ub are Elmer Fudd and Marvin the Martian fare. You and the ub deny the Gospel of the Grace of God, the only way to Salvation. Forget about your slick words and phrases trying to skate out of these facts. You and the ub are Anti-Christ and Anti-Christian - plain and simple. The urantia UFO cult and its materials are pure garbage, and that's putting it mildly. By the way, you won't be correcting me or teaching me anything. I don't recognize you as a source for anything useful. I hope this is clear enough.

Excellent post.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

I just recognize little green men in UFOs.

Did your "Little green men" in their shiny UFOs tell you what to say here?

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

I only wish I could let TOL folks know how silly I feel about my belief in the Urantia UFO Cult. However, I just can't seem to get enough gumption up to announce it to all my fellow posters.
I'm so sorry to those I've offended here at TOL. I know in my heart, The Urantia UFO Cult is a bunch of malarky but it's all I have going for me at this time in my life. Please be patient with me while I'm struggling to pull myself together? Perhaps someday I'll come to my senses, but for now, I'll just have to continue playing the "Court Jester, town character, and the most ignorant human being on earth." My sincerest apologies. Oh, and GM, I really respect your views man. I only wish I could be just like you.

I changed it for ya Freelight. I wanted to make you appear both sane and lucid. No offence intended buddy.

 

[freelight]

Freelight,

I could care less what you believe or what the ub teaches. I've given up on you completely. I post what I do here for future readers. You and your ub are Elmer Fudd and Marvin the Martian fare. You and the ub deny the Gospel of the Grace of God, the only way to Salvation. Forget about your slick words and phrases trying to skate out of these facts. You and the ub are Anti-Christ and Anti-Christian - plain and simple. The urantia UFO cult and its materials are pure garbage, and that's putting it mildly. By the way, you won't be correcting me or teaching me anything. I don't recognize you as a source for anything useful. I hope this is clear enough.

:wave2:

 

[freelight]

Continuing with the Foreward.....

Continuing with the Foreward.....

0:1.14 Deity may be existential, as in the Eternal Son; experiential, as in the Supreme Being; associative, as in God the Sevenfold; undivided, as in the Paradise Trinity.

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.

0:1.16 DIVINITY is the characteristic, unifying, and co-ordinating quality of Deity.

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.

0:1.18 Divinity may be perfect—complete—as on existential and creator levels of Paradise perfection; it may be imperfect, as on experiential and creature levels of time-space evolution; or it may be relative, neither perfect nor imperfect, as on certain Havona levels of existential-experiential relationships.

:idea:

This verse is particularly wonderful distinguishing between terms -

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.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

:idea:

This verse is particularly wonderful distinguishing between terms -

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.

You may think it's a "good read" however, it's still the work of someone's vivid imagination. Perhaps, one of your little green men friends in their UFO?

 

[Derf]

You may think it's a "good read" however, it's still the work of someone's vivid imagination. Perhaps, one of your little green men friends in their UFO?

 

[Caino]

Crucible, you will have to forgive them, for they have not read the book that they disagree with:

188:4.7 "Though it is hardly proper to speak of Jesus as a sacrificer, a ransomer, or a redeemer, it is wholly correct to refer to him as a savior. He forever made the way of salvation (survival) more clear and certain; he did better and more surely show the way of salvation for all the mortals of all the worlds of the universe of Nebadon."

 

[freelight]

Crucible, you will have to forgive them, for they have not read the book that they disagree with:

188:4.7 "Though it is hardly proper to speak of Jesus as a sacrificer, a ransomer, or a redeemer, it is wholly correct to refer to him as a savior. He forever made the way of salvation (survival) more clear and certain; he did better and more surely show the way of salvation for all the mortals of all the worlds of the universe of Nebadon."

Yes, also important to know -

188:5.1 The cross of Jesus portrays the full measure of the supreme devotion of the true shepherd for even the unworthy members of his flock. It forever places all relations between God and man upon the family basis. God is the Father; man is his son. Love, the love of a father for his son, becomes the central truth in the universe relations of Creator and creature—not the justice of a king which seeks satisfaction in the sufferings and punishment of the evil-doing subject.

188:5.2 The cross forever shows that the attitude of Jesus toward sinners was neither condemnation nor condonation, but rather eternal and loving salvation. Jesus is truly a savior in the sense that his life and death do win men over to goodness and righteous survival. Jesus loves men so much that his love awakens the response of love in the human heart. Love is truly contagious and eternally creative. Jesus' death on the cross exemplifies a love which is sufficiently strong and divine to forgive sin and swallow up all evil-doing. Jesus disclosed to this world a higher quality of righteousness than justice—mere technical right and wrong. Divine love does not merely forgive wrongs; it absorbs and actually destroys them. The forgiveness of love utterly transcends the forgiveness of mercy. Mercy sets the guilt of evil-doing to one side; but love destroys forever the sin and all weakness resulting therefrom. Jesus brought a new method of living to Urantia. He taught us not to resist evil but to find through him a goodness which effectually destroys evil. The forgiveness of Jesus is not condonation; it is salvation from condemnation. Salvation does not slight wrongs; it makes them right. True love does not compromise nor condone hate; it destroys it. The love of Jesus is never satisfied with mere forgiveness. The Master's love implies rehabilitation, eternal survival. It is altogether proper to speak of salvation as redemption if you mean this eternal rehabilitation.

188:5.3 Jesus, by the power of his personal love for men, could break the hold of sin and evil. He thereby set men free to choose better ways of living. Jesus portrayed a deliverance from the past which in itself promised a triumph for the future. Forgiveness thus provided salvation. The beauty of divine love, once fully admitted to the human heart, forever destroys the charm of sin and the power of evil.

The very act of the 'bestowal' of the Creator Son itself, and the living and serving as the Son of God & Son of man in the flesh...is itself a demonstration of love manifested to our world, having all its impact and potential of salvation, having its effect on the planet and thru-out the other worlds also created by this Creator Son. The 'cross' in this sense serves as a symbol of sacrificial love, a love that forgives and destroys sin, but it is only that love lived among men, that make for their salvation, apart from which the kingdom of heaven cannot be realized.

 

[Caino]

Yes, also important to know -




The very act of the 'bestowal' of the Creator Son itself, and the living and serving as the Son of God & Son of man in the flesh...is itself a demonstration of love manifested to our world, having all its impact and potential of salvation, having its effect on the planet and thru-out the other worlds also created by this Creator Son. The 'cross' in this sense serves as a symbol of sacrificial love, a love that forgives and destroys sin, but it is only that love lived among men, that make for their salvation, apart from which the kingdom of heaven cannot be realized.

And keep in mind it was the 7th time he did it. The previous 6 were as other orders of beings under his creatorship in other parts of his universe over a period of 1 billion years.

 

[freelight]

The Creator Son's bestowal missions......

The Creator Son's bestowal missions......

And keep in mind it was the 7th time he did it. The previous 6 were as other orders of beings under his creatorship in other parts of his universe over a period of 1 billion years.

Yes, and think of how much experiential wisdom and mercy were expanded by such 'bestowals', which traditional Christianity understands in certain insights of the mystery of the Incarnation. This record notes 7 bestowals which are usually customary for Creator Sons to undergo in their created worlds. (See: Paradise Creator Sons)

The Bestowal of Michael on Urantia

Looking deeper into UB Christology it would be interesting to compare what school it might be in agreement with, as many theological debates were over 'Christology' in particular, the defining of the human and divine nature, their union/synergy, etc.

As shared in the above paper, an excerpt -

120:4.2 But make no mistake; Christ Michael, while truly a dual-origin being, was not a double personality. He was not God in association with man but, rather, God incarnate in man. And he was always just that combined being. The only progressive factor in such a nonunderstandable relationship was the progressive self-conscious realization and recognition (by the human mind) of this fact of being God and man.

120:4.3 Christ Michael did not progressively become God. God did not, at some vital moment in the earth life of Jesus, become man. Jesus was God and man—always and even forevermore. And this God and this man were, and now are, one, even as the Paradise Trinity of three beings is in reality one Deity.

120:4.4 Never lose sight of the fact that the supreme spiritual purpose of the Michael bestowal was to enhance the revelation of God

So for those not informed of the UB's teaching on the incarnation,....it fully holds that Jesus is fully God and Man. Exploring further how this is defined and assumed is a matter of fine tuning

 

[Caino]

Yes, and think of how much experiential wisdom and mercy were expanded by such 'bestowals', which traditional Christianity understands in certain insights of the mystery of the Incarnation. This record notes 7 bestowals which are usually customary for Creator Sons to undergo in their created worlds. (See: Paradise Creator Sons)

The Bestowal of Michael on Urantia

Looking deeper into UB Christology it would be interesting to compare what school it might be in agreement with, as many theological debates were over 'Christology' in particular, the defining of the human and divine nature, their union/synergy, etc.

As shared in the above paper, an excerpt -



So for those not informed of the UB's teaching on the incarnation,....it fully holds that Jesus is fully God and Man. Exploring further how this is defined and assumed is a matter of fine tuning

From the opening recital of the Michael bestowals beginning nearly 1 billion years ago.

THE BESTOWALS OF CHRIST MICHAEL


119:0.1 "CHIEF OF THE EVENING STARS of Nebadon, I am assigned to Urantia by Gabriel on the mission of revealing the story of the seven bestowals of the Universe Sovereign, Michael of Nebadon, and my name is Gavalia. In making this presentation, I will adhere strictly to the limitations imposed by my commission.

119:0.2 The attribute of bestowal is inherent in the Paradise Sons of the Universal Father. In their desire to come close to the life experiences of their subordinate living creatures, the various orders of the Paradise Sons are reflecting the divine nature of their Paradise parents. The Eternal Son of the Paradise Trinity led the way in this practice, having seven times bestowed himself upon the seven circuits of Havona during the times of the ascension of Grandfanda and the first of the pilgrims from time and space. And the Eternal Son continues to bestow himself upon the local universes of space in the persons of his representatives, the Michael and Avonal Sons.

119:0.3 When the Eternal Son bestows a Creator Son upon a projected local universe, that Creator Son assumes full responsibility for the completion, control, and composure of that new universe, including the solemn oath to the eternal Trinity not to assume full sovereignty of the new creation until his seven creature bestowals shall have been successfully completed and certified by the Ancients of Days of the superuniverse of jurisdiction. This obligation is assumed by every Michael Son who volunteers to go out from Paradise to engage in universe organization and creation.

119:0.4 The purpose of these creature incarnations is to enable such Creators to become wise, sympathetic, just, and understanding sovereigns. These divine Sons are innately just, but they become understandingly merciful as a result of these successive bestowal experiences; they are naturally merciful, but these experiences make them merciful in new and additional ways. These bestowals are the last steps in their education and training for the sublime tasks of ruling the local universes in divine righteousness and by just judgment.

119:0.5 Though numerous incidental benefits accrue to the various worlds, systems, and constellations, as well as to the different orders of universe intelligences affected and benefited by these bestowals, still they are primarily designed to complete the personal training and universe education of a Creator Son himself. These bestowals are not essential to the wise, just, and efficient management of a local universe, but they are absolutely necessary to a fair, merciful, and understanding administration of such a creation, teeming with its varied forms of life and its myriads of intelligent but imperfect creatures.

119:0.6 The Michael Sons begin their work of universe organization with a full and just sympathy for the various orders of beings whom they have created. They have vast stores of mercy for all these differing creatures, even pity for those who err and flounder in the selfish mire of their own production. But such endowments of justice and righteousness will not suffice in the estimate of the Ancients of Days. These triune rulers of the superuniverses will never certify a Creator Son as Universe Sovereign until he has really acquired the viewpoint of his own creatures by actual experience in the environment of their existence and as these very creatures themselves. In this way such Sons become intelligent and understanding rulers; they come to know the various groups over which they rule and exercise universe authority. By living experience they possess themselves of practical mercy, fair judgment, and the patience born of experiential creature existence.

119:0.7 The local universe of Nebadon is now ruled by a Creator Son who has completed his service of bestowal; he reigns in just and merciful supremacy over all the vast realms of his evolving and perfecting universe. Michael of Nebadon is the 611,121st bestowal of the Eternal Son upon the universes of time and space, and he began the organization of your local universe about four hundred billion years ago. Michael made ready for his first bestowal adventure about the time Urantia was taking on its present form, one billion years ago. His bestowals have occurred about one hundred and fifty million years apart, the last taking place on Urantia nineteen hundred years ago. I will now proceed to unfold the nature and character of these bestowals as fully as my commission permits." UB 1955

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

THE BESTOWALS OF THE GIANT CYCLOPS

One billion years ago this very day the "Monumental Day of the Giant Cyclops Began!" He was seventy-five and a quarter foot tall with a rather large horn on the top of his head. He had the muscles of Hercules and the intellect of a cosmic physicist. He had three toes on each foot and three fingers on each hand. He was rather handsome for a cyclops. People from all around the planet of Zipron came to listen to his wisdom and admire his skin which had a bluish green tint. He spoke of far away Galaxies and would mention a planet called: Urantia.

He decided to inspire his fellow "Ziprons" and told them they ought to build a Ginormus flying ship and fly it to planet Urantia. Once there, they would find all wisdom and truth. So, they set about to build this GINORMOUS flying ship. The day came when the task was finished, at last. The Cyclops gathered them together in order to make a speech. He told them the following: "I wish I could go with you guys, however, I have a very bad case of the sniffles and I'm afraid the trip would wreak havoc on my sinuses. I want you to know that my mind, heart, one eye and the horn, on the top of my head, will be with you invisibly throughout your journey to Urantia. I want you to know: "When the times get tough, the tough get going." He also stated: It's always darkest before the dawn and there's a tunnel at the end of every rainbow. I wish to bestow and impart this one truth: "I never eat on an empty stomach." Good luck and fair-thee-well."


Caino, that was quite a story. I almost believe it's true?

 

[Lon]

Get out of the Urantia book cult with cult help.com!

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Hey, Freelight, how's your little green men in their UFOs doing? :rotfl: