Even if you don't believe in the authenticity of the text I still stand by my statement that it answers or has an opinion on any conceivable religious/philosophic topic you can think of.*my opinion*

Those that just view it as a curiosity are welcome to ask questions just for fun etc. This is kinda my own personal exercise.

Just a quick response for now as I'm heading out (and don't have time to even read the post re Mercury yet).

I don't have a problem with anything you have written in the quote above. If you believe it answers every conceivable religious/ philosophic topic then that's fine, I don't have an issue with that at all. My point is only regarding the scientific issue where things are much more clear cut. Denying there are clear errors in the book does you no favours when you then go on to discuss other matters concerning the book.

I understand where you are trying to say Husker but if you give an example of an error that implies the book is incorrect and then I show you how that error is perhaps not an error where will your pure skepticism halt and at least give some respect to this text, one which you wont even take a little time out to read, if not even reading my post explaining the concern you raised twice with your (bumpity bump). A firm believer vs a firm doubter, who will blink first. I at least went and took some time to address your issue while you say you don't even have time to read my post. At this point you do no service to your efforts at discrediting this text that you have no capacity to read or honor my response to your direct challenge.

There may be other things that appear as inconsistencies with the revelation but my energy will not be consumed in researching each one so that you will feel comfortable respecting and approaching a text you will never read (maybe stick with family guy?). If you had that intention maybe, but it seems I would just be wasting my time when there are more fun and interesting topics to explore (perhaps just for fun or novelty) over your purely boorish objections.

I don't want to claim the infallibility of the text (Even if I personally believe it is very close to being so) as that will invite people who have no intention of enjoying the text for what it is from exploring it // taking away from those who might. Not to say you are not welcome but you add nothing of value to this thread if you are simply standing around and cherrypicking things that may or may not be errors in the first place. Maybe read a section and add something that you like or find interesting.

Quoting the UB "Dont throw your pearls before swine"

I read this cover to cover twice quite some time ago. I've started reading it again recently.

I think it is really hard to get a grasp on this unless you read it in its entirety. It's long and difficult reading but I would highly recommend it.

Awesome BB... do you have a favorite section or subject?

This quote from the book is very clear and isn't ambiguous at all.

This isn't what the statement from the book is saying. And I think almost anyone reading it with an unbiased view would agree.


This is basically saying, okay the statement is wrong, let's see if we can attempt to interpret it differently to make it fit.

I find your explanation of the 'Mercury point' to be unconvincing, and I stated in my previous reply, so would most others with an unbiased view.
Also, re not having the time to read your post. I have a life, posting on internet forums doesn't consume me and I don't put 'real life' on hold to post on here. I said I would get back to address the point and I have.

Throwing in statements about family guy and boorish objections don't do you any good. You may want to reconsider your approach if you want to be taken seriously.

This forum is about discussion, not proselytising, so criticism and questions come with the territory. You have trouble accepting clear errors in the book because you are tied to it. Others won't give those errors a free pass and indeed some believers in the book are at least sensible enough to realise the problems accepting these errors cause and have therefore admitted they are wrong.

Does this book provide an opinion on Tibetan Buddhism or vjarayana? You mentioned deities earlier, any overlap with TB, e.g., Tara or Chenrezig?

Not really a favorite, but I tend to enjoy it more as it progresses. The first part is so (not sure what the best word is really) that it's hard to get my mind around it. It gets more, I guess I could say, earthly as it goes which makes it a little easier to grasp. I really like the discussions about religion in general.

I like the concept of how everything is always evolving - science, religion, etc. It sort of gives you a different point of view about where we are now. For instance, there is always this contingent ready to sort of throw away the whole idea of religion and God because our religions now are flawed. But if you look at it as an evolutionary process it changes your perspective. Or at least it did for me.

I can't remember this specifically, but I believe it does. As I recall, it covered every religion I had ever heard of.

I agree, This is a very cool aspect of the book. I forget the exact quote but I think its 'progress (ie evolution)Is the watchword of the universe' meaning almost everything In the seven created universes is evolving towards a state of perfection. Pretty much everything from physical system organization, down to our own earthly concepts of deity, social institutions, and biological evolution. The book does not mince words when it comes the shortcomings of institutionalized religion.

What does it have to say about the origin of evil?

Taken from paper 94 which has alot more information than I have copied

(1036.4) 94:8.2 Buddhism took origin in a historic person, not in a myth. Gautama’s followers called him Sasta, meaning master or teacher. While he made no superhuman claims for either himself or his teachings, his disciples early began to call him the enlightened one, the Buddha; later on, Sakyamuni Buddha.

(1036.5) 94:8.3 The original gospel of Gautama was based on the four noble truths:

(1036.6) 94:8.4 1. The noble truths of suffering.

(1036.7) 94:8.5 2. The origins of suffering.

(1036.8) 94:8.6 3. The destruction of suffering.

(1036.9) 94:8.7 4. The way to the destruction of suffering.

(1036.10) 94:8.8 Closely linked to the doctrine of suffering and the escape therefrom was the philosophy of the Eightfold Path: right views, aspirations, speech, conduct, livelihood, effort, mindfulness, and contemplation. It was not Gautama’s intention to attempt to destroy all effort, desire, and affection in the escape from suffering; rather was his teaching designed to picture to mortal man the futility of pinning all hope and aspirations entirely on temporal goals and material objectives. It was not so much that love of one’s fellows should be shunned as that the true believer should also look beyond the associations of this material world to the realities of the eternal future.

(1036.11) 94:8.9 The moral commandments of Gautama’s preachment were five in number:

(1036.12) 94:8.10 1. You shall not kill.

(1036.13) 94:8.11 2. You shall not steal.

(1036.14) 94:8.12 3. You shall not be unchaste.

(1036.15) 94:8.13 4. You shall not lie.

(1036.16) 94:8.14 5. You shall not drink intoxicating liquors.

(1036.18) 94:8.16 Siddhartha hardly believed in the immortality of the human personality; his philosophy only provided for a sort of functional continuity. He never clearly defined what he meant to include in the doctrine of Nirvana. The fact that it could theoretically be experienced during mortal existence would indicate that it was not viewed as a state of complete annihilation. It implied a condition of supreme enlightenment and supernal bliss wherein all fetters binding man to the material world had been broken; there was freedom from the desires of mortal life and deliverance from all danger of ever again experiencing incarnation.

(1037.1) 94:8.17 According to the original teachings of Gautama, salvation is achieved by human effort, apart from divine help; there is no place for saving faith or prayers to superhuman powers. Gautama, in his attempt to minimize the superstitions of India, endeavored to turn men away from the blatant claims of magical salvation. And in making this effort, he left the door wide open for his successors to misinterpret his teaching and to proclaim that all human striving for attainment is distasteful and painful. His followers overlooked the fact that the highest happiness is linked with the intelligent and enthusiastic pursuit of worthy goals, and that such achievements constitute true progress in cosmic self-realization.

(1037.2) 94:8.18 The great truth of Siddhartha’s teaching was his proclamation of a universe of absolute justice. He taught the best godless philosophy ever invented by mortal man; it was the ideal humanism and most effectively removed all grounds for superstition, magical rituals, and fear of ghosts or demons.

(1037.3) 94:8.19 The great weakness in the original gospel of Buddhism was that it did not produce a religion of unselfish social service. The Buddhistic brotherhood was, for a long time, not a fraternity of believers but rather a community of student teachers. Gautama forbade their receiving money and thereby sought to prevent the growth of hierarchal tendencies. Gautama himself was highly social; indeed, his life was much greater than his preachment.

---------------

Jesus on Buddha:


(1466.3) 132:7.3 It was on the visit to Switzerland, up in the mountains, that Jesus had an all-day talk with both father and son about Buddhism. Many times Ganid had asked Jesus direct questions about Buddha, but he had always received more or less evasive replies. Now, in the presence of the son, the father asked Jesus a direct question about Buddha, and he received a direct reply. Said Gonod: “I would really like to know what you think of Buddha.” And Jesus answered:

(1466.4) 132:7.4 “Your Buddha was much better than your Buddhism. Buddha was a great man, even a prophet to his people, but he was an orphan prophet; by that I mean that he early lost sight of his spiritual Father, the Father in heaven. His experience was tragic. He tried to live and teach as a messenger of God, but without God. Buddha guided his ship of salvation right up to the safe harbor, right up to the entrance to the haven of mortal salvation, and there, because of faulty charts of navigation, the good ship ran aground. There it has rested these many generations, motionless and almost hopelessly stranded. And thereon have many of your people remained all these years. They live within hailing distance of the safe waters of rest, but they refuse to enter because the noble craft of the good Buddha met the misfortune of grounding just outside the harbor. And the Buddhist peoples never will enter this harbor unless they abandon the philosophic craft of their prophet and seize upon his noble spirit. Had your people remained true to the spirit of Buddha, you would have long since entered your haven of spirit tranquillity, soul rest, and assurance of salvation.

(1467.1) 132:7.5 “You see, Gonod, Buddha knew God in spirit but failed clearly to discover him in mind; the Jews discovered God in mind but largely failed to know him in spirit. Today, the Buddhists flounder about in a philosophy without God, while my people are piteously enslaved to the fear of a God without a saving philosophy of life and liberty. You have a philosophy without a God; the Jews have a God but are largely without a philosophy of living as related thereto. Buddha, failing to envision God as a spirit and as a Father, failed to provide in his teaching the moral energy and the spiritual driving power which a religion must possess if it is to change a race and exalt a nation.”

(613.1) 54:0.1 EVOLUTIONARY man finds it difficult fully to comprehend the significance and to grasp the meanings of evil, error, sin, and iniquity. Man is slow to perceive that contrastive perfection and imperfection produce potential evil; that conflicting truth and falsehood create confusing error; that the divine endowment of freewill choice eventuates in the divergent realms of sin and righteousness; that the persistent pursuit of divinity leads to the kingdom of God as contrasted with its continuous rejection, which leads to the domains of iniquity.

(613.2) 54:0.2 The Gods neither create evil nor permit sin and rebellion. Potential evil is time-existent in a universe embracing differential levels of perfection meanings and values. Sin is potential in all realms where imperfect beings are endowed with the ability to choose between good and evil. The very conflicting presence of truth and untruth, fact and falsehood, constitutes the potentiality of error. The deliberate choice of evil constitutes sin; the willful rejection of truth is error; the persistent pursuit of sin and error is iniquity.

-----

evil is basically relative and represents your choice of doing things that are in direct contrast to what your progressing moral nature leads you to do. No act in inherently evil but is entirely based on your available choices. Evil is present in the world simply because everyone is allowed to choose things individually and collectively as a society or institution during the time conditioned evolutionary process. Simply my take on this subject.

Eh ... monolithic treatments of Buddhism erk me a little - its like someone didn't want to dig any deeper and just kept with the surface. And basically want to interpret Buddha through a Christian lens - at least in the west. Its hard sometimes to remove the cultural trappings and to stop bootstrapping things into well ingrained conceptual frameworks.

This reads like that. At the very least, there is a God realm within the Bardo, however, that would still be very much within karmic consequences.

Seems as though there was a lack of treatment of Theravada, Mahayana and Vjarayana schools - there are all very different. Theravada practioners seek to become Arhats, some Mahayana schools emphasize meditation only and the Vjarayana has a pantheon of Bodhisattvas and Buddhas.

Is there no discussion of the yidam practices? How about in addition to Tara and Chenrezig, any talk of Amitabha?

Not sure if Amithaba = Amida in the text but here is some more if you did not read paper 94 yourself.

12. The God Concept of Buddhism

(1040.5) 94:12.1 The great weakness in the cosmology of Buddhism was twofold: its contamination with many of the superstitions of India and China and its sublimation of Gautama, first as the enlightened one, and then as the Eternal Buddha. Just as Christianity has suffered from the absorption of much erroneous human philosophy, so does Buddhism bear its human birthmark. But the teachings of Gautama have continued to evolve during the past two and one-half millenniums. The concept of Buddha, to an enlightened Buddhist, is no more the human personality of Gautama than the concept of Jehovah is identical with the spirit demon of Horeb to an enlightened Christian. Paucity of terminology, together with the sentimental retention of olden nomenclature, is often provocative of the failure to understand the true significance of the evolution of religious concepts.

(1040.6) 94:12.2 Gradually the concept of God, as contrasted with the Absolute, began to appear in Buddhism. Its sources are back in the early days of this differentiation of the followers of the Lesser Road and the Greater Road. It was among the latter division of Buddhism that the dual conception of God and the Absolute finally matured. Step by step, century by century, the God concept has evolved until, with the teachings of Ryonin, Honen Shonin, and Shinran in Japan, this concept finally came to fruit in the belief in Amida Buddha.

(1041.1) 94:12.3 Among these believers it is taught that the soul, upon experiencing death, may elect to enjoy a sojourn in Paradise prior to entering Nirvana, the ultimate of existence. It is proclaimed that this new salvation is attained by faith in the divine mercies and loving care of Amida, God of the Paradise in the west. In their philosophy, the Amidists hold to an Infinite Reality which is beyond all finite mortal comprehension; in their religion, they cling to faith in the all-merciful Amida, who so loves the world that he will not suffer one mortal who calls on his name in true faith and with a pure heart to fail in the attainment of the supernal happiness of Paradise.

(1041.2) 94:12.4 The great strength of Buddhism is that its adherents are free to choose truth from all religions; such freedom of choice has seldom characterized a Urantian faith. In this respect the Shin sect of Japan has become one of the most progressive religious groups in the world; it has revived the ancient missionary spirit of Gautama’s followers and has begun to send teachers to other peoples. This willingness to appropriate truth from any and all sources is indeed a commendable tendency to appear among religious believers during the first half of the twentieth century after Christ.

(1041.3) 94:12.5 Buddhism itself is undergoing a twentieth-century renaissance. Through contact with Christianity the social aspects of Buddhism have been greatly enhanced. The desire to learn has been rekindled in the hearts of the monk priests of the brotherhood, and the spread of education throughout this faith will be certainly provocative of new advances in religious evolution.

(1041.4) 94:12.6 At the time of this writing, much of Asia rests its hope in Buddhism. Will this noble faith, that has so valiantly carried on through the dark ages of the past, once again receive the truth of expanded cosmic realities even as the disciples of the great teacher in India once listened to his proclamation of new truth? Will this ancient faith respond once more to the invigorating stimulus of the presentation of new concepts of God and the Absolute for which it has so long searched?

(1041.5) 94:12.7 All Urantia is waiting for the proclamation of the ennobling message of Michael, unencumbered by the accumulated doctrines and dogmas of nineteen centuries of contact with the religions of evolutionary origin. The hour is striking for presenting to Buddhism, to Christianity, to Hinduism, even to the peoples of all faiths, not the gospel about Jesus, but the living, spiritual reality of the gospel of Jesus.

(1041.6) 94:12.8 [Presented by a Melchizedek of Nebadon.]


I will research more when I get home but keep the questions coming

What is the most profound passage(s) you've encountered in this book?

I probably won't bother with going out and about and researching Urantia for myself - the curiousity only motivates so much and I have too much already going on each day ... Sorry for that, I am just content to ask a few questions.

Amida is Japanese for Amitabha ... Wonder why Japan is highlighted and not the other Mahayana and Vjarayana traditions... Amitabha is pretty much everywhere in Buddhism.

It would be incorrect though to characterize Buddha's as gods, Amitabha's pureland is the first of many.

Anything in regard to the Bodhisattvas moving through the Bhumis?

What does it say about Islam?

Thats really hard to say because there are so many...I was listening today and these successive passages kinda struck me

(1153.4) 105:1.7 The universe of universes, with its innumerable host of inhabiting personalities, is a vast and complex organism, but the First Source and Center is infinitely more complex than the universes and personalities which have become real in response to his willful mandates. When you stand in awe of the magnitude of the master universe, pause to consider that even this inconceivable creation can be no more than a partial revelation of the Infinite.

(1153.5) 105:1.8 Infinity is indeed remote from the experience level of mortal comprehension, but even in this age on Urantia your concepts of infinity are growing, and they will continue to grow throughout your endless careers stretching onward into future eternity. Unqualified infinity is meaningless to the finite creature, but infinity is capable of self-limitation and is susceptible of reality expression to all levels of universe existences. And the face which the Infinite turns toward all universe personalities is the face of a Father, the Universal Father of love.

I had to look up Bodhisattvas and Bhumis but I think you are asking "Has anyone who has attained higher universe status come down from their relative places of progressive estate - to help those who are still in this early realm?"

-If this is your question then the answer is a definitive yes as one of the characteristics of higher celestial personalities is their desire to serve those below them, especially those who are the lowest( mortals of planetary origin). Even those mortals who climb to paradise are filled with the desire to come back down and help those much lower attain higher spiritual status.
-This happens to be one of the biggest themes of the book..

Those beings that are of created celestial status are classified as the "Descending Sons of God" And are a testament to God's love for mortals and progressing creatures

(331.19) 30:1.30 A. The Descending Orders.

(331.20) 30:1.31 1. Creator Sons.

(331.21) 30:1.32 2. Magisterial Sons.

(331.22) 30:1.33 3. Bright and Morning Stars.

(331.23) 30:1.34 4. Father Melchizedeks.

(331.24) 30:1.35 5. The Melchizedeks.

(331.25) 30:1.36 6. The Vorondadeks.

(331.26) 30:1.37 7. The Lanonandeks.

(331.27) 30:1.38 8. Brilliant Evening Stars.

(331.28) 30:1.39 9. The Archangels.

(331.29) 30:1.40 10. Life Carriers.

(331.30) 30:1.41 11. Unrevealed Universe Aids.

(331.31) 30:1.42 12. Unrevealed Sons of God.


There is an endless cycle of service in the universe, Christ Michael is the Creator son (of our universe of Nebadon) and he came here in physical form to minister to us, providing an advanced and progressive concept of a loving Father for our edification. He is the supreme example of this willingness to serve creation.

(558.1) 48:8.3 The mortal-survival plan has a practical and serviceable objective; you are not the recipients of all this divine labor and painstaking training only that you may survive just to enjoy endless bliss and eternal ease. There is a goal of transcendent service concealed beyond the horizon of the present universe age. If the Gods designed merely to take you on one long and eternal joy excursion, they certainly would not so largely turn the whole universe into one vast and intricate practical training school, requisition a substantial part of the celestial creation as teachers and instructors, and then spend ages upon ages piloting you, one by one, through this gigantic universe school of experiential training. The furtherance of the scheme of mortal progression seems to be one of the chief businesses of the present organized universe, and the majority of innumerable orders of created intelligences are either directly or indirectly engaged in advancing some phase of this progressive perfection plan.

(558.2) 48:8.4 In traversing the ascending scale of living existence from mortal man to the Deity embrace, you actually live the very life of every possible phase and stage of perfected creature existence within the limits of the present universe age. From mortal man to Paradise finaliter embraces all that now can be — encompasses everything presently possible to the living orders of intelligent, perfected finite creature beings. If the future destiny of the Paradise finaliters is service in new universes now in the making, it is assured that in this new and future creation there will be no created orders of experiential beings whose lives will be wholly different from those which mortal finaliters have lived on some world as a part of their ascending training, as one of the stages of their agelong progress from animal to angel and from angel to spirit and from spirit to God.


The ministries (be they instructive or administrative) of these other beings are detailed in the book

Some selected quotes


(1010.2) 92:5.14 6. The sixth century after Christ. Mohammed founded a religion which was superior to many of the creeds of his time. His was a protest against the social demands of the faiths of foreigners and against the incoherence of the religious life of his own people.


(1144.6) 104:1.9 The followers of the Islamic faith likewise failed to grasp the idea of the Trinity. It is always difficult for an emerging monotheism to tolerate trinitarianism when confronted by polytheism. The trinity idea takes best hold of those religions which have a firm monotheistic tradition coupled with doctrinal elasticity. The great monotheists, the Hebrews and Mohammedans, found it difficult to distinguish between worshiping three gods, polytheism, and trinitarianism, the worship of one Deity existing in a triune manifestation of divinity and personality.

(1076.3) 97:10.6 The Jews loved justice, wisdom, truth, and righteousness as have few peoples, but they contributed least of all peoples to the intellectual comprehension and to the spiritual understanding of these divine qualities. Though Hebrew theology refused to expand, it played an important part in the development of two other world religions, Christianity and Mohammedanism.

(67.3) 5:4.5 All religions teach the worship of Deity and some doctrine of human salvation. The Buddhist religion promises salvation from suffering, unending peace; the Jewish religion promises salvation from difficulties, prosperity predicated on righteousness; the Greek religion promised salvation from disharmony, ugliness, by the realization of beauty; Christianity promises salvation from sin, sanctity; Mohammedanism provides deliverance from the rigorous moral standards of Judaism and Christianity. The religion of Jesus is salvation from self, deliverance from the evils of creature isolation in time and in eternity.

(1051.4) 95:7.6 The strength of Islam has been its clear-cut and well-defined presentation of Allah as the one and only Deity; its weakness, the association of military force with its promulgation, together with its degradation of woman. But it has steadfastly held to its presentation of the One Universal Deity of all, “who knows the invisible and the visible. He is the merciful and the compassionate.” “Truly God is plenteous in goodness to all men.” “And when I am sick, it is he who heals me.” “For whenever as many as three speak together, God is present as a fourth,” for is he not “the first and the last, also the seen and the hidden”?

(1029.6) 94:2.8 It was during the times of the writing of the Upanishads that Buddhism arose in India. But despite its successes of a thousand years, it could not compete with later Hinduism; despite a higher morality, its early portrayal of God was even less well-defined than was that of Hinduism, which provided for lesser and personal deities. Buddhism finally gave way in northern India before the onslaught of a militant Islam with its clear-cut concept of Allah as the supreme God of the universe.

1038.1) 94:9.3 Buddhism, later on, was much affected by Taoism in China, Shinto in Japan, and Christianity in Tibet. After a thousand years, in India Buddhism simply withered and expired. It became Brahmanized and later abjectly surrendered to Islam, while throughout much of the rest of the Orient it degenerated into a ritual which Gautama Siddhartha would never have recognized.

That sounds pretty close... I think.


Why Christianity in Tibet and not Bon? The position of Bon in Tibet is similar to that of Shinto in Japan, the pre-Buddhism religion.

I think they are saying christianity affected buddhism after buddhism had been initially influenced by bon teachings which if i am correct, predate the appearance of christianity.

Can you give a tl;dr? What is the purpose of life? How does one achieve salvation?