© 1991 Richard I. Bain
© 1991 The Christian Fellowship of Students of The Urantia Book
The Bible is a collection of books. The Urantia Book is a collection of papers. Both books speak of the origin of mortals on this planet. Both discuss our relationship with God. Both contain some information about Jesus’ life and teachings. In the view of many Christians, the New Testament is just an update to the Old Testament. Some who read The Urantia Book may regard it as a supplement to the Bible or see it as a “third testament.” From a spiritual point of view this may be true. A critical evaluation of both books, however, indicates they are written on different conceptual levels. One obvious difference is that the Bible is a prescientific document. It was written by people who believed the world was flat and who had no idea that the stars are distant suns. The Urantia Book, on the other hand, is in harmony with both 20th century science and the teachings of Jesus.
The Urantia Book speaks of Jesus’ mission here as the Fourth Epochal Revelation to our planet. The book identifies itself as the Fifth Epochal Revelation. Thus, the book could be considered in a certain sense a supplement to the teachings of Jesus. It should be noted, however, that the teachings Jesus presented to the people of his time were in their idiom, using examples primarily from their herder/agrarian culture to teach them eternal spiritual truths. He did not attempt to enlarge their concepts of the material nature of the universe. First of all, his was a spiritual mission; secondly, the people were not ready for such an expansion of knowledge. But now, nearly 2000 years later, we are in the midst of a continuing scientific revolution and it is appropriate to have an expanded revelation that treats the material and spiritual natures of the universe in a holistic fashion. This is exactly what The Urantia Book does.
What is needed in the 20th and 21 st centuries is a philosophy and reality view that will restore the credibility of the spiritual, while at the same time recognizing the validity of the theories and observations of science.
In the past several hundred years, science and religion have not always had a cordial relationship. The church attempted to cling to the outdated concepts of a prescientific era while trying simultaneously to suppress the sometimes disturbing new insights being forced upon them by science. But science was not to be denied. As soon as religion lost the power of the state to enforce its edicts, science bloomed and prevailed. The scale has tipped so far in the direction of science that it is nearly a religion in our materialistic age. Many today look to science for answers to questions such as the origin of life or how to prevent or end suffering. The realm of the spirit is suspect. The atmosphere that was once full of angels now contains only such things as radio waves, visible light waves, and satellites. What is needed in the 20th and 21 st centuries is a philosophy and reality view that will restore the credibility of the spiritual, while at the same time recognizing the validity of the theories and observations of science. Such a view of reality should not only elevate science and religion, but should also show their interrelatedness. The Urantia Book offers such a view. Further, it delineates how the two pursuits can be balanced and harmonized by philosophy.
When considering the science and cosmology of the book, it should be noted that the authors had certain restrictions placed on them regarding what they could reveal to us. On UB 101:4.6 we are told by the revelators, “The laws of revelation hamper us greatly by their proscription of the impartation of unearned knowledge…We are not at liberty to anticipate the scientific discoveries of a thousand years.” So, what can they tell us in this area? The authors inform us that they can discuss known or about-to-be-known facts. Of course, “about-to-be-known” implies a relatively short time period for us, but how long is it for beings who existed before mortals appeared on earth? The authors of the papers seem to imply that this time period is less than a thousand years. We can get some idea of how far the authors were permitted to project by comparing the concepts that they have included in the papers with current theories of our scientists. The inclusion in the book of scientific concepts that will soon be outdated raises a serious question. Does the credibility of science in the book reflect on the validity of the spiritual concepts in the book?
The authors of The Urantia Book make it quite clear that the cosmology and science in the book are in a quite different category than are its spiritual concepts. On UB 101:4.6 we read, “The cosmology of these revelations is not inspired… While divine or spiritual insight is a gift, human wisdom must evolve.” The authors further inform us on the same page, “…within a few short years, many of our statements regarding the physical sciences will stand in need of revision in consequence of additional scientific developments and new discoveries.” It is clear that the spiritual concepts in the book must stand on their own merit. But if a portion of the science will soon be obsolete, of what value is that portion to us? On UB 101:4.6, the authors tell us that the scientific ideas "are of immense value in that they at least transiently clarify knowledge by:
How well does the science and cosmology of The Urantia Book fulfill these five purposes? To answer this question, it will be helpful to examine the science presented in the book and its correlation (or lack thereof) with our present scientific knowledge.
For purposes of comparison, the relationship between the science and cosmology presented in The Urantia Book and the theories current in science today can be divided into seven categories. As a preface to what follows, note that the Urantia Papers were received in 1934 and 1935, but the book was not published until 1955 .
The first category encompasses scientific concepts that were considered valid at the time the Urantia Papers were received, and are still considered valid. An example of a concept in this category is the presence in space of calcium that has migrated out of stars. Calcium was the first material discovered in free space by astronomers. There are many other examples of concepts in the book in the first category.
The authors of The Urantia Book make it quite clear that the cosmology and science in the book are in a quite different category than are its spiritual concepts.
The second category is science that was outdated quite soon after the book was published but which agreed with scientific theory at the time the Urantia Papers were received. This second category is of special interest because there may be an unrevealed purpose in including this sort of science in the book. There are two good candidates in this second category. One of these is the distance to the Andromeda galaxy. On UB 15:4.7 of the book we are told that the light we see from this galaxy took one million years to get here, yet today astronomers have good reason to set the distance to this galaxy at over two million light years. At the time the papers were received, however, astronomers believed this galaxy to be only one million light years away. Another example of second category science concepts concerns the planet Mercury. A statement on UB 57:6.2 informs us that the planet Mercury keeps the same face to the sun as it revolves around it. In fact, Mercury rotates about 1.5 times for each revolution around the sun. This was found in the 1960’s by radar studies, but at the time the papers were received and at the time the book was published, astronomers believed that Mercury kept the same face to the sun. Another possible member of the number two category is the “one hundred elements” puzzle. The Urantia Book seems to say that there can be only 100 elements, yet today science claims to have found over 120 elements. A few subtleties may qualify the elements above number 100 in a way that excludes them from consideration as elements, but these subtleties have yet to be found by our scientists. It may be possible to explain away the apparent conflict by noting that science had discovered less than 100 elements by the time the Urantia Papers were received. Perhaps the authors were not permitted to go beyond concepts for which a theory or number already existed.
The third category includes science that did not agree with the scientific theory current at the time the papers were received, but which has since been validated by new scientific findings. An example of this category concerns plate tectonics and continental drift. In an issue of the Six-O-Six newsletter from Australia, Dr. Ken Glasziou discusses the history of the theory of continental drift in an article entitled “The Second Prediction.” He relates that the theory was proposed in 1912 by Wegener, but was generally discredited until the 1960’s when examination of geological processes in the sea floor confirmed the concept of continental drift. The Urantia Book speaks of the single super continent that some scientists have called “Pangea.” The book says that this continent broke apart, forming the continents of today. The book thus supports a theory which was discredited at the time the papers were received.
In the fourth category are scientific facts for which there were either no theories or theories not validated by research before the papers were received, but which have been since discovered and/or validated by scientific research. In another article, “Science and The Urantia Book”, by Dr. Glasziou, several ideas in this category are mentioned. These are the neutrinos a supernova creates, the strong nuclear force, and neutron stars.
The Urantia Book speaks of the single super continent that some scientists have called “Pangea.” The book says that this continent broke apart, forming the continents of today. The book thus supports a theory which was discredited at the time the papers were received.
The fifth category of scientific concepts in the book are those that are part of an ongoing controversy, with some scientists holding theories that agree with the book, and some holding opposing views. The best known of this category is the theory of evolution. Until recently, Darwin’s concept of natural selection was the only theory of evolution accepted by most biologists and other scientists. In the past decade, however, a few scientists have been proposing a different idea that they call punctuated evolution. This theory supposes that evolution is not a gradual process of small changes accumulating to create a new species, but rather a process with new species appearing as a result of rapid and profound changes in existing species. In fact, this is exactly the concept that The Urantia Book teaches regarding evolution. It has the beauty of explaining the so called “missing links”, or transitional forms. They aren’t missing; they never existed!
The sixth category of science in the book is closely related to the fifth category. In the sixth category there are concepts that disagree with current scientific theories. The most popular theory of modern cosmology is the Big Bang. The Urantia Book presents a quite different concept for the origin of the universe. In the Big Bang scheme, the universe resulted from the explosion of and subsequent expansion of a small, unbelievably dense cosmic egg. If God’s hand is seen at all in this, it is only as initiator of the cosmic egg. The only uniformity in the Big Bang universe is the uniform expansion. Everything else happens by random chance. While there is apparent disorder, the book states that the universe evolves in accordance with a plan. Much as apparently random mutations produced a progression of higher life forms culminating in mortal will creatures, so too is the universe passing through stages toward some state of relative perfection in the far distant future. While the Big Bang theory of the origin of the universe seems currently to be on very solid ground, its foundations may not be as solid as they appear.
The key evidence for the Big Bang theory rest on the concept of the red shift. Because of red shift observations, astronomers decided that the universe is flying apart due to some immense explosion that they labeled the “Big Bang.” This supposedly happened 15 to 17 billion years ago. If the red shift as evidence of the expansion theory is invalidated, the Big Bang theory is in big trouble. In fact, there are several astronomers who are questioning the idea that the red shift of distant galaxies and other objects is due solely to the speed with which they are flying away from us. The dissenters feel that part of the measured red shift may be due to a cause other than the speed of recession. The Urantia Book states quite clearly that part of the red shift observed for distant bodies is in fact due to a cause other than speed of recession. It also reveals that there is some expansion due to a phenomenon known as space respiration. This phenomenon is not due to a Big Bang; it is a periodic billion year long cycle of limited expansion followed by limited contraction. If the few scientists who are examining other causes of red shift prove their position, the field of astronomy will be greatly shaken, and new theories of the origin of the universe will have to be considered. Perhaps these new theories will converge on The Urantia Book point of view.
The seventh and final category contains those scientific concepts in the book for which there are no current scientific theories. One of the most significant concepts in this category is that of the ultimaton. We are informed that this particle is more basic than the electron. In fact, the ultimaton is the most basic particle, according to the book. If we could dissociate an ultimaton, we would find that it was composed not of smaller particles, but of a primal form of energy. Science currently considers the electron itself to be a basic particle of a group of particles known as leptons. Quarks are considered by physicists to be basic building blocks of other particles such as protons and neutrons. The Urantia Book does not mention quarks, but they could conceivably be conglomerations of ultimatons.
On the surface, prediction of the ultimaton and other concepts in this category may seem to be a sort of scientific prophecy. The authors of the papers say that they are permitted to discuss known or about-to-be-known facts. It is possible that we will discover or predict the ultimaton in the next few decades, so it could conceivably be called an about-tobe-known fact. Though much of the particle research today concerns the quark, a few physicists have wistfully wondered when the next smaller particle will be discovered.
There is a temptation to look at facts in the third and fourth categories and cite these as proof of the validity or even the infallibility of The Urantia Book. We need consider only the concepts in the second category, however, to see that facts do not support this conclusion. In fact, we might well ask ourselves why the authors opted to include such items as the rotation of Mercury and the distance to the Andromeda galaxy. They don’t seem to serve any of the five purposes previously listed. Could it be that the authors deliberately included science and cosmology that would soon be outdated to prevent claims of infallibility for the book? Considering our predilection for undue reverence toward so called holy books, this possibility might be considered.
No doubt the science and cosmology in the book have an importance in their own right, but science is only one third of the interrelated triad which includes philosophy and religion. Historically there has been conflict between scientists and religionists. What is the proper relationship between the two? How can the apparent conflicts be resolved? What is the larger view which will unify science and religion? The Urantia Book states their complementary relationship in a number of ways. The most concise description is that science, philosophy, and religion concern themselves respectively with things, meanings, and values. Meanings are derived from things which in turn suggest values; and meanings are also rooted in values which condition things. Philosophy stands as a link between science and religion, as the interpreter of science to religion and religion to science. The important fact is that these three human activities are related; they concern themselves with three different aspects of the same eternal reality. The scientist is studying the laws of the universe, which are the habits of the impersonal nature of God. The philosopher is trying to discern the meaning of the universe, which is the meaning with which God endowed it. The religionist attempts to find and establish a relationship with the personal nature of God. All who search for factual laws, philosophic meanings, and personal religious experience therefore search for the same eternal reality-God. On infinite and eternal levels all aspects of Reality are one, but on our finite level diversity appears. Like those who cannot see the forest for the trees, we cannot see the unity existing at infinite and eternal levels because we are finite and therefore have limited vision; but as we grow spiritually and intellectually during our eternal careers, our vision will expand. As Paul said, “For now we see as in a mirror dimly, but then face to face.” (I Cor. 13:12)
Richard Bain is an electrical engineer and editor of “Cosmic Reflections.” He is a long time student of The Urantia Book.