© 2001 Jean Royer
© 2001 French-speaking Association of Readers of the Urantia Book
| The role of emotions in spiritual research | Le Lien Urantien — Issue 18 — Summer 2001 | Relaxation corner: Impressions of the future |
Law is life itself and not the rules of its conduct. Evil is a transgression of law, not a violation of the rules of conduct pertaining to life, which is the law. Falsehood is not a matter of narration technique but something premeditated as a perversion of truth. The creation of new pictures out of old facts, the restatement of parental life in the lives of offspring—these are the artistic triumphs of truth. The shadow of a hair’s turning, premeditated for an untrue purpose, the slightest twisting or perversion of that which is principle—these constitute falseness. But the fetish of factualized truth, fossilized truth, the iron band of so-called unchanging truth, holds one blindly in a closed circle of cold fact. One can be technically right as to fact and everlastingly wrong in the truth. (UB 48:6.33)
Let’s take two examples: Peter thinks he sees Jesus walking on the water, and tells him to walk on the water too. He ends up falling into the water. The story is found in Matthew 14: 22-32; Mark 6: 45-51; John 6: 16-21. We know that this is not factual. (cf. UB 152:4.1), but for Peter it is a truth, there is no falsehood. Let’s remember what falsehood is:
Law is life itself and not the rules of its conduct. Evil is a transgression of law, not a violation of the rules of conduct pertaining to life, which is the law. Falsehood is not a matter of narration technique but something premeditated as a perversion of truth. The creation of new pictures out of old facts, the restatement of parental life in the lives of offspring—these are the artistic triumphs of truth. The shadow of a hair’s turning, premeditated for an untrue purpose, the slightest twisting or perversion of that which is principle—these constitute falseness. But the fetish of factualized truth, fossilized truth, the iron band of so-called unchanging truth, holds one blindly in a closed circle of cold fact. One can be technically right as to fact and everlastingly wrong in the truth. (UB 48:6.33)
Second example: the resurrection.
The facts are there, and yet the apostles and the theologians who followed them were unable to arrive at the truth of the resurrection. We cannot really blame them, but nevertheless, someone decided to want to eliminate doubt in the mind of the reader of the gospels. The best way to convince is to throw down a challenge, global, that is to say addressing all the apostles in Luke (Cf. Luke 24.39) and particular, addressing the unbeliever by definition (Thomas) in John. (Cf. John 20.27). Jesus telling the apostles or Thomas to put their finger on his wounds is to convince those who doubt, and it is false.
But what about the Urantia Book? Does it always tell us the truth? Certainly not the factual truth. The Urantia Book has Jesus—and also, for example, Rodan—say many things that he never said. These are all speeches that begin with a warning like: we will freely translate his words into modern terminology [UB 130:1.4]. We can summarize and rephrase as follows, in modern language… [UB 144:4.1]. In all, about fifteen indications that what we are going to read is not what was really said.
So? Should we conclude that The Urantia Book practices falsehood? Of course not. It is not a question here of deceiving the reader, but of making him understand what Jesus said in modern language. We must understand these are the ideas, this is the general meaning, these are the values proposed, whereas in the gospel it is a question of adding a little personal touch. The difference is crucial. Who added these details? We do not know. But let us be careful not to want to promote The Urantia Book in a similar way, it is a temptation to which it is too easy to succumb.
Jean Royer
| The role of emotions in spiritual research | Le Lien Urantien — Issue 18 — Summer 2001 | Relaxation corner: Impressions of the future |