© 2004 Ken Glasziou
© 2004 The Brotherhood of Man Library
| Prophetic material and errors in Urantia revelation | Volume 11 - No. 3 — Index | Why is there both Error and Prophecy in the Urantia Revelation? |
The Papers’ authors describe the boundaries of the universe mandate for revelation–which include giving preference to the highest human concepts relating to any topic. They declare they have resorted to pure revelation only when there is no adequate previous presentation upon a particular topic by a human mind. They state that vast amounts of information were available to them both for the preparation of Parts 1-3 and for Part 4 of the Papers. Also we are informed that divine revelation, meaning infallible truth, is the exclusive possession of creator identities. Reference to The Urantia Book’s contents index shows that none of these authors were of that exalted status–thereby warning us that the Papers are the work of fallible beings. Hence they cannot legitimately be used as the foundation for a fundamentalist religion. (UB 101:4.1)
In formulating the succeeding presentations having to do with the portrayal of the character of the Universal Father and the nature of his Paradise associates, together with an attempted description of the perfect central universe and the encircling seven superuniverses, we are to be guided by the mandate of the superuniverse rulers which directs that we shall, in all our efforts to reveal truth and co-ordinate essential knowledge, give preference to the highest existing human concepts pertaining to the subjects to be presented. We may resort to pure revelation only when the concept of presentation has had no adequate previous expression by the human mind. (UB 0:12.11)
And from the author of Part 4, “The Life and Teachings of Jesus,” we have:
Acknowledgment: In carrying out my commission to restate the teachings and retell the doings of Jesus of Nazareth, I have drawn freely upon all sources of record and planetary information. My ruling motive has been to prepare a record which will not only be enlightening to the generation of men now living, but which may also be helpful to all future generations. From the vast store of information made available to me, I have chosen that which is best suited to the accomplishment of this purpose. As far as possible I have derived my information from purely human sources. Only when such sources failed, have I resorted to those records which are superhuman. When ideas and concepts of Jesus’ life and teachings have been acceptably expressed by a human mind, I invariably gave preference to such apparently human thought patterns. . . . (UB 121:8.12)
The authors have left no room for us to elevate their records to a divine infallibility status. Outside of Paradise, they inform us, “Truth is partial, relative, and progressive.” And so as to leave no stone unturned in our efforts to acquaint the new reader with what the authors themselves claim about their efforts to bring us enlightenment, we have been informed:
Partial, incomplete, and evolving intellects would be helpless in the master universe, would be unable to form the first rational thought pattern, were it not for the innate ability of all mind, high or low, to form a universe frame in which to think. If mind cannot fathom conclusions, if it cannot penetrate to true origins, then will such mind unfailingly postulate conclusions and invent origins that it may have a means of logical thought within the frame of these mind-created postulates. And while such universe frames for creature thought are indispensable to rational intellectual operations, they are, without exception, erroneous to a greater or lesser degree. (UB 115:1.1)
Conceptual frames of the universe are only relatively true; they are serviceable scaffolding which must eventually give way before the expansions of enlarging cosmic comprehension. The understandings of truth, beauty, and goodness, morality, ethics, duty, love, divinity, origin, existence, purpose, destiny, time, space, even Deity, are only relatively true. God is much, much more than a Father, but the Father is man’s highest concept of God. . . . Man must think in a mortal universe frame, but that does not mean that he cannot envision other and higher frames within which thought can take place. (UB 115:1.2)
What then was their purpose in giving us a 2000 page book if not to provide a true and reliable description of the universe in which we live? One answer is that any true and reliable account would have quickly be turned into an object of irrational reverence, obsessive devotion, even worship. This problem certainly arose with Adam and Eve, and with Melchizedek, who were all elevated to the status of Gods or demi-Gods by mortals of their time. The same problem occurred with Jesus who came to lead us into a knowledge of the Father, but we mortals quickly submerged his teachings by substituting the worship of Jesus himself. The Bible too has suffered the fate of becoming an object of worship.
In seeking to avoid this same fate, the authors have gone to great lengths to mix remarkable prophecy with obvious error, or sometimes subtle error. But they knew that, at least initially, they would have only limited success. Eventually the included error would dominate the responses of the new readers–and the real message, the facts about our personal relationship with the Father, and the spiritual nature of our real goals, would have to be selected out from the window dressing and presented in its pure form.
The religious challenge of this age is to those farseeing and forward-looking men and women of spiritual insight who will dare to construct a new and appealing philosophy of living out of the enlarged and exquisitely integrated modern concepts of cosmic truth, universe beauty, and divine goodness. Such a new and righteous vision of morality will attract all that is good in the mind of man and challenge that which is best in the human soul. (UB 2:7.10)
We are shaped and fashioned by what we love.
Goethe
| Prophetic material and errors in Urantia revelation | Volume 11 - No. 3 — Index | Why is there both Error and Prophecy in the Urantia Revelation? |