© 2005 Philip Calabrese, Ph.D.
© 2005 The Christian Fellowship of Students of The Urantia Book
| The Challenge ( Part II ) | Spring 2005 — Index | Significant Books: “Astrobiology: The Origins of Life and the Death of Darwinism” by Rhawn Joseph |
“… revelation does synthesize the apparently divergent sciences of nature and the theology of religion into a consistent and logical universe philosophy, a co-ordinated and unbroken explanation of both science and religion, thus creating a harmony of mind and satisfaction of spirit which answers in human experience those questionings of the mortal mind which craves to know how the Infinite works out his will and plans in matter, with minds, and on spirit.” (The Urantia Book, UB 101:2.1)
This paper is addressed mainly to people who already believe in The Urantia Book as divine revelation, believers who wish to get a clearer and more complete idea of the meaning and significance of the book’s own disclaimers of being infallible, errorless, or necessarily “inspired”. So in this paper we shall assume that The Urantia Book is what it purports to be and see where that leads.
(In another paper for the upcoming IC’05 conference dealing with the scientific credibility of The Urantia Book I hope to address skeptical outsiders and non-believing insiders, folks who think that The Urantia Book could have been written by human beings.)
Here I will rebut various critiques frequently heard against the scientific significance of The Urantia Book coming from supposed believers or partial believers and repeatedly published in secondary Urantia publications. Since they have been published so many times as part of what has been called a “de-mystification of The Urantia Book campaign” it hardly seems necessary to quote them again here. In that regard, were I to believe The Urantia Book has as many obvious errors as some supposed believers think, then I would have to regard it as a dangerous fraud, definitely not what it purports to be. Let us view these well-publicized critiques of The Urantia Book’s science in light of the Book’s own statements and the implications of those statements.
One benign critique from inside the believer community cautions all believers against “Urantia fundamentalism,” which would be a belief that The Urantia Book is absolutely true or that it has no errors. This concern is valid, but often exaggerated in the present Urantia Book reading community since no believers are claiming The Urantia Book is absolutely true.
“To become fetishes, words had to be considered inspired, and the invocation of supposed divinely inspired writings led directly to the establishment of the authority of the church, …” (UB 88:2.10) And for such reasons some people worry about “Urantia Fundamentalism,” but their concern is premature.
One of the characteristics of fundamentalism is a refusal to change one’s doctrine or interpretation. But as long as one is honestly ready to acknowledge better ideas and interpretations, there is no danger of succumbing to fundamentalism of any kind. Here on the way to Rome Jesus explained it thusly:
“All static, dead, concepts are potentially evil. The finite shadow of relative and living truth is continually moving. Static concepts invariably retard science, politics, society, and religion. Static concepts may represent a certain knowledge, but they are deficient in wisdom and devoid of truth. But do not permit the concept of relativity so to mislead you that you fail to recognize the co-ordination of the universe under the guidance of the cosmic mind, and its stabilized control by the energy and spirit of the Supreme.” (UB 130:4.15)
Only evolving thoughts can keep up with living experience. No fixed English words can fully capture the infinity and eternity being experienced by any person living at this moment. How could words on a page ever fully represent living experience, living reality? They can’t. Nor is the human mind able to fully grasp the infinity and eternity of the cosmos. The words will always have to change as the concept of our experience is more clearly conceived. Therefore non-changing, non-growing “fundamentalism” is never justified.
How could words on a page ever fully represent living experience, living reality? They can’t. Nor is the human mind able to fully grasp the infinity and eternity of the cosmos. The words will always have to change as the concept of our experience is more clearly conceived. Therefore non-changing, non-growing “fundamentalism” is never justified.
This warning is altogether appropriate because it applies in the present and will also apply in the distant future, as it has applied in the past, to all written texts. It is part of the human condition of being temporal and finite and therefore unable to completely grasp infinity and eternity due to limitations of mind and language. Therefore must language grow — change — accommodate new experience.
Nevertheless, this change is a slow process over decades and centuries, even millennia; authoritative, progressive scientific language does not become outdated quickly “in a few short years” or “in a very short time.” So this is not an issue that should concern those of us now discussing The Urantia Book in 2005 barely 50 years after it’s initial publication. It is rather for those that will read it 200, 500 or 1000 years from now after new discoveries and new language make some Urantia Book statements less precise or conceptually less clear than our science will then allow. Nevertheless, still other scientific statements in The Urantia Book will last very much longer without needing revision.
“The great advance made in Buddhist philosophy consisted in its comprehension of the relativity of all truth. Through the mechanism of this hypothesis Buddhists have been able to reconcile and correlate the divergencies within their own religious scriptures as well as the differences between their own and manyothers. It was taught that the small truth was for little minds, the large truth for great minds.” (UB 94:11.4)
If all human concepts must grow then all our human concepts are relative, but we can still imagine relatively absolute concepts, concepts that capture something of the absolute in a relative context.
Still another critique from supposed believers refers to the numerous differences between contemporary science and The Urantia Book’s cosmology as Urantia Book“errors.” Supposedly, all or most of The Urantia Book’s science and cosmology is already outdated, merely early 20th century science (because the revelators were not permitted to reveal “unearned” or pre-mature knowledge). I will show that this contention is false by exhibiting passages that demonstrate that some new and long-lasting scientific knowledge was allowed, and some was even mandated. Other information, although relatively transient in comparison to “ages upon ages”, is still of “immense value” to scientists, if they would read it. However, almost all of our scientists have still to notice the “immense” scientific value of The Urantia Book.
Some people first misinterpret numerous differences between contemporary science and The Urantia Book as obvious Urantia Book errors, and then promote the deceptive idea that these presumed errors must have been purposely included as “time bombs” designed to ensure that The Urantia Book would not be canonized or made into a fetish! Another reason offered for supposedly putting in false science is that the Revelators were forbidden to answer but didn’t want to say so.
(This “time bombs” misinterpretation seems almost diabolically conceived as it confuses and insidiously undermines the very credibility of the superhuman authors and their writing with a potentially disarming acknowledgement that they were in fact superhuman! In other words, these misguided believers say, "yes The Urantia Book was authored by higher order beings of the universe and superuniverse, and even Paradise, … but they told us scientific lies (I’m not talking about imprecise language here) supposedly because they were forbidden to reveal unearned knowledge in their portrayal of the truth. How terribly misleading! Does this sound like a higher universe you’d like to belong to, or have allegiance to? These debilitating contentions represent a cruel distortion of this wonderful Book that expertly weaves matter, mind, spirit and personality into a seamless cosmic fabric. It could not really do this so well with science already filled with many obvious errors, not for this scientist.)
Supposedly, all or most of The Urantia Book’s science and cosmology is already outdated, merely early 20th century science (because the revelators were not permitted to reveal “unearned” or pre-mature knowledge). I will show that this contention is false by exhibiting passages that demonstrate that some new and long-lasting scientific knowledge was allowed, and some was even mandated.
We learn as scientists or from The Urantia Book that “In knowledge alone there can never be absolute certainty, only increasing probability of approximation.” (UB 102:2.4)
Therefore we scientists often give an interval of possibilities and then estimate the probability that the true or observed value is within this range of possibilities. This principle of the precision of a scientific statement is crucial to an adequate appreciation of The Urantia Book’s scientific statements. How small is the range and how high is the probability of observing the value of the relevant variable within that range of possibilities? The smaller the range and the higher the probability the more precise is the statement. The implied precision of The Urantia Book’s words and expressions needs to be assessed from the context in order to adequately interpret its scientific statements.
If clear, crisp, unequivocal statements are made then they should be accurate, not false. But if fuzzy words like “roughly,” “upwards of” or “not so much bigger as before,” are used, then the implied precision is much less, and only rough approximations are being stated, not precise values.
We are informed that some revelation is essential to human understanding because human metaphysics is incapable on its own of adequately grasping the morontia point of view. (UB 101:2.2) When we carefully examine the descriptions of The Urantia Book’s revelatory mandate we find that the Revelators identified three categories of scientific information:
So let us now carefully analyze the “limitations of revelation” as expressed in The Urantia Book, broadening the context at times to construct a fuller understanding of the likely meanings and interpretations to be associated with these oft-quoted passages.
I will interrupt the relevant quotations to point out some implications that might have passed by unnoticed in earlier readings.
“FOREWORD: In the minds of the mortals of Urantia — that being the name of your world — there exists great confusion respecting the meaning of such terms as God, divinity, and deity. Human beings are still more confused and uncertain about the relationships of the divine personalities designated by these numerous appellations. Because of this conceptual poverty associated with so much ideational confusion, I have been directed to formulate this introductory statement in explanation of the meanings which should be attached to certain word symbols as they may be hereinafter used in those papers which the Orvonton corps of truth revealers have been authorized to translate into the English language of Urantia. It is exceedingly difficult to present enlarged concepts and advanced truth, in our endeavor to expand cosmic consciousness and enhance spiritual perception, when we are restricted to the use of a circumscribed language of the realm.” [The Urantia Book, 1955, UB 0:0.1]
Note that among the stated goals of this author of the Forward, a superuniverse Divine Counselor, are to “present enlarged concepts” and to “expand cosmic consciousness.” These cosmological goals are important to the main revelatory goal of presenting “advanced truth” and “enhancing spiritual perception.” “But our mandate admonishes us to make every effort to convey our meanings by using the word symbols of the English tongue. We have been instructed to introduce new terms only when the concept to be portrayed finds no terminology in English which can be employed to convey such a new concept partially or even with more or less distortion of meaning.”
Note, that when the concept to be presented had not found an adequate human expression the author was “instructed” to introduce new terms in order to describe the mandated spiritual truths. This was an authorization to provide some cosmological instruction.
“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…” (Forward, Acknowledgment, UB 0:12.11)
Note that the author is mandated to “attempt” a 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 highestexisting 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)
So, the author may “resort” to pure revelation when the “concept of presentation” has no adequate human expression. So not just early 20th century science was allowed. Some more advanced concepts were supposed to be presented, because they were deemed necessary to explain the spiritual truths to be revealed. These more adequate descriptions in The Urantia Book of such advanced scientific concepts must be fairly accurate or else The Urantia Book is not what it purports to be.
“Successive planetary revelations of divine truth invariably embrace the highest existing concepts of spiritual values as a part of the new and enhanced co-ordination of planetary knowledge. Accordingly, in making these presentations about God and his universe associates, we have selected as the basis of these papers more than one thousand human concepts representing the highestand mostadvanced planetary knowledge of spiritual values and universe meanings. Wherein these human concepts, assembled from the God-knowing mortals of the past and the present, are inadequate to portray the truth as we are directed to reveal it, we will unhesitatingly supplement them, for this purpose drawing upon our own superior knowledge of the reality and divinity of the Paradise Deities and their transcendent residential universe.” (UB 0:12.12)
So, again, to portray the truth as directed, the Revelators “unhesitatingly” supplemented inadequate human concepts with superhumanly derived ones. If we were supposed to be told a spiritual truth, that would allow being told some essential cosmology, preferably but not necessarily humanly expressed, as a basis for understanding that truth. This is why certain sections of The Urantia Book seem to discuss far advanced cosmology. They were necessary for an adequate grasp of the spiritual truth being revealed.
“We are fully cognizant of the difficulties of our assignment; we recognize the impossibility of fully translating the language of the concepts of divinity and eternity into the symbols of the language of the finite concepts of the mortal mind. But we know that there dwells within the human mind a fragment of God, and that there sojourns with the human soul the Spirit of Truth; and we further know that these spirit forces conspire to enable material man to grasp the reality of spiritual values and to comprehend the philosophy of universe meanings. But even more certainly we know that these spirits of the Divine Presence are able to assist man in the spiritual appropriation of all truth contributory to the enhancement of the ever-progressing reality of personal religious experience — Godconsciousness.” (UB 0:12.13)
[Indited by an Orvonton Divine Counselor, Chief of the Corps of Superuniverse Personalities assigned to portray on Urantia the truth concerning the Paradise Deities and the universe of universes.] (UB 0:12.13-14)
Note here again that the authors were mandated to present both the Paradise Deities and the universe of universes. And this is the statement of an Orvonton Divine Counselor, the head of the superuniverse Revelators of the Urantia Papers. So the divine counselor’s statement must serve to clarify what will seem to be a somewhat less refined statement by a Nebadon Melchizedek.
“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. Ifmind cannotfathom 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 mindcreated 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.”
“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.”
“In order to facilitate mortal comprehension of the universe of universes, the diverse levels of cosmic reality have been designated as finite, absonite, and absolute.” (UB 115:1.1-3)
Note again the intermediate goal of The Urantia Book to facilitate mortal comprehension of the universe of universes and levels of reality.
“The absolute cosmos is conceptually without limit; to define the extent and nature of this primal reality is to place qualifications upon infinity and to attenuate the pure concept of eternity. The idea of the infinite-eternal, the eternal-infinite, is unqualified in extent and absolute in fact. There is no language in the past, present, or future of Urantia adequate to express the reality of infinity or the infinity of reality. Man, a finite creature in an infinite cosmos, must content himself with distorted reflections and attenuated conceptions of that limitless, boundless, never-beginning, never-ending existence the comprehension of which is really beyond his ability.” (UB 115:3.1)
So language is always somewhat inadequate to express eternal reality.
“Mind can never hope to grasp the concept of an Absolute without attempting first to break the unity of such a reality. Mind is unifying of all divergencies, but in the very absence of such divergencies, mind finds no basis upon which to attempt to formulate understanding concepts.” (UB 115:3.2)
Mind frames are necessary to think but always falsify reality to a lesser or greater degree. Infinity is beyond the complete grasp of the human mind. But such limitations of human understanding have already been adequately discussed under “Urantia Fundamentalism.”
We now come to the section most often quoted when authors exaggerate the limitations of Revelation. It was written by a local universe Melchizedek, before a superuniverse Divine Counselor wrote the much more delicately balanced statements of the Forward, which therefore must qualify this Melchizedek’s words and statements, as the Forward itself declares about all of the subsequent Papers.
I will also point out how this Melchizedek’s whole statement must be taken into account to consistently interpret his words and expressions in various individual paragraphs that are often quoted without adequate regard to their context.
“Because your world is generally ignorant of origins, even of physical origins, it has appeared to be wise from time to time to provide instruction in cosmology. And always has this made trouble for the future.” (UB 101:4.1)
Note: the author admits they are again providing “instruction in cosmology,” but that this makes trouble for the future. He immediately informs us of the scientific fact that we are generally scientifically ignorant of physical origins, Paradise for instance. So here he is giving us this information about physical origins before we learn of it on our own.
“The laws of revelation hamper us greatly by their proscription of the impartation of unearned or premature knowledge.” (UB 101:4.1)
What is unearned or premature knowledge? He doesn’t really define it. It will become clear that a lot of new cosmic information (revelation) was apparently neither unearned nor premature.
“Any cosmology presented as a part of revealed religion is destined to be outgrown in a very short time. Accordingly, future students of such a revelation are tempted to discard any element of genuine religious truth it may contain because they discover errors on the face of the associated cosmologies therein presented.” (UB 101:4.1)
Here, “in a very short time” is a fuzzy term whose definition must come by comparison with other time periods mentioned which give contextual meaning to “in a very short time.” Notice therefore that the very next sentence refers to “future students” suggesting at least students who are not contemporaries of present day students of the Book. So “a very short time” could easily be longer than a lifetime, or two.
“Mankind should understand that we who participate in the revelation of truth are very rigorously limited by the instructions of our superiors. We are not at liberty to anticipate the scientific discoveries of a thousand years.” (UB 101:4.2)
Does he mean anticipate “most,” “some” or “all” of the future discoveries in the next 1000 years? It must not be “all” because then there would be no instruction in cosmology at all. He does not offer any distinctions in this sentence.
“Revelators must act in accordance with the instructions which form a part of the revelation mandate. We see no way of overcoming this difficulty, either now or at any future time. We full well know that, while the historic facts and religious truths of this series of revelatory presentations will stand on the records of the ages to come, 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.” (UB 101:4.2)
Note first that he refers to “many,” but not “all” of their scientific statements. Next, concerning these “many” statements regarding the physical sciences, note that the expression “within a few short years” is a fuzzy period of time. And of course one year is really no shorter than the next. So “a few short years” can only be adequately interpreted in the context of, and in comparison with, the other time period mentioned. Here that contrasting period is “ages to come,” which is thousands of years! So a “few short years” could easily be 100 or 200 years or more, allowing time for a programmed slow instruction in cosmology to take place. New students and scientific developments don’t happen in “a few short years” if “few” means less than 10 years. This process must take many decades just to be noticeable unless and until some spectacular corroborated predictions occur that attract many more scientists to The Urantia Book.
“These new developments we even now foresee, but we are forbidden to include such humanly undiscovered facts in the revelatory records.” (UB 101:4.2)
So, this Nebadon Melchizedek can foresee some of our scientific discoveries in the next 1000 years, which will make some of their present statements about the physical sciences need revision. I can imagine that some time in the next 1000 years we will finally start to conceive time as the moving image of a fixed Paradise center, and space as a moving image, a fleeting shadow of Paradise realities. That will make many of the scientific or cosmological statements need revision into the new Paradise center framework. But even then there will be spiritual truths in The Urantia Book no less valuable than today.
“Let it be made clear that revelations are not necessarily inspired. The cosmology of these revelations is not inspired. It is limited by our permission for the co-ordination and sorting of present-day knowledge. While divine or spiritual insight is a gift, human wisdom must evolve.” (UB 101:4.2)
By “inspired” is meant that the words are regarded as coming from God or from the Spirit and so may become fetishes like the canons of some religious organizations are thought to be absolute or infallible. That would be trouble for the future. So while the revelations are sometimes inspired, the associated cosmology is never “inspired” because it is limited by the use of human knowledge whenever possible.
I can imagine that some time in the next 1000 years we will finally start to conceive time as the moving image of a fixed Paradise center, and space as a moving image, afleeting shadow of Paradise realities. That will make many of the scientific or cosmological statements need revision into the new Paradise center framework. But even then there will be spiritual truths in The Urantia Book no less valuable than today.
This is often taken as the end of this quotation, but important statements that further qualify the ones just quoted follow it shortly.
“Truth is always a revelation: autorevelation when it emerges as a result of the work of the indwelling Adjuster; epochal revelation when it is presented by the function of some other celestial agency, group, or personality.” “In the last analysis, religion is to be judged by its fruits, according to the manner and the extent to which it exhibits its own inherent and divine excellence.” (UB 101:4.3)
Now this Melchizedek further qualifies his previous statements about the limitations of revelation by first elaborating on the meaning of “inspired,” allowing that truth can be “relatively inspired” even though revelation is always spiritual:
“Truth maybe but relatively inspired, even though revelation is invariably a spiritual phenomenon. While statements with reference to cosmology are never inspired, such revelations are of immense value in that they at least transiently clarify knowledge by:”
“1. The reduction of confusion by the authoritative elimination of error.” (UB 101:4.5-6)
So statements of cosmology, while not “inspired,” are still “of immense value,” by reducing confusion and transiently clarifying cosmological knowledge. Compared to the spiritual truths that will be of record in the “ages to come”, thousands upon thousands of years, these statements of cosmology will need revision in a relatively few years, (100-200) say. While these statements may be “transiently” clarifying, they still are supposed to be “authoritative” for a relatively short period of time compared to the ages during which the writings will be of record. Again, “transiently” is a fuzzy period of time that can be interpreted only by the context in which it is found. Compared to ages to come, even a few hundred years is “transient.”
“2. The co-ordination of known or about-to-beknown facts and observations.” (UB 101:4.7)
Observations such as that the universe is flat and that hundreds of millions of whirling star systems exist in outer space were unknown by our scientists in 1955, but now they have discovered the flatness and they know about a “great wall” of galaxies.
“3. The restoration of important bits of lost knowledge concerning epochal transactions in the distant past.” (UB 101:4.8)
Other facts of historical significance, such as the whereabouts of first garden of Eden, were once known by human beings, but lost. This lost knowledge alone is of immense scientific value.
“4. The supplying of information which will fill in vital missing gaps in otherwise earned knowledge.” (UB 101:4.9)
So instead of waiting for us to find these vital “missing gaps” and fill them in ourselves, the Revelators were permitted, and sometimes even instructed, to fill them in for us, thereby greatly speeding up the rate of evolutionary progress. These gaps in our knowledge were not considered unearned or premature knowledge for us.
“5. Presenting cosmic data in such a manner as to illuminate the spiritual teachings contained in the accompanying revelation."So cosmic data is presented albeit with the purpose of illuminating the spiritual teachings.” (UB 101:4.10)
In summary then, the Melchizedek who says many of The Urantia Book’s scientific and cosmological statements will need revision in “a few short years” or “in a very short time” also says that statements of cosmology, while not “inspired”, are still “of immense value” by reducing confusion and transiently clarifying cosmological knowledge. Compared to the spiritual truths that will be of record in the “ages to come” — thousands of years — “many” statements of cosmology will need revision in a relatively few years. That could be 100-200 years. While cosmology statements may be “transiently” clarifying, they still are supposed to be “authoritative” during a relatively short period of time compared to the ages during which the writings will be of record. But since few contemporary scientists have had their confusion reduced by the perspective of The Urantia Book, and since contemporary science does not yet recognize any authoritative elimination of error represented by the cosmology of The Urantia Book, this stated value of The Urantia Book must still be mostly an unrealized potential. Hardly any professional cosmologists take it seriously, or they’re hiding the fact if they do.
Compared to the spiritual truths that will be of record in the “ages to come” — thousands of years — “many” statements of cosmologywillneed revision in a relatively few years. That could be 100-200 years. While cosmology statements may be “transiently” clarifying, they still are supposed to be “authoritative” during a relatively short period of time compared to the ages during which the writings will be of record.
“I will, however, endeavor to lessen conceptual confusion by suggesting the advisability of adopting the following classification for cosmic force, emergent energy, and universe powerphysical energy:” (UB 42:2.2)
So the author of Paper 42, a Mighty Messenger writing at the request of Gabriel, is “lessening conceptual confusion” and redefining words used by physicists to describe the scientific universe. Can he possibly do that with early 20th century science, as some have characterized the science in The Urantia Book?
“The quantity of energy taken in or given out when electronic or other positions are shifted is always a ”quantum“ or some multiple thereof, but the vibratory or wavelike behavior of such units of energy is wholly determined by the dimensions of the material structures concerned. Such wavelike energy ripples are 860 times the diameters of the ultimatons, electrons, atoms, or other units thus performing. The never-ending confusion attending the observation of the wave mechanics of quantum behavior is due to the superimposition ofenergy waves: Two crestscan combine to make a double-height crest, while a crest and a trough may combine, thus producing mutual cancellation.” (UB 42:4.14)
So the author of Paper 42 claims to tell us why there is such “never ending” confusion concerning the interpretation of quantum wave mechanics. In fact he states here and elsewhere the scientific position that particles have diameters and that the waves are 860 times in wavelength as those diameters. In effect The Urantia Book states that the particles are not the waves that they make. This is still an open question in contemporary quantum mechanics and a minority position too, but it appears to be gaining support.
The Urantia Book’s account implies that the waves are reactions of the whole universe to local events. The Urantia Book goes on elsewhere (UB 86:2.3) to describe these unknown forces saying that our scientists are slow to realize that “reactions of existence appear between acts and their consequences.” Contemporary science recognizes no such “universe reactions of existence” to local events regarding such notions as “spooky action at a distance.”
The Urantia Book’s account implies that the waves are reactions of the whole universe to local events. The Urantia Book goes on elsewhere (UB 86:2.3) to describe these unknown forces saying that our scientists are slow to realize that “reactions of existence appear between acts and their consequences.” Contemporary science recognizes no such “universe reactions of existence” to local events regarding such notions as “spooky action at a distance.”
“Science may be physical, but the mind of the truth-discerning scientist is atonce supermaterial. Matter knows not truth, neither can it love mercy nor delight in spiritual realities. Moral convictions based on spiritual enlightenment and rooted in human experience are just as real and certain as mathematical deductions based on physical observations, but on another and higher level.” (UB 195:6.12)
Here the Mighty Messenger informs us of the supermaterial level associated with human mind, a higher moral level that is still just as mathematical as physics.
Next we hear from Jesus, according to The Urantia Book, about space and time. If these are not accurate then The Urantia Book must be a fraud; if they are accurate, then The Urantia Book must contain immensely valuable science, that will tempt some present and future students to claim that the cosmology is from God (inspired) and so therefore practically infallible and absolute. That would be trouble for the future. That will be the time to point out the disclaimers.
“There are seven different conceptions of space as it is conditioned by time. Space is measured by time, not time by space. The confusion of the scientist grows out of failure to recognize the realityof space. Space is notmerely an intellectual concept of the variation in relatedness of universe objects. Space is not empty, and the only thing man knows which can even partially transcend space is mind. Mind can function independently of the concept of the space-relatedness of material objects. Space is relatively and comparatively finite to all beings of creature status. The nearer consciousness approaches the awareness of seven cosmic dimensions, the more does the concept of potential space approach ultimacy. But the space potential is truly ultimate only on the absolute level.” (UB 130:7.6)
So here the The Urantia Book identifies the confusion and failure of our scientists to accept pure space as a reality, and non-empty. Have scientists yet discovered this? Just a few. And according to the midwayer authors, Jesus asserted that only mind can partially transcend space relatedness in human knowledge. This is still ahead of contemporary science.
“There is innate in matter and present in universal space a form of energy not known on Urantia. When this discovery is finally made, then will physicists feel that they have solved, almost at least, the mystery of matter.” (UB 42:1.3)
So here the Mighty Messenger writing for Gabriel, head of all created personalities in the local universe including all Melchizadeks, claims that a type of energy will “finally” be discovered on Urantia. This could be the wave energy of quantum mechanics. In any case, clearly a long delay is suggested before this scientific discovery is “finally” made. “And so will they have approached one step nearer the Creator; so will they have mastered one more phase of the divine technique; but in no sense will they have found God, neither will they have established the existence of matter or the operation of natural laws apart from the cosmic technique of Paradise and the motivating purpose of the Universal Father.”
So physicists will learn the “cosmic technique of Paradise.” What technique? They don’t yet even recognize the existence of a Paradise center, let alone its technique. But that may be coming soon with discoveries of quantum entanglement and “spooky action at a distance.”
So physicists will learn the “cosmic technique of Paradise.” What technique? They don’t yet even recognize the existence of a Paradise center, let alone its technique. But that may be coming soon with discoveries of quantum entanglement and “spooky action at a distance.”
“Subsequent to even still greater progress and further discoveries, after Urantia has advanced immeasurably in comparison with present knowledge, though you should gain control of the energy revolutions of the electrical units of matter to the extent of modifying their physical manifestations-even after all such possible progress, forever will scientists be powerless to create one atom of matter or to originate oneflash of energy or ever to add to matter that which we call life.” (UB 42:1.4)
Above, in line 39, the Mighty Messenger is not talking about 20th century science. He is talking about science far into the future after it has advanced “immeasurably in comparison with present knowledge,” and he even states flatly (and precisely) that “forever will scientists be powerless” to among other things “add to matter that which we call life.”
These are scientific statements of the impossibility of such knowledge or ability by human discovery. Here is a scientific statement that is intended to last for ages, not a “few short years” or need revision in “a very short time.” Otherwise The Urantia Book is not what it purports to be. If it makes precise statements, then they must be accurate.
In the next paragraph this Mighty Messenger lays out the transmutation of primordial space force through two stages of Paradise force organizers and power directors to the atomic stage of energy. The Urantia Book author is therefore talking about energy stages about which our scientists are not at all presently aware. But their revelation must have been considered essential for an adequate revelation of Paradise, where Jesus said he had once lived with his Father and our Father.
“It is indeed difficult to find suitable words in the English language whereby to designate and wherewith to describe the various levels of force andenergy — physical, mindal, or spiritual. These narratives cannot altogether follow your accepted definitions offorce, energy, and power. There is such paucity oflanguage that we must use these terms in multiple meanings. In this paper, for example, the word energy is used to denote all phases and forms of phenomenal motion, action, and potential, while force is applied to the pregravity, and power to the postgravity, stages of energy.” (UB 42:2.1)
The Mighty Messenger is obviously trying to explain energy evolution well beyond our present concepts and words.
(Look for the conclusion in the next issue of the Journal.)
Phil Calabrese is a professional mathematician and a reader of The Urantia Book since 1970. More biographical information will be included at the conclusion of this paper in the next issue of the Journal.
| The Challenge ( Part II ) | Spring 2005 — Index | Significant Books: “Astrobiology: The Origins of Life and the Death of Darwinism” by Rhawn Joseph |