Comments on: A Revelation of Cosmic Evolution

By: Gene

Gene — Wed, 19 Jan 2011 04:08:18 +0000

Come on. Is this article and most of the attached posts a put-on, or what? Do people who are aware of Integral concepts REALLY take this Urantia book seriously? I feel like I should be checking to see if this is April 1stm or if I might be accidentally reading The Onion. But alas, no.

Urantia book:

“Gautama’s experience was tragic, however, in that he was an “orphan prophet” whose philosophy failed early on to envision the reality of a spiritual God.”

Really?

By: Nada

Nada — Tue, 18 Jan 2011 16:01:59 +0000

That’s a great point, Byron; that the Urantia Book “is a massive compendium of words.” It’s an imperative to remember that no matter how wise, informed or knowledgeable a written tome is, it’s expression is from a particular perspective,and therefore, is still a perspective informed either thru scholarship, direct experience or both,but no matter what the case, can only represent particularity, and hence, partiality. While meaning is infinite, language itself falls into syntaxical and sub-order rules of formation; it simply has to in order to make sense to the reader. This is why mystics and sages use metaphor(as do scientists)that is “pointing to” without literalizing the subject. Is the Urantia Book as metaporical as the Bible?(which is often taken to be literal) or does it provide a literal representation? I recommend reading those things that take a literal stance,like much of what came out of the “new age,” with a more discerning eye. Metaphor turns a person back onto themselves, and hopefully to the interior posture of Unknowing.

This is also a great reason to take up Integral Theory in which perspectives and research are lined-up, side-by-side with each other and scrutinized for similarities and differences. It can help anyone interested in the transformation of consciousness to take a “perspective on perspectives” in a more informed way. In this way, the fragmentation between perspectives is healed and rejoined in greater understanding of the One that is in/as the Many; perspectives are honored from all sides and a greater understanding of how we are informed by our contexts,conditioning and self-imposed limitations comes to the fore.

Thanks Again,
Linda Nada

By: Aliya

Aliya — Tue, 18 Jan 2011 14:48:49 +0000

And why should God experience something like evolution, a pure projection and illusion of the limited human mind?!
There is one thing very important to be understood – God’s reality does not include non existentiality, falsity and illusory staff. The Being of God’s Ultimate Reality has nothing to do with the false Non-being of the illusions.

By: Tim

Tim — Tue, 18 Jan 2011 11:50:24 +0000

Beautiful fiction.

Much like the graphic for this article.

By: Haven

Haven — Tue, 18 Jan 2011 10:15:23 +0000

How is it possible to believe in the Urantia book ?
It is the opposite of enlightenment !

By: Byron Belitsos

Byron Belitsos — Sun, 16 Jan 2011 23:40:43 +0000

I am grateful to all who commented. I especially liked when Dave Tucker quotes St Francis in Dave’s post above: “Preach the gospel at all times; when necessary, use words”. The Urantia Book is one key feature of the progressive unfolding of a planetary spiritual renaissance, but it is after all just a massive compendium of words. We truly need these revelatory words, but we also need deeds of love and compassionate action to restore justice and peace on our world (on planet Urantia, if you will). My prayer is that the Urantia teachings lead to such a result, sooner than later. (By the way, I pick up these sorts of themes at my blog, RadWisdom.com.) Again, thanks to all for your interest and commentary on my piece. –Byron

By: Madalyn

Madalyn — Sun, 16 Jan 2011 22:50:57 +0000

Thanks for doing what you do Byron and for putting out info on the Urantia material. You are a hero.
http://www.HealingOriginalSin.com
Madalyn

By: james olson

james olson — Sun, 16 Jan 2011 00:19:16 +0000

If God is inclusive, there is nothing that is not God, which suggests that God includes evolutionary aspects of reality. If God wishes to experience God’s creation, then God must wish to experience evolution. My number one rule is to never limit God by supposing God cannot or does not do something. To suggest that God does not experience evolution, limits God.

By: Aliya

Aliya — Sat, 15 Jan 2011 19:47:21 +0000

Thank you, Rhonda, for your advise:) Still, I can never become ineterested in human mind’s projections and illusions, it does not matter how skilfully the book auhtors managed the science fiction.
The way to God is rather the reverse – through your heart into your inner being not through your mind and its fantasies.

By: Fem Grey

Fem Grey — Sat, 15 Jan 2011 14:02:53 +0000

Judeo-christian anthropocentric gnosis for the space age.

The text reflects all the cultural bias of the 1950′s American south -Jesus, salvation, the angelic host and a no-uncertain put-down of great teachings such as Buddhism. It also denigrates what it euphimistically calls the ‘indigo race’ aka black people.

I’m sure people of Africa would be delighted to know what the celestial host thinks of them.

It’s an entertaining read as are many other ‘New Age’ fads and perhaps an improvement on many religous dogmas, but let’s not get too distracted by the metaphysical fireworks display.