Moontanman Posted July 1, 2008 Report Share Posted July 1, 2008 The Urinantia book is nothing more than another silly attempt to validate the concept of god by making claims that cannot be verified. I can say the universe is 12 seconds old and that god brought everything into being 12 seconds ago complete with memories of every thing that has happened in every one lives and a complete history of a 13 billion year old universe. can you deny this is true? Of course not, it's totally unprovable from any perspective. the book Of urinantia is no different. As long as science disagrees with the book all you have to say is that science just hasn't progressed far enough to see the truth of the urinantia and there is no way to prove anything. It's a completely false premise and it has no place on this forum at all. It is no better than any other book of myths and has no more basis in reality than the gods of Olympus or the Norse gods or elves and unicorns. It's simply a story, nothing more nothing less. If you want to do good and take care of people good for you but leave out all the mystical clap trap and be honest about it. Other wise you are spending far too much time and energy debating something that has nothing to do with doing good in the world and contributes nothing to your supposed cause of doing good in the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
modest Posted July 1, 2008 Report Share Posted July 1, 2008 I can say the universe is 12 seconds old and that god brought everything into being 12 seconds ago complete with memories of every thing that has happened in every one lives and a complete history of a 13 billion year old universe. Moontanman, you've just unwittingly started a new religion ~modest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted July 1, 2008 Report Share Posted July 1, 2008 The whole book of urinantia is nothing but contradictions, it makes claims that cannot be falsified because no contradictory evidence is ever accepted no matter how compelling it might be. Just another elves and unicorn story. Not even as compelling as a elves and unicorn story. At least an elves and unicorn story doesn't expect you you to shut down your brain and believe it to be the word of god. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted July 1, 2008 Report Share Posted July 1, 2008 Moontanman, you've just unwittingly started a new religion ~modest Oh boy! I can't wait for the prestige, power, and money to start rolling in, send you entire wallet to yet another religious rip off care of this list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted July 1, 2008 Report Share Posted July 1, 2008 Moontanman, you've just unwittingly started a new religion ~modest What do you mean unwittingly? God speaks through me late at night, 12 seconds ago the universe came into being, this is the absolute truth, send me 90% of your pay check if you want the universe to continue to come into existance every 12 seconds! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
modest Posted July 1, 2008 Report Share Posted July 1, 2008 What do you mean unwittingly? God speaks through me late at night, 12 seconds ago the universe came into being, this is the absolute truth, send me 90% of your pay check if you want the universe to continue to come into existance every 12 seconds! I can't disprove what you say... so I guess it's undeniably true.. oh mighty exalted one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Majeston Posted July 1, 2008 Report Share Posted July 1, 2008 The whole book of urinantia is nothing but contradictions, . There are not 2 contradictions in the entire book of 2097 pages of fine print. You don't know what you are talking about,. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Majeston Posted July 1, 2008 Report Share Posted July 1, 2008 I don't have a problem with investigating the thing in more depth. Bring it on, bring on the evidence. You're correct, I've not read much. I am not going to ignore or fail to recognize something that makes sense because of preconceptions. If there is something that makes sense or is looks correct, I'll say so. You've pointed out some things for me to read and I will. Let's see what can be validated and verified. But please realize, validating some of the claims in that book would require an extraordinary amount of evidence. More than some coincidences. Until that extraordinary evidence presents itself I will hold to my presumptive opinion that the book is fiction. This is not a matter of failing to reserve judgment but is rather normal in a scientific investigation. Science is skeptical. ~modest Modest, Above anyone else who has posted their opinions here, I respect your ability to scientifically assess the paper by Ken Glaziou. I surmise his credentials are at least as good as your own and from a scientific viewpoint I expect that his research, his examples and his selections of material for scientific analysis meet at least the minimum standards for critical serious peer review. IIRC Ken suffered a stroke a few years ago and the collection of material he analyzed may be about 10 years old by now. Nevertheless, it is quite comprehensive and covers the lions share of what any serious researcher of U science would question. I can of course provide additional material from other scientists which may cover a few items which Ken has not addressed or which is dealt with in a slightly different manner, as well as a few discoveries of my own. The 4.5 billion year date is discussed by Ken as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
modest Posted July 1, 2008 Report Share Posted July 1, 2008 Let me look back at these and the others you mentioned. It might take a bit of time but I will respond. Last night and this morning, I looked at the Adam and Eve claim: Urantia News - Verifying Science and History in The Urantia Book I started by reading papers 74-76 which I'd love to give a lengthy review on, but we've got bigger fish to fry. The claim which U supporters reference: Evidence that the adaptive allele of the brain size gene microcephalin introgressed into Homo sapiens from an archaic Homo lineage concerns human genetics. There is some tentative evidence that modern man interbred with some other lineage of the genus-homo (most likely Neanderthals). This is said to have happened 37 thousand years ago and roughly 70% of earth's current population is descended from this genetic event. It is therefore thought to have caused a selected trait. I'd love for freeztar or anyone else more proficient in genetics to take a look at the study as I feel incapable of commenting on its credibility - it is an interesting study from what I understood. Urantia has Adam and Eve coming to earth about 37,000 years ago and adding their distinctive genetic material to the population. So the the arrival of the pair and the results of the study are assumed to be related. In the Urantian story of Adam and Eve genetics is actually a major plot line. I'm about to get into that, but first... The study above looked at haplogroup D, of the MCPH1 gene. There are two major groups of this. 70% have the newer "Adam" or "Neanderthal" haplogroup-D while 30% have the older haplogroup-D which was dated to 1.1 million years ago. They are related - these two haplogroups. This means Adam/Neanderthal was related to the common ancestor 1.1 million years ago that donated the other one. While this is expected for a Neanderthal - exactly expected I might add. This would not be expected for Adam who had no ancestry on Earth. So this does not work. This claim can not be supported with this study. Furthermore, this investigation has left me absolutely sickened by the content of this text. I was expecting to find a description of Adam's progeny populating the earth in a good way - somewhat like Abraham in the bible, but then I read this: Nevertheless, the more intelligent of the races of earth looked forward eagerly to the time when they would be permitted to intermarry with the superior children of the violet race. And what a different world Urantia would have become if this great plan of uplifting the races had been carried out! Even as it was, tremendous gains resulted from the small amount of the blood of this imported race which the evolutionary peoples incidentally secured. And thus did Adam work for the welfare and uplift of the world of his sojourn. But it was a difficult task to lead these mixed and mongrel peoples in the better way. The "violet race" are the children of Adam which are white with blue eyes and blond, red, or brown hair. The "mongrel peoples"... well - not. To which this quote aught to infuriate the room: But when they [Adam and Eve] addressed themselves to the all-important work of eliminating the defectives and degenerates from among the human strains After reading this I delved into paper 64 on the evolution of man and it's just awful - I mean it's God-awful: The groups going west became less contaminated with the backward stocks of mutual ancestral origin than those going east, who mingled so freely with their retarded animal cousins. These unprogressive individuals drifted southward and presently mated with the inferior tribes. Later on, increasing numbers of their mongrel descendants returned to the north to mate with the rapidly expanding Andonic peoples, and such unfortunate unions unfailingly deteriorated the superior stock. Fewer and fewer of the primitive settlements maintained the worship of the Breath Giver. This early dawn civilization was threatened with extinction. And thus it has ever been on Urantia. Civilizations of great promise have successively deteriorated and have finally been extinguished by the folly of allowing the superior freely to procreate with the inferior. So, this book is a morally corrupt bunch of eugenics trash that finds no excuse in the time period it was written. It's inexcusable and intolerable and utterly shameful that people are supporting it. Turtle and Moontanman and everyone else who have put effort into showing this book for what it is - you are saints. I don't think I will any longer be debating nor critiquing it, but you are saints for doing so. ~modest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted July 1, 2008 Report Share Posted July 1, 2008 There are not 2 contradictions in the entire book of 2097 pages of fine print. You don't know what you are talking about,. No, you are so deep in denial that you believe anything the book says no matter far from reality it is. Typical fundamental religious behavior. Being stubborn makes it correct, deny anything and ridicule any one or anything that points to flaws in your world view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freeztar Posted July 1, 2008 Report Share Posted July 1, 2008 As if the fraudulent science was not enough!! Here's an article written by a UB follower entitled "Ethical Eugenics: A Modest Proposal for the 21st Century":Urantology (note: thanks for that article Modest, I'll check it out) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted July 1, 2008 Report Share Posted July 1, 2008 I can't disprove what you say... so I guess it's undeniably true.. oh mighty exalted one Hey, I don't see any money coming in, I allowed the universe to exist for a few 12's of seconds last night and now 1728 billion years later I call the universe back into being (I was busy thinking) but no offers of money. Next time I might not bring the universe back exactly the way it is now! Yeah I said I brought it back, I am now the straw boss of the universe! Maybe next time I'll make Venus and Mars habitable and the Earth uninhabitable, no wait intelligent dinosaurs, yeah that's the ticket! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Majeston Posted July 1, 2008 Report Share Posted July 1, 2008 As if the fraudulent science was not enough!! :hihi: Here's an article written by a UB follower entitled "Ethical Eugenics: A Modest Proposal for the 21st Century":Urantology (note: thanks for that article Modest, I'll check it out) My Thanks as well, this was an excellent article by Chick Montgomery BA (*** laude), Harvard Master's in Public Administration, U.S.C. Another fine article on the same subject is by Dave KantorRace, Evolutionary Biology and the Kingdom of HeavenRace, Evolutionary Biology and the Kingdom of Heaven "Introduction The Urantia Book contains some statements about race and biological fitness which, when first encountered, disturb many readers. "The real jeopardy of the human species is to be found in the unrestrained multiplication of the inferior and degenerate strains of the various civilized peoples." "Unrestrained multiplication of inferiors, with decreasing reproduction of superiors, is unfailingly suicidal of cultural civilization." "It is neither tenderness nor altruism to bestow futile sympathy upon degenerated human beings, unsalvable, abnormal and inferior mortals." "It seems that you ought to be able to agree on the biologic disfellowshiping of your more markedly unfit, defective, degenerate and antisocial stocks." "The church, because of overmuch false sentiment, has long ministered to the underprivileged and the unfortunate ... leading to the unwise perpetuation of racially degenerate stocks." "Inferior minds will spurn the highest culture even when presented to them ready-made." "The selective elimination of inferior human strains will tend to eradicate many mortal inequalities." "A good environment cannot contribute much toward really overcoming the character handicaps of a base heredity." Disturbing indeed. But there is more. Consider these quotes: "Only ethical consciousness can unmask the immorality of human intolerance and the sinfulness of fratricidal strife." "A creative imagination cannot produce worthy children when the stage whereon it functions is pre-occupied by prejudice, hate, resentments, revenge and bigotries." "No state can attain ideal levels of functioning until every form of intolerance is mastered -- intolerance is everlastingly inimical to human progress." "Lack of ideals is the explanation for racial hatreds." "True religion is the only power which can lastingly increase the responsiveness of one social group to the needs and sufferings of other groups." Can this range of comments possibly be integrated into a coherent view of the problem? Why do some of the comments regarding race and genetic deterioration made in the Urantia papers disturb us? Do we feel the ideas expressed misrepresent reality? Are we made uncomfortable because of the potential volatility of some of these comments if taken out of context?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted July 1, 2008 Report Share Posted July 1, 2008 My Thanks as well, this was an excellent article by Chick Montgomery BA (*** laude), Harvard Master's in Public Administration, U.S.C. Another fine article on the same subject is by Dave KantorRace, Evolutionary Biology and the Kingdom of HeavenRace, Evolutionary Biology and the Kingdom of Heaven "Introduction The Urantia Book contains some statements about race and biological fitness which, when first encountered, disturb many readers. "The real jeopardy of the human species is to be found in the unrestrained multiplication of the inferior and degenerate strains of the various civilized peoples." "Unrestrained multiplication of inferiors, with decreasing reproduction of superiors, is unfailingly suicidal of cultural civilization." "It is neither tenderness nor altruism to bestow futile sympathy upon degenerated human beings, unsalvable, abnormal and inferior mortals." "It seems that you ought to be able to agree on the biologic disfellowshiping of your more markedly unfit, defective, degenerate and antisocial stocks." "The church, because of overmuch false sentiment, has long ministered to the underprivileged and the unfortunate ... leading to the unwise perpetuation of racially degenerate stocks." "Inferior minds will spurn the highest culture even when presented to them ready-made." "The selective elimination of inferior human strains will tend to eradicate many mortal inequalities." "A good environment cannot contribute much toward really overcoming the character handicaps of a base heredity." Disturbing indeed. But there is more. Consider these quotes: "Only ethical consciousness can unmask the immorality of human intolerance and the sinfulness of fratricidal strife." "A creative imagination cannot produce worthy children when the stage whereon it functions is pre-occupied by prejudice, hate, resentments, revenge and bigotries." "No state can attain ideal levels of functioning until every form of intolerance is mastered -- intolerance is everlastingly inimical to human progress." "Lack of ideals is the explanation for racial hatreds." "True religion is the only power which can lastingly increase the responsiveness of one social group to the needs and sufferings of other groups." Can this range of comments possibly be integrated into a coherent view of the problem? Why do some of the comments regarding race and genetic deterioration made in the Urantia papers disturb us? Do we feel the ideas expressed misrepresent reality? Are we made uncomfortable because of the potential volatility of some of these comments if taken out of context?" The problem is that these type things are what lead to the killing of six million and more human beings in WW2 alone that were deemed undesirable or less than human. You promotion of these ideas is despicable. No one can decide who is or who is not less than ideally human. No one has the right to label anyone as inferior, the quotes that seem to go against this "ideal' are just another contradiction that can be ignored or followed as the person who wants to label another group as inferior can use the book of urinantia to justify his sick perversions of humanity and his desire to purify the human race. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
modest Posted July 1, 2008 Report Share Posted July 1, 2008 The problem is that these type things are what lead to the killing of six million and more human beings in WW2 alone that were deemed undesirable or less than human. You promotion of these ideas is despicable. No one can decide who is or who is not less than ideally human. No one has the right to label anyone as inferior, the quotes that seem to go against this "ideal' are just another contradiction that can be ignored or followed as the person who wants to label another group as inferior can use the book of urinantia to justify his sick perversions of humanity and his desire to purify the human race. It's worse than that. The whole thing - the whole book is built on this. The bible apparently doesn’t strongly enough endorse racism. They had to make a whole new religion to accommodate the kind of hatemongering that crap is talking about. It's the whole theme. ~modest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REASON Posted July 1, 2008 Report Share Posted July 1, 2008 Can this range of comments possibly be integrated into a coherent view of the problem? What problem are you referring? Why do some of the comments regarding race and genetic deterioration made in the Urantia papers disturb us? Because the notion of racial superiority brings with it examples from the past of the abuse of peoples, and those who are appalled by such a notion choose instead to advance mankind in a direction that involves consideration of others in an effort to find unity, not separation. Who deserves to be categorized as "genetically deteriorated?" Do we feel the ideas expressed misrepresent reality? Are we made uncomfortable because of the potential volatility of some of these comments if taken out of context?" Maybe you'd be willing to elaborate on your perception of the context. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eclogite Posted July 1, 2008 Report Share Posted July 1, 2008 Another fine article on the same subject is by Dave KantorRace, Evolutionary Biology and the Kingdom of HeavenWhat did you find 'fine' about it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts