Brent

My friends who may be following along with interest, My apologies in advance for the somewhat lengthy post as I try to recap and move ahead . To save time and energy I’ve thought it best to condense some core concepts from Parts I & II of the UPapers as helpful background for Part IV: The Life and Teachings of Jesus. Very much comprehensive satisfaction must be lost in such a gross abbreviation. Only application to the whole will provide clarity and consistency of details. A deep and thorough consideration of the text is beyond the purview of PC forums. The discussion of peripheral issues concerning phenomena associated with the origins of the UPapers, while inevitable and perhaps interesting, will not reveal the value of the teachings contained. Some of the more important postulates which I’ve more or less soft-pedaled are: The three Co-Equal and Co-Eternal Persons of the Trinity resident on Paradise The First Source and Center’s bestowals of personality and God-fragments upon created beings The spiritual mercy ministry of the Second Source and Center – The Eternal Son The infinite mindal and material ministry of the Third Source and Center – The Infinite Spirit The focus of material gravity and force-energy in the Isle of Paradise The non-existential, experiential growth aspect of Deity – the evolving Supreme Being The incomprehensible nature of infinite, transcendental, and eternal realities to finite minds I’ve opted to present information regarding the origin and nature of Creators Sons, Creative Daughters, or other Trinity origin divine beings without going into drawn-out analyses of the UPapers versus Gnosticism. Such discussions might be worthwhile on another thread, but here would tend toward time-consuming drift without resulting in the kind of convincing and consistent clarity that the text itself provides. Post #47 of this thread was the last one addressing the subject of our local Creator Son (Jesus Christ-Michael). Dutch subsequently wrote in post #58: According to the authors, a local universe eventually comprises 10 million planets inhabited by evolutionary mortal will creatures + many additional worlds (“mansions”) which facilitate the ascension plan to the Paradise Trinity. No matter how many Creator Sons and Creative Daughters exist (after all, it’s a very BIG universe of universes), it’s their nature and function that’s important to understand. It's further stated that the life of Jesus was the bestowal of our local universe Creator, who thereby acquired the experience of living (and dying) as one of the material-mortal creatures of his own design. Incarnation by a Creator Son through normal birth (not ‘virgin’), life, and death on an evolutionary planet is an experiential requirement for Master Son universe sovereignty. It might prove helpful to consider some other selected quotes that refer to Christ's pre-bestowal divine nature before focusing on the life and teachings of Jesus. In your service, may our Lord's Peace and Joy be with you, Brent

Friends, We’re agreed then, that personal belief in the revelatory origin of any written work has no bearing on the validity of any such claim. We also share recognition that persuasive efforts intended to support such claims are generally pointless and perhaps counterproductive. As for “Where’s the beef?” (not even slightly taken as a wise-crack), there’s so much to present that this portion will require both pleasing presentation on my part and some ‘mastication’ (reading) on yours. So, we’ll see how it goes… Since Mathew 5-7 was brought up, some might have the interest (and time) to read and comment on UP 140: The Ordination of the Twelve (The Sermon on the Mount). This jump into Part IV is ahead of the semi-scheduled sequence that I’ve sort of planned, but I don’t mind. I enjoy contributing to other threads with UP “beef”, but want to be sensitive to such service effort being perceived as overbearing or being “Johnny-one-note”. A Dios friends, Brent

George, Since my original plan (loosely limiting this thread to discussions directly concerned with the text itself) was modified to include peripheral issues, I will attempt some further clarification related to a question which seems dear to you and is naturally raised in any introduction of the UPapers: Revelatory authority? Agreed, but to make the obvious point: If it is divinely inspired, then whether anyone accepts it, or not, has no bearing on the claim. This view is common to skepticism. It generally discounts the real possibility of revelatory origin and implies ‘priming’ or ‘conditioning’ as the rationale for acceptance. Also, I disagree with the thought that divine inspiration cannot be revealed in the writing itself. Still, although the authors make unequivocal statements claiming the revelatory nature of the UPapers, neither believing nor disbelieving will affect the value and relevance of the text. Perceptions will be relatively distorted in either case. Therefore, I think that any effort to persuade regarding the subject of revelatory authority would be both pointless and counterproductive. Actual demonstration of the value and relevance of the UPapers will be conditioned by the depth of my own wisdom and communication skills, or lack thereof. Deeper discussion of this issue would perhaps afford the opportunity to present additional context provided by the authors themselves. In good spirit, Brent

Hi Derek, Have you seen the Hubble photos and recent probability projections of trillions of planetary systems such as ‘Super-Earth,’ 1 of 50 Newfound Alien Planets, Could Potentially Support Life? Will our desire or need for simplicity make the universe of universes any less complex or more essenceless? Honestly, the very concept of “essencelessness” is self-contradictory, imo. The closest Google search comes to it is “senselessness” - no disrespect intended my friend. Though this Buddhist anecdote ranges far afield from UP teachings, it seems to me that any “analysis of the essencelessness of phenomena” would inherently seek for meanings/values of some sort, but would eventually bear fruitlessness. If I haven't “got it”, then so be it! I wholeheartedly agree that we only discover God through love, but going further will propose that experiential perception of this same God of love necessarily occurs within mind. Wonderful semantics, eh? I take this call as one to a quality of faith, and not to the intellectual simplicity of a child... May we all be “grabbed” by God! A Dios amigo, Brent

Myron, Theosophy and various other religio-philosophical movements were extant or emerging concurrently with the reception of the UPapers. Forms of Gnosticism, though, appear to date from much the more distant past. While discussion of such religio-social evolution, philosophy, and psychology could yield valuable insights and broadened perspective, I feel that going there would end up diluting my focus on the text of the UP. Perhaps this is something you would like to explore in a new thread? Drawing from ‘apocryphal’ sources, the purported superhuman beings involved in presenting the UPapers supposedly realized the need for and had been planning and anticipating the release of a written form of “epochal” revelation to our planet for several centuries. The association of Dr. Sadler (and subsequently the “forum” group) with the “contact personality” apparently presented a rare and fortuitous circumstance which they were prepared to utilize for our advantage. In good spirit, Brent

Myron, I must admit to being ‘out-of-the-loop’ regarding Dr. Sadler’s leaning with respect to his professional associates and their divergent viewpoints. As I understand the history, Dr. Sadler would certainly never have made any such claim of authorship. “Dr. Sadler was a highly respected psychiatrist who taught at the Post-graduate School of Medicine at Chicago University. For almost thirty years he was also a lecturer in Pastoral Counseling at McCormick Theological Seminary.” (Sprunger) I suspect some of the dozens of books written by Dr. Sadler would likely broach the subject of transmarginal consciousness. Whether or not there was any “nod towards W. James” is a question I can’t answer. As far as the subject of transmarginal consciousness relates to the reception of the UPapers, Dr. Sprunger writes: So Myron, whereas among Freud, Adler, and Jung there is much analysis of the subconscious and/or unconscious (personal and collective) mind, it appears that the appearance of the UPapers as well as the thrust of their teachings are rather more oriented toward superconscious mind activity. According to the UP, this realm "above" consciousness is where contact is made with real spiritual ministries (in contrast to the potent archetypal symbols of the sub/unconscious mind) resulting in the actual birth and growth of a soul of potential survival value. I hope that helps, bro. Brent

Hello friends, how're y'all? From the start of this thread, I’ve tried to sincerely and appropriately share my view of the UPapers as a highly valuable, though generally misunderstood and thus underutilized progressive resource. In serving to demonstrate the value and relevance of this "Wisdom Tradition", I am ipso facto looking to be persuasive to some degree. Lest I be convicted of being “slippery” as in the ‘shadow of a hair’s turning’, please let me qualify my earlier use of the phrase “fruitless and empty efforts at persuasion…” as referring to something like a salesman who knowingly promotes a worthless bill of goods. Your assessments of the validity of UP revelatory claims or of the admittedly unverifiable “possible intricacies in God’s infinite creation”, are completely within the realm of free will sanctity, a gift of God which I humbly honor. You have my sincere gratitude for also honoring mine. As a total skeptic I saw no reason at all to bore myself with reading the UPapers. When my shallow opinion was challenged, I decided to document evidence in support of my contention that over 2000 pages of quasi-religious and likely delusional fabrications written in the early 1930’s contained mountains of illogical inconsistencies and outright falsehoods and thus deserved summary dismissal. Right from the Foreward, the interwoven theological and cosmological complexities presented somewhat of a challenge comparable with study of an advanced scientific or technical text. It seemed so “far out” and unverifiable that to achieve a complete reading (‘skipping’ would overlook perjorative evidence) I found it necessary to adopt a detached investigative attitude, to pigeonhole my own incredulity and to treat it as a benign science-fiction parading as revelation. There are thousands of students of the UPapers worldwide, each with their own initial impression and subsequent perspective. Many folks are put off by the difficult reading of Parts I & II, but were intrigued and attracted enough by Part IV: The Life and Teachings of Jesus to treat it as an enjoyable ‘stand-alone’ (700 page) fiction. Harry McMullan, CEO of Alliance Steel Corp. in Oklahoma City, has published a separate paperback Part IV called Jesus: A New Revelation. Quoting from the back cover: Among the primary subjects of the UP that I believe worthy of elaboration and discussion is their portrayal of the life and teachings of Jesus as well as the truth about his personal relationship to the kingdom of heaven. I had thought it best to attempt a broad cosmological overview covering the hypotheses of the Paradise Deities and their residential superuniverse of Havona as a backdrop for positing the pre-existent nature of our local Creator Son. My intention was not to confuse or overawe with superfluous complexities, but to contextualize a majestic view of Christ Jesus and his bestowal life upon this world. My sense is that this is somewhat as the authors also intended by their arrangement of the actual text. As time allows, I’d like to pick up where we left off by posting some further UP quotes and add some of my thoughts about Jesus’ pre-existence as our Creator Son. Hope you'll join in sometime... All the best of many blessings, Brent “Faith transforms the philosophic God of probability into the saving God of certainty in the personal religious experience. Skepticism may challenge the theories of theology, but confidence in the dependability of personal experience affirms the truth of that which has grown into faith.” UP 102:6.4

George/Joseph, Believe me friends, fruitless and empty efforts at persuasion are as unattractive to me as to anyone halfway aware. I’ve more respect for the sanctity of free-will than that. The recognition or certification of divine revelatory status is not the point, to me anyway. As for my demonstrating the value and relevance of the UPapers, I suspect that is a continuing service challenge for me which will be qualified more by my own capabilities than any lack of the same in the work. A Dios friends, Brent

Yes friends, To Joseph I will surely agree and, when all is said and done, I surmise that even the authors of the UP will thankfully admit that salvation by faith requires no inkling of universe cosmology, planetary history, revealed theology, or sublime philosophical concepts. Your observation is addressed by the core teaching, that we are each personally sonshipped by God with an absolute and pristine fragment of Chemself in our minds, the "Mystery of Mysteries". It is entirely voluntary and according to individual disposition whether anyone chooses to be informed of the possible intricacies in God's infinite creation. However, there are some particular details that imo do serve to strengthen a pleasing and comprehensive balance of understanding. One of those deals with our Creator Son, claimed by the authors to have lived his bestowal life in the flesh as Jesus of Nazareth. To Myron I will say - I could hardly presume to speak for Dr. William Sadler’s intentions, who reached the age of 93 before passing in 1969. From what I have gathered, it would seem difficult to fathom any other outcome from the process which transpired than for the UPapers to have been published/introduced. According to the historical archives maintained by the Urantia Book Fellowship, Dr. Sadler was likely introduced to the human “contact personality” as early as 1906. This was five years before the doctor and his wife went abroad to study psychiatry in Leeds and Vienna. This unidentified man, possibly the husband of a patient of Dr. Lena Sadler, consulted with Dr. William due to a bizarre sleeping behavior. The Sadler’s began hosting a weekly Sunday afternoon social gathering at their home in January of 1923 which came to be known as “the forum”. In February of 1925, the curiosity of forum participants was aroused when Dr. Sadler spoke of his perplexities regarding the unusual case of his “sleeping subject”. The group decided to begin submitting questions to the purported “superhuman personalities” which vocalized through this individual during his sleep. “Some sources indicate that Dr. Lena Sadler was a key figure…reported to have believed right from the start that something significant was occurring whereas Dr. Sadler remained skeptical until 1936. He wanted to abandon the process at several points but continued at her insistence.” UB Fellowship archives Parts I-III were composed through a drawn out process of questioning by the forum and refinement by the purported revelators until completed in 1934. Part IV, The Life and Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth, was entirely unanticipated and was received complete in February of 1935. In the papers themselves, the authors make the claim that their presentation is an “epochal revelation” to our planet that was authorized by the administrators (Ancients of Days) of the superuniverse within which our evolutionary world spins. From this brief sketch you may surmise that the UPapers are not chiefly concerned with theories of human psychology, per se. Those who invest their time and energy toward a thorough evaluation while managing to withhold premature interim judgments will be richly rewarded, imo. In good spirit, Brent

My friends, neither am I partial to “wall(s) of text”, but I wouldn’t have thought those 3 sentences to be excessively difficult to “deal with” for such alert PC minds. I’ll proceed with that constraint in mind, seeking to provide (God willing) something palatable for diverse appetites. The Paradise residence of existential Trinity and the central superuniverse of Havona are described as never-beginning and never-ending, eternal. The central Isle of Paradise and these (over one billion) perfect worlds are shielded from our view here in the time-space universes by a vast expanse of unique dark space bodies. Perhaps some will enjoy stretching conception by attempting to grasp the immensities of seven trillion planets inhabited by mortal will creatures in the Grand Universe revolving around Havona, while an incalculable number of presently uninhabited galaxies are being formed beyond this in the Master Universe. Attempts to simplify the UP presentation of God’s gifts in the personality spectrum of Havona and the inhabited superuniverses to such fine works as “The Shack” could result in being penny wise and pound foolish in some ways. The UP authors assert that each Paradise Creator Son “flashes into full-fledged being” “21:1.1 When the fullness of absolute spiritual ideation in the Eternal Son encounters the fullness of absolute personality concept in the Universal Father…” Future posts will explore the UP teaching that though Christ is not identified as the Second Person of Trinity this fact does not lessen his stature but in actuality makes it possible for him to be even more divinely versatile as a universe Sovereign. Of significant note, we are told that the Creators Sons don’t work alone in the creation and administration of the local evolutionary universes (which eventually comprise 10 million inhabited spheres each): To be continued, as time permits… All the best blessings, Brent

Hi Dutch, George, Jenell & friends You wrote: Firstly, I’d like to be clear that, imo, the teachings of UP are not (and have no business becoming) a ‘religion’. Secondly, I see the apparent monotheism?/polytheism?/Gnosticism? conundrum fully unraveled with in-depth study, which understandably requires an serious investment of time and effort. Lastly, I can’t overemphasize my overarching consideration that the forest not be lost in the trees, to wit: The paramount importance of the gospel of sonship/daughtership with God and the consequent brotherhood of man mustn’t be forgotten amidst complex and/or intellectually appealing cosmologies, theologies, and philosophies no matter how accurately these might reflect factual realities. That said, since the sincere questions merit honest consideration, I could point to one quote which seems to apply: From UP 32: The Evolution of Local Universes – Section 4: God’s Relation to a Local Universe I’m content to linger with these questions for a while if y’all like, before moving on with my intended closer look at our own Creator Son. Also, as I've said, I will enjoy contributing my take on UP perspectives to various other threads from time to time. All the best blessings, Brent

Greetings PCers, Brother Dutch is likely not alone with early impressions of Part I wherein are described a vast panorama of beings extending from Paradise and the Central Superuniverse out into the time-space creations which have led him to comment: In hopes of aiding understanding, I will quote a reference from among many which point out how consistent with God’s loving nature is the creation of divine beings to whom he delegates powers and authority throughout the many thousands of galaxies formed and forming in the Grand (presently inhabited) and Master (presently uninhabited) time-space universes: In the next few posts I’d like to share more from the UPapers about our own Creator Son, Christ Michael/Jesus of Nazareth, beginning with some quotes from one paper which Dutch listed above - PAPER 21: THE PARADISE CREATOR SONS. Until later then, A Dios and have a beautiful week friends, Brent

Friends, Among those PCers who’ve pondered some portions of the UPapers, I wonder if anyone has carefully read enough of the Foreward up through Paper 11, or so, to have developed an informed opinion on their unique exposition of the Paradise Trinity? Be that as it may, I realize how limited my own viewpoint can be as I’m humbly ignorant of the existence of a more satisfying presentation of the eternal Three-in-One. For such sublime and profound concepts to have come from a soundly sleeping securities trader (totally unaware of what transpired) in Chicago circa the 1920's and 30's has caused many to wonder...How, who, and why? Enjoy~ Moving on from consideration of these existential Paradise Deities, I think a few posts dedicated to the UPapers revelation of the origin and nature of our local universe Creator Son would be worthwhile. Until then, A Dios, Brent

Friends, Perhaps I can address a couple of questions without getting too wordy. Jenell: I wish you success on finding Jungian material. When I lived in Honolulu in the early ‘70s, my library card at the university enabled me to bring home his 22 (or 23) volume of collected works, which I read. I also had Man and His Symbols and Memories, Dreams, and Reflections. Here’s my understanding of why Dr. Sadler was involved with the ‘sleeping subject’ (or ‘contact personality’): Dr. Sadler’s wife, Dr. Lena (Kellogg) Sadler, also had a practice in Chicago at the time (around 1906-1908). She was very active in reproductive health and women’s issues. A colleague of Lena’s, who worked in the same building as her practice, came to her for help after being unable to awaken her husband during episodes of verbalization during his sleep. Both Drs. William and Lena Sadler agreed to observe the phenomena at its next occurrence. Dr. Sadler (having had deep connections which had been eventually severed – by excommunication - with Seventh Day Adventism and their “prophetess”, Ellen White) was very keen to debunk psychic, spiritualistic, channeling phenomena, etc. He actually enjoyed and went out of his way exposing fraudulent or delusional claims. The ‘contact personality’ was a securities trader and Chicago Board of Trade member who was basically uninterested in what was happening with no conscious awareness of anything which transpired. The Sadler’s observation of his nocturnal abnormalities began as merely doing a favor and out of curiosity. This went on for over 20 years before Dr. Sadler happened to mention the strange case at one of the Sunday afternoon social gatherings at his home. Technically, this man was not a patient and these episodes seemed to have no effect on his normal functioning. George: If I can be of service by offering relevant perspectives from the UPapers in the context of other discussions I am glad to, and have done so. I certainly will seek to avoid fanatical ‘thread-hog’ interjections. Myron: Dr. Sadler was quite versatile and renowned, also teaching at several seminaries including pastoral counseling at McCormick Theological. Many blessings, Brent

Hi Jenell, Just seeing your question about Dr. Sadler, I'll respond later with more info... Have a great day, Brent

Hi Jenell, I hope that my recommendation of the UPapers has not been perceived as insistence that they be read/studied in their entirety. Just as I have multiple demands upon my time, I fully understand that everyone here likewise has their own. All I’ve intended, in good spirit and friendship, is to introduce what I feel is a magnificent resource. I advise anyone considering their value to take their time and enjoy the UPapers as they see fit. Whether or not folks agree with my assessment is not really a huge concern for me, as it quite likely may reflect more upon my communication skills more than it does the value of the tome. I’ve enjoyed and appreciated all of the very respectful and kind responses from the list. My intention is to continue sharing some of the major themes found within the UP from time to time. Perhaps someone will find these worthy of discussion. Many blessings, Brent

Friends, As more resources (time) becomes available, I’ll try to be more thorough in reviewing the questions raised in this more ‘free-flowing’ discussion of the UPapers. I’m finding all of your comments to be very heartening. For now, I’d like to address Bill’s post, in part. Bill, you described as having identified in the past, (3 or 4) paths, or ways, to reconcile the disconnect which you experienced in your faith understanding. At this point in your perusal of the UPapers, it seems to you that the authors have taken the second path of “constructing a larger “belief system” or paradigm that could account 100% for all of the data.” I can vouch that you're not alone in judging this as "WAY too complicated". There being no question that the UPapers present a heckuva complex panorama, you’ve reached a natural (though perhaps interim) conclusion regarding the authors’ motivations. I wouldn’t be surprised if you haven’t also considered that they may well have had other reasons that haven’t occurred to you yet. A brief rendering of the circumstances under which this material was originally presented might suggest far-reaching purposes. Dr. William Sadler (sometimes called the father of American psychiatry) had the ‘sleeping subject’ under observation for at least 20 years before mentioning the peculiarities of his case to a social group of friends meeting at his home on Sunday afternoons in Chicago. Dr. Sadler was stymied and was completely unable to categorize the phenomena. After his mention of the case, a suggestion was made that he verbally present questions of the group to the ‘voices’ that conversed through the sleeping subject. The response received by Dr. Sadler from the ‘voices’ was that “If you knew what you were in contact with, you would cease asking trivial questions.” This challenged the doctor, and at the next Sunday gathering he had his social friends compose the most difficult questions they could think of. The UPapers were produced over the next 5-6 years (1928-1934) through an evolving interaction with the group (the Forum). Part IV was different, being unexpectedly presented by the authors after the other parts had been refined interactively with Forum members over those years. In other words, Parts I-III weren’t just plopped down but were in a sense ‘asked for’ by human beings in the late 20’s and early 30’s of the last century. As you read (or listen) to the UPapers 80 years later, try imagining how those regular folks might have reacted to this information. Also consider, if you will, that this material will be scrutinized by many people of diverse persuasions for many years to come. Imo, it seems wise to have offered mankind something comprehensive, thought admittedly complex, in nature. Now, your knack for reduction to the lowest common denominator definitely identifies you as a kindred soul. When speaking of God’s love, I smilingly favor the term “most common denominator”. As you take your time discovering the depth of values presented by the authors, I predict that you will recognize some startling simplicities of just the sort that you so much appreciate. A few quick examples from Part IV come to my mind, but there are many, many more: I’m gonna take a break here, friends, and try to address Bill’s more personal questions later. Love and blessings, Brent

Friends, I imagine that many folks will experience some sense of bewilderment as they become acquainted with the UPapers. Beginning with the Foreward we are presented with quite an edifice of alien concepts. When Dutch mentioned science-fiction, I’m reminded of my own approach to withholding judgment while in reading the book. As I’m about to leave for work, I would like to bring notice to a line from UPaper 2:0:2 From this statement, and others like it throughout Parts I, II, & III, we begin to get an idea of the value of Part IV of the book. I enjoy 'hearing' your thoughts... All the best, Brent

Friends, Although I find the UPapers to be qualitatively authoritative and precisely as claimed by the authors listed at the end of each paper, I have no need to persuade one person that they should also be so inclined. That “revelatory authority is always open to question” is a very good thing, I’m sure. Again, authority is not a criterion of truth; and, uniquely “personal judgment can be made based on the quality of the material being evaluated.” After browsing through the book at a bookstore in 1979, I conjectured that a friend of Timothy Leary had swallowed enough LSD to fry every rational circuit in their mind, soon to be a resident of a mental health facility. About 1 year later I was asked how I could be so sure of my evaluation, since I had not read the book. I made a determined decision to read the entire work from first word to last, quite sure that I would then have unquestionable evidence to refute it as fraudulent. These days, because I greatly value their content, I enjoy study and discussion of the UPapers among open-minded and righteous truth-hungry friends. After 30 years of my own reading, I’m confident that some folks will discover something valuable in them. Of course, it’s not for me to decide how anyone judges their quality and value. I’ve read and continue to read many other religious works, but haven’t found any which supersede what I consider the greatest masterpiece in human literature. Many of you will have some very good questions. I doubt that I have the ability or resources to answer and settle all these that will naturally arise, again and again . Therefore I appreciate the sincerity, honesty, patience and kind friendliness that I’ve found among folks here. Blessings, Brent

Dear friends, In the first post on this thread, I expressed my sense that progressive comprehension would be best served by focusing on the text of the UPapers rather than peripheral issues. After considering that some discussion of these subjects are of genuine interest as well as unavoidable, I’d like to reverse myself and be open to a more free-flowing thread, to the best of my ability and resources. Yes George, imo, the UPapers are special and I consider them authoritative. As the basis for this authority I would submit the qualitative evidence their own declarations and statements. I’m sure Dr. Meredith Sprunger (ordained UCC minister in early 1950’s, 35 years senior pastor Fort Wayne, past professor of psychology, head of psychology dept, Dean of College of Liberal Arts, President of Indiana Institute of Technology) won’t mind my quoting from his 1979 essay “The Origin of The Urantia Book”: For anyone with the interest and time to investigate, you may enjoy various of Dr. Sprunger’s essays which are archived on the Urantia Book Fellowship website under : "Christianity and the Urantia Book" For those who are inclined to further investigation, I highly recommend A History of the Urantia Papers, by Larry Mullins (Amazon paperback) If I am able to help in any way, I am at your service. That’s it for now, friends. Until later, be blessed, Brent

Since I was very young, tree climbing was a favorite pastime for me. One summer job was climbing to remove dangerous dead or dying limbs at a Holiday Inn Travelpark in Virginia Beach. I truly enjoyed that work, studying each climb from below and planning to navigate the difficulties. There was always time to relax, breathe, and sense the peacefulness. Many times I’ve been drawn to a particularly inviting tree and climbed to the very highest (and smallest) of branches, where I’ve propped myself into the forks and enjoyed a wonderful exhilaration among the swaying leaves as clouds drifted by just over the treetop. Ah, the oaks, magnolias, beeches, hickorys, pines, sycamores, poplars, gums, and more...So I'm blessed with many fond memories, including some very, very tight hugging! Just today I’m involved in a repair project on my small ‘arborist’ chain saw, and my livelihood involves handling and building with wood every day. I, too, am thankful for trees.

Dear PC friends, Anyone tackled the Foreward yet? I know, that's quite a bit to chew, but for some it'll whet an appetite for more... There may be little doubt as to the veracity of the observation (in another thread) of our sister Jenell: Yet, I've found that there are even additional rationales given for sometimes deep reluctance to investigating the Urantia Papers. For me, it took a conscious decision to withhold judgment in spite of my arrogance, to set aside preconceptions and biases until the very last page. In this way I was able to refrain (even when inclined) from stereotyping and pigeonholing until I could honestly make an informed assessment of the work as a whole. Now, 30 + years later, I am still even more grateful. That said, I realize the UPapers are not a particularly easy read, but who would expect an epochal revelation to our world - commissioned by the Ancients of Days (Superuniverse Divine administrators) - to be superficial? From Part I – The Central and Superuniverses Paper 001 – The Universal Father :1 – The Father’s Name; :2 – The Reality of God; :3 – God is a Universal Spirit; :4 – The Mystery of God; :5 – Personality of the Universal Father: :6 – Personality in the Universe; :7 – Spiritual Value of the Personality Concept In loving service, Brent

Lovely friends, Who wouldn't agree that discovering kindred truth hunger is always a welcome experience? If anyone has yet sallied forth upon the UPapers, my own experience would suggest perhaps an experience of incredulity combined with inner insight/recognition of a startling revelation. While the (17 page) Foreward is admittedly difficult reading for many progressive religionists, who wouldn’t be challenged to learn about the subjects introduced under these headings?: I. Deity and Divinity II. God III. The First Source and Center IV. Universe Reality V. Personality Realities VI. Energy and Pattern VII. The Supreme Being VIII. God the Sevenfold IX. God the Ultimate X. God the Absolute XI. The Three Absolutes XII. The Trinities This week, as is often my habit when I have finished a reading of Part IV: The Life and Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth, I have returned to Part I: The Central and Superuniverses. After the Foreward, this Part begins with 11 informative papers on the Persons of Trinity and the Isle of Paradise, which I find packed with logically coherent, yet astounding, advanced, and quite glorious concepts unequaled in any human library. Imo, assessment should be based on the actual quality of content. Is it possible to withhold judgment until the last of 2,097 pages has been read, when we find statements such as this one concluding the very first Paper? After reading the Foreward and those first Papers, nothing would deter me from a thorough study of the full text. Perhaps someone here will also derive a measure of satisfaction therefrom. In good spirit, Brent

Greetings Derek and friends, I appreciate the info. Do you now, or have you resided in Japan? A fellow student of the Urantia Papers and friend of mine, Robert Reno, lived there for some years, developing very close relationships with Buddist scholars and monks and being deeply versed in Amida Buddism. Curiously, it was Robert who linked me to TCPC several years ago. Another friend and scholar of the UPapers, Dr. Jeff Wattles, professor of philosophy and world religions at Kent State has close ties with the Japanese, as well. I also find the term “oya-sama” endearing and “favourable”. Regarding this grace, I would note that the same UPaper 144 from Part IV: The Life and Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth which was referenced in my last post includes the following: Part III of the UPapers: The History of Urantia, includes several papers devoted to a presentation of information regarding the emergency bestowal mission of a local universe Melchezidek Son which occurred at Salem (Jerusalem) 1,973 years before the birth of Jesus. From among his disciples, some travelled as far as Japan. UPaper 94: The Melchezidek Teachings in the Orient includes a section titled: The God Concept in Buddism, wherein is found these words: Finite concepts regarding a location for our Paradise Parent seem so inadequate, and perhaps further exploration and discussion of the subject would be fruitful. Many blessings my friends, Brent

Friends, An acquaintance once wrote an interesting paper suggesting the use of these coined non-gender pronouns - Che, Ches, and Chem - for the existential Trinity God(s) of eternal Paradise. Any thoughts? Being cognizant of individual sensitivities regarding (intended or unintended) attributions of anthropomorphic gender to the Paradise Sources and Centers, I proffer two different versions of the "Believer's Prayer" that were reportedly used by Jesus for illustrative value. From Paper 144 (At Gilboa and the Decapolis) wherein is found "The Discourse on Prayer" (144:2) and additional prayers from other inhabited planets (144:5): note: the Urantia Papers are uncopyrighted in the "public domain" Enjoy and A Dios, Brent