The Late Great Urantia Revelation

[Caino]

The Jews who rejected Jesus did not recognize Jesus' words as being the words of God.

Jesus did teach atonement. God gave the teaching tool and shadow of Jesus to Moses to give to the Jews.

Even John the baptizer, the forerunner, the one who prepared the way for Jesus exclaimed that Jesus is the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world.

The blood is for atonement. There is no forgiveness of sins without the shedding of blood.

Leviticus 17:11 For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for one's life.

Hebrews 9:22 In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.

John 1:29 The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, "Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!

The Jews had adopted Pagan sacrifices for sins, Jesus taught repentance, a change of heart, forgiveness and salvation by faith, all of which takes away the sin of the world. The original gospel changed after Jesus left, it was modified for the simple minded people of the Pagan world. The Romans already believed in blood drinking and blood sacrifice, so they were more receptive to Pauls remixed version.

 

[God's Truth]

The Jews had adopted Pagan sacrifices for sins, Jesus taught repentance, a change of heart, forgiveness and salvation by faith, all of which takes away the sin of the world. The original gospel changed after Jesus left, it was modified for the simple minded people of the Pagan world. The Romans already believed in blood drinking and blood sacrifice, so they were more receptive to Pauls remixed version.

God gave Moses the law which included animal sacrifices.

 

[freelight]

primitive atonement concepts challenged.......

primitive atonement concepts challenged.......

God gave Moses the law which included animal sacrifices.

And yet all that animal blood could not take away sins. No amount of physical blood, of any kind can atone for sin. Blood being used in any case is symbolic of the soul-life of one surrendering or yielding themselves to the Spirit, while there is no real forgiveness until one actually repents and renews/transforms their mind towards 'God' or 'doing right'. We further explore 'Atonement without blood' here - beyond the symbolic value if any of killing innocent animals, I think some of the sacrificial system was borrowed from pagan ritual-concepts and belief-systems, - still researching this.

We've amply gone over the concept of 'blood atonement' and 'the Eucharist' from a UB perspective here. (see respective links)

 

[patrick jane]

1. THE MORON TRANSIT

:chuckle:

 

[freelight]

The Resurrection and material body of Jesus......

The Resurrection and material body of Jesus......

:chuckle:

I wouldnt chuckle too soon there pj

If you read the whole account and further on the Resurrection of Jesus and 'The Material body of Jesus' in this paper 189, The Resurrection....you'll see how the teaching of the 'morontial' form...or the 'morontia body' is of a condition or substance that is inbetween the physical and spiritual, - this is what is referred to as 'morontia' or that which is 'morontial' in nature, and it was Jesus 'morontial body' that resurrected from the tomb while the physical body lay undisturbed. All mortals after material death proceed into the morontial realm of existence, in morontial bodies, before proceeding into a more pure spiritual form or life in the higher celestial worlds, after putting on immortality (fusing with their thought-adjuster). So, no 'morons' are involved here - its a matter of understanding the metaphysics and process of soul-evolution in the papers, its terms and meanings. - thats one problem with nay-sayers here, not understanding the theology, since some refuse to even learn it, in order to properly discuss or debate the subjects.

You may further note that the this record says the the material body of Jesus was NOT resurrected, but the morontial body, so the resurrection was essentially and ultimately SPIRITUAL in nature. The physical body of Jesus was supernaturally disintegrated by the celestial assistance of accelerating time, to the point of a near-instantaneous dissolving of Jesus material body. Hence the physical body was disintegrated, hence it not being found in the tomb, - this was a supernatural process....while the morontial/spiritual body carrying the personality of Jesus AROSE from the tomb. This is one tenable explanation of the "empty tomb" This may be a familiar view of the JWs and some Seventh Day Adventists, but we'd have to review the details involved to qualify any particulars.

 

[God's Truth]

And yet all that animal blood could not take away sins. No amount of physical blood, of any kind can atone for sin.

God said to do and that is what one had to do.

Blood being used in any case is symbolic of the soul-life of one surrendering or yielding themselves to the Spirit, while there is no real forgiveness until one actually repents and renews/transforms their mind towards 'God' or 'doing right'. We further explore 'Atonement without blood' here - beyond the symbolic value if any of killing innocent animals, I think some of the sacrificial system was borrowed from pagan ritual-concepts and belief-systems, - still researching this.

God did not like it that the Jews would give a sin offering of blood but not really be sorry for their sins. However, it was the way in the old law to give a blood offering. You are wrong about God borrowing from pagans.

We've amply gone over the concept of 'blood atonement' and 'the Eucharist' from a UB perspective here. (see respective links)

I do not read things from people who go against what the Holy Bible teaches. State your beliefs here and debate me here.

 

[Caino]

God said to do and that is what one had to do.


God did not like it that the Jews would give a sin offering of blood but not really be sorry for their sins. However, it was the way in the old law to give a blood offering. You are wrong about God borrowing from pagans.



I do not read things from people who go against what the Holy Bible teaches. State your beliefs here and debate me here.

In the age of the blood sacrifices of the Israelites, religions all around the earth were practicing them as well. The claim that the Jews always lived in their own bubble with no influences from other ritualistic practices is just not a realistic claim. Abrahams religion was originally that of his Fathers from "beyond the rives". His descendants such as Rachel and her rock worship, the Golden Calf idolatry as well as beliefs from Egyptian religions were all an undeniable part of their history.

 

[God's Truth]

In the age of the blood sacrifices of the Israelites, religions all around the earth were practicing them as well. The claim that the Jews always lived in their own bubble with no influences from other ritualistic practices is just not a realistic claim. Abrahams religion was originally that of his Fathers from "beyond the rives". His descendants such as Rachel and her rock worship, the Golden Calf idolatry as well as beliefs from Egyptian religions were all an undeniable part of their history.

You do not believe the Bible and that is where you err.

 

[Caino]

You do not believe the Bible and that is where you err.

You are stunted by the doctrine of inspiration, that is where you are presently marooned.

The current common bible is composed of 66 books. There are many spiritual truths within those books. I don't believe some of the wild claims that the Jewish authors made about themselves.!

 

[Charity]

You are stunted by the doctrine of inspiration, that is where you are presently marooned.

The current common bible is composed of 66 books. There are many spiritual truths within those books. I don't believe some of the wild claims that the Jewish authors made about themselves.!

yep I believe in the 14th century when the printing press was invented the roman empire went down to the basement, gathered all the law books that they had looted from nations and created the bible.. which can't possible function as the truth without an enemy. The story's about DNA,SONS STAND UP FOR THE FATHERS, yet they fight each other with different mothers... the koran reminds its readers to Remberber Father Abraham, issac, and Jacob. and Mose's who discovered who he was, then lead the army of stars back to israel to claim the land and estate his immigrant father Abraham had VERBALY promised, whom had migrated one thousand years before, SAT DOWN and dreamed of his seed to come walking threw the gates OVER throwing Davids fathers, in which roman power, history they erased. vatican country put a wall up and convinced it own people that god wanted the priest to have a government country within a country..where they hid events and treasures the world deserves to know. believing in the holy bible is rather historical words.. time and DNA will tell the truth.

 

[God's Truth]

You are stunted by the doctrine of inspiration, that is where you are presently marooned.

The current common bible is composed of 66 books. There are many spiritual truths within those books. I don't believe some of the wild claims that the Jewish authors made about themselves.!

You do not believe that an All Mighty God can preserve His words just the way they are.

 

[Charity]

this is sad.. I can't believe people are so retarded .. the bible was printed when the printing press was invented.. the roman empire new they would make money selling what they said was holy information...

 

[patrick jane]

this is sad.. I can't believe people are so retarded .. the bible was printed when the printing press was invented.. the roman empire new they would make money selling what they said was holy information...

Is that what you learned down under?

 

[Caino]

You do not believe that an All Mighty God can preserve His words just the way they are.

The almighty IS the Word. The bible books were written by men who then indoctrinated sincere believers with the false teaching that the books that they created were written by God. They do that for control.

God would never write a verse that says iron chariots are stronger than he is. He would never make so many other mistakes either. God is the Word, only God is perfection.

 

[patrick jane]

The almighty IS the Word. The bible books were written by men who then indoctrinated sincere believers with the false teaching that the books that they created were written by God. They do that for control.

God would never write a verse that says iron chariots are stronger than he is. He would never make so many other mistakes either. God is the Word, only God is perfection.

You're brainwashed

 

[TulipBee]

Nevermind the uratians. They claim contradictions in the bible so...

proof inspiration Bible Question: "Is there proof for the inspiration of the Bible?"

Answer: Here are some evidences that the Bible is inspired (God-breathed) by God, as declared in 2 Timothy 3:16.

1) Fulfilled prophecy. God spoke to men telling them of things He would bring about in the future. Some of them have already occurred. Others have not. For example, there were more than 300 prophecies concerning Jesus Christ's first coming 2,000 years ago. There is no doubt that these are prophecies from God because of manuscripts and scrolls dated before the birth of Christ. These were not written after the fact. They were written beforehand. Scientific dating proves this.

2) The unity of Scripture. The Bible was written by approximately 40 human authors over a period of approximately 1,600 years. These men were quite diverse. Moses, a political leader; Joshua, a military leader; David, a shepherd; Solomon, a king; Amos, a herdsman and fruit picker; Daniel, a prime minister; Matthew, a tax collector; Luke, a medical doctor; Paul, a rabbi; and Peter, a fisherman; among others. The Bible was also written under a variety of circumstances. It was written on 3 different continents, Europe, Asia, and Africa. Yet, the great themes of Scripture are maintained in all the writings. The Bible does not contradict itself. There is no way, apart from God the Holy Spirit supervising the writing of the Bible, that this could have been accomplished.

Contrast this with the Islamic Koran. It was compiled by one individual, Zaid bin Thabit, under the guidance of Mohammed's father-in-law, Abu-Bekr. Then in A.D. 650, a group of Arab scholars produced a unified version and destroyed all variant copies to preserve the unity of the Koran. The Bible was unified from the time of its writing. The Koran had to be unified through the editing of men.

3) The Bible presents its heroes truthfully with all of their faults and weaknesses. It does not glorify men as other religions do about their heroes. When you read the Bible, you realize that the people it describes have problems and do wrong just as we do. What made them great was that they trusted in God. One example is David. David is described as “a man after God's own heart” (1 Samuel 13:14). Yet, David committed adultery (2 Samuel 11:1-5) and murder (2 Samuel 11:14-26). This could have been left out of Scripture to hide these details of David's life. But God included these things.

4) Archaeological findings support the history recorded in Scripture. Though many unbelieving people throughout history have tried to find archaeological evidence to disprove what is recorded in the Bible, they have failed. It is easy to say that Scripture is untrue. Proving it to be untrue is a different story. It has not been done. In fact, in the past the Bible contradicted the current “scientific” theories, only to be proven later to be in fact true. A good example is Isaiah 40:22, which declared that God “sits on the circle of the earth” long before scientists claimed the earth was flat.

The Bible’s claims of being from God should not be understood as arguing in a circle or by circular reasoning. The testimony of reliable witnesses - particularly of Jesus, but also of others such as Moses, Joshua, David, Daniel, and Nehemiah in the Old Testament, and John and Paul in the New Testament - affirm the authority and verbal inspiration of the Holy Scriptures. Consider the following passages: Exodus 14:1; 20:1; Leviticus 4:1; Numbers 4:1; Deuteronomy 4:2; 32:48; Isaiah 1:10, 24; Jeremiah 1:11; Jeremiah 11:1–3; Ezekiel 1:3; 1 Corinthians 14:37; 1 Thessalonians 2:13; 2 Peter 1:16–21; 1 John 4:6.

Also of interest are the writings of Josephus, an historian who recorded much of the history of Israel during the first century. In this he records some events which coincide with Scripture. Beware though, his writings are rather lengthy. Considering the evidence given, we have no choice but to accept the Bible as being from God (2 Timothy 3:16).

 

[God's Truth]

The almighty IS the Word. The bible books were written by men who then indoctrinated sincere believers with the false teaching that the books that they created were written by God. They do that for control.

God would never write a verse that says iron chariots are stronger than he is. He would never make so many other mistakes either. God is the Word, only God is perfection.

Just because you do not have understanding does not mean the Bible is wrong.

 

[freelight]

Brain washed..............

Brain washed..............

You're brainwashed

I dont see where Caino is 'brainwashed' in seeing that 'God' Alone is the 'Word'(logos), He is the sole Source, the Original Creator, the One Power and Presence, The Absolute ONE. Only this 'God' who is ABSOLUTE is 'perfect'. All else in creation that suffers some kind of relativity, distortion or fragmentation is less than perfect.

To be fair, we should all look at our opinions, beliefs and 'theology' to see where we could be being 'brainwashed' - this includes yourself. Your own beliefs are chosen or preferred for whatever reasons or factors unique to your own conditioning, upbringing, culture, etc. You can be being 'brainwashed' to various degrees, do you place yourself beyond such 'conditioning'? All viewpoints ARE subject to change. As long as there is learning, evolution, progress, change....all viewpoints are subject to be modified. Philosophically,....we assume that reality we call 'God', is the sole absolute reality, while all else is but 'relative'. Our views about 'God' could be more or less wrong,...our 'theology' could be 'religious fiction' as well, to varying degrees. If you are willing to change or drop any views that could be hindering your knowing true reality, then you are in a good place to begin your journey and realize what 'God' actually IS....as the eternal, infinite I AM.

So dont be so quick to assume someone ELSE is 'brainwashed',...your own mind could be sloshing around in the same cosmic washing machine, sudsing along like other minds in the froth. Welcome to the club.

 

[Caino]

Just because you do not have understanding does not mean the Bible is wrong.

We have understanding, the Bible books were edited but Bible worshipers are not honest people.


From http://errancy.org/index.html


Problem: Saul forgets who David is
Verses: 1 Samuel 16:14-23, 17:55-58;


"There seem to be two accounts in the Old Testament about how King Saul met David, who would later become king himself. The first version indicates that Saul, apparently suffering from mental illness (a "harmful spirit from God"), sent for David after hearing that he was a skilled lyre player. This is 1 Samuel 16:21-23:

And David came to Saul and entered his service. And Saul loved him greatly, and he became his armor-bearer. And Saul sent to Jesse, saying, "Let David remain in my service, for he has found favor in my sight." And whenever the harmful spirit from God was upon Saul, David took the lyre and played it with his hand. So Saul was refreshed and was well, and the harmful spirit departed from him. (ESV)

The second account is in the next chapter, where Saul agrees to let David try to slay Goliath, and then inquires about him. This is 1 Samuel 17:55-58:

As soon as Saul saw David go out against the Philistine, he said to Abner, the commander of the army, "Abner, whose son is this youth?" And Abner said, "As your soul lives, O king, I do not know." And the king said, "Inquire whose son the boy is." And as soon as David returned from the striking down of the Philistine, Abner took him, and brought him before Saul with the head of the Philistine in his hand. And Saul said to him, "Whose son are you, young man?" And David answered, "I am the son of your servant Jesse the Bethlehemite." (ESV)

It seems that Saul did not recognize David. However, it's worth noting that Saul does not ask who David is, but rather who his father is. Why this is important to him is not clear, but it's nowhere stated that he didn't recognize David himself. If he merely forgot who David's father was, the problem is very mild.


However, this explanation is made more tricky by the fact that Saul calls David "this youth", "the boy", and "young man", all of which suggest he didn't recognize him. David wasn't wearing armor, so that can't be the reason.

I suppose that it's possible that Saul's mental illness was particularly severe at this point, which can always explain a great many things.


The non-inerrantist explanation is that there were two different versions of the same story, which at some point were merged together into the final version which we now have: a merging that was not quite seamless, however."

 

[God's Truth]

We have understanding, the Bible books were edited but Bible worshipers are not honest people.


From http://errancy.org/index.html


Problem: Saul forgets who David is
Verses: 1 Samuel 16:14-23, 17:55-58;


"There seem to be two accounts in the Old Testament about how King Saul met David, who would later become king himself. The first version indicates that Saul, apparently suffering from mental illness (a "harmful spirit from God"), sent for David after hearing that he was a skilled lyre player. This is 1 Samuel 16:21-23:






The second account is in the next chapter, where Saul agrees to let David try to slay Goliath, and then inquires about him. This is 1 Samuel 17:55-58:






It seems that Saul did not recognize David. However, it's worth noting that Saul does not ask who David is, but rather who his father is. Why this is important to him is not clear, but it's nowhere stated that he didn't recognize David himself. If he merely forgot who David's father was, the problem is very mild.


However, this explanation is made more tricky by the fact that Saul calls David "this youth", "the boy", and "young man", all of which suggest he didn't recognize him. David wasn't wearing armor, so that can't be the reason.

I suppose that it's possible that Saul's mental illness was particularly severe at this point, which can always explain a great many things.


The non-inerrantist explanation is that there were two different versions of the same story, which at some point were merged together into the final version which we now have: a merging that was not quite seamless, however."

As for asking who is David's father, it could be because Saul promised to reward the man who killed Goliath by giving his father’s house exemption from taxes in Israel.

1 Samuel 17:25 Now the Israelites had been saying, "Do you see how this man keeps coming out? He comes out to defy Israel. The king will give great wealth to the man who kills him. He will also give him his daughter in marriage and will exempt his family from taxes in Israel."

As for Saul commenting on David's appearance, it could very well be to draw attention to the amazement of being such a young person yet such a fierce warrior.

David was a young man. Maybe when he played the harp he was just a teenager, and then later grew up to be a fighter with facial hair and muscles. I can hardly believe you want to cast doubt on the whole Bible because of some things you do not understand.