The Philosophy Of The Urantia Book

[Archaeopteryx]

The same is true for the doctrines of doubt.

There appears to be no such thing. You made it up.

 

[Colter]

That is true and for very sound and incontestable reasons. There are also no Unicorns, gremlins or fairies for the same reasons.

I don't agree with you, I think that your thinking is every bit as limiting as the religious cult. Its like scientific Scientology. Your default reasoning is not a search for truth it's a prevention of discovering anything new.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Colter, it seems as though you are saying that it doesn't matter whether someone is wrong about the divine; it doesn't even matter how wrong they are, so long as they have faith. I find this remarkable, but not in a good way. Don't you care about the truth?

 

[Colter]

You cannot claim it is a work in progress if you cannot actually demonstrate any significant progress in our understanding. We can only progress in our understanding if we admit the possibility of error and critically examine whether the claims are credible. How do we do that?



How do we identify which of these concepts are inadequate and which have merit?

You do that by keeping an open mind, you closed your mind at some point and now use this argumentative legalistic stuff to block any penetration of new thinking.

I have had quite a bit of progress in my understanding in my own life, weather you have or not is your problem to solve.

 

[Colter]

Colter, it seems as though you are saying that it doesn't matter whether someone is wrong about the divine; it doesn't even matter how wrong they are, so long as they have faith. I find this remarkable, but not in a good way. Don't you care about the truth?

Why? Would you destroy the concepts of a 5 year old child because they don't think like you, or would you allow them to grow up?

 

[Colter]

There appears to be no such thing. You made it up.

Promotion of the belief of a Godless universe, that religious people are just imagining things to satisfy static insecurity and provide a rational meaning for existence in light of their general ignorance, those are an example of the doctrines of doubt. You can wish all that you want that such a proposition is not a belief but it is.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

You do that by keeping an open mind, you closed your mind at some point and now use this argumentative legalistic stuff to block any penetration of new thinking.

I do keep an open mind about it, which is why I'm asking you these questions. Accusing me of closed-mindedness is no substitute for a good response to those questions. In fact, it's attempt to shut down the discussion.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Why? Would you destroy the concepts of a 5 year old child because they don't think like you, or would you allow them to grow up?

What does the child liking me or not have to do with anything?

 

[Colter]

Jesus of the UB at Urmia, prior to the beginning of his public work:


Sovereignty — Divine and Human

The brotherhood of men is founded on the fatherhood of God. The family of God is derived from the love of God — God is love. God the Father divinely loves his children, all of them.

The kingdom of heaven, the divine government, is founded on the fact of divine sovereignty — God is spirit. Since God is spirit, this kingdom is spiritual. The kingdom of heaven is neither material nor merely intellectual; it is a spiritual relationship between God and man.

If different religions recognize the spirit sovereignty of God the Father, then will all such religions remain at peace. Only when one religion assumes that it is in some way superior to all others, and that it possesses exclusive authority over other religions, will such a religion presume to be intolerant of other religions or dare to persecute other religious believers.

Religious peace — brotherhood — can never exist unless all religions are willing to completely divest themselves of all ecclesiastical authority and fully surrender all concept of spiritual sovereignty. God alone is spirit sovereign.

You cannot have equality among religions (religious liberty) without having religious wars unless all religions consent to the transfer of all religious sovereignty to some superhuman level, to God himself.

The kingdom of heaven in the hearts of men will create religious unity (not necessarily uniformity) because any and all religious groups composed of such religious believers will be free from all notions of ecclesiastical authority — religious sovereignty.

God is spirit, and God gives a fragment of his spirit self to dwell in the heart of man. Spiritually, all men are equal. The kingdom of heaven is free from castes, classes, social levels, and economic groups. You are all brethren.

But the moment you lose sight of the spirit sovereignty of God the Father, some one religion will begin to assert its superiority over other religions; and then, instead of peace on earth and good will among men, there will start dissensions, recriminations, even religious wars, at least wars among religionists.

Freewill beings who regard themselves as equals, unless they mutually acknowledge themselves as subject to some supersovereignty, some authority over and above themselves, sooner or later are tempted to try out their ability to gain power and authority over other persons and groups. The concept of equality never brings peace except in the mutual recognition of some overcontrolling influence of supersovereignty.​

 

[Colter]

What does the child liking me or not have to do with anything?

Answer the question. Would you destroy the concepts of a 5 year old child because they don't think like you, or would you allow them to grow up?

 

[Colter]

I do keep an open mind about it, which is why I'm asking you these questions. Accusing me of closed-mindedness is no substitute for a good response to those questions. In fact, it's attempt to shut down the discussion.

I've given you a response to your questions, if those responses are not good enough then leave it at that. You don't seem to be a truth seeker rather more a contrarian at every turn. That is to say, I don't think you are really trying to understand, you are trying to discredit.

 

[bhsmte]

I've given you a response to your questions, if those responses are not good enough then leave it at that. You don't seem to be a truth seeker rather more a contrarian at every turn. That is to say, I don't think you are really trying to understand, you are trying to discredit.

With some, when concepts have no objective support, they are not considered reliable concepts.

 

[Colter]

This was the answer I gave you before you got out the "knit picking stick" again:

In order to find spiritual truth one must search in spirit, but you want the end of the adventure before you start the search. I'm in the adventure, I'm in the search, I cannot prove to you the discoveries I have made so far other than share bits of wisdom and encouragement. You are trying to use science to analyze spirit.

This I can say with certainty, once a person begins their search in earnest for God, they have already found him. Going forward they will come to know him better.​

 

[bhsmte]

This was the answer I gave you before you got out the "knit picking stick" again:

In order to find spiritual truth one must search in spirit, but you want the end of the adventure before you start the search. I'm in the adventure, I'm in the search, I cannot prove to you the discoveries I have made so far other than share bits of wisdom and encouragement. You are trying to use science to analyze spirit.

This I can say with certainty, once a person begins their search in earnest for God, they have already found him. Going forward they will come to know him better.​

Translation:

Begin your search with a strong psychological need to believe in God and you will find him.

 

[Colter]

With some, when concepts have no objective support, they are not considered reliable concepts.

Agreed to a point, but mind cannot have the first rational thought without a concept. As we grow in spirit or in intellect our concepts change.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

I've given you a response to your questions, if those responses are not good enough then leave it at that. You don't seem to be a truth seeker rather more a contrarian at every turn. That is to say, I don't think you are really trying to understand, you are trying to discredit.

You claimed that it was a work in progress. I asked how you assess progress - not an unreasonable question, I think. You dodged, accused me of being closed-minded, and now cast me as a contrarian. This is not the first time we have had this conversation. You've reacted similarly on other occasions.

 

[bhsmte]

Agreed to a point, but mind cannot have the first rational thought without a concept. As we grow in spirit or in intellect our concepts change.

That concept may be; observe the objective evidence and then form a conclusion. As opposed to; form a predetermined concept, then go looking for ways to confirm it.

 

[Colter]

Translation:

Begin your search with a strong psychological need to believe in God and you will find him.

Its a search for values, but by the same token, when you are devoted to the doctrines of doubt you will just keep finding more doubts protecting your ego from any real change.

 

[Colter]

You claimed that it was a work in progress. I asked how you assess progress - not an unreasonable question, I think. You dodged, accused me of being closed-minded, and now cast me as a contrarian. This is not the first time we have had this conversation. You've reacted similarly on other occasions.

It gets frustrating wasting time with an intelligent person who doesn't use it. Are you going to answer the question or is this a control thing with you?

 

[bhsmte]

Its a search for values, but by the same token, when you are devoted to the doctrines of doubt you will just keep finding more doubts protecting your ego from any real change.

You mean that the change I resisted when I went from Christian of 40 years, to not being a Christian.

I think that would qualify as a change and a change that required me to have an open mind and accept and recognize new knowledge I did not possess.