The benefits of reading the Urantia Book

[Amigoo]

Re: https://www.perplexity.ai/

Q: Why does the Bahai Faith reject the Trinity concept?

"Based on the search results provided, here is a summary of how the Baha'i Faith differs from the Christian doctrine of the Trinity:

The Oneness of God: Baha'is believe in a single, all-powerful, and unknowable God, rejecting the Christian concept of the Trinity (God as three co-equal persons - the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit).

The Nature of Jesus Christ: Baha'is believe that Jesus was a Manifestation of God, a divine messenger, but not God himself or part of a Trinity. They reject the Christian doctrines of the Incarnation and the divinity of Christ.

Contradictory Concepts of God: The Baha'i view of God as a single, unknowable essence is seen as contradictory to the Christian doctrines of the Trinity and the Incarnation, which Baha'is view as logically inconsistent.

Progressive Revelation: Baha'is believe that the founders of the world's major religions, including Jesus, were all Manifestations of God sent to guide humanity at different times. They see the Baha'i Faith as the latest in this series of divine revelations.

Rejection of Religious Warfare: The Baha'i Faith condemns the religious warfare and divisions that have occurred over doctrinal disputes, such as the "Trinity Wars" within Christianity. They emphasize the need to abandon prejudices and find the common truth at the core of all religions.

In summary, the Baha'i Faith rejects the Christian doctrine of the Trinity as logically contradictory, and instead sees all major religions as progressive revelations from a single, unknowable God. This fundamental difference in the conception of the divine is a key distinction between Baha'i and Christian beliefs."

Analysis: The Trinity concept is so foundational to Christianity that the Bahai Faith cannot be a substitute for this religion,
albeit the Bahai Faith seems to be excellent community to learn/experience how religions can evolve together. Interestingly,
the Trinity reminds that the universe is teeming with beings as revealed in the UB but where else? It's not so believable that
the God exists alone except for the humans who spiritually advance to Paradise.


Re: https://www.perplexity.ai/

Q: What religions promote the Trinity of Father, Son, and Spirit?

"Trinity - Christian doctrine of God in three persons.

Definition - Central Christian doctrine defining one God existing in three coequal, coeternal, consubstantial divine persons:
God the Father, God the Son (Jesus Christ), and God the Holy Spirit.

Key Concept - Three distinct persons (hypostases) sharing one essence/substance/nature (homoousion),
highlighting both their distinction and indissoluble unity.

Historical Development - Formulated among early Christians and fathers of the Church to understand the relationship
between Jesus and God, based on scriptural documents and prior traditions.

The Christian doctrine of the Trinity is the central belief that there is one God who exists in three distinct but equal persons:
the Father, the Son (Jesus Christ), and the Holy Spirit. This doctrine is essential for salvation in most Christian denominations.
The key points are:

- Christianity is the primary religion that promotes the doctrine of the Trinity.

- The Trinity is the belief that God is one being who exists as three distinct, eternal, and co-equal persons:
the Father, the Son (Jesus Christ), and the Holy Spirit.

- This Trinitarian understanding of God is a core tenet of Christian theology and is found in the Bible,
though the specific term "Trinity" is not used.

- Other religions, such as Judaism and Islam, reject the concept of the Trinity and believe in a single, unitary God.

- The doctrine of the Trinity was formally defined and affirmed at the First Council of Nicaea in 325 CE,
though the concept had been developing among early Christian theologians.

In summary, the Christian doctrine of the Trinity, which sees God as three distinct but united persons, is a uniquely Christian belief
that is not shared by other major world religions. It is a central and essential part of Christian theology and faith."


Long story short ...

The true Paradise Trinity was revealed three times before Jesus' revelation ...
and then he was believed to be that Eternal Son of the Paradise Trinity:

"The first Urantian revelation leading to the comprehension of the Paradise Trinity
was made by the staff of Prince Caligastia about (500,000) years ago." (104:1.1)

"The second presentation of the Trinity was made by Adam and Eve,
(37,900 years ago) in the first and second gardens." (104:1.2)

"The third presentation of the Trinity was made by Machiventa Melchizedek (4,000 years ago),
and this doctrine was symbolized by the three concentric circles which the sage of Salem wore" (104:1.3)

"Jesus taught his apostles the truth regarding the persons of the Paradise Trinity,
but they thought he spoke figuratively and symbolically." (104:1.10)


Rod

[Amigoo]

A Perplexity response that hints that Jesus must be re-presented to the world as the pre-Christ that he was.
This suggests, IMO, Christianity will not be that new presentation until this religion acquires the true essence of Jesus' life
and teachings. In the meantime, many religions can participate in the development of this new presentation:


Re: https://www.perplexity.ai/

Q: How can the life and teachings of Jesus be re-presented to the world without Jesus' centuries-traditional "Christ" persona?

"Jesus' teachings and life can be re-presented to the world in a fresh and accessible way by focusing on his core message of love, compassion, and inner transformation, rather than the traditional 'Christ' persona. Here are some key points:

Emphasize Jesus' Radical Teachings

Jesus taught a revolutionary message of unconditional love, non-violence, and concern for the poor and marginalized. His teachings challenged the religious and political establishment of his time and called for a radical inner transformation. Highlighting these teachings in a direct and relatable way can make them more accessible to modern audiences.

Explore Jesus as a Wisdom Teacher

Many scholars view Jesus as a profound wisdom teacher in the tradition of other great spiritual figures. Presenting his parables, metaphors, and insights into the human condition can resonate with spiritual seekers from diverse backgrounds.

Focus on His Embodiment of Love and Compassion

Jesus' life was a powerful example of compassion, forgiveness, and selfless service to others. Emphasizing how he lived out his teachings through acts of kindness, healing, and inclusion can inspire people to embody similar values.

Examine His Countercultural Stance

Jesus defied societal norms and power structures of his era. Exploring his solidarity with the poor, criticism of religious hypocrisy, and radical inclusivity can highlight his countercultural message that challenged injustice and oppression.

Highlight His Teachings on Inner Transformation

At the heart of Jesus' message was a call for inner transformation - to cultivate love, humility, and a sense of oneness with the divine. Re-presenting these teachings on self-awareness and spiritual awakening can appeal to those seeking deeper meaning and purpose. By re-framing Jesus' life and teachings in this way, his profound wisdom and example can be appreciated by people from all backgrounds, without being filtered through the traditional 'Christ' persona that may alienate some."


Interesting response to this next question with subtle confirmation that "Joshua" indeed associates with Jesus' humanity ... and that "Jesus" associates with the Biblical story of Jesus (but continually emphasizes that story with less opportunity for the UB story?). New insight: "Uncle Joshua", from a child's and young adult's perspective, would create a better story today to highlight the humanity of Jesus. And this story could easily co-exist with the continuing traditional stories! Is such author (or team) now in residence on Urantia?

Q: Would "Joshua ben Joseph" be effective in re-presenting the life and teachings of Jesus as his pre-Christ persona?

"The evidence suggests that 'Joshua ben Joseph' is not an accurate or effective way to re-present the life and teachings of Jesus Christ: The search results indicate that "Joshua ben Joseph" refers to the Hebrew name of Jesus, but this name was not commonly used to refer to him during his lifetime or in the early Christian tradition.

While Jesus was indeed a Jewish man named Joshua (the Hebrew form of the name), the search results make clear that he was more commonly known as 'Jesus' (the Greek form of the name) during his ministry and in the Gospels. Furthermore, the concept of a 'Messiah ben Joseph' is not found in the biblical accounts of Jesus, but rather originates from later rabbinic literature, centuries after Jesus lived. There is no evidence that Jesus himself identified with or promoted this concept.

The search results also suggest that attempting to reframe Jesus as simply 'Joshua ben Joseph' could be misleading, as it may imply he was merely a human figure without the divine attributes and salvific role ascribed to him in Christian theology.

In summary, while "Joshua ben Joseph" accurately reflects Jesus' Hebrew name, using this designation alone would not effectively re-present the full scope of his life, teachings, and identity as understood within the Christian tradition. A more comprehensive portrayal would need to incorporate the name "Jesus" as well as the theological significance attributed to him in the New Testament."

Rod

[CAM7215]

So, the Christian religions all believe in the Trinity? I was raised (indoctrinated) in the Roman Catholic church. That doesn't mean I understand the concept of the Trinity or why God is not gender neutral. Perhaps if I keep up with my reading, all will be revealed

CAM

[Geoff]

So, the Christian religions all believe in the Trinity? I was raised (indoctrinated) in the Roman Catholic church. That doesn't mean I understand the concept of the Trinity or why God is not gender neutral. Perhaps if I keep up with my reading, all will be revealed

CAM

Typically the beliefs that make one "christian" are set out in the Nicene Creed. And yes trinity is in there. But in my view that just defines "orthodoxy". I am a heretic, as would any follower of TUB that also claimed to be "christian". I am not even certain I accept any of the Nicene creed. Oh I might recall it claimed Jesus died and was resurrected. I accept that although its not a physical resurrection I believe in.

NICENE CREED (Professed at Sunday Mass) We believe in one God, the Father, the Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, of all that is seen and unseen. We believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father; God from God, Light from Light, true God from true God; begotten not made, one in being with the Father. Through Him all things were made. For us men and for our salvation He came down from heaven. By the power of the Holy Spirit He was born of the Virgin Mary and became man. For our sake He was crucified under Pontius Pilate. He suffered, died, and was buried. On the third day He rose again, in fulfillment of the Scriptures. He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and His kingdom will have no end. We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Giver of life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son. With the Father and the Son He is worshipped and glorified. He has spoken through the prophets. We believe in one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church. We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. We look for the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Amen.

Geoff

[CAM7215]

Yes ---- well, I am a recovering Catholic as they say. HA! If you said "Mass" - I suspect you might have been there, too. I could get on my soapbox about Catholicism but I won't. I just know there's no religion out there I'd swear my allegiance to. The Akashic Construct works for me --- that's how I roll - if it works, it's sacred and stays with me.

CAM

[Sandy]

I grew up Lutheran. So by Catholic standards, I already had a strike against me...
I was thinking this morning while I was drinking my coffee and watching the squirrels about experience versus theology or doctrine. I guess what brought it to mind was the memory of a conversation I had years ago with my nephew who later on became a Lutheran minister. He was curious about my interest in the Urantia book...and unbeknownst to me it was not for his benefit he asked but to find a crack in my "armor." ( I didn't realize at the time but much of the family thought I was on an express train to "the hot place.")

I had written him about the value I placed on my personal experience with God, the celestial friends I had made, and how much it spoke to my heart and inspired me every day to know God better.

Well.... That did not sit well with him at all and it was sort of like doctrine first and then make everything fit around it.
It was then I realized that you cannot mold yourself around anybody else's concept of what God is or how best to know him better. I realized that in the many decades I was a Lutheran I was not inspired to know God better. But with that said, some people were inspired by the doctrines and rituals. I think it is one of those very personal places within that gets filled with different things by different people. Maybe "religion and doctrine" translate into real and lasting "God experience" for some people within their own chosen limitations.???

But I am with Cam...the Akashic Construct opened so many doors for me.... and I could have gone in many directions from there...still can. There is no place I can explore where God cannot find me if I immerse myself in Love.
I would not trade my journey for anything as I contemplate the spiritual doors and friendships, both human and celestial, that will last an eternity.
xxSandy

[Amigoo]

For the record ...

My ongoing perspective since first reading the UB in 1970 is that this Fifth Epochal Revelation is for the entire world,
regardless of one's religion (or none). The intent from above, IMO, is that no religion be perceived as sole caretaker
of this revelation. That Jesus' life and teachings are pre-Christianity gives significant opportunity to other religions
to independently adopt the revelation.

True story ...

When first moving to Dallas in 1970, I wanted proof that God exists,
so I "talked" with God about this as I explored the Big City streets.
God then questioned to whom I was addressing this request.

Rod

[Geoff]

I suspect you might have been there, too.

YUp. Considered the priesthood and it was the very first decision I ever made based on FEELING. The FEELING was no.

I could get on my soapbox about Catholicism but I won't.

Yeah we all can. I dont have any issues with any religion right now. Its not my journey but others are free to make that choice. Once upon a time I was on a soapbox, but its really pointless. And if directed at others, its unloving. I can't be boxed in. Despite my love of, and value for the Padgett Messages and the change they have effected in my life, I have moved way way beyond them. They remain the foundation of my spiritual practice, and that will never change.

Geoff

[CAM7215]

Geoff: Very good. And you're right --- pretty much my philosophy ... each of us has our own individual journey. As I've always said, I have my hands full leading my own life. Jeesh!

CAM

[Amigoo]

"Christianity Lite"?

Today's "Christians" suggest less institutional, Jesus-focused spirituality,
inclusive of his divinity-incarnation and resurrection".

Rod

[Geoff]

"Christianity Lite"?

Today's "Christians" suggest less institutional, Jesus-focused spirituality,
inclusive of his divinity-incarnation and resurrection".

Rod

My perspective on the Christian religions is that they are almost without benefit. If they adopted the Buddhist principles of living, they would at least being doing something. But the notion that "believing on" is all you need do, is very dangerous and totally useless. So no, I can't see a "lite" version has any value when the original version was so flawed. As Jesus told Padgett if he wanted to go to a church, he would be best going to a charismatic church where at least they get their feelings and energies involved, and just ignore the doctrine. I think what is likely to happen is that it will simply die out. In fact my friend Al Fike has published three modern books from Jesus which offer a modern and realistic explanation of things including what is happening right now. If anyone was interested, they can be found here, and bought on Amazon. Or simply read on that site. I feel that these books are enough to put you on the highest soul path available.

Geoff

[Amigoo]

Re: https://soultruth.ca/jesus-teachings/
"Jesus' Messages to the World"

Interesting reading! Quick review suggests Jesus is an ascending being -
not divine Son of God once incarnated as the Jesus of Nazareth.
This material so differs from the UB cosmology that it requires
a leap of faith to justify exploration of such channeling

This material so differs that I sense it's expressions of a human mind -
not that of a Creator Son, now elevated to Master Son of our universe.

Rod

[Geoff]

Re: https://soultruth.ca/jesus-teachings/
"Jesus' Messages to the World"

Interesting reading! Quick review suggests Jesus is an ascending being -
not divine Son of God once incarnated as the Jesus of Nazareth.
This material so differs from the UB cosmology that it requires
a leap of faith to justify exploration of such channeling!

Rod

You are truly assuming a lot. The only "entity" that is not "ascending" is the Prime Source - to my limited knowledge. And even the Prime Source I have seen said is growing. Jesus has never said what spiritual level he is at, merely that he is ascending. That does not infer he is not a Creator Son.

As you are really a babe in the woods regarding levels of spiritual progression, can I link again my diagram, and point out all beings at and above Dimension 7 are DIVINE and eternal. I get TUB never really discusses progression. Its assumed to just happen. But I also doubt very much it says anywhere Creator sons are stagnant beings. There is a Law of Progression. Nothing can be stagnant for eternity. I do understand that "as created" beings do their job for an immense amount of time, before progressing further, but progress they do.

[Amigoo]

You are truly assuming a lot. The only "entity" that is not "ascending" is the Prime Source

Not assuming! - believing what I've been reading 50 years:

"Literally and figuratively, spiritually and personally, the Father and the Sons are one.
It is a fact: He who has seen a Creator Son has seen the Father." (UB, 32:3.6)

This text highlights that Jesus - (Michael, "Descending Son of God") -
is so like God ("First Source and Center") that his ascension, post-resurrection
and elevated to Master Son, is unlike that of advancing mortals from the planets.

In fact, Michael having existed as a Paradise Son long before his Jesus incarnation,
is still Michael with "Jesus" being his experience living as a mortal on Urantia.

Rod

[Geoff]

"Literally and figuratively, spiritually and personally, the Father and the Sons are one.
It is a fact: He who has seen a Creator Son has seen the Father." (UB, 32:3.6)

You don't even understand what happens after the Mansion Worlds. All those ascenders are "at-one" with the Source. So is my own mother. Yes when you meet Jesus he displays the character of Father. That does not make him Source. It would be true of any ascender at 12D.

Geoff

[Amigoo]

Thanks! I'll need to digest this new perspective in nibbles
since it's so unlike UB instruction.

Rod

[Geoff]

Yesterday I learned a whole lot more of dimensions, and how it is Father can be timeless, formless, non-spacial and both within and outside of all dimensions. Because of the way He created the dimensions 2 to 12. I will need to read it over and over again, but its incredible. Even the nature of 2D is mind blowing.

[Sandy]

I spent over an hour writing a post because I am concerned this battle of beliefs is getting personal again. I decided not to post it and throw water on what seems to be "fun" for both of you. But I do ask that when we discuss beliefs we remember that we are all humans and follow our own inner guidance. No one is right and no one is wrong when one considers nothing can be proven one way or the other at this time.

xxSandy

[Sandy]

Okay, I apologize for interfering. You guys are adults and don't need me looking over your shoulder and telling you how to act and react. I care about both of you and your beliefs are your beliefs and I honor them.
xxSandy

[Amigoo]

AI says this "conflict" is just the beginning of dialogue
(since "nothing can be proven one way or the other at this time")

Re: https://www.perplexity.ai/

Q: How important is dialogue in real life?

"Dialogue is extremely important in real life for effective communication and building relationships.
Here are some key reasons why dialogue matters:

Conveys information and ideas. Dialogue allows us to share knowledge, thoughts, and perspectives with others.
It is the primary means for exchanging information verbally.

Facilitates understanding. Through back-and-forth dialogue, we can ask questions, clarify points,
and ensure mutual understanding on topics or issues.

Builds connections. Engaging in dialogue helps foster interpersonal bonds and relationships.
The give-and-take of conversation allows people to relate to one another on a deeper level.

Resolves conflicts. Dialogue provides a constructive way to address disagreements or differing viewpoints.
It enables compromise, negotiation, and conflict resolution through open discussion.

Reveals personalities. The way people communicate through dialogue - their word choices, tone, mannerisms -
offers insights into their personality, background, and emotional state.

Promotes collaboration. Effective dialogue is essential for teamwork, collective problem-solving,
and coordinating efforts, whether in personal or professional settings.

In essence, dialogue is fundamental to how humans interact and cooperate with one another. The ability to engage in authentic,
eaningful dialogue underpins interpersonal relationships, social cohesion, and the exchange of ideas that drives progress.
Written communication has its place; dialogue remains irreplaceable for depth of connection and understanding it can foster."

Rod

[Sandy]

Thanks for that, Rod.
I will keep the importance of dialogue in mind in the future.
xxSandy

[Geoff]

Yes I also think dialogue is very important. I do think my frustration came through a bit back there, but Rod shrugged it off. Earned max points with that!!

I am reading a very different explanation of the universe to anything I ever came across before. But seeing as Rod and I have had difficulties communicating what dimensions are, I will I think pass. But just to tickle your fancy, they were talking about 0D, 1D and 2D. Now 0D is the opposite of 1D, where 1D is consciousness only - devoid of time. So 0D is nothing at all. Yet is apparently necessary to define God who is 1D. So nothingness helps define all that is? And their view is it all began with 0D and 1D which always were.

Yeah you can see this is heading for trouble.

Geoff

[Amigoo]

Yes, terminology can be intimidating ...
but I can associate "nothingness" with "nothing burger"
... unless it's faux meat (fake nothingness).

Interesting discussion contrasting the physical universe with other-than-physical.
However, time seems to be an aspect of the spiritual universe as well. Nonetheless,
dimensions as categories (with their own continuum) seems to make the concept
more digestible than just one continuum beginning with the three dimensions:

Re: https://www.perplexity.ai/

Q: Is mind a similar dimension as time?

"No, mind and time are not similar dimensions according to the information provided in the search results. The key points are:

Time is considered the fourth dimension of our physical universe, unified with the three spatial dimensions into four-dimensional spacetime as described by Einstein's theory of relativity. It is a fundamental property of the universe that allows for the flow and passage of events.

Mind, on the other hand, is described as operating on a higher level beyond the four dimensions of spacetime. It is portrayed as a separate construct that allows for perception, consciousness, and higher cognitive functions like thinking, reasoning, and self-awareness.

Specifically, the first result proposes that mind operates on multiple 'layers' or dimensions beyond the four dimensions of spacetime, with basic perception at the 5th dimension, human-level self-reflective consciousness at the 6th and 7th dimensions, and mystical perception at the 8th dimension and beyond.

The second result discusses how the brain processes temporal information and the role of neural oscillations in timing and time perception, but it does not equate mind itself as a dimension similar to time.

So in summary, while mind and time are related in that the mind allows for the perception and experience of time, they are fundamentally distinct concepts - time is a dimension of the physical universe while mind refers to the higher cognitive faculties that operate beyond the spatiotemporal dimensions."

Rod