“The UB could not be more clear.” I can accept some of what TUB says. But as human beings evolve and our understanding of reality grows, some of it will be proven wrong. Keep in mind the limitations of revelation based on human understanding of 1934. “The entire post should be deleted. ” This forums’ administration may do so any time they want. “The Hollow Moon idea is generally considered a conspiracy theory and falls into the realm of science fiction.” Yes, I have already said that. But there is a real space race taking place. The focus where projected lunar bases are planned to be built is near the moon’s south polar region. There is a reason for that. One that is quite difficult to accept. “Solid Evidence: Lunar samples, gravity mapping, and data from the Apollo missions confirm the Moon is a solid body with a crust, mantle, and core, consistent with the giant-impact hypothesis.” As I’ve already stated, the status quo must be maintained. There is other data which has not been revealed to the general public. That data doesn’t come from the Soviet Union. I’ve attempted to find videos containing second or third hand references to that data. I fully realize this is not scientific. In some ways native science is slowly becoming aligned with the uninspired scientific teachings of TUB, otherwise there is no scientific proof for most of what The Urantia Book says. Including architectural worlds. You have made your viewpoint clear. We’re not going to agree on this. Believe whatever you want, Bradly. It makes no difference to me. I have nothing to prove. I have mistakenly thought students of The Urantia Book might be open minded enough to consider things which it does not explicitly state. Only time will tell if the moon is more than what it seems to be. Only time will tell if those lunar bases will actually be built.
I appreciate the response. The disconnect/disagreements here are not about being “open minded” or not. One who reads the UB is often sincerely seeking more than they know or understand (open minded). Those who eventually come to believe it’s claims and reality perspective must overcome many prior beliefs and prejudices to embrace such teachings too.
But certainly there are some who only seek affirmations, both in the text and here too. Many cannot handle the inherent conflicts and conundrums of paradox, or the text which contradicts their existing beliefs. And then there are some seeking an audience to convince or for proselytizing, to save the UB students from the teachings within the text.
Like some others before, you appear to believe that “uninspired” somehow means false or untrue, as if inspired might mean factual. Both beliefs are inaccurate.
If truth (a function of personal subjective perspective) and fact (impervious and indifferent to perspectives, beliefs, and opinions – objective) are distinct (and certainly they are distinct), then one might claim that truth is inspired while fact is, by definition and always, uninspired. The same is true of the historical and chronology record and sequences of time provided – not inspired but a factual recital.
Many others have been here before you to generously persuade UB students how wrong the UB is. It’s a curious and interesting phenomenon.
I find it illogical, perhaps even irrational, to believe in architectural worlds as presented in the Papers but then ignore or disagree with the detailed history, age, purpose, and construction of the architectural spheres as given in the same source document by what it obviously and redundantly and “explicitly states”.
No one here has ever been coerced or even asked to agree with the universe reality perspective in the Papers. But it is hoped that we can all agree on what the UB actually says.
It says what it says and doesn’t say what it doesn’t say. The contents are not metaphorical or mystical. The UB says what it means and means what it says regardless of what we believe or agree with or disagree with. Like reality itself, the UB is indifferent to our beliefs and theories and lack of beliefs and our disbelief too.
Finally, for now, the Forum is a study group of the UB to discover, explore, study, and learn about the Papers. All other sources and materials and opinions and theories must of course be compared and contrasted then with the UB text.
Don’t you think?
"Live loyally today—grow—and tomorrow will attend to itself. The quickest way for a tadpole to become a frog is to live loyally each moment as a tadpole."
