Preview: a read-only copy of the forum. To post or reply, use the current forum.

Need clarification on the rebellion papers…

278 posts · 10 participants · started Aug 22, 2014, 2:00 AM

BradlyParticipant
Sep 14, 2014, 3:04 PM
Thanks Bonita….even the rebels after rebellion and entrenchment were honored and protected by the sanctity of free will – I found this in my sequential reading last night; an interesting form of “liaison” – benign still but functional nonetheless:

(489.8) 43:4.5 The residence of the Faithful of Days on Edentia is located to the north of these residences of the Most Highs and is known as the “mount of Paradise assembly.” On this consecrated highland the ascending mortals periodically assemble to hear this Son of Paradise tell of the long and intriguing journey of progressing mortals through the one billion perfection worlds of Havona and on to the indescribable delights of Paradise. And it is at these special gatherings on Mount Assembly that the morontia mortals become more fully acquainted with the various groups of personalities of origin in the central universe.

(490.1) 43:4.6 The traitorous Lucifer, onetime sovereign of Satania, in announcing his claims to increased jurisdiction, sought to displace all superior orders of sonship in the governmental plan of the local universe. He purposed in his heart, saying: “I will exalt my throne above the Sons of God; I will sit upon the mount of assembly in the north; I will be like the Most High.”

(490.2) 43:4.7 The one hundred System Sovereigns come periodically to the Edentia conclaves which deliberate on the welfare of the constellation. After the Satania rebellion the archrebels of Jerusem were wont to come up to these Edentia councils just as they had on former occasions. And there was found no way to stop this arrogant effrontery until after the bestowal of Michael on Urantia and his subsequent assumption of unlimited sovereignty throughout all Nebadon. Never, since that day, have these instigators of sin been permitted to sit in the Edentia councils of the loyal System Sovereigns.

(490.3) 43:4.8 That the teachers of olden times knew of these things is shown by the record: “And there was a day when the Sons of God came to present themselves before the Most Highs, and Satan came also and presented himself among them.” And this is a statement of fact regardless of the connection in which it chances to appear.

(490.4) 43:4.9 Since the triumph of Christ, all Norlatiadek is being cleansed of sin and rebels. Sometime before Michael’s death in the flesh the fallen Lucifer’s associate, Satan, sought to attend such an Edentia conclave, but the solidification of sentiment against the archrebels had reached the point where the doors of sympathy were so well-nigh universally closed that there could be found no standing ground for the Satania adversaries. When there exists no open door for the reception of evil, there exists no opportunity for the entertainment of sin. The doors of the hearts of all Edentia closed against Satan; he was unanimously rejected by the assembled System Sovereigns, and it was at this time that the Son of Man “beheld Satan fall as lightning from heaven.”

"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."
MaraParticipant
Sep 14, 2014, 3:10 PM
To me it is audacious for us to imagine how and in what manner the liaison occurred . We like to speculate. But the liaison in the production of midwayers is a puzzlement to the revelators. If the revelators can’t explain it, how the heck are we to comprehend it?

77:1:2 [#3]

It is well always to bear in mind that the successive bestowals of the Sons of God on an evolving planet produce marked changes in the spiritual economy of the realm and sometimes so modify the workings of the interassociation of spiritual and material agencies on a planet as to create situations indeed difficult of understanding. The status of the one hundred corporeal members of Prince Caligastia’s staff illustrates just such a unique interassociation: As ascendant morontia citizens of Jerusem they were supermaterial creatures without reproductive prerogatives. As descendant planetary ministers on Urantia they were material sex creatures capable of procreating material offspring (as some of them later did). What we cannot satisfactorily explain is how these one hundred could function in the parental role on a supermaterial level, but that is exactly what happened. A supermaterial (nonsexual) liaison of a male and a female member of the corporeal staff resulted in the appearance of the first-born of the primary midwayers.

Perhaps “liaison” is the best word they have to use to describe an interassociation. I do think in the case of the rebellion, the liaison was to use an overpowering argument and the force of it to corrupt the freewill choice of beings to Lucifer’s cause. Those being are responsible for their choices. And some have repented.
Brooklyn_bornParticipant
Sep 14, 2014, 3:10 PM

Bonita wrote:

Brooklyn_born wrote:

But there is massive danger in allowing mortals to believe that they are in danger of being violated by superior, unseen beings.

I am assuming you listened to the audio. Where does Chris say that the danger of being violated by superior, unseen beings exists as a possible event?

BB
BonitaParticipant
Sep 14, 2014, 3:12 PM

Brooklyn_born wrote:

Certainly he is not telling anyone that they possibly could be raped when they enter the mansion world in the event of a rebellion.

Then why bring it up at all? The fact that evil forces can intimately invade another person without their permission regardless of where they are domiciled (here or in heaven) is an enormous LIE. A HUGE, HUGE LIE.

The other foible here is trying to convince people that protection of their mind and soul comes from Physical Controllers. It’s such a huge bubfameister, almost like believing that there are things to protect you from the evil eye . . . it’s VERY primitive thinking. What protects us is our loyalty to Michael. We have the Spirit of Truth; Manotia did not have that, but she had Michael himself, which is even better. Teaching people that anyone should rely on physical protection against destruction of the mind and spirit is fallacious, irresponsible, and in a way, helps the rebel cause in confusing and confounding people. That’s why you see such strong condemnation BB. It’s important even though you cannot seem to recognize it right now.
BradlyParticipant
Sep 14, 2014, 3:16 PM
Brooklyn_born wrote:

When did you hear Chris claim to be an ‘expert’?

Well…..anyone who professes to be a teacher and operate an academy and anyone at all who is paid for their “services” is, by definition, claiming to be an expert. Otherwise he’s just another dude with the text….does he not “explain” what the written word “means”….and earn a living doing so?

I didn’t say he teaches fear, I said his teaching creates fear if he teaches that any being at any time in any way is in endangered by any other….or believes it to be so. Are we to believe Manotia believed herself to be in danger at the hands of others? So Manotia was afraid? Of a delusion and universal falsehood? Come, come. What a crock. If such is not possible and no such fear existed…then where does Chris’ “speculation” come from or take us? What’s the purpose and the point then? What is being taught hereby? What “lesson” is to be learned?

I certainly don’t (now) believe Chris is any expert at all. Just a guy making a buck. And, I hope, doing the best he can with what he’s got. Hope many benefit thereby. Good for him. Not so much for me.

Let me ask: what has his teaching “clarified” for you? What confusions have arrived or been dispelled by this teaching?

"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."
BonitaParticipant
Sep 14, 2014, 3:19 PM

Brooklyn_born wrote:

I am assuming you listened to the audio. Where does Chris say that the danger of being violated by superior, unseen beings exists as a possible event?

Quoting Chris from the broadcast in question:

“For instance, taking that all the way to the direct thought that we have when we see the word liaison, you can have a non-sex liaison. You can overlap your energy systems and it’s really cool. I mean It’s very intimate and if you haven’t asked permission for that it would be called rape. So, I mean, Lucifer and his crew are thinking they’re going to break the etiquette here. Try to get a whole bunch of fellow rebels to impose their negative energy upon Manotia and disrupt his body. But you notice that not a single loyal seraphim was harmed. There are beings called Master Physical Controllers that don’t go into rebellion. Good luck on that attempt guys.”

He says you can have a non-sex liaison by overlapping your energy systems and that you can do that to other people without their permission, which is called rape. He says that Lucifer got a bunch of celestials together to gang rape Manotia. I ask you, if Lucifer can do that to an angel, how much more susceptible is a human to celestial gang rape? It seems if they break the etiquette with angels, what would stop them from breaking the etiquette with humans? And if you have not made that link of logic yourself, I assure you that others will. That is the danger. I know Lucifer is locked up, but Caligastia roams free. Think about it.
Brooklyn_bornParticipant
Sep 14, 2014, 3:22 PM

Bradly wrote:

Brooklyn_born wrote:

When did you hear Chris claim to be an ‘expert’? Well…..anyone who professes to be a teacher and operate an academy and anyone at all who is paid for their “services” is, by definition, claiming to be an expert. Otherwise he’s just another dude with the text….does he not “explain” what the written word “means”….and earn a living doing so? I didn’t say he teaches fear, I said his teaching creates fear if he teaches that any being at any time in any way is in endangered by any other….or believes it to be so. Are we to believe Manotia believed herself to be in danger at the hands of others? So Manotia was afraid? Of a delusion and universal falsehood? Come, come. What a crock. If such is not possible and no such fear existed…then where does Chris’ “speculation” come from or take us? What’s the purpose and the point then? What is being taught hereby? What “lesson” is to be learned? I certainly don’t (now) believe Chris is any expert at all. Just a guy making a buck. And, I hope, doing the best he can with what he’s got. Hope many benefit thereby. Good for him. Not so much for me. Let me ask: what has his teaching “clarified” for you? What confusions have arrived or been dispelled by this teaching?

Bradly, I am an adjunct professor. I teach undergrad courses. I have a master’s degree in aviation science and on track for a PhD in transportation planning and engineering. I do not consider myself an expert nor am I considered one in my field, yet I teach. I have competency and proficiency in the disciplines I teach, however, enough to meet minimum qualification for an adjunct. Because you are teacher does not necessarily mean you are an “expert.” You are unfairly putting titles on Chris, Bradly.

BB
Brooklyn_bornParticipant
Sep 14, 2014, 3:25 PM

Bradly wrote:

Brooklyn_born wrote:

I didn’t say he teaches fear, I said his teaching creates fear if he teaches that any being at any time in any way is in endangered by any other…

And I am saying he never taught that, or at least I may have missed that part. Could you quote where he teaches any being is endangered by another?

BB
Brooklyn_bornParticipant
Sep 14, 2014, 3:33 PM

Bonita wrote:

Brooklyn_born wrote:

I am assuming you listened to the audio. Where does Chris say that the danger of being violated by superior, unseen beings exists as a possible event?

Quoting Chris from the broadcast in question:

“For instance, taking that all the way to the direct thought that we have when we see the word liaison, you can have a non-sex liaison. You can overlap your energy systems and it’s really cool. I mean It’s very intimate and if you haven’t asked permission for that it would be called rape. So, I mean, Lucifer and his crew are thinking they’re going to break the etiquette here. Try to get a whole bunch of fellow rebels to impose their negative energy upon Manotia and disrupt his body. But you notice that not a single loyal seraphim was harmed. There are beings called Master Physical Controllers that don’t go into rebellion. Good luck on that attempt guys.”

He says you can have a non-sex liaison by overlapping your energy systems and that you can do that to other people without their permission, which is called rape. He says that Lucifer got a bunch of celestials together to gang rape Manotia. I ask you, if Lucifer can do that to an angel, how much more susceptible is a human to celestial gang rape? It seems if they break the etiquette with angels, what would stop them from breaking the etiquette with humans? And if you have not made that link of logic yourself, I assure you that others will. That is the danger. I know Lucifer is locked up, but Caligastia roams free. Think about it.

No he does not, Bonita. You are interpolating stuff into his statements. He tells us these angels ‘thought’ they could pull off the IMPOSSIBLE. They were DELUDED by that belief.

Look:

“… Lucifer and his crew are thinking they’re going to break the etiquette here. Try to get a whole bunch of fellow rebels to impose their negative energy upon Manotia and disrupt his body. But you notice that not a single loyal seraphim was harmed. There are beings called Master Physical Controllers that don’t go into rebellion. Good luck on that attempt guys.”

He says it right there —> “Lucifer and his crew are thinking they’re going to break the etiquette here…. but… notice…. not a single loyal seraphim was harmed… good luck on that ATTEMPT“

BB
BonitaParticipant
Sep 14, 2014, 3:43 PM

Brooklyn_born wrote:

Because you are teacher does not necessarily mean you are an “expert.”

Expert means that you have comprehensive and authoritative knowledge on the subject you teach. If you do not have comprehensive and authoritative knowledge on a given subject, you should not teach it. To do otherwise would be a disservice to your students. If you must teach something that you do not have comprehensive and authoritative knowledge on, then you should announce that fact before attempting to teach; admit that you are speculating, assuming, or teaching based on limited knowledge. Personally, I would find that embarrassing and would not even attempt to go there.

I taught post-doctoral students. If I dared to open my mouth on any subject, it had better be because I had comprehensive and authoritative knowledge on the subject. My students were sharp enough to recognize someone flubbing around. If I did not have extensive knowledge on a given subject, I would keep my mouth shut and direct my students to an authority on it. It’s dangerous to teach about things you don’t comprehensively understand. That’s why professors research and publish so much, to establish their authority on a subject.

The fact that Chris taught what he taught indicates to me that he was pretty certain of his authoritative knowledge on the subject. And don’t tell me that he’s so humble that he would never think such a thing. I’m not buying that he’s a lowly seventh circler, as he says. That would mean that he hasn’t grown morally or spiritually since the age of five. Then again, if he believes in the possibility of celestial gang rape, then maybe it’s true. I see red flags waving everywhere. Others see them too, so I know I’m not hallucinating.

I do wish he would come here and defend himself. Perhaps he has new ideas on the subject, or perhaps he could clarify what he meant, rather than what he actually said. Sometimes what you really mean doesn’t come out as well as you ‘d like it. That could be the case here, but we’ll never know unless he clears it up.
Brooklyn_bornParticipant
Sep 14, 2014, 3:55 PM

Bonita wrote:

Brooklyn_born wrote:

Because you are teacher does not necessarily mean you are an “expert.”

Expert means that you have comprehensive and authoritative knowledge on the subject you teach. If you do not have comprehensive and authoritative knowledge on a given subject, you should not teach it. To do otherwise would be a disservice to your students. If you must teach something that you do not have comprehensive and authoritative knowledge on, then you should announce that fact before attempting to teach; admit that you are speculating, assuming, or teaching based on limited knowledge. Personally, I would find that embarrassing and would not even attempt to go there. I taught post-doctoral students. If I dared to open my mouth on any subject, it had better be because I had comprehensive and authoritative knowledge on the subject. My students were sharp enough to recognize someone flubbing around. If I did not have extensive knowledge on a given subject, I would keep my mouth shut and direct my students to an authority on it. It’s dangerous to teach about things you don’t comprehensively understand. That’s why professors research and publish so much, to establish their authority on a subject. The fact that Chris taught what he taught indicates to me that he was pretty certain of his authoritative knowledge on the subject. And don’t tell me that he’s so humble that he would never think such a thing. I’m not buying that he’s a lowly seventh circler, as he says. That would mean that he hasn’t grown morally or spiritually since the age of five. Then again, if he believes in the possibility of celestial gang rape, then maybe it’s true. I see red flags waving everywhere. Others see them too, so I know I’m not hallucinating. I do wish he would come here and defend himself. Perhaps he has new ideas on the subject, or perhaps he could clarify what he meant, rather than what he actually said. Sometimes what you really mean doesn’t come out as well as you ‘d like it. That could be the case here, but we’ll never know unless he clears it up.

Bonita, educators (secondary school teachers) and adjunct professors with master’s degrees teach yet are not considered ‘experts’ in academia. Since you taught post-doctoral students then you are an expert in whatever field you taught. Chris has qualified some of the ideas he put forth as speculation. I am a witness to that.

I agree, Chris should be the one defending and clarifying his teaching.

BB
BonitaParticipant
Sep 14, 2014, 4:12 PM

Brooklyn_born wrote:

He says it right there —> “Lucifer and his crew are thinking they’re going to break the etiquette here…. but… notice…. not a single loyal seraphim was harmed… good luck on that ATTEMPT“

The fact that he’s teaching that they could even ATTEMPT it, is a LIE (invention). Why bring it up if you don’t think that it was considered to be a viable alternative for the rebels? And why bring up the idea that they the only way they were prevented from their ATTEMPT was because of intervention from Master Physical Controllers, which is another LIE (myth).

Angles do not have physical bodies. How can a Physical Controller stop an angel’s body from being destroyed if it is not physical? Where does it say that Lanonandeks and angels have power over physical energy such that they can overlap them and gang rape someone? The whole construct is flawed from the outset based on a compete misunderstanding of the use of words.

The whole scenario presented by Chris is based upon a mistaken understanding of the use of these two words: LIAISON AND FORCES. Liaison, in this instance, does not mean non-sex overlapping of energy systems, physical or otherwise. Liaison means an intermediary, an agent. Forces means that there were more than one intermediary. Forces in this instance has nothing to do with energies, overlapping or otherwise. Forces means a body of individuals acting as agents of Lucifer. If Chris had used these words the way they were intended, he would not have had to LIE (fabricate) about gang rapes and Physical Controller mojo. Those two concoctions of his are the evidence of falsehood which raises red flags.

Look . . . there’s a reason why they add mercaptan to natural gas. It’s a stinky warning of trouble. The three cosmic reality recognition reflex responses are like the antidote to the stench of mercaptan. When something doesn’t smell right, we know it isn’t real. This whole thing reeks. Strong words for a strong odor.
Brooklyn_bornParticipant
Sep 14, 2014, 4:47 PM

Bonita wrote:

The fact that he’s teaching that they could even ATTEMPT it, is a LIE (invention).

Are you saying speculation is a lie? Void of evidence to contradict Chris’ speculation, how do you determine it a lie? Is there any line in TUB that suggests otherwise? Could you supply it? I don’t think there is. It is speculation so why not accept it as mere speculation? Why go so far as to place strong condemnation on the claim and its author? To me, the fact they, allegedly, attempted the act, if anything, suggests strong delusion on their part. And I can say with certainty that these angels were full of delusions. After all, they fully bought into the Lucifer Manifesto, replete with delusions. So in that sense, I could entertain Chris’ speculation. And does his speculation strike fear in the hearts of people? I don’t see why it should. Chris is not telling us the possibility of rape exists on the mansion world.

Why bring it up if you don’t think that it was considered to be a viable alternative for the rebels?

Because the account is ambiguous. It leaves room for speculation.

And why bring up the idea that they the only way they were prevented from their ATTEMPT was because of intervention from Master Physical Controllers, which is another LIE (myth).

I would think in order to get the narrative to make sense, he extrapolated that information. Honestly Christ has to be the one to defend his innovation. I am not even on board with MPC acting as guardians.

Angles do not have physical bodies.How can a Physical Controller stop an angel’s body from being destroyed if it is not physical?

I do not know. Chris needs to clarify that.

Where does it say that Lanonandeks and angels have power over physical energy such that they can overlap them and gang rape someone?

The concept of overlapping I believe is drawn from the narrative on the Caligastia 100.

The whole construct is flawed from the outset based on a compete misunderstanding of the use of words. The whole scenario presented by Chris is based upon a mistaken understanding of the use of these two words: LIAISON AND FORCES. Liaison, in this instance, does not mean non-sex overlapping of energy systems, physical or otherwise. Liaison means an intermediary, an agent. Forces means that there were more than one intermediary. Forces in this instance has nothing to do with energies, overlapping or otherwise. Forces means a body of individuals acting as agents of Lucifer.

You very well may be right, Bonita. This is why it is important that Chris makes a distinction in all his teachings as to whether he is speculating or expanding on concepts clearly defined in ther revelations.

If Chris had used these words the way they were intended, he would not have had to LIE (fabricate) about gang rapes and Physical Controller mojo. Those two concoctions of his are the evidence of falsehood which raises red flags.

And I agree, red flags should be raised when someone is introducing an innovation, especially when there is no revelation specific to it. But personally I am not going to condemn someone’s character based on an error. Heck, I have speculated on numerous occasions and shared them on this forum.

Look . . . there’s a reason why they add mercaptan to natural gas. It’s a stinky warning of trouble. The three cosmic reality recognition reflex responses are like the antidote to the stench of mercaptan. When something doesn’t smell right, we know it isn’t real. This whole thing reeks. Strong words for a strong odor.

But to other people it rings true. At the end of the day people are going to believe what they want *shrugs*

BB
BonitaParticipant
Sep 14, 2014, 5:13 PM

Brooklyn_born wrote:  Are you saying speculation is a lie?

No, I didn’t say that. Theorizing on a subject is an honest endeavor.

Brooklyn_born wrote:

Void of evidence to contradict Chris’ speculation, how do you determine it is a lie? . . . It is speculation so why not accept it as mere speculation?

Did Chris say that he was speculating? If he did I missed it. He spoke his words as fact. Now, I know that it is not a fact. A non-fact is figment, fabrication, untruth, a lie. I’m not saying it was a lie meant deliberately to deceive; I’m saying it is a taradiddle. Perhaps he meant to say that he was speculating, but he did not. That is why he should clarify his statement, and until he does, I consider it to be a myth of huge proportion.

Brooklyn_born wrote: Chris is not telling us the possibility of rape exists on the mansion world.

He doesn’t have to say that. If it could happen on Jerusem, it could happen anywhere. Aren’t angels pretty much everywhere?

Brooklyn_born wrote: The concept of overlapping I believe is drawn from the narrative on the Caligastia 100.

Yes, you’re probably right. But what does that have to do with a party of Lucifer minions? He obviously misunderstood.

Brooklyn_born wrote:  But personally I am not going to condemn someone’s character based on an error.

I am not condemning his character. I am condemning his teaching on this subject. Why people always take personal offense when you question their logic and turn it into a personal vendetta, I’ll never understand. I’m not saying anything at all about Chris the person. I’m talking about his ideas on the subject of Manotia. Some people think that they are their ideas, they identify with them so strongly. But if Chris, the person, cannot be separated from his ideas, then we have another, bigger problem.

Brooklyn_born wrote:  But to other people it rings true.

Yeah, and Hitler’s rhetoric rang true to some people too. There were people raising red flags then too, but they were slaughtered.
TUBParticipant
Sep 14, 2014, 5:14 PM

Bradly wrote:

Brooklyn_born wrote:

When did you hear Chris claim to be an ‘expert’?

Well…..anyone who professes to be a teacher and operate an academy and anyone at all who is paid for their “services” is, by definition, claiming to be an expert. Otherwise he’s just another dude with the text….does he not “explain” what the written word “means”….and earn a living doing so?

I didn’t say he teaches fear, I said his teaching creates fear if he teaches that any being at any time in any way is in endangered by any other….or believes it to be so. Are we to believe Manotia believed herself to be in danger at the hands of others? So Manotia was afraid? Of a delusion and universal falsehood? Come, come. What a crock. If such is not possible and no such fear existed…then where does Chris’ “speculation” come from or take us? What’s the purpose and the point then? What is being taught hereby? What “lesson” is to be learned?

I certainly don’t (now) believe Chris is any expert at all. Just a guy making a buck. And, I hope, doing the best he can with what he’s got. Hope many benefit thereby. Good for him. Not so much for me.

Let me ask: what has his teaching “clarified” for you? What confusions have arrived or been dispelled by this teaching?

Holy smokes you guys are completely twisting Chris’ words. Chris never stated that anyone even Manotia could be raped or harmed in any way! He said that Manotia could not be harmed by some bozo rebels. Chris is saying that just the mere fact that rebels thought that they could even harm Manotia is delusional. Their superiors are not going to let them hurt anyone. The only speculation Chris made was that a Master Physical Controller could easily stop a rebel angel.
Brooklyn_bornParticipant
Sep 14, 2014, 5:18 PM
Bonita, you gave me a hell of a mental workout today lmao! I am mentally spent! Now it is time to hit the gym and give some of these lesser than cerebral muscles a workout too! Bonita, you definitely mastered the revelations in my opinion. Someone had better think twice before attempting to pass off fiction as fact while you’re around! Until the next time, enjoy the rest of the day.

BB
BradlyParticipant
Sep 14, 2014, 5:25 PM
Brooklyn_born wrote:

You are unfairly putting titles on Chris, Bradly.

Me here: Perhaps you are right BB. But does he operate something he calls an “institute”? Does he “teach” to an audience of students? Does he get paid for this “service”? Hmmm…..if it walks and quacks like a duck, you can call yourself a cow if you wish but….. I do not know Chris and I have not or have not intended to criticize him personally. I listened to the claims he made and made comment, criticized, those words as spoken and I have “speculated” as to the dangers inherent in teaching that either the individual is in danger of violation by others, or that Manotia believed this fallacy and felt fear from or by the choices or acts of others – in liaison or league with others or not. The danger is not to Chris but to those he “teaches”. This is why the pattern of the universe is presented I think: who teaches Chris? We are all to be both student and teacher, learning from those who know more or understand better and teaching those who know less or understand less well.

Chris teaches a heresy IMO by this lesson of his either way you wish to interpret his words. There is no such threat of focused energy or personality liaisons to anyone at all anywhere at all anytime at all….period. The individual is a sacred entity of selfhood and freewill choice. Which goes directly to the question you first posed….what was the source of danger? It was not the liaison of other beings that was the source of any “danger” and there is nothing in the quote which would lead anyone to speculate that Manotia was afraid of an unreal threat that has never ever in eternity been real. To whom does this unreality “ring true”? Why would such basic unreality ring true? Except and unless someone was afraid of such liaison forces conspiring against their own person?

(1574.4) 140:5.11 3. “Happy are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.” Genuine meekness has no relation to fear. It is rather an attitude of man co-operating with God — “Your will be done.” It embraces patience and forbearance and is motivated by an unshakable faith in a lawful and friendly universe. It masters all temptations to rebel against the divine leading. Jesus was the ideal meek man of Urantia, and he inherited a vast universe.

(1950.3) 180:5.8 But the highest realization and the truest interpretation of the golden rule consists in the consciousness of the spirit of the truth of the enduring and living reality of such a divine declaration. The true cosmic meaning of this rule of universal relationship is revealed only in its spiritual realization, in the interpretation of the law of conduct by the spirit of the Son to the spirit of the Father that indwells the soul of mortal man. And when such spirit-led mortals realize the true meaning of this golden rule, they are filled to overflowing with the assurance of citizenship in a friendly universe, and their ideals of spirit reality are satisfied only when they love their fellows as Jesus loved us all, and that is the reality of the realization of the love of God.

Are we to think that an angelic child of the Mother did not understand this or experience this and that, rather, felt fear at the hands or minds of another in this friendly universe which they actually witnessed unfold for untold time? The assertion of such angelic fear itself, and then the added assertion as to the cause of this fear is beyond speculation…it was clearly presented as fact and truth by one who also claims to be qualified enough to teach that they charge money for it. Despite Chris’ humility potential, it is the audience itself that elevates by their faithful adoration and attention to create a real potential for great mischief and evil in both the audience and the one held up as teacher – this is not a new phenomenon in life or in the UB student body – seen this before with tragic results.

There are no checks and balances in this “institute” of “learning”….teachers need to be in a train of student, teacher, student, teacher and there needs to be some scholarly body of student/teachers to present curriculum that is text centered. This “lesson” on the rebellion and the experience of Manotia is neither scholarly or text centered and even defies the clearly written words so deformed by their presentation. This is a big deal. Not some trifle of speculation and technical disagreement, but a teaching of contradiction. Indeed the circular suppositions required in his presentation or construct often contradict each other. There was a danger of liaison energy forces, except there wasn’t, it was a delusion shared by rebels and loyals alike, but never fear for this non-existent threat was able to be over turned by the Controllers? Say WHAT???!!!

And he gets paid for such “reasoning” and “teaching”? Hmmmm…..I wouldn’t pay much for long. Even much attention. Tadpoles….we’re a funny bunch of monkeys indeed.

"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."
TUBParticipant
Sep 14, 2014, 5:27 PM
Again for the record Chris never said that Manotia was harmed or could be harmed. In fact he said that she couldn’t be harmed by some bozo rebels. So this whole argument against Chris is all based on a lie.

As for Liaison, Mara provided a nice quote. I see Bonita hasn’t responded to her comment about a Princes Staff member having a (supposedly nonsexual) liaison with their own self. Which is a good call I probably would back away from that assertion to.

77:1:2 [#3]

It is well always to bear in mind that the successive bestowals of the Sons of God on an evolving planet produce marked changes in the spiritual economy of the realm and sometimes so modify the workings of the interassociation of spiritual and material agencies on a planet as to create situations indeed difficult of understanding. The status of the one hundred corporeal members of Prince Caligastia’s staff illustrates just such a unique interassociation: As ascendant morontia citizens of Jerusem they were supermaterial creatures without reproductive prerogatives. As descendant planetary ministers on Urantia they were material sex creatures capable of procreating material offspring (as some of them later did). What we cannot satisfactorily explain is how these one hundred could function in the parental role on a supermaterial level, but that is exactly what happened. A supermaterial (nonsexual) liaison of a male and a female member of the corporeal staff resulted in the appearance of the first-born of the primary midwayers

This quote is saying that beings can HAVE OFFSPRING ON A SUPERMATERIAL LEVEL THROUGH A NONSEXUAL LIAISON OF A MALE AND FEMALE. There you guys go. That speaks for itself. So far you guys are batting 0/2 on your accusations against Chris.
TUBParticipant
Sep 14, 2014, 5:30 PM
Bradley: Chris teaches a heresy IMO by this lesson of his either way you wish to interpret his words. There is no such threat of focused energy or personality liaisons to anyone at all anywhere at all anytime at all….period.

What are you even talking about??? Chris never said that Manotia was in danger, or that any being was in danger of being harmed by liaison forces or anything like that. He actually said that Manotia couldn’t be harmed
TUBParticipant
Sep 14, 2014, 5:49 PM
A supermaterial (nonsexual) liaison of a male and a female member of the corporeal staff resulted in the appearance of the first-born of the primary midwayers

So Bonita I guess this goes against your theory that the Princes Staff where having Liaisons with their own self. This quote flat out says that the midwayers where being produced by a liaison between a male and a female. Ie. That Danite couple where having a liaison with each other.

You guys got all upset just by Chris’ assertion that two beings can have a intimate (nonsexual) liaison with one another.

Reply on the current forum