242 posts · 12 participants · started Jan 20, 2015, 5:30 PM
in the “era to come” do you think that in regard to the eugenics of the era that abortion will be a useful tool? I hope not.
I hope not, too. In fact, I have faith that the horrors of abortion and other harmful means of eugenics will not be used. That is our challenge, and opportunity as a society, to increase in wisdom, love and faith so as to identify the appropriate means of attaining the genetic upliftment that will move Urantia toward an era of Light and Life.
And just because I’m a man that will never experience the procedure does not make me totally ignorant of the impact of it all. My opinions do have some validity.
My wife will never experience prostrate cancer but she will have a very good idea of its impact on the family and it will have some validity.
in the “era to come” do you think that in regard to the eugenics of the era that abortion will be a useful tool? I hope not.
I hope not, too. In fact, I have faith that the horrors of abortion and other harmful means of eugenics will not be used. That is our challenge, and opportunity as a society, to increase in wisdom, love and faith so as to identify the appropriate means of attaining the genetic upliftment that will move Urantia toward an era of Light and Life
totally agree – we have much to learn and grow
Being respectful and having admiration for women comes honestly enough to me.
The decadence of prosperity is a well known social malady well covered in the UB while the decadence of poverty is but an oxymoron…..suitable though, considering the source.
Grannie always said, if you can’t something nice about someone, then say nothing at all. What a trial you present Louis to such good advice.
149:6.11 “You do well to be meek before God and self-controlled before men, but let your meekness be of spiritual origin and not the self-deceptive display of a self-conscious sense of self- righteous superiority. The prophet spoke advisedly when he said,
Walk humbly with God,’ for, while the Father in heaven is the Infinite and the Eternal, he also dwellswith him who is of a contrite mind and a humble spirit.’ My Father disdains pride, loathes hypocrisy, and abhors iniquity. And it was to emphasize the value of sincerity and perfect trust in the loving support and faithful guidance of the heavenly Father that I have so often referred to the little child as illustrative of the attitude of mind and the response of spirit which are so essential to the entrance of mortal man into the spirit realities of the kingdom of heaven.The difference between you and me Bradly, is that you acknowledge your poverty and wallow in it. I was poor and did not even know it till someone told me as an adult. You hold it up as a badge of honor. I consider poverty a disease to be cured, not glorified.
The poor are not to be admired but given a hand up. Once they are up, they are then encouraged to walk and then to run, and then to run fast. They are not to be carried on our backs as trophies of our righteousness.
BTW, tadpole, get a sense of humor man.
P.S. I may be an oxymoron but I’m an “oxyclean” oxymoron. :)
Women may be somewhat less logical than men, but women are advantaged as regards intuition, moral standard-bearers and spiritual leadership.
Different but equal, right?
So, emanny, in a sex ed class you would teach young women to stay away from rapists and incestuous relatives. Great tip!
Would you support a curriculum that does the opposite? Would you teach young girls to surf the internet for the most attractive rapist?
I would strongly encourage all participants to this thread to tread carefully when discussing the topic of abortion. Given its propensity to provoke powerful emotions, I would urge everyone to direct their comments to the ideas, beliefs, or arguments of the other rather than judging the person making those assertions. Emanny, I would respectfully ask you to desist from making personal attacks against others participating in this thread. I will leave you all with a few quotes to ponder on:
…the manifestation of greatness on a world like Urantia is the exhibition of self-control. The great man is not he who “takes a city” or “overthrows a nation,” but rather “he who subdues his own tongue.” P.317:1
Many other minor matters were considered and their solutions unanimously agreed upon. These twenty-four men had a truly remarkable experience these two weeks when they were compelled to face problems and compose difficulties without Jesus. They learned to differ, to debate, to contend, to pray, and to compromise, and throughout it all to remain sympathetic with the other person’s viewpoint and to maintain at least some degree of tolerance for his honest opinions. P.1625:8
Jesus commented at great length on the relation of prayer to careless and offending speech, quoting: “Set a watch, O Lord, before my mouth; keep the door of my lips.” “The human tongue,” said Jesus, “is a member which few men can tame, but the spirit within can transform this unruly member into a kindly voice of tolerance and an inspiring minister of mercy.” P.1640:2
Back to the new era.
eugenics was brought up with a little hesitation but went well imho
taken a step farther let’s try racial blending – our destiny one way or another.
how should a mature Human race approach it?
anyone wanna try?
Emanny, I would respectfully ask you to desist from making personal attacks against others participating in this thread.
I will certainly try. It is difficult,however, to ignore attacks on what I write. And although I take no personal offense and would never think of complaining to you as a moderator, bullying is prevalent here. It is of the underhanded and stealthy variety but present non the less. I tend to be direct and have not developed this back handed approach to the art of the insult, but it is not personal.
The decadence of prosperity is a well known social malady well covered in the UB while the decadence of poverty is but an oxymoron…..suitable though, considering the source.
Even though this was directed at me, I did not take offense but instead made a joke of it. Humor is always welcomed and is in very short supply here.
Let me make a vital distinction as to the blogosphere. I would never say what I write here to someones face. Careless and offensive speech is very different than the written word. I am not looking into someones eyes, their soul, as I write.
We are not dealing in the same reality when we write our thoughts as when we speak face to face. In person we communicate at the speed or sound and the speed of light as we look at each others facial expressions and reactions. My tongue is not the same as my typing fingers. To know me is to know me in person. You cannot possibly know me by what I write here. I cannot be attacked personally on this blog because I am not here personally, only symbolically.
Bradly is naturally offended at what I have questioned in the person of Gabriel of Salvington. He feels that I have attacked his belief system and I have. TUB is true and factual, I accept it as axiomatic. Part I set the context for the rest of the book. Part II is the heart of the book and its center piece is the rebellion. Part III is the context for the 7th bestowal of Michael. Part IV would seem to be the most important but is essentially unnecessary. The Spirit of Truth does the ultimate job of presenting the life of Jesus to the individual.
At the center of the heart of the book is the “Lucifer rebellion” and its consequences and aftermath. The second thing Immanuel said pre-bestowal to Michael was that he was to end the rebellion as the “Son of Man”, which he did. This final bestowal of the Creator Son was for an entire Universe, not just for Urantia. When Jesus spoke as Michael he spoke to all of his children in the entire universe of Nebadon.
In particular, and as it pertained to the Lucifer rebellion, was the parable of the prodigal son. His admonition to a universe not to judge lest you be judged. This, I believe, was a direct reference to the eldest brother Gabriel and the younger brother, the rebels in general. It would seem that when Jesus ended the rebellion that all who sought redemption and forgiveness received it with a feast of a fatted calf. Those who would not receive (Satan) forgiveness were told to leave Jesus’ site. If in fact Lucifer did receive forgiveness for himself, he was at feast with his father. The eldest brother, Gabriel, would be absent from the festivities. If Gabriel’s resentments led to further actions against Lucifer and others at the feast then Michael would be grieved indeed.
This is the controversy that is at the heart of Bradly’s, and others, resentment of my written words. I know that this would cause an uproar but so be it. I had to write about it because no one else dared to. I want my brother Gabriel to be able to be released from his resentments because it affects all of us. Michael is grieved over this I know for a fact. What father would not be upset over a trial where the adversaries are sons.
You have shown a need to look beyond that which is plainly written for underlying elements that appear to change, not enhance or elaborate, the words given. This is so regarding your claims and insinuations regarding Lucifer’s “innocence” in rebellion and Gabriel’s “sins” in his role in the affair and now you interpret the prodigal son parable in such a fashion as well. Has Lucifer repented and confessed his treachery like the prodigal? No. The fatted calf is for those who have:
(1853.2) 169:1.15 Jesus was very partial to telling these three stories at the same time. He presented the story of the lost sheep to show that, when men unintentionally stray away from the path of life, the Father is mindful of such lost ones and goes out, with his Sons, the true shepherds of the flock, to seek the lost sheep. He then would recite the story of the coin lost in the house to illustrate how thorough is the divine searching for all who are confused, confounded, or otherwise spiritually blinded by the material cares and accumulations of life. And then he would launch forth into the telling of this parable of the lost son, the reception of the returning prodigal, to show how complete is the restoration of the lost son into his Father’s house and heart.
As prior text posted says clearly that one of Lucifer’s great crimes was the destruction of and leading astray of those sheep in his care. His crimes were not only against God and Michael but also us and the angels and midwayers and others for whom his disloyalty and treachery and self love wreaked havoc. This had nothing to do with any personal dispute between Lucifer and Gabriel as has been shown repeatedly to you. Rebellion is always a potential in free will beings….but that does not erase nor defend its cause or results.
You continue to trivialize the crimes and defend the criminals and accuse the Son’s first born as the despicable character in need of forgiveness and you offer now the prodigal parable as evidence that Lucifer’s folly is really about Gabriel’s anger, resentment, hate and lynch mentality-human trait transference onto celestial mind and universe organization and management. The UB plainly disagrees with you. But believe what you will Louis about guilt and innocence and justice and mercy and who deserves what. Our beliefs and knowledge have little to do with the work at hand…personal spirit progress in a friendly and well ordered universe that operates with love and service as its core elements. Who violated those elements of love and service? Gabriel? or Lucifer and his henchmen? And who needs mercy and faces justice in the universes of time and space? The stewards who robbed others of their peace and assurance or was it those charged with ending rebellion and restoring order?
(614.8) 54:2.3 Lucifer’s folly was the attempt to do the nondoable, to short-circuit time in an experiential universe. Lucifer’s crime was the attempted creative disenfranchisement of every personality in Satania, the unrecognized abridgment of the creature’s personal participation — freewill participation — in the long evolutionary struggle to attain the status of light and life both individually and collectively. In so doing this onetime Sovereign of your system set the temporal purpose of his own will directly athwart the eternal purpose of God’s will as it is revealed in the bestowal of free will upon all personal creatures. The Lucifer rebellion thus threatened the maximum possible infringement of the freewill choice of the ascenders and servers of the system of Satania — a threat forevermore to deprive every one of these beings of the thrilling experience of contributing something personal and unique to the slowly erecting monument to experiential wisdom which will sometime exist as the perfected system of Satania. Thus does the Lucifer manifesto, masquerading in the habiliments of liberty, stand forth in the clear light of reason as a monumental threat to consummate the theft of personal liberty and to do it on a scale that has been approached only twice in all the history of Nebadon.
(615.1) 54:2.4 In short, what God had given men and angels Lucifer would have taken away from them, that is, the divine privilege of participating in the creation of their own destinies and of the destiny of this local system of inhabited worlds.
(615.2) 54:2.5 No being in all the universe has the rightful liberty to deprive any other being of true liberty, the right to love and be loved, the privilege of worshiping God and of serving his fellows.
"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."
you offer now the prodigal parable as evidence that Lucifer’s folly is really about Gabriel’s anger, resentment, hate and lynch mentality-human trait transference onto celestial mind and universe organization and management.
This deserves repeating. As does this:
Our beliefs and knowledge have little to do with the work at hand…personal spirit progress in a friendly and well ordered universe that operates with love and service as its core elements.
Bradly wrote:As prior text posted says clearly that one of Lucifer’s great crimes was the destruction of and leading astray of those sheep in his care. His crimes were not only against God and Michael but also us and the angels and midwayers and others for whom his disloyalty and treachery and self love wreaked havoc. This had nothing to do with any personal dispute between Lucifer and Gabriel as has been shown repeatedly to you. Rebellion is always a potential in free will beings….but that does not erase nor defend its cause or results.
Bradly wrote:You continue to trivialize the crimes and defend the criminals and accuse the Son’s first born as the despicable character in need of forgiveness and you offer now the prodigal parable as evidence that Lucifer’s folly is really about Gabriel’s anger, resentment, hate and lynch mentality-human trait transference onto celestial mind and universe organization and management.
139:12.9 Judas became increasingly a brooder over personal disappointment, and finally he became a victim of resentment. His feelings had been many times hurt, and he grew abnormally suspicious of his best friends, even of the Master. Presently he became obsessed with the idea of getting even, anything to avenge himself, yes, even betrayal of his associates and his Master.
Moderator-2 wrote: I would strongly encourage all participants to this thread to tread carefully when discussing the topic of abortion. Given its propensity to provoke powerful emotions, I would urge everyone to direct their comments to the ideas, beliefs, or arguments of the other rather than judging the person making those assertions. Emanny, I would respectfully ask you to desist from making personal attacks against others participating in this thread.
Thank you!
You have shown a need to look beyond that which is plainly written for underlying elements that appear to change, not enhance or elaborate, the words given. This is so regarding your claims and insinuations regarding Lucifer’s “innocence” in rebellion and Gabriel’s “sins” in his role in the affair and now you interpret the prodigal son parable . . . .
Thank you Bradly.
you offer now the prodigal parable as evidence that Lucifer’s folly is really about Gabriel’s anger, resentment, hate and lynch mentality-human trait transference onto celestial mind and universe organization and management.
This deserves repeating. As does this:
Our beliefs and knowledge have little to do with the work at hand…personal spirit progress in a friendly and well ordered universe that operates with love and service as its core elements.
Thank you Keryn!
Bradly wrote:As prior text posted says clearly that one of Lucifer’s great crimes was the destruction of and leading astray of those sheep in his care. His crimes were not only against God and Michael but also us and the angels and midwayers and others for whom his disloyalty and treachery and self love wreaked havoc. This had nothing to do with any personal dispute between Lucifer and Gabriel as has been shown repeatedly to you. Rebellion is always a potential in free will beings….but that does not erase nor defend its cause or results.Again, I agree with you Bradly. Did the prodigal son lead anyone astray? We certainly are not told that he did. In fact, it was because of the bickering between the two brothers that the prodigal son decided to leave his father’s house.Thank you Bonita!
nelsong wrote: Back to the new era. eugenics was brought up with a little hesitation but went well imho taken a step farther let’s try racial blending – our destiny one way or another. how should a mature Human race approach it? anyone wanna try?
Yes, getting back to the new era and the ideological struggles of the present era. I think one of the biggest ideological problems we, as a people, are struggling with now is the idea of fairness. What is fairness? So many think equal rights is fair, yet we are told that it is not possible for society to offer equal rights to all. The only thing society can do is administer rights fairly. I don’t think the current society has any idea how to do that, hence the constant arguments, back and forth, about social justice and equal rights.
70:9.17 But this equality ideal is the child of civilization; it is not found in nature. Even culture itself demonstrates conclusively the inherent inequality of men by their very unequal capacity therefor. The sudden and nonevolutionary realization of supposed natural equality would quickly throw civilized man back to the crude usages of primitive ages. Society cannot offer equal rights to all, but it can promise to administer the varying rights of each with fairness and equity. It is the business and duty of society to provide the child of nature with a fair and peaceful opportunity to pursue self-maintenance, participate in self-perpetuation, while at the same time enjoying some measure of self-gratification, the sum of all three constituting human happiness.
nelsong wrote: Back to the new era. eugenics was brought up with a little hesitation but went well imho taken a step farther let’s try racial blending – our destiny one way or another. how should a mature Human race approach it? anyone wanna try?Thank you nelsong! Back to the new era just ahead. I think over time blending will occur naturally. Blended families provide opportunity for the extended family members to get to know more about others. North American culture is a pretty good example of it. 80:9:16I see it happening but it is this the best approach, jump into a multicultural blending pot with little consideration of consequences?
Yes, getting back to the new era and the ideological struggles of the present era. I think one of the biggest ideological problems we, as a people, are struggling with now is the idea of fairness. What is fairness? So many think equal rights is fair, yet we are told that it is not possible for society to offer equal rights to all. The only thing society can do is administer rights fairly. I don’t think the current society has any idea how to do that, hence the constant arguments, back and forth, about social justice and equal rights.
70:9.17 But this equality ideal is the child of civilization; it is not found in nature. Even culture itself demonstrates conclusively the inherent inequality of men by their very unequal capacity therefor. The sudden and nonevolutionary realization of supposed natural equality would quickly throw civilized man back to the crude usages of primitive ages. Society cannot offer equal rights to all, but it can promise to administer the varying rights of each with fairness and equity. It is the business and duty of society to provide the child of nature with a fair and peaceful opportunity to pursue self-maintenance, participate in self-perpetuation, while at the same time enjoying some measure of self-gratification, the sum of all three constituting human happiness.
IMHO our American Constitution was written so beautifully that it is difficult for me to concieve of people having problems with the right to free speech, or to self defend, or to private property or equal opportunity etc.
What was meant by the words “all men are created equal” when clearly there is no such thing as equality? The only answer is a spiritual one.
Equal opportunity is a difficult concept for the current generation that is entitlement minded. How does a government administer equal opportunity? Get out of the way IMHO – allow people to make or break themselves.
However, without honesty, integrity and personal responsibility, none of this will work – obviously.
IMHO our American Constitution was written so beautifully that it is difficult for me to concieve of people having problems with the right to free speech, or to self defend, or to private property or equal opportunity etc. What was meant by the words “all men are created equal” when clearly there is no such thing as equality? The only answer is a spiritual one.
That’s not in the Constitution. I think you’re referring to this part of the Declaration of Independence.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Men are created equal in the eyes of the Creator who endows them with certain rights: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. But . . . what the UB tells us is that society cannot offer equal rights to anybody; and, the rights offered by nature, life and an environment in which to live it, don’t really exist either. Also, the liberty mortals enjoy in this life is also limited by the Creators; free will is relative. The pursuit of happiness is not a right either, but it sure sounds good.
70:9.1 Nature confers no rights on man, only life and a world in which to live it. Nature does not even confer the right to live, as might be deduced by considering what would likely happen if an unarmed man met a hungry tiger face to face in the primitive forest. Society’s prime gift to man is security.
You have shown a need to look beyond that which is plainly written for underlying elements that appear to change, not enhance or elaborate, the words given. This is so regarding your claims and insinuations regarding Lucifer’s “innocence” in rebellion and Gabriel’s “sins” in his role in the affair and now you interpret the prodigal son parable in such a fashion as well. Has Lucifer repented and confessed his treachery like the prodigal? No. The fatted calf is for those who have:
You, Bradly, have shown a need to look beyond that which I have plainly written. I do not insinuate anything. That is your tactic, Bradly. I am plain spoken and direct. I never said Lucifer is innocent. I never said Gabriel is sinful. We do not know what Lucifer has done because he has not told us. We only have one side of the story. There is another side and that side will come out at trial.
As prior text posted says clearly that one of Lucifer’s great crimes was the destruction of and leading astray of those sheep in his care. His crimes were not only against God and Michael but also us and the angels and midwayers and others for whom his disloyalty and treachery and self love wreaked havoc. This had nothing to do with any personal dispute between Lucifer and Gabriel as has been shown repeatedly to you. Rebellion is always a potential in free will beings….but that does not erase nor defend its cause or results.
The allegations are very clear but they remain allegations till the trial.
You continue to trivialize the crimes and defend the criminals and accuse the Son’s first born as the despicable character in need of forgiveness and you offer now the prodigal parable as evidence that Lucifer’s folly is really about Gabriel’s anger, resentment, hate and lynch mentality-human trait transference onto celestial mind and universe organization and management.
I trivialize nothing. I simply have not much to say about allegations. Michael did not have much to say about these allegations either and remained ALOOF. The parable of the prodigal son is not my doing, but I can interpret it as I will. An interpretation is not evidence of anything. What are you talking about? This is obviously a rant about something that is troubling you into a fearful frenzy.
The UB plainly disagrees with you. But believe what you will Louis about guilt and innocence and justice and mercy and who deserves what.
I am not in an argument with a book. Justice is not about my beliefs, it about a trial that has not happened yet as far as I know.
Who violated those elements of love and service? Gabriel? or Lucifer and his henchmen? And who needs mercy and faces justice in the universes of time and space? The stewards who robbed others of their peace and assurance or was it those charged with ending rebellion and restoring order?
I do not know the answers to these questions and neither do you. If the Ancients of Days know then there is not a need for a trial.
Thus does the Lucifer manifesto, masquerading in the habiliments of liberty, stand forth in the clear light of reason as a monumental threat to consummate the theft of personal liberty and to do it on a scale that has been approached only twice in all the history of Nebadon.
Have you seen the unedited version of the Lucifer manifesto? I have not. It is conveniently summarized for our rapid consumption.
(615.1) 54:2.4 In short, what God had given men and angels Lucifer would have taken away from them, that is, the divine privilege of participating in the creation of their own destinies and of the destiny of this local system of inhabited worlds.
Lucifer can take away what God had given men and angels? That seems a little crazy to me.
Again, I agree with you Bradly. Did the prodigal son lead anyone astray? We certainly are not told that he did. In fact, it was because of the bickering between the two brothers that the prodigal son decided to leave his father’s house. There is no evidence at all that bickering between Gabriel and Lucifer caused Lucifer to leave the Father’s house.
What evidence would satisfy you, Bonita? Maybe it will come out in trial.
The prodigal son went to his father and asked for his inheritance and for permission to leave. Did Lucifer do that? No, he attempted to take his inheritance by fiat.
Lucifer has no inheritance. The Father gave it all to him already, every penny. And the Father holds no one captive so permission to leave is implied.
How can he have an inheritance without someone leaving it to him. Also, ignorance of or refusal to accept the laws of the universe is not a defense in any system. Everybody knows that.
Who is saying that Lucifer’s or the erring son’s actions and behavior are defensible? They are, however, forgivable.
Bingo! Resentment is a human emotion, and a sinful one at that. People who are resentful tend to project their resentment onto others by suspicion and revenge. It’s not by accident that Judas Iscariot was given to us a prime example of resentment gone awry to the point of near total destruction of personality. Resentment leads to suspicion, suspicion leads to revenge, and revenge is suicidal. Resentment is extremely poisonous because it is so addictive; it leads to madness. What other than madness could convince a person to work towards nailing the Son of God to a tree? Murderous revenge! Now, to turn this same resentment, suspicion and revenge onto the Son of God’s first-born Son, Gabriel, is sickening! It makes me want to hurl.
But Bonita, do you not resent ME for writing what I have written? Please do not hurl, it is likely to be green and your head may spin. :)
