Problems
in Urantia Paper 92
Introduction
The
topic of this article focuses upon the Urantia Papers, a New Age
writing totaling up to thousands of pages that followers hold as
revelations by many cosmic beings (Pg. 1008 of the Urantia Paper).
The following below will deal with the Urantia
Book, Part III: The History of Urantia, Paper 92. Though Paper
92 deals with “the later evolution of religion? the author find
it relevant since Christianity is among those it collectively comment
and evaluate under the grouping of “evolved religions? (See pages
1007-1011)
Problems
- "Religion
arises as a biological reaction
of mind to spiritual beliefs and the environment"(Page 1004;
emphasis is not in the original)
Response:
What is the
origin of man’s religiousness? Can religious origin be reduced
ONLY TO biological and naturalistic explanation? If religion "arises",
originated or act as a “reaction?at the biological level, being
materialistic, this explanation of religious origin makes every,
any, and ALL religious discussion and debate meaningless, futile
and arbitrary. If religious belief has its origin in materialistic
casual relationship in one’s brain between neutrons and electrons
as a chemical reaction to stimulus “out there?(the environment)
or simply put if we were biologically determined and “hard-wired?
it is pointless to have any religious or inter-faith dialogue,
not to mention debate. What make one brain wave pattern “more
true?than his or her’s opponents? That is the problem of determinism
whether from the environment or the brain internally. It also
demonstrates the futility of a materialistic and naturalistic-reduction
explanation of religious experiences. Yet, the Urantia Paper is
inconsistent with the logical end of their position by the very
fact that not only does it presuppose but attempts to articulate
and persuade the reader that their worldview is true! Within its
own worldview, to do such things would be a meaningless act. The
Uranita Paper can not account for logic and argumentation within
its own belief system. In giving a empirical explanation of the
formulation of religious thought, it has made its own explanation,
not an explanation at all. For a refutation of materialism, see
my article, Reviewing the
Philosophy of Materialism.
- “Holy water,
relics, fetishes, charms, vestments, bells, drums, and priesthoods
are common to all religions.?(Page 1004)
Response:
Not every religion has these things in common. If the Urantia
Paper is supposed to give deep, profound, supernatural insight
into religion and also deep, philosophical issues that concern
man, and yet can not accurately describe existing religions, that
would pose a problem. The religion of Hinduism, the Hebrews, and
Christianity are among those religions discussed in this section
of the Urantia Paper. (Pg. 1011) We would expect that at the least,
if all religions have relics, charms and bells in common, then
those religions that the Urantia Paper would be discussing about
would have this commonality at the least. Remember, logically
speaking, if only one religion is shown to not possess any of
the “common?characteristics listed above then it is enough to
show that the above statement is false.
We demonstrated below:
| |
Hinduism |
Hebrew |
Biblical
Christianity |
| Practice |
|
|
|
| Relics |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
| Fetish |
Yes |
No |
No |
| Charms |
Yes |
No |
No |
| Bells |
Yes |
Yes |
No |
| Drums |
Yes |
No |
No |
| Priests |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes
(Footnote 1) |
- If man were
not the ascendant product of animal evolution, then would such
a course of religious development stand without justification"(Pg.
1006)
Response:
If the premise that man evolved from animals was false, we would
then expect the Urantia’s Paper view of religious evolution to
be false also, given their relationship in the Urantia Paper’s
outlook as stated above. There are other sources that deals with
this topic in depth and one such recommended source would be “The
Case For a Creator?by Lee Strobel. Given the limit of the scope
of this article, we can not go deeper on the problems of evolution
but this author wants to point out that during the year 2005 alone,
it has been a bad year for evolution in the news of scientific
development. For example, in an Associates Press article titled,
“Fossil is Proof of Mammal Eating Dinosaur?it documents that
there are now “proof that mammals hunted small dinosaurs some
130 million years ago?and this “contradicts conventional evolutionary
theory that early mammals were timid, chipmunk-sized creatures
that scurried in the looming shadow of the giant reptiles.?(See
Footnote 2) Among the growing list of
frauds by evolutionists include the recent case of German professor
Reiner Protsch von Zieten which in a German news article stated
that “tests revealed that all of the skulls dated by Prof Protsch
were in reality far younger than he had claimed, prompting Prof
Terberger and a British colleague, Martin Street, to write a scientific
paper last year.?(See Footnote 3)The
British newspaper, “The Guardian?also reported this in an article
titled, “Flamboyant anthropologist falsified dating of key discoveries?
on February 19th, 2005.
- “Evolutionary
religion makes no provision for change or revision; unlike science,
it does not provide for its own progressive correction.?Pg. 1006)
Response:
Every religion, be it Christianity, Judaism or Hinduism have statements
or propositions that it believes is true. Hence, every religious
doctrine or beliefs have truth value, be it true or false. Any
religion that needs progressive correction of its belief would
hence either be always false or that eventually through time it
would be false. But if Christianity was the true religion, and
it contains ultimate timeless truths, it would be meaningless
to talk about “progressive correction.?It would not need any
correction. Again, as stated, any religion that needs progressive
correction would not be the ultimate truth to begin with and will
be false, if it is not already. The Urantia Paper appears from
the above statement to hold in high regard that religion should
be able to change; it must be able to allow for progressive correction
to its error. If the worldview of the Urantia Paper is in a “higher
category?than evolutionary religion since it is open to “progressive
correction?(which presupposes it is has errors), why accept the
Urantia Papers to begin with? Given that its?stated truths are
nothing absolute and it is all relative, why begin with the Urantia
Papers to begin with?
- "The
Hebrew religion encompasses the philosophic transition from polytheism
to monotheism; it is an evolutionary link between the religions
of evolution and the religions of revelation."(Pg. 1011)
Response: See my article, Evolving
Monotheism.
- “The Christian
religion is the religion about the life and teachings of Christ
based upon the theology of Judaism, modified further through the
assimilation of certain Zoroastrian teachings and Greek philosophy,
and formulated primarily by three individuals: Philo, Peter, and
Paul.?(Pg. 1011)
Response:
How can Philo in any way be the primary three who “formulated
primarily?and “modified further?Christianity when he was a Jew
and never a Christian? Further, one would expect that if Philo
was critical and essential to formulating Christianity after Jesus,
Philo would have wrote extensively about Jesus and the Christian
faith. Philo, being a Jewish philosopher, never wrote about Jesus,
or made references to Christianity! In logical sequence order,
Philo could not have “formulated?and “modified further?Christianity
since he lived primarily most of his life before Jesus, and even
then he lived at Alexandria Egypt!
Summary
& Conclusion
We
have demonstrated in this article the problems in Urantia Paper
Section 92. In summary, its claim of being revelation of deep truths
is seriously undermined; it can not even give an accurate description
of other religions without serious mistakes (Problem 2) and also
Christianity in particular (Problem 6) which makes any serious thinkers
ask: how would it give accurate description of other unverifiable
truths? The Paper also states that if evolution is not true then
the Paper’s doctrine of religious evolution would be “without justification?
We demonstrated that was the case (Problem 3 and 5). The Urantia
Paper also presupposes it has errors to begin with, which begs the
question of why would one accept the Uranita Paper for truth in
the first place (Problem 4). More powerfully, the Urantia Paper
self-defeats any intelligibility of reasoning, logic and explanation
of the world with its proposition of a materialistic explanation
of the universe (Problem 1). This reduces the Urantia Paper to the
absurd. Yet, followers still believe in the meaningfulness and intelligibility
of reasoning and the laws of logic. They can not justify this within
their worldview, but need another worldview as the foundation for
its justification. In actuality, the Urantia book presupposes Christianity
as the precondition necessary for the laws of logic, reasoning,
explaining the universe, etc, to be meaningful and not arbitrary.
Proponents of these Papers must reject the Papers and come to Christ,
repenting of their sins and errors of their ways. Only Christ can
“save?the utilization of their reasoning from being a futile activity.
And only Christ can saves them from their sins and give meaning
and purpose and truths in their lives.
Footnotes
- The New Testament position on the priesthood
is that all Christians are priests, as evident 1Peter 2:5 and
1Peter 2:9 that states “you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood,
a holy nation, a people belonging to God?
- AP News on Jan 12, 2:42 PM, accessed at http://apnews.myway.com/article/20050112/D87INR7O1.html
- http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,1564,1493421,00.html
|
