Matter knows not truth.

The inclusion of a now outdated cosmology, and of allegory and myth, in the Urantia Papers in no way detracts from their value as religious revelation. For many of us, this knowledge frees the revelation from entanglement with things both material and social, leaving it to deal with what really matters--the revelation of our "divine and eternal destiny," the confirmation of our universal brotherhood, the validation of the reality of a God whose nature is love, mercy, and compassion, and who, in spirit form, deigns to dwell within us.

True revelation has no function in the sorting of the supposedly material facts of science, history, or even philosophy. These are man-made fields for investigation. Revelation is a sorting process in which the truths of spirit acquirement are sifted from the accumulated errors of evolutionary religion (see p. 1110). Revealed religion is a spirit derivative that deals exclusively with that which has spiritual value.

This view of the content of the Urantia Papers  encourages us to differentiate between what is given to us as background information upon which to structure a personal universe frame relating ourselves to our reality, and that which is provided for the enhancing of our spiritual progress. But we must be continually aware that our universe frame is unavoidably erroneous. (1260)

When assuming that the whole of The Urantia Book is divinely sanctioned revelation, readers place themselves in a similar position to those biblical fundamentalists who fail to differentiate between the word of God and the words of men. With this kind of fundamentalist attitude, there is no valid way to apportion relative value, for who would dare judge themselves worthy to adjudicate on the divine word?

All revelation is partial, transient, adapted.

The Urantia Papers protect us from this conundrum. The revelators themselves inform us that what they have provided is not divine revelation (absolute truth), and that its cosmology (background knowledge) would soon need replacement.

"But no revelation short of the attainment of the Universal Father can ever be complete. All other celestial ministrations are no more than partial, transient, and practically adapted to local conditions in time and space. While such admissions as this may possibly detract from the immediate force and authority of all revelations, the time has arrived on Urantia when it is advisable to make such frank statements, even at the risk of weakening the future influence and authority of this, the most recent of the revelations of truth to the mortal races of Urantia." (1008)

A time to think!

In the light of these words from the revelators, surely it is time to rethink attitudes, purposes, and goals. What can now be done that will enhance the acceptability of the Urantia Papers to the world in general but particularly to the Christian church where the message of the Fourth Epochal revelation lies confused and partially dormant? The hopes of the revelators are expressed by:

"The time is ripe to witness the figurative resurrection of the human Jesus from his burial tomb amidst the theological traditions and the religious dogmas of nineteen centuries. Jesus of Nazareth must not be longer sacrificed to even the splendid concept of the glorified Christ. What a transcendent service if, through this revelation, the Son of Man should be recovered from the tomb of traditional theology and be presented as the living Jesus to the church that bears his name, and to all other religions!"

next column>

There are several such comments scattered through the pages of the Papers that indicate the enlightenment of the Christian Church was a primary purpose for the Papers.

The theological institutions responsible for the teaching of biblical scholarship to those entering the ministry of mainstream churches in the U.S.A. have been struggling even before the turn of this century to  modify the popular image of Jesus which they accept is seriously misleading.¹

Despite the efforts of scholars and teachers, little progress has been made with church congregations in updating attitudes to scripture. The Urantia Papers may have been of inestimable assistance in this task if they had not been not presented as another infallible revelation. At least the Papers may then have been acceptable reading, but unfortunately opposition grew quickly and they were labeled as gnostic, of no consequence, or not worth reading.

What can Urantians contribute?

A possible way to change the current situation may be a new printing with an introduction to the book that would explain what the revelators themselves have stated about the Papers. Such an introduction would need to be forceful enough to overcome the stigma already earned by previous attitudes. And if it merely stimulated enough interest to induce reading the story of Jesus and other key Papers such as those on the nature of God and the role of the Thought Adjusters, the revelation might begin to have the effect for which its authors appear to have hoped.

It appears possible that this kind of approach might, in the short term, result in decreased sales of the book. A warning of this possibility is given in the quotation used from p. 1008. Obviously the revelators are not so much concerned with book sales as with the good the revelation might achieve.

While a decrease in general sales may initially occur, the real hope is that there would be an increase in interest from theologians, philosophers, scientists, and academia in general. There are many Papers in the book that are absolutely outstanding in content and quality that could not fail to impress the minds of all but the most prejudiced and conservative. The approval of this group must ultimately bring feedback to a much wider group.

What else is there?

Another alternative is secondary works. Because of preceding events in the Urantia movement, secondary works might now be the only realistic option. Here the principal problem will not be so much the writing of these works for there are many talented writers among the readership. The major problem will be distribution for, without the backing of a major publishing house, the present system of book distribution virtually excludes the works of little known authors. This is a serious difficulty that would need addressing. Perhaps the potential may be with the CD - ROM and copious advertising.

Reference:

1. Borg, Marcus, "Jesus: A New Vision." (Harper, SanFrancisco, 1991) See "Introduction" and page 17, ref.  5.