The stimulus that prompted this article came from some remarks in a letter front Matthew Block who lead just attended the World Parliament of Religions at Chicago. Matthew said:

"I'm all for secondary works based on the teachings (of The Urantia Book) and works promoting the book itself. We must diversify, build bridges to many different communities and mind-sets and content ourselves with finding a niche amongst many other movements and groups interested in world progress and spiritual enlightenment. I no longer see the book as necessarily having to supersede all other religions and philosophies. Nor do I see it as the panacea that will change the world after all other philosophies and religions have been tried and found wanting. In my heart I'm convinced that the book is far better and greater than anything else on the planet but finally I'm off my high horse.

"After participating at The Urantia Book booth (in the midst of 100-odd other booths representing other religions movements and service organizations) I realized that what we in the Urantia movement were really lacking was a sense of footing on the current scene we were always trying to be above everything inhabiting a nebulous no-zone waiting for some imaginary bell to signal that the world was finally ready for us it was just a great feeling at The Parliament to find ourselves being accepted and welcomed as one of many."

Thanks for those remarks, Matthew. Is it true that The Urantia Book students tend to set ourselves and our revelation in a zone apart from and above the rest of humanity while we await the signal that they are ready to hear us?

We are not supposed to indulge ourselves in much introspection but maybe a little will do no harm. I think most of us have at one time or another suffered from the "chosen people" syndrome and made ourselves obnoxious in the same way as the churchgoing community is seen by many outsiders to be obnoxious. I know this happens so let us try to find the reasons. Could it be that we offend by elevating the revelatory status of The Urantia Book to a level never intended by the revelators? Have we unintentionally become close to being as fundamentalist about our revelation as Christian or Islamic fundamentalists are about their holy books?

Perhaps one of the reasons for the extremely slow progress of our movement is that we have never taken the trouble to understand or explain in just what way The Urantia Book is a "revelation"--and in failing to do so we have deprived multitudes of both Christians and non-Christian from the saving truth contained therein. While we may believe that our book contains the highest truth available on our planet, have we fallen into the trap of assuming, perhaps unconsciously that our book is also its sole source of truth?

How many of us are aware that, excepting for its description of the hierarchy of supernatural beings, a great deal of the textual material of The Urantia Book already exists somewhere in the written records of mankind?

One of the reasons for our problem is the connotation of divine origin that is automatically attributed to the word "revelation." My Oxford dictionary definition is: "Knowledge disclosed to man by divine or supernatural agency; revealing of some fact"--thereby acknowledging that the word can be used in at least two distinct ways. The Urantia Book states: "Truth is always a revelation: autorevelation when it emerges as a result of the work of the indwelling, Adjuster; epochal revelation when it is presented by the function of some other celestial agency, group, or personality." (1109)

The book has a revealing statement about its use of the word, truth. "Nothing which human nature has touched can be regarded as infallible. Through the mind of man divine truth may indeed shine forth, but always of relative purity and partial divinity. The creature may crave infallibility, but only the Creators possess it " (1768)

To continue our examination of the use of the word "revelation" in The Urantia Book, we need to take note of two further snippets of information:

First, it is a fact that no author listed in the Table of Contents for the Urantia Book was of "Creator" status (who are the only beings possessing infallibility).

Second, the statement at the conclusion of the "Foreword" (17) tells us that more than one thousand of the highest human concepts have been collated in producing, the first part of the book and, for Part 4, the midwayer responsible for preparing the narrative of the life and teachings of Jesus utilized thought gems and superior concepts assembled from "more than two thousand human beings who have lived on earth from the days of Jesus down to the time of the inditing of these revelations, more correctly restatements" Other sources were used only when the midwayer could testify that he had failed to find the required conceptual expression in purely human sources. (l 343) I leave it to the reader to figure out the significance of  "...revelations, more correctly restatements."

next column>

When introducing, The Urantia Book to Christians we need to be aware that many believe that all revelation ceased with the Book of Revelations. The reason for this is to be found in that book's concluding verses which threaten anyone adding or taking away from the book with plagues, and other terrible consequences. It is not widely known that this kind of threat was once very common, a forerunner of what we now know as copyright. Perhaps because of its positioning at the very end of the Bible, a large segment of Christendom consider that this threat in the Book of Revelations is applicable to the whole of the Bible. Knowing that, we should not be surprised if such people automatically recoil from any suggestion of a new revelation.

The Urantia Book makes it clear that an Epochal Revelation is not necessarily a divine, infallible revelation. It appears that only the Creators themselves can know for certain just what parts of any revelation are infallible. However, we must recognize that the revelatory status of The Urantia Book is both limited and urgently needful of explanation if we hope for widespread acceptance of the book itself among Christians.

The book says: "There was just one motive in Jesus' postbaptismal life on Urantia, and that was a better and truer revelation of his Paradise Father." (1543)

Further along in the book, a second great motive was included--to lead men to become son-conscious, to faith-realize that they are the children of the Most High. (1578) These original motives have come close to being lost. Christianity has corrupted Jesus' primary aim by confusing his revelation of the Paradise Father with Old Testament images of Yahweh. Jesus' secondary aim has also been subverted by downgrading the concept of sonship to that of faithful servant.

If these two primary motives can be restored in the pure form as Jesus revealed them, I believe that the major errors of Christianity will melt away. One contemporary theologian has sown a potentially fertile seed that may bear much fruit by asserting that for Jesus, reality was a gracious and compassionate God.¹ However, the profundity of that statement is not likely to reach the grass roots level for a very long time unless it is wrapped in a more digestible package. It also needs the addition of the "Father" concept of God so consistently emphasized in The Urantia Book.

If promoted sufficiently, these two simple concepts are capable of breaking down the fundamentalist attitude to scripture, the so-called divine dictation theory according to which God alone is responsible for the content of the Bible. This theory has long since been rejected in the seminaries that train the clergy, also by Popes Benedict XV and Pius Xll, and by the Second Vatican Council. However it remains as firmly implanted as ever at the grass roots level. A direct attack on the Bible will not work. But when people have a true concept of God as a gracious, compassionate, and loving heavenly Father established in their minds, they will realize that the divine dictation theory, along with other serious error, is untenable.

The Urantia Book contains the necessary information, but experience has surely shown that the book alone cannot achieve the task. Secondary works are needed. The book itself tells us this when it states that "the dead theory of even the highest religious doctrines is powerless to transform us." (380). The Urantia Book is the highest religious doctrine available on this planet and it admits its own powerlessness! So let's introspect and if we have been riding high, dismount, and rejoin the world.

We also need to carefully explain the meaning of revelation as it relates to The Urantia Book so that people will. be enabled to discard their fear. Only then will they study the book with unprejudiced minds that will permit them to discover for themselves whatever new truth they can find therein.

But that is only one of the necessary steps. Having rejoined the world, we must face reality. Our present times have been dubbed "the post-literate age." The vast majority of people are virtually incapable of studying a 2000--page book such as The Urantia Book. But they are God's children, our brothers and sisters. It is our unavoidable responsibility to bring them the teachings of Jesus in digestible chunks and in forms that will be seen, heard, and heeded. The Urantia  Book cannot perform this task. It was never meant to do so. And that is why you and I have it. In conclusion, and in confirmation of some of what has been said, here is advice that Jesus gave:

"You cannot teach the deep things of the spirit to those who have been born only of the flesh; first see that men are born of the spirit before you seek to instruct them in the advanced ways of the spirit. Do not undertake to show men the beauties of the temple until you have first taken them into the temple. Introduce men to God and as the sons of God." (1592)

Let first things come first.

Ken Glasziou, Australia

Reference:
1. Borg, Marcus J. (1987) "Jesus: A New Vision." (Harper San Francisco)