This is a rebuttal to comments about the Urantia revelation

made by Dale Essary from:



Dale Essary says:



“In the minds of the mortals of Urantia--that being the name of your world--there exists great confusion respecting the meaning of such terms as God, divinity, and deity.” (A “Divine Counselor,” from The Urantia Book, 0:0.1)


“But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed.” (The apostle Paul, from the Holy Bible, Galatians 1:8)


My comments are indented:

Here’s the UBhoax website’s authors’/writers’ first mistake, and one that will be repeated over and over throughout his “argument,” because it’s all Christians have. Christians are not followers of Jesus, they are followers of Paul and his teachings ABOUT Jesus, and that’s why you will see, as above, Christians quoting Paul almost exclusively to prove this or that or the other thing. (And talk about an ego trip! Paul is saying that anyone preaching any gospel which is not his, even if the person preaching it is “an angel of heaven,” such as Gabriel perhaps, or Melchizedek, that that person will be accursed!) Of course, such proof is only proof if you believe it is. If you are not a follower of Paul, then whatever Paul said is largely or entirely irrelevant. Christians, like the Pharisees before them who brought about the murder of the Son of God, think that they already know everything, and anything that doesn’t agree with what they know, they will say it’s wrong and will crucify it literally or figuratively, or attempt to destroy it by any means possible.


I once was given a typical Christian pamphlet by a wild eyed Christian while in a laundry-mat . In the pamphlet were 15 quotes. One was from the Old Testament (OT), one was from Jesus, the Son of God himself, and 13 were from Paul. And therein lies a problem.


Also, throughout this or any Christian attack on the Urantia Revelation, or any other religion that is not theirs, or with which they don’t agree, the attackers will use the term, “the Bible,” as in, “the Bible says” or “according to the Bible,” “the Bible instructs us,” etc., and as if that somehow settles everything. Just drop in the phrase, “according to the Bible” and somehow everyone is supposed to assume the discussion is over.


It should also be understood by everyone that the term “the Bible” means many different meanings to different people. Every time the term is used, the reader should stop and consider what it means in that particular instance. To Jews, the Bible means their scriptures, completed 2400 years ago, the Old Testament. To Jews, their Bible has nothing whatsoever to do with the Christians or the Christian Bible, or with Jesus, even though the Christians have appropriated the Hebrew scriptures for their own use. To the Christian writer of this attack on the Urantia Book, “the Bible” means the entire Jewish scriptures added to the front of the much smaller Christian scriptures. And these two sets of scriptures are 400 years apart in time. And last but not least, when a Christian says, “according to the Bible” he more often than not means, “according to the [self appointed] apostle Paul.” Of course, Paul is not “the Bible.” But that’s what they mean.


The Urantia Book is a literary hoax, a spiritual fraud, and a false gospel!


Not true, and simply making such statements does not make them true. It’s a new revelation of religious truth from God’s government to our planet, just as it says it is.


Although The UB purports to be a revelation authored by altruistic, supermortal celestial beings hailing from distant planets and alternate time dimensions…


Alternate time dimensions? Now there’s a new one. What’s that about, I wonder? Some Urantia Book references to them would be helpful. And “altruistic, supermortal celestial beings hailing from distant planets”? Yeah, that’s another good one. They’re called ANGELS. One other Christian referred to plain Jane angels (in the Urantia Book) as “alleged disembodied beings in ‘higher” universes’“ Isn’t that amazing? How many different ways can you smear someone else’s religion and how many weird ways can you describe “angels” so that they sound sinister? Unbelievable.


it is instead a literary hoax perpetuated by one or more humans amidst the bustling hubris of early-to-mid-twentieth-century Chicago, USA.


Not true at all. Statements such as that are just statements without any backing or support whatsoever. Don’t be swayed by unsupported statements. Here’s one: “Paul’s writings are a literary hoax perpetuated by one or more humans amidst the bustling hubris of early-to-mid-first-century Palestine and the eastern Mediterranean basin.” See how easy it is to simply make statements up, statements that sound authoritarian, but which have no basis in reality?


Though its stated purpose is to “expand cosmic consciousness and enhance spiritual perception” (0:0.2), The UB’s apparent intent is to mimic celestial endorsement of a supposedly “new” and “improved” religious construct which is decidedly rooted in archaic ideas that are clearly aberrant and/or heretical from a historical Christian perspective.


That’s not the Urantia Book's “apparent intent” at all. The Urantia Book's apparent intent is as it’s clearly and plainly stated, to “expand cosmic consciousness and enhance spiritual perception.” Perhaps there is something about that statement that the Urantia Book attacker doesn’t understand? It seems simple enough. Or perhaps the person who wrote it is looking for things to distort? Gee, that’s not honest. They distorted and ridiculed even the Son of God. How hard is it to distort and ridicule? Not hard. But one should be able to expect honesty from a Christian. Nor is anything in the UB archaic (Look at the “Bible”! Talk about archaic ideas!), or aberrant, or heretical from the only standpoint that matters, God’s standpoint. From a (fundamentalist) “Christian perspective?” Well sure, probably, but so what? The whole point of the Urantia revelation is to bring this planet up to date and up to speed, and that necessarily means correcting the erroneous religious beliefs of Christians and others that have developed over the millennia.


The primary target for which the UB “authors” claim is in need of “improvement” in the arena of religious thought is none other than the Bible, with all its “misconceptions” regarding the nature of God, who Jesus was, the need for and means of salvation, etc.


Yes, that’s right, the Bible is a mess and many Christian beliefs are wrong. Liberal Christian thinkers know this, and Biblical scholars know this. Christian fundamentalists are in the dark, and/or in denial. The Bible is loaded with contradictions, incest and killings and rape, and blasphemies against God. (But I don’t know if the Urantia Book authors “claim” that the Bible is the “primary target.” Where is the reference for that statement?) For example (just one of many actually, -here’s one: Exodus 20:13) “the Bible,” meaning the Jewish scriptures, the OT in this case, admonishes us with God’s commandment:


“Thou shalt not kill”


and then it blasphemes against that very same God and suggests that God ordered the slaughter of the Amalekites, every “man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.” (1 Samuel 15:3) Yes, not just the adult Amalekites, but even the dumb animals and tiny helpless babies. That’s blasphemy against God, right in the Bible. It’s disgusting. Any God loving person should throw up their hands (and maybe just throw up, period) in disgust at such blasphemy against God. It was either written by men with an agenda trying to cover up or justify genocide, or it was written by The Devil himself. Shame on anyone for believing that is “the word of God.” Incredible. Then too (without checking too much), I think the Amalekites were obliterated several times, again and again. You’d think one obliteration would be plenty. In another place, the holy “Word of God” talks about people drinking “piss” and eating feces together. (See 2 Kings 18:27, and Isaiah 36:12 KJV) That’s very holy stuff, highly spiritual. (wink) Yes, the Bible (meaning in particular and in this case, the Old Testament of the Jews which has been appropriated for their own use by the Christians) is a mess alright. People may as well face the truth. There’s no reason to duck this issue or soft pedal it or sugar coat it. As noted above, Biblical scholars know the Bible has a lot of problems. Fundamentalists do not.


Every “Christian” who is intellectually honest must do his or her best to find out what is true in the Bible (meaning the OT and the NT together in this case) and what’s not true. They need to investigate and find out what biblical scholars already know. Christians should not get all their Bible information from fundamentalists who wallow in their fundamentalism and their willful biblical ignorance. In the introduction to “Self-Contradictions of the Bible” by William Henry Burr, R. Joseph Hoffmann writes:


“Fundamentalism - the belief that the Bible is the inspired, inerrant, and literally true word of God - thrives on ignorance, not just of a general sort, but an ignorance of the Bible itself. The ability to perceive contradictions in a written text, to appreciate the nuances of historical and literary context or the intentions that ancient writers hide beneath their words are hard-acquired skills in the best of times. Fundamentalism presupposes none of them.”


As with Christianity, Jesus is of central importance to The UB.


Gee, that sounds good, it should be correct, but it’s not really correct. Jesus is not of central importance to Christianity if people think about it carefully. It *seems* on the surface that it is so or should be so, but it’s not and Christians stagger back in disbelief and denial when you suggest this truth. Paul and his teachings about Jesus’ death and resurrection are central to Christianity, but Jesus and his very own clear teachings about God the Father, eternal life and how to have it, how to have your sins forgiven, etc., are not central to Christianity. In fact, Mark 7:13 as spoken BY Jesus well describes the situation in Christianity with regard to the teachings OF Jesus, who was GOD:


“Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.” KJV


Paul has muddied the clear truth that Jesus presented to mankind. It’s Paul, not Jesus, who is the founder of Christianity, and it’s Paul, Paul, Paul ad infinitum, that Christians look to and love to quote, not Jesus the Son of God. The essence of Jesus’ message, the good news and glad tidings from and of Jesus, has been partially or wholly lost to us today, and has been ‘made of no effect through tradition’ and replaced by another message, the gospel about Jesus from Paul. And Paul didn’t simply found the Christian church, he wrote his own theology, which Christians now regard as the “word of God,” replacing in many cases, the real “word of God,” Jesus’ words.


More than one third of the page count in the book is devoted to a retelling of the life of Jesus by way of a complete overhaul of the four New Testament Gospels.


It’s not really an “overhaul,” if by that is meant some sort of Hollywood style rewrite. Rather it’s the real, complete, and corrected story. Well, I guess it is an overhaul then, in the best meaning of the word, and long overdue too. The Bible can be likened to the way a child might submit a second grade essay on some complex subject to the teacher of the class, and the teacher would correct and comment on the errors and omissions in the child’s essay. In that way, the Urantia Book is an “overhaul” of not just the Bible, but of all manner of things.


However, the “Jesus” you will meet in The UB is not the same Jesus who, according to the Bible, willingly died on the cross to save you and me from our sins. Ironic though it may seem, The UB interacts with the Bible a great deal and devotes much attention to reinterpreting the meaning of many concepts and facts presented in Scripture, to the detriment of the very source it so heavily relies on as its primary source of inspiration!


Aye, there’s the rub. In fact, there are several rubs. Yes, it’s the same Jesus alright, the real Jesus this time, along with the real truth about him and his life and teachings on earth. And the truth is that he never came here to die “on the cross to save you and me from our sins.” Jesus never said any such thing. In fact, what Jesus said contradicts that false doctrine. And it is a false gospel, the gospel of Paul, that Christians have been preaching for 2,000 years. When the writer above throws in the phrase “according to the Bible” some might think that the phase has meaning and carries weight and authority and thus, proves something or other. But such is not the case. It’s a meaningless phrase. As mentioned before, to Jews, the “Bible” is exclusively their Old Testament scriptures. The writer is not a Jew. To the writer, “according to the Bible” in this case means according to the Paul in the New Testament scriptures of the Christians, the only scriptures really that they can call their own. “According to the Bible” in this case does not mean the Bible that is the first bible, the Hebrew scriptures, and it doesn’t even mean the New Testament. It simply means the ideas of a mere man named Paul, the founder of Christianity, and the one that Christians follow. Phases such as “according to the Bible” are meaningless, but nevertheless will be dropped into discussions as if they carried great weight. People should not let such phrases such as “according to the Bible” or “the Bible says” or “the word of God” get by them without knowing precisely what is meant, and questioning, even if silently, the underlying, hidden premises and assumptions that are being slid into the reader’s brain. The Old Testament (OT), which is 4/5ths of the Christian “Bible” is actually the Jewish Bible, and they don’t believe any of the Christian/Pauline ideas about Jesus. The OT is the Jewish scripture. They’re the experts. It’s their religion. Christians should give it back to them. What sort of self respecting religion steals the scriptures of another religion and pastes it on to the front of their own meager holy books and then tells the religion they took from that they are all wrong and twists and distorts and uses the scriptures of the older religion for their own purposes?


Christians also use the phrase “the gospel of Jesus” (another phrase loaded with assumptions that they slide into your head if you aren’t paying attention) but nothing could be further from the truth. It’s the gospel of Paul about Jesus. Paul even says so himself:


“In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ *according to my gospel.*” -Romans 2:16 KJV


“Now to him that is of power to [e]stablish you *according to my gospel*” -Romans 16:25 KJV


“Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead *according to my gospel.*” -2 Timothy 2:8 KJV


So don’t call Paul’s gospel, “the gospel of Jesus.” It’s not. It’s Paul’s gospel. Jesus, the Son of God, was here thirty some years and he NEVER ever said that anyone needed to believe that he came to die on the cross for our sins, or that that was the Good News, or that it was HIS Gospel.


Jesus NEVER stood before the multitude at any time and said:


“Hi folks. Hey, weren’t those fish and loaves great? Let’s have a big hand for the caterers. Anyway, my name is Jesus and these are my apostles here on the left and right of the stage, and I’m here today to tell you some GREAT GOOD NEWS, and that good news is that my father, God, sent me here to earth to die for your sins. If you believe that, then my father will give you eternal life and happiness with Him in heaven, but if you don’t believe it, then my loving father will torture you in Hell for all eternity. Isn’t that great news folks? That’s right, ladies and gentlemen, that’s my gospel.”


Jesus never said any such thing. The core centerpiece belief of Christianity, and Jesus NEVER said it. And yet we know that the real gospel comes FROM JESUS, and not from Paul:


The New Testament tells us that Jesus and the apostles (Paul was not one of Jesus’ twelve personally trained apostles and came on the scene long after Jesus’ death) went from city to city, preaching “the gospel of the kingdom” and “the glad tidings of the kingdom of God” to the multitude, long before Paul.


“And Jesus went about all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing every sickness and every disease among the people.” (Matthew 9:35)


“And it came to pass...that Jesus went throughout every city and village, preaching and showing the glad tidings of the kingdom of God: and the twelve were with him...” (Luke 8:1) (Also see Matthew 4:23, Mark 1:14, and Luke 4:43.)


From these verses we can see that the gospel was something that Jesus actually preached and taught during his appearances before large crowds in many cities, long before his death, and of course, long before anyone ever heard of Paul. Thus, the questions of who, when, and where the real gospel comes from are answered. The gospel of the kingdom, the glad tidings, the good news, comes from Jesus, the Son of God, and that gospel is not the gospel preached by Christians.


Ironic though it may seem, The UB interacts with the Bible a great deal and devotes much attention to reinterpreting the meaning of many concepts and facts presented in Scripture, to the detriment of the very source it so heavily relies on as its primary source of inspiration!


It must be noted here again, and in every instance, that the term “the Bible” as used above is full of different meanings. 4/5ths of “the Bible” that the writer is referring to is not even a document of Christian origin, but rather is the purloined scriptures of the Jews. And the UB doesn’t “interact” with the Bible, it corrects it and completes it, with information from both human and celestial (angelic) sources. It’s really quite idiotic and egotistical to think that we mighty humans have our own perfect record of these events, but that God’s government does not (or that God’s government has our “Bible” with its piss drinking and feces eating --2 Kings 18:27, Isaiah 36:12 KJV-- Amalekite slaughter and genocide, and other blasphemies for its universe record of events on Earth. It’s ludicrous that God’s record would be THAT record, the historical, legend-myth record of a small group of nomadic peoples. What about the rest of the people on earth and their records?) And “the Bible” is not “the very source [the Urantia Book] so heavily relies on as its primary source of inspiration!” “The Bible simply contains the many of the roughed out stories, myths, and legends that the Urantia Book clarifies and corrects and completes so very well from both human and celestial records. The Urantia Book does have some qualified praise for some of the books of the Bible however:


95:1.10 It was the Salem missionaries of the period following the rejection of their teaching who wrote many of the Old Testament Psalms, inscribing them on stone, where later-day Hebrew priests found them during the captivity and subsequently incorporated them among the collection of hymns ascribed to Jewish authorship. These beautiful psalms from Babylon were not written in the temples of Bel-Marduk; they were the work of the descendants of the earlier Salem missionaries, and they are a striking contrast to the magical conglomerations of the Babylonian priests. The Book of Job is a fairly good reflection of the teachings of the Salem school at Kish and throughout Mesopotamia.


96:7.2 The Psalms are the work of a score or more of authors; many were written by Egyptian and Mesopotamian teachers. During these times when the Levant worshiped nature gods, there were still a goodly number who believed in the supremacy of El Elyon, the Most High.


96:7.3 No collection of religious writings gives expression to such a wealth of devotion and inspirational ideas of God as the Book of Psalms. And it would be very helpful if, in the perusal of this wonderful collection of worshipful literature, consideration could be given to the source and chronology of each separate hymn of praise and adoration, bearing in mind that no other single collection covers such a great range of time. This Book of Psalms is the record of the varying concepts of God entertained by the believers of the Salem religion throughout the Levant and embraces the entire period from Amenemope to Isaiah. In the Psalms God is depicted in all phases of conception, from the crude idea of a tribal deity to the vastly expanded ideal of the later Hebrews, wherein Yahweh is pictured as a loving ruler and merciful Father.


96:7.4 And when thus regarded, this group of Psalms constitutes the most valuable and helpful assortment of devotional sentiments ever assembled by man up to the times of the twentieth century. The worshipful spirit of this collection of hymns transcends that of all other sacred books of the world.



(I include this here to show the Master’s full range of views concerning the scriptures.)


159:4.1 And then went Jesus over to Abila, where Nathaniel and his associates labored. Nathaniel was much bothered by some of Jesus’ pronouncements which seemed to detract from the authority of the recognized Hebrew scriptures. Accordingly, on this night, after the usual period of questions and answers, Nathaniel took Jesus away from the others and asked: “Master, could you trust me to know the truth about the Scriptures? I observe that you teach us only a portion of the sacred writings—the best as I view it—and I infer that you reject the teachings of the rabbis to the effect that the words of the law are the very words of God, having been with God in heaven even before the times of Abraham and Moses. What is the truth about the Scriptures?” When Jesus heard the question of his bewildered apostle, he answered:


159:4.2 “Nathaniel, you have rightly judged; I do not regard the Scriptures as do the rabbis. I will talk with you about this matter on condition that you do not relate these things to your brethren, who are not all prepared to receive this teaching. The words of the law of Moses and the teachings of the Scriptures were not in existence before Abraham. Only in recent times have the Scriptures been gathered together as we now have them. While they contain the best of the higher thoughts and longings of the Jewish people, they also contain much that is far from being representative of the character and teachings of the Father in heaven; wherefore must I choose from among the better teachings those truths which are to be gleaned for the gospel of the kingdom.


159:4.3 “These writings are the work of men, some of them holy men, others not so holy. The teachings of these books represent the views and extent of enlightenment of the times in which they had their origin. As a revelation of truth, the last are more dependable than the first. The Scriptures are faulty and altogether human in origin, but mistake not, they do constitute the best collection of religious wisdom and spiritual truth to be found in all the world at this time.


159:4.4 “Many of these books were not written by the persons whose names they bear, but that in no way detracts from the value of the truths which they contain. If the story of Jonah should not be a fact, even if Jonah had never lived, still would the profound truth of this narrative, the love of God for Nineveh and the so-called heathen, be none the less precious in the eyes of all those who love their fellow men. The Scriptures are sacred because they present the thoughts and acts of men who were searching for God, and who in these writings left on record their highest concepts of righteousness, truth, and holiness. The Scriptures contain much that is true, very much, but in the light of your present teaching, you know that these writings also contain much that is misrepresentative of the Father in heaven, the loving God I have come to reveal to all the worlds.


159:4.5 “Nathaniel, never permit yourself for one moment to believe the Scripture records which tell you that the God of love directed your forefathers to go forth in battle to slay all their enemies—men, women, and children. Such records are the words of men, not very holy men, and they are not the word of God. The Scriptures always have, and always will, reflect the intellectual, moral, and spiritual status of those who create them. Have you not noted that the concepts of Yahweh grow in beauty and glory as the prophets make their records from Samuel to Isaiah? And you should remember that the Scriptures are intended for religious instruction and spiritual guidance. They are not the works of either historians or philosophers.


159:4.6 “The thing most deplorable is not merely this erroneous idea of the absolute perfection of the Scripture record and the infallibility of its teachings, but rather the confusing misinterpretation of these sacred writings by the tradition-enslaved scribes and Pharisees at Jerusalem. And now will they employ both the doctrine of the inspiration of the Scriptures and their misinterpretations thereof in their determined effort to withstand these newer teachings of the gospel of the kingdom. Nathaniel, never forget, the Father does not limit the revelation of truth to any one generation or to any one people. Many earnest seekers after the truth have been, and will continue to be, confused and disheartened by these doctrines of the perfection of the Scriptures.


159:4.7 “The authority of truth is the very spirit that indwells its living manifestations, and not the dead words of the less illuminated and supposedly inspired men of another generation. And even if these holy men of old lived inspired and spirit-filled lives, that does not mean that their words were similarly spiritually inspired. Today we make no record of the teachings of this gospel of the kingdom lest, when I have gone, you speedily become divided up into sundry groups of truth contenders as a result of the diversity of your interpretation of my teachings. For this generation it is best that we live these truths while we shun the making of records.


159:4.8 “Mark you well my words, Nathaniel, 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.


159:4.9 “But the greatest error of the teaching about the Scriptures is the doctrine of their being sealed books of mystery and wisdom which only the wise minds of the nation dare to interpret. The revelations of divine truth are not sealed except by human ignorance, bigotry, and narrow-minded intolerance. The light of the Scriptures is only dimmed by prejudice and darkened by superstition. A false fear of sacredness has prevented religion from being safeguarded by common sense. The fear of the authority of the sacred writings of the past effectively prevents the honest souls of today from accepting the new light of the gospel, the light which these very God-knowing men of another generation so intensely longed to see.


159:4.10 “But the saddest feature of all is the fact that some of the teachers of the sanctity of this traditionalism know this very truth. They more or less fully understand these limitations of Scripture, but they are moral cowards, intellectually dishonest. They know the truth regarding the sacred writings, but they prefer to withhold such disturbing facts from the people. And thus do they pervert and distort the Scriptures, making them the guide to slavish details of the daily life and an authority in things nonspiritual instead of appealing to the sacred writings as the repository of the moral wisdom, religious inspiration, and the spiritual teaching of the God-knowing men of other generations.”


159:4.11 Nathaniel was enlightened, and shocked, by the Master’s pronouncement. He long pondered this talk in the depths of his soul, but he told no man concerning this conference until after Jesus’ ascension; and even then he feared to impart the full story of the Master’s instruction.


It is the intent of this website to provide sufficient evidence in support of the position as stated above, submitted for the reader’s consideration.


It can only do so from one position and one position only, and that is the position that “It’s not Biblical!” In other words: “The Bible (whatever that means) says it (according to the particular Christian sect I belong to), I believe it, and that settles it!” It can only do so from a faith standpoint which declares, “I believe this, so that must be wrong.”


It will be left to the reader to decide whether the evidence presented herein is sufficient to draw the conclusions that The UB lacks any supernatural credibility;


Yes, it will be up to the reader, but sadly most of these issues end up as Paul Simon said in “The Boxer”: “…a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest.” However, there really can be no “evidence” since all such things ultimately are matters of faith.


…that its contents can be explained purely on the basis of human authorship;


Jesus’ incarnation likewise can be explained purely on the basis of human genetics and procreation, Joseph having sexual relations with Mary, for example. In such matters, belief and faith trump all else. But a thoughtful reading of the Urantia Papers will show any discerning person who is open to new truth that it indeed came from God’s government. Just as the Son of God can be rejected and was rejected, so too can any revelation from God be rejected. And all manner of “explanations” and rationalizations can be offered to support such rejections.


…that its scientific claims were either common knowledge at the time of writing and are now outdated,


Urantians have already dealt with this issue. Yes, some of the science in the book was common knowledge at the time of writing. So what? Plenty of it was not, and is not common knowledge to this day. Much of it is still far advanced and may not be proven as fact for hundreds of years or more. And none of it, to my knowledge is “now outdated.”


…or were just plain wrong to begin with;


Nonsense. While no Urantian I know of claims perfection for the book, there is very little if any of it that is “just plain wrong.” That’s an absurd, baseless claim.


…that its historic content is more fiction than fact;


That’s going to be a hard one to prove!


…that it lacks any authentic spiritual content;


Oh, that’s shameful. What is God going to do with people who not only reject, but apparently can’t see “authentic spiritual content” when He puts it right in front of them? Worse still, they try to destroy it! Well, it’s nothing new. The same thing happened when God put Jesus in front of the Pharisees of that day.


…and that it contains numerous plagiarisms from once-popular human sources, which in and of itself detracts from its claim to celestial authorship.


There is no plagiarism, and there can be no plagiarism in the Urantia Book since God is omniscient. That means all knowing for those who are not. God is all knowing. Everything in the universe, past, present, or future, is known to God. How then can a revelation authorized by God’s government and authored by agents of God’s government (angels and such) contain any plagiarized information? Plagiarism is a human idea and has nothing to do with God. God already knows everything and he cannot plagiarize from Himself. That God chooses to use human sources to impart universal truth to our planet is simply because it’s the best way to help us relate to the information.




DISSENTING VOICES (More from the UBhoax website)

A compilation of internal contradictions and inconsistencies within The UB


Those who promote the teachings of The UB tell us that one of the more convincing aspects of its authenticity is its internal consistency. We are told that The UB presents a unified view of religion, science, philosophy, and history that is beyond reproach.


Who exactly is the person or persons that are referred to above (as “Those who promote…”) who have said that “The UB presents a unified view of religion, science, philosophy, and history that is *beyond reproach*.”? The “beyond reproach” part is the part I’m most interested in. How many of “those” who say it’s *beyond reproach* are there? One? 500? Please name names and provide quotes from them. I can’t imagine any Urantian believer who would say that, and I’ve never heard it said, or read it anywhere but here. Did you make up the “beyond reproach” part? Did you embellish? Exaggerate? None of those things are honest, if so. In any case, the Urantia Book doesn’t claim to be written by God, and it doesn’t claim perfection.


However, there are those of us (yours truly included among them) who beg to differ.


I’d say you have created a debate device called a straw man, and now you are knocking it down. You are arguing with yourself in order to win the discussion. But if any Urantian has said that the UB is “beyond reproach” rest assured that that Urantian does not speak for the entire Urantia community of readers and believers.


Listed below is a continuing series of questions for which two or more divergent answers can be found within the pages of the so-called Fifth Epochal Revelation. Otherwise known as internal contradictions and/or inconsistencies, these conundrums are too numerous for The UB be taken seriously as a divine revelation, and expose the element of human error that runs throughout.


Oh my goodness. A “continuing series” of “Internal contradictions and/or inconsistencies”? In the Urantia Book? Looks like three to me. Coming from a Bible believer against the Urantia Book it’s almost more laughable than a body can stand. The Bible has hundreds of contradictions and inconsistencies. Here’s one just for a taste of a Biblical contradiction: two conflicting accounts for why the Jews keep the Sabbath:


For [in] six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them [is], and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it. -Exodus 20:11


And remember that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and [that] the LORD thy God brought thee out thence through a mighty hand and by a stretched out arm: therefore the LORD thy God commanded thee to keep the sabbath day. -Deuteronomy 5:15


And, the Urantia Book is only a “divine revelation” from the standpoint that it was authorized by God. It was not authored by divine beings, and it does not claim perfection.


For those who are up to the challenge, feel free to respond with a proposed solution to the apparent conflict posed by any of the questions posted below…


I think I am up to the challenge.


so that it may be passed on to those in need of resolution. Be forewarned, however, that any information submitted may in fact backfire on the respondent’s intended purpose by way of updating the discussion portion of the subject question!


Whew! Now there’s one confusing paragraph after the “up to the challenge part.” “…so that it may be passed on to those in need of resolution”? And the last sentence is completely incomprehensible to me. But anyway, it looks as if the anti-Urantia revelation author has gathered together all in one place below, three GIGANTIC alleged “internal contradictions and/or inconsistencies,” from the Urantia Book, or at least what he’d like to think of as such anyway, out of a 2000 page book.


1. The biblical Trinity consists of how many Gods?


According to Christianity, it consists of three Gods. Three Gods in one. That’s what the “tri” in trinity means, three. Here you are trying to have it both ways, three Gods in one, but one God. That’s OK, the Urantia Book supports your belief, but Muslims and Jews will say about Christianity’s Trinity exactly what you are trying to say below about Urantian Trinitarianism, and that’s that you worship more than one God. In fact, that’s their objection to Christianity, that it’s polytheistic, while their religion is truly monotheistic. How is it that you are trying to make against the Urantia Book the same charge of polytheism that the Jews and the Moslems make against Christianity? What a strange world this is.


One God: “‘In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth and all things therein.’” (131:2.2; citing Gen. 1:1)


I just read Genesis 1:1, KJV, and it doesn’t read exactly as the quoted text above. It doesn’t say, “…and all things therein,” for instance. Thus, your assumption that the Urantia Papers are citing Genesis 1:1 may not be correct. Or, the KJV translation is wrong? Or it’s a paraphrase. Who knows? Ganid is summarizing the entire Hebrew scriptures in two pages of the Urantia Book. Further, below, you attribute the Genesis 1:1 text statement above to Jesus. The Papers indicate that Ganid assembled the statement for his manuscript on monotheistic world religions. Actually, Genesis 1:1 before translation from Hebrew says NONE of the above and certainly doesn’t use the word “God.” It uses the word Elohim, which is a plural Hebrew noun meaning “Gods.”


Three Gods: “‘Do you not recall how the Scriptures begin by asserting that “In the beginning the Gods created the heavens and the earth”? This indicates that when that record was made the Trinity concept of three Gods in one had found lodgment in the religion of our forebears.’” (142:3.6; “Jesus” citing Gen. 1:1)


This is so nitpicky it defies belief. The Urantia Book *supports* the Christian idea of the Trinity, and yet here this anti-Urantia revelation writer is attacking the Urantia Book because it doesn’t agree absolutely and completely with his or her previously settled Trinitarian ideas. Furthermore, Jewish religion and Jewish websites all deny the Trinity, as does Islam. How is it that some Christian fundamentalists are more expert at the Hebrew scriptures than Jesus or the Jews themselves?


This is a classic example of what Joseph Hoffman was talking about farther above: “Fundamentalism -…- thrives on ignorance, not just of a general sort, but an ignorance of the Bible itself.”


From this Christian website, and the section “Introduction to Biblical Hebrew,” I gleaned this excerpt below, of which the second paragraph is particularly relevant here:


“For students new to the Hebrew scriptures Genesis 1:1 is very revelatory. In English it is translated “In the beginning God created the Heavens and the Earth.” This translation is very close, but, there are some things you should take note of. (remainder of the first paragraph snipped, second paragraph continues below:)


“By examining the meaning of the word “Elohim” you will understand the use of the words “we”, “they”, and “us” in so many places in Genesis and in particular during the Creation and Garden stories as they pertain to Deity. All Hebrew words ending in “im” or “eem” (Yodh-Mem) are PLURAL. “Elohim” literally refers to “Gods”… [Emphasis is that of the website, not mine.]


I guess the Jesus in the Urantia Book knew a lot more about the Hebrew text and the meaning of Genesis 1:1 and the word Elohim than the fundamentalist writer of the attack on the Urantia Book. Furthermore, it makes not ONE iota of difference to anyone’s eternal survival if they believe in or don’t believe in the Christian idea of the Trinity, the Urantia Book idea of the Trinity, or no Trinity at all as the truly monotheistic Moslems and Jews do. The whole discussion is nitpicking and silly. The idea of the Trinity is validated in the Urantia Book. Christians should be thankful.


Discussion: Supposedly, it was “Jesus,” along with his philosopher sidekick Ganid, who hand-selected the passage in 131:2.2 from the Torah, whilst compiling a collection of the finest passages offered by the world’s religions during a visit at the great library in Alexandria at the age of 28. It was only a few years later that “Jesus” uttered the words in 142:3.6. Quite a radical turnaround, wouldn’t you say?


These sorts of mischaracterizations are shameful and unnecessary. Ganid was not Jesus’ “philosopher sidekick.” Ganid was the teenage son of a businessman from India who, with is father, toured the Mediterranean region with Jesus as Ganid’s tutor. And at 131:0.1 and 131:0.2 the Papers seem to make it pretty clear that it was Ganid, and not “Supposedly, it was Jesus” who “hand selected the passage in 131:2.2 from the Torah.”



DURING the Alexandrian sojourn of Jesus, Gonod, and Ganid, the young man spent much of his time and no small sum of his father’s money making a collection of the teachings of the world’s religions about God and his relations with mortal man. Ganid employed more than threescore learned translators in the making of this abstract of the religious doctrines of the world concerning the Deities. And it should be made plain in this record that all these teachings portraying monotheism were largely derived, directly or indirectly, from the preachments of the missionaries of Machiventa Melchizedek, who went forth from their Salem headquarters to spread the doctrine of one God—the Most High—to the ends of the earth.

131:0.2 There is presented herewith an abstract of Ganid’s manuscript, which he prepared at Alexandria and Rome, and which was preserved in India for hundreds of years after his death. ...


No, not only is there no “radical turnaround,” there’s not even an issue.


2. How Many Gods Does The UB Say We Should Worship?


Only One: “In the highest sense, we worship the Universal Father and him only.” (5:3.1)


Three:When we worship the Universal Father, actually we at the same time worship God the Son and God the Spirit.” (6:2.3)


Discussion: Taken in conjunction with other UB passages that depict each member of the Paradise Trinity as a distinct God and a unique being (6:0.4; 10:5.8; 120:4.3; 161:1.6), the second passage cited above (6:2.3) promotes the worship of three Gods.


More nitpicking, and by the way, that’s exactly what the Jews and the Moslems say Christians do, worship three Gods: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Spirit, -polytheism. Better clean up your own three God-Trinity problems before you start attacking the Urantia Book which supports the Christian Trinity idea. Christians CANNOT explain their three-Gods-in-one system to Moslems and Jews. How is it then that they are attacking a very supportive three-Gods-in-one system of another religion? Unbelievable. And as if it makes any difference to anyone’s eternal survival.


This construct amounts to tritheism (three gods), a form of polytheistic worship.


Too bad. This is EXACTLY what Jews and Moslems say about Christianity, that your Trinity belief “amounts to tritheism (three gods), a form of polytheistic worship.” Wake up! You can’t even sell your own story.


The biblical Trinity, on the other hand consists of one God comprising three, co-equal, co-eternal Persons within the same monotheistic Godhead.


So you say! And Urantians agree. But hello? The Old Testament is the scripture of the Jews. They’re the experts on their scriptures and they DENY any such “biblical Trinity” ideas in their scriptures. Go to their websites and see what they say about the Trinity. IT’S THEIR BOOK!


The Bible condemns the worship of more than one god as idolatry (see “A Biblical Evaluation of The UB, Part III”).


Stop talking about what the Bible condemns if you mean the Old Testament. It’s not even yours, and there’s 400 years separation between Christianity’s meager text and the four times larger Old Testament of the Jews to which Christianity appended theirs. The Jews, whose scripture it is, and Moslems too, condemn Christianity as a polytheistic religion, worshipping three Gods, just as you are trying to do with the Urantian Trinitarian ideas. And the Jews certainly condemn Christian attempts to make their scriptures support your Trinitarian ideas. Tsk, tsk. You have your own Trinity problems, and the Urantia Book’s Trinity is essentially identical to Christianity’s. Suggestions that the three Gods in one idea in Christianity is monotheism but the three Gods in one idea in the Urantia Book is polytheism is quibbling of the worst sort. You don’t know who your friends are. I gather you believe in the Father as God, the Holy Spirit as God, and Jesus as God? Then according to you, you are a polytheist. Three Gods in one is a paradox than man cannot understand, and no amount of parsing the words on your part will make your three Gods in one any more monotheistic than the Urantia Book’s explanation, which is much fuller and richer. If you were a Moslem or a Jew, a true monotheist, you might get some traction with your charges against the Trinity of the Urantia Book, but you’re not. You’re a Trinitarian just like Urantians. As the saying goes, better find another tree to bark up.


3. Do your feelings determine the validity of religious experience?


Yes: (1) “It is high time that man had a religious experience so personal and so sublime that it could be realized and expressed only by ‘feelings that lie too deep for words.’” (99:5.9; emphasis added) (2) “The new cult must, like the old, foster sentiment, satisfy emotion, and promote loyalty . . . .” (87:7.7; emphasis added) (3) “You cannot perceive spiritual truth until you feelingly experience it, and many truths are not really felt except in adversity.” (48:7.18; emphasis added) (4) “3. The emotion designers. These enhancers and conservators of feeling are those who preserve the sentiments of morontia and the emotions of divinity for the study and edification of the children of time and for the inspiration and beautification of morontia progressors and advancing spirits.” (44:6.5; emphasis added) (5) “In the schools of the morontia life these teachers engage in individual, group, class, and mass teaching. On the mansion worlds such schools are organized in three general groups of one hundred divisions each: the schools of thinking, the schools of feeling, and the schools of doing.” (48:5.6; emphasis added) (6) “The feeling of religious assurance is more than an emotional feeling. The assurance of religion transcends the reason of the mind, even the logic of philosophy.” (101:0.3; emphasis added)


No: (1) “It is your thoughts, not your feelings, that lead you Godward. . . . [N]either is religion the offspring of sublime feelings and purely mystical emotions. (101:1.3,4; emphasis added) (2) “The Urantia races are so largely electrically and chemically controlled, so highly animallike in their common behavior, so emotional in their ordinary reactions, that it becomes exceedingly difficult for the Monitors to guide and direct them. You are so devoid of courageous decisions and consecrated co‑operation that your indwelling Adjusters find it next to impossible to communicate directly with the human mind.” (110:4.5; emphasis added)


Discussion: The revelators seem confused about this aspect of humanity called emotion. Should we trust our feelings, or shouldn’t we? I guess the answer will depend on which “revelator” we ask!


There is a disconnect between the original question, and the two answers provided. Initially, it’s asked: “Do your feelings determine the validity of religious experience?” “The validity of religious experience” is the crux and keywords of the question. After many quotes from the Urantia Book the author seems to decide that yes, feelings are important according to the book, for helping determine the validity of religious experience. But later, in the second answer, the author switches the subject to what will “lead you Godward.” That’s another subject, and it turns out that it’s your thoughts that will lead you Godward. There is no contradiction because the author changed subjects but pretended that he had not.




WHAT IS THIS? (more from the UBhoax website)


UBHOAX.ORG is a Christian apologetics website dedicated to exposing The Urantia Book, an alleged celestial revelation written by angels, to be a literary hoax that was in reality spawned by human invention.


It can’t be done, except of course in the context that “It’s not Biblical.” Such things are matters of faith.


The primary purpose of this website is to provide information to Christians who have been exposed to the fraudulent teachings of The Urantia Book,


No Christians have been exposed to the fraudulent teachings of The Urantia Book because there aren’t any fraudulent teachings of The Urantia Book. Christians may have, however, been exposed to new revealed truths from God’s government that may not agree with your particular Christian sect’s interpretation of what it thinks the Bible says, meaning the scriptures of the Jews, the New Testament scriptures, and the writings of one Paul of Tarsus.


and to aid them in countering its teachings with biblically-based, well-reasoned responses to those who are actively engaged in its promotion (1Pet. 3:15).


The terms “biblically based” and “well reasoned” don’t go good together in my opinion. And while I don’t have any problem with the 1 Peter 3:15 verse, I have to ask, why do Christians so very rarely quote Jesus, the Son of God, who was here on Earth for thirty some years?


Because Jesus Christ has freely offered His grace to me, as His disciple, and as part of my spiritual service of worship, I offer all information at this site free for use by all who desire to use it. If you believe any information is incorrect, please e-mail me. It is my desire to reflect only truth, and I will strive to that end.


Really? Is that true?


I recognize that perfection is impossible in this world, and so request that the Lord hold me accountable through the eyes of those who read my work.


Yes, and I am sure he will hold you accountable for all you’ve done. He said:


“Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.” –Matthew 7:22-23


Your feedback is welcome. Devotees of The Urantia Book are especially encouraged to submit comments, provided they do not use said invitation as an opportunity to engage in spurious arguments, ad hominem attacks, or threatening language.


Spurious arguments? As determined by whom?


Such behavior will be ignored and will be met with suspension of communicative privileges.


Sure. Cut off communication if you don’t like it. Everyone has that option.


It is my fervent prayer that God the Holy Spirit will use this material through the lives of those who read it, to His glorious purpose. His will be done!


He will, and it will.



Norm Du Val