I take it that the material in italics is not from the Wikipedia site.

OK. We don't believe the book was channeled. It's a bit of a read but here's a good account of how the book came about:

http://www.609g.biz.ht/index.html

No, I don't think anyone, any Urantia Book believers, think that Sadler or Kellogg or any of the "Contact Commission" were prophets at all. Good question, though. They seem to have been a cog in a celestial program-attempt to materialize The Urantia Papers into the human evolutionary stream, I guess that's how I'd put it. Here's what they had to say about the book, some excerpts:

Dr. Sadler: "The [Urantia] Papers were published just as we received them." "The contact commissioners had no editorial authority." "Our job was limited to spelling, capitalization, and punctuation." Emma Christensen, contact commissioner wrote, "The authors are all listed in the book itself..." "I can categorically assure you that no humans decided the content of the Urantia Book. The Book is as the revelators gave it to us." "The Urantia Book was not written by the Urantia Foundation. It is a revelation given to this world by superhuman personalities." "The Urantia Book was published precisely as it was given to the people of this planet. Not a word has been added or deleted." "No human scholars edited the book." Thomas Kendall, Foundation trustee wrote, "The Urantia Book is arranged and assembled exactly as revealed." "No human ever edited this material."

And regarding the expansion of the universe, the book says it expands and contracts, in a sort of "space respiration." I think it's says it's a billion years expanding and then a billion contracting. I think it says we're in the expansion phase now. Might be like the Hindu theory, I'm not sure. But I would say it describes a sine-wave, like many other things in nature, the seasons on earth, and so on.

Thank you. My bad.

Actually, we do know.

93:2.1 It was 1,973 years before the birth of Jesus that Machiventa [MELCHIZEDEK] was bestowed upon the human races of Urantia [EARTH]. His coming was unspectacular; his materialization was not witnessed by human eyes. He was first observed by mortal man on that eventful day when he entered the tent of Amdon, a Chaldean herder of Sumerian extraction. And the proclamation of his mission was embodied in the simple statement which he made to this shepherd, “I am Melchizedek, priest of El Elyon, the Most High, the one and only God.”

93:2.2 When the herder had recovered from his astonishment, and after he had plied this stranger with many questions, he asked Melchizedek to sup with him, and this was the first time in his long universe career that Machiventa had partaken of material food, the nourishment which was to sustain him throughout his ninety-four years of life as a material being.

93:2.3 And that night, as they talked out under the stars, Melchizedek began his mission of the revelation of the truth of the reality of God when, with a sweep of his arm, he turned to Amdon, saying, “El Elyon, the Most High, is the divine creator of the stars of the firmament and even of this very earth on which we live, and he is also the supreme God of heaven.”

93:2.4 Within a few years Melchizedek had gathered around himself a group of pupils, disciples, and believers who formed the nucleus of the later community of Salem. He was soon known throughout Palestine as the priest of El Elyon, the Most High, and as the sage of Salem. Among some of the surrounding tribes he was often referred to as the sheik, or king, of Salem. Salem was the site which after the disappearance of Melchizedek became the city of Jebus, subsequently being called Jerusalem.

93:2.5 In personal appearance, Melchizedek resembled the then blended Nodite and Sumerian peoples, being almost six feet in height and possessing a commanding presence. He spoke Chaldean and a half dozen other languages. He dressed much as did the Canaanite priests except that on his breast he wore an emblem of three concentric circles, the Satania symbol of the Paradise Trinity. In the course of his ministry this insignia of three concentric circles became regarded as so sacred by his followers that they never dared to use it, and it was soon forgotten with the passing of a few generations.

93:2.6 Though Machiventa lived after the manner of the men of the realm, he never married, nor could he have left offspring on earth. His physical body, while resembling that of the human male, was in reality on the order of those especially constructed bodies used by the one hundred materialized members of Prince Caligastia’s [THE DEVIL] staff except that it did not carry the life plasm of any human race. Nor was there available on Urantia the tree of life. Had Machiventa remained for any long period on earth, his physical mechanism would have gradually deteriorated; as it was, he terminated his bestowal mission in ninety-four years long before his material body had begun to disintegrate. -The Urantia Book

Who cares?

Blake, How can the Spirit of Truth guide you into all truth, as Jesus said, with your absolute assertions as you have given them above? And you didn't get those absolute assertions from The Spirit of Truth, you got them from indoctrination by mere men into the religious theories and doctrines of mere men. Someone, some human or humans, "sold" you on the idea of biblical inerrancy and you bought it. Isn't that right? Who was it, do you remember?

And then you had an experience, like Meatloaf sings about in "Paradise by the Dashboard lights" right?

"I couldn't take it any longer
Lord I was crazed
And when the feeling came upon me
Like a tidal wave"

An attitude of "I will only accept new truth from the Spirit of Truth if that new truth agrees with what I already believe," will effectively block The Spirit of Truth from operating in your mind.

"...The Spirit of truth, ...will guide you into all truth." (John 16:13)

But not if a person won't allow it. The Spirit of Truth respects our freewill to believe as we want to believe. The Spirit of Truth, on it's own, will not change one's wrong beliefs. It needs our co-operation.

That's not what the Trinity is about. The Trinity is all about "One God." Not multiiple Gods, not three Gods. Three persons in ONE God.

Jesus is "one" with the Father in the same way that a cup of water from the Ocean is exactly the same essence as the Ocean itself. Jesus and the Father are of the same divine essence. But Jesus is not the same "person" as God the Father. Jesus is the Son. Apparently, in Judaism and Islam, and some "Oneness" Christian sects, they just can't "get" or accept the Trinity. But the Trinity IS. In any case, Trinity or not, belief in it or not, it will not affect anyone's salvation.

...Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life? (Luke 10:25)

And the answer contains nothing about the Trinity.

Agreed. Well said.

Warning: Don't read this if you are not open to new truth because you won't be able to un-read it.

Here is the truth, the revealed, or re-revealed, truth about Luke 17:21, "...behold, the kingdom of God is within you," and "translation" and "fusion" (fusion comes first before translation). And there is a definite link between Luke 17:21 and Hebrews 11:5, IF you are open to new truth. And you MUST be open to new truth or the Spirit of Truth cannot operate within you. If you say, "Oh yeah, I'm open to new truth but only if it agrees with what I already believe or only if it agrees with what my sect says the bible says," then you tie the hands of the Spirit of Truth and you are not, in fact, open to new truth.

Jesus said "The kingdom of God is within you." This is a profound truth that has been lost to Christianity. And they (Christians) go to great lengths to parse away this profound truth, they'll say, "Oh, Jesus didn't mean that. He meant "near you" or "around you" or "in your midst," etc. (It's similar to how some try to parse away the concept of "translation" by claiming the word should be "transfer," as Jesus said: "Making the word of God of none effect." Mark 7:13) They don't want to think that God is within everyone, but only in them, Christians. But there is an actual pre-personal fragment of God within every human being, which comes with the occurance of a child's first moral decision, usually around age 5 or 6. Later, as an adult who has developed enough spiritually, when you align your will perfectly with God's will as Enoch and Elijah did, you FUSE and become ONE with that pre-personal fragment of God and you are "translated" in a "chariot of [spiritual] flames" directly to "the mansion worlds" which Jesus referred to as the "many mansions in my Father's house." (John 14:2) They are not exactly "heaven" but they have been perceived as such in human visions and literature. There's seven mansion worlds, the "seven heavens." When you fuse with the pre-personal Father fragment, that fragment of God gains personality, yours, and you gain a measure of divinity. The bible, and Christian doctrine, know little or nothing about these things.

Elijah and Enoch both "fused" with the fragment of God within them and they were both "translated" (changed from one form, the material, physical form, to another form, a semi-spiritual state of the sort Jesus had when he rose from the dead) in a "chariot of [spiritual] fire directly to the mansions that Jesus referred to and both of them BYPASSED NORMAL MORTAL DEATH. They never died and they never will, they made it to "heaven" without dying.

On many worlds, when the planet is spiritually advanced enough, these "fusions" and "translations" are commonplace and people go to special places for the big day and friends and relatives come to see them off and wish them well. These are special facilities for these events and also for the protection of the bystanders from the spiritual energies of the fusion/translation process. These same spiritual energies were probably what was released in Jesus' tomb that caused some sort of x-ray type image to be inprinted in the tell-tale chemicals of the Shroud of Turin.

Very few humans "fuse" with the Father fragment while here on earth. Elijah and Enoch were exceptions. And there may be others that we don't know about, and not just from Judaism or Christianity. But as, and if, the world advances spiritually, it may become more common. In any case, if it doesn't happen here, it WILL happen at some point in our post-resurrection career beginning on the "mansions," or "The Mansion Worlds" as The Urantia Book calls them. You (we) will be able to take all the time we need to become spiritually perfected enough to fuse. We have all eternity. And there are some who will choose not to make the journey after all. As Jesse Winchester sang:

Life is just too short for some folks
For other folks it just drags on
Some folks like the taste of smokey whiskey
Others figure tea's too strong
-"Nothing but a breeze"

"Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect." (Matthew 5:48)

But perfection will not be handed to you magically after you die. Like everything else, you will have to earn it. If you were dysfunctional here, you will wake up on the mansions in the same condition, only with better teachers, and you will also have the knowledge of your own survival and that of others.

Did you mean "If not..." ? The "w" is not particularly close to the "t".

We will all be here until the dispensation. Then we will all awaken (be resurrected) on the "many mansions" that Jesus spoke of (John 14:2). There, everything will be explained by seriously qualified angels, and we will all be able to make an informed choice about our futures.

Anyway,

(2Ki 2:11) And it came to pass, as they still went on, and talked, that, behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven.

John 3:13 is clearly wrong.

"went up" is functionally equivalent to "ascended."

"God moves in a mysterious ways; His wonders to perform." -William Cowper

God has sent a correction.

What does any of this below matter?, when all one really needs to know is the answer to this one question:

...Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life? (Luke 10:25)

QUOTE:
What about Elijah?

(2Ki 2:11) And it came to pass, as they still went on, and talked, that, behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven.

Clearly John 3:13 is wrong.

Jesus said, "...The Spirit of truth, ...will guide you into all truth." (John 16:13)

But what if someone believes that they or their sect of one or many already knows everything? Maybe their claim to being a bible scholar is, "I have been working in the Scriptures since I was 18." What if such a person was able to sneak into a bible scholar conference with say, the likes of Bart Ehrman, Marcus Borg, Rudolf Bultmnann, Charles Ryrie, et al, there, and they asked, "What are your qualifications to attend and contribute to this meeting? What schools did you attend?" And the answer was, "I have been working in the Scriptures since I was 18."

The Spirit of Truth cannot, and will not, change anyone's previously settled beliefs. In such a case, and there are many, where a person believes they already have all truth, that they basically know it all, The Spirit of Truth cannot function in that person's mind. The Spirit of Truth can no more guide a person who thinks they already know it all into truth than a man who leads a horse to water can make it drink. If you believe wrong things, the Spirit of Truth will not correct you against your will. You must be open to new truth. You must be thirsty.



Whatever. When you start "perhapsing" and "iffing," the train has left the track.

QUOTE:
That's like saying, I drive the oldest and rustiest Model T available to mankind today.



You are mistaken. Translate is the word. The King James got it right.



First of all, Strongs was not written by God. It doesn't matter what Strongs says. What matters is what the Spirit of Truth, not Strongs, says, but you have to be open to the truth. In any case, you seem to be cherry picking Strongs, you left a lot out. Other people can look up Strongs too even if you have been working in the bible since you were 18.

Heb 11:5  By faithG4102 EnochG1802 was translatedG3346 that he should notG3361 seeG1492 death;G2288 andG2532 was notG3756 found,G2147 becauseG1360 GodG2316 had translatedG3346 him:G846 forG1063 beforeG4253 hisG846 translationG3331 he had this testimony,G3140 that he pleasedG2100 God.G2316

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?t=niv&strongs=g3346

The KJV translates Strong's G3346 in the following manner: translate (2x), carry over (1x), remove (1x), change (1x), turn (1x).

"Transfer" is not even mentioned, above.

TO CHANGE is to TRANSLATE from one substance to another.

As Merriam Webster says:
TRANSLATE:
a : to turn into one's own or another language
b : to transfer or turn from one set of symbols into another : transcribe
c (1) : to express in different terms and especially different words : paraphrase (2) : to express in more comprehensible terms : explain, interpret
2 a : to bear, remove, or change from one place, state, form, or appearance to another : transfer, transform translate ideas into action
b : to convey to heaven or to a nontemporal condition without death
c : to transfer (a bishop) from one see to another

b : to convey to heaven or to a nontemporal condition without death -and this is exactly what happened to Elijah and Enoch. The King James is correct when it uses the word "translate." And the truth of this matter has now been revealed to you. The question is now, What are you going to do with this truth?

Strong’s Definitions (Strong’s Definitions Legend)
μετατίθημι metatíthēmi, met-at-ith'-ay-mee; from G3326 and G5087; to transfer, i.e. (literally) transport, (by implication) exchange, (reflexively) change sides, or (figuratively) pervert:—carry over, change, remove, translate, turn.

2. to change (Herodotus 5, 68); passive of an office the mode of conferring which is changed, Hebrews 7:12; 71 τί εἰς τί, to turn one thing into another (τινα εἰς πτηνην φύσιν, Anth. 11, 367, 2);

So you have cherry picked Strongs because, not being open to the truth of the matter, you prefer "transfer" to "translate."

FWIW, The Urantia Book says that our area of space, our area of the Universe, was organized 987 billion years ago. That's just shy of a trillion years.

Well, it should matter. Just because you believe it's "God's word" doesn't negate the need to know who authored it. Maybe it's not "God's word" at all. How would you know?



The bible states a lot of things. Not everyone here is a bibliolator. This is not the Bible Forum.

Lazarus died more than once.



It doesn't matter. This is not the Bible Forum. It has not been agreed to by everyone here that the bible is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

Anyway, Lazarus is clearly an exception.



You essentially added your own words when you said, "The Word of God states that it is appointed to all men to die once with no exceptions to be found."

The "Word of God" does NOT state that there are no exceptions to be found. You added that condition yourself.



Indeed. Don't be afraid to read it.

Of all human knowledge, that which is of greatest value is to know the religious life of Jesus and how he lived it. -196:1.3 The Urantia Book

Agree? Disagree? Or do you think that "of all human knowledge, that which is of greatest value to know is that 'it is appointed to all men to die once' as some anonymous writer once said 2000 years ago"?



Not at all. And if you do some Googling, you'll quickly find that there are a lot more opinions on the subject of the two witnesses than just what you and your sect of Christianity believe.



It's not plausible. Enoch and Elijah are no longer material beings, mortals like us, nor are they here. They are on the "many mansions" (John 14:2) that Jesus spoke of and they are in spiritual form and they are NOT coming back.

The business of "fusion" with the Father fragment within (Luke 17:21), and translation to the "mansions" is something that Christians know little about. In fact, the profound truth of Luke 17:21 has been lost to Christianity, but it's closely related to what happened to Elijah and Enoch.

"...behold, the kingdom of God is within you." (Luke 17:21)

And no, Jesus didn't mean "near you" or nearby or "in your midst" or around you, and so on. There is a pre-personal fragment of God the Father within every normal minded human being on this earth, and within every normal minded mortal on every inhabited world in the universe, and there are a lot of them.

Jesus was also talking about them when he said:

And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd. (John 10:16)

No, contrary to what Ludlow (you remember him?) says, "this fold" is not the Catholic church on planet earth. "This fold" IS planet earth.

You can know more, blake, but you have to be open to new truth.

That's like saying, I drive the oldest and rustiest Model T available to mankind today.

If there ever was a Big Bang at all.

"Translated" means to change from one form or state to another. In Elijah and Enoch's cases, translated means changed instantly from the mortal, physical, material form into the spiritual form (in a "chariot" of spiritual flames (2Ki 2:11)), by-passing normal mortal death. Elijah and Enoch ARE on the mansions (John 14:2) now. They will never die, or return here. They are on their journey to Paradise.

Merriam-Webster (See #2b below, bolded)

Definition of translate

transitive verb
1 a : to turn into one's own or another language
b : to transfer or turn from one set of symbols into another : transcribe
c (1) : to express in different terms and especially different words : paraphrase (2) : to express in more comprehensible terms : explain, interpret
2 a : to bear, remove, or change from one place, state, form, or appearance to another : transfer, transform translate ideas into action

b : to convey to heaven or to a nontemporal condition without death

c : to transfer (a bishop) from one see to another

And Heb_9:27 does not say "with no exceptions to be found." That, apparently, has been added by men. By you?

Also, no one even knows who wrote Hebrews.

Wikipedia:
Authorship
Main article: Authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews
By the end of the first century there was no consensus on the author’s identity. Clement of Rome, Barnabas, Paul the Apostle, and other names were proposed. Others later suggested Luke the Evangelist, Apollos, or his teacher Priscilla as possible authors.[12]

Though no author is named, the original King James Version of the Bible titled the work "The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews". However, the KJV's attribution to Paul was only a guess, and is currently disputed by recent research.[6] Its vastly different style, different theological focus, different spiritual experience, different Greek vocabulary – all are believed to make Paul's authorship of Hebrews increasingly indefensible. At present, neither modern scholarship nor church teaching ascribes Hebrews to Paul.[13]

Because of its anonymity, it had some trouble being accepted as part of the Christian canon, being classed with the Antilegomena. Eventually it was accepted as scripture because of its sound theology, eloquent presentation, and other intrinsic factors.[6]:431 In antiquity, certain circles began to ascribe it to Paul in an attempt to provide the anonymous work an explicit apostolic pedigree.[14]

In the 4th century, Jerome and Augustine of Hippo supported Paul's authorship: the Church largely agreed to include Hebrews as the fourteenth letter of Paul, and affirmed this authorship until the Reformation. Scholars argued that in the 13th Chapter of Hebrews, Timothy is referred to as a companion. Timothy was Paul's missionary companion in the same way Jesus sent disciples out in pairs of two. Also, the writer states that he wrote the letter from "Italy", which also at the time fits Paul.[15] The difference in style is explained as simply an adjustment to a distinct audience, to the Jewish Christians who were being persecuted and pressured to go back to traditional Judaism.[16] Many scholars now believe that the author was one of Paul's pupils or associates, citing stylistic differences between Hebrews and the other Pauline epistles.[17] Recent scholarship has favored the idea that the author was probably a leader of a predominantly Jewish congregation to whom he or she was writing.[18]

Believing the author to have been Priscilla, Hoppin posits that the name was omitted either to suppress its female authorship, or to protect the letter itself from suppression.[19]

Also convinced that Priscilla was the author of Hebrews, Gilbert Bilezikian, professor of biblical studies at Wheaton College, remarks on "the conspiracy of anonymity in the ancient church," and reasons: "The lack of any firm data concerning the identity of the author in the extant writings of the church suggests a deliberate blackout more than a case of collective loss of memory." [20]

A.J. Gordon ascribes the authorship of Hebrews to Priscilla, writing that "It is evident that the Holy Spirit made this woman Priscilla a teacher of teachers". Originally proposed by Adolf von Harnack in 1900,[21] Harnack’s reasoning won the support of prominent Bible scholars of the early twentieth century. Harnack believes the letter was written in Rome – not to the Church, but to the inner circle. In setting forth his evidence for Priscillan authorship, he finds it amazing that the name of the author was blotted out by the earliest tradition. Citing Chapter 13, he says it was written by a person of "high standing and apostolic teacher of equal rank with Timothy". If Luke, Clemens, Barnabas, or Apollos had written it, Harnack believes their names would not have been obliterated.[22]

Donald Guthrie’s commentary The Letter to the Hebrews (1983) mentions Priscilla by name as a suggested author.[23]

In the 3rd century, Origen wrote of the letter,

"In the epistle entitled To The Hebrews the diction does not exhibit the characteristic roughness of speech or phraseology admitted by the Apostle [Paul] himself, the construction of the sentences is closer to the Greek usage, as anyone capable of recognising differences of style would agree. On the other hand the matter of the epistle is wonderful, and quite equal to the Apostle's acknowledged writings: the truth of this would be admitted by anyone who has read the Apostle carefully...If I were asked my personal opinion, I would say that the matter is the Apostle's but the phraseology and construction are those of someone who remembered the Apostle's teaching and wrote his own interpretation of what his master had said. So if any church regards this epistle as Paul's, it should be commended for so doing, for the primitive Church had every justification for handing it down as his. Who wrote the epistle is known to God alone: the accounts that have reached us suggest that it was either Clement, who became Bishop of Rome, or Luke, who wrote the gospel and the Acts."[24]

Further, "Men of old have handed it down as Paul's, but who wrote the Epistle God only knows".[25]

What about Elijah?

(2Ki 2:11) And it came to pass, as they still went on, and talked, that, behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven.

Clearly John 3:13 is wrong.

And Enoch?

Gen 5:24 And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him.

"By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God." (Heb 11:5)

I doubt if that's the "purpose," but it does seem as though certain science types will go to almost any length of argument to keep the Divine foot out of the door. But evolution could very well be, and is, imo, God directed and God initiated.

And until Science can whip up some live "protoplasm" from a bowl of inert chemicals, they've got nothing. And they're face to face with that fact all of the time. They know that dead end is waiting for them, the time must come when they will have to come to the conclusion that "God did it."

Your post below is quite good and actually, parallels The Urantia Book.

FWIW:

Note: The Urantia Book uses the term "universe" somewhat differently than we use it today.

12:1.7 The Grand Universe is the present organized and inhabited creation. It consists of the seven superuniverses, with an aggregate evolutionary potential of around seven trillion inhabited planets, not to mention the eternal spheres of the central creation. But this tentative estimate takes no account of architectural administrative spheres, neither does it include the outlying groups of unorganized universes. The present ragged edge of the grand universe, its uneven and unfinished periphery, together with the tremendously unsettled condition of the whole astronomical plot, suggests to our star students that even the seven superuniverses are, as yet, uncompleted. As we move from within, from the divine center outward in any one direction, we do, eventually, come to the outer limits of the organized and inhabited creation; we come to the outer limits of the grand universe. And it is near this outer border, in a far-off corner of such a magnificent creation, that your local universe has its eventful existence.

2nd Note:

The Urantia Book describes a species of "non-breathers," mortals. In other words, within parameters, life is designed to fit a habitat. No air? They can get their sustenance from sunlight. And The Urantia Book says this below about a race of non-breathers "in close proximity" to our world. I take that to mean the Greys, and I take it to mean they live right here in our solar system with us. They don't come from another star to visit us. They're probably native to the Moon, Mercury, Ganymede, Callisto, Europa, or perhaps even Pluto. There are a lot of non-breather candidate worlds in our solar system.

49:3.6 You would be more than interested in the planetary conduct of this type of mortal because such a race of beings inhabits a sphere in close proximity to Urantia.