Compair and Contrast: (Urantia Papers and Terra Papers)

The Terra Papers is one man's account, story teller, of the history of mankind and the meanings.

The Urantia Papers is said to be channeled through a unknown host to a group of doctors, scientists and others.

How do these two compair and/or contrast?

Do you accept one and reject the other, if so why?

Is one more of an athority?

OOh ooh ooh!

Good topic.

I have the Urantia book and have read it for a few years. I would say it's either a really inspiring spiritual text or a very well written science fiction novel.

I tried reading the Terra Papers but it just seemed so bizarre and the only copy I could find was the original hand-typed version, that I couldn't wrap my head around it.

Granted, Urantia has a crapload of archaic, boring, bible-like text in the beginning that almost sounds like the opening of the next L. Ron Hubbard movie. But, I really enjoy the writings about the life of Jesus and what went on in his life that didn't show up in the bible.

The thing that impressed me about Urantia is that they don't seem to be 'selling' anything. You can go to their website and read the whole thing for free, or the book is not all that expensive.

I know there are several folks here that have read 'Terra' and maybe they can talk about some of it's points and I could see if Urantia compares?

Good topic

Originally posted by emsed1
I tried reading the Terra Papers but it just seemed so bizarre and the only copy I could find was the original hand-typed version, that I couldn't wrap my head around it.

I believe you're mostly right! The Terra Papers do seem to be semiconfused ramblings, though those are not the words you've chosen.

I'd like to know more why you choose to stress the "Urantia Book" as "science fiction". As for me, I personally studied deep within the ancient meanings and such scriture based understandings before I ever opened the Urantia book. Would is suprize you to find out that the Urantia book is actually fact over fiction? Would you rather accept the Urantia book as "non-fiction" over fact? Why or why not?

My personal opinion is they are both alien propaganda. Fact mixed with fiction in order to steer the reader in a certain direction. Nothing wrong with that because at least you get some facts. I haven't read anything that was 100% but that's the nature of our controlled environment.

At the same time, a source may want to be completely accurate. The source may be accurate in their own view but their view isn't completely accurate. Then you have the bias of the person receiving the information. Then you have the possibility of correction of the communication channel.

I think the best approach is to not be biased towards one source over another but to read all sources. Then allow that information to expand the scope of possibilities within the mind without coming to a firm conclusion. The only way to ensure one doesn't succumb to dis/mis-information is to deal not with belief but simply with probabilities of possibilities based on available information.

This is the first I have herd of this book , did a search and found this en.wikipedia.org...

Seems interesting .
I tried reading the Terra papers and I just cant seem to finish reading it . To put it simple , I don't believe the author's claims , assuming it was written as a non fiction .

[edit on 22-7-2008 by Max_TO]

reply to post by Incarnated


"The Terra Papers" seem to be taken from Von Daniken, Zecharia Sitchin, and George Lucas (his Death Star makes a guest appearance). I did not read 'The Urantia Papers", but they seem to be a from of Christian dogma and Scientology.

While i havent read the Urantia book, I read the Terra Papers last friday and i have to say.......

......it sounds to me like a completely made up work of fiction.

The author stretches the origins and meanings of words and names in a way that even someone with basic knowledge of origins of words would see that its complete nonsense.

The entire work is supposedly from an oral story told by an alien grey to a tribe of native americans, yet it is very precisely detailed in a way that doesnt hint at an oral story.

The entire story seems so contrived that i have a hard time believing a single word of it. ......


.....although i wish that SOMEONE would be able to come out with some proof of ETs...


ps. Whoever said that about the L ron Hubbard movie thing, i agree. For some reason, i kept thinking about battlefield earth.

Originally posted by kidflash2008
reply to post by Incarnated

 

"The Terra Papers" seem to be taken from Von Daniken, Zecharia Sitchin, and George Lucas (his Death Star makes a guest appearance). I did not read 'The Urantia Papers", but they seem to be a from of Christian dogma and Scientology.

That's a sad and vastly generalized blanket inturpetation, however it can be perceived as you have done.

However upon closer viewing and clearer understanding it can be seen that "scientology" is actually the opposing viewpoint to the Urantia story. In the urantia story "beings" (aliens) were suposed to take care of mankind but they instead didn't follow what they were suposed to do so they become mortal and are trapped in a state of karmaic birthing cycles until cleansed from the planet. However the Scientology story is from the perspective of those that become trapped.

The Tarra Papers can seem like they are taken from the works you say, but they are not. The reason they seem so much alike are they are both from a semi-confused, shadowed, humanbiased, tainted, and long lost/forgoten perspective of mankind.

All the works you've spoke of, at least to me, do talk about the same things in general, only from vastly diffrenting perspectives.

As for the Urantia book being a wildly "christianized" perspective, I disagree. You assum alot about a body of work just because it uses charactors that are in a greater story. The christian religion is a red headed stepbrother of the truth. This is addressed in the Urantia book.

All and all the urantia book is the clearest and most accurate accounting of the story at hand. Oddly so many people have issue with it because it is "channeled" or "recieved", but in closer eximanitaion so too are all the documents of prophets in the bible.

While both books are interesting reads, and it may very well be that there is some truth in them - we must remember that the burden of proof is flatly on the people/person making the claims. Until any such proof has been made available and verified, I would suggest that both books be taken as fiction.

However, if I was forced to pick one over the other, I would say The Terra Papers for the simple fact that you have a flesh and blood person (Robert Morning Sky) putting his name behind his words and being accountable for them.

Final thoughts to consider:
Be very wary of anyone claiming channeled messages. Very wary! It can never be proven or disproven (which is very convenient) and is often the stuff Cults are made of. That's not a point of view, it's fact. May I point to groups such as the Raelians to back that fact!

IRM

[edit on 23/7/08 by InfaRedMan]

I cant read the whole of Urantia but like searching certain keywords for answers and info....gotta finish reading terra papers yet...

Not quite sure what to make of Urantia but it seems more interesting than any other spiritual book....I think we can assume this as we become more intelligent so things make more sense.....back in the BC days none of what is in Urantia would make any sense....

I like the part about Adam and Eve....this just seems to fit in how we came here and missing links etc...

I would have to sayin my own understandings that I feel that the Urantia Book at least is confabulated fiction or at best a disinfo peice of fictional literature disseminated by the Incanabula/Illuminati.
I would place more credence in the Law of One Books which were channelled by the STO (Service to others ) conglomerate entity so named; Ra (as in the Egyptian Sun god deity)

Originally posted by Incarnated

I'd like to know more why you choose to stress the "Urantia Book" as "science fiction". As for me, I personally studied deep within the ancient meanings and such scriture based understandings before I ever opened the Urantia book. Would is suprize you to find out that the Urantia book is actually fact over fiction? Would you rather accept the Urantia book as "non-fiction" over fact? Why or why not?

On the contrary I would love it if Urantia were true. On the whole it makes a lot of sense. The only part I have a hard time with is the claim that supernatural beings met with a group of businessmen and scientists(or whatever) to deliver the message.

It sounds sort of Cayce/Joseph Smith-ish.

But, it is a beautiful spiritual book and personally I think it's probably very close to the truth.

[edit on 7/23/08 by emsed1]

"Urantia" is filled with a lot of information about the evolution of society, morals, religion, marriage, etc...

Much of the book is just a very spiritual and rational overview of how to devote one's self and service to meaningful and supreme human values. Whether or not the cosmology and the terrestial history of earth is true or not, their are a lot of great quotes and realizations that the book utilizes that can be self-revelatory.

It is extremely detailed, and the theory of spontaneous mutation as being how creatures evolve is pretty fascinating. And recently with the discovery of new plants, insects, and species of animals, it suggests maybe there is some higher power that is responsible for mutational adaptation to environmental conditions.

The section on the evolution and habitat of a similar world that is relatively near to us, or within the same subuniverse as ours, questions whether the book is just a commentary on attaining some Utopia or how to achieve a time-space, mortal civilization of paradise.

Regardless its a good read, and it'll take a few years to read the whole thing. I've read about 1000 pages and have skipped a lot of the revelations about the different worlds and deities that are superpersonal and that transcend our material world, a lot of it is redundant or just hard to comprehend.

To be fair in the introduction of "Urantia" it does say it is often times redundant and may seem like idealistic nonsense lol

[edit on 23-7-2008 by uva3021]

Originally posted by uva3021

Regardless its a good read, and it'll take a few years to read the whole thing. I've read about 1000 pages and have skipped a lot of the revelations about the different worlds and deities that are superpersonal and that transcend our material world, a lot of it is redundant or just hard to comprehend.

To be fair in the introduction of "Urantia" it does say it is often times redundant and may seem like idealistic nonsense lol

[edit on 23-7-2008 by uva3021]

Yeah I had to skip that part too. It's like the parts of the Bible where they start going "so and so begat so and so, he begat him... blah blah"

Originally posted by General Izer
My personal opinion is they are both alien propaganda. Fact mixed with fiction in order to steer the reader in a certain direction. Nothing wrong with that because at least you get some facts. I haven't read anything that was 100% but that's the nature of our controlled environment.

At the same time, a source may want to be completely accurate. The source may be accurate in their own view but their view isn't completely accurate. Then you have the bias of the person receiving the information. Then you have the possibility of correction of the communication channel.

I think the best approach is to not be biased towards one source over another but to read all sources. Then allow that information to expand the scope of possibilities within the mind without coming to a firm conclusion. The only way to ensure one doesn't succumb to dis/mis-information is to deal not with belief but simply with probabilities of possibilities based on available information.

I totally agree - without really looking at a body of work including its context of creation, you can't determine what's right or wrong about it. I studied channelers for several years and concluded we have to follow our gut - use the information that works, don't use the information that doesn't. I think it's the same story told in many different ways and different times - aliens creating humans - that's the bottom line -

I tried to read the Urantia Book and could not - it is far too volumnous for my brain and have to respect it for its' sheer size! I'm personally not comfortable with religious concepts in our history (as they tend to exclude others who are not of their persuasion) so that made it even harder to get through it. I believe many channelers are sincere in their work - but I cannot 'know' the source of their message and suspect deception can happen above just as well as below, if you get my meaning...

To clarify the Terra Papers as best I can, the story told to Roberts grandfather is represented in Roberts writing of the Terra Papers - Robert wrote the story and filled it in by researching parts of our real history, hence the egyptian linguistics. It wasn't intended to be a finished book but ended up remaining as it was written many years ago. Robert was not familiar with Zecharia Sitchins work at that time, Robert did his own research which is one reason I gave it credibility. He had intended to rewrite it, but as far as I know didnt - instead he wrote many other volumes of work which would explain more fully the Terra Papers. For me, The Terra Papers gives a very good history of our existance in a story form - but the story itself is very much based in real history as anyone who looks will also find. Robert didn't make it up. He simply put it down in black and white.

In a workshop he also spoke once of how messages are given to us to remind us of who we are - like running dreams through Mr. Lucas similar to the history so he can be inspired to make the movie - there is logic in that - everyone receives inspiration and it has to come from 'somewhere'.

And I also believe nothing is 100 % true - it's all best guesses based on all these writings and stories. It's a continual sorting process - and (in my findings), a very, very arge story.

"Urantia" says periodically supreme beings are materialized and mortalized in order to spiritually progress mortal beings. One of these situations invoked a personality (Calagastia I think, can't remember, reminds me of Caligula lol) that instead of carrying out the initial plan of spiritual progression, was enammered with the way he was worshipped initially by humans, and deviated from the plan, causing a rebellion of some sort. This caused a retrogression in human spiritually (not physical regression) for a few hundred thousand years before it was eventually stabilized, if you will, through different revelatory beings, whether of human origin or divine. Urantia (Earth) was originally created to experientially attain a higher level of human progression, I can't remember but I think time-space worlds operate on 3 levels of mortal superiority, Urantia is inevitably mortalized on the second level because of this "rebellion."

Like I said, Idealistic nonsense, lol, but it is a good read

great topic incarnated.

i see the urantia book as being more substantiated than the terra papers due to the sheer volume and intelligent language that is contained within. the urantia book speaks with authority and was written through a certain type of divinity.

the terra papers, i am not saying they are untrue but, rather, are a different man made version of a truth, they are man made and come from a singular perspective. one of robert morning sky.

both are sketchy in their creation and existence but the origins of the urantia book are much more interesting, mysterious, and valid, in my opinion, than the very "star warsesque" terra papers.

Here are some quotes from Urantia Web Site:

What is the Urantia Book?

The Urantia Book, first published by Urantia Foundation in 1955, claims to have been presented by celestial beings as a revelation to our planet, Urantia. Many who have read it accept this assertion.

The writings in the Book instruct us on the genesis, history, and destiny of humanity and on our relationship with God the Father. They present a unique and compelling portrayal of the life and teachings of Jesus. They open new vistas of time and eternity to the human spirit, and offer new details of our ascending adventure in a friendly and carefully administered universe.

The Urantia Book offers a clear and concise integration of science, philosophy, and religion. Those who read and study it believe that The Urantia Book has the capacity to make a significant contribution to the religious and philosophical thinking of people worldwide.

and

Where did the Urantia Book come from?

In the early 20th century, a physician practicing in Chicago became the head of a group known as the Contact Commission. This small group was the focal point for the production of, and the primary custodian for, the final text of The Urantia Book. They were sworn not to disclose details about the transactions in order to preclude future generations from venerating the participants. It was considered important that no individual might be exalted through their association with The Urantia Book. Because of its revelatory nature, the book must stand on its own merit.

As the contents of book were being transcribed, the papers were read to, and questions were requested from "The Forum," a group that had been meeting regularly for discussions at the doctor's house. The answers to these questions were then incorporated into the papers. These early readers formed the first core group of believers in the revelation and became committed to the mission of sharing the teachings of The Urantia Book with the world.

I haven't read the whole thing through, but I have owned a copy for almost 10 years. Not to be disrespectful, but I find it to be an excellent 'bathroom reader' because it is organized in relatively short chapters.

There are a lot of explanations of science, evolution, etc and in my opinion it leans toward 'intelligent design'.

The prose can be off-putting at times because it sounds archaic and sort of new-agey, but the explanation they give is that our language can't really express what they are trying to say effectively.

I also don't find it to be 'pushy' like Scientology. In fact the foundation doesn't seem to push anything at all except trying to get the book out to as many people as possible.

So, I approach it with a healthy dose of cautious skepticism but find it to be pretty fascinating to read.

Here's another interesting take on how the Urantia book was created:

www.ubfellowship.org...

Originally posted by FremenBlueEyes
the terra papers, i am not saying they are untrue but, rather, are a different man made version of a truth, they are man made and come from a singular perspective. one of robert morning sky.

What I say about it is this. The best we can assume about the Terra Papers is that they are not a con. If they are "true" they are still bogged down with the authors personal perspective along side with the questionablility of the deliver.