|
cannot penetrate to true origins, then will such mind unfailingly postulate conclusions and invent origins that it may have a means of logical thought within the frame of these mind-created postulates. And while such universe frames for creature thought are indispensable to rational intellectual operations, they are, without exception, erroneous to a greater or lesser degree."
(P. 1260)
This paragraph verifies the fact that the revelators have provided a framework for their presentations. Additionally, the terms of the mandate (P. 1109) explain the presence of error and out-datedness. But we are still left without any obvious explanation for the provision of certain prophetic material that does not appear to comply with the terms of the mandate as key or lost information. Why was it included?
One answer is that it is there to help those who are new to this unusual 2000-page book to make their decision to undertake a serious study of its content. But with the passage of time, the problem will arise that what was initially prophetic will become common place--in fact, has already done so. Hence, if The Urantia Book is to last as a useful revelation for an extended period, perhaps a succession of revised editions will be a necessity.
Obviously there are many sections in the book that must remain as originally provided. However, it would appear to be an act of intellectual vandalism to reject, out-of-hand, the proposal that there are some sections of The Urantia Book that will stand in need of revision or even deletion. In fact, the time for that need to eventuate is already upon us.
"What a sorry sight for successive generations of the professed followers of Jesus to say, regarding their stewardship of divine truth: 'Here, Master, is the truth you committed to us a hundred or a thousand years ago. We have lost nothing; we have faithfully preserved all you gave us; we have allowed no changes to be made in that which you taught us; here is the truth you gave us.' But such a plea concerning spiritual indolence will not justify the barren steward of truth in the presence of the Master. In accordance with the truth committed to your hands will the Master of truth require a reckoning." (P.1927)
Continental Drift 3--Secondary Effects
"There is a curious parallel history between the histories of black holes and continental drift. Evidence for both was already non-ignorable by 1916, but both ideas were stopped in their tracks for half a century by a resistance bordering on the irrational…but resistance to both began to crumble around 1960." (Werner Israel, quoted in Thorne1)
"...disbelief (in continental drift) was so strong that it often bordered on indignation. One of the strongest opponents was the British geophysicist Sir Harold Jeffreys, who spent years attempting to demonstrate that continental drift is impossible because the strength of the mantle should be far greater than any conceivable driving force….It was in North America, however, that opposition to Wegener's ideas was vigorous to the point of excess and very nearly unanimous….Wegener was attacked from virtually every possible vantage point, his paleontological evidence attributed to land bridges, the similarity of strata on both sides of the Atlantic called into question, the fit of Atlantic shores declared inaccurate, and his very competence doubted."2
In the light of such opposition one must wonder what would have caused the authors of the Urantia Papers to base the whole of their report on the evolution of continents and life on this planet upon the truth of continental drift--unless they had access to some special source of knowledge.
Moreover they were not simply following Wegener's version of drift. Wegener began his story with a single continent that he called Pangea that commenced to break up in the order of 200 million years ago. The story presented in the Papers commenced with a single continent that commenced to break up 750 million years ago. Wegener's views prevailed until around 1970 when some geologists began to voice a different opinion which is reported in a book entitled "Genesis" published in 19823. In this, it was proposed that there may have been a pre-existing continent, a Pangea 1, roughly 600 million years ago that had broken up into four new continents by about 450 million years ago, at the end of the Ordovician age. Then, about 250 million years later, these continents were thought to have converged to form Pangea 2 which
|
|
