The Great Chain on Urantia

At Kobo, we try to ensure that published reviews do not contain rude or profane language, spoilers, or any of our reviewer's personal information. You submitted the following rating and review. We'll publish them on our site once we've reviewed them. Item s unavailable for purchase. Please review your cart. You can remove the unavailable item s now or we'll automatically remove it at Checkout. Continue shopping Checkout Continue shopping. Ratings and Reviews 0 0 star ratings 0 reviews. Overall rating No ratings yet 0. How to write a great review Do Say what you liked best and least Describe the author's style Explain the rating you gave Don't Use rude and profane language Include any personal information Mention spoilers or the book's price Recap the plot.

Close Report a review At Kobo, we try to ensure that published reviews do not contain rude or profane language, spoilers, or any of our reviewer's personal information. Would you like us to take another look at this review? No, cancel Yes, report it Thanks! You've successfully reported this review. We appreciate your feedback. This Point of View. Nakedness, Death, and the Number Zero. A to Z Stories of Life and Death. I Cry Gray Mountains on the Moon. Water from a toad. Remnants of a Hallucination to Resolve Eternal Solitude. Caged Birds Don't Fly.

Pieces of the Paradox. Shawn Michel de Montaigne.

• Geothermal Tomorrow: Work of the Department of Energy and the Geothermal Technologies Program, National Laboratory, Enhanced Geothermal Systems (EGS), Price, Financing, Utilities, State Policies.
• Oneness Process: Appreciative Inquiry For Awakening Our Universal Wisdom;
• Join Kobo & start eReading today.
• Did you eat my babies?!

The Symphony of Being. Tears of Indulgence and Lesser Things. The End Of Humanity. The Light of Kyon. The Crucible of the Miraculous.

Silence Speaks a Thousand Words. Le verbe s'est fait livre: Study aids for part IV of the Urantia Book: Cleveland Paperback - Jan 6, God Without the Garbage: This has been cited in the article as a mistake in the book under the "Criticism of science" section with this language:. Every so often, a person will come by the article, and add commentary that there were in fact 3 solar eclipses in , and they will cite a source such as NASA to prove it. This is true, there were 3 solar eclipses in But unfortunately, these edits are not made with a full understanding of solar eclipses, or with the well-documented historical record of this event.

Most critically, the idea that any of these three could have been potentially the Tenskwatawa eclipse is mistaken because any given solar eclipse is only visible to a very small slice of the earth's surface. The three eclipses of were extremely remote and were not visible to Tenskwatawa or his followers:. Also, the prediction by Tenskwatawa according to historic references was for a total eclipse. There are 3 different types of eclipse -- partial, annular, and total -- and only two total eclipses during the lifetime of Tenskwatawa that were viewable in North America.

The first was on June 16, This is perhaps best represented visually with a graphic of the paths of occlusion for total and annular eclipses during that time period according to NASA The other one was in , two years prior to his death The three solar eclipses that occured in were not only extremely remote, they were underwhelming partial eclipses. All scientific evidence, all calculations, all historical records point to the Tenskwatawa prediction eclipse as the total eclipse having occured on June 16, See the book The Life of Tecumseh and of His Brother the Prophet for historical documentation of as the year because its copyright has expired, it can be obtained for free from books.

Editors will have to provide published scientific and historical evidence to support any theorized doubts about as the correct date of the eclipse that Tenskwatawa is associated with. Atlantic, Costa Rica] Jun 28 Annular 0. Chile, Argentina, Uruguay, s Atlantic]. The June 28 annular eclipse shows a path directly over northern florida http: GIF The quotation in the Ub does not say anything about a "total" eclipse.

The material now contained in Wikipedia regarding an error in the Ubook is mis-leading at best. I've added a link to a chalkboard to display proposed revisions to the article so people can see the proposed revision and comment on it.

Available on

I think the dots under "Comparison to Christianity" are hard on the eyes, and would propose a wikitable instead. I am constructing one to show what I mean, and comments would be welcome here. What seems to be more standard I've been told is a sandbox for TUB. So, that has been activated. The idea is to be able to place and arrange content so the article can be trimmed and developed without disturbing the entire ecosystem, if you know what I mean.

More on that below. I'm not sure where to put the sandbox link for TUB. The link for the Urantia readers international was removed recently. It seemed like an appropriate link to me, and seemed to contribute to this article. There was no explanaton of why it was removed, and if there are no comments to the contrary, I'll put it back in shortly. LINKS , "Adding external links can be a service to our readers, but they should be kept to a minimum of those that are meritable, accessible and appropriate to the article.

Under "Links to normally be avoided", see numbers 1, 3, and 13 in particular. The link to Urantia Readers-International seems to be important to one individual but it isn't clear why it is a meritable organization or unique resource of information regarding the article's topic.

Talk:The Urantia Book/Archive 5

As I wrote in the "Removal of link" comment above, I understand the notability of three other organizations from third-party published sources. The pattern of edits on this even is suggestive that it is for advertising purposes, which is a no-no. The chalkboard is not appropriate, I've learned, but a sandbox is, so here's the link: I've done a little rewriting of the Intro, Overview, and Teachings, for anyone to look at and comment on.

This article treats the book as if it isn't two thousand pages of bullhockey. Wikipedia can be so funny sometimes. All organized religions and groups that exclude others are cults. There's a long list of references. The suggestion has been made by Majeston that the article "Urantia Book" be renamed "Urantia" because there is a Urantia movement.

I am trying to visualize this in an encyclopedic manner and see how to relate those two.

• Capabilities.
• More titles to consider?
• Monuments historiques (French Edition).
• Urantia Book - Bible Cross References.
• Shopping Cart.
• Improving Food Affordability and Health Awareness in Atlanta?

Maybe if there was more elaboration on those thoughts, I could get a better idea of what is meant. In the meantime, I'm interested in looking at getting some of the sections we currently have into a more encyclopedic and readable prose. Looking at the sections "The Nature of God" and "God and the Individual", it seems like they could benefit from a simpler rewording, and make the sections more readable. I'm not going to proceed with that however, unless I hear there are no objections. We can talk about it though.

Talk:The Urantia Book/Archive 5 - Wikipedia

I see your ideas from the sandbox setup you've worked on. To me to start with where I have most disagreement some parts of the article in particular I know to have been polished and enriched over a long time by contributions of many people to reach the current state. I'm less supportive of overhauls of these sections in the absence of people being squeaky wheels about there being such significant shortcomings to merit it.

For example, the "God and the individual" section -- many people have collaborated on this part, argued over its language, and refined it over a long time, a touchy subject for POV and other reasons, and I see how it has matured into a stable, balanced, well-sourced section now as a result of the collaborations.

It hasn't provoked POV or content disputes for quite a while. Simplification is one characteristic to consider to make language more effective but also simplification is in the eye of the beholder. Though intentioned for improvement I don't agree it should be done just for its own sake by one or two people as this is from subjective opinions ultimately and overrides the natural development and growth these sections have seen by many editors. It would be a loss not a gain in my view comparing current article version to minimalistic, 4th-grade-reading-level version in the sandbox. On the "Nature of God" section, this is a more recent development that branched off from "God and the individual".

I'm the one who did that. The first paragraph and some other parts were taken from "God and the individual". I added material, and probably a third of it has been cut since then. I did some of the cutting myself and others have also. I personally think it's currently a pretty decent, lean summary of the main macro-level points on the topic "Nature of God" considering there are hundreds of pages on the topic in TUB. If I thought otherwise I would have already edited it directly to improve. But this is a section I know has had less richness of editor collaboration and so I recognize that more input and discussion probably could help it be better.

The Great Chain on Urantia

I see you've added a lengthy comment to my talk page, I'll add some more points there. I'm going to try to present some thoughts about what I mean when I say "simplifying the article". I think it is a bit difficult to try to sift through whats in the UB and convert it to a good article type of state, so I'm going to put some of my thoughts down, and I may need to revise my comments as I proceed, as discussion develops.

In terms of style, I would like to see a more simple use of language, that is informational and smoothly readable, with ideas that are easy to comprehend by the general reader, that has no background in the UB. What it seems that we have in some sections is a promotional and subtle pov style.

I think some things could be said more directly, with less superfluous additional material, or exposition. There may be a simpler, less complex way to present the complex ideas in the UB. There are a number of areas I think might be improved in terms of the above ideas, but its probably best to just look at a section at a time, and go from top to bottom, a little at a time. Philosophy is a complex field and there is no light shed on it from the UB except to combine science philosophy and religion as part of the cosmic intuitive mind in human experience.

Navigation menu

If the sentence is placed in the Revelation side article, the Revelation article is improved, the readability of the intro is improved, and the content of the purpose of the revelation is still retained. The Urantia Book is a book that discusses God , science , religion , history , and destiny. The book originated in Chicago, Illinois, U. Among many other topics, it expands on the origin and meaning of life , describes humankind's place in the universe , discusses the relationship between God and people, and presents a detailed biography of Jesus.

The book is 2, pages long, and consists of a Foreword and papers, divided into four parts. Preceeding sentence removed below. The Urantia Book introduces the word Urantia as the name of the planet Earth. Colloquially , the word "Urantian" is sometimes used to denote an individual who admires and believes in the book, but this meaning is not found in the book itself. Translations into numerous languages are available with several new translations in process.

In , Urantia Foundation lost the U.