|
Error in the Urantia Papers.
Our previous discussion has presented lines of reasoning that may shed light upon the many occurrences of errors in the Urantia Papers. That these errors do constitute a mystery derives from the observation by so many that the authors of these Papers had an excellent, highly specialized knowledge in multiple areas of science, as well as in religion, the Bible, theology and philosophy.
Because of this, it is incomprehensible that such authors would undertake the enormous labor of writing a 2000-page book and knowingly include a multitude of potential sources of error--then present it as an epochal revelation in the full knowledge that only a minor error or two could discredit the whole of their work.
No suggestion has ever come forward linking the name of any academic with authorship of these Papers. Statistical analysis using the well-accredited method of Mosteller and Wallace demonstrated multiple authorship for these Papers and also excluded the possibility of Dr Sadler himself as being a major contributor.
The best known 'errors' in the Papers are the distance to the Andromeda galaxy, the "instantaneous disruption" of elements higher than the one-hundredth, the planet Mercury always turning the same face to the sun, and the human chromosome number. Regardless of how individuals may view them, the fact remains that, taken at face value, they will always present to new, science-oriented readers as wrong. Among such, the more knowledgeable may recognize these and other errors as views commonly held in the mid-1930's, since found to be incorrect.
There is a general agreement that the probable direct source of these Papers was a single patient of Drs. William and Lena Sadler who apparently spoke and wrote while asleep but had no consciousness of doing so once he awakened.1 The fact remains today that there is no realistic competing suggestion.
Allegedly, the sources for this material originated elsewhere than from this planet. The content of the communications was sufficiently fascinating to arouse the interest of the recipients--but it also aroused their natural desire to test and expose the credentials of the alleged sources. Thus, when an invitation was given to submit questions that should be of "supreme value to the human race," the opportunity was seized to ask questions "that no human being could answer."2
1. Possible error sources. Not answering the unanswerable.
Unknown to the questioners, their stated intention of asking questions no human could answer was in conflict with a "universe rule for revelation that proscribes the provision of unearned knowledge." (Paper 101, Section 4)
As stated previously, posing such questions for the proposed purpose placed the source authors in a quandary. They were being tested. Allowing the veracity of their claims as being of celestial origin, to tender an excuse on why they could not answer would almost certainly engender the conclusion that their claims were false--and this would nullify their previous fifteen to twenty years of preparatory work. But if they complied they would be forced to break what, for them, was an unbreakable universe rule.
It appears that their compromise was, for the most part, to supply plausible responses that would be outdated at some future time. Alternatively, they sometimes supplied prophetic information as covered by the terms of two codicils in Paper 101 permitting them to provide key or lost information when considered necessary. In various other Papers they informed receptive readers of their policies.
2. Possible error sources. Cancellation of free will
Besides the universe rule against providing unearned knowledge, there was a second possible reason why these celestial authors could not comply with requests for information that "no human being could possible answer." To do so would almost certainly lead to their responses ultimately being credited as divinely authoritative, hence infallible. Throughout these Papers we
|
|
