|
Prophetic Science in the Urantia Papers--Discussion
Although the Urantia Papers contain a considerable amount of science related material, most of it is really a background setting for the important aspects of these Papers--those concerned with the religious and spiritual values of mankind. Whether or not this background setting ranks as infallible truth is not as important as that it provides a framework in which we can think about that which is ultimately of extreme importance to mankind--why are we here and what is our destiny?
Nevertheless any rational thinker must admit that the Papers do present some truly prophetic scientific material having aspects that were unknown to human scientists at the time of receipt in 1935--as well as some that remained unknown until long afterwards. Contrasting with this, the Papers also contain much material that was either outdated, soon to be outdated, or simply erroneous. Obviously the authors of these Papers were amazingly knowledgeable, highly intelligent, and display extraordinary wisdom. Their strange way of presentation must have been considered and deliberate. Our question is why?
Historically, few of the early readers of the Papers were qualified to judge the quality of science in the book. Hence most, swayed by the exalted status claimed for the authors but despite denials in the Papers themselves, assumed revelation must automatically imply infallibility.
Since those early days, many readers have discovered that the science content of the Papers includes both remarkable prophesy and serious error. At times skeptics have leveled the criticism that if enough random guesses are made, some will be correct by sheer chance. However there are instances in these Papers where the probability of being right or wrong through random guesswork can be rationally assessed--and in enough instances to cause us to conclude that the "through guesswork" alternative is not really a valid option. That leaves an unanswered question--what is the explanation for this strange mix of prophetic science and sometimes ridiculously wrong material?
The history of the Urantia Papers as provided by the convener of the so-called Contact Commission, Dr W. S. Sadler1, and by others2,3, tells of distinct phases during the receipt of the Papers. The first, a preparatory stage, commenced perhaps as early as 1905 and continued through until 1924; a second, in which questions were asked and new Papers received, was from 1925 until 1935 when the final version of the Papers was pronounced to be complete; a third period lasted until 1942 during which some minor modifications were made, the contract to print was signed and the galley proofs checked; there then followed a lengthy and unexplained period terminating in 1955 when the book was finally published. During this final period the completed printing plates remained in the strong room of the publishers, R. R. Donnelly and Sons, awaiting instructions to print.
If we accept Dr Sadler as our sole authority, all of the Papers of Parts 1, 2, and 3 were received through a single unidentified person, a patient of Dr's William and Lena Sadler, who either spoke or wrote during a disturbed period of sleep of which he was quite unconscious. Part 4 of the book, the Life of Jesus of Nazareth, may have had a different origin though the evidence for this is conflicting.2 Parts 1, 2, and 3 were completed in 1934, and Part 4 in 1935.
For our present purpose, the period during which the Papers were received is our main interest. Lasting about ten years, according to Dr Sadler it commenced in a contact experience when a "visitor," speaking through the sleeping subject, answered a question with these words, "If only you knew what you are in contact with you would not ask such trivial questions. You would rather ask such questions as might elicit answers of supreme value to the human race."
Later that night one of Dr. Sadler's group exclaimed: "Now they have asked for it--let us give them questions that no human being can answer1."
A group called the Forum was then organized, the arrangement being that Papers would be received only as answers to specific questions from the Forum. Questions were posed, collected by Dr Sadler, placed in an arranged location, and an answer later received through the medium of the "sleeping subject."
One of these Papers contained material important to our quest for understanding the error content of the Papers. It needs to be read in the light of the aim of the Forum members that they should ask questions that no human being could answer.
|
|
