Home Page

Scientific Predictions of The Urantia Book

by Irwin Ginsburgh, Ph.D., and Geoffrey L. Taylor

The Urantia Book contains much scientific information that was revealed between 1925 and 1935 to an individual who cared little about the material. Some of this information disagreed with science's version. Half a century later, some of this originally conflicting information now agrees with science, and some still does not. The information deals primarily with creation of the universe, the Earth and man, as well as the fundamentals of matter and energy. Theories about these kinds of subjects evolve as science matures, and some of science's ideas change. These changes have brought about the new agreement between science and The Urantia Book, and the now agreeing Urantia information can be considered to have been predictions.

The authors consider about thirty predictions that are in their areas of expertise or interest, but there are many others in the book. Science does not now know some of the information in the book. There is a distinct possibility that some of this Urantia information may also turn out to be scientific predictions in the future. If more of these predictions ultimately agree with science, it will give the scientific part of The Urantia Book an authenticity that will enhance the believability of the rest of the book. The authors examine about thirty scientific predictions in The Urantia Book, compare them with science's versions, see how much agreement we can find, and how much more we can anticipate. Those predictions that now agree with science and that partly agree constitute about one-third of all the predictions considered. This can be considered remarkable. Most predictions have yet to agree, but this is to be expected of a book with a very long life. More prediction analysis is warranted in the future, as is more detailed study of individual predictions.


After studying The Urantia Book, one comes to grips with a personal question: Is the book completely correct or only partially so? Of course, one could take it all on faith and believe it completely. To help make this choice, we will examine the book's scientific information. The scientific information in the book that we will consider was either unknown to science in 1935 or differed from information generally accepted by science in 1935. Some of this information now agrees with science and can be considered predictions of what science would discover after 1935. We will examine some of these predictions and see how many now agree with science. If enough of them do, they can enhance the believability of the rest of The Urantia Book. However, we must remember that, presently, science only deals with the physical world, while the book deals with physical, spiritual and other matters.

Much of the scientific information in the book agreed with science, but some differed. Where they differed, the subjects cover matters such as creation of the universe, creation of our world, creation of life, fundamentals of energy, etc. Many of these subjects cannot be tested in a laboratory. Science's theories about such matters are designed to fit the available evidence. Historically, some theories change with time as science matures and new data become available. Those 1935 disagreements which now agree with science provide a unique way of testing the validity of the scientific part of The Urantia Book. The remaining disagreements may agree in the future, and these could provide additional confirmation of the scientific part of the book.

Limitations of Disclosure

The Urantia Book warns of the limitation of the English language (*469) for transmitting some ideas, and these ideas may not get through clearly or correctly. This is a problem with all telepathically received books which discuss matters that are unknown to the receiver. The understanding of the receiver can be a limitation. In addition, there are a number of presenters, and some may be more skillful at revelation than others--especially in dealing with information that is unknown to the receiver. Furthermore, much of the material was originally recorded by stenography, and translation from stenographic notes is not always perfect, especially if the stenographer is unfamiliar with the material. (The first edition of Mind at Mischief by Dr. William S. Sadler, Funk & Wagnalls 1929, has a note about the use of stenography in the transmission of the Urantia Papers.)

In dealing with future events, the names that will be used in the future are not known, and this may hinder identification. For example, the book discusses "continental drift" on the Earth's surface, while science talks of "plate tectonics"; but there is no problem with identification in this case.

The book clearly states there is a time limitation on the information that can be presented, and information can only be provided if we will soon discover it ourselves. This is an understandable restriction on revelation, because there are many cases on Earth where an advanced culture introduced advanced technology to a less developed culture, and this usually harmed or destroyed the less developed culture.

Analysis of Predictions

With revelation, a fully developed theory is presented to a human receiver. If science finds a need for a new theory or improvements to an existing theory, the new theory starts out as an idea in someone's mind. The idea is changed, expanded, modified, etc., until it appears to fill the necessary data requirements. When the theory is completed, it is publicly announced to other scientists in the field, and the publication date is usually considered as the discovery date. Then it has to pass the acid test of experimental verification and reverification by other scientists. Other workers in the field compare the old and the new theories and informally decide which best explains the phenomenon. There may be several years between conception and verification. During this time period, the idea may be discussed with other experts in the field, and the new information is known to this small group of experts. We will use the announcement date as the discovery date, even though the concept was known to a small group before this. Members of this group might have been an inadvertent source of information for the presenters. We will also present major criticism of some predictions, since it exists in the real world and makes a more balanced presentation. Science allows for improvements in its theories, and these changes have given rise to the scientific predictions in The Urantia Book.

Much of our material is science that has been developed after 1935. There are two major categories for the predictions--those that disagreed with science in 1935, and those that were unknown to science in 1935--and one minor one. There are several classes in each major category. Much of the material in the first category involves science that has been developed within the authors' lifetimes. The categories and the classes are:

* * *

The A, B, and C categories cover a wide range of subjects. The seven predictions of category A can be considered remarkable. These predictions clearly disagreed with science in 1935. Since then, science has improved its theories and created the agreement. Critics will say that some developments were underway in 1935, and a few experts in each field were aware of some of the development work in 1935. But the information was not generally known at that time, and there was no assurance that the work would succeed. However, this information matches the book's limitation on revealing information that we will develop shortly. The two predictions of category B partially agree now, and agreement could improve with time. Category D is even more remarkable, since these items were unknown to science in 1935.

Category C, with five predictions, disagrees with science, but that does not mean the predictions are wrong. They just disagree with science's ideas on the subject. But the nature of the information is such that science's theories could change in the future. The history of a subject in science is often a series of theories that improve with time.

Categories D, E, and F are mostly unknown to science even today and could be the most intriguing, since future scientific discoveries could verify some of these far-out predictions. In fact, four of these predictions are being researched today (category D), because science now needs this kind of information. Five more predictions can be tested with modern technology (category E). Eight predictions are still unknown to science (category F). This type of information is important for a book with a very long life. Verification of some of these predictions in the future could make it easier to believe other parts of The Urantia Book.

The thirty-odd predictions to be briefly discussed can be categorized as follows:

Brief Discussion of Individual Predictions

AA--Information known to science and The Urantia Book

There is much material in The Urantia Book which agrees with science. These cannot be used for predictions. However, it is useful to discuss one of these subjects. The book says that the speed of light is 186,280 miles per second (*260). This figure has six known numbers in it. The speed of light measured by science in 1931 was 186,270 miles per second--10 miles per second difference. By 1949, the value increased to 186,282 miles per second, and it has remained close to this ever since--2 miles per second difference. This shows the degree of accuracy of some of the information in the book, about one part in 100,000. However, there are other places where the information is vague or incomplete.

Category I--Predictions that disagreed with science in 1935

I.A.1.--Healing Chemicals for Wounds (Medicine, *735)

[Parentheses show the field of science and The Urantia Book page number. Scientific information is available in any good modern encyclopedia.]

The Urantia Book claims that healing chemicals for wounds will be discovered. In 1928, penicillin was discovered, but serious work did not start until ten years later. Sulfa drugs were discovered in 1935 but came into use five years later. Both of these chemicals fight infection and speed up the healing process. Both discoveries were essentially unknown in 1935, and this is a prediction that has partially come true. The book also speaks of healing chemicals that involve the cells themselves, and the book hints at other discoveries of this type which will be made in the future.

I.A.2.--Plate Tectonics or Continental Drift (Geology, *663,668)

The book says that the continents drift slowly over the surface of the Earth, and the drift started about 700 million years ago. This was proposed in the early years of the twentieth century and had not been proved by 1935. However, a look at the east coast of South America and the west coast of Africa readily shows the ancient fit. But science requires proof, and proof came in 1969 by matching subsurface earth layers on the two continents and finding an ocean floor crack between the continents. However, the start of the drift was recently computed by science as starting 200 million years ago, based on the oldest ocean bottom rocks in the Atlantic Ocean. Another prediction essentially came true even if science calls this plate tectonics.

I.A.3.--Source of the Sun's Energy (Physics, Astrophysics, *464)

The book says the sun generates energy by combining four hydrogen atoms to form one helium atom, using carbon as a catalyst. This is a mass-to-energy conversion. Science worked out this technology in 1939. This prediction also came true.

I.A.4.--Temperature at the Center of the Sun (Physics, Astrophysics, *463)

The book claims that the temperature at the center of the sun is 35 million degrees F. In the mid '30s, science only guessed at a temperature of millions of degrees. An estimate of 29 million degrees was made in the late '30s. This is good agreement.

I.A.5.--Chemical Element with Atomic Number 101 (Nuclear Physics, *478)

The book says that the very heavy element, number 101 (the number relates to the structure and electric charge of the atomic nucleus) would be so unstable that it would disintegrate radioactively almost instantaneously. In 1935, the heaviest naturally occurring element known was Uranium, number 92, and it disintegrated slowly. Experiments to make heavier elements were done in the late '30s, but with little success--certainly not up to number 101. This was finally done years later, was labeled Mendelevium, and it turned out to be stable for about an hour. This is not a bad fit for the prediction, but critics will say that a competent scientist could have made a good guess.

I.A.6.--Discovery of the Neutrino Particle (Nuclear Physics, *464,479)

The book mentions a small, unnamed, chargeless particle which could be the particle that science calls the neutrino. The particle was theoretically predicted in 1931 and was labeled the neutrino; but because it was so difficult to detect, it was not found until 1938. Here again critics might argue about an educated guess, but the prediction did come true.

I.A.7.--Mass of the Meson Particle (Nuclear Physics, *479)

The book uses the term "mesotron" instead of the presently used word "meson." The mesotron term was used in the 1930s when the early theoretical work was done on this particle. The presenters were familiar with the mesotron work. The book claims the mesotron has a mass that is 180 times the mass of the electron. Science has found that the mass is 207 times the electron mass. This is a small discrepancy. However, the presenter was aware of the term mesotron, and this shows knowledge of human thought. This prediction does agree with science, but it was made at a time coincident with the discovery.

Score: Seven predictions agree with science.

I.B.1.--Creation of the Sun (Cosmology, Stellar Physics, *651)

Science says that the sun was created when an enormous cloud of gas contracted by gravity and heated itself by gas compression until it was hot enough to become a solar furnace. The book says the same thing except that there were about one million other suns that were also created from the same enormous Andronover Nebula. Their creation took about two billion years, and they were ejected from the nebula after formation. Science does not know about the other million suns or the nebula or the ejection from the nebula, but there is good overlap in this case.

I.B.2.--Creation of the Earth and Moon (Cosmology, Astronomy, *659)

Science says that the Earth condensed when the sun did and picked up some material by accretion of meteors and planetesimals. The moon was created when a planetesimal hit the Earth and ejected enough material that coalesced to form the moon. Interestingly, an old, discredited theory said that the moon was torn away from the Earth, leaving the pacific basin, but did not specify the cause. The book says that the Earth and the moon coalesced as a pair of twin planets after the giant Angona Nebula came close to the sun and pulled away enough material to form all the planets. The sun and the moon both grew by accretion--the Earth enormously so, compared to the moon. Again, there is some overlap, but differences in details.

Score: Two predictions partially agree with science. In time, this number could increase.

I.C.1.--Creation of Matter and Energy (Cosmology, Physics, *49,55,468)

The book says that matter and energy are continuously being created in many places in the universe, especially beyond the seven superuniverses. Science has a discredited theory about continuous creation, but the accepted theory today is that all the energy in our universe was created ten to fifteen billion years ago in an instant and in one place. This is called the Big Bang theory. This energy has been spreading out ever since and has resulted in the entire universe. Interestingly, some of the newest experimental results are raising questions about the Big Bang. The Urantia Book does speak of an enormous disturbance in our part of the universe eight to ten billion years ago, which could have been a local big bang. While there is disagreement, perhaps there is a glimmer of agreement. Remember that science's measurements are all made here on Earth and are used to explain events that happened fifteen billion years ago and very far away. The extreme extrapolations in time and distance could lead to erroneous results. I remember that in the twentieth century, science's universe kept getting older and older. Has science found the right age now?

I.C.2.--Creation of Our Solar System (Cosmology, *655)

In the 1930s, one of science's proposed theories was that a massive body came close to the sun and tore out huge amounts of matter which later coalesced to form the planets. This theory is no longer accepted, and the best theory now says that the planets were created by the coalescence of matter adjacent to the sun at the same time the sun coalesced. The book says that the giant Angona Nebula came close to the sun and tore away lots of matter which coalesced to form the planets. This particular theory explains the additional seven-degree tilt of the sun's axis to the plane of the planets. The best science theory, above, does not explain this tilt. In this case, the book and science originally agreed, but science has changed its mind. However, agreement may return in the future. Remember that there are several hundred astronomer/ cosmologists in the world, and they reach a consensus about which theory best fits all the available scientific data; changes in this theory can occur.

I.C.3.--Life Implanted on Earth 550 Million Years Ago (Paleontology, *667)

The book says that life was implanted on the Earth 550 million years ago, but it does not specify exactly what was implanted. Science says that life started over 3 billion years ago, as single-cell life. This is based on circumstantial evidence of ancient cellular structures that resemble living single-cell structures. Science also says that multi-cell life with significant DNA--structures in a cell that control all phases of cell life--appeared 600 million years ago. The differences here may ultimately be resolved. Science has produced the building blocks of life, but has never combined them to produce any lifelike structure that can reproduce itself. Science has never created life from scratch and does not know how to do it.

I.C.4.--End of the Cretaceous Age: 65 Million Years Ago (Geology, *690)

Science knows that the dinosaurs and many other classes of life disappeared about 65 million years ago in what is called the end of the Cretaceous age. Science's newest theory is that a 10-mile-diameter meteor struck the Earth; this created a long-lasting dust and cloud cover that blocked sunlight and adversely affected plant growth and, thus, many other living species. The crucial clue is the presence of a high concentration of the heavy element, iridium, in the boundary layer of deposits at the end of the Cretaceous. Iridium is not plentiful at the Earth's surface; it is found deep in the Earth or on certain meteors. The book says that the greatest lava flow of all time occurred at the end of the Cretaceous--it covered parts of several continents. It could have come from deep in the Earth, thus providing a source of iridium.

I.C.5.--Breakup of the Fifth Planet from the Sun (Astronomy, Cosmology, *658)

The book says that the fifth planet from the sun was slowly attracted by the gravity of the giant sixth planet, Jupiter. When it was close enough, Jupiter's gravity pulled the fifth planet apart. Science now says there never was a fifth planet, and that the asteroids are pieces of space matter (planetesimals) that never formed a planet.

Score: Five presently unfilled predictions.

[The following category is even more interesting than category A, because this material was not known to science in 1935 and is now being actively investigated.]

Category II--Predictions Unknown to Science in 1935

II.D.1.--Dark Matter in the Universe (Astronomy, *173)

The book discusses dark matter and dark islands of space and says that we will discover dark matter soon. Because dark matter cannot be seen (it emits no light), science knows little about it. Science thinks that some dark matter is different from normal matter, such as a dense, cooled star. Recently, science has found several good theoretical reasons for the existence of such matter. Serious efforts are being made to find such matter, and positive results can be expected in the future. This has a very good chance of coming true.

II.D.2.--Organization of Matter in a Superuniverse (Astronomy, *167,168)

The book describes the organization of matter in a superuniverse. Science knows about some of this information, but does not know it all. In fact, science does not know about superuniverses. The book says that science will discover some of this information soon. The table below compares the equivalent information from science and The Urantia Book. The first column lists the Urantia criteria for the number of inhabited worlds in parts of a superuniverse. The other columns are self-explanatory. There is a question as to whether the Milky Way galaxy is a local universe or a minor sector of a superuniverse.

II.D.3.--Location of Seven Superuniverses in the Grand Universe (Astronomy, *164,165)

The book describes the seven superuniverses circling around Havona in a planar elliptical course. It also says that science has almost found superuniverse number seven and will find the rest soon. In 1935, science thought that all the galaxies were uniformly distributed throughout space. The existence of large voids between galaxies and the clustering of galaxies have only recently been discovered. This also has a chance of coming true.

II.D.4.--Use of DNA to Evolve Human Species (Genetics, *734)

The book says that the human species will no longer evolve by natural means. Scientific knowledge of DNA will be used in the future to improve the human species. Science is just getting started to map the entire human DNA genome. After this is completed, we may be able to start to understand how the DNA functions. Even now we are just starting to attack some genetic diseases which are apparently caused by errors in the DNA. This will probably come true in the future.

Score: Four predictions with good chances of coming true.

II.E.1.--Reduced Gravity Effect on Calcium Ion (Physics, *462)

Calcium atoms usually have two outermost electrons and are electrically balanced. At very high temperatures, one of the negatively charged electrons can be removed, and the resulting ion is positively charged. The book claims that such ions are slightly less affected by gravity than normal calcium atoms (beyond the mere loss of an electron's mass), and this accounts for the higher concentration of calcium atoms on the sun's surface rather than inside. This reduced gravity is quite unexpected, and might even be worth a Nobel prize to the scientist who discovers it. A test of this would require generating a beam of calcium atoms and a beam of high-temperature calcium ions, and comparing the effect of gravity on the two beams.

II.E.2.--No Gravity Effect on Free Neutrons (Physics, *476)

The book says there is no gravity pull on free, uncharged, unattached electronic energy particles. We take this to include free neutrons. This is also quite unexpected, and might likewise be worth a Nobel prize. It might be checked by generating a very weak beam of neutrons and measuring the effect of gravity on the beam.

II.E.3.--The Origin of the Sunspot Cycle (Astronomy, *459,656)

The book says that our 11-year sunspot cycle is a slow remnant of the short-term (3.5 day) Cepheid Variable phase of the sun. The Cepheid phase of a star is a cyclic variation of the brightness of a star, and the frequency of the variation and the brightness are related. Although science does not make this claim, it is plausible. A study would require accurate brightness measurements of very long-term Cepheid Variable stars and precise, space-based, long-term measurements of the variations in the sun's brightness.

II.E.4.--Twelve Planets in Our Solar System (Astronomy, *656)

While science knows of nine planets and the remnants or pre-planetesimals of a tenth, the book says there are twelve planets in the sun's family. Astronomers are presently looking for other planets by watching for very small changes in motions of the outer planets, which could be caused by the gravity of two faraway planets. The two space probes that are traveling beyond Pluto, Pioneer 10 and 11, are also being watched for small changes that might be caused by the gravity of another planet or two.

II.E.5.--Two Unknown Types of Energy (Physics, *474)

The book discusses all the types of electromagnetic radiation known to science. It also discusses two other types of radiation that science does not know. One is called infraultimatonic rays and is involved in the first stage of created energy. The other is called ultimatonic rays and involves the conversion of energy to ultimaton particles (see sixth prediction of next section). Some of the experimental work with high-energy machines may lead to discovery of these rays.

Score: Five predictions awaiting further work.

II.F.1.--Cause of Wave Action of Light (Physics, *461)

The book says that light consists of particles, but another energy, unknown on Earth, acting on the light causes the particles to bunch together in a wavelike fashion. Science knows that light has wave and particle properties, but does not know why both properties exist.

II.F.2.--Speed Greater than the Speed of Light (Physics, Theology, *260)

Science maintains that a physical body cannot move faster than the speed of light. The book discusses speeds faster than the speed of light, but it is talking about spiritual matter rather than physical.

II.F.3.--Two Kinds of Gravity (Physics, *125)

Science is familiar with the gravitational attraction between two physical bodies, but it does not understand the fundamentals. The book calls this linear gravity. It also talks about radial gravity, which apparently works between the central universe and certain other bodies--free ultimatons--and between the central universe and energy. Science has conducted very difficult experiments to see if linear gravity affects light energy. It does, but there may be enough of a discrepancy to account for another type of gravity.

II.F.4.--Anti-gravity (Physics, *101)

The book discusses anti-gravity and some particles that are affected by it. Science speculates that anti-gravity may exist, but has few ideas about it.

II.F.5.--Major Energy of Space (Physics, *467)

The book says that light and electricity are not the major energy of space. Apparently neither is gravity. The book said that science did not know about it in 1935. This energy apparently flows through space in circuits. One wonders if the book is referring to the strong nuclear force which science now knows about, and which is involved in the conversion of mass to energy in the stars. However, this energy does not flow through space.

II.F.6.--The Ultimaton Particle (Physics, *465,467, 472,473,476)

The book discusses the fundamental particle, the ultimaton. This is the first mass particle that energy is converted to. One hundred ultimatons make up an electron, but they do not use orbits of motion as electrons do; perhaps some kind of structure is involved. Science has no idea that electrons are made up of smaller particles.

II.F.7.--Neanderthal to Cro-magnon Transition (Anthropology, *890)

Science is aware that there was a rapid change from neanderthal types of humans to cro-magnon or modern man about 35,000 years ago. Science does not know how this happened so quickly, since evolution will not account for such a quick transformation. The book says that the descendants of superior extraterrestrials--namely, Adam and Eve--crossbred with indigenous Earth people to create modern man, who wiped out the neanderthals.

II.F.8.--Life of an Ordinary Star (Stellar Physics, *172,465)

The book says that an ordinary star, like the sun, can shine for billions of years (*465). Science also calculates that stars can generate enough energy to shine for billions of years. But the book says (*464) stars that are in the mainstream of space energy flow can acquire more energy and shine indefinitely. On page 172, the book claims star life of trillions of years. The existence of a special space energy flow is unknown to science, as is the existence of flow channels for this energy.

Score: 8 predictions science does not know about.

Category III--Predictions That Are in Complete Disagreement with Science

III.G.1.--Periodicity of Similar Chemical Elements (Chemistry, *480,10)

The book says that if the chemical elements are listed by increasing atomic weight (relates to atomic structure), the lighter ones repeat their chemical properties every seventh active element. However, there are inactive elements in the sequence (the noble gases, such as helium and neon), and this stretches the actual sequence to eight elements. This is the number that science uses, and has known this for over 100 years. Some recently completed work has shown that some of the noble gases are slightly reactive, and this is now complicating the problem. The book talks about a repetition every seven elements, because seven is an important spiritual number.

III.G.2.--Surface Temperature of the Sun (Astronomy, *463)

The book says that the surface temperature of the sun is 6,000 degrees Fahrenheit. Science measures the temperature of the sun as 6,000 degrees Centigrade, or 10,000 degrees Fahrenheit. This could be due to any of a number of errors. There is another solar temperature mentioned in the same paragraph, and this one agrees with science's value.

[These errors mostly involve numbers or values--and errors could be expected. It is interesting that there are such a small number of serious errors in the book--less than ten percent of the predictions we considered.]

Score: 2 disagreements which could be explainable or accidental errors.


The thirty-three discussed predictions involve subjects that science developed or discovered around 1935 or sometime afterward. Most of these predictions come from these Urantia papers: 57, Origin of Urantia; 58, Life Establishment on Urantia; and 41, Physical Aspects of the Local Universe. A tabulation of results follows:

Category I--Predictions that disagreed with science in 1935.

Category II--Predictions that were unknown to science in 1935:

Category III--Predictions that seriously disagreed with science in 1935:

There are many other predictions in the book. Those that have been analyzed are the easiest for the authors to judge. They cover the subjects of physics, cosmology, energy, etc. There are more analyses that can be done by experts in other fields and in later years when more predictions may have come true.

Class A can be considered remarkable for 1935. This information disagreed with science in 1935, but 50 years later there is agreement. However, since the book was published in 1955, critics could claim that the 1955 date is applicable. For the 1955 date, the predictions are not exceptional. They are obviously in accord with The Urantia Book requirement that revelation be limited to information we will discover in the near future. Category B predictions have reached partial agreement with science and may agree more in the future. Together, A and B are about two thirds of category I. This indicates that some of the advanced technical information in The Urantia Book is correct. The presenters had access to information that was unknown to the human mind. In addition, the information comes from a number of presenters and covers a number of fields of science. The remarkable predictions of this information make it easier to believe some of the other material in the book. Category C still disagrees with science, but these are quite fundamental subjects, and scientific data are often quite sparse. This does not mean that category C predictions are wrong. They disagree with science's present theories. Science's theories on some of these matters could change, and there could be more agreement in the future.

Categories D, E, and F are even more intriguing, because they were unknown to science in 1935 and even 1955. Category D has four predictions that are well on their way to reaching agreement with science. Categories E and F involve some far-out subjects, and, if some of these agree with science in the future, this could enhance the believability of the rest of the book. The possibility of predictions coming true in the future is very important for a book with a very long life. The book says that knowledge of God comes through the spirit, and science now cannot help with that.

There are other subjects that are discussed in the book that may be amenable to prediction analysis. These include material such as spirit, mind, the Thought Adjuster, social science, etc. These should be combed to try to find objective material that could be new or predictive. Most likely, such information will be subjective, and this kind of material is very difficult to substantiate. However, it might be interesting to develop a survey questionnaire that could be used to compare experienced readers with new readers of the book. The results could be of great interest to other readers. However, even if such predictions are found, they would just make the book easier to believe. They would not necessarily prove the correctness of other parts of the book.

Revelation is matched to the needs of those who receive it. It may not completely cover a subject, and could even omit major parts of a subject. It will not provide information that will become useful far in the future. In this century, some readers' scientific needs are more stringent than those of other readers. This could be helpful to all readers, since it adds a factor of revelatory truth to some of the scientific material in the book, and implies that the rest of the book is more believable. One final piece of advice. Some of the secrets of understanding The Urantia Book are repetition, thinking, and not reading the book sequentially. Start and read what you can understand; then go back and study the other parts.

A service of
The Urantia Book Fellowship