Perfection type number '5' in the 1955 text reads: "Absolute perfection in no direction, relative perfection in all other manifestations." The word 'other' was removed in subsequent Urantia Foundation printings.

Webmaster's editorial note: The material believed to be the source of this section in The Urantia Book is from "Man's Vision of God" by Charles Hartshorne. Hartshorne's writing uses the term "respects" as a general categorical identifier in his version of this outline. It is of great interest to me that the Urantia Book editors chose to substitute numerous other words in their version -- "aspects," "phases," "directions," "manifestations," "attributes" -- this is worthy of a serious study in itself.

But the change made in item 5 by Urantia Foundation after the first printing makes no sense to me. In fact, I believe it obscures meaning to such an extent that the original seems most likely to be correct. The use of "direction" and "manifestations" in a comparative manner is very puzzling if the term "other" is removed.  The statement appears logical as long as the "other" is included.

In other words, "absolute perfection in no direction" can be understood to be a manifestation.  But if the word "other" is removed we're forced to try and understand "direction" and "manifestations" as being somehow related in some ontological way which implicitly excludes "direction" from being considered a "manifestation." In the original version we are provided with a comparison. This is consistent with the logical structure of the other six items as well as the Urantia Book editor's introductory sentence which notes that we are considering seven conceivable types of relativity. If the term "other" is removed, this sentence becomes a contrastive logical statement rather than a comparative statement, making it inconsistent with the rest of the material. I believe the original statement is correct and that it's deletion causes considerable confusion when attempting to grasp meaning.

On page 8 of Hartshorne's book is the following wording:

1. Absolute perfection in all respects.
2. Absolute perfection in some respects, relative perfection in all others.
3. Absolute perfection, relative perfection, and "imperfection" (neither absolute nor relative perfection), each in some respects.
4. Absolute perfection in some respects, imperfection in all others.
5. Absolute perfection in no respects, relative in all.
6. Absolute perfection in no respects, relative in some, imperfection in the others.
7. Absolute perfection in no respects, imperfection in all

Original Reference:

^{P3:6, 000:1.19} When we attempt to conceive of perfection in all phases and forms of relativity, we encounter seven conceivable types:
1. Absolute perfection in all aspects.
2. Absolute perfection in some phases and relative perfection in all other aspects.
3. Absolute, relative, and imperfect aspects in varied association.
4. Absolute perfection in some respects, imperfection in all others.
5. Absolute perfection in no direction, relative perfection in all other manifestations.
   
6. Absolute perfection in no phase, relative in some, imperfect in others.
7. Absolute perfection in no attribute, imperfection in all.