Reincarnation

[elise]

Hello. I have recently came across this sight and while I can't say that I've read everything yet, I have an endless amount of questions. For now I'll start with one that has been bothering me:

Why would the Urantia book specifically discount reincarnation if in fact it was true?

Maybe if I keep reading I'll find the answer to it, but I can't seem to find it anywhere. I couldn't remember exactly what the Urantia book said about it so I looked it up and I found this:

Paper 94- line 51: The undue concentration on self led certainly to a fear of the nonevolutionary perpetuation of self in an endless round of successive incarnations as man, beast, or weeds. And of all the contaminating beliefs which could have become fastened upon what may have been an emerging monotheism, none was so stultifying as this belief in transmigration--the doctrine of the reincarnation of souls--which came from the Dravidian Deccan. This belief in the weary and monotonous round of repeated transmigrations robbed struggling mortals of their long-cherished hope of finding that deliverance and spiritual advancement in death which had been a part of the earlier Vedic faith.

Paper 164- line 57: There was, throughout all these regions, a lingering belief in reincarnation. The older Jewish teachers, together with Plato, Philo, and many of the Essenes, tolerated the theory that men may reap in one incarnation what they have sown in a previous existence; thus in one life they were believed to be expiating the sins committed in preceding lives. The Master found it difficult to make men believe that their souls had not had previous existences.

[Adam]

elise, I would not give any creditability to the Urantia Book perspective. Because of the problem of Ghost writers and the inability to stand in the light of truth.

In addition you might note that the unknown source of the writings that you posted are stating an opinion. Not confirming or denying reincarnation.

As far as the Master comment goes ( again its just third party speculation by an unknown person). And this is a problem for movie and television actors as well. People think they know the actors. Include politicians.

As far as robbing struggling mortals goes....to me its a false argument with intent to deceive.

Since I am here on Earth, My opinion carries more weight than the non existent authors of the UB.

[walompio]

The problem I have with reincarnation is very simple.

Supposedly, a human beings reincarnates to evolve. In other words, with every new 'existential experience' one is supposed to grow in their evolutionary moment.

Well, considering the world population growth, as opposed to how humans have generally behaved throughout history, it is impossible for me to conceive such postulate.

In addition to that; as it is ilustrated here in PH, there is a certain number of people or 'souls' already assigned to a world. If the rule was that one would 'regress' into a lower evolutionary moment given poor performance in a lifetime causing the person to reincarnate as a goat or a bee, then maybe I could make some sense of it.... but that is not the 'reasoning' behind believing in reincarnation; that would defeat the purpose of allowing one to grow in their evolutionary moment.

In the year 1900 the Earth was home to about 1.6 billion people. The total had grown by 600 million in the 100 years since 1800, the year that the first billion was reached; but the change in the 19th century gave no hint of things to come. By the middle of the present century another billion had been added, in the remarkably short span of only 50 years. Moreover, and significantly, 80 percent of the growth had taken place in the world's poorer, or "developing," nations. In 1995, but 45 years later, world population had risen by an additional three billion, with most of the increase, as before, in Asia, Africa, and Latin America.

The dramatic fashion in which new numbers have been added to the world's population since 1950 is shown in this figure. While it took the several million years of human history to reach the first billion, and 130 years to reach the second, today each new billion is added in but 11 years.

It came as something of a surprise. The fact that world population would grow by billions in but a few decades was not anticipated by demographers in the initial postwar period. The earliest United Nations projections showed more concern with the possibility of devastating mortality striking the developing countries. As a result, U.N. projections made in 1951 predicted the 1980 population at anywhere from 3 to 3.6 billion, but the higher limit was considered optimistic and unlikely. The actual figure, as best we now know, proved to be about 4.4 billion: a large difference in a less than 30 year projection.

I had asked about this more than once, and I have been un-satisfied with the answers relating to 'temporal engineering' and 'the figures of population are wrong' etc. The concept of other worlds where we go after the first human experience described in the UB as the morontia worlds makes more sense to me. There, people from all worlds would be able to continue in their progression where they left off as mortal, and therefore advance in their spiritual development within conditions similar to those they were familiar with when they lived as mortal.

I am yet to hear a reasonable explanation to the reincarnation theory in light of the world population exponential growth (explained in the quote above) considering the human behavioral changes and progressional improvements (as a whole).

If anyone can shed some light and defend the reincarnation theory ... feel free, but first consider the quote, and do some research as to how the figures may (or may not) be accurate).

[Caligastia Lanonandek]

Elise

It is true that on a universal world - reincarnation is not employed.
You get a life span of 125 years (one bite of the apple) and then are judged. The ascendancy rate for those worlds is 1 out of 5.
Then they sit in a hall of souls for the end of the timeline (500,000 years)

On Earth the ascendancy ratio will be 4 out of 5. 50% at the time of the first taking and 4/5 by the end of the timeline.

The universe teaches that 'self' is a bad thing, You are supposed to be a mindless insect in the ant farm and 'they' will tell you what is good for you. By way of perspective, if the angels of the universe were to stand judgement today - less than 1 out of 10 would pass.

Christianity avoids the issue of reincarnation even though it is clearly inferred. Jesus incarnated once. There is no suggestion that he couldn't do as many lifetimes as he wanted OR that this is a procedure limited only to the Son.

Also, John's distinctions between the first death (body) and the second death (soul) leave the very real possibility of reincarnation. If there's anything I'll agree with the UB on its that THIS IS NOT A UNIVERSAL WORLD.

Jesus did not teach the ant farm mentality. He told us that it is through service to others that we also serve ourselves.

Samael, the 'most high' ancient of days is a good case in point.
He accuses others of ego aggrandizement ignoring that he is the poster boy for it. His message is that thou shalt not have an ego greater than mine and given the poor state of angel kind, his methodologies qualify as extremely poor.

REV 12 10 AND I HEARD A LOUD VOICE SAYING IN HEAVEN NOW IS COME SALVATION AND STRENGTH AND THE KINGDOM OF OUR GOD AND THE POWER OF HIS CHRIST FOR THE ACCUSER OF OUR BRETHREN IS CAST DOWN WHICH ACCUSED THEM BEFORE OUR GOD DAY AND NIGHT

This verse references the red dragon, the beast, the devil, the ancient of days who is called Samael.

The AOD hates the Son of God and will stand in rebellion against him. His principle gripe is that he has a long list of executions he wants performed and the Son won't do it. Only Father or a Son can execute a soul - the AOD has no such power.

For what its worth to you - I call the UB the Devil's Book of Lies
They tell you the truth but in a fashion that elevates their opinions over 'fact'.

For example, they tell you they don't know why Caligastia did x,y, or z. He wouldn't say. Then they lay 5 pounds of opinion on it tell you what I did, with whom and even what was in my mind.
1 ounce of truth 'we don't know' invalidates the 5 pounds of opinion but the average person can't see through it AND they knew that would be the case. They also 'didn't know' there'd be a skin suit awakening and my mouth (speaking great things) is still running. What they don't know is far greater than what they do.

Here is an extract from my book

Daniel also describes a person who has a highly elevated opinion of his position within creation. He calls himself ‘The Most High Ancient of Days’. Christianity, in general, works along the assumption that the Son of God must be the ‘Most High’ and believe this is but another title for Him. It isn’t. The proof is found in The Revelation Code.

Referencing The Ancient of Days:

DAN 7:10 A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him: thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him: the judgment was set, and the books were opened.

Addressing Jesus:

REV 5:11 And I beheld, and I heard the voice of many angels round about the throne and the beasts and the elders: and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands;

Let’s do the math:

AOD = (1,000 x 1,000's) + (10,000 x 10,000)
SON = (10,000 x 10,000) + (1,000 x 1,000's)

We can see that if we were to complete the equation, we'd arrive at the same number. The only difference, and it is a big difference, is that the numbers are reversed! The Apostle John did this in Revelation with precise deliberation.

The reversal allows us to extrapolate the obvious:

The Ancient of Days is opposite The Son.
The Ancient of Days is against The Son.
The Ancient of Days is anti The Son.
The Ancient of Days is Anti-Christ - the Most High Anti-Christ.

The totality of the numbers refers to the length and breadth of the universe as a kingdom. The Son and The Ancient of Days are laying claim to rulership of the very same universe. It takes no leap of imagination to propose that the Ancient of Days is a usurper intent on dethroning the Son of God. An exemplar of one reversal would be considered anomalous. However, This is a tool that John employed repeatedly and it establishes ‘methodology’.

You can get some usefulness from the UB as a liner for a bird cage or a cat box.

[elise]

Well I don't know much about you, but it seems as if it's you against the entire universal bureaucracy. I'd like to know why I should trust you and your "faster" methods of doing things over an entire ancient universes methods. I also don't know much about universal politics and survivor ratios but in my short life span I've learned that faster is not always better.

I don't recall the universe teaching that self is a bad thing, but rather over self-aggrandizement which is what I believe the UB book teaches as well. It is the over exaltation of the ego that seems to cause most of the worlds problems. If we were merely viewed as ants in an ant farm by the universe, I don't believe each of us would be dwelt by a fragment of God. Why would you honestly want more than that?

I've noticed that a majority of your discussions center around politics. When Michael was incarnated as Jesus, he avoided political earthly affairs at all costs. Why don't you?

It is interesting that you call the UB the Devils book of lies. I've found it to contain the highest concentration of truth than any other book I've encountered. You can use the UB for the liner of a litter box, but I'll stick to cat litter. A book doesn't make a good liner anyway.

[Caligastia Lanonandek]

>>>Well I don't know much about you, but it seems as if it's you against the entire universal bureaucracy. I'd like to know why I should trust you and your "faster" methods of doing things over an entire ancient universes methods.

Your trust is irrelvant. The bare truth is - my planet - my rules.
You conveniently ignored the answer that was provided.
An ascendant ratio of 4 out 5 is significantly better than 1 out 5.
But if you'd prefer kissing the backsides of those who are willing to kill 4 out 5 people - be my guest. There is a reason the Devil is called a murderer. Oops wrong book - the UB is supposed to replace the Bible isn't it.


>>>I don't recall the universe teaching that self is a bad thing, but rather over self-aggrandizement which is what I believe the UB book teaches as well. It is the over exaltation of the ego that seems to cause most of the worlds problems. If we were merely viewed as ants in an ant farm by the universe, I don't believe each of us would be dwelt by a fragment of God. Why would you honestly want more than that?

Ah so, a died in the wool Ubite. Ok - prove to me who wrote the UB. As such it means truth is of no interest and you're just promoting a mindless agenda based on a book you can't produce one iota of proof to support. Likewise, you ignore the stated inaccuaries re: caligastia presented in the prior post. How very Ubite of you. I suggest you read the conversation with caligastia page and Ubook people. Your act has been seen before as has your dishonest technique.

So let's see - who gets to be the arbiter of who is being aggrandizing? A BUREAUCRAT! Wonderful.

Ubites never ask question they want to hear an answer to and ignore any answer that doesn't conform with the prejudices they got from a book they can't source. Clearly my accelerated practices or the universal ones haven't served you well. Yet, come rapture, the numbers will speak for themselves.

>>I've noticed that a majority of your discussions center around politics. When Michael was incarnated as Jesus, he avoided political earthly affairs at all costs. Why don't you?

Really? Perhaps you should review the list of some of his incarnations. He's been the president of the United States. Forgive me, you only know what you've read in your book I shouldn't assume you'd collect valid sourcing.


>>It is interesting that you call the UB the Devils book of lies. I've found it to contain the highest concentration of truth than any other book I've encountered. You can use the UB for the liner of a litter box, but I'll stick to cat litter. A book doesn't make a good liner anyway.

Oh the truth is in there and truth is always an absolute. However, it requires one open their eyes when they read it rather than to give blind belief to unproveable propaganda.. You are the proving that you lack the wherewithall to see what is plainly in front of your face.

Perhaps your great UB intellect can answer the question.

We don't know why Caligastia did what he did.

If they don't know - how can they presume to the purported knowledge they spead like manure? Hmmmmm?

You also ignored the Biblical cite showing the division between the Ancient of Days and the Son of God. Unfortunately, we know who wrote the book of Daniel and Revelation. If you can produce Betty Boop from Alpha Centauri then we can consider the UB.

Now, I suspect you'll make some inane comment about my discourteous demeanor. After the first 1000 copies of you - it wears thin so I'll refer you to Caligastia's Definitions #1

1. Cast not pearls before swine.

a. Don't waste your time with idiots
b. Don't over value BS.
c. Don't beat a dead horse.
d. Don't hassle the small stuff.

[Caligastia Lanonandek]

Wally

It's well established (for me) that you accept only what you want to hear and want to establish a personal paradigm to justify making poor choices. Freewill comes with responsibilities and consequences - something else you dont want to accept.

Regardless, reality has the certainty of bighting you in the butt whether you want to accept it or not.

[mar10]

W
Reincarnation. Try working backwards from the position of assuming reincarnation for the common man is valid. Why would man need to reincarnate? If free will is also assumed, then everything before rapture is your free will - including reincarnation.

So, why would you choose to reincarnate? To take another shot at what you missed in the previous round. It has been reasoned to me that lifetimes are limited to a finite number of years (roughly 100 years max) for good reason. As we get older we learn less and less, and are less likely to make significant life changes either for better or worse. We stagnate.

So, learn from the framework. Man inherantantly stagnates on evolutionary momentum, and needs to reincarnate to get another chance. Even if you take reincarnation out of the equation, you are still left with "inherant stagnation". We ALL get set in our ways and our beliefs, and don't move forward. The key is to get unstuck - by being good and doing good. Sometimes when you are really stuck in the muck, you have to pull your feet right out of your boots and leave them behind. Get a new pair of boots and take a different path.

Marten

[elise]

Well now I will make an inane comment about your discourteous demeanor. Your angry ranting proved to me who you are more than what you said could have.

You are right. My trust is irrelevant and I did ignore your answer. 4 out of 5 is a better fraction than 1 out of 5. I honestly don't know what to think about that. But I'm a Ubite idiot right?

I find your personal attacks quite interesting. If you find answering my questions like casting pears before swine, then don't answer them in the first place. Seems a waist of a planetary princes time.

[Jeremiah]

Elise: it's quite obvious that he's only prince from la la land... there´s only one thing thou, that we could thank him, and that is providing us this forum so we could share ideas and learn from each others comments. peace to all.

[elise]

>>I've noticed that a majority of your discussions center around politics. When Michael was incarnated as Jesus, he avoided political earthly affairs at all costs. Why don't you?

>>Really? Perhaps you should review the list of some of his incarnations. He's been the president of the United States. Forgive me, you only know what you've read in your book I shouldn't assume you'd collect valid sourcing.

And your sourcing is valid?

[Adam]

"Elise: it's quite obvious that he's only prince from la la land... there´s only one thing thou, that we could thank him, and that is providing us this forum so we could share ideas and learn from each others comments. peace to all".



Jeremiah, The Prince has oversight over la la land because of the people who choose to ignore the truth. The Prince has written years ago that he invites new ideas (thought). Elise is looking for confirmation in a belief system. Learning is only a hope were there is no reasoning.
Reasoning demands that she answer Cals questions to the best of her ability. Line by line.

[david]

Matthew 12.32
And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come

Its perhaps just as well for those of us your are not in the know.

[ophello]

Elise: entering into this forum is like stepping into a movie theater half-way in and asking a stranger to tell you what happened for the last hour.

I recommend reading more on HQ and also taking the time to go through the old message forum archives. It is well-established here that the UB was written with the intent of deceiving, not informing or inspiring. If merely reading a book makes you certain you've found truth, you've found nothing. The funny feeling you get when you read the UB is not one of spiritual transformation or the evolution from 'lost' to 'born-again'. It is your beliefs being twisted before your eyes.

Truth with a capital 'T' is lived, discovered through experience, or granted from the Father – not read and dictated from the pages of an authorless tome.

[Caligastia Lanonandek]

Well now I will make an inane comment about your discourteous demeanor. Your angry ranting proved to me who you are more than what you said could have.

There is no anger in my ranting. Just long experience with the dishonesty employed by Ubites when they come here. Instead of playing 50 rounds of questions and answers wherein the majority of the answers are ignored, I prefer to cut to the chase and save myself a lot of time because I know you have no repect for the time you'd waste.


You are right. My trust is irrelevant and I did ignore your answer. 4 out of 5 is a better fraction than 1 out of 5. I honestly don't know what to think about that. But I'm a Ubite idiot right?

Well then, perhaps you ignored the Biblical cites showing your 'most high' ancient of days to be in conflict with the Son of God.

There are 3 basic types of Ubite. The casual reader to takes it as a maybe interesting work. The would be follower looking for something to believe in (other than traditional religion) and the true hard core believer who doesn't care for logic, reason and fact and is willing to employ dishonest and fascist dictims to enforce their view and will upon others. For these, free will and self determination are vulgarisms.

I find your personal attacks quite interesting. If you find answering my questions like casting pears before swine, then don't answer them in the first place. Seems a waist of a planetary princes time.

You haven't seen a personal 'attack'. The attack is on your dishonesty and you are quite correct, I find the Ubite mentality a waste of precious time. As you have no interest in the truth, there is nothing on HQ that could be of value to you.

I noticed still unanswer is

We didn't know why Caligastia did x y and z
nor
a Proving as to the source of the book you worship above reason.

Now, if you'd like to restart this conversation from a more reasoned place, I'm willing to have a go at it but don' insult my intelligence assuming you can play me for a chump.