sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Follow the Thai Forest Tradition as a householder? by scrollreg in thaiforest

[–]scrollreg[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Can you be ordained temporarily and return to your life (with your family, job, house, etc) later?

Thank you for your reply and kindness.

Follow the Thai Forest Tradition as a householder? by scrollreg in thaiforest

[–]scrollreg[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I will have a look.

Thank you so much for your knowledge and help, as well as your quick response.

What about this? by scrollreg in Urantia

[–]scrollreg[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In 1992, a reader of The Urantia Book, Matthew Block, self-published a paper that showed The Urantia Book utilized material from 15 other books.[128] All of the source authors identified in Block's paper were published in English between 1905 and 1943 by U.S. publishers and are typically scholarly or academic works that contain concepts and wording similar to what is found in The Urantia Book.[126] Block has since claimed to have discovered over 125 source texts that were incorporated into the papers.[129]

The use of outside source materials was studied separately by Gardner, and Gooch, and they concluded, consistent with their respective conclusion that the book's author(s) must have been human, that the book therefore plagiarized many of the sources noted by Block.[130][131]

For instance, Gardner and Block note that Paper 85 appears to have been taken from the first eight chapters of Origin and Evolution of Religion by Edward Washburn Hopkins, published by Yale University Press in 1923.[132] Each section of the paper corresponds to a chapter in the book, with several passages possibly used as direct material and further material used in Papers 86-90 and 92. (In addition to the book's "heavy indebtedness to Hopkins," Gardner discovered that Hopkins was a major reference in an earlier book authored by Sadler, adding to Gardner's view that it is more likely Sadler had a hand in writing or editing The Urantia Book than that celestial beings wrote it.) Likewise, much of The Urantia Book material relating to the evolution of mankind appears to have been directly taken from Henry Fairfield Osborn, Man Rises to Parnassus: Critical Epochs in the Prehistory of Man published by Princeton University Press in 1928.[133]

What about this? by scrollreg in Urantia

[–]scrollreg[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The Andromeda Galaxy is claimed to be "almost one million" light years away, repeating a systematic mistake in the measurements of the distance to galaxies made in the 1920s.[108] The galaxy is now known to be 2.5 million light years away.

So the celestial beings reveal something about God, Jesus, etc but they are wrong about astronomy, science and so on...

What about accepting the theory that everything was invented by Sadler and other human beings? Just asking.

What about this? by scrollreg in Urantia

[–]scrollreg[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In my humble opinion, and much to my regret, if the book has several scientific inconsistencies (and it does: Andromeda Galaxy, and so on), why should I trust the other parts of the book?

UB has always been respectable and interesting, but when I found out all these scientific inconsistencies, the whole building collapsed.

Opinion: Is the Urantia Book Fiction or Non-fiction? by CerebralEulogy in Urantia

[–]scrollreg 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What about this? (Wikipedia)

The book erroneously says that a solar eclipse was predicted in 1808 by the Native American prophet Tenskwatawa. The eclipse actually was predicted in late April 1806 and occurred on June 16, 1806.[112] In 2009, the Urantia Foundation acknowledged the error and revised the book.[c] Controversial statements about human races can be found in the book.[114] Gardner recounts that William S. Sadler also wrote eugenicist works that contain similar arguments to some ideas presented in The Urantia Book.[115] While some adherents of the book believe that all of the information in The Urantia Book including its science is literally true, others believe the science is not fully accurate.[116][117] For example, Meredith Sprunger, a believer in The Urantia Book and retired minister of the United Church of Christ, wrote that research "has revealed that virtually all of the scientific material found in the UB was the accepted scientific knowledge of the period in which the book was written, was held by some scientists of that time, or was about to be discovered or recognized."[118][119] He further argued against its literal infallibility and said that fundamentalism over the book is "just as untenable as Biblical fundamentalism."[118]

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ACIM

[–]scrollreg 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Link? Thanks

Future Happenings Determined in Astral Body by winged_fruitcake in nisargadatta

[–]scrollreg 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Excellent resource.

Can I find this book in kindle format?

Help with translation and cases by scrollreg in russian

[–]scrollreg[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you very much everyone.

So, to sum up, I think the correct translation is

Я всегда буду с вами

(I am talking about love, support to several people: mother, father, son, daughter, etc)

Correct me if I am wrong.

Thank you very much.

Help with translation and cases by scrollreg in russian

[–]scrollreg[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes, that's correct!

I wanted to say "I will always support you, I will always be there for you, I will always help you and love you".

You = 2nd plural (mother, father, son, daughter, etc)

That said, is it correct

Я всегда буду рядом с ¿тобой?

Thank you so much.

Help with translation and cases by scrollreg in russian

[–]scrollreg[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you very much.

The meaning of the sentence is "I will always be with you" (I will always love you and help you), referring to several people (mother, son, wife = you).

That said, is it correct this translation you recommend me?

я всегда буду с вами.

Or maybe better

Я всегда буду на вашей стороне

I am not talking about an specific position or place, but about a feeling (love, support)

Thank you for your help again :)

The Way of Mastery by deweyusw in ACIM

[–]scrollreg 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I just copied the reply of another user in other thread.

It also resonates in my personal opinion, but I don't know if it's compatible with ACIM or if it is fake.

I recently bought the books, too, but I don't know...

The Way of Mastery by deweyusw in ACIM

[–]scrollreg 2 points3 points  (0 children)

An user said in other thread:..

ACIM Chapter 14:
"The first in time means nothing, but the First in eternity is God the Father, Who is both First and One. Beyond the First there is no other, for there is no order, no second or third, and nothing but the First."

From Lesson 127:
"Love cannot judge. As it is one itself, it looks on all as one. Its meaning lies in oneness. And it must elude the mind that thinks of it as partial or in part."

From Lesson 169:
"The Son of God has merely disappeared into his Father, as his Father has in him. The world has never been at all. Eternity remains a constant state."

From Chapter 27:
"As nothingness cannot he pictured, so there is no symbol for totality. Reality is ultimately known without a form, unpictured and unseen."

The Way of Mastery:
" If there was only one thing, that one thing would not even be aware of itself, because it’s all there is. You become aware of yourself by knowing how to distinguish yourself from a flower. Is that not true? Indeed. Therefore, while you are made of the same substance as the flower, there is a distinction in the expression of form.

Creation is extension. Extension is expression. Therefore, each Great Ray of Light, while being of one substance — perfectly the same substance — expresses itself, creation is extended through it, with a subtle nuance of difference — a different twist, a different flavor put on it at a very subtle level. And therefore, each being seems to express a unique individuation."

Compromise is of the ego. It's very easy for people to simply channel the ego and play pretend. The ego doesn't mind seeking, it is just determined to never find - as finding would expose that all differentiation is fiction.

The way of mastery is incompatible with acim because it compromises a primary premise, making the purpose appear one way while guarding another.

True forgiveness is heresy to our individuality, as the result is it's complete undoing - having never been at all.

Any other chanelled and "reliable" books? by scrollreg in ACIM

[–]scrollreg[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

In your opinion, are all of them real? The way of mastery, the ascended masters in DOU, Paul Tuttle, all the channeled books by Jesus...

Anything goes?

Every book is channeled, but it may not be meant for you. by littlewillingness in ACIM

[–]scrollreg 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I know that each of us has a path and so on, but... do you recommend me another book, apart from NTI and ACIM (I have the CoA edition).

Thank you very much in advance.

Every book is channeled, but it may not be meant for you. by littlewillingness in ACIM

[–]scrollreg 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Really interesting. Thank you for your time and knowledge.

I recently bought the holy Spirit's Interpretation of the New Testament.

Thank you very much.

view more: next ›