Jump to content
Urantia Book Forum, conversations with other readers

Daniel Foster

Members
  • Content Count

    28
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Daniel Foster

  • Rank
    Poster
  • Birthday 11/29/1966

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    TQBloode
  • MSN
    Thackeray
  • Website URL
    http:// http://www.myspace.com/t_bloode
  • ICQ
    0

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    soCal
  • Interests
    God. Music engineering, theory, and jazz. Astro/quantum physics and chemistry. Cosmology. Poetry. <br /><br />purpose: realigning myself again for the real world and the workforce.
  1. There's a small train ride from the Foundation to a Bahai temple. It was a very peaceful quiet place to commune with the Father.
  2. The electric spark that is needed to activate and generate cloned cells is not the same spark as the Life Carriers used for life implantation on Urantia. Therefor clones would not be TA indwelt and would most likely never serve beyond the super universe levels very much like non-breathers.
  3. Vinny, I suggest going to the Foundation's web sight and making several searches using "death" along with the seven NDE mentions, however, I don't believe you'll find much as far as NDE. You will find much on the ascension plan or after death experience. Also type in "resurrection" and see what pops up before part 4. In part four read up on Lazarus. Enjoy.
  4. Although now the situation is different than thousands of years ago, there are similarities too. The race harmonization was undone then and it still is. The same basic rules still apply. There, Rock, your admittance. It should be well known within the readership that scientific method is not enough. Race harmonization in collusion with science is the answer. Our revelation is clear on this. Your provided quotes on the subject do not deny this. Good going :-) Leaving out racial amalgamation is selling our revelation short if not outright sinful potentially evil. History has blatantly shown that an individual master race within humanity is iniquitous. Good reading. The race info\papers of the UBook are NOT the controversial conundrum that "glancers" so perceive. More a "Non-issue" certainly more friendly and loving than many of those who peruse the papers allow which should indicate the large work ahead humanity has at realizing these matters much less actualizing our revelation.
  5. Scientific effort in collusion with racial amalgamation.
  6. Hello forum members, I'll be in Toronto the 17th -21st this month so I was wondering about study groups in the area I might attend. Daniel
  7. Actually a bust in the chops is what I'm vying for by the particular presentation I'm making of this discussion... I'm not asking whether or not we as readers discern metaphysics versus revelation. I'm actually pining to see if we as readers bring our preconceived notions of metaphysics with us into our understanding and dissemination of the Ubook. A good(ness) package? By itself that may be anything that meets the triune arrangement\qualifications of truth, beauty, and goodness? If we are looking at the reference I made something that falls short in one of those categories. My question is if something does fall short do we have the eyes of revelaton that allow us to see meanings and values? Or, do we by our preconcieved metaphysics, shy, cower, write off something; say a horror movie which took tremendous investigation etc. to appeal to our senses of reality? What about a piece of music by co ordination of three keys finds resolve in a diminished realm only to plummet into one of inharmonious distortions, dissonance, and blatting intonations?? Do we as readers see the beauty, truth and, goodness in inharmoniousness of artistic expression? If we can do that, can we by all means witness the quarantined native no matter how poorly delivered share his\ her ecstatic joys at acceptance of the ascension plan; the call to perfection of purpose? If we can do that can we who read the revelation enjoy the perils of a note\pitch deaf native of 606 completely raised ignorant of formalized religion, spirit, and survival capacities much less music sing a gangster rap song out of key not in tune staggering out of time and see the communion of something higher within them? Can we see that they mean to transcend their place in the space time continuum? That in the most crudest form worship is activated? Are Ubook readers already blinded by their preconceived notions of metaphysics to distort the full meaning of the Urantia book? These are my personal concerns. We know not to throw pearls before swine. Can we as bypassers see the smallest of worship traits? Can we develop appreciation of those traits by alligning ourselves the empathy to partially see into the history of an individual completely foriegn to the thrust of our lives; revelation and still reclaim that person in our hearts even selflessly serve them? For the record, Bill, I never found these forums. I was asked to join them when T-list disbanded (a daily activity) and because I have been an UAI member since 1999 or 2000 one of them. I held workshops at the USUA conference in Missourri last year. I know people like the page and line of a poster's ramblings, however, I'm putting our self realizations and responsibilities as readers to the observation board. Not applicable. Now exposed can we still answer these questions honestly? Moreover, do we value readers\members who can reach downwardly to those thirsty souls described? Even if to plant some memory seeds of the divine within such foriegn minds? These citations are slim when considering how we might distort the dissemination process with our own diehard "a hole so deep we can't climb out" as Jose mentions metaphysics. This could be a huge bundle of various non-connecting problems we as readers must face. It isn't truly lite and light is it? ...lighten light etc. such queer metaphysical pronounciations mean nothing from a so called TEAM category of readers. With revelation comes a yoke. The Jesus idealism quotes provided in this discussion do impart some answers to these. Just another reason I'm enjoying this discussion more than I had planned :-)
  8. The thrust of my intentions for raising a discussion. It turns out that my responses to this thread were being fed to the admin team here and not posted to these forums for viewing. I was replying from my email notifications. Neither had I the luxury of reading Jose's postings as well as Midsoniter's so unfortunately, I hadn't the information to address some issues and I don't know if my replies can be reclaimed. The following is my latest response: In no way at all do I have an apology to offer anyone here for my posting or for my ability to respond in a timely manner. You aren't playing 'pin the crypto on the clam' with me ;-) (snicker) That written, I want to make it clear that this was to promote a discussion about metaphysics and the revelation regardless of some personal meanderings on the subject over what I have observed through readers and non alike. I never said I was stepping up leading these discussions. Generally, I find that Ubook readers are excited\willing to share their knowledge of the revelation. Some of us get anxious over it ...tromping fat through the hallway...some of us get bruised. Moving away from the human smarm, I have to report that per usual the additions, quotes, and SOME comments proffered made the discussion much more interesting than expected. Quotes dealing with harmony, faith, unification, triunity (I'm thinking on bringing some of the absolutes into the discussion), the quotes Bonita provided from the Jesus papers where far from this mind and especially welcomed, John made direct hits on what I intended to share, Bill you have an impressive intellectual knowledge of the revelation. Is there a Daniel's Jesus? You're a funny guy, Bill. Has anyone of us thought to bring any "gravity" quotes to the subject? **Daniel writes: QUOTE It's as though many readers don't know the difference between thought, focus, gravitation, blindness, and expression ----------------------------- [John] Daniel, no one has yet given you an opening to explain these differences for us. But are they essential to the future of metaphysics? Metaphysics still must begin with Ontology (the study of the real) and carry its critique into the realms of the outer, objective cosmos (physical science) and the inner, subjective realm of mind. Better that we should start with actual elements of reality (as revealed):** No. Those cited differences where examples of mindal forces which become blurred by poor metaphysics the type one sees in modern bookstores, John, those usually don't begin with something stolid and real. In a way my intentions for these discussions are more a warning flag for readers not so much for UAI members per se though some qualify but new readers and a majority of the fellowship fringe range who'll soak up anything. I like to speculate about a FUTURE metaphysics, however what's being bandied about nowadays has far less value than Kerouac's "Some of the Dharma" the cream of the worst so I don't expect metaphysics is heading towards any upliftment any time soon it appears to be breaking down. If people submerged in current metaphysics were to read the revelation they would see through real and spiritual eyes. Another thing. Do we readers of the revelation blindly skim over truths, beauties, that are in front of us everyday because they might not be wrapped in a good(ness) package? Do our astute recognitions of spiritual fruits narrow our vision? Anyway, so far I'm happy with these discussions (which wasn't the point more an unexpected return) and I'll be back with more quotes after some study of the absolutes etc...even if everyone has dropped from the discussion at that point. personal note again: There are times I really love getting formal and wordy my brothers and sisters. I can be and have been as formal and intellectual as most of us. Please. Don't ask me to mimic your ideal. Demand page numbers when I want to have an informal discussion? Maybe since I've been lurking so long I'm being treated like a newbee, how refreshing. ~fine discussion so far folks and thankyou!
  9. Correct me if I'm wrong, doesn't the Ubook indicate that humans descended from the lemur side? This article may not mirror Ubook science exactly, however, I found this interesting. (CNN) -- Scientists hailed Tuesday a 47-million-year-old fossil of an ancient "small cat"-sized primate as a possible common ancestor of monkeys, primates and humans. Scientists say the fossil, dubbed "Ida," is a transitional species, living around the time the primate lineage split into two groups: A line that would eventually produce humans, primates and monkeys, and another that would give rise to lemurs and other primates. The fossil was formally named Darwinius masillae, in honor of the anniversary of Charles Darwin's 200th birthday. "This is the most complete primate fossil before human burial," said Dr. Jorn Hurum, of the Natural History Museum at the University of Oslo, who led the study of the fossil, a young female primate. "And it's not a few million years old; it's 47 million years old," Hurum said, speaking at a news conference at the American Museum of Natural History in New York. The fossil was discovered in 1983 in the Messel Pit, Germany, near Frankfurt, and had been until recently in private collections, according to an article published Tuesday in the scientific journal PLoS ONE, a publication of the Public Library of Science. However, because it was split into two parts, its significance was not immediately recognized. An international team of scientists, which Hurum led, conducted a detailed forensic analysis of the fossil for the past two years, the release said. Hurum nicknamed the fossil Ida after his young daughter, he said. The fossil's body is nearly complete; only part of one leg is missing, according to Hurum. In addition to the bones, the softer features are also preserved, as are the remnants of its last meal: fruits, seeds and leaves, which were found in Ida's gut, according to the scientists. "It's such a beautiful specimen," Hurum said of Ida. He said the fossil is about 2 feet long, "like a small cat in size." The fossil has both adult and baby teeth, indicating that it was weaned and about 9 months old when it died, the PLoS article said. She would have eventually grown to the size of a lemur, the article said. The young primate fossil does not have two crucial anatomical features found in lemurs: a grooming claw on the second digit of its foot and a fused row of teeth in the middle of its lower jaw, known as a toothcomb, the scientists said. X-rays revealed a broken wrist, which the team of scientists believe may have contributed to Ida's death, according to a news release from the museum at Oslo. Ida may have been overcome by carbon dioxide gas while drinking from the Messel lake, which was often covered by a low-lying blanket of the gas, the news release said. Hampered by the broken wrist, the young primate may have fallen into unconsciousness and may have slipped into the lake. The primate sunk to the bottom and was preserved for 47 million years, the news release said. Here's more:http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/20...link-discovery
  10. Metaphysics: Hole in reality not whole. I'm making an effort to begin a discussion on Metaphysics so I've decided to start with 'thinking is being'. Is it true what we focus on becomes realized, and if we give energy to darkness (thoughts, etc) then we in a way are helping create evil? how important it is, then to shun the dark thought, and embrace the truth (like a white hot flame: borrowed from singer/songwriter Howard Eisberg)..is that correct thinking? The Urantia Book has much to say on metaphysics and most of what is says about that are warnings about or shortfalls\pitfalls of. I hoping to pique a study on the subject of metaphysics, here, and so I'll refrain from posting any quotes in the hopes that people\readers will join the discussion. There are some great truths which can edify us in the Thinking is Being category. However, what I have observed in many readers is that they instinctively react towards any type of negativity with disdain. It's as if their personalities cower in the face of anything other than the fruits of the spirit. More apropriately their discernment of the fruits of the spirit is lacking. Some of the most beautiful musical melodies on Urantia are melancholic. That doesn't mean we should ignore them. To appreciate the mechanics of such a piece and the extraordinary power of thinking that went into designing and building such a piece is not meant to be ignored and neither is the musical piece itself. It's as though many readers don't know the difference between thought, focus, gravitation, blindness, and expression The metaphysics of 'thinking is being' is not an absolute power but it can make us gravitate towards what we are afraid of and helps us manifest that lesser scariness which sometimes can lead us to that particular reality because that's all we see and vice versa although not as dramatically on the versa side. If you look for the finer side you attract the finer things. My problem about it all is when people view that situation: Thinking is Being as an overall fact they're mistakenly wrong! People like that tend to flee from artistic expressions over that and it's stifling and sad to see them ignore whole parts of their lives because they don't know or can't handle the difference between thought, gravitation, feeling, and expression. It can be a truth that kills so many parts of believers. It is a dangerous path which requires astute assessment\discernment. It hurts me to see so many people that have allowed themselves abuse over this concept as they abuse others over it. Sharon Eiker a poet lady I was staying with a short time in Kansas City believed that such is an absolute power that if you don't think of it it can't happen. "Just wait until the unseen bites your silly bald butt.", is my retort. That 'Thinking is Being' is what we attract is a fine teaching but the way is a very narrow one. Usually, when we are gravitated towards a thing by mere power of thought is because we think of it so much that it becomes blinding. Our actions mimic the reality until it is realized then actualized. We may not see we think such a way or it is all we think about. It would be a far too easy world were such an absolute fact. You can think you are a millionaire and practically be penniless all your life. Believing your are rich won't make you rich by gravitation. Mindless uncontrolled thought and gravitation can easily lead to injury, however, and deposit us to a specialized reality by living it. It happens more naturally that way when concentrating on the negative versus concentrating on the positive. To have a positive outcome takes learning and work to rise above the visitudes... not mere thinking is being. All Metaphysics are not absolute. They all have great holes when you lay their stencils over the fabric of reality. What are your opinions, observations, and what does the Ubook say? :-) your bro Dan'l
  11. I know how it feels Carolyn, ~not being the greatest example dealing with chronic pain and dire self medication. Just know that we all are in debt to your services. Having met you personally I can say that I truly love you. Unification has is certain drawbacks...lets hope the teachings inspire the fruits of the spirit within us...ALL...someday. I haven't much interest since T-list but then again that was backwaters also. Since there are no more studygroups in my area I mean to be a "member at large" until I might pull something together myself. Since I moved to the state of Misery (the show me state) studygroups are remedial reading classes compared to the wonderful proactive people of SURF. I truly miss Miss Vanwoert, The Ploetzes, Shirley is in Hawaai, and I am thrilled to see Bart has moved into our area. I was so very thankful to see Patti and James at the American conference among so many others. The Ubook is music to my ears and I am able to sing every line please take time away as I had, Carolyn. Times and demeaners do change. I miss you. Mr. Daniel Foster
  12. I could not have put that more succinctly, Carolyn. Thank you
×
×
  • Create New...