Talk:Urantia United

What is the real point of this article and why is it here? This is apparently a self-serving presentation by a single individual of his massive abridgement of The Urantia Book. Obviously anyone is entitled to play with their copy of the text of the book in any way they like; however, the presentation of this material in this location (complete with references back to the wikipedia Urantia entry) seems to convey an authority that is altogether absent. Since a naive reader of the UB could become terribly confused and misled by this approach, which is not at all representative of the book itself, I believe the article should be qualified to indicate that it in no way represents the conceptual content of the real book, nor does it reflect any generally accepted approach to abridgement. If this is the product of a seriously minded group of readers, rather than a single overly committed individual, that group should make itself known and open its work to discussion. Absent this, the article should be rewritten to emphasize that this abridged text is NOT The Urantia Book, is NOT representative of the contents of The Urantia Book, and is NOT supported by a community of knowledgeable readers of The Urantia Book.

This is not to say that a naive reader may not gain spiritual insight from reading this Reader's Digest version. The selected material is excellent and communicative. But there are very good reasons for not presenting this material in this manner, especially to inexperienced readers. Although it is taken from the Book, this is not very representative of the real Urantia Book. Any why is it in "Wikiversity" anyway? If I receive no replies to this note, I will proceed to edit the entry as I see fit. 68.55.164.69 21:09, 7 January 2007 (UTC)ldmjr@comcast.net


 * Please register a Wikiversity user name and edit the page. By definition, the content of the page is open to discussion. This topic is under the wing of the Wikiversity School of Theology and this applies: "Participants in the Wikiversity School of Theology use rational analysis and argument to discuss, interpret, and teach on any of a myriad a religious topics." --JWSchmidt 21:27, 7 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the comment. I will follow your advice about registering to edit when ready. I have brought the matter to the attention of The Urantia Book Fellowship and prefer to hear from other interested parties before just digging into what's here. There's no guarantee that what I changed would be an improvement since it's just one person's opinion. It is entirely possible the Fellowship will assign one or more people from their Education Committee to explore this in greater depth. Perhaps they would even take a constructive interest in fostering a group that might emerge around this broad topic. (Should one abridge the Book? Who? What? When? Where? Why? How? etc.) 68.55.164.69 23:00, 7 January 2007 (UTC)ldmjr@comcast.net

Urantia Book
We also have a new learning resource, Urantia Book intended to cover the UB in its original unabridged form as a study group and part of School:Theology. CQ 00:38, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

categories
Would it be good to add the categories Theology and/or spirituality to this page? Michael Ten (talk) 17:25, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't think it would hurt. I'll add them now, if they're not already there. Xaxafrad (talk) 01:56, 17 January 2013 (UTC)