http://urantiabook.org/archive/science/ginsss2.htmScientific Predictions of The Urantia Book
by Irwin Ginsburgh, Ph.D., and Geoffrey L. Taylor
The Urantia Book contains much scientific information that was revealed between 1925 and 1935 to an individual who cared little about the material. Some of this information disagreed with science's version. Half a century later, some of this originally conflicting information now agrees with science, and some still does not. The information deals primarily with creation of the universe, the Earth and man, as well as the fundamentals of matter and energy. Theories about these kinds of subjects evolve as science matures, and some of science's ideas change. These changes have brought about the new agreement between science and The Urantia Book, and the now agreeing Urantia information can be considered to have been predictions.
The authors consider about thirty predictions that are in their areas of expertise or interest, but there are many others in the book. Science does not now know some of the information in the book. There is a distinct possibility that some of this Urantia information may also turn out to be scientific predictions in the future. If more of these predictions ultimately agree with science, it will give the scientific part of The Urantia Book an authenticity that will enhance the believability of the rest of the book. The authors examine about thirty scientific predictions in The Urantia Book, compare them with science's versions, see how much agreement we can find, and how much more we can anticipate. Those predictions that now agree with science and that partly agree constitute about one-third of all the predictions considered. This can be considered remarkable. Most predictions have yet to agree, but this is to be expected of a book with a very long life. More prediction analysis is warranted in the future, as is more detailed study of individual predictions.
Introduction
After studying The Urantia Book, one comes to grips with a personal question: Is the book completely correct or only partially so? Of course, one could take it all on faith and believe it completely. To help make this choice, we will examine the book's scientific information. The scientific information in the book that we will consider was either unknown to science in 1935 or differed from information generally accepted by science in 1935. Some of this information now agrees with science and can be considered predictions of what science would discover after 1935. We will examine some of these predictions and see how many now agree with science. If enough of them do, they can enhance the believability of the rest of The Urantia Book. However, we must remember that, presently, science only deals with the physical world, while the book deals with physical, spiritual and other matters.
Much of the scientific information in the book agreed with science, but some differed. Where they differed, the subjects cover matters such as creation of the universe, creation of our world, creation of life, fundamentals of energy, etc. Many of these subjects cannot be tested in a laboratory. Science's theories about such matters are designed to fit the available evidence. Historically, some theories change with time as science matures and new data become available. Those 1935 disagreements which now agree with science provide a unique way of testing the validity of the scientific part of The Urantia Book. The remaining disagreements may agree in the future, and these could provide additional confirmation of the scientific part of the book.
more>>>>>
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(605 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
