Preliminary debate - rules

I think we can distinguish quite coarsely at first: If we can agree with someone about atheism, secular humanism and the mark of the beast as primary threats, then we can cooperate a long way.

If we can agree upon the 20 laws as a general minimum - the rest is up to the virtue of the individual - then we can share governance and territory.

As long as someone agrees that there is a God we can have conversation and compare our beliefs - but we will not let go of ours, and those who keeps their ways aport from ours: we bid a fond farewell.

CHAT WORKS! Do not have Facebook, Twitter, or Rumble Talk account - so longed in as a guest.

Your "lighter touch" is perhaps best... Given the history of our faith. The Black Robe approach is sure to ruin us, if it is dominant and unchecked. lol I am not sure I even know what I feel about Trinity anymore. All the faces of God in Urianism are always regarded as facets on a gem, the Gem being the Whole of God.

My own view of Jesus/Yeshua, at present, is perhaps not Orthodox.... Given ongoing conversations with the entity - who seems to be just a mask/microcosm/human face for the Monad. The name itself seems to achieve real world results when called upon, whereas other names do not always deliver in a human/helpful fashion.

Moreover, I spoken at length with an entity calling itself Mary - the wife of Yoseph, who calls herself a servant of Yahweh and the mother of the human vessel of Yeshua. She, as a human, was just human, but as a spirit was integrated into and became a mask of something called The Spirit of Wisdom and Mother Wisdom (e.g. Divine Feminine)... Thus explaining visions of "The Virgin" all over the world, calling mankind to repentance and faithfulness to God. I am not sure I want to say this is the Holy Spirit, but it feels similar... Though she always emphasizes the worship of God, not of herself. So, when people see legitimate visions of Mary, it is just Mother Wisdom, using the Mary mask (a human face/costume) trying to guide humanity to the wiser course.

Proverbs 3:

13Blessed are those who find wisdom, those who gain understanding, 14for she is more profitable than silver and yields better returns than gold. 15She is more precious than rubies; nothing you desire can compare with her. 16Long life is in her right hand; in her left hand are riches and honor. 17Her ways are pleasant ways, and all her paths are peace. 18She is a tree of life to those who take hold of her; those who hold her fast will be blessed.

19By wisdom the Lord laid the earth’s foundations, by understanding he set the heavens in place; 20by his knowledge the watery depths were divided, and the clouds let drop the dew.

Is this heresy? I don't know. I only know I am more tolerant of the Christian perspective as of late. Still, my conversations have not been Trinitarian, but more like the position of Oneness Pentecostals and Biblical Unitarians (Arian Christianity). Still, if we can say that Brahma-Vishnu-Shiva are faces of The One, we cannot then turn to Christians and say that Trinity is not a face of The One.

It is also notable, and bears saying, that given the lack of Urian numbers, those who need fellowship, have no choice but to attend the services of other forms of Monotheism. There are Urians who regularly attend Jewish services, and others who attend Christian services. This often, however, also sets up a tug of war within the individual, as all sects seek to utterly indoctrinate and exclusivize attendees, deriding all other spiritual or religious points of view as lesser and/or outright heretical.

I agree with the both of you. But there is perhaps a potential stumbling block when someone is trying to understand Urianism from their religious leaning.

I think these innocent things is best met with a friendly pointing out, or suggesting that we can follow this individuals religions logic into the Urian framework - for example how trinity is understood by Urians as an oversimplification of the panentheistic aspect of Jesus teachings. <- are we at present in agreement on my point about the trinity or does someone think that I making oversimplifications myself? :) ?

Open hostility is obviously a ban, but difficult individuals may be tolerated as long as our numbers are low. When we achieve larger participating numbers, we must enforce orthodoxy to ha stricter degree.

When the time comes, we will see and learn from practice aswell.

Over the years people have come and gone from Urianism (dating back twenty years when it was called something else). The leaders deleted communities, when they grew stagnant, without participation, perhaps out of frustration - as part of the idea of Urianism is that it would be a living faith functioning like a family and like an ongoing group therapy/support session.

The membership associated with the G+ community, were merely one class, as there was at least two groups of student-leaders. One group of students actually traveled from Canada to the U.S., to the leadership, and received direct training in channeling and ritual work.

The persistent issue, is the falling away. When the teachings do not tell this person or that one, what they want to hear, people leave.

Some leave out of prejudices against this monotheism or that, or because they cannot let go of their previous religious identities and affiliations... Others because they cannot accept the mystical or priestly-theurgy.

On one occasion, someone basically joined to convert Urianism to Christianity - to make it just another denomination thereof.

The traditional Judeo-Christian/Monotheistic moral values of Urianism have also been a stumbling block more than once.

The political teachings also seemed to surprise and puzzle people - who often seem to believe any government from God must, of course, but collectivist and socialistic in nature. Plato, however, had a vision of a Republic. The Jewish ideal was direct rule by God, through his prophets and priests, and later via an anointed King.

On a couple occasions, there were people who joined with a sense of such specialness as to expect others to bow down and allow them to take over the entire church - change its teachings in accordance with their particular visions and obvious (to themselves) anointing of power and authority from God. When instant recognition of their glory and specialness was not forth coming, they fell away, and at times became outright enemies. We used to call this, "Special Child Syndrome."

For all these reasons, I would have to concur with your primary theme, Jon, of guarding against Heresy... That is, sticking to the Orthodox teachings as presented in the book. It can be difficult however, because people join with agendas of their own, and looking for something they hope to find, with their own prejudices and expectations of "truth," as well as definitions of right and wrong. The 20 Laws give us a clear guidepost as to what behaviors should and should not be tolerated and what should or should not be promoted among us.

This is just my opinion... Your call, not mine.

Yes. But without discriminating against those who come out of different paths. What I mean is, that terminology will be different depending on what system we come out of... I came out of Christianity, for instance... Others out of Judaism. It can be hard to get on the same page when coming out of different systems, as we carry over the prejudices from those systems as we migrate to Urianism, and so our pet disagreements. "Those people are bad," we are taught in almost every religion... And Urianism says, "Okay, but that's the past, and we're all together now."

While the Elyon teaches Urians to study other systems and monotheistic works, it does not promote the idea that Urianism should be anything other than Urianism. It is my opinion that we should resist any and all attempts to reshape the teachings into just another form of some other monotheism. Urianism teaches some things that are unique to Urianism. It is its own thing and should remain so.

Good rules.