The Neanderthal Mystery That Isn’t

For years scientists continue to be baffled about the origin and migration patterns of the Neanderthalers. They continue to be suprised, and then therefore need to constantky recalibrate their data with every new discovery. Indeed, this race of early man provides great intrigue, mainly because of one single quedtion. Why did they failed to survive?

I posit, because of my knowledge of the historical accuracy of the Urantia Book text, much time and energy could be saved if the science community would at least consider what the Urantia revelation can offer in terms of concrete data that might aid in accelerating new discovery.

For example, this most recent discovery has to do with a genome seqeuence of one particular fossil of a male that contains a unique signature not usually found with any previous Neanderthal fossil.

This specimen indicates that this new Neanderthaler came from an even earlier hominid species – much older than previously thought, a species that existed more than 700,000 years ago, which means Neanderhalers existed much longer than the current 150,000 year timeline.

The Urantia Book states emphatically that 750,000 years ago this race (The Neanderthal species) emerged from a tribe of homo sapien (whom they call The Badonans of what is now Northwest India), and further, this robust new species lasted for more than 500,000 years, until the superior colored Sangik tribes (whom Science refers to as the homo sapien sapien) wiped them out).

The Urantia Book also says Neanderthalers earliest fossil records can be found in the Swahilik Vallet in Northwest India, start there. This is where Neanderthalers came from. Not Africa, not Europe, but India.

There most be a treasure-trove of fossils ready to be discovered which would excite any anthropologists or archeologist looking to secure a Nobel Prize.

Most, if not all new discoveries about this mysterious race were documented in 1934, when the Urantia Book was written.

But sadly, even after so many validations of the past six decades, Science continues to ignore this great revelation of pre-human history.

Mankind’s Next Important Chapter

I want to share some thoughts having to do with the study of Paper 81 on The Development of Civilization – how we got here and what happens next.

For those who are not familiar with who the Adamites and the Nodites were, these names reference ancient superior races who were descended of Adam and Eve, as well as a previous race of “Mighty Men of Old’ (Genesis 6:4) who are identified as the Nodites (‘In the land of Nod, where Cain found a wife” (Genesis 4:16).

On the advice the Revelators give for maintaining civilization in the face of our modern challenges, the underlying lessons I see from Paper 81 are important to understand.

These are surely unprecedented times, the accumulation of the ages forcing us to adapt as no other generation before us has ever had to face. Needless to say the message is loud and clear: Things are changing and you need to be prepared!

Paper 81 summarizes two key points:

1) That we are the end result of hundreds of thousands of years of evolutionary hard labor, coupled with the help of advanced races of the past.

2) That because we are “plunging forward” with the “accumulated momentum” of the previous few hundred thousand years of evolution, a spiritual foundation (or renaissance) is now needed to keep society from breaking down.

The Nodites, Adamites and the mixed Andites started out as spiritually superior races and cultures, as well as also being biologically superior. They have now been completely absorbed into the six primary races of mankind (and the earlier aboriginal Andonites, as well). We are what remains, and so now that we have benefitted from this collective soup of human genomes, both of a divine and a materially progressive order, perhaps now we can start to progress in our spiritual attainment in the coming age. 

The revelators say the next age will be marked by the desire to improve our “quality of thinking.” 

Our intellectual progress AND our spiritual perception must be improved if we are to withstand and control the tidal wave of accumulated momentum that is pushing us forward with breakneck speed.

And that is the challenge, isn’t it?

If mankind is to take that very next important evolutionary step towards world peace and brotherhood, we must improve our thinking, as well as our spiritual understanding of things; not just with the pre-occupation of knowledge alone, but also of meanings, values, purposes, eternal concepts and long-term goals of spiritual-as well as intellectual discovery.

I can’t say it any more plainly than this. But perhaps the late great thinker Steve Allen said it best, echoed by the late-great comedian George Carlin:

“We need to stop being stupid.”

Why Urantians’ Should Pay Attention To China

As of this writing, it can be confirmed through numerous and reliable sources that the government of China, the largest government on the planet, is routinely harvesting organs, primarily from religious people who have been imprisoned for being found guilty of the egregious crime of displaying their faith in God.

The Epoch Times, for example, documents as many as 3,000 recent cases where people from South Korea, Africa snd Middle East have traveled to Chinese hospitals to recieve organs, with wait times no longer than a few weeks.

For a Urantian, a person who is familiar with the historical roots of spirituality, this is an unprecedented horror. That a country five times more densely populated than the United States, can, with unfettered ability, persecute people in the form of removing their organs simply because the believe in God, Jesus, Buddhist, or Allah, is beyond reprehensible, and marks a very dark chapter in the annals of human history.

Such methods of human governance also perfectly illustrates why it is so neccessary to have God in our conscience. If ours was a secular government which denied that we were “endowed by our creator,” then we too would have a government that puts its own selfish needs before the dignity of the human spirit. And there is always this ever-present danger if we don’t, as a people, protect religious liberties.

Our ignorance, or our unwllingness to confront organ harvesting within China’s borders is a battle cry for every person of faith who believes something should be done to help save every Falun Gong, Christian or Uyghur Muslim alive today who faces this kind of torture.

I will compose a follow up article on what I think could be a viable step towards helping the prisoners of conscience in China if I can reach 1000 interested readers.

I hope you will share this message.

Below is a 4-part audio summation of this report.





Jim Watkins is 30-student of The Urantia Book, a national media consultant, author and former network talk show producer and host of the Candidly Speaking political blog and podcast

To My Fellow Humanist, No Thanks

by Jim Watkins

A group called Good Without God wanted its city to remove a cross that was erected to honor a World War I veteran.

The case, like many, seeks to uphold the seperation of Church and State, with which I firmly agree. The State should never foster or inhibit religion, it’s in our Constitution, and it is relevant because no government should ever pick sides on which faith it supports.

But by the same token, Good without God is a misnomer. How can good without God be real? Good comes from God, good is God in action, his three personality traits are Truth, Beauty and Goodness. God is the source of all that is good, for goodness would not be possible unless human beings could percieve such a divine attribute; as spiritual beings we observe good, therfore, Good Without God contradicts reality.

I understand there are people who choose to believe there is no such thing as God. To many the idea is slavish, unreasonable and archaic. Humanism is exalted as altogether reasonable; hence it becomes defacto materialistic to assume that since no one can prove God exists, such a belief is unreasonable.

But Humanists miss the point. To assume there is no deity is to profess ignorance of origins. We have no idea why human will creatures have evolved, Science can tell us how, but not why.

Only a belief in a first or original source personality can explain why there is personality. If all things material have a source point of origin, then where does individual perception, personality interpretation find its beginnings?

The ‘why’ is God’s purpose.

If one chooses to believe there is no ‘why’ or purpose to the existence to life, then that is a belief system, a postulate that is also unverified.

An argument could be made that any Athiest group who demands the removal of religious symbols is asking for the prohibtion of religion – which is unconstitutional – and is asking the government to assert on one specific belief system or the other. In this case a non-believer is asserting his/her non-belief as factual, but unverifiable, over another who does believe in deity purpose, a belief which is also yet unverifiable.

Here’s the irony. That such sons of God should debate the ethics of governing is in and of itself, proof of mans’ desire to be godly and more perfect in his governorship, a spiritual principle.

To the Humanist, no thanks. I’ll stick with my belief system until you can prove to me that God does not exist.

The Safety of Non-Belief

Western secularism has a done a terrific job at inoculating people from having faith or conviction.  We call them “the Nones,” people who aren’t particularly religious, and except for perhaps some minor flicker of faith in some vague notion of providence or the “common good,” most Nones are happy not believing in anything.

And there is a good reason for this.

Dr. Jordon Peterson explains in one of his many dissertations that “failure to engage means not having to say you are sorry for being wrong.” In other words, if you don’t believe in anything you don’t run the risk of being wrong, or being disappointed. For example, if you don’t believe in heaven (since you can never really know for sure until you die), then it won’t matter anyway. If it’s there, we’ll find out.

Most people have this same feeling towards religion.

One person told me “all religions say the same thing, and yet they all say they are “the truth. Who knows what the truth is? or even if there is truth?”

Another person once quipped, “why spend so much time believing in something you can never know is true?” In both scenarios, non-belief requires no action, no engagement, no risk.

But to those who are willing to engage and put their beliefs on the line, there is tremendous gain, and sometimes horrific loss. But you have to put it out there, you do have to have a dog in the race.

I can be committed to the environment or to Krishna, it doesn’t matter, I am making an emotional commitment to being involved because I believe there is a payoff to my emotional contribution; there is something I wish to gain. This is the same when it comes to having religious faith.

I have no doubt that many people of many faiths also feel love and comfort because of their religious faith. In a sense, the comment, “all religions are essentially saying the same thing is a true statement, because one thing (good) religions have in common is that they offer the personal religious experience, the payoff, and something you can never have if you are not religious, just as a person who, in Peterson’s model of social engagement, can never experience career success or relationship success if one never “puts it out there,” and risks rejection or failure.

For the Nones it’s a matter of being non-committed, and therefore, safety in non-belief.

Religion may very well be an invention of man to make him feel better, or it could also be something that is in our DNA because it was put there to drive our spiritual curiosity. Survey after survey says that people who have faith live happier lives, just as it is probably true that people who work hard have better careers or more satisfying lives. When your will becomes self-identified with a cause, any cause, you are engaged and the payoff is commensurate with the effort

Without engagement, there is no payoff, there is only sameness.

To the point of the second comment as to why anyone would choose belief in anything that cannot be proven in our lifetime, I believe this attitude is the result of secular culture that has been a part of the fabric of the Occidental West since the 17th and 18th Century. To paraphrase Allen Bloom from his 1990’s book The Closing of the American Mind,” it is easier to believe in nothing if you just believe in everything

Truth has become relative in our culture, it has become a shape-shifting, in congruent notion of evolving thought, aways in motion, subjective to the times and thoughts of the people. Except that in this scenario truth becomes non-absolute, and without absolutes there is no touchstone, no standard, no foundation on which to build. Truth may be relative to us, but this does not mean truth is relative. It only means we are growing in awareness of truth, which is what religious faith offers. Not truth in whole, but truth in awareness.

This is why God is elusive to many people, because they don’t want absolutes, it means they have to agree and be held accountable to that absolute; it means they have to adhere to something that is real and has meaning and is not subject to change. Gravity is an absolute. Thought (the ability to reason) is an absolute. Many argue God is the ultimate Absolute, or as the Urantia Book states, the “only un-caused cause.”

I could quote one of my favorite past time phrases which says that “it’s better to believe in God and be wrong than to not believe and be wrong,” but I really rather wish to close by offering advice to those people who truly believe there is nothing to believe in with conviction, or who subscribe to the belief that all truth is relative, and that message is this:

What gives religion its greatest appeal is that through faith, a will to know, God can be experienced now; you don’t have to wait until whatever happens after this life to find out jf God really exists. It is within each of us to know that answer now. All it takes is a little engagement – and a willingness to risk being wrong.

What a shame that so many people, if they would only have faith and engage in their spiritual potential, would discover the very spirit that eludes them because of their own present disbelief.

It is equally shameful that people are taught not to have confidence in themselves or in the spiritual quest. Religion may be man’s expression of his faith, this is true, so to some extent religion is man’s invention, a physical way to express spiritual feelings. but the real joy comes from experiencing your own faith firsthand.

Having faith requires risk to be sure, but the rewards are far greater than having no faith at all, which is to say you have no dog in this race and no payoff because there’s no investment of self.

To be safe therefore, is to not grow in awareness of truth.