1. Does it contain anything that could not have been known at the time? Why should anyone take it the least bit seriously? It has all the tedium of the Bible with none of the historical/ cultural value. Hey, according to wikipedia, two of the authors of the Urantia book used to be 7th Day Adventists. So there. Hi Spidergoat, There is a website that addresses the above called, "UBTheNews", *Can't post link* The site deals with the credibility of the book by giving examples of the history of planet earth contained in the Urantia Book (UB) that was not known at the time of the writing of this book. The book was published in 1955 but all the text contained therein had been completed by 1937. To the best of my knowledge nothing was added or subtracted from the book after that date. The UB claims that the historic and geologic information is 100% accurate while the scientific information will need to be updated in the future. The UB states: “…The laws of revelation hamper us greatly by their proscription of the impartation of unearned or premature knowledge. Any cosmology presented as a part of revealed religion is destined to be outgrown in a very short time. Accordingly, future students of such a revelation are tempted to discard any element of genuine religious truth it may contain because they discover errors on the face of the associated cosmologies therein presented.” “Mankind should understand that we who participate in the revelation of truth are very rigorously limited by the instructions of our superiors. We are not at liberty to anticipate the scientific discoveries of a thousand years. Revelators must act in accordance with the instructions which form a part of the revelation mandate. We see no way of overcoming this difficulty, either now or at any future time. We full well know that, while the historic facts and religious truths of this series of revelatory presentations will stand on the records of the ages to come, within a few short years many of our statements regarding the physical sciences will stand in need of revision in consequence of additional scientific developments and new discoveries.” I apologize if I am committing a breach of etiquette; this is my first post on this site…. I agree that this subject should be discussed on your “Religion page.” But the thread was started here, so here I am. Think I'll go check out the religion page now.