I don't take what you have to say to mean you are chiding I nor am I chiding de I
I fully agree with you that the Urantia can be distorted, i would actually say it is distorted in a lot of aspects - But is not he Urantia )(alone) where I get my reasoning, it would be a sad state of affairs if it was that publication alone I was basing my thoughts upon! - I am sure you would agree!
However to answer the points you raise:-
Regardless of whether Melchizedek is historical or not, it is not the person I am following it's the positive idea/concept/livity that I accept.
What I am saying is that things occur and get distorted by those who seek to circumvent the truth - as that is their purpose.
Truth is the truth, that which is not mis-truth or untruth but the truth, which is what we are trying to ascertain.
But the Truth
FAIR USE NOTICE:
This site may at times contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml