Introduction of friends
aumorchestra
took for Deborah (BC). My apologies to both.
please welcome Deborah as a new contributor. She is writing blogs and
inspires me on other lists. So, dear Deborah, what can we do to
distinguish you with Debroah (BC). Maybe Debinsky is a solution. But
plerase introduce yourself to this wonderful board.
The only ACIM board in the Universe where God's Children have to
moderate themselves gladly. Or not :-)
oneLove, maz
www.acimradio.net
Deborah
Thanks, Maz. "Debinski" works for me, but with an "i" not a "y" so as
to ensure that I am recognized as an "ignorant pollack" -- with my
apologies to any other "pollacks" here -- whether ignorant or not. I
speak only for myself. I might add that I am blonde as well. Or once
was anyway and still am thanks to the wonderful, magical use of
peroxide. So, if you happen to read any of my comments, please
remember I am just another dumb, blonde pollack and don't take
anything I may or may not write too seriously. I am often rather vocal
about anything attributed to Jesus and have been too busy the past
couple of days stirring up "controversy" over Molly Thompson's claim
that she is one of only two people officially "authorized by Jesus" to
explain A Course in Miracles to the rest of us peons to get too
involved in discussions here. For which you may just want to give
thanks to God.
Debinski
Deborah
Debinski
> This is a test to see if my handle changed this time!
Test number 2 of 3. I WILL get this!
maz
"Debinski" <debdan...@yahoo.com> schreef in bericht
news:c26c39da-68a7-44a4...@s31g2000yqs.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 20, 12:48 pm, Deborah <debdaniel...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> This is a test to see if my handle changed this time!
>> Test number 2 of 3. I WILL get this!
pURfect! We passed.
;-) oneLove, maz
Philomene
> On Nov 18, 3:24 pm, aumorchestra <maz.we...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > LOL, fam, just arrived is Deborah not from (BC) which I mistakenly
> > took for Deborah (BC). My apologies to both.
>
> > please welcome Deborah as a new contributor. She is writing blogs and
> > inspires me on other lists. So, dear Deborah, what can we do to
> > distinguish you with Debroah (BC). Maybe Debinsky is a solution. But
> > plerase introduce yourself to this wonderful board.
>
> > The only ACIM board in the Universe where God's Children have to
> > moderate themselves gladly. Or not :-)
>
> > oneLove, mazwww.acimradio.net
>
> Thanks, Maz. "Debinski" works for me, but with an "i" not a "y" so as
> to ensure that I am recognized as an "ignorant pollack" -- with my
> apologies to any other "pollacks" here -- whether ignorant or not. I
> speak only for myself. I might add that I am blonde as well. Or once
> was anyway and still am thanks to the wonderful, magical use of
> peroxide. So, if you happen to read any of my comments, please
> remember I am just another dumb, blonde pollack and don't take
> anything I may or may not write too seriously. I am often rather vocal
> about anything attributed to Jesus and have been too busy the past
> that she is one of only two people officially "authorized by Jesus" to
> explain A Course in Miracles to the rest of us peons to get too
> involved in discussions here. For which you may just want to give
> thanks to God.
>
> Debinski
Who is Molly Thompson? What does she teach about ACIM?
Please don't tell me the other authorized teacher is Ken Wapnick.
Debinski
>
> - Show quoted text -
As far as I can tell no one knows who the second "approved teacher" is
but I don't think it's NOT Ken Wapnick as this "new teaching" is being
called "Phase II" -- which left me with the impression "Jesus" has
decided to pass the golden sceptor on to Molly Thompson. Apparently,
Gary Renard failed the test. <smile> Molly Thompson is a "mental
health professional" who claims to have been working with Jesus "in
spirit" for 25 years. She says she is channeling Jesus AND at the same
time has achieved such an astoundingly superior ability to recognize
what ego is up to that "Jesus" now wants the rest of us to know that
only she and one other person have completed "Phase I" of the Course
teaching and are therefore capable of teaching the rest of us how to
"recognize ego" and "uncover guilt." I probably wouldn't have given
her a second thought if an invitation to join in a study group of her
materials hadn't been extended to me. I mean it's not unusual for
someone or another to make such claims. What surprised me was that
some teachers I respect are not only supporting and promoting her
teaching but justifying her claims to exclusivity: In her own words
(or I mean in "Jesus words") here's her message "To Teachers of A
Course in Miracles":
"Up to now, I have not intervened into the activities of students of
A Course in Miracles. They could do whatever they wished, for example,
they could teach, publish web sites and books, write blogs and so
forth all during this period when I was testing out my Spiritual Path.
But now I have begun to ask serious students no matter how long they
have studied A Course in Miracles to first consider their preparedness
for Phase II and if they determine they are prepared after carefully
considering all the requirements, then I want them to just begin
practicing the Process of Forgiveness in a certain way. Also, I want
leaders of Study Groups and students in them to follow certain
guidelines relating to how these Groups function. These changes are
all in the best interests of students because the Path that I am
laying out will expedite their spiritual advancement in the best way
possible. Therefore, the Post below called “Overview of Phase II,
Study Group Procedures & The Beginning Process of Forgiveness,” which
includes Section 1-3 is important to read because this material
discusses these changes and how to go about them.
Since there are many students of A Course in Miracles teaching A
Course in Miracles, I am asking that these teachers follow and begin
to implement what I have presented in the aforementioned Post too.
Overall, I am aware that many teaching Centers and their teachers
depend upon teaching A Course in Miracles to make a living. Anyone who
is doing this is also being asked to focus their teaching efforts on
the preparatory work that is necessary in order for students to begin
Phase II where they will work with me or work with a Master Teacher
Guide I have assigned to a student whom I have trained to guide and
help students in many special ways. All the preparatory work needs to
be done from the Text, A Course of Miracles, and from this blog.
If you have any questions, please refer them to Molly Thompson using
her e-mail of mtho...@aol.com
Sincerely yours,
Jesus
Written through Molly Thompson
http://miraclemethod4forgiveness.wordpress.com/
Debinski
Debinski
>
> Sincerely yours,
>
> Jesus
>
> Written through Molly Thompson
>
> http://miraclemethod4forgiveness.wordpress.com/
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
I guess I left out the "best part."
"Again, I want to reiterate, unless a student has gone through this
Second Phase with Jesus, and so far only Molly and one other student
have done this effectively, they cannot know what the ego is up to.
Therefore, at this time, *** it is incumbent upon students *** to put
their trust in what Jesus is asking them to do and thus refrain from
all types of teaching so they do not further maintain and reinforce
their ego in any of the ways mentioned above [publish books on A
Course of Miracles, give workshops, write blogs, setup and run forums
on the Internet and have Web Sites devoted to information on A Course
in Miracles]."
maz
Look up yahoo group the peace of god.
molly is a group facilitator who pissed off
debinski because there are claims of specialness
in there. But the overall theme of this hype is: <paraphr>
STOP preaching, START PRACTICING (guilt digging, receptive listenening, be
still in right mind, repeat proces) for the next 10 years please.
lol
but seriously, debinski imo just can't stand the mirror of authority claims.
so did i. Doug thompson endorsed it, ted poppe endorsed it, and i want to
say I only endorse EVERYONE speaking from his/her own Guidance, EVEN if
there a flaws in it....
The idea is timely, the content is ok, the form is a bit clumbsy.
I have asked Debinski, who got all wound up, on POG:
"Deb, It would imo make more sense to ie. publically dismantle the apparent
anti-christ course alien teachings of Ken Wapnick who seems to mislead many
people on a grand scale than pay attention to some minor perpetuation of the
authority fallacy in particular study groups. And that's just me. ;-)"
1love, maz
>> Please don't tell me the other authorized teacher is Ken Wapnick.
Wapnick is a great teacher in how not to do it. And I authorize him to be a
deluded but well-intentioned sweet brother.
To be Precice, John:
I found the 1825 Prophecy of Jacob Lorber. Jesus told him 150 yrs ago that
one day The 2nd coming will hapen as INFORMATION in the INFORMATION age with
fax.email and telephone. Ken just fulfilled the Prophecy part 1.
Now we are to share the UR for all future generations.
We are blessed.
peace, maz
Debinski
>
> - Show quoted text -
You can't say I didn't warn you I tend to get a bit vocal when people
claim "Jesus says" and proceed to say things *I* don't think anyone in
their right mind could ever believe "Jesus said." But since you DID
ask, anyone interested in my views on the subject can find my blog
posts -- "Approved Teachers?" and "Approved Teachers - Part 2" here:
Maz says she's just a teacher of a small study group and if I want to
get my panties in an uproar about something why NOT go after Ken
Wapnick? But I figure he's already got enough of the "big guns" going
after him. I do set my sights on Renard from time to time though.
<smile>
maz
> I found the 1825 Prophecy of Jacob Lorber. Jesus told him 150 yrs ago that
> one day The 2nd coming will hapen as INFORMATION in the INFORMATION age
> with fax.email and telephone. Ken just fulfilled the Prophecy part 1.
PS Lorber's prohpecy says its going to be in BOOKS spread around the globe
in many languages when people have learned to read and write, and he will
dictate through the hearts of open minds. If I find the quote i'll post it.
I think i have posted it already, but my mind is distracted right now.
1love, maz
maz
LOL you're such a gem, debinski. Don't you understand that the highest
pedestal is the first to knock down, i mean in Peace and Love and
Compassion. Philomene has the best insight into fallacies by psychologists
trying to do philosophy.
BTW i had a miracle the other week. An interview tih personal assistent of
Renard, Linda McNabb. If That is what Gary's book do to people, I have no
problem at all with his bullshit any more. Case closed lol Christ is King.
maz
Carrie
there a flaws in it....
Don't see there being any other way.
Flaws in it would be coming from the one seeing them?
Carrie
>
> You can't say I didn't warn you I tend to get a bit vocal when people
> claim "Jesus says" and proceed to say things *I* don't think anyone in
> their right mind could ever believe "Jesus said." But since you DID
> ask, anyone interested in my views on the subject can find my blog
> posts -- "Approved Teachers?" and "Approved Teachers - Part 2" here:
>
> http://ddanielski.xanga.com/
>
> Maz says she's just a teacher of a small study group and if I want to
> get my panties in an uproar about something why NOT go after Ken
> Wapnick? But I figure he's already got enough of the "big guns" going
> after him. I do set my sights on Renard from time to time though.
> <smile>
Why go after anyone?
Debinski
I don't mean "go after" anyone personally, Carrie. I'm just fooling
around with Maz who thinks I'm pissed at people. I don't know Gary
Renard, Ken Wapnick OR Molly Thompson. I just don't much like
teachings being attributed to Jesus. Especially things that sound like
the exact opposite of what *I* think Jesus would say. Heck, if I could
find anyone who could explain how it is helpful to believe the goal of
A Course in Miracles is the disappearance of the universe. Or why the
Course says "God is the universe" and "God is in everything I see"
when what it "really means is God isn't even aware of the universe or
anything I see," I would rejoice! But thus far, the only explanation I
ever get is "A good God couldn't have created this evil world."
Debinski
george
Evil is only in the mind that wants it. Evil doesn't exist in truth.
The world and EVERYONE in it are not evil if seen through the loving
vision of the Holy Spirit. but full of goodness.
Only the ego EVER sees evil, hate or tragedy as it would make no sense
to love. Love can't see what isn't a part of it. Only those that
choose to see it, have it within themselves that the choice is even
possible and thus by their choice, it becomes part of them in their
own mind. It's the choosing to not perceive evil that convinces the
mind that it isn't one with it. That's why my choice of perceptions is
my path to salvation and my true nature.
Debinski
>
> - Show quoted text -
I've been thinking about how to respond to your other post about good
and evil, George. Now this one appears and I'm just downright
confused. I thought you said it wasn't helpful to deny that you see
war? Correct? So you're saying you choose to perceive war as "good"
and that in choosing to see war as "good" your true nature is
revealed? Is that what you're saying? If that's what you're saying, I
couldn't disagree more. Truth or "true nature" can't BE perceived, but
perception CAN proceed from it. Anything a mind can convince itself of
isn't true. Truth is what it is -- with or without perception or
belief and in my experience always comes from outside of any thought
process. Your other post sounded to me like you were suggesting
exchanging a belief that war is evil for a belief that war is good,
which doesn't really change anything except your viewpoint. Now it
sounds like you're saying the way to reveal the true nature of the
universe is ALSO to convince yourself it isn't evil, which again
doesn't change anything exept your viewpoint. If that isn't what you
are saying, please clarify. Thanks.
Debinski
Philomene
>> Who is Molly Thompson? What does she teach about ACIM?
>>
>> Please don't tell me the other authorized teacher is Ken Wapnick.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> As far as I can tell no one knows who the second "approved teacher" is
> but I don't think it's NOT Ken Wapnick as this "new teaching" is being
> called "Phase II" -- which left me with the impression "Jesus" has
> decided to pass the golden sceptor on to Molly Thompson. Apparently,
> Gary Renard failed the test. <smile> Molly Thompson is a "mental
> health professional" who claims to have been working with Jesus "in
> spirit" for 25 years. She says she is channeling Jesus AND at the same
> time has achieved such an astoundingly superior ability to recognize
> what ego is up to that "Jesus" now wants the rest of us to know that
> only she and one other person have completed "Phase I" of the Course
> teaching and are therefore capable of teaching the rest of us how to
> "recognize ego" and "uncover guilt." I probably wouldn't have given
> her a second thought if an invitation to join in a study group of her
> materials hadn't been extended to me. I mean it's not unusual for
> someone or another to make such claims. What surprised me was that
> some teachers I respect are not only supporting and promoting her
> teaching but justifying her claims to exclusivity: In her own words
> (or I mean in "Jesus words") here's her message "To Teachers of A
> Course in Miracles":
Interesting.
Who are these teachers you respect who support Thompson's claims?
From what | read of Thompson's position it appears she's saying Jesus
as teacher and author of ACIM is a necessary intermediary between the
student and the Holy Spirit.
Which seems to me a straight reading of the course.
I'd have to read the specifics of other claims and teaching to give my
opinion, but lets say Renard opened the door to wild claims, and so its
not surprising other "teachers" are making wild claims and wild claims
which leave Renard out the elect.
george
What I said was yes I see war and it's a good thing, part of God's
perfect plan...but I can't deny I can see it...all I can do is choose
how I WANT to see it. Is it evil or good? Both choices are ALWAYS
available.
So you're saying you choose to perceive war as "good"
> and that in choosing to see war as "good" your true nature is
> revealed? Is that what you're saying? If that's what you're saying, I
> couldn't disagree more.
Yes you understand what I'm saying so you disagree with me. That's
okay not many people agree with me.
Truth or "true nature" can't BE perceived
I'm not saying it can be what I am saying is that my path back to my
true nature is by choosing to see what's in my true nature. Pure love
is my true nature as God gave me. Love sees love. If I choose to see
in this world anything else I'm choosing to deceive myself about what
I am.
, but
> perception CAN proceed from it. Anything a mind can convince itself of
> isn't true. Truth is what it is -- with or without perception or
> belief and in my experience always comes from outside of any thought
> process. Your other post sounded to me like you were suggesting
> exchanging a belief that war is evil for a belief that war is good,
> which doesn't really change anything except your viewpoint.
Exactly and that's all that matters because in my changed viewpoint is
what I'm choosing to believe about myself. I'm trying to remember what
I am in truth as I have forgotten and made a new voice, the ego, that
sees things in a way that doesn't exist in truth. I remember my true
nature by choosing to see only what the Holy Spirit shows me and that
is everything is perfect and that love is all that really exists here.
Only in my fantasies can I see what doesn't exist. Yet God is
everywhere so he must be here and everything must be according to his
plan. All I'm dong is trying to accept what is already here in truth
and reject what isn't and that's all done by my CHOICE of perception.
In truth, I am God's son and perfect, pure love just like he is and
so is everyone else. If I CHOOSE to see anything except what is my
true nature I'm deceiving myself and convincing myself I am, what I'm
not. Because another way to look at things is always available. The
other way when I'm not decieved is the loving way that the Holy Spirit
sees everything and everyone. The everything that is happening on this
world is exactly the way it's supposed to be happening and that it's
all part of God's perfect plan.
Philomene
> What I said was yes I see war and it's a good thing, part of God's
> perfect plan...but I can't deny I can see it...all I can do is choose
> how I WANT to see it. Is it evil or good? Both choices are ALWAYS
> available.
You see war as a good thing?
If that was true you'd be encouraging people to build more nuclear
bombs, raise more armies and kill, kill, kill because after all "war is
a good thing."
More, if you truly saw war as a "good thing," you'd out there getting
your own kill quota.
That's generally what is meant in English by a "good thing."
Oh! That's not what you meant. You have to explain again your assaine
mis-use of the English language because you haven't taken the time to
express with the correct concepts what you are actually trying to say,
so everyone you write to has to unravel the totally f**ked up notion
that ACIM (according to George)teaches "war is a good thing."
Carrie
I was just fooling around with you LOL
Carrie
Do think God is aware of this ego stuff like war? And decides if it's a
good thing and particpates in it?
Maybe watches and helps one side and not the other, or makes bets?
george
> george wrote:
> > What I said was yes I see war and it's a good thing, part of God's
> > perfect plan...but I can't deny I can see it...all I can do is choose
> > how I WANT to see it. Is it evil or good? Both choices are ALWAYS
> > available.
>
> You see war as a good thing?
>
> If that was true you'd be encouraging people to build more nuclear
> bombs, raise more armies and kill, kill, kill because after all "war is
> a good thing."
I look after myself and do what I believe is right at this moment. I
don't tell anyone else how to live their lives of how they,"SHOULD"
act as that IS playing God and deciding for someone else what they
need to do INSTEAD of concentrating on the only thing I actually CAN
change, myself and the way I choose to look at the world and everyone
in it.
If I believed I was a body killing would be a horrible thing but
since I don't, I can CHOOSE to believe that all anyone can do is
deceive themselves that they are terrible and kill others. No one
dies, all that happens is a body is laid down and they are released to
heaven. Of course one could CHOOSE to see it as a horrible tragedy and
wrong but my question is WHY?
Do I actually WANT to hold on to my grievances and see things that
don't really exist in truth?
>
> More, if you truly saw war as a "good thing," you'd out there getting
> your own kill quota.
Everything in truth is good and part of God's plan. How could it be
any other way? It CAN'T that's the point. I did drugs to understand I
don't want to do them, so the doing of the drugs was a good thing to
help me understand. I don't need to kill others to understand I don't
want to do that but obviously others do as that Is what they do. I
CHOOSE not to judge them as bad for it as that is a lie but INSTEAD
choose to see that they are learning their own lessons just as I do.
>
> That's generally what is meant in English by a "good thing."
I could choose to see my drug use as a bad thing that I wish I hadn't
done but all that does is tie me to the bad past event instead of
releasing me to the clean loving present. It's just a CHOICE on how to
see the world and myself. Why would I ever WANT to see what I've done
as BAD? Why would I want to see anything anyone else does as bad? So I
can feel guilty and to project my guilt onto others? Release from
guilt is done by seeing what is there in truth. That EVERYTHING that
happens is good and part of God's perfect plan.
george
I think God can't understand war as it makes no sense to him.
And decides if it's a
> good thing and particpates in it?
Lol God and war seem like opposites to me but IF his children choose
to go insane and try to do what isn't possible in truth then he KNOWS
that only good can come from it because they are his perfect children.
I guess one could believe that he has no faith in us to figure out our
true nature, that we are bad but why would anyone want to believe
that?
> Maybe watches and helps one side and not the other, or makes bets?
Lol
Debinski
Oh, okay. Now maybe we're getting somewhere, George. What you're
saying is that the only way you can let go of guilt/grievance/
resentments is to reinterpret the past in such a way as to call it
"good?" Is that right? So you don't really mean to say that war here/
now is good or that to plan for war in the future is good,but only
that it does no good to bring past resentments into the present. So
what you really mean is "all things work TOGETHER for good." Is that
correct? Is so, I DO agree with that. I can't look at the past and say
"it all went according to God's perfect plan, but I CAN look at the
past and say "I really messed that one up, but thank God I KNOW
somehow someway good WILL come of it."
I'm going to hold off responding to anything else you wrote until you
either confirm or deny that's what you' really mean.
Debinski
That truly>
>
> > More, if you truly saw war as a "good thing," you'd out there getting
> > your own kill quota.
>
> Everything in truth is good and part of God's plan. How could it be
> any other way? It CAN'T that's the point. I did drugs to understand I
> don't want to do them, so the doing of the drugs was a good thing to
> help me understand. I don't need to kill others to understand I don't
> want to do that but obviously others do as that Is what they do. I
> CHOOSE not to judge them as bad for it as that is a lie but INSTEAD
> choose to see that they are learning their own lessons just as I do.
>
>
>
> > That's generally what is meant in English by a "good thing."
>
> I could choose to see my drug use as a bad thing that I wish I hadn't
> done but all that does is tie me to the bad past event instead of
> releasing me to the clean loving present. It's just a CHOICE on how to
> see the world and myself. Why would I ever WANT to see what I've done
> as BAD? Why would I want to see anything anyone else does as bad? So I
> can feel guilty and to project my guilt onto others? Release from
> guilt is done by seeing what is there in truth. That EVERYTHING that
> happens is good and part of God's perfect plan.
>
>
>
>
>
> > Oh! That's not what you meant. You have to explain again your assaine
> > mis-use of the English language because you haven't taken the time to
> > express with the correct concepts what you are actually trying to say,
> > so everyone you write to has to unravel the totally f**ked up notion
> > that ACIM (according to George)teaches "war is a good thing."- Hide quoted text -
Philomene
> On Nov 20, 4:30 pm, Philomene <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> george wrote:
>>> What I said was yes I see war and it's a good thing, part of God's
>>> perfect plan...but I can't deny I can see it...all I can do is choose
>>> how I WANT to see it. Is it evil or good? Both choices are ALWAYS
>>> available.
>> You see war as a good thing?
>>
>> If that was true you'd be encouraging people to build more nuclear
>> bombs, raise more armies and kill, kill, kill because after all "war is
>> a good thing."
>
> I look after myself and do what I believe is right at this moment.
So what? You wrote "war is good." You believed that was right when you
wrote it. This statement is an endorsement of war. If you wouldn't join
and army and kill then it stands to reason that you either believe
killing is evil/bad, or that somehow you would find it difficult or
impossible to kill and still see that killing as good and "part of God's
plan."
If you killed a stranger on the street and chose to see this as good
--as in there is no evil and everything is good and part of God's plan,
if you choose to see it that way--then this is pretty much the
definition of a sociopath.
george
The only way to actually let go of grievances IS to see them as a good
thing through the Holy Spirit's loving eyes. That nothing bad actually
happened. So there is no REASON for any grievance. If I hold onto ANY
shred of that something ,"bad happened" it's impossible to let go of
the grievance because there is a REASON to have a grievance. That's
why in truth nothing BAD can happen. Only the ego can perceive tragedy
evil and hate but in truth they never existed.
I'll give you the example of when I was given the opportunity to
donate to a drug addict that came into our house when no one was home.
I was lucky enough to be able to help him with my money and stuff that
he needed at that moment. In this way I'm seeing ONLY the good and
there is no reason to have a grievance.
So you don't really mean to say that war here/
> now is good
I'm not saying in the present I would ever be in a war. I wouldn't.
Others might need to go to war to understand their own path and true
natures that is not for me to decide. All that I can do is have faith
in them that they are God's children just like all of us are and that
they will figure out what they need to know. If they have to lay down
a bunch of bodies to do that, that's up to them not me and I won't
condemn them for it as that would be condemning myself. We all make
mistakes but they are part of God's perfect plan to understand our
true nature..so can they really even be called mistakes?
or that to plan for war in the future is good,but only
> that it does no good to bring past resentments into the present. So
> what you really mean is "all things work TOGETHER for good." Is that
> correct?
All things do work together for good because they are all part of
God's perfect plan.
Is so, I DO agree with that. I can't look at the past and say
> "it all went according to God's perfect plan
Why not? Everything has to work according to God's perfect plan unless
I choose to believe God is powerless.
, but I CAN look at the
> past and say "I really messed that one up, but thank God I KNOW
> somehow someway good WILL come of it."
You have heard the saying when God gives you lemons make lemonade. The
point I'm trying to make is God only gave the lemonade and that the
lemons never existed except in my insanity to see them.
george
> george wrote:
> > On Nov 20, 4:30 pm, Philomene <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> george wrote:
> >>> What I said was yes I see war and it's a good thing, part of God's
> >>> perfect plan...but I can't deny I can see it...all I can do is choose
> >>> how I WANT to see it. Is it evil or good? Both choices are ALWAYS
> >>> available.
> >> You see war as a good thing?
>
> >> If that was true you'd be encouraging people to build more nuclear
> >> bombs, raise more armies and kill, kill, kill because after all "war is
> >> a good thing."
>
> > I look after myself and do what I believe is right at this moment.
>
> So what? You wrote "war is good." You believed that was right when you
> wrote it. This statement is an endorsement of war.
It's an endorsement of the people that have to find their own way. If
they need to lay a ton of bodies on the ground it doesn't matter and I
won't condemn them for it as the condemnation IS the choice to see
them as seperate, evil and wrong. I'm not here to decide for anyone
except me.
If you wouldn't join
> and army and kill then it stands to reason that you either believe
> killing is evil/bad,
I choose only for me what I need to do to understand my true nature. I
know I don't want to kill already. I didn't know I didn't want to do
drugs and alcohol until I did them. Others do the same and I have
faith in them no matter what they say or do that they will find their
true nature. To doubt others and what they do IS to doubt myself and
to not know my true nature. Because what I see in the outside world is
just a reflection of my inner world.
MikeRyder
The only way to let go of grievances is to understand that while the
ego will judge YOU have no emotional invenstment in the ego's
judgment--NOT pretend that the holy spirit sees grievances lovingly.
george
> On Fri, 20 Nov 2009 17:19:02 -0800 (PST), george
>
>
>
Debinski
So you're NOT really saying "war is good." What you're saying is we
are free to go to war if we choose to do so and that men don't go to
war because they are evil but because they are ignorant of God. And
that the act or effects of war work for good by revealing that
ignorance. If THAT is what you're saying, then I agree. I do NOT,
however, agree that war is "God's perfect plan." It is an effect of
ignorance of God or interference with God. Which brings us back to
where we began. Evil truly does not exist. It isn't that I can
convince myself that what I see isn't evil. It's that there is no such
thing as evil, any more than there is any such thing as dark. Evil,
like darkness, only SEEMS to exist in the opposites implied by
language. In other words, it has no substance or power, but only
points toward an apparent absence of substance or power.Language
implies that evil is the opposite of good, just as it implies that
dark is the opposite of light and heat the opposite of cold, but it
isn't true. Nothing real can be threatened -- Life/Love/Light/Good --
nothing unreal exists -- death/fear/dark/evil. The way I see it, the
choice we have isn't what words to use to describe what we see -- but
to allow or resist What IS to be.
So yes, mistakes can sometimes reveal our true nature, but not by
being reinterpreted as "good' or "not mistakes" but by bringing us to
the point of realizing what we thought was true about ourselves was
not. Truth isn't something to be believed, but what is revealed when
we give up thinking we already know. So if a war or a mistake leads us
to question the belief that led to it, yes, it can open the door to
revelation of Truth.
> or that to plan for war in the future is good,but only
>
> > that it does no good to bring past resentments into the present. So
> > what you really mean is "all things work TOGETHER for good." Is that
> > correct?
>
> All things do work together for good because they are all part of
> God's perfect plan.
>
> Is so, I DO agree with that. I can't look at the past and say
>
> > "it all went according to God's perfect plan
>
> Why not? Everything has to work according to God's perfect plan unless
> I choose to believe God is powerless.
>
> , but I CAN look at the
>
> > past and say "I really messed that one up, but thank God I KNOW
> > somehow someway good WILL come of it."
>
> You have heard the saying when God gives you lemons make lemonade. The
> point I'm trying to make is God only gave the lemonade and that the
> lemons never existed except in my insanity to see them.
>
If God gave me lemons He probably wanted me to make lemonade --
metaphorically speaking. <smile> Only God exists, George, and when He
is ignored, war happens.
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Carrie
It doesn't have to be good or bad, it's over and done, right?
Carrie
Why not just forget about it and let it go and not try and figure it out
and see it in anyway.
Which is really just speculation anyway.
Carrie
War is legalized murder. Even if it's friendly fire, like one side
accidentally kills one of their own.
I was watching a TV show one night, with woman talking about going to Iraq
and leaving their amilies and some were going to have to go back AGAIN. I
think the point was what it does to them. Mentally and physically.
Emotionally. And what veterans needed when they came back. They were saying
never to ask a veteran how many people they killed. This was the worst thing
and most veterans just wanted to block it out and forget about it.
So, the killing can be trained into them, and justified, but still (when
remembered, out of the war situation) it doesn't feel right.
One Commandment is "Though shalt not kill". Yet, soliders are trained
to kill. Police, and law enforcement people are too, in a way. And it's
usually justified.
What if everyone follwed their own instincts and refused to kill?
Like how could they have a war if no one could participate.
Philomene
> On Nov 20, 5:14 pm, Philomene <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> george wrote:
>>> On Nov 20, 4:30 pm, Philomene <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> george wrote:
>>>>> What I said was yes I see war and it's a good thing, part of God's
>>>>> perfect plan...but I can't deny I can see it...all I can do is choose
>>>>> how I WANT to see it. Is it evil or good? Both choices are ALWAYS
>>>>> available.
>>>> You see war as a good thing?
>>>> If that was true you'd be encouraging people to build more nuclear
>>>> bombs, raise more armies and kill, kill, kill because after all "war is
>>>> a good thing."
>>> I look after myself and do what I believe is right at this moment.
>> So what? You wrote "war is good." You believed that was right when you
>> wrote it. This statement is an endorsement of war.
>
> It's an endorsement of the people that have to find their own way.
No its not.
If you wished to convey that notion you'd say "war is," or say nothing
at all.
You tie yourself in language knots because you insist on articulating
course metaphysics in terms of "good and evil," which are nearly always
subjective judgments.
The author articulates his ideas in terms of thinking --right thinking,
and wrong thinking/upside down thinking. Which are NOT judgments at all,
but transcendental facts, and facts totally independent on how YOU or
anyone chooses to "see" or judge thinking.
As a course student it is much more profitable to examine things and
situations in terms of right thinking and wrong thinking instead of
taking the useless and confusing journey of judging things and
situations as good or evil, or "always good."
In the thought system of healing, the notion of "wrong," implies
something "wrong" is correctable and SHOULD and must be corrected. It
doesn't imply wrong is "evil," or that "wrong" must be and can only be good.
If you are still articulating with the notions of good and evil, clearly
you are still working in the thought system of sin, not the thought
system of healing error.
MikeRyder
I believe that's what i just said.
Carrie
Yes.
I joined it in discussion.
Philomene
>>> Who is Molly Thompson? What does she teach about ACIM?
>
> molly is a group facilitator who pissed off
> debinski because there are claims of specialness
> in there. But the overall theme of this hype is: <paraphr>
>
> STOP preaching, START PRACTICING (guilt digging, receptive listenening, be
> still in right mind, repeat proces) for the next 10 years please.
>
> lol
I read Thompson and she's got it right. What I call the Atonement
process she calls the Forgiveness process. Everything she writes
completely jives with my 12 or so yrs of study group experience. My
method is more truncated, hers more elaborated-- and this is good. Also
her method directly and unabashedly involves Jesus --and this too is
good and an improvement.
This is a phase shift from 1st level course study to second level that I
have been predicting for some years. I suspect Thompson will find great
success and a wide, receptive audience. Thompson will soon be the major
teacher of ACIM, in other words a phase change from Wapnick, new age
flavored course study and "Jesus is just a symbol" course study. I
suspect Thompson never plays the "duality, non-duality," gambit.
george
To choose to believe anything is against God's perfect plan is IMO to
play God of how it should be. It is what it is and whatever happens is
ALWAYS perfect and part of God's plan. Otherwise what, I know better
than God how it "should be". Believing that everything happens for a
reason and it's all part of God's perfect plan is true acceptance of
God and his love IMO. To choose to see anything else is to not
understand God the way I understand him. But hey who knows maybe I'm
wrong and God is powerless and things can actually happen that he
doesn't want to happen. It makes no sense to me though and why would I
believe in a powerless God?. It does make sense to me that everything
happens because he wants them to as he has all power and everything
that does happen is part of his perfect plan.
Debinski
What did you find to be new about her method, Philomene? If Molly is
correct that Jesus says only she and one other student have the
ability to recognize what ego is up to and teach this "Phase II" level
of study, how did YOU happen to predict it would happen? Or are you
the other undisclosed student who is capable of recognizing what ego
is up to? I totally agree that the vast majority of Course students
*I* try to converse with don't seem to even understand what they are
trying to teach. But it seems to me Thompson is making the same
mistake Wapnick did -- in slightly different form. He tried to use
copyright laws to control how the Course was taught. She's trying to
use the false (in my opinion) authority of "Jesus says" to control how
the Course can be taught. THAT is my problem with it. We've been
there, done that 2,000 years ago -- burned men and books "in the name
of Jesus."
MikeRyder
MikeRyder
>play God of how it should be. It is what it is ...blah...
You know, george, one of your biggest problems is you are
so...so...windy. Such a...a...blowhole. lol What you're apparently
rattling on about (again) is the idea that as we do not know the
particulars of God's plan for the salvation of the Sonship we're not
qualified to judge the spects of it. Therefore, ours is to let the
plan play out, even if that means wars, seeming injustices, etc etc
etc.
Philomene
> On Nov 20, 8:56 pm, Philomene <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> maz wrote:
>>>>> Who is Molly Thompson? What does she teach about ACIM?
>>> Look up yahoo group the peace of god.
>>> molly is a group facilitator who pissed off
>>> debinski because there are claims of specialness
>>> in there. But the overall theme of this hype is: <paraphr>
>>> STOP preaching, START PRACTICING (guilt digging, receptive listenening, be
>>> still in right mind, repeat proces) for the next 10 years please.
>>> lol
>> I read Thompson and she's got it right. What I call the Atonement
>> process she calls the Forgiveness process. Everything she writes
>> completely jives with my 12 or so yrs of study group experience. My
>> method is more truncated, hers more elaborated-- and this is good. Also
>> her method directly and unabashedly involves Jesus --and this too is
>> good and an improvement.
>>
>> This is a phase shift from 1st level course study to second level that I
>> have been predicting for some years. I suspect Thompson will find great
>> success and a wide, receptive audience. Thompson will soon be the major
>> teacher of ACIM, in other words a phase change from Wapnick, new age
>> flavored course study and "Jesus is just a symbol" course study. I
>> suspect Thompson never plays the "duality, non-duality," gambit.
>
> What did you find to be new about her method, Philomene?
"I've been around you know. I've seen things."
Al Pacino as Lieutenant Colonel Frank Slade in a Scent of a Woman.
Its not about new. Its about emphasis and focus.
The notion is that A Course in Miracles is about a simple, fool-proof
effective and complete method of mental healing which can be quickly
learned and taught, while greater mastering of this method is learned by
repetition over time.
The method is if one is out of peace or not feeling complete peace and
joy --one can ask for mental healing through miracles and the
intercession of the Holy Spirit by remembering peace, FEELING peace,
then choosing peace at the emotional/feeling level, while sincerely
reciting the Atonement affirmation/prayer at the end of Ch 5 of the text.
Part of the pre-condition or pre-learning of this method is
learning/experiencing how to access peace through meditation or group
meditation. But accessing peace is both easily taught and learned in a
group and learning to do the Atonement is simple and never fails. If a
student asks for correction whenever she is out of peace, eventually and
over time the mind is healed. That's it. That's the whole Course in
Miracles. There ain't no more.
Thompson is saying the same thing but with more elaboration and more
self-questioning and processing. I can accept that, but I think the
steadfast acceptance/feeling of profound inner peace at the emotional
level is most importance and trumps all need to do self-analysis.
You could call first generation course study "A Course in Forgiveness,"
rather than A Course in Miracles. Too often mental healing was
articulated as "doing the lessons." Mental healing was often explained
as forgiveness without a mention of miracles, with confused, often
contradictory notions about how one forgives. Often some form of
forgiveness to destroy was the method du jour of first generation course
study. So to me, Thompson apparently integrating forgiveness with
miracles and Jesus into a workable, effective correction process with
demonstrable results is a major event in the course world.
As far as her authority coming from Jesus --that will be proved or
disproved over time. Speaking from authority and abusing authority is
two different things. Thompson raises the bar high and will be roundly
criticized if she abuses or misuses her claimed authority.
george
It's not useless or confusing to accept the truth. The truth is we are
all God's children and God only knows us as our perfect selves. For me
to know what God knows, I must reject the false self I created to
oppose God. The false self is the ego and the false self sees what God
knows isn't true. It perceives all the things on the dark side as it
believes them to be true.
The way home IMO is to choose not to believe the lies it tells because
I'm not the ego and never have been. It's not hard to apply what I
said, all it takes is the WILLINGNESS to let God take all the false
ideas from me. I call it good and evil, you call it right mindedness
and wrong mindedness and I can see why, as it is an ACIM NG and that
is the term ACIM uses but IMO calling it good and evil make the idea
much easier to grasp. It's still the same idea about the split mind
and seeing the world. You say one is fact and one is judgement but I
say they are both actually the same idea. It's the same idea as it it
is the two viewpoints of seeing the world and the choice is completely
up to me. One way of seeing brings reasons for love and one way brings
reasons for hate and conflict.
The path back to my true self isn't about magic and things that come
from outside me but about my choices on what I want and I'm an active
participate by my choices and my salvation comes from God THROUGH me
as I choose to let him lead and see the world for me as it IS in
truth. I choose to believe what he tells me INSTEAD of the lies the
ego speaks about all the injustice and tragedy.
All of us are God's thoughts. So our thoughts have power. If I choose
to see hate it becomes one with me in my dream and I fall deeper
asleep by my choice of which thought I'm WILLING to accept into my
mind. If I choose to see love it becomes one with me and leads me back
out of this dream to my true reality as God created it.
The power of choice and perception is the path of salvation because
it is my choice of what I choose to accept into my mind. Love or hate,
I can see either in almost any event by how I want to see it. One is
true and one is a lie that never existed in truth but was made up in
fantasy.
I am what God made me, so it only makes sense that I want my true self
so I can be happy. Happiness is being myself not something else. Hate
and evil don't feel good that's how I know they aren't apart of my
true self.
Philomene
Ever heard of the "face of innocence"?
"The Beginning Process of Forgiveness; Uncovering & Facing Guilt
Continues Outside of The Study Groups
Outside of the Study Groups, Jesus wants students to be uncovering and
facing their guilt. This too is an ongoing process and is incorporated
in the Second Phase in the Process of Forgiveness. The uncovering of
guilt may begin and be continued in the following way, which Jesus
suggests his students follow. Keep in mind that guilt covers any feeling
that arises from the ego. At first, it is easiest to begin with feelings
or reactions that are negative. Once a student is aware of a negative
feeling state, then he may begin to explore this state by uncovering it
so that it maybe faced.
Students will find that underneath what they have uncovered will be
another feeling of guilt, which the former feeling is hiding or
defending. At the very top of layer of guilt the most common feeling is
innocence where there is a denial of guilt as one attempts to uphold a
face or front of innocence.
Jesus through Molly Thompson
http://miraclemethod4forgiveness.wordpress.com/author/miraclemethod4forgiveness/
Philomene
> The way home IMO is to choose not to believe the lies it tells because
> I'm not the ego and never have been. It's not hard to apply what I
> said, all it takes is the WILLINGNESS to let God take all the false
> ideas from me. I call it good and evil, you call it right mindedness
> and wrong mindedness and I can see why, as it is an ACIM NG and that
> is the term ACIM uses but IMO calling it good and evil make the idea
> much easier to grasp.
Easier to grasp???
Rejecting evil is NOT the same as recognizing and correcting error.
In fact rejecting evil is a great way to never correct errors in
thinking and keeping the ego fully operational, because declaring
victory before any real healing is done, while simultaneously arguing
wrong thinking is too hard a concept to grasp is pretty much an
indication of the ego withering in the light and tying desperately to
hide in darkness.
Here's an idea. If an elementary idea like wrong thinking is too
difficult to grasp then ask God to take that false idea from your mind
and give you some basic understanding about right mindedness and wrong
mindedness that doesn't involve first believing in sin then fighting
against sin. The subtly here is one has to make something real to reject
something. The act of rejection makes real.
The act of correct proves the result of the error in thinking was unreal.
Pieter
"Philomene" <ph...@gmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:he84ff$87i$1...@aioe.org...
>
> Ever heard of the "face of innocence"?
It is described in chapter 31 section V.
Debinski
So you agree with this statement (from the Thompson
material)? :"Students' cannot just turn to the Holy Spirit and expect
that function to be there for them when they have for millenniums' cut
themselves off from the right mind and Holy Spirit since they believe
that their ego's identity and existence depends on this separation."
If so, how do you reconcile that with "Heaven waits not upon time, but
welcome." And "Heaven is here. Where else could it be? Heaven is now.
There is no other time?"
>
> The method is if one is out of peace or not feeling complete peace and
> joy --one can ask for mental healing through miracles and the
> intercession of the Holy Spirit by remembering peace, FEELING peace,
> then choosing peace at the emotional/feeling level, while sincerely
> reciting the Atonement affirmation/prayer at the end of Ch 5 of the text.
>
> Part of the pre-condition or pre-learning of this method is
> learning/experiencing how to access peace through meditation or group
> meditation. But accessing peace is both easily taught and learned in a
> group and learning to do the Atonement is simple and never fails. If a
> student asks for correction whenever she is out of peace, eventually and
> over time the mind is healed. That's it. That's the whole Course in
> Miracles. There ain't no more.
>
Well, my copy says "salvation is a secret you have kept but from
yourself. The universe proclaims it so." Which tells me God is
gracious enough to bring whatever guilty feelings *I* need to undo to
my attention without MY having to seek them out by specifcally
prescribed methods. Nor do I find any indication within the pages of
the book that this can't be done without placing yet another idea
between myself and God -- those ideas being Holy Spirit, Jesus, Molly
Thompson. Can God be reached directly or not?
> Thompson is saying the same thing but with more elaboration and more
> self-questioning and processing. I can accept that, but I think the
> steadfast acceptance/feeling of profound inner peace at the emotional
> level is most importance and trumps all need to do self-analysis.
>
> You could call first generation course study "A Course in Forgiveness,"
> rather than A Course in Miracles. Too often mental healing was
> articulated as "doing the lessons." Mental healing was often explained
> as forgiveness without a mention of miracles, with confused, often
> contradictory notions about how one forgives. Often some form of
> forgiveness to destroy was the method du jour of first generation course
> study. So to me, Thompson apparently integrating forgiveness with
> miracles and Jesus into a workable, effective correction process with
> demonstrable results is a major event in the course world.
>
> As far as her authority coming from Jesus --that will be proved or
> disproved over time. Speaking from authority and abusing authority is
> two different things. Thompson raises the bar high and will be roundly
> criticized if she abuses or misuses her claimed authority.- Hide quoted text -
>
IMO, she has already misused it when she tells all others to cease and
desist from teaching A Course in Miracles until they have learned her
method. Btw I notice you haven't followed that directive. Or have you?
Have you chosen to teach the Course only as it is explained on Molly's
blog -- as she says Jesus says is incumbent upon you to do?
Debinski
Ahh, George, just when I thought we might be getting somewhere, you're
back to "opposing God." First of all, let me say I don't think God has
a "perfect plan" for salvation. Salvation is already complete. My part
is only to be willing to allow that completion to be revealed.
Planning requires belief in time/space -- an illusion the Course tells
us is helpful but not real. Far from suggesting you know better than
God, I am suggesting you can only know with God or you know nothing at
all -- what I call "ignorance of God." IOW, "Father forgive them for
they know not what they do."
IF God has a perfect plan, I don't think my finite mind can come close
to understanding what that plan might be. I tend to rely on the
Biblical statement to explain God's role in what we perceive to be a
playing out of "God's plan." "God causes the sun to shine on the good
and the evil. The rain to fall on the just and the unjust." I think A
Course in Miracles explains how we came to perceive and believe
separation from God better than any other book I have read thus far.
"T 27 I 6. Into eternity, where all is one, there crept a tiny, mad
idea, at
which the Son of God remembered not to laugh. In his forgetting did
the thought become a serious idea, and possible of both accomplishment
and real effects. Together, we can laugh them BOTH away, and
understand that time can NOT intrude upon eternity. It IS a joke to
think that time can come to circumvent eternity, which MEANS there
is no time. A timelessness in which is time made real; a Part of God
Which can attack Itself; a separate brother as an enemy; a mind
WITHIN a body; all are forms of circularity, whose ending starts at
its
beginning, ending at its cause."
However, I also think it is a mistake to understand that passage to
mean the "tiny mad idea" occurred at a specific time/place in the
past. I see it as a choice I make each and every instant -- or not.
Carrie
I think what is useless is trying to push what you believe (and how you
believe it) on "someone else".
All you can do is believe it and live it yourself.
Carrie
> Ever heard of the "face of innocence"?
I think we are supposed to let go of Guilt and not go looking for it.
Maybe be aware of it in OURSELF in order to then let it go, asking HS help
with this.
I don't think looking for an uncovering guilt in someone else (outside
of the stdudy groups?) is what Jesus ever said.
See the face of Christ in our Brothers.
I guess this is what you are saying, in response to Molly Thompson.
I haven't been paying much attention to the Molly Thompson stuff, but
I'm starting to think she is another Gary Renard LOL
But, to each his own, and there's a teacher for everyone...
Carrie
Yes
This, to me is pure ACIM.
And, what so many have said for so long they want on this ng. Real
course discussion, without ego stuff and personal attack.
We are currently seeing an example of this. A miracle.
george
Only someone that applies ACIM can understand what it means. It's a
Course meant to be applied in daily life. Reading ACIM will not help
anyone understand what it MEANS. The application IS the meaning. The
proof of ACIM is the application and the way it changes one's life
from unhappiness to happiness. In that change is the proof that they
understand it.
george
Agreed
> Planning requires belief in time/space -- an illusion the Course tells
> us is helpful but not real. Far from suggesting you know better than
> God, I am suggesting you can only know with God or you know nothing at
> all -- what I call "ignorance of God." IOW, "Father forgive them for
> they know not what they do."
Agreed. We are talking the same thing. To let go of the past. Any and
ALL grievances from the past must be seen through the Holy Spirit's
loving eye's. In this way he reinterprets all past events into good
events in my mind if I'll let him. If I'm not willing to let him do
this and there is any darkness I hold onto ANY event that things
should have gone a different way or this shouldn't have happened then
I'm holding onto a grievance. I'm not wiling to release the past and
let the joyous present shine into my mind. This is why I say
everything that has happened was perfect and according to God's
perfect plan. Do you understand the point I'm trying to make?
This is all I'm saying that everything that happened in the past was
part of God's perfect plan and exactly how it should have happened. If
I'm not willing to say this and let go of ALL my grievances from the
past I'm not willing to let the joyous present into my mind. If there
is even one thing about the past I'm not wiling to let go of I can't
know my true nature as I'm telling myself I'm not what I am in truth.
Do you understand the point I'm trying to make and why it's so
important to be able to say EVERYTHING that happened was what should
have happened? I add my part in that God wanted it that way and it's
part of his perfect plan for my salvation because it helps me to have
faith in a perfect pure loving God but that part isn't needed.
>
> IF God has a perfect plan, I don't think my finite mind can come close
> to understanding what that plan might be.
Me neither, that's why I accept whatever happened or happens as a part
of his plan. In this way I build faith in him instead or tearing it
down. I think faith is an important part of my spiritual development.
george
Agreed. I do like to offer it though, as it has helped my life
transform.
george
>
> read more »
I wasn't clear why the Holy Spirit needs my willingness to let him
reinterpret all past events into good things. Because if I'm not
WILLING to see whatever happened as a good thing then I have a REASON
to have a grievance. If anything from the past is,"bad wrong" then my
CHOICE of that perception makes the choice of my reaction in the
present. That thing in the past that was bad HAS to be condemned and
fought against as my choice of seeing it as bad makes it that way.
george
> > The way home IMO is to choose not to believe the lies it tells because
> > I'm not the ego and never have been. It's not hard to apply what I
> > said, all it takes is the WILLINGNESS to let God take all the false
> > ideas from me. I call it good and evil, you call it right mindedness
> > and wrong mindedness and I can see why, as it is an ACIM NG and that
> > is the term ACIM uses but IMO calling it good and evil make the idea
> > much easier to grasp.
>
> Easier to grasp???
IMO the split mind is one part of my mind believes in goodness love
peace truth this is right minded thinking. The other side believes in
hate war tragedy lies this is wrong minded thinking. Everyone
understands goodness and love and hate and evil, that's why IMO its
much easier to grasp the concepts of the split mind by seeing them as
good and evil. IMO it's the same thing. I need to let my mind be
healed by understanding only one side of my mind actually exists, the
part I think with God. This is the right minded part or the part that
sees good and love.
The healing is done by my choice of perception about who I WANT to be.
In truth I am as God created me a perfect loving being but I don't
KNOW it and that's why I need healing. The healing is done by letting
the truth dawn on my mind as I'm WILLING to let go of the lies I
believed before from my wrong minded thinking. The healing comes from
God and I'm in charge of when I get it by my wiliness to let him see
the world for me as it is, not as how I think it should be. It already
is perfect, that's the point I just haven't been willing to see it.
>
> Rejecting evil is NOT the same as recognizing and correcting error.
>
> In fact rejecting evil is a great way to never correct errors in
> thinking and keeping the ego fully operational, because declaring
> victory before any real healing is done, while simultaneously arguing
> wrong thinking is too hard a concept to grasp is pretty much an
> indication of the ego withering in the light and tying desperately to
> hide in darkness.
>
> Here's an idea. If an elementary idea like wrong thinking is too
> difficult to grasp then ask God to take that false idea from your mind
> and give you some basic understanding about right mindedness and wrong
> mindedness that doesn't involve first believing in sin then fighting
> against sin. The subtly here is one has to make something real to reject
> something. The act of rejection makes real.
I agree that to see something makes it real to me. That's why I have
to ask the holy Spirit for a different way to see it that doesn't
involve evil or tragedy. In that perception IS the healing so I need
to grab onto that perception that sees reasons for love and let go of
what I thought before that sees reasons for condemnation.
Carrie
Someone once said to me (as you have noticed, I sometimes tend to ramble
on)
"if you have something to say, there is someone who needs to hear (read)
it"
Even if I never know this, who who or how it effects the person in a
good way.
And if someone doesn't want to hear it, they can just skip over it and
move on.
Carrie
You can also offer what it teaches without even mentioning it.
george
Yes the light shines either way.
Carrie
> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 11:48:57 -0800 (PST), george
> <georgec...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>> Agreed. I do like to offer it though, as it has helped my life
>>>> transform.
>>>
>>> You can also offer what it teaches without even mentioning it.
>>
>> Yes the light shines either way.
>
> Thos who are filled with it are apparent to others, no matter how
> hard-bitten they might be. It is almost tangible.
>
> I have always imagined that, had I known Jesus when he walked the
> earth, that is what I would have sensed in him.
>
> In his teachings he didn't refer much to any scriptures or any laws.
> That wasn't his reference point. His reference point was God Himself
> - that is what he taught from. He was the Voice for God. Still is.
>
> Deborah (BC)
and Love
george
> On Sat, 21 Nov 2009 08:03:23 -0800 (PST), george
>
> <georgeculol...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >IMO the split mind is one part of my mind believes in goodness love
> >peace truth this is right minded thinking. The other side believes in
> >hate war tragedy lies this is wrong minded thinking.
>
> formula might work for your seminars, George, but it isn't ACIM. In
> ACIM the split mind is part ego,
This is the part that see evil hate and tragedy
part Holy Spirit.
This is the part that sees Goodness and love. This IS the split mind.
The two opposing sides of my mind that see opposites. One is true and
one is false. I can go on deceiving myself about all this tragedy in
the world or I can accept the truth that God didn't make tragedy so it
doesn't exist. I only have to let go of my ego perception that there
is tragedy and see through the Holy Spirit's eyes that there isn't.
The thing about this idea is because I'm willing to let go of all my
Ego's perceptions of hate, tragedy and conflict. I don't have any
REASON to ever have any grievance because everything is as it "should
be" without any input from me. Since if I have no grievances then the
world I see is peaceful and so am I.
This idea about choice of perception also doesn't have anything to do
with the outside world or anyone in it, so I'm completely in control
of it by my choices of which eye's I want to see through. Doesn't it
make sense that nothing outside of me would have any control over my
salvation? These are the goals of ACIM and this is the path as I know
it. I know it works because I've done it and do it every day.
Maybe your right and there is another way that I haven't been told
yet. I haven't heard anything from anyone else that is so clear and
makes any sense and that arrives at the same goals of peace joy and
happiness. Also my life IS transformed. That alone is my proof for
me.
The HS doesn't
> have beliefs. The HS knows God and knows God's creations and our
> creations. The HS preserves that knowledge for us.
And in my road home it's to see through HIS eyes and not the egos so I
can understand I'm not the ego and that it's perceptions are not the
truth.
The idea is simple anyone can do it and anyone can understand it. IMO
that is a trademark of the truth. I did learn all of the this from
ACIM and my inner guide. ACIM says this same thing in different words
over and over. It calls it rightminded thinking and wrongminded
thinking.
The only question is am I willing to let go of all my judgements of
hate, evil and condemnation.
> The ego can just as easily throw us off the road home with "love-
> infused" special relationships as it can with hatred. "Love" in
> special relationships can turn into hatred on a dime. How full of the
> belief in need and lack is the person who can't live without
> so-and-so? Whatever happened to God? If we loved God the way we love
> so-and-so we'd never be abandoned. We'd never feel empty, desolate.
>
> The ego can use all manner of things other that evil and conflict. It
> can use illness. Few of us are going to avoid illness in our
> lifetime. Few of us are going to live lovely healthy lives until we
> suddenly depart this world. The question is not whether we will get
> sick or not. The question is will we believe that we are bodies or
> will we believe that we remain as God created us? Spirit and mind?
>
> That is the question with every situation that confronts us in this
> world.
>
> Deborah (BC)
MikeRyder
I thought I'd just toss in the 'blowhole' part in the personal message
to george. lol The point is, we all ramble. What has captured my
interest right now, tho, is the usual conflict is going on in the
group. Still. A couple new posters have targeted ol' george for his
acim-spiritual incorrectness. What's new, right? Well, ol' george is
obviously not going to change his ways/perception/mind/blah blah blah.
And so, the 'correction posts' from the newbies just serve to sustain
the conflict.
Not that conflict is bad. It just...is. All i can really say is I hope
the newbies have no expectations that they're gonna straighten out ol'
george because that doesnt seem very likely. lol
Debinski
Yes, George, I THINK I understand the point you're trying to make, but
I'm not at all sure that you understand the point I am trying to make.
I don't buy into this "it's all good" notion so popular these days.
Nor can I go along with reinterpreting history in such a way as to
elliminate "the bad guys." Without that contrast, there is no purpose
to remembering, speaking or writing of the past because there is
nothing to be learned from it. To learn from our mistakes we have to
be wiling to look at them as they are -- not at a whitewashed version
of them. In my experience the Holy Spirit doesn't cover over or deny
mistakes by calling them "good." In fact, He does just the opposite of
that. He removes my judgments/beliefs that would otherwise interpret
the events from that limited perspective so they can be seen as they
actually are. Learning from mistakes requires willingness to recognize
them as mistakes. It seems to me if your way of reinterpreting the
past was, in fact, the way the Holy Spirt reinterprets the past there
would be no ACIM at all. The Holy Spirit would simply say "It's all
good. Just keep on keepin' on."
Do YOU understand the point *I* am trying to make, George? "Good" is
just as much a judgment as is "evil." Judgment always gets in the way
of seeing things as they actually are. Does what is called "evil" work
for good? I would say yes. Not because the Course says so, but because
my experience seems to confirm it. I can even go so far -- as I said
previously -- as to say that since war has already happened it will
work for good. But it didn't HAVE to happen that way and does not have
to continue to happen that way. God doesn't plan war -- although He
does allow it -- men plan wars in ignorance of God.
> If I'm not willing to let him do
> this and there is any darkness I hold onto ANY event that things
> should have gone a different way or this shouldn't have happened then
> I'm holding onto a grievance. I'm not wiling to release the past and
> let the joyous present shine into my mind. This is why I say
> everything that has happened was perfect and according to God's
> perfect plan. Do you understand the point I'm trying to make?
>
So you're saying you can't remember past events as they actually
happened and learn from the mistakes you made without feeling
resentment. Is that what you're saying?
> This is all I'm saying that everything that happened in the past was
> part of God's perfect plan and exactly how it should have happened. If
> I'm not willing to say this and let go of ALL my grievances from the
> past I'm not willing to let the joyous present into my mind. If there
> is even one thing about the past I'm not wiling to let go of I can't
> know my true nature as I'm telling myself I'm not what I am in truth.
>
> Do you understand the point I'm trying to make and why it's so
> important to be able to say EVERYTHING that happened was what should
> have happened? I add my part in that God wanted it that way and it's
> part of his perfect plan for my salvation because it helps me to have
> faith in a perfect pure loving God but that part isn't needed.
>
I can say that "what happened is exactly what should have happened or
it wouldn't have happened," yes. I cannot, however, say that's the way
God wanted it to happen or that it was "good" or "perfect." My gosh, I
can't think of a single thing I EVER did perfectly or couldn't have
done better. I think there is a difference in "acceptance" -- not
holding grievance or resentment about the past, or the present for
that matter -- and "contentment." Do I accept/allow what is without
grievance? Absolutely. Am I content with what is? Absolutely not. The
way I see it, contentment is a fate worse than death. And I don't mean
that in the "self-improvement" sense so popular today. My Father is
Creative. How can I be unlike Him?
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
george
I would first off like to say I enjoy talking to you. You come across
as someone easy to like and make your points with ease and clarity in
a non threatening nice way. We might never agree but it's nice to be
able to discuss this in a nice way where I might learn something.
> Nor can I go along with reinterpreting history in such a way as to
> elliminate "the bad guys." Without that contrast, there is no purpose
> to remembering, speaking or writing of the past because there is
> nothing to be learned from it.
Here is where we go different directions. What I believe IS to be
learned from the past that there Is no bad guys and never has been.
Only in my insanity did I choose to judge them in a way that sees them
as bad. And by my choice of that NOW to see them that way the badness
is transferred to me because I have to fight against it. Fighting and
goodness are opposites and now I'm choosing to believe I'm bad by
seeing it. I could see it another way..you used the word whitewashed
father down and to the ego it IS whitewashed and STUPID and not true.
They ARE EVIL and need to be condemned. But lets not forget there is
another way to see them...you can call it whitewashed if you want but
it IS another way. So doesn't it follow that because there are 2 ways
of seeing the same event that the only difference between the
whitewashed way and the ego's harsh condemning way is my CHOICE of how
I WANT to see it? Neither of the ways can be fact because there are 2
ways to see it. So doesn't it then follow that IF I want peace and joy
in my life I WANT to look for peace and joy. Peace and joy flood in as
long as there are no REASONS not to have them as that is my natural
state. The only reason I don't feel peace and joy is because I hold
grievances that MUST come from seeing the "bad" in anyone or anything.
To learn from our mistakes we have to
> be wiling to look at them as they are -- not at a whitewashed version
> of them.
Okay let's go back to when I donated my things and cash to the drug
addict that came into my house when no one was here. You can call that
a whitewashed insane way to look at it. But what is my goal here on
earth. Do I want peace, joy and happiness or do I want hate, conflict
and sorrow.
Okay I set the goal. It talks of this in ACIM. The goal IS peace joy
and happiness. Someone comes into my house and takes $20,000-$30,000.
It's already happened and the past can't be changed. Do I REALLY WANT
my goal? Then how can I see what happened so I may achieve my goal. Oh
yeah God has been VERY good to me and I overflow with abundance.
Wouldn't it be great to give of my abundance to someone that doesn't
know their own abundance. Of course it would and this ACHIEVES my goal
and there is nothing to forgive and no reason to call the police. This
works in EVERY situation and all it takes is the willingness to let go
of my grievance and what God never created..hate evil conflict and to
see them through the Holy Spirit's eyes in a different light that
calls forth love and joy...That is my goal and HOW I'm healed.
In my experience the Holy Spirit doesn't cover over or deny
> mistakes by calling them "good." In fact, He does just the opposite of
> that. He removes my judgments/beliefs that would otherwise interpret
> the events from that limited perspective so they can be seen as they
> actually are. Learning from mistakes requires willingness to recognize
> them as mistakes. It seems to me if your way of reinterpreting the
> past was, in fact, the way the Holy Spirt reinterprets the past there
> would be no ACIM at all.
ACIM taught me this. I didn't know it before I read ACIM, did the
lesson and applied ACIM's lessons and principles in my everyday life.
So Jesus wrote ACIM to help those that want help. I did and still do.
The Holy Spirit would simply say "It's all
> good. Just keep on keepin' on."
let me go further on that statement," and when you are ready to see
that only light, love and joy exist just open your eyes because it's
true.
>
> Do YOU understand the point *I* am trying to make, George? "Good" is
> just as much a judgment as is "evil."
Agreed. The difference is where does each lead me. Evil hate and
conflict wrong mindedness leads to feeling of pain, sorrow and
suffering. This is one side of the split mind it's easy to see by how
I FEEL. The other side what I call goodness love and peace right
mindedness lead to the feelings of joy peace and love. God is love he
isn't hate or pain so any perception I have that doesn't lead to my
feeling of joy peace and love MUST be a deception and need to be re-
looked at so I can choose again as another way to see it is always
available and one that leads to joy.
Judgment always gets in the way
> of seeing things as they actually are. Does what is called "evil" work
> for good? I would say yes.
Then it's good, not evil. Those two terms are opposites. It's either
one or the other.
Not because the Course says so, but because
> my experience seems to confirm it. I can even go so far -- as I said
> previously -- as to say that since war has already happened it will
> work for good. But it didn't HAVE to happen that way and does not have
> to continue to happen that way.
How can you say something didn't have to happen. If it DID happen, the
past is gone and can't be changed. That's fighting the reality of what
did happen and leads to unhappiness. Unhappiness is not my goal or my
true nature as God created me.
God doesn't plan war -- although He
> does allow it -- men plan wars in ignorance of God.
>
> > If I'm not willing to let him do
> > this and there is any darkness I hold onto ANY event that things
> > should have gone a different way or this shouldn't have happened then
> > I'm holding onto a grievance. I'm not wiling to release the past and
> > let the joyous present shine into my mind. This is why I say
> > everything that has happened was perfect and according to God's
> > perfect plan. Do you understand the point I'm trying to make?
>
> So you're saying you can't remember past events as they actually
> happened and learn from the mistakes you made without feeling
> resentment. Is that what you're saying?
Okay let's talk about my drug addicting as an example. I could choose
to see my drug addiction as a mistake, a horrible thing that thank God
I don't do anymore. That's one choice and in that choice is my
condemnation of myself at the time I was doing the drugs. In that
choice is also my condemnation of all drug addicts that are currently
using. True?
Or I could choose to leave condemnation and guilt completely out of
the picture as they are not a part of me in truth. So instead I see my
drug addiction as a good thing that taught me I don't want to use
drugs or alcohol. Remember what my goal is. This perception leads me
towards my goal not away from it as the other one does.
>
> > This is all I'm saying that everything that happened in the past was
> > part of God's perfect plan and exactly how it should have happened. If
> > I'm not willing to say this and let go of ALL my grievances from the
> > past I'm not willing to let the joyous present into my mind. If there
> > is even one thing about the past I'm not wiling to let go of I can't
> > know my true nature as I'm telling myself I'm not what I am in truth.
>
> > Do you understand the point I'm trying to make and why it's so
> > important to be able to say EVERYTHING that happened was what should
> > have happened? I add my part in that God wanted it that way and it's
> > part of his perfect plan for my salvation because it helps me to have
> > faith in a perfect pure loving God but that part isn't needed.
>
> I can say that "what happened is exactly what should have happened or
> it wouldn't have happened," yes. I cannot, however, say that's the way
> God wanted it to happen or that it was "good" or "perfect." My gosh, I
> can't think of a single thing I EVER did perfectly or couldn't have
> done better.
But couldn't you if you wanted let go of all that and just let God
tell you that you ARE perfect, everything happened for a reason and
you did the best you could at that moment with what you knew then? You
did, everyone does. This is true acceptance of God's love.
I think there is a difference in "acceptance" -- not
> holding grievance or resentment about the past, or the present for
> that matter -- and "contentment." Do I accept/allow what is without
> grievance? Absolutely.
The only way to accept something without grievance is to not have any
REASON for grievance. That means whatever happened had to be good and
in your best interest. If any part of me is holding onto any shred of
that it wasn't all good and it wasn't in my best interest then BOOM
it's impossible NOT to have a grievance because I'm choosing to have a
reason for a grievance.
Am I content with what is? Absolutely not. The
> way I see it, contentment is a fate worse than death. And I don't mean
> that in the "self-improvement" sense so popular today. My Father is
> Creative. How can I be unlike Him?
>
> >
>
>
>
> > > IF God has a perfect plan, I don't think my finite mind can come close
> > > to understanding what that plan might be.
>
> > Me neither, that's why I accept whatever happened or happens as a part
> > of his plan. In this way I build faith in him instead or tearing it
> > down. I think faith is an important part of my spiritual development.
>
> > I tend to rely on the
>
> > > Biblical statement to explain God's role in what
>
> ...
>
> read more »
Carrie
Everyone must be attracted to this ng for some reason, for their own
personal lessons.
Even George.
Philomene
>> The notion is that A Course in Miracles is about a simple, fool-proof
>> effective and complete method of mental healing which can be quickly
>> learned and taught, while greater mastering of this method is learned by
>> repetition over time.<
>
> So you agree with this statement (from the Thompson
> material)? :"Students' cannot just turn to the Holy Spirit and expect
> that function to be there for them when they have for millenniums' cut
> themselves off from the right mind and Holy Spirit since they believe
> that their ego's identity and existence depends on this separation."
>
> If so, how do you reconcile that with "Heaven waits not upon time, but
> welcome." And "Heaven is here. Where else could it be? Heaven is now.
> There is no other time?"
I don't know if I agree. I'd have to see the larger context.
As I read and understand the Atonement process, this process is
predicated on the student being able to experience and return the mind
to a state of inner peace. I agree this ability is simple and natural
and there essential for the asking, but its not a given. In other words,
the student must learn to quite her mind.
I'm also open to the idea that Jesus or another "Master," operates as an
necessary intermediary until the student can directly access the HS.
What I think is refreshing is Molly Thompson if bringing back Jesus as
an important part of A Course in Miracles after much effort by some
teachers to reduce the author to a symbol.
>
>
>> The method is if one is out of peace or not feeling complete peace and
>> joy --one can ask for mental healing through miracles and the
>> intercession of the Holy Spirit by remembering peace, FEELING peace,
>> then choosing peace at the emotional/feeling level, while sincerely
>> reciting the Atonement affirmation/prayer at the end of Ch 5 of the text.
>>
>> Part of the pre-condition or pre-learning of this method is
>> learning/experiencing how to access peace through meditation or group
>> meditation. But accessing peace is both easily taught and learned in a
>> group and learning to do the Atonement is simple and never fails. If a
>> student asks for correction whenever she is out of peace, eventually and
>> over time the mind is healed. That's it. That's the whole Course in
>> Miracles. There ain't no more.
>>
>
> Well, my copy says "salvation is a secret you have kept but from
> yourself. The universe proclaims it so." Which tells me God is
> gracious enough to bring whatever guilty feelings *I* need to undo to
> my attention without MY having to seek them out by specifcally
> prescribed methods.
I have no idea what you are arguing about or arguing for.
The promise of The Course is the Mind can be healed, and the promise of
The Course is this method of healing is simple, fool-proof and ego-proof
and with demonstrable results.
In fact, without such a method of healing ACIM is just another book of
feel-good, comforting religious philosophy. One would expect the author
would accurately and specifically describe this method, and the proof
that the student/reader understands the author's prescribed method is
that the method works and has demonstrable results.
I couldn't care less what "Teacher," after the fact figures out and
articulates the author's method for mental healing, because the
demonstration that the Course teaches a simple, fool-proof, exact method
of mental healing is necessary to advance course study and the overall
Atonement. So the test is pragmatic. What Molly T. prescribes either
heals the mind or it doesn't.
Nor do I find any indication within the pages of
> the book that this can't be done without placing yet another idea
> between myself and God -- those ideas being Holy Spirit, Jesus, Molly
> Thompson. Can God be reached directly or not?
If you can reach God directly then show how you do it. Teach your method
to others. Show that it will work, work simple and work for everyone.
>
>
>
>> Thompson is saying the same thing but with more elaboration and more
>> self-questioning and processing. I can accept that, but I think the
>> steadfast acceptance/feeling of profound inner peace at the emotional
>> level is most importance and trumps all need to do self-analysis.
>>
>> You could call first generation course study "A Course in Forgiveness,"
>> rather than A Course in Miracles. Too often mental healing was
>> articulated as "doing the lessons." Mental healing was often explained
>> as forgiveness without a mention of miracles, with confused, often
>> contradictory notions about how one forgives. Often some form of
>> forgiveness to destroy was the method du jour of first generation course
>> study. So to me, Thompson apparently integrating forgiveness with
>> miracles and Jesus into a workable, effective correction process with
>> demonstrable results is a major event in the course world.
>>
>> As far as her authority coming from Jesus --that will be proved or
>> disproved over time. Speaking from authority and abusing authority is
>> two different things. Thompson raises the bar high and will be roundly
>> criticized if she abuses or misuses her claimed authority.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>
> IMO, she has already misused it when she tells all others to cease and
> desist from teaching A Course in Miracles until they have learned her
> method. Btw I notice you haven't followed that directive. Or have you?
> Have you chosen to teach the Course only as it is explained on Molly's
> blog -- as she says Jesus says is incumbent upon you to do?
All this rhetoric goes with the territory.
Thompson is either channeling Jesus or she' not.
If she's not then all her directives or unlikely to mean much and she
will be caught in some major error.
On the other hand if she is channeling Jesus, the real Jesus, the author
of The Course, then its likely she will be well guided.
Debinski
Thanks, George. You seem like a nice guy, too, and very sincere in
your beliefs. I don't think you're hearing anything I'm suggesting to
you, but that's okay, too. I have no interest in convincing you of
anything. If you're happy with your beliefs. You're happy with your
beliefs. I'm only suggesting that belief that "evil is really good"
isn't necessary. Evil does not exist. It only seems to exist in
language. That's the truth. It's true whether you or I or anyone else
believes it or doesn't believe it. Truth doesn't need my permission or
acceptance to be true.
So when I write "bad guys" I'm not condemning anyone. I'm not even
judging anyone, I'm just using language in the only way it can be
useful -- discerning contrast. When I say "God doesn't plan war. Men
plan war in ignorance of God," I'm not saying anything other than what
Jesus said as he hung on the cross "Father forgive them for they know
not what they do." There was no condemnation in that. But he did NOT
say "this is good" either. "They know not what they do." If they knew,
they would do. No one knows God and chooses to oppose Him. We can
forget or ignore Him but He has no opposite.
It also seems easy enough -- to me -- for anyone willing to look to
see that belief IS the cause of all conflict in the mind whether you
believe in goodness or in evil -- belief separates the mind -- the
part that believes and the part that doesn't really believe. And it
separates the world into "those who agree with what I believe" and
"those who don't agree with what I believe." That conflict in the mind
IS the cause of war in the world, no matter how "peaceful" you believe
yourself to be. And no, that's not a condemnation of belief either.
It's just a fact. Unless there is a part of the mind that does not
believe, belief isn't necessary. When Truth is revealed, belief is
undone, which is what *I* think A Course in Miracles is all about. It
isn't a Course in changing my story ABOUT the world but getting all
such stories (illusion) out of the way to reveal the world as it is --
what is called "the real world" or "the forgiven world." It isn't
about exchanging a belief that "I am a guilty sinner" for a belief
that "I am an innocent Son of God." It's about getting all belief
about who you are out of the way to reveal who you already are and
always have been.
I'm not telling you what I believe, George. I'm describing what I see.
I write only from experience. I don't repeat anything I don't know
from experience to be true -- or if I do I will say "The Course says,
but I don't know." But I get the impression you're not interested in
understanding that evil doesn't exist and if that's the case, then I'm
just wasting my time explaining it, right?
Debinski
Maybe because I'm not arguing for or against anything.
> The promise of The Course is the Mind can be healed, and the promise of
> The Course is this method of healing is simple, fool-proof and ego-proof
> and with demonstrable results.
>
> In fact, without such a method of healing ACIM is just another book of
> feel-good, comforting religious philosophy. One would expect the author
> would accurately and specifically describe this method, and the proof
> that the student/reader understands the author's prescribed method is
> that the method works and has demonstrable results.
>
> I couldn't care less what "Teacher," after the fact figures out and
> articulates the author's method for mental healing, because the
> demonstration that the Course teaches a simple, fool-proof, exact method
> of mental healing is necessary to advance course study and the overall
> Atonement. So the test is pragmatic. What Molly T. prescribes either
> heals the mind or it doesn't.
>
> Nor do I find any indication within the pages of
>
> > the book that this can't be done without placing yet another idea
> > between myself and God -- those ideas being Holy Spirit, Jesus, Molly
> > Thompson. Can God be reached directly or not?
>
> If you can reach God directly then show how you do it. Teach your method
> to others. Show that it will work, work simple and work for everyone.
>
I don't presume that I can improve upon what is already given. Didn't
you say yourself that the Course is "fool-proof?" Doesn't the Course
itself say "This is a simple Course?" If people don't "get it," it's
because they don't want to get it yet. When they want to hear, they
will hear. If there were a "better way" don't you think we would have
found it by now? Just an hour or so ago, I read a quote on the POG
forum that says it far better than I ever could:
"I have said that the ego's rule is, 'Seek and do not find.'
Translated into curricular terms this means, 'Try to learn but do not
succeed.' The result of this curriculum goal is obvious. Every
legitimate teaching aid, every real instruction, and every sensible
guide to learning will be misinterpreted, since they are all for
facilitating the learning this strange curriculum is against. If you
are trying to learn how not to learn, and the aim of your teaching is
to defeat itself, what can you expect but confusion? Such a curriculum
does not make sense." [T210f/226]
And where is it written that I can't say the Jesus I know and love
does not compel, demand and mandate. He leads and suggests. When
people called the Jesus I know and love "teacher" he is said to have
responded "Why do you call me teacher? You have one teacher, your
Father in Heaven." He didn't go here and there telling people who he
was he asked "Who do you say that I am?"
The statement that "only Molly Thompson and one other student are
capable of recognzing what ego is up to" sounds far more like ego than
the Jesus I know and love. Have *I* not just as much right to say so
as she has to say that he said it?
- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
george
I could have sworn I said evil doesn't exist in truth but only in the
mind of the one that wants it.
Thanks for your thoughts I enjoyed reading them. It seems to me we are
heading in the same direction just taking a different train.
>
> > > Nor can I go along with reinterpreting history in such a way as to
> > > elliminate "the bad guys." Without that contrast, there is no purpose
> > > to remembering, speaking or writing of the past because there is
> > > nothing to be learned from it.
>
> > Here is where we go different directions. What I believe IS to be
> > learned from the past that there Is no bad guys and never has been.
> > Only in my insanity did I choose to judge them in a way that sees them
> > as bad. And by my choice of that NOW to see them that way the badness
> > is transferred to me because I have to fight
>
> ...
>
> read more »
Philomene
>> All this rhetoric goes with the territory.
>>
>> Thompson is either channeling Jesus or she' not.
>>
>> If she's not then all her directives or unlikely to mean much and she
>> will be caught in some major error.
>>
>> On the other hand if she is channeling Jesus, the real Jesus, the author
>> of The Course, then its likely she will be well guided.
>
> And where is it written that I can't say the Jesus I know and love
> does not compel, demand and mandate. He leads and suggests.
Obviously it is NOT written anywhere.
You can believe what you wish to believe about Jesus and others can
believe what they wish to believe.
Of course how Jesus does things most likely has little to do with what
others choose to believe about him.
Debinski
Yes, George, you did say that "evil doesn't exist in truth." The rest
of what you say doesn't sound much like you understand what that means
though. Maybe you do and I'm just misunderstanding. Thanks for the
conversation.
>
>
>
>
> > > > Nor can I go along
>
Debinski
Hi George, I have no idea why my previous response came through blank
and hadn't noticed that it did. Yes, you did say that "evil doesn't
exist in truth but only the mind of the one that wants it." But most
of what you say seems to me to indicate you don't really understand
that evil doesn't exist, but only believe that it doesn't exist at
some "level" other than the level at which we are trying to
communicate.If you truly understand that "evil does not exist in
truth" why would there be any need to reinterpret it? Why would you
not simply accept that the word "evil" doesn't point toward anything
real but only toward an apparent absence of what is real? If you
understand that "evil doesn't exist' why can't the word be used
without conjuring up images of condemnation, resentment and grievance?
I'm pretty sure the Course says somewhere that in order to understand
something, you first have to love it. Can we truly love what is called
"evil" by simply changing its name?
>
>
>
>
> > > > Nor can I go along
>
george
I have to do that when I forget and believe the lies the ego told me
that this or that was wrong, evil, bad.
Then I have to choose again because I need healing. I have a split
mind that I'm choosing to heal by understanding that evil doesn't
exist so it CAN'T be seen except in my fantasies.
If I'm seeing it, I KNOW I'm mistaken and need to ask for help to see
whatever has me deceived so I can see whatever it is truely so that I
understand whatever it is has no evil, tragedy or hate in it.
Why would you
> not simply accept that the word "evil" doesn't point toward anything
> real but only toward an apparent absence of what is real?
It's easy for me to accept yes evil doesn't exist but I make mistakes
and SEE it and so I need help to get back to the truth that it doesn't
exist. This IS the healing of the split mind. It is the choice to see
what is there, what God created and to not see what isn't, what he
didn't create, and in this choice comes the healing of me and the
world I see and experience.
If you
> understand that "evil doesn't exist' why can't the word be used
> without conjuring up images of condemnation, resentment and grievance?
Because that is evil's meaning. It's bad and HAS to be fought against
wherever it is seen, because it's evil and no one likes evil. If it
was all good there would be no fight as everyone likes good. It's the
seeing of it that makes it true for me and then I know I need help.
> I'm pretty sure the Course says somewhere that in order to understand
> something, you first have to love it. Can we truly love what is called
> "evil" by simply changing its name?
Of course not because evil doesn't exist except in the mind that WANTS
to see it and isn't wiling to let it go. God can show that mind the
truth if it is WILLING to let go of the evil it thinks it sees. The
truth being it doesn't and never has existed.
george
wrote. The posts are too long that why it doesn't show up. I did
answer you.
Pieter
"george" <georgec...@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:267b9611-ca3c-4a2a...@g1g2000pra.googlegroups.com...
> You just have to click the read more to see the responses and what you
> wrote. The posts are too long that why it doesn't show up. I did
> answer you.
A good habit would be cutting the parts of a post
which can be missed; are no longer of direct relevance.
Debinski
>
> > Deb: Hi George, I have no idea why my previous response came through blank
> > and hadn't noticed that it did. Yes, you did say that "evil doesn't
> > exist in truth but only the mind of the one that wants it." But most
> > of what you say seems to me to indicate you don't really understand
> > that evil doesn't exist, but only believe that it doesn't exist at
> > some "level" other than the level at which we are trying to
> > communicate.If you truly understand that "evil does not exist in
> > truth" why would there be any need to reinterpret it?
>
> George: I have to do that when I forget and believe the lies the ego told me
> that this or that was wrong, evil, bad.
Yes, this is what we keep coming back to, isn't it? If you believe
evil does not exist then the part of the mind that does NOT really
believe evil does not exist and attaches blame/resentment to it will
continue to reassert itself and have to be subdued or denied again and
again. If, on the other hand, you understand that evil does not exist,
you need never reinterpret it again because there won't be any blame
or resentment attached to it. Guilt isn't in the words. It's in past
associates with the words. A Course in Miracles isn't about
reallocating guilt, or calling it by a new name. It's about undoing
the belief that causes it. We can SEEM to do that one little event at
a time and project salvation into an imaginary future for a year or
for lifetimes. IOW, keep trying to become what we are not. Or we can
just "go for the jugular" by finding out whether we ever really
opposed God in the first place. When it is truly understood that *I*
never disobeyed God -- that God indeed has no opposite, it's not
possible to believe other people are disobeying or opposing Him
either. As we're told, however, that is what ego fears most -- looking
within and finding no guilt. When no guilt is found within, there can
be no guilt without either because within and without are exactly the
same thing.
>
> Then I have to choose again because I need healing. I have a split
> mind that I'm choosing to heal by understanding that evil doesn't
> exist so it CAN'T be seen except in my fantasies.<
What is the cause of that "split mind," George? Isn't the "you" that
you say is choosing to heal it actually its cause?
>
> If I'm seeing it, I KNOW I'm mistaken and need to ask for help to see
> whatever has me deceived so I can see whatever it is truely so that I
> understand whatever it is has no evil, tragedy or hate in it.
>
> Why would you
>
> > not simply accept that the word "evil" doesn't point toward anything
> > real but only toward an apparent absence of what is real?
>
> It's easy for me to accept yes evil doesn't exist but I make mistakes
> and SEE it and so I need help to get back to the truth that it doesn't
> exist. This IS the healing of the split mind. It is the choice to see
> what is there, what God created and to not see what isn't, what he
> didn't create, and in this choice comes the healing of me and the
> world I see and experience.
>
I'm not talking about "accepting" that evil doesn't exist, George.
Acceptance/rejection is a process of thought. Thought can't heal
thought. Understanding that heals comes from outside the thought
process. A "me" choosing to heal is the very thing hiding the health
that is already here.
Debinski
Mike
> On Nov 20, 2:21 pm, Debinski <debdaniel...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 20, 2:16 pm, Debinski <debdaniel...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Nov 20, 1:27 pm, Philomene <qqjo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Nov 19, 10:54 am, Deborah <debdaniel...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Nov 18, 3:24 pm, aumorchestra <maz.we...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > LOL, fam, just arrived is Deborah not from (BC) which I mistakenly
> > > > > > took for Deborah (BC). My apologies to both.
>
> > > > > > please welcome Deborah as a new contributor. She is writing blogs and
> > > > > > inspires me on other lists. So, dear Deborah, what can we do to
> > > > > > distinguish you with Debroah (BC). Maybe Debinsky is a solution. But
> > > > > > plerase introduce yourself to this wonderful board.
>
> > > > > > The only ACIM board in the Universe where God's Children have to
> > > > > > moderate themselves gladly. Or not :-)
>
> > > > > > oneLove, mazwww.acimradio.net
>
> > > > > Thanks, Maz. "Debinski" works for me, but with an "i" not a "y" so as
> > > > > to ensure that I am recognized as an "ignorant pollack" -- with my
> > > > > apologies to any other "pollacks" here -- whether ignorant or not. I
> > > > > speak only for myself. I might add that I am blonde as well. Or once
> > > > > was anyway and still am thanks to the wonderful, magical use of
> > > > > peroxide. So, if you happen to read any of my comments, please
> > > > > remember I am just another dumb, blonde pollack and don't take
> > > > > anything I may or may not write too seriously. I am often rather vocal
> > > > > about anything attributed to Jesus and have been too busy the past
> > > > > couple of days stirring up "controversy" overMollyThompson's claim
> > > > > that she is one of only two people officially "authorized by Jesus" to
> > > > > explain A Course in Miracles to the rest of us peons to get too
> > > > > involved in discussions here. For which you may just want to give
> > > > > thanks to God.
>
> > > > > Debinski
>
> > > > Who is Molly Thompson? What does she teach about ACIM?
>
> > > > Please don't tell me the other authorized teacher is Ken Wapnick.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > but I don't think it's NOT Ken Wapnick as this "new teaching" is being
> > > called "Phase II" -- which left me with the impression "Jesus" has
> > > decided to pass the golden sceptor on to Molly Thompson. Apparently,
> > > Gary Renard failed the test. <smile> Molly Thompson is a "mental
> > > health professional" who claims to have been working with Jesus "in
> > > spirit" for 25 years. She says she is channeling Jesus AND at the same
> > > time has achieved such an astoundingly superior ability to recognize
> > > what ego is up to that "Jesus" now wants the rest of us to know that
> > > only she and one other person have completed "Phase I" of the Course
> > > teaching and are therefore capable of teaching the rest of us how to
> > > "recognize ego" and "uncover guilt." I probably wouldn't have given
> > > her a second thought if an invitation to join in a study group of her
> > > materials hadn't been extended to me. I mean it's not unusual for
> > > someone or another to make such claims. What surprised me was that
> > > some teachers I respect are not only supporting and promoting her
> > > teaching but justifying her claims to exclusivity: In her own words
> > > (or I mean in "Jesus words") here's her message "To Teachers of A
> > > Course in Miracles":
>
> > > "Up to now, I have not intervened into the activities of students of
> > > A Course in Miracles. They could do whatever they wished, for example,
> > > they could teach, publish web sites and books, write blogs and so
> > > forth all during this period when I was testing out my Spiritual Path.
> > > But now I have begun to ask serious students no matter how long they
> > > have studied A Course in Miracles to first consider their preparedness
> > > for Phase II and if they determine they are prepared after carefully
> > > considering all the requirements, then I want them to just begin
> > > practicing the Process of Forgiveness in a certain way. Also, I want
> > > leaders of Study Groups and students in them to follow certain
> > > guidelines relating to how these Groups function. These changes are
> > > all in the best interests of students because the Path that I am
> > > laying out will expedite their spiritual advancement in the best way
> > > possible. Therefore, the Post below called “Overview of Phase II,
> > > Study Group Procedures & The Beginning Process of Forgiveness,” which
> > > includes Section 1-3 is important to read because this material
> > > discusses these changes and how to go about them.
>
> > > Since there are many students of A Course in Miracles teaching A
> > > Course in Miracles, I am asking that these teachers follow and begin
> > > to implement what I have presented in the aforementioned Post too.
> > > Overall, I am aware that many teaching Centers and their teachers
> > > depend upon teaching A Course in Miracles to make a living. Anyone who
> > > is doing this is also being asked to focus their teaching efforts on
> > > the preparatory work that is necessary in order for students to begin
> > > Phase II where they will work with me or work with a Master Teacher
> > > Guide I have assigned to a student whom I have trained to guide and
> > > help students in many special ways. All the preparatory work needs to
> > > be done from the Text, A Course of Miracles, and from this blog.
>
> > > If you have any questions, please refer them to Molly Thompson using
> > > her e-mail of mthom...@aol.com
>
> > > Sincerely yours,
>
> > > Jesus
>
> > > Written through Molly Thompson
>
> > >http://miraclemethod4forgiveness.wordpress.com/
>
> > > Debinski- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
>
> > "Again, I want to reiterate, unless a student has gone through this
> > Second Phase with Jesus, and so far only Molly and one other student
> > have done this effectively, they cannot know what the ego is up to.
> > Therefore, at this time, *** it is incumbent upon students *** to put
> > their trust in what Jesus is asking them to do and thus refrain from
> > all types of teaching so they do not further maintain and reinforce
> > their ego in any of the ways mentioned above [publish books on A
> > Course of Miracles, give workshops, write blogs, setup and run forums
> > on the Internet and have Web Sites devoted to information on A Course
> > in Miracles]."- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> claim "Jesus says" and proceed to say things *I* don't think anyone in
> their right mind could ever believe "Jesus said." But since you DID
> ask, anyone interested in my views on the subject can find my blog
> posts -- "Approved Teachers?" and "Approved Teachers - Part 2" here:
>
> http://ddanielski.xanga.com/
>
> Maz says she's just a teacher of a small study group and if I want to
> get my panties in an uproar about something why NOT go after Ken
> Wapnick? But I figure he's already got enough of the "big guns" going
> after him. I do set my sights on Renard from time to time though.
> <smile>- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Read Molly Thompson's blogs. Nothing new there. One could learn
more from Molly Hatchet or even Molly Ringwold.
george
I agree with you here, my problem is I believe I'm human and that I
live within this body. It would be BS for me to say I don't or that
I'm perfect and never see evil or that I'm always at peace at this
moment. ACIM has taught me how to undo that when I deceive myself and
see what can't and doesn't actually exist.
ACIM is practical, it's taking me where I believe I am and is leading
me gently back to my true nature by my choices of letting go of what
doesn't exist.
From God's timeless point of view statements like, there is no world
and time doesn't exist make perfect sense but from my point of view
right now in time, they don't seem reasonable or make sense to me. I'd
be lying if I said they do as I'm experiencing this world in time.
This is the same as saying there is no evil but then perceiving it in
any form. That makes no sense to me as I have seen it with my own eyes
and I must believe it or I couldn't have seen it. ACIM has taught me
that all I've done is deceive myself and that all I need do is ask for
a different way to perceive the seeming evil that shines it away and
brings me back to the truth that it doesn't exist.
You called it a whitewashed perception earlier, I call it seeing the
truth and letting go of the false.
It seems reasonable and makes sense to me that I can see things in two
ways where one is true and one is false because I can always do that
right now if I choose to as I've explained before. It doesn't seems
reasonable or make any sense to me to say there is no evil if I'm
seeing it with my own eyes now or in the past. Because my choice of
seeing the evil has made it real for me even if it doesn't exist in
truth.
IMO anyone that doesn't actually believe there is evil, has no split
mind and no ego and evil can't be perceived by them at all. I'm here,
I have a split mind, why deny the truth instead of letting God help me
to heal it by my choice of perceptions where I let go of all the hate
and evil that never existed in truth anyway.
When it is truly understood that *I*
> never disobeyed God -- that God indeed has no opposite
, it's not
> possible to believe other people are disobeying or opposing Him
> either.
Since I know this to be true, then doesn't it make sense that
everything in the past, present and future is perfect and part of
God's perfect plan? That everyone IS doing exactly what they are
supposed to be doing at this moment to learn the lesson they need to
learn.
As we're told, however, that is what ego fears most -- looking
> within and finding no guilt. When no guilt is found within, there can
> be no guilt without either because within and without are exactly the
> same thing.
>
>
>
> > Then I have to choose again because I need healing. I have a split
> > mind that I'm choosing to heal by understanding that evil doesn't
> > exist so it CAN'T be seen except in my fantasies.<
>
> What is the cause of that "split mind," George? Isn't the "you" that
> you say is choosing to heal it actually its cause?
No doubt but to deny this is what I'm experiencing would be lying to
myself and that can't be helpful. I'm talking about a practical method
anyone can understand and apply that brings heaven to earth. To say
evil doesn't exist and to not experience that in the world I know,
makes no sense to me. I'm talking about experiencing that evil doesn't
exist now, in this world, by my choices of letting God show me the
truth in every perception.
Mike
George: What one person sees as an act of evil another person
sees as a call for love. It is as simple as
that.
>
> When it is truly understood that *I*
>
> > never disobeyed God -- that God indeed has no opposite
>
> , it's not
>
> > possible to believe other people are disobeying or opposing Him
> > either.
>
> Since I know this to be true, then doesn't it make sense that
> everything in the past, present and future is perfect and part of
> God's perfect plan? That everyone IS doing exactly what they are
> supposed to be doing at this moment to learn the lesson they need to
> learn.
The past, present and future are part of the ego's almost
perfect
plan. I think your statement that 'everyone IS doing exactly
what
they are supposed to be doing at this moment' is fatalistic.
If
everyone was doing everything they were supposed to be doing
then why do anything at all? Why a celestial speed-up for
instance? Why speed up that which is 'perfect'?
> > Debinski- Hide quoted text -
george
When you say fatalistic are you talking about destiny?
> If
> everyone was doing everything they were supposed to be doing
> then why do anything at all?
So I can understand my true nature. I don't and need God's help to me.
I'm the one not understanding my perfection but that doesn't me I'm
not perfect. I just have to bring my true nature into my awareness.
Why a celestial speed-up for
> instance?
To minimize the pain to the one's that don't understand it's all
perfect.
Why speed up that which is 'perfect'?
The speed up is part of the perfect plan. No matter what happens it
HAS to be perfect and the way it was supposed to be unless I choose to
believe in a powerless God.
>
>
>
Mike
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
George, I don't know where to start with all of that. So, I
don't
think that I will.
Happy
Thank you for teaching how to not teach... again.
LOL
Carrie
This is actaully a good point.
I get a ride with someone, and seems like as soon as I'm in the car she
starts in lecturing me about things. I should be doing this, or that, and
not doing, etc. Opinionated might be the word. After this, I sometimes (more
and more) think to myself "do I ever do this to someone else? And does it
ever do any good, does the person feel motivated to do or not do what they
feel lectured about?"
When I am tempted to "say something" (like lecture someone on something
they are doing I don't think is good for them, or tell them how they SHOULD
be living their life) I think of this.
Much better to just look at them in a different way, what I feel might
be better- like "innocent" and a Child of God, part of the Sonship, and who
am I to judge them and decide what their life (and lessons) are or should
be.
So, the person lecturing me is helping me learn and I am grateful.
Mike
>
> - Show quoted text -
It doesn't get more dramatic than this, Phil.
It sure doesn't, Mel. Bottom of the ninth, bases loaded, down two
runs, two away and Happy steps to the plate.
I'm a little surprised they're sending in Happy to pinch hit, Phil
His slugging percentage with men on base is not good this year.
Not good at all.
That's right, Mel. A dismal .138. But maybe the manager thinks
he's due.
Maybe, Phil. Let's see. The wind up; the pitch; a swing and a
miss.
He won't get a better look than that. You know, the book on Happy
is he can't hit the curve ball. And he's a sucker for high balls
away.
The delivery; the pitch; called strike two. Happy looks a little
un-
comfortable up there, don't you think?
Too many hotdogs?
Ha ha.
He has to produce or the word is he'll not be renewed next year.
I can feel the tension.
Count is 0 and 2; the wind up; the pitch. Strike three. Called out
on strikes with the bat still on his shoulder. Go figure.
eluq
Thanks for the good discussion. I'm going to interpret what I hear you
(trying :)) to say, George. I hear you describing the miracle process --
"A miracle is a correction. It does not create, nor really change at all.
It merely looks on devastation, and reminds the mind that what it sees is
false. It undoes error, but does not attempt to go beyond perception, nor
exceed the function of forgiveness. Thus it stays within time's limits.
Yet it paves the way for the return of timelessness and love's awakening,
for fear must slip away under the gentle remedy it brings."
By definition a miracle is hard to define. Fun to try to describe something
that transcends description. If it was easy to explain or define it
wouldn't be a miracle. It would just be more form. I hear you saying you
are open to the following -- "A miracle inverts perception which was upside
down before, and thus it ends the strange distortions that were manifest."
Imo what gets kindof hinky is the separate will mind will dictate the
process and assume it is in charge and that it can perceive correctly and is
still the authority. Hard to not believe interpreting perception in this or
that way affects the mind. The only truish perception is seeing the world
as forgiven (not real) Probably healing comes from giving this thought up.
George/et al. has the capability to allow the miracle process and George/et
al. has the capablility of limiting the miracle process by judging
perception as real. Guessing it is so very subtle from this temporal
position that there is the willingness to decide that I am as God created me
and willingness to accept that it takes a miracle to transcend the thoughts
of a mind without contradicting, rebutting, or making the thoughts real.
thanks again
jon
"george" <georgec...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2d73362b-7fbb-4dfe...@z4g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
MikeRyder
>On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 02:21:23 -0800 (PST), Happy
><happyd...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> � � � � �George, I don't know where to start with all of that. �So, I
>>> don't
>>> � think that I will.
>>
>>Thank you for teaching how to not teach... again.
>>
>>LOL
>
>Could you be confused, Happy? Mike isn't Mike Ryder.
>
>Deborah (BC)
Wow, i sure am your and happy-whatever's personal devil, arent I! lol
george
> Hi George,
>
> Thanks for the good discussion.
Sure, it's fun to share what I've learned.
I'm going to interpret what I hear you
> (trying :)) to say, George. I hear you describing the miracle process --
> "A miracle is a correction. It does not create, nor really change at all.
> It merely looks on devastation, and reminds the mind that what it sees is
> false. It undoes error, but does not attempt to go beyond perception, nor
> exceed the function of forgiveness. Thus it stays within time's limits.
> Yet it paves the way for the return of timelessness and love's awakening,
> for fear must slip away under the gentle remedy it brings."
I'd say what I do by letting go of my perceptions of what doesn't
exist and accepting what does can be described the way you just did.
It sounds harder to understand WHAT to do the way you've written it
but it does describe the same process I think. I'm guessing this is a
quote from ACIM.
>
> By definition a miracle is hard to define. Fun to try to describe something
> that transcends description. If it was easy to explain or define it
> wouldn't be a miracle. It would just be more form. I hear you saying you
> are open to the following -- "A miracle inverts perception which was upside
> down before, and thus it ends the strange distortions that were manifest."
Yes I think you are understanding what I'm saying and throwing it back
to the way ACIM puts it. Are you?
>
> Imo what gets kindof hinky is the separate will mind will dictate the
> process and assume it is in charge and that it can perceive correctly and is
> still the authority.
I think the key to this process is done by where will my perceptions
lead. It's easy to FEEL if a perception leads to peace, joy and love
or condemnation and conflict. There is the road marker IMO. So if it
doesn't feel right, I have to look again and ask for help as I've
deceived myself and believed what isn't true.
Hard to not believe interpreting perception in this or
> that way affects the mind.
I know it affects my mind. My peaceful perceptions bring me peace and
when I'm mistaken I know it because I'm not peaceful...I want revenge
or condemnation or it "should" have gone this way. These are all keys
to knowing I'm screwing up and need to ask for help.
The only truish perception is seeing the world
> as forgiven (not real) Probably healing comes from giving this thought up.
> George/et al. has the capability to allow the miracle process and George/et
> al. has the capablility of limiting the miracle process by judging
> perception as real. Guessing it is so very subtle from this temporal
> position that there is the willingness to decide that I am as God created me
> and willingness to accept that it takes a miracle to transcend the thoughts
> of a mind without contradicting, rebutting, or making the thoughts real.
>
I'm not understanding you on the above part can you write it again a
different way for me TIA.
> thanks again
> jon
>
I like talking to you. You make me think so thank you!
> "george" <georgeculol...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
Happy
> On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 02:21:23 -0800 (PST), Happy
>
> >> George, I don't know where to start with all of that. So, I
> >> don't
> >> think that I will.
>
> >Thank you for teaching how to not teach... again.
>
> >LOL
>
>
> Deborah (BC)
Yes I'm confused. The odds are astounding! Let me see if I've got this
right. Two posters, both named Mike, have come together on a single
NG and both have attain the same level of non-teaching enlightenment.
Amazing!
~LOL
Mike
And we have been together on this same ng for more than 10 years.
Perhaps you would be more than Happy if you observed more things.
And perhaps had a less inflated opinion of yourself.
Carrie
Mike is a very common name, at least it was used to name many baby boys at
one time.
I have a son Mike, a son in law Mike, and EX son in law Mike, and almost
grandson in law (now friend) Mike. And 3 grandsons with "Michael" for a
middle name.
The odds of two Mikes coming together on a newsgroup isn't that hard to
believe.
There used to be two "Happys" here (dreamin and slave) which, to me seems
more unusual. How many babies have been named "Happy"?
Mike
>
> - Show quoted text -
This one and the dwarf.
Carrie
Has the dwarf been on this ng?
Okay, that makes 3 people named "Happy"
. There are probably more, but not as many as Mike.
eluq
> as forgiven (not real) Probably healing comes from giving this thought up.
> George/et al. has the capability to allow the miracle process and
> George/et
> al. has the capablility of limiting the miracle process by judging
> perception as real. Guessing it is so very subtle from this temporal
> position that there is the willingness to decide that I am as God created
> me
> and willingness to accept that it takes a miracle to transcend the
> thoughts
> of a mind without contradicting, rebutting, or making the thoughts real.
>
I'm not understanding you on the above part can you write it again a
different way for me TIA.
Hi again George,
Not surprising the above is non-understandable. Trying to put subtle
thoughts into written words doesn't always translate that well (or at least
by jon).
Perception is part of the projection of the wish to be first source. I'm
with you (correct me if not hearing accurately) in that there is only
perfection and that only truth "IS". I'm with you in that there is the
belief we seem to be in a temporal realm. We might diverge in the area of
how perception is evaluated. George seems to say that there is only
perfection so what I'm perceiving must be perfect. Jon promotes that
perception is a projection of the separation idea, so perception is an
aspect of a false belief so it doesn't exist, therefore, there is only
perfection.
Course forgiveness is seeing the perceptual world as a misthought, an
impossible belief, the product of the belief in separation from first
Source. Does that fit with you seeing the false thought as perfect? I
think it can, it is just difficult because it encompasses two levels.
Transcendence of the "lower" level is necessary to see the world's only
purpose is forgiveness. Transcendence plays out in words like right
mindedness, miracle minded, true perception, recognition of Self. It
unfolds as a process in time.
So what actual capabilities does george or jon have? Can they think? What
might they actually control? There can't really be a george or jon outside
of mind can there? Aren't we as georges or jons an effect of the separation
idea? What capacity do these effects have? Can they (effects) represent
anything other than what their cause (mind) thinks?
Hope this isn't too "out there" but there can only be a singular expression.
There is only this singular expression BEING (verb). Whatever it (the
singularity) is BEING - is Reality, is Truth or perfection. Something
outside of this is impossible. Even if the singular expression attempts to
express something outside of itself it is impossible, it can be believed but
it is inherently impossible. Perception, duality, a movie screen (the
world) etc are effects of this attempt to "be" outside of BEING.
The only capability george or jon, et al. have is to accept that there is
only One Source. ****An effect that can believe it is source must also have
the capability to realize it is not source. This is the seeming process
ACIM promotes, which it calls forgiveness -- or the recognition of the
falsity of a source other than First Source.
There is only mind expressing and as the mind releases false belief it is
reflected in the preceptual realm as things like each of us remembering
perfection and giving up attachment to a belief in another will other than
God's.
Ha George, teach you to ask me to clarify something! :)
peace, brother
MikeRyder
wrote:
Howdy Mike of Florida. Mike of California here. :)
As we know, who's on first and who's on second is one of the religious
regulars' favorite conflict games...in a newsgroup driven by conflict.
I've noticed in other posts that john lopez is back with a new
personna, and that has prompted even more conflict.
This newsgroup is never going to change. lol