RIP
Mike
maz
"Mike" ...
> So, this place finally died.
Silent Mind :-)
http://www.reverbnation.com/tunepak/song_2119928
george
> So, this place finally died.
I didn't die. And I'm enjoying the peace.
george
I think it's going through a rebirth period full of joy, peace, love
and the practice of ACIM.
Pieter
"maz" <m...@solcon.nl_> schreef in bericht
news:4af6a662$0$27047$703f...@news.kpn.nl...
- Very nice; thank you!
Pieter
"Mike" <gurus...@yahoo.com> schreef in bericht
news:51f576b9-5dfb-4f01...@k19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
> So, this place finally died.
- You don't know yet that death is but an illusion?
maz
"Pieter" <hrdo...@zonnet.nl> schreef in bericht
news:4af6ead9$0$18803$bf49...@news.tele2.nl...
Mike knows everything! So we're dead already!
Sharon
"Mike" <gurus...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:51f576b9-5dfb-4f01...@k19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
> So, this place finally died.
I thought it was just waiting on me to have the final word.
:)
deb
"Sharon" <blue...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:hd78s3$gg0$1...@adenine.netfront.net...
MikeRyder
wrote:
> So, this place finally died.
I've said it before, I'll say it again. Without war--without people
calling people liars, fakes, phonies and filthy names--this newsgroup
will die everytime. The newsgroup exists on war. It always has. It
always will.
RIP (until the next war)
Pieter
"MikeRyder" <no...@nospam.com> schreef in bericht
news:2bcef51pt8k67t8q8...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 01:04:06 -0800 (PST), Mike <gurus...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>> So, this place finally died.
>
> I've said it before, I'll say it again.
- Why?
MikeRyder
>On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 01:04:06 -0800 (PST), Mike <gurus...@yahoo.com>
>wrote:
>
>> So, this place finally died.
>
>No. But I'm kind of hoping it will look that way for long enough to
>lose the interest of certain people (none of whom have posted here
>recently) forever.
As one of those "certain people" I can assure you that I share the
hope that certain other people will lose interest forever.
>Deborah (BC)
MikeRyder
wrote:
>
>"MikeRyder" <no...@nospam.com> schreef in bericht
>news:2bcef51pt8k67t8q8...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 01:04:06 -0800 (PST), Mike <gurus...@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> So, this place finally died.
>>
>> I've said it before, I'll say it again.
>
>- Why?
Why not?
george
> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 22:57:25 +0100, "Pieter" <hrdou...@zonnet.nl>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >"MikeRyder" <n...@nospam.com> schreef in bericht
> >news:2bcef51pt8k67t8q8...@4ax.com...
> >> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 01:04:06 -0800 (PST), Mike <gurustom...@yahoo.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >>> So, this place finally died.
>
> >> I've said it before, I'll say it again.
>
> >- Why?
>
> Why not?
>
>
>
> >> Without war--without people
> >> calling people liars, fakes, phonies and filthy names--this newsgroup
> >> will die everytime. The newsgroup exists on war. It always has. It
> >> always will.
>
> >> RIP (until the next war)
Because war and peace are opposites and one of the main goals of ACIM
is peace within oneself.
Pieter
> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 22:57:25 +0100, "Pieter" <hrdou...@zonnet.nl>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >"MikeRyder" <n...@nospam.com> schreef in bericht
> >news:2bcef51pt8k67t8q8...@4ax.com...
> >> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 01:04:06 -0800 (PST), Mike <gurustom...@yahoo.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >>> So, this place finally died.
>
> >> I've said it before, I'll say it again.
>
> >- Why?
>
> Why not?
- That is not an answer.
Why evade one?
MikeRyder
And the peace is extended into the perceptual world. If you ever
decide to get honest with yourself, you will see why this newsgroup
exists for and because of conflict.
It's never been any different; it will never be any different--in
spite of any luv-words attempt on you part. The newsgroup is a toilet
in which war swirls around and around and never flushes down the
drain.
MikeRyder
wrote:
Shall we have another war, peiter? Before you post another word think
about this carefully.
george
> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 14:18:07 -0800 (PST), george
>
>
>
> <georgeculol...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >On Nov 8, 2:06 pm, MikeRyder <n...@nospam.com> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 22:57:25 +0100, "Pieter" <hrdou...@zonnet.nl>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >"MikeRyder" <n...@nospam.com> schreef in bericht
> >> >news:2bcef51pt8k67t8q8...@4ax.com...
> >> >> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 01:04:06 -0800 (PST), Mike <gurustom...@yahoo.com>
> >> >> wrote:
>
> >> >>> So, this place finally died.
>
> >> >> I've said it before, I'll say it again.
>
> >> >- Why?
>
> >> Why not?
>
> >> >> Without war--without people
> >> >> calling people liars, fakes, phonies and filthy names--this newsgroup
> >> >> will die everytime. The newsgroup exists on war. It always has. It
> >> >> always will.
>
> >> >> RIP (until the next war)
>
> >Because war and peace are opposites and one of the main goals of ACIM
> >is peace within oneself.
>
> And the peace is extended into the perceptual world.
Exactly!
MikeRyder
As usual you have cut out most of what I told you. I'll repost it...
george
> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 14:35:36 -0800 (PST), george
>
>
>
I cut it out because it makes no sense to me. The part I agreed with
does make sense to me. It follows from what we agree on that anyone
that teaches, or practices ACIM would try to do their best to bring
peace to the perceptual world. If they believed it were true or wanted
to understand the meaning of ACIM.
MikeRyder
Sure it does. You just like to publicly pretend it doesnt. lol
george
> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 14:48:32 -0800 (PST), george
>
>
>
Of course it doesn't. And I think I know me better than you do.
Carrie
> So, this place finally died.
I just clicked on it to see what was going on. I figured so many had said
I had driven people away, and I should leave, it would be jumping, without
me posting here.
Every now and then I have looked at it, but didn't seem like much of
anything going on for discussion.
Where is all the active and interesting course discussion some were blamed
for preventing?
Pieter
> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 14:22:37 -0800 (PST), Pieter <hrdou...@zonnet.nl>
Why do you think in terms of war??
MikeRyder
You may be you, but you're very easy to read--you are a man in
unhealthy denial. You engage in contention all the while insisting you
dont. lol
Carrie
Possibly this could also apply to "the world" too.
Isn't this what the course says? It's the ego issues, u
nforgiveness,grievances,attack that keep the world "real".
"I can escape from the world I see by giving up attack thoughts." (Lesson
23)
george
> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 14:55:19 -0800 (PST), george
>
>
>
You're funny.
MikeRyder
There's never been an intention on the part of some of the faithful to
have interesting course discussions. There has on the other hand been
no scarcity of intention to bitch that some (the unholy, undesirable
ones) were preventing such discussions.
Carrie
> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 01:04:06 -0800 (PST), Mike <gurus...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>> So, this place finally died.
>
> lose the interest of certain people (none of whom have posted here
> topic for discussion. So far it's been pretty bland. There has to be
> an element of controversy for a discussion to really happen. Some
> topic that people hold strong and differing opinions on. Plus there
> have to be enough people around, and I'm not sure how many still are.
>
> Deborah (BC)
Maybe you could list the certain people you mean, so they'd know who
they are and choose to not post here again, since it bothers you so much if
they do?
Being vague about it, it could apply to anyone.
And, is it just you who gets to say "certain people" should stay away,
so you won't be bothered by them? What if someone was bothered by you, and
you are on THEIR "certain person" list?
Would you stay away if they named names and you were one of them?
MikeRyder
wrote:
>On 8 nov, 23:34, MikeRyder <n...@nospam.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 14:22:37 -0800 (PST), Pieter <hrdou...@zonnet.nl>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >On 8 nov, 23:06, MikeRyder <n...@nospam.com> wrote:
>> >> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 22:57:25 +0100, "Pieter" <hrdou...@zonnet.nl>
>> >> wrote:
>>
>> >> >"MikeRyder" <n...@nospam.com> schreef in bericht
>> >> >news:2bcef51pt8k67t8q8...@4ax.com...
>> >> >> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 01:04:06 -0800 (PST), Mike <gurustom...@yahoo.com>
>> >> >> wrote:
>>
>> >> >>> �So, this place finally died.
>>
>> >> >> I've said it before, I'll say it again.
>>
>> >> >- Why?
>>
>> >> Why not?
>>
>> >- That is not an answer.
>> >Why evade one?
>>
>> Shall we have another war, peiter? Before you post another word think
>> about this carefully.
>
>Why do you think in terms of war??
Nobody forced you to type the word 'war.' Why do YOU think in terms of
war?
Carrie
Again, you should list them. Maybe yours and Deborah's are different.
I'd like to know if I am on someone's "certain person's list". I might
be on one, but not someone else's and in that case who's would be valid?
I get the feeling, reading on here tonight, some have gone because
"certain persons" are no longer here, for them to see as enemies and attack
and try and drive away.
They cleaned the place up and moved on.
>
>
>> Deborah (BC)
MikeRyder
Obviously the 'faithful' here are not willing to learn the lesson.
MikeRyder
You're ridiculous.
Pieter
> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 15:01:31 -0800 (PST), Pieter <hrdou...@zonnet.nl>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On 8 nov, 23:34, MikeRyder <n...@nospam.com> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 14:22:37 -0800 (PST), Pieter <hrdou...@zonnet.nl>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >On 8 nov, 23:06, MikeRyder <n...@nospam.com> wrote:
> >> >> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 22:57:25 +0100, "Pieter" <hrdou...@zonnet.nl>
> >> >> wrote:
>
> >> >> >"MikeRyder" <n...@nospam.com> schreef in bericht
> >> >> >news:2bcef51pt8k67t8q8...@4ax.com...
> >> >> >> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 01:04:06 -0800 (PST), Mike <gurustom...@yahoo.com>
> >> >> >> wrote:
>
> >> >> >>> So, this place finally died.
>
> >> >> >> I've said it before, I'll say it again.
>
> >> >> >- Why?
>
> >> >> Why not?
>
> >> >- That is not an answer.
> >> >Why evade one?
>
> >> Shall we have another war, peiter? Before you post another word think
> >> about this carefully.
>
> >Why do you think in terms of war??
>
> Nobody forced you to type the word 'war.' Why do YOU think in terms of
> war?
Mike, when someone poses a question
to you, why not simply and in peace answer it?
MikeRyder
wrote:
>On 9 nov, 00:09, MikeRyder <n...@nospam.com> wrote:
pieter, when someone answers your question the way they choose, "why
not simply" accept the answer you get and be at peace at peace with
it?
deb
"Carrie" <starch...@charter.net> wrote in message
news:LbIJm.14487$ET3....@newsfe17.iad...
I think the names change from time to time, along with plonking. :))
>
MikeRyder
Lots and lots of plonking!
Pieter
> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 15:17:12 -0800 (PST), Pieter <hrdou...@zonnet.nl>
You're right. I do accept your counter-question
as an answer. It says enough. As an answer,
I would direct have understood the indelicacy
of asking further. :-)
MikeRyder
wrote:
Good. My suggestion then is to drop it. You're probably not going to
get your expectations met.
Pieter
> You're probably not going to get your expectations met.
- What are my expectations?
MikeRyder
wrote:
>On 9 nov, 01:05, MikeRyder <n...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>> You're probably not going to get your expectations met.
>
>- What are my expectations?
You tell me. You appear to have them.
Or, would you prefer to drop your questioning before it escalates into
something bigger?
Ted
LOL!!
Carrie
I haven't been plonked in such a long time...
Actually, one reason I stopped posting is the Charter newsgroup server
doesn't always work, or work well, sometimes posts, sometimes doesn't (or if
I go to the outbox and click send/receive it will) and the alternative was
to go find it and respond in google groups.
I got tired of trying to get it to work smoothly.
I just realized I have missed everyone here.
Carrie
I wonder if this word has made it into the dictionary yet?
Like to "google" something.
Carrie
I know. And it seems kind of silly now, after being away from it for
awhile.
Maybe the value of the newsgroup hasn't been "serious course
discussions" (that people are prevented from having) but practicing, and
remembering what really matters, and I can change my own mind and peaceful
choose what, if anything I respond to, and how?
We usually can't change the world and people in it, if we don't like
it/them. At least in a direct way.
ellie
> On Nov 8, 6:25 am, george <georgeculol...@hotmail.com> wrote:> > I didn't die. And I'm enjoying the peace.
>
> I think it's going through a rebirth period full of joy, peace, love
> and the practice of ACIM.
It's all in the mind of the beholder :)
ellie
> "Sharon" <bluefi...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>
> news:hd78s3$gg0$1...@adenine.netfront.net...
>
> > "Mike" <gurustom...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >news:51f576b9-5dfb-4f01...@k19g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
> >> So, this place finally died.
>
>
> Well that's enough to get it going again. :))
lol
ellie
> On Nov 8, 2:42 pm, MikeRyder <n...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 14:35:36 -0800 (PST), george
>
> > <georgeculol...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >On Nov 8, 2:26 pm, MikeRyder <n...@nospam.com> wrote:
> > >> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 14:18:07 -0800 (PST), george
>
> > >> <georgeculol...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >On Nov 8, 2:06 pm, MikeRyder <n...@nospam.com> wrote:
> > >> >> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 22:57:25 +0100, "Pieter" <hrdou...@zonnet.nl>
> > >> >> wrote:
>
> > >> >> >"MikeRyder" <n...@nospam.com> schreef in bericht
> > >> >> >news:2bcef51pt8k67t8q8...@4ax.com...
> > >> >> >> wrote:
>
> > >> >> >>> So, this place finally died.
>
>
> > >> >> >- Why?
>
> > >> >> Why not?
>
> > >> >> >> calling people liars, fakes, phonies and filthy names--this newsgroup
> > >> >> >> will die everytime. The newsgroup exists on war. It always has. It
> > >> >> >> always will.
>
> > >> >> >> RIP (until the next war)
>
> > >> >Because war and peace are opposites and one of the main goals of ACIM
> > >> >is peace within oneself.
>
> > >> And the peace is extended into the perceptual world.
>
> > >Exactly!
>
> > As usual you have cut out most of what I told you. I'll repost it...
>
> > If you ever
> > decide to get honest with yourself, you will see why this newsgroup
> > exists for and because of conflict.
>
> > It's never been any different; it will never be any different--in
> > spite of any luv-words attempt on you part. The newsgroup is a toilet
> > in which war swirls around and around and never flushes down the
> > drain.
>
> does make sense to me. It follows from what we agree on that anyone
> that teaches, or practices ACIM would try to do their best to bring
> peace to the perceptual world. If they believed it were true or wanted
> to understand the meaning of ACIM.
Trying to bring peace to the perceptual world is not what the Course
is about in my opinion. Letting go of ones obstacles to peace is.
ellie
> Mike wrote:
> > So, this place finally died.
>
> I had driven people away, and I should leave, it would be jumping, without
> me posting here.
> Every now and then I have looked at it, but didn't seem like much of
> anything going on for discussion.
> Where is all the active and interesting course discussion some were blamed
> for preventing?
Good to see all my friends have been p-osting today after a long
absence. :)
ellie
> On 8 nov, 23:34, MikeRyder <n...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 14:22:37 -0800 (PST), Pieter <hrdou...@zonnet.nl>
> > wrote:
>
> > >> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 22:57:25 +0100, "Pieter" <hrdou...@zonnet.nl>
> > >> wrote:
>
> > >> >"MikeRyder" <n...@nospam.com> schreef in bericht
> > >> >news:2bcef51pt8k67t8q8...@4ax.com...
> > >> >> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 01:04:06 -0800 (PST), Mike <gurustom...@yahoo.com>
>
> > >> >>> So, this place finally died.
>
>
> > >> >- Why?
>
> > >> Why not?
>
> > >Why evade one?
>
> > Shall we have another war, peiter? Before you post another word think
> > about this carefully.
>
> Why do you think in terms of war??
One does not have to think in terms of war to see that war exists. :)
ellie
> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 17:37:26 -0600, "deb" <dwal...@tx.rr.com> wrote:
>
> >"Carrie" <starchild1...@charter.net> wrote in message
> >news:LbIJm.14487$ET3....@newsfe17.iad...
> >> Deborah wrote:
> >>> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 01:04:06 -0800 (PST), Mike <gurustom...@yahoo.com>
> >>> wrote:
>
> >>>> So, this place finally died.
>
> >>> No. But I'm kind of hoping it will look that way for long enough to
> >>> lose the interest of certain people (none of whom have posted here
> >>> recently) forever. Sooner or later somebody will come up with a good
> >>> topic for discussion. So far it's been pretty bland. There has to be
> >>> an element of controversy for a discussion to really happen. Some
> >>> topic that people hold strong and differing opinions on. Plus there
> >>> have to be enough people around, and I'm not sure how many still are.
>
> >>> Deborah (BC)
>
> >> Maybe you could list the certain people you mean, so they'd know who
> >> they are and choose to not post here again, since it bothers you so much
> >> if
> >> they do?
> >> Being vague about it, it could apply to anyone.
> >> And, is it just you who gets to say "certain people" should stay away,
> >> so you won't be bothered by them? What if someone was bothered by you, and
> >> you are on THEIR "certain person" list?
> >> Would you stay away if they named names and you were one of them?
>
> >I think the names change from time to time, along with plonking. :))
>
> Lots and lots of plonking!
The ol' in an out!
Carrie
I know what you are saying, and I agree. But, I think letting go of
one's obstacles TO peace would bring about peace in the preceptual world.
So, the end result would be the same, and much more possible. Maybe it's an
example of a paradox? You can't make things (out there) peaceful, only by
being at peace with whatever IS, then you will achieve peace (out there)
Something like that.
Carrie
Oh well. Their choice, right?
Carrie
george
The ego sees war and reasons to fight while the Spirit sees calls for
help and reasons for trying to help. War only exists for the ones that
WANT it, just like evil. There is a different way to see evil and war
so they only exist for those that choose to want it. They are not
reality in themselves but a choice of the thinker as they COULD choose
to see war and evil in a different light that shines them both away to
be replaced by calls for help and reasons to give love.
Carrie
Maybe a vacation is good at some point. New perspective, new start, and
all.
I have been busy, I don't know where summer went, or even if we had one.
I think it was mainly cold and rainy, which is okay with me, I don't like
hot and humid.
Had someone living here again (I keep saying "never again", it's people
with problems who are usually the ones in need of a home. This one wasn't
too bad, though and stayed out of my way most of the time (LOL)
High point newswise was my Golden Retriever Izzy swallowed a sewing
needle... I had taken in a puppy, someone who couldn't keep her (ended up
finding her a good home, and now have another dog someone moving into an
apartment couldn't take). I blame it on the puppy of course. I was mending
something and left my sewing basket on the table beside the bed. The puppy
had a chewed up spool of thread, there was chewed up spool in the bed and
the needle that had been stuck in the side of the spool was missing. I kept
thinking it must be here I'm just not seeing it.
But, Izzy was coughing and gagging and I could feel it in the back of her
throat (sideways) but it was too slippery to pull out (think wiggly dog,
and slimey tongue) Got her to the vet, X rays showed there was a needle, by
then it was down near her stomach. If it was too far, she'd have to go to
Burlington for surgery. But, the local vet anestitized her and managed to
get it out (with something, I wasn't there. Long tool to get things out of
animal's stomachs?). Kept her overnight to make sure her throat was okay.
And next day she was fine. $174, which wasn't bad compared to what I'd
thought, taking her to Burlington (100 or so miles away) for surgery. They
even charged 75 cents for disposal of the needle.
Just when you think your kids are grown up and on their own, there's
pets.
Actually, when looking it up online (waiting to find out if my vet could
get it) I found out the thread would have been worse. Had she eating THAT it
does something like tangles up in their intestines. That's why they kept
saying "are you sure she didn't eat any of the thread?"
I usually keep the sewing box up, mainly because I don't want them
ruining the thread (the cats would love to play with it) but didn't realize
how dangerous (and expensive) it could be.
I just had on the Animal Planet channel, they were showing weird things
that animals swallow. One dog swallowed a knife, another one a 2' plastic
mop handle. A python that was loose in FL swallowed a cat (the cat didn't
survive)
Another one ate 4 golf balls, thinknig they were eggs. (these were
surgically removed)
Yikes....
Ted
Who is it that would let go?
deb
Wow, poor thing, that's quite an ordeal and actually recovering it. :))
deb
"ellie" <miracl...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:6874f00f-215e-4b2a...@b36g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
Guess it's not technically a plonk if there is no one here to plonk. :))
ellie
Everyone who takes on a body and lives in this world cannot help but
see war .... it still exists in the world of form. Jesus saw the
world as it was .... as does the Holy Spirit. How one reacts to what
is seen is what is important. Does one react? Or does one see calls
for love that one answers with love?
ellie
The one who thinks there is something that needs holding onto?
ellie
$174 to remove a neddle from the stomach? If only humans hadn't lost
their tails they could save thousands of dollars by just going to the
vet!
Ted
Who is that?
george
It's a choice and doesn't exist at all except in the thinker that
wants to see it. No one chooses for me and I don't choose to see war
as I choose to see insane men calling for help.
Jesus saw the
> world as it was .... as does the Holy Spirit.
Here I agree but we don't agree on what they see :)
How one reacts to what
> is seen is what is important.
One MUST react to their CHOICE of perception. It's the choice of
perception that makes the reaction.
ellie
The one who suffers needlessly.
ellie
So it's the word you don't see? Are *they* any less insane and
calling for help if you don't use the label "war"?
> Jesus saw the
>
> > world as it was .... as does the Holy Spirit.
>
> Here I agree but we don't agree on what they see :)
How do you know that we don't agree?
> How one reacts to what
>
> > is seen is what is important.
>
> One MUST react to their CHOICE of perception.
Why must one react?
Pieter
"MikeRyder" <no...@nospam.com> schreef in bericht
news:7lnef5963oarspidn...@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 16:11:24 -0800 (PST), Pieter <hrdo...@zonnet.nl>
> wrote:
>
>>On 9 nov, 01:05, MikeRyder <n...@nospam.com> wrote:
>>
>>> You're probably not going to get your expectations met.
>>
>>- What are my expectations?
>
> You tell me. You appear to have them.
Tell me what I "appear to have",
since I really don't know
what you are aiming at.
> Or, would you prefer to drop your questioning before it escalates into
> something bigger?
Sorry, I don't understand
what you are talking about.
Nevertheless, thanks for
your presence here.
Pieter
"ellie" <miracl...@yahoo.com> schreef in bericht
news:b966e121-db4d-46c6...@q40g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
> Good to see all my friends have been p-osting today after a long
> absence. :)
- That's how I see it as well!
george
The label war means a conflict right? It doesn't mean insane men
calling for help does it? To choose to perceive ANY conflict is to
become a part of it as the choice has made it real for the thinker.
But another choice is always available that doesn't perceive the
conflict but looks past it to the truth that insane men are calling
for help. Others might be in conflict but I don't have to see it or
become a part of it and why would I want to?
>
> > Jesus saw the
>
> > > world as it was .... as does the Holy Spirit.
>
> > Here I agree but we don't agree on what they see :)
>
> How do you know that we don't agree?
Because you said they see war. I don't believe that.
>
> > How one reacts to what
>
> > > is seen is what is important.
>
> > One MUST react to their CHOICE of perception.
>
> Why must one react?
Because the choice of perception IS the choice of reaction. That's why
the perception is chosen. It doesn't have to be a physical reaction
but the thoughts that come from the CHOICE of perception mean as much
actions as they always precede them.
Carrie
Who is it that is asking?
Carrie
>> Who is it that would let go?
>
> The one who thinks there is something that needs holding onto?
And the one writing about it on an internet newsgroup.
Carrie
I think it was worse for me!
She came back the next day, fine, and probably had forgotten all about
it.
Animals seem to have a way of letting things go and moving on.
Carrie
I know, but animals don't have inisurance, Medicaid, etc. to help.
If the needle had gone too far down, she'd have had to go to Burlington
(big city) for surgery. Well, the laposcope or whatever they use. None of
the local vets here have them or do that. But, on the other hand, they are
probably good at working without one. Since it had only gotten to the bottom
of her throat, and not into her stomach, he was able to get it out. My first
thought when I heard he was going to try was a picture of a bent open coat
hanger, like you use to reach things with (LOL) Of course, it was more than
that, h probably has long thin forcepts of some kind. They sedated her
first, too.
I probably would have freaked out at $174 if I hadn't been imaginin what
it would cost to take her to Burlington for surgery, before that.
My daughter's dog had kidney stones and the treatement and later removal
of them added up to $1300. And vets insist on being paid, at the time.
Now I think of all this when I do something, before leaving a sewing
basket with thread, and a needle stuck in the side (I was going to come back
to what I was doing) within reach of dogs.
Of course I think it was all the puppy's fault (the puppy I had at the
time (LOL)
Carrie
Maybe we get into taking things too seriously, and every now and then need
some space to put it in better perspective. Let a little time go by, and
see it in a new way.
Carrie
Sort of like once you perceive something you then can't NOT perceive it.
You can change your mind, make a better choice and see it differently.
george
EXACTLY! And in the choice of perception is all salvation and an
acceptance of the atonement. It's not hard but it does willingness to
see things and people in a different light than how the ego judges
them. So the choice to see things differently and through the Holy
Spirit's loving eyes instead, is a choice to distance oneself from the
ego rants and it's holier than though judgements.
george
I said this wrong in my other response. Perception is always a choice
now. I can perceive war today and yet ask within for a different
perception and I will be given a new way to look at it now and now is
all that matters because that's where we all live.
Carrie
Someone we can only do for "ourself" and not look for, decide, see in
someone else.
ellie
> On Nov 9, 12:50 am, ellie <miraclelur...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > So it's the word you don't see? Are *they* any less insane and
> > calling for help if you don't use the label "war"?
>
> The label war means a conflict right? It doesn't mean insane men
> calling for help does it? To choose to perceive ANY conflict is to
> become a part of it as the choice has made it real for the thinker.
> But another choice is always available that doesn't perceive the
> conflict but looks past it to the truth that insane men are calling
> for help. Others might be in conflict but I don't have to see it or
> become a part of it and why would I want to?
To be a presense of peace within conflict? To be an answer to their
calls for love?
Dince the Holy Spirit's voice is always available to everyone it means
the Holy Spirit is present even within conflict/war. There is nowhere
where He is not. So those who remember this truth are his helpers and
needed wherever there are calls for love and most certainly where
there is conflict/war/insanity.
One does see what is not true while not "becoming a part of it" ....
Compassion stems from not denying the full import that your brothers
illusions have on him.
> > > Jesus saw the
>
> > > > world as it was .... as does the Holy Spirit.
>
> > > Here I agree but we don't agree on what they see :)
>
> > How do you know that we don't agree?
>
> Because you said they see war. I don't believe that.
If Jesus didn't see "war"/suffering/insanity/calls for help there
would be no reason for an answer like ACIM. He speaks very clearly
that He sees what His brothers see. The differece is that he Knows
that is is not the Truth. But He is alse very clear that we are to
look at every bit of/fear/darkness/illusion and we are not to deny
it's full import in any way.
> > > How one reacts to what
>
> > > > is seen is what is important.
>
> > > One MUST react to their CHOICE of perception.
>
> > Why must one react?
>
> Because the choice of perception IS the choice of reaction. That's why
> the perception is chosen. It doesn't have to be a physical reaction
> but the thoughts that come from the CHOICE of perception mean as much
> actions as they always precede them.
If one is in the world but not of the workd one is not reacting to the
workd.
ellie
This is I think the crux of where we part ways, george. One cannot
distance themselves from the ego rants as there is only one son. Only
by first taking ownership of all that is the one mind can one truly
forgive/ not judge.
ellie
wow lots of typos .... hope you can read it. :)
Ted
Who is that?
Ted
No one is asking. :-))
Ted
Who chooses? Who reacts? Awareness doesn't react, so who does?
Ted
Who chooses?
Ted
Are the peaceful judgements of the ego somehow different from than the
holier than though judgements? Who is it that judges one judgement to be
better than another?
Ted
Yes, but then who takes ownership?
george
>
> > On Nov 9, 12:50 am, ellie <miraclelur...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > So it's the word you don't see? Are *they* any less insane and
> > > calling for help if you don't use the label "war"?
>
> > The label war means a conflict right? It doesn't mean insane men
> > calling for help does it? To choose to perceive ANY conflict is to
> > become a part of it as the choice has made it real for the thinker.
> > But another choice is always available that doesn't perceive the
> > conflict but looks past it to the truth that insane men are calling
> > for help. Others might be in conflict but I don't have to see it or
> > become a part of it and why would I want to?
>
> To be a presense of peace within conflict?
We just don't agree no big deal. Maybe your right. I believe to choose
to perceive the conflict at all makes the unreal, real to me. While to
choose to see ONLY the calls for love doesn't. To see the conflict is
a choice and one I don't take for the reasons i just stated. Others
can be in conflict within themselves and others but I believe the
healing is done by looking through the conflict to see only the calls
for love and not seeing the conflict at all because to see it IS to
react to it because I've made it real. It's like the saying when you
get lemons make lemonade. I believe God doesn't give lemons but only
the lemonade. Or my drug addiction wasn't bad because it taught me I
don't want to use drugs so it was a good thing. In this way the
duality of the perceptual world is replaced with one love and only one
way of seeing things. God's way IMO
To be an answer to their
> calls for love?
>
> Dince the Holy Spirit's voice is always available to everyone it means
> the Holy Spirit is present even within conflict/war. There is nowhere
> where He is not. So those who remember this truth are his helpers and
> needed wherever there are calls for love and most certainly where
> there is conflict/war/insanity.
>
> One does see what is not true while not "becoming a part of it" ....
We don't agree here because I believe that to even CHOOSE to perceive
it IS to become part of it. Because another perception that doesn't
see the conflict is always available and in that way the conflict
becomes unreal to me. So I can't become part of it as it doesn't exist
for me. But once I choose to perceive conflict I can't help become
part of it because I have chosen to make it real for me. Conflict is
only real to those that WANT it.
> Compassion stems from not denying the full import that your brothers
> illusions have on him.
We don't agree here either as I believe healing comes from God and
being able to see through his loving eyes that don't perceive conflict
or tragedy at all. That the healing is done by not seeing what isn't
there so its not strengthened in my mind or the mind of the other
person. To me this is true compassion because it IS healing.
>
> > > > Jesus saw the
>
> > > > > world as it was .... as does the Holy Spirit.
>
> > > > Here I agree but we don't agree on what they see :)
>
> > > How do you know that we don't agree?
>
> > Because you said they see war. I don't believe that.
>
> If Jesus didn't see "war"/suffering/insanity/calls for help there
> would be no reason for an answer like ACIM.
IMO he only sees calls for help as war and suffering are unreal and
don't exist unless one chooses to believe that God is mean.I believe
God is love and not mean.
He speaks very clearly
> that He sees what His brothers see. The differece is that he Knows
> that is is not the Truth. But He is alse very clear that we are to
> look at every bit of/fear/darkness/illusion and we are not to deny
> it's full import in any way.
In OURSELVES so it can be healed. What is seen within reflects in the
outside world
>
> > > > How one reacts to what
>
> > > > > is seen is what is important.
>
> > > > One MUST react to their CHOICE of perception.
>
> > > Why must one react?
>
> > Because the choice of perception IS the choice of reaction. That's why
> > the perception is chosen. It doesn't have to be a physical reaction
> > but the thoughts that come from the CHOICE of perception mean as much
> > actions as they always precede them.
>
> If one is in the world but not of the workd one is not reacting to the
> workd.
It still comes back to my CHOICES of perception if I'm of the world or
not and my reaction HAS to be based on what I CHOOSE to perceive in
the world. Because the perception can go either way from the Holy
Spirit's loving point of view or the ego's judgemental point of view.
So my CHOICE of perception IS my choice of reaction and my choice,
( not the truth) of what I want to be and what I will believe about
myself. God let's me wander off into insanity and choose to see things
like war, hate and tragedy if I want to but why would I? So I can
become that by CHOOSING to percieve it? No I like love love better :)
Ted
Have you considered the possibility that all choices are equally unreal?
Who is it that will accept one illusion real and reject another illusion as
unreal?
george
I have. That I am actually in a dream state where nothing means
anything and that this me I know isn't actually me. This is what ACIM
says and I believe that it's true. I also know right now I seem to
live in this world. To deny I live here wouldn't make sense to me
right now as this is what I know now. I also know I've been on this
spiritual path that God is taking me down to what I believe will be my
awakening to the truth where all this dream world stuff will be gone.
He's given me ACIM and the Holy Spirit within me to help me on this
path and what I've learned so far is that my CHOICES of perception is
my choice of who I believe I am. God knows the truth about me yet I
have to learn it by choosing it over and over since I'm the one that
threw the knowledge of my true reality away.
I'm only here to learn the truth about myself that I could never
change by my choices to see what doesn't really exist in truth. Like
evil, bad, tragedy, hate. Everything and everyone is perfect and doing
exactly what they are supposed to in God's grand plan. To believe
otherwise IS to play God and to tell him how it "should be". I'd
rather have faith in God and let him run everything.
In other words my choices about how I see things and people reflects
what I CHOOSE to believe is inside me. Do I see evil and tragedy
everywhere? That would just be a reflection of the choices I make and
a reflection of what I've chosen to believe about myself. Of course if
I don't like what I see because it frightens me or makes me feel bad,
I can choose again by asking for God's help in seeing things
differently. He always gives me a different way to see what has
happened that doesn't feel bad so why wouldn't I take it?
MikeRyder
wrote:
My 'presence' is only temporary. And now I'm gone again.
maz
"Ted" <octag...@gmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:_YudnaoSQbyo9mXX...@centurytel.net...
A Course in Miracles trains the mind. Not all minds are in perception mode.
You might want to look up "special agents" and remember that members of the
Sonship are currently helpers for the "separated ones", operating from the
realm of Knowledge, sharing the temporary dual function of the Holy Spirit,
Knowledge and right perception. It is on Them that the Atonement rests. A
mind is not healed by denying its creative or mis-creative powers. Both rest
on c/Choice.
maz
What is this supposed to mean, "only"one son? Every God created mind/Soul
("living thing") is part of the Sonship which constitutes the "One Son". A
number of members of the Sonship have invented the ego and elected it their
own father. Only by 'distancing' themselves from their miscreative,
self-imposed tyranny (ego) can they remember that they are "One Son".
> Only by first taking ownership of all that is the one mind can one truly
> forgive/ not judge.<
And you know that how exactly? Did you "take ownership of all that is the
one mind" yet, and are you able to maintain this w/o ego while operating in
the realm of perception, and obviously while operating with a split-off part
in your mind called ego?
Pieter
> On Mon, 9 Nov 2009 11:04:38 +0100, "Pieter" <hrdou...@zonnet.nl>
> wrote:
> . . . . . . thanks for
> >your presence here.
>
> My 'presence' is only temporary. And now I'm gone again.
Then goodby for the present; God bless you!
MikeRyder
wrote:
>On 9 nov, 22:45, MikeRyder <n...@nospam.com> wrote:
You invoke God to bless me. Have you decided that you're a treacher of
God? Do you think the use of words do the job for you?
Pieter
> On Mon, 9 Nov 2009 14:08:19 -0800 (PST), Pieter <hrdo...@zonnet.nl>
> wrote:
>
>>On 9 nov, 22:45, MikeRyder <n...@nospam.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 9 Nov 2009 11:04:38 +0100, "Pieter" <hrdou...@zonnet.nl>
>>> wrote:
>>
>>> . . . . . . thanks for
>>> >your presence here.
>>>
>>> My 'presence' is only temporary. And now I'm gone again.
>>
>
> You invoke God to bless me. Have you decided that you're a treacher of
> God? Do you think the use of words do the job for you?
Is it a problem for you
if someone is kind to you,
and wishes you the best?
MikeRyder
wrote:
You didnt answer my question. Why didnt you?
ellie
anyone ... everyone .... no one.
ellie
The one who sees anyhting as separate from themselves. And I have
tons of work to do today. Go look in the mirror and ask your
questions. :)