A Course in Miracles

[_Lucretia MacEvil]

because the greatest miracle of all is that a holy God (am I allowed to say 'holy') redeemed us from being dead in our sins (ooops, the 's' word) and brought us into a saving relationship with Himself.
Changing our thoughts? No, we must honestly recognize what we are as sinners and understand His holiness.

or are these words anethema in the course?

If this Holy God knowingly created flawed and awful sinful creations then what does this say about his holiness?

That is a very good question.

[_paulhadik]

1965???
are we saying Jesus like "Gee-zuz" or "Hay-soos"?? If the first then on what basis are these teachings being made? Certainly not Scripture..
Be ye holy for I am holy...is the standard to which we are all held and that holiness is most certainly reflected in our behavior and morals.
I am interested too in where we draw the line. If being gay is fine how about dangerous eating habits that destroy my body? Or when my actions bring sadness and suffering to the lives of others?
If the contention is true that Jesus never condemned us then what was the point of his even coming to earth as a man? If we were doing ok than he didn't need to clarify any teachings and he certainly didn't need to suffer and die
I would be very interested in hearing how this course defines the word "holiness"
paul

[_MarkF]

The Course in Miracles (ACIM) was channelled (Spiritism) by Helen Schucman, an atheist psychologist, who said that the spirit dictating to them later identified itself as Jesus Christ. The Bible warrants discerning this as a deceptive spirit, which rebelled the early Gnostics to reject the work of the Cross, in ACIM 'attonement' corrects the erroneousness of the Cross that man is separated from God and guilty, as already discussed. ACIM is also alleged to encourage investigators to reject applying to reason & thinking. An unedited, earlier version (Hugh Lynn Cayce Text) was discovered (allegedly) with a number of key differences between it and Shucman's final manuscript.

http://cana.userworld.com/cana_spiritcontact1.html

[_Roger Morrison]

An interesting topic. One that was thoroughly engaged some time ago between Kool-7 (i think) & myself. As with most professions of "truth" the whole needn't be swallowed to derive some benefit...

I think the essence of ACIM is discerned by most who have studied life, religion, human-nature, sage philosophy, have a healthy degree of self-confidence and intelligence, and are not so hung-up by authoritarianism that they can't make their own decisions...

In a sense we all "Channel"; albeit some better than others... Evidenced by responses on threads such as this. Case-in-point: The thought posed by Jason Bourne is a perfect example of a rational, intuitive question/statement that cannot but provoke honest thought... Which by the process itself doesn't neccessarily lead to agreement between folks from all spheres of influence. BUT minds that are not "sealed" might entertain the thought AND its projection...

Since this thread is about "Miracles" some might find the "...Miracle..." topic i opened yesterday in the Terrestial Forum of some interest... Warm regards, Roger

[_MarkF]

... Most folk will have a prime belief, e.g. Christianity, and with learnerdness or past exposure to others, e.g. New Ageism. Some problems with open-mindedness is that it doesn't desire to contend with the contentions between them, and also its naïve clamour to "channel" with anything outside themselves. I understand from an ex-medium of folk within the fold of Spritism who've discerned a sense of its deceiving spirits, but who stay-in because it offers signs & wonders. I understand that ACIM reinterprets the word "miracle" into psychological terms.

[_Lucretia MacEvil]

1965???
are we saying Jesus like "Gee-zuz" or "Hay-soos"?? If the first then on what basis are these teachings being made? Certainly not Scripture..
Be ye holy for I am holy...is the standard to which we are all held and that holiness is most certainly reflected in our behavior and morals.
I am interested too in where we draw the line. If being gay is fine how about dangerous eating habits that destroy my body? Or when my actions bring sadness and suffering to the lives of others?
If the contention is true that Jesus never condemned us then what was the point of his even coming to earth as a man? If we were doing ok than he didn't need to clarify any teachings and he certainly didn't need to suffer and die
I would be very interested in hearing how this course defines the word "holiness"
paul

Paul, I wrote a response to this last night and lost it. I will get back to it ASAP.

Mark F and Roger, will respond as soon as I get some work done

[_Lucretia MacEvil]

1965???
are we saying Jesus like "Gee-zuz" or "Hay-soos"?? If the first then on what basis are these teachings being made? Certainly not Scripture..
Be ye holy for I am holy...is the standard to which we are all held and that holiness is most certainly reflected in our behavior and morals.
I am interested too in where we draw the line. If being gay is fine how about dangerous eating habits that destroy my body? Or when my actions bring sadness and suffering to the lives of others?
If the contention is true that Jesus never condemned us then what was the point of his even coming to earth as a man? If we were doing ok than he didn't need to clarify any teachings and he certainly didn't need to suffer and die
I would be very interested in hearing how this course defines the word "holiness"
paul

Short answers:

Yes, 1965.

The Course doesn't mandate pronunication. I say it the way most English speakers say it.

It's not based on scripture and doesn't claim to. It is an entirely different approach to spirituality, God doesn't have an ego.

As for drawing the line, the Course is absolute. It doesn't draw lines. It doesn't make rules for using or caring for our bodies. It is about changing our thoughts from fear-based to love-based. Our actions proceed from our thoughts. Love-based thoughts don’t lead to hurting anyone, and our mistakes along the path have no eternal consequence.

There is no condemnation so it follows that the point of his coming to earth was not to sacrifice himself or to redeem us. That doesn’t mean we were doing okay, or that we are doing okay yet. We have created an insane world and he can lead us out and of the insanity and back into unity with God.

holiness, holy
A quality of divine innocence or purity, untainted by the slightest sin, guilt or impurity. A quality that comes from God to those things that are like Him. Holiness is the natural condition of God's creations and is shared. It is characterized not by separation from the impure (as in some traditional notions), but by oneness with all things. It can never be tainted or lost, only obscured. Salvation comes through overlooking all unholiness and seeing again the native holiness in others and in oneself

Here’s the link to that quote:

http://www.circleofa.org/glossary/AcimGlossaryIndex.php

Here’s another glossary.

http://www.facim.org/acim/glossary.htm

There is a lot of information on the web. I hope this helps.