I've changed the subject on this reply so it will post as a new
string. The string to which it formerly belonged is getting very
long. The problem is, I posted this reply about 45 minutes ago, and it
still hasnt shown up. So the story I'm telling myself is that some
kind of Dept of Homeland Security filter caught the buzz words I had
originally typed in the subject line, "Child Killers and the Course,"
and now I'm going to get a knock on the door tonight at 3:00am and
*they* will take me away to the slammer kicking and screaming.
Well, it's always interesting to fantasize. If this post does
eventually show up under the original title, just disregard it. My
bad. If even this post doesnt show up, and neither do I, you'll know
what happened. lol
On Mon, 19 May 2008 06:58:02 -0700 (PDT), george
<georgeculolias@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>On May 19, 12:13 am, MikeRyder <n...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> On Sun, 18 May 2008 15:49:22 -0700 (PDT), george
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> <georgeculol...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >On May 18, 3:31 pm, MikeRyder <n...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >> On Sun, 18 May 2008 15:11:10 -0700 (PDT), george
>>
>> >> <georgeculol...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >> >On May 18, 2:34 pm, MikeRyder <n...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >> >> On Sun, 18 May 2008 13:10:31 -0700 (PDT), george
>>
>> >> >> <georgeculol...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >> >> >On May 18, 10:33 am, Deborah <debo...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >> >> >> On Sun, 18 May 2008 08:57:01 -0700 (PDT), Robin
<miracle...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>> >> >> >> wrote:
>>
>> >> >> >> >On May 18, 12:25 am, Deborah <debo...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> On Sat, 17 May 2008 22:02:21 -0700 (PDT), george
>>
>> >> >> >> >> <georgeculol...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >On May 17, 9:49 pm, Deborah <debo...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, 17 May 2008 21:27:25 -0700 (PDT), george
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> <georgeculol...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >> >> >My only study comes from the inside where I find all my
answers. But
>> >> >> >> >> >> >follow my posts from a few days ago and it says in the
book all things
>> >> >> >> >> >> >are planned for your good. I'll find it for you. May
15th check the
>> >> >> >> >> >> >post from me there are only two in it. It says
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> - What could you not accept, if you but knew
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> that everything that happens, all events,
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> past, present and to come, are gently planned
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> by One Whose only purpose is your good?
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >This is said beautifully here and is all I've been
trying to put
>> >> >> >> >> >> >forth in many of my posts.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> Well, whoa whoa whoa whoa whoa, George. Let's have a
look at the rest
>> >> >> >> >> >> of the quote:
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> "What could you not accept, if you but knew that
everything that
>> >> >> >> >> >> happens, all events, past, present and to come, are
gently planned by
>> >> >> >> >> >> One Whose only purpose is your good? Perhaps you have
misunderstood
>> >> >> >> >> >> His plan, for He would never offer pain to you. But your
defenses did
>> >> >> >> >> >> not let you see His loving blessing ****ne in every step
you ever took.
>> >> >> >> >> >> While you made plans for death, He led you gently to
eternal life."
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> I don't think you can mix this in with the physical
plane, because it
>> >> >> >> >> >> isn't ABOUT the physical plane. Later in Lesson 135,
there is this:
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> "If there are plans to make, you will be told of them.
They may not
>> >> >> >> >> >> be the plans you thought were needed, nor indeed the
answers to the
>> >> >> >> >> >> problems which you thought confronted you. BUT THEY ARE
ANSWERS TO
>> >> >> >> >> >> ANOTHER KIND OF QUESTION, WHICH REMAINS UNANSWERED YET
IN NEED OF
>> >> >> >> >> >> ANSWERING UNTIL THE ANSWER COMES TO YOU AT LAST".
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >> Go on to Lesson 136, if it isn't clear enough from this
that God's
>> >> >> >> >> >> plan for salvation is, essentially, that time cannot
come to encroach
>> >> >> >> >> >> on eternity. The illusion cannot change reality. God's
plan for
>> >> >> >> >> >> salvation, IOW, has already been carried out. We but
defend against
>> >> >> >> >> >> it with our little lives on earth and everything that
seems to happen
>> >> >> >> >> >> to us here. God's plan for salvation means that our
detour into time
>> >> >> >> >> >> will not prevail.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >I agree with all your conclusions except the one that
disagrees with
>> >> >> >> >> >what the book states.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> >What could you not accept, if you but knew
>> >> >> >> >> >that everything that happens, all events,
>> >> >> >> >> > past, present and to come, are gently planned
>> >> >> >> >> >by One Whose only purpose is your good?
>> >> >> >> >> >I KNOW this to be true, here and now. All things are for
my good NOW.
>> >> >> >> >> >Everyone is perfect and sinless NOW! I've proven this to
myself in the
>> >> >> >> >> >same way I've proven God to myself, by my experience. You
don't have
>> >> >> >> >> >to believe it, by why wouldn't you want to?
>>
>> >> >> >> >> Sure it is true here and now, George. Truth is truth
always. But
>> >> >> >> >> truth has nothing to do with the physical plane. It has to
do with
>> >> >> >> >> who we are in reality. The course asks "Who is the you who
is living
>> >> >> >> >> in this world" for a reason. The reason is because it is
an illusory
>> >> >> >> >> self that is living in this world. You can lay down that
illusory
>> >> >> >> >> self at will, but if you're not prepared to do that, then
best to deal
>> >> >> >> >> with the world in worldly terms, IMO. Nothing wrong with
looking for
>> >> >> >> >> the good. Nothing wrong with making that your focus. But
it's just
>> >> >> >> >> balderdash to pretend to see love in a serial killer when
he's intent
>> >> >> >> >> on killing you. I like to keep my levels unconfused.
>>
>> >> >> >> >> Deborah (BC)
>>
>> >> >> >> >You are really into "what ifs" - heres one for you, what if
by George
>> >> >> >> >seeing Love everywhere, he never attracted the serial killer
into his
>> >> >> >> >field...
>>
>> >> >> >> Didn't work for him with respect to the guy who B & E'd his
house...- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> >> >> >> - Show quoted text -
>>
>> >> >> >Have you heard me cry about the B and E or have I let the Holy
Spirit
>> >> >> >see the incident through his eyes and found something positive
to
>> >> >> >focus on? No matter what the world throws at anyone the Holy
Spirit is
>> >> >> >there to transform the perception into one of love if that's
what a
>> >> >> >person WANTS.
>>
>> >> >> And if you were a Jew in nazi Germany you would see something
loving
>> >> >> and positive when the gestapo dragged you out of your home for
>> >> >> trans****t to the death camp.
>>
>> >> >> George it is silly to think that you must see love in something
when
>> >> >> love isnt there.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> >> >> - Show quoted text -
>>
>> >> >But I can see it as for my benefit to grow into someone stronger.
>>
>> >> Let's revisit that extreme hypothetical of hitler and the nazi
>> >> empire...
>>
>> >> If the world had felt (read: believed) the way you do, the nazi army
>> >> would have marched lock-step all across the world and, today, we
would
>> >> all be speaking German and saluting the swastika. The entirety of
the
>> >> Jewish population would have been deleted. Blacks would most likely
>> >> have been put back into slavery along with slavs and other
>> >> "undesirables." Books like A Course in Miracles would never have
made
>> >> it from one pair of eyes to another much less into print. Hitler
would
>> >> have become the new god. And the "state religion" would have been
>> >> practiced at the altar of the ouija board.
>>
>> >> How would this had benefited you when the only premissable book to
>> >> read would have been main kampf?
>>
>> >> But this hypothetical didnt happen. Instead, the world defeated the
>> >> nazi menace, and as a result enough relative peace returned to the
>> >> world, that has provided a platform for you to make the spiritual
>> >> gains you have made.
>>
>> >> You can thank the bloody World War II for the inroads you have made
in
>> >> your life.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> >> - Show quoted text -
>>
>> >Do you want to justify attack? It's only a choice. One I choose not to
>> >make.
>>
>> You are missing the point.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>No you are missing the point. And you avoided my question. I've made
>the same point over and over everytime you asked all the extreme
>questions of the nazis, the seriel killers and child killers. I said
>it's all the same, God can and does transform any outcome with the
>perception of the Holy Spirit. All I have to do is ask for the Holy
>Spirits perception instead of the egos and the Holy Spirit's
>perception will engender love and joining instead of hate and
>seperation. So I ask again, do you WANT to justify attack?
These pesky extreme hypotheticals are indeed getting irritating, arent
they. Your frustration has been noted.
I want to recap a little here....
Extreme hypothetical number one was about Hitler and how he could have
conquered the world had the rest of humanity been willing to stand by
passively and love Hitler.
The second extreme hypothetical was about a serial killer zeroing in
on your child and your contention that you would sit back passively
and let the Holy Spirit transform the child's murder into something
loving and beneficial.
The third extreme example was an embellishment on the second one where
a child molester would ask you to hold your daughter down while he
raped the child and murdered her.
In each of these cases your replies were the same: You would passively
sit back and let the Holy Spirit transform the evil into something
loving and beneficial for you.
Have I described your stance correctly? Correctly me if you think I've
gotten it wrong. But it seems to me that I am correct. And fair
enough.
Last night I posted the following passage from the Course which I
noticed you didnt reply to -- as of this afternoon anyway. The passage
deals with the idea that we are to do anything our brothers ask us to
do -- even if it seems outrageous. Gene replied to this and attempted
to invalidate this passage in the context in which I'm using it. But
his attempt was non-applicable in my opinion. The point is, this
passage clearly tells us to do what our brothers ask of us, period.
Does it not? It would then seem to me that the passage addresses your
point of contention that all of the extreme hypotheticals I came up
with are all the same and your task is to let the Holy Spirit
transform them into something loving and beneficial. That would seem
to include non-interference when an evil is being perpetrated in your
presence -- even if you actually do something to prevent the evil
event from happening.
Posted again, this is the passage...
"Recognize what does not matter, and if your
brothers ask you for something "outrageous," do it <because> it does
not matter. Refuse, and your opposition establishes that it does
matter to you. It is only you, therefore, who have made the request
outrageous, and every request of a brother is for you. Why would you
insist in denying him? For to do so is to deny yourself and impoverish
both. He is asking for salvation, as you are. Poverty is of the ego,
and never of God. No "outrageous" requests can be made of one who
recognizes what is valuable and wants to accept nothing else."
But the Course's author doesnt stop with this passage. He goes on to
say the following...
"I have said that if a brother asks a foolish thing of you to do it.
But be certain that this does not mean to do a foolish thing that
would hurt either him or you, for what would hurt one will hurt the
other."
This is a call to common sense. Common sense as advocated by the Holy
Spirit. And without this qualification, the Course could be
interpreted as giving permission to passively allow anything in this
world "in the name of love" -- even Hitler's conquest of the world and
the murder of a child, to name just a couple extreme hypotheticals.
George, you can come to the relative safety of this newsgroup and make
claims about how in the name of love you would allow any and all evils
to happen, even if they hurt a loved one, and perhaps that's how you
would react in the face of a real danger -- but this isnt what A
Course in Miracles tells you to do.
The qualifying passage above (T-16.I.6) says in full: "The meaning of
love is lost in any relation****p that looks to weakness, and hopes to
find love there. The power of love, which <is> its meaning, lies in
the strength of God that hovers over it and blesses it silently by
enveloping it in healing wings. Let this be, and do not try to
substitute your "miracle" for this. I have said that if a brother asks
a foolish thing of you to do it. But be certain that this does not
mean to do a foolish thing that would hurt either him or you, for what
would hurt one will hurt the other. Foolish requests are foolish
merely because they conflict, since they always contain some element
of specialness. Only the Holy Spirit recognizes foolish needs as well
as real ones. And He will teach you how to meet both without losing
either."
An example of a "foolish request" that you should do is when you are
watching a football game on TV and your wife wants you to go with her
to the mall. Your wife's request would conflict with your wish to
watch the game and that conflict speaks of specialness. But sitting
back passively while a totalitarian dictator conquered the world or a
killer murdered your child is something completely different. And if
you're willing to lt Him, the Holy Spirit will distinguish between the
two and will set you on the correct course of action.
The problem comes, of course, when the ego tries to set its own course
of action...or inaction. The ego is very tricky. This is why the
author says "...do not try to substitute YOUR 'miracle'." [emphasis
mine]
The point is based in common sense...which intellectualized
spirituality most often lacks.
|
