ACIM: radical but sensible?

The upper-crust forum for scholarly, polite, and respectful discussions only. Heavily moderated. Rated G.
_Lucretia MacEvil
_Emeritus
Posts: 1558
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 7:01 am

Re: ACIM: radical but sensible?

Post by _Lucretia MacEvil »

Michael wrote:
I'm reading the book slowly. I sometimes read a page or two and then think about it for a while. This may come off as a bold statement, but this may very well be the best book I've ever read. It's so simple yet profound. Anyone of any belief system can find the message of this book a relief. It's easy to see how universal the principles are and how a person doesn't need to buy into the supernatural to implement what is taught. I'm a little intimidated by ACIM itself. I suppose I can take it little by little...perhaps even a study group although I don't want to get wrapped up with folks who are over the top supernatural believers of un-proveable mystical things. I just want to learn the principles.

In short...I love the book.


I love it too. It seems like some of us are attracted to it for whatever reason.

ACIM says that words are just symbols of symbols, and the words are misunderstood on many levels (i.e., the "over the top supernatural believers of un-proveable mystical things"). I guess we just have to trust that we are all getting what we need from it no matter what how we are interpreting it.
The person who is certain and who claims divine warrant for his certainty belongs now to the infancy of our species. Christopher Hitchens

Faith does not give you the answers, it just stops you asking the questions. Frater
_Michael
_Emeritus
Posts: 74
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2012 5:24 pm

Re: ACIM: radical but sensible?

Post by _Michael »

Crog wrote:You assumed a lot about me... And you were wrong.


Fair enough. I apologize. You seem like a nice enough fellow.
Peck's Dilemma: We are all inside a box. The instructions for getting out of the box are written on the outside of the box

Certainty is a confession of ignorance about our ability to be passionately mistaken.
Valerie Tarico
_Crog
_Emeritus
Posts: 147
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 5:06 am

Re: ACIM: radical but sensible?

Post by _Crog »

Michael,

No apology needed!

Mrs MacEvil,

You state again that there is no personages in ACIM! Is not Jesus the personage that Helen dictated the ACIM meterial for? You are being disingenuous as the teachings are supposedly from Jesus!

Does Ken Wapnic run an ACIM foundation and have courses, seminars, and run an academy? Seems more than just the caretaker of the copyright of the book.

Ken has also made money writing his own books... He sure seems to be making a lot of money on this c course that was dictated by Helen from the visits from Jesus she had!

Did i say that ACIM was 100 years old? Hell no! I said some of the material that Helen got was 100 year old Christian Science stuff!

also

If Helen was not visited by Jesus than ACIM is all crap! Now the ideas that were stolen for ACIM might be good i would not care to support thieves like Ken Wapnic...

As for the similarities to Christian Science? They have libraries all over the place to read their material. I am not a follower even though i have a few of their old books and like some of their old take on theology and THE SPIRITUAL!

you are obviously vested in ACIM.. But like the average Mormon knows nothing about it's church history.. You know little of ACIM's
The road to ruin is paved with good intentions.

nightlion, quote.
"Nowadays LDS have no doctrine just confusion. No gospel. No theology. Just confusion. The fruits of trampling the Holy One of Israel under foot........pride led."
_Lucretia MacEvil
_Emeritus
Posts: 1558
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 7:01 am

Re: ACIM: radical but sensible?

Post by _Lucretia MacEvil »

snip
The person who is certain and who claims divine warrant for his certainty belongs now to the infancy of our species. Christopher Hitchens

Faith does not give you the answers, it just stops you asking the questions. Frater
Post Reply