A Course in Miracles

  • Thread starter Thread starter ryanoneil
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Angie_Baskin said:
Dear Therese. ( I sense your gentle spirit). I have read this account by Fr Benedict but I found that the way Helen lived or ended her life in no way reflects on the courses teaching. If anything, it shows how she diversed from it. Many people no doubt would use this course as their sole spiritual imput. I think this IS error. God never gave ALL inspiration to any ONE group deliberatly. He wanted mankind to work together not lord it over one another. The Catholic Church is by far the most rounded of belief systems (though the Budists would disagree) and anyone could go their entire lives with nothing more and be “enlightened” to use a controversial but true (Budist) word. There are many significant Catholics that live the principles of forgiveness. Mother Theresa for one and Pope John Paul11. They didn’t get caught up in jargon. They just lived the basic principles and look at their fruit. Of course I’m not saying they read or even knew of the course (JP11 probably did) but the way they lived their lives is how Jesus asked us to and it just happens to be what the course professes. I don’t see the controversy??
Click to expand...
Do you believe that Jesus spoke with this Women too ?
catholicforum.com/churches/cathteach/divinemercy1.htm
our.homewithgod.com/divinemercy/
 
to Jam. (my link is VERY slow) Thankyou for that vatican site on new age. I will read it more thouroughly and pray on it. I leave you with one last thought. Don’t throw out the one good apple with the box of bad. All Catholics/Christians need to be constantly listening for the Holy Spirit’s urgings. You didn’t reply to my comment on the use of confirmation if there is no direct inspiration from the heaven’s to be had??. In fact you haven’t addressed any of the quotes by Jesus I quoted any their relating issues. It’s like you have completely skipping over the REAL issues just to can ACIM. It’s true! there ARE a lot of New Age thinking out there, I never realized. I have never persued such directions and consider it mostly bad apples. That is why I am still a committed Catholic. And I have always been passionate about Jesus and His word and will defend it to the last (no matter where it comes from). To Josie L : The boxes similii is just me going on in my arty farty style. The point was that I believe we’re disagreeing over the same thing and therefore over nothing. (Just seeing something from a different view point).
 
TO TECHNO2000. Funny you should raise the subject of the Rosary. I am 52yrs old and have said the Rosary EVERY DAY of my life. It was a faithful practice of myl arge family as I was growing up and I have faithfully continued this rich blessing. I had my first REAL personal experience with Jesus while saying the Rosary and remember it like it was yesterday. You may call it a REVELATION!!. I’ve been ‘in love’ with Jesus ever since. I have never actually read all the promises to those who say the rosary, but find them reasuring. Thanks!
 
Angie_Baskin said:
TO TECHNO2000. Funny you should raise the subject of the Rosary. I am 52yrs old and have said the Rosary EVERY DAY of my life. It was a faithful practice of myl arge family as I was growing up and I have faithfully continued this rich blessing. I had my first REAL personal experience with Jesus while saying the Rosary and remember it like it was yesterday. You may call it a REVELATION!!. I’ve been ‘in love’ with Jesus ever since. I have never actually read all the promises to those who say the rosary, but find them reasuring. Thanks!
Click to expand...
Angie, I read the ACIM…well half of it, it seem like it was saying lot, but it wasn’t say nothing, all I got from it was that "we are co-creator " I Believe this was a Demon masquerading as Jesus,read about St.Faustina and her Divine Mercy Diary… Jesus’s words sound way different than in the ACIM.
our.homewithgod.com/divinemercy/
catholicforum.com/churches/cathteach/divinemercy1.htm
 
TO TECHNO2000 Thankyou Techno. Yours is the only positive response I’ve read. I fully intend to read about St Faustina & her Diary. What I did read was very uplifting. If I feel urged to continue with the course, I will do so with fervent discernment. Angie:thumbsup:
 
Angie_Baskin said:
TO TECHNO2000 Thankyou Techno. Yours is the only positive response I’ve read. I fully intend to read about St Faustina & her Diary. What I did read was very uplifting. If I feel urged to continue with the course, I will do so with fervent discernment. Angie:thumbsup:
Click to expand...
Fantastic,you can read the Diary with Great confidence, because it’s 100% approved by the RCC ,it will also give you a good glimpse into the supernatural world.
 
Angie_Baskin said:
I believe that many of "a course in Miracles"quotes have been taken out of context. A grave mistake! This course needs to be read with an open mind (all be it a discerning attitude). Rather than discounting the Bible, it actually reinforces it along with putting light on areas that ‘made no sense’ before. So many beliefs make sense with this new interpretation of the word. It is the only interpretation that answers ALL QUESTIONS and explains (with sense) ALL MOTIVATION. We would be small minded in truth if we dismissed this revelation from Jesus. And why would it not be from Jesus as it is claimed?? Everything said alines with Jesus Bible teaching. If you strip away the politics and rivalries that changed interpretation of different passages in the bible, you would see that this is true. And TRUTH has a certain ring. It cuts to the core. Don’t be disceived by the small minded. GOD is greater and bigger than anything we can imagine. To put Him into our tiny little boxes of understanding would be false belief. What everyone forgets is that God created us in His image. That means - eternal spirit/ perfect & sinless. If God could create anything that can sin He would not be God. And Jesus is said to be the 1st of many brothers. That means we, who come after, are just like Him and part of a Sonship of Christ. That is why Jesus said that greater things we would do in Christ’s name then He. I suggest you read ‘a course in miracles’ before you pass judgement. And remember, it wasn’t long ago the the accepted church belief was that the earth was flat. :eek:
Click to expand...
Protestants are attacked a lot for having differing views about many small things in Christianity and having Denominations, etc. What I see in the Catholic Church, as stated above and in many examples in this board is that there are people who have just as varying if not more varying beliefs within the Catholic Church as there are in Protestant denominations.

I just found this interesting…
 
Angie_Baskin said:
CIM was NOT delivered by automatic writing! It was a different voice within the mind of the scrib telling her things she did not previously know (she was originally an Atheist). You may find similar concourse in the Bible with Abraham and Isaiah as well as some New Testiment Prophets. Are you saying that these too were automatic writing and condemned by the Church?? She started writing down what she heard (URTEXT - an interesting read with the author wanting to use certain words and the Inspirational Voice insisting on another for all the right reasons). It was only as the dictation proceeded that the voice was revealed as Jesus, and this only through recognition. What I HAVE found is that to open this book up and read anything at random (OUT OF CONTEXT) is the worse thing anyone can do and is bound to give wrong interpretation. I found that it had to be read page by page with thought and discernment. When I did come to areas that blew my mind and previous belief, I found that by reading just a little further and all would come to light and that my first reation was in fact wrong and that I had misunderstood what was being said. I would say you are not READY for this course or you would have started at the begining. As for the misquote you quoted. NO WHERE does it say that Jesus is not the Son of God. In fact it is constantly refering to Jesus AS The Son of God created in God’s image and part of the Holy Trinity along with the Holy Spirit. As far as the 'deceived & deceiving"business, that was refering the the Son of Man. THAT’S US! we can be deceived. I don’t know what you read or thought you read but it wasn’t what I’m reading.
Click to expand...
So this is new revelation? If it is being read in Unity churches along side Deepak Chopra’s The Third Jesus I cannot trust it. Does this belong side by side with other new revelation such as The Book of Mormon and many Pseudopigrapha that have been written from 200BC to 800AD that describe visitations of angels, trips to heaven and hell describing all they saw and new revelation, etc.?
 
Angie_Baskin said:
RE jam. Again! you are looking at it from an earthly point of view. NOWHERE does it claim that Jesus is not God. It not declares Him a God but as also one with the Father in the Holy Trinity. Jesus said the battlefield is in the mind. ACIM states that from an EARTHLY point of view there definately is original sin that man DID fall from grace that there IS a devil (how ever you perceive it to be). But the whole idea of ACIM is to start perceiving from a HEVENLY point of view. From a hevenly view point, we are the perfect creations of God made in His image (think about that) and Jesus was the first of many. (think about that). To say that the Biblical account of anything is JUST AS IT OCCURED is nieve. How do you think the account of Genisis came to be?? Did the scribe in this situation write down what was said in his mind (inspiration) or would you say it was automatic writing and therefore invalid?? What about the quarrals between the apostles and Paul as to whose interpretations of Jesus teaching were correct?? Paul (who had a soldiers background) won out and he didn’t even know Jesus personally. The apostles that did know Him, their interpretations were relagated to only 4 gospels that seemed to corrilate. All other writings were thrown out. What about the recently discovered gospel of Thomas?? He was consided one of Jesus closest followers. THAT gospel (still in its original style text - not narrative) should be at least considered to be possibly THE most authentic text today, but because it includes (along with many of the same sayings as in the 4 gospels) statments by Jesus directly to him and not to the group, it is held in suspicition even accused as HERESY. How could this be if it IS true. I suppose only Jesus and Thomas really know. But what a loss if it IS the truest of all the gospels.
Click to expand...
I think it is very strange that you find the Gospel of Thomas Orthodox… I have read it and do not see how you can not see it’s Gnostic influences and how it contradicts statements made in the 4 gospels… Have you studied Marcion? Have you read the Secret Gospel of John (Secret John)? Seriously, Gnostics believe that Sophia, the mother, created YHWH (Yahweh), old testament God, but he was evil, there was a creation before the creation that made us, but it was corrupt, so, Sophia tricked Old Testament god (I am not talking about he Father here, I will not capitolize) to create humans and she actually breathed life into us, making us holy. Jesus is now the NT god to Gnostics, He came to defeat and take the place of the Old testament god.

Don’t even get me started on Aeons, etc, the Gnostics believe in many Gods and are not even close to Orthodoxy. The Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Judas, Gospel of Mary, Secret John, etc. are all very untrustworthy documents.

To come to a full understanding of the content of all bible pseudopigrapha, I reccommend you pick up these books which have just about ever extra-biblical book and explanations of what is contained in each one plus the text of each document:

The Lost Books of the Bible and the Forgotten Books of Eden by Rutherford H. Platt

Lost Scriptures: Books that Did Not Make It into the New Testament by Bart D. Ehrman

The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, Volume 1: Apocalyptic Literature and Testaments (The Anchor Yale Bible Reference Library) by James H. Charlesworth

The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, Volume 2: Expansions of the “Old Testament” and Legends, Wisdom and Philosophical Literature, Prayers, Psalms and Odes, … (The Anchor Yale Bible Reference Library) by James H. Charlesworth (Hardcover - Aug 27, 1985)
 
firstmode said:
So this is new revelation? If it is being read in Unity churches along side Deepak Chopra’s The Third Jesus I cannot trust it. Does this belong side by side with other new revelation such as The Book of Mormon and many Pseudopigrapha that have been written from 200BC to 800AD that describe visitations of angels, trips to heaven and hell describing all they saw and new revelation, etc.?
Click to expand...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Course_in_Miracles
 
Techno2000 said:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Course_in_Miracles
Click to expand...
From Wiki:

Summary

ACIM integrates ideas from Christianity, Eastern religions, mysticism, psychology, and Platonism, viewing reality as monistically consisting of a single thing, the love of God and the physical world as a projection in the mind.[8] ACIM focuses on cultivating awareness of love in the self and in others.[9] Believers in ACIM consider it an inspired scripture using Biblical terminology, but possessing a greater coherence by dint of its consistent source.[8]
 
firstmode said:
From Wiki:

Summary

ACIM integrates ideas from Christianity, Eastern religions, mysticism, psychology, and Platonism, viewing reality as monistically consisting of a single thing, the love of God and the physical world as a projection in the mind.[8] ACIM focuses on cultivating awareness of love in the self and in others.[9] Believers in ACIM consider it an inspired scripture using Biblical terminology, but possessing a greater coherence by dint of its consistent source.[8]
Click to expand...
A Course in Miracles is not a Catholic Book, many Christians have read it,
prominent Catholics have pointed out its errors, what are you trying to say ?
 
Angie_Baskin said:
to Jam. (my link is VERY slow) Thankyou for that vatican site on new age. I will read it more thouroughly and pray on it. I leave you with one last thought. Don’t throw out the one good apple with the box of bad. All Catholics/Christians need to be constantly listening for the Holy Spirit’s urgings. You didn’t reply to my comment on the use of confirmation if there is no direct inspiration from the heaven’s to be had??. In fact you haven’t addressed any of the quotes by Jesus I quoted any their relating issues. It’s like you have completely skipping over the REAL issues just to can ACIM. It’s true! there ARE a lot of New Age thinking out there, I never realized. I have never persued such directions and consider it mostly bad apples. That is why I am still a committed Catholic. And I have always been passionate about Jesus and His word and will defend it to the last (no matter where it comes from). To Josie L : The boxes similii is just me going on in my arty farty style. The point was that I believe we’re disagreeing over the same thing and therefore over nothing. (Just seeing something from a different view point).
Click to expand...
Angie, I’m sorry for not responding. I’m not sure what else I can say. Yes, there are private revelations, some approved by the Church, some not. Although, we as Catholics are not bound to believe any of them.
As someone else pointed out, there are approved writings such as St. Faustina’s diary that you can seek inspiration from. When we begin to look outside of the Church approved material we start to get into dangerous waters.
ACIM, in my estimation, is a bad apple, as you call it. It’s not in line with scripture, Tradition or the Church and appears to be demonically channeled. So why would you want anything to do with it?
People have pointed out prominent Catholic figures that have studied and warned fellow Catholics to stear clear. Not because they want to just bash ACIM but because they recognize it as spiritually dangerous.
Hope that helps. I didn’t mean to upset you or come off sounding harsh. If I did I apologize. I’m just telling you because I care. 🙂
 
Is it true that ACIM teaches the physical universe and our individual self is a dream of separation, guilt and fear that resulted from our judgment against our reality of Oneness in the unity of God?
 
ryanoneil said:
Is it true that ACIM teaches the physical universe and our individual self is a dream of separation, guilt and fear that resulted from our judgment against our reality of Oneness in the unity of God?
Click to expand...
In other words, nothing in this world is real. Therefore there is no sin and the bad things are created by our negative thoughts or vibrations?
We must put on a “christ conscience”?
 
jam070406 said:
In other words, nothing in this world is real. Therefore there is no sin and the bad things are created by our negative thoughts or vibrations?
We must put on a “christ conscience”?
Click to expand...
I wonder if that is the way Angie Baskin understands the course?
 
thereseozi said:
Hi Angie,

Fr. Benedict Groeschel (who is also a psychologist) personally knew Helen Schucman. He writes extensively, in a fair and balanced way, about *A Course in Miracles * in his book “A Still, Small Voice - A Practical Guide on Reported Revelations”. I wish I could print everything from the book here in this post as it really would explain it all. Here is a brief excerpt: “Others have claimed that there is a diabolical element operating in this whole matter. At first this seemed to me to be very far-fetched. However, as I recall the terrible deterioration of Helen at the end of her life (she was frightening to be with) and her hatred for the Course and for all spiritual things, I have reason to wonder. When I see that devout people - both Christians and Jews - have replaced faith in divine revelation with this Course I am absolutely appalled.”

Fr. Groeschel also explains why the Course is a false revelation, why it is New Age, how it is a spiritual menace, etc… I hope you will obtain a copy of the book. Here is a link for more information amazon.com/Still-Small-Voice-Practical-Revelations/dp/0898704367/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top

I hope you will keep an open mind and research the other side to this subject. 🙂

Therese
Click to expand...
Therese, this article at the Catholic Culture further addresses Fr. Groeschel’s critique of ACIM.

catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=2575&repos=1&subrepos=0&searchid=464618
 
Angie_Baskin said:
, , , God never gave ALL inspiration to any ONE group deliberatly. . . .
Click to expand...
Angie, you are conflating Divine Revelation with Divine inspiration. God most definitely entrusted His Self-Revelation in Christ to His Catholic Church. Any supposed “inspiration” that is in opposition to that Self-Revelation (e.g., ACIM) is not an inspiration from God, as much as one might like to think so. It is the Church’s Magisterial duty to discern the wheat from the chaff in preserving the Revelation in Christ; it is not the prerogative of individuals who do not have the assured guidance of the Holy Spirit.
 
Angie_Baskin said:
Dear Therese. ( I sense your gentle spirit). I have read this account by Fr Benedict but I found that the way Helen lived or ended her life in no way reflects on the courses teaching. If anything, it shows how she diversed from it. . . .
Click to expand...
You do not get the precise connection between Mrs. Schucman’s “blackest psychotic depression” in her last years (as Fr. Groeschel expressed it) and her involvement in spirit channelling and the demonic source of that. Becoming a useful tool of the enemy bears its consequences.
. . .Fr. Groeschel’s experience as a psychologist and priest included being called upon by his Bishop to investigate reported diabolic manifestations in his New York City diocese. In the lecture Fr. Groeschel described one experience — called as an exorcist — where he witnessed objects unexplainably being thrown about a room. At the end of a lengthy discussion he attributed that particular experience to paranormal manifestations — but not diabolic in nature (3). Fr. Groeschel is not easily inclined to attribute any experience to the diabolic. The possible diabolic origin in the spirit channeling of Helen Schucman was one exception given by Fr. Groeschel./QUOTE]
Click to expand...
catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=2575&repos=1&subrepos=0&searchid=464618
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top