My attempt at reading A Course in Miracles

[usmaak]

Warning.  This is long and is kind of just a random stream of thoughts about my foray into A Course in Miracles.

For me, God and all things related carry more baggage than I even understand.  I think that it was somewhere else on this group that I mentioned ACIM and how I could never read it.  When I was a kid, I was traumatized by two summers at a born again Christian summer bible camp.  It left a permanent mark on me.  Even though I grew past all of the fear it caused me, to this day I always think "what if?"  What if it's true?  What if the hell that they scared us with is more than just campfire stories and tracts?  What if that's where I go because I didn't stay true to what I was taught all of those years ago?  I know how ridiculous that sounds, but it's always been this little voice in the background of everything I learn on the spiritual side of things.  In spite of it, I finally got myself to the point where for the most part, I don't believe in any of it.  I don't believe that there is a god out there somewhere.  I think that the bible is pure fiction.  It's a bunch of stories designed to keep people in fear.  While there might have been a person named Jesus who lived way back in history, he was just a person who stories were written about.  Fictional stories.  Through my life, I've vacillated between believing that we create our reality and that we are a gigantic cosmic joke/accident.  I've gone between believing that this life is but one of many and that when you shuffle off, that's the end.  Seth has figured prominently in my life since I was introduced to it in the late 80s.  I've read every single mainstream Seth book out there multiple times.  I've also read dozens of other "Seth like" books.  Besides Seth, my favorite books have been those by Eckhart Tolle.

For some reason, I have always found myself gravitating toward ACIM. I've picked it up so many times.  I've read into it and as soon as I see the god stuff (it's literally everywhere in that book), I've thrown it down and sworn to never look at it again.  But it keeps coming back into my life.  The latest is from a very good friend of mine who is reading it.  We sometimes discuss it and I decided to give it a try and really stick with it no matter how uncomfortable it made me.  I bought the book (Circle of Atonement edition) and found a 365 day reading plan.  I'm now on day 65.  There's also the workbook, which is 365 lessons.  Because I'm so god averse, I found a couple of books that deal with the topic in less "godlike" terms.  My favorite is written by someone who has at least as much baggage as I do when it comes to the god thing.  The author is Pam Grout and the name of the book is The Course in Miracles Experiment - A Starter Kit for Rewiring Your Mind.  She takes some of the daily lessons and rewords them in ways that they still make sense with the lessons that the represent.  She's the only reason I've been able to get as far as I have.

Many of the lessons in ACIM have definite "create your own reality" undertones to them.  Especially the first few lessons.  But the entire thing is so religious that it makes my skin crawl.  Because you might refer to me as a "lapsed Christian" or a "recovering Christian", I am not as well versed on Christianity as I once was.  I did a lot of research into ACIM and I read tons of articles about how it's not really Christianity and it contradicts a lot about what Christians believe.  I don't know.  The "scribe" theoretically was an atheist who was channeling Jesus Christ and all of the talk about "our father" and God and blah blah blah.  It sure seems Christian to me.  And the idea of the actual Jesus being channeled by some random woman in the 60s seems blatantly ridiculous.  Many of the articles and websites and forums that I read were going under the assumption that the players in this drama are actually real and the discussion often talked about how ACIM is actually the devil just pretending and how the entire course is made to lead people into hell.  Stuff like that, as you'd expect.  I don't know what all Christians believe but it seems like one overarching theme to Christianity is that if you don't believe in the Christian god, there's no way to the kingdom of heaven.  Everyone who is not Christian and has not taken JC as their personal savior is doomed to rot in the pit.  Sorry all you followers of the hundreds of other religions on the planet.  Sorry all of you poor unfortunates who live there entire lives never even hearing about Christianity.  Sucks to be you.  That kind of stuff is a definite trigger for me.

I was reading Lesson 65 today and as I was having my usual reaction to the material and it got me asking why I was torturing myself with this every day.  I mean the last three lessons have been:

- I am blessed as a son of God.
- God goes with me wherever I go.
- God is my strength.  Vision is his gift.

The gag factor on these three lessons alone is strong.  Even working with the lessons made me feel like a complete hypocrite because I don't believe in any of the characters in the story.  It felt like lies.

I can see echos of the Seth material in it and I know that ACIM was one of the teachings used by folks like Eckhart Tolle.  But it's so thoroughly soaked in religious terminology that it's really hard for me to take.  I decided that I am going to go no further with the readings.  It is difficult for me to work with a teaching when I do not believe in any of the characters in the story.  I thought that I could get through it by swapping out God and JC with things like Higher Power.  But I have to admit that I am not sure I even believe in that.  Sometimes I believe in nothing at all.  It can be a tough way to live.  So many people believe in something and in some ways I'm jealous of that.  Faith must be nice but it all seems like one big con job to me.  I might continue with the lessons but by using the Pam Grout book instead of the actual ACIM text.  She and I at least seem on the same wavelength in terms of aversion to the words of Christianity.

Anyway, thanks for reading my rambling.

[Sena]

This is long and is kind of just a random stream of thoughts about my foray into A Course in Miracles.

usmaak, thanks for your interesting post. I assume you mean the book by Helen Schucman.

Many of the lessons in ACIM have definite "create your own reality" undertones to them.  Especially the first few lessons.  But the entire thing is so religious that it makes my skin crawl.

I had a look at a pdf of the book, but the heavy doses of conventional Christianity turned me off. How I see it is that the message of Jesus has been totally distorted by the various Churches, but Helen Schucman did not appear to understand this. To get something like the real teaching of Jesus the minimum requirement is to read something of the gnostic gospels found at Nag Hammadi, but Schurman does not appear to have done that.

[usmaak]

Yup.  Although she doesn't claim to have authored it.

Whenever I come across books like this that freely use God and other loaded religious words, they often say that the reader should just use whatever words they want.  I just don't work well with that because the author's intent is important to me.  If they are using God, then that is what they are using.

ACIM is like that.  It even claims not to be a Christian teaching, yet the language is horrifyingly Christian all the way through the book.

Helen was theoretically an atheist but that doesn't make sense to me at all.  How a true atheist could tolerate channeling an entity referring to itself as Jesus without going crazy is beyond understanding, at least to me.  If I ever started hearing a voice that identified itself as Jesus, I'd check myself into a residential psychiatric facility that same day.

I wish that I'd read the freely available online PDF before spending somewhere around $50 for various books having to do with the course.  Who knows?  Maybe someday I'll start reading it and I'll be in sync with it.  For now, the idea that God is actually real instead of a bunch of stories told to people to keep them behaving in a somewhat reasonable and humane fashion is such a foreign idea to me.

I mean none of this as an insult to anyone who's a believer.  In a way, I am jealous of those who believe this type of thing without question.  It must be nice to believe in something other than eventual obliteration.

[Deb]

Usmaak, I have the same knee-jerk reflex when it comes to religion and the use of the word god. Too much catechism and nightmare stories as a kid. Since reading the Seth materials, I've calmed down a bit and mentally replace the word god with ATI and that helps somewhat. I tell myself that various religions' ideas of god are really talking about the same concept, it's just that they've dressed it up and personified it for their own reasons. I don't see ATI as a person or personality, it see it more as conscious energy that exists in everything.

Everyone was always talking about how amazing ACIM was, and so I bought the combined volume years ago. I found it way too religious for me and donated the book after trying to get into it a couple of times. I can live without it and I'm good with that.

[jbseth]

Hi usmaak, Hi All,

It seems to me that each and every person is on a very unique path, as we journey through life. It also seems to me that each and every person's individual likes and dislikes are also very unique. This seems to apply to everything, including our beliefs.

In regards to ACIM. It seems to me that some people like it and others don't, just like every other spiritual path, religion and philosophy.

For me personally, I'm in the "others don't" category in regards to ACIM.  However, I also think that there are some other spiritual paths, religions and philosophies that are much more objectionable than ACIM.


-jbseth

[usmaak]

For me personally, I'm in the "others don't" category in regards to ACIM.  However, I also think that there are some other spiritual paths, religions and philosophies that are much more objectionable than ACIM.

I'm sure that there are a great many.  The way ACIM is described to me, it fits closer to Seth than most other mainstream religions.  I was in Christian Science for a few years as well and there are a lot of parallels between CS and ACIM.  That was many years ago but the Mother Church still hasn't gotten the hint and occasionally asks me to send money.

That was so long ago.  My wife says to me, I can't imagine you actually being in a religion.  She knows me well.

I used to consider myself agnostic but now I count myself as an atheist.  It's not that I think that the existence of God can't be proven.  It's that I think that it's all nothing more than a work of fiction that was written a long time ago to teach morality lessons.  That's what makes ACIM difficult on me.  God this and God that.  Jesus channeled.

Anyway, thanks for reading my ramblings and the responses.

[T.M.]

Hi All,

Hi Usmaak,

I've flirted with ACIM a bit. Never really took to it though. Now I think I know why. It strikes me as what I call "the love and light" religion.  I don't like that religion. Not that I'm against that idea, essentially. It just seems to me that most religions are about controlling others. The way they use what they call "love and light" is no more than a means to tell you to stuff and repress your emotions, and get back into line with whatever ideology they are putting out.

The absolute last thing organized religions want are people that are in touch with themselves mentally and or emotionally. It's too hard to manipulate them.

I do think a good part of the problems in this world are people denying their emotions, instead of just exploring them and trying to understand why they are feeling whatever they are feeling at a given time. Instead most try to be what they consider as positive, by not having what they consider negative feelings.

What generally happens is they just deny and stuff what they consider negative thoughts or feelings with catchy little phrases like love and light. Instead of acknowledging those feelings, and trying to understand them or work through them.

I picked up a habit awhile back. If I'm reading an overtly religious work, when I see the word God, I substitute the word Drug.
Then when it gets strange as it usually does, I find it a much more understandable in context.

[usmaak]

I picked up a habit awhile back. If I'm reading an overtly religious work, when I see the word God, I substitute the word Drug.
Then when it gets strange as it usually does, I find it a much more understandable in context.

I love this!

[Deb]

I picked up a habit awhile back. If I'm reading an overtly religious work, when I see the word God, I substitute the word Drug.
Then when it gets strange as it usually does, I find it a much more understandable in context.

OMG that's brilliant! Thank you!

[leidl]

usmaak, I enjoyed the honesty of your post.  It's interesting that you have repeatedly gone back to the Course, despite your resistance to it.  Hopefully your negative childhood experiences with religion didn't instill a belief that spiritual practices are both necessary and terrifying.  That combo would create one hell of a reality.  ;-)

I've read much of the Course, but think I may have bailed before getting all the way through.  I can see how it would be effective as a de-programming course for traditional Christians, since it uses Christian vocabulary but has a radically different perspective on "sin," the nature of reality, etc.  The tone of it made me squirm; it felt like an attempt to brainwash.  But I don't reject its message, really.  Perhaps it could be described as a very systematic attempt to remove the kinds of beliefs that produce a negative outcomes like guilt and fear, and replace them with beliefs that help us see ourselves as safely and eternally a part of the love that is All That Is.  But I don't like rigorous spiritual systems where you proceed through a series of steps in a certain order at a certain speed.  They make me feel like an animal being shuttled from the stockyard to the slaughterhouse.

There's another thread on this site where Sena provided a link to a site on Gnosticism.  On that site is a quote that I've been thinking about, "The only practises that give no result are the ones that are not done" – V.M. Rabolú  I'm of the "all roads lead to Rome" persuasion, but some roads just suit me better than others.  I'm more likely to stay on those roads long enough to get to the destination.  Seth is a good fit for the religion-averse.

[usmaak]

It's interesting that you have repeatedly gone back to the Course, despite your resistance to it.  Hopefully your negative childhood experiences with religion didn't instill a belief that spiritual practices are both necessary and terrifying.  That combo would create one hell of a reality

I have had a lot of time to think about this as I started reading Seth back in the late 80s, just a few years after leaving Christian Science behind.  I think that the net result of my experiences is that I am unable to believe anything 100 percent.  Even if something feels right, my brain tells me that it's just a trick to keep me from thinking about the primal fear of the end that is seemingly built into humanity.  As I get older, of course, I spend more time thinking about this.  I've been told that I am too analytical and sometimes it's to my detriment.  I require absolute proof on things and do not take anything on faith, ever.  I see people who legitimately believe 100 percent in the Christian God and all that goes with it and I feel jealous that those people are able to believe.  As misguided as I feel it is, it must be fantastic to believe in anything like that.  I'll never know because I will never get there.  When I am deep into the Seth material, it feels right.  I get some relief from worries about the future.  But short of something smacking me in the back of the head and saying "hey dummy, here I am", my mind will always come up with ways to debunk everything.

Seth is a good fit for the religion-averse.

I find this to be true.  My mind calls BS on anything he does say that has to do with religion though.  I don't think that there's a second coming.  I don't believe that Jesus is going to be back among us in a different form.  I think that the Christian world is all based on a poorly written fictional story.  I love the fact that Seth is not couched in religious jargon though.  ACIM is not supposed to be Christian.  It is then the ultimate joke that the entire course uses nothing but Christian jargon and is supposedly voiced by their figurehead.

I finished the Seth material in its entirety about two years ago.  I'd been reading it for four or five years, with the goal of reading them all.  Then I set it aside.  I've read a few other book, some of which I liked very much.  I'll always like the Eckhart Tolle books and went through them.  Though there's a little too much God in them for my liking, they are well written and more accurately reflect some of Seth's message than many other books.  I also read one by Wayne Dyer named The Power of Awakening.  About ten years ago I decided I was going to read some of his books and I bought a bunch of them.  I got about 20 pages into one of them and then got rid of the lot of them.  Wayne was another  of the if you don't like the word God, substitute it with the word of your choice, only to use the word in every other sentence types.  I think that maybe my experiences with ACIM made Wayne's use of the word seem minor in comparison because it didn't bother me in this book.

Anyway, I started the Seth material again a couple of days ago.  I am now reading The Seth Material.  I have every single Seth book on my Kindle, as well as a set of well worn paperback stuck in a box somewhere that never got unpacked after I moved.

So who knows.  Maybe I'll spend more time on this forum, talking out the concepts. 

[Sena]

So who knows.  Maybe I'll spend more time on this forum, talking out the concepts. 

usmaak, I look forward to your thoughts! I don't think we should regard the Seth teachings as something static. The teachings need to be developed.

[usmaak]

So who knows.  Maybe I'll spend more time on this forum, talking out the concepts.

usmaak, I look forward to your thoughts! I don't think we should regard the Seth teachings as something static. The teachings need to be developed.

I do know that they're not static in that every time I read them, I get something new out of them.  Sometimes it feels like I'm reading an entirely new book.

[leidl]

As misguided as I feel it is, it must be fantastic to believe in anything like that.  I'll never know because I will never get there.

I require absolute proof on things and do not take anything on faith, ever.

Well, you're taking it on faith that you will never be able to believe, right?   

If you've ever taken a philosophy class, especially a philosophy of science class, you're probably aware that some philosophers point out that we can have no certain knowledge about anything except mathematics, because effects are not evident in causes, and causes aren't evident in effects. 

In other words, if you toss your computer mouse out into the room right now, you take it on faith that the mouse will fall to the ground, but you can't absolutely know it will.  Gravity is a theory with a lot of explanatory power.  A lot of experiments are strongly suggestive the theory is true.  But still, it is a theory, and the cause of falling objects might actually be something other than gravity.  And that something might occasionally cause things to fall upwards, if the conditions are right!  We believe that when we drop things they will fall because repeated experience tells us this is so; not because we can have certain knowledge. 

So...if it is repeated experience that causes us to believe things, then why not be open to the possibility that someday you might repeatedly experience enough high strangeness that you will have a faith in Seth that equals your faith in science?  Maybe you'll have enough experiences of a certain sort in the next year, that you'll become confident that you are communicating with entities in F2 while you sleep, and subconsciously choosing to act on those communications while awake.

My guess is you believe in global warming without 100% proof.  A lot of evidence is pointing in that direction...a heck of a lot.  But, there could in theory be another cause that scientists haven't quite stumbled on yet.  Yet most of us (including me) accept that global warming exists.  I don't see why Seth's ideas should be any different; science has confirmed some of them, at least to the degree science can confirm things.  Even hardcore skeptics are pretty good at taking things on faith, when you really think about it. 

I've had some pretty interesting things happen to me in recent weeks.  If these kinds of coincidences continue to happen, even my analytical mind will start to accept them as evidence of a reality that physicalist science still rejects.  It might look like faith to others, but really, it is just the result of enough repetitions of experience.  It isn't all that different from the faith that scientists have when they repeatedly get the same results from their experiments.  Is it?

[Sena]

I've had some pretty interesting things happen to me in recent weeks.  If these kinds of coincidences continue to happen, even my analytical mind will start to accept them as evidence of a reality that physicalist science still rejects.

leidl, it is this kind of experience that keeps us in the Seth teachings. The materialist universe is essentially meaningless. If we feel that life is meaningful, we have gone beyond the materialist universe.

[usmaak]

Well, you're taking it on faith that you will never be able to believe, right?   

Well, I'm taking it on experience as it has been my experience for all 50+ years of my life.  The part of my brain that needs proof never really gets it.

So...if it is repeated experience that causes us to believe things, then why not be open to the possibility that someday you might repeatedly experience enough high strangeness that you will have a faith in Seth that equals your faith in science?  Maybe you'll have enough experiences of a certain sort in the next year, that you'll become confident that you are communicating with entities in F2 while you sleep, and subconsciously choosing to act on those communications while awake.

I'm trying.  But I'm constantly analyzing what's happened to date and it doesn't jive with this.  Nothing strange happens to me.  I don't remember most of my dreams but the couple that I do remember are useless jumbles.  The evidence of my life never proves any of this.  And I understand that from a Seth perspective, if that is what I expect to see, that's what I'll see.  I've always struggled with the concepts of "you create your own reality."  I don't get the whole "pretend you have something until you do" or "fake it till you make it."  If I don't have something, I don't have it.  I can play a game of pretend but at the end of the day, I still don't have the something.

My guess is you believe in global warming without 100% proof.  A lot of evidence is pointing in that direction...a heck of a lot.  But, there could in theory be another cause that scientists haven't quite stumbled on yet.  Yet most of us (including me) accept that global warming exists.  I don't see why Seth's ideas should be any different; science has confirmed some of them, at least to the degree science can confirm things.  Even hardcore skeptics are pretty good at taking things on faith, when you really think about it.

I don't know if there is 100% proof of anything so widescale and global.  I used to be a meteorologist before moving on to what I do now and though I didn't do a lot with global climate concepts, I've seen enough to make me believe that there's a possibility that the globe is warming and that humanity has something to do with it.  It's really funny that you bring this up but for a different reason.  I belong to a couple of weather groups and there isn't a single person in those groups that I know of that believes any of it.  They're stuck on the whole "we've only been on this planet a short time and we can't have that big an impact."  They are simply not open to any other interpretation and probably generate half of the anti climate change memes that are out there.  I don't participate because my ideas are not popular.

I've had some pretty interesting things happen to me in recent weeks.  If these kinds of coincidences continue to happen, even my analytical mind will start to accept them as evidence of a reality that physicalist science still rejects.  It might look like faith to others, but really, it is just the result of enough repetitions of experience.  It isn't all that different from the faith that scientists have when they repeatedly get the same results from their experiments.  Is it?

This isn't directed at you but what you said made me think of it.  So, coincidences.  I often wonder how much people see is actually real and how much is them seeing what they want to see to validate their views/opinions on something.  People who are religious see God in everything.  There is no convincing them otherwise.  God is driving their lives and they're along for the ride.  I don't see any of that.  Who's to say that coincidences aren't anything more than assigning meaning to something completely random so that a point of view is validated?  I'm not saying that I don't see coincidences too.  Just the other day I saw someone at a store that I had just been thinking about a few minutes before.  I can wow, what a coincidence.  I was just thinking of you.  But it really was just the person needing an item at the same store that I was in.  It was a random and meaningless occurrence but I could certainly assign meaning to it if I wanted to.

I am thinking of giving this book a read.

https://www.amazon.com/Squared-Pam-Grout-ebook/dp/B00B2JSRAS

It provides "experiments" to prove that we influence and create the reality that we see.  It might be interesting and I really like the author.  She has the same views on the religious aspects of ACIM as I do.

[Sena]

But I'm constantly analyzing what's happened to date and it doesn't jive with this.  Nothing strange happens to me.  I don't remember most of my dreams but the couple that I do remember are useless jumbles.  The evidence of my life never proves any of this.  And I understand that from a Seth perspective, if that is what I expect to see, that's what I'll see.  I've always struggled with the concepts of "you create your own reality."  I don't get the whole "pretend you have something until you do" or "fake it till you make it."  If I don't have something, I don't have it.  I can play a game of pretend but at the end of the day, I still don't have the something.

usmaak, what you have written is quite interesting. The impression I get (I may be totally wrong!) is that your life has been running quite smoothly.  That's great, because that is the reality you have created. My reality over the past year has been dominated by my wife's serious illness. She is now over the worst. She was able "to see the right doctor at the right time". She is a devout Catholic, and that may have enabled her to create that reality. The Seth teaching is that one's beliefs create one's reality, whether the beliefs are Seth teachings or otherwise.

Seth emphasizes the Inner Self and Framework 2. This means that the reality we create is in accordance with the plan which the Inner Self has made in Framework 2, rather than creating according to whims and fancies. I don't get regular information from dreams, but I had an interesting dream about 4 years ago which gave me an inkling about a past life.

[Deb]

I've had some pretty interesting things happen to me in recent weeks.  If these kinds of coincidences continue to happen, even my analytical mind will start to accept them as evidence of a reality that physicalist science still rejects.

If you'd care to share them, we have a topic called Synchronistic Events and there are some real doozies in there—most of which are too much to write off as simple coincidences. It makes me think there's more going on here than meets the eye. Actually I have a good story to add to that topic when I get a few more minutes.

Susan Watkins, a friend of Jane and Rob and a class attendee, wrote a few Seth-related books. Her most popular is Conversations with Seth, but she also write "What a coincidence!" I read it a few years ago. I wouldn't say it's a prize winner, but she had a few good stories to tell.

She also wrote, "Dreaming Myself, Dreaming a Town." From Amazon: "The story of Sue Watkins' astounding dream project, in which the dreams of residents of the small town of Dundee, NY, were collected, examined and correlated with daily events." I have book, have not read it yet. She also wrote, "Speaking of Jane Roberts."

[usmaak]

But I'm constantly analyzing what's happened to date and it doesn't jive with this.  Nothing strange happens to me.  I don't remember most of my dreams but the couple that I do remember are useless jumbles.  The evidence of my life never proves any of this.  And I understand that from a Seth perspective, if that is what I expect to see, that's what I'll see.  I've always struggled with the concepts of "you create your own reality."  I don't get the whole "pretend you have something until you do" or "fake it till you make it."  If I don't have something, I don't have it.  I can play a game of pretend but at the end of the day, I still don't have the something.

usmaak, what you have written is quite interesting. The impression I get (I may be totally wrong!) is that your life has been running quite smoothly.  That's great, because that is the reality you have created. My reality over the past year has been dominated by my wife's serious illness. She is now over the worst. She was able "to see the right doctor at the right time". She is a devout Catholic, and that may have enabled her to create that reality. The Seth teaching is that one's beliefs create one's reality, whether the beliefs are Seth teachings or otherwise.

Seth emphasizes the Inner Self and Framework 2. This means that the reality we create is in accordance with the plan which the Inner Self has made in Framework 2, rather than creating according to whims and fancies. I don't get regular information from dreams, but I had an interesting dream about 4 years ago which gave me an inkling about a past life.

I'd say "relatively smoothly."  I have a job that I love doing.  I have the usual health issues that some my age has and some significant back problems that pretty much generate pain 24/7.

I am sorry to hear about your wife's issues.  I am glad that she is over the worst and it is my hope that she continues on the road to recovery.

I have probably taken up enough of everyone's time with my speculation and doubts.  I think that this a great group and I don't want to derail it with my silliness. 

[Sena]

I have the usual health issues that some my age has and some significant back problems that pretty much generate pain 24/7.

I am sorry to hear about your wife's issues.  I am glad that she is over the worst and it is my hope that she continues on the road to recovery.

I have probably taken up enough of everyone's time with my speculation and doubts.  I think that this a great group and I don't want to derail it with my silliness.

usmaak, you are making a valuable contribution to the forum. I hope your back pain will become less and less.

[leidl]

 
Hey folks,

I have probably taken up enough of everyone's time with my speculation and doubts.  I think that this a great group and I don't want to derail it with my silliness. 

usmaak, with all due respect, from a Sethian perspective I'm not sure your belief that you can derail this group would derail it for anyone except those also choosing that belief.      
Sena, it is lovely that even though you no longer identify as Catholic, you see the value of your wife's belief system, and honor it.  May she continue to mend, and usmaak, I hope your chronic pain subsides as well.
Deb, I've read some of the synchronicity thread, and you're right, there are some doozies there!  Mine so far seem very small in comparison; they involve things like chocolate-glazed donuts and bumper stickers.  But they are happening frequently, and I'm enjoying it.  Maybe I'll have something worthy of the group list soon.

I looked up the book by Pam Grout, and even found some "lab report" pages she's published for people to use in their DIY project of determining if they really do create their own reality.  Presumably these pages correspond to the 9 experiments she's devised in the book;  I've pasted the first one below.  She's gone out of her way to make this accessible and fun, it seems.  If this looks like something you're interested in doing, folks, check out the others lab pages at https://pamgrout.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/lab-report-sheets.pdf
 
Maybe we can play with this as individuals and report our results here?


Lab Report Sheet

The Principle: The Dude Abides

The Theory: There is an invisible energy force or field of infinite possibilities.
And it's yours for the asking.

The Question: Does the F.P. exist?

The Hypothesis: If there's a 24/7 energy force equally available to everyone, I
can access it at any time by simply paying attention. Furthermore, if I ask the force for a
blessing, give it a specific time frame, and clear instructions, it'll send me a gift and say,
"my pleasure."

Time required: 48 hours

Today's Date: __________ Time:________________

Deadline for receiving gift: ____________________

The Approach: I hate to break it to ya, God, but folks are starting to talk. They're
starting to wonder, "Is this guy for real?" I mean, really, like it'd be so much skin off
your chin to come down here and call off this crazy hide-and-seek thing you've been
playing. I'm giving you exactly 48 hours to make your presence known. I want a thumb's
up, a clear sign, something that cannot be written off as coincidence.

Research Notes:___________________________________________________

"We now have a science of spirituality that is fully verifiable and objective."
-- Amit Goswami, Ph.D., Retired Theoretical Physicist

[usmaak]

usmaak, with all due respect, from a Sethian perspective I'm not sure your belief that you can derail this group would derail it for anyone except those also choosing that belief.   

That's a relief to me!

[Sena]

"We now have a science of spirituality that is fully verifiable and objective."
-- Amit Goswami, Ph.D., Retired Theoretical Physicist

leidl, thanks for your quote from Amit Goswami, but I am not sure I agree with him. It seems to me that where spirituality is concerned there is always an element of uncertainty.

"This means that you deal, even consciously, with vast areas of probabilities, with various combinations, with ways in which identity itself will be defined and experienced. You will react to your definitions of yourselves. In that regard the Sinful-Self concept represents an exaggerated, distorted version of man's recognition that in certain ways he seems (underlined) less sure of himself than the other species, less at ease, for he has taken upon himself the creative recognition of uncertainties"
—TPS6 Deleted Session April 16, 1981

Mine so far seem very small in comparison; they involve things like chocolate-glazed donuts and bumper stickers.  But they are happening frequently, and I'm enjoying it.

The small things are the most interesting!

[DylansDad]

This is long and is kind of just a random stream of thoughts about my foray into A Course in Miracles.

usmaak, thanks for your interesting post. I assume you mean the book by Helen Schucman.

Many of the lessons in ACIM have definite "create your own reality" undertones to them.  Especially the first few lessons.  But the entire thing is so religious that it makes my skin crawl.

I had a look at a pdf of the book, but the heavy doses of conventional Christianity turned me off. How I see it is that the message of Jesus has been totally distorted by the various Churches, but Helen Schucman did not appear to understand this. To get something like the real teaching of Jesus the minimum requirement is to read something of the gnostic gospels found at Nag Hammadi, but Schurman does not appear to have done that.

Helen used Christian terminology but her source in channeling  REDEFINED THE WORDS! So she used Christian trigger words but rescued them from traditional Christian usage. This may make reading ACIM more difficult. You need to find a glossary online that shows you what she intended by the words.  She CHANNELED the Course in Miracles, yet you expect her to have done research beforehand? Either she just made it all up or it was channeled by someone claiming to be Jesus. While I totally doubt it was the historical Jesus, you can't ding her for not knowing history of something that is being merely channeled THROUGH her!  It would be like if I channeled information about Atlantis and someone said "Well, he obviously  never read Plato".  I and Helen are the channels, not the source of the material.  A channel can be dumb as a doornail, since they are merely a conduit to the information from beyond.

[Deb]

I and Helen are the channels, not the source of the material.  A channel can be dumb as a doornail, since they are merely a conduit to the information from beyond.

Yep, good point. It's just a matter of sorting through a multitude of channelers and trying to figure out who is legit and who is not. Our only tool, since we can't investigate and know the heart and mind of them all, is our gut feelings—whether something feels right or not. If some channeler does not resonate with me, and there are quite a few, I don't feel the need to investigate much further. Especially when something like the Seth materials fit (mostly) like a glove from the get-go.