|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: Reality ScanReality Scan Date: Mar 24, 2008 13:44
On Mar 24, 3:27 pm, "Carrie" kingcon.com> wrote:> "Deborah" blanketyblank.com> wrote in message
>
> news:7t2gu3d9b8jm2hneuv5a1u581pcaqtirao@4ax.com...
>>> On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 07:36:24 GMT, "James"
>> gmail.com> wrote:>
>>>Gene desperate for somebody to talk to him.
>
>>>Hi Gene.
>
>> Proving once again that all the EOTS folks are here to do is disrupt
>> any course discussion that arises.
>
> If you believe this, why let them by giving attention to it?
> I mean, it seems simple.
>
>
> ...
|
| Show full article (0.63Kb) |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: DeborahDeborah Date: Mar 24, 2008 13:50
On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 16:27:07 -0400, "Carrie" kingcon.com>
wrote:
>
>"Deborah" blanketyblank.com> wrote in message
>news:7t2gu3d9b8jm2hneuv5a1u581pcaqtirao@4ax.com...>> On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 07:36:24 GMT, "James"
>> gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>Gene desperate for somebody to talk to him.
>>>
>>>Hi Gene.
>>
>> Proving once again that all the EOTS folks are here to do is disrupt
>> any course discussion that arises.
>
> If you believe this, why let them by giving attention to it?
> I mean, it seems simple.
Follow you own advice, Carrie. I'm referring here to Katie.
Deborah (BC)
|
| |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: MikeRyderMikeRyder Date: Mar 24, 2008 14:29
On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 17:14:16 GMT, Gene Ward Smith chewbacca.org>
wrote:
>MikeRyder nospam.com> wrote in news:rmreu398jqqh9lhl6eko26c8asovma63fa@
>4ax.com:
>>> How about this. Your prefection includes your perceived imperfection
>> in the world.
>>
>
>That would mean it is recalled in Heaven, which the Course denies.
In nothingness...no thing...nothing is recalled.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: CarrieCarrie Date: Mar 24, 2008 14:41
"Deborah" blanketyblank.com> wrote in message
news:hv4gu3h2ers6ckp57bmhb2ern2f80dfgvs@4ax.com...> On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 16:27:07 -0400, "Carrie" kingcon.com>
> wrote:
>>>
>>"Deborah" blanketyblank.com> wrote in message
>>news:7t2gu3d9b8jm2hneuv5a1u581pcaqtirao@4ax.com...>>> On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 07:36:24 GMT, "James"
>>> gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>Gene desperate for somebody to talk to him.
>>>>
>>>>Hi Gene.
>>>
>>> Proving once again that all the EOTS folks are here to do is disrupt
>>> any course discussion that arises.
>>
>> If you believe this, why let them by giving attention to it?
>> I mean, it seems simple. ...
|
| Show full article (1.06Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: PieterPieter Date: Mar 24, 2008 14:48
"Gene Ward Smith" chewbacca.org> schreef in bericht
news:Xns9A6B69A68CBF1genewardsmithsbcglob@207.115.33.102...> "Pieter" wrote in news:47e78fbd$0$10700
> $bf4948fe@news.tele2.nl:
>
>>
>> "Gene Ward Smith" chewbacca.org> schreef in bericht
>> news:Xns9A6AEE83A6D9Dgenewardsmithsbcglob@207.115.17.102...
>>>>> We are told that the Son has the capacity, lacking in Father and Holy
>>> Spirit, of believing in error.
>>
>> "We are told . . ." : would you be so kind as
>> to specify where and how this is told?
>
> "In the Divine psyche, the Father and the Holy Spirit are not incomplete
> at all. The Sonship has the unique faculty of believing in error, or
> incompleteness, if he so selects. However, it is quite apparent that so to
> elect IS to believe in the existence of nothingness. The correction of
> this error is the Atonement." ...
|
| Show full article (3.93Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Reality ScanReality Scan Date: Mar 24, 2008 14:48
On Mar 24, 4:41 pm, "Carrie" kingcon.com> wrote:> "Deborah" blanketyblank.com> wrote in message
>
> news:hv4gu3h2ers6ckp57bmhb2ern2f80dfgvs@4ax.com...
>
>
>>> On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 16:27:07 -0400, "Carrie" kingcon.com>
>> wrote:>
>>>"Deborah" blanketyblank.com> wrote in message
>>>news:7t2gu3d9b8jm2hneuv5a1u581pcaqtirao@4ax.com...>>>> On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 07:36:24 GMT, "James"
>>>> gmail.com> wrote:>
>>>>>Gene desperate for somebody to talk to him.
>
>>>>>Hi Gene.
>
>>>> Proving once again that all the EOTS folks are here to do is disrupt ...
|
| Show full article (1.57Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Reality ScanReality Scan Date: Mar 24, 2008 14:59
On Mar 24, 3:00 pm, Gene Ward Smith chewbacca.org> wrote:>>> Unless it knew that was impossible.
>
>> Yeah, but how could God possibly "know" that?
>
> By knowing why his is existence is necessary, he might know why it is the
> only existence which is necessary.
But isn't "necessity," a concept God, Himself created to create? And
if it it isn't, where did the notion of necessity come from?
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Reality ScanReality Scan Date: Mar 24, 2008 15:02
On Mar 24, 3:20 pm, Deborah blanketyblank.com> wrote:> On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 11:52:26 -0700 (PDT), Reality Scan
>
> netzero.com> wrote:>>Yeah, but how could God possibly "know" that? I'm not really clear on
>>what "self created," means. And the author really doesn't attempt to
>>explain it. In that respect, sometimes reading the Course is like
>>listening to Fox News. But then again, I could just be cynical.
>
> It means God wasn't created by something else like His creations are.
> It means He's first cause of creation.
>
> Deborah (BC)
Are you supplying that "meaning," and is that meaning sufficient to
understand the concept. And if you think it is --then why use the term
"self-creating," which implies a creation, rather than a term such as
"always existing"???
I mean if God is self creating what existed before God self created?
|
| Show full article (0.98Kb) |
| 1 Comment |
|
|
Author: PieterPieter Date: Mar 24, 2008 15:40
> On Mar 24, 3:20 pm, Deborah blanketyblank.com> wrote:>> On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 11:52:26 -0700 (PDT), Reality Scan
>>
>> netzero.com> wrote:>>>Yeah, but how could God possibly "know" that? I'm not really clear on
>>>what "self created," means. And the author really doesn't attempt to
>>>explain it. In that respect, sometimes reading the Course is like
>>>listening to Fox News. But then again, I could just be cynical.
>>
>> It means God wasn't created by something else like His creations are.
>> It means He's first cause of creation.
>>
>> Deborah (BC)
>
>
> Are you supplying that "meaning," and is that meaning sufficient to
> understand the concept. And if you think it is --then why use the term
> "self-creating," which implies a creation, rather than a term such as ...
|
| Show full article (1.37Kb) |
| 4 Comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Gene Ward SmithGene Ward Smith Date: Mar 24, 2008 15:44
"Pieter" wrote in news:47e8219e$0$13135
$bf4948fe@news.tele2.nl:
>> But why? Why was the Holy Spirit created only in response to the
>> separation?
>
> I don't see your problem. The Holy Spirit
> was God's Answer to the separation.
>
But had the Son and Holy Spirit been created together, the separation would
not have happened. That's the "problem".
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
