> On Sun, 27 Apr 2008 19:25:55 -0700 (PDT), Mike yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>

>>On Apr 27, 6:33 pm, sue...@aol.com wrote:

>>> On Apr 27, 1:58 pm, Mike yahoo.com> wrote:

>

>>>> On Apr 27, 4:45 pm, sue...@aol.com wrote:

>

>>>>>  ACIM is non-dual if it's properly understood.

>

>>>>    Sue, I kept the important part of your post.
>>>>    Nice argument.  Especially if one happens to believe
>>>>    ACIM is non dual.  I don't.  So now all you have to
>>>>    argue is that I don't properly undersand it.  :))
>>>>  .

>

>>> hmmm....what happened to you did?  out of curiosity.  Reference, the
>>> nondual thread maz started.  "Truth has no opposite" as the crux of
>>> the Course, I believe it was....

>

>>> you and Lee still seem to have this aversion to 'blob theory' which we
>>> agreed (didn't we?) is monism, not nonduality.

>

>>> You know I don't really care what you believe.  If you take it on
>>> faith, you do.  Tap water, vodka, it's all the same to me (hi John).
>>> If we meet again in Blobville, that will be quite the cosmic joke.  I
>>> don't know what eternity looks like, and I don't think anybody else in
>>> a meat suit does.  : ))

>

>>  I see.  Kind of a surprising answer coming from you.
>>  Eternity looks just like this...........

>
> .....a bunch of dots?? Awwwww, say it aint so! Say it aint so!!!!- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -