> On Aug 6, 6:16 am, "maz" rocketmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>

>> "Chuck" yahoo.com> schreef in berichtnews:1186393770.159578.149420@w3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>> On Aug 6, 5:34 am, "maz" rocketmail.com> wrote:

>

>>>>>Sure, every act of ignorance, evil, denial, stupidity, bigotry,

>

>>> intolerance, selfishness, etc. depending on the focus all have a
>>> matter of goodwill in common. <<

>

>>> So tell us, what is your goodwill while performing
>>> and endorsing such acts? Inquiring minds would like
>>> to know.

>

>>> namazté

>>>>I have no interest in defending or endorsing such acts.

> ...

> Sorry for speaking for you, Chuck!

> I hope I haven't told too much, or given away too much about
> those insidious plans you so carefully craft and work out constantly!

> It's just that I have
> so much confidence in your ability to mystify, stun, confuse, and aggravate Gene that I figured a
> few clues and revelations wouldn't go amiss.

> On Aug 6, 9:49 am, "maz" rocketmail.com> wrote:

>> Can you answer a simple question? Where is the matter
>> of goodwill you announced to detect here?

>
> I didn't claim I detected goodwill, that's what you read into my
> remarks.

> The point is simple, I repeat myself,
> Through history, all of these have been done in the name of religion.

> As such we are talking about the problem of human nature not
> particular religions, political affiliations, philosophies, or ethical
> systems.

> And if this is NOT the case, then "Chuck," and "Katie," should be able
> to offer an alternative to religion, in fact, offer their personal
> alternative to religion which can't be critiqued in the same manner,
> they choose to critique "religion."

>>

>>> As far as I'm concerned, this is really simple. Helen did not take
>>> responsibility for the work in her lifetime as far as I can see. She
>>> allowed it to be spread, and failed to take...

> On 6-Aug-2007, Chuck yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

>>>> As far as I'm concerned, this is really simple. Helen did not take
>>>> responsibility for the work in her lifetime as far as I can see. She
>>>> allowed it to be spread, and failed to take responsibility for this
>>>> action as well. I don't care what her excuses were. I don't expect to
>>>> get away with this kind of behavior. To expect me to allow someone
>>>> else to get away with this kind of behavior is inconsistent with my
>>>> expectations of myself and everyone else I deal with. If someone wants
>>>> to claim they channel someone I recognize (or not), fine. I expect
>>>> them to be responsible for what they do with what they channel. And
>>>> the test of that, for me, is being able to explain what the meaning is
>>>> and to be able to live by what they channel. If they can't do that, ...

>Your words were, "Regardless of Helen's example, or lack thereof, I
>think that the course, by reinforcing the truth that we ARE
>responsible for what we experience, has probably contributed to and
>expanded the web of shared responsibility on our planet, small and
>weak though it may be."
>
>My focus of the response was "reinforcing the truth that we ARE
>responsible for what we experience." This is something that you have
>claimed for yourself from the course. Some others who have been here
>do not seem to claim this.

>
> "Katie" yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:46b705fe$0$4891$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...

>>
>> "Deborah" noemail.com> wrote in message
>> news:uiscb3h6h93hiq4kev36gvhsr2vvl2fihl@4ax.com...
>>

>>>Helen's most
>>> memorable statement for me was when she said "I KNOW the course is
>>> true... but I don't BELIEVE it."

>>
>> Mine was when she mumbled and sighed that she didn't believe that she
>> channelled anything, but that her handlers must know better, so if they
>> said so, it must be so.
>>

>>>That is very real for me.

>>
>> As Carrie says, we can all make whatever we like out of all and ...

>
> "Katie" yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:46b66261$0$8926$4c368faf@roadrunner.com...

>>
>> "maz" rocketmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:koadnQkTM-DtcyjbnZ2dnUVZ8v3inZ2d@fiberworld.nl...

>>>>> Re: Why Religious Belief Should Be Abandoned - Part 1

>>>
>>> Yeah, that's like saying we should abandon our
>>> healthy sex lives because some whackos indulge
>>> in cross dressing perversity. rotfl!

>>
>> No, actually, it's not.
>>

>
> I was wondering about that, too.
>
> It doesn't make any sense ...

>
> "Katie" yahoo.com> schreef in bericht

>> On Aug 5, 11:31 am, "maz" rocketmail.com> wrote:

>

>>> The Golden Rule

>>
>> You mean they preach the golden rule but don't bother practicing it.

>
> No, i don't mean that. I mean all are students/teachers,
> and that we need to practise in order to become
> masters. Inconsistencies along the way can be both,
> stumbling blocks and also stepping stones. See the
> difference?