Did Jesus see assholes?

[Carrie]

Would he now?
Would anyone who has given his "Self" to God, and thus be like Jesus, see
brothers as enemies, in need of defense, and attack/counter attack?
If anyone saw a brother as an emeny (on the level of form) isn't this
where we are to "choose once again" and ask Holy Spirit's help in seeing him
(her) in a different way?
What if Jesus had an internet discurssion group? Would all be welcome,
without conditions, and if anyone was seeing them in any way but Perfect
(Love) it would be their own mind that needed to change?
Maybe Jesus in today's world (with the internet and all) would be
different?

C-5.2. The name of <Jesus> is the name of one who was a man but saw the
face of Christ in all his brothers and remembered God.

[Deborah]

On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 12:44:08 -0500, "Carrie"

Post by Carrie
Would he now?
Would anyone who has given his "Self" to God, and thus be like Jesus, see
brothers as enemies, in need of defense, and attack/counter attack?
If anyone saw a brother as an emeny (on the level of form) isn't this
where we are to "choose once again" and ask Holy Spirit's help in seeing him
(her) in a different way?
What if Jesus had an internet discurssion group? Would all be welcome,
without conditions, and if anyone was seeing them in any way but Perfect
(Love) it would be their own mind that needed to change?
Maybe Jesus in today's world (with the internet and all) would be
different?
C-5.2. The name of <Jesus> is the name of one who was a man but saw the
face of Christ in all his brothers and remembered God.

It might be more helpful if you just changed all those "we"s into
"I"s. Otherwise the lesson has been wasted.

Deborah

[Carrie]

Post by Deborah
On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 12:44:08 -0500, "Carrie"

Post by Carrie
Would he now?
Would anyone who has given his "Self" to God, and thus be like
Jesus, see brothers as enemies, in need of defense, and
attack/counter attack? If anyone saw a brother as an emeny (on
the level of form) isn't this where we are to "choose once again"
and ask Holy Spirit's help in seeing him (her) in a different way?
What if Jesus had an internet discurssion group? Would all be
welcome, without conditions, and if anyone was seeing them in any
way but Perfect (Love) it would be their own mind that needed to
change? Maybe Jesus in today's world (with the internet and
all) would be different?
C-5.2. The name of <Jesus> is the name of one who was a man but saw
the face of Christ in all his brothers and remembered God.

It might be more helpful if you just changed all those "we"s into
"I"s. Otherwise the lesson has been wasted.
Deborah

Or, if I stopped trying to have course discussions on this newsgroup.
Maybe that's the overall lesson.

[HappyD]

Post by Deborah
On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 12:44:08 -0500, "Carrie"

 Would he now?
  Would anyone who has given his "Self" to God, and thus be like Jesus, see
brothers as enemies, in need of defense, and attack/counter attack?
   If anyone saw a brother as an emeny (on the level of form) isn't this
where we are to "choose once again" and ask Holy Spirit's help in seeing him
(her) in a different way?
 What if Jesus had an internet discurssion group? Would all be welcome,
without conditions, and if anyone was seeing them in any way but Perfect
(Love) it would be their own mind that needed to change?
      Maybe Jesus in today's world (with the internet and all) would be
different?
C-5.2.  The name of <Jesus> is the name of one who was a man but saw the
face of Christ in all his brothers and remembered God.

It might be more helpful if you just changed all those "we"s into
"I"s.  Otherwise the lesson has been wasted.
Deborah

Hi Deborah. Its always so nice to see your comments here.

[Carrie]

Hi Deborah. Its always so nice to see your comments here.- Hide quoted text -

-

She should be here, she's one of the founders. Seems like more of
them would. At least those still into the course. Maybe they have
moved on. Like Wayne Austin. (does he still have EOTS?)

But then, maybe they learned all they needed to from the ng and have
moved on in that way.

[HappyD]

Hi Deborah. Its always so nice to see your comments here.- Hide quoted text -

 -
   She should be here, she's one of the founders. Seems like more of
them would. At least those still into the course. Maybe they have
moved on. Like Wayne Austin. (does he still have EOTS?)
 But then, maybe they learned all they needed to from the ng and have
moved on in that way.

Happy:D

Should she? Who's to say who should and should not be here. I'm just
glad she is and she posts from time to time.

[Carrie]

Post by HappyD

Hi Deborah. Its always so nice to see your comments here.- Hide quoted text -

 -
   She should be here, she's one of the founders. Seems like more of
them would. At least those still into the course. Maybe they have
moved on. Like Wayne Austin. (does he still have EOTS?)
 But then, maybe they learned all they needed to from the ng and have
moved on in that way.

Happy:D
Should she? Who's to say who should and should not be here. I'm just
glad she is and she posts from time to time.

Just a word "should". More like it would be nice if she did post
here more, seeing as she is one of the ones who were there when the
group started. Easy to say something, wrote a word (or more) that
someone else perceives in a different way than it was meant. Its a
wonder people can ever peacefully communicate, using words.

[HappyD]

Post by HappyD

Hi Deborah. Its always so nice to see your comments here.- Hide quoted text -

 -
   She should be here, she's one of the founders. Seems like more of
them would. At least those still into the course. Maybe they have
moved on. Like Wayne Austin. (does he still have EOTS?)
 But then, maybe they learned all they needed to from the ng and have
moved on in that way.

Happy:D
Should she? Who's to say who should and should not be here. I'm just
glad she is and she posts from time to time.

    Just a word "should". More like it would be nice if she did post
here more, seeing as she is one of the ones who were there when the
group started. Easy to say something, wrote a word (or more) that
someone else perceives in a different way than it was meant. Its a
wonder people can ever peacefully communicate, using words.

You should write what you mean. Words are important.

[Carrie]

Post by HappyD

Hi Deborah. Its always so nice to see your comments here.- Hide quoted text -

 -
   She should be here, she's one of the founders. Seems like more of
them would. At least those still into the course. Maybe they have
moved on. Like Wayne Austin. (does he still have EOTS?)
 But then, maybe they learned all they needed to from the ng and have
moved on in that way.

Happy:D
Should she? Who's to say who should and should not be here. I'm just
glad she is and she posts from time to time.

    Just a word "should". More like it would be nice if she did post
here more, seeing as she is one of the ones who were there when the
group started. Easy to say something, wrote a word (or more) that
someone else perceives in a different way than it was meant. Its a
wonder people can ever peacefully communicate, using words.

You should write what you mean. Words are important.-

I think I do writ what I mean. Words are relative and open to
interpretation by those reading them. And making them into whatever
they want them to be, to prove their own points or something? Usually
in a negative way.
What I wrote about Deborah " she should be here, she's one of the
founders" could be taken is another way than saying what someone
"should/shoulnd't" do.
That wasn't how I meant it, and I thought it was clear. I guess I
"should" have written it differently, but anyone could have taken THAT
in another way than I meant it, too.
Depends one where the reader is coming from when they read it,
and what they want from it?

[HappyD]

Post by HappyD

Hi Deborah. Its always so nice to see your comments here.- Hide quoted text -

 -
   She should be here, she's one of the founders. Seems like more of
them would. At least those still into the course. Maybe they have
moved on. Like Wayne Austin. (does he still have EOTS?)
 But then, maybe they learned all they needed to from the ng and have
moved on in that way.

Happy:D
Should she? Who's to say who should and should not be here. I'm just
glad she is and she posts from time to time.

    Just a word "should". More like it would be nice if she did post
here more, seeing as she is one of the ones who were there when the
group started. Easy to say something, wrote a word (or more) that
someone else perceives in a different way than it was meant. Its a
wonder people can ever peacefully communicate, using words.

You should write what you mean. Words are important.-

     I think I do writ what I mean. Words are relative and open to
interpretation by those reading them. And making them into whatever
they want them to be, to prove their own points or something? Usually
in a negative way.
  What I wrote about Deborah " she should be here, she's one of the
founders" could be taken is another way than saying what someone
"should/shoulnd't" do.
    That wasn't how I meant it, and I thought it was clear. I guess I
"should" have written it differently, but anyone could have taken THAT
in another way than I meant it, too.
     Depends one where the reader is coming from when they read it,
and what they want from it?

Can you explain to me the other way you meant "should" I'm still not
getting it.

[Carrie]

Post by HappyD

Post by HappyD

Hi Deborah. Its always so nice to see your comments here.- Hide quoted text -

 -
   She should be here, she's one of the founders. Seems like more of
them would. At least those still into the course. Maybe they have
moved on. Like Wayne Austin. (does he still have EOTS?)
 But then, maybe they learned all they needed to from the ng and have
moved on in that way.

Happy:D
Should she? Who's to say who should and should not be here. I'm just
glad she is and she posts from time to time.

    Just a word "should". More like it would be nice if she did post
here more, seeing as she is one of the ones who were there when the
group started. Easy to say something, wrote a word (or more) that
someone else perceives in a different way than it was meant. Its a
wonder people can ever peacefully communicate, using words.

You should write what you mean. Words are important.-

     I think I do writ what I mean. Words are relative and open to
interpretation by those reading them. And making them into whatever
they want them to be, to prove their own points or something? Usually
in a negative way.
  What I wrote about Deborah " she should be here, she's one of the
founders" could be taken is another way than saying what someone
"should/shoulnd't" do.
    That wasn't how I meant it, and I thought it was clear. I guess I
"should" have written it differently, but anyone could have taken THAT
in another way than I meant it, too.
     Depends one where the reader is coming from when they read it,
and what they want from it?

Can you explain to me the other way you meant "should" I'm still not
getting it.-

I might not be keeping up too well here today, it won't connect to
the server in Outlook Express and I'm not sure Google Groups is as
fast (though it seems to be doing okay today)

I don't know if I could explain what I meant, another way of using
"should". You seem to have already made up your mind I was saying what
Deborah should/shouldn't do.
Maybe it was more like she has a right to be here, and
"should" (if she chooses to) be part of it, and could add much to it,
overall, where she was part of the founding of it, years ago?
It would be nice if she were part of it, along with others who
were part of it starting?
I think Richard might have been, but not sure. I always think of
him (and Lee Flynn) as being part of the course from the early days.
And Dave Thomson, who recently posted here, so apparently still checks
it out now and then.
Maybe the "should"- which was only used as a suggestion, "should"
have been something like "it would be nice if..." and the people who
started this ng have a right to be part of it, and it would be nice if
they were.
(I put Dave Thomson in SEARCH here to check the spelling- had it
with a P first, Thompson, and came up with hundreds, maybe thousands
of old posts about him. A lot of them not very nice. Included in this
were a lot of "not very nice" posts about others, too. Anytime I look
in the archives for something I am surprised and amazed by this. And I
can see why Deborah (BC) doesn't want HERS archived anymore (LOL)

[HappyD]

Post by HappyD

Post by HappyD

Hi Deborah. Its always so nice to see your comments here.- Hide quoted text -

 -
   She should be here, she's one of the founders. Seems like more of
them would. At least those still into the course. Maybe they have
moved on. Like Wayne Austin. (does he still have EOTS?)
 But then, maybe they learned all they needed to from the ng and have
moved on in that way.

Happy:D
Should she? Who's to say who should and should not be here. I'm just
glad she is and she posts from time to time.

    Just a word "should". More like it would be nice if she did post
here more, seeing as she is one of the ones who were there when the
group started. Easy to say something, wrote a word (or more) that
someone else perceives in a different way than it was meant. Its a
wonder people can ever peacefully communicate, using words.

You should write what you mean. Words are important.-

     I think I do writ what I mean. Words are relative and open to
interpretation by those reading them. And making them into whatever
they want them to be, to prove their own points or something? Usually
in a negative way.
  What I wrote about Deborah " she should be here, she's one of the
founders" could be taken is another way than saying what someone
"should/shoulnd't" do.
    That wasn't how I meant it, and I thought it was clear. I guess I
"should" have written it differently, but anyone could have taken THAT
in another way than I meant it, too.
     Depends one where the reader is coming from when they read it,
and what they want from it?

Can you explain to me the other way you meant "should" I'm still not
getting it.-

  I might not be keeping up too well here today, it won't connect to
the server in Outlook Express and I'm not sure Google Groups is as
fast (though it seems to be doing okay today)
    I don't know if I could explain what I meant, another way of using
"should". You seem to have already made up your mind I was saying what
Deborah should/shouldn't do.
    Maybe it was more like she has a right to be here, and
"should" (if she chooses to) be part of it, and could add much to it,
overall, where she was part of the founding of it, years ago?
     It would be nice if she were part of it, along with others who
were part of it starting?
     I think Richard might have been, but not sure. I always think of
him (and Lee Flynn) as being part of the course from the early days.
And Dave Thomson, who recently posted here, so apparently still checks
it out now and then.
  Maybe the "should"- which was only used as a suggestion, "should"
have been something like "it would be nice if..." and the people who
started this ng have a right to be part of it, and it would be nice if
they were.
  (I put Dave Thomson in SEARCH here to check the spelling- had it
with a P first, Thompson, and came up with hundreds, maybe thousands
of old posts about him. A lot of them not very nice. Included in this
were a lot of "not very nice" posts about others, too. Anytime I look
in the archives for something I am surprised and amazed by this. And I
can see why Deborah (BC) doesn't want HERS archived anymore (LOL)

Happy:D

So funny most of this seems so nonsensical to me. Maybe I'll just have
to allow room for that with us my dear.

[Carrie]

Post by HappyD

Post by Carrie

Post by HappyD

Post by Carrie

Post by Carrie

Post by HappyD

Post by Carrie

Hi Deborah. Its always so nice to see your comments here.-
Hide quoted text -

-
She should be here, she's one of the founders. Seems like more
of them would. At least those still into the course. Maybe
they have moved on. Like Wayne Austin. (does he still have
EOTS?)
But then, maybe they learned all they needed to from the ng
and have moved on in that way.

Happy:D
Should she? Who's to say who should and should not be here. I'm
just glad she is and she posts from time to time.

Just a word "should". More like it would be nice if she did post
here more, seeing as she is one of the ones who were there when
the group started. Easy to say something, wrote a word (or more)
that someone else perceives in a different way than it was
meant. Its a wonder people can ever peacefully communicate,
using words.

You should write what you mean. Words are important.-

I think I do writ what I mean. Words are relative and open to
interpretation by those reading them. And making them into whatever
they want them to be, to prove their own points or something?
Usually in a negative way.
What I wrote about Deborah " she should be here, she's one of the
founders" could be taken is another way than saying what someone
"should/shoulnd't" do.
That wasn't how I meant it, and I thought it was clear. I guess I
"should" have written it differently, but anyone could have taken
THAT in another way than I meant it, too.
Depends one where the reader is coming from when they read it,
and what they want from it?

Can you explain to me the other way you meant "should" I'm still not
getting it.-

I might not be keeping up too well here today, it won't connect to
the server in Outlook Express and I'm not sure Google Groups is as
fast (though it seems to be doing okay today)
I don't know if I could explain what I meant, another way of using
"should". You seem to have already made up your mind I was saying
what Deborah should/shouldn't do.
Maybe it was more like she has a right to be here, and
"should" (if she chooses to) be part of it, and could add much to it,
overall, where she was part of the founding of it, years ago?
It would be nice if she were part of it, along with others who
were part of it starting?
I think Richard might have been, but not sure. I always think of
him (and Lee Flynn) as being part of the course from the early days.
And Dave Thomson, who recently posted here, so apparently still
checks it out now and then.
Maybe the "should"- which was only used as a suggestion, "should"
have been something like "it would be nice if..." and the people who
started this ng have a right to be part of it, and it would be nice
if they were.
(I put Dave Thomson in SEARCH here to check the spelling- had it
with a P first, Thompson, and came up with hundreds, maybe thousands
of old posts about him. A lot of them not very nice. Included in this
were a lot of "not very nice" posts about others, too. Anytime I look
in the archives for something I am surprised and amazed by this. And
I can see why Deborah (BC) doesn't want HERS archived anymore (LOL)

Happy:D
So funny most of this seems so nonsensical to me. Maybe I'll just have
to allow room for that with us my dear.

Or, we could just drop it.

[HappyD]

Post by HappyD

Post by Carrie

Post by HappyD

Post by Carrie

Post by Carrie

Post by HappyD

Post by Carrie

Hi Deborah. Its always so nice to see your comments here.-
Hide quoted text -

-
She should be here, she's one of the founders. Seems like more
of them would. At least those still into the course. Maybe
they have moved on. Like Wayne Austin. (does he still have
EOTS?)
But then, maybe they learned all they needed to from the ng
and have moved on in that way.

Happy:D
Should she? Who's to say who should and should not be here. I'm
just glad she is and she posts from time to time.

Just a word "should". More like it would be nice if she did post
here more, seeing as she is one of the ones who were there when
the group started. Easy to say something, wrote a word (or more)
that someone else perceives in a different way than it was
meant. Its a wonder people can ever peacefully communicate,
using words.

You should write what you mean. Words are important.-

I think I do writ what I mean. Words are relative and open to
interpretation by those reading them. And making them into whatever
they want them to be, to prove their own points or something?
Usually in a negative way.
What I wrote about Deborah " she should be here, she's one of the
founders" could be taken is another way than saying what someone
"should/shoulnd't" do.
That wasn't how I meant it, and I thought it was clear. I guess I
"should" have written it differently, but anyone could have taken
THAT in another way than I meant it, too.
Depends one where the reader is coming from when they read it,
and what they want from it?

Can you explain to me the other way you meant "should" I'm still not
getting it.-

I might not be keeping up too well here today, it won't connect to
the server in Outlook Express and I'm not sure Google Groups is as
fast (though it seems to be doing okay today)
I don't know if I could explain what I meant, another way of using
"should". You seem to have already made up your mind I was saying
what Deborah should/shouldn't do.
Maybe it was more like she has a right to be here, and
"should" (if she chooses to) be part of it, and could add much to it,
overall, where she was part of the founding of it, years ago?
It would be nice if she were part of it, along with others who
were part of it starting?
I think Richard might have been, but not sure. I always think of
him (and Lee Flynn) as being part of the course from the early days.
And Dave Thomson, who recently posted here, so apparently still
checks it out now and then.
Maybe the "should"- which was only used as a suggestion, "should"
have been something like "it would be nice if..." and the people who
started this ng have a right to be part of it, and it would be nice
if they were.
(I put Dave Thomson in SEARCH here to check the spelling- had it
with a P first, Thompson, and came up with hundreds, maybe thousands
of old posts about him. A lot of them not very nice. Included in this
were a lot of "not very nice" posts about others, too. Anytime I look
in the archives for something I am surprised and amazed by this. And
I can see why Deborah (BC) doesn't want HERS archived anymore (LOL)

Happy:D
So funny most of this seems so nonsensical to me. Maybe I'll just have
to allow room for that with us my dear.

    Or, we could just drop  it.

Dropped.

[Deborah]

On Wed, 26 Jan 2011 10:29:58 -0800 (PST), Carrie

Post by Carrie
(I put Dave Thomson in SEARCH here to check the spelling- had it
with a P first, Thompson, and came up with hundreds, maybe thousands
of old posts about him. A lot of them not very nice. Included in this
were a lot of "not very nice" posts about others, too. Anytime I look
in the archives for something I am surprised and amazed by this. And I
can see why Deborah (BC) doesn't want HERS archived anymore (LOL)

That's not why I began to use the no archive command, Carrie, but
carry on with those assumptions of yours...

Dave ThomPson is not the same Dave as Dave Thomson, either.

Deborah

[Sidney Lambe]

From: Deborah <bcdeb1[AT]gmail.com>
Newsgroups: talk.religion.course-miracle
Subject: Re: Did Jesus see assholes?
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2011 20:01:39 -0800
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 16
Message-ID: <q447k6hna2qb7h87u9u2fpm8rl2a31feks[AT]4ax.com>
References: <3ba859a2-f9e0-42d5-a20d-af1680e95626[AT]s9g2000vby.googlegroups.com> <b1b859cb-bb0f-449a-ab02-b5ec9e598c3c[AT]j19g2000prh.googlegroups.com> <d16ec33d-7a7e-47d3-b809-200061c428a8[AT]m20g2000prc.googlegroups.com> <51e8121f-9020-4b33-a809-e4278104eb7d[AT]j32g2000prh.googlegroups.com> <f7008ca3-0aed-4d0e-987d-1acb00da848d[AT]j19g2000prh.googlegroups.com> <39d41c46-1fad-4e88-a06a-d369bc10e9f7[AT]d23g2000prj.googlegroups.com> <93eae6df-2dcc-4e9e-8b93-eac8f8d6a2b5[AT]29g2000prb.googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="omkooNWL7jZ7hPJsbTKpLQ"; logging-data="6188"; mail-complaints-to="abuse[AT]eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19+qS2eFRP8VWkpzeQ6WP7c"
X-No-Archive: yes

Guess again.

X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 2.0/32.652
Cancel-Lock: sha1:gZm+P4m1CxYNCB5doZXVblEiwO8=
Path: x-privat.org!newsfeed.x-privat.org!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail

Eternal September. The Usenet's number one trollsnest. Home
to most of the vermin on the Usenet.

Xref: news.x-privat.org talk.religion.course-miracle:126059
On Wed, 26 Jan 2011 10:29:58 -0800 (PST), Carrie

Post by Carrie
(I put Dave Thomson in SEARCH here to check the spelling- had it
with a P first, Thompson, and came up with hundreds, maybe thousands
of old posts about him. A lot of them not very nice. Included in this
were a lot of "not very nice" posts about others, too. Anytime I look
in the archives for something I am surprised and amazed by this. And I
can see why Deborah (BC) doesn't want HERS archived anymore (LOL)

That's not why I began to use the no archive command, Carrie, but
carry on with those assumptions of yours...
Dave ThomPson is not the same Dave as Dave Thomson, either.
Deborah

The XNA header is a waste of time. Most Usenet archives don't
recognize it, and even googlegroups just removes the post
from public access, and then only after leaving it for many
weeks clearly marked for removal so that everyone has a chance
to copy it and the headers.

It doesn't remove the posts from the hundreds of thousands
of private newspools, or from any of the Useenet servers.

And it will have no effect on this post, which will be archived
more effectively than googlegroups would have done it, because
I've changed all the "circle with an a in it" to "[AT]", which
keeps googlegroups from obscuring critical information in the
headers and body.

Carrie? You have been a naughty girl and refused to submit
to dominance by "Deborah" and her cronies and sockpuppets.
Therefore, you can't do anything right in their eyes.


Sid

[Carrie]

Post by Sidney Lambe
Carrie? You have been a naughty girl and refused to submit
to dominance by "Deborah" and her cronies and sockpuppets.
Therefore, you can't do anything right in their eyes.

Oh well...

Post by Sidney Lambe
Sid

[HappyD]

Post by Sidney Lambe
Carrie? You have been a naughty girl and refused to submit
to dominance by "Deborah" and her cronies and sockpuppets.
Therefore, you can't do anything right in their eyes.

    Oh well...

Post by Sidney Lambe
Sid

So what's new under the sun.

LOL

[Carrie]

Post by HappyD

Post by Carrie

Post by Sidney Lambe
Carrie? You have been a naughty girl and refused to submit
to dominance by "Deborah" and her cronies and sockpuppets.
Therefore, you can't do anything right in their eyes.

Oh well...

Post by Sidney Lambe
Sid

So what's new under the sun.
LOL

I was thinking, why would anyone think how someone feels about me and
what they write here is of any real importance in my life?
I'm probably contributing to it, and according to ACIM I am projecting
it, but I haven't felt Deborah likes me in all the years she's written to
me. Starting on a board Ryan (Aminadab) used to have. She came on like the
wicked witch of the west and I think that's the image most people got of
her.
I've tried to get along with her, but should have taken her seriously
all the time she's seen me in a "less than good" way, and said she had me
blocked and wouldn't read or respond to me anymore. I remember her once
saying I remind her of her mother.
Sometimes the most peaceful (and maybe loving) way is just to leave
people alone.

[Deborah]

On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 11:17:21 -0500, "Carrie"

Post by Carrie
Starting on a board Ryan (Aminadab) used to have. She came on like the
wicked witch of the west and I think that's the image most people got of
her.

Funny. That's the very opposite of my recollection. You were at
Ryan's board first, and when I went there to get away from all the
eots disruption going on here, you absolutely lit into me. You
clearly did not welcome me there. So I left.

And I think my recollection is 100% more accurate than yours.

Post by Carrie
I've tried to get along with her, but should have taken her seriously
all the time she's seen me in a "less than good" way, and said she had me
blocked and wouldn't read or respond to me anymore. I remember her once
saying I remind her of her mother.

You still do Carrie. And it's still for the same reason. You are
among the most argumentative people I have ever encountered. You
answer back no matter what is said. And lke hap says
"Carrie-is-always-right". It's how you always *have* to be, because
if you are ever wrong you will shatter into a millions pieces or
something.

In all your years of study of ACIM you have not even begun to
understand what the ego is.

Deborah

[Carrie]

Post by Deborah
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 11:17:21 -0500, "Carrie"

Post by Carrie
Starting on a board Ryan (Aminadab) used to have. She came on like
the wicked witch of the west and I think that's the image most
people got of her.

Funny. That's the very opposite of my recollection. You were at
Ryan's board first, and when I went there to get away from all the
eots disruption going on here, you absolutely lit into me. You
clearly did not welcome me there. So I left.
And I think my recollection is 100% more accurate than yours.

Post by Carrie
I've tried to get along with her, but should have taken her
seriously all the time she's seen me in a "less than good" way, and
said she had me blocked and wouldn't read or respond to me anymore.
I remember her once saying I remind her of her mother.

You still do Carrie. And it's still for the same reason. You are
among the most argumentative people I have ever encountered. You
answer back no matter what is said. And lke hap says
"Carrie-is-always-right". It's how you always *have* to be, because
if you are ever wrong you will shatter into a millions pieces or
something.
In all your years of study of ACIM you have not even begun to
understand what the ego is.
Deborah

And, obvsiously, you have LOL

[Sidney Lambe]

On talk.religion.course-miracle, Carrie <***@charter.net> wrote:
[delete]

Post by Carrie

Post by Deborah
In all your years of study of ACIM you have not even begun to
understand what the ego is.

This is how power-hungry, elitist, would-be gurus operate. She
wants you to believe that she is more intelligent and intuitive
than you are, and can understand things you can't.

Post by Carrie

Post by Deborah
Deborah

And, obvsiously, you have LOL

Way to go, Carrie!

If that bitch was in my real life, I'd tell her one time to shut
her anus mouth, and if she didn't, I'd shut it for her with the
back of my hand.

The same for the rest of the assholes here, most of whom are the
same person.

When are you going to learn that ACIM produces human scum, and
drop it from your life?

"The Nature of Personal Reality" makes ACIM look like the
pathetic and deranged document it is.

www.sethcenter.com

Sid

[Deborah]

On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 14:55:33 -0500, "Carrie"

Post by Carrie

Post by Deborah
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 11:17:21 -0500, "Carrie"

Post by Carrie
Starting on a board Ryan (Aminadab) used to have. She came on like
the wicked witch of the west and I think that's the image most
people got of her.

Funny. That's the very opposite of my recollection. You were at
Ryan's board first, and when I went there to get away from all the
eots disruption going on here, you absolutely lit into me. You
clearly did not welcome me there. So I left.
And I think my recollection is 100% more accurate than yours.

Post by Carrie
I've tried to get along with her, but should have taken her
seriously all the time she's seen me in a "less than good" way, and
said she had me blocked and wouldn't read or respond to me anymore.
I remember her once saying I remind her of her mother.

You still do Carrie. And it's still for the same reason. You are
among the most argumentative people I have ever encountered. You
answer back no matter what is said. And lke hap says
"Carrie-is-always-right". It's how you always *have* to be, because
if you are ever wrong you will shatter into a millions pieces or
something.
In all your years of study of ACIM you have not even begun to
understand what the ego is.
Deborah

And, obvsiously, you have LOL

The level of defensiveness you have demonstrated.is quite unequalled
Carrie, by me. You do not seem to really get it that what needs
defense is not what you are in reality but just an image you have of
yourself. I got that years ago.

Excuse me but I have to go do my workout and spend some time at the
library on my studies. I'll set the DVR to record the All-Star
pre-game before I go. Hope you have something better to do than hang
around on the net, today, as well.

Deborah

[Carrie]

Post by Deborah
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 14:55:33 -0500, "Carrie"

Post by Carrie

Post by Deborah
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 11:17:21 -0500, "Carrie"

Post by Carrie
Starting on a board Ryan (Aminadab) used to have. She came on like
the wicked witch of the west and I think that's the image most
people got of her.

Funny. That's the very opposite of my recollection. You were at
Ryan's board first, and when I went there to get away from all the
eots disruption going on here, you absolutely lit into me. You
clearly did not welcome me there. So I left.
And I think my recollection is 100% more accurate than yours.

Post by Carrie
I've tried to get along with her, but should have taken her
seriously all the time she's seen me in a "less than good" way,
and said she had me blocked and wouldn't read or respond to me
anymore. I remember her once saying I remind her of her mother.

You still do Carrie. And it's still for the same reason. You are
among the most argumentative people I have ever encountered. You
answer back no matter what is said. And lke hap says
"Carrie-is-always-right". It's how you always *have* to be, because
if you are ever wrong you will shatter into a millions pieces or
something.
In all your years of study of ACIM you have not even begun to
understand what the ego is.
Deborah

And, obvsiously, you have LOL

The level of defensiveness you have demonstrated.is quite unequalled
Carrie, by me. You do not seem to really get it that what needs
defense is not what you are in reality but just an image you have of
yourself. I got that years ago.
Excuse me but I have to go do my workout and spend some time at the
library on my studies. I'll set the DVR to record the All-Star
pre-game before I go. Hope you have something better to do than hang
around on the net, today, as well.
Deborah

What could be better than this?
Advanced ACIM training.

[Carrie]

Post by Deborah
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 11:17:21 -0500, "Carrie"

Post by Carrie
Starting on a board Ryan (Aminadab) used to have. She came on like
the wicked witch of the west and I think that's the image most
people got of her.

Funny. That's the very opposite of my recollection. You were at
Ryan's board first, and when I went there to get away from all the
eots disruption going on here, you absolutely lit into me. You
clearly did not welcome me there. So I left.
And I think my recollection is 100% more accurate than yours.

Post by Carrie
I've tried to get along with her, but should have taken her
seriously all the time she's seen me in a "less than good" way, and
said she had me blocked and wouldn't read or respond to me anymore.
I remember her once saying I remind her of her mother.

You still do Carrie. And it's still for the same reason. You are
among the most argumentative people I have ever encountered. You
answer back no matter what is said. And lke hap says
"Carrie-is-always-right". It's how you always *have* to be, because
if you are ever wrong you will shatter into a millions pieces or
something.
In all your years of study of ACIM you have not even begun to
understand what the ego is.
Deborah

Maybe my response TO you (from the start) was just that, a response TO
you and how you were coming across.
You didn't seem to like me from day one (and I realize this is now
hindsight) and I reacted to that.
Seems like you said one time I reminded you of your mother. So, maybe
in a psyciatric way, it was like transferance (and what the course calls
projection) and you treated me like you'd have liked to tread your mother,
but would have felt too guilty if you did.
Maybe it was all good, even though we didn't realize it, and still
might not?
Who's to say what we learn, and who from. Doesn't the course (at
least the one I have) say no one comes into our lives by accident and we're
all teachers/students to and for each other?

[HappyD]

Post by Deborah
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 11:17:21 -0500, "Carrie"

Post by Carrie
Starting on a board Ryan (Aminadab) used to have. She came on like
the wicked witch of the west and I think that's the image most
people got of her.

Funny.  That's the very opposite of my recollection.  You were at
Ryan's board first, and when I went there to get away from all the
eots disruption going on here, you absolutely lit into me.  You
clearly did not welcome me there.  So I left.
And I think my recollection is 100% more accurate than yours.

Post by Carrie
   I've tried to get along with her, but should have taken her
seriously all the time she's seen me in a "less than good" way,  and
said she had me blocked and wouldn't read or respond to me anymore.
I remember her once saying I remind her of her mother.

You still do Carrie.  And it's still for the same reason.  You are
among the most argumentative people I have ever encountered.  You
answer back no matter what is said.  And lke hap says
"Carrie-is-always-right".  It's how you always *have* to be, because
if you are ever wrong you will shatter into a millions pieces or
something.
In all your years of study of ACIM you have not even begun to
understand what the ego is.
Deborah

      Maybe my response TO you (from the start) was just that, a response TO
you and how you were coming across.
      You didn't seem to like me from day one (and I realize this is now
hindsight) and I reacted to that.
       Seems like you said one time I reminded you of your mother. So, maybe
in a psyciatric way, it was like transferance (and what the course calls
projection) and you treated me like you'd have liked to tread your mother,
but would have felt too guilty if you did.
       Maybe it was all good, even though we didn't realize it, and still
might not?
       Who's to say what we learn, and who from. Doesn't the course (at
least the one I have) say no one comes into our lives by accident and we're
all teachers/students to and for each other/

Happy:D

Deb, the hot potato of guilty is yours again. Back to you I't seems.

[Carrie]

Post by HappyD

Post by Carrie

Post by Deborah
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 11:17:21 -0500, "Carrie"

Post by Carrie
Starting on a board Ryan (Aminadab) used to have. She came on like
the wicked witch of the west and I think that's the image most
people got of her.

Funny. That's the very opposite of my recollection. You were at
Ryan's board first, and when I went there to get away from all the
eots disruption going on here, you absolutely lit into me. You
clearly did not welcome me there. So I left.
And I think my recollection is 100% more accurate than yours.

Post by Carrie
I've tried to get along with her, but should have taken her
seriously all the time she's seen me in a "less than good" way, and
said she had me blocked and wouldn't read or respond to me anymore.
I remember her once saying I remind her of her mother.

You still do Carrie. And it's still for the same reason. You are
among the most argumentative people I have ever encountered. You
answer back no matter what is said. And lke hap says
"Carrie-is-always-right". It's how you always *have* to be, because
if you are ever wrong you will shatter into a millions pieces or
something.
In all your years of study of ACIM you have not even begun to
understand what the ego is.
Deborah

Maybe my response TO you (from the start) was just that, a response TO
you and how you were coming across.
You didn't seem to like me from day one (and I realize this is now
hindsight) and I reacted to that.
Seems like you said one time I reminded you of your mother. So, maybe
in a psyciatric way, it was like transferance (and what the course
calls projection) and you treated me like you'd have liked to tread
your mother, but would have felt too guilty if you did.
Maybe it was all good, even though we didn't realize it, and still
might not?
Who's to say what we learn, and who from. Doesn't the course (at
least the one I have) say no one comes into our lives by accident
and we're all teachers/students to and for each other/

Happy:D
Deb, the hot potato of guilty is yours again. Back to you I't seems.

I was thinking back, after she said I attacked her from the start. From
what I remember, I now feel I was reacting to her and how she was seeing me.
Just an observation, trying to learn from it, no one has to be guilty.

[Deborah]

On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 10:19:43 -0800 (PST), HappyD

Post by HappyD

Post by Deborah
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 11:17:21 -0500, "Carrie"

Post by Carrie
Starting on a board Ryan (Aminadab) used to have. She came on like
the wicked witch of the west and I think that's the image most
people got of her.

Funny.  That's the very opposite of my recollection.  You were at
Ryan's board first, and when I went there to get away from all the
eots disruption going on here, you absolutely lit into me.  You
clearly did not welcome me there.  So I left.
And I think my recollection is 100% more accurate than yours.

Post by Carrie
   I've tried to get along with her, but should have taken her
seriously all the time she's seen me in a "less than good" way,  and
said she had me blocked and wouldn't read or respond to me anymore.
I remember her once saying I remind her of her mother.

You still do Carrie.  And it's still for the same reason.  You are
among the most argumentative people I have ever encountered.  You
answer back no matter what is said.  And lke hap says
"Carrie-is-always-right".  It's how you always *have* to be, because
if you are ever wrong you will shatter into a millions pieces or
something.
In all your years of study of ACIM you have not even begun to
understand what the ego is.
Deborah

      Maybe my response TO you (from the start) was just that, a response TO
you and how you were coming across.
      You didn't seem to like me from day one (and I realize this is now
hindsight) and I reacted to that.
       Seems like you said one time I reminded you of your mother. So, maybe
in a psyciatric way, it was like transferance (and what the course calls
projection) and you treated me like you'd have liked to tread your mother,
but would have felt too guilty if you did.
       Maybe it was all good, even though we didn't realize it, and still
might not?
       Who's to say what we learn, and who from. Doesn't the course (at
least the one I have) say no one comes into our lives by accident and we're
all teachers/students to and for each other/

Happy:D
Deb, the hot potato of guilty is yours again. Back to you I't seems.

Only if I choose to accept something God does not give.

Deborah

[Carrie]

Post by HappyD

Post by Carrie

Post by Sidney Lambe
Carrie? You have been a naughty girl and refused to submit
to dominance by "Deborah" and her cronies and sockpuppets.
Therefore, you can't do anything right in their eyes.

Oh well...

Post by Sidney Lambe
Sid

So what's new under the sun.
LOL

It's snowing (again)
I got caught up in watching a movie from Netflix (instant play) called
"Exam".
Didn't have any big stars in it, at least that I recognized, and was sort
of a psychological, puzzle, what's the answer and who are the good/bad guys
kind of plot. 8 applicants for a good, well paying job were put in a room
to take a test. Time limit, and a few rules. They were given pieces of
paper, and told there was only one question to answer, and given a few
rules. (if they broke them they were escorted out by the armed guard).
Problem, there when they turned the exam papers over they were blank. Of
course, at the end, the answer to it was "right there".

[Mike]

Hi Deborah. Its always so nice to see your comments here.- Hide quoted text -

 -
   She should be here, she's one of the founders. Seems like more of
them would. At least those still into the course. Maybe they have
moved on. Like Wayne Austin. (does he still have EOTS?)
 But then, maybe they learned all they needed to from the ng and have
moved on in that way.

Yes, he still has EOTS.

[HappyD]

Hi Deborah. Its always so nice to see your comments here.- Hide quoted text -

 -
   She should be here, she's one of the founders. Seems like more of
them would. At least those still into the course. Maybe they have
moved on. Like Wayne Austin. (does he still have EOTS?)
 But then, maybe they learned all they needed to from the ng and have
moved on in that way.

  Yes, he still has EOTS.

Happy:D

Will "The End of the Search "ever end?

LOL

[Carrie]

Post by HappyD

Post by Mike

Post by Carrie

Hi Deborah. Its always so nice to see your comments here.- Hide quoted text -

-
She should be here, she's one of the founders. Seems like more of
them would. At least those still into the course. Maybe they have
moved on. Like Wayne Austin. (does he still have EOTS?)
But then, maybe they learned all they needed to from the ng and have
moved on in that way.

Yes, he still has EOTS.

Happy:D
Will "The End of the Search "ever end?
LOL

I thought (for Wayne and the followers) it already did?

[John Radgosky]

Post by Deborah
On Tue, 25 Jan 2011 12:44:08 -0500, "Carrie"

 Would he now?
  Would anyone who has given his "Self" to God, and thus be like Jesus, see
brothers as enemies, in need of defense, and attack/counter attack?
   If anyone saw a brother as an emeny (on the level of form) isn't this
where we are to "choose once again" and ask Holy Spirit's help in seeing him
(her) in a different way?
 What if Jesus had an internet discurssion group? Would all be welcome,
without conditions, and if anyone was seeing them in any way but Perfect
(Love) it would be their own mind that needed to change?
      Maybe Jesus in today's world (with the internet and all) would be
different?
C-5.2.  The name of <Jesus> is the name of one who was a man but saw the
face of Christ in all his brothers and remembered God.

It might be more helpful if you just changed all those "we"s into
"I"s.  Otherwise the lesson has been wasted.
Deborah

Hi Deborah. Its always so nice to see your comments here.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

I agree .....

jr