Stephen Hawkings "God did not create the universe."

**MizMotown** · September-14-10, 12:07 PM

It sounds as though the Course is setting up permanent dependence on the Course the way Scientology does.

AGAIN, the Course says...

Simply do this: Be still, and lay aside all thoughts of what you are and what God is; all concepts you have learned about the world; all images you hold about yourself. Empty your mind of everything it thinks is either true or false, or good or bad, of every thought it judges worthy, and all the ideas of which it is ashamed.

Hold onto nothing.

Do not bring with you one thought the past has taught, nor one belief you ever learned before from anything. Forget this world, forget this course, and come with wholly empty hands unto your God."

--- ACIM Lesson 189,

**maxx** · September-14-10, 12:29 PM

Originally Posted by MizMotown

a message from Jesus author of A Course In Miracles...

Why should anyone believe that the son of a god is the author of the Course? It sounds like just another way to take money from the true believers who need to believe in the supernatural.

You can accept insanity because you made it,

This sounds like blaming the victim unless the Course is just tossing the word insanity around irresponsibly.

You would rather be a slave of the crucifixion than a Son of God in redemption.

So this is about positive thinking. A person is not supposed to worry about past trangressions because...? All is forgiven? Without even asking? Without even doing penance? That doesn't sound like teaching responsible action.

You are more afraid of God than of the ego, and love cannot enter where it is not welcome. But hatred can, for it enters of its own volition and cares not for yours.

So anyone who questions the Course has committed the sin of having an ego which means that s/he is open only to hate and not to love. No good can come from questioning the Course. That sounds pretty fundamentalist.

**Gyro** · September-14-10, 01:00 PM

I find it next to impossible to even talk to people like MizMotown since they live in a fantasy world of imaginary gods and magical powers. They use undefined terms and assume relationships not in evidence. I often wonder how such people manage to make a living in the real world.

The Bible tells you to become as little children. Little children recognize that they do not understand what they perceive, and so they ask what it means. Do not make the mistake of believing that you understand what you perceive, for its meaning is lost to you. Yet the Holy Spirit has saved its meaning for you, and if you will let Him interpret it, He will restore to you what you have thrown away. Yet while you think you know its meaning, you will see no need to ask it of Him.

For someone who doesn't even believe the evidence of her own eyes, MizMotown certainly seems to have a lot of gratuitous advice for us: be like an ignorant child, don't trust your own intelligence, but do trust an imaginary, male "Holy Spirit" [[whatever that might be), and you will understand without having to think for yourself. I feel like I'm being set-up for a scam.

You do not know the meaning of anything you perceive. Not one thought you hold is wholly true. The recognition of this is your firm beginning. Does this apply to MizMotown? If so, I think I agree with her. You are not misguided; you have accepted no guide at all. I don't think this is true. MizMotown obviously has been guided by some kind of mystical Christian cult. Instruction in perception is your great need, for you understand nothing. She just told us we shouldn't trust our perceptions! Recognize this but do not accept it, for understanding is your inheritance. Perceptions are learned, and you are not without a Teacher. Ah! the "teacher" is going to reprogram your thinking!... Yet your willingness to learn of Him depends on your willingness to question everything you learned of yourself, for you who learned amiss should not be your own teacher. ...But only with your willing cooperation. Sounds to me like someone's about to be conned out of their bank account.

This kind of mystical mumbo-jumbo is a big part of what's wrong with the world. Ignorance and superstition, peddled by religious con-men, teaches people to believe in imaginary, magical forces. The con men convince people they can live forever, that they will be given 72 virgins in heaven if they commit suicide while murdering innocent people, and that it's okay to torture, commit genocide, and drop bombs on people as long as gawd approves of it. And if you want to know what gawd thinks, just ask the con-man!

The world would be far better off without superstitious thinking and religious wars. We are not ignorant children dependent on received wisdom from religious hucksters. Human intelligence built the house you live in and the computer you're looking at right now. It put men on the moon and discovered the actual origin of the universe using the scientific method which requires replicable evidence and which constantly tests its theories against reality. Scientific knowledge -- REAL knowledge -- has given us the comfortable life we live. Abandoning it for mysticism is the biggest mistake you can make.

**Gyro** · September-14-10, 01:36 PM

Even they mystics can't agree...

http://www.bibleprobe.com/miraclecourse.htm

Apparently the entire course was written by the allegedly divine inspiration of of a mentally ill woman named Helen Schueman, and exploited by some hucksters named William Thetford and Kenneth Wapnick. Spend your money here folks!

http://www.skepdic.com/cim.html

**MizMotown** · September-15-10, 07:27 AM

LMAO... do all your research and than give it a try. THAN come talk to me.

Good luck!

**MizMotown** · September-15-10, 07:32 AM

http://www.skepdic.com/cim.html again your reading one website containing the one controversy of ACIM brought about by the Christian Fundies. Do real research and than come blab your ignorant mouth! There are plenty of psychologists, religious leaders, spiritual leaders, who believe in the Course and consider it's take on the though system is like no other. Helen remained anonymous regarding her writings of the Course. It is a book that is free on the internet or by request. Just like the bible. If you want to purchase your own copy your free to do that also.

You are a perfect example of someone who walks in judgement of things they know very little about.

Peace!

**MizMotown** · September-15-10, 07:42 AM

Well wishes Maxx. I'm always up for debate but it takes the fun out of it when folks like Gyro come around dissin' me in third person on a damn forum instead of directing their comments directly to me...

I've respect your views or anyone's that we are just randomly here without rhyme or reason. My personal experiences have led me to believe otherwise. My spiritual beliefs come from a combination of studies and experiences. ACIM being one of them. Just like I respect where you are coming from I would expect the same. I may not be able to convince you with facts, and figures nor may I be able to entice you with my experiences of my heart and soul. But that is not my goal either way. I'm not here to convert anyone. There are not better ways, just different ones.

To be awake is to be alive. - Henry David Thoreau

**MizMotown** · September-15-10, 11:57 AM

Interesting reads...

There is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind
http://www.amazon.com/There-God-Noto.../dp/0061335290

http://www.deism.com/atheisttodeist.htm

For most of his life Flew has been a consistent and strong advocate for natural philosophy, unemcumbered by belief in God or miracles. To him, he advocated a negative form of atheism, placing the burden of proof of belief in any transcendence squarely on the shoulders of theists. Since propositions of belief in God cannot be disproven, he would say, then he argued that it would be senseless to even advocate a rational marriage between belief and unbelief, like much of philosophy has tried to do. One key to understanding much of Flew's philosophy: to follow evidence wherever it leads, something also said by Socrates more than two thousand years ago.

By a strange twist of intellectual honesty [[some people call it intellectual dishonesty or age-old decrepitude), in 2004 Flew changed his mind. Still denying much belief in a personal God, life after death, or the supernatural, he began to argue that discoveries into the DNA prove that an intelligent design of some sort must have brought such complex matter into existence. He went on to argue that although this proved that something-- never calling that something by a name-- had to have been involved in the first act of creation, what is called the Big Bang, the springing forth, of sentient matter from inanimate matter. What that something was, Flew didn't go into detail. It was a deism in the philosophical tradition of Thomas Jefferson.

http://the-reyes-report.blogspot.com...o-anthony.html

**maxx** · September-15-10, 12:31 PM

MizMoTown:
I appreciate the information you have given on the Course, although it appears to me to be just another sale of the usual snake oil minus the hellfire.

Incidentally, I've heard Anthony Flew described incorrectly by religionists as a scientist. Here is an interview with him.
http://www.biola.edu/antonyflew/
P.2 Flew: " But for me the most important thing about Spinoza is not what he says but what he does not say. He does not say that God has any preferences either about or any intentions concerning human behaviour or about the eternal destinies of human beings."

So whether there is or is not a creator/ god is of no relevance to the destiny of humans. Flew is certainly not advocating for anything connected to the Bible or dealing in an afterlife. He is just using the argument from credulity to answer questions he feels need answering. I also don't understand why he thinks teaching religion to children would be more likely to make them moral. If the family which is raising a child and is immediate to a child's needs cannot make a child behave morally, how can a distant god whose only threat of punishment occurs after death?

**Gyro** · September-15-10, 02:51 PM

"[Anthony Flew] began to argue that discoveries into the DNA prove that an intelligent design of some sort must have brought such complex matter into existence."

Apparently Mr. Flew underestimated how easily DNA could have developed from simpler molecules. New discoveries show that the much simpler RNA could have been the chemical precursor for DNA. If he had been aware of this recent discovery he wouldn't have had to leap to unwarranted assumptions about irreducible complexity and intelligent design.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0812151630.htm

**Gyro** · September-15-10, 06:51 PM

Can you imagine?

**MizMotown** · September-16-10, 08:21 AM

Again, I appreciate your time Maxx. To myself and millions of others who study, appreciate and understand the Course I can only offer the explanation that it is a personal experience that words cannot describe. Although it is written in Christian terms it is not about religion but more about psychology. I do believe that any person has a right to their beliefs and if religion brings a sense of peace to their lives so be it. I do not believe in hyprocrites and fear based teaching/preaching.

**canuck** · September-21-10, 04:25 AM

It may sound godmatic to you, but I believe in Dog!

**Gyro** · September-22-10, 08:58 PM

Originally Posted by canuck

It may sound godmatic to you, but I believe in Dog!

It sounds dyslexic to me.

**maxx** · September-24-10, 01:18 PM

Science is self-correcting. People still put Einstein's theories to the test.
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Einst...s-157965.shtml

**justanotherboy** · September-24-10, 01:47 PM

Stephen Hawkings "God did not create the universe."

Isn't this just as much hate speech as burning a Quran?

**maxx** · September-25-10, 11:02 AM

Originally Posted by justanotherboy

Stephen Hawkings "God did not create the universe."

Isn't this just as much hate speech as burning a Quran?

Please elaborate. Who or what is being hated? Your god? Prove that "he" exists first. Belief, fact. Learn the difference.

**Zacha341** · September-25-10, 12:31 PM

Well it's NOT likely to inspire mayhem, murder and death the person saying it...

Originally Posted by justanotherboy

Stephen Hawkings "God did not create the universe."

Isn't this just as much hate speech as burning a Quran?

**MizMotown** · September-27-10, 08:52 AM

Prove that "he" exists first. Belief, fact. Learn the difference.

FAITH
belief or trust: belief in, devotion to, or trust in somebody or something, especially without logical proof

**maxx** · September-27-10, 12:55 PM

Originally Posted by MizMotown

Prove that "he" exists first. Belief, fact. Learn the difference.

FAITH
belief or trust: belief in, devotion to, or trust in somebody or something, especially without logical proof

Yes, without logical proof. IOW irrational.

**Pam** · September-28-10, 08:59 AM

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_rel_re..._literacy_poll

A new survey of Americans' knowledge of religion found that atheists, agnostics, Jews and Mormons outperformed Protestants and Roman Catholics in answering questions about major religions, while many respondents could not correctly give the most basic tenets of their own faiths.

Respondents to the survey were asked 32 questions with a range of difficulty, including whether they could name the Islamic holy book and the first book of the Bible, or say what century the Mormon religion was founded. On average, participants in the survey answered correctly overall for half of the survey questions.

Atheists and agnostics scored highest, with an average of 21 correct answers, while Jews and Mormons followed with about 20 accurate responses. Protestants overall averaged 16 correct answers, while Catholics followed with a score of about 15.

**Gyro** · October-01-10, 02:18 PM

Originally Posted by MizMotown

Prove that "he" exists first. Belief, fact. Learn the difference.

FAITH
belief or trust: belief in, devotion to, or trust in somebody or something, especially without logical proof

FAITH: Ignorance raised to a virtue.

**maxx** · November-08-10, 12:21 PM

Ten questions for S. Hawking
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...029483,00.html
"

I don't claim that God doesn't exist. God is the name people give to the reason we are here. But I think that reason is the laws of physics rather than someone with whom one can have a personal relationship. An impersonal God..."

**blackmath** · November-08-10, 01:25 PM

Those of you making the argument that if there were no religion there would be no conflict, or the twin towers would still be standing are missing the mark completely. Firstly, I'm not sure what I believe in. Science has given us a lot, but at the same time it has killed untold millions of people - just as religious fanaticism has. I think most people who believe in a god or a higher power aren't the type who believe the earth is 7500 years old and believe that dinosaurs were a fabrication by "Darwinists". Most religious people believe in and understand that evolution occurs and is a scientific reality. So, using examples of religious fanatic idiots as an example of a religious person is the same as using Joseph Mengele, or Dr Edward Teller as an example of a run of the mill scientist.

However, in anything, scientific or religious, I must question everything I am told. Questioning, to me, is the very essence of science, and I would argue religion. Today's facts are tomorrows archaic and laughable primitive beliefs, as in the "fact" that the earth was most certainly flat, and that it was about half the size it really is. Or the "fact" that the earth was the center of the universe. We simply don't know everything there is to know, so putting my belief 100 percent in ANYTHING is totally foolish, short sighted and anti-scientific.

Getting back to my first point, it wouldn't matter if all religion was completely obliterated, people would still kill each other. The post-religion argument would probably be who's interpretation of science was better. Humans are by their nature extremely violent creatures, so getting rid of religion would do absolutely nothing to curb violence.