<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:creativeCommons="http://backend.userland.com/creativeCommonsRssModule"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Proof at last??</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.miracle-studies.net/musings/proof-at-last/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.miracle-studies.net/musings/proof-at-last/</link>
	<description>A resource for students of A Course In Miracles</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 05:04:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: miracles</title>
		<link>http://www.miracle-studies.net/musings/proof-at-last/comment-page-1/#comment-796</link>
		<dc:creator>miracles</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Mar 2009 21:10:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.miracle-studies.net/?p=280#comment-796</guid>
		<description>ACIM is but one path. As for our brothers, our only responsibility is to forgive them.
Thank you for your comment.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>ACIM is but one path. As for our brothers, our only responsibility is to forgive them.<br />
Thank you for your comment.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Richard Thompson</title>
		<link>http://www.miracle-studies.net/musings/proof-at-last/comment-page-1/#comment-795</link>
		<dc:creator>Richard Thompson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Mar 2009 11:07:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.miracle-studies.net/?p=280#comment-795</guid>
		<description>I have spent my professional life in the scientific and engineering fields and up till 12 years ago always defended the scientific explanations against any alternatives. New Scientist caricatured that stance to my great satisfaction. I now see that position as rather absurd since there are so many aspects of our lives that simply cannot be understood from that perspective. Of recent years New Scientist has softened its hard line approach. They publish material by Paul Davies for example who in my view is cleverly undermining the hard liners. I am not sure how far he would go in supporting ACIM which in the words of Gary Renard is far more radical than most people realise. 
Having provided the above short introduction I now arrive at my final position: Attempts to explain the principles of ACIM in scientific terms is to lose sight of the relevance of each to this incarnation of ours. Science and engineering have provided us now with the means for inviting our brothers to look at the way their minds are dominated by ego and to suggest that perhaps there are benefits in lessening the ego&#039;s grip. ACIM and the internet are both anarchic and so are able to work together to help us to return to God via forgiveness.
A stumbling block that keeps bothering me is the demonstrable fact that ACIM appeals to intellectuals. How do we draw in the majority of our brothers? I suppose the answer is that we need simply to demonstrate that there are other ways to behave and to relate to our fellows. Hopefully that will be sufficient when I develop my love and forgiveness better than it is now, to help my brothers along the path back to God.
These are thoughts that I have not put into the written word previously so it will be interesting to watch my progress. My ego still feels the need to find encouragement from the outside world. It will be good to let go of that need. There are many other things that I also need to let go. 
I feel that I am trailing off into.........</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have spent my professional life in the scientific and engineering fields and up till 12 years ago always defended the scientific explanations against any alternatives. New Scientist caricatured that stance to my great satisfaction. I now see that position as rather absurd since there are so many aspects of our lives that simply cannot be understood from that perspective. Of recent years New Scientist has softened its hard line approach. They publish material by Paul Davies for example who in my view is cleverly undermining the hard liners. I am not sure how far he would go in supporting ACIM which in the words of Gary Renard is far more radical than most people realise.<br />
Having provided the above short introduction I now arrive at my final position: Attempts to explain the principles of ACIM in scientific terms is to lose sight of the relevance of each to this incarnation of ours. Science and engineering have provided us now with the means for inviting our brothers to look at the way their minds are dominated by ego and to suggest that perhaps there are benefits in lessening the ego&#8217;s grip. ACIM and the internet are both anarchic and so are able to work together to help us to return to God via forgiveness.<br />
A stumbling block that keeps bothering me is the demonstrable fact that ACIM appeals to intellectuals. How do we draw in the majority of our brothers? I suppose the answer is that we need simply to demonstrate that there are other ways to behave and to relate to our fellows. Hopefully that will be sufficient when I develop my love and forgiveness better than it is now, to help my brothers along the path back to God.<br />
These are thoughts that I have not put into the written word previously so it will be interesting to watch my progress. My ego still feels the need to find encouragement from the outside world. It will be good to let go of that need. There are many other things that I also need to let go.<br />
I feel that I am trailing off into&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
