Talk:A Course in Miracles/Archive 3

1777:

other Biblical passages describing how we are forgiven only through "Christ's blood, even the forgiveness of sins" and the note refers to a passage in a bible: "In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God's grace." This seems to be a either a very poor example, or confusing, or both. How can a statement made about a person after death based on that person's teaching be contrasted to that person's teaching using that person's own words? It seems to be rather contradictory to say that the person agrees with himself as an example of how two perspectives contradict themselves. Either way, it looks like OR using the A = True, B= True, therefor synthesis A + B = C must be true. I didn't delete it, but I think someone else should take a close look at it.

1217:

much redundant information on this page, but the article is shifting too heavily toward contrasting ACIM with Christianity. A proper article on ACIM should describe its doctrine first, as it was meant to stand on it's own merit, and only afterward highlight obvious differences betwen ACIM teachings and non-ACIM interpretations of the standard interpretation of Christianity. JzG is assuming that a proper interpretation of ACIM is as Christian supplemental material, rather than the Christian Bible being supplemental ACIM material. He is not "playing the game", so to speak, and so long as he doesn't, this article

760:"The 1975 copyright of "A Course in Miracles" was voided by Federal District court judge Robert W. Sweet for the US Federal District Court in the Southern District of New York on 10/24/2003 on the grounds of general distribution prior to obtaining copyright thus placing it in the public domain, as Amended on 6/16/2004. The previously registered Trademark on the acronym, "ACIM" was canceled by the US Trademark Office on 10/25/2005 and the previously registered Service-mark on the book title, "A Course in Miracles" was canceled by the US Trademark Office on 8/10/2005." 31: 200:(Please don't change my personal messages. I did that with your personal message because I didn't realize it WAS a personal message as it appeared to be a verbatim transcription of Knowledge (XXG) policy. I hadn't seen your signature at the bottom, because it was buried under a rather long deletion nomination. Had I seen your signature there, and had I realized that those were considered your 796: 803: 789: 551: 831: 615:

disambiguity page that seperates the topic should be done, or, the article should include all of the various factions and be sperated by sub-topic. In either instance the ambiguity that appears to be the base problem would be eliminated. As an encylopedia we should be striving to resolve ambiguity rather than become victims of it ourselves.

482:

write articles about ACIM on Knowledge (XXG). I am attempting to edit this page to make it more neutral, because, frankly, I like the thought of that. I'd like this page to be crisp and "cold" (what I mean is, I'd like this page to be completely without any flowery prose; flowery prose has its place, but usually not in such articles). --

1758:, doesn't offer any actual analysis for the claim made. It also states that Schucman was influenced by "Jewish propaganda" growing up and that the heterodoxy of ACIM can be attributed to her being a Jew. It is just a rant, not a well-thought out criticism and it is not claimed to be the view of anybody beyond the author. 1612:

All templates applied to this article are both being actively discussed on this page as well as serve the primary purpose of attracting the attention of other editors who perform cleanup to this page. There is nothing at all derogatory about a template which is being used to help improve the article.

1275:

So, it's understandable to want to quote only reliable secondary sources outside the movement, for these will be objective, able to see outside ACIM's world and look in safely, untouched. And in ACIM's world, only the perfectly inclusive is true, and as such, to stand outside the movement and look in

1184:

This article is in urgent need of serious pruning. Many sections of it read as a sermon. Where are the secondary sources of commentary, form which we can distill the encyclopaedic content? Knowledge (XXG) is not a place to proselytise, we are here to document what the external world understands of

806:

In or about December 1995, FIP entered into a five-year licensing agreement with Penguin, granting Penguin a license to publish and distribute the Course in English in all territories except the United Kingdom. The Penguin edition of the Course is a single hardcover volume. FIP and its licensees also

799:

In December 1995, FIP entered into a five-year licensing agreement with Penguin, pursuant to which Penguin was granted the license to publish and distribute A Course in Miracles in English in all territories except the United Kingdom. The version of the book published and distributed by Penguin was a

1738:

and posited that ACIM may have started as a mind control experiment but eventually took on a life of its own. Helen Schucman's reluctance to endorse the Course and her eventual descent into psychotic depression is cited as evidence that she was initially Thetford's unwitting dupe but finally came to

1554:

The article is now down to 33 kilobytes. I believe this is focused on one specific book with multiple variations published by numerous sources. FIP and FACIM are two different but closely tied organizations. The trademark on "ACIM" has been revoked by the US Patents Office (see elsewhere). It may be

1541:

Just in case you aren't able to complete the effort, I have reapplied the tag. You were able to knock it down by 3K which is good. The other article hasn't anything to do with this article. The other article is about all of the various books that stemmed from the original texts. This article is only

1394:

I'm not sure I understand you correctly Antireconciler. I haven't ever read any of the books with this title, but I can read. I have found several secondary sources about various things to do with this specific version of this title. One does not need, in fact, it is in my opinion detrimental to the

554:

of black three ring binders, if we made such a picture it would only be original research since the picture wasn't previously published. The image that this article has now is basically the same thing, since it has never been previously published. But also, this article should probably be renamed to

508:

I believe the initial image should be removed. This is simply an ad for one variation of one version of ACIM. I do not believe the article should begin with advertising for FIP and FACIM. ACIM is available for free as public domain on the internet. This second edition of the FIP version has material

1425:

for what you're talking about, Antireconciler. Your comment reminds me of Woody Allen's joke that he cheated on a metaphysics exam by looking into the soul of the person next to him. If we're going to chuck "scientific, objective verifiability" and replace it with "it seems true to me" why do you

1265:

Understandable. Surely Knowledge (XXG) is not a soapbox, nor should it provide incredible information, so I can understand your reasons for wanting to remove it. No one should be lead into misinformation at the hands of article writers who write to validate their own opinions instead of from a true

877:

The article probably needs splitting into A Course in Miracles (book) and A Course in Miracles (movement); the book can be described neutrally without reference to the movement, the movement would be a suitable merge target for a lot of material which AfD seems to think should be merged rather than

481:

I agree that the page looks like what Knowledge (XXG) calls "Original Research". This is because it is. The article was written by a (very kind) man who reads the Course and who was simply trying to provide information about it. He isn't in any way making money off of the Course. He simply likes to

1776:

In the comparison section on forgivness, etc., There is a cited statement: "For example: Jesus, teaching in the 'Lord's Prayer' about forgiveness, says, "God forgives our trespasses just as we forgive (the trespasses of) those who trespass against us." This seems to be slightly inconsistent with

1399:

the good part is, there are many, many editors on WP that will come along and clear out the POV, the misspailings, the awkward grammar, do cite checks, rearrange for aesthetic quality, etc., etc. Anything else that doesn't come from a verifiable secondary source, is just opinion and belongs in the

1395:

process to know anything at all about the subject matter as an editor. If a verifiable source is found, then it's quite an easy task to add content to an article. Just repeat what that source says. *poof* voila! Everything just falls into place. Nobody expects that to be rocket science, of course,

1280:

for ACIM, and so ACIM will naturally be misperceived by a view from nowhere that tries to say anything meaningful about it. For one cannot understand by standing on the outside looking in objectively. Only those inside will understand, for inside is all there is to those inside, and the man on the

1231:

Only if it can be sourced from reliable secondary sources. The major problem with it was that the whole thing was completely unreferenced and read like a dissertation or homily. Knowledge (XXG) is not a soapbox, it's an encyclopaedia distilled from the body of knowledge as presented in reliable,

820:

I am not a lawyer but it appears to me that the Criswell and the first edition of the FIP version are public domain. It also appears that the HLC is public domain. I suspect the Urtext is public domain as well but Wapnick does have a copyright filed on it c. 1990. Personally, I do not believe that

1644:

My Contributions are readily available if you believe that I spend an undue amount of time in that regard. Per advising my use of the word "happy" you should be aware that it is the resolution of a complaint and a suggestion for consensus. The complaint made above was addressed specifically at me

1527:

Understood. I've tightened it to 44 KB by removing redundant or uninformative parts, and perhaps some redundant information on docrine should be trimmed off as well. We are certainly still working on ideas for more properly managing this information, and our solution may depend on what happens to

1216:

I believe we have lost much valuable information as a result of JzG's "pruning" efforts. We should start an "A Course In Miracles (doctrine)" page for the fruit JzG dislikes. If it were not for JzG's positive intentions, I would call the result vandalism, so let's do better. I agree that there is

1006:

You are certainly correct that there is a major difference between the Bible and Christianity. But in so far as I know, the majority of the students of ACIM could be described in a single sentence as those who consider ACIM as their primary written source of spiritual wisdom and inspiration, but

939:

becomes possibly confusing or possibly even controversial when attempting to describe the majority of the students of this book. The majority of those who study this text have no formal organization to which they belong, but prefer to gather only to read and directly discuss the text itself. To

892:

It seems to me that the movement of students that this book has generated is inseparably related to the book itself, and that as such, any article about the movement would need to have an in depth treatment of the evolution of the book within it. To try to discuss the movement without such an in

629:

It is quite common that editors (and people in general) do not agree. Perhaps we should focus on this topic of discussion - the initial image. I think keeping the image places Wiki at legal risk as it may violate FIP's copyright. It introduces bias at the beginning of the article. It does not add

580:

If the article were renamed, then the main entry "Course in Miracles" could be given a dismabiguation page which is a normal practice on WP. Each version of the book could then have it's own article, and edit wars caused by ambiguity could be avoided in the future. It's seems like a very fair and

1787:

The passage discusses Christian teaching, which includes both the Lord's Prayer and Ephesians (in which the cited passage is found). Most Christians would think that both are the inspired word of God, so comparing them is valid. As an aside, the passage quoted above mischaracterizes the Lord's

566:

Does Wiki have legal permission to publish this image? If there is any uncertainty on this the image should be removed now until this is resolved. I believe that the image as is adds bias to the article. I do not agree that the article should be renamed as suggested. This would induce tremendous

1159:

I don't actually believe that quoting the source in this regard is applicable towards it's notability, but be that as it may, it is referencing itself, but as you point out, it does not actually say this according to these two versions. Perhaps it would be better to take what is common in both

841:

1. Registration Number: RE-882-755 Title: A course in miracles; text, workbook and teachers manual, 4 v. By Helen Schucman. Claimant: Deborah Forrest (NK) Effective Registration Date: 25Jun03 Original Registration Date: 6Oct75; Original Registration Number: A693944.

321:

Based on the information provided by the top comment and that both of these non-profit organizations bear the same trademark, they are at least a conglomeration or partnership and are also, as pointed out, the sole source of this book, which defines them, then, as self published resources. The

276:

was me, since I agree absolutely that ACIM is of insufficient significance to justify its inclusion in that article. It discusses the major religions, minor sects have no place there. I have also edited the above comment to reduce it's unnecessarily combative tone. Please endeavour to remain

596:

Please do not rename the article. There is not enough variation in the versions to warrant separate articles at this time. Doing this would only increase the division that arose during the "Course war". This is my personal opinion but I believe that this article should mainly help someone not

1634:

This is not a therapy session but an encyclopedia article. The time saved from informing others of the appropriate emotional reaction may allow you to take your own advise and devote your considerable energies to the large backlog of various articles that could use your attention. Thank you.

614:

What exactly is the "Course War"? The fact that editors cannot agree on things only further substantiates that the name is highly ambiguous. I am still completely neutral on all of this, but the ambiguity seems to be the underlying problem. Some editors think X, and others think Y. Either an

250:

Can hardly qualify as harrassment when it was posted here and is factual. You have indeed attempted to have all of the above ACIM-related articles deleted. I think another editor pointed out something important about your activities: you don't understand that Knowledge (XXG) is not a "paper

1450:

Science does have its role. It is does not encompass all of academic study which is usually considered to fall both within art and science. This is particularly true of philosophy, psychology, and religion. It even applies to Medicine which is considered to be both an art and a science. --

1663:

If it is your goal to create bits of writing so laden in Knowledge (XXG) jargon and stiff in tone that they are hardly intelligible to anyone but yourself, I think you have succeeded, my friend. Godspeed! I still think you would do better to stop telling others how they should feel.

445:

This article does not cite its references or sources. You can help Knowledge (XXG) by introducing appropriate citations. The tag on the article will help attract other editors to this page to remedy the problem. Please leave the maintenance tag so that others may be helpful. Thanks.

1565:

In good faith I am sure that over the period of a month or so, which was previously agreed to by consensus among at least four editors, that this article's size will be reduced as promised and still have plenty of room to discuss all of the various versions in a balanced fashion.

1472:

Someone went through the trouble of merging Attitudinal Healing with A Course In Miracles ... but didn't really merge the contexts. The topics don't appear to relate to each other. Unless anyone wants to link the two topics more clearly, I'd like to simply get rid of the section.

1629:

Ste4k, please be advised that as a Knowledge (XXG) editor it is not your appropriate place to inform fellow editors of the appropriate state of their emotional ("happy" or "sad") reaction with regard to the placement of templates in given Knowledge (XXG) articles, e.g,

396:

of trying to control ACIM, and of actually rewriting it to his own liking and to interpreting it to his own liking. Further, there are differences between the first edition of ACIM and the second edition of ACIM (which was published after the deaths of both

555:"A Course in Miracles by Foundation of Inner Peace" since the name it has right now is causing a considerable amount of ambiguity and because the only version mentioned in this article and its references is the version by that publisher. Do you agree? 391:

worked with Helen Schucman to edit ACIM and prepare it for publication. In the original manuscript, there was a great deal of personal information and advice for Helen and William. This was one of the major aspects of the court case; people accused

1150:"T-in.1. This is a course in miracles. 2 It is a required course. 3 Only the time you take it is voluntary. 4 Free will does not mean that you can establish the curriculum. 5 It means only that you can elect what you want to take at a given time. 792:

Although it was Schucman's directive that only a nonprofit foundation was to publish the Course, FIP assigned it to a for-profit company, Penguin, for $ 2.5 million dollars. Skutch Whitson and her family receive salaries, perks and benefits from

1613:

I think that you misunderstand the purpose of such templates and should be instead happy that many other editors will be notified that this article needs help. You should avoid becoming too attached to any specific article since there are

821:

this copyright would stand under a court challenge. The second edition of the FIP version is under copyright as a result of a later copyright that covers the additional material as well as the specific outline numbering system. --

362:

address is the name of the author of this book. Are the contents of this book the exact same as the original writings that took seven years to produce? Is there an objective third party reference that can verify this?

1118:

There are three primary versions of ACIM with multiple variations all called "A Course in Miracles". Some are in written form and some are "electronic". Some individuals or groups may use one or more particular forms.

251:

encyclopedia". I will certainly agree that it will be a long, long time before ACIM is written about in Encyclopedia Brittanica. But Knowledge (XXG) is not Encyclopedia Brittanica. Knowledge (XXG) has an article about

1137:"The book states that it is intended as a self study guide." Although this is often said, where exactly does the original material state that it is a "self study guide?" This description of ACIM should be removed. 377:

article. You seem to be unable to grasp that within the ACIM "community" the very authorship of this book is hotly debated. I mean, click on the above link and SEE. Or, actually, you should recall how heated it

1677:

There is a difference between "suggesting" and "telling". My suggestion for consensus about the article's content and maintenance is quite different than speaking to me directly about my conduct. Please review

1516:

Attention Firefox and Google Toolbar users: You may find that long pages are cut off unexpectedly while editing in tabs; please be careful. This issue has been reported to Google, and we hope they will fix it.

539:

Is an image of the written form of the book helpful to the article? If so, then I think one image from each publisher would be preferable (with a smaller image and caption) so that the article is unbiased. --

1032:

groups like Endeavor Academy would seem to deserve separate mention here, but I don't see why the majority of the rather un-notable intentionally unorganized students of ACIM would deserve their own separate

1092:

I'm not sure I quite understand what you're saying there. Are you saying that there are several groups interested in several different versions of books that all have the same title "A Course in Miracles"?

1698:

So, is that basically all you do on Knowledge (XXG), memorize the rules and then try to remind others that they are not following them? If you have any personal friends, they most likely think you're very

330:. The specific information that these sources should supply is the data regarding the sales and distribution of the item, and also other third party neutral sources by which those figures can be verified. 1153:

It is crucial to say first that this is a required course. Only the time you take it is voluntary. Free will does not mean that you establish the curriculum. It means only that you can elect what to take

940:

attempt to define the dynamics of such a group without directly discussing the text in detail would seem to me to be rather difficult and conterproductive. Separate articles for what I would refer to as

306:

forgiveness? Forgiveness is the centerpiece of ACIM. I don't think that can be said of any other spiritual system. Within the context of an article about forgiveness, I think that makes ACIM notable. --

597:

familiar with ACIM to answer the question, "What is "A Course in Miracles"?" As this page is refined it may be useful to have breakout articles relating to Course versions, the philosophy of ACIM, etc.

965:

Actually that is pretty much my point. The book says it's a self-study guide, but people like the Endeavor Academy have turned it into a social network and more of a belief system or religious sect.

233:

These comments are both against good faith and harrassment. I'll say no more and be bringing this matter up to mediation. In the meantime I'd suggest that you find some credible sources for this book.

190:, both of which are the official websites of California-based non-profit organizations. This editor's deletion attempts are merely personal bias masquerading as adherence to Knowledge (XXG) policy. -- 1185:

this concept and has written in reliable authoritative sources. Above all we are not here to publish someone's dissertaiotn on the subject of this book, which is how I think this article started.

491:

I don't believe you ever quite understood that this is not about other people having anything against the man, or the book, or the publisher, etc. It really isn't. Its about an encyclopedia.

1244:. The problem is not with the truth, if truth it be, but with the fact that it is funcitonally indistinguishable from opinion. So, do start woith citations to reputable seocndary sources 811:

Seeing that these are quotes from the proceedings of the court case which rendered the copyright void, this version that sold over a million copies is indeed now in the public domain.

709:

How can that be so? Wasn't Penguin's 2.5 million dollar contract the same contract that had Penguin publish 1.5 million copies over a period of five years ending in December of 2000?

644:

Since this article causes so much contraversy, since it's in the public domain, why don't we just print it as an article and put a freeze on it? Seriously, couldn't we just do that?

1542:

about one specific book printed by one specific publisher, The Foundation for Inner Peace (a.k.a. FACIM and highly associated with the acronym "ACIM" which is their trademark).

1303:. Where Knowledge (XXG) has demanded an outside, separate, objective view, must the system fail where separation means nothing, for no concept is more critical for ACIM to make 906:

There are two threads to the article, though: the book and its history, including the copyrioght dispute; and the movement and its history, which seem to me to be separable.

1170:

There is a difference between the Bible and Christianity. At this point in time, I agree that it would not be helpful to separare the book and the movement for ACIM. --

1289:

true, then the man on the outside who is inside not knowing it is speaking as if he knew what it was like to be inside but cannot for the fundemental reason that the

509:

that is not public domain including an outline numbering system and additional sections. It adds to the length of the article without adding content. Discussion? --

1632:"I think that you misunderstand the purpose of such templates and should be instead happy that many other editors will be notified that this article needs help." 743:

Do you mean that you haven't read anything about books with this title? I thought you mentioned earlier that you considered yourself an expert on these matters.

354:

According to the first cited source, this book was written by hand by a psychologist while channeling "The Voice". The specific question which this article does

519:

I think there are at least two other book covers that would make the point clearer rather than lose one version we already have. Maybe setting the book covers

1800:

I also agree that OR could be a problem here, but cites have been promised, so let's give other editors some time to go back through their source material.

1327:, we will be able to post valuable information of such a nature on Knowledge (XXG). Otherwise, we have done ourselves a disservice. Despite the demise of 520: 467:

or another sister project. Please stick to facts which are stated in neutral terms from the mainstream press, well-known religious papers and so on.

973:

are separate too. A bit more significant, of course, and a bit more widely discussed in secondary sources, hence a larger treatment. Have a look at

1583:

You have already plastered enough derogatory templates on this page, one at a time please. Discuss, agree, then another, but not this flurry please.

1007:

who, in accordance with the recommendations of this book, have no official membership organization. Does this sentence deserve its own article?

1266:

objective desire to spread genuine knowledge. Such actions bring down the credibility of the entire encyclopedia, and thus its effectiveness.

322:

information they provide can be used about the book, but do not provide any sort of notability for the book. Please read section 6.3 of the

89: 408: 155: 113: 108: 81: 76: 64: 59: 255:

for pete's sake! As the other editor noted, "notability" on Knowledge (XXG) is a lot more lenient than in most print encyclopedias. --

1331:, many will still believe that scientific, objective verifiability is what it means for a statement to be meaningful. These people do 374: 171: 342:

Issues of notability with regard to this topic have already been settled and established. I'm not reinventing the wheel with you. --

893:

depth treatment would result in an incomplete article. Thus I feel that such a separation of this article would not be practical. -

415:); the second edition contains a numbering system and a book not in the first edition, a book called "Clarification of Terms". -- 428:

I do appreciate all the attention you're giving me Andrew, but seriously, what does any of it have to do with this article?

526: 1529: 1221:

be neutral, for playing ACIM's game is what it means to be charitable, and charity is what it means to be neutral. —

1248:

the movement. Commentary in standard texts on comparitive religion, references from psychological texts and so on.

1788:

Prayer, which is an entreaty to God and does not guarantee forgiveness from him if someone forgives other people.

412: 151: 38: 1645:

rather than speaking about the article in general. Please refer to the guidelines for such matters, specifically

47: 17: 159: 1320:

fail in such instances. Perhaps if we post a disclaimer in the "main tenets" section that the information is

1065:

As there is no central authority on ACIM, who judges which groups are "un-notable" and which are notable? --

1300: 455:

Also please note that the tag was added by an administrator on the basis that the entire article reads like

1295: 383:

In short, no, what is presently published is NOT exactly what Helen Schucman took down. In point of fact,

1717: 1704: 1665: 1636: 800:

single hardcover volume. The Penguin licensing agreement expired by its terms in or about December 2000.

367: 1483:

I have no qualms with that. Your comments on the Afd discussion would be most welcome too. Thanks, -

1316:

Where separation means nothing, then, allow us to plea an exception to Knowledge (XXG)'s rules, which

334: 194: 135: 1614: 1804: 1792: 1762: 1533: 1474: 1430: 1345: 1222: 139: 1328: 853: 483: 416: 343: 308: 256: 252: 205: 191: 1276:

as an outsider ... well, this will be necessarily to miss the point, for this perspective is an

278: 302:

But forgiveness is the major aspect of ACIM. How many spiritual systems are primarily focused

1241: 1816: 1807: 1795: 1781: 1765: 1720: 1707: 1690: 1668: 1657: 1639: 1621: 1603: 1589: 1570: 1559: 1546: 1536: 1521: 1500: 1487: 1477: 1455: 1433: 1404: 1377: 1362: 1348: 1256: 1225: 1206: 1193: 1174: 1164: 1141: 1123: 1097: 1069: 1040: 985: 948: 914: 897: 886: 867: 857: 846: 825: 815: 780: 764: 747: 730: 713: 696: 679: 676: 658: 648: 634: 619: 601: 585: 571: 559: 544: 533: 513: 495: 486: 475: 450: 432: 419: 404: 384: 346: 311: 289: 259: 237: 224: 208: 147: 1683: 1650: 1646: 1532:. I've removed the {{verylong}} tag in light of this. Thank you for your helpful efforts, — 1233: 327: 1586: 1513:

This page is 47 kilobytes long. This may be longer than is preferable; see article size.

1484: 1037: 945: 894: 727: 693: 655: 393: 388: 167: 931:

guide. Nowhere does the book state that it was written with any intention of starting a

460: 456: 323: 179: 1649:

regarding personal attacks, and suggestions on ways to prevent them. Please also review

1496:

Is this article being discussed for for deletion, too? Where is that discussion, Scott?

1812:

I certainly agree about time. I think the wording here is nevertheless very confusing.

1801: 1789: 1759: 1427: 398: 143: 1237: 977:, by the way - look at the references, the way it's written, the tone of the article. 1843: 1755: 1596: 1370: 1249: 1186: 978: 907: 879: 468: 282: 221: 654:

The material is not entirely in the public domain and it is over 1,000 pages long. -

974: 970: 1751:, is to Thetford's cv, not to criticism and "other critics" seems a cover for OR. 1556: 1452: 1366: 1202:

been "seriously pruned" and all questionable material moved here to discussion.

1171: 1138: 1120: 1066: 822: 777: 761: 631: 598: 568: 541: 510: 273: 217: 163: 46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

459:. Analysis of the book and its alleged significance should be on the basis of 1831: 1813: 1778: 1748: 1687: 1654: 1618: 1567: 1543: 1518: 1497: 1422: 1401: 1203: 1161: 1094: 864: 835: 812: 744: 710: 692:

Also, the public domain version is not the one that sold 1.5 million copies. -

668: 645: 616: 582: 556: 530: 492: 447: 429: 364: 331: 234: 175: 131: 1653:, my comments are intended to help this article rather than hurt it. Thanks. 1679: 966: 672: 667:

FYI, for material that is in the public domain, we have our sister projects

1555:

useful to retain the tag for now to help prevent unnecessary additions. --

1147:

According to two of the versions at my disposal, the first statements are:

523: 1735: 1713: 1617:

quite a few articles on Knowledge (XXG) that could use your attention.

464: 1291:

error he makes cannot be contained as if it were an isolated instance

807:

publish and distribute eight foreign-language editions of the Course.

463:. Knowledge (XXG) is not the place for book reviews, they can go on 134:

has recently submitted deletion nominations for all of the following

1365:

for exceptions to policies explicitly stated as "non-negotiable" by

1739:

understand the nature of the movement she had helped to initiate."

1700: 860: 849: 1595:

He's right, though - the entire document reads like an essay.

1577:

Plastering multiple templates on this page without discussion.

373:

This is actually a topic that I hope will be addressed in the

25: 1730:

I deleted the following material from the criticism section:

785:

Good fact. I think that Scott was asking about these though:

1734:"Other critics have noted William Thetford's connections to 944:

such as Endeavor Academy does seem to me to be in order. -

1325:

unverifiable and unintelligible by objective outside means

935:. Therefore it seems to me that even the use of the term 220:

page. Please note that good intended edits are welcome.

1844:

A Course In Miracles (ACIM). The Miracle of Brainwashing

1756:

A Course In Miracles (ACIM). The Miracle of Brainwashing

772: 769:

Source: U.S. Patients, Trademarks, and Copyrights site:

726:

Amazing statistics you quote. Any citations for them? -

550:

Actually an image of the written form of the book would

187: 1199: 183: 204:

statements, I wouldn't have edited it. Thank you. --

216:

He also attempted to delete the ACIM section on the

1400:opinion bin under the heading original research. 567:bias. Let me start a discussion on the versions. 1160:versions and requote the source. Just an idea. 272:And the last person to remove the section from 1426:even need an encyclopedia in the first place? 830:The copyright once held by Ken Wapnick which 8: 878:given its own (largely uncited) treatment. 1307:, again, by the aforementioned principles. 1832:William Newton Thetford Professional Vita 1749:William Newton Thetford Professional Vita 927:The book states that it is intended as a 529:would do better to get the point across. 1299:, which is a natural consequence of the 358:address and which all articles on books 1824: 1726:Deleted material from criticism section 114:Archive 2: Nov 12, 2005 - June 29, 2006 98:Archive 3: June 28, 2006 - Jul 13, 2006 109:Archive 1: May 17, 2004 - Nov 12, 2005 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 1232:independent secondary sources. Read 7: 756:This is fact and should be included: 1686:in regard to such matters. Thanks. 409:Foundation for A Course In Miracles 156:Foundation for A Course In Miracles 856:that rendered it void was ordered 407:and was primarily overseen by the 375:Authorship of A Course in Miracles 172:Authorship of A Course in Miracles 24: 834:A693944 is void. A search of the 178:will not accept ANY websites as 29: 182:with regard to ACIM, including 104:To view earlier archives, see: 845:the date on this record shows 1: 1712:I think Ste4k has forgotten 326:which are used to establish 1530:A Course in Miracles (book) 1468:Attitudinal Healing section 324:reliable sources guidelines 1863: 461:reliable secondary sources 413:Foundation for Inner Peace 152:Foundation for Inner Peace 1817:01:49, 13 July 2006 (UTC) 1808:18:18, 12 July 2006 (UTC) 1796:18:13, 12 July 2006 (UTC) 1782:17:23, 12 July 2006 (UTC) 1766:01:19, 11 July 2006 (UTC) 1721:12:34, 13 July 2006 (UTC) 1708:09:45, 13 July 2006 (UTC) 1691:17:33, 12 July 2006 (UTC) 1669:06:21, 12 July 2006 (UTC) 1658:15:51, 11 July 2006 (UTC) 1640:03:26, 11 July 2006 (UTC) 1622:20:59, 10 July 2006 (UTC) 1604:16:07, 10 July 2006 (UTC) 1590:16:06, 10 July 2006 (UTC) 1571:02:56, 13 July 2006 (UTC) 1560:21:24, 12 July 2006 (UTC) 1501:12:28, 10 July 2006 (UTC) 1456:04:07, 12 July 2006 (UTC) 1434:13:16, 10 July 2006 (UTC) 1405:00:20, 10 July 2006 (UTC) 1207:05:31, 19 July 2006 (UTC) 1175:22:38, 11 July 2006 (UTC) 1165:17:37, 12 July 2006 (UTC) 1142:22:14, 11 July 2006 (UTC) 1124:22:28, 11 July 2006 (UTC) 1070:22:31, 11 July 2006 (UTC) 868:18:43, 13 July 2006 (UTC) 826:16:51, 13 July 2006 (UTC) 816:04:17, 13 July 2006 (UTC) 781:22:06, 11 July 2006 (UTC) 765:21:24, 11 July 2006 (UTC) 748:20:30, 10 July 2006 (UTC) 731:20:27, 10 July 2006 (UTC) 635:20:18, 13 July 2006 (UTC) 620:19:18, 13 July 2006 (UTC) 602:19:07, 13 July 2006 (UTC) 586:18:47, 13 July 2006 (UTC) 572:18:17, 13 July 2006 (UTC) 560:17:16, 13 July 2006 (UTC) 545:16:13, 13 July 2006 (UTC) 534:04:34, 13 July 2006 (UTC) 514:18:31, 12 July 2006 (UTC) 487:03:19, 30 June 2006 (UTC) 476:12:08, 29 June 2006 (UTC) 451:11:44, 29 June 2006 (UTC) 420:03:22, 30 June 2006 (UTC) 368:07:12, 29 June 2006 (UTC) 347:03:19, 30 June 2006 (UTC) 335:07:12, 29 June 2006 (UTC) 312:03:19, 30 June 2006 (UTC) 290:12:12, 29 June 2006 (UTC) 281:even while disagreeing. 260:03:19, 30 June 2006 (UTC) 238:05:25, 29 June 2006 (UTC) 225:12:59, 28 June 2006 (UTC) 209:03:24, 30 June 2006 (UTC) 195:08:12, 28 June 2006 (UTC) 160:Community Miracles Center 18:Talk:A Course in Miracles 1547:05:37, 8 July 2006 (UTC) 1537:04:51, 8 July 2006 (UTC) 1522:12:10, 7 July 2006 (UTC) 1488:15:00, 6 July 2006 (UTC) 1478:05:49, 6 July 2006 (UTC) 1378:18:52, 8 July 2006 (UTC) 1349:03:36, 6 July 2006 (UTC) 1257:21:37, 5 July 2006 (UTC) 1226:21:16, 5 July 2006 (UTC) 1194:12:52, 5 July 2006 (UTC) 1098:20:57, 8 July 2006 (UTC) 1041:14:57, 6 July 2006 (UTC) 986:21:41, 5 July 2006 (UTC) 949:14:18, 5 July 2006 (UTC) 915:12:53, 5 July 2006 (UTC) 898:12:35, 5 July 2006 (UTC) 887:16:15, 1 July 2006 (UTC) 832:was registered as number 714:20:55, 8 July 2006 (UTC) 697:14:48, 6 July 2006 (UTC) 680:15:59, 5 July 2006 (UTC) 659:12:31, 5 July 2006 (UTC) 649:14:08, 1 July 2006 (UTC) 496:01:09, 1 July 2006 (UTC) 433:14:04, 1 July 2006 (UTC) 1369:is not going to work. 1301:law of noncontradiction 126: 1714:WP:Don't Be an Asshole 1296:principle of explosion 842:Original Class: A 1283:inside not knowing it 1028:I agree that notable 836:U.S. Copyright Office 773:http://www.uspto.gov/ 188:http://www.facim.org/ 170:. And in the article 42:of past discussions. 630:substantive content. 581:neutral suggestion. 184:http://www.acim.org/ 136:A Course in Miracles 140:Attitudinal healing 138:-related articles: 1754:The second source, 1329:logical positivism 552:need to be a stack 253:Celebrity sex tape 1212:"Pruned" material 457:original research 95: 94: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 1854: 1847: 1841: 1835: 1829: 1747:The first cite, 1718:Secondary Source 1705:Secondary Source 1666:Secondary Source 1637:Secondary Source 1600: 1374: 1363:special pleading 1305:any sense at all 1253: 1190: 982: 911: 883: 472: 405:William Thetford 385:William Thetford 360:certainly should 286: 180:reliable sources 148:William Thetford 73: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 1862: 1861: 1857: 1856: 1855: 1853: 1852: 1851: 1850: 1842: 1838: 1830: 1826: 1774: 1728: 1598: 1579: 1511: 1470: 1372: 1251: 1214: 1200:article has now 1188: 1182: 980: 942:splinter groups 909: 881: 875: 873:Needs splitting 843: 642: 506: 470: 443: 394:Kenneth Wapnick 389:Kenneth Wapnick 284: 168:Kenneth Wapnick 129: 127:Ste4k's actions 69: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 1860: 1858: 1849: 1848: 1836: 1823: 1822: 1821: 1820: 1819: 1798: 1773: 1770: 1769: 1768: 1752: 1741: 1740: 1727: 1724: 1696: 1695: 1694: 1693: 1672: 1671: 1627: 1626: 1625: 1624: 1607: 1606: 1584: 1582: 1578: 1575: 1574: 1573: 1552: 1551: 1550: 1549: 1534:Antireconciler 1510: 1507: 1506: 1505: 1504: 1503: 1491: 1490: 1475:Antireconciler 1469: 1466: 1465: 1464: 1463: 1462: 1461: 1460: 1459: 1458: 1441: 1440: 1439: 1438: 1437: 1436: 1414: 1413: 1412: 1411: 1410: 1409: 1408: 1407: 1385: 1384: 1383: 1382: 1381: 1380: 1354: 1353: 1352: 1351: 1346:Antireconciler 1339: 1338: 1337: 1336: 1311: 1310: 1309: 1308: 1270: 1269: 1268: 1267: 1260: 1259: 1223:Antireconciler 1213: 1210: 1181: 1178: 1168: 1167: 1157: 1156: 1155: 1151: 1135: 1134: 1133: 1132: 1131: 1130: 1129: 1128: 1127: 1126: 1107: 1106: 1105: 1104: 1103: 1102: 1101: 1100: 1083: 1082: 1081: 1080: 1079: 1078: 1077: 1076: 1075: 1074: 1073: 1072: 1052: 1051: 1050: 1049: 1048: 1047: 1046: 1045: 1044: 1043: 1034: 1017: 1016: 1015: 1014: 1013: 1012: 1011: 1010: 1009: 1008: 995: 994: 993: 992: 991: 990: 989: 988: 956: 955: 954: 953: 952: 951: 920: 919: 918: 917: 901: 900: 874: 871: 840: 809: 808: 801: 794: 758: 757: 753: 752: 751: 750: 738: 737: 736: 735: 734: 733: 719: 718: 717: 716: 704: 703: 702: 701: 700: 699: 685: 684: 683: 682: 662: 661: 641: 638: 627: 626: 625: 624: 623: 622: 607: 606: 605: 604: 591: 590: 589: 588: 575: 574: 563: 562: 537: 536: 505: 502: 501: 500: 499: 498: 442: 439: 438: 437: 436: 435: 423: 422: 399:Helen Schucman 380: 379: 352: 351: 350: 349: 319: 318: 317: 316: 315: 314: 295: 294: 293: 292: 267: 266: 265: 264: 263: 262: 243: 242: 241: 240: 228: 227: 213: 212: 144:Helen Schucman 128: 125: 123: 121: 119: 117: 116: 111: 103: 101: 93: 92: 87: 84: 79: 74: 67: 62: 52: 51: 34: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 1859: 1845: 1840: 1837: 1833: 1828: 1825: 1818: 1815: 1811: 1810: 1809: 1806: 1803: 1799: 1797: 1794: 1791: 1786: 1785: 1784: 1783: 1780: 1771: 1767: 1764: 1761: 1757: 1753: 1750: 1746: 1745: 1744: 1737: 1733: 1732: 1731: 1725: 1723: 1722: 1719: 1715: 1710: 1709: 1706: 1702: 1692: 1689: 1685: 1681: 1676: 1675: 1674: 1673: 1670: 1667: 1662: 1661: 1660: 1659: 1656: 1652: 1648: 1642: 1641: 1638: 1633: 1623: 1620: 1616: 1611: 1610: 1609: 1608: 1605: 1602: 1594: 1593: 1592: 1591: 1588: 1576: 1572: 1569: 1564: 1563: 1562: 1561: 1558: 1548: 1545: 1540: 1539: 1538: 1535: 1531: 1526: 1525: 1524: 1523: 1520: 1514: 1508: 1502: 1499: 1495: 1494: 1493: 1492: 1489: 1486: 1482: 1481: 1480: 1479: 1476: 1467: 1457: 1454: 1449: 1448: 1447: 1446: 1445: 1444: 1443: 1442: 1435: 1432: 1429: 1424: 1420: 1419: 1418: 1417: 1416: 1415: 1406: 1403: 1398: 1393: 1392: 1391: 1390: 1389: 1388: 1387: 1386: 1379: 1376: 1368: 1364: 1360: 1359: 1358: 1357: 1356: 1355: 1350: 1347: 1343: 1342: 1341: 1340: 1335:a disservice. 1334: 1330: 1326: 1324: 1319: 1315: 1314: 1313: 1312: 1306: 1302: 1298: 1297: 1292: 1288: 1284: 1279: 1278:impossibility 1274: 1273: 1272: 1271: 1264: 1263: 1262: 1261: 1258: 1255: 1247: 1243: 1239: 1235: 1230: 1229: 1228: 1227: 1224: 1220: 1211: 1209: 1208: 1205: 1201: 1196: 1195: 1192: 1179: 1177: 1176: 1173: 1166: 1163: 1158: 1152: 1149: 1148: 1146: 1145: 1144: 1143: 1140: 1125: 1122: 1117: 1116: 1115: 1114: 1113: 1112: 1111: 1110: 1109: 1108: 1099: 1096: 1091: 1090: 1089: 1088: 1087: 1086: 1085: 1084: 1071: 1068: 1064: 1063: 1062: 1061: 1060: 1059: 1058: 1057: 1056: 1055: 1054: 1053: 1042: 1039: 1035: 1031: 1027: 1026: 1025: 1024: 1023: 1022: 1021: 1020: 1019: 1018: 1005: 1004: 1003: 1002: 1001: 1000: 999: 998: 997: 996: 987: 984: 976: 972: 968: 964: 963: 962: 961: 960: 959: 958: 957: 950: 947: 943: 938: 934: 930: 926: 925: 924: 923: 922: 921: 916: 913: 905: 904: 903: 902: 899: 896: 891: 890: 889: 888: 885: 872: 870: 869: 866: 862: 859: 855: 851: 848: 839: 837: 833: 828: 827: 824: 818: 817: 814: 805: 802: 798: 795: 791: 788: 787: 786: 783: 782: 779: 775: 774: 770: 767: 766: 763: 755: 754: 749: 746: 742: 741: 740: 739: 732: 729: 725: 724: 723: 722: 721: 720: 715: 712: 708: 707: 706: 705: 698: 695: 691: 690: 689: 688: 687: 686: 681: 678: 674: 670: 666: 665: 664: 663: 660: 657: 653: 652: 651: 650: 647: 640:Public Domain 639: 637: 636: 633: 621: 618: 613: 612: 611: 610: 609: 608: 603: 600: 595: 594: 593: 592: 587: 584: 579: 578: 577: 576: 573: 570: 565: 564: 561: 558: 553: 549: 548: 547: 546: 543: 535: 532: 528: 525: 522: 518: 517: 516: 515: 512: 504:Initial Image 503: 497: 494: 490: 489: 488: 485: 484:Andrew Parodi 480: 479: 478: 477: 474: 466: 462: 458: 453: 452: 449: 440: 434: 431: 427: 426: 425: 424: 421: 418: 417:Andrew Parodi 414: 410: 406: 403: 400: 395: 390: 386: 382: 381: 376: 372: 371: 370: 369: 366: 361: 357: 348: 345: 344:Andrew Parodi 341: 340: 339: 338: 337: 336: 333: 329: 328:verifiability 325: 313: 310: 309:Andrew Parodi 305: 301: 300: 299: 298: 297: 296: 291: 288: 280: 275: 271: 270: 269: 268: 261: 258: 257:Andrew Parodi 254: 249: 248: 247: 246: 245: 244: 239: 236: 232: 231: 230: 229: 226: 223: 219: 215: 214: 210: 207: 206:Andrew Parodi 203: 199: 198: 197: 196: 193: 192:Andrew Parodi 189: 185: 181: 177: 173: 169: 165: 161: 157: 153: 149: 145: 141: 137: 133: 124: 120: 115: 112: 110: 107: 106: 105: 100: 99: 91: 88: 85: 83: 80: 78: 75: 72: 68: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 1839: 1827: 1775: 1742: 1729: 1711: 1697: 1643: 1631: 1628: 1580: 1553: 1515: 1512: 1471: 1396: 1332: 1323:in principle 1322: 1321: 1317: 1304: 1294: 1290: 1286: 1282: 1277: 1245: 1218: 1215: 1197: 1183: 1169: 1136: 1029: 975:Christianity 971:Christianity 941: 936: 932: 928: 876: 844: 829: 819: 810: 784: 776: 771: 768: 759: 643: 628: 538: 507: 454: 444: 401: 359: 355: 353: 320: 303: 201: 130: 122: 118: 102: 97: 96: 70: 43: 37: 1581:Dear Ste4k, 1367:our founder 1361:I'm sorry, 1281:outside is 677:Will Beback 274:forgiveness 218:forgiveness 164:Gary Renard 36:This is an 1615:WP:BACKLOG 1421:There's a 1333:themselves 1285:. If ACIM 929:self study 669:Wikisource 90:Archive 10 1743:Reasons: 1680:Help:Talk 1601:you know? 1597:Just zis 1509:very long 1375:you know? 1371:Just zis 1254:you know? 1250:Just zis 1191:you know? 1187:Just zis 983:you know? 979:Just zis 967:The Bible 912:you know? 908:Just zis 884:you know? 880:Just zis 838:reveals: 673:Wikibooks 473:you know? 469:Just zis 441:Unsourced 287:you know? 283:Just zis 82:Archive 5 77:Archive 4 71:Archive 3 65:Archive 2 60:Archive 1 1772:Example? 1587:Scott P. 1485:Scott P. 1038:Scott P. 1033:article. 1030:splinter 946:Scott P. 937:movement 933:movement 895:Scott P. 854:judgment 852:but the 728:Scott P. 694:Scott P. 656:Scott P. 279:WP:CIVIL 202:personal 1736:MKULTRA 1293:by the 1246:outside 1242:WP:NPOV 1180:Pruning 465:Wikinfo 39:archive 1805:(Talk) 1793:(Talk) 1763:(Talk) 1684:WP:CIV 1651:WP:AGF 1647:WP:CIV 1557:Who123 1453:Who123 1431:(Talk) 1234:WP:NOR 1172:Who123 1139:Who123 1121:Who123 1067:Who123 858:27 Apr 847:25 Jun 823:Who123 778:Who123 762:Who123 632:Who123 599:Who123 569:Who123 542:Who123 511:Who123 1814:Ste4k 1802:JChap 1790:JChap 1779:Ste4k 1760:JChap 1688:Ste4k 1655:Ste4k 1619:Ste4k 1568:Ste4k 1544:Ste4k 1519:Ste4k 1498:Ste4k 1428:JChap 1402:Ste4k 1219:can't 1204:Ste4k 1162:Ste4k 1154:when. 1095:Ste4k 865:Ste4k 813:Ste4k 745:Ste4k 711:Ste4k 646:Ste4k 617:Ste4k 583:Ste4k 557:Ste4k 531:Ste4k 493:Ste4k 448:Ste4k 430:Ste4k 378:gets. 365:Ste4k 332:Ste4k 235:Ste4k 222:speet 176:Ste4k 132:Ste4k 16:< 1701:anal 1682:and 1423:word 1318:must 1238:WP:V 1198:The 969:and 861:2004 850:2003 804:Link 797:Link 793:FIP. 790:Link 671:and 527:side 521:side 411:and 387:and 186:and 1599:Guy 1397:BUT 1373:Guy 1252:Guy 1189:Guy 981:Guy 910:Guy 882:Guy 675:. - 471:Guy 402:and 356:not 285:Guy 174:, 1716:. 1703:. 1344:— 1287:IS 1240:, 1236:, 1119:-- 863:. 524:by 304:on 166:, 162:, 158:, 154:, 150:, 146:, 142:, 86:→ 1846:. 1834:. 1585:- 1473:— 1036:- 211:) 50:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index