Today I just read the part where they were explaining this part to you - how their style would change toward the end of their visits as your need for using a sarcastic style was lessened. Before that, I had heard that the Course was given in a Shakespearean style partly as a gift to Helen as she loved that style. I had heard, too, that the message from the Holy Spirit is given in a style that suits the receiver, so I didn't think anything about it. It just showed a lot of what you were like at the time -? a joking kind of guy. It is?helpful that you showed yourself just as you were. I could then think of ways in myself that are similar even though different in form. Same in content. From where I am now in the book, it looks like they are going to be showing that in your it was a cover-up for self-hatred.?You are a fine mirror!
?
Sarcastic styles?in general, anyway, are?not offensive to me. I do not speak that way myself, but it does not bother me when others do. In fact, I can smile about it. It was kind of fascinating to me to see the way they worked with you. Talk about empathy and joining! This is an example. I have thought for some time, too, that one cannot have any idea what "spiritual" looks like. To do so, could eliminate terrific opportunities. Obviously, the image we have of what "spiritual" looks like has not proven to be reliable at all. And many of us thought the image we had of Jesus was spiritual. Throwing over the table of moneychangers and getting angry, etc. When I try to come up with a formula of what spiritual looks like,?it is very confusing. The Course is helpful, because I don't have to weigh and choose what is and what is not. It is ALL spiritual.
?
The fact that Billy recommended the book so highly to me, too, helped me to expect that whatever it sounded like, it was going to be very helpful. (Thanks again, Billy.)
garyrrenard wrote:
Before the book came out, one of the things I thought might
cause the most discussion was the smart-ass type style that is
sometimes evident. I mention in my Author's Note that Pursah told me
their style was designed to get me to pay attention. Also, readers
will note that *my* smart ass comments were usually a defense against
my painful shyness, which I didn't really start to get over until
this latest phase of my life with my ascended visitors and the Course.
It's been surprising to me that I really haven't received many
complaints about this particular subject. Even in exchanging e-mails
with priests (both Catholic and Episcopalian) and ministers, I don't
think I've heard one negative comment about the book's style. A
priest told me it's nothing compared to what he hears in confession!
In any case, A Course in Miracles says, "If you would be heard by
those who suffer, you must speak their language. If you would be a
savior, you must understand what needs to be escaped." (M64-65)
So maybe my visitors knew what they were doing. However, I'd be
happy to hear any comments, positive or negative, about what any of
you thought when you first noticed that this book didn't have the
same style as most of the other spiritual books, and whether or not
you found it helpful in communicating the message it was intended to.
Love and peace, Gary.
Do you Yahoo!?
Free with sync to Outlook(TM).
