Some of you might remember this, some forum members such as Justin, Rondelle, Berserk and myself have in the past written about how we don't believe that ACIM and Gary Renard are good sources of information. (I don't think Berserk ever said anything about Gary Renard.)

The other day I ran into a site by a man named  Bruce Fraser  MacDonald. Mr. MacDonald (to avoid confusion with Bruce Moen's name I'll say Mr.  MacDonald) claims that he is the reincarnation of the man who wrote "The Gospel According to Thomas." Supposedly, the author of "The Gospel According to Thomas" is was Jesus' twin brother.

Surely some of the above will cause people to have doubt. I am not creating this thread with the intent of validating Mr. MacDonald's claims. People can decide for themselves what he is about. I am providing links to his site because he does a good job of showing that Gary Renard is a fraud.  I've read a lot of Gary's "Disapearance of the Universe," it is basically hard core nonduality, and is very misleading.  Anybody who is a fan of the book shouldn't be insulted by what I say here, because according to the book, this world doesn't exist at all, there is nobody to forgive, and nobody to do the forgiving.

I am also providing a link to Mr. MacDonald's site, because there is a page that does a better job of explaining why ACIM is false, than I ever provided. Mr. MacDonald said he received these words from God and Jesus. If this seems questionable, remember, in an inconsistent and contradictory way, ACIM claims that Helen Suchman received words from Jesus.

I believe that it is possible that Mr. MacDonald actually conversed with Jesus, because the only name I ever received from my guidance has been either "Jesus," or "Christ." Some of you might doubt this, that is okay. What's more important, does the information in the links provided make sense?

http://www.thomastwin.com/23%20A%20Who%20is%20Gary%20Renard.html

Below are some words from the below link.

http://www.thomastwin.com/21%20A%20Jesus,%20God%20and%20ACIM.html


All of this immediately creates a conflict, as you can see. You are left with the choice whether to believe what is written through Bruce MacDonald or what is written through Helen Schucman.

            That is a critical choice.  Again I assert that ACIM did not come from me, from Yeshua, Jesus, the one you know as the Christ. We have already seen that the narrator, the person actually doing the teaching in ACIM is not reliable.  And in claiming that it came from me, it also lies.  ACIM thus has a primary level of its meaning which came from a major deception when it claimed to come from me.  It is built on a lie, and your confidence in it is based on a lie.

            The choice is yours, of course, whether to believe the lie or to examine the matter more closely.  The consequences are very real, since neither your life nor the world are illusions and decisions you make have real effects which stretch through centuries.

Roger:


Regarding my seeing Renard as a fraud, when I checked to see what he is about I didn't know about the Thomas identity mistakes he made. I saw him as a fraud because 1) he supported ACIM which is a misleading source that doesn't seem to come from Jesus, 2) his books says things that don't sound true, and 3) his explanation as to why he doesn't have recordings of meeting with the two physically manifested ascended masters he claims to have met, doesn't seem true.

I initially thought of creating this thread on the off topic section, but figured it might get more exposure on the main thread. It would be nice if importance was considered when determining where a thread should go.

Is this thread important? Well, for one, I didn’t write it for my sake. I wrote it because I care about the welfare of other people and this world. If there are sources of information that lead many people astray, I believe it is worthwhile to say so.  I also believe that it is no small thing if Jesus is misrepresented.

When I first started reading ACIM, I can’t say that I was Mr. Wisdom as I did so. I was anxious to read something that supposedly came from Jesus. The book has a “lot” of pages, and due to my anxiousness, I read through them quickly, even though my guidance tried to give me clues that I should take care. Eventually I noticed that the course was having a brainwashing effect on me.  This being the case, there were a number of times I meditated, prayed, and asked God and Christ if ACIM from Jesus. On more than one occasion, in some way, I was told “no.” I was also told that it has a negative origin. I also had some dreams that made the point that the course leads people astray and not in the direction that Jesus taught and represents.

After finding this out, I took the time to think about the course in a thorough way, and found that it was misleading. It claims that God didn’t create this world, because everything that God creates is perfect. With a similar way of thinking it claims that God has nothing to do with this world. If this is so, then what created the world? Is there something, after looking at the chain of causation,  that ultimately doesn’t have God as its source? If everything ultimately has God as its source, and everything God creates is perfect, then there wouldn’t be something that is able to create something that is imperfect (if you consider the matter from ACIM's false circular logic). The reason imperfection exists is because when God created us, he had the wisdom to give us free will. This free will enables us to sometimes create things that aren’t ideal. This doesn’t mean that God isn’t perfect and that he isn’t here in this world. His presence and guidance is always available.  Even if a person doesn’t seek such presence and guidance a person can catch glimpses of God when they see beauty, see people share love with each other, and other ways. Such beautiful things couldn’t exist if the beauty of God’s being wasn’t available. If a person reads ACIM and allows it to program his (or her) mind to believe that God has nothing to do with this world, he is likely to create a barrier between himself and God.

ACIM also places way too much emphasis on ego. Each of us was created so we do in fact have an eternal self. ACIM will get a person to think of their sense of self in a false way, rather than a true way.

With its extreme repetition of the same few basic points, its attempt to get people to believe things that aren’t true, and its 365 day affirmation course (Would Jesus teach in such way?), ACIM is set up so that it can have a brainwashing effect. Would a valid source of information take such an approach? Going by my experience and what makes sense to me, a true, healthy and balanced approach to spiritual growth leads to freedom of mind.

Dude, I appreciate your comment, but please consider what I say with a grain of salt. As you can see above, I sometimes have a problem figuring things out accurately.

p.s., regarding the creation of ACIM--I currently lean to it's creation being the result of the collaboration of Sons of Belial in the flesh (CIA connected individuals), and a negative ET and/or nonphysical force. How conscious or unconscious this collaboration, I don't know, but we do know that ACIM has clear connections to the CIA and more specifically to the MK Ultra program which was based around the manipulation and influencing of perception in core ways.  Sometimes called "brainwashing", which I find a very inaccurate term, because no "washing" is involved.  It's more like brain-filthing or brain-distorting. 

  It's well documented that the MK Ultra program and program offshoots, and the various people involved--psychologists, military folks, CIA agents, etc, experimented with everything from using drugs like LSD on others, to researching hypnosis and the subconscious mind. 

   ACIM may be a combo of an experiment in the conscious sense (let's see what this does to people), and in the unconscious sense (the ET and/or nonphysical side), let's hinder people's spiritual paths and growth. 

Hopefully these posts don't appeal to some people's "inner teenager".  The rebellious part that feels, "ooh a taboo, let me try THAT", or feels, "drama, I love drama, got to check out the drama".