"First, the assumption is implicit that what God has Created can be changed by the mind of Man."

So even before having any sense of what you could change God's creation INTO, you started out with the idea that you COULD change God's creation at all. That includes the belief you can change God himself, change yourself, or change anything else real. This must include the 'mad idea' that things which literally are permanent and CANNOT be changed, can be changed. So this represent the first slip into believing something false, believing the impossible is possible, and thus denying reality.

"Second, the concept that what is perfect can be rendered imperfect (or wanting) is intruded."

So now having decided that you can change things that are permanently unchangeable, you start to explore what it can be changed INTO, and thus get this idea that the perfect can be made to be imperfect. That there can be something lacking, needs arising, problems developing, a sense of the absence of God growing.

"Third, the belief that man can distort the Creations of God (including himself) has arisen, and is tolerated."

This now includes the idea that even your own self, which God created to be permanent, is changeable, can be made to be imperfect, taken away from its perfection, converted into something else. And that YOU can be the one to do this, therefore CAUSING your own self to be whatever you decide to change it into.

"Fourth, that since man can create himself, the direction of his own creation is up to him."

So now you set about the belief that because you can change your own self, can make yourself imperfect, and can literally 'redefine' who and what you are "at will", you can determine the "direction of your own creation", ie whether or not you are created at all (life vs death), and that if you do continue to exist, what 'form' you take or what is true of your nature or how you function. You think you now have the power to "create yourself" or re-create yourself, in whatever way you please, which has to automatically deny the Father's role as your Creator.

"These related distortions represent a picture of what actually occurred in the Separation. None of this existed before, nor does it actually exist now."

You become "ego", by having taken on this position of believing you created yourself, God is not your father, God is absent, you have control over yourself, you can define yourself to be whatever you want to be, you are "constantly changing", you can destroy yourself, you have an ability to determine what you are, and that you have the power to redefine what is true and what is real. This is essentially what egotism is. It's this 'logical conclusion' we've come to on the basis of believing the permanent can be changed, and now we find ourselves in a state of constantly denying what's permanently real and trying to constantly change it into something that it's not.

In the physical world we often think of quantum physics as the pinnacle of scientific success in describing "reality". The more you dig into it the more subtle it becomes. Quantum flux, string theory, unified theories of gravity, multi-dimensional realities, anti-matter and dark-matter, black holes, notions of how consciousness plays a part in forming spacetime etc.

But here is the truth of it. Quantum physics is the study of an illusory world, using separation-based scientific mathematics, confirmed using illusory physical experiments, studied by illusory bodies, drawing conclusions based on a MASSIVE assumption that this world has any reality at all.

It seems at times that the physics tells us truths which might previously have only been the domain of religion or mysticism. Such that the physical nature of objects isn't wholly real, matter comes in and out of seeming existence, particles have probabilities of location which only forms into matter when observed, etc. They've done all kinds of experiments which seem to reveal at least some of the properties of spacetime.

This then leads to the idea that quantum physics is a kind of new scientific spirituality, or that it's proving things that transcend the illusory nature of the world. But we have to be clear here. It is still a mathematical scientific study of a dream world. Even at the lowest level.

Beyond quarks and muons and all manner of exotic particles, beyond the quantum fields and flux, this is all still part of a dream. At some level they still believe that the basis of all of this is reality, even if they are willing to entertain the idea that the surface layers are illusory. They never actually go so far as to say that the universe is absolutely nothing and does not exist. They won't touch ever on the idea that God is real, and they always stop short of heaven.

Here is the main problem. All of this theoretical physics is based on extremely advanced math. Math is based on the idea of separation, that one thing is not another thing. That all the numbers are separate in their values and are not the same. 1 is not 2 and 2 is different than 3. These are the 'quantum' building blocks of the physics itself. Provided numbers remain separate, then you can do math with them. You can calculate things and come up with equations. But what if numbers themselves are flawed?

In heaven's reality, the truth is that 1+1=1. And no matter how many times you "add one" (create a soul), the sum total is still 1, because they are still "one with God". There are all kinds of ways that this plays out. For example the idea that you can share an idea and retain the idea and yet both people now have the idea - the idea that giving and receiving are one, and that you lose nothing by giving everything. This is TOTALLY incompatible with the idea of numbers.

I have 1, and I give 1 to you. And now you have 1, I should have 0. But I don't. We both have 1. And moreso, it's the same one. It shouldn't ever be possible for me to have the whole of something, while you simultaneously have the whole of something, and it be the same whole. In the world of separate numbers, transferring value to you takes it away from me, and to give is to sacrifice. I lose by sharing. 1+1=2 really means separation and separation produces two separate things. It does not speak of oneness.

The entire system of math is fundamentally based on laws of separation, which is based on the ego thought system of separation from God. So that means that now we're trying to do mathematical physics based on laws of separation, trying to describe a reality that is beyond separation. All we end up doing is describing THE separation, ie a separated state, and regarding it as the whole of reality. This is what quantum physics is doing. It is blind to God and blind to heaven's nature.

When God extends the whole of himself, he gives all that he has to his creation, and yet he ALSO retains it all. He does not lose anything by giving it. He shares. Now his creation has everything, and so does he.

This would also suggest to the ego and to math, that if that first created being has everything, there is nothing left for anyone else to have. And yet God can create a second creation by sharing the whole of what he has with it, giving it everything, and now it ALSO has everything. And now two have everything. Two have the same value. And equal value is the Golden Rule.

"Each Soul knows God completely. This IS the miraculous power of the Soul. The fact that each Soul has this power completely is a fact that is entirely alien to human thinking, in which if any ONE has everything, there is nothing LEFT."

You can't describe that using math other than to say 1+1=1. Or you can even say 2=1. Well, now if the value of 2 is the same as the value of 1, and those two things ARE each other, because they are totally equated, then ALL numbers equal 1. That's what oneness is about. The many created children of God sharing everything and therefore having the same whole and the same value. That means ALL numbers equal 1.

You cannot DO math when all numbers have the same value. You cannot do quantum physics or ANY kind of physics. Heaven is NOT quantum physics and it is not run by quantum physics. It's laws transcend all of space and time and the laws of separation.

So you have to be kind of careful when you put the ego's triumph of extremely complicated analysis and calculations on a pedestal and call it "reality". They are not even studying reality, they're studying an illusion of a world that doesn't exist, under the assumption that it has reality. They don't even know what reality means. It's all a calculated guess, and it's all mistaken. Just as all beliefs in separation are mistaken.

E=MC squared which supposedly tells you the relationship of mass and energy vs speed of light and how time changes relatively and so on.... it's all made up. It might seem to roughly and closely correlate to a world of separation. Yes. Because THIS world, this illusion of a world, IS based on separation.

So it naturally SEEMS to line up with separation-based physics. The math SEEMS to correlate. AND the whole separate system of spacetime is so seemingly stable, most of the time, that you can even do experiments IN spacetime that seem to prove or correlate to what the theory says should happen. That's how they "validate" their physics. But all this is really doing is taking an illusory world, studying it with illusory means, using its illusory nature to correlate to illusory predictions, and then when they match up they claim that this is truth. It is nothing of the sort.

All that quantum physics can do is describe roughly and incorrectly and from a very false-perception vantage point, what appears to be the nature and workings of an hallucinated unreal world, without truly acknowledging its unreality. All of the "laws of physics" such as gravity, seem to be observable phenomena because of the fact that Newton got bopped on the head with an apple one day. But there are no apple trees in heaven and stuff doesn't fall on people's heads.

What this really boils down to is, the body is being used to try to tell you what the truth about the body is. And on that matter, the body is entirely biased and ONLY will tell you that the body IS real. We are using a device to try to discern whether the world exists, based on the fact that the body MAKES the world seem real.

"Only the body makes the world seem real." And then we're assuming that its reality can be studied and verified and proven. All we're doing is using a biased apparatus to make a REFLECTION of the world and are calling it a unified theory of reality. But a reflection of hell is not the truth.

You cannot look to science to tell you what is ultimately true. You CAN look to science to tell you in most cases what seems to be true in a fairly "stable" unreal world. You can use it to measure your body. You can use it to evaluate the redshift of starlight. You can use it to calculate approximately the motion of objects. But you CANNOT use it to tell you, in the big picture, ANYTHING REAL.

"I am under no laws but God's".

"There are no laws but God's. Dismiss all foolish magical beliefs today, and hold your mind in silent readiness to hear the Voice that speaks the truth to you."

"I am under no laws but God's. I am constantly tempted to make up other laws, and give them power over me. I suffer only because of my belief in them. They have no real effect on me at all. I am perfectly free of the effects of all laws save God's. And His are the laws of freedom."

"I am entitled to miracles because I am under no laws but God's. His laws release me from all grievances, and replace them with miracles. And I would accept the miracles in place of the grievances, which are but illusions that hide the miracles beyond."

"The Holy Spirit is invisible, but you CAN see the results of His Presence, and through them, you will learn that He is there. What He enables you to do is clearly NOT of this world, for miracles violate every law of reality, as this world judges it. Every law of time and space, of magnitude and mass, of prediction and control, is transcended, for what the Holy Spirit enables you to do is clearly beyond ALL of them. Perceiving His RESULTS, you will understand where He MUST be, and finally KNOW what He is."

In the course Jesus describes "what happened in the separation" in 4 steps. The first step says this:

"First, the assumption is implicit that what God has Created can be changed by the mind of Man."

The remedy for this perhaps is to then recognize that you HAVE NOT changed because you CANNOT change. God has not changed you. You have not changed yourself. Nothing in the world can change you. What you are is permanent and fixed and absolute. You are immortal. You will always be EXACTLY as God created, in the most explicitly precise way possible.

You cannot be changed. Therefore, the beginning of the separation, which was the idea that you CAN change the changeless, is reversed. By affirming your unchangeability, you attune to your permanent immortal nature.

The fact that you cannot change even reveals that your "spiritual path" is a temporary thing. We are really moving towards a remembrance and recognition of what is already true, that you are STILL as God created you, having not changed in the slightest way. This also tells you that you cannot be affected by ANYTHING, nothing has any power over you and nothing can cause you in any way. You cannot therefore be made to suffer against your will, and not even sickness or death can occur.

It would seem that you have changed in your MIND, and that you can potentially change your mind back to its original state. But its original state is an alignment with the changeless. Mind cannot really stop BEING mind because it is permanently mind. Mind therefore cannot really change either, but it can imagine that it has. And so we are just undoing the illusion that we are not as we were created to be.

YOU CANNOT BE CHANGED. YOU ARE PERMANENTLY PERFECT.

"He is immortal as his Father. What he is cannot be changed. He is the only thing in all the universe that MUST be One."

"It cannot change, and be in opposition to Itself. Father, my will is Yours. And I am safe, untroubled and serene, in endless joy, because it is Your Will that it be so."

"This may threaten my ego, but cannot change my function in any way."

"But all the while his Father shines on him, and loves him with an everlasting Love Which his pretenses cannot change at all."

"His errors cannot change this, and can have no effect at all on the truth in YOU."

"You were NOT born to die. You CANNOT change, because your Function HAS been fixed by God."

"Purpose is of the mind. And minds can change, as they desire. What they ARE, and all their attributes, CANNOT change."

"Reality is changeless. It is this that MAKES it real, and KEEPS it separate from all appearances. It MUST transcend all form to be itself. It CANNOT change."

"Different realities ARE meaningless, for reality MUST be one. It CANNOT change with time, or mood, or chance. Its changelessness is WHAT MAKES IT REAL."

"God's plan for your salvation cannot change, nor can it fail. Be thankful it remains exactly as He planned it."

"The mind can think it sleeps, but that is all. It cannot change what is its waking state."

"You can DENY His knowledge, but you CANNOT change it."

"But the Holy Spirit teaches you that truth was created by God, and YOUR decision CANNOT change it."

"What is created is apart from all of this. Defenses are plans to defeat what cannot be attacked. What is unalterable cannot change. And what is wholly sinless cannot sin."

"Joy does NOT turn to sorrow, for the eternal cannot change."

"You cannot be ANYWHERE that God did not put you, and God created you as part of HIM. That is both WHERE you are and WHAT you are. This is COMPLETELY unalterable. It is total inclusion. You cannot change this now or ever. It is forever true. It is NOT a belief, but a fact."

"You cannot change laws you did not make, and the laws of happiness were created FOR you, NOT BY you."

"It is impossible that God lose His identity, for if He did, YOU WOULD LOSE YOURS. And BEING yours, He cannot change Himself, for your identity IS changeless. The miracle ACKNOWLEDGES His changelessness, by seeing His Son as he always was, and NOT as he would make himself."

"Whatever is true and real is eternal, and CANNOT change or be changed. The Soul is therefore unalterable because it is ALREADY perfect"

"What is within your brother still contains ALL of creation, everything created and creating, born and unborn as yet, still in the future or apparently gone by. What is in him is changeless, and YOUR changelessness is recognized in its acknowledgment."

If you start with "I'm defective, I need to improve", you will end up with an ego.

If you start with "I'm perfect, I need not change", you will end up with a perfect self.

Most of us start with the approach that we're defective, full of guilt, unhappy, broken, lost, etc.... and then we start seeking on the basis of this premise.

But when you do that, there is huge risk of not questioning the premise itself, which is false. The premise says "there's something wrong with me, I need to improve myself." That's NOT true. But if you believe it, you'll start the "seek and do not find" spiritual journey.

Then you'll be trying to make yourself better, be more loving, have more wakefulness, gain more growth etc. The trouble is, this will cause you to AVOID the real problem. The real problem is your belief that you are defective in the first place.

If you start with "I'm not defective, I only need to accept I am already perfect", then you're starting out on the right foot. And it results in you questioning any belief that says otherwise, without you going off on a tangent based on a false premise.

So it's another sort of paradoxical thing. You have to start out as you mean to finish. You have to start as though you're already at the end, and sort of work backwards to accepting a pre-existing God-created condition of perfection.

If you do it the other way around, starting with lack and guilt and not good enough and all that, thinking this is true, and reacting to it, and feeling compelled to do something based on it, you'll be led astray by the ego. And then you'll become a spiritualised ego.

We've all fallen for this trap. Believing we even NEED to seek for a perfection, or to make it happen, or to construct a better self, when in fact God has already done the hard work.

If we adopt the ego's view that we need to perfect ourselves, then we avoid looking at the fact that we are IN DENIAL. We have DENIED that we are perfect, and this denial is the problem. We have DENIED happiness and peace and love, and the removal of the denial is necessary in order to become AWARE OF it again.

If we are in the business of trying to focus on the positives and the being more loving and more kindness and all these sort of non-denial happy-go-lucky perspectives, then we may inadvertently NOT LOOK at the DENIAL that we have. We may not look at the actual problem - the block to awareness - the barriers that we have built against a PRE-EXISTING perfection.

So in general we have it all backwards. We are looking for something in the wrong place and in the wrong way. The spiritual path is actually back to front. We need to be melting within, going within, finding the truth that God has already put there, finding the solution God has already established, accepting, recognizing, rather than going out of our minds trying to make it, build it, change it, author it, transform into it.

If you can't look at and question the ASSUMPTION of the belief "I'm not perfect", "there's something wrong with me", then you're not really making any headway. The trick is not to answer the question of what you have done wrong, it's to question WHETHER OR NOT you have done anything wrong.

There is nothing wrong with you. You're just pretending, and you don't really need fixing. But your belief that you need fixing needs fixing.

"We will but be making perfect TO you, what is ALREADY perfect IN you."

"To repeat an earlier statement, and also to extend it somewhat, the Soul is already perfect, and therefore does not require correction."

"Whatever is true and real is eternal, and CANNOT change or be changed. The Soul is therefore unalterable because it is ALREADY perfect, but the mind can elect the level it chooses to serve. The only limit which is put on its choice is that it CANNOT serve two masters."

When a situation presents itself, on a physical level, with signs and symptoms and effects that you can see and touch, it seems to be real to you. If you do not overlook it, they form evidence and proof that something seems to be going wrong. On the basis of this you can't help but go into fear as a logical consequence. If the problem is real, you should be concerned.

What then happens is you'll start going into the "I have to do something about it" mode. This compulsion will arise as a natural logical consequence, following on from the belief that the problem is real. If it's real, it really needs solving. If it's real, it's seen as a real threat, calling for a real solution.

Before you know it, you'll be launching into a tirade of all the things that you thin should happen, need to happen, should be done, that other people should be doing, etc, in order to "save" the situation. And this will take the form of what appears to be genuine concern, caring, wanting to help, trying to fix, compelling others to act, trying to get something to be done about it, a sense or urgency and demand and even anger in the name of getting someone to solve it.

While on the surface this will look and feel like some fervent effort to help, and even if it might bring what many would consider forms of assistance and magical solutions that many would consider a resolution, this performance of drama and urgency is heavily laden with attack. If a person were totally fine and nothing were going wrong, and you were expressing these compulsions toward and about them, it would be attacking their invulnerability.

Claiming "something seriously needs to be done about it" relies entirely on the strong belief that there is attack, there is weakness, there is compromise and suffering. You can't have these kind of thoughts without buying into the belief in these things. And the belief in these things IS a form of attack. It contributes to supporting the notion that the problem exists, and you can't be doing that if you are trying to make it go away.

If I say, ok, someone needs to do something about this right now because there's really a major problem, then mixed in with what seems like selfless helpful attitudes is a whole array of undermining, making real, believing in suffering, giving power away, energizing the problem, holding it in a space of attack, and just generally having a negative fearful attitude about it. And fear, even if it seems to be an experience of being under attack, is itself a form of attack.

While it's seemingly true that a person might really "need help", at least on a physical level, through some magical means, and that this help might indeed seem to help the situation, there is also the fact that this help is in part harmful. And it will always have side effects to prove it. These side effects come from the fact that fear is a form of attack, and concern for physical appearances is actually an attempt to reinforce them, making them worse. The person trying to "save" with the ego is actually against salvation.

There is alternative way to help and to save, and it moves the mind and perception in the direction of true healing. Not just the illusion of healing but actual miraculous support. And for this, the entire ego mechanic of making the problem real and coming from fear and urgency has to be let go. It has to be recognized as fake help, a reaction based on the assumption that the problem is real. As fear turns to anger and insistence, it becomes murderous.

It's better that we move into true forgiveness, where we withdraw belief in the problem, we stop fearing by stopping believing that there is even a real problem happening, we move into a mindset of recognizing the person's wholeness and health, we get our mind out of the gutter of ego temptation, we affirm what is really true about them beyond appearances, step back and allow the Holy Spirit to heal, and dismantle the artificial forms of salvation that were making the problem worse.

In this we undo, take away, cancel, reverse, disbelieve, disempower, disappear, vanish and generally make non-existent the problem. There is no real problem. There is no real suffering. There is nothing real going on here that calls for serious reactions and actions. This stepping back has a power in it far greater and able to actually heal and correct the signs and symptoms and effects, than the measly magical efforts that were an attempt to extend fear. By NOT supporting the existence of the situation, you weaken it and move it towards undoing.

We either get to simply react to what appears to be happening, as though it were dreamed by someone else. Or we get to express God's Power and assert what IS true and make it so. We are the dreamer of the dream. We can change what we choose to occur in the dream. The power of decision is your own. Choosing what must be is far more powerful than reacting to what appears to have come from an alien will. Paradoxically it's by withholding the ego's outward reactions that your inner light intensifies and shines forth to correct all ills. By not trying to fix, you can truly save.

Everyone is immortal and cannot die. So anything suggesting otherwise MUST be an illusion and not a reality. Any sign or symptom MUST be a disguise, a lie, a mistake and is correctable. There can be no suffering in God because it's not God's will that you suffer. Only the truth is true and nothing else is true.

"What you find difficult to accept is the fact that, LIKE your Father, YOU are an idea. And like Him, YOU can give yourself COMPLETELY, wholly without loss, and ONLY WITH GAIN."

When giving and receiving are seen as separate, you will believe that your brother gives something to you without giving it to themselves. That they escape from the effects of what they cause.

You will also believe that you are receiving something that you did not give. This is perceived as an attack against your will. If you did not give it, you have not asked for it, and yet have received it, so you do not want it.

If we are in any kind of perception where it seems like we are receiving something - being at the effect of - others or anything in the world or body, it's because we believe there is a separation between giving and receiving.

You cannot receive without giving, in truth. But ego is the idea of separation between cause and effect, or father and creation. If cause escapes from its effects it does not receive what it gives, and so "gets away with murder" by being able to do something without experiencing the consequences.

The ego then really is nothing more than a logical premise that you are separate, and every other conclusion that you come to is based on that. If you are separate, what you give and receive are separate. And who you give and receive them to/from are separate.

If you are separate, it makes perfect logical sense that you should not give, otherwise you will fail to receive what you have given, and therefore will lose it. No-one would consider it to make sense to give when they see themselves as standing to lose in the deal.

The ego or "a sense of self based on the assumption that you are separate", only appears to be selfish, or having unshared self-interests, because it makes perfect sense to do so. If separation is true, you should and cannot share with anyone, and therefore must hoard everything, or you'll end up with nothing.

People being egotistical will therefore automatically and quite "naturally" attempt to keep everything for themselves, and will be unloving, only because it makes sense to them. They recognize that giving is a loss and a sacrifice, so it works against them to give anything away freely.

This simply means that such a person is mistaken, because what they believe about themselves - that they are separate - is false. It isn't a sin, therefore, to be selfish, it is just a mistake based on a false premise. ie it's completely understandable why we'd want to claim private possession of everything if it's true that we are fundamentally a non-shared identity.

All we then need to do, which sounds simple enough, is transition from a sense of being separate, to a sense of being joined. This is nothing more than a shift in premise from "I am separated off" to "I am one with". From what appears to be a state of selfishness, to a state of sharing. From inequality to equality.

If the premise is that we are shared, our identity is shared (Christ), and we are each other (one), then it will make perfect logical sense to say that we CAN give everything away and still end up with everything. To have all, we can give all to all. And to have all, we should give all to all. This then means that if you DON'T give everything, you will have nothing.

So now it becomes in your own best interests to give love unconditionally all the time to everyone, because you recognize that this IS the ONLY WAY that you can receive it. To be included in the receipt of the love, you must be one with the receivers. And giving must not be seen as loss or sacrifice or deprivation, or any kind of a cost. What is seen as a cost is seen as a punishment.

If we are one, then what is mine literally is yours, and what is yours literally is mine. And because we share everything, the same everything belongs to both of us. And now no-one can lose anything at all.

Forgiveness reflects this truth that everything belongs to everyone, and therefore everyone loves everyone in order to receive everything. This reflects the nature of heaven, in which everything literally belongs to everyone simultaneously, and everything is shared - even your self.

"You had everything when you were created, just as everyone did."

"To give and to receive are one in truth."

"Here are both giving and receiving seen as different aspects of one Thought Whose truth does not depend on which is seen as first, nor which appears to be in second place."

"The unforgiving mind does not believe that giving and receiving are the same. Yet we will try to learn today that they are one through practicing forgiving toward one whom you think of as an enemy and one whom you consider as a friend."

"No-one can lose, and everyone MUST benefit. Each miracle is an example of what justice can accomplish, when it is offered to everyone alike. It is received and GIVEN equally. It IS awareness that giving and receiving ARE the same."

"the RECIPROCAL relationship of giving and RECEIVING will be recognized"

When something is logical, you start with a premise, and then as the nature of this premise "extends", it produces logical conclusions. The conclusions that will come from this premise are really established in the premise itself. The limitations or scope of the premise determines what can come from it, and what comes from it is completely in accord with its starting point.

"Every system of thought must have a starting point. It begins with either a making or a creating, a difference we have already discussed. Their resemblance lies in their power as foundations. Their difference lies in what rests upon them. Both are cornerstones for systems of belief by which one lives."

When you use logic, and you arrive at a logical conclusion, what you're looking for is consistency, or the lack of contradiction within the logical system. If what you end up with seems to correlate to what you started with, and there was no obvious "nonsense" creeping in, then you can conclude that your logical conclusions are valid. You won't see any sign of contradiction so you'll consider the conclusion to be "correct". It will seem that the logic "makes sense".

What's happening is you're finding an internal consistency within the system, set up by the premise you started with. And each step you took in your reasoning did not violate the rules of the logic system. So whatever conclusions you ended up with seemed to make sense, based on what you started with. And this gives you a notion of things making sense, being valid, even being correct.

The problem is that the premise itself has absolutely everything to do with what you end up with. The conclusions that come from it, if you follow the logical steps carefully and impeccably, are really "automatic". If you start at a given starting point, you WILL end up at an ending point which is in harmony with the starting point. And you won't be able to come to a "false conclusion" if you reason it through carefully.

But if you start off on the wrong foot, if you begin with an assumption, of your premise is entirely wrong to begin with, what will happen? You'll still make logical steps, you'll still seek out internal consistency, you'll still look for that sense of "it all seems to fit together", and you'll still draw conclusions which seem to be in accord with the premise you started with. And you'll conclude "it makes sense" even. But the conclusions you come to, if you start off on the wrong foot, will be actually false. Even though they'll seem correct.

So you can be logical, and be wrong. If you start out wrong, you will only get something wrong at the other end. If you begin with a lie, you will end up with a lie, but it will be a logical lie which makes sense within the context of the whole system.

Thought systems work the same way, whatever the system is based on determines what can come from it, and only that can come from it and nothing else, unless you want to be contradictory. Yet if you start out with a system based on a lie, you will end up with lies. The lies will seem to make sense and even will seem "true" in that they seem to "add up" without contradicting the starting point, but they will still be false in the big picture. But if you believe them, you will be trapped and stuck, while believing you are free. And that is false perception.

This is the problem with the ego thought system. In the really big picture, the ego's system is a "small picture", and it is out of context, and it does not start with the whole truth. It is not beginning with something that is actually really true. It is starting out on the wrong foot, such as the belief that separation is true, or sin is real, or the impossible is possible, or death is life, or something real can be threatened etc.

When you start out with something ultimately false like that, you will produce an ENTIRE logical "system", where your reasoning will progress completely "logically" from the start to the end. And you will end up with conclusions which seem consistent. The conclusions will even seem to make total sense, IF the premise is true. But in the big picture, if it is recognized that the premise was false to begin with, then even though the conclusions are logically consistent, they are still false conclusions.

So the ego starts off on the wrong foot, on an assumption which is wrong. It starts with the belief that separation is possible, or sin is real, and then begins a progression of seemingly natural logical conclusions. If separation is real, then it must be true (consistent) that bodies are real. Then if bodes are real, it must be true that anything bodies experience is real. And if their experiences are real, then death is real. etc. That's a natural logical progress and completely impeccable logic. But the conclusion is insane because the whole "system of thought", the system of logic, began with a false premise.

When you start with a true premise, such as that God is infinite and permanent and immortal, there are once again logical progressions which come from this. If you follow the steps and start to draw conclusions based on that, and if you are careful to be consistent and not contradictory, you will end up with natural conclusions. And these conclusions will make sense, and seem valid, and they ALSO WILL BE TRUE. If you start with truth, you will end up with truth. And so whether or not the result is true or false, depends on whether the premise is true or false. And what you get out of the system as a natural logical conclusion or outcome, is set up in its starting point.

When the starting point is God, the natural logical outcome of God is the creation of the Kingdom. It's not that God randomly decides to create immortal beings, it's that the whole system just functions that way, truth goes in at the start, progressions of logical consistency occur, and you automatically get creation out the other end. And because you started with immortality, you end up with immortality. "God is but love, and therefore so am I." Such conclusions therefore are not only making sense, they are also TRUE.

"The Kingdom is the result of premises, just as this world is. You may have carried the ego's reasoning to its logical conclusion, which is total confusion about everything."

"The ego's logic is as impeccable as that of the Holy Spirit, because your mind has the means at its disposal to side with Heaven or earth, as it elects."

"From the belief in sin, the faith in chaos must follow. It is because it follows that it seems to be a logical conclusion; a valid step in ordered thought. The steps to chaos do follow neatly from their starting point. Each is a different form in the progression of truth's reversal, leading still deeper into terror and away from truth."

When you begin a thought process/system on a lie or illusion, you will end up with illusory lies which seem to make sense but are false. This means the total absence of REASON, which is the absence of sanity, because the whole system of thinking started out insane. When you start out the thought process/system with sanity and truth, you end up with a SANE conclusion. This is what ACIM refers to as REASON. The reasoning is LOGICAL, just as the ego's reasoning is logical, but it starts with sanity so ends with sane conclusions.

Just because something seems extremely logical, does not mean it is true. And this is a BIG problem for a lot of people studying ACIM. If for example you start out with a premise that e.g. God created the world, and you do not challenge this premise, the ENTIRE course will now be interpreted to try to "fit" it into that premise. And every conclusions drawn will not challenge that premise.

In order to uphold the premise that God created this world, a LOT of adjustments have to be made to the course's meanings, in order to produce consistency and a lack of contradiction. And this can lead to what seems like a consistent picture, but it is also completely wrong. Because it started out with a belief that is completely mistaken and unfounded, in light of God's nature.

A massive collection of CONSISTENT logical conclusions will be made based on it. And all of these conclusion together will form the appearance of what seems like a completely consistent internal coherence. It will STILL all seems to "fit together". A clear "picture" will form. There won't appear to be any contradictions. And any steps necessary to keep the premise valid will be made, regardless of the extent to which that means changing the meaning of the course.

Everything it says will be interpreted through that lens and filter. And the person will end up with a very elaborate, consistent, highly polished, internally supportive, self un-contradictory, and seemingly highly sensible set of conclusions. And it will all seem TRUE because it seems to make sense. And they will marvel at the seeming beauty of its logical harmony. BUT, the entire thing will be bullshit, because it all starts out with a false premise. And so the entire system of thought is completely mistaken. Yet it is regarded as truth because of its consistency.

You have to therefore be careful that your reasoning begins with something which is absolutely true. You need to understand God's nature first. And when you reason based on the truth, you will end up with truthful and valid and consistent answers, which are correct. You can't start with the world and try to reason backwards to find the truth. You have to start at the beginning of the system.

You have to have an awareness or grasp of what the absolute truth IS FIRST, before you can even proceed to think about anything. If you set off on the wrong foot, every conclusion you come to will be potentially false. But most of us will start out with false conclusions and assumptions and not question them, resulting in more false conclusions. Because we're starting out exploring all this with our egos, which has taken a whole bunch of assumptions as true, and this has not yet been questioned.

We have to find out first what the premise of our entire thinking is, whether we have started out on the wrong foot or not. And for that you have to ask yourself, what is the ultimate truth really like? What is God like? What is his nature? What IS the ultimate absolute premise? Where DID everything actually start, and what is the logical nature of that premise? Because from God, everything real proceeds as a logical system of thought, and it proceeds only according to His nature, and nothing can come from it which is unlike its starting point. So you have to be REALLY clear about God's nature before you can reason anything correctly.

When you can understand what God is like, you can start to draw truthful conclusions. And if you are careful, you can be GUARANTEED that these conclusions will be true. But if you do not understand God's premise, or you have difficulty being impeccable with your logic, then you will come to false conclusions because you'll be starting out with something false. And yet these conclusions will see true to you and make sense, even though they are mistakes or errors in reasoning. And you can end up with a whole lot of "it makes sense" even if you start out with lies.

This is happening A LOT in ACIM circles because many students are not yet in a position to grasp the nature of God's system, the premise of reality and the one truth. And so most of us are struggling to come to terms with what the conclusions are, yet alone being able to grasp where it all started or what it's all based on. And a lot of time is spent trying to uncover or learn about the premise.

If you return to the highest possible starting point, the pre-separation system, and you look at how God functions, and then you begin to reason out what CAME from that premise, and if you do so impeccably logically, you WILL come to true conclusions. But if you are mistaken about God, you will be mistaken in everything you conclude.

Those true conclusions will not only show you the things God COULD do, it will also show you what he COULD NOT do. What CAN come from Him, and what cannot. What He would will, and what he would not. And thus what you are, what your nature is, and what you are capable of in reality. When you do that, you'll see why the ego's system is entirely a FALSE premise, and EVERYTHING that comes from it will be false. And that includes the attempt to oppose God's premise, to overthrow the Kingdom, to make another world (including Earth), and why Earth CANNOT have come from God due to its nature being a complete contradiction of God's nature.

God does not make contradictions because He is logically consistent. For Him, heaven is the natural outcome of His premise. And Heaven is the ONLY outcome of His premise. Nothing else CAN come from it because it is rooted in truth. And because of His nature, Heaven HAD to be created. It's in God's nature to extend His logical premise to produce The Kingdom. Which is why it has always existed.

Earth, which is OPPOSITE to heaven in *EVERY* way, CANNOT COME FROM GOD. Its nature is opposite to His premise. It does not function like Him. It does not begin with the premise He begins with. And it cannot be a natural outcome of His thought system. If He were to create it, in addition to creating Heaven, that would mean two entirely different and opposing outcomes can result from a single premise. This is logically IMPOSSIBLE regardless of what the premise is. Each premise produces ONE conclusion in accord with it, not two different ones.

God could only create one or the other, and which one is set up in his beginning nature. Since Earth is opposite to Heaven, God could NOT have created it, otherwise He would have to have STARTED OUT with a split mind and be opposing himself. He would have to be fundamentally contradictory, as a premise, in order to PRODUCE two contradictory outputs. He could only Create ONE or the other, not both, and they cannot both exist or "be one" because of their contradictory natures. If Earth is real, heaven does not exist at all.

God is NOT contradictory, so He can ONLY produce ONE outcome. That outcome is HEAVEN, and Earth is therefore NOT OF GOD, and is not based on truth or reality. And since God is real, Earth therefore, logically, cannot be real. And since only what God creates CAN exist, Earth does not exist at all. And if God is permanent, Earth cannot be permanent. And if God exists, having Created ONLY heaven, Earth cannot exist at all. This is why "there is no world" and God did not create it.

"The world you see is an illusion of a world. God did not create it, for what He creates MUST be eternal AS HIMSELF" is a logical statement. Since Earth is NOT eternal, it must have come from a NON-ETERNAL premise, and since God is eternal, it cannot have come from HIS premise. And because HIS premise is true, it must have come from a FALSE premise. And therefore Earth is an illusion, and never will it be His one outcome.

"Heaven remains your one alternative to this strange world you made and all its ways; its shifting patterns and uncertain goals, its painful pleasures and its tragic joys. God made no contradictions. What denies its own existence and attacks itself is not of Him. He did not make two minds, with Heaven as the glad effect of one, and earth the other's sorry outcome which is Heaven's opposite in every way."

A desire to affirm what is true or spiritual or more positive, can actually be a form of denial.

What you are actually doing is you are trying to make the bad stuff go away, not by its proper undoing, but by glossing over it, replacing it, trying to create an illusion of peace or happiness, or trying to attack it with images of something you prefer.

Years ago this was my only strategy to deal with long-term unhappiness - to try to pull myself out of the mud temporarily and yearn toward the light and try to be positive and look on the bright side and act as if it wasn't there. And then it pulled me right back into it, because I was being a spiritual ego. I was in denial and using denial to try to make stuff go away rather than dealing with it.

So if you are thinking that you just need to repeat what the Course says, or say your favorite quotes, or use certain magical phrases, in an attempt to "deal with" the problem, what you are doing isn't so much correctional as it is a reaction and a way to try to make the bad stuff go away.

It is not our job to make bad stuff go away. This was an ego strategy and it is the ego's attempt at being spiritual. It will try to cover up bad stuff with a glossy surface layer, painting pretty pictures and having positive thoughts and trying to strive towards a happy-go-lucky attitude, all the while keeping depression and self hatred and thoughts of suicide buried underneath.

Dark shit is not healed this way. It doesn't go away, it merely goes out of awareness. The ego's strategy for dealing with anything has always been to make stuff go out of awareness, in an attempt to create the illusion that it no longer exists. This is how it "got rid of God". This is how it denied sin and covered it up with fake guilt instead of undoing it.

This is how it turns guilt into fear and fear into punishment and punishment into death. It uses a form of denial and replaces it with something which looks, on the surface, to be something initially better or more promising or which creates an illusion of things having improved.

But all this does is KEEP the underlying belief, does not correct anything, and in fact makes things worse, because now you have a solid belief in sin covered over with a nice layer of fake innocence, so now you have two layers of problems.

Don't think that denial only looks like denial. Denial takes on whatever form is necessary in order TO deny the truth, and so it is always deceptive in its appearance. It can look like salvation. It can look like peace and light. It can look like becoming more spiritual or being happier. It is the ego's coping mechanism for trying to "deal with" the underling problem in a way which DOES NOT REALLY WORK, but which SEEMS to work.

So if you are trying to combat the bad stuff with quotes and sayings and phrases as if to say these things is getting your mind to believe them more, you are not really directly tackling the problem. You are not looking at the problem squarely and asking yourself, is this even true? Is it even real? Why am I even believing this in the first place? Just assuming it is true and then using denial to make it go away, does not work. At all. Ever.

We come to the course with the ego, and that means we come to it with the ego fully functional in its efforts to cope with life and to manage what it thinks are problems. Its mechanisms for doing this need to be uprooted. If you have always tried to be light and positive and happy while burying your belief in sin and guilt, then you're going to be in for a surprise when someday that 'body of pain' erupts in your mind and cannot be ignored.

When something happens or someone seems to upset us or something goes wrong, if our response to this is to quote course at it or try to be positive or to "see it a different way" (ie see only the good in it, even though we still believe it's happening), then we are using the ego to do the course and are in denial.

Denying what we've already made real does not undo it and this is not forgiveness. Forgiveness is willing to look directly at the dark shit, with truth and light, and examining what it is made of, where it came from, whether there is any real truth or reality to it, and upon recognizing that it is FALSE, letting it go, rather than hiding it.

If your bath is overflowing and there is water all over the floor and it's starting to leak through the floorboards and go all over the place, the solution is not to fetch a magical mop and bucket or to throw down some towels to soak up the water, or to just shut the door and deal with it later. It's to turn off the fricking tap! The problem must be addressed at its CAUSE, its SOURCE, not in terms of its effects or things further down the line.

This is why we have to QUESTION EVERY ASSUMPTION about the ego or about what's seeming to happen. To question even whether it is even really happening at all. To question whether sin is even POSSIBLE, yet alone whether someone sinned. Accepting anything of the ego as a "given" is a mistake, and all of the reactionary band-aids that you use to try to cope with the "effects" of those "real causes" are not going to work. The only thing that will work is to correct the problem at its source by learning to recognize what it is and what it is not.

"The world you see is the delusional system of those made mad by guilt. Look carefully at this world, and you will realize that this is so. For this world is the symbol of punishment, and all the laws which seem to govern it are the laws of death. Children are born into it through pain and in pain. Their growth is attended by suffering, and they learn of sorrow and separation and death. Their minds are trapped in their brain, and its powers decline if their bodies are hurt. They seem to love, yet they desert, and are deserted. They appear to lose what they love, perhaps the most insane belief of all. And their bodies wither and gasp and are laid in the ground, and seem to be no more. Not one of them but has thought that God is cruel."

This is one of those 'clincher' statements about the world which make it SO clear that he's talking about the physical world, and NOT some kind of interpretation of the world.

Children are PHYSICALLY BORN into it, through physical pain and in physical pain.

The children's PHYSICAL bodies grow and suffer.

Their minds are trapped in the PHYSICAL brain.

Their PHYSICAL bodies become hurt.

Their PHYSICAL bodies wither and die.

These are not perceptions. These are physical states.

And because of this, because of these things happening, PHYSICALLY, with actual physical matter going through these things, people would believe that God is cruel.

This has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with having false perceptionr OR true perception ABOUT the world. It is merely a statement of facts about the PHYSICAL. Physicality, ITSELF, is cruel, and if it were real, God would be its creator, which would make God cruel. And everyone who DOES BELIEVE that the physical world is reality, MUST believe that God is cruel.

Either the world is reality and God IS cruel. OR, the world is NOT reality and God is loving. Since the world IS PHYSICALLY cruel, regardless of anyone having any perceptions or meanings of projections or interpretations or judgements of it, PHYSICAL DEATH IS A CRUELTY, if such things are real then God must be cruel.

And this is why so many people legitimately recognize that because the physical world IS fundamentally, INHERENTLY cruel, a loving God CANNOT have created it. If God had created it, God MUST be cruel, because the world is physically cruel.

And this is why many people become disillusioned with God existing, because they reason that since the world IS cruel, God must either exist AS a cruel creator - which we rightly would want nothing to do with, and would be justifiably angry at, OR God does not exist at all.

But of course the alternative option which many overlook, is that God DOES exist, and IS NOT cruel, and HAS NOT created this world, because the physical world IS NOT reality. The assumption that it is real has to be questioned in order to arrive at any sense of what can possibly be NOT cruel - a loving experience, a loving God.

When you attune to the loving God, your interpretation of or use of this cruel physical world changes, and you RECOGNIZE it as cruel, and not of God, while simultaneously being in a greater state of love WITHIN yourself. The world then appears to take on what we might call a less harmful registering with the mind. But it is still always PHYSICALLY cruel even if it is interpreted as not psychologically cruel. It is then a STRANGE combination, like a "beautiful tragedy", or a "happy dream of death".

And who wants a world that is a contradiction anyway. A world that a loving God creates cannot even entertain the merest POSSIBILITY of cruel things occurring, such as damages or breakages or loss or getting stuck or attack or harm or decay or weapons or war or forms of sickness or pain or misery or death. These things cannot even be CONCEIVED OF by a loving God, yet alone exist.

If God is loving, there can BE no real explosion, no real wars, no real sicknesses, no real missing limbs, no real deaths, no real losses, no real attacks or lacks or limitations of any kind, no physical plane crashes, no broken bodies or bodies at all. And that means there can be NO PHYSICAL WORLD. Because physicality itself is literally a state of separation and sin. And without the idea of death, spacetime would vanish completely along with all its contents.

Earth IS NOT heaven. At best it can reflect heaven when you look at it lovingly, but in and of itself it is nothing but an illusion of a system of death and destruction. And it will end. Just as space and time will end. Nothing unreal lasts forever.

Each of us has free will. Each of us has everything within us, given by God. No-one can add to what you are or to what is true of you. However, when you are denying your own perfection, a situation arises where you may seem to need guidance or teaching from others.

But the ultimate aim of this teaching isn't to give you something you don't have, it's to help you to find it within yourself, given that it's there already. Actually in the Psychotherapy pamphlet we're told that really psychotherapy is the only form of therapy, ie teaching. That any teacher is really a healer/therapist who should be helping you to heal from your self-induced amnesia.

But what often happens is that we become enamored with certain teachers, particularly in terms of personality worship. We grow dependent on them, look up to them, put them on a bedestal, and look to them to give you everything you lack. And when they do seem to give you things you think you lack, you think of them as a kind of savior. And you will then start to defend them rather blindly against any questioning of their integrity or truth.

What happens here is that when we lack total responsibility for what we are doing to ourselves, and for owning up to being CHRIST, we project this responsibility onto teachers. We more or less want them to be what we are insisting on not being. We want them to have all the answers, to do for us what we don't want to do ourselves, and to lead us out of the desert.

There is a high likelihood that, when it appears that someone else has stuff that you lack, or knows stuff you don't know, that you'll form a dependent relationship with them. You'll actually be forming a SPECIAL relationship with them. This means that you include them and allow them to give to you, or to get from them, at the same time as shutting others out and rejecting them.

It's a conditional relationship permitted only within the confines of your limitations. It's even possible to use a teacher to keep yourself in the dark, by finding someone who agrees with everything you say and never questions your mistakes. And so your specialized ego "likes" them and sees them as an ally, precicely because they really don't challenge or teach you anything you don't already believe. Using them as a way to prove yourself right isn't really an openness to learning.

These special relationships with teachers lead a lot of "followers" to become sheep, or blind cattle, the herd, simply following along and hanging off every word as if it's the whole truth. Not questioning anything and trying to just absorb whatever is expressed. This happens when a person stops thinking for themselves and places far too much responsibility into the hands of another.

Particularly if that other is quite intelligent and seems to know more than you, in that they can run circles around you and keep you bound to them because you lack the ability to see through their deceptions.

What is supposed to happen to move towards a holy relationship, is that you are supposed to become EQUAL with everyone. And that means you can't be under the thumb of a teacher, or bound to a specific individual, or worshipping the ground someone walks on, or just blindly believing everything someone says without any discernment of your own. You're not supposed to be a sheep, you're supposed to be a fully autonomous perfect being with no needs and dependent only on God. And if you're becoming defensive on behalf of some teacher you think is infallible, you've got a problem.

What I see is that these dynamics of idol worship and specialness mirror a lot of what happens in parent-child relationships. Whereby the parent takes on a role of "being parental", which often involves control and protection and manipulation and so on, and in many cases an obsession or "need" to forever maintain that role. The parent can identify with the role and see themselves as only that, instead of an equal.

And in turn, the child can often "be a child" for life, always under the parent's thumb, not seeing themselves as equal to the parent or having a holy relationship with them.

There's always tons of skewed dysfunctional relationship dynamics, where the child can't get out from under the weight of the parent's overbearing nature, and the parent doesn't want to stop being a parent. So that sets up a vicious cycle of being kept in the dark, disempowered, overpowered, and unequal.

The same thing happens with all kinds of teachers IF the teacher or the student develops a special relationship with them. If the teacher doesn't lift the student UP to their own level and SET THEM FREE of themselves, then they are not really teaching a whole lesson. If the student is addicted to the teacher and of remaining in their shadow and having a conditional exclusive relationship with them, they are trying to remain a child, treating the teachers as a parental figure.

You can see this happening a lot when people hang off every word a particular teacher says under some kind of assumption that everything they say is correct. Or people who seem to "resonate" with a certain person, and who "seems to make sense" to them, and so they don't see a need to question anything. People then form into camps and groups and little armies which fight silly wars about which one is right.

What any ACIM student should be doing is honoring their TOTAL FREEDOM, by recognizing that a guide should always respect their free will, and the fact that you were created perfect. This means recognizing that no other person can give you what God gave you in your creation. And any person can only at best ADVISE you and give you guidance or information, and you're not supposed to treat them like an idol to be worshipped or as some kind of God-like parental figure that you live in the shadow of. We are all supposed to be equals.

Addiction to teachers can particularly happen, I think, for people who perhaps struggle with the course a lot, and need someone else to help them. But if we are not careful we in fact give our power away to such people and blur the lines as to who is responsible for CHOOSING TO BELIEVE whether something is true or not. We are all supposed to discern and freely decide whether to accept or deny truths, not to just "feed off" someone who looks like a leader who seems to spoonfeed endless volumes of food to you.

Think for yourself. Question your teachers. Find out if IF something is true and WHY. Be willing to be mistaken. And be willing to recognize that any and all teachers may be mistaken as well. Only the Holy Spirit and the ascended ones truly know what the whole story is.