This means that when someone is in ego and is trying to attack you, you love them.

This means that when terrible disasters are occurring on the news, you love everyone involved.

This means that when someone is portraying themselves as sick and a victim, you love them.

This means that there is never really anything 'personal' in you that gets engaged with the story or illusion of what seems to be happening.

This means there is only this extending of love and at no point in this is there ever need for concern or fear or wondering what to do or figuring out how to speak or what to say or how to react differently to each situation.

The call for love requires a response of love, and nothing else. But we are extremely conditioned to respond to seemingly individual, separate illusions, with individualized, separate responses, coming from an individual that is separate, in separate ways.

The unification of our response, becoming "always love", is the aim of awakening. It may seem to be a tremendous challenge, to be free of ego reactions and upsets and involvement and interference, especially in the midst of 'temptation' by someone else or when someone's ego or pain is trying to distract your mind or to tempt you into conflict. But even then we are asked to only love.

This is difficult for me to do, and yet this is part of the lessons I am learning now. To choose to love ANYWAY, even if it does not seem called for, even if it is not asked for, even if it doesn't seem warranted or justified or deserved, and even if I am all upset and pissed off because my ego has gotten triggered.

I cannot love all the time. I can only partly love part of the time. But I am learning how loving fully all of the time is the truth of God and the light in which I am set free of my own unlovability. Because the lovability I see in others, is the lovability of myself, and my failure to love them is a failure to love me.

Always love.

God's nature is not alluded to by the nature of things in this world. We are incredibly used to this world, conditioned in believing that everything does and must change all the time. Even time and space possess properties of change. Every atom is always moving, every object always transforming, everything always being born and growing and dying. God is not like that.

God doesn't change or transform over time. He doesn't create in order to experience 'new' or previously non-existent parts of Himself. He doesn't have moods. He doesn't change His mind. He doesn't get upset or angry or judgemental. He doesn't experience harm or damage or resentment.

If ever there was an 'identity' which you could truly say is so rock-solid and clear and absolutely free from any deviation or adjustment or change whatsoever, it's the identity of God. What God is. It's permanent.

So God is always there. No matter how many 'times' you go to Him, he is always there, always the same. Like.. the most reliable 'thing' in existence. He's always in the same place, having the same expression of divine love, constantly consistent and extremely joyous. He is absolutely unaffected by anything, anywhere.

This is what immortality is like.

And God created us as Immortal Spirit, so this is really what our own true identity is like, as well. Unchanging, unaffected, unmodified, already perfectly whole and innocent, completely unharmed and having never left God in any way whatsoever.

Really, the difference between God and this world is the difference between the absolute and the relative. God works the same all the time. He is always absolute. Always complete. Everything he does is complete. There are no loose ends, no guesses, no 'maybes', no confusions, no delusions or illusions, no mistakes, no options. Just always the same. Totality.

God's nature is your true nature. You are not this strange formation of ideas and concepts and thoughts and memories and experiences and differences and reactions and mortal specialness. There is nothing exclusively special to God because everything is equally special to God, including you, including your enemies.

God loves your enemies. Yup.

Just the same as God loves you.

You can see this in stores, where people are standing looking at several shelves filled with basically the same product, wondering which one to pick. And this is also me ;-)

In ego metaphysical terms, what's happening is the ego presents a vast variety of FORMS, each of which presents the ILLUSION that these forms are unique and different. They distinguish themselves as being unrelated to and distinct from each other.

So instead of, you know, going to get the one headache pill, you go and have to wade through 5 different brands each of which has like 10 variations and subtleties, which you were not expecting.

So you enter into confusion. If it's true that these objects are unique and different, then this suggests a great degree of fragmentation. And in order to understand what you're faced with, your mind is going to be in so much conflict, trying to discern or balance the subtle differences as if they are important.

The more ego problems you are given, and the more they seem to present distinctly different options, the more you get lost in trying to find MEANING. Meaning only really comes from oneness, so the more fragmentation there is, the less sense it makes.

It's like being faced with a complicated puzzle, which your mind just doesn't know how to deal with. It scrambles your brain. You are completely befuddled trying to find 'clarity' or 'confidence' or 'certainty' in the face of so many conflicting viewpoints.

So commercialism, in this way, is the ego's way to get people to believe in separate problems. And the more options and choices and 'freedom of choice' there is, the LESS certain you become.

Stores are filled with thousands of brands, millions of products, all vying for attention, trying to prove to you that they are what you want and need, when you really need God. It is a huge ego distraction.

Commercialism and ever increasing choices builds up the ILLUSION that different forms have a different value, or different content. Like, exactly how many different varieties of something does anyone really need?

I work at a company that sells a certain type of product, and there are like over 30,000 products being sold, and honestly, for most people, you would've seen all the majorly 'unique' options within about 50 products.

Take a look at Amazon, millions upon millions of products. Each time I go on there, I can browse for ages and not find anything I want. I'm not too picky ;-)

Anyway, the whole point is, is not to get you to find exactly the perfect item that you really really want....it's to get you so conditioned to think that this is what you want that you end up NOT FINDING ANYTHING. It is another part of "seek and do not find".

The ego loves to tell you that when such-and-such happens, you MUST have a reaction.

It acts like it's a given. This is because it believes that a 'cause' outside of you has the power to affect you. This so-called cause DEMANDS that you be affected by it.

This is also to do with the hierarchy of illusions, which means that apparently different severities of problems seem to demand different kinds of reactions.

The ego had this set up so that, for example, when you blow your nose you don't have a significant reaction, but when someone tells you you have a disease, you freak out. Or when someone stubs their toe you have a slight response but when they fall on their face and hurt themselves you have a much bigger response.

We've become conditioned by what seems to be 'called for' in different situations, largely based on how things *appear* physically, causing us to develop a conditional response. Situation A calls for response A. Situation B calls for response B. This way we have learned to be conditional and to be reactive and affected by what happens.

We need to BREAK this connection between external causes and given levels of reaction, if we are to become unconditional.

I was talking to Jesus last night and was imagining this scenario where a person might die and how I would feel, and already just with the imagining of it I noticed I felt upset, and Jesus stopped me. I looked at it and realized, I am actually giving energy to this idea and I'm the one who is imagining it. So really, it's nothing to do with the situation happening, I am literally doing it to myself right now. So I stopped, I stopped buying into my own prediction, and laughed.

What this showed me is that we do not HAVE to suffer. Just because something supposedly 'bad' might happen around us, it doesn't HAVE to mean that we have a given reaction. We don't HAVE to have a meltdown. We don't HAVE to completely lose it and become seriously upset.

What we have to learn to see is that it is our own perception that shows us a belief in external causes being real, in being powerless, threatened or victimized. It's our own mind that is CHOOSING to suffer. Suffering is a choice, brought on by a perceptual mistake. We can choose not to have this reaction by choosing not to to see the situation this way.

So this breaks the ego's strangle-hold and the hierarchy of illusions, by breaking the connection between external causes and internal reactions. We do not have to suffer. We do not have to be upset. We do not have to have reactions. We are literally choosing to suffer on our own by how we're using our mind and perception. If something 'bad' happens, if something 'serious' happens, those are judgements by ego, that seem to demand serious reactions. We don't have to play that game. We don't have to lose our peace.

All is choice.

You'll defend something to the death if you think it's true. Your effort to be "right" about it is a combination of something that you believe is true combined with a sense of certainty. The power of conviction is not wrong, it is just misplaced onto something false. It's okay to acknowledge that your mind is powerful, it's just that it is 'mis-creating'.

If you are believing something is true which is actually false, and you are really adamant about it, it's going to take some 'undoing' to reverse this sense of conviction. You've probably built up a lot of "story" that explains, justified, rationalizes and establishes "why" this is true.

The more evidence you have gathered and the more you've "proven" it to yourself and talked yourself and others into it, the more volume of material is going to need to be undone. Those who are really extremely convinced of a lie are heavily "conditioned" by all of this psychological support, which may have come from culture or where you live or the kinds of people around you or your upbringing or experiences you had etc.

You'll need to look at what, in your belief system, 'supports' this truth. Look at all the scaffolding you've erected around it, all the supporting ideas and background information, the opinions of others, sources of authority that you believe in that support this truth, experiences you had which led you to be even more convinced this is true, affirmations that you make about its righteousness, ways you spin stories about it which back it up and regurgitate and reinforce it, how you defend it against other truth which seems to not be in accord with it, etc. All of these things add "weight" to this sense of it being real and valuable and correct.

It's not a problem to be correct. It's okay to be correct when you ARE correct. It's okay to be correct about Holy Spirit's truth which IS correct, and a correction of all else. But when you are correct about something that is an error or mistake or faulty conclusion or something based on dishonesty, it's going to present problems for you. You don't REALLY want to be right about how you need to suffer and die, for the sake of some "truth" that the ego has convinced you of, do you?

So as you pull apart your thought system you'll need to realize you've got all this support built up that defends this belief/truth and that all of that needs to be examined with Holy Spirit's light. It needs to be seen from a vantage point of a greater truth, otherwise you cannot recognize the falseness of it. You need to get outside of it and look in from a wider perspective.

For example, let's say you believe that you're in mortal danger because some body part seems to be failing and all the doctors said it's seriously bad and all your family members are showering you with sympathy and all you coworkers are retelling their own stories of woe and you've got yourself all worked up and terrified. Well, now this means that not only do you believe in sickness and so on but you also believe what your family and neighbors and coworkers are all telling you is the truth as well. And maybe you also "taught yourself" that all the doctors are well-trained and totally know what they're talking about, and that you don't dare question their authority. And maybe you yourself have justified to yourself why you need to be sick because it proves how guilty you are about something. All of these attitudes and opinions support keeping the problem real and true for you. You must be willing to question whether ANY of these supports are true.

What if absolutely everyone involved is telling you a lie, to show you what YOU believe that's a lie, and that you need to change your mind about what YOU think is true, so that they will stop telling you you're sure to die? Where is the empowerment and strength in listening to the voice for death? Where is the empowerment in not taking back responsibility for choosing to believe something that is grossly mistaken? You have to dismantle all of the lies that support the main lie in order for the main lie to be recognized as holding no ground. That it has no support. That it can't be justified. That it doesn't have any proof. And thus that you can't believe it. While you think lies are believable, you are stuck. The ego is literally unbelievable.

I think one of the main reasons people seem to be homophobic, is just because we expect men to be men and women to be women. And if we ourselves are "straight" which largely means squarely or "purely" male or female and not a mix of the two, we project that onto everyone.

I think we become conditioned to think that there are only 100% males and 100% females. Then we project that onto people and expect them to comform to that.

When someone is more of a mix of gender traits, partly male, partly female, in whatever ways, it starts to fall outside of the standard "heteronormative" society model.

This is where a person starts to become offended, because whenever something seems to go outside of our beliefs, it registers to us as false. Whatever we believe or think is the acceptable standard is always regarded as true. When something seems opposite or doesn't fit with our truth, we judge it as false, and that also gets lumped in with negativity, evil, darkness, sin, guilt, perversion, rejection, etc. It's quite a basic mechanism.

So then if some man is partly female, but the model in the viewers mind is that they are supposed to be purely male, the person will seem to be violating the model. That will register as that they're not conforming to the norm, and are doing something they're not supposed to be doing. That registers as sin and violation and offence.

It's interesting that if a man is feminine and doing some things that a straight man would judge as wrong, but if you then ramped up the femininity of that man to the point where he turns into a complete woman, then the straight man suddenly would find no problem with them, because now they are conforming again to the model of strictly separate genders. So it's only the middle-ground where someone isn't entirely fitting into the strict model, that registers as an offence against the model.

This then leads to the viewer becoming offended, feeling violated, attacked, threatened, upset by the hideous creature they they see, which seems to be doing things and acting in ways that are not "normal" to them, or rather, not conforming to their model of what a man or woman is.

The problem really is that there is an expectation and a projection of the idea of what a man or women must be, and the ego especially likes to keep these extremely separated out. That you can be either one or the other, not both. "Not both" is the ego's standard function of "not God", because God's whole system of truth is based on both/and. The opposite of both/and is either/or, which the ego loves to uphold.

And indeed its sense of identity requires a strong contrast between exclusive opposites, in which the males try to keep the females outside of themselves so that they "know who they are" and have a firmer and clearer sense of identification with their gender. Or rather, so that their ego can stand out as being more separate and different, in order to have an identity, because the ego depends on opposition. And if you are not being "man enough" then you somehow are becoming too feminine and are stepping over the line.

If someone seems to fall outside of the projected model, it registers as false, evil, wrong, offensive, upsetting, an attack, violent against their very sense of identity. This does two things - it threatens the clarity of distinguishing who they are, in which they need to keep male and female separate in order to "exist", and secondly it seems to threaten the model of what a man or woman is.

This perceived violation is then interpreted as that the stranger is actually breaking rules, attacking their truth, going outside the bounds of what is acceptable into territory of "perversion", is seen as unnatural, vile and disgusting, can't be tolerated, and is seen as actually a direct attack upon the viewer and everything they stand for and are. Indeed if the person IS really purely a man AND then proceeds to act like a women, that would be register as an actual perversion.

Having perceived that the not-quite-straight person is threatening them and offending their ways, this then produces the perception of justified anger, because they feel actually literally under attack by the non-conforming person, as if that person will infect them, change them, influence them, invade their integrity, remind them of the fragility of their masculine identity, invade their boundaries, and do things to them which persons of a given gender are not supposed to be doing.

This can take on ridiculous forms such as fearing that the queer person will turn the kids gay just by living nearby, or radiate gay rainbow vibes into their minds, or have ultra evil sexual powers of lust after their treasured ones such that they'll be taken into a cult and subjected to satanic abuses, or that the queer person is simply am abomination against their God and breaking all the laws of heaven in a state of sin and madness.

So then they project hate and rejection onto the queer person, which they see as completely justified, because they've perceived that the queer person has attacked them first just by existing, and now this evil spectre must be destroyed in order to protect oneself. Which means the homophobia is seen as a justified and needed act of self-preservation based on fear. This is where the "phobia" part comes in, because the anger and abuse literally stems from a perceived fear, that something outside of what is acceptable is threatening to undermine their truth. Not just their truth, but their whole sense of identity and reality.

Because if a man can be partly not a man, and a woman can be partly not a woman, then that brings into question what is a man or woman, how are they defined, and how to distinguish a sense of self in the midsts of the seemingly "vague and muddy" mixture of gender and identity.

The ego would like things to be clear-cut, but the queer person is presenting a picture of something not so clear-cut, something which appears to be crossing over boundaries, "gender bending", breaking the ego rules of either-this-or-that, and corrupting the whole model of "man and woman produce male or female kids only." And now queerness is a boundary-violating attack upon families and marriage and religious institutions. And all this is is a concern for what happens when something transcends the rigid boxes that everyone wants to live in.

Really all of these reactions, which are just ego projections of a rigid model of identity, are only happening because the viewer lacks discernment and sees things in a very black-and-white exclusive and special way. They are not recognizing something, which is always the failing of the ego mindset. By not recognizing that the person is not JUST male or JUST female, and that people actually can be "not entirely one thing", there is no account made for people who seem to blend across the boundaries. And then "non-binary" is seen as the ultimate sin and rejection of all that is good and proper in the human race.

If they would open their minds from the closed-off either/or mindset of male/female strictness, which is closed-mindedness and a lack of spirituality, they would consider that some people (in body terms) are not purely male or purely famale, and that such people are completely acceptable and part of "nature".

If the viewer would then stop trying to force the person to be eieither man or woman, they wouldn't actually produce all the distorted reactions - which they do to themselves - that arise from trying to fit something into a box that it doesn't belong in. It's only because of the projecting of the "I know what a man is!" that a person requires someone else to conform to that.

There has to be an opening up to a greater repertoir of how many different types of human bodies there are, just as we have to open up to accept people from other countries and enthicities without judgement. And to then drop the expectation and conditioning that says you have to be one of only two things, and you must never be a mixture in any way. It's only those strict rules that give rise to a sense of the rules being violated, which then leads to the fear of invasion and the discomfort of being "pursued by a gay rapist", which then leads to the angry projections of guilt, which becomes homophobic abuse - all an attempt to maintain the ego.

If we could better recognize what people ARE, rather than what we think they SHOULD BE, we'll be better able to accomodate everyone and stop trying to force people to conform to a rigid tight little structure. The problem is really that egos are JUDEGMENTAL, and this judgement is always flawed and narrow and wrong.

Homophobia is actually just an expression of the regular ego doing its regular ego thing, just in the same way as any other conditioned belief which results in a sense of being offended by anyone or anything that outside of that belief - be it someone of another religion, another race, another gender, another color, size, hairstyle, whatever.

The fact is that the world is not black and white, it is not purely either/or, it quite often happens - though to less of a percentage usually - that there are exceptions to rules. Flowers that sometimes grow double heads, creatures which sometimes are half female and half male, humans that sometimes have a mix of sex-oriented organs, people with darker skin who become albino, people that are sometimes born as siamese conjined twins instead of separate bodies, etc.... nature isn't completely strict in its forms.

People only have prejudice against various aspects of the physical world when they think it's supposed to be a very very basic black-and-white model, where you have to be 100% this or 100% that. And as the mind believes strongly in separation the egotism emphasizes this contrast and exepcts everything to conform to it. And anything that deosn't is labeled as a sin. That's standard ego functioning, nothing special. It's unforgiveness. It's based on the belief that the world is absolutely real, and therefore separation is truth.

To be more forgiving we have to be willing to really look at what things are, not what we wish they would be, or what category they're supposed to fall into, or to judge them based on appearances while trying to fit them into neat little boxes. Some people are such a mix of things that you'd have a hard time even describing them accurately. In the past society was much more recognizing of the fact that everyone is to some degree bisexual, which is still true, even if people try to deny it.

Long story short, society needs to become more forgiving and learn that the human race isn't composed of pure men and pure women, but rather than absolutely everyone is at least to some degree partly both. All human embrios start out as female and even the males still have some trace of that in them. This is a world of relativity, in which nothing is absolute and nothing is extremely pure and nothing is completely separate. There is no real man or real woman. We are ALL hybrids, and everyone is queer. That's not wishful thinking etiher, that's the nature of spacetime.

The course speaks from a perspective of Oneness. That means quite literally that you and all other people are ONE person - one mind, one being. It means you SHARE a mind with everyone else. It should be immediately obvious how much that runs contrary to how most people perceive reality.

It doesn't mean you are a little bit joined and a little bit separate. It doesn't mean you can be sort of One but still retain a sense of separate self. It means you are 100%, totally, absolutely, unconditionally, completely the same as, completely equal with, and completely AS ONE with all other people.

In that view, there is actually a whole different ballgame being played which is vastly different to the ballgame of 'duality', which springs up in the ego and makes you perceive others as 'not you'. The only way for you to see yourself as 'separate me' is to distinguish that other people have differences that you do not have, and therefore which prove your inequality, and demonstrate you are not of One mind. It is a huge cover-up.

So in Oneness, the way that you look at a relationship between two people is very different to how you look at relationships with the ego. In Oneness, because you are One, joined, and sharing everything with the WHOLE sonship (not just one individual), everything that you seem to 'do' to other people, or how you view them or perceive them, applies to them, and to everyone else, and to yourself, all at once. There is then no escaping or being able to say, well, I can treat this part of the sonship one way, and I can treat this other part another way, and I can treat myself entirely a third way. In Oneness, everything is shared, there are no private thoughts, and we all access and express the same mind and Identity (Christ 'consciousness').

Another aspect of the Oneness of the Sonship is that, since everything always applies to everyone equally, anything you do applies to everyone and so you can only either separate from everyone simultaneously, or join with everyone simultaneously. If you could visualize that as a vertical ladder, or 'moving vertically' as some people say, to make true progress in awakening you must uncover the sonship's Oneness in 'layers'. So its like you take a blanket off of the entire sonship at once, to reveal a great degree of Oneness that applies to everyone. Or if you choose the ego and you cover things up, you cover up the entire sonship at once with that same blanket. Whatever you apply to one brother applies to all, including yourself.

Now, just because you start applying ACIM or a mindset of Onenss it doesn't mean your mind is fully committed to it right away. It is very conditioned in the ego's 'mind' and a way of perceiving that is very dualistic. Duality basically attempts to fragment the sonship by dividing it up into many parts. Then it says that different rules and values apply to different parts, and that not all parts are the same. This is an attack on Oneness. But we are very steeped in dualistic mindsets and ways of perceiving each other that are very separation-based. Most of the systems in the world are all founded on this idea of separate individuals (as per physical body boundaries). Acting in a body, as a body, leads us to develop a host of distortions and attitudes and perceptual models which are delusional and very blind to Oneness.

So as you start to 'expose' yourself to Oneness, or a thought system of non-duality like with Holy Spirit/ACIM, you gradually start to chisel away at those ways of perceiving and they gradually get 'corrected'. The mind is, effectively, 'healed', because it's belief in separation is a form of suffering. Duality is suffering. So the mind's perception has to be healed so that the way of perceiving dualisti ally can be transformed into a way of perceiving holistically - ie to perceive with Oneness and to see only Oneness.

That takes time. A lot of time. It's a big transformational process. It takes a lot of work and effort and willingness and healing to 'correct' all of the false perceptions and distorted ways of thinking that duality (ego) has assumed are totally normal for a long long time. So usually waking up to Oneness doesn't happen over night. But gradually, slowly, you start to SEE things more from a perspective of Oneness, and with that comes the ability to see things how Jesus sees them - and you realize that ACIM was written FROM a viewpoint of pure and perfect Oneness. Being able to see that makes everything just fall into place and make perfect sense, whereas seeing it through a filter of duality is ... very confusing.

Anyway... Rambling on a bit.. Oneness... as I do unto others I LITERALLY am doing unto myself. As I see others I see myself. I can't wake up and have a happy jolly experience unless I'm willing to allow that experience to include seeing everyone else WITH happiness and joy, and to recognize MYSELF in them. Or more to the point, recognizing that I don't HAVE a self of 'my own' because everyone SHARES IT.

You might not be used to telling illusions what to do. You are more likely conditioned and used to a certain degree of victimhood, or powerlessness, which means that you allow stuff outside of you to seem to have power, or to have a say in what happens against your will.

Or to put it another way, you are used to listening to the ego. You're used to believing appearances. You're used to letting the world tell you what is happening. You're used to believing that these illusions are real and that they dictate what you are going to experience.

With divine healing, your attitude has to be different. It has to not listen to the ego. It has to not pay attention to appearance. It has to cut through all of the incoming signals from the ego illusion, ignore them completely, and demand and command the illusion to do what you want it to do.

So because of your mental conditioning in which you are very used to being quite wishy-washy about situations, where you sit on fences and maybe 'ask' life to change, you have to get out of that PASSIVE mentality. You have to stop paying so much attention to what your senses tell you and stop acting like a weak victim.

So this can actually take some practice to overcome and push past that conditioning, that way of using your mind that you've been so used to. It takes practice to learn whether you are actually fully COMMANDING that something change or be healed, versus whether there are elements of .. indecision, doubt, fear, uncertainty, paying attention to how things look, being caught up in the seeming reality of it, having reactions based on how the situation appears, etc... you have to weed all of that stuff out.

You need to become a finely tuned, PURIFIED, focused, clear, direct, certain, creative and firmly expressive miracle worker. You need to have authority. You must not lay down and just let the illusion, sickness, or whatever walk all over you with how much power it seems to have.

There is no order of difficulty in miracles, which means one miracle is not more difficult than another. But it ALSO means, MIRACLES ARE NOT DIFFICULT! Miracles are meant to be EFFORTLESS! In fact one of the miracle principles speaks of how miracles shouldn't be under conscious control, which speaks to how we need to be a conduit or bridge for the miracle to flow across without interference. But if our bridge is only half-built and stops short of fully extending into the illusion, to fully DELIVER God's promise of divine healing, then the effects will also fall short.

So experiment. Take time to speak TO the problem and tell it what you want it to do, explicitly and directly, not taking no for an answer. You have to be firm, and you have to be very clear. This takes some refinement. I've found that I tended at first to 'ask' problems to go. This does not work. I found that I would describe the problem. That doesn't work. I found that I would talk about the problem, to myself or others or to God. That doesn't work. I found that I would then talk about what I wanted to happen in a kind of future tense, but that also did not work. You have to tell the problem directly, NOW, in first-person immediate language, in a commanding way, "sickness, leave right now. Go! Get out!". You have to CONFRONT IT, which takes some balls especially if you are a people pleaser ;-)

I've found that it took several attempts and various failures to learn how to be commanding. It was not natural to me at first. I was too passive and uncertain and afraid. I would buy into doubts too much, like wondering if it would work or what would happen. We cannot be like that. We are representatives of God. We are like his policemen, enforcing his law. We have to be AUTHORITATIVE. And illusions MUST obey. But if you are not authoritative, illusions and sickness and all other forms of suffering will STAY because you are failing to give it a direct order to leave. If you don't use very direct commanding language, which is vague and wishy-washy, you will see 'reflected back' in the dream mirror vague results or half-hearted responses.

Illusions must respond to the commanding confidence of Christ.

In all cases, when Jesus healed the sick and so on, he always gave a very direct command. "Get up and walk". "Lazarus, get up and a live". etc... these are not requests. They are powerful commands. And that is how power flows across them. Words are a transit system for the communication and flow of God's power. You have to speak to the problem and tell it what to do.

"For truly I say to you, whoever SAYS to this mountain (notice the SPOKEN command), 'Be removed and be thrown into the sea!' and does not doubt in his heart (no fear, no uncertainty, completely belief and confidence), but BELIEVES that what he says will come to pass (believing it is a very important part of conviction), he will have whatever he says" (Bible, Mark 11:23).

"The ego equates:

Not agreeing with me = denial.

But correction is not denial.

It’s reinterpretation."

(ChatGPT)

"True denial is a very powerful protective device. You can and should deny any belief that error can hurt you. This kind of denial is NOT a concealment device, but a correction device. The "Right Mind" of the mentally healthy DEPENDS on it."

I wonder if, as egos, we are not really very accustomed to looking for a different interpretation. The ego's main and really only device is separation. We are very very conditioned to USE separation to make things go away.

The ego operates on a horizontal axis of go towards, or go away from (desire/fear, gain/loss etc). It does not know anything about staying where you are and going upwards, or finding a higher ground, or a broader perspective.

This movement of forgiveness which looks for another way to look at things, is not 'natural' in the egos functioning. Perhaps thats why we all get a bit lost in using spiritual things to bypass, because we tend to "shut things out" as a problem solving method - ie separate from it, deny it, hide it, attack it, to solve it.

We're not being asked to separate from the world and problems as such, we're being asked to reconsider what they mean, to realize that we've added meaning and judgement on top of them, and that this layer of meaning and judgement can be changed independently of the thing they're projected onto.

This really entails breaking out of the idea of sin. Because sin, as false perception, associates guilt with form, with objects, with bodies and places and things. It locks it in. And once it's locked in we are not accustomed to breaking out of that, we just think a given person is guilty or that the sinfulness is inherent to what happened. We don't realize there's two parts to it - the thing and the interpretation of the thing.

"What the world is, is but a fact. You cannot choose what this should be. But you can choose how you would see it. Indeed, you must choose this."

To forgive we do have to recognize there are two parts, the "what seemed to happen" and the "what I made of it". And then to realize we can in fact change the "what I make of it" and see it differently. And this doesn't necessarily have to entail a bypass, a denial, an ignoring or a shutting out, of the thing being reinterpreted.

I think perhaps we tend to throw the baby out with the bathwater, because having attached meaning to form we want to avoid or throw away the form in order to be relieved of its meaning. This is our mistake. This is how we bypass. We want to just get rid of the thing that we think is evil, instead of separating out the judgement of evil from the neutral thing.

The path of forgiving is a bit more subtle than our kneejerk reaction or out typical 'goto' for problem solving. It's a bit of a "twist" psychologically... to in a way 'keep and acknowledge' the feelings, the situation, the happenings, but alter the internal vantage point. We're not used to that "shifting" of perception. We tend to think perception if fixed (this is the idea of sin).

So the formula ends up being more like, keep looking at this but look at it differently ... rather than, don't look at this at all in order to pretend it's not there anymore.

It's not about attacking, denying, hurling quotes at, separating from, one-upping, or any other type of way that you'd treat a 'singular thing' in order to make it go away. Instead it's about changing how you see it, what you make of it, what meaning you give it, how you use it. And that means the thing doesn't necessarily go away, and isn't denied, but your experience of it is changed.

Trying to make the thing go away entirely becomes a murderous attack upon the body and the feeling and the world. This is driven by a perception that "it is one thing", ie a sinful thing. And if this were true, the only way to get rid of a wicked thing is to destroy it. But we're not asked to do this. We're asked to change how we look at it - who we look with, so that we see something different in how it strikes us and how we use it. The purpose that we see it for.

We end up with a re-interpretation, not a blanket of denial or an intellectual escape or a denial of feelings or a sweeping wave of destruction.

Well actually yes you do. Here's why.

Evaluations of 'good and bad' are both ego. In your ego, there are two parts.

A) The persona self, which is what the ego 'keeps' of your identity, and is only a part of the whole. It rejects everything it considers bad, through judgement about what's good and bad, and relegates all of the bad stuff to the shadow. Therefore, this good-seeking persona, which you think is all of your conscious self, is actually responsible for creating bad stuff - the very bad stuff that it seeks to get rid of.

B) The shadow self, houses the bad stuff that the persona judged as not good enough. This bad stuff is all the things your persona believes are dark and evil and not acceptable as part of the 'self'. Whatever the ego keeps as the persona, it gets rid of as the shadow. The shadow still stays as part of your mind, the unconscious mind, which houses all the repressed murderous through of the persona. The persona is murderous because it tries to get rid of all bad stuff, in order to make itself look good. Surprise!

Okay so, most people who do forgiveness, focus on getting rid of bad stuff. And this is because you are so conditioned by the ego to always keep the persona, and attack something else. This is the ego's survival mechanism - throw out a decoy, attack the decoy even though it's made of ego, and pretend that what's doing the judging is not ego. Therefore, you accidentally keep the ego in the name of getting rid of it. The ego is quite sneaky. And we fell for it big time.

So we're spending most of our time in the persona, thinking this conscious self is all of ourself. And our hidden shadow self is usually unconscious, unless it rears its ugly head at which point it hurls attack at the persona (which is sort of a good thing, cus the persona is a big liar and needs to be dismantled), but this also can manifest as sickness and death.

The problem is, we think that all of the 'bad stuff' that bothers us, that we don't like, that we are upset by, we think it is all the fault of our shadow (which we project onto others). So we get busy forgiving that stuff... we forgive the enemies, we forgive what seems 'bad', BUT, really the only way truly forgive what seems bad is to stop the 'good-loving' persona from doing its nasty work. We have to become willing to recognize the 'good' persona is actually just as much the problem.

The good persona is the victim in most scenarios, victimized by the shadow, and desiring to protect itself from destruction. If you were to protect it, you'd keep the ego. Yet if you don't protect it, you still keep the ego because it will be attacked. Lose lose. The only way to win, is to see that you are playing both parts, you're focusing on only keeping good stuff and this is creating more bad stuff.

So really your GOOD judgements are what creates bad stuff. Your special love. Your special idol worship. Your favoritism. Your people pleasing. Your trying to appear successful and happy. Your spiritual seeking. All this stuff is creating the shadow.

So we need to be careful we're not just trying to undo the shadow. Working ON the shadow, as our 'enemy', actually is a decoy and deceives us into not noticing the behavior of the persona, which is where the ego houses all of its bullshit and lies. The persona needs to be undone, in order to get rid of the shadow, but the persona wants to keep manufacturing the shadow in order to 'get rid of it'. Getting rid of shadow makes more shadow. Fail.

I guess my longwinded point is, don't just think you have to forgive the bad stuff. If you believe in bad stuff it MUST mean you believe in good stuff, which is still a dualistic judgement from the ego persona, trying to pretend not to be evil. It is still separation. There is still a war going on. Its this separation between good and bad that is the problem, not just the bad stuff. Both parts are actually innocent, not just the bad stuff. But until you see that, recognize both parts are the cause of guilt, not just the 'bad stuff'.

Forgive the good and the bad, undo the separation of duality that creates them both, and return to wholeness. That's forgiveness.