Talk:A Course in Miracles: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 18:52, 8 July 2006 editJzG (talk \| contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers155,090 edits →"Pruned" material: no← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 17:32, 31 August 2024 edit undoTgeorgescu (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users55,079 edits →A Course In Miracles: emic and etic
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Talk header\|search=yes}}
	To view earlier archived discussions of the A Course In Miracles article, please see:
			{{WikiProject banner shell\|class=Start\|
			{{WikiProject Books}}
			{{WikiProject Christianity\|importance=Low}}
			{{WikiProject Religious texts\|importance=Low}}
			{{WikiProject Spirituality\|importance=Low}}
			{{WikiProject Skepticism\|importance=Low}}
			{{WikiProject Religion\|importance=Low\|NRM=yes\|NRMImp=High}}
			}}
			{{afd-merged-from\|A Course in Miracles - Original Edition\|A Course in Miracles - Original Edition\|05 January 2014}}
			{{afd-merged-from\|Gary Renard\|Gary Renard (4th nomination)\|13 August 2017}}
			{{User:MiszaBot/config
			\|maxarchivesize = 80K
			\|counter = 10
			\|algo = old(90d)
			\|archive = Talk:A Course in Miracles/Archive %(counter)d
			}}
			{{Archive box}}

			== Could use a content section ==
	*]
	*
	*

			This article gives some background and a very basic explanation of what it is, but it lacks even a fundamental description of its content. ] (]) 20:43, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

			What if the reason the article only gives the most basic outline of the Course is because no one really knows what it is talking about? For what if there is no reason or light in this darkness? <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 09:12, 21 October 2023 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
	== Unsourced ==

			== A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion ==
	This article does not cite its references or sources. You can help Misplaced Pages by introducing appropriate citations. The tag on the article will help attract other editors to this page to remedy the problem. Please leave the maintenance tag so that others may be helpful. Thanks. ] 11:44, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
			The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
			* ]<!-- COMMONSBOT: speedy \| 2023-03-07T08:38:03.698567 \| ACIM3COVER.jpg -->
			You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —] (]) 08:38, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

			== A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion ==
	Also please note that the tag was added by an administrator on the basis that the entire article reads like ]. Analysis of the book and its alleged significance should be on the basis of ]. Misplaced Pages is not the place for book reviews, they can go on ] or another sister project. Please stick to facts which are stated in neutral terms from the mainstream press, well-known religious papers and so on. ] 12:08, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
			The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
			* ]<!-- COMMONSBOT: discussion \| 2023-03-07T11:08:04.017852 \| ACIM3COVER.jpg -->
			Participate in the deletion discussion at the ]. —] (]) 11:08, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

			== Journalist ==
	:I agree that the page looks like what Misplaced Pages calls "Original Research". This is because it is. The article was written by a (very kind) man who reads the Course and who was simply trying to provide information about it. He isn't in any way making money off of the Course. He simply likes to write articles about ACIM on Misplaced Pages. I am attempting to edit this page to make it more neutral, because, frankly, I like the thought of that. I'd like this page to be crisp and "cold" (what I mean is, I'd like this page to be completely without any flowery prose; flowery prose has its place, but usually not in such articles). -- ] 03:19, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
	::I don't believe you ever quite understood that this is not about other people having anything against the man, or the book, or the publisher, etc. It really isn't. Its about an encyclopedia. ] 01:09, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
	::Flowery prose has no place on Misplaced Pages at all, actually. Neither does anything which cannot be verified from reliable secondary sources. ] 16:32, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

			] passes ]. If you think he doesn't, this is not the place to argue that, instead you should submit his article for deletion. Do I like yoga? No, but it's a free country. People don't have to ask for my permission in order to practice yoga. ] (]) 14:25, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
	:::The summarization found in this article is sourced directly from the book. Admittedly there is much "summarization" of the ACIM text on this page that has been agreed upon by several students of this work. The work is rather lengthy and I see no reason that a summary of the work is inappropriate here. If anyone might feel they might have a more accurate summary than found here, by all means, please edit away.

			:What if, seeming to tell the truth, ACiM is a book of lies?
	:::-] 12:29, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
	::::Have you read ]? ] 13:21, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
	:::::Yes, I have read a great deal of the work. -] 14:07, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

			:What if, appearing to heal, the book contains many harmful ideas?
	This claim of no sources appears to be written by some who have not read the material. Otherwise they would not be making a blanket request for sources but would be pointing to specific sentences which they believe to be incompatible with the source text. Unless someone is able to point out a single sentence in this article which they are certain is not supported by the text, I submit that this claim of being unsourced is rather a stab in the dark by those who are unfamiliar with the material. The article on the Christian Bible does not have a footnote on every sentence because those who read it are already familiar with the Bible enough to know that the content is supported by its source text. I would ask that if this ''uncourced'' template is to remain, that those who are placing this blanket statement support their claim with at least a single instance of material which conflicts with the source text.
	-] 12:07, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
	:How about starting with the first sentence. It reads "A Course in Miracles (sometimes referred to as ACIM or simply the Course) is a self-study book of "spiritual psychotherapy" or spiritual transformation. The author of the book Dr. Helen Schucman, asserts that she "scribed" the book with the assistance of Dr. William Thetford under divine inspiration. It was first published prior to 1976 and has sold over 1.5 million copies worldwide in 15 different languages." It cites as it's source. www.acim.org is owned by the organization publishing this version of the book. That makes this source a primary source. According to ], "''We may not use primary sources whose information has not been made available by a reliable publisher.'' See ] and ]". About the source itself, on that page (currently) there is no mention of Schucman or Thetford. There isn't any mention in the text about "sometimes referred to as ACIM", and the only "ACIM" written on that page is the trademark for the particular version of the book written by that publisher. There is no mention about X-million number of copies, etc., etc. ] 12:31, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

			:What if, having promised to show the/a way - the Course sets out to mislead? <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 21:10, 11 November 2023 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
	::Unless the publisher's reputation has been tarnished, it is generally accepted practice in the publishing world to accept a publisher's statement at face value a factual statement of the number of copies it has published. If you might be able to somehow significantly tarnish the reputation of FIP, then perhaps its accounting of the number of copies published might be considered worthy of question. Otherwise we will have to begin deleting references to the number of books published by every book whose publisher you happen not to believe. Nobody but a publisher normally keeps such records. How else do you suppose they are normally tracked? Unfortunately someone seems to have recently deleted the article on FIP so it now becomes rather difficult to track them. Go figure. (BTW, FIP is the publsher, not acim.org.)

			::Misplaced Pages isn't about ], but about ]erifiable information form ]. ] (]) 21:30, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
	::-] 13:32, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

			== A Course In Miracles ==
	==Public Domain==
	Since this article causes so much contraversy, since it's in the public domain, why don't we just print it as an article and put a freeze on it? Seriously, couldn't we just do that? ] 14:08, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

			it is misleading to claim that this teaching " borrows from New Age ideas "
	:The material is not entirely in the public domain and it is over 1,000 pages long. -] 12:31, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
			There is no evidence of this at all.

			It is highly original in content.
	::FYI, for material that is in the public domain, we have our sister projects ] and ]. -] 15:59, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
			Of course those indoctrinated with familiar Christian dogma, are going to dismiss it, on entirely spurious grounds ] (]) 22:49, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

	:~~::Also, the public domain~~ ~~version~~ is ~~not~~ ~~the~~ ~~one~~ ~~that~~ ~~sole 1.5 million copies. -~~] 14:48, 6 July ~~2006~~ (UTC)		:The statement is sourced. --] (]) 06:59, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
			:I have watched this subject butchered many times over many years, this rendition is by far the worst.

			:‘A Course In Miracles’ is a modern day manual for the transformation of Mind, as given by Jesus. ] (]) 12:48, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
	== Needs splitting ==
			::First, I'm not a Christian, so I have no reason to defend Christian dogmas. Similarly, there are religion scholars who ascribe ACIM to the New Age, but do not write in order to defend Christian dogmas.

			::Second, see ]. ] (]) 17:32, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
	The article probably needs splitting into A Course in Miracles (book) and A Course in Miracles (movement); the book can be described neutrally without reference to the movement, the movement would be a suitable merge target for a lot of material which AfD seems to think should be merged rather than given its own (largely uncited) treatment. ] 16:15, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

	:It seems to me that the movement of students that this book has generated is inseparably related to the book itself, and that as such, any article about the movement would need to have an in depth treatment of the evolution of the book within it. To try to discuss the movement without such an in depth treatment would result in an incomplete article. Thus I feel that such a separation of this article would not be practical. -] 12:35, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

	::There are two threads to the article, though: the book and its history, including the copyrioght dispute; and the movement and its history, which seem to me to be separable. ] 12:53, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

	:::The book states that it is intended as a ''self study'' guide. Nowhere does the book state that it was written with any intention of starting a ''movement''. Therefore it seems to me that even the use of the term ''movement'' becomes possibly confusing or possibly even controversial when attempting to describe the majority of the students of this book. The majority of those who study this text have no formal organization to which they belong, but prefer to gather only to read and directly discuss the text itself. To attempt to define the dynamics of such a group without directly discussing the text in detail would seem to me to be rather difficult and conterproductive. Separate articles for what I would refer to as ''splinter groups'' such as Endeavor Academy does seem to me to be in order. -] 14:18, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

	:::: Actually that is pretty much my point. The book says it's a self-study guide, but people like the Endeavor Academy have turned it into a social network and more of a belief system or religious sect. ] and ] are separate too. A bit more significant, of course, and a bit more widely discussed in secondary sources, hence a larger treatment. Have a look at ], by the way - look at the references, the way it's written, the tone of the article. ] 21:41, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

	:::::You are certainly correct that there is a major difference between the Bible and Christianity. But in so far as I know, the majority of the students of ACIM could be described in a single sentence as those who consider ACIM as their primary written source of spiritual wisdom and inspiration, but who, in accordance with the recommendations of this book, have no official membership organization. Does this sentence deserve its own article?

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

	:::::-] 14:57, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

	== Use of the acronyn "ACIM" is advertising. ==

	This acronym "ACIM" is a registered trademark. Judith Skutch Whitson and her husband started the Foundation of Para-Sensory Investigations, Inc. (FPI) in October of 1971. She was a teacher and lecturer at New York University on the science of the study of consciousness and parapsychology. She was introduced to Schucman, Thetford and Wapnick in May of 1975. In June of 1976, the Foundation for Parasensory Investigation changed its name to The Foundation of Inner Peace due to Schucman's distaste for the former name. Dr. Schucman died in 1981. Two years later control of the copyright was essentially transferred to the Foundation for "A Course in Miracles" (FACIM) in 1983 when it was organized by Wapnick, the Board of Directors being himself, Judy Skutch Whitson, and her husband Robert Skutch. Due to a suit by Penguin, and TFIP, brought against the Church of the Full Endeavor for teaching students with the manuscript they had obtained, it was found that because of preliminary distribution of the work that the contents of the book are considered public domain. There is absolutely no reason to advertise on this encyclopedia.<ref>{{cite web
	\|url=http://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/courtweb/pdf/D02NYSC/03-04125.PDF
	\|author=U.S. District Court Southern District Of New York
	\|title=Penguin Books U.S.A., Inc., Foundation for "A Course in Miracles, Inc.", & Foundation for Inner Peace, Inc., Plaintiffs, against New Christian Church of Full Endeavor Ltd., & Endeavor Academy Defendents. Case: Civil 4126 (RWS) Admissable Evidence
	\|year=1996
	\|format=PDF
	\| accessdate=]]
	}}</ref><ref>{{cite web
	\|url=http://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/courtweb/Pdf/D02NYSC/00-07413.PDF
	\|author=U.S. District Court Southern District Of New York
	\|title=Penguin Books U.S.A., Inc., Foundation for "A Course in Miracles, Inc.", & Foundation for Inner Peace, Inc., Plaintiffs, against New Christian Church of Full Endeavor Ltd., & Endeavor Academy Defendants. Case: Civil 4126 (RWS) Denial for Summary Judgment
	\|year=1996
	\|format=PDF
	\| accessdate=]]
	}}</ref><ref>{{cite web
	\|url=http://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/courtweb/Pdf/D02NYSC/03-08697.PDF
	\|author=U.S. District Court Southern District Of New York
	\|title=Penguin Books U.S.A., Inc., Foundation for "A Course in Miracles, Inc.", & Foundation for Inner Peace, Inc., Plaintiffs, against New Christian Church of Full Endeavor Ltd., & Endeavor Academy Defendants. Case: Civil 4126 (RWS) Conclusion Dismissal
	\|year=1996
	\|format=PDF
	\| accessdate=]]
	}}</ref><references/>


	:I am not quite certain what you are trying to point out here. I am not aware of any Wiki policy which discourages or prohibits the use of trademarked acronyms if they serve a significantly useful informative purpose. -] 12:38, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
	::] small ]. ] 13:18, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

	:::I apologize, but I still do not understand what two concepts you are referring to. Could you please clarify? Thanks, -] 14:09, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
	::1. Trademarks are for ]'s 2. Neutral Point of View ]. If you click on the word, your Web Browser will be conducted to the specific topics which explain both of the concepts completely. Thanks. ] 20:25, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

	:::I am also confused by your argument. It seems that according to your arguments, Misplaced Pages would not be allowed to refer to ] or ], since those terms are also trademarked. — ] ] 20:55, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

	::I'm pretty sure that both of those meet ] correct? And it's good that you noted that WP has articles on both of them, let me point out a third: ]. I'm glad that you can appreciate how a tradmark distinguishes one group from the next. Notice how there isn't any particular trademark associated with the topic ]. I am glad that you brought this easy analogy to mind. Thanks. ] 23:22, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

	:::Certainly Burger King meets this criteria, but are you saying that the use of any trademarked acronym in Wiki should automamatically be treated as POV or advertising per Wiki policy? I still don't understand. Are you're saying that this article is primarily advertising, even though it makes no attempt to sell anything? Admittedly it does attempt to explicate ACIM, but advertising and explication are two different things. I thought that that the explication of notable but otherwise difficult topics was Wiki's purpose. I apologize but I still do not understand. :::-] 00:23, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

	== Pruning ==

	This article is in urgent need of serious pruning. Many sections of it read as a sermon. Where are the secondary sources of commentary, form which we can distill the encyclopaedic content? Misplaced Pages is not a place to proselytise, we are here to document what the external world understands of this concept and has written in reliable authoritative sources. Above all we are not here to publish someone's dissertaiotn on the subject of this book, which is how I think this article started. ] 12:52, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

	== "Pruned" material ==

	I believe we have lost much valuable information as a result of JzG's "pruning" efforts. We should start an "A Course In Miracles (doctrine)" page for the fruit JzG dislikes. If it were not for JzG's positive intentions, I would call the result vandalism, so let's do better. I agree that there is much redundant information on this page, but the article is shifting too heavily toward contrasting ACIM with Christianity. A proper article on ACIM should describe its doctrine first, as it was meant to stand on it's own merit, and only afterward highlight obvious differences betwen ACIM teachings and non-ACIM interpretations of the standard interpretation of Christianity. JzG is assuming that a proper interpretation of ACIM is as Christian supplemental material, rather than the Christian Bible being supplemental ACIM material. He is not "playing the game", so to speak, and so long as he doesn't, this article ''can't'' be neutral, for playing ACIM's game is what it means to be charitable, and charity is what it means to be neutral. — ] 21:16, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

	:Only if it can be sourced from reliable secondary sources. The major problem with it was that the whole thing was completely unreferenced and read like a dissertation or homily. Misplaced Pages is not a soapbox, it's an encyclopaedia distilled from the body of knowledge as presented in reliable, independent secondary sources. Read ], ], ]. The problem is not with the truth, if truth it be, but with the fact that it is funcitonally indistinguishable from opinion. So, do start woith citations to reputable seocndary sources ''outside'' the movement. Commentary in standard texts on comparitive religion, references from psychological texts and so on. ] 21:37, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

	::Understandable. Surely Misplaced Pages is not a soapbox, nor should it provide incredible information, so I can understand your reasons for wanting to remove it. No one should be lead into misinformation at the hands of article writers who write to validate their own opinions instead of from a true objective desire to spread genuine knowledge. Such actions bring down the credibility of the entire encyclopedia, and thus its effectiveness.

	::So, it's understandable to want to quote only reliable secondary sources outside the movement, for these will be objective, able to see outside ACIM's world and look in safely, untouched. And in ACIM's world, only the perfectly inclusive is true, and as such, to stand outside the movement and look in as an outsider ... well, this will be necessarily to miss the point, for this perspective is an ''impossibility'' for ACIM, and so ACIM will naturally be misperceived by a view from nowhere that tries to say anything meaningful about it. For one cannot understand by standing on the outside looking in objectively. Only those inside will understand, for inside is all there is to those inside, and the man on the outside is ''inside not knowing it''. If ACIM ''IS'' true, then the man on the outside who is inside not knowing it is speaking as if he knew what it was like to be inside but cannot for the fundemental reason that the ''error he makes cannot be contained as if it were an isolated instance'' by the '']'', which is a natural consequence of the ]. Where Misplaced Pages has demanded an outside, separate, objective view, must the system fail where separation means nothing, for no concept is more critical for ACIM to make ''any sense at all'', again, by the aforementioned principles.

	::Where separation means nothing, then, allow us to plea an exception to Misplaced Pages's rules, which ''must'' fail in such instances. Perhaps if we post a disclaimer in the "main tenets" section that the information is '''''in principle''' unverifiable and unintelligible by objective outside means'', we will be able to post valuable information of such a nature on Misplaced Pages. Otherwise, we have done ourselves a disservice. Despite the demise of ], many will still believe that scientific, objective verifiability is what it means for a statement to be meaningful. These people do ''themselves'' a disservice.

	::— ] 03:36, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

	:::I'm sorry, ] for exceptions to policies explicitly stated as "non-negotiable" by ] is not going to work. ] 18:52, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

	== Attitudinal Healing section ==

	Someone went through the trouble of merging Attitudinal Healing with A Course In Miracles ... but didn't really merge the contexts. The topics don't appear to relate to each other. Unless anyone wants to link the two topics more clearly, I'd like to simply get rid of the section. —] 05:49, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

	:I have no qualms with that. Your comments on the Afd discussion would be most welcome too. Thanks, -] 15:00, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

	== Rationale for proposed ACIM article group restructure ==

	Apparently user ] has decided that this article ultimately needs to be deleted and replaced with her own article at ], and also a second article which she apparently plans to create later on to be titled something like ''A Course in Miracles (movement)''. This user has also nominated multiple ACIM related articles for deletion, some deletions of which have succeeded. A discussion about ]'s plans to effect these changes is under way at . The input of editors of this page at that article would be very much appreciated. To the best of my knowledge, this editor has not yet made any detailed analysis on Wiki of the actual contents of ACIM. Thanks, -] 12:57, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
	:Your presumption is quite incorrect. Thanks. ] 18:40, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

	== very long ==

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

	Attention Firefox and Google Toolbar users: You may find that long pages are cut off unexpectedly while editing in tabs; please be careful. This issue has been reported to Google, and we hope they will fix it. ] 12:10, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
	:Understood. I've tightened it to 44 KB by removing redundant or uninformative parts, and perhaps some redundant information on docrine should be trimmed off as well. We are certainly still working on ideas for more properly managing this information, and our solution may depend on what happens to ]. I've removed the <nowiki>{{verylong}}</nowiki> tag in light of this. Thank you for your helpful efforts, —] 04:51, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
	::Just in case you aren't able to complete the effort, I have reapplied the tag. You were able to knock it down by 3K which is good. The other article hasn't anything to do with this article. The other article is about all of the various books that stemmed from the original texts. This article is only about one specific book printed by one specific publisher, The Foundation for Inner Peace (a.k.a. FACIM and highly associated with the acronym "ACIM" which is their trademark). ] 05:37, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 17:32, 31 August 2024

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the A Course in Miracles article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10Auto-archiving period: 3 months

This article is rated Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook

Christianity Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Religious texts (defunct)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religious texts, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.Religious textsWikipedia:WikiProject Religious textsTemplate:WikiProject Religious textsReligious texts

Spirituality Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spirituality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spirituality-related subjects on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpiritualityWikipedia:WikiProject SpiritualityTemplate:WikiProject SpiritualitySpirituality
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Skepticism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Religion: New religious movements Low‑importance

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Misplaced Pages's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by New religious movements work group (assessed as High-importance).

A Course in Miracles - Original Edition was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 05 January 2014 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into A Course in Miracles. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

Gary Renard was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 13 August 2017 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into A Course in Miracles. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

Archives

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5	Archive 6
Archive 7	Archive 8	Archive 9
Archive 10

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Could use a content section

This article gives some background and a very basic explanation of what it is, but it lacks even a fundamental description of its content. 166.182.250.207 (talk) 20:43, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

What if the reason the article only gives the most basic outline of the Course is because no one really knows what it is talking about? For what if there is no reason or light in this darkness? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.149.166.189 (talk) 09:12, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

ACIM3COVER.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:38, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

ACIM3COVER.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:08, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Journalist

Matthew Remski passes WP:N. If you think he doesn't, this is not the place to argue that, instead you should submit his article for deletion. Do I like yoga? No, but it's a free country. People don't have to ask for my permission in order to practice yoga. tgeorgescu (talk) 14:25, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

What if, seeming to tell the truth, ACiM is a book of lies?

What if, appearing to heal, the book contains many harmful ideas?

What if, having promised to show the/a way - the Course sets out to mislead? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.147.153.122 (talk) 21:10, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages isn't about WP:THETRUTH, but about WP:Verifiable information form reliable sources. tgeorgescu (talk) 21:30, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

A Course In Miracles

it is misleading to claim that this teaching " borrows from New Age ideas " There is no evidence of this at all. It is highly original in content. Of course those indoctrinated with familiar Christian dogma, are going to dismiss it, on entirely spurious grounds 80.189.60.71 (talk) 22:49, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

The statement is sourced. --Hob Gadling (talk) 06:59, 10 July 2024 (UTC)

I have watched this subject butchered many times over many years, this rendition is by far the worst.

‘A Course In Miracles’ is a modern day manual for the transformation of Mind, as given by Jesus. 2001:8003:321A:7001:1CE2:EBD3:D857:1D5 (talk) 12:48, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

First, I'm not a Christian, so I have no reason to defend Christian dogmas. Similarly, there are religion scholars who ascribe ACIM to the New Age, but do not write in order to defend Christian dogmas.

Second, see emic and etic. tgeorgescu (talk) 17:32, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

Categories: