Conversations with God

[Bosphorus1982]

Dear folks,

I'd like to share an interesting passage from Conversations with God book. I used to read it whenever i was low and sad.



Hear Me, everywhere. Whenever you have a question, simply know that I have answered it already. Then open your eyes to your world. My response could be in an article already published. In the sermon already written and about to be delivered. In the movie now being made. In the song just yesterday composed. In the words about to be said by a loved one. In the heart of a new friend about to be made.

My Truth is in the whisper of the wind, the babble of the brook, the crack of the thunder, the tap of the rain. It is the feel of the earth, the fragrance of the lily, the warmth of the sun, the pull of the moon.

My Truth—and your surest help in time of need—is as awesome as the night sky, and as simply, incontrovertibly, trustful as a baby’s gurgle. It is as loud as a pounding heartbeat—and as quiet as a breath taken in unity with Me.

I will not leave you, I cannot leave you, for you are My creation and My product, My daughter and My son, My purpose and My… Self. Call on Me, therefore, wherever and whenever you are separate from the peace that I am.

I will be there.

With Truth.

And Light

And Love.

 

[Matthew]

I listened to the audiobook versions of the CwG books regularly several years ago but before I discovered this site. I found that the audiobook recordings really brought the material alive. Ed Asner did a stunning job as the male voice of God and I could not help but hear his voice when I read the section that you posted. They were a source of quite some comfort to me in a very dark part of my life and gave me plenty to contemplate. It seems to me that there is a great deal of congruence between the input of the C's and the material of the CwG books. However, as with any source, it is prudent to not take anything as 'gospel' but to maintain a questioning attitude and decide for oneself what one thinks.

osit

 

[Michael B-C]

Bosphorus1982.

You opened two new identical threads yesterday with the title ‘Conversations With God’. One of them has been deleted and I am now replying to the only active thread left in your name.

Bosphorus1982 you have started so many new topics of late that, even weeks on still only have your first post on them. Have you looked back to see that next to no one is joining in your attempts at conversation?

Do you understand that this silence is a form of clear negative feedback from other members here?

That means your approach just isn't working for you or us. It’s called ‘noise’ here.

‘Noise’ means a distracting din that doesn't allow for beneficial conversation and exchange involving more than one voice to take place in.

Please stop now!

This Forum is not a dumping ground for anyone’s random thoughts.

It has also been noticed that this is the third name you have posted under since you first landed here in 2009, and yet after 11 years you still seem to have no idea what this place is about or how to conduct yourself properly.

Therefore please do not post again anywhere else on this forum without first responding to the following questions;

1. Are you aware that you are only talking to yourself by posting in this manner?

2. Are you thinking at all about how you will encourage others to talk with you?

3. You say:

I used to read it whenever i was low and sad.

So, can you tell us about what being low and sad means to you? Can you please share some examples?

It is important you give serious thought to these questions before replying because the way you have thus far chosen to network here simply cannot continue.

 

[Guest 15258]

Do you understand that this silence is a form of clear negative feedback from other members here?

Some of Bosphorus1982's posts get a few likes, this could be interpreted as positive feedback from other members.

I only point this out because from Bosphorus1982's perspective perhaps the idea that the silence is a form of negative feedback might come as a bit of a shock. I don't know this for a fact however.

It is important you give serious thought to these questions before replying because the way you have thus far chosen to network here simply cannot continue.

Would putting up a barrier to the way Bosophorus1982 networks here be an STS or STO action?

I agree that noise means unnecessary work for other people.

But part of being STO is letting other people do what they want to do.

Since this forum is big on working on oneself, I'll sincerely ask Bosophorus1982 this:

Why are you creating so many new threads?

It makes no difference to me, but I think the answer may be deep.

So, can you tell us about what being low and sad means to you? Can you please share some examples?

I second these questions. But I don't want to add any pressure.

 

[Jacques]

But part of being STO is letting other people do what they want to do.

Well not exactly, STO means Service to Others and not at all letting people do what they want to do.

If I give you an easy example, I will let someone kill my wife/husband/children because he/she wants to do so and I will just stay there doing nothing and just watching it.
Another one, one person enter your home and has decided to break everything, since it is what he wants to do, I will let him destroys my house.

 

[Michael B-C]

Some of Bosphorus1982's posts get a few likes, this could be interpreted as positive feedback from other members.

I only point this out because from Bosphorus1982's perspective perhaps the idea that the silence is a form of negative feedback might come as a bit of a shock. I don't know this for a fact however.

I agree that noise means unnecessary work for other people.

Why are you creating so many new threads?

It makes no difference to me, but I think the answer may be deep.

I second these questions. But I don't want to add any pressure.

Do you notice Archaea how the above contain a number of logical fallacies? e.g. some of his threads get a few likes = could be seen as positive feedback. So if 99 people disagree with me but one person agrees with me does that necessarily mean I have received positive feedback?

You also seem torn yourself between agreeing and disagreeing with my propositions?

It might be an idea if we all wait for Bosphorus1982 to reply to the questions I have posed without getting sidetracked further. The following observation of yours was, however, spot on, thank you:

I agree that noise means unnecessary work for other people.

 

[Alejo]

I just wanted to point something out, that while @Archaea actually took the time to read what @Michael B-C posted and think through it and ask a few questions, @Bosphorus1982 has not taken the time to respond.

 

[Guest 15258]

If I give you an easy example, I will let someone kill my wife/husband/children because he/she wants to do so and I will just stay there doing nothing and just watching it.
Another one, one person enter your home and has decided to break everything, since it is what he wants to do, I will let him destroys my house.

Makes sense, thanks Gandalf.

The killing example is pretty extreme. But for the smashing house example could the difference between STS and STO be that STS gets unhappy/upset about it and STO accepts it and possibly even thanks the DCM?

I don't know the answer, I'm asking because I want to know.

Do you notice Archaea how the above contain a number of logical fallacies? e.g. some of his threads get a few likes = could be seen as positive feedback. So if 99 people disagree with me but one person agrees with me does that necessarily mean I have received positive feedback?

I don't know. I thought the like button was there so people could give positive feedback without having to think of something to say.

You also seem torn yourself between agreeing and disagreeing with my propositions?

No, I agree with your propositions. My concern is that your post was too harsh, and may not have helped Bos with his/her problems if indeed Bos is here to get help.

It might be an idea if we all wait for Bosphorus1982 to reply to the questions I have posed without getting sidetracked further. The following observation of yours was, however, spot on, thank you:

You're welcome.

I just wanted to point something out, that while @Archaea actually took the time to read what @Michael B-C posted and think through it and ask a few questions, @Bosphorus1982 has not taken the time to respond.

I'm open to the idea that I'm projecting onto Bos, but I think Michael B-C's post may have scared him off so to speak.

I think Bos might be shy, and creating new threads was his sub-conscious expressing suppressed emotion, which s/he isn't comfortable facing yet.

That's why I think the answer to,

Why are you creating so many new threads?

might be deep.

 

[Glenn]

I think Bos might be shy, and creating new threads was his sub-conscious expressing suppressed emotion, which s/he isn't comfortable facing yet.

That's why I think the answer to,
Why are you creating so many new threads?

might be deep.

Why don't you let him answer that. When you step in like this and answer for someone else, it really just creates noise... It's not helpful...IMO.

 

[Jacques]

The killing example is pretty extreme. But for the smashing house example could the difference between STS and STO be that STS gets unhappy/upset about it and STO accepts it and possibly even thanks the DCM?

I don't know the answer, I'm asking because I want to know.

If you want to know, I will just tell you to read the "Wave" written by Laura.