One Course, Two Visions: A Comparison of the Teachings of the Circle of Atonement and Ken Wapnick on 'A Course In Miracles' Paperback – December 1, 2004

This is a fantastic book that clearly points out the two different interpretations of ACIM. Whichever view is yours, you will see it clearly outlined. It helped me understand why I objected to some Course teachings, because I didn't interpret them in the same way. I am very heart centered in my approach, so I really like the Circle's interpretations. They fit with my experience. I have been teaching "A Course in Miracles" since 1978 and learned from the original sources of the book. I highly recommend this book.

This is an unusual book from a Course in Miracles perspective. It is of necessity critical and polarizing, qualities which are the antithesis of what the Course is ultimately about, and this fact alone will be enough to single it out for criticism among some followers. You don't come away from it feeling very inspired, integrated or at one - but you do come away very convinced. The authors almost want to apologize for writing it, but see it as 'fulfilling an important need, ' and on this I would have to agree with them.I have great respect for Ken Wapnick as almost the third parent, or 'stepfather' of the Course, for his deep appreciation and knowledge of it, and I know all that he has done over the years at every level has been in the spirit of the highest concern for what he considers to be its highest good. But I think his good intentions have on balance proved to be very detrimental on a number of levels, and perhaps most detrimental of all has been the interpretation, the very meaning of what its 600 or so pages are attempting to convey.When I read Wapnick, or watch him talk, I do not see an enlightened Master. I see an academic, a very clever man, but I do not see a man truly at peace with himself. This would be something he has in common with the two original scribes, neither of whom proved ultimately capable of living the teachings that were given them. Wapnick, of course, tried to do exactly that, in fact set himself up as the ultimate authority on it. In the process I think he created a Course that largely reflected his own personality, one full of darkness and trials, rather than of joy and Light. He was a psychotherapist at heart, and saw the Course essentially just as an ultimate form of psychotherapy, a bottomless and endless investigation of the evils of ego, an endless process of exposure and sacrifice for the reward of a spurious and uncertain final peace.This book lays bare very clearly the truth of how little his non-dualistic interpretation really does accord with the words actually written in the text. The complex four-level Separation process he describes, for example, is all out of his head, though it has become so familiar that many students simply assume it is part of the Course itself. The same applies to his conceptions of Jesus and the Holy Spirit, both of whom he essentially strips of any personhood or even reality under the ruthless microscope of his non-dualism. This may be his God, but it is not the God of the Course I would want personally.Of course this book is one sided. It could not be otherwise. But Wapnick never responded to it in his lifetime, though he was invited to. Also neither, to my knowledge, have any of his followers. Doubtless there is a reason for that. Its arguments are systematic and have the unquestionable support of textual citations. It is altogether rather devastating and a little clinical, and I think it may be this tone that some people might have objections to. (There is a very unnecessary piece at the end that I think really steps over the line, where the reactions of Wapnick and the COA authors to a hypothetical homeless person asking for help are compared). And the COA authors definitely don't always have it right themselves on interpretation. None of this, though, seriously detracts from the book itself, which is a useful addition to any ACIM library.

Received the One Course Two Visions book and half way through it. For me the first impression was the right one; I am sad that Wapnick's reality is one of such bleakness. His metaphoric vision of ACIM offers no comfort or reason to proceed with the course. It would seem to me the traditional New Testament offers more comfort than Wapnicks view of the Holy Spirit. Wapnick states that the Holy Spirit "doesn't act in the world because their is no world and HS is an illusionary split or projection of our own mind. HS is a metaphorical memory that does not have a plan or actively participate in the world but is only a passive symbol " I find Wapnick's views on helping and joining others the familiar perspecive of a Psychotherapist whose perspective is strongly Freudian and individualistic/isolationist. Rather than seeing the person and the environment as needing one another for optimal development; his feeling seems to be one of a solitary pursuit. " If the world is an illusion who is there to help" or Atonement for ourselves in our minds will automatically enlighten the minds of the world." Extension or joining with others is referred to as "example of magic" and the impulse to help or join with others is most certainly driven by our own ego quest for specialness. I have read a couple of his books: "Ending Our Resistance to Love"."A vast Illusion of Time", and "Stages of our Spiritual Journey." I enjoyed Illusion of Time the most but he made interesting intellectual points in all of them. For myself I just resonate more with Robert Perry who has a more realistic application for living ACIM not as an isolated mental pursuit but as an integrative inclusion and extension in a world illusionary or not. Both Perry and Wapnick are titans in the ACIM world so I guess the difference in their interpretation of the course has to fall into a personal resonance and not a right vs wrong. Feels kind of like the doctrine disagreements between fundamental Christians and Charismatic Christians. Four starts for book content, five stars for delivery on times.

Very good but very difficult to say who's vision is right when you are not a seasonned ot advanced student of the course. My feeling is that the truth lies between both visions depending on how you read ACIM. I will definitely continue to look for answers.

I found this book refreshingly honest, highly informative, logically consistent and fairly presented. I really am thrilled with it, and it has opened new horizons for me. I have read many of Ken Wapnick's books and experienced some cognitive dissonance reading them. I couldn't put my finger on it, but now, with having read this book I can. I think that many of Perry's and other Circle of Atonement writers are brilliantly observant and great tellers of the Truth.I would regard this book (and others by the Circle of Atonement) as essential reading for serious students of the Course.I am not anti Ken Wapnick, and would love to see his response someday if he would only join in the debate to which he is invited.

The Circle of Atonement authors don't seem to understand non duality. Nor the fact that any authentic presentation of Truth be inherently non dual. If they did, they would not be all muddled up like they obviously are. ACIM is clearly non dualistic. Even a beginner can see this. Their misconceptions are clearly the product of the ego thought system. The only use for this book is to highlight these severe misunderstandings. Other than that it has no value as a book. I have to assume that all the Circle of Atonement books are equally valueless as books. No one will ever return home, never undo the ego, following their teachings. The non dual nature of Reality, of the Truth, is revealed on the path of progress at a certain point for each practiyioner. If this doesn't happen, then you're doing something wrong. If you get enlightened while following their dualistic teachings, then it wasn't because of them, but by the blessing of Grace. And you're very lucky.