Posted on 02/10/2004 10:46:05 AM PST by ksen
Good to know you are more "righteous" than Paul, who "railed" against "false apostles" who spread false doctrine:
2 Corinthians 11
12But what I do, I will also continue to do, that I may cut off the opportunity from those who desire an opportunity to be regarded just as we are in the things of which they boast. 13For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ. 14And no wonder! For Satan himself transforms himself into an angel of light.
Your stance has no basis in Scripture.
Our discussion however had to do, specifically, with whether or not to characterize the source of another’s Spiritual understanding.Paul says false doctrines are characterized as having Satan and demons as their source.
1 Timothy 4:
1 Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons, 2speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron,
Again, your stance is contradicted by the Word of God, therefore is of human invention.
On the strength of Jude and the 12th chapter of the first three Gospels - I assert that we ought not to malign the source of another's Spiritual understanding.
In the passage you quoted of Jesus warning of "false prophets who are wolves in sheeps clothing", is Jesus "maligning" the source of their "spiritual understanding"?
Was Jesus maligning the source of the Pharisee's spiritual understanding when He called them "sons of their father, Satan"?
Yes -- but I just thought he was your typical British socialist. The other couple dozen people there, however, regarded him as if he were some kind of "risen master". He was a real "guru" type -- sycophants all over the place.
This was back in the days when I was studying Bailey, at the behest of a friend who was hooked on dear Alice and also Madame Helena Blavatsky; and who idolized Creme. I met "Ben" on several occasions; but the most fun was a very long conversation we had at the conclusion of a so-called "group meditation."
He and I found ourselves in the kitchen, and somehow -- magically -- "Ben" produced a bottle of Dewars. :^) He and I proceeded to consume it, just we two. A tete-a-tete ensued. :^)
We had the loveliest time knocking back scotch and arguing with each other for the next few hours. We ended up draining the bottle. :^)
My friend was scandalized, apoplectic over this; and mad as hell at me for "monopolizing Ben" like that, when so many of his disciples wished to speak to their guru. (Hey, the scotch was his idea, and he clearly wanted to drink it!)
I don't think Ben was at all accustomed to encountering right-wing conservatives at his festivities. Needless to say, we didn't agree about a single thing. And even though he had this most annoying habit of blaming America for all the ills in the universe, it really was fun! (He is very charming -- twinkling blue eyes, like some kind of mischievous imp....)
You know that he is very active with a prominent NGO called Share International. They do a lot to keep things stirred up at the UN.
P.S.: I didn't last very long as a "Bailey student." :^)
Definitely "New Age" favors both -- and they do get the ear of the United Nations to a most troubling degree, usually for the purpose of blaming America for whatever "failure" in the world is their cause of the day....
Contrary to the "tolerant", "politically correct" Jesus you subscribe to, he does not exist. To not "object" to false doctrine, is to deny the Word of God.
Ephesians 5:11;
And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them.
Is it one in allignment with mistah jimah cartah by chance?
With or without the white sheet? :-)
Koszonom. 8~)
It's my experience that New Agers come in all shapes and sizes, some with prodigious mathematical skills.
Numbers have been important to the wandering mind for eons.
May I inquire: What is your experience with New Agers?
I do know Dr. Grandpierre has a profound interest in ancient cultures. I know that he was deeply disturbed by the communist regime's misappropriation and co-option of Hungarian cultural symbols, particularly folk art and music, that it "twisted" in such a way as to legitimize and prop up the state -- and he loudly complained about it at the time.
No, just sisters in spirit.
And? Are you trying to make a point in relation to any comments of mine? Perhaps in my comments referring to Joseph Smith being a false prophet?
If so, that isn't a matter of non-essentials or mere "wrongheadedness", but of absolute blasphemy.
Less than a bottle of Glenlivet, but more than a sip of Macallan. 8~)
Thank you for saying that about "Hammerskjold", one never knows what othrers will do in the name of a another who can not defend themselves. I always like Hammerskjold and felt let down after I learn of these thing. I also thought the crash was suspicious!
No, more in relation to the fact that you lumped Calvin, Arminius, Billy Graham, et al. in with him.
If so, that isn't a matter of non-essentials or mere "wrongheadedness", but of absolute blasphemy.
With regard to the FR Fifth Amendment's founder, I agree.
~looks like Robert Byrd~
With or without the white sheets?
LOL. Without. "With" is Krispy Kreme.
And that's only two K's. 8~)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.