THAT “for instance,” was never specified by you, and is not a referenced quote, which normally have numbers after them per the standard practice, but it was included just after the quote with its number due to some piece of html code unintentionally being in there (and my hastily not previewing it)
And which you and i perpetuated in reposting, as was another comment, while after that which supplied some clarification by me, (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2931985/posts?page=579#538) you broadly stated that “those, [plural] are not Roy’s quotes.” (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2931985/posts?page=545#545) However, thus i showed that the number-referenced quotes are indeed from Masters, and that my comment is accurate.
And the next quote you reject as being from Roy is also from him, which my next post will address and document.
Do you have the book in your hands and are quoting from it, no you are not. Plenty of people hate Roy and take things and twist them and online stuff can easily be manipulated. As I said before, some are true quotes and others are not. Roy is not into new age at all but if it is not understood or in the bible, for you it is wrong and that is ok....but don’t go and slander the man and you never commented on the brief youtube video....is that because it is indeed not what you all have thought of Roy?