Tuesday, December 04, 2012

LEARNING TO LOVE BIG BROTHER -- YOU ARE SLATED TO BE "DE-ORWELLED"!

To my readers:  I was moved to write this article today after discovering the blatancy of material I found in my voluminous library that I had previously not had the opportunity to read.  Today I read it closely.  I composed the following article.  I thought it needed to reach a much larger article.  As I am still a columnist for NewsWithViews.com, I contacted the publisher who agreed with me that it needed to reach the public as soon as possible.  This article will be running on that website which has a much broader reader base than mine.  It is up there now, this Tuesday morning of December 4, 2012.  I want my own readers to have the earliest exposure possible, so here it is.  I would appreciate your feed back.  Sometimes writing is painful and difficult.  The material I found in the book, TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY INTELLIGENCE, by Dr. Wesley K. Wark angered me to the point that the words immediately flowed and found expression.  

The article content is found below.  This is what they are planning for surveillance for our current times.


Stay tuned!


CONSTANCE


LEARNING TO LIVE AND LOVE GEORGE ORWELL’S 
1984 BIG BROTHER
“Intelligence” for the 21st Century – “De-Orwell” People?
© 2012 by Constance E. Cumbey
All Rights Reserved

Our long perceived liberties are now at a dangerous tipping point.  I’ve been recently reflecting on my life’s  work informing the public of the New Age Movement and its related “hidden dangers.”  Those dangers are now becoming much less hidden.  Many are diverted by 2012 New Age Mayan prophecies and fail to see more here and now dangers.   Almost all from believers to those who have viewed the movie series THE OMEN or even the LEFT BEHIND books and films are familiar with the following Book of Revelation warnings:

 15And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.
16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:
17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.

As I first wrote in 1981 in my expository book about the New Age Movement, THE HIDDEN DANGERS OF THE RAINBOW, New Agers, and allegedly Christian fellow travelers were calling for a New World Order with an accompanying global food redistribution program -- aided of course by modern technology, i.e. computers.  Much more than mere redistribution, bad as that might be, was implied by that prophecy.  It also clearly meant  surveillance.

On the secular side, George Orwell (1903-1950) led a relatively short but insightful life.  His landmark novel, 1984, amply and graphically described the potential horrors and desensitization of a total surveillance society where we would eventually “come to love Big Brother.”  If you can no longer find that book, here is a place to read it on line for free:

The last two paragraphs of the book are the saddest part of Orwell’s prophecy.  The prisoner of the system had come to love Big Brother:

The voice from the telescreen was still pouring forth its tale of prisoners and booty and slaughter, but the shouting outside had died down a little. The waiters were turning back to their work. One of them approached with the gin bottle. Winston, sitting in a blissful dream, paid no attention as his glass was filled up. He was not running or cheering any longer. He was back in the Ministry of Love, with everything forgiven, his soul white as snow. He was in the public dock, confessing everything, implicating everybody. He was walking down the white-tiled corridor, with the feeling of walking in sunlight, and an armed guard at his back. The long hoped-for bullet was entering his brain. 

He gazed up at the enormous face. Forty years it had taken him to learn what kind of smile was hidden beneath the dark moustache. O cruel, needless misunderstanding! O stubborn, self-willed exile from the loving breast! Two gin-scented tears trickled down the sides of his nose. But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother.

Well, there are serious elements out there in the “HUMINT” (Human Intelligence) community now demanding for real that “we come to love Big Brother.”  They consider George Orwell a practical threat to their control freak aspirations.  As they expedite their manufacture of drones and other surveillance apparatus, they plot how to “De-Orwell” the populace.  Wesley K.  Wark, a participant-author-professor on the subject of Intelligence has overseen the collection of essays by fellow spies and wannabes on the subject.  The intelligence network is an international one with USA, Brits, Canadians, and even Russians now collaborating on how to flush out the rest of us who value both security and privacy.  I have one of his major books in my personal library, TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY INTELLIGENCE.  Individual chapter writers include besides Wark, Alan DuPont, Michael Herman, Melvin A. Goodman, Matthew M. Aid, Gregory F. Treverton, Nick Cullather, John Ferris and Ronald J. Deibert.

Wark might be the most frightening thinker of all.  If his fellow collaborators agree with him, as I suspect they do, we are all in deep trouble.  The apparent consensus is that “we must learn to live with Orwell.” [1]   

“The diminution of 'Orwell', a codeword  for the fear of intelligence, will be a necessary condition for the success of a revolutionary change now unfolding in the practice of intelligence. Looking back, the  twentieth century may be seen as the age of Secret intelligence . . .

Whether rare, or the norm, public intelligence will require a new public outlook on intelligence, one beyond, as suggested above, the habit of 'Orwell'.[2]

Wark and his fellow contributors consider the task crucial and urgent.  His introductory remarks conclude with the excerpted following:

If an age of public intelligence is upon us, it will demand a revolutionary change in the practice of intelligence and in the doctrine of secrecy. New attention will have to be paid to devising intelligence assessments designed for public consumption, as opposed to products shaped for intelligence's traditional government 'consumers'. While such forms of intelligence assessment are devised, great care will have to be given to protecting the role that intelligence traditionally plays in informing government decision-making on national and international security issues. Great care will also be required in protecting intelligence sources and methods - the lifeblood of intelligence work. New restraints will have to be devised to ensure that the intelligence product does not become completely politicised [sic] in its transit to the public audience, both domestic and foreign. As US scholar John Prados put it, 'what is there to prevent public intelligence from becoming public relations?'20   Integrity of intelligence reporting will be a huge issue. The quality and persuasiveness of intelligence judgements [sic] will face an enormous test, in the open and fractious marketplace of public debate. To persuade its new, and much more diverse audience, intelligence assessments will have to be very good indeed.

Finally, there will be a reciprocal onus on public consumers of intelligence to understand the nature of the intelligence product, both its strengths and its limitations.
If public intelligence is the radical future, its emergence will build on the technological enhancement and delivery of intelligence. Public intelligence requires display, precisely of the sort delivered by Colin Powell's address to the Security Council in February 2003, with its Sigint soundtrack, and its satellite imagery. Public intelligence is unthinkable without the technological infrastructure that supports a global media and global Internet.[3]

High sounding words all to justify what we so justifiably dreaded – an age of total surveillance and snooping.  They are determined to have it, but they cannot have it unless WE FIRST LEARN TO LOVE BIG BROTHER?  As of this writing, December 3, 2012, there were 50,500 google  NEWS references alone to the emerging drone technology.  There were in more than 30 million GOOGLE hits on the scary technology.

Drones serve both spying and weaponry functions.  Are they to be used as the potential enabler of prophesied search and destroy operations against believers?  We may currently rest in peace believing they are only to be used against believers of Islamic religions and ideologies.  As we were told in law school, harsh cases make bad law.  Once the precedent is set, it is out there for use against whatever stands in the way of “glocalist” agendas (“think globally, act locally).

I for one have no present plans to embrace Big Brother.  I pray you have none either.  Big Brother is decidedly NOT YOUR FRIEND!  It has long been said that eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.  That vigilance is now needed more than ever.  Otherwise, the “necessary condition” for “revolutionary fear is here!

 The diminution of 'Orwell', a code word for the fear of intelligence, will
be a necessary condition for the success of a revolutionary change now
unfolding in the practice of intelligence.[4]




[1] (Wesley K. Wark, 2005), page 6.    TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY INTELLIGENCE:  Routledge, London and New York.
[2] Ibid., page 11.
[3] Ward, Ibid., page 10.
[4] Wark, Ibid., page 7.



429 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 400 of 429   Newer›   Newest»
Anonymous said...

Christine
and...
let it all out.

Then we can move on.

Anonymous said...

The fear of the Lord is His treasure. But fools despise correction ... while the wise seek (God's) transformation. (Rom 12:1,2,21)) God speaks to us thusly; 'Turn at my rebuke. Behold, I will pour out My Spirit upon you ... I will make My Words known into you'.

Anonymous said...

I must concur with the anonymous poster's comments at 11:19 AM.

Christine, you react to the anon poster of 7:13 PM (who speaks with philistine hypocrisy and with the stone cold tongue of a wayward pharoah when accusing myself and Physicist of raw speech).

Christine, how dare you talk about gracious speech when you swear and employ the utmost filth and foul language which is a shame to even repeat!

You attempt to denegrate and insult the host of this blog, Constance, right at the very top of the page, and continuing onward, in your post at 3:00PM just before my last two posts here.


Your comments and attitude show you for who your really are, with the foul language you spew on this site and the blatant New Age themes you've recently written on this blog such as your posts supporting chakras, nibiru et al, and so forth, and on and on and on!

Yes your vile language and promotion of new age themes damaging this blog and causing many formerly regular and polite posters to give up posting here as they've had enough of your rubbish strewn all over the pages. Such is the festering attitude of yours, a dishonouring of your mother in a hateful way on this site, promotion of new age ideas, accusing physicist of being a liar and attacking him and others who won't relent to your strange posts, and your foul swearing, all of this is an abominable stench to the nostrils.
What have you posted on the topic? You've done your best to get the subject off track through some vile motive because, as you've admitted before, noone visits your blog.

If you have the intelligence to understand my simply written and clear comments agreeing with the sentiments of the anon poster at 12:23-25 regards the dangers of the Cutting Edge blog, you would not have continued your ludicrous responses and evasion of my points. Or was, as I suspect, it an angry stubborn tantrum on your part? Was it nothing but an expression of your puffed up pride and dirision of anything exposing the dangers of the New Age? You are a very selfish person, puffed up and angry, a ruinous woman if ever there was one! I and others have been patient with you beyond the call of duty. You are not a helpless child Christine! May the Lord rebuke you for your hypocrisy!

As for the anon poster at 11:13 AM, take the log out of your own eye first! You say nothing about Christine's foul language at all. Sure, I perhaps could have written my last two posts with a bit more gentle diplomacy, once again cotton wooling Christine as she inks venomous arrogance all over this blog. But I am human and until she can mend her ways have had it with her!

So, without futher ado anon 11:13, you see that I and Physicist are not just cowering and grovelling in response to your comments about the 'hardest of hard hearts' and your unfair judging.

In addition, there is Christine's foul language, promotion of witchcraft, and twisting of Holy Scripture (Christine's recent posts deceptively and deviously insisting chakras are spoken about and in a fair light at that in Ecclesiastes)show why others including myself are not very friendly with Christine.

P.S., Christine, how you of all people have the audacity to call others trolls is beyond me. You are the queen of trolls, as your words and actions portray.

I urge anon 11:13 AM and Christine to repent, and direct the pair of you to Proverbs 22 KJV.

http://kingjbible.com/proverbs/22.htm

Frank.

Anonymous said...

God is no respecter of persons, no phd, no what ever degree, etc. The world in their wisdom reject God's word, so God has told us He has choosen (to use His) 'foolishness', ( which is far wiser than any worldly wisdom - preaching His Word), to save whoever would (repent and humble-them-self and) believe. But we are fore-warned, that not many will. So today, if you hear His Voice, do not harden your heart, but take His word as the very word of Almighy God, in whose hand, is your very next and every breath.

Anonymous said...

Now ... let's recall also ... a soft answer turns away wrath ... and above all, God delights in mercy, and WILL dwell with those who have a broken and contrite heart , and so tremble to do His word. (I'm preaching to myself here also, because I need His continual cleansing and exhortation to with fear and trembling work out the awesome salvation He has given me, continually being made aware that He is in me, both to will and do His pleasure, rather than to just follow my fleshy urges, which is what, except by the grace of God, we all tend to do.) Note: we are all exhorted to GROW in grace and knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ. Baruch HaShem!!!

Anonymous said...

Now ... back to the topic of overcoming the evil plans of 'Big Bro' ... according to God's word. I am reminded again of Rom 12:1,2-21 and Mat 5,6,7 and especially overcoming by faith in His Blood, His very life's blood poured to cleanse us from every sin and our sure defense against all accusations. Now we are told that if we have died with Him, we will also be raised by Him, to live, even now, a new life. In our zeal to correct false teaching, the hallmark of that new life is still ... 'see how they love one-another'

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

I haven't used foul language here in a long time. Be fair. Only the biblical word skubala which covers a range from poop to garbage, and I thank Physicist for turning me on to that word.

I have NEVER promoted witchcraft, and you don't know anything about it if you think I have, or else you are just engaging in false accusation. The foul language thing
is not false entirely, but out of date enough to be false, certainly the implication of your phrasing, that it is a current issue, is false.

I don't expect people to cower just investigate sources and follow links and study a matter before condemning it out of hand, especially because of some received scientific tradition that works most of the time but historically there is more to it, and to use discernment not look for "authorities" online.

I did not engage in any evasion about your complaints about cutting edge, I answered it directly, and you were accusing them falsely, they EXPLICITLY supported the KJV TEXT and TRANSLATION but noticed wierd stuff in the art and illumination of first letters in that first edition.

Peace to all and Merry Christmas aka Nativity, the choice of Dec. 25 having more to do with hanukkah than solar worship. Also, the timing on both events is a rebuke to the worshippers of false light, here the TRUE Light Jesus came into the world.

Anonymous said...

All of the last posts are very nice, but they did not stop the Holocaust, the killings in Stalinist Russia, and the killings of Christians going on right now in countries under Islamic control. All of which can be tied to the New Age movement.

While the physical bodies of posters here are safe right now, so few people are doing anything about the future. I do my best, but feel very lonely in my efforts.

Posters here seem to think that sharing information among themselves is enough. I have never read of anyone doing anything more. No one cares enough, even here, to challenge people like Christine.

Even on this very unimportant blog so few people are willing to take a stand against someone whose views go against everything this blog is supposed to stand for, Even Constance doesn't take a stand against anything problematic here.

I guess, following the lead of every one else, the only thing left is to keep one's mouth closed, say nothing, and hope for the best.

Anonymous said...

I have not accused you falsely. witchcraft is perhaps to loaded a term, as you probably did not know that was what you were promoting when you promoted and defended chakras. These are things that dirctly pertain to the occult and sorcery, whether cloaked in major false religions such as Hindooism or not. To promote such is to therefore promote the occultic things of sorcery, i.e., witchcraft! Furthermore, you previously claimed chakras are mentioned in the Ecclesiastes in the way you did is to aim to bring the Holy Bible into question.

I agree you relaxed and bettered for sometime and I got on with you. I do not like all your tactics nor much of what you post here but as a person I actually like you and your direct and honest approach but I yearn for you to apply it to exposing things unbiblical, for you to swallow your stubbornness and pride sometimes as I also need to learn to do again. If I have hurt you, I am sorry for my angry rashness and for the over-the-top comments I made at 3:26PM, 3:44PM, and 5:09 PM. I was angry with your approach to individuals and this blog on this current page.

I did not accuse Cutting Edge FALSELY at all! I exposed Cutting Edge. Read all comments, mine and others here.

Anyway. It is sad that I am again tangled in arguing with you and behaving in an unbecoming manner at points. Please ask God to truly humble you and to move you from your stubborness, as I must also do. I do believe you owe Constance an apology seeing as this is her blog and you have openly denegrated her without reason whether intentional on your part or not.

Christian love,

Frank

Anonymous said...

In my last comment at 6:51 PM, I should have made clear it is addressed to Christine.

Frank

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

"Furthermore, you previously claimed chakras are mentioned in the Ecclesiastes in the way you did is to aim to bring the Holy Bible into question."

No, it is to use the authority of The Holy Bible to support the existence of something, which is misused by the occult.

a very good article I put a link to once, would be a great weapon against New Age practices because it points out they are targetting your chakras for harm.

you said cutting edge denied the validity of the KJV, which it DEFENDS, it is only the artists who illustrated the early edition that they contend with. And it isn't even a matter you can find mentioned on the front page, I had to search with KJV and cuttingedge as terms to find it.

There is hardly any site that doesn't have something wrong anyway, and yet has at least one thing right, often many things.

Anonymous said...

Christine, in my second paragraph at 6:51 PM I should have clarlified where I wrote, ...' but I yearn for you to apply it to exposing things unbiblical ...', and added 'and to also promote things Biblically correct'.

Frank

Anonymous said...

In my limited view of things, Christine is this blog's view of encountering the New Age movement on a small scale.

Those who finally understand what New Age is about keep learning. They analyze carefully the information they encounter. They don't discard information easily, but try to understand why it was brought to their attention. They grow in their understanding of what is happening.

They may not have professional credentials though they understand how important credentials are in speaking to an uninformed public. (This is why I refer to Constance and her connection to the University of Michigan so often when I speak to those new to the topic.)

Christine, on the other hand, seems to bring New Age to my attention. She links to the same views, though not the same links, over and over again. She never backs down. She is persistent. She appears well-meaning (and how does one face down a well-meaning person). Her views have only the backing of alternative sources mostly connected with the New Age movement.

When we look at the New Age movement we have to go past "I think." We have to go past sources which we likely would agree with, such as established Christian and Jewish organizations. Yes, quotes from the Bible are valuable, but they need to be viewed in light of the world around us.

,

Anonymous said...

In my limited view of things, Christine is this blog's view of encountering the New Age movement on a small scale.

Those who finally understand what New Age is about keep learning. They analyze carefully the information they encounter. They don't discard information easily, but try to understand why it was brought to their attention. They grow in their understanding of what is happening.

They may not have professional credentials though they understand how important credentials are in speaking to an uninformed public. (This is why I refer to Constance and her connection to the University of Michigan so often when I speak to those new to the topic.)

Christine, on the other hand, seems to bring New Age to my attention. She links to the same views, though not the same links, over and over again. She never backs down. She is persistent. She appears well-meaning (and how does one face down a well-meaning person). Her views have only the backing of alternative sources mostly connected with the New Age movement.

When we look at the New Age movement we have to go past "I think." We have to go past sources which we likely would agree with, such as established Christian and Jewish organizations. Yes, quotes from the Bible are valuable, but they need to be viewed in light of the world around us.

,

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

things unbiblical - okay, read Revelation about the mark of the beast. This is a symbol and/or his name and/or his number, which is branded or tattooed on the right hand or forehead of a person who has worshipped him or his image.

Now, that is NOT a social security number, and it is NOT an RFID tag all of which are to distinguish one individual (person or sometimes object) from another individual.

This is some immediately visible, and it is the same on each wearer, only variation being is it name, number or symbol, but it does not identify the wearer as one individual among other individuals.

It identifies the wearer as a member of a club, like gang colors if you will, or a uniform, as being of that group of people who have worshipped the antichrist or his image.

(A dry run of this was done using a document to be carried by the worshipper of the emperor to show he had made the worship in the days of Roman emperor worship, though it was only in a few cities.)

The effort to write modern high tech stuff and cashless society into this scene are questionable at best. THERE IS NO NEED FOR A HIGH TECH CIVILIZATION TO DO ANY OF THIS.

Just indelible tattooing ink and the tattooing equipment, which does NOT have to be electrically powered since tattoos go way back before electricity was in use.

The reference to horses and blood up to the bridles here and there makes me suspect this will take place after the fall of modern civilization.

THAT DOES NOT MEAN DISLIKE OF CHIPPING IS WRONG. There are many bad problems these things can have.

THAT ALSO DOESN'T MEAN THAT MODERN SUPPORTERS OF THE ANTICHRIST OF THE FUTURE AREN'T THINKING ALONG THESE HIGH TECH INTERPRETATION LINES, AND PUSHING THESE THINGS FOR THAT AGENDA.

It just means they are in fact
1. irrelevant
2. bad in themselves for other reasons, aside from the intentions of some of the promoters.
3. usable for purposes of identification and roundup of whoever incl. Christians (though some "Christians" are so hairbrained and violent and unbibllical, like the Bible twisting Reconstruction and Theonomy crowds, that they belong in the FEMA camps).

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

my alternative sources are not mostly only rarely connected to the NAM, many are specifically Christian. many could be called neutral. the value is the historical and technical facts presented nothing more. Christian sites are not new Scripture and if you are looking for new Scripture and inspired inerrant truth other than The Holy Bible, you won't find it.

Anonymous said...

Christine, it comes as some surprise for you to accuse me (at 3.36am) of stubbornness when you consistently refuse to change your mind about matters of physical science after it is explained in detail how your comments are based on misunderstanding. For a time I did (and occasionally still do) my best to educate you, but you have proved to be ineducable on the subject and with regret I now write here on physics mainly to prevent others being taken in by you.

I am no better than you, I just know more physics than you. Doubtless there are subjects on which you know more than me. But when I meet an expert on a subject in which I am interested and about which I know little, I take the opportunity to learn.

Physicist

Anonymous said...

One of my sources wrote the following response to something I shared. Christine fits the pattern described.

"Yes, the information overload is spot on, especially when they also have roped you
into a situation where they also control your time. When there is not any time to explore
another view. You are stuck with theirs if you allowed yourself to be exposed to it
because you were given the parts you like. Then they can expand on that. Then they can
add the lies which you can not check up on because they are controlling your time
at the conference or retreat place. You can not leave their Restaurant table that you
paid for and go to a local Library (which is also controlled by them)....
I wonder, if folks with laptops try to check up on information? That would be difficult too.
They would control the efficiency of that by hacking you and the events are usually run
so that you have to be passive and listen to them and there would not be an opportunity
to check information on a laptop as you would appear to be rude...as all your moments
are controlled by them."

This is how brain-washing works!"

Yes, this is how Christine uses our time.

Anonymous said...

No ... we are commanded to speak the truth in (agape) love ... the kind of love that is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit that has been given to us. If God so loved us ... as aged John writes to us ... My (dear) little children ... love one another... even to the point of giving our life, as Yeshua did for us ... for if we would be 'Overcomers' ... we are also not to love our life ... Rev 12:11

Anonymous said...

No ... We are to speak the truth in (agape) love. And be willing to lay down our lives for our Lord as per Rev. 12:11 ... if we would be overcomers of 'big bro'

Anonymous said...

PART 1

In response to Christine at 6:56 PM.

Christine you wrote regarding your previous claims that chakras are in Ecclesiates:

'No, it is to use the authority of The Holy Bible to support the existence of something, which is misused by the occult.'

Christine, nowhere in the Holy Bible, neither in Ecclesiates nor anywhere else in Holy Scripture, are chakras referenced. However, sorcery (witchcraft) is talked about and forbidden in the Holy Bible, chakras are part of the deception that pertains to sorcery and the kundalini demon. There are in fact no chakras whatsoever in the human or any other body. To claim there is is a lie from the bowels of Hell. To claim chakras are simply misused by sorcery (implying they actually exist and have a proper use apart from a deceptive device to pull people into false beliefs and getting them to dance with the kundalini demon), is like claiming channelling is misused by those in sorcery, implying it may have a proper use for those wanting to contact a dead relative because they are still grieving. Whereas in fact, both the deceptions of chakras and channelling is inseparable from sorcery and the lies and deceptions of Satan!

You are a New Ager Christine, whether you know it or not, and you need to repent of this and ask God for guidance and revelation as to why this is wrong. You are a danger to young Christians not yet weened from the milk, even if you are one yourself (you can be 60 and still be a young Christian Christine).

Moreeover, you continue: '
a very good article I put a link to once, would be a great weapon against New Age practices because it points out they are targetting your chakras for harm.'

I reiterate, Christine, thewre are no such thing as chakras! You are talking New Age rubbish! It is like claiming that there's white and black magic, andf the former is okay. No, Christine, all sorcery and things pertaining to it, including promoting chakras, are wrong and of the Devil.

Christine, you come across as a spiritual thornbush and yet you want us to believe we can gather grapes from you.

Christine, I repent for having called you honest earlier. It was naive of me to do so. You are cunning and dishonest in the extreme!

Cutting Edge does not defend the KJV, it brings it into question. Go back and read all my and others comments on this. Stop selecting parts for your own benefit! David Bay of Cutting Edge claims that his and those of Cutting Edge's: 'research indicates that the official KJV scholarship committee completed their work in 1610 and handed the manuscript to King James. The King then promptly gave that manuscript to Sir Francis Bacon, who possessed it for about one year, until 1611, when he handed the manuscript back to the King, who promptly sent it to his official printer'. Where is David Bay's evidence? I have already stated earlier that King James was a committed Christian as his writings show. I have also told you that there is no evidence for David Bay of Cutting Edge's claims that is why he provides none.

Frank.

Anonymous said...

PART 2

In response to Christine at 6:56 PM continued.

David bay, urging us to remember his 'main premise' at Cutting Edge also writes, ' some of the most evil men in world history had their hands on the King James Bible from the inside out...', yet where is his evidence? He slanders a well known Christian, authoriser and commissioner of the KJV translation, yet provides no evidence, despite there being reems of evidence to contradict David Bay's nonsense. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence yet ?David Bay does not even provide a sub-standard attempt at proving this, and unless he is naive to the extreme and knows not what he is saying, then he knows he cannot because he knows it is untrue, which is why he adds the caveat, ' they could not change one bit of the text', and therefore causes anyone with an ounce of discernment to have to wonder howe his motives could be other than to aim to question the standing of the KJV and to get people embarking on a wild goose chase, where the gullible are in danger of straying into the treacherous waters of New Age sites such as that of the vile liar and blasphemer Jordan Maxwell!

It angers me that I have had to repeat myself from things I've already shown in other posts just because of your dishonestly presented responses, which are liable to lure the unsuspecting into those very waters I have just warned about.

You are the false accuser Christine, as any honest and clear headed person here will see.

Furthermore, where's the evidence about the Protestant ministers that I asked you to provide after your outrageous claims and vicious attack on the poster Paul's credibility?

I put it to you Christine that you are just like David Bay's tactics at Cutting Edge (so rightly warned of by an earlier anon poster's 3 posts at 12:23 -25 PM). You are here to distract, detract, cause division, deceive, get people wasting their time (including me), and you speak falsehoods against the Holy Bible such as your points on chakras. Yes, you can misquote or dishonestly use passages from the Bible for your own ends, even Satan does that!

Yet to properly refer to Holy Scripture Christine, I tell you by their fruits shall ye know them. You Christine, are bearing the fruit of the deadly nightshade and the yew tree!

Christine, you also write: 'There is hardly any site that doesn't
have something wrong anyway...'

Yes, but those worth their salt do not attack the true history of the Holy Bible, nor deliberately claim falsehoods, slandering the reputations of good Christians, and attempt to lead people astray!

I apologised to you, yet you did not do so in turn to Constance, Paul, physicist, nor myself for the awful misrepresentation, denegration, insults, and humiliation that you have tried in one way or another to direct at us.

I repent for calling you honest, you are not! And I realise, that although I am to love you, and my exposing of you is part of this in hope that you repent, I really do not like you at all.

You are foul-mouthed, with a lying, accusing and decieving spirit, roaming this blog seeking whom you can devour! You are of your father the Devil because having a seered conscience you do the things he does!

If anyone is in any doubt over what I have written here then I
emplore them to carefully study all comments made on the pages of this current topic. Don't spend too long though, as that is just what Christine wants you to do, i.e, do not waste too much time nor pay too much interest in the self-seeking mischief of a certain attention seeking Christine.

Frank.

Anonymous said...

Besides the various typing errors and the occasional grammatical slip up, I wish to clarify a point from the last paragraph of part 1 of my comments here at 2:19 PM.

I wrote: 'Cutting Edge does not defend the KJV, it brings it into question.'

However, I should have been clearer and written:
Cutting Edge does not defend the KJV, it attempts to bring it into question.

Frank

Anonymous said...

'The US government, with assistance from major telecommunications carriers including AT&T, has engaged in a massive program of illegal dragnet surveillance of domestic communications and communications records of millions of ordinary Americans since at least 2001.'

'News reports in December 2005 first revealed that the National Security Agency (NSA) has been intercepting Americans’ phone calls and Internet communications. Those news reports, combined with a USA Today story in May 2006 and the statements of several members of Congress, revealed that the NSA is also receiving wholesale copies of American's telephone and other communications records. All of these surveillance activities are in violation of the privacy safeguards established by Congress and the US Constitution.'

'The evidence also shows that the government did not act alone. EFF has obtained whistleblower evidence [PDF] from former AT&T technician Mark Klein showing that AT&T is cooperating with the illegal surveillance ...'

www.eff.org/nsa-spying

See also:

http://rt.com/usa/news/nsa-whistleblower-binney-drake-978/

or

http://tinyurl.com/cfq77q4


and

http://www.businessinsider.com/nsa-spying-4th-amendment-2012-8

or

http://tinyurl.com/936pttk


Frank.

Anonymous said...

Here's a link to the American Civil Liberties Union web-page with some interesting links on the subject of the Government spying on citizens:

www.aclu.org/spy-files


Frank

Anonymous said...

This blog's comments section is really about nothing or no-one else but Christine and Christine is the blog's mule.

Anonymous said...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdI3Gsplm_Y

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

http://www.activistpost.com/2012/08/as-above-so-below-globalist-agenda.html

the COG or Council of Government is not the same as COG Continuity of Government issue discussed by many conspiracy and corruption and so forth watchers.

Anonymous said...

Bravo, Frank, for the post.

Christine has locked up this blog for more than a year now and the conversation does not change:
Christine promotes the new age. Everyone else is stupid.

I think even Constance refuses to read her own blog anymore.



Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

peace and blessing to you Frank, in Jesus' Name.

why are you so hung up on chakras? did you have a NAM background that began by this means?

so what if there is an etheric reality side of the body, do you not as a Christian believe that something survives after physical death? Or are you one of those heretics the Jehovah's Witnesses who recreate all major heresies Christianity fought and rejected from the first century to now, or some heretic group like Christadelphians who hold to some minimal one or two heresies?

If you accept something survives the bodily death just what do you think it is doing BEFORE death, eh?

THERE IS NO LOGICAL CONNECTION - regardless of NAM says - BETWEEN "ASTRAL" BODY ETC. AND NAM DOCTRINES ESPECIALLY PANTHEISM, REINCARNATION, AND SELF AS GOD.

They have absolutely no relationship to each other. Total non sequitur.

New Age propaganda is heavily non sequitur. ask physicist what that word means.

just because the sun in the sky exists, does not prove it is divine despite the claims of sun worshippers.


"Remember your Creator before the silver cord is loosed, or the golden bowl is broken, or the pitcher shattered at the fountain, or the wheel broken at the well. Then the dust will return to the earth as it was, and the spirit will return to God who gave it. (NKJV) Eccl. 12:6-7

http://www.neverthirsty.org/pp/bible-questions/answer00009-what-is-the-silver-cord.html attempts to solve this puzzle by citing possible means of death, head wound, heart as the wheel, etc. but the silver cord as spinal cord? separated meaning taken far away? that is not a spinal severing injury.

http://biblesuite.com/hebrew/1534.htm

galgal is a wheel, whirling wind, chariot wheels, not a pumping blob.

http://spokensanskrit.de/index.php?tinput=wheel&script=&direction=ES&link=yes

you can see cakra or chakra is wheel in the same sense, so much so that it is part of the word cakrasanda or wheelchair.

same concept. something round or roundish and usually, or sometimes, or at least potentially, rotating.

The term silver cord in use in out of body research, and the realm they go to is highly deceptive I don't recommend this, originates from that passage in the KJV because that is what the connection to the body looks like to the bilocator. Apparently there are many cords not just one but the overall impression is one, but the connection depends on where you went out from.

JUST HOW DO THESE EXPERIENCES PROVE NAM SELF DEITY or PANTHEISM or REINCARNATION false doctrines?

They don't. they are totally irrelevant.

And if you can stop spewing and start using this argument with your NAM acquaintances, or family members? you could go a long way to ripping the rug out from under them.

even the politics and the all is one or should be nonsense is NOT supported by chakras or OOBE, but the IRRATIONAL MISEQUATION is used
to lead many from this to a range of lies, nonsense, delusion, and worse.

undercut the supports and call the rest into question.

undercut the supports by showing there IS NO LOGICAL CONNECTION BETWEEN CHAKRAS ETC. and what the NAM step by step or faster tries to lead you into using it.

Anonymous said...

Actually, anon 5:26 pm, I think Christine is this blog's tar baby......................

Anonymous said...

The Lord Jesus Christ rebuke you Christine for continuing to insist on and disseminate New Age ideas, i.e., aspects of sorcery found in false religions such as Hindooism.

Now I know standards in the Eastern Orthodox churches have been slipping recently but I am still sure that such blatantly New Age ideas as you possess are not tolerated in such churches, unless of course the parish to which you belong is run by Orthodoxy's very own answer to Pierre Teilhard de Chardin!

You clearly have little understanding of the historicity of linguistics, as your comments on chakras are etymologically, philologically and semantically nonsensical. Yet you pretend authority (as you also do with physics) and imply such a Sanskrit derivative has any philological and etymological bearing upon Ancient Hebraic semantics is similtaneously lamentable and laughable! The word chakra, its connotations and denotations, its philology and epistomology, and any variant evolution of it, has no bearing whatsoever on the semantic development of Ancient Hebrew, nor any Semitic language!

It (chakra or cakra) is neither a linguistic nor a conceptual signifier for anything signified in Ecclesiastes or anywhere in the Holy Bible. What you are doing is eisegetical and it is Biblically forbidden to add, take away, or twist Holy Scripture as you have done Christine.

The tactics you’re employing are typically New Age, the aim of which is to deceive anyone whose Christian faith is not strong enough nor is their discernment mature enough to see through it.

Physics, linguistics, or other branches of knowledge are not wrong to learn, it is commendable to reason and to search a matter thoroughly. In and of themselves they are in accordance with whole of Holy Writ. It is only when people such as yourself add Gnosticism or lean on their own understanding, ignoring Holy Scripture, that a problem arises. Then people who have understanding of such fields are right to employ them to refute and correct, exhort, expose and rebuke, where necessary anything or anyone applying them dihonestly or erroneously which aims to distort the truth of the Holy Bible and the traditions of the Christian faith once delivered unto the saints. You keep leaning on your own understanding Christine, you are like the scribes and Pharisees implementing the lies of the Ancient Babylonian mystery schools, forever learning and never understanding.

I am a born again Christian. I am not a member of the cult that calls itself Jehovah's Witness. I believe that when I die I will immediately be taken to be in the presence of God and will be in Heaven, just as my Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ when on the cross had promised to the repentant thief, who was one of two also crucified next to Him.

Just because I expose it, taking heed and warning others not to be decieved by it and its adherents, such as yourself does not mean I have ever dabbled in New Age practices. I have never been a New Ager in the same as Constance hasn't!

If I had been a New Ager I would admit it as part of my Christian tesimony and witness against it!

You Christine, however, still bare all the fruits of a lying deceiving New Ager.

STOP WASTING MINE AND EVERYONE ELSE'S TIME!

The Lords rebuke you for twisting His Word!

Frank.

Anonymous said...

Correction to the end part of the third line of my third paragraph, which originally read: ... 'upon Ancient Hebraic semantics is similtaneously'...

It should read: ... 'upon Ancient Hebraic semantics, which is similtaneously'...


Frank.

Anonymous said...

CORRECTION


PART 1

The Lord Jesus Christ rebuke you Christine for your continuing to insist on and disseminate New Age ideas, especially your promotion of those aspects of sorcery found in false religions such as Hindooism.

Now I know standards in the Eastern Orthodox churches have been slipping recently but I am still sure that such blatantly New Age ideas as you possess are not tolerated in such churches, unless of course the parish to which you belong is run by Orthodoxy's very own answer to Pierre Teilhard de Chardin!

You clearly have little understanding of the historicity of linguistics. Your comments on chakras are etymologically, philologically and semantically nonsensical. Yet Christine, you pretend authority (as you also do with physics) and erroneously imply such a Sanskrit derivative has any philological and etymological bearing upon Ancient Hebraic semantics, which is similtaneously lamentable and laughable!

The word chakra, its connotations and denotations, its philology and epistomology, and any variant evolution of it, has no bearing whatsoever on the semantic, nor general or any specific lingistic development, of Ancient Hebrew, nor any Semitic language!

It (chakra or cakra) is neither a linguistic nor a conceptual signifier for anything signified in Ecclesiastes or anywhere in the Holy Bible. What you are doing is eisegetical and it is Biblically forbidden to add, take away, or twist Holy Scripture as you have done Christine.

The tactics you’re employing are typically New Age, the aim of which is to deceive anyone whose Christian faith is not strong enough nor is their discernment mature enough to see through it.

Physics, linguistics, or other branches of knowledge are not wrong to learn, it is commendable to reason and to search a matter thoroughly. In and of themselves they are in accordance with the whole of Holy Writ. It is only when people such as yourself add Gnosticism or lean on their own understanding, ignoring Holy Scripture, that a problem arises. Then people who have understanding of such fields are right to employ their knowledge in order to refute and correct, exhort, expose and rebuke, where necessary anything or anyone applying them dihonestly or erroneously which aims to distort the truth of the Holy Bible and the traditions of the Christian faith once delivered unto the saints.

You keep leaning on your own understanding Christine, you are like the scribes and Pharisees in your implementation of the lies of the Ancient Babylonian mystery schools. Christine, you are forever learning and never understanding.

Frank

Anonymous said...

PART 2

You questioned my faith in what can be understood as nothing more than a further ruse by you to try and decieve whomsoever you can into falling for the lies you promote. The Biblical truth is, man is a tripartite being made of spirit, soul and body, as expressed by St. Paul in 1 Thessalonians 5:23 ([KJV] 'And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ'), none of which pertains to supposed chakras!

Moreover, I am a born again Christian. I am not a member of the cult that calls itself Jehovah's Witness. I believe that when I die I will immediately be taken to be in the presence of God and will be in Heaven, just as my Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ when on the cross had promised to the repentant thief, who was one of two also crucified next to Him.

Just because I determine to expose the New Age and all things unbiblical for the filth they are, taking heed and warning others not to be decieved by the New Age movement (or any false teaching), its ideas, and its adherents, such as yourself, does not mean I have ever dabbled in New Age practices. I have never been a New Ager in the same way as Constance Cumbey hasn't!

If I had been a New Ager I would have admitted it as part of my Christian tesimony and witness against it!

You Christine, however, have previously admitted to having dabbled in New Age practices, and you sadly still defend such, and you still bare all the fruits of a lying deceiving New Ager.

STOP WASTING MINE AND EVERYONE ELSE'S TIME!

The Lord rebuke you for twisting His Word!

Frank.

Anonymous said...

Lol, In Part 1 of my post (10:45 AM) I have again made a mistake(I guess that comes from trying to do many things at once). At the beginning of the fourth paragragh I have written, '[t]he word chakra, its connotations and denotations, its philology and epistomology [the correct spelling is epistemology of course]...', yet should have written: The word chakra, its connotations and denotations, its philology and etymology (...)

Still Christine, seeing as you mistake gnosis for epistemology, you are ontologically deluded into believing a lie (such as the lie that there is such a thing as chakras), rather than being a good Berean and searching the Holy Scriptures diligently to find the truth of the matter, as you are exhorted to do. Repent and be saved Christine.

Frank.

Anonymous said...

Enough of corrections ...paragraph ...

Smiles,

Frank.

Anonymous said...

New Age types thrive on emotional blackmail and arguments from suspicion on the supposed motives of others. An indication that someone is not doing too well on the facts.


Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

chakras are a part of the soul, nephesh is a term that is both the immortal part that interfaces spirit also immortal with the body, and a term that covers the entire body soul spirit spectrum. At death the denser part body drops off the rest goes on.

I see you are still spewing. I wonder if you have a certain freudian projection problem.

I have read THE ENTIRE BIBLE KJV COVER TO COVER three times, each time took three or four months to finish it. I have probably forgotten more than you ever knew.

Having an occultic background is useful for recognizing it, and is a feature of major anti NAM writers.

So, you are born again from childhood.

Tell me about your church. Charismatic by any chance?

chakra means WHEEL. galgal means WHEEL, and is used in Eccles. to refer to some feature of the body or soul that breaks (and when a wheel breaks what does it do? it stops turning) at death.

If you were to translate Hebrew galgal to Sanskrit you would use chakra.

I have used occult background in testimony, even here. more so elsewhere.

Anonymous said...

Christine, Chakras are an occultic concept propounded by the false religion, Hinduism. According to Hindooism, there are supposedly seven of these chakras dispersed throughout the body. These are supposedly energies, and the higher up the body these chakras supposedly are the closer they supposedly are to affording the person whose body it is spiritual enlightenment. This is supposedly done by opening or unblocking the supposed chakras through supposed transcendental meditation. Also, chakras themselves are supposed to be intangible and invisible energies which are supposedly located in areas of the body, as opposed to being parts of the body themselves.

Transcendental meditation where one relinquishes power over their bodies and minds by dispelling true thought is the complete opposite to Christian meditation where one contemplates the Holy Scriptures in a thinking and rational manner.

The things that Ecclesiastes 12:6 is describing are not supposed spiritual energies that one opens and unblocks through transcendental meditation or otherwise. Neither is there seven things mentioned in Ecclesiastes 12:6. They can be interpreted as being physical areas of the body employing vital functions to keep our bodies alive and still habitable for our spirits to dwell in. They have nothing to do with the concept of chakras at all.

Chakras are a gnostic claim and have no basis in Holy Scripture. They are a deception that opens man up to the dangers of demonic possession, and are akin in their supposed changes in consciousness and enlightenment to the supposed 10 sephirot of the Kabbalah. Both sephirot and chakras have their origins in the sorceries of the Ancient Babylon mystery schools and are lies from the pit of Hell. They are not endorsed nor their existence supported anywhere in Holy Scripture.

http://bible.cc/ecclesiastes/12-6.htm

If you have not realised this and you are not deliberately out to deceive people on this blog or elsewhere and you have merely some baggage you are still trying to deal with as perhaps a new Christian then I am sorry for my abruptness sometimes. I do not mean to be wantonly unkind to you Christine.

However, if you know what you are doing, and if after correction you persist in this, you leave anyone reading this blog with no option other than to assume you are still an active New Ager.

May you find peace, and I pray the Heavenly Father, His Son our Lord Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit reveal the truth as really contained in the Holy Scripture to you.

May God bless you with humility and a contrite spirit.

Frank.

Anonymous said...

Christine, just because I call myself a born again Christian does not mean I am part of a so-called charasmatic movement. Just because others may use or usurp the term does not mean I belong to their club, in the same way as Jehovah's Witnesses are not witnesses for Jehovah, i.e., Yahweh, at all but rather are blind and wretched people deceived by an evil system and trapped in legalism.

I am a Christian because I am a believer in and a follower of my Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. I therefore believe in God. That is, I believe in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit as three Persons in one Agreement. These Three are therefore One.

I cherish those living traditions once delivered unto the saints as described throughout Holy Scripture and only hold to that which is in harmony with Holy Scripture as being of God.

What do I mean by being born again? All true Christians are born again. This does not mean they are members of so-called charasmatic churches that use the term. I believe in Jesus Christ and what John has recorded of Him and His teachings. Don't you?

http://kingjbible.com/john/3.htm


What does it mean to be a born again Christian?

http://www.gotquestions.org/born-again.html


http://kingjbible.com/john/3.htm

Anonymous said...

Christine, Chakras are an occultic concept propounded by the false religion, Hinduism.

According to Hindooism, there are supposedly seven of these chakras dispersed throughout the body. These are supposedly energies, and the higher up the body these chakras supposedly are the closer they supposedly are to affording the person whose body it is spiritual enlightenment. This is supposedly done by opening or unblocking the supposed chakras through supposed transcendental meditation. Also, chakras themselves are supposed to be intangible and invisible energies which are supposedly located in areas of the body, as opposed to being parts of the body themselves.

Transcendental meditation where one relinquishes power over their bodies and minds by dispelling true thought is the complete opposite to Christian meditation where one contemplates the Holy Scriptures in a thinking and rational manner.

The things that Ecclesiastes 12:6 is describing are not supposed spiritual energies that one opens and unblocks through transcendental meditation or otherwise. Neither is there seven things mentioned in Ecclesiastes 12:6. They can be interpreted as being physical areas of the body employing vital functions to keep our bodies alive and still habitable for our spirits to dwell in. They have nothing to do with the concept of chakras at all.

Chakras are a gnostic claim and have no basis in Holy Scripture. They are a deception that opens man up to the dangers of demonic possession, and are akin in their supposed changes in consciousness and enlightenment to the supposed 10 sephirot of the Kabbalah. Both sephirot and chakras have their origins in the sorceries of the Ancient Babylon mystery schools and are lies from the pit of Hell. They are not endorsed nor their existence supported anywhere in Holy Scripture.

http://bible.cc/ecclesiastes/12-6.htm

If you have not realised this and you are not deliberately out to deceive people on this blog or elsewhere and you have merely some baggage you are still trying to deal with as perhaps a new Christian then I am sorry for my abruptness sometimes. I do not mean to be wantonly unkind to you Christine.

However, if you know what you are doing, and if after correction you persist in this, you leave anyone reading this blog with no option other than to assume you are still an active New Ager.

May you find peace, and I pray the Heavenly Father, His Son our Lord Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit reveal the truth as really contained in the Holy Scripture to you.

May God bless you with humility and a contrite spirit.

Frank.

Anonymous said...

Christine, just because I call myself a born again Christian does not mean I am part of a so-called charasmatic movement. Just because others may use or usurp the term does not mean I belong to their club, in the same way as Jehovah's Witnesses are not witnesses for Jehovah, i.e., Yahweh, at all but rather are blind and wretched people deceived by an evil system and trapped in legalism.

I am a Christian because I am a believer in and a follower of my Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. I therefore believe in God. That is, I believe in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit as three Persons in one Agreement. These Three are therefore One.

I cherish those living traditions once delivered unto the saints as described throughout Holy Scripture and only hold to that which is in harmony with Holy Scripture as being of God.

What do I mean by being born again? All true Christians are born again. This does not mean they are members of so-called charasmatic churches that use the term. I believe in Jesus Christ and what John has recorded of Him and His teachings. Don't you?

http://kingjbible.com/john/3.htm


What does it mean to be a born again Christian?

http://www.gotquestions.org/born-again.html


http://kingjbible.com/john/3.htm

Anonymous said...

Christine, just because I call myself a born again Christian does not mean I am part of a so-called charasmatic movement. Just because others may use or usurp the term does not mean I belong to their club, in the same way as Jehovah's Witnesses are not witnesses for Jehovah, i.e., Yahweh, at all but rather are blind and wretched people deceived by an evil system and trapped in legalism.

I am a Christian because I am a believer in and a follower of my Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. I therefore believe in God. That is, I believe in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit as three Persons in one Agreement. These Three are therefore One.

I cherish those living traditions once delivered unto the saints as described throughout Holy Scripture and only hold to that which is in harmony with Holy Scripture as being of God.

What do I mean by being born again? All true Christians are born again. This does not mean they are members of so-called charasmatic churches that use the term. I believe in Jesus Christ and what John has recorded of Him and His teachings. Don't you?

http://kingjbible.com/john/3.htm


What does it mean to be a born again Christian?

http://www.gotquestions.org/born-again.html


http://kingjbible.com/john/3.htm


Frank

Anonymous said...

In addition you talk about translation. This however has no bearing whatsoever on philology, etyology nor especially as to whether the same connotations are used.

I have already shown why.

Frank.

Anonymous said...

In addition you talk about translation. This however has no bearing whatsoever on philology, etymology nor especially as to whether the same connotations are used.

I have already shown why.

Frank.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

What you have missed is what I already said on this. What hinduism says about chakras is wrong.

the hindu goal is to progressively detach you from mere physical life, and frankly it looks like a labor intensive form of suicide. hinduism like the gnostic heresy despises the physical universe,

ERGO THEIR VIEW OF WHAT CHAKRAS SHOULD LOOK AND ACT LIKE AND BE USED FOR

IS AUTOMATICALLY SUSPECT. mostly wrong.

There is nothing spiritual or superior about blasting and rewiring your mind to go into a bliss and/or coma (parasamadhi).
It can be done, but there is no merit and more likely demerit at the last judgement.

pagans say sun and moon are gods.
But they are not gods. But they DO exist.

hindus and new agers say chakras have such and such a purpose that is "spiritual" and should be in a certain condition.

but these purposes are false.

nonetheless, bioenergy centers exist.

New Age use of chakras is mostly an abuse of them.

Anonymous said...

I have not missed it Christine. Chakras are a demonic deception, the use of the word has its origins in Sanskrit and the beliefs of Hindooism. It is inseparable from this fact. A deception is a deception is a deception Christine no matter how much you dust it down and iron it. Go back and read my comments again.

Frank.

Anonymous said...

I have not missed it Christine. Chakras are a demonic deception, the use of the word has its origins in Sanskrit and the beliefs of Hindooism. It is inseparable from this fact. A deception is a deception is a deception Christine no matter how much you dust it down and iron it. Go back and read my comments again.

Frank.

Anonymous said...

I have not missed it Christine. Chakras are a demonic deception, the use of the word has its origins in Sanskrit and the beliefs of Hindooism. It is inseparable from this fact. A deception is a deception is a deception Christine no matter how much you dust it down and iron it. Go back and read my comments again.

Frank.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

"In addition you talk about translation. This however has no bearing whatsoever on philology, etymology nor especially as to whether the same connotations are used.

I have already shown why."

no you have not. you have just slung big words around.

The connotations ARE THE SAME.

A wheel like object that turns or can turn. period.

In The Bible such a thing is described as being destroyed at death as part of the death process of the body.

end of subject. your argument is like saying that because galgal on a chariot is a chariot wheel reference while english wheel referring to a car wheel and tire do not have the same connotation because the structure and materials and look (and vehicle) are different.

No, it is the same connotation. Round rotating thing that a vehicle moves on. galgal = wheel.

galgal = chakra for the same reason. Check Strong's Concordance.

wheel like elements to the soul part of the body are seen by some with supernatural sight, perhaps given by God or inherited such as when a prophet prayed to God to open the eyes of a man and he then could see the invisible armies of angels in one of the books of Kings. or Chronicles. go find it.

so someone who can see the unseen, reports this wheel like whirlpools in the soul at the soul body interface.

That has no bearing on the NAM which gives a whole other interpretation on purpose and use to these wheels.

exactly what is the golden bowl as distinct from the pitcher is unclear though the latter's break could refer to urinary and bowel leakage that often happens at death when tonus is lost. And what shade of gold is implied is anyone's guess. perhaps since the person addressed is in need of being told to remember his Creator, that person's aura is the unwholesome gold that new agers think (wrongly) is a sign of great spirituality.
or perhaps it is not the brassy kind of gold but very light.

That said, before anyone runs off to get energy treatments avoid anything involving physical contact you can get influenced that way. reiki is especially evil.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

I forgot - another way hinduism and new age are wrong about chakras THERE ARE A LOT MORE THAN SEVEN OF THEM. some are minor, usually acupuncture points. But there are more than seven major ones.

Anonymous said...

Furthermore, your point about translation is irrelevant. Firstly we are talking about spiritual matters. What the various connotations of wheel are in Ancient Hebrew, especially within the framework of Tanakh Judaism are very different from those couched in the term chakra, which has its origins in Sanskrit, the false religion of Hinduism and ultimately comes from the Ancient Babylonian mystery schools as I've stated in my earlier post. All that I've said on the matter is sufficient for you to reealise that you are creating false premises and therefore your conclusion is wrong. Or, a non-sequitor as you'd have it.


Frank

Anonymous said...

Furthermore, your point about translation is irrelevant. Firstly we are talking about spiritual matters. What the various connotations of wheel are in Ancient Hebrew, especially within the framework of Tanakh Judaism are very different from those couched in the term chakra, which has its origins in Sanskrit, the false religion of Hinduism and ultimately comes from the Ancient Babylonian mystery schools as I've stated in my earlier post. All that I've said on the matter is sufficient for you to reealise that you are creating false premises and therefore your conclusion is wrong. Or, a non-sequitor as you'd have it.


Frank

Anonymous said...

Furthermore, your point about translation is irrelevant. Firstly we are talking about spiritual matters. What the various connotations of wheel are in Ancient Hebrew, especially within the framework of Tanakh Judaism are very different from those couched in the term chakra, which has its origins in Sanskrit, the false religion of Hinduism and ultimately comes from the Ancient Babylonian mystery schools as I've stated in my earlier post. All that I've said on the matter is sufficient for you to reealise that you are creating false premises and therefore your conclusion is wrong. Or, a non-sequitor as you'd have it.


Frank

Anonymous said...

Furthermore, your point about translation is irrelevant to the semiotics at play. Firstly, we are talking about spiritual matters. What the various denotations and connotations of wheel are in Ancient Hebrew, especially within the framework of Tanakh Judaism are very different from those conveyed by the term chakra, which has its origins in Sanskrit, the false religion of Hinduism and ultimately comes from the Ancient Babylonian mystery schools as I've stated in my earlier post. All that I've said on the matter is sufficient for you to reealise that you are creating false premises and therefore your conclusion is wrong. Or, a non-sequitor as you'd have it.


Frank

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

your remarks are beside the point. A lot of "spiritual" stuff is just whatever most people can't see. Some people, because of a gift from God, or an inherited mutation comparable to what makes cats and dogs see farther into UV and IR and see the stuff we can't, but we see them looking at something, and some because of demonic reasons,

CAN see.

So such a person in India sees into the normally invisible soul body interface and sees vortices and calls them wheels because they look like that.

Another such a person in Israel, sees into the normally invisible soul body interface, and sees vortices and calls them wheels because they look like that.

"And Elisha prayed, and said, LORD, I pray thee, open his eyes, that he may see. And the LORD opened the eyes of the young man; and he saw: and, behold, the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire round about Elisha." 2 Kings 6:17.

semiotics I might add could be considered a postmodern concept.

I suppose since the word for horse in sanskrit, whatever that word is, because it is from a heathen language, should not be taken as indicating an animal remotely resembling what Hebrew calls a horse exists.

Anonymous said...

Furthermore, your point about translation is irrelevant.

Firstly we are talking about spiritual matters. What the various connotations of wheel are in Ancient Hebrew, especially within the framework of Tanakh Judaism are very different from those couched in the term chakra, which has its origins in Sanskrit, the false religion of Hinduism and ultimately comes from the Ancient Babylonian mystery schools as I've stated in my earlier post.

All that I've said on the matter is sufficient for you to realise that you are creating false premises and therefore your conclusion is wrong. Or, a non-sequitor as you'd have it. Yet you persist arrogantly in this, even after being clearly shown the nonsensicality of your position.

I must therefore wipe the dust off my feet with you Christine. Apart from to rebuke where necessary I shall have no more to do with you unless and until you truly repent. You know nothing of linguistics as you know nothing of physics. That is why you claim I've just, 'slung big words around'.

Your responses, evasions, and arrogant continuance in your dissemination of delusion and deception show that you are out to deceive people on this blog and elsewhere. As I wrote to you at 3:15 PM: 'However, if you know what you are doing, and if after correction you persist in this, you leave anyone reading this blog with no option other than to assume you are still an active New Ager.'

I see even more clearly the saint like patience that physicist has shown you. You deserve a thorough rebuking from every Christian on this blog.

It is safe to conclude you are an active New Ager out to destroy this blog and deceive many if possible!

The Lord rebuke you Christine. You are unruly, rebellious, and demonic in your nature. I would not be surprised to find out you were indeed demonically possessed.

Frank.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

see the post before yours, written to answer yours, I don't know why it is before yours.

I have refuted your spirituality and tanakh this and that and heathen language issues.

It looks like a wheel, its called a galgal by a Hebrew seer, or chakra by a sanskrit speaking seer.

that's all. Nothing relevant to religion, any more than anatomy or geography is. Just another part of God's creation

to make it simple I will repeat the post you probably missed.


AND I DO NOT MAKE ANY EVASIONS. THESE ARE STRAIGHT ANSWERS. STOP YOUR FALSE ACCUSATIONS.

your remarks are beside the point. A lot of "spiritual" stuff is just whatever most people can't see. Some people, because of a gift from God, or an inherited mutation comparable to what makes cats and dogs see farther into UV and IR and see the stuff we can't, but we see them looking at something, and some because of demonic reasons,

CAN see.

So such a person in India sees into the normally invisible soul body interface and sees vortices and calls them wheels because they look like that.

Another such a person in Israel, sees into the normally invisible soul body interface, and sees vortices and calls them wheels because they look like that.

"And Elisha prayed, and said, LORD, I pray thee, open his eyes, that he may see. And the LORD opened the eyes of the young man; and he saw: and, behold, the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire round about Elisha." 2 Kings 6:17.

semiotics I might add could be considered a postmodern concept.

I suppose since the word for horse in sanskrit, whatever that word is, because it is from a heathen language, should not be taken as indicating an animal remotely resembling what Hebrew calls a horse exists.

Anonymous said...

You know nothing of linguistics Christine. I am educated at European honours degree level (almost equivilent to US masters), the nature language is my field. I am not being boastful but I know you know nothing about linguistics as you know nothing about physics.

You have evaded apologising to Constance for trying to denegrate her, you have evaded providing thorough evidence for the ridiculous claims you made for which Paul rebuked you and you in turn wrongly called him a liar. You have evaded the points physicist has made over and again regards the concept of aether or the use of HAARP etc., you have evaded my points depicting the true nature of what Ecclesiastes 12:6.

In short, Christine, you are a liar, a false accuser, and as New Age and amoral as they come.

Your views are far more Wiccan than they are Christian. You are a most unpleasant person indeed!

The Lord rebuke you.

Frank.

Anonymous said...

You know nothing of linguistics Christine. I am educated at European honours degree level (almost equivilent to US masters), the nature of language is my field. I am not being boastful but I know you know nothing about linguistics as you know nothing about physics.

You have evaded apologising to Constance for trying to denegrate her, you have evaded providing thorough evidence for the ridiculous claims you made for which Paul rebuked you and you in turn wrongly called him a liar. You have evaded the points physicist has made over and again regards the concept of aether or the use of HAARP etc., you have evaded my points depicting the true nature of what Ecclesiastes 12:6.

In short, Christine, you are a liar, a false accuser, and as New Age and amoral as they come.

Your views are far more Wiccan than they are Christian. You are a most unpleasant person indeed!

The Lord rebuke you.

Frank.

Anonymous said...

To what level and in what field are you educated, Christine? I feel sorry for your doctor! I am sure it is neither linguistics nor physics. Of course, this would not matter but for your deluded arrogance and Philistine attitude.

I am not boasting, but to study to such levels takes an enormous amount of work, patience and determination to truly uncover a matter. I guess that is why you are so averse to it.

Frank.

paul said...

Christine,
You invoke Freud, the quintessential anti-Christian,
in attacking Frank.
You also regularly invoke terms like "soul spirit interface" ( very NA ) and, of course your famous "vampire feeding frenzy" to describe things in life that don't require such silly terms.
So, how is this mingling of Christianity and Hinduism working for you ? Has God blessed your mind with peace ?

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

1. your alleged degree in linguistics is meaningless. if a word means wheel like on a chariot in Hebrew and another word means wheel like on a chariot or wheelchair in sanskrit, then one word translates the other.

exactly what translation can you do? linguistics theories and history have nothing to do with getting along in a foreign land.

2. Paul either lied or is too stupid to click on links. I showed you the links were on the page. That is YOUR problem not mine.

3. I did not denigrate Constance, I praised her for catching up to what is going on in the world. Really, if she hadn't been so obsessed with Solana and euro politics she would have been sounding the alarm about Agenda 21 before I ever heard of it.

Not that solana and euro politics are pointless, just they have blinded her to other things.


3. I HAVE NOT DONE THE EVADING, I HAVE PROVIDED LINKS AND MADE DIRECT ANSWERS IT IS YOU WHO DODGE AND PHYSICIST WHO SHIFTS GROUND AND EVADES,

you are so full of rage you can't even see straight if you call my DIRECT ANSWERS to you evasions.

Frank, go look in the mirror.

I repeat, you don't need to go to school to handle traveller's translation booklets. And it is exactly at that level we are talking about.

No education is of any importance in the matters we are now arguing about. Or not much.

I am a born again Christian by the same definition you declare yourself to be.

And you don't need to get beyond junior high school to be able to read what those who have done the work to uncover a matter say.

WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME YOU READ THE ENTIRE BIBLE THROUGH IN THREE MONTHS?

Anonymous said...

Thank you for your kind support Paul.

Yes, Christine is sadly deluded, deliberately evasive, and with a deceiving spirit. She should not be permitted to continue running riot on this blog without rebuke.

She still has not provided any evidence to support her ridiculous claims against Protestant ministers and nor can she do so. She is the liar, and anyone reading this blog knows it.


God bless you greatly Paul.

Christian love,

Frank.

Anonymous said...

The Lord rebuke you Christine. You have a lying and unclean spirit.


Frank.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

I provided the link to the page that had blue links each of which went to over a hundred individual cases often with specific newspaper source cited.

when you complained there was no link on the protestant clergymen, I checked to make sure it worked, and that the links to click worked.

They worked.

YOU LIE.

The Lord Jesus Christ rebuke the both of you.

Anonymous said...

No Christine, it only seems travel book level to you because you are an arrogant ignoramous and haven't a clue what you are talking about. I bet you are purple with rage that you have been shown for the charlatan you are. Still, as we say in London: 'Some muvvaz do 'ave 'em'. Lol

Christine, you are no more Christian than John Dee, Benjamin Franklin, Jack the Ripper or Alice Bailey. You ooze New Age poison all over this blog.


Frank.

Anonymous said...

Don't evade ANY points here if you wish to show yourself not to be a liar Christine.

So who are these Protestant ministers who are alleged to have done these things?

What are their names? Where are their parishes located? What are they individually accused of doing, specific names for ewach specific accusation please! Et cetera!

Go on, Christine! You make such spurious accusations, search the matter out yourself and show us the evidence thoroughly if you have any.

No? Won't do it? Didn't think so, liar! Now sit down before you pop a blood vessel old girl!


Frank

Anonymous said...

Don't evade ANY points here if you wish to show yourself not to be a liar Christine.

So who are these Protestant ministers who are alleged to have done these things?

What are their names?

Where are their parishes located?

What are they each individually accused of doing? Specific names for each specific accusation please!

Et cetera!

Go on, Christine! You make such spurious accusations, search the matter out yourself and show us the evidence thoroughly if you have any.

No? Won't do it? Didn't think so, liar! Now sit down before you pop a blood vessel old girl!


Frank

Anonymous said...

Christine, you wrote, "I forgot - another way hinduism and new age are wrong about chakras..."

Give that there is no systematic exposition of chakras in the Holy Bible, and given that the concept originated in Hindu India and became popular in the West via the New Age movement, just who DO you regard as a reliable source of information about chakras?? I have no desire to learn about them, but I am perplexed as to who on earth you believe understands them and why.

Physicist

Anonymous said...

What's new in here? Oh, I see..

Chakras and reptiles and vampires, oh my!

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

there are no systematic treatment of soul wheels in the Bible for the same reason there is no systematic treatment of internal anatomy and minimal external anatomy or for that matter the existence of China or Japan.

These things are irrelevant to salvation. That is what The Bible is about.

No, I am not purple with rage, I don't feel even irritated. I think you are the one showing rage and the way you vomit it all over this blog is a bit inappropriate.

you display rage at the drop of a hat.

I have not been shown to be a charlatan at all. If anything, YOU have been shown to be a dilletant.

now, I will post that link again.

http://www.reformation.com/

"Welcome to a collection of news reports of ministers sexually abusing children:
The support of the congregation and elders

ALL Protestant denominations - 838 Ministers

147 Baptist Ministers

251 "Bible" Church Ministers (fundamentalist/evangelical)

140 Anglican/Episcopalian Ministers

38 Lutheran Ministers

46 Methodist Ministers

19 Presbyterian Ministers

197 various Church Ministers"

now those are in BLUE and you put the cursor on them so it turns from an arrow to a hand. Let's see, first one. 147 Baptist ministers

here are the first 3 out of 147 to save space here.

"Eddie Thomas, pastor of St. Luke Baptist Church in Ringgold, LA., is arrested and charged with indecent behavior with a juvenile, aggravated incest and pornography involving a juvenile. (the Shreveport Times, July 17, 2003)
Police seize videotape alleged to show sex with child

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

NEWARK, N.J. A convicted sex offender who was named pastor of a city church several weeks ago has been removed from the post. Shiloh Baptist Church leaders had hired the Rev. Chavalis T. Williams in mid-March, even though they knew he had pleaded guilty in Florida to charges of child abuse and using children in a sexual performance. (Newsday, May 7, 2003)
Convicted sex offender removed as pastor of Newark church

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Tinley Park, IL. For the second time in two weeks, a Baptist pastor from New Lenox has been charged with molesting a child — and prosecutors said they are looking for more victims. Dennis Larry Shaw, 53, of the 2100 block of Sanford Drive, New Lenox, was charged Monday with aggravated criminal sexual abuse of a 16-year-old girl, according to the Will County state's attorney's office. On Jan. 31, Shaw was arrested on similar charges after a parishioner's 12-year-old daughter alleged she was fondled by the pastor inside the church between October and December, prosecutors said. (Daily Southtown, February 11, 2003)
Minister again charged with molestation

_____________________________________________________________"

Constance Cumbey said...

Somewhat speechless after the terrible tragedies in Oregon and Connecticut last week. Reminds me of Seraphim Rose's observation in his book ORTHODOXY AND THE RELIGION OF THE FUTURE: "Satan is now entering naked into human history . . ."

Anonymous said...

"there are no systematic treatment of soul wheels in the Bible for the same reason there is no systematic treatment of internal anatomy... salvation... is what The Bible is about."

Agreed Christine, but you avoided my question: If the Bible is essentially silent on chakras, and if Hindu India and the New Age (the two main sources of info on them) are unreliable as you say, then where IS reliable information on them to be found?

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

there are no reliable overall 100% sources on anything. however, those who have practical experience not related to preprogrammed meditation etc. can give some idea.

bearing in mind that this whole subject is irrelevant to salvation and spiritual health.

I had two experiences which contradicted the new age charts on location of the throat chakra. I recall a chart in a book which instead of distributing them along the spine, locate them more in relation to the endocrine system components and some major organs.

one person on an egroup mentioned hyperactivity of "minor chakras" in the hand and wrist, and I couldn't get a straight answer like this was some big secret, but a little webcrawling got me to someplace that said that these are the acupuncture points.

acupuncture charts are based on pragmatics so more reliable, but they don't deal with major soul wheels (lets call them that) since these don't attach at the surface.

I recall reading decades ago, of a Korean scientist who injected radioactive tracers into acupuncture points, and found them later in parts of the body elsewhere that were on the same meridian. this may be the lymph system, this may be something else or both, but this is something real.

This sort of thing is where you chuck all the traditional knowledge, and go back to the drawing board and experiment, and look for anomalous stuff in reports of people who can "see."

there are tibetan singing bowls that contrary to normal ones, are made of a white milky glass like material, and each size keyed to a soul wheel. sounding the bowl stimulates the relevant soul wheel.
I only had the experience for the throat, I don't really like dealing with new age equipment and suppliers so I doubt I will be pursuing this.

whatever the physical or mental health issues are, these soul wheels do their thing without our having to supervise. noticing attacks on locations, and how to block them is another matter.

As I said at the start, there isn't any reliable uncompromised body of facts. the hindu focus on the seven major ones, is for a purpose that is not good.

http://www.netplaces.com/reflexology/understanding-the-body-as-it-relates-to-reflexology/chakras.htm

mentions three other chakras besides the main seven, so is at least on the right track since not limiting to traditional stuff, but whether the main seven described are in fact as described, is another matter.

but the whole thing has to be taken apart and reworked from scratch.

THIS IS NOT EVASION.

THERE IS NO SUCH AS AUTHORITATIVE AND RELIABLE 100% IN ANY CATEGORY

even this blog according to Constance herself, isn't perfect.

stop looking for an authority to accept blindly. "examine [or test or prove ] all things, hold fast to what is good." I Thess. 5:21

Anonymous said...

3 out of 147 to save space? What a cop out! Since when have you been interested in saving space Christine? You can do much better than that if you want anyone to believe it is not simply yet another ruse by you to waste time. Put the whole list up in detail Christine!

You have evaded my points that those things mentioned in Ecclesiastes 12:6 are talking about physical parts of the body that are vital to keeping the body alive, and that when these are broken the body will naturally die and the spirit will therefore depart from it. Nothing here even remotely resembles the concept of chakras whatsoever.

Furthermore, you have, therefore, totally evaded the truth of the question physicist put to you. I'll simplify it for you: 'Christine,... just who DO you regard as a reliable source of information about chakras?

I am sure you will not give full, truthful, clear and direct answers to all of these points Christine. For in order to do so you will have to swallow your puffed up pride and admit you have been wrong all along on this. Any other conclusion would be simply dishonest. You made the claims, back them up fully or by default all will know what a losing and slippery lying coward you really are, viper! Goodness me Christine, as one earlier anonymous poster put it, your mother must have truly been a saint to support you. Poor woman, listening to your mushroomed delusions and wild alcoholic like rants. Now, will you boringly over-use capital letters again to rabidly shout your bile and bitter contents of you parentally dishonouring heart again? For the things you spew forth from your heathen heart are most bitter, and boring, and poisonous indeed! Still purple with rage there? Oh dear!

The Lord rebuke you Christine!

Frank

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

"You have evaded my points that those things mentioned in Ecclesiastes 12:6 are talking about physical parts of the body that are vital to keeping the body alive, and that when these are broken the body will naturally die and the spirit will therefore depart from it. Nothing here even remotely resembles the concept of chakras whatsoever. "

I have already, before you brought it up, dealt with that argument which I ran into online.

There is no match in the physical body for a "wheel." Neither are any of these terms used in Scripture to refer to body parts.

Ecclesiastes was written by someone who admitted he tried everything, incl. all kinds of knowledge, and all was vanity. that would incl. supernatural sight of invisible things, which does not in itself give you life in God.

Those statements were not bile, I have to use caps to make emphasis because I have made this kind of point before and it is missed. I showed no bile.

It is you that are showing bile. Take the log out of your own eye and then you will be able to see clearly and give any valid helpful criticism. Matt. 7:3-5

when have I been concerned about saving space? Since I found out I am limited to 4,000 something characters incl. spaces.

I notice you do not limit yourself at all. you are doing all you accuse me of, and it consists of yelling and bile and very little worth reading. you tie up an incredible amount of space rebuking me, and apparently can't be bothered to go read the material on that site.

do you expect everything to be hand fed you here? use the links provided and investigate. highlight, copy, paste and go. you do know how to do these things don't you?

this is rapidly becoming Frank and Paul and anon's anti Christine blog.

Anonymous said...

Christine: So in short, YOU are the world authority on chakras, knowing more about them than Hindu and New Age cultures wherein the notion evolved. I know nothing about them and don't want to, and I accept that you are not promoting them, but an older theme continues: you know more about chakras than the experts, just like you know more about physics than all the world's physicists. Perhaps this attitude of yours is not unrelated to your perception that "this is rapidly becoming Frank and Paul and anon's anti Christine blog".

Here's a genuine suggestion. Do you have the courage to post here, under your name, the following words: "Do people here genuinely appreciate my posts on this blog? I'd welcome feedback written in good faith."

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

I said I am not an authority I haven't done the research, but there is enough off with the traditions on it, both in terms of their bias (unbiblical motives gnostic rejection of the physical world) and discoveries that point to a different number and locations, NO ONE is the authority. The whole thing needs rework.

as for your challenge, fine, lets hear from some here who do like any or some of my posts.

But I don't post to be accepted or respected or in hopes my posts will be liked.

I collect information and share it. someone will benefit.

Anonymous said...

Christine, this is Physicist. I am responding to your willingness to solicit feedback on your thread posts here, which I appreciate. You wrote that "I collect information and share it. someone will benefit" but in physics at least, my perception is that the information you share is misleading and often simply wrong. In that case people are done a disservice. I also regret that you are unwilling to be corrected. I believe this blog would be better if you desist from making comments here about physical science.

I also find that you post way too much here. Yes it's permitted by our gracious hostess Constance, but it reminds me of the guest at a dinner table who, unawares, monopolises the conversation to everybody else's detriment. It would be great if you were to examine your motives for why you post so much here rather than on your own blog.

Thank you for your willingness to solicit comments. That takes courage.

History Maker said...

http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/273271-dem-renews-call-for-department-of-peace-after-conn-shooting

"Dem renews call for 'Department of Peace' after Conn. shooting"

I bet Marianne Williamson, Barbara Marx Hubbard, et al are thrilled. Never let a crisis, or tragedy, go to waste!

~HM

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

hello....?

I am not really into popularity contests, but I know from online and a phone contact that two or three people here like at least some of my stuff.

so anyone who has found anything of use or merit in my posts, please speak up.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

regarding being corrected by physicist, as I have tried to tell him over and over, he has no grounds to correct me or anyone on, because he is working from the incomplete 20th century perspective, and is unwilling to go back beyond his teachers to origins and forward again.

I would rather listen to physicists with degrees who have gotten into this stuff, than to physicists with degrees who have not.

Anonymous said...

"regarding being corrected by physicist, as I have tried to tell him over and over, he has no grounds to correct me... because he is working from the incomplete 20th century perspective, and is unwilling to go back beyond his teachers to origins and forward again."

This is a wild assertion of yours, empty rhetoric against some imagined 'establishment' because you have nothing else to use as argument. Furthermore it is wrong. As I have told you over and over, physics *itself* continually goes back and then forward again, because every time technology improves we revisit the key experiments and repeat them to better accuracy. If an anomaly showed up then the theorists would go back to that point too.

"I would rather listen to physicists with degrees who have gotten into this stuff, than to physicists with degrees who have not."

What you actually listen to are results from the first generation of experiments when apparatus was more string-and-sealing-wax than today and much more prone to error, plus the writings of people who have inadequate technical expertise but fancy themselves as some kind of next Einstein. Their writings are mostly inconsistent with other experimentally verified parts of physics that they don't mention, and you (Christine) do not have enough expertise to recognise that fact.

The amount of time you waste on this stuff is up to you, but please refrain from misleading others here.

Physicist

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

no, I listen to much more current work which reinvented the wheel so to speak.


Anonymous said...

I think if only one person writes to thank Christine for her posts, she will keep going and going and going. So far so good. No one. But I don't think that will even stop her. Her vanity has no limits. She likes being the center of attention and she could cares less about the other people here, the destruction of Constance's blog or any discussion about the New Age movement.

The only one that can stop Christine is Constance, and she's not going to do it. It's called wishful thinking on Constance's part. She thinks there will always be people who are concerned enough about New Age to overlook everything, who will continue to read and post no matter how much garbage surrounds their posts.

So sad.

Anonymous said...

When I see a Christine comment I yawn and log off. She should start her own blog!

I miss the lively variety of a variety of people. This is the first comment in months that I am posting. I only read the main entry that Constance posts and skip the comments as they are hijacked by Christine.
melinda

Anonymous said...

Once again, more of Christine's fine work to turn a blog into a bog. Real info, I've noticed, gets sidetracked and sidelined here-even when we collapse comments.
Why not be a friend to Constance's efforts rather than an impediment since you have so much respect for her work? Sorry, but too often, you "muddy the water" with mostly unhelpful, too much useless detail, bringing division here instead of real cut to the chase info on NAM and NWO topics.
It is time to "drain the swamp" you have created Christine. Why not tend to your own "knittin'" at your own blog and when you can stop being so anti-social and stay on topic then come back?

Anonymous said...

This blog post has 269 comments so far. Out of 269 posts, I found only 19 worth reading.

I skip anything having a lead of Christine says... and any responses directed to her.

Out of 269 posts, 19 worthwhile of my time. Sad, isn't it. That is why I rarely visit the comments section here anymore because it hasn't changed for the past year and there is too much dung to wade through.

For the record, the posts I found worthwhile:


Anon 9:37 Re Vatican & RFID
Anon 1:48 RE Internet of Everything
Frank 4:35 Re Professor Wesley Wark
Anon 5:11 Re Maitreya TV appearances
Craig 9:27 Re HS Students' & RFID
Anon 12:50 Gender Confusion
Anon 3:07 Zen Meditation
Dave in CA 12:30 Re Spied on people
Anon 12:09 Re Drudge headline
Physicist 5:05 Re Ron Hubbard
Anon 7:15 Re Israel
Anon 3:38 Re Alinsky
Anon 8:13 Re Christian minority
Anon 7:07 Lawsuits against churches
Anon 1:15 Bishop cracksdown on New Age nuns
Frank 8:01 KJV post
Anon 12:09 permanent record
Cumbey 12:13 This week's events
History Maker 3:11 Hubbard

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

http://educate-yourself.org/nwo/nwotavistockbestkeptsecret.shtml

http://www.demonbuster.com/masscont.html

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

BTW, scroll down in that first link to the article itself, never mind the introductions. TAVISTOCK - THE BEST KEPT SECRET IN AMERICA

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

following my own advice, I went over some old posts here.

"Constance Cumbey said...
Darwin, it seems, was into the occult, participating in seances as were so many in the "scientific set" or as Apostle Paul put it, "Science, so called."

I ordered the book on Kindle and am starting to read for myself THE IMMORTALITY COMMISSION: SCIENCE AND THE STRANGE QUEST TO CHEAT DEATH by John Gray.

Looks like an important book!"

well, I took a look. yep, it is pretty important. Get a load of this from the kindle preview,
http://www.amazon.com/The-Immortalization-Commission-Science-ebook/dp/B00457X7WW
"In one case, only made public nearly a century later, they became involved in a secret scheme to conceive a messianic child." psychic researchers in the 1800s.
kindle price $9.99

Anonymous said...

I don't know much about Tavistock today but the idea that it successfully turned the interwar British from being against another war with Germany to being in favor is nonsense, to the extent that I would not trust authors who say otherwise on any other topic. Lest we forget: It was the Germans who started WW2, and the British who had to defend their skies from an attack that was intended to be a precursor to invasion. Germany was led by a man who invaded Russia and, less than a week after Pearl Harbor, declared war on the USA.

The swing in Britain in the late 1930s was not to belligerence, but to recognition that another war was likely because of Hitler. Blurring of that distinction is an act of propaganda or folly. Churchill had his faults but he knew his enemy. Chamberlain and Halifax would have seen Britain under the swastika. People who post links to this rubbish here should think twice.

Anonymous said...

"Darwin, it seems, was into the occult, participating in seances"

The book form which Constance got this 'information' states that Darwin took part in the hope of debunking seances; that nothing happened while he was present; and that he came to the conclusion mediums were fraudulent. Nothing different from James Randi there, but it is misleading to claim that he was "into the occult" on the basis of these words.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

Britain incl. the Royal Family had its share of Nazi symphathizers in power.

Darwin is only a sideline on this. The real issues are the various forms of trying to eliminate (not stave off) death on any terms but God's terms. And this incl. the occult as background to a lot of developments today incl. of course transhumanism, which is part of this.

transhumanism makes use of ideas like cybernetic human interface that are medically useful (electronic prosthetics and pacemakers for instance) but goes beyond mere function improvement of weakened or damaged parts to seeking superhumanity in cyborgism and eugenics and genetic engineering incl. gene doping of nonhuman DNA into humans to make super soldiers, DARPA's latest craze

http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/u-s-super-soldiers-of-the-future-will-be-genetically-modified-transhumans-capable-of-superhuman-feats

which way predates this public announcement. Decades ago I ran across a reference to US Navy working on mixing fish and human characteristics - or trying to - to make frogmen for real not just metaphorically. I doubt this was successful, but the point is, this line of research goes back to the late 1960s.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

http://harrypotterpower.com/snares.html

scroll down to Darwin and read on. seems his involvement in the occult and witchcraft developed in South America hanging out with the local shamans and stuff, learning too much from them. the slipshod silliness he rejected in Britain is of course nothing like the more serious and also chemically supported stuff in indigenous settings.

http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/sci-ev/sci_vs_ev_1.htm

interesting history of the whole evolution cult development.

Anonymous said...

O dear O dear O dear,

This blog is surely NOT the place to discuss evolution and/or creationism, but regardless of where the truth is to be found in that debate I plead for accuracy in references cited.

"scroll down to Darwin and read on. seems his involvement in the occult and witchcraft developed in South America hanging out with the local shamans and stuff..."

WHAT involvement with witchcraft, Christine? The previous reference cited by Constance showed that Darwin attended a seance or two as a skeptic in the hope of finding it fraudulent, and reached that exact conclusion. Both websites that you cite at 5.07am claim that Darwin drank deeply of the occult in South America from natives, but these websites refer only to books written by creationists. Not a single reference to Darwin's book "Voyage of the Beagle" in which he speaks extensively about about his time there. Not a single reference to his extant correspondence. Not a single reference to anything written by any of his crewmates on the Beagle, whom he might have told about his experiences.

Proving a negative is not easy, but in online editions of The Voyage of the Beagle there is no mention of witches or witchcraft (except one disparaging reference to it as a nonsense that the locals believed), no mention of sorcerers or sorcery, no mention of spirits or spiritism, no mention of the 'occult'. Googling Darwin with these buzzwords and "South America" gets nowhere either.

Irrespective of the truth or otherwise of Darwinism, let this be a lesson to amateur scholars: VERIFY YOUR REFERENCES. I am prepared to believe this claim provided it can be sourced in Darwin's own writing. Can it, Christine (or anybody else)?

Those websites also talk nonsense about Darwin stealing his theory from Wallace. It is clear from the correspondence that they both had the idea independently but that Wallace wanted to write it up as a short paper whereas Darwin wanted to write a book with a mass of evidence from the animal and plant kingdoms worldwide. They opted for joint publication.

It also betrays ignorance and/or prejudice to castigate Darwin for making mistakes in an era when the genetic basis of heritance was not established. (Darwin wrote before Mendel.)

For the third and last time in this comment, let us not discuss the subject of evolution here, but let us please not talk secondhand nonsense either.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

it would be nice if you would read what is being referred to before criticizing. the ref was not to Constance or the book but another link given at the harry potter snares thing.

I am not posting about evolution but about the issue you or someone raised that Darwin only attended seances superficially and rejected them. the point made was that he became changed and more ardently anti Christian.

wrong about genetics they already were established and ironically Lamarck was on the right track but wrong way, google hoxsey genes, "junk" genes that control expression of other genes and get switched on and off and sometimes the switch result passes on this in response to environmental stuff.

Darwin and his whole crew were on an anti Christian bandwagon. Like either Dawkins or Hawking said, Darwin made atheism respectable.

none of the evidence in nature Darwin presented proves macroevolution. Modern evolutionists are deserting Darwin for a range of alternatives, Intelligent Design, Saltation, Punctuated Equilibrium and even gasp Creationism. Classic darwinism even among the evolutionists is on the way out.

As for ignorance, if you don't understand the connection between personal agendas and how one interprets "evidence" you need to study up on some basic psychology.

I used to believe in evolution like it was god.

If you had read the link, you would see the source was not Darwin but the captain of the Beagle.

you are barking up the wrong tree, and may have to leave the Internet and go for interlibrary loan to get that. Or try http://www.archive.org they have old books scanned there.

Meanwhile, pay $9.99 and read the kindle version of the book Constance was looking at, I am sure the sample given free doesn't go into the entire picture which is way beyond Darwin and moves to the present time people like Kurzweil.

Merry Christmas, and a safe and holy AD 2013 to all here.

Anonymous said...

Christine,

Anyone reading your post of 3.17pm would think that the captain of the Beagle explicitly recounted Darwin getting into pagan religious practises through encounters with South American natives. In fact all that (one of) those websites says is that the captain noticed Darwin appearing to become sceptical of religion on the voyage. That is why I said there was no reference in your earlier post to Darwin doing paganism in his own words or in the words of his crewmates. For all we know, Darwin's change might have been because the theory of evolution was occurring to him and he was unable to square it with Genesis. (Whether evolution actually is true, and whether it can be so squared, is not a matter for this blog.)

Those websites, and you who quote them uncritically, make the claim that Darwin got into pagan religious practises through encounters with South American natives. I am willing to believe it IF you can provide some testimony of that from Darwin or the crew of the Beagle. So far, you haven't (and fairly extensive googling suggests to me that you won't be able to). As I said at 3.17pm, verify your references - or risk looking foolish.

"wrong about genetics they already were established [when Darwin wrote]"

Darwin published The Origin of Species in 1859. Of course people noted heritability of traits before that, and postulated information about traits concealed in egg and sperm; but the master notion that explained previously inexplicable patterns of inheritance was that of dominant and recessive genes, published by Mendel in 1865-6. Who's wrong?

Anonymous said...

At Amazon that book that Constance cited is searchable. Search in it for "Darwin". Look at the results. Some are included in the free sample, and say what I said - that Darwin was a skeptic. Other hits are not in the free sample but you can get more of the quote by passing the cursor over the relevant search return, and enough it given to make it clear that none of those is about Darwin and the occult.

Anonymous said...

Good old Christine. Arrogant as ever. I sure called it on whether you could stop. Not one pro-Christine note and yet you go on an on like some perpetual motion machine that I'm sure one day you will tell us exists.

In the meantime, why don't you do a website search for "New Age" Christmas and entertain yourself.

Anonymous said...

http://www.cis.org.uk/ireland/documents/God&Science_Paper2_Finlay.pdf

http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2008/PSCF6-08Finlay.pdf

...trans-species genetic observations (including man) that evolution explains in a very simple way (set forth by the author, a Christian medical geneticist), but which creationists have been unable to explain. We await...

Moreover four of our cranial nerves follow tortuous paths, and have functions for which other nerves would be better suited. But in modern animals which our ancestors resemble (according to the fossil record), those nerves have different functions. This is one example of the fact that our insides are like the plumbing and wiring in a building that has had many extensions added to it, and if you were designing it from scratch as a separate species you would do it differently. Another argument for speciation that creationists cannot explain!

Anonymous said...

Testing 123 ...

Anonymous said...

PART 1

Christine,

I understand you're offering salutations regarding Christmas but how can you do this in all honesty when you are determined to spread this blog with false information, things you cannot back up, attacks on Constance the blog host, attacks on Physicist even after he had shown great restraint and kindness to you at 7:21 PM. Your arrogant responses, such as your comment at 1:50 PM say it all: 'no, I listen to much more current work which reinvented the wheel so to speak.'

What, like your comments on the Hindu Occult wheels, i.e., chakras? Where you proclaim: 'I said I am not an authority I haven't done the research ... NO ONE is the authority. The whole thing needs rework.'

The sad fact is, you favour and spread New Age concepts and false religious nonsense on this blog without in what can only be described as fits of gnostic hubris. You have continued in doing so, despite being corrected and shown to have no reasonable grounds to hold the ideas you do, such as chakras, Nibiru, and vampires, etc.

I have done a quick internet search of your name. Now Mary, that is your first name, isn't it?

On one site, we find a reply allegedly written by you (sent on Sunday, 10 Feb 2008) to a group that identifies itself as the, 'Society for The Academic Study of Magic',

'Subject: Re: Wicca, Tantra etc':

'... I think that the body energy system, incl. the chakras and meridians and acupuncture points, considered by some energy feeding or psi vampires as lesser chakras, are an objective reality ...'


https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ACADEMIC-STUDY-MAGIC;6c559c1a.0802

or

http://tinyurl.com/c28lvxp

I bet Seraphim Rose, author of Orthodoxy and the Religion of the Future, an exposer of the NAM, would have been saddened by Mary Chistine Erikson's insistence on trying to pollute Biblical truth with the demonic concepts of NAM and Hindooism. Yet even on Orthodox websites she allegedly continues her attempts to decieve others about chakras and acupuncture as being worthwhile persuits. Firstly someone identifying himself as a doctor, and sadly not understanding the dangers behind certain practices he is involved in, writes:

'Dear brother,
thank you. I am an Orthodox doctor, in Italy. I became Orthodox in
1999. In 1990 I had taken a degree in Acupuncture and Chinese
Medicine. I also teach Acupuncture. Since 1999 I try to work with
Chinese medicine in an effort to separate the medical practice (which
is very useful for pains and other symptoms) from the taoistic and
buddhistic philosophy. I do this also in my work of teacher. I think
that this is my role.'

Frank (Continued)...

Anonymous said...

PART 2

Yet how does another, who is allegedly (Mary aka) Christine(shouting forth her gnostic views and twisting Ecclesiastes 12:6, for which she has been shown to be wrong about in several comments earlier) reply? Does she truly dissuade him? Or cunningly push him further (despite a few [pretended?] caveats) into his folly?:

'I am always hesitant to risk misdirecting anyone [REALY?], but there
is a certain Biblical basis for the idea of an energy body.'

'In Ecclesiastes... "Chakra" is Sanskrit for wheel, so called
because a normal chakra spins.'

[No capital usage at the beginning of a new sentence? Who could this be?]

'apparently there are a mishmash of "minor chakras" as seen
and referred to by a different system, which, when you can
track them down, add up to acupuncture points.'

(Pretended?) Caveats

'At the same time, the possibility of communication of
demonic or other evil across a telepathic or healing
energy link is grave. So avoid Reiki and any laying on of
hands or hypnotic stuff. Reiki in particular should be
repented of, as it involves receiving an initiation and
the passing of a current, and the concept is so familiar
and comfortable to Victor Anderson Feri Witchcraft that
many are also reiki.'

'Mary Christine Erikson'

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/father-seraphim/message/1691?o=1&d=-1

or

http://tinyurl.com/c8darn6


Now, I do not agree with everything expounded by Orthodox beliefs. However, we learn from a gentleman of the Orthodox faith, who goes by the internet tag 'Irish Hermit', that a certain 'Mary Christine Erikson' (who in turn also identifies herself 'InfoWolf1' [she is more wolf than info, methinks]), has been banned from every Orthodox site worth its salt out there:

'Irish Hermit:
Quote from: MCE on December 27, 2009, 04:05:33 AM'


'Mary Christine Erikson (OCA, baptismal name Justina)'

'This lady is a recent convert to Orthodoxy and has spent probably a year and more literally bombarding the Orthodox e-lists with the Protestant teaching of penal substitutionary atonement.'

'Priest after priest has attempted to reason with her on the Orthodox lists and forums. All to no avail. Her messages can become intemperate and even obscene and she has ended up being banned from every Orthodox list she has been writing on.'

'I am sorry to write so bluntly but the warning should be put out there...'

http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php?topic=11389.435;wap2

or

http://tinyurl.com/cmn9jrj


Incidentally, another New Ager influenced by Freud, (which lots of New Agers follow, especially those with new 'knoweledge' about supposed chakras) and is of a Danish, and German-Jewish background (a similar background to claims made by Mary Christine Erikson), and immersed in the same nonsense about chakras is Erik Erikson ... 'a German-born American developmental psychologist and psychoanalyst ...'

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erik_Erikson

or

http://tinyurl.com/mlrtk

Incidentally, his ideas seem to be behind ‘enlightening’ other New Agers on the nature of chakras. A hero of yours Christine?

http://www.google.co.uk/#hl=en&tbo=d&sclient=psy-ab&q=Erik+Erikson+chakra&oq=Erik+Erikson+chakra&gs_l=hp.3...6262.9571.1.10218.7.7.0.0.0.0.296.997.0j1j3.4.0.les%3B..0.0...1c.1.K_BDrlkouf8&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.1355534169,d.d2k&fp=def9f3f538eb70d&bpcl=40096503&biw=1280&bih=912
or
http://tinyurl.com/cmxoat2

Did you change your name in honour of Erik, Mary? Or is he a relation perhaps? No need to answer.

Frank.

Anonymous said...

Mary, aka Christine, aka Justina.

The sad fact is, you favour and spread New Age concepts and false religious nonsense on this blog throughout, with what can only be described as fits of gnostic hubris.

Frank

Anonymous said...

"Mary Christine Erikson... has ended up being banned from every Orthodox list she has been writing on"

Not a bad precedent...

Anonymous said...

6:17PM ... lol

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

the most important stuff in the book are NOT in the sample, pay $9.99 and read the whole thing on kindle.

the most important stuff is NOT about Darwin, he's functioning as a red herring in all this discussion.

creationists have no trouble explaining anything. God did it that way.

Also changes later after the Fall and The Flood.

Besides if God used something that had vaguely resembled something else He wanted but could not (because there is no macroevolution) get beyond that point, He could use it as a template and change an individual animal or its eggs, and here comes the new species.

I repeat, Darwin IS IRRELEVANT to that book, THE MOST IMPORTANT STUFF IS NOT IN THE SAMPLE. That a circle tried to engineer a messiah child shows how eugenics was operating then as a concept, and even more now. But that is only part of it.

The biggest dirt on Darwin is not in that book, but other links I provided which DO NOT CLAIM TO BE HIS WORDS but another's who observed him.

Stop distracting attention from the main thing. the occult new age link to transhumanism.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

getting banned from Orthodox egroups - NOT from all of them, and each time it was because I went ballistic over coddling active homosexuals.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

I might add, I said very little about the PSA core angle on the Atonement which liberal protestants, new agers, heretics and an increasing number of misguided Orthodox since the late 1800s because of metropolitan Anthony Khrapovitsky himself influenced by secular philosophy and Abelard. And he missed going on trial for heresy by the skin of his teeth. Had to agree to shut up.

Anonymous said...

Mary aka Christine aka Justina, are you referring to the rumours regarding Seraphim Rose?

If he were a homosexual, he soon repented of it and went on to defend the Church by exposing those such as yourself who are engaged in promoting and spreading NAM ideologies.

Mary, you wrote:

'I repeat, Darwin IS IRRELEVANT to that book'.

Well, allow me to reply succintly, given the absence of comments by others in favour of your continuing to post here:

'You are IRRELEVANT to this blog'!


Frank.



Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

no I am not referring to Fr. Seraphim Rose, I am referring to clergy and laity current.

the PSA thing while twisted to make it look like hate and so forth, is routinely deplored by new agers and
so forth.

it is part of the Catechism of St. Philaret and Peter Moghila or Mohyla's catechism, and the Council at Jassy only required removing purgatory, application mechanistically of merits of saints, and suchlike RC influence NOT substitutionary atonement.

St. John Cassian preaches it in explaining why prayers are given at a certain hour.

I was studying Orthodoxy for several years before I was chrismated.

Anonymous said...

Christine, Infowolf1 has been exposed a number of times on this blog. It doesn't make a difference. Here is one of the first references to that name. It goes back to July of 2009.

Blogger infowolf1 said...

the reference to a "blue god" gets my attention, because such is part of the pantheon of Feri witchcraft, which is closer to the real thing than the fluff bunny sweetness and light wicca stuff is.
The references to Michael Ford also get my attention. This is damn serious stuff.

----

There was a time when comments could be searched for added factual information on this blog. It doesn't happen now.

There was a time when some very serious researchers posted here. It doesn't happen now.

Bjorn was accepted on this blog as a good contact by Constance until he was exposed. Constance wrote about him:

"I have been saddened and sickened all day by what you see at my left. It appears to be "Farmer's" other blogspot. Sadly, it is as New Age/Pagan/anti-God as can be. New Agers on the web have taken great comfort and enjoyment from it."

This is the individual whose work Christine, Infowolf1, was writing about. Christine is deep into information about the ugly side of New Age/paganism. She is not just some little researcher whose information is way off base by chance.

I wish I could post all we know about her, but it would be useless. It has been posted and yet she is allowed to go on and on.

Anonymous said...

It is not by chance that Christine refers to such deceptive sites as Cutting Edge. That network, as checked out by another, is so very big. I do not have permission to share what was found though.

Anonymous said...

Mary, yes that's disgraceful!

Also, allowing unrepentant New Agers in who are determined not to relinquish and reject their wicked delusions but use Christian sites to spread some of the lying aspects of Hindoo sorcery, such as chakras, is unacceptable. I only hope you come to your senses before time. Whether you realise it or not we are living in the last days and you need to choose which side you're on.

As 1 Corinthians 10:21 (KJV) clearly states: Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils.


Frank

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

I never paid attention to Erik Erikson so this chakra thing about him is news to me. from the lead statements in the google search, without reading any articles yet, it is the chakra users trying to corellate chakras to his levels of something or other rather than his own ideas but that might be corrected by content of an article quoting him.

I NEVER changed my name. My father was born Epsteen his father a lawyer in San Francisco wanted to change his name to avoid antisemitic problems in the SF business community, because he wanted him to be having an import export company out of Elliot Epsteen Sr.'s office. The name was to be Easton. My father didn't want to do this but was under age and couldn't refuse, so asked to have a name already in the family, which was Erikson, the maiden name of his mother.

Anonymous said...

Anon at 6:52PM, & 6:55 PM, respectively. I have just read your posts. Sadly, it does not surpprise me. I know I can be harsh sometimes, I am working on that. I also know at times that I was over the top with Dorothy, and for that I am sorry. Although I do believe I am right ot stand against some of the things she defended and to defend some of those she bullied. I should have been gentler with Dorothy and I regret I was not.

Thank you for the posts.


Frank.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

bjorn farmer can't post, but his page is still on her list of links because of some of his research.

Anonymous said...

"The biggest dirt on Darwin is not in that book, but other links I provided which DO NOT CLAIM TO BE HIS WORDS but another's who observed him. Stop distracting attention from the main thing. the occult new age link to transhumanism."

Who decides what the main thing is here? It has been you not Constance for too long. YOU claimed that Darwin was willingly initiated into paganism by South American natives, and now that you can't prove it - by quoting Darwin or anybody he spoke to or who saw him - you are setting your usual smokescreen. It is not hard to see through.

Anonymous said...

"creationists have no trouble explaining anything. God did it that way."

Except that, in view of the genetic findings, this would mean God is a capricious practical joker who deliberately strews misleading evidence around His creation. I don't think so.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

I gave you the link to pursue the initiation thing it is at the harrypotter/snares site. stop lying.

the issue is not what the main thing HERE is but what the main thing in that BOOK is.

stop false accusing. you are very dishonest. Only that "Irish Hermit" aka hieromonk ambrose or "ambrois" can beat you, in his denial of substitutionary atonement being any part of Christ's redemption of us on the Cross, and attacking anyone who supports this doctrine.

which doctrine in theory every RC and protestant here is committed to substitutionary atonement.

God is not made out to a capricious practical joker at all. He created things in a more or less finished condition, and if we read all kinds of stuff into that that is our fault.

Anonymous said...

To be fair, there is nothing in Christine's blog, that is New Age. She uses certain new age concepts to prove they're own theories wrong. Beating someone over the head with their own claims, is not the same as supporting those claims.

Do people hear have a comprehension problem or reflexives so sensitive, that they have to yell, heresy, witch, at every non-Chrsitan term they come across.

The Bible also says, bless and do not curse. Yet the constant calls for God to rebuke here etc. etc.

And if you think her theories are wrong, point it out charitably.

No wonder Christians are being branded as fanatics. We deserve it for our own behaviour.

Anonymous said...

11:46, you mean well, but either you have no clue what New Age is about or you are covering for Christine. The New Age movement is not some goofy set of ideas. It is something that is dangerous, ugly and controlling. If you put the word gargoyle and "New Age" into a web search, you will learn something about the New Age movement.

At this thread you can learn something about New Age and gargoyles. You can learn how New Age is like gargoyles.

http://quotes.liberty-tree.ca/quote_blog/David.Spangler.Quote.ACEF

I still think following the activities of flesh and blood people who are bringing New Age about is extremely important.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

there are two dangers. the NWO and NAM of the externalize the hierarchy sort, which you rightly track. and the occultism and spirit influence encouraging "goofy ideas" which are a problem since before the NAM and are part of its recruiting arm, and when it brings contact with the NAM spirits these evil people serve, further the interests of these things.

The error is to deny what Constance and everyone but you apparently recognize, that the NAM is both a political movement and a spiritual occult movement, united in opposition to biblical Christianity (as distinct from the phony Christianity of people like Matthew Fox) however splintered at some levels it may be.

The same evil spirits are behind both.

It is not EITHER attack goofy ideas OR track and oppose the controlling and closet Nazi NAM of the political sort. The former is the source of the latter, both in terms of the history of the movement, and in individual terms, how people are led step by step.

Indeed, there are New Agers who oppose the controlling angle on the NAM political movement because it would interfere with their personal agendas, ambitions or anarchic versions of NAM. And they often present good facts and history against it. Their solutions however are another matter always falling back on "spirituality."

But if your only problem with the NAM is that it is controlling, beware lest you fall for some new version that would have none of the EU and UN and world government, but would be anti Christian nonetheless, and occultic and "spiritual" to the core.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

http://books.google.com/books?id=dduAOks3xIMC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false

21st Century Intelligence
By Wesley K. Wark

for those who want to read more in the book that Constance blogged about regarding surveillance, google books has an extensive preview.

Anonymous said...

"I gave you the link to pursue the initiation thing it is at the harrypotter/snares site. stop lying."

You, Christine, claimed that Darwin entered into South American pagan rituals - a highly significant claim - but you failed to provide any evidence for it, in the URLs you cited. Now you are trying to get off the hook: you have said that this is not the main point; that the info came from the captain of the Beagle when all he said was that Darwin appeared to become more skeptical of Christianity (for which there is a ready alternative explanation); you now divert from your failure with the serious claim that I am lying (where?); and you say it is up to others to follow the references you gave. No it isn't. If YOU make a specific claim then it is up to YOU to provide the evidence for it in the words of Darwin or of somebody he told or who saw him - not to cite someone hostile to him. That would be the correct standard of evidence in scholarship (and in law). Unfortunately your standards of scholarship have consistently been embarrassing, and this is another example. Put up or shut up.

Anonymous said...

"God is not made out to a capricious practical joker at all. He created things in a more or less finished condition, and if we read all kinds of stuff into that that is our fault."

I think you have simply failed to grasp my argument. The inner workings of bodies of animals resemble the electricity and plumbing systems of a vast mansion which has seen extension after extension tacked on to it piecemeal, rather than designed ab initio as would be the case if each species were designed by God separately. The obvious conclusion is differentiation of species by a process of evolution. If God did not oversee such a process then why should He put misleading evidence for evolution into His creation?

Anonymous said...

"....why should He put misleading evidence for evolution into His creation?"

With respect 6:10 AM, what misleading evidence or evidence are you refering to?

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

I did not try to get off any hook. you are the one who made Darwin the main thing when the book at issue shows him as peripheral. Go do the research on the links provided, or not. pursue beyond the links.

as for the appearance of things, you can assume some changes after the fall and after the flood.

And, you can also assume that God used the same basic stuff in all cases and it is not species but genera and phyla at issue. We and all creatures share an awful lot of DNA, some the same some similar and of same purpose. Like the PFOX gene for instance.

That merely shows the same hand at work, and if some saltation or punctuated equilibrium type evolution occurred over thousands instead of millions of years, that fairly screams for a Creator to do it.

Anonymous said...

Reader, don't take this for support of the chakra stuff. I just want to show that the study of the occult view of things is much more complex than Christine shares to try to make us believe she is knowledge about things. There are many of us who have read this blog over the years who have a large library of information on the occult because we believe in the commandment not to bear false witness. We think that it applies not only to those who think as we do, but it also applies to those we consider opponents. We are not to supply false information about them. We study what they say even though we completely disagree with their premises and conclusions.

I am not giving the name of the book because this information should be easily available to people like Christine or Frank, both of whom speak oh so glibly to those who they consider uninformed.

Under the topic Kundalini Chakras there are these subject matters.

Akasa#2
Alta Major Center
Amrit
Anahat Chakra
Ananda
Anja Chakra
Astral Lotuses
Baptism by Fire
Battle Ground
Brahamaranda Chakra
Brahamadanda
Brahmanical Thread
Brow Chakra
Caduceus of Mercury
Caduceus Winding Symbol
Cakras
Central Axis of Creation
Chakra
Chakra Stem
Charka System
Chakram
Chamber of the Heart
Chitrini
Chrism Oil
Coiled Serpent
Cosmic Fire
Crown Chakra
Dhdammachakkappac
Divine Fire in Man
Divine Marriag
Earth Chakaras
Etheric Bowl
Etheric Ceenters
Fiery Furnace
Fiery Power
Fire of Creatiaon
Fire of Wisdom
Fish Gate
Force Centers
Fourth Chakra
Gates
Gateway to the Heart
Godhead
Golden Oil

plus another 75 topic links.

Christine you should be able to find something in that batch to help you understand how the occult views chakras.

Frank, somewhere in that batch of information you can find things you disagree with so fully that it would help us factually discredit that entire topic.

As for me, the research I did is enough FOR ME to say "Nice Try. No Cigar." I don't have to justify further because I'm no authority anyone looks to.

Anonymous said...

"I did not try to get off any hook. you are the one who made Darwin the main thing when the book at issue shows him as peripheral. Go do the research on the links provided, or not. pursue beyond the links."

I repeat - YOU made the claim that Darwin entered into South American pagan ritual, so it is up to YOU to provide evidence, ie Darwin in his own words or anyone he might have told or who could have witnessed it. This you have repeatedly failed to do.

You linked to an online article that cites p25-6 of the "Evolution Handbook" by Vance Ferrell (who is hostile to Darwin) but does not give any sources or say whether Ferrell does. Your saying that I should check this out if I am interested is simply academic bad manners. It is up to those who make a claim to provide evidence for it. Until or unless you do, people here (including myself) will not take this claim seriously. So you check Ferrell, and go googling Darwin together with occult/spiritism and South America. Do something here that commands respect for once; then we will respect you.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

I did not try to get off any hook. you are the one who made Darwin the main thing when the book at issue shows him as peripheral.

now, on that anti harry potter page, you would have found if you bothered to read, OR bothered not to lie, that the source for all this is Villiers, Alan. "In the Wake of Darwin's Beagle." National Geographic (October 1969), 449-95

Darwin spent a lot of time with the natives, studying their customs, and at the start was not anti God, but something happened that changed him, the Godfearing captain noted, and he turned anti God.

quoting article

While in South America, Darwin spent a total of several months with natives—constantly learning from them, eating as they did, and doing what they did.

“While the ship pursued its task, Darwin often disembarked for weeks or months at a time . . Wherever he went, his perceptive eye scanned the jumble of nature’s phenomena and seized on that which gave meaning to the rest . . The study of human nature—whether seen in the behavior of a savage tribesman or glimpsed in the recesses of his own heart—also came within his purview.”—Allen Villiers, “In the Wake of Darwin’s Beagle,” National Geographic, December 1969, p. 453.

“After an excursion to Tierra del Fuego, she [the ship, Beagle] returned north for seven more months in 1833. During both periods Darwin explored ashore, making discovery after discovery. For weeks at a time he trekked on horseback, through the forests of Brazil and over the wide pampas of the Argentine, living with gauchos, roughing it with his saddle for a pillow and sheepskin saddle blanket for a bed.”—Ibid., p. 467. [Gauchos weren't without some folk magic ideas.]

Because the chart room on the ship, where Darwin stayed, was small and crowded, when at sea he ate meals with Captain Fitz Roy, who was a godly Christian. In later years, the captain mentioned that, although energetic, the young man did not seem a bit skeptical of religion at first. But, by the time the Beagle had left South America in September 1835, Darwin seemed to have become a changed man. Something had happened to his thinking since the ship made its first port of call on that continent in December 1831.

After spending some time with the natives at Tierra del Fuego, the Beagle journeyed to Argentina, where from August 11 to 17, 1833, Darwin traveled on horseback in the back country. Arriving at Montevideo, he made a round-trip by horseback from November 14 to 28. From September 27 to October 2, he journeyed again on horseback, returning by boat down the river.
“He braved all dangers in quest of knowledge, journeying hundreds of miles with a few gauchos. He traveled from the mouth of the Rio Negro north to Bahia Blanca, and thence another 400 miles to Buenos Aires, sleeping under the stars, eating whatever game the gauchos could bag . .
“From Buenos Aires he rode horseback 300 miles northwest over dangerous roads to Santa Fe, on an arm of the Parana, returning by boat down­river.”—Ibid., p. 473.

On June 11, 1834, the Beagle entered the Pacific Ocean. Several times when the ship landed at various ports in Chile, Darwin would go ashore for more trips: April 18 to May 8, 1834 traveling on the Santa Cruz River by boat, with frequent stops to learn native lore from indigenous peoples. March 18 to April 10, 1835 was spent inland, during which time he left Valparaiso and crossed the Andes by mule.

end of article.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

part 2 since characters are limited

now, another site shows Darwin's father was atheist, and Darwin may have ALREADY been a secret atheist. If so, exposure to occultism in South America would have emboldened him, not real changes.

"His Notebooks also reveal his theological views in those early years from 1837 to 1840. The Creator God of the Bible is discarded, man is degraded to an evolved animal and his mind, thoughts, religion, emotions, language and facial expressions are made into products of evolution. The philosophy of materialism is enthusiastically embraced and human freedom of the will is repudiated. .... on the long voyage young Charles maintained a reputation for being a biblical literalist. Yet as we have seen, after only five months or less off the ship Darwin had written down some of his basic ideas on evolution and his repudiation of the God of the Bible. It is incredible that his thinking could have undergone total transformation from biblical literalism in that short time. No, on board ship he must have acted like an orthodox Christian in order to please his opinionated captain."
http://www.parentcompany.com/csrc/cdagenda.htm

regarding the evolution argument, you can assume God used the same basic stuff in all cases and its not species but genera and phyla at issue. We and animals and plants share some DNA. That merely shows the same hand at work, and if saltation or punctuated equilibrium type evolution occurred over thousands instead of millions of years, that fairly screams for a Creator to do it.

Anonymous said...

Thank you Christine. Your original words about Darwin, some way above, were: "seems his involvement in the occult and witchcraft developed in South America hanging out with the local shamans and stuff, learning too much from them". I repeat: WHAT involvement in the occult and witchcraft? According to the book that Constance quoted, all that happened subsequently is that he attended a small number of seances AS A SKEPTIC, at which he found his skepticism justified. Personally I wouldn't do that, but James Randi has; would you call him an occultist?

One of your links claimed that "Charles Darwin, while a naturalist aboard the Beagle, was initiated into witchcraft in South America by nationals. During horseback travels into the interior, he took part in their ceremonies". This quote is apparently taken from a book by Vance Ferrell. There is not a word in the extended quote you have just posted about Darwin taking part in native pagan rituals, is there? Or anywhere else in Darwin's own words or the words of people he spoke to or who were with him, so far as I can tell, which would be the only evidence having any reliability. Please either find some such or stop spreading hearsay.

Anonymous said...

PART 1: In Reply to Anonymous 6:59 AM.

Hello anonymous poster 6:59 AM, well now, you are a little coward shooting from the weeds! I’m sure there are many here who recognise your bombastic style of writing.

Well, you are not getting away with trying to decieve readers here by trying to dilute the reader's understanding of the seriousness and damage the content of Christine's posts may cause here.

Anonymous 6:59 AM, you try to manipulate the readers of this blog by associating me with Christine, as though I am standing with and alongside her views, when in fact, I am opposing her spreading of New Age nonsense here, such as chakras, Nibiru and vampires, and defending the reputations of those Christians she attacks.

You do this where you state: ‘... people like Christine or Frank, both of whom speak oh so glibly to those who they consider uninformed.’

You then write ‘oh so glibly’ yourself, where you state ever so patronisingly to the readers of this blog that, ‘the study of the occult view of things is much more complex than Christine shares’ (most of us reading this blog are already well aware of that, thank you, Anonymous 6:59 PM), and you continue by concluding that Christine’s position is merely, ‘to try to make us believe she is knowledge about things’ (Your grammar anon 6:59 AM, not mine).

What utter nonsense and a perversion of truth you spin out, Anonymous 6:59 AM, Christine is defending, promoting and disseminating in favour of (not merely erroniously commenting on) the concept of chakras and other lies from demonic sources such as vampires and Nibiru. She has even tried to pervert Holy Scripture (Nb: Ecclesiastes, 12: 6) to try and support her ludicrous New Age claims and has refused to heed correction even when she has run out of excuses.

Your post betrays you, Anonymous 6:59 AM, I readily admit that you're able to list the 'subject matters' as you've put it, and you can specify 'kundalini chakras' (are there other kinds? No need to answer!), yet your comments imply you care and understand little about defending Christianity and Christians on this blog whom Christine has denegrated, insulted, rudely dismissed, falsely accused and wasted the time of, including targetting Constance, the host of this blogspot. (Have you ever spoken condescendingly to Constance and other Christians here, Anonymous 6:59 AM?)

What is really your issue? Is it that I have aimed, and will continue to aim, at exposing the evils of NAM and other aspects and proponents of sorcery, such as the evil origins of the Kabbalah sephirot and the wicked deception of chakras? Only you know your reasons for your illogical rant.

Evidently Anonymous 6:59 AM, you are not out to defend the Truth of the Holy Tanakh. Neither are your intentions, going by the nature of your comments, to stop the bearing of false witness, nor to get this blog back on track, nor to stand up for justice, nor to defend Christians and Christianity here.

Indeed, you seem to employ the same tactics as Christine appears to do here: Aiming to get readers to embark on wild goose chases, wasting their time; you attack the credibility of Christians and try to undermine the defences of Christianity and Christians exposing those things unbiblical.

Anonymous 6:59 AM, you write in a condescending manner, patronising in tone and content yet without any real and clear evidence for (and often with evidence already there clearly refuting any logic of), your claims, attacks and false accusations, and in so doing you therefore break the Commandment not to bear false witness!

Frank.

Anonymous said...

PART 2: In Reply to Anonymous 6:59 AM.

Furthermore Anonymous 6:59 AM, you claim you are, 'no authority anyone looks to', I agree! However, you began your post trying to position yourself in the reader's mind as a person of authority! Wanting to condescendingly, ‘show that the study of the occult view of things is much more complex’, and suggesting that you (couching your point by stating ‘many of us’ to try and hide your rabid hubris), ‘have a large library of information on the occult ...’

Moreover Anonymous 6:59 AM, far be it from me to suggest you do not know the ins and outs of sorcery used by the New Age far more than I do, yet your post shows that you do not care to show contextually in a Biblically correct way why it is necessary to rebuke, expose, encourage, correct, and support things in accordance with Holy Scripture. I hope you do not support the concepts and practices of anything occultic, such as chakras or Kabbalah, which have their origins in the Ancient Babylonian mystery schools of sorcery, and which are Biblically forbidden. For, it is written in Deutoronomy 18: 9 – 12 (KJV):

9 When thou art come into the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations of those nations.

10 There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch.

11 Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer.

12 For all that do these things are an abomination unto the LORD: and because of these abominations the LORD thy God doth drive them out from before thee.

In Ephesians, 5: 6-13, we read:

6 Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.

7 Be not ye therefore partakers with them.

8 For ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord: walk as children of light:

9 (For the fruit of the Spirit is in all goodness and righteousness and truth;)

10 Proving what is acceptable unto the Lord.

11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.

12 For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret.

13 But all things that are reproved are made manifest by the light: for whatsoever doth make manifest is light.

So, Anonymous 6:59 AM, my position is a Christian one. Sure, I have my faults, but I am willing to apologise when needed. Are you willing to ever apologise on this blog, Anonymous 6:59 AM? Have you?

My position is not to be merely to be knowledgeable about occult practices but rather is to expose them, in the way God wants me to do, which means from a Christian standpoint. What is your reason for studying such things Anonymous 6:59 A.M.?

Do you refuse to have ‘fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness’, such as Kabbalah and Hindoo beliefs, ‘but rather reprove them’, in the Name of Jesus Christ? I know I do. Or are you out to decieve Christians here with vain words (despite claiming not to bear false witness, your fruits evidenced by your post overall show your position to be the contrary)?

Finally, embark on your own wild goose chases and waste your own time! I shall continue to trust in Jesus Christ, and fight against strongholds defended by people such as you.

Frank.

Anonymous said...

Now, 6:59 AM, both you and Christine have had far too much time from me and from others following this blog. Waste your own time and stop wasting the time of readers here with your unChristian nonsense and distractions!

Have you posted anything really useful to the blog and the current topic yet?

Frank.

Anonymous said...

Frank, you want to know how you are you like Christine? She speaks down to readers here as you do. Taking up a lot of space to say little is the main way.

You act as if readers here are not familiar with Christianity and that you must teach them what it is. Your grand pronouncements are insulting. Christine wants to lead one faction of readers. You are trying oh so hard to bring together and lead another.

Your brand of Christianity has nothing to do with the Bible and Jesus. Jesus was not a Jew hater as he was Jewish. He was speaking against the Jewish thinkers of his time, and rightly so, as honest Christians of our time speak against some who label themselves Christian but are leading their flocks into the New Age to get their hateful messages heard.

Christine's subtle promotion of one part of occult thinking, New Age, has little to do with those who have seriously immersed themselves in the occult for years, only to find their lives wasted and damage done to themselves and their communities. The Bible rightly warns against such dangers. The Bible also rightly warns against people like you, Frank.

It is when occult beliefs, Judaism or Christianity are manipulated for political agendas can major damage be done. It's when rousing the rabble takes place. You, Frank, are a rabble rouser with your grand pronouncements. Christine doesn't rabble rouse. She deliberately leads others away from the Bible.

There needs to be two sides for conflict and destruction to take place. You represent one side. She represents another. Both of you are leading others to destruction.

Anonymous said...

Anon@2:01 a.m.

I do know what the New Age is about. I suffered from spiritual attacks when researching it. I know that unless one is very strong, you might not want to go there.

Constance is very strong, and God has obviously protected her through it.

I don't know about Christine, but I do not think she's some kind of New Age double agent. She has a lot of time on her hands.



Gary said...

Hey Constance,

Have you addressed author Theresa Talea?

Please check out her website "allthatisrevealed.com". I am having conversations with people who are being led astray by her New Age lies.

Check out the Table of Contents of her book:

http://www.allthatisrevealed.com/index.php/book-previews

Aquarian News said...

Big day for the New Age Movement. 12/21/2012. Sorry, but the world is still here. However, this doesn't mean that in the near future we will see more and more signs of everything prophesized in the Bible.

Anonymous said...

PART 1: Reply to 1:40 PM

Anonymous at 1:40 PM, you wrote: 'Frank, you want to know how you are you like Christine?'

Where did I write that I wanted to know how I was like Christine? I have illustrated clearly to you how my position is to stand against New Age practices such as exposing the Kabbalah and chakras. Christine has stubbornly refused to relinquish her belief, promotion and favourable dissemination in some aspects pertaining to false religions and lying concepts of sorcery, such as chakras. If she were to do so I would be overjoyed and encourage and exhort her to hold on to the Faith once delivered unto the saints.

Have you defended any areas of sorcery, such as the practice of Kabbalah, Anonymous 1:40 PM?

You should realise that this is a blogspot which rightly aims to expose and warn against all areas of Sorcery, the New Age Movement, the New World Order, and anything standing against the Truth found in the Holy Tanakh and the New Testament.

What have you posted here lately on the current topic or something exposing the areas just mentioned to feel you have the right to accuse me of, 'Taking up a lot of space to say little', and for you to have the audacity to assert that this is 'the main way'? Do you seriously think I am going to stop standing against those things unbiblical because of the evil manipulation you use in your writing? Do you not know such manipulation as you have been using in your unwarranted vitriol against me, in your attempt to deceive the readership here with your twists and contortions of reality is, de facto, an act of sorcery?


You continue:'She speaks down to readers here as you do.'

For those things where I have been wrong I have apologised. I ask you again, are you willing to apologise to those you have wronged on this blog and elsewhere?Have you? I speak down to nobody that does not put themselves forward to try and destroy the reputations and confidence of others such as Christine and yourself have done. You are a false accuser.

Do you have the guts to come out from the weeds? You of all people have some nerve to claim that I speak down to readers and imply that I do so just for the sake of it.

You continue: 'You act as if readers here are not familiar with Christianity and that you must teach them what it is'.

Yet, I am not here to keep silent and not spread the Truth of the Holy Bible because you say so, Anonymous 1:40 PM, I agree with the reply given by Peter and the apostles when they were brought before the Sanhedrin.

Acts 5:27-29:

http://kingjbible.com/acts/5.htm

27 And when they had brought them, they set them before the council: and the high priest asked them,

28 Saying, Did not we straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name? and, behold, ye have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man's blood upon us.

29 Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.

Anonymous 1:40 PM, take heed not to be as is described in 2 Timothy 3:

7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

8 Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith.

9 But they shall proceed no further: for their folly shall be manifest unto all men, as theirs also was.

So I shall take heed and obey that which is written in 2 Timothy 3 (KJV).


15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.


Frank

Anonymous said...

PART 2: Reply to 1:40 PM


You shall not harass me into remaining silent rather than defend the Truth of the Holy Gospel! I will continue to correct, exhort, rebuke, warn and sound the alarm when those whose ideas may mislead the vulnerable and unsuspecting as well as themselves.


Matthew 5:10-16 (KJV)

10 Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

11 Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.

12 Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.

13 Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men.

14 Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid.

15 Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house.

16 Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.

Proverbs 27: 3-5

3 A stone is heavy, and the sand weighty; but a fool's wrath is heavier than them both.

4 Wrath is cruel, and anger is outrageous; but who is able to stand before envy?

5 Open rebuke is better than secret love.


Ezekiel 33 (KJV)

7 So thou, O son of man, I have set thee a watchman unto the house of Israel; therefore thou shalt hear the word at my mouth, and warn them from me.

8 When I say unto the wicked, O wicked man, thou shalt surely die; if thou dost not speak to warn the wicked from his way, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand.

9 Nevertheless, if thou warn the wicked of his way to turn from it; if he do not turn from his way, he shall die in his iniquity; but thou hast delivered thy soul.


Frank.

Anonymous said...

PART 3: Reply to 1:40 PM


So I will continue to rebuke and correct where necessary, and forgive any who have wronged me. I will endure afflictions and do the work of an evangelist.


2 Timothy 4: 1-5

1 I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom;

2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.

3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;

4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

5 But watch thou in all things, endure afflictions, do the work of an evangelist, make full proof of thy ministry.


Luke 17: 1-4:

1 Then said he unto the disciples, It is impossible but that offences will come: but woe unto him, through whom they come!

2 It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones.

3 Take heed to yourselves: If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him.

4 And if he trespass against thee seven times in a day, and seven times in a day turn again to thee, saying, I repent; thou shalt forgive him.

Frank

Anonymous said...

PART 4: Reply to 1:40 PM

Anonymous 1:40 PM, you also imply I am anti-Semitic where you write:

'Your brand of Christianity has nothing to do with the Bible and Jesus. Jesus was not a Jew hater as he was Jewish.'


I am not anti-Semitic. Where is your evidence for this? You are bearing false witness against me!

I have stated before and will state again, I have cousins who
are ethnically half German-Jewish, they lost family members in the Holocaust. I am therefore not a Holocaust denier nor a Jew hater as I would be hating my own flesh and blood, which I do not.

However, I do not see why a certain poster (is it you?) should be allowed to silence anyone and brand them anti-Semite just because she does not like any criticism even where false teaching and practices of sorcery are present.

Therefore, I will continue to stand against the evil of the Kabbalah Zohar, and expose the evil blasphemies contained in the Talmud just as I will stand against any false teachings. Those books are contrary to the teachings and Truth found in the real Holy Torah (Pentateuch) and the Books of the Prophets throughout the entirity of the Holy Tanakh!

Part

I also believe that the only way to Salvation for both Jew and Gentile is through Jesus Christ, the Lord and Saviour, because I believe Him:

John 14:6

Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am [the one I claim to be], you will indeed die in your sins.


Frank

Anonymous said...

PART 5: Reply to 1:40 PM

Now knowing that Jesus Christ is the Truth, it would be hateful and anti-Semitic of me to act like John Hagee and pretend there was Salvation for the Jews outside Jesus. For Jesus told Nicodemus, a Jewish leader, you must be born again:


John 3

King James Version (KJV)


3 There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews:

2 The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.

3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?

5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

9 Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be?

10 Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?

11 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.

12 If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?

13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.

14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:

15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.

16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.

20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

22 After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized.

23 And John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim, because there was much water there: and they came, and were baptized.

24 For John was not yet cast into prison.

25 Then there arose a question between some of John's disciples and the Jews about purifying.

26 And they came unto John, and said unto him, Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou barest witness, behold, the same baptizeth, and all men come to him.

Frank

Anonymous said...

PART 6: Reply to 1:40 PM

John 3 (KJV) Continued:

27 John answered and said, A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven.

28 Ye yourselves bear me witness, that I said, I am not the Christ, but that I am sent before him.

29 He that hath the bride is the bridegroom: but the friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth greatly because of the bridegroom's voice: this my joy therefore is fulfilled.

30 He must increase, but I must decrease.

31 He that cometh from above is above all: he that is of the earth is earthly, and speaketh of the earth: he that cometh from heaven is above all.

32 And what he hath seen and heard, that he testifieth; and no man receiveth his testimony.

33 He that hath received his testimony hath set to his seal that God is true.

34 For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God: for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him.

35 The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand.

36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.


Frank

Anonymous said...

PART 6: Reply to 1:40 PM

John 3 (KJV) Continued:

27 John answered and said, A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven.

28 Ye yourselves bear me witness, that I said, I am not the Christ, but that I am sent before him.

29 He that hath the bride is the bridegroom: but the friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth greatly because of the bridegroom's voice: this my joy therefore is fulfilled.

30 He must increase, but I must decrease.

31 He that cometh from above is above all: he that is of the earth is earthly, and speaketh of the earth: he that cometh from heaven is above all.

32 And what he hath seen and heard, that he testifieth; and no man receiveth his testimony.

33 He that hath received his testimony hath set to his seal that God is true.

34 For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God: for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him.

35 The Father loveth the Son, and hath given all things into his hand.

36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.


Frank

Anonymous said...

PART 7: Reply to 1:40 PM

Romans 2

1 Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.

2 But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things.

3 And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?

4 Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?

5 But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God;

6 Who will render to every man according to his deeds:

7 To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life:

8 But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,

9 Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;

10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:

11 For there is no respect of persons with God.

12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;

13(For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:

15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)

16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.

17 Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God,

18 And knowest his will, and approvest the things that are more excellent, being instructed out of the law;

19 And art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light of them which are in darkness,

20 An instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, which hast the form of knowledge and of the truth in the law.

21 Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal?

22 Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege?

23 Thou that makest thy boast of the law, through breaking the law dishonourest thou God?

24 For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written.

25 For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision.

26 Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision?

27 And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law?

28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:

29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.


Frank

Anonymous said...

PART 8: Reply to 1:40 PM


Romans 9 (KJV)

1 I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost,

2 That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart.

3 For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh:

4 Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises;

5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.

6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:

7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.

8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.

9 For this is the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sara shall have a son.

10 And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac;

11(For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;)

12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. 13As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.

14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.

15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.

16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.

17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.

18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.

19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?

20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?

21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?

22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:

23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,

24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?

25 As he saith also in Osee, I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved.

26 And it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people; there shall they be called the children of the living God.

27 Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved:

28 For he will finish the work, and cut it short in righteousness: because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth.

29 And as Esaias said before, Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we had been as Sodoma, and been made like unto Gomorrha.

30 What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith.

31 But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.

32 Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;

33 As it is written, Behold, I lay in Sion a stumblingstone and rock of offence: and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.


Frank.

Anonymous said...

PART 9: Reply to 1:40 PM


This is what I believe and will continue to do so despite your persecution of me. You see, I believe the Words of a Jew whose Name is Jesus Christ (Yeshua Ha' Mashiach), not in the lies and racism of Kabbalistic practicioners such as 'Rebbe' Menachem Mendel Schneerson.

Repent, believe on the Lord and be saved! For why will you perish?

Frank.

Anonymous said...

Go to your local bar and pay on credit card if you believe the world is going to end by midnight at the international dateline!

Anonymous said...

By the way, Anonymous 1:40 PM, you write that I am 'a rabble rouser' that I make 'grand pronouncements'.

You continue your rubbish with:

"There needs to be two sides for conflict and destruction to take place. You represent one side. She represents another. Both of you are leading others to destruction."

No, I am leading noone to destruction! I am defending Biblical truth. I tell you the truth: you are a liar and false accuser of the brethren!

Take the log out of your own eye first, repent, accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Saviour! Then you'll see clearly to help me with the speck or log in mine. I am not here to fight flesh and blood but to stand against the wiles of the enemy, and spiritual wickedness n high places. I recognise there are two sides to every conflict. I am on the side of Jesus Christ and therefore the Truth. Whose side are you on, Anonymous 1:40 PM? For in Matthew 12:30 we read the Words of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ:

'He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad.'

Let God be true and every man a liar!


Frank.

Anonymous said...

Blah, blah blah Frank. You wrote
"PART 2: Reply to 1:40 PM
You shall not harass me into remaining silent rather than defend the Truth of the Holy Gospel! I will continue to correct, exhort, rebuke, warn and sound the alarm when those whose ideas may mislead the vulnerable and unsuspecting as well as themselves. "

As if anyone is stopping you!!! You pretend things that are not. You lie as much as any sinner who uses the Bible to cover their abominations.

The best I can say about this blog now is it had a great history of exposing falsehoods.

Now it is just a soapbox (does anyone remember why the word is used) for people who want to attract a crowd for their emotional rants. Granted that there are huge audiences both on the left and right because logic has left the scene and people are still searching for some kind of foothold.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

"As if anyone is stopping you!!! You pretend things that are not."

Indeed. delusions of persecution. reminds me of a crazy bunch in the post persecution days of the church in north africa they wanted to die as glorious martyrs, but no one was martyring Christians any more. so they would attack armed travellers, and while the latter were killing the former in self defense, the "victims" would be screaming "Jesus is Lord!" so (they thought) they qualified as martyrs. This info from St. John of Damascus.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

I am not leading anyone to destruction. if you stop viewing things as package deals, and look for what is true and what is not, and take The Bible as true then

1. the validation of soul wheels and bilocation in The Bible DOES NOT call The Bible into question
merely validates some phenomena that are themselves IRRELEVANT to New Age quasi theology etc.

2. this DOES NOT validate the NAM because these things are separatable from it. soul wheels, yeah. bilocation, yeah. reincarnation, no. seeking contact with spirits, no. seeking supernatural knowledge of the future (aka divination), no. messiahs and avatars other than Jesus Christ, no. possiblity of exploitation of ether and soul wheels and tendrils and telepathy to enslave with enchantment, a real menace, bad, forbidden.(Deut.) possibility of misuse of bilocation to cause deception by spirits and sorcerers, yes, trust nothing, trust no visions, test the spirits (I John 4:4).

2. the separation of them from NAM immunizes the sheep (and dislocates the new agers sometimes) from the NAM because these particular things being shown to be phenomena OF NO RELIGIOUS OR ESCHATOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE WHATSOEVER,

they no longer serve to support NAM and cannot easily when stumbled on tempt the believer who has some odd experience.

now, I got a phone call from a fan of mine who posts here, I suggested he post what he told me himself since there is such a hysterical reaction, but I will say this.

google terms gaia, mother earth demands sacrifice, green cult.

UN depopulation and agenda 21 as disguised human sacrifice. that is the concept.

Anonymous said...

Frank, nobody here disagrees with the Bible - the issue is about how we live it - and I doubt that anybody, whether your targets or not, is going to read the extended passages of scripture that you post verbatim. Perhaps you could make your views clear in your own words, and then simply reference the extended passages, including the most telling verses?

History Maker said...

This was on Huffington Post last week, not some obscure new age website or article. (Many of my liberal acquaintances and relatives read the Huff Post.)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bernard-starr/the-coming-interspiritual-age_b_2254690.html?utm_hp_ref=fb&src=sp&comm_ref=false#sb=3923841,b=facebook

"The Coming Interspiritual Age"

~HM

History Maker said...

Also... Are people (Ms. Cumbey?) aware of Christine Pack and Marcia Montenegro? (I can't remember if I've seen their names mentioned on here.) They are a couple of ladies warning about New Age teachings infiltrating the church. Their FaceBook page is where I learned about the previous story. If you're not on FB, they have a blog called Sola Sisters.

http://solasisters.blogspot.com/

I'm not necessarily *always* in agreement with their concerns. :) However, I think it's wise to be very cautious about Christian (or "Christian") leaders/teachers/authors these days, and they share a lot of helpful information.

~HM

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 5:06 AM, you write: '... nobody here disagrees with the Bible ... '

You're comment shows you to be a viper hissing in the weeds, a coward, are you the same coward that posted at 6:59 AM and 1:40 PM? Are you a Christian? Yes or No? Agree with this:


2 Timothy 3:16

16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for
instruction in righteousness:


So, that being said, go back and read all that I've written and all the Holy Scripture Ive referred to.

Therefore, because of your rejection of Holy Scripture and defence of the promotion of witchcraft (whether Kabbalah or attempting to stop me rebuking and correcting Christine for her support of chakras and her delusions twisting Holy Writ), you will know it is you, as your actions show you to be of the synagogue of Satan, being referred to where Jesus Christ declares in his Revelation to John being spoken about in Revelation 2:9

9 I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.

And again in Revelation 3:9 (KJV)

9 Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.

Again, I refer you to my earlier posts. Pay particular attention to every jot and tittle referenced.

You trolls still haven't posted any evidence to support your outrageous claims I am anti-Semitic. Which I am not, and have given ample evidence above to refute your evil and false accusations:


Matthew 23:33

33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?

http://kingjbible.com/matthew/23.htm

Is it because you're angry that I have rightly spoken against the filth of Kabbalah and the rot of the Unholy BABYLONIAN Talmud?:

Deuteronomy 18

9 When thou art come into the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations of those nations.

10 There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch,

11 Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer.

12 For all that do these things are an abomination unto the LORD: and because of these abominations the LORD thy God doth drive them out from before thee.

13 Thou shalt be perfect with the LORD thy God.

14 For these nations, which thou shalt possess, hearkened unto observers of times, and unto diviners: but as for thee, the LORD thy God hath not suffered thee so to do.

Matthew 15 (KJV)

7 Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying,

8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.

9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.



Waste your own time, you wretched spiritual paupers, who falsely accuse, and defend Gnosticism.

Mary aka Christine aka Justina, you remind me of the slave girl out of Acts 16:16-18

16 And it came to pass, as we went to prayer, a certain damsel possessed with a spirit of divination met us, which brought her masters much gain by soothsaying:

17 The same followed Paul and us, and cried, saying, These men are the servants of the most high God, which shew unto us the way of salvation.

18 And this did she many days. But Paul, being grieved, turned and said to the spirit, I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her. And he came out the same hour.

Frank

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 5:06 AM, you write: '... nobody here disagrees with the Bible ... '

You're comment shows you to be a viper hissing in the weeds, a coward, are you the same coward that posted at 6:59 AM and 1:40 PM? Are you a Christian? Yes or No? Agree with this:


2 Timothy 3:16

16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for
instruction in righteousness:


So, that being said, go back and read all that I've written and all the Holy Scripture Ive referred to.

Therefore, because of your rejection of Holy Scripture and defence of the promotion of witchcraft (whether Kabbalah or attempting to stop me rebuking and correcting Christine for her support of chakras and her delusions twisting Holy Writ), you will know it is you, as your actions show you to be of the synagogue of Satan, being referred to where Jesus Christ declares in his Revelation to John being spoken about in Revelation 2:9

9 I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.

And again in Revelation 3:9 (KJV)

9 Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.

Again, I refer you to my earlier posts. Pay particular attention to every jot and tittle referenced.

You trolls still haven't posted any evidence to support your outrageous claims I am anti-Semitic. Which I am not, and have given ample evidence above to refute your evil and false accusations:


Matthew 23:33

33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?

http://kingjbible.com/matthew/23.htm

Is it because you're angry that I have rightly spoken against the filth of Kabbalah and the rot of the Unholy BABYLONIAN Talmud?:

Deuteronomy 18

9 When thou art come into the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations of those nations.

10 There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch,

11 Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer.

12 For all that do these things are an abomination unto the LORD: and because of these abominations the LORD thy God doth drive them out from before thee.

13 Thou shalt be perfect with the LORD thy God.

14 For these nations, which thou shalt possess, hearkened unto observers of times, and unto diviners: but as for thee, the LORD thy God hath not suffered thee so to do.

Matthew 15 (KJV)

7 Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying,

8 This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.

9 But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.



Waste your own time, you wretched spiritual paupers, who falsely accuse, and defend Gnosticism.

Mary aka Christine aka Justina, you remind me of the slave girl out of Acts 16:16-18

16 And it came to pass, as we went to prayer, a certain damsel possessed with a spirit of divination met us, which brought her masters much gain by soothsaying:

17 The same followed Paul and us, and cried, saying, These men are the servants of the most high God, which shew unto us the way of salvation.

18 And this did she many days. But Paul, being grieved, turned and said to the spirit, I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her. And he came out the same hour.

Anonymous said...

RE: 2:52 PM Post.


Frank

Anonymous said...

"Anonymous 5:06 AM, you write: '... nobody here disagrees with the Bible ... ' You're comment shows you to be a viper hissing in the weeds, a coward, are you the same coward that posted at 6:59 AM and 1:40 PM? Are you a Christian? Yes or No? Agree with this: 2 Timothy 3:16..."

Show me a little Christian charity Frank, I wrote neither of those comments and I am a committed evangelical Christian who regards 2 Timothy 3:16 as part of God's inerrant and holy word. All I said was that I don't find it helpful that you post long passages of scripture here. We can get those anywhere online. Why do you regard me as a viper and a coward?

Anon@5:06 AM

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

probably because it makes him feel important to sling such words.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

thank you for the solasisters link, that is an excellent blog.

ironically, I find on it this classic example of sex abuse in the protestant scene.

http://solasisters.blogspot.com/2012/10/janet-mefferd-interviews-attorney-on.html

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

here's another excellent post from that blog. I am reading the older posts now.

http://solasisters.blogspot.com/2012/10/does-mysticism-lead-us-to-god.html

"The reason this is an important event for Christians to be aware of is because most, if not all, of these New Age/New Spirituality/New Thought concepts are now coming into the church in "Christianized" forms: contemplative prayer, Lectio Divina, labyrinth, prayer circles, breath prayers, Word of Faith "name it and claim it," etc."

Anonymous said...

I'd bet my bottom dollar that Anon 11:46 PM is Christine's post.

Anonymous said...

Christine@3.35pm, did you not know that contemplative prayer has been extensively practised in the Orthodox church for many centuries?

Anonymous said...

Anon@4:38 PM, ask her!

Anonymous said...

We are in such dangerous times.

Click here and click there and anyone can feel extremely knowledgeable. There is no need to deeply do first person research or to analyze what one finds. Just find someone through a click on the mouse who agrees with you and that makes it official, beyond question, knowledge worth passing on as valid

Add that to a loud "I condemn you." and the case is made until another comes along shouting louder.

Where will this all end? Who can shout the loudest? Who can type the frothiest?

Anonymous said...

Luk 2:12 And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger.
Luk 2:13 And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying,
Luk 2:14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.

........Peace and Goodwill.......Merry CHRISTmas to everyone.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

contemplative prayer in RC and emergent church is NOT the same as the Jesus Prayer in Orthodoxy. there is no visualization, or there isn't supposed to be. you are supposed to think about the prayer and about God and not let thoughts the devil sends distract you.

if you get visions etc. you are to ignore them, as likely deceptions.

In the overbearing and controversial Ephraimite monasteries the Jesus Prayer IS sometimes functioning as a mantra along with excessive loyalty to a spiritual father as a guru. A lot of Orthodox have comdemned this crew as excessive.

"Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me a sinner." This is wrongly called contemplative prayer, a term out of RC describing stuff quite different.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

I don't post anonymously. and I couldn't find Anon 11:46 PM to see what you are talking about. So I guess you don't know what you are talking about, as usual.

Anonymous said...

"contemplative prayer in RC and emergent church is NOT the same as the Jesus Prayer in Orthodoxy"

Never said it was. Just that there is a HUGE tradition of contemplative prayer in Eastern Orthodoxy, a tradition of which the Jesus prayer is but a small part. Surely if you are Orthodox you know this? Read Lossky's book The Mystical theology of the Eastern Church for a summary. Yet you indiscriminately slam contemplative prayer at 3:35 PM.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

the kinds of things solasisters slam which I agree in slamming, are not part of EO. They are also strongly criticized by evangelicals with no EO knowledge, and even in the past at least by some RC.

"contemplation of divine things" contemplation is precisely the kind of thing that hinduism rejects as having thoughts and focus on a subject and would go supposedly beyond this into "meditation." what has been translated in The Bible by the word "meditation" is "chewing" on concepts and statements, precisely the kind of thinking the hindus reject as a mere lower stage in mental development.

the goal of theosis or "deification" is not what new age means by it, for we are cautioned that we only become by grace not by essence which remains that of a creature, separate from God in His essence, we can become godly (which means godlike) in the ways Jesus spoke of "be perfect like your Father in heaven is perfect" not in any sense of becoming or realizing that one is deity.

the restoration of the image and likeness of God that Genesis says we were created in, and which became warped in The Fall.

there are twists and errors. But the RC mysticism is very subjective, very emotional and often beset with longwinded lectures by God or Mary or whoever, which is not characteristic of His words in The Bible, and "locutions"
where you feel or hear the words in your body. Very wierd.

The whole style is dubious. I have reluctantly without EO help come to the conclusion that Fatima and Lourdes were deceptions, both paranormal UFO etc. and human, and the vision at La Salette warned there would be phony Marian appearances, so may have been legitimate.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

""For one thing, EC (ie, Emergent Church) as opposed to EOC) patterns itself after more mystical theologians, with prayers such as hesychastic prayers, centering oneself, controlling one's breathing, seeking the contemplative part of worship, etc. Use of icons, incense, candles."
I must admit, I have never seen anything liturgical in an EC situation. Are we talking about the same thing? All of the ECs here have signs that say things like "Redefining Church" and "Church without walls" and have names like "Living Water Church" etc. I agree they use centering prayer, but Orthodox don't "do" centering prayer. Centering prayer is heretical. Hesychasm with its breathing techniques are a) restricted to a very small minority of monks who are under the direction of a spiritual father b) do not involve any mental imagery whatsoever (which defines centering prayer), c) is Christ-centered, not man-centered, the idea being to keep your mind and your heart united, on the name of Jesus, instead of letting your mind wander about thinking about material things. So any similarity to me would be superficial in this regard.
"EC puts a strong emphasis on community and the voices of the community, which is very similar to the way EOC recognises post facto out of all little-t tradition the big-S Sacred big-A Apostolic big-T Tradition that it acknowledges as authoritative and normative for the church."
We do in fact put an emphasis on the people of God, but our emphasis is always on the people of God protecting the eternal truths, not redefining them for cultural relevancy. You may disagree that that is what we are doing, but our aim is not to take small t traditions and expand them everywhere as big T tradition (Traditionalist Orthodox don't even believe that is a real dichotomy anyway, but that is another discussion), but to preserve Tradition and only define it as a reaction to an error. The EC phenomenon seems to relish in "recontextualizing" the "message" as often as possible."

http://rhoblogy.blogspot.com/2010/04/similarities-between-eastern-orthodoxy_22.html

the article by Lossky is not evidence of a huge or even minimal tradition of contemplative prayer, you seem to equate several things that are not the same thing.

Anonymous said...

Constance,

Why have you permitted this blog to become occupied? It appears 99 percent of the posts are either from one poster or a combative responses to said poster.

I've reviewed several past threads and they are the same.

YOUR blog has become really pretty bad. I just read and held my head in my hands and wonder, WHY?

I understand your reluctance to place limits on free speech, but would you allow a house guest to dominate EVERY conversation and NEVER leave?

To ignore the "occupier" is to ignore your entire comments section. Why not just shut down the comments section altogether?

If any of the "old timer" researchers are still around please make yourself known.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

11:46 AM found it, I had searched with anon in the find search term, my bad.

No that isn't me but I appreciate the comment. I don't post anonymously.

Frank, you ply Scripture section on Scripture section, without explaining how ANY of it has relevance to the stuff you are denouncing about me. I agree with
all those Bible points, but they do not mention wheels or bilocation. Neither do these things have relevance to the prohibitions in Deuteronomy, except insofar as they might be misused to accomplish some enchantment.

people like Frank had a hand in driving off the old timer researchers.

Anonymous said...

"the article by Lossky is not evidence of a huge or even minimal tradition of contemplative prayer, you seem to equate several things that are not the same thing."

Christine I am neither criticising nor promoting Christian contemplative prayer here, but you seem ignorant of the traditions of the church movement which you have joined. Lossky's "Mystical Theology of the Eastern Church" is not an article but a book; is universally reckoned by mainstream Eastern Orthodox themselves (of which Lossky is one) to be a classic; and it points out (correctly) that of all church movements Orthodoxy has been the most resolute in practising mysticism and contemplative prayer. Don't take my word for it, or the internet's as without knowledge you cannot tell there what is fringe and what is mainstream. Ask your Orthodox brethren. Incidentally I don't think you are particularly arrogant, but you do seem to me on the basis of your posts to be stumbling about in some kind of personal fog. It isn't good for you or this blog, and I hope that you will soon emerge from it.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

what you do not seem to get, is that "contemplative prayer" in RC and RC sourced emergent church, is not the same as EO. There is no visualization or fantasy reinactment of Bible scenes with yourself in them (such as Spiritual Exercizes of St. Ignatius Loyola)and there HAVE been excesses and errors which have been addressed also.

Self watchfulness to correct flaws in the heart (which means core of mind or nous not emotions, then the emotions are brought under control) is a big part of this.

In the monastic scene at early times, a subclinical gnosticism of rejection of the physical did occasionally exist. Evagrius Ponticus seems to written a few problematic things, and was never glorified/canonized, but his other writings and ideas have been considered important. Evagrius worked up something I would call a systems analysis of sin and virtue in the soul, the tendencies that lead to actions.

Orthodoxy is not uniform except in core doctrine and liturgics and there are disputes in it. for instance, there have been attempted incursions of speaking in tongues supported by one Greek Orthodox jurisdiction priest in I think Florida. It hasn't gotten very far.

the name worshipping heresy is raising its head again and will get shut down. This caused a monastery in Athos to get shut down at the Tsar's orders and by his troops in the 1800s.

the first chapter of his book which I linked to shows there is a difference between mysticism of the sort you are used to and EO mysticism.

more seriously still, thanks to an archbishop who grew up steeped in worldly literature and liberal quasi protestant influences in the 1800s, there is the false notion being put about that Atonement involving payment for sin debt is wrong and not Orthodox when it is present as a core (but not the only) point in understanding the redemption by Christ from early writers. This is often presented as consisting strictly of appeasing the honor of an offended God, when it is far more complex as St. Athanasius shows.

Now to get received into Orthodoxy, you do not get quizzed on Lossky or mysticism.

In that first chapter (I have found the partial book at google books) http://books.google.com/books?id=dxqvWwPSCSwC&printsec=frontcover&dq=inauthor:%22Vladimir+Lossky%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=ltLWUP6BLpCEiwLEsYDoDw&ved=0CD4QuwUwAQ#v=onepage&q&f=false

he draws a clear distinction between mysticism as "a spirituality which expresses a doctrinal attitude," and that which is opposed to doctrine, and something beyond understanding and totally personal and subjective and
resolutely opposed to theology.

The latter is the type you think of when you hear of mysticism.

Wesley and his concept of holiness was heavily influenced by the early Fathers.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

thank you for pointing me to Lossky. I am reading the part where he shows how pseudo Dionysius the Areopagite rejects plotinus' concepts that appear similar but are not.

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEFAeu3DYeo

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

fast forward through the creepy J Z Knight channeling stuff

Anonymous said...

Let's see, all the posts here are telling Christine she's a blog hog and no-one likes the comments section because of this.

Christine takes no responsibility and blames it on Frank and posts another 7 comments within a short period of time.

You must sit back and snicker Christine of what you're done to a professional researcher's blog. Your "research" contributes nothing of value here yet you have the nerve to tell Constance she's catching up with you.

Anonymous said...

I don't think that Christine snickers. I suspect she believes she is misunderstood. I think it would be too painful for her to admit to herself what effect she is having and (above all) why. Hopefully Constance can have a word with her off-blog as Christine's email address is public on her own blog.

Anonymous said...

Thanks History Maker for the lead to the Huffington Post article.

The article is straight New Age as you know. There were some good comments such as the one written by the man who paralleled trying to find what true spirituality was to peeling an onion. When everything is taken away, nothing will be found at the center. And another which read "Everybody's religion is inevitably nobody's religion."

Everyone who has been following this blog knows that the idea presented is nothing new. It is straight New Age and it's been in the planning and moving forward stages for decades. No, people aren't going to start believing in large numbers in Ascended Masters who have come back after death to give advice. Some will say, "Well maybe it could be true..." Most people will just go along with giving in to the ideas that are promoted by "people with good reputations." (said sarcastically)

Two thoughts from the article: "...coupled with the dream of moving toward holistic, heartistic, trans-traditional, transcultural, and transnational perspectives." and "These changes are moving human consciousness toward a we-oneness universal state and away from the I-me consciousness that has hampered our spiritual growth."

From major New Age promoter David Spangler's book Reflections on the Christ:

"Lucifer comes to give to us the final gift of wholeness. If we accept it then he is free and we are free. This is the Luciferic initiation. It is one that many people now, and in the days ahead, will be facing, for it is an initiation in the New Age."

Read this review of his latest book. He calls it Holarchy. I think it also goes under another name, Communism. It's being sold again using the same emotional tactics.

Anonymous said...

I forgot the link to the review of Spangler's book.
http://www.sevenpillarshouse.org/index.php/article/a_vision_of_holarchy1/

Huffington Post article:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bernard-starr/the-coming-interspiritual-age_b_2254690.html?utm_hp_ref=fb&src=sp&comm_ref=false#sb=3923841,b=facebook
or http://tinyurl.com/cray4a3

Anonymous said...

Christine,

As an RC, I can tell you that there is a difference between Christian mysticism or contemplation and the whole ecumenical movement that deals with the same.

This is why, I think it's important to get canonical church approval, of any movement. For example, the Intercessors of the Lamb, were a contemplative group of nuns, who were told to wait for an investigation and canonical approval. They refused. They were disbanded by the church.

The same has taken place with certain Charismatic groups who went away and started their own things, without permission.

Protestants might find this too rigid, but it helps prevent the presence of all sorts of mystical groups, leading to individuals to go on blogs such as this, to discern their teachings and motives.





Anonymous said...

OK - I'll get it right yet. It's an article by David Spangler written for a New Age organization called Seven Pillars House of Wisdom. If you are into researching the topic of New Age, you might want to look at the Seven Pillars webpage.

History Maker said...

Thanks, Anonymous, for your response to my post and the information. Yes, I'm aware of Spangler (via Ms. Cumbey), but I don't read too much of what he writes or has written. I checked out that Seven Pillars site and could only stand to look around for a few moments. Reading too much of *their* stuff gives me the creeps. I can't seem to tolerate reading those kinds of things in depth, as I used to when I first read Ms. Cumbey's books and found this website several years ago. I know what they're trying to do and I know where it comes from. I don't need to "go there" anymore. ;)My purpose now is to warn others, especially my friends and family (my children!), and encourage them to hold fast to the Gospel. Another resource that has helped me and I've recommended to others is Reinventing Jesus Christ by Warren B. Smith. Anytime someone is promoting oneness (at-one-ment vs. atonement), red flags should go up! Twice on FB, I've privately emailed friends from church to warn them of Marianne Williamson after they posted one of her "inspirational" quotes on their walls. I've found that keeping it simple is helpful. People are SO distracted and easily distracted these days, that too much info will overwhelm them and then my warning will probably be brushed off. Doing research is not something most people want to do, whether we like it or not, so the best thing is to be succinct. The important thing is them heeding the warning, not demonstrating my VAST knowledge of the subject. lol!

I'm very grateful for Ms. Cumbey, as well as others on here and elsewhere, for warning ME. :)

Merry Christmas everyone!

~HM

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

I posted little short posts. not like Frank who posts huge longwinded posts and not only the ones that are extensive Bible quotes that don't address the issues he is upset about.

Anonymous said...

History Maker,
I'm happy for you that you have so many friends who trust you so completely that telling them what to watch out for in a few words does the job. For many people to just speak succinctly might do the job of warning them about the extent of the New Age movement. Readers here are generally very knowledgeable and come here to learn more. They are reaching out for more information.

The people I know are complex in their response to new ideas, somewhat like the people Constance meets, which is why she keeps learning and teaching after so many years. There are many different kinds of people in the world.

In fact, Constance's comment to me about the information I shared was "Thoughtful, well written, with compelling points."

I hope you have a very fulfilling Christmas day and a joyous holiday season which lasts long past Epiphany.

Anonymous said...

Newsmax is making another of its regular offers -- subscribe to this magazine and get two reports free. In this case they are offering two free reports on What Prayer Does To Your Brain. Based on the audio promo it sure sounds like good news for believers as in, "See I told you belief in God is now a proven fact." The promo suggests that prayer will make you healthier, happier, more relaxed, less stressful, more forgiving, less likely to come down with dementia of various kinds.

But before one gets too excited, it is important to remember that they define praying as any spiritual experience, messaging God, meditation, chanting, etc., a kind of active, relaxing mental participation with or without a goal. No religion is specified. God isn't mentioned. Apparently belief in God isn't needed. No comparisons are made between specific religions. Kind of an academic version of the song, "Don't worry, be happy."

This science is called Neurotheology. I'm not doubting the results or saying these things shouldn't be studied. Unlike what the hype suggests, studies of the science of religion have been going on a long time. The New Age Paul Templeton Foundation reported in 2008 http://tinyurl.com/clk7ahc , "Over the past several decades the field of science and religion has produced a rich body of scholarship concerning the different purposes, methods and epistemologies of these two areas and their modes of interaction.." The studies were done in countless high school and college classrooms, thus introducing these ideas into the younger generation. A long time ago, in a Futurist magazine, I read that the best religion would be that which could be proven scientifically. The goals have been in place for a long time.

The audio promoting the Newsmax reports can be found at http://tinyurl.com/cy64k3l

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

http://www.ourladyswarriors.org/dissent/centerprayer.htm

shows difference between centering prayer and correct prayer, and quotes Theresa of Avila against this sort of thing, she is often vaguely referenced to support it.

Susanna said...

I would like to wish everyone here a very Merry christmas and a Happy, Healthy New Year!

Anonymous said...

Not good news at Christmas time which should be joyous, but it's realistic news. Maybe it's time for Christians to fight back against the inroads of the New Age movement. And you can't fight back unless you know who the enemy is.

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/christians-under-threat-civitas/2012/12/23/id/468866?s=al&promo_code=1147F-1
or http://tinyurl.com/bvzc5bb

Study: Christians Under Threat Around the World

Christians are rapidly disappearing from the region of Jesus Christ’s birth – the modern Middle East – and are being persecuted in many other regions of the world where their religion is viewed as “Western” and foreign.

The new study, reported Sunday by the British Telegraph newspaper, warns that Christians suffer greater hostility across the world than any other religious group. It also claims politicians have been “blind” to the extent of violence faced by Christians in Africa, Asia and the Middle East.

"A far less widely grasped fact is that Christians are targeted more than any other body of believers,” the study adds.

The study also estimates that 200 million Christians, or 10 per cent of Christians worldwide, are “socially disadvantaged, harassed or actively oppressed for their beliefs.”
(more at the link)

Christine Erikson (aka Justina) said...

I was puzzled by Frank's hostility to cuttingedge.com, acting as if it was self evidently trouble and even falsely accusing their position on KJV. Seems they are on Barbara Aho's hit list, I guess he is following Aho, and while some of her criticisms of some evangelical sites are valid, she is unwilling to notice what is right with any of them. seems she (as I used to be) and Frank are just looking for a fight, any fight, and they just happen to be Christian, but the touchstone feeling of truth is that it gives you a feeling of righteous outrage regardless of what position is involved. The muslim extremists and agnotics who love a war are the same breed of cat.

Such people, if they happen to target an actual evil, or support an actual good, or happen to be Christian instead of muslin, hindu or mormon fundamentalist or even neo nazis, if they happen to be Christian it is the grace of God to them, not anything to do with their preferred state of mind. The latter they share with the rest of the people on this list and others.

Anonymous said...

Christine, can you stop the narcissism on Christmas eve which is about the Baby Jesus and not you again. If you feel lonely turn on the television. That advice is my gift to you.

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 400 of 429   Newer› Newest»