The new age movement is satanic at its core

[ialsop]

this is what i got after asking him.

Ive talked to him or her a LOT and argued and argued about MY view. So i want to here what HE or SHE has to say about what would make them want to be more seriously catholic, or what their view of a serious catholic is.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

Ive talked to him or her a LOT and argued and argued about MY view. So i want to here what HE or SHE has to say about what would make them want to be more seriously catholic, or what their view of a serious catholic is.

Fewer people like you would be a start.

 

[ialsop]

Fewer people like you would be a start.

Well, I guess with that attitude you will never get anywhere beyond trolling forums and annoying people. Fewer people like me? Obviously more of an insult than an answer. Seeing that you really dont care about your faith in any way or another, I find it hard to take anything you say seriously.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

Well, I guess with that attitude you will never get anywhere beyond trolling forums and annoying people. Fewer people like me? Obviously more of an insult than an answer. Seeing that you really dont care about your faith in any way or another, I find it hard to take anything you say seriously.

Congratulations! Your reaction is one more reason why I’d have more respect for this faith if there were fewer people like you in it. Face it. The only reason why you call me a troll is because I insult something that’s too firmly attached to your ego.

 

[Jack007]

let us discuss the topic instead of each other

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

let us discuss the topic instead of each other

Indeed. Let’s. So far, we’ve perfectly proven just what is wrong with the premise of the thread: A knee-jerk reaction towards anything because it sounds ‘New Age’ or even deliberately bears the label.

 

[Jack007]

Indeed. Let’s. So far, we’ve perfectly proven just what is wrong with the premise of the thread: A knee-jerk reaction towards anything because it sounds ‘New Age’ or even deliberately bears the label.

the church has condemned all forms and types of new age spirituality.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

the church has condemned all forms and types of new age spirituality.

And you define this as…?

 

[Jack007]

And you define this as…?

you said that there is no one new age. so i said all kinds and forms.

 

[Lost_Wanderer]

you said that there is no one new age. so i said all kinds and forms.

And what exactly are these ‘kinds and forms’?

Your answer doesn’t get us anywhere. When I say there is no ‘one’ new age, any condemnation of the label is deliberately flawed because what’s New Age is also intertwined with what’s Buddhist, Hindu, as well as Catholic, Protestant, Muslim, Jewish etc. To condemn the ‘spirituality’ that way is to condemn anything it’s similar to.

You’re just extending the adjectives without actually defining the object.

 

[Jack007]

And what exactly are these ‘kinds and forms’?

Your answer doesn’t get us anywhere. When I say there is no ‘one’ new age, any condemnation of the label is deliberately flawed because what’s New Age is also intertwined with what’s Buddhist, Hindu, as well as Catholic, Protestant, Muslim, Jewish etc. To condemn the ‘spirituality’ that way is to condemn anything it’s similar too.

You’re just extending the adjectives without actually defining the object.

The New Age movement is a religious or spiritual movement that developed in Western nations during the 1970s. Precise scholarly definitions of the movement differ in their emphasis, largely as a result of its highly eclectic structure. Nevertheless, the movement is characterised by a holistic view of the cosmos, a belief in an emergent Age of Aquarius – from which the movement gets its name – an emphasis on self-spirituality and the authority of the self, a focus on healing (particularly with alternative therapies), a belief in channeling, and an adoption of a “New Age science” that makes use of elements of the new physics

wikipedia

New Age is not a movement in the sense normally intended in the term “New Religious Movement”, and it is not what is normally meant by the terms “cult” and “sect”. Because it is spread across cultures, in phenomena as varied as music, films, seminars, workshops, retreats, therapies, and many more activities and events, it is much more diffuse and informal, though some religious or para-religious groups consciously incorporate New Age elements, and it has been suggested that New Age has been a source of ideas for various religious and para-religious sects.(9) New Age is not a single, uniform movement, but rather a loose network of practitioners whose approach is to think globally but act locally.

churches response

The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. She regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings which, though differing in many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men. Indeed, she proclaims, and ever must proclaim Christ “the way, the truth, and the life” (John 14:6), in whom men may find the fullness of religious life, in whom God has reconciled all things to Himself.(4)

nostra aetate. it and dignitatis humanae as hypertext used to be my signature as i was tired of posting these everywhere. i suggest you read them too.

 

[ialsop]

Indeed. Let’s. So far, we’ve perfectly proven just what is wrong with the premise of the thread: A knee-jerk reaction towards anything because it sounds ‘New Age’ or even deliberately bears the label.

Funny. multiple times I seriously try to discuss things with you, but you respond each time with insults at me. So if you could stop talking about MY ego and lets talk about new age, thatd be great. i let you spill your ideas, and what you need to realize before we discuss further is that if I present my ideas it is not hate against you. it is just me presenting my ideas.
Now. Beyond this, no more insults, okay?

 

[ialsop]

And what exactly are these ‘kinds and forms’?

Your answer doesn’t get us anywhere. When I say there is no ‘one’ new age, any condemnation of the label is deliberately flawed because what’s New Age is also intertwined with what’s Buddhist, Hindu, as well as Catholic, Protestant, Muslim, Jewish etc. To condemn the ‘spirituality’ that way is to condemn anything it’s similar to.

You’re just extending the adjectives without actually defining the object.

Okay, then lets not use the word “New Age”, lets use the words “pagan” and “occult”. To be more precise. You and others seem to attach New Age to a whole lot of things im not talking about. So Ill just say “occult” instead.

 

[ialsop]

And BTW when i say no insults i mean that I will make a conscious effort to not be rude and be charitable and on topic.

 

[Jack007]

Okay, then lets not use the word “New Age”, lets use the words “pagan” and “occult”. To be more precise. You and others seem to attach New Age to a whole lot of things im not talking about. So Ill just say “occult” instead.

Paganism is a broad group of indigenous and historical polytheistic religious traditions—primarily those of cultures known to the classical world.

The occult (from the Latin word occultus “clandestine, hidden, secret”) is “knowledge of the hidden”. In common English usage, occult refers to “knowledge of the paranormal”, as opposed to “knowledge of the measurable”, usually referred to as science. The term is sometimes taken to mean knowledge that “is meant only for certain people” or that “must be kept hidden”, but for most practicing occultists it is simply the study of a deeper spiritual reality that extends beyond pure reason and the physical sciences. The terms esoteric and arcane have very similar meanings, and in most contexts the three terms are interchangeable.
It also describes a number of magical organizations or orders, the teachings and practices taught by them, and to a large body of current and historical literature and spiritual philosophy related to this subject.

i think we shall continue with “new age.”

Funny. multiple times I seriously try to discuss things with you, but you respond each time with insults at me. So if you could stop talking about MY ego and lets talk about new age, thatd be great. i let you spill your ideas, and what you need to realize before we discuss further is that if I present my ideas it is not hate against you. it is just me presenting my ideas.
Now. Beyond this, no more insults, okay?

let us b peaceful in discussion. i agree

 

[ialsop]

i think we shall continue with "new age."let us b peaceful in discussion. i agree

Yes but the issue is that new age has been mistaken thus far as a music style, a lifestyle, and a philosophy, even CHRISTIANITY. I see it as none of those. Perhaps then we must define “New age” before we continue.

 

[Jack007]

Yes but the issue is that new age has been mistaken thus far as a music style, a lifestyle, and a philosophy, even CHRISTIANITY. I see it as none of those. Perhaps then we must define “New age” before we continue.

i tried to tell what i was referring in post 191.

and for posters’ information: new age we are talking about is new age spirituality. not the music,lifestyle,philosophy,etc. those who say that new age is christianity dont understand either.

 

[Mystical_Seeker]

so people in different platforms cannot stop saying those words?

Sometimes it seems like it.

When they lock horns, though, their brain switches out of “growth” mode and into “defensive” mode. This is a flight/fight response. New ideas are shunned to protect old ones – to keep “stability” for lack of a more precise term.

For me, the trick was that I had to Stand Down. Listen for the sake of listening, not for the sake of debating. I just got a really cool thing from the Franciscans about this; I’ll see if I can find it and post it.

MS

 

[Mystical_Seeker]

you said that there is no one new age. so i said all kinds and forms.

Actually I thought it was a fair question.

You are the one who said the church has condemned “all forms.” If she has done so then how does she define “all kinds and forms?”

Your say the church condemns his point of view. If you do not know what his point of view is, or how the church defines that which it condemns, then there really isn’t anything to back you up other than your thinking it’s so.

If I tell someone “the likes of X are evil” but can’t define X or what specifically is evil, then the statement carries no information. If you invoke the Church teachings, but can’t say what they are, then your statement bears no authority.

Sorry to side with the “evil thinking person” but if we are going to make any progress we need to define the terms we are throwing around.

MS

 

[Mystical_Seeker]

wikipediachurches response

nostra aetate. it and dignitatis humanae as hypertext used to be my signature as i was tired of posting these everywhere. i suggest you read them too.

I didn’t see this before I posted that last post. I have no opinion on whether it means anything. I just got my ego up to play Discussion Police.