Comments on: ASS Syndrome: The Problem With New Age “Religion”

By: William

William — Tue, 14 Jun 2011 05:20:13 +0000

Absolute Spiritual Superiority is the one common denominator that ALL religions share. Jesus may have said, “I am the way..” but every religion, denomination, and individual place of worship virtually shreiks that only their interpretation of “Truth” is true. “New Agers” may be making it up on the spot as you say. Just like L.Ron Hubbard made up his hornswaggle in his time. Just like Joseph Smith made up the Golden Plates. Just like the very human authors made up a holy book 2000 yrs ago. Just like the Jews before them. And the Hindus before them. And the cave drawers before them. They all made it up on the spot in their time. A fiction today carries no more nor less reality than a fiction of a millenia ago. My evidence to support is this; Baptism , sprinkle or immerse?

By: thefakejohnshore

thefakejohnshore — Thu, 10 Feb 2011 06:54:06 +0000

Brother I appreciate your words here. The battle is fierce and we should absolutely justify our “growling” because as Dog the Bounty Hunter says so often “that dog don’t hunt, son, it just growls”. Of course he was speaking of heroin at the time but he’s a fellow brother in the Lord, it is important to take it the way he meant it.

I hope this helps.

Blessings,

FJS

By: DR

DR — Thu, 10 Feb 2011 06:49:07 +0000

Always fun to see the Christians fight, we can count on that since the Resurrection. Thanks for keeping the tradition alive, super productive!

By: John Shore

John Shore — Thu, 10 Feb 2011 03:52:28 +0000

I think I was too harsh in this piece.

By: Mary G

Mary G — Thu, 10 Feb 2011 01:48:32 +0000

Thank you Diana.

When I read the title and the first little bit, I actually expected this blog post to be pretty much what you said. I was actually disappointed to find it a rant against those who are seeking Truth, but are sadly misguided. They are to be pitied, not reviled. Where as the Christians suffering from ASS…. no, I guess they get to be pitied as well.

Thanks.

By: Christian Beyer

Christian Beyer — Sat, 09 Jan 2010 06:04:33 +0000

Uh, yes I do deny it. It is the doctrinal result of church debates long afterwards. As for the link in question, I'm sure the Jews have as much scriptural scholarship as Catholics and they likely hold your PSA to be fodderall as well. Another apologetic draw.

By: MarkF

MarkF — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 17:14:16 +0000

Christian Breyer, what a load of fallderall that link was.

It's like shooting fish in a barrel really. When Jesus says "I am the way" or other such phrases, that is far different phrasing from his simple declaration that "before Abraham was, I am." In the first sentence the use of the very "to be" is meant as a equal sign to link the subject and verb of the sentence. As in if I said "I am a man" means "I = a man." The use of the verb "to be" in the sentence "before Abraham was, I am", there is no subject of the verb. This is the same formulation that the angel revealed to Moses about God, "I AM THAT I AM." God is pure existence.

I have NO idea what that site you linked over to was about. But it does not matter because it is not a part of the Catholic and Orthodox tradition. We have two thousand years of holy men reading the Bible and over that time ideas come and go. But the truth is what remains. We call it the deposit of faith. We are not left on our own, with no rudder to guide us. God left us a Church, "the pillar and bullwark of the truth." In matters dealing with salvation, the truth is out there, is easy to find and will always be there. You can accept that truth or reject it. But in the combined wisdom of the apostles, Fathers, councils, Doctors and saints of the Church is a consensus of teaching that we call the Magisterium. This has little to do with the seldom used (or never used) Papal infallibility. This is the much more commonly used larger infallibility of the whole Church over time. And the consensus of the faithful is that Jesus was consubstantial with the Father. You can either accept or reject that teaching, but you can't deny that this is what has been believed since apostolic times.

By: John Shore

John Shore — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 10:36:51 +0000

That's it. From now on, I'm going to start using bigger words in my posts.

By: Christian Beyer

Christian Beyer — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 10:31:10 +0000

Peregrinu, I think that many of us (Christians), if pressed on this, are Sabellians, in spite of what Church authorities tell us to believe. It took a long time for the 'majority' of early church leaders to agree upon trinitarian doctrine and it helped to have the emperor on their side.

But you make a good point: because of the church's discomfort with Jesus' message of God's infinite love, grace and mercy (which does not satisfy our need to see 'justice' served nor help maintain religiously supported empire ) it was necessary to flesh out this scripturally hidden concept of the Trinity ( a 'mystery' we can never understand, as Sister Paul told me 40 years ago). The Trinity is necessary to prop up the sad idea that Jesus was the 'perfect' blood sacrifice that God requires to keep us from the hell we deserve.

By: Christian Beyer

Christian Beyer — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 10:11:50 +0000

That scripture does not necessarily present Jesus declaring that he is God. For another detailed take on this check out:

http://assemblyoftrueisrael.com/Documents/I_AM.ht…

They list contextually the list of 'offenses' Jesus commits leading up to this statement. In conclusion they say:

"… Yahshua was not declaring that he is the great "I AM" of Ex.3:14. There are many occurrences in the Greek, which proves that the term "I am" is a very common phrase, a verb of existence, meaning "I am He" or "I am the one." This phrase by it's self is not a 'stone-able' offense, for it is used many times. As we have already shown, there were a lot of implications in this chapter which ground into the minds and heart of the Yahudain leaders. All the offenses combined, culminated at this point, into the prophesied path (end result) for Yahshua."