Quote:
Originally Posted by King Lear
Then you haven't understood the Deagle interview correctly.
He always arguments - in everything he says - with weird apocalyptic allusion from the bible - in a way no graduated theologist would accept.
And by religious ideology I mean exactly this abuse of the holy book and the intentionous misinterpreting of it's message.
And on Wilcock, you are again wrong - perhaps he isn't on the doomsday bus - but he believes in something paranormal which will be caused by 2012.
The allignment - which is proven to be false - is one of his favorite topics.
And about history he knows nada - only the history he constructs.
|
First, int he first post you put bill deagle from nowhere because he is totally against the 2012 "change of paradigm".
So why mixing him in a post he is TOTALLY AGAINST (block mayus to make it clear).
The people will think he agree with that id*ot idea.
Second, wilcock Is a contactee, Is teosophic what he says (what the "
spirits" say to him and say to proove to make his followers acept the teosophic doctrine with the reason to, because that he makes his research). And by the way, I think because of a lot of evidence that the Vast, Vast mayority of the cases of contactism are a scam.
(Why the ancients banned contactism?)
Third, I understand the camelot inteview perfectly. He say I'm not religious I'm "spiritual person"
fourth, I asked why you put deagle in middle of the post, you answer in Other post "because he has religious ideology" who has Nothing to do in the 2012 so is totally out of place.
5 You answer the question about what do you mean with religious ideology with valid reasons, and tht's ok, but I don't think that having religious ideology makes valid to make people believe he has something to do with the 2012 idea of the teosophic "ascension".
By the way 2 I don't believe either of the subjets do it for money.
Please, why mixing deagle with new age? is like the opposite.