Hi Sacredstar —
How many of you believe that anti-love is anti-christ?
As God is love (1 John 4:8),
And as Christ is God (eg Mark 1:1 et seq),
Then anti-love is indeed anti-Christ:
"Therefore I say to you: Every sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven men, but the blasphemy of the Spirit shall not be forgiven" (Matthew 12:31)
'Blasphemy of the Spirit' means refuting the Love of God, in which case it's not so much a case of not being forgiven, but rather man placing himself beyond forgiveness, by refusing to be forgiven.
Attentive reading of Scripture reveals that hypocrisy annoyed Christ more than anything else.
That there were teachings promoted by Rome in the bible that include anti-love?
If you can find it, I can explain it for you, but I can say without doubt that there is no teaching against love as such in the Bible, and most probably that you have been fed some anti-Catholic propaganda.
In the past I was given some divine guidance, I was told that in the past I had used the term 'they do not resonate with my energy, and that it was now time to move up another level of consciousness. If ever I felt that I did not resonate with someone's energy then that means that I must love them more'.
Don't know where you got that from, but it's not Christian as such.
Christianity is a supernatural message, and should be understood as such, and its teaching belongs to the supernatural — 'resonate' and 'energy' and 'level of consciousness' are cosmological terms and general with regard to 'personal development' but alien with regard to Christianity as such.
Put another way, the first meditation I was taught by a Buddhist was the Metta Bhavana Meditation, which again teaches just what you have said.
Indeed, even a humanist would teach that. So the guidance was general, not even necessarily divine. Could be angelic, though.
Likewise your reference to chakras, etc: It's worth remembering that the chakra system is not a 'fact' like lungs or liver, it's a model to explain something. There are, indeed, many models with variations, so again one should not assume them as something 'wired' into the system.
This is not a Christian doctrine, which does not mean it's not true, but does mean you'll end up in confusion if you try and apply something from one system in another, where it has no place — you are obliged to invent a place for it, and then you're on a slippery slope of inventing whole screeds of theoria and praxis ... not a good idea.
The saints and mystics got their message across, and performed miracles, without recourse to stuff from other doctrines and other cultures — one would be wise to follow them.
And so it is I do my best to love everyone unconditionally no matter what, to see through GOD's eyes of love always.
Good for you.
What do you think about the anti-love promoted by Rome in the past.
I say you have been misled.
I say in the past because Rome as made some big shifts in recent years due to the influence of GOD and leaders from other religions and cultures...
Well we have to proceed carefully here. what do you mean by shifts? The doctrine is the same as it ever was, although its expression is different ... the task of the Church is to express those timeless truths revealed and entrusted to Her in a manner that people can understand, hence any 'shift' is probably more to do with compensation necessary to address the age and times in which it finds itself. Its refusal to alter doctrine to suit the tastes of the day is one of the main reasons people object to the Church.
These shifts are not liked by a lot of people as one can witness from many CF websites attacking the Pope and Rome which once again is anti-love.
One of my main arguments is that if one loves Christ, then one loves His Church, and if one loves His Church then one would want to see it flourish ... so those who criticise the Church from without would actually do better to keep their opinions to themselves:
"But he that shall scandalize one of these little ones that believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone should be hanged about his neck, and that he should be drowned in the depth of the sea." (Matthew 18:6)
Much better is to get involved, and seek to put it right.
I am Roman Catholic, and I know the Church has its faults. Why does it have faults? Because it's composed of people. So I toil away, and hope and pray, and rely on God to brring it right in the end, because I know when man steps in with his big idea, we're usually all in trouble.
Will this happen in my lifetime? No. But then I'm not in it for this life, but the next one.
I wish to understand why anyone should wish to hold on so tightly to anti-love?
Simple. They love themselves more.
Thomas
). In their innocence, children are closer to God than most adults. The same is true, I believe, of the mentally retarded - they are like the original adam and eves, unknowing of evil, innocent. Have you ever spoken with someone who has Down Syndrome? Child-like. Innocent. (Usually.) Of course, both children and the mentally handicapped need guidance, which is why I also agree with Basstion. In their innocence, it is often difficult for them to comprehend why certain actions are wrong to do. So, they require guidance, not from equals, but from parent figures.
