Wes Huff debunks gnostic/new age lies of Billy Carson in debate.
(www.youtube.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (4)
sorted by:
Gnostic (to know) implies ones perception within all perceivable...new contradicts that, since all perceivable was before ones perception came into being within that which was.
NEW implies the artificial inversion of natural NOW...if one ignores natural (perceivable) for artificial (suggested) by consenting to suggested gnostic-ISM (or any other -ism).
Gnostic (to know) implies a division of all perceivable and each ones perception without a conflict. Consenting to suggested gnostic-ISM establishes a conflict of reason aka a de (division) bate (to beat) where two sides are mutually battering each other senseless.
Choosing either side tempts both sides into a mutual VERSUS conflict against each other called "reason", which also entraps ones free will of choice within circular logic...circular because reason TURNS one against another.
Both sides are established by ones consent to a suggestion, while ignoring ones perception within all perceivable aka gnostic/gnōstos/gno - "to know".