Lee Carroll and several others have been promoting something called "Krayon," via a series of books and other media. There is even a website. What is Krayon? There are two options: it is either a hoax, or it is a spirit being channeled, which is what it purports to be.
Krayon (or Carroll, if this is just a hoax) has created a system that is a mixture of science fiction, new age concepts, and Biblical concepts. It is possible that people who hear the Biblical ideas and themes may think there is a ring of truth in what Krayon teaches.
If this is you, beware! Scripture has very explicit teaching that channeling is evil. In the Scriptures, this practice is referred to as having a "familiar spirit." It is condemned either explicitly or implicitly in the following:
Leviticus 19:31
Regard not them that have familiar spirits, neither seek after wizards, to be defiled by them: I am the LORD your God.
Leviticus 20:6
And the soul that turneth after such as have familiar spirits, and after wizards, to go a whoring after them, I will even set my face against that soul, and will cut him off from among his people.
Leviticus 20:27
A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death: they shall stone them with stones: their blood shall be upon them.
Deuteronomy 18:11
Or a charmer, or a consulter with familiar spirits, or a wizard, or a necromancer.
1 Samuel 28:3
Now Samuel was dead, and all Israel had lamented him, and buried him in Ramah, even in his own city. And Saul had put away those that had familiar spirits, and the wizards, out of the land.
1 Samuel 28:7-9
Then said Saul unto his servants, Seek me a woman that hath a familiar spirit, that I may go to her, and enquire of her. And his servants said to him, Behold, there is a woman that hath a familiar spirit at Endor. And Saul disguised himself, and put on other raiment, and he went, and two men with him, and they came to the woman by night: and he said, I pray thee, divine unto me by the familiar spirit, and bring me him up, whom I shall name unto thee. And the woman said unto him, Behold, thou knowest what Saul hath done, how he hath cut off those that have familiar spirits, and the wizards, out of the land: wherefore then layest thou a snare for my life, to cause me to die?
2 Kings 21:6
And he made his son pass through the fire, and observed times, and used enchantments, and dealt with familiar spirits and wizards: he wrought much wickedness in the sight of the LORD, to provoke him to anger.
2 Kings 23:24
Moreover the workers with familiar spirits, and the wizards, and the images, and the idols, and all the abominations that were spied in the land of Judah and in Jerusalem, did Josiah put away, that he might perform the words of the law which were written in the book that Hilkiah the priest found in the house of the LORD.
1 Chronicles 10:13
So Saul died for his transgression which he committed against the LORD, even against the word of the LORD, which he kept not, and also for asking counsel of one that had a familiar spirit, to enquire of it;
2 Chronicles 33:6
And he caused his children to pass through the fire in the valley of the son of Hinnom: also he observed times, and used enchantments, and used witchcraft, and dealt with a familiar spirit, and with wizards: he wrought much evil in the sight of the LORD, to provoke him to anger.
Isaiah 8:19
And when they shall say unto you, Seek unto them that have familiar spirits, and unto wizards that peep, and that mutter: should not a people seek unto their God? for the living to the dead?
Isaiah 19:3
And the spirit of Egypt shall fail in the midst thereof; and I will destroy the counsel thereof: and they shall seek to the idols, and to the charmers, and to them that have familiar spirits, and to the wizards.
Isaiah 29:4
And thou shalt be brought down, and shalt speak out of the ground, and thy speech shall be low out of the dust, and thy voice shall be, as of one that hath a familiar spirit, out of the ground, and thy speech shall whisper out of the dust.
As you can see from the context, the condemnation of channeling is not limited that, but is one of a variety of magical practices that are condemned. Other related condemnations include:
Exodus 22:18
Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.
Deuteronomy 18:10
There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch.
1 Samuel 15:23
For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king.
2 Kings 9:22
And it came to pass, when Joram saw Jehu, that he said, Is it peace, Jehu? And he answered, What peace, so long as the whoredoms of thy mother Jezebel and her witchcrafts are so many?
Micah 5:12
And I will cut off witchcrafts out of thine hand; and thou shalt have no more soothsayers:
Nahum 3:4
Because of the multitude of the whoredoms of the wellfavoured harlot, the mistress of witchcrafts, that selleth nations through her whoredoms, and families through her witchcrafts.
Galatians 5:19-21
Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
Krayon claims that, in essence, the world is coming to an end in 2012. You do not need to fear this spirit, real or hoaxed. No one knows when the world will end - certainly not a channeled spirit or a man pretending to channel a spirit.
-TurretinFan
Friday, June 08, 2012
Thursday, June 07, 2012
Gates of Hell in the Deuterocanon
In a previous post, I explained from the Scriptures why the "gates of hell shall not prevail" in Matthew 16:18 refers to the fact that the church, i.e. all believers, will be raised to eternal life. In hindsight, I probably should have pointed out that this interpretation is also supported in the deuterocanonical book of Wisdom.
Wisdom 16:13
For thou hast power of life and death: thou leadest to the gates of hell, and bringest up again.
It has nothing to do with an institutional church weathering the storms of heresies, although a lot of people have mistakenly treated it that way.
-TurretinFan
Wisdom 16:13
For thou hast power of life and death: thou leadest to the gates of hell, and bringest up again.
It has nothing to do with an institutional church weathering the storms of heresies, although a lot of people have mistakenly treated it that way.
-TurretinFan
Bede - the Ark of the Covenant, a Type of Christ
In general, the ceremonial law and its appointments all pointed to Christ and his work. Some of the early church fathers appreciated this more than others. On the other hand, Rome has tried to argue that some aspects pointed toward - you guessed it - Mary. For example, Munificentissimus Deus (Pius XII, 1950, defining the Bodily Assumption) repeatedly identifies the ark as a type of Mary (although, interestingly, Ineffabilis Deus by Pius IX in 1854 does not make this identification while defining the immaculate conception).
But what does Bede (A.D. 672-735) have to say. He declare the ark of the covenant to be a type of Christ:
Bede's analysis is certainly not the only patristic comment on the matter, but it is a very reasonable analysis, and at least fits well with the overall typology. By contrast, replacing Christ with Mary - as in Munificentissimus Deus, introduces a number of significant problems.
-TurretinFan
But what does Bede (A.D. 672-735) have to say. He declare the ark of the covenant to be a type of Christ:
Likewise, the ark, which has been brought into the holy of holies, is a type of the humanity assumed by Christ and led within the veil of the heavenly court, while the ark's carrying-poles prefigure the preachers of the Word through whom [Christ] became known to the world. A golden urn containing manna was in the ark because all the fullness of divinity dwells bodily [Colossians 2:9] in the human Christ. In the ark also was Aaron's branch which had flowered again after having been cut down because the power to sentence everyone belongs to him whose sentence was seen to have been removed in suffering's humiliation. The tablets of the covenant were also there, for in it are hidden treasures of wisdom and knowledge [Colossians 2:3]. Poles were fixed to the art for carrying it, because teachers who once laboured in Christ's Word now rejoice in the present vision of his glory. For what one of these [preachers] said about himself - I desire to die and be with Christ [Philippians 1:23- he surely meant to be understood of all who share in his work.Bede, Thirty Questions on the Book of Kings, Question 14, pp. 111-12 in "Bede: Biblical Miscellany," Foley and Holder trs.
Bede's analysis is certainly not the only patristic comment on the matter, but it is a very reasonable analysis, and at least fits well with the overall typology. By contrast, replacing Christ with Mary - as in Munificentissimus Deus, introduces a number of significant problems.
-TurretinFan
Tuesday, June 05, 2012
Debate Challenge for "Called to Communion" Team
Dr. James White has offered a debate challenge to the Roman communion group at the "Called to Communion" blog (mp3, you can start around 6 minutes, if you just want to hear the challenge in context).
-TurretinFan
I am laying out an open challenge to any of the people at Called to Confusion: 2013 - let's set up a debate. I'll take on ten of you at once, if you'd like. I don't care. If you want to roll through the whole group, I don't care. 1, 2, 3, 10, doesn't matter. You simply defend the following words, ok? You defend these words:I would second Dr. White's challenge and his comments. I did a debate with William Albrecht on the Assumption of Mary, and in the course of the debate, it became readily apparent just how frail the Scriptural and patristic argument for Rome's position is (link to mp3). So, if any of Rome's apologists, either from CtC or elsewhere would prefer to Skype debate me, I'm willing to offer the same challenge.
... a truth which is founded on the Sacred Scriptures, has been fixed deeply in the minds of the faithful in Christ, has been approved by ecclesiastical worship even from the earliest times, is quite in harmony with other revealed truths, and has been splendidly explained and declared by the zeal, knowledge, and wisdom of the theologians."(full text at #2332)
To what do we refer? Those are words from the definition of the bodily assumption of Mary, which actually began:
Since, then, the universal Church, in which the Spirit of Truth flourishes, who infallibly directs it to achieve a knowledge of revealed truths, has through the course of the ages repeatedly manifested its own faith; and since the bishops of the whole world with almost unanimous consent request that the truth of the bodily Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary into heaven be defined as a dogma of the divine and Catholic faithand then you have that following description. So will you defend the idea that the bodily assumption of Mary is a truth which is founded on the sacred scriptures? Secondly, that it has been approved by ecclesiastical worship even from the earliest times? So, will you defend the idea that the bodily assumption of Mary is founded on the Sacred Scriptures and was a part of the teaching of the ancient church in the earliest times? Now, I know factually beyond any doubt that that is a lie. It is untrue. There is not any reason on this planet to believe that, other than you have already accepted the authority claims of the bishop of Rome. Period. End of discussion.
-TurretinFan
Monday, June 04, 2012
Reciprocal Links and the Future of this Blog
I really appreciate the many readers of this blog, both friendly and unfriendly, in agreement and out of agreement, foreign and domestic. A lot of you have kindly put me in a blog roll or otherwise posted a link to my blog on your site. I have tried to reciprocate with a link back in the sidebar of my main page. If you have linked to me, and you haven't received a link bank, please let me know.
I am not sure what the future holds for this blog. I plan to continue blogging to the glory of God, the edification of the saints, and the evangelisation of the unbelieving. I also plan to continue debating, whenever the opportunity arises. I plan to remain pseudonymous for the time being, although I'm constantly aware of the fact that my pseudonymity is something that is mostly out of my hands.
I would love to hear from readers of this blog regarding their, i.e. your, thoughts for the future of this blog.
I am not sure what the future holds for this blog. I plan to continue blogging to the glory of God, the edification of the saints, and the evangelisation of the unbelieving. I also plan to continue debating, whenever the opportunity arises. I plan to remain pseudonymous for the time being, although I'm constantly aware of the fact that my pseudonymity is something that is mostly out of my hands.
I would love to hear from readers of this blog regarding their, i.e. your, thoughts for the future of this blog.