Difference between revisions of "Talk:New age movement"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(both sides?)
(can you elaborate, Everwill?)
Line 2: Line 2:
  
 
:Not in so many words. It would be better to take a 'both sides' approach, as Wikipedia says (but often does not do). --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 07:13, 31 March 2007 (EDT)
 
:Not in so many words. It would be better to take a 'both sides' approach, as Wikipedia says (but often does not do). --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 07:13, 31 March 2007 (EDT)
 +
 +
::Everwill, do you mean because they are choosing paths other than Christ and therefore inviting a doomed afterlife?  I think making a distinction and pointing a few things out might be a good idea.  Of course we should avoid predicting who will be saved and who won't. [[User:Miles|Miles]] 16:09, 3 April 2007 (EDT)

Revision as of 20:09, April 3, 2007

Should this article point out why New Ager's are dopey? Everwill 06:24, 31 March 2007 (EDT)

Not in so many words. It would be better to take a 'both sides' approach, as Wikipedia says (but often does not do). --Ed Poor 07:13, 31 March 2007 (EDT)
Everwill, do you mean because they are choosing paths other than Christ and therefore inviting a doomed afterlife? I think making a distinction and pointing a few things out might be a good idea. Of course we should avoid predicting who will be saved and who won't. Miles 16:09, 3 April 2007 (EDT)