Andy, Methinks you speak with forked tongue. You speak of not passing judgement then pass judgement yourself. I think it’s a reasonable question to ask why it is called a temple if, as you say, religion has no place within it. Explaining that it relates to King Solomon’s Temple hardly lessens the force of my question. Indeed I would think it accentuates it! Your defensive response leaves me with the impression that maybe the question is too close to the bone.

Thanks Jarred, I was expecting a little fire from your end, except I was expecting it from a different direction which just goes to show how much I still have to learn in this area. You have both given me much to think about. I am glad I have guys like you to give me your perspective.

Jonathan, I believe the verse you are referring to is Isaiah 31:1, which reads, "Woe to those who go down to Egypt for help, who rely on horses, who trust in the multitude of their chariots and in the great strength of their horsemen, but do not look to the Holy One of Israel, or seek help from the Lord." In context the suggestion is that Israel should rely on God to fight for them, not military allies. If you are going to apply this verse to a health care situation, the immediate question this raises for me is, how would the title of "Eqypt" not equally apply to secular medicine, medical centers and doctors? For that seems to be the implication of your interpretation when we pan back and look at the wider situation. Should we avoid aniceptics and antibiotics too, as they, likewise, reflect dependence on something other than God? I am hoping you'll agree that is too simplistic. Moreover, earlier in Isaiah the prophet says, "The Lord Almighty will bless them, saying, “Blessed be Egypt my people, Assyria my handiwork, and Israel my inheritance.” (Isaiah 19:25) This shows the problem of cherry picking verses without exploring scripture as a whole. I think a broader survey of scripture reveals that we need a more nuanced approach to energy healing than a simple yes/no, black/white answer.

Hmmm, I know I've made a few people feel awkward over the years :-)

Maybe so, but the clumsy association of edginess with heresy and cuteness with orthodoxy not only filters out a lot of good stuff unnecessarily, it also allows in a lot of Trojen horses. Just use the right buzz words, soppy imagery and sugar it with 'niceness' and you can sneak in just about any heresy.

Tony, I think I get where you are coming from, nevertheless I think it does muddy the waters. I myself would say that everything is relative to Christ. However, this carries the implication that Christ is a fixed reference point, much as the speed of light has an absolute value in Einstein's theory of relativity. This is different to a system with no fixed reference points. I suppose this is what I am querying here. How genuinely relative is the ethical relativism?