I wish to here challenge the idea that Beth Moore is not leaning towards a pagan point of view. In the DVD, Be Still, the main "character" is Richard Foster. Richard Foster is one the main proponents of a newer meditation form that is creeping into the Evangelical/Reformed/Baptist arena. How can I call it pagan? simple, and I quote Foster: I have in-depth definitions of what "astral projection" is if you follow the links in the quotes. So anything to do with such a person makes me suspect, as, I am suppose to test all things and hold fast to that which is good. Another person Moore is close to is David G. Benner, who, is the reason I first got involved in this topic of study. I was taking my last class at seminary and it was an integrative Bible Counseling class, and Benner was on the materials list. As I make a habit of, most authors recommended or on the required reading list I will get most of what they write and reference those works as well. This is just one troubling resource I found out in the ether called the internet as reading through his Papa Prayer raised some red-flags in my mind: Beth has an unhealthy view of generational sin, almost identical to the "deliverance" ministry of Neil Anderson. One site builds their case against Beth this way: Take note that due to many ideas infiltrating my church caused me to leave ("me" defined: my kids grew up there, my wife and I had our marriage saved there... we loved our church and leaving it was hard). I had a new pastor to our church's staff discuss my seminary class with me, to my surprise, he had been involved in this "emergent" movement for over a decade. He knew I was a reader so he dropped off an armfull of books -- which caused me to buy about thirty books by these authors, I read them, then I bought the books critical of them. This is the ideas gleened from these books dropped off to me by a pastor; and keep in mind that Beth Moore is intimately involved with many of them: that the first three miracles in John were inserted by writers to “woo in pagans,” as they are themselves adopted from pagan stories (something you referred to as an “interesting theory”); the Virgin Birth was also a deep seated fear of sexuality and not really a miracle; books that teach that penal substitution as a vile doctrine; that Hell is not a place for persons to be placed after a future judgment, and that Hell is actually here now and that we must bring in God’s Kingdom (separate from that future judgment); these books say we do not have the Gospel right yet; they teach that travelling to Buddhist temples and practicing meditative techniques in these temples is Christian; they show that many of the practices rejected by the Reformers are in fact useful to the Christian; they show that Yoga can make one closer to God and to realize and experience the “divine;” they teach that the doctrines of the Trinity, nature of Christ, nature of Scripture, and the nature of marriage are “still on the table,” doctrinally; teach that Paul was really communicating Platonism and not bringing us Scripture; on-and-on. While I am sure many here can pick apart each book or author/quote and make the conversation die the death of a thousand qualifications (Ravi Zacharias) -- taken as a whole, this entire movement is a threat to the heart-and-soul of the Christian faith, and may be a great falling away. The final or last straw that caused me to leave my church of almost 12-years was the use of a book with the men's college group. I have many audio resources linked off of my critique of this book... so plan on taking some time with this if you are serious about this topic. As you read my critique, keep in mind the following idea from Robert Culver: God Bless and Much Thought [the two go well together].