@Arwen and Praus Yes I am quite familiar with their demonism and such lol. From my understanding the Kundalini is a hindu/buddhist concept of a serpent (curious choice for them to believe it is a serpent) that is anchored in their spine that they believe they can force to use during meditation and yoga and all that sorta stuff. Not sure if I should call it just plain hokey or demonic, but I have noticed in my research how the people that get real into that stuff all seem to talk about some very similar characters that tell some very similar lies to them lol.
Being familiar with some forms of demonism doesn't make us immune to being deceived ourselves. None of us are above being deceived. The moment we think we can't be is when we're about to be deceived. It just sets us up for deception.
Yes, kundalini is a concept from the eastern religious contexts, such as in Buddhism and Hinduism. But there is a demonic spirit behind it. This demonic spirit (or a similar one) has wormed its way into the church. If Christians show no discernment, they can and do welcome in demonic spirits, thinking it is the Holy Spirit.
This is also how I know Simiel is not preaching a demonic doctrine. All that I have seen him say so far in various topics is pretty extraordinary actually and is in fact Scripturally sound and in accordance with Jesus and the rigorous Bible tests. Not saying you gotta go out and practice this stuff because I myself am kinda unsure of myself too and want to learn more first, but I gotta say this stuff Simiel is telling us and some of the healers he has shown us (ie: Pete Cabrera Jr) is pretty cool. Even from a skeptic and a Biblical supernaturalist point of view I have to say this stuff from what I have seen and weighed so far fits the Bible's definitions and tests for legit "miracles."
The things that Simiel says often line up with the things that the Christians who accept all these weird manifestations also teach. Some of the stuff Simiel says -- I don't know if he is just throwing random stuff out there, or if he actually believes what he writes. A large majority of it, though, is NAR/hyper-charismatic doctrine.
There are at least four examples of this in this thread already:
1.) Kenosis (the teaching that Jesus gave up His deity and divine powers when He came to earth, and that He did everything as merely a man to model for us how we could walk in the supernatural, too, being empowered by the same Holy Spirit.)
2.) That Christians cannot sin -- that their sinful nature is gone.
3.) That healing is guaranteed in the atonement
4.) That we have to renew our minds to this sinless state that we are in so that we can "live from the throne." Simiel has over and over again used the NAR definition of repentance, which simply means to change your thinking to God's truth, and it has nothing to do with repenting of sin.
None of this is sound doctrine. Sure, you can find verses that support each of the above teachings, but you have to take things out of context and force the Bible to say these things.