Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Power/Reality Of Demons And Supernatural Evil.
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 734 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 91 of 334 (75484)
12-28-2003 7:40 PM
Reply to: Message 90 by Buzsaw
12-28-2003 6:52 PM


So if demons may well be responsible for mental disorders like my son's form of epilepsy, which responds very well to treatment with drogs like Dilantin or Felbatol, you would agree that these must be Anti-Demon Potions of great efficacy? That the pharmaceutical companies, despite being staffed with card-carrying biologist members of the Intercontinental Evolutionist Conspiracy, are actually putting out antidemonics instead of anticonvulsants?
And why stop with mental ailments? Do measles, yeast infections, and the common cold have a demonic component, or is it just infectious organisms? What about lupus or Crohn's disease, which don't have germs and are perhaps less understood by modern medical science than many forms of epilepsy? Does that mean they're demon-influenced?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by Buzsaw, posted 12-28-2003 6:52 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by Stephen ben Yeshua, posted 12-28-2003 8:42 PM Coragyps has not replied
 Message 133 by Buzsaw, posted 12-31-2003 8:14 PM Coragyps has not replied
 Message 201 by UV2003, posted 04-09-2004 10:57 AM Coragyps has not replied

  
Stephen ben Yeshua
Inactive Member


Message 92 of 334 (75500)
12-28-2003 8:42 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by Coragyps
12-28-2003 7:40 PM


Demons and epistemology
I tried to read most of the posts on this thread, to see if this point was made. But, I may have missed it; if so, please forgive. But I believe it is critical to the discussion.
Suppose, for the sake of argument and testing, that demons exist. Then, consider what demons may be thinking and doing in the midst of a debate that inquires into their existence and function.
1. Getting into it. "Speak of the devil, ..." as we say. Demons are such egotists, when we start talking about them, they get into to it, bragging, and showing off their stuff.
2. Confusing the issue. Here we are, in a land where it is known that calling on the blood of Jesus, or holding up crossed fingers, can cast out demons. Of course, doing it wrong can be damaging. As is true with having sex. But, doing it right, and there are many books citing hundreds of cases of correct deliverance (Pigs in the Parlor is the best), can potentially cause demons great loss. Many of our most devout atheists appear actually to be fairly good scholars. If they ever caught on to a reality of demonic possession and interactions, some might actually figure out how to do successful deliverances. Then the demons would be in trouble. So, it's very important that these non-believers stay the way they are.
So, supposing that demons exist (just for the sake of argument, mind you), and that they have a mixed agenda which includes interfering with the debate, how shall we proceed? It's a fascinating epistemological question.
It's like studying radioactivity. A course of study that takes several months requires lead shields, since the object of the study will kill the student without that shield, before the student discovers what they were looking for.
Therefore, we have to shield the discussion from any potential demons, or else we will never get to the truth. If demons do not exist, the shield is a waste of time, but the study will find them absent. If demons do exist, the sheild will allow us to determine that. But, without the sheild, any conclusions as to the absence of demons could be truth, or could be demonic manipulation.
So, everyone ought to pray, at least, "In the blood of Yeshua, or Jesus, deliver us from evil, as we carry on this discussion." Perhaps the prayer is useless, perhaps critical. We will never know unless we pray it.
Personally, I get all I want to know about demons by asking God directly, to tell me stuff. I figure that if there is no God, but there are demons, I'm *expletive deleted.* If there is a God, and either demons or no demons, He's the best source of reliable information. If there is no God, and no demons, when I ask, nothing will happen. I did ask, He did answer, there are demons, there is a lot to learn about them and it's very useful. They are messing with this discussion. Let us pray.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by Coragyps, posted 12-28-2003 7:40 PM Coragyps has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by sidelined, posted 12-29-2003 4:02 AM Stephen ben Yeshua has replied

  
Itachi Uchiha
Member (Idle past 5614 days)
Posts: 272
From: mayaguez, Puerto RIco
Joined: 06-21-2003


Message 93 of 334 (75522)
12-28-2003 11:29 PM
Reply to: Message 89 by sidelined
12-28-2003 2:26 AM


sidelined writes:
What is the level of vision acuity that you now possess? I am wondering why you consider your vision problem now to be a result of demon activity and not a natural occurence like the cataracts were?
I am almost completely blind in my left eye as result of the catarats
but have excelent right eye vision because it was removed before it could pass to my right eye. The demon wanted to harm my right eye and that is what i had to pray against. The catarats was a natural occurence because i was to big for my mothers womb. The pressure i had inside the womb made my body put that pressure on my eyes and that is why i developed the condition.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by sidelined, posted 12-28-2003 2:26 AM sidelined has not replied

  
sidelined
Member (Idle past 5907 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 94 of 334 (75558)
12-29-2003 4:02 AM
Reply to: Message 92 by Stephen ben Yeshua
12-28-2003 8:42 PM


Re: Demons and epistemology
Stephen
The very error of assumption on your part that demons exist is reflected in your statement here.
Suppose, for the sake of argument and testing, that demons exist.
You conveiently allow for arguement but you do no testing.Missing also is the removal of extraneous notions in order to simplify the study.You assume demons are egoistsbefore establishing their existence.This biases your investigation into demons and brings into play errors in thought.
You make further assumptions in this statement.
Confusing the issue. Here we are, in a land where it is known that calling on the blood of Jesus, or holding up crossed fingers, can cast out demons.
Here we are assuming that christ exists, that demons confuse issues that crossing fingers works magic.
You could never be trusted to do a proper study of something you have a foregone conclusion upon.What makes you think that this is remotely related to investigation procedures?
How about showing us evidence seperate from your beliefs that there even exists demons.That in this day and age that people could swallow this medeival crap is frightening.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by Stephen ben Yeshua, posted 12-28-2003 8:42 PM Stephen ben Yeshua has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by Stephen ben Yeshua, posted 12-29-2003 10:34 AM sidelined has replied

  
Stephen ben Yeshua
Inactive Member


Message 95 of 334 (75586)
12-29-2003 10:34 AM
Reply to: Message 94 by sidelined
12-29-2003 4:02 AM


Re: Demons and epistemology
Sidelined,
Sorry, I should have stated my position as a professional scientist whose highly successful (if brief) professional career was based on the hypothetico-deductive method of doing science. I admit that that methodology, thought by many to be the basis of most successful science, is in fact controversial. It works so well in practise, that I have come to regard the controversy surrounding it confirming demoniic intervention in the search for truth by humans.
But, in the H-D method, what one does is take an idea in its fullest expression, assume for the sake of testing that is is true (make it an hypothesis), provisionally believe it long enough to generate logical, or deductive consequences, and then test those consequences, called predictions. If the predictions are a priori unlikely, and later confirmed, the plausibility of the original idea increases.
So, with the idea that demons exist, first we suppose that they do. We look at what that might mean, usually by responding to the idea as presented by previous intellectual colleagues. CS Lewis's The Screwtape Letters presents a fairly clear image of what demons might be like, as well as the Bible, from which Lewis's artistic presentation derives. Milton, Goerthe (sp?), and others have also tried to imagine what Satan is like as a person. We then reason, "If they exist, and are like such or so, what do we expect to happen, say to this discussion? Are those expectations a priori reasonable, or are they weird? Let's test and see."
I've been thinking like this for 40 years, and found it to be the most useful applied epistemological strategy out there. It costs me, of course, since when predictions are rejected, I have to give up beliefs that I adopted to get those predictions. I knew when I took up the beliefs, that "it was for the sake of argument" but it still is painful to give them up, especially when they were at first confirmed, and began to appear to be true.
But, as a naturalist, human evil remains best, most simply explained by the demon hypothesis. A priori, I find the reluctance of many to believe that demons exist most puzzling. Every other species out there has to deal with higher predatory or parasitic beings that they cannot sense, that are smarter and more powerful than they are. Why not us? And now, with the discovery of dark matter and dark energy. I mean, Is dark matter inhabited? Why is that question weird, but we happily invest in SETI, looking for life on other electro-magnetic parts of our universe?
As to evidence of demons, like I say, the nature of the hypothesis puts interesting limits on getting such evidence. But try prayer experiments, bringing God as a truth giver into the study. I found that such experiments readily confirmed the presence of demons as normally hypothesized to exist.
Hope this is useful.
Stephen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by sidelined, posted 12-29-2003 4:02 AM sidelined has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by sidelined, posted 12-29-2003 12:53 PM Stephen ben Yeshua has replied
 Message 99 by Coragyps, posted 12-29-2003 2:47 PM Stephen ben Yeshua has replied

  
sidelined
Member (Idle past 5907 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 96 of 334 (75601)
12-29-2003 12:53 PM
Reply to: Message 95 by Stephen ben Yeshua
12-29-2003 10:34 AM


Re: Demons and epistemology
Stephen
So, with the idea that demons exist, first we suppose that they do.
This is granted,however you do not proceed from there to investigate how such beings operate but fall to the bible ,c.s. lewis et al and you do no testing.
But try prayer experiments, bringing God as a truth giver into the study. I found that such experiments readily confirmed the presence of demons as normally hypothesized to exist.
Now we have you hinting at experiments but you do not give us the details of how you went about it. How do I know from what you have presented here that you have not decieved yourself or used proper controls?
A priori, I find the reluctance of many to believe that demons exist most puzzling.
The reluctance is not in believing whether it is true or not but in showing whether it is going on or not.
Talk is cheap old man,where's the beef?
------------------
Chemical kinetics firmly restrains time's arrow in the taut bow of thermodynamics for milliseconds to millennia.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by Stephen ben Yeshua, posted 12-29-2003 10:34 AM Stephen ben Yeshua has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by Stephen ben Yeshua, posted 12-29-2003 2:38 PM sidelined has not replied

  
Stephen ben Yeshua
Inactive Member


Message 97 of 334 (75617)
12-29-2003 2:38 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by sidelined
12-29-2003 12:53 PM


Re: Demons and epistemology
Sidelined,
My first taste of data confirming God demonstrated demonic presence was the delightful little book by Frank Loehr on "The power of prayer on plants" where he got prayer groups to pray for plants. Now, I will grant you that the main intent of those experiments was to confirm the God of Orthodox Theology, and so their direct effect on the plausibility of demonic influence was weak. But, as I read it, the argument went like this.
The earth is fallen, and the devil loosed upon it, causing trouble including poor seed germination and crop growth.
When we pray, our prayers normally include or mean "deliver us from evil" and undo the works of the evil one.
So, if we pray, and things get better, this confirms (of course, does not prove) the idea that there was a problem caused by demons, which is now solved, to some degree, by God.
Well, they (and hundreds after them, according to Dr. Larry Dossey, Harold Koernig, others) conducted prayer experiments, and found some reduction in evil.
Meanwhile, if we go after the plausibility of the hypothesis by confirming that God wrote the Bible, the various efforts to do that (Panin, Washburn, Witztum et. al.) are also scientific experiments that validate the point. Witztum's study was the best, since he took the book of Genesis, where the devil first appears, and randomly mixed up the letters. Then he compared the "Bible Codes" found in the text as it has come to us, and that random mix. He found messages that could only be known to a timeless God in the Genesis as written, but those messages were impossibly rare in the random text. Since this book reports the devil's existence, this increase in the plausibility that they are really written by a truth-loving Person outside our ken increases the liklihood that we (still) have demons to contend with.
Some near-death studies, and possibly the soul-weighing experiments, also confirm (make more plausible! Don't prove!) the idea that demons exist.
Your problem believing me, of course, to be handled scientifically, would be solved by your doing the experiments yourself. Get the materials and methods down right ("pray aright" as James puts it), and do the experiments yourself, on evil that you personally are dealing with. It's what I, as a scientist, did, to convince myself. If you are not qualified to pray, take on some evil and get those who are qualified to pray to help you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by sidelined, posted 12-29-2003 12:53 PM sidelined has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 98 by Rrhain, posted 12-29-2003 2:47 PM Stephen ben Yeshua has replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 98 of 334 (75619)
12-29-2003 2:47 PM
Reply to: Message 97 by Stephen ben Yeshua
12-29-2003 2:38 PM


Re: Demons and epistemology
Stephen ben Yeshua writes:
quote:
Some near-death studies, and possibly the soul-weighing experiments, also confirm (make more plausible! Don't prove!) the idea that demons exist.
Incorrect. They actually do the opposite.
For example, there is no change in body weight of a person at the moment of death. Lots of people think there is (and thus, the movie 21 Grams is playing on that), but there is a difference between what people think and what actually is.
------------------
Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by Stephen ben Yeshua, posted 12-29-2003 2:38 PM Stephen ben Yeshua has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 100 by Stephen ben Yeshua, posted 12-29-2003 3:20 PM Rrhain has replied

  
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 734 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 99 of 334 (75620)
12-29-2003 2:47 PM
Reply to: Message 95 by Stephen ben Yeshua
12-29-2003 10:34 AM


Re: Demons and epistemology
A priori, I find the reluctance of many to believe that demons exist most puzzling.
No more puzzling than I find the reluctance of some people to believe that The Invisible Pink Unicorn (PBUHHH!) brought the entire universe, including "memories" of the past, into existence last Tuesday afternoon. That bumfuzzles me completely.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by Stephen ben Yeshua, posted 12-29-2003 10:34 AM Stephen ben Yeshua has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by Stephen ben Yeshua, posted 12-29-2003 3:22 PM Coragyps has not replied

  
Stephen ben Yeshua
Inactive Member


Message 100 of 334 (75629)
12-29-2003 3:20 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by Rrhain
12-29-2003 2:47 PM


Re: Demons and epistemology
Rrhain,
You say:
"Incorrect. They actually do the opposite.
For example, there is no change in body weight of a person at the moment of death. Lots of people think there is (and thus, the movie 21 Grams is playing on that),"
Why do you think this?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by Rrhain, posted 12-29-2003 2:47 PM Rrhain has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 102 by Rrhain, posted 12-29-2003 3:32 PM Stephen ben Yeshua has replied
 Message 103 by sidelined, posted 12-29-2003 3:53 PM Stephen ben Yeshua has replied

  
Stephen ben Yeshua
Inactive Member


Message 101 of 334 (75630)
12-29-2003 3:22 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by Coragyps
12-29-2003 2:47 PM


Re: Demons and epistemology
Coragyps,
Why do you find unbelief in such a unlikely proposition strange? It's just what I would expect Homo sapiens to do.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by Coragyps, posted 12-29-2003 2:47 PM Coragyps has not replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 102 of 334 (75635)
12-29-2003 3:32 PM
Reply to: Message 100 by Stephen ben Yeshua
12-29-2003 3:20 PM


Re: Demons and epistemology
Stephen ben Yeshua responds to me:
quote:
quote:
For example, there is no change in body weight of a person at the moment of death. Lots of people think there is (and thus, the movie 21 Grams is playing on that),
Why do you think this?
Because it has actually been studied and found that there is no change in body weight at death.
What, you think I just made it up?
------------------
Rrhain
WWJD? JWRTFM!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by Stephen ben Yeshua, posted 12-29-2003 3:20 PM Stephen ben Yeshua has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 104 by Stephen ben Yeshua, posted 12-30-2003 12:10 PM Rrhain has not replied

  
sidelined
Member (Idle past 5907 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 103 of 334 (75639)
12-29-2003 3:53 PM
Reply to: Message 100 by Stephen ben Yeshua
12-29-2003 3:20 PM


Re: Demons and epistemology
Stephen
You do realize that if a soul has weight this means that it has gravitationally accelerated mass? If it has mass how do you explain this? It would be subject to the same physics as everything else.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by Stephen ben Yeshua, posted 12-29-2003 3:20 PM Stephen ben Yeshua has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 105 by Stephen ben Yeshua, posted 12-30-2003 12:18 PM sidelined has replied

  
Stephen ben Yeshua
Inactive Member


Message 104 of 334 (75822)
12-30-2003 12:10 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by Rrhain
12-29-2003 3:32 PM


Re: Demons and epistemology
Rrhain,
"...Because it has actually been studied and found that there is no change in body weight at death."
Really! Who did that?
Stephen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by Rrhain, posted 12-29-2003 3:32 PM Rrhain has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 106 by Coragyps, posted 12-30-2003 12:33 PM Stephen ben Yeshua has replied

  
Stephen ben Yeshua
Inactive Member


Message 105 of 334 (75825)
12-30-2003 12:18 PM
Reply to: Message 103 by sidelined
12-29-2003 3:53 PM


Re: Demons and epistemology
Sidelined,
There is measurable plausibility that we have 21 gram souls, which when they leave our bodies, enter into a timeless world, where they somehow fall into a black hole and suffer a lot. Donald Carpenter has published an e-book on the matter of the soul's weight, and he seems to be most trustworthy authority on that subject. The near death studies substantially increase the plausibility of souls surviving our bodies. The PEAR work at Princeton the timelessness of the dark-matter, soulish, or spiritual world. Naturally all this is contested, but not by anyone we have any reason to trust.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by sidelined, posted 12-29-2003 3:53 PM sidelined has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by sidelined, posted 12-30-2003 12:38 PM Stephen ben Yeshua has replied
 Message 110 by :æ:, posted 12-30-2003 1:11 PM Stephen ben Yeshua has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024