Thread: Demons Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.
To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=028919
Posted by Raptor Eye (# 16649) on
:
What are your views about the demons Jesus and his followers were said to drive out of people?
Some claim that demonic forces are everywhere. I know someone who says that demons came out of him when he was saved. He puts this down to his having dabbled in spiritualism. He claims that they were connected to his addictions.
I also know someone who is aggrieved, having been at the other end of the 'Come out of her in the name of the Lord' brigade when she had a fairly common illness. She puts this down to the stories in the Bible.
I try to keep an open mind, but would prefer to think that there were no such things.
Istm that unless given the authority by God to use such words, as discerned by the church, none of us should ever try to drive out demons, whether or not they exist.
What are your thoughts?
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
Well, I do not believe there is a demonic cause for most things; but I need to ask why the Church of England - hardly a demons-under-every-stone -charismatic fellowship - has an exorcist in every diocese (so I believe).
Demons are real but not common.
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on
:
I believe in the existence of demons, but that almost everything that people imagine to be demonisation or demonic activity today is not.
I've been on the receiving end of being discerned as having a "Jezebellic spirit", which you can read about at length in books like this and this. They list various supposed "symptoms", all of them subjective, some of them contradictory, and none of them based on any clear biblical exegesis. This "discernment" cost me, well, a lot.
If you look at the OT story of Jezebel, however, particularly the story of Naboth's vineyard, the plain narrative describes how Jezebel schemes to acquire some real estate, with the scheme aided and abette by some pseudospiritual talk.
In my experience this kind of action is alive and well in churches today and is truly demonic. Inexplicably, it gets less attention than people hearing voices or listening to Black Sabbath (backwards or forwards).
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
I think everybody, given the choice, would prefer to think there were no such creatures! Unfortunately, I think there is. Still, they seem to have been unusually common in Jesus' day, possibly as a direct reaction to the Son of God's invading the world.
And of course you have to tread very, very carefully before concluding that a demon is directly responsible for particular situations today. There are way too many natural and human factors that can easily account for most problems.
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Well, I do not believe there is a demonic cause for most things; but I need to ask why the Church of England - hardly a demons-under-every-stone -charismatic fellowship - has an exorcist in every diocese (so I believe).
Demons are real but not common.
This.
Posted by betjemaniac (# 17618) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Well, I do not believe there is a demonic cause for most things; but I need to ask why the Church of England - hardly a demons-under-every-stone -charismatic fellowship - has an exorcist in every diocese (so I believe).
Demons are real but not common.
This.
Oh, and yes, you're right, they do. Because, on a vanishingly small number of occasions, it's necessary.
Posted by Porridge (# 15405) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
I think everybody, given the choice, would prefer to think there were no such creatures!
And I suspect a great many people would much prefer to believe in them. Handy "outs" for those reluctant to accept responsibility for their own actions.
Posted by TomM (# 4618) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Well, I do not believe there is a demonic cause for most things; but I need to ask why the Church of England - hardly a demons-under-every-stone -charismatic fellowship - has an exorcist in every diocese (so I believe).
Demons are real but not common.
This.
Oh, and yes, you're right, they do. Because, on a vanishingly small number of occasions, it's necessary.
...and it's good to have an expert to discern whether exorcism is necessary or whether to refer to appropriate medical professionals/counsellors etc. (As opposed to the parish priest, who will almost certainly never have any relevant experience)
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Well, I do not believe there is a demonic cause for most things; but I need to ask why the Church of England - hardly a demons-under-every-stone -charismatic fellowship - has an exorcist in every diocese (so I believe).
Demons are real but not common.
This.
Oh, and yes, you're right, they do. Because, on a vanishingly small number of occasions, it's necessary.
Can I ask you about that? If there is a 'vanishingly small number' - by which I think you mean that exorcisms are needed less because demonic activity is lessening - why would that be?
Are demons less active?
To be honest it seems that people might have taken over their jobs! (bitter laugh).
Of course, we cannot know, but I wonder if the lack of activity is a kind of preparation for a greater assault? Kind like the tide going way out before a tsunami?
Is Satan preparing for a 'big event'?
Posted by Bostonman (# 17108) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Well, I do not believe there is a demonic cause for most things; but I need to ask why the Church of England - hardly a demons-under-every-stone -charismatic fellowship - has an exorcist in every diocese (so I believe).
Demons are real but not common.
This.
Oh, and yes, you're right, they do. Because, on a vanishingly small number of occasions, it's necessary.
Can I ask you about that? If there is a 'vanishingly small number' - by which I think you mean that exorcisms are needed less because demonic activity is lessening - why would that be?
Are demons less active?
To be honest it seems that people might have taken over their jobs! (bitter laugh).
Of course, we cannot know, but I wonder if the lack of activity is a kind of preparation for a greater assault? Kind like the tide going way out before a tsunami?
Is Satan preparing for a 'big event'?
"Vanishingly small" typically means "very small" rather than "increasingly small" (decreasingly large, however you'd rather look at it).
Perceived demonic activity is diminishing because the majority of people no longer see epilepsy, schizophrenia, or groups of women as demonic in etiology.
Dioceses have exorcists for historical reasons (this is a church continuous with late antiquity and the medieval period in its institution) and to refer people to mental health professionals as needed. And perhaps for an occasional exorcism. I doubt (although I'm not sure) that this is a full-time vocation for most diocesan exorcists.
Posted by mark_in_manchester (# 15978) on
:
quote:
Is Satan preparing for a 'big event'?
I'm not having a go at you, Mudfrog, because I've been pulled up on something a bit like this too, in the fairly recent past. But doesn't this depend a bit on where one is, asking this question? After all, if we were in Mosul, Donetsk, Freetown or bits of northern Nigeria, we'd presumably be thinking that a worlds-worth of demonic shit was going down, right now. And if we had been in those places a couple of years ago and sitting pretty, wondering about spooky graveyards and rock-band lyrics (thanks Euty) like some Christians do, we would have been forgetting those poor folks in Haiti, coastal Japan or whose kids had just been kidnapped in the middle of the night by the Lord's Resistance Army.
Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on
:
The Twilight book series has sold over 100 million copies, because that many people are pleasantly thrilled to imagine vampires are real. I think some of those people get the same shivery delight thinking there might be demons.
I don't believe in vampires or demons and it bothers me when Christians suggest that some people do need the services of an exorcist, because, to my mind, those ill people are made worse and are delayed getting the medical treatment they need.
As for the demons Jesus treated. I don't know. Maybe those people were mentally ill or maybe Jesus was treating something we don't have a name for, but he was Jesus and we're not. I wouldn't want a self-styled exorcist working over me anymore than I would want a church official to try and cure my eye infection by spitting on mud and putting it over my eyes.
Posted by Gramps49 (# 16378) on
:
The modernist/post modernist views seek to find a rational way to explain everything.
However, in cultures that are still relatively primitive, demons are very much real.
I knew a missionary in the Philippines who were working with a people that believed in demons. He even witnessed some himself. He described seeing seven demons dancing on a hill.
My pastor would say a demon is anything that seeks to destroy human relationships and even destroy the sense of self.
I really have never experienced a sense of a demon, though I know many people who have.
One thing I learned over my life time is if you don't believe in them, you won't see them.
Posted by Belle Ringer (# 13379) on
:
Back in the hippie era people would sometimes talk about an empty room you walk into and feel "bad vibes." For no known reason.
Posted by Martin60 (# 368) on
:
Twilight.
Posted by HughWillRidmee (# 15614) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Well, I do not believe there is a demonic cause for most things; but I need to ask why the Church of England - hardly a demons-under-every-stone -charismatic fellowship - has an exorcist in every diocese (so I believe).
Not under every stone perhaps but....
Some twenty months ago I was present at an Anglican church service where the priest related an event which he claimed was an instance of the Holy Spirit (thru him and others) casting out demons that had been forced to name themselves. He immediately proclaimed "a miracle" despite a much more likely but prosaic explanation (endorphins). A few minutes later he halted his attempt at mass hypnosis by insisting that it needed a congregation-wide triple shout of "Jesus is Lord" (because that was very potent in the spirit world) to enable the Holy Spirit to escape the realm of demonic powers and grace his service with its presence. I don't know what happened - as was said on some Sundays under different circumstances, I made my excuses and left.
I wonder if the CofE might need the services of exorcists to minister to its own?
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
Back in the hippie era people would sometimes talk about an empty room you walk into and feel "bad vibes." For no known reason.
The word "known" is important.
Posted by Arethosemyfeet (# 17047) on
:
I was always under the impression that the CofE maintained exorcists partly as an insurance in a kind of well-demons-might-exist-so-we'd-better-be-prepared way and partly to keep the wackier fringes of the church under control by having set procedures for dealing with suspected "demonic possession". I've never seen anything I would consider evidence of demonic activity but I'm not going to rule out the possibly of malign spiritual entities entirely.
Posted by Stetson (# 9597) on
:
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
Back in the hippie era people would sometimes talk about an empty room you walk into and feel "bad vibes." For no known reason.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The word "known" is important.
I wasn't around for the hippie era, but I always took the phrase "bad vibes" to be something like saying "There's something about that guy that rubs me the wrong way". Not a mystical thing, more just an intimation of things that are hard to classify or verbalize.
Though, I suppose the words "vibes" is derived from "vibrations", which taken literally would mean a real force emanating from spaces or objects, over and above just negative emotions. That's usually not how I read it, though.
Posted by Honest Ron Bacardi (# 38) on
:
I think HughWillRidMee's point is a valid one, nevertheless. "Demons" can be used as a sort of negative version of a God of the Gaps.
Posted by Martin60 (# 368) on
:
Like Twilight, it's not for me to question Jesus, even though I embrace His full humanity.
But there can be NO QUESTION that evil is real. As a foul synergy of ... our humanity. In the institutions, the systems, the cultures, the memes, the religions, the politics that emerge from us.
What else do you call the FUCKING bedroom tax? Who needs Satan and demons when we can do that? Or did they make us do it? And my profanity?
[ 07. March 2015, 22:13: Message edited by: Martin60 ]
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Porridge:
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
I think everybody, given the choice, would prefer to think there were no such creatures!
And I suspect a great many people would much prefer to believe in them. Handy "outs" for those reluctant to accept responsibility for their own actions.
I'm quoting this because it seems to me a good example-in-miniature of an attitude that seems to be common, namely, that there are only two camps--those who are rational, modern, intelligent disbelievers about demons, and those who believe in them (or say they do) as a way of getting power over others.
There is at least one more option--that the things actually exist, and cause some people grief, which they rightly want to be rid of.
Look, not everybody who believes they are real is a jerk. I believe they exist, and I am not some fool who thinks epilepsy or bipolar or various other conditions are caused by demonic possession. You don't have to be a scientific ignoramus to believe that spiritual beings who wish us ill do exist.
After all, there are physical beings who wish us ill and exist (as anybody who has ever had a human enemy can attest). If spiritual beings exist (which is a question in itself), it is not such a great leap to suppose that some of them may not be well disposed toward us.
My primary grounds for believing in them are first of all, Scripture (which obviously not everyone accepts) and the fact that Jesus himself believed they existed. I'm inclined to take his word for it.
But my secondary grounds--which are soft evidence, not hard--are based on experience. Namely 25 years in missionary service, and some of the things we have seen there. Almost any missionary can tell you stories, though most of the ones I've met tend to be close-mouthed for fear of triggering freako reactions in unstable listeners. Which is to say, we don't make these things a primary focus of our talking-to-the-people-back-home presentations. An interest in demons tends to be unhealthy if it goes very far.
But this is what I'm thinking about: On more than one occasion we've had people from the community come to us requesting exorcism (if that's the right word) after a series of uncanny events affecting their families. We didn't suggest it, they were the ones who came begging for it. And they're not singling out an individual as a candidate for exorcism--there's no concern about abusing a person who needs medical help.
So what do you say to such a family--"Go home, demons don't exist, and never mind the odd happenings in your home"? Because I do think they exist, though I hesitate to say in any particular case that they are involved.
Sorry for the incoherence.
[ 07. March 2015, 22:26: Message edited by: Lamb Chopped ]
Posted by Nicolemr (# 28) on
:
I do think there are spiritual entities of some type that are ill disposed towards people. Whether they are demons or spirits or the unquiet dead I don't claim to know. I don't think they interfere with us on too regular a basis but I do think it happens occasionally.
Posted by Belle Ringer (# 13379) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
an attitude that seems to be common, namely, that there are only two camps--those who are rational, modern, intelligent disbelievers about demons, and those who believe in them (or say they do) as a way of getting power over others.
There is at least one more option--that the things actually exist, and cause some people grief, which they rightly want to be rid of.
The "rational, modern, intelligent" argument is commonly used to declare there are no miracles and never were, the "natural explanations" including "Jesus' body is still in the tomb, the disciples were inspired by memory of him, that memory was the resurrection." I.e. rejection of supernatural effect on lives, past or present, is rejected with the insistence there's a natural (non-supernatural) explanation.
I hadn't thought to wonder until this discussion - are there people who believe in supernatural positive (miracles) but reject the concept of supernatural negative (harassment, blocking)? Or is the issue the *any* supernatural reality that sometimes directly affects individual lives?
Posted by IngoB (# 8700) on
:
If you believe that God exists, then you believe that a pure Spirit can exist as a living being, and be a Person who acts without a body. If you believe that a Divine Spirit can have incorporeal personal life, then it seems difficult to deny that a created spirit could have incorporeal life as well. And given God's evident happiness to create all sorts of stuff, it seems rather probable that he created some incorporeal persons. Angels. If angels exist as created persons, then it seems likely that they will be challenged by sin somehow. And it also seems likely that some of them ended up being evil somehow. Demons, devils.
To claim that one believes only in God, but not in angels or demons, is a strange kind of Divine exceptionalism. Somehow God pulls off the trick of existing as a personal Spirit, but cannot (or does not want to) create other personal spirits. I find that hard to believe. Even without any scriptural evidence (and there's plenty), theo-logic would suggest the likelihood of the existence of angels and demons.
I have no better demon detector than anybody else, so I have no real clue what fraction of psychological disturbances and evil in this world is due to direct demonic action. But I would point out one key advantage of thinking of our mental struggles as fighting against inner demons. For saying that one is "possessed" by a demon (or many...) does not need to be simply a facile attempt to evade responsibility. It can also be a way to separate yourself, the "true you", from that what ails you, and make it your enemy, that which you oppose.
We are often told that the first step to healing is to step back from yourself and see your problems. Well, easier said than done. But thinking in terms of demons allows a very efficient version of this. Maybe not one that satisfies the criteria of enlightened scepticism, but one that pragmatically works. For if I am occupied by evil, sin, addiction, you name it, personified, then I can become a freedom fighter against that occupation of myself by that demon.
I do not know how often there really is a demon in us, and how often that is just a way of discerning who we really want to be vs. who we currently really are. But maybe that is less important than driving out those demons.
And if you drive out a demon, then you can shed your guilt and shame in the same act. There is no need to dwell on the past of how you were, once you have reformed yourself (other than possibly to prepare defences against renewed attacks). You were more a victim than a perpetrator, having freed yourself you are free. You can even feel pride at having emerged victorious from this battle. And also others, if they join you in your belief, can find forgiveness for you much more readily. For who is going to blame the person who was under the yoke of an evil tyranny, and fought so hard to be free of it, for all that was done while the tyranny had not yet been overthrown? That would be petty.
If a demon leaves a person, then in some sense that person is reborn as their true self. What is there to do but to rejoice, even if that person injured us when they were still under the influence of that demon?
I think believing in demons, and dealing with them, can help us and others do what we should be doing. Yes, like everything this has a bad side, and I'm certainly not advocating that we should ignore for example biochemical imbalances in the brain leading to depression just to uphold some narrative of demons. But we should be a bit careful about dismissing demons too quickly. Both as real entities, and as a pragmatic way of dealing with people in psychological difficulties.
Posted by Porridge (# 15405) on
:
There's a fourth option, Lamb Chopped:
Phenomena we do not (yet) understand and/or do not or cannot (yet) accept -- and may never know or accept.
Given the discussion on another thread about the inconceivable scope of the universe, and the paltriness of humankind, it always astonishes me how readily we all seem to forget how little we know and understand as opposed to how much there is to know, and what miniscule access we have to nearly all of it.
Posted by Oscar the Grouch (# 1916) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
I hadn't thought to wonder until this discussion - are there people who believe in supernatural positive (miracles) but reject the concept of supernatural negative (harassment, blocking)? Or is the issue the *any* supernatural reality that sometimes directly affects individual lives?
I might be one such person - as long as you surround my position with a ton loads of caveats....
I don't think we see "miracles" as such in today's world. But I am not 100% convinced that God cannot perform miracles.
But I reject the idea of "demons" - and certainly reject the idea of any dualistic arrangement where "demons" and "angels" are in a reasonably equal battle over the souls of humans.
Demons are the personification of impersonal forces of injustice, oppression, evil and hatred. And - as Jesus so vividly pointed out - such forces are not "out there" but lie deep within every one of us.
Believing in demons is a way of saying "the problem is out there - it's not my fault." I think we need to lose the idea of demons so that we can clearly see that I am the problem - that WE are the problem.
But that - to my mind - is a completely different argument to the one about whether God can perform miracles.
Posted by ChastMastr (# 716) on
:
I agree with Mudfrog, Lamb Chopped, Nicolemr, and IngoB. Also Porridge, since there are also things we don't understand going on (which needn't be mutually exclusive with the other things).
I'd also point out that the notion of angels and demons (and, to a degree, God and Satan) as roughly equal and opposite forces engaged in a war in which the outcome is really in doubt is a product of fiction, not of anything I'd recognize as Christian theology. It's kind of in there with the notion that humans become angels or demons after death. ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
For my money, Dr Andrew Walker and the former president of the Baptist Union, Nigel Wright, have written intelligently and cogently on this subject - and in a way that is consonant with Big T Tradition in what we might call the Orthodox and RC senses of the term ...
Like Lamb Chopped, I don't believe that one has to be some kind of flat-earth fundie to believe in the reality of these things ... but we have to be careful how we frame them.
I think it was from Walker and Wright that I got the - to me very helpful - idea that with the Devil and all his legions (as it were) we are not talking about 'personality' as such - at least not in the conventional sense - but rather a kind of 'anti-personality'.
On one level, evil is simply the absence of good - it doesn't have any 'positive' existence but it is nonetheless very, very real and its effects can be seen all around us.
Consequently - although they are 'created beings' - or spiritual entities that have become warped somewhere along the line - I don't think we should consider demons - or jinns or whatever else we might call them - as 'creatures' in the same way as, say, a cat, dog, weasel, whale or albatross are creatures ...
That's one of the issues I have with Gramps's account of his pastor friend 'seeing' seven demons dancing on a hill-top. I tend to think that each culture envisages or 'pictures' these things in accordance with its own visual culture or traditions - so in the West we would tend to visualise them in terms of medieval depictions and the bat-like creatures on frescoes and so on - whereas in Eastern religions they tend to be visualised in keeping with Hindu or Buddhist iconography ...
As IngoB reminds us, we are not dealing with corporeal forces here - 'our battle is not with flesh and blood ...'
Now, I'm sure Lamb Chopped and other former or current missionaries could tell me stories that would raise my eyebrows so high that they'd tumble down the back of my head ...
People may well 'see' things - but essentially we are dealing with unseen and uncorporeal forces here ... and whilst electricity might not be an exact analogy it might be a helpful one to some extent.
As for exorcisms and the CofE ... I agree with what's been said so far that each Diocese has someone who specialises or advises on such things ... but from what I can gather, most Diocesan exorcists (or RC exorcists) tend to be called up to exorcise places and things rather than people.
The pub my Dad used to frequent was thought to have a malign atmosphere or 'presence' in certain rooms so an exorcist was brought in to quell and calm the evil influences ... much to my father's amusement.
I'd say there was a malign atmosphere in that particular pub alright - but it wasn't anything to do with ghouls and ghosts lurking in the wainscot but rather the somewhat toxic atmosphere generated in the public bar night after night ...
But that's another story ...
As for whether Satan is planning some kind of big push - or Battle of the Bulge as it were - as a counter-attack to Calvary ...
Well, that all depends on your eschatology.
My own view is that as Judeo-Christian influence gradually withdraws from the public sphere then the way is open for all manner of influences to fill the gaps - some benign, some otherwise ... indeed, some positively demonic.
I would not hesitate to use the term 'demonic' to describe what happens in societies when things go badly awry - be it Nazi Germany, Stalinist Russia, Pol Pot's Cambodia, Rwanda during the genocide or the incursions of IS ...
These are the forces we should fear and attempt to stand against and 'exorcise' ... they are unseen and largely 'impersonal' forces - but they lead to dreadfully tangible results ... the fanatics with the suicide-belts and Kalashnikovs, the destruction of ancient artefacts and cultures, the desire to dehumanise anyone who disagrees ...
These demonic attributes can be seen anywhere and everywhere ... and such forces are at work, I believe, whenever we see 'ethnic cleansing' of whatever kind, the demonisation of any group or sector within society or the exaltation of our own agendas over and above the common good ...
Posted by HughWillRidmee (# 15614) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
As for exorcisms and the CofE ... I agree with what's been said so far that each Diocese has someone who specialises or advises on such things ... but from what I can gather, most Diocesan exorcists (or RC exorcists) tend to be called up to exorcise places and things rather than people.
The pub my Dad used to frequent was thought to have a malign atmosphere or 'presence' in certain rooms so an exorcist was brought in to quell and calm the evil influences ... much to my father's amusement.
I recall that, in my early teens, my father was persuaded to exorcise a house in his West London parish which the occupants were convinced they shared with a poltergeist. I think he went to the house and read a few prayers (he wasn't a sprinkle and tinkle vicar) and I can't recall any discussion as to whether it was effective in changing their conviction.
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
I hadn't thought to wonder until this discussion - are there people who believe in supernatural positive (miracles) but reject the concept of supernatural negative (harassment, blocking)? Or is the issue the *any* supernatural reality that sometimes directly affects individual lives?
To some of us the concept of "supernatural reality" is an oxymoron. If supernaturalism exists I can find neither evidence that survives rigorous questioning for it nor for any effect it has on "the natural world", and if it has no effect it effectively does not exist. There are, of course, things we can't explain - but then we couldn't explain seasons, volcanoes or infection until fairly recently in human existence could we? We only understand them now because, instead of settling for simple guesses based on supernatural concepts, we followed the more effective route of scientific enquiry. The danger, for humanity, in belief in the supernatural (be it alternatively medical, talking to the dead etc. or religious) is that it impedes, restricts and prevents rational processes that lead to better lives for many (climate forecasting, evacuation procedures and vaccination for starters).
Posted by itsarumdo (# 18174) on
:
That depends on your view of causality... if you believe that spiritual forces are largely powerless, then yes - that is a good strategy. If you believe that they are not, then the situation is rather more complex, and what is "right" or not is harder to define.
Posted by Jack o' the Green (# 11091) on
:
In the Hebrew Bible, there isn't as much room for demons in its world view as in later theology, since Yahweh is seen as the author of both Good and Evil. By being an exorcist, Jesus is not only a child of his time, but also a child of his place as demons weren't universally believed in by Jews, but do appear to be a popular idea in northern Palestine. Rough contemporaries like the charismatic Rabbi Hanina Ben Dosa were also well known as exorcists. Of course the obvious reply to that would be that one of the reasons God chose that particular time and place to become incarnate was because demons are real and he wished this to be affirmed by his ministry as a human being.
Of course it's impossible to disprove the existence of demons if you believe in God - just as it's impossible to disprove the existence of water nymphs, fairies and leprechauns. Everything except the intrinsically impossible is up for grabs if you believe in an omnipotent creator Spirit.
Modern evidence of demons and possession tend to be decidedly underwhelming. Malachi Martin - the former Jesuit who wrote 'Hostage to the Devil', is an unreliable witness to put it mildly. His 'student' the Psychiatrist M. Scott Peck's book on exorcisms which he undertook is inconclusive. His grounds for diagnosing possession rather than mental illness is dodgy to say the least.
My understanding of diocesan exorcists in the Church of England is that the vast majority of what they do (from what they say or are permitted to say) seems to be more to do with allowing restless human spirits to 'pass on' from places rather than with battling demons possessing humans.
Posted by Aravis (# 13824) on
:
Has anyone any suggestions what to say or do if someone tells you, in some detail, that they have been plagued by spirits for many years?
This wasn't in the context of anything to do with church. The person had no idea whether or not I had any faith of any description. She needed someone to talk to and appeared genuinely very frightened. Mental health services have closed involvement as she won't turn up to appointments.
Posted by itsarumdo (# 18174) on
:
Maybe a caveat is in order...
There is another thread about faith/belief on this board, and one important point is that there are more people prepared to believe tacitly in demons because they are scared of them, than are prepared to get their head round the issues of belief in God. That is totally the wrong way round, and in a general sense, the issue of demons or not demons is better ignored.
For sure, thought forms that did not originate in the person they reside in are fairly common, though they usually do not possess malevolent intent. Assuming that they do without a greater faith in God is a dangerous path to walk on - even if they don't exist.
Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Aravis:
Has anyone any suggestions what to say or do if someone tells you, in some detail, that they have been plagued by spirits for many years?
This wasn't in the context of anything to do with church. The person had no idea whether or not I had any faith of any description. She needed someone to talk to and appeared genuinely very frightened. Mental health services have closed involvement as she won't turn up to appointments.
Perhaps you could find out if any of the priests in your parish or diocese are interested in exorcism and if they could offer her any help.
Posted by pimple (# 10635) on
:
Anything frightening, unusual, or unexplained tended to be ascribed to demons in various places and at various times.
There is no consistency, as far as I can see, even within the New Testament, regarding what conditions were demonic and which were not. There are exorcisms in Mark, certainly, but elsewhere epilepsy seems to have been recognised as something with a physical cause.
One way of dealing with mental illnesses in modern times has ben the use of ECT - electro-convulsive therapy. AIUI, this works by artificially stimulation an epileptic fit.
I've often wondered whether exorcisms worked in a similar way - and with similarly inconsistent results. This is pure conjecture, I must add - I'm no neuro scientist.
But one famous - or notorious - advocate of exorcism, M. Scott Peck has been very open about the dangers involved. Even to the point of admitting that it may be fatal - and the patient (whose total acquiescence is a sine qua non) must be informed of the possible side effects. More astonishingly, Peck has asserted that non-Christians may be involved in the exercise in some appropriate circumstances.
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Aravis:
Has anyone any suggestions what to say or do if someone tells you, in some detail, that they have been plagued by spirits for many years?
This wasn't in the context of anything to do with church. The person had no idea whether or not I had any faith of any description. She needed someone to talk to and appeared genuinely very frightened. Mental health services have closed involvement as she won't turn up to appointments.
Firstly, the usual hostly caveat about not seeking medical advice of any sort here.
To some extent, I think accompaniment in this realm should be allowed to be tailored to the worldview of the individual, provided it does not involve dishonesty on the part of the helper.
Someone I spoke to recently gave a lengthy account of undue influence of black magic running through several generations in their family with horrendous consequences, including an apparition of the perpetrator.
The latter was quite likely a case of pareidolia.
I don't think the person in question would be mentally capable of understanding pareidolia or how it could have that effect, but a Bible verse about God cursing for a couple of generations but blessing for a thousand seemed to be of considerable help right there and then.
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
With my head, I find the idea of demons hard to grasp. They don't fit in with the physical world. And, more than that, to have God allow these predatory entities to wander round causing grief to people who cannot defend themselves, without having his own entities dealing with the situation seems wrong.
But. A couple of odd instances. "Bad vibes" turned up in my spare bedroom, with no apparent triggering event in that location. I was so concerned that I tried sitting in there praying, but it was difficult. I got a friend to go in there to see if he noticed anything - which he did, but he, of course, realised that I had a reason for asking him to go in. Then I put up a mutual friend who had lost his home temporarily as a result of the 1987 storm. This friend used to recite the Offices in there as part of his prayer life, and when he was able to return home, the feeling had gone. we never asked him if he noticed anything. It was already his habit to pray that way.
And, with the same friend, I used to go to pray in a South London church which was open very late at night. On one occasion, I found it very difficult to settle into the silence. There were odd noises, and a sense of unease. As we left, my friend asked if I had noticed anything. In his case, the noises had occurred exactly at the moments when he had been "centring down" (I can't remember what words he used) and he felt it as an attack on his praying. We searched the whole place, organ loft, round behind the altar, under the altar, the lot, to make sure there was no-one there, and the only odd thing we found was a single freesia lying in the aisle by the front pew. we also checked round the outside. Nothing. We didn't tell anyone, and thought that if anything was amiss, the next day's services would probably sort it out.
I'm not convinced that demons were involved though. Unquiet dead people? I don't know.
Posted by ChastMastr (# 716) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
And, more than that, to have God allow these predatory entities to wander round causing grief to people who cannot defend themselves, without having his own entities dealing with the situation seems wrong.
As for your first comment, one could say the same about human serial killers, but there they are; as for the second, as I understand it, He does have His own entities dealing with the situation--both His own mighty legions of (unfallen) angels, and by the power of Christ working through us.
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Aravis:
Has anyone any suggestions what to say or do if someone tells you, in some detail, that they have been plagued by spirits for many years?
This wasn't in the context of anything to do with church. The person had no idea whether or not I had any faith of any description. She needed someone to talk to and appeared genuinely very frightened. Mental health services have closed involvement as she won't turn up to appointments.
This is where you try to get a professional involved. Ideally you want a pastor/priest who is older (=experienced), stable, humble, loving, of strong faith, and who believes such things exist but doesn't spot them under every bush. Such a person will have connections with medical and mental health people, so if it turns out to be that sort of a thing, they can take over the effort to get her properly cared for. If it really is a spirit thing, they're equipped for that as well. But you yourself probably shouldn't be trying to cope with it on your own.
I'm sure you know this, but it takes a long time usually to get a real sense for what's going on and how best to handle it. It sounds like she needs someone knowledgeable and wise who will take the time to get to know her and make that determination only after a lot of assessment, hopefully with other professionals involved.
Posted by Chorister (# 473) on
:
As I understand it, through supporting a frightened friend, the named Diocesan person (who is not actually called an exorcist) is more usually involved in reassurance than anything spectacular. But they are senior priests, who understand the dangers of meddling with people's minds and sense of fear.
On the other hand, I have come across some quite scary (cultish?) self-appointed people who don't understand these dangers, who would be quite happy to offer vulnerable people all sorts of quack cures for supposed demons. I'm sure many people here would agree that it's best to give them a very wide berth!
Something I've seen, and don't quite understand, is that some Christians, after getting quite intense about telling everyone about how wonderful God is, then move on to frightening those people by obsessing about how they have devils and demons within them, who need to be got rid of. The message of love and hope somehow gets twisted into a message of fear and paranoia. Why does that happen? Is it due to the thrill of feeling power and control, perhaps?
Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on
:
Yes, Aravis, there should be a diocesan person who might help. Have a word with your parish priest, who should know who it is, or be able to find out. They are usually very discreet and very sensible.
Posted by Ikkyu (# 15207) on
:
There is something I don't understand. More than one person in this thread has mentioned the importance of belief in the existence of demons before you can deal with them or experience them. Things like "if you don't believe they exist you probably won't see them".
Or the need of finding clergy who believe that this thing can happen to deal with "possible demonic possession".
Why would belief make any difference? If something exists in the world outside of my head. I should not have to believe in it before it shows up.
Imagine if this was a trial and you had to believe the defendant is guilty before being allowed into the jury. Seems like an attempt to stack the deck.
Or maybe what is been described is a subjective phenomenon with no counterpart in the world outside our minds.
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
No--it's more that in order to cope effectively with something, you have to be at least open to the possibility that it exists. Otherwise you are likely to squash whatever evidence you run across into the shape of what you DO think exists, and overlook anything that hints of something different this time around. It's a pretty universal human failing. (See: Columbus and his refusal to consider the possibility that he had found something other than the Indies; the naysayers at the time germ theory began; the wee child who assumed that the man who accompanied me to church all the time was my Daddy, as that was the only category she had for related adult males; etc. etc. etc.)
Posted by Ikkyu (# 15207) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
No--it's more that in order to cope effectively with something, you have to be at least open to the possibility that it exists. Otherwise you are likely to squash whatever evidence you run across into the shape of what you DO think exists, and overlook anything that hints of something different this time around. It's a pretty universal human failing. (See: Columbus and his refusal to consider the possibility that he had found something other than the Indies; the naysayers at the time germ theory began; the wee child who assumed that the man who accompanied me to church all the time was my Daddy, as that was the only category she had for related adult males; etc. etc. etc.)
But being open to the possibility that something exists is not the same as believing that something exists. I am open to the possibility of intelligent alien life for example. But that would not be my first choice for an explanation when confronted by an unknown radio emission from outer space. Only when I had exhausted all non artificial alternatives would aliens start to sound possible. In the same vein starting with an exorcist or a believer in demons before exhausting other mental health alternatives seems extremely foolish to me. And the reason it seems foolish is that we don't have any evidence for the existence of demons. At least not better evidence that that for the existence of Fairies.
And the last time it was government policy to take demons seriously it resulted in witch burning, not an example we want to repeat.
[ 09. March 2015, 03:20: Message edited by: Ikkyu ]
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
Gamaliel, I knew Nigel Wright when he was a pastor in a very successful and famous (at the time) Baptist Church in Ansdell near Lytham St Annes. A number of us used to go to his church on occasional Sunday nights and a number of our Salvation Army youth group were baptised there (!) I remember one very good weekend where he hosted one of John Wimber's healing teams. This was a very charismatic 'signs and wonders' church.
Anyway, what you have written regarding 'anti-personality' was helpful and thought-provoking. One of the problems with a lot of supernatural or apocalyptic thinking in the church and especially in the world, is that it has entered our consciousness through medieval Roman catholic European imagery and Victorian Gothick melodrama.
It is hard to escape the demons-as-imps imagery and the equating the demonic with the ghostly, the paranormal, the 'malign influence'. Once you believe that demons are just a cold spot in an old house or an evil feeling in the corner of a pub, you've got a losing battle on your hands.
If I've missed it in the preceding threads I apologise, but Biblically (or at least in one interpretation) are not the demons the third of the angelic host that were cast down with Lucifer? If that is true then they are indeed created but are spiritual creatures, not mortal and not identifiable by appearance or 'substance' (struggling for words here!)
As to visible sightings of demons, would it not be safe to say that they might occasionally/rarely/hardly ever 'show themselves' in particular circumstances in a similar way that angels occasionally/rarely/hardly ever 'show themselves; and that these visible appearances do not reveal what they really look like (having no outward form), but change depending on the person or the circumstances?
Angelic appearances (across all the different 'types') range from Isaiah's seraphim with 6 wings, to Ezekiel's wheels within wheel's vision, to the shepherds angels with glory shining around, to the resurrection's young man in white. There is no 'angel costume' that all angels wear; they certainly do not look like blond women in a lovely dress with huge feathery wings. similarly, demons, are not of fixed imp-like appearance with obligatory pitchfork.
It might happen as you suggest Gamaliel and different cultures have different imagery because one half remembered encounter for person has led to a widespread 'this is what all demons look like all the time'.
I do agree therefore that demons are not like the hoards of orcs or goblins from Mordor ready to be deployed by the evil Satan; but I would still suggest that in a similar (but not dualistic way) demons do have individual identities akin to the angels (being of the same substance, as it were) and they are only as evident in 'the world of men' as the angels are.
But that, as we know, doesn't remove their influence, effectiveness or 'ministry' (anti-ministry?).
We do indeed fight against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.
The important thing to remember, whatever we believe, is the cross has disarmed all of them and we need not be personally subject to them.
Posted by IngoB (# 8700) on
:
Ikkyu, I'm not sure what you imagine there. Exorcisms are not being proposed as some kind of alternative mental health care. They may be used as something like that in the Third World, where access to mental health care is often non-existing. But that is often shading more into "spiritual healing" than exorcism proper, and born out of desperation. (And yes, arguably 1stC Palestine was "Third World" in that sense, and Jesus' exorcisms are consequently not as clearly compartmentalised.)
Anyway, exorcism is a sacramental, not a sacrament. This immediately puts it into the same spot as crossing yourself with holy water. It's significant, but it is not supposed to be a major spiritual event. Confession is the relevant sacrament here, exorcism is simply a help to get you there. Most exorcisms are not Hollywood style shocking affairs either.
But perhaps most importantly, exorcism is targeted at something specific. The main "sign" of demonic possession is a strong aversion to holy things (holy water, blessings, ...) but being subdued by "direct" invocations of Christ's authority (e.g., by showing a cross, speaking His name, ...). Thus even if you don't believe in demons at all, you could see this as an entirely "internal" affair of Christianity. Basically a special kind of Christian hysteria, that can often be treated by a relatively harmless "ritual" mostly consisting in a priest praying over the person.
Where it should get interesting is in fact where non-Christians get cured by exorcisms. You can easily explain away Christians getting cured as mild psychic problems that get expressed in a particular cultural fashion, and that respond positively to external attention lavished onto the problem in the same particular cultural fashion. But where Christians exorcise "successfully" non-Christians, that could be interesting for a sceptic. That doesn't happen in the West though, but I bet examples could be found in the Wild South...
Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on
:
That is interesting, but presumably in most of those cases either the afflicted person, or someone who cares about them, has asked for help. ISTM that would put them into a similar position to that of the centurion and his servant whom Christ healed.
Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by ChastMastr:
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
And, more than that, to have God allow these predatory entities to wander round causing grief to people who cannot defend themselves, without having his own entities dealing with the situation seems wrong.
As for your first comment, one could say the same about human serial killers, but there they are; as for the second, as I understand it, He does have His own entities dealing with the situation--both His own mighty legions of (unfallen) angels, and by the power of Christ working through us.
The difference between demons and serial killers is that the latter are susceptible to observation and being dealt with by physical means - we may not be particularly good at it, is shown by the way the human powers that be shut up those who reported the behaviour of one Jimmy Saville, but the evidence is there and unarguable, in the end. Demons, however, depend entirely on the observation of individuals for detection, and if they bother people who don't believe in them cannot be recognised or dealt with. We largely don't have the tools given us to deal with the world invisible, and that is what I meant by God allowing their behaviour. If the angels are capable of sorting them out, then they shouldn't be able to bother anyone at all. If they are there, and they are destroying lives, then there is a failure of the way the world is set up.
In the recent case of the poor child Ayesha, the place I would want to look for demons - if they are about - is within the person who claimed the child was possessed. The belief in them causes more damage than they could manage by themselves, it seems to me.
Posted by Adeodatus (# 4992) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Well, I do not believe there is a demonic cause for most things; but I need to ask why the Church of England - hardly a demons-under-every-stone -charismatic fellowship - has an exorcist in every diocese (so I believe).
Demons are real but not common.
Technically, each diocese has a "ministry of deliverance team". And rule one in ministry of deliverance is that if someone is complaining of weird noises in the night, you don't go in waving crucifixes and yelling "The power of Christ compels you!" - you check the plumbing first.
Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on
:
A sensible article here. And the CofE's exorcism guidelines can be found of the CofE website (search 'exorcism').
[ 09. March 2015, 08:43: Message edited by: Albertus ]
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
@Mudfrog - Nigel Wright has changed/modified his views since his Ansdell days.
I know people who were involved back then and there was a rather unhealthy fixation with demons and 'deliverance' among some people who attended the church at one time.
I suspect this may have led Wright towards his curernt, more moderate position.
As for the Wimber-ish things ... yes, he was very much into that at one time but again, whilst not dismissing all of it - he has modified his views and now thinks - as I do - that a lot/most of it was down to suggestibility and so on.
On the nature of angels and demons - well, yes, I don't have a particular problem - other than issues of vocabulary which we are both struggling with here - as indeed is only to be expected - with what you've outlined.
I would tend to think that the way people 'see' demons (or angels for that matter) is likely to be influenced by depictions within their cultural background rather than the other way round ... ie. I'm not convinced that a medieval imp on a roof-boss or fresco is based on some kind of visual sighting ...
Rather, the depiction derives from what that culture saw as looking wicked or scary - hence venomous creatures - snakes, toads - or spiky looking ones - bats etc.
That isn't to deny the underlying reality, of course.
Posted by Belle Ringer (# 13379) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I know people who were involved back then and there was a rather unhealthy fixation with demons and 'deliverance' among some people who attended the church at one time.
Yup, some people attribute everything they dislike to demons, and seem to spend more time/energy ordering Satan to leave than talking to God. That's unhealthy. quote:
... the way people 'see' demons (or angels for that matter) is likely to be influenced by depictions within their cultural background
I think God communicates with us in our own language, or at least a language we recognize. In the Bible (some) angels don't have wings - Gideon thought he was talking to a man until the angel rose in the flames. But if God wants you to *know* you are seeing an angel, and you believe angels have wings, winged is what you'll see. One Shipmate has said she and a friend saw an angel dressed locally - Indonesian. Locally dressed (skin color too) is easier to relate to than totally strange when one is being supernaturally startled!
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
"Bad vibes" turned up in my spare bedroom, with no apparent triggering event in that location. I was so concerned that I tried sitting in there praying, but it was difficult. I got a friend to go in there to see if he noticed anything - which he did,...
...a South London church which was open very late at night. On one occasion, I found it very difficult to settle into the silence. There were odd noises, and a sense of unease. As we left, my friend asked if I had noticed anything. In his case, the noises had occurred exactly at the moments when he had been "centring down"...
I'm not convinced that demons were involved though. Unquiet dead people? I don't know.
When househunting, one house we walked into, sigh, that sort of negative electric sense in the atmosphere. It got thicker as we moved closer to the back of the house, thickest in the bedroom where there was an altar to what looked like a martial arts guy.
We left, I asked the real estate agent if he had felt anything unusual. He said the hairs on his legs were standing on end in the house.
I said "demons" (although "restless dead person" is a possibility, I once dealt with a "creepy room" no staff would go it where that turned out to be the problem). The agent said he has been told by other agents that when you walk into a house where a murder was committed, you feel it even if you weren't told. My saying "sigh, demons" didn't freak him out because he'd already been warned by other agents, he just hadn't yet experienced that sort of encounter.
Posted by Ikkyu (# 15207) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
Where it should get interesting is in fact where non-Christians get cured by exorcisms. You can easily explain away Christians getting cured as mild psychic problems that get expressed in a particular cultural fashion, and that respond positively to external attention lavished onto the problem in the same particular cultural fashion. But where Christians exorcise "successfully" non-Christians, that could be interesting for a skeptic. That doesn't happen in the West though, but I bet examples could be found in the Wild South...
Other than wondering what you mean by the "Wild South". Why would it not happen in the west?
Objective phenomena don't happen "only" on the edge of unexplored regions of maps. "Here be dragons". Especially when there are no such places anymore.
If there were such things as demons why would they act differently in Bolivia than in Berlin?
That is a lot easier to explain as a cultural difference than by the existence of an unseen supernatural force.
Posted by Raptor Eye (# 16649) on
:
I've been reading through as you've all been posting. There's a massive amount of food for thought here, thank you all.
I was less likely to accept the idea of evil created spirits than that of malignant 'ghosts' of 'restless dead people', particularly as the person in the op who claimed to have been freed of demons had been inviting the latter in to his life through ouija boards and spiritualist meetings.
I will continue to keep an open mind.
It makes sense to me that all that influences us, whether directly into our thoughts or in pictures laid down in the subconscious, will be from a combination of physical, mental and spiritual sources, both internal and external, which would be very difficult to separate out. Our own beliefs and tendencies would themselves influence any attempts to do so.
Posted by IngoB (# 8700) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ikkyu:
Other than wondering what you mean by the "Wild South". Why would it not happen in the west?
"Wild South" was just a fun play on "Wild West", given that the West (Europe + North America) is ecclesiastically tame and controlled these days, whereas the South (Africa in particular, but also South America) isn't as much.
The reason why it won't happen in the West is indeed cultural, but that's quite independent of how "real" this phenomenon is. In the West, exorcism "providers" - at least official ones, like the RCC, the Anglicans, etc. - are professional and regulated. And in the West, potential exorcism "customers" do not live in a general culture that would encourage them to eclectically seek help from the officials of a different religion. I just don't think the exorcist licensed by a bishop in a Western diocese will often get a call from some animist family to help drive out a devil. So the interesting case of a non-Christian being exorcised in the name of Christ may happen in Africa, but I doubt that it happens often in say the UK.
And the point I was making was not that demons only act in Africa; but rather that the easy explanation of the work of demons as just a kind of Christian hysteria is not as obvious when one has non-Christians being exorcised, and that sort of thing is more likely to happen in Africa.
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ikkyu:
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
No--it's more that in order to cope effectively with something, you have to be at least open to the possibility that it exists. Otherwise you are likely to squash whatever evidence you run across into the shape of what you DO think exists, and overlook anything that hints of something different this time around. It's a pretty universal human failing. (See: Columbus and his refusal to consider the possibility that he had found something other than the Indies; the naysayers at the time germ theory began; the wee child who assumed that the man who accompanied me to church all the time was my Daddy, as that was the only category she had for related adult males; etc. etc. etc.)
But being open to the possibility that something exists is not the same as believing that something exists. I am open to the possibility of intelligent alien life for example. But that would not be my first choice for an explanation when confronted by an unknown radio emission from outer space. Only when I had exhausted all non artificial alternatives would aliens start to sound possible. In the same vein starting with an exorcist or a believer in demons before exhausting other mental health alternatives seems extremely foolish to me. And the reason it seems foolish is that we don't have any evidence for the existence of demons. At least not better evidence that that for the existence of Fairies.
And the last time it was government policy to take demons seriously it resulted in witch burning, not an example we want to repeat.
As far as I know, nobody has suggested involving the government or any other legal authority. Nor has anybody suggested starting off with an exorcist as a court of first resort. And exorcists themselves (the diocesan type, we're not talking self-appointed weirdoes in the street), once you get to them, are highly unlikely to simply start exorcising a person the first time he pokes his nose through the door! There is such a thing as careful assessment and differential diagnosis. Not to mention consultation with various professionals. I would expect most cases of alleged demonic interference to "wash out" during this process, before ever getting to exorcism. The two cases involving exorcism requests to us both did.
As for their being no evidence of the existence of demons--well, you've not seen any. And those who have, or believe they have, generally have much better things to do with their time than try to design rigorous double blind scientific studies to prove the existence of such creatures to everybody who's curious. (How would one go about that, anyway? If demons DO exist, allowing a group of people to remain plagued by them in the interests of science would be massively unethical. Not to mention the difficulty in recruiting enough subjects to draw conclusions about such a rare phenomenon, the fact that intelligent beings such as demons are unlikely to cooperate in the study, and the fact that we really don't know enough to even ask the right questions at this point.)
To the best of my knowledge, most (all?) exorcists are at most very part-time. Which is as it should be, since there does not seem to be a massive outbreak of these issues in Western countries right now. (Mission fields differ from one another and you'd have to consult with experienced local leaders.)
Which is all to say that if such matters are properly handled, without sensationalism and stupidity, there's no reason why you or the general public should ever become aware of a potential exorcism case unless directly involved.
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on
:
Do demons exist? I would say 'not so much', but it isn't my reality that is important if someone says a demon did this or that. I think it is perfectly possible to not believe in demons or devils etc to understand someone who does. You could probably perform an exorcism without believing in demons. You can also do yoga without accepting whatever distilled eastern beliefs accompany it.
Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
... if such matters are properly handled, without sensationalism and stupidity, there's no reason why you or the general public should ever become aware of a potential exorcism case unless directly involved.
Exactly so.
Posted by Twilight (# 2832) on
:
How many humans have died before us, walked the same paths, lived in the same areas? How many of them died in perfect peace, painless and without animosity toward anyone? I would think the number of restless dead people would be legion.
When the U. S. Air Force first sent us to Washington DC the billeting was full and so were all the hotels in the area. One night we took our sleeping bags and slept between some graves in Arlington Cemetery. We were not bothered by any restless dead people in spite of some pretty horrific deaths among the soldiers buried there.
When we went to England we rented a cottage and after a few months someone told us that the previous owner had hung herself over the stairs. I had been almost deliriously happy, alone there much of the time, and continued to be.
I can easily imagine going into a house and getting "bad vibes," though. The smell of dead mice, mold, or bad plumbing could all bother me. Poor ventilation and lack of sunlight could depress me. An altar to a movie star would make me feel sad, but restless dead people would never be my guess as to what was wrong.
You might just say I'm too insensitive to feel their presence, it's possible, but I really think there's almost always a logical explanation for any close encounters with restless dead people.
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ikkyu:
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
Where it should get interesting is in fact where non-Christians get cured by exorcisms. You can easily explain away Christians getting cured as mild psychic problems that get expressed in a particular cultural fashion, and that respond positively to external attention lavished onto the problem in the same particular cultural fashion. But where Christians exorcise "successfully" non-Christians, that could be interesting for a skeptic. That doesn't happen in the West though, but I bet examples could be found in the Wild South...
Other than wondering what you mean by the "Wild South". Why would it not happen in the west?
Objective phenomena don't happen "only" on the edge of unexplored regions of maps. "Here be dragons". Especially when there are no such places anymore.
If there were such things as demons why would they act differently in Bolivia than in Berlin?
That is a lot easier to explain as a cultural difference than by the existence of an unseen supernatural force.
I'll answer this one, if I may!
The first question has to do with what demons are. Traditional, orthodox Christianity sees them as spirits that are opposed to God and to his kingship--specifically, to Jesus Christ and the salvation he has brought for humankind. But though demons are intelligent and antagonistic, they are rebels against Christ--not rival powers on an equal level with him. Their rebellion can be, and is in the process of being, crushed. God's power is greater.
That being the case, you'd expect to find little demonic activity in a geographical location that is pretty much saturated with Christians. That territory is much less vulnerable to attack, and frankly, probably a waste of a demon's time. It would be more cost-effective for them to go make trouble somewhere that is as yet largely unaffected by Christianity--which is in fact what the (merely anecdotal, of course) reports bear out.
Most useful of all from a demon's point of view would be to focus their activity on the front lines of the kingdom of God--that is, places / people groups / situations where Christianity is advancing, but hasn't gained a decisive advantage yet. The intention would be to stop Christianity getting a foothold, or to harass and destroy new believers during their time of weakness, their spiritual infancy. This scenario would explain why there seems to have been an explosion of demonic activity in Palestine during the life of Christ. It's also the reason why missionaries always, and desperately, ask for people's prayers. Being on the front lines means getting shot at. And you can get hurt and suffer real damage.
Just a note--those front lines are not always in "the wild South", China, Africa, etc. We've spent nearly 30 years now on the front lines in the American Midwest, in a major city. But the group we are caring for is less than 5% Christian, so it's no wonder there's a lot of spiritual blowback as people come to faith.
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
I just don't think the exorcist licensed by a bishop in a Western diocese will often get a call from some animist family to help drive out a devil. So the interesting case of a non-Christian being exorcised in the name of Christ may happen in Africa, but I doubt that it happens often in say the UK.
We're in the American Midwest, and our two cases were both requests from non-Christian, animistic and ancestor-worshipping families to evict demons from their homes. In both cases they were heavily involved with fortune telling for money. They came to us (the local Christian leaders) because they recognized the power of Christ and wished to harness it for their own needs, much as you might "rent" an off-duty cop to deal with your security problems at a bar.
Posted by IngoB (# 8700) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
We're in the American Midwest, and our two cases were both requests from non-Christian, animistic and ancestor-worshipping families to evict demons from their homes. In both cases they were heavily involved with fortune telling for money. They came to us (the local Christian leaders) because they recognized the power of Christ and wished to harness it for their own needs, much as you might "rent" an off-duty cop to deal with your security problems at a bar.
Interesting. Did you do it? And if yes, did the exorcism "work" for the "clients"?
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
They ultimately backed out. You recall Jesus' parable about the man possessed by a demon who gets cast out? When it returns, it finds the "house" empty though clean. So it goes and finds seven spirits worse than itself, and moves back in.
We take that as a warning to anyone who tries to evict evil spirits without simultaneously seeing to it that the "house" is filled by a new tenant--namely, the Holy Spirit. And so, after telling them Jesus' parable, we told them that we'd be willing to do it for them, but that for it to be effective, they would need a) to stop the fortune telling business, and b) to become Christian believers of some sort. But the families made considerable amounts of money from fortune telling. They ultimately decided that the price was too high to pay, and decided to move house instead, in the hopes that the demons would be too stupid to follow them.
I often wonder how that worked out.
Posted by Ikkyu (# 15207) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
And the point I was making was not that demons only act in Africa; but rather that the easy explanation of the work of demons as just a kind of Christian hysteria is not as obvious when one has non-Christians being exorcised, and that sort of thing is more likely to happen in Africa.
Those cultures also have traditions that have demons in them. In a poor country the local "shaman" might have lest prestige in the eyes of some than a missionary from the west. I can easily see a person or family from a different religion seeking the help of a prestigious western minister unless their tradition expressly forbids them to. That does not make it any more or less "real".
Posted by Ikkyu (# 15207) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
As far as I know, nobody has suggested involving the government or any other legal authority.
This I find strange. If we are talking about a real phenomenon. Why would you not want the government involved? When there was widespread belief that demons were real the government did get involved. It would affect things like the Judicial system. "The devil made me do it" defense might have a point in some real cases. Doctors would have to be trained in recognizing demon possession,because if its real they would encounter it. But what we find is the opposite.
While it was widely accepted in the past, advances in the sciences and medical treatment rejected it.
It was not the case that it was ignored and not considered as a possibility. It passed from being a consensus idea to a fringe idea.
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
As for their being no evidence of the existence of demons--well, you've not seen any. And those who have, or believe they have, generally have much better things to do with their time than try to design rigorous double blind scientific studies to prove the existence of such creatures to everybody who's curious.
I understand an isolated minister or priest would not have the time nor the resources. But a church?
If this is real, what is the problem with proving it? If its real people who are endangered by this would need good reasons to take it seriously.
Failing to provide them is not helpful.
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif)
Seriously? (Cough, sputter, choke) Sorry. It's just that that is so far the reverse of what I'm used to... In my admittedly not - comprehensive experience, if an outside-the-culture missionary gains such respect ( in spiritual things--I'm not talking about economic or political power, which an outsider can easily have from day one) but as I was saying, if they get consulted for spiritual matters instead of the local indigeneous shaman, it's because they've earned it. Spirituality is usually so "interior" to a culture, to consult a yet-unknown outside missionary is very like asking him/her for advice on how to make grandma's soup.
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
Holy crosspost, Batman! This post here is in response to your second, then. The practical problems of organizing such research are immense, as I indicated upthread. I agree in principle that scientific proof would be a lovely thing to have, but no church I know of (except possibly Rome) has the financial and political power to organize any such study ( which would have to include a massive number of people, as I explained before). And the ethical issues would still remain. What priest, what Christian would be willing to withhold treatment from suffering people in the control group? And see to it that nobody else outside the study offered help either?
Uhuh, won't work. It's like trying to study prayer for healing. Even if you could personally refrain from praying for someone in the interests of science, you can bet their friends and relatives won't observe your restriction.
Posted by Ikkyu (# 15207) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
Seriously? (Cough, sputter, choke) Sorry. It's just that that is so far the reverse of what I'm used to... In my admittedly not - comprehensive experience, if an outside-the-culture missionary gains such respect ( in spiritual things--I'm not talking about economic or political power, which an outsider can easily have from day one) but as I was saying, if they get consulted for spiritual matters instead of the local indigeneous shaman, it's because they've earned it. Spirituality is usually so "interior" to a culture, to consult a yet-unknown outside missionary is very like asking him/her for advice on how to make grandma's soup.
You are actually strengthening my point. If the person has earned "spiritual" respect. The people asking for help are a lot closer to being Christians, than would be good for IngoB's point.
Which was I believe that the fact that Christian exorcism "works" for non Christians strengthens the case for the either the existence of Demons or it not being a Christian issue.
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
Isn't it correct that demons have been internalized, or if you like, psychologized? So there has been a kind of secularization.
I remember in training, studying the 'inner saboteur', also given other names, which can be a tremendously malevolent force inside some people; also these forces often seem autonomous, beyond our control. There are many techniques for dealing with them.
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
Ikkyu--I wasn't at all addressing whether exorcism "works" for non-Christians. I assume it can (should we place all Jesus' subjects in the already-converted camp?) but one would hope the helped person would go on to consider the claims of Christ. (else, as pointed out above, he/she might be at risk for a re-infestation.)
The people who contacted us were in no sense close to becoming Christians. Far from it. But they were pragmatists, and they saw a source of power they thought they could access, er, control. Quite sensible, really, given that we would of course have done it for free, and if it failed they would have been no worse off.
Posted by ChastMastr (# 716) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Penny S:
If they are there, and they are destroying lives, then there is a failure of the way the world is set up.
Well, yes; this is known as The Fall, and applies to all sorts of things other than malevolent discarnate spirits.
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Rather, the depiction derives from what that culture saw as looking wicked or scary - hence venomous creatures - snakes, toads - or spiky looking ones - bats etc.
That isn't to deny the underlying reality, of course.
Indeed. I agree with Lewis, and prefer bats to bureaucrats.
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
You could probably perform an exorcism without believing in demons.
I, er, wouldn't advise trying something like that. ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
I would think the number of restless dead people would be legion.
Hopefully they eventually, you know, rest. I feel sorry for them.
quote:
... I really think there's almost always a logical explanation for any close encounters with restless dead people.
Well, of course there is; they're restless dead people. That's quite logical. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
That being the case, you'd expect to find little demonic activity in a geographical location that is pretty much saturated with Christians.
I'm not sure I agree in this specific case, unless you mean visible/spooky/paranormal demonic activity, rather than general (and arguably nastier in the long run) temptation. But a lot of it may depend on the culture and context, so in one place, using spooky stuff may be the tactic, and in another, nudging people toward a self-satisfied materialism.
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
They ultimately decided that the price was too high to pay, and decided to move house instead, in the hopes that the demons would be too stupid to follow them.
I often wonder how that worked out.
*facepalm* Well... at least they did count the cost. You'd think that this would be a no-brainer, but, well...
quote:
Originally posted by Ikkyu:
If we are talking about a real phenomenon. Why would you not want the government involved?
We believe Jesus is real, too, but we don't want a theocracy!
quote:
Originally posted by Ikkyu:
And the last time it was government policy to take demons seriously it resulted in witch burning, not an example we want to repeat.
I think you've answered your own question here. If the price of having this in government hands is witch hunting and burning, then it's too high a price to pay. But there's arguably a great big thread to unpack there too, with the matter of the church using the weapons of this world, and the corruption which has ensued as a result.
Many of us believe that orthodoxy is a good and real thing, and that heresy is a bad and real thing, but that doesn't mean we want the government messing about in that. Centuries of history have shown that that's a spectacularly horrible idea.
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
I But they were pragmatists, and they saw a source of power they thought they could access, er, control.
Reminds me of Simon the sorcerer from Acts. There's something really sad about all of that. The idea that healing and love is available, but it's just seen as another source of power... ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Posted by ChastMastr (# 716) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Ikkyu:
At least not better evidence that that for the existence of Fairies.
Fairies would be another thread, I think.
Posted by The Silent Acolyte (# 1158) on
:
In my work I don't spend any time talking about what I call "History Channel" religion. You know the sort: breathless dramas masquerading as documentaries about Jesus' lost brother, or wife, or the ossuary containing the mortal remains of James or Judas or whomever or how the church hid the lost gospels. Still less do I waste my or my clients' time talking about The Exorcist or diocesan exorcisms. All that teevee dreck is designed to sell eyeballs to advertisers, among which I included the Beeb and enn-pee-r.
The high profile, 36-point headline demons are distracting entertainment for most people, and really beside the point. Monster movies with a thin shiny veneer of religious cred troweled on.
From the fourth century, Evagrius laid out a demonic schema that is decidedly retail, low rent, and utterly lacking in Big Screen Appeal. But, it is utterly practical and life reforming.
The demons are lazy sons of bitches. They plant an idea and then they let us run with it. They allow us to do all the heavy lifting ourselves while they return to bed.
The Eight Thoughts are these:- Gluttony
- Greed
- Lust
- Sadness
- Anger
- Despondency
- Pride
- Vainglory
Mark the Ascetic identifies the process by which these demons inveigle themselves into our minds:- Provocation
- Disturbance of the intellect
- Entertainment (in the sense of entertaining a guest)
- Assent
- Prepossession
- Passion
Pace Lamb Chopped, the demons are most active when Christians are working hardest. And, they are most vicious (vice-promoting) when most quotidian.
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by ChastMastr:
quote:
Originally posted by Ikkyu:
At least not better evidence that that for the existence of Fairies.
Fairies would be another thread, I think.
Was in Newfoundland a decade ago, walking the East Coast Trail in the south of the Avalon Peninsula, staying Bed and Breakfasts in the rain and wind, all of it recommended.
One utterly desolate day we sat in a room overlooking Pee-pee Island and its Arse Leg Point (not making that up), when then the CBC had a noon call-in show where people called in for advice on dealing with the fairies that were giving their babies colic, souring the milk, giving them impotence and otherwise wilting the cabbages. They weren't describing nice little Disney creatures, but little devilish demons every bit as demony as your regular non-Newf forked tailed horny demons. We were chuckling about it all, but dummied up our seriousness when it became apparent that our hosts were as convinced about fairies as their pope was about his infallibility.
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
When I said "demons are more active in places where there are few or no Christians," I was referring of course to the kind of spooky activity most people automatically think of as demonic. I have no doubt demons are involved in ordinary temptation etc, but there it's so hard to tease apart what is due to them and what is due to the world and to our own weak flesh that it really isn't worth it anyway, is it? You just have to get on with it, with the help of God. Then, too, this is an area where formal exorcism is rarely employed, probably because it's so hard to distinguish where the temptation is coming from (though if I have my suspicions raised for some particular occasion, I admit I do ask Jesus if he'd be so kind as to have a word with whatever is harassing me, and tell it to go away).
Perhaps I should have said the activity of demons is more out-in-the-open in the absence of many Christians.
Posted by ChastMastr (# 716) on
:
As an important side note, most of us who believe in demons aren't like this guy.
Posted by Eirenist (# 13343) on
:
We carry our own personal demons around within us. If they gain control we are in Hell.
Posted by Raptor Eye (# 16649) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Eirenist:
We carry our own personal demons around within us. If they gain control we are in Hell.
What do you think the nature of these personal demons is? Where do they come from?
Posted by Palimpsest (# 16772) on
:
I'm skeptical about demons except as a metaphor for personal internal dysfunction. So I am surprised to meet so many believers.
Do demons have free will? Can they be saved? Can they be destroyed?
Posted by Truman White (# 17290) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
I believe in the existence of demons, but that almost everything that people imagine to be demonisation or demonic activity today is not.
I've been on the receiving end of being discerned as having a "Jezebellic spirit", which you can read about at length in books like this and this. They list various supposed "symptoms", all of them subjective, some of them contradictory, and none of them based on any clear biblical exegesis. This "discernment" cost me, well, a lot.
I've done a bit of "pastoral" or if you like, recovery work with people who've been in your shoes. Taking a more objective, outside the situation looking in sort of view I reckon the people who most often express the character of the "Jezebal spirit" are them what most often discern it.
Hope you've recovered.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
I'm skeptical about demons except as a metaphor for personal internal dysfunction. So I am surprised to meet so many believers.
I am too - totally sceptical. In fact, I can see no reason whatever for their existence, or for me to believe that they may exist.
Posted by Chorister (# 473) on
:
Doesn't 'Jezebel Spirit' just mean 'you think differently to me and I can't cope with people who insist on doing that'!!
Posted by Ikkyu (# 15207) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
I'm skeptical about demons except as a metaphor for personal internal dysfunction. So I am surprised to meet so many believers.
I am too - totally sceptical. In fact, I can see no reason whatever for their existence, or for me to believe that they may exist.
![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
Posted by Mudfrog (# 8116) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
I'm skeptical about demons except as a metaphor for personal internal dysfunction. So I am surprised to meet so many believers.
I am too - totally sceptical. In fact, I can see no reason whatever for their existence, or for me to believe that they may exist.
Do they have to have a reason to exist?
Why can we not just accept that there is an order of creation that we know nothing about.
I myself wish that wasps did not exist. I can see no point to them except to torment me in August.
Neither can I see the point of those flies that only live for a day; what's that about? Why bother?
But then I realise that I, as a mere creature, should not be so arrogant as to say to God: I can't see the point for spiritual creatures so I don't believe you created them.
Posted by Palimpsest (# 16772) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
I'm skeptical about demons except as a metaphor for personal internal dysfunction. So I am surprised to meet so many believers.
I am too - totally sceptical. In fact, I can see no reason whatever for their existence, or for me to believe that they may exist.
Do they have to have a reason to exist?
Why can we not just accept that there is an order of creation that we know nothing about.
I myself wish that wasps did not exist. I can see no point to them except to torment me in August.
Neither can I see the point of those flies that only live for a day; what's that about? Why bother?
But then I realise that I, as a mere creature, should not be so arrogant as to say to God: I can't see the point for spiritual creatures so I don't believe you created them.
You're eliding reasons for believing things exist with the purpose of things that exist. I believe wasps exists, despite them not being directly useful to me. They may be part of some complicated ecology that is involved in producing the food I eat. But there's ample evidence they exist.
As for your question
quote:
Why can we not just accept that there is an order of creation that we know nothing about.
Why so modest? Why not just accept that there are billions of orders of creation that we know nothing about and have no evidence exist. Maybe they're all true. But until evidence shows up, I'll not assume they exist.
Posted by Teufelchen (# 10158) on
:
To apply Ockham's Razor: There is no observable phenomenon which can be explained with a demon that cannot be better and more simply explained without a demon.
So for practical purposes, they don't exist, any more than phlogiston or luminiferous ether.
t
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on
:
"Better" is a matter of opinion.
And I am at present teaching a class of high schoolers online from ca .2000 miles away. I suspect that my students could make precisely the same argument against my existence.
On the internet, no one knows you're a demon (English teacher). ![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
Posted by mousethief (# 953) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
The Twilight book series has sold over 100 million copies, because that many people are pleasantly thrilled to imagine vampires are real.
Does not follow. I like stories about fairies but I don't imagine for an instant that they're real. They just make for good stories. Just because someone enjoys books about vampires doesn't mean they imagine they're real. Indeed, the same delighted readers might be horrified to imagine that vampires were actually real. Some things are more enjoyable when you know they have no possibility of existing.
Posted by Eirenist (# 13343) on
:
IMV, a 'demon' is that part of us that is out of tune with God. Nazi Germany, to take one example, shows what happens when demons get together and take over a nation.
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on
:
On "casting out" in general, I was well advised by my counselling supervisor (a Christian who counselled, rather than a "Christian counsellor") that she had spent months and months aiding the recovery of folks who had had "things" cast out of them which were never there in the first place. The dangers of incoherent and contradictory definitions, and false confidence that "you know" that someone is afflicted in this way are very real.
On Jezebel or Jezebellic Spirit, I think Truman White is right in this quote
quote:
Taking a more objective, outside the situation looking in sort of view I reckon the people who most often express the character of the "Jezebal spirit" are them what most often discern it.
Simply put, what is described as a Jezebel spirit is "a single minded determination to have one's own way, no matter who or what is destroyed in the process". Used by someone in spiritual authority, it can be used to damage and disempower divergent thinking, which is always characterised as undermining or rebellion.
Beware of those who brook no opposition. Such people are a danger to themselves and others. Are they demonised? I'd rather describe them as suffering from the great sin of pride. That way we can all recognise the dangers to ourselves of a misuse of authority. Particular if we have authority ourselves.
[ 18. March 2015, 09:17: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on
:
Thanks Truman White for your sympathy. I think I've recovered as much as I'm ever going to, but I don't think I'm ever going to be the way I was.
I often compare the experience to suffering a career-ending sporting injury: you can never play again, but that doesn't mean you have nothing to contribute to the sport.
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Simply put, what is described as a Jezebel spirit is "a single minded determination to have one's own way, no matter who or what is destroyed in the process".
That is one way of summarizing what is popularly meant by a Jezebel spirit, but I think the biblical evidence for it is flimsy to say the least, and that in practice the accusation is a blunt instrument for getting rid of someone with whom you disagree. It's best countered not in spiritual terms but in common-sense ones.
Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on
:
It's probably clear already that I agree with Eutychus' last para, but there is no harm in reinforcing it. Control freaks do precisely what Eutychus says. They just feel threatened or insulted by those who diverge from their own views. They know better what's right than "mere underlings". Pride, as I said.
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
Indeed ...
Meanwhile, apologies for being picky, but truly spiritual solutions will tend to be 'common sense' ones.
You can be spiritual and 'common sense' at one and the same time, of course. Lots of people are.
It's the combination of 'super-spirituality' and spiritual pride - what the Russians call 'prelest' - which is the toxic mix.
I agree with Truman White, Barnabas62 and Eutychus on this one ...
In terms of whether demons or angels 'exist' in the traditional sense of how they've been envisaged - well yes, I am prepared to accept that they do - but with various caveats and corollaries.
If I said that someone was suffering from their own 'personal demons' I wouldn't necessarily be envisaging some kind of demonic possession or malignant spiritual forces - I may simply be referring to some kind of self-destructive trajectory that they are on through a combination of factors - which may range from addictions to poor life choices to adverse social conditions and influences and much else besides ...
In other contexts, I might well be referring to demons as traditionally understood - but, as we've discussed upthread, certainly not malicious entities with imp-like features and horns/wings etc.
I still think that Nigel Wright's 'anti-matter' or 'anti-personality' analogy has much to commend it ... but as with any of these things we have to tread carefully along the bounds of speculation.
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
It's worth pointing out that the notion of the internal saboteur, or inner critic (given many other names) has been the focus of considerable work in psychotherapy. In fact, with some clients, learning to deal with such hostile internal forces may be a big part of the therapy; and it is often difficult and painful work. One of the paradoxes that is found is that some people are very attached to their own 'demons', and are loath to let go of them.
Another point of interest is the connection between internal malevolence and external, for example, how much has been internalized.
[ 18. March 2015, 11:22: Message edited by: quetzalcoatl ]
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I still think that Nigel Wright's 'anti-matter' or 'anti-personality' analogy has much to commend it
If Satan is a created entity, he is not an "anti-entity". Beware dualism.
Posted by Belle Ringer (# 13379) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
Simply put, what is described as a Jezebel spirit is "a single minded determination to have one's own way, no matter who or what is destroyed in the process".
...in practice the accusation is a blunt instrument for getting rid of someone with whom you disagree. It's best countered not in spiritual terms but in common-sense ones.
Yes.
In my experience, when someone wants to force you down or force you to leave, they use un-disprovable accusations, knowing many will assume "where there's smoke there's fire." It's a power play with no truth behind it. Happens in business world too, backstabbing competition with vague, un-disprovable accusations that, if true, would make the victim a poor choice for the promotion, management often won't take the risk. It works is why it's done.
If someone really thought you were plagued with an unholy spirit they would feel sorry for you and try to help, not accuse! The lack of compassion is good indication it's a this-world power play.
Unfortunately, we often internalize the accusation, especially if it's repeated a lot. I was damaged in by the childhood local TEC church's insistence women are spiritually forbidden to be develop any talents other than housekeeping and childrearing. That makes any career excellence "wrong."
But God is in the healing business. Might take a long time, might be in steps, but the result is being healthier than before the damage. I will never again fully trust any church, but that is much healthier than the mindless unquestioning trust I was taught! People who see you getting free will try to pull you back into their own unhealth, but you'll be better able to shrug off the accusations and stay focused on enjoying God.
Don't assume you are permanently damaged. Don't look back to who you were before and wish to return. Ask God to help you become the person God had in mind when making you. It will be a bit different than who you were, more amazing.
Disclainer, I am not a counselor, just a former victim of "jezebel spirit" and related put-downs.
Posted by Truman White (# 17290) on
:
What Belle Ringer said. And what Silent Acolyte said. St Ignatius had a hat full of stuff to say about demons, but in the context of the "good" and "bad" spirit. He's got some ideas on discerning spiritual influences, based on the notion that, in his world view, spiritual beings can work through natural processes. It's like we are in a sort of Eco-system which contains both. All quite subtle.
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Why can we not just accept that there is an order of creation that we know nothing about?
Wisdom and knowledge may intercept, but they are two different things.
I think it's wise to deal with reality. Which is difficult enough. There is no point blaming something on a 'demon' when there are plenty of real, difficult, psychological, physical, emotional, sociological and intellectual reasons for the way we behave.
Lets begin to deal with them before we start making up supernatural causes.
Posted by Truman White (# 17290) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
Why can we not just accept that there is an order of creation that we know nothing about?
Wisdom and knowledge may intercept, but they are two different things.
I think it's wise to deal with reality. Which is difficult enough. There is no point blaming something on a 'demon' when there are plenty of real, difficult, psychological, physical, emotional, sociological and intellectual reasons for the way we behave.
Lets begin to deal with them before we start making up supernatural causes.
Historically, it's the sense of the supernatural that came first. We've developed a stack of other ways of understanding our experience - doesn't mean we need to chuck out our understanding of a world with a spiritual dimension. You can work with both.
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
I am not saying that Satan is 'anti-entity' -nor do I think Wright is saying that - if I understand him correctly. Rather it's an anti-person thing - in both senses of that term. It is a long time since I read the book though. I wouldn't accuse either Walker or Wright of dualism.
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on
:
My point still stands. If you define Satan, demons, etc. only as a negative, being the "opposite" of something else, you risk compromising the historic biblical notion that they are created beings.
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
I can understand your concern, Eutychus but this isn't how Wright's argument - endorsed by Walker - came over to me.
If I understood them correctly, they both accept that the Devil and his legions are created beings - but not beings as we conventionally understand them.
'This is life Jim, but not as we know it.'
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Truman White:
Historically, it's the sense of the supernatural that came first. We've developed a stack of other ways of understanding our experience - doesn't mean we need to chuck out our understanding of a world with a spiritual dimension. You can work with both.
The key word here is 'developed'. There are many, many things which were thought - in ancient times - to be of supernatural origin. They were not, but it was certainly the best explanation they had at the time.
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by Truman White:
Historically, it's the sense of the supernatural that came first. We've developed a stack of other ways of understanding our experience - doesn't mean we need to chuck out our understanding of a world with a spiritual dimension. You can work with both.
The key word here is 'developed'. There are many, many things which were thought - in ancient times - to be of supernatural origin. They were not, but it was certainly the best explanation they had at the time.
Yes, I'm just reading a history of Henry VIII, and everything is seen as providence; so a miscarriage shows God's displeasure (although Henry is very good at twisting this to his own ends - God surely wants wife no. 4 got rid of). But you can also see an incipient secularism at work.
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
Yes, indeed - you can see a struggle with this in much 17th century biographical writing too - and in letters and journals.
Mind you, Oliver Cromwell could still say, in all seriousness, 'God gave them as stubble to our swords ...'
Posted by Truman White (# 17290) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by Truman White:
Historically, it's the sense of the supernatural that came first. We've developed a stack of other ways of understanding our experience - doesn't mean we need to chuck out our understanding of a world with a spiritual dimension. You can work with both.
The key word here is 'developed'. There are many, many things which were thought - in ancient times - to be of supernatural origin. They were not, but it was certainly the best explanation they had at the time.
I see where you're coming from Boogle - yeah, there was stuff previous generations could
only account for supernaturally which we can account for through a fuller understanding of natural processes. The point's a tad more subtle. If we accept that effects we experience can be a combination of both natural and supernatural - or if you like material and immaterial - or physical and spiritual (take yer pick) you can get a richer view of reality.
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
That's fine in theory, Truman White - and I don't particularly have a problem with it - but the tricky part comes in how we work this out in practice.
I s'pose this is where 'discernment' comes in ... although in my experience those who most loudly claim to have that patently don't ...
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
None of these things are an exact science. How do we know where the 'spiritual' ends and the 'natural' begins, for instance?
Eutychus has warned about Dualism.
It's all too easy for those wedded to a particularly supernaturalist view of reality to fall into that trap.
No names or pack drill, but my brother-in-law and myself were quite taken aback the other week when a friend from our old restorationist house-church days posted something on a particular social media forum complaining that she was feeling rather languid and depressed - for no apparent reason.
Alongside some sane and practical advice - have a cuppa, go for a walk etc - plenty of her pals came on urging her to 'rebuke Satan' or defy the demons and so on ..
![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif)
Some people spiritualise absolutely everything.
I'm not including present company in that but it's something that certain strands of evangelical charismatic spirituality are all too prone to do. There are equivalents within popular Catholicism too, of course ...
I suspect the mileage varies for each of us, but I'm intrigued as to where we draw the line.
Posted by JeremiahTheProphet (# 18366) on
:
I have read this post with interest and would like to say that my own view would be basically in line with Eutychus & Gamalial's perspective so won't repeat their comments but would like to add that
a] As a Christian we have to accept that there is such a thing as evil and there are spiritual forces either behind & influencing some of that. Those spiritual forces are described in the bible as demons
b] Jesus quite clearly believed in their existence but dealt with people suffering from their influence with love and compassion
c] The bible describes "The love of money as the root of all kinds of evil" and in my own experience have come across a circumstance in business where very unpleasant forces (that I would rather not post about on a public forum) motivated by the love of money were influencing a person in an extremely destructive way. I therefore think that particularly in the west demons (or whatever term you want to use) are much more active in this area than the more sensational stuff your read and hear about
Posted by Truman White (# 17290) on
:
@ Gamaliel. Spooky. I nearly finished my last post by saying "As my old mate Gamaliel might say, it's less either or, and more both and." .
Agree with you mate, discerning the spiritual isn't a science. In my book, spiritual discernment is closer to moral than physical sense. Most rational people recognises there's a realm in which we make choices about what's fundamentally right and wrong as opposed to just what's expedient. Honest people of good will come to different decisions about plenty of issues in that realm which you can't resolve through a universally recognised process or decision-making tool. Same with the spiritual realm I reckon. You can agree there is a spiritual realm that's an influence on us - the fact it can be hard work understanding what's going on there doesn't make it any less real.
How we understand the influence of one on t'other - is that a tangent or a new thread?
Posted by Truman White (# 17290) on
:
@Jeremiah. I reckon it was Roger Forster who reckoned "Mammon" was a spiritual power as well as a general description of the panaply of wealth and its influence. Sounds like you'd both have something to talk about on that one.
Posted by JeremiahTheProphet (# 18366) on
:
Truman Ive not come across Roger Forster but it is something I feel quite strongly about and have experienced
Posted by Eutychus (# 3081) on
:
Welcome on board!
As I said upthread, what sticks in my mind about the biblical story of Jezebel is that it's all about getting one's hands on a juicy piece of real estate.
[edited to remedy idiocy]
[ 19. March 2015, 21:15: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
I'm skeptical about demons except as a metaphor for personal internal dysfunction. So I am surprised to meet so many believers.
Re your point about internal dysfunction, I've wondered if perhaps the attribution to others who behave oddly or evilly that a demon or the devil made them do it: isn't this a way to suggest to oneself that the person is not inherently evil, but rather, that they had a temporary problem. Thus, belief in demons controlling the behaviour of people could allow human groups and societies to reduce conflict by forgiving. Today we tend to say things like 'I wasn't myself today', 'I got up on the wrong side of the bed', or 'what got into him?'. All of which I think are ways of excusing conduct that appears contrary to a specific person's nature, or contrary to the nature of people in general. The leap to attributing it to demons is small.
Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on
:
Nothing 'spooky' whatsoever, of course Truman ...
I think most people have clocked my predictability by now ...
![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif)
Mind you, I don't think there's anything necessarily 'spooky' about a lot of alleged demonic activity.
It's not 'things that go bump in the night' that should cause the most concern but the sort of issues that JeremiahTheProphet has alluded to - corporate greed, nefarious pressures and practices in the work-place, issues and trends in societies that can lead to disfunctionality, oppression and violence ...
Those are harder issues to tackle and a few 'we rebuke you' prayers from earnest charismatics or sprinklings with holy water by diocesan exorcists aren't going to make that much impression on those ...
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Yes, indeed - you can see a struggle with this in much 17th century biographical writing too - and in letters and journals.
Mind you, Oliver Cromwell could still say, in all seriousness, 'God gave them as stubble to our swords ...'
I live near a church where some of the Putney Army Debates took place, after the civil war; all well and good, and part of God's plan, but when they started criticizing private property, not part of God's plan, and Cromwell closing them down, was!
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on
:
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
quote:
Originally posted by Palimpsest:
I'm skeptical about demons except as a metaphor for personal internal dysfunction. So I am surprised to meet so many believers.
Re your point about internal dysfunction, I've wondered if perhaps the attribution to others who behave oddly or evilly that a demon or the devil made them do it: isn't this a way to suggest to oneself that the person is not inherently evil, but rather, that they had a temporary problem. Thus, belief in demons controlling the behaviour of people could allow human groups and societies to reduce conflict by forgiving. Today we tend to say things like 'I wasn't myself today', 'I got up on the wrong side of the bed', or 'what got into him?'. All of which I think are ways of excusing conduct that appears contrary to a specific person's nature, or contrary to the nature of people in general. The leap to attributing it to demons is small.
Interesting that in modern psychotherapy, we have the idea of 'the autonomy of internal objects', meaning roughly that that malevolent force inside you is, well, autonomous. But we can still chase the bugger out of hiding, and neutralize him/her. But I've sat in a room in a cold sweat at the sheer malevolence of someone's internal foe; I thought I was in The Exorcist.
Posted by Martin60 (# 368) on
:
IngoB has got my mind right again. Not in polarization. If I bow the knee to Mary's and Jesus' accounts of good and bad Archangels, which I must, then I MUST to angels including the fallen.
It's like the monarchy. With my rationality it's absurd. Supernatural creatures are unbelievable, unnecessary, explain nothing, make reality unreal, inaccessible, un-parsimoniously complicated.
What are they FOR? That's rhetorical. Sheer diversity I suppose.
© Ship of Fools 2016
UBB.classicTM
6.5.0