homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   »   » Oblivion   » Exorcism (Page 1)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Exorcism
Kaplan Corday
Shipmate
# 16119

 - Posted      Profile for Kaplan Corday         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
This could be written off as just another one of countless oddities available online from the religious fringe, but it has been picked up here in Australia and run on SBS news, as well as used in a Fairfax press Odd Spot.

In fact, exorcism per se cannot be easily dismissed on the grounds that it is theologically and ecclesiastically downmarket, since it is taken seriously by the RCC, not just various Protestant conservatives.

To most of those - not just evangelicals - who claim to take the Bible seriously, the whole question of demon possession is, let’s face it, a bit embarrassing.

On the face of it, Jesus seems to have believed in demons, and claimed to exorcise them.

Many of us therefore theoretically believe in the phenomenon, but prefer to take the safe way out, and assume that anyone manifesting possibly demonic symptoms is in fact psychiatrically disturbed, and needs professional medical assistance, not an exorcist.

The exceptions, in the West at least, are some penties who see demons everywhere (or used to; I am a bit out of touch with the Pentecostal scene these days, but get the impression that looking for demons under every rock is far less common now than in the past).

I realize we have run this before, but perhaps this latest public airing justifies a rerun.

Any comments on the exegetical / theological / psychiatric issues involved?

Anyone had any direct experience, for good or ill, at a pastoral level?

[ 31. January 2014, 06:49: Message edited by: Ancient Mariner ]

Posts: 3355 | Registered: Jan 2011  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I believe there's a difference between demonisation and psychiatric or other illness, though the two may overlap.

For me exorcism is pretty much like healing. Occurs much more rarely than thought, and most where least noise is made about it.

And demons don't tend to be the bulging-eyes-and-sulfurous-breath type. They have moved on since the Middle Ages.

[ 31. January 2014, 05:26: Message edited by: Eutychus ]

--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy

Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768

 - Posted      Profile for Penny S     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
LBC 97.3, a London based phone-in radio station discussed this yesterday, and it was notable that practically all the calls (all those I heard) were from people from a culture that believed in djinn possession - not necessarily as practicing as you might expect, at least one from a secular and sceptical background.
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009  |  IP: Logged
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110

 - Posted      Profile for Barnabas62   Email Barnabas62   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Well, I know a retired Anglican diocesan exorcist, a very funny and well-grounded man, who took his role seriously, himself a good deal less so, and left the role with his already good reputation significantly enhanced.

He seemed to be able to "spot the difference", also offer advice, take actions, which worked well whether the cause was psychological, or to use Luther's analogy, malevolent "birds flying round the head, trying to nest in the hair".

I have had one experience of this; an emergency call from a friend to help him with a distressing and frightening experience he was going through right at that time with a mutual friend of ours, who we both thought was very sane. What helped in that situation was the use of some lines from the Catholic rite of exorcism, which I'd happened across in some very recent personal study of this conundrum. Basically, I was sceptical. My counselling supervisor, a profoundly wise Christian women, said that she spent months counselling people who had "things cast out of them which were, in my opinion, never there in the first place". That had served me well as a touchstone.

But this situation really seemed different. I didn't really know what to do. But I recalled those lines from the Catholic rite. Used some of them. But I didn't thunder them out, or use other physical demonstrations. The words were a bidding of anything evil which was was causing disturbance and distress to depart. I spoke them very quietly. And the person who was behaving very bizarrly calmed down. No revolving heads, sulphurous breaths, changes in temperature! Something changed.

I now think there is something in the idea of "coming in the opposite spirit to what seems to be going on". If it seems to be deception, truth. If there is noise, quiet. If there is bizarre, normal. This would seem to be valuable whether what is happening is inner disturbance or some strange malevolent influence. It is a different sort of confronting. The aim is for folks to be restored, to become again "in their right minds". Tossing dramatic verbal and physical hand-grenades about in already volatile situations doesn't really seem to cut it. Still, small voices of calm seem better than earthquake, wind and fire.

[ 31. January 2014, 08:31: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]

--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?

Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
I now think there is something in the idea of "coming in the opposite spirit to what seems to be going on". If it seems to be deception, truth. If there is noise, quiet. If there is bizarre, normal. This would seem to be valuable whether what is happening is inner disturbance or some strange malevolent influence. It is a different sort of confronting.

That doesn't really answer the question of whether demonisation is simply the ancient diagnosis of psychiatric disorder or something else entirely.

There is no doubt in my mind that people's expectations about how their afflictions may be resolved contributes hugely. I used to "exorcise" a Congolese lady in our church with resounding success; the same tactics on someone from a less, um, spirited background failed completely.

Does this mean there were demons in the first case and not the second, or neither, or both? I'm not sure, but I do think the demonic inhabits different bits of the psyche depending on our culture, background etc.

--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy

Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322

 - Posted      Profile for Enoch   Email Enoch   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
This may surprise, or even slightly shock, some Shipmates in other parts of the world, but every diocese in the CofE has to have an official exorcist who is first port of call for any pastoral issues that could involve that sort of thing. I'm also under the impression that clergy are not allowed to try and deal with this themselves on their own initiative.

--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson

Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110

 - Posted      Profile for Barnabas62   Email Barnabas62   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
That doesn't really answer the question of whether demonisation is simply the ancient diagnosis of psychiatric disorder or something else entirely.

Quite right. That's because, certainly in my case, I'm not sure in any individual case whether I would know.

I watch too much classic TV. In recent re-run of an episode of "The Practice" your point re the Congolese woman was illustrated perfectly. A Catholic priest performs an exorcism on a woman who did indeed believe she was possessed, in the belief that it might help her. He thought her problems were probably psychological, but went with the grain of her apparent need. Unfortunately, she dies of a heart attack as a direct result of the exorcism. The moral and ethical and legal dilemmas of this were pretty informative.

I am pretty sure that the temptations, trials and evils of this world are a mixture of external and internal influences, some of which may not be "of this world". Something to reflect on is the line from the Lord's Prayer. "Lead us not into temptation (do not put us to the test) but deliver us from evil". That daily prayer seems a pretty powerful reminder of both internal and external influences, even though we may not be able to figure out which is which, or how much of either is involved. Traditional belief in the efficacy of exorcism needs to be tempered with a clear understanding of our complex psychology. That does not eliminate the possibility of malevolent evil, but ought to make us cautious, look for responses which will help "whatever".

In this area, Eutychus, I am reverently agnostic! I don't know for sure what the Hell is going on, or what part Hell might have to play in it.

[ 31. January 2014, 09:44: Message edited by: Barnabas62 ]

--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?

Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
que sais-je
Shipmate
# 17185

 - Posted      Profile for que sais-je   Email que sais-je   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
And demons don't tend to be the bulging-eyes-and-sulfurous-breath type. They have moved on since the Middle Ages.

So what do they look these days?

--------------------
"controversies, disputes, and argumentations, both in philosophy and in divinity, if they meet with discreet and peaceable natures, do not infringe the laws of charity" (Thomas Browne)

Posts: 794 | From: here or there | Registered: Jun 2012  |  IP: Logged
Penny S
Shipmate
# 14768

 - Posted      Profile for Penny S     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Small and grey with large black oval eyes?
Posts: 5833 | Registered: May 2009  |  IP: Logged
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649

 - Posted      Profile for Raptor Eye     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Someone I know well insists that his 'dabbles' into spiritualism, ouija boards, etc opened him up to 'familiar spirits' which had made their home with him without him knowing it. He was surprised when he first came to faith and found himself writhing on the ground 'like a snake' as people prayed for him. It took years before he was rid of all of them. He didn't and doesn't suffer with mental illness, and although he did drink and take drugs up until that time, he assures me he was not under the influence at the time.

I don't know what to think. I keep an open mind.

--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10

Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011  |  IP: Logged
Jack o' the Green
Shipmate
# 11091

 - Posted      Profile for Jack o' the Green   Email Jack o' the Green   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I used to be quite an avid reader of supposed true accounts of exorcism. Books like Malachi Martin's 'Hostage to the Devil' and M Scott Peck's 'Glimpses of the Devil'. They never convinced me. Martin was a pathological liar - even Peck who was 'mentored' by him acknowledged that. Martin's accounts are so fantastic they can't be taken seriously. Peck's book is rather worrying. The criteria which he uses for discerning a case of 'true' possession is laughable and very disturbing coming from a psychiatrist. I don't think it was a coincidence that most of the members of the exorcism teams were male, while both of the 'patients' were female and spent much of the time tied up. I couldn't see anything in his accounts which couldn't be explained in terms of known psychological processes.

As to Jesus' belief in demons, it was typical of Jews from that time and place i.e. first century northern Palestine. It's probably no coincidence that other famous exorcists such as Honi the Circle Drawer and Hanina Ben Dosa came from a similar time and place, and that John's Gospel which is far more focused on Jerusalem has no exorcisms.

[ 31. January 2014, 18:56: Message edited by: Yonatan ]

Posts: 3121 | From: Lancashire, England | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by que sais-je:
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
And demons don't tend to be the bulging-eyes-and-sulfurous-breath type. They have moved on since the Middle Ages.

So what do they look these days?
Well my wholly unsupported, fanciful, probably heretical and vastly generalised take is roughly as follows:

Now that psychiatry and stuff has come along and doctors are all a bunch of rationalists, demons have lost their traditional way of terrorising people, so any power they might have once had in that realm is severly diminished. This is no fun for them. After all, nobody likes to be made fun of, especially when fear is your stock in trade.

So I reckon one place they hang out is churches that pooh-pooh psychology. Not so much in the exorcisms (at least not on the deliverance end) but in the worship, the teaching, and the abusive leadership practices. These type of churches don't tend to approve of people mocking hyperspirituality, so the demons get on just fine.

I think they've also taken up residence in all the dehumanised spaces of contemporary vast and sprawling institutions and bureaucracies. Nobody makes fun of them there, either, because they simply fade into the prevailing grey and nobody ever wanted to laugh at anything in an administration anyway, so they can just suck the life out of everyone. People will come and go, but the institution and its "spirit" live on.

Finally, there are probably a fair chunk lurking in the mainstream media (remember that in The Gravedigger File, the senior demon is in the process of being transferred from Moscow to Los Angeles) ensuring that viewers live in a mixture of fear, confusion and vapid entertainment.

In the main, these new roles are much less overt and more a case of the long con rather than the smash and grab, but I think the end results are pretty much the same. I'm not sure exorcisms are much good at getting rid of this type, though. Perhaps prayer and fasting...?

--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy

Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238

 - Posted      Profile for Crœsos     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
This could be written off as just another one of countless oddities available online from the religious fringe, but it has been picked up here in Australia and run on SBS news, as well as used in a Fairfax press Odd Spot.

I'm not sure what's so odd or fringey about it. Once you've posited that there are invisible, malevolent spirits that can take control of human beings and that such spirits can be "cast out" using verbal commands, why is " . . . and you can do it over Skype!" going too far?

--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto

Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574

 - Posted      Profile for Ad Orientem     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Personally I do believe in demons and that people can be possessed by them. I don't claim to have seen such a thing myself but the scriptures and the lives if the saints tell us that such is the case. The Church, it seems, was convinced enough to include "excorcist' among the orders.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013  |  IP: Logged
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110

 - Posted      Profile for Barnabas62   Email Barnabas62   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The etymology of malevolent is helpful. Having or demonstrating a wish to do evil to others. That wish to do evil is real enough, ubiquitous enough, whatever the causes may be.

Solzhenitsyn observed in "Gulag Archipelago 2", after the reawakening of his Orthodox faith while imprisoned in that "archipelago" himself, that religions strive with the evil inside human beings. That in all human beings, no matter how malevolent, there is some restorable area of good. And that in all human beings, no matter how good, there is some unhealed area of malevolence.

Whether we think evil is culturally defined or not, all human societies perceive a common area of socially dangerous behaviour and call it "bad-wishing" or something similar. They seek to counteract it because it is bad for the society. Most also see that it is bad for the person.

The social relativism dimension is only too obvious in the creation of the Gulags. Articles 58 of the old Soviet penal code was designed to root out counter-revolutionaries who were bad for society. It was worded so widely that it could be and was used, with deliberate malevolence, as an instrument of personal revenge, or state control. So it gave rise to all manner of evils, wreaked on millions of people who were not socially dangerous. This reality and the bitter personal experience of it, caused Solzhenitsyn (and many others) to look for deeper reasons for evil, older ways of wrestling with it. He regarded his imprisonment as a strange blessing from that point of view.

It taught him something he needed to re-discover; that social norms may themselves be sources of evil. And that warning certainly should be applied to both the superstitious use of exorcisms and the complacent ignoring of the reality of evil behaviour.

I quite like Eutychus's "heresy". It's a modern version of Lewis's well known "equal and opposite errors" concerning demons. They are equally happy with either an overweening, morbid, interest or a total ignoring. There is a lot of fanciful nonsense talked, and talked up, in this area. I'm pretty sure it is not all nonsense. At any rate, the use of prayer in the combating of evil is a regular part of my devotional life. The use of rituals of exorcism is not.

--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?

Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012

 - Posted      Profile for daronmedway     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
This may surprise, or even slightly shock, some Shipmates in other parts of the world, but every diocese in the CofE has to have an official exorcist who is first port of call for any pastoral issues that could involve that sort of thing. I'm also under the impression that clergy are not allowed to try and deal with this themselves on their own initiative.

Prayers for deliverance from evil, including from spirits which promote evil, are a normal part of liturgical and pastoral practice for priests within Anglicanism. I think the prohibition you mention specifically applies to cases of demonic occupation (i.e. possession), rather than oppression.
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
EtymologicalEvangelical
Shipmate
# 15091

 - Posted      Profile for EtymologicalEvangelical   Email EtymologicalEvangelical   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday
To most of those - not just evangelicals - who claim to take the Bible seriously, the whole question of demon possession is, let’s face it, a bit embarrassing.

I must admit that I don't really understand the logic of this comment. How can someone who "takes the Bible seriously" regard demon possession as "a bit embarrassing"?

I would have thought that someone who regards the latter as embarrassing would also have to regard the Bible as somewhat suspect.

The idea that Jesus simply went along with the views of his supposedly ignorant, primitive and deluded contemporaries, is a case of naturalistic special pleading driven by what CS Lewis called "chronological snobbery" without any basis in fact or evidence. Furthermore, it is theologically inadmissible, given the nature of Christ as "the Truth".

--------------------
You can argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome': but you neither can nor need argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome, but I'm not saying this is true'. CS Lewis

Posts: 3625 | From: South Coast of England | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
Kaplan Corday
Shipmate
# 16119

 - Posted      Profile for Kaplan Corday         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday
To most of those - not just evangelicals - who claim to take the Bible seriously, the whole question of demon possession is, let’s face it, a bit embarrassing.

I must admit that I don't really understand the logic of this comment. How can someone who "takes the Bible seriously" regard demon possession as "a bit embarrassing"?

I would have thought that someone who regards the latter as embarrassing would also have to regard the Bible as somewhat suspect.

The idea that Jesus simply went along with the views of his supposedly ignorant, primitive and deluded contemporaries, is a case of naturalistic special pleading driven by what CS Lewis called "chronological snobbery" without any basis in fact or evidence. Furthermore, it is theologically inadmissible, given the nature of Christ as "the Truth".

1. I believe the Bible to be the Word of God, and that it teaches that evil spirits exist, and that the Lord Jesus exorcised them.

2. I find the whole idea of belief in evil spirits embarrassing, and I bet I'm not the only one.

No doubt I shouldn't find it embarrassing, and no doubt, as you suggest, it exposes my captivity to another spirit,ie the zeitgeist, but as Doctor Johnson said, "Sensation is sensation".

Posts: 3355 | Registered: Jan 2011  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I'm not sure whether embarassment is appropriate, but I see no reason to own sensationalist portrayals of spiritual issues such as exorcism. Not everyone claiming to be an exorcist is one, and I expect that charlatans make for better TV.

--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy

Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641

 - Posted      Profile for chris stiles   Email chris stiles   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:

The idea that Jesus simply went along with the views of his supposedly ignorant, primitive and deluded contemporaries, is a case of naturalistic special pleading driven by what CS Lewis called "chronological snobbery" without any basis in fact or evidence.

I think there is a general shift in the understanding of what the demonic consists of in the few centuries prior to Jesus' coming. To that extent Jesus did 'go along' with the views of his contemporaries - with some exceptions.

I also believe that there was in all probability a rise in demonic activity around the incarnation - hence references to binding the strong man etc.

In any case, the spectacular tales of heads rotating, glowing eyes and projectile vomiting etc. mostly date from the middle ages, and I don't feel we need to assimilate them as part of our beliefs.

I suspect Eutychus mostly is correct in his diagnosis of where demons hang out these days - and there would be parallels here in Walter Wink's writings on The Powers. Similarly I would also see parallels in the work of Andrew Walls especially when it comes to how this picture varies across the world. There is a small taster here:

http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=2052

Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
EtymologicalEvangelical
Shipmate
# 15091

 - Posted      Profile for EtymologicalEvangelical   Email EtymologicalEvangelical   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles
In any case, the spectacular tales of heads rotating, glowing eyes and projectile vomiting etc. mostly date from the middle ages, and I don't feel we need to assimilate them as part of our beliefs.

I agree, along with certain depictions of hell.

However, while I believe we need to be extremely cautious in our diagnosis of moral and apparently psychological problems, I don't accept that the Bible supports the assumption that all instances of demonic activity in and through human beings should be understood as cases of mental and / or physical illness. I am certainly no advocate of the "pigs in the parlour" (or rather "parlor"!) approach (in which it seems almost everyone has a demon), but I have been coming round to the realisation that the theory of the influence of evil spirits seems worthy of serious investigation, given that certain problems seem so entrenched and irrational and seemingly beyond natural cure. Of course 'influence' does not necessarily mean 'possession' ("Get thee behind me Satan" is one bibical example of this, in which Peter came under the influence of the evil one, but was clearly not possessed).

--------------------
You can argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome': but you neither can nor need argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome, but I'm not saying this is true'. CS Lewis

Posts: 3625 | From: South Coast of England | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
Lord Jestocost
Shipmate
# 12909

 - Posted      Profile for Lord Jestocost   Email Lord Jestocost   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
London Review of Books has published a fascinating account of possession and exorcism following the Japanese tsunami.

Here I definitely incline towards the psychological explanation: the reaction of a particular cultural mindset to a specific event. (If the mass wipe-out of tens of thousands of people always led to this kind of thing regardless of background then the phenomenon would be better documented.) But, whether we're talking spirits or people's minds, it seems that the enormity of that tragedy tore open holes which Stuff was then able to come through, and it needed sensitive handling by a spiritually wise and mature individual to be healed.

Posts: 761 | From: The Instrumentality of Man | Registered: Aug 2007  |  IP: Logged
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641

 - Posted      Profile for chris stiles   Email chris stiles   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:

However, while I believe we need to be extremely cautious in our diagnosis of moral and apparently psychological problems, I don't accept that the Bible supports the assumption that all instances of demonic activity in and through human beings should be understood as cases of mental and / or physical illness.

Similarly I don't think we should necessarily assume things are either one or the other - I suspect that some instances of 'possession' are a hybrid of demonic activity laid over mental breakdown in a parasitic manner. I wonder itself if possession in and of itself is less of an effective tactic - for some of the reasons Eutychus describes - and so demonic activity tends to have somewhat different characteristics, as raw fear itself doesn't seem to be as effective.

I also suspect that for some of the reasons laid out above the scope of demonic activity waxes and wanes - but yes, there are also examples of influence rather than possession behind the actions of certain institutions and individuals. As their general tactic seems to be to prey on human brokenness.

[ 05. February 2014, 12:36: Message edited by: chris stiles ]

Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Do we have any evidence whatsoever that "the demonic" actually exists? Do we really need this concept given what abnormal human psychology is quite capable of?

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Do we have any evidence whatsoever that "the demonic" actually exists?

I don't come at it from that perspective.

I take the fairly straightforward view that Jesus appeared to believe in the existence of demons and that even within the NT, not all illness is said to be of demonic origin, so there is no reason to conflate everything attributed to demonic forces to solely psychological or biological factors. I tend to assume that this still holds true today, with the caveats I've mentioned upthread.

If one takes the view that Jesus was a prisoner of his immediate socio-cultural environment when it came to discernment of this nature, it's hard to assign much value to anything else he said. I don't find this option to make much sense, personally.

--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy

Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Jesus seemed to believe that epilepsy was caused by demons. We know that isn't so.

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
EtymologicalEvangelical
Shipmate
# 15091

 - Posted      Profile for EtymologicalEvangelical   Email EtymologicalEvangelical   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider
Do we have any evidence whatsoever that "the demonic" actually exists? Do we really need this concept given what abnormal human psychology is quite capable of?

If someone is convinced that the Bible is true, then the testimony of the Bible would be accepted as legitimate evidence. This may sound like a circular argument, but it is not necessarily. Many things are believed to be true simply on the basis that something else that supports or implies those claims, is believed. An example within science would be: many aspects of the origin and development of life, which are unobserved and unobservable, are believed to have occurred on the basis that theories that imply these ideas are accepted.

There is also the evidence of the personal experience of various people, who have been into, say, witchcraft or the occult, and who have been healed through spiritual deliverance. The entire process involved the belief in and experience of the expulsion of demons. To argue that this experience was entirely psychological is to posit a theory which is unsupported by evidence - or at least is as evidentially tenuous and tendentious as the demon theory.

--------------------
You can argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome': but you neither can nor need argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome, but I'm not saying this is true'. CS Lewis

Posts: 3625 | From: South Coast of England | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
If a person comes to believe that their problems are caused by demons, then "exorcising" those demons may quite reasonably help with those problems; that's not reason enough to actually postulate the objective existence of these demons. A point against their objective existence is that they only seem to be a problem inasmuch as people believe in them. When I believed in them, I was seeing their activity all the time. Now I'm fairly sure I don't, they don't do anything.

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238

 - Posted      Profile for Crœsos     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Is there any reason to limit demonic influence to mental illness? Why not physical ailments as well? Should we give serious consideration to substituting exorcisms for chemotherapy or antibiotics?

--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto

Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Jesus seemed to believe that epilepsy was caused by demons. We know that isn't so.

I don't think it's that clear cut.

Somebody with the symptoms resembling epilepsy is said to have been healed through deliverance. It's a big jump from there to asserting that Jesus thought everybody with epilepsy was demonised. And there are NT healings that make no reference at all to demonisation.

I have some sympathy for your perspective when you say you're no longer seeing things you thought were demonic in the same light as before, but again I don't think this is conclusive.

Books like Pigs in the Parlor and From Witchcraft to Christ have a lot to answer for in a certain subculture's view of the demonic - probably more than the NT if one is honest. I think the reality of evil with a personality is much more subtle than that, but I don't get paranoid about it.

[ 05. February 2014, 13:46: Message edited by: Eutychus ]

--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy

Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012

 - Posted      Profile for daronmedway     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Jesus seemed to believe that epilepsy was caused by demons. We know that isn't so.

Hm. Not sure about that. Jesus certainly healed people who were having seizures, but the gospel writer tends to include such people a list of illnesses both spiritual and physical.
quote:
23 Jesus went throughout Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, proclaiming the good news of the kingdom, and healing every disease and illness among the people. 24 News about him spread all over Syria, and people brought to him all who were ill with various diseases, those suffering severe pain, the demon-possessed, those having seizures, and the paralysed; and he healed them. 25 Large crowds from Galilee, the Decapolis, Jerusalem, Judea and the region across the Jordan followed him.
Matthew 4:23-25


Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
So if we have someone with the symptoms of epilepsy today, do we seriously consider the possibility that it's actually demonic possession? Or did demons only do that in NT times? It may be going beyond the text to conclude that Jesus thought all epileptic symptoms were demonic, but the fact remains that there are no instances of him seeing epileptic symptoms he says are not demonic, and it is therefore equally going beyond the text to say that Jesus would have distinguished between organic epilepsy and demonically caused epileptic-like symptoms. A considerably (to my mind) more parsimonious explanation is that in Jesus' time people did put epilepsy down to demons, and Jesus either didn't know better, or didn't see fit to correct the impression.

[x-post with Numpty]

I think what's being lost here is that it's incumbent on those proposing demons to demonstrate their existence; it is not incumbent on anyone to demonstrate that they don't. cf. pink unicorns, Flying Spaghetti Monsters etc.

[ 05. February 2014, 13:53: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
Is there any reason to limit demonic influence to mental illness?

Not according to the NT, no, as we have just seen.
quote:
Should we give serious consideration to substituting exorcisms for chemotherapy or antibiotics?
I have been arguing why that's not a good idea. But it may just be that for some people, exorcisms might just be equally effective. This is not medical advice, just an observation that people are complex creatures. I note the humbler doctors, whether christians or not, recognise that modern medicine can't explain everything.

--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy

Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Homeopathy and Reiki sometimes work, but they're still bollocks. And they don't work because "science doesn't know everything"; they work because of well-known placebo effects. Besides which, "science doesn't know everything" isn't an invitation to invent stuff or throw in whatever favourite ideas we may have; it's an invitation for science to learn more.

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:A considerably (to my mind) more parsimonious explanation is that in Jesus' time people did put epilepsy down to demons, and Jesus either didn't know better, or didn't see fit to correct the impression.
More cross-posting, but let me have another go at this, in line with what I posted much earlier.

In my view, it may just be that the cultural environment of an NT epilepsy-sufferer meant they could be cured by exorcism in a way a twenty-first century Westerner could not.

To me, this cultural restriction does not necessarily mean no demons were present back then, though.

My theory (and I accept it is a highly speculative one, but it's the best I've got for now) is that demons inhabit the "space" our psyche allows them to.

I think people with a rationalistic, scientific worldview are unlikely to be successfully exorcised à la NT - not because I don't think it was true then, but because I think they are unlikely to be demonised in the same way nowadays.

As I posted earlier, I think demons muck around with us rationalistic types in other ways and are probably got rid of in different fashion. Trying to transpose exactly how Jesus did things in this realm is about as stupid as trying to walk on water - not that some people don't try.

--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy

Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Seems awfully complicated, when we could simply say "they believed in demons then, we don't now."

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
it's incumbent on those proposing demons to demonstrate their existence

I don't think demons are answerable to us. If they exist, they are a higher (albeit corrupted) order of being.

My assumption (and yes it is an assumption, and you are free to mock it as a naive one) is that demons exist because the Bible speaks about them, and does so in a way that to me at least, suggests they are not merely a cultural artefact.

I have no problem with science mopping up areas of superstition, but I think anyone who assumes that it will ultimately succeed in banishing archaic fears (and thus demons' stomping-grounds) from every quarter of the human psyche for good is, well, as naive as I am...

It's an old quote from Hamlet, but an apposite one in my view:

quote:
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy


--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy

Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
EtymologicalEvangelical
Shipmate
# 15091

 - Posted      Profile for EtymologicalEvangelical   Email EtymologicalEvangelical   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider
I think what's being lost here is that it's incumbent on those proposing demons to demonstrate their existence; it is not incumbent on anyone to demonstrate that they don't. cf. pink unicorns, Flying Spaghetti Monsters etc.

Why is it 'incumbent' on them to do this?

Within a naturalistic scheme it is not incumbent on anyone to do anything, because matter just IS. End of. There is no 'ought' anywhere.

Where does nature - empirically investigated - provide us with any instruction concerning the allocation of the burden of proof?

But even if you are right, the same argument applies to naturalistic claims. Those who claim that all mental, physical and moral problems are caused entirely materially are making a definite and positive claim about an aspect of reality. Therefore, there is a burden of proof on them to demonstrate that their theory is true. How many psychopaths have been cured by drugs?

--------------------
You can argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome': but you neither can nor need argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome, but I'm not saying this is true'. CS Lewis

Posts: 3625 | From: South Coast of England | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It's always incumbent on someone proposing the existence of something to provide the evidence base for its existence. Otherwise I could just say "actually, mental illness is caused by Green Flargles from the Planet Xarff" and then require you to prove that it's not.

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I believe in the truth of the Bible to the extent that I believe its description of demons means they exist, then and now. For the purposes of this thread, I think that opening assumption is good enough.

If you think it isn't, then it's off to Dead Horses, but I don't promise to follow you there.

--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy

Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238

 - Posted      Profile for Crœsos     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
But even if you are right, the same argument applies to naturalistic claims. Those who claim that all mental, physical and moral problems are caused entirely materially are making a definite and positive claim about an aspect of reality. Therefore, there is a burden of proof on them to demonstrate that their theory is true.

Yes, which is why most advanced countries have agencies which assess the effectiveness of treatments for various medical conditions. If Conglomerated Pharmcorp wants to distribute a pill they say will fight infection, they have to demonstrate that the pill does, in fact, fight infection. Why do you regard this as an insurmountable problem?

--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto

Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
I believe in the truth of the Bible to the extent that I believe its description of demons means they exist, then and now. For the purposes of this thread, I think that opening assumption is good enough.

If you think it isn't, then it's off to Dead Horses, but I don't promise to follow you there.

It's not that simple though is it? I wasn't aware that participation in this thread required adherence to a particular belief in the nature of Scripture.

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081

 - Posted      Profile for Eutychus   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
It's not that simple though is it? I wasn't aware that participation in this thread required adherence to a particular belief in the nature of Scripture.

It's definitely not that simple...

No particular belief is required to join in the thread, but I've joined in on the basis of my stated assumption. There is no particular requirement to defend stated assumptions either.

--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy

Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Seems awfully complicated, when we could simply say "they believed in demons then, we don't now."

Or we began to see demons as internal (psychological) persecutory forces? Makes sense to me. You can even see them as autonomous, i.e. independent of the ego or self. Of course, this raises lots of other questions as to what 'autonomous' means, but going o/t.

It has the advantage of preserving the idea that these demonic forces are out to get me - I think this can be true.

--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.

Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740

 - Posted      Profile for quetzalcoatl   Email quetzalcoatl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Do we have any evidence whatsoever that "the demonic" actually exists? Do we really need this concept given what abnormal human psychology is quite capable of?

Sorry, I have answered your posts out of sync, but I would say that exorcism has been (considerably) secularized, in that the various psychological treatments, viz., psychiatry, therapy, counselling, and so on, are types of exorcism.

I certainly know therapists who will speak of someone having a demonic force inside them. However, 'demonic' in this context has a different sense really, but it is still quite useful. They can certainly seem unearthly, uncanny, and fucking scary. Think Regan in 'The Exorcist'.

I see horror films in fact as containing useful information about such demonic forces, but of course, with the proviso that they are psychic in nature. But they're still real and autonomous.

--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.

Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011  |  IP: Logged
EtymologicalEvangelical
Shipmate
# 15091

 - Posted      Profile for EtymologicalEvangelical   Email EtymologicalEvangelical   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider
It's always incumbent on someone proposing the existence of something to provide the evidence base for its existence.

Who says it's "always incumbent"?

But even if this rule somehow objectively exists, then it applies equally to the claims of naturalism.

By the way... I have provided "the evidence base", which is the Bible and personal experience. If the evidence of personal experience is interpreted in a purely naturalistic way, then those proposing that interpretation are making a definite and positive claim, and therefore there is a burden of proof on them to substantiate it.

[ 05. February 2014, 15:27: Message edited by: EtymologicalEvangelical ]

--------------------
You can argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome': but you neither can nor need argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome, but I'm not saying this is true'. CS Lewis

Posts: 3625 | From: South Coast of England | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The personal experiences you describe are already explicable in terms of known psychology; therefore they don't support the introduction of another otherwise unnecessary entity to explain them. The Bible only demonstrates that the Bible writers believed in them, nothing more.

So far no-one's given me an objective reason to suppose these demons exist; I can't prove they don't, but nor can I prove that pink unicorns don't play in the back of my garden when I'm not looking.

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76

 - Posted      Profile for Karl: Liberal Backslider   Author's homepage   Email Karl: Liberal Backslider   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Do we have any evidence whatsoever that "the demonic" actually exists? Do we really need this concept given what abnormal human psychology is quite capable of?

Sorry, I have answered your posts out of sync, but I would say that exorcism has been (considerably) secularized, in that the various psychological treatments, viz., psychiatry, therapy, counselling, and so on, are types of exorcism.

I certainly know therapists who will speak of someone having a demonic force inside them. However, 'demonic' in this context has a different sense really, but it is still quite useful. They can certainly seem unearthly, uncanny, and fucking scary. Think Regan in 'The Exorcist'.

I see horror films in fact as containing useful information about such demonic forces, but of course, with the proviso that they are psychic in nature. But they're still real and autonomous.

Oh aye, but you know and I know that that's not what the traditional understanding of the term "demon" means - it's talking about putative fallen angels now hanging around the place looking for people to control. That's what I'm more than a little sceptical about. According to a lot of people that should make me easy prey for them, and yet I can't recall the last time I growled blasphemies in a strange voice or started screaming on sight of a crucifix.

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
EtymologicalEvangelical
Shipmate
# 15091

 - Posted      Profile for EtymologicalEvangelical   Email EtymologicalEvangelical   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Croesos
Yes, which is why most advanced countries have agencies which assess the effectiveness of treatments for various medical conditions. If Conglomerated Pharmcorp wants to distribute a pill they say will fight infection, they have to demonstrate that the pill does, in fact, fight infection. Why do you regard this as an insurmountable problem?

Did I say that the testing of drugs was "an insurmountable problem"??

Of course many problems and conditions - probably 99.9% - are naturally caused, and natural treatments have been successfully tested. I am not against medicine, and nothing I have said has suggested that. It's not a case of "either...or", but sometimes "both...and". If we believe that there is a spiritual dimension to a person's being (as I certainly do), then some problems are spiritual. Of course, an atheist won't accept that, but that doesn't affect my thinking, given that I am under no compulsion to subscribe to the thoroughly unconvincing worldview of naturalism, which attempts to explain everything in entirely physicalist terms.

The idea that there is a chemical, genetic or mechanistic solution to every problem in life stretches credulity to the limit and beyond.

--------------------
You can argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome': but you neither can nor need argue with a man who says, 'Rice is unwholesome, but I'm not saying this is true'. CS Lewis

Posts: 3625 | From: South Coast of England | Registered: Sep 2009  |  IP: Logged
Crœsos
Shipmate
# 238

 - Posted      Profile for Crœsos     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by EtymologicalEvangelical:
If the evidence of personal experience is interpreted in a purely naturalistic way, then those proposing that interpretation are making a definite and positive claim, and therefore there is a burden of proof on them to substantiate it.

Personal experience is usually "interpreted in a purely naturalistic way" because so few people claim to have supernatural powers. In fact, most of us and most of the people we meet lack discernible supernatural abilities, so that interpretation is, itself, based on personal experience. Couple this with the way many people making supernatural claims about their abilities (e.g. various TV psychics, Peter Popoff, etc.) turn out to be frauds and grifters, so this is not an unreasonable starting position.

--------------------
Humani nil a me alienum puto

Posts: 10706 | From: Sardis, Lydia | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools