Existence of Demons (and Angels)

quote:

---

Let me know as soon as you have acquired the strength to create new universes or been able to define the natural laws of one-- I'd like to see that.

---

Not a forward-looking thinker then... I said 'humanity', and 'some day'.I don't expect us to be able to do it tomorrow, and I find it annoying that you misconstrued my post to mean something nonsensical.This message has been edited by IrishRockhound, 12-08-2004 11:36 AM

Demons and Angels exist.
Why do you believe that?
Because it is written in the bible and the bible is the word of God.
Why do you believe that?
Because I was raised in a Christian country, raised as a Christian, and I have read the bible and I believe it is unerring.
So you believe in Angels and Demons because you believe what was written in the Bible by the influence of God?
Yes.So you believe in something, even though it runs contrary to all the physical laws of the universe, and even though there is no logical reason to believe it. You believe it because that is your tradition. And even though the Bible has been shown to be written over centuries, contradictory, redacted, based on midrash of Judiasism. Even though the concept of the Devil has been shown to come from Bababylonian mythology. Even though there is not one non bias source of evidence to support any of it, you still believe it.
OK.
So do you believe in the Book of Mormon?
No...why not it is based on the word of God too. Oh you get to select what books to believe in and what is the real word of God.
I get it.
Well I do not believe in Angels or Demons because I have seen no evidence what so ever to give creedence to such mythos.
Well you should believe it because my friend saw a demon.
Oh Ok I guess thats good enough.

---

"One is punished most for ones virtues" Fredrick Neitzche

There are many ways of looking at a belief system.

Ok. born again? what does that mean?
you experienced him? what does that mean?
and you have seen proof. What proof did you see?
Born again is a term based on the acceptance of Jesus Christ as God and the sacrifice made from his death to allow the forgivness of sin.Wellllllll...First off one must first believe God exist. And also that the concept of sin is factual. and lastley that Jesus was God incarnate.
If one is atheist or Buddhist the God thingy is not a option for any one except montheistic religions.
The concept of original sin based on the Garden of Eden story bases the whole need of a reedemer on this thing called sin. If sin is found to be based on societies waviering morality and is subjective then the whole need for redemption falls like a house of cards.
Lastley only Christians believe that Jesus was God incarnate, so what does this mean to everyone else? We are all just shit out of luck."I experienced him" ok...you felt the presence of God. You felt the holy spirit fill you. ummm you were guided by his presence.
Thats all well and good except that PET scans of people in religious states of mind and prayer reveal that the brain does indeed have some physical changes associated with meditation. OR prayer. So is it God or is it Endorphins? Note that even buddhist monks and pagans where able to achieve this effect."I have seen proof" Proof is a function of mathmatics. If there is a proof of God then you Phatboy are privy to some information that escapes the rest of humanity.God may very well exist...but I do not believe if he does that he cares what religion you are, or what you believe, or whether or not you send 300 dollars from your credit card as a "seed of faith". I think God if he exist is nothing like what many claim they have "seen" or felt. Take care and Peace be with you.

I hope this will help you. The Bible speaks of the gifts of the Spirit in 1 Cor. 12:10 etc, and one of those gifts is 'discerning of spirits'.Original Language Definition The Greek word for "discernment" here is "diakrisis" which, according to Vines' Expository Dictionary (p. 171), means "a distinguishing, a clear discrimination, discerning, judging... of spirits, judging by evidence whether they are evil or of God.I do not see a reason why this particular gift should not be desired.

I just found this topic.
Like Demosthenes Fan (hi, new people!!!) said, if you take yage or other hallucinogens, it's not any big surprise if you "talk to demons" while you're trippin'. Back in 1969 I sat outside the bowling alley in Bentonville, Arkansas, and watched the cars coming down the bypass turn into running tigers and lions as they went by.....Modern synthetic stuff instead of Harmala sp., but the same effect. There are dozens of examples of people "seeing demons" or "angels" when they are known to have ingested some such stuff - ergot-infested rye in medieval France, absinthe, peyote - or when they've gone on a three-day fast like the Plains Indians here in the US used to do.It's brain chemistry. It doesn't necessarily have to involve taking anything - our bodies can manufacture the chemicals. Cultural context is what determines the difference between "God spoke to me!" and "Whoa! That was weird!"

---

El sueo de la razn produce monstruos. - Francisco Goya

I think you took what I said a little too literally and missed the point entirely. How can you expect any human even in the infinitely distant future to change the physical laws that control this world? Show me any proof that it can be done, or even proof that we can break the physical laws of this universe (any "broken" rule is an allowance by another law already in place). There is no way we can make any technology that can move us backward through time, at least according to our understanding of the physical laws. Is someone succeeds in making such a machine, they will have not changed the laws, they will have shed light on how our understanding of the CURRENTLY EXISTING (existing as in "in the universe" not as in that we know about) laws us flawed, but no scientist will ever let you say that these "new" laws suddenly came into effect-- they have always been there, just hidden from our understanding.You (or any human, or any other being bound by the laws of physics) can create or destroy matter or energy (this is different than interchanging matter and energy for each other, because it is understood that they are different forms of each other). If you (read: humanity) succeed in creating a machine whose efficience is over 100%, you will not have created a new law or changed the old one, you will jsut have discovered a flaw with our current understanding that has always been there since the creation (or, if you prefer, the mindless chance beginning) of the universe.Again, don't take everything I say literally- look at the ideas and concepts behind my examples rather than the examples themselves (in other words, I don't expect you to create a time machine or an infinite source of energy to prove your point, but the concepts of those examples are still perfectly valid).

I dunno. I went through the L.S.D. Mushroom era,and I know how the substances work. There is more exposure to different stimulus and perceptions for sure...but I am not convinced that our perception = what is actually real. I have heard unseen and unknown voices while not tripping. I have had friends who were tripping and had a host of encounters. So was it all the drugs? Like I said, for me the conclusion Isn't.

Sorry about the late reply - I've been having Internet problems.I feel you missed the point of my post - I was stating my opinion, based on my observations of the current rate of technological advance, that someday it is not unrealistic to assume that humanity will be able to manipulate the natural laws of this universe, or indeed create entirely new ones. I, of course, have no proof for this; it is only an opinion after all, based on my own experience.I understand your point about the breaking of rules, but I did not suggest that it would occur (I wonder how I could have seeing as my post was so short).I feel I understand your points very well. In what way have I misunderstood?The RockhoundThis message has been edited by IrishRockhound, 12-11-2004 01:36 PM

You suggested in your previous post (earlier on in this duscussion) that the breaking of rules might occur, not specifically in jsut the post I was directly replying to. This is the misunderstanding I was reffering to-- I did not by any means misconstrue what you said-- I was just pointing out that we cannot break the laws that are in place or make any new ones that are not already in place (the same thing I explained at length in my last post).

Firstly, the reason I was including scripture is that I often like to end my post in a verse, not necessarily to prove my point, but jsut because I like to incorporate scripture into everything I do (In other words, it is not an integral part of my argument, its just something I stuck on there cause I liked it). Secondly, I'll quote as much scripture as I like- I'm not asking you to read it, but if I want to quote it, who are you to tell me not to?And no, I don't have to prove anything to you. God knows it already and that's all that's important to me.

If you are including something that's not part of the message or thread, it's usually a good idea to set it off in someway so that folk don't try to make sense of it within the context of the message.

---

Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:

Change in Moderation? (General discussion of moderation procedures)
or
Thread Reopen Requests
or
Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum
or
Introducing the new "Boot Camp" forum

Thank you for the tip- I will try to remember to do that from now on.

Phatboy, Xenocrates referenced a book called Spirit of the Rainforest where he stated that the book details the shamans’ interactions with demons in graphic detail. I simply proposed that shaman use entheogens*, which often causes people to have hallucinations of alien like characters. I stated that given that fact, that book and the shaman that are quoted in it, are not really what one should call empirical evidence, but more anecdotal.Coragyps — Thanks for the warm greeting!!!*Erowid DMT Vault : Apparent Communication with Discarnate Entities, by Peter Meyer

quote:

---

You suggested in your previous post (earlier on in this duscussion) that the breaking of rules might occur, not specifically in just the post I was directly replying to.

---

I wonder how I did, because I certainly didn't mean to. I knew already that which you pointed out in your post - that when we appear to break the rules, it is because we lack a better understanding of exactly what the rules are.But this is off-topic. Back to the discussion...