Hitler and Stalin were possessed by the Devil

September 13, 2006

It seems to me to try to give logic and reason to any part of the devil's pathways is merely to undermine the reality that_____

[:"red"] "Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father it is your will to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and standeth not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father thereof." [/] John 8:44 ASV

This text is not meant by this disciple, to pertain to anyone on this forum. It is merely presented as pointing out the fallacy that we can give any good reason for the works of the devil, and if we come to believe we are beginning to understand the mystery of iniquity, perhaps we're not spending enough time looking into the mystery of godliness.

[:"red"] "And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness; He who was manifested in the flesh, Justified in the spirit, Seen of angels, Preached among the nations, Believed on in the world, Received up in glory." [/]

1 Timothy 3:16 ASV

September 13, 2006

Another infamous conversation stopper by LHC! He specialises in them. <img src="/adventist/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Now ... where were we? Anyone care to pick up the thread from page 3? <img src="/adventist/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

September 13, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Nicodema said:

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Planey said:

What criteria could you use to decide one way or the other? Are there any definitive tests that one could use?

...One last monkey wrench to throw into the equation: I have also read in certain tomes of "spiritual warfare" that there is an advanced level of demonic symbiosis (possession) known as "perfect possession" in which the process is irrevocably complete and irreversible. That is, where the demon(s) have so completely taken over the host/ess that there no longer remains any part of the host that is not fused with the demonic entity. In such a configuration, the distinction between host and possessing entity or entities is completely erased. The demonic invaders have swallowed their prey whole, so to speak. The integration is seamless, and there is no more struggle. The prey has no will of its own and never will again. These "perfect possessions" by their very nature will NOT typically manifest as a case of possession because it is seamless and there is no conflict. The bizarre behavior of the possessed is due to the internal conflict between invader(s) and host/ess -- the host/ess is struggling to keep hold of any tiny portion of control s/he can grasp -- and thus in a case of perfect possession there would not be all the histrionics and drama normally associated with the typical possession case.

But whether there's truth to that notion or whether it's more smoke blowing, I could not tell you ....

...

I hadn't heard of that name-- "perfect possession"-- for what you are describing, nor do I believe that a person can be so possessed that there is no possibility of being freed. Yet it should be kept in mind that one of the great dangers of playing with Satan and of becoming possessed is that one may get to the point where he/she has no desire to be free. (People can be harassed, controlled, or possessed by demons.)

A person can become so possessed by Satan that they practically have no will of their own. In that case, the person's liberation and salvation depends on intercessory prayer. For instance, it may be necessary for an entire congregation, or more, to pray for that person. But if he or she has let it be known in some way that they want spiritual help, that is the key. A nod of the head or the squeeze of a hand is enough to communicate this message to a Christian willing and able to help. It often happens that the possessed person cannot even pray or read the Bible. Nevertheless, if a possessed person wants Jesus in their lives, that is all that is necessaary to start the process that may eventually result in full and complete freedom from Satan. After the demons are cast out, that person will continue to need a lot of prayer and close association with other believers. It is true that people who have been possessed may always have a weak will when it comes to resisting sin and Satan. But their will can be strengthened through excercise and intense prayer and long periods of deep study of God's word. There are many people who seemed to be hopeless cases but who, through prayer and faith,

are today strong and fulfilled Christians. But it often takes years of persistent work on the part of faithful Christians.

The following are two books that describe personal experiences but also discuss at length the Bible and Ellen White evidence: http://www.tsibooks.com/scripts/search.php?search_in=author&search_text=Vaughn+Allen

September 13, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

bevin said:

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Do you personally think this is the literal truth, though? That such beings exist?

I have no scientific evidence in favor of their existence.

Just as with the Plan of Salvation etc, I accept it as plausible and make decisions in my life assuming that it is so.

/Bevin

As a Christian, why do you need scientific evidence in order to accept something that the Bible so plainly teaches? There are few things taught more clearly in the Bible than the existence of God, Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit, unfallen angels, and fallen angels called demons. While there is no scientific evidence proving their existence, there is certainly good reason to believe that all of them do exist.

I'd like to suggest to you that what you call "accepting as plausible" and "assuming" is not Bible, saving faith. It sounds like you've made a good beginning, but the question we need to ask ourselves is whether our faith is strong enough to carry us through the tests that God allows us to experience. It probably won't if it is based on whether it is supported by scientific evidence and mere plausibility.

September 13, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

John317 said:

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Nicodema said:

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

John317 said:

... all a part of Satan's attempt to trick people into thinking that either there's no serious problem or that demons or demon possession don't really exist. And of course if your enemy can persuade you he doesn't exist, he obviously has a great advantage over you.

But if we are going to go to the logic that "the cleverest trick pulled by the devil was to convince the world that he did not exist" then we are banking on something of an epistemological[:"red"]*[/] quagmire here. It is common knowledge that a negative cannot be proven.

But if we accept what the Bible teaches about Satan, that is exactly what we will believe about him, epistemological quagmire or no. The Bible says Satan blinds people to the truth and that he often takes on the form of an angel of light. You can believe your epistemology or the Bible. Take your choice. The just shall live by faith, not espistemology. You can study or accept Kant and Hegel all you want but that won't get you one step closer to faith in Jesus Christ and in His word, which is really what's all important. Remember the Bible is a more sure word than our personal experiences and feelings about things. Your espistemology, on the other hand, is completely subjective and, therefore, unreliable, as a way to truth, particularly spiritual truths.

---------------------------------

[:"red"]*[/] I'm constantly substituting this word for the word I really want, which constantly eludes me. I want the word for begging the nature of how we determine reality itself, not just the limits of human knowledge, and I'm constantly forgetting it!! ACK! <img src="/adventist/images/graemlins/AAdoh.gif" alt="" />

How about phenomenology? |fi?näm??näl?j?| noun Philosophy the science of phenomena as distinct from that of the nature of being. • an approach that concentrates on the study of consciousness and the objects of direct experience.

September 13, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Nicodema said:

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

John317 said:

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Nicodema said:

But if we are going to go to the logic that "the cleverest trick pulled by the devil was to convince the world that he did not exist" then we are banking on something of an epistemological[:"red"]*[/] quagmire here. It is common knowledge that a negative cannot be proven.

But if we accept what the Bible teaches about Satan, that is exactly what we will believe about him, epistemological quagmire or no. The Bible says Satan blinds people to the truth and that he often takes on the form of an angel of light. You can believe your epistemology or the Bible. Take your choice. The just shall live by faith, not espistemology. You can study or accept Kant and Hegel all you want but that won't get you one step closer to faith in Jesus Christ and in His word, which is really what's all important. Remember the Bible is a more sure word than our personal experiences and feelings about things. Your espistemology, on the other hand, is completely subjective and, therefore, unreliable, as a way to truth, particularly spiritual truths.

(1) I thought I made it clear that "epistemological" was a placeholder word because I could not remember the precise word I was seeking?

(2) John317, we will get along a LOT better if you refrain from making assumptions about what I read/study and what "MY" supposed "epistemology" consists of. Fact of the matter is I haven't read Kant or Hegel other than a cursory glimpse MANY moons ago in college, long forgotten now. Up until now I have enjoyed our exchange as a pleasant one -- and hope the feeling has been mutual -- but I warn you if you are going to take this attitude with me, and fling these sorts of assumptions and presumptions in my face instead of dialoguing, it will bring that pleasant factor to a screeching halt pretty durn quick. And I will NOT be held responsible for what transpires when that happens.

I suppose I answered you the way I did because epistemological matters is precisely the subject of an entire book that I have recently been studying. It has to with liberal theological views of the Bible within the Adventist church, and it shows how many Adventists are changing so that they no longer accept the Bible as normative or even authoritative. For such people, the way to truth is their own observation of society.

I'm very sorry if I misunderstood you.

September 13, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

John317 said:

As a Christian, why do you need scientific evidence in order to accept something that the Bible so plainly teaches? There are few things taught more clearly in the Bible than the existence of God, Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit, unfallen angels, and fallen angels called demons. While there is no scientific evidence proving their existence, there is certainly good reason to believe that all of them do exist.

I'd like to suggest to you that what you call "accepting as plausible" and "assuming" is not Bible, saving faith. It sounds like you've made a good beginning, but the question we need to ask ourselves is whether our faith is strong enough to carry us through the tests that God allows us to experience. It probably won't if it is based on whether it is supported by scientific evidence and mere plausibility.

unholy fragamoley!! i'm sure glad that post was addressed to Bevin and not to me. i'm not touching that with a fifty foot pole. <img src="/adventist/images/graemlins/1poke.gif" alt="" />

September 13, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

As a Christian, why do you need scientific evidence in order to accept something that the Bible so plainly teaches? ...

How do you know what the Bible teaches?

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

I'd like to suggest to you that what you call "accepting as plausible" and "assuming" is not Bible, saving faith.

Amusing. Because you don't understand that your assumptions lack evidence, you have "saving faith". Because I can see clearly that the evidence is lacking, my faith is somehow inadequate.

Gullible people are easier to save?

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

It sounds like you've made a good beginning, but the question we need to ask ourselves is whether our faith is strong enough to carry us through the tests that God allows us to experience. It probably won't if it is based on whether it is supported by scientific evidence and mere plausibility

You been taking lessons from George Bush - "Be fearful, be fearful, be fearful, and do what I want you to do"?

Salvation isn't via gullibility. It is by deciding to follow Jesus - and that does NOT depend on some gullible emotional claptrap about "I am certain He exists even though I have no evidence for it", it depends on sharing His values.

This thread is all about how demons can deceive. People who can't tell what is evidence and what is emotion are trivial to deceive.

/Bevin

September 14, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

bevin said:

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

As a Christian, why do you need scientific evidence in order to accept something that the Bible so plainly teaches? ...

How do you know what the Bible teaches?

If you get a comprehensive concordance of the Bible or a topical Bible and study everything the Bible has to say about faith, you also may know and understand. Study what Jesus taught about faith and then read Hebrews 11 and 12 and James 1 & 2. If you believe in Ellen White's writings, read what she says about saving faith. God has made subjects like faith and salvation fairly easy so that even a child can understand them if only they will. The difficulty comes when we resist His word or when don't ask the Holy Spirit to make us teachable and to open our hearts and minds to the truth. The same Holy Spirit that inspired the prophets to write the Bible is necessary in order for us to understand it and have its truths applied to our lives.

Your question implies that the Bible cannot be understood and that we can 'treally be sure what it teaches. That is exactly what Satan and his demons want people to believe. The Bible, God's special revelation, is God's primary means of speaking to us, and Satan knows that if he can break people's confidence in it, he can accomplish his purpose even better than by having the Bible destroyed.

September 14, 2006

So the Bible, like the Koran, the literature of the Hindu's, and the material of Wicca, is all produced by people, transmitted by people, read by people.

Here is the Bevin's Imitation Holy Book

Everything in this Book is True
If you don't believe in the material in this Book you are Evil and, upon your death, your soul will spend eternity in the Great Blender At The Center of the Universe
On Sept 14th 2006, the Easter Bunny living in the center of the Sun started counting the fleas on all the dogs in the USA, and when He finishes the count, He is coming to this planet to kill all the Evil People and take all the Righteous ones with Him to paradise

Your approach, so far, fails to provide a reason why I should accept the Bible and not this crude imitation.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

God has made subjects like faith and salvation fairly easy so that even a child can understand them if only they will. The difficulty comes when we resist His word or when don't ask the Holy Spirit to make us teachable and to open our hearts and minds to the truth.

Sigh. Every time you emotional types find yourself face to face with FACTS, you resort to [:"red"] "this person is resisting the Holy Spirit", "this person is evil", "this person needs to be converted", "even a child can be fooled by this clap-trap, why can't you just roll over and play dead too". [/]

/Bevin

September 14, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

bevin said:

So the Bible, like the Koran, the literature of the Hindu's, and the material of Wicca, is all produced by people, transmitted by people, read by people.

Bevin, have you studied those books? I assume you might have. I myself took classes in them at a public university. Except for Wicca, the sacred texts of those religions are in my personal library and have read them many times. While in my twenties, I became particularly interested in Buddhism and used to attend Buddhist meetings. I developed a deep interest in world religions. That interest eventually led me to graduate with a degree in religion.

There is a big difference between those texts and the Bible, and those differences are what led me to decide to become a Christian. You are right that all of them were produced by people. But the Bible is the only one that was written by prophets who were inspired by the living and only true God. The true God did not inspire the Koran, the Buddhist texts or any of the other so-called sacred texts. And the true God who inspired the Bible most certainly did not inspire people to write the false material of Wicca. They are all false, misleading religions, guiding people on the wrong road to a false salvation. Jesus Christ said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No man comes to the father except through me." "And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent." Acts 4:12, "And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved." Romans 10, "...if you confess with your lips that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved."

The Bible teaches that there is no other Savior and no other way of being saved (Isaiah 45:21, 22). In other words, one cannot be saved and enter everlasting life and the kingdom of God by practicing those false religions or by putting one's trust in them or in their false gods. That is the reason it is so urgent that the Gospel be preached, because it is the only means God has provided for salvation. (See Romans 10:13,14)

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Here is the Bevin's Imitation Holy Book

Everything in this Book is True
If you don't believe in the material in this Book you are Evil and, upon your death, your soul will spend eternity in the Great Blender At The Center of the Universe

<hr /></blockquote>

Indeed, the Bible makes plain that people will be held accountable for the truth that they know yet reject. All people, in and of themselves, apart from Christ, are evil. That is what Jesus Christ Himself taught and what the Bible teaches.

Apparently you are --please forgive me if I'm mistaken here-- unwilling to conform your spiritual beliefs to the Bible's teachings and instead you seem to be trying to make up your own truth on the basis of your observation and according to what you personally find palatable. But God has revealed His will in the Bible, not in the Koran, or in any other so-called sacred texts, and therefore the Bible is normative and the basis of our faith and doctrines. Jesus said, "Your [God's] word is truth." (Compare carefully 2 Timothy 3:1-7.) 2 Timothy 3:15-17 says, "...the sacred writings... are able to instruct you for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equiped for every good work." That cannot be found in any of those other books.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
On Sept 14th 2006, the Easter Bunny living in the center of the Sun started counting the fleas on all the dogs in the USA, and when He finishes the count, He is coming to this planet to kill all the Evil People and take all the Righteous ones with Him to paradise

The Bible teaches that Jesus Christ is returning to this planet in order to take back with him all those who are eagerly waiting for him (Hebrews 9:28). The rest of humanity, who are not eagerly waiting for him but are rather in rebellion against Him, will be destroyed by the brightness of his coming. (2 Thess. 1: 7-10; Matthew 24: 30-31; 2 Peter 3:3-10). Christ's coming in glory is the Christian's blessed hope (Titus 2:13).

Like I say, apart from Chirst, all of us are evil. Apart from Christ, I am evil. This is because apart from Christ, we are allied with Christ's enemy, Satan, who claims this earth and everyone in it.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Your approach, so far, fails to provide a reason why I should accept the Bible and not this crude imitation.

We all must come to the point where we submit our ideas, values & wishes to God's wishes and plans as revealed plainly in His word. Have you ever prayed that God would help you do this? If not, may God help you to do it!

God's will, as revealed in the Bible, is glorious and wonderful!! By submitting to the only true God, Yahweh, and His Son Jesus Christ, we are entering into eternal life (John 3:16; 17:3; 1 John 1: 2; 5:11-3, 20.) On the other hand, when we reject Him, we are entering into death. There's no third alternative; it's one or the other. Do you believe this?

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

God has made subjects like faith and salvation fairly easy so that even a child can understand them if only they will. The difficulty comes when we resist His word or when don't ask the Holy Spirit to make us teachable and to open our hearts and minds to the truth.

Sigh. Every time you emotional types find yourself face to face with FACTS, you resort to [:"red"] "this person is resisting the Holy Spirit", "this person is evil", "this person needs to be converted", "even a child can be fooled by this clap-trap, why can't you just roll over and play dead too". [/]

/Bevin

No, not every time I am faced with facts. Unfortunately, in the present post, I don't think I've had a great many of them to deal with. I would've liked to've been face-to-face with a bit more, actually. Perhaps you might try again soon.

By the way, your last line must be a typo. Did you really mean to put them within quotation marks? I would never tell anyone those words. The other words, yes, I readily admit I have used them, except that I'd use the word evil mostly to describe myself as either I was or as I'd be right now were I not in Christ. John3: 17

September 14, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

But the Bible is the only one that was written by prophets who were inspired by the living and only true God.

How do you know that?

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

We all must come to the point where we submit our ideas, values & wishes to God's wishes and plans as revealed plainly in His word. Have you ever prayed that God would help you do this? If not, may God help you to do it!

And the Buddhists have a different answer, and the Hindu's a different one, and the Wicca approach has yet another

How should one chose?

Answer: By using evidence, not emotion. You are all about using feelings. You feel that God has impressed you that one particular answer is the right one.

Remember the starting point. I make assumptions and I know that I am making assumptions and I state that I am making assumptions. You think that pretending to be certain is a more righteous stand.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Did you really mean to put them within quotation marks?

Not intended as quotation marks - intended as speech marks. Quotes look like this

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

By submitting to the only true God, Yahweh, and His Son Jesus Christ, we are entering into eternal life (John 3:16; 17:3; 1 John 1: 2; 5:11-3, 20.) On the other hand, when we reject Him, we are entering into death. There's no third alternative; it's one or the other. Do you believe this?

Lots of insane people hear voices in their head. How do they know these voices aren't God, and that they should not submit to them?

/Bevin

September 15, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Lots of insane people hear voices in their head. How do they know these voices aren't God, and that they should not submit to them?

Well hell's bells, for that matter, how do we know for certain that hearing voices in one's head isn't a more exalted state of being -- or at least what is supposed to happen -- and the rest of you who are "alone" in yours are deficient somehow?

Bottom line is objectively speaking, we know nothing.

September 15, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

bevin said:

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

But the Bible is the only one that was written by prophets who were inspired by the living and only true God.

How do you know that?

I'd like to know if you are serious, that is, if you really have no idea and if you believe they are all of equal spiritual or religious value. Are you saying you have studied all of them and see no more significance or truth in the Bible than you see in the others? Do you see any differences? Do you have any answers to your question or are you asking the question simply to be asking it? Are you a Christian, and if so, why? Why are you not a Buddhist or Hindu or Muslim or whatever? I could go into hours of explanation on this subject, but I would want to know first of all that I am dialoguing with someone who is asking a sincere question.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

We all must come to the point where we submit our ideas, values & wishes to God's wishes and plans as revealed plainly in His word. Have you ever prayed that God would help you do this? If not, may God help you to do it!

And the Buddhists have a different answer, and the Hindu's a different one, and the Wicca approach has yet another

And? You're aware of course that even when the law is very clear on something, you will still find differences of viewpoint about it among lawyers. Does that mean everything is uncertain and that there is no truth? There are all kinds of opinions about virtually everything under the sun, yet I hope tht does not mean you are confused and can't know what is true. Are you saying their answers confuse you? Are you saying that because they seem to have "answers" or a viewpoint, it means you can't make up your mind about the issues we're discussing? Do you actually believe they are all equally valid and true? And if not, why are you asking the question-- just to see what my answer is? I'm getting the impression that in many instances you already know the answer and have made up your mind but that you just want to see what answers I will give.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

How should one chose?

Answer: By using evidence, not emotion. You are all about using feelings. You feel that God has impressed you that one particular answer is the right one.

Well, of course it is about evidence and reason. You have evidently overlooked or misunderstood an important point, and that is that after one has seen the evidence that the Bible is God's word and after one comes to trust the Bible as God's revelation and to trust Jesus Christ, one should not continue to need scientific evidence in order to believe everything the Bible says.

But you won't find anything I said that would indicate that these matters are determined by personal feelings and private ideas. In fact, I am saying quite the opposite. The truth is objective, not subjective. See, for example, 2 Peter 1: 19-21; 3: 15,16. Needing scientific evidence in order to believe something the Bible says is not faith in God or in His word. That is faith in scientific evidence and in human reasoning. Faith and reason are not opposed to each other, but neither are they the same. For instance, when Abraham was told by God to sacrifice his only son Isaac, Abraham did of course use reasoning but he did not wait for anything like scientific evidence before he obeyed God. The same with Noah and Moses and Paul and of course Jesus Christ. There comes a point where we have to trust the naked word of God, often when it seems utterly impossibe for God to fulfil His word, as in the case of Abraham and Sarai having a baby. It should be obvious that that does not mean there was no reasoning involved in the decision to trust God. There is always reasoning involved in that decision, and by the way, there are always feelings also involved; but usually the feelings come as a result of the decision, not the other way around. God made us with both judgment, or intellect, and feelings. They both are used but they both have their proper sphere.

A good example of this is found in the experience of Thomas in John 20. He needed scientific proof before he would believe. Notice that Jesus did not commend Thomas for this sort of belief. In fact, Jesus said blessed are those who believe without the scientific evidence, that is, by believing the word of God even though they see nothing. That is faith; that is trusting God's word alone.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Remember the starting point. I make assumptions and I know that I am making assumptions and I state that I am making assumptions. You think that pretending to be certain is a more righteous stand.

No, it's not a matter of pretending to be certain. Was Christ or Paul or any of the other great men and women of faith in the Bible pretending to be certain of something? Nor am I merely pretending to be certain. Perhaps if you said you are certain that angels or demons exist, would it be merely pretense on your part? It wouldn't be for me. ( I realize that there are actually SDA today who believe and teach that Paul's understanding of the gospel was faulty and that the writers of the Bible were often not right. I don't share this view. I suspect you do.)

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Did you really mean to put them within quotation marks?

Not intended as quotation marks - intended as speech marks. Quotes look like this

There is, of course, no difference between quotation marks and speech marks. The reason I asked is that, as I said, those speech or quotation marks don't accurately reflect anything I would say to anyone.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

By submitting to the only true God, Yahweh, and His Son Jesus Christ, we are entering into eternal life (John 3:16; 17:3; 1 John 1: 2; 5:11-3, 20.) On the other hand, when we reject Him, we are entering into death. There's no third alternative; it's one or the other. Do you believe this?

Lots of insane people hear voices in their head. How do they know these voices aren't God, and that they should not submit to them?

/Bevin

Seems like you are associating or even perhaps equating submitting to the word of God, the Bible, with insane people hearing voices.

The answer to your question is, I'm afraid, that the insane don't know the voices aren't from God, and they do submit to them all the time.

I know of a young man who thought his dead mother was telling him to gouge his own eyes out with bed springs. He did it. He was in a mental hospital at the time. My father visited him. It turned out to be the voice of demons. He was not insane. Lots of people commit murder because demons are telling them to do it. I know of quite a number of suicides that happened after people told of hearing voices commanding them to kill themselves. Some are insane and others are not. Not all of those voices are due to insanity.

How do you know the voice who commanded Abraham to kill Isaac was not a demon? Would you say we cannot know for sure? If Abraham lived today and did now what he did back then, wouldn't he be considered "insane"?

Tell me what you believe are some good answers to your last question, and I will be glad to discuss the subject with you.

Also you might answer my last question while you're at it-- that is, do you beleive that by accepting Christ as Savior we are entering eternal life and that by rejecting Him we are entering into death?

September 15, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Nicodema said:

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Lots of insane people hear voices in their head. How do they know these voices aren't God, and that they should not submit to them?

Well hell's bells, for that matter, how do we know for certain that hearing voices in one's head isn't a more exalted state of being -- or at least what is supposed to happen -- and the rest of you who are "alone" in yours are deficient somehow?

Bottom line is objectively speaking, we know nothing.

It's common for writers, dramatists, and poets to speak of characters in their fiction or plays as having real, distinct voices. Page after page of dialogue between fictional character have been written as if by dictation by voices in some author's minds. Some quite well known authors claim virtually an entire book was written by voices in their heads. But that doesn't mean that those voices were from outside the writer's head. I take it to mean that in the creative process the characters are so real and the author's mind has been working so long on the character's creation that it is all part of the writer's discipline to be able to sleep on a character and then have it come alive when the writer sits down to work. I myself have heard "voices" in that sense, when I have been deep into certain writing projects. The ancient poets called them their "muse". The great poet William Blake wrote according to a voice, which he called "my angel."

September 15, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Are you saying you have studied all of them and see no more significance or truth in the Bible than you see in the others?

Of course I see a difference - because I get to compare them with the real world. But that same comparison process that tells me that some parts are scientifically and historically accurate tells me that other parts aren't. The same comparison process tells me that I don't have evidence for the existence of evil angels.

However, since you don't allow the evidence to decide what faith you have, have do you decide whether to use the Bible or the Koran?

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

There are all kinds of opinions about virtually everything under the sun, yet I hope tht does not mean you are confused and can't know what is true

I don't need certainty. 100% certainty, like security, is a mental crutch for people who can't face the real world. I need to know what the underlying assumptions are.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Needing scientific evidence in order to believe something the Bible says is not faith in God or in His word. That is faith in scientific evidence and in human reasoning.

If you don't use science to understand and compare the book to the real world, then there is nothing except your personal easily fooled emotional state to help you choose the Bible v Bevin's Imitation Holy Book (see earlier).

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Nor am I merely pretending to be certain

For you, certainty is an emotional state. You FEEL certain. For me certainty is a state based on solid repeatable experiments. It can go contrary to my emotions.

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

It turned out to be the voice of demons. He was not insane

What evidence do you have for this statement?

/Bevin

September 15, 2006

bevin = Thomas

September 15, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

bevin said:

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Are you saying you have studied all of them and see no more significance or truth in the Bible than you see in the others?

Of course I see a difference - because I get to compare them with the real world. But that same comparison process that tells me that some parts are scientifically and historically accurate tells me that other parts aren't. The same comparison process tells me that I don't have evidence for the existence of evil angels.

However, since you don't allow the evidence to decide what faith you have, have do you decide whether to use the Bible or the Koran?...

/Bevin

Do you believe in the devil? Do you believe in unfallen angels? How about Michael the archangel?

Of course I allow the evidence to decide what faith I have. I have been saying that the whole time. Please go back and reread what I have written about studying the religions. Study the Koran and the Bible and make the comparisons, but do it deeply, not superficiously. For instance, you will notice that the Koran contains no prophecies in the way the Bible does. The Koran says Jesus was not the Son of God. The Koran says Jesus was only a prophet and not even the greatest prophet. The Koran says God made man from a "despised fluid." Etc etc. Both books cannot be from the same God.

I'll answer more, later. Have to go for now.

September 15, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

John317 said:

It's common for writers, dramatists, and poets to speak of characters in their fiction or plays as having real, distinct voices. Page after page of dialogue between fictional character have been written as if by dictation by voices in some author's minds. Some quite well known authors claim virtually an entire book was written by voices in their heads. But that doesn't mean that those voices were from outside the writer's head. I take it to mean that in the creative process the characters are so real and the author's mind has been working so long on the character's creation that it is all part of the writer's discipline to be able to sleep on a character and then have it come alive when the writer sits down to work. I myself have heard "voices" in that sense, when I have been deep into certain writing projects. The ancient poets called them their "muse". The great poet William Blake wrote according to a voice, which he called "my angel."

Mine I call my Guardians.

They rarely use human language though.

They speak in many ways. Energy signatures, biochemical trails, sometimes they just skip communication altogether and insert understanding directly into my consciousness, like an influx of gnosis or a "Gestalt" of sorts ... a tesseract in thought.

I myself have functioned as Muse to others for many years. All my creations dreamt through others bear my energy signature. If you know what to look for.

I am glad you are open minded about such things, and glad you enjoy Will Blake. He is pretty incredible. <img src="/adventist/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

September 15, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />

Do you believe in the devil? Do you believe in unfallen angels? How about Michael the archangel?

I doubt we agree on the definition of the word "believe".

To me, a belief includes things I suspect to be true, that I act on, but don't have strong evidence for.

Yes, I believe in the devil, in unfallen angels, that the Bible names Michael the arch-angel, and that this phrase may or may not mean Michael is an angel, and that (if Michael is NOT an angel) Michael might be another name/role for Jesus.

Beliefs = assumptions + things for which there is strong evidence

Beliefs, assumptions, and even things for which there is strong evidence can be overturned by new experimental results.

/Bevin

September 16, 2006

Hey John 317, olly olly oxen free!

come on out 'n' play!

September 23, 2006

<blockquote>Quote:<hr />
John317 said:

It's common for writers, dramatists, and poets to speak of characters in their fiction or plays as having real, distinct voices. Page after page of dialogue between fictional character have been written as if by dictation by voices in some author's minds. Some quite well known authors claim virtually an entire book was written by voices in their heads. But that doesn't mean that those voices were from outside the writer's head. I take it to mean that in the creative process the characters are so real and the author's mind has been working so long on the character's creation that it is all part of the writer's discipline to be able to sleep on a character and then have it come alive when the writer sits down to work. I myself have heard "voices" in that sense, when I have been deep into certain writing projects. The ancient poets called them their "muse". The great poet William Blake wrote according to a voice, which he called "my angel."

<hr /></blockquote>

Mine I call my Guardians.

They rarely use human language though.

They speak in many ways. Energy signatures, biochemical trails, sometimes they just skip communication altogether and insert understanding directly into my consciousness, like an influx of gnosis or a "Gestalt" of sorts ... a tesseract in thought.

I myself have functioned as Muse to others for many years. All my creations dreamt through others bear my energy signature. If you know what to look for.

I am glad you are open minded about such things, and glad you enjoy Will Blake. He is pretty incredible. <img src="/adventist/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Yes, I do very much enjoy reading Blake, as well as all the poets of the Romantic "period" or movement. I especially like Wordsworth. His poetry is conversational, like Frost's.

I'd like to talk with you some time about your Guardians. I've been away for a while and have to be away again for a couple of days but should be back to talk by Monday, the 25th.

September 23, 2006

Quote:

Do you believe in the devil? Do you believe in unfallen angels? How about Michael the archangel?

I doubt we agree on the definition of the word "believe".

To me, a belief includes things I suspect to be true, that I act on, but don't have strong evidence for.

Yes, I believe in the devil, in unfallen angels, that the Bible names Michael the arch-angel, and that this phrase may or may not mean Michael is an angel, and that (if Michael is NOT an angel) Michael might be another name/role for Jesus.

Beliefs = assumptions + things for which there is strong evidence

Beliefs, assumptions, and even things for which there is strong evidence can be overturned by new experimental results.

/Bevin

I understand faith in what the Bible says differently than you do. Faith is firm belief and doesn't waver or fail just because someone contradicts what God has said. That sort of "faith" would not have served Christ or Saint Paul, John or Abraham very well. What you are describing seems to me conditional belief. I am not really finding fault with it; I am just saying I don't think that's the sort of faith in God that He is looking for. The Bible describes some pretty awful conditions that Christians will have to go through that will test our faith, and if we have the kind of faith that can change at any time because of a change in situations, then our faith is probably not going to stand through to the end. I think that is one reason Christ waits and hasn't come the second time yet-- He's waiting for people to really make up their minds and have a stronger faith, because if He were to allow the testing time to arrive now, there are just so many people who would give up their faith in Him.

The Bible uses "angel" in several different ways. It basically just means messenger, so that messenger doesn't necessarily mean supernatural being. I beleive that Michael the archangel is another name for Jesus Christ. There's a verse in Daniel that describes Michael as the head or leader of the angels, which is really what arch means anyhow.

September 23, 2006

I'd like to talk with you some time about your Guardians. I've been away for a while and have to be away again for a couple of days but should be back to talk by Monday, the 25th.

I'd be delighted! Ping me whenever you desire.

September 24, 2006

Quote:

Are you saying you have studied all of them and see no more significance or truth in the Bible than you see in the others?

Of course I see a difference - because I get to compare them with the real world. But that same comparison process that tells me that some parts are scientifically and historically accurate tells me that other parts aren't. The same comparison process tells me that I don't have evidence for the existence of evil angels.

However, since you don't allow the evidence to decide what faith you have, have do you decide whether to use the Bible or the Koran?

Quote:

There are all kinds of opinions about virtually everything under the sun, yet I hope tht does not mean you are confused and can't know what is true

I don't need certainty. 100% certainty, like security, is a mental crutch for people who can't face the real world. I need to know what the underlying assumptions are.

Quote:

Needing scientific evidence in order to believe something the Bible says is not faith in God or in His word. That is faith in scientific evidence and in human reasoning.

If you don't use science to understand and compare the book to the real world, then there is nothing except your personal easily fooled emotional state to help you choose the Bible v Bevin's Imitation Holy Book (see earlier).

Quote:

Nor am I merely pretending to be certain

For you, certainty is an emotional state.

No, you are wrong. I have certainty in the Bible as God's word based on about 30 years of study. Each of us has to make our own personal decisions about whether to accept the Bible or not. That was after years of study and consideration of history, archeology, philosophy, and other religions.

Quote:

You FEEL certain. For me certainty is a state based on solid repeatable experiments. It can go contrary to my emotions.

I don't "feel" any more certain than you do. I don't go by "feelings." I go by objective evidence. There is evidence that the Bible is true and can be trusted.

Quote:

It turned out to be the voice of demons. He was not insane

What evidence do you have for this statement?

/Bevin

Get "The War Is Real" or "You Can Be Free" by Vaughn Allen, which can be purchased online.

Sign In

Hitler and Stalin were possessed by the Devil

Recommended Posts

LifeHiscost

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Nicodema

John317

John317

John317

John317

Nicodema

bevin

John317

bevin

John317

bevin

Nicodema

John317

John317

bevin

Amelia

John317

Nicodema

bevin

Nicodema

John317

John317

Nicodema

John317

Join the conversation

Browse

Activity