• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Let's talk about Demons.

Resume said:
Edited by kmortis: 
Removed previously moderated content and response to same



If a person is suffering chest pains, you don't take a brief side trip to the homeopaths, you go to the emergency room.


A dangerously delusional person requires proper and immediate attention. Been there, seen that.


ETA: If after evaluation, a medical professional determined an exorcism might be a harmless placebo, meh who cares. But I would doubt such a "treatment" would be recommended.
Click to expand...

Sorry for (removed by mod) insult, I misread your post.

A non-mental illness example might make my point clearer. If someone is suffering from a fatal but treatable illness (let's say it's a form of cancer with 80% surgery/chemo success rate) and someone you care about is refusing treatment, you talk to them on Saturday and they promise to go to the hospital and start treatment Monday if you will first take them to a priest on Sunday for the rite of anointing of the sick, and to the homeopathic store to pick up some so-called remedy, just in case.

If you refuse, they won't get medical treatment and will die very painfully. If you agree, they will have an 80% chance of survival and you will have made them happier regardless of outcome.

So if someone is suffering from mental illness that is at that moment acute, they are an imminent threat to themselves or others, that is one thing - analogous to your heart attack example. But if it's more chronic, they've had very poor compliance with treatment in the past, they've been released because not (normally) deemed a threat, and if your cooperating with them in seeking an exorcism first, if you care about them, why not, because it increases the chance of a successful long-term outcome by increasing chance of compliance.
 
epeeist said:
Sorry for (removed by mod) insult, I misread your post.
Click to expand...
I have broad shoulders.
A non-mental illness example might make my point clearer. If someone is suffering from a fatal but treatable illness (let's say it's a form of cancer with 80% surgery/chemo success rate) and someone you care about is refusing treatment, you talk to them on Saturday and they promise to go to the hospital and start treatment Monday if you will first take them to a priest on Sunday for the rite of anointing of the sick, and to the homeopathic store to pick up some so-called remedy, just in case.

If you refuse, they won't get medical treatment and will die very painfully. If you agree, they will have an 80% chance of survival and you will have made them happier regardless of outcome.

So if someone is suffering from mental illness that is at that moment acute, they are an imminent threat to themselves or others, that is one thing - analogous to your heart attack example. But if it's more chronic, they've had very poor compliance with treatment in the past, they've been released because not (normally) deemed a threat, and if your cooperating with them in seeking an exorcism first, if you care about them, why not, because it increases the chance of a successful long-term outcome by increasing chance of compliance.
Click to expand...
I think our difference here is that I view this particular delusion as deserving of immediate medical evaluation. If the diagnosis is such that an "exorcism" before beginning treatment is deemed harmless, I'd just shrug.
 
Thor 2 said:
Tell me what other things do Christians think are not worth thinking about?
Click to expand...
For a start, I want to make clear that I'm in no way referring to all Christians. Merely the ones of my personal acquaintance. Please do not assume that I am trying to characterise all Christians in the same way - that would be absurd, with the number of different and sometimes mutually exclusive sects and interpretations that exist around the globe.

But since you ask I will indulge you in a minor off-topic diversion. I once asked a Christian to explain why the genealogies of Jesus in Mark and Luke are so different.

Their response was "eh." They honestly hadn't thought about it, and didn't really care. There are other apparent contradictions in the Bible that they didn't seem to have thought about either. And they didn't care. To them, since they did not believe that the Bible was a source of literal truth about the world, contradictions were merely the result of the fact that it had many authors, and were therefore unimportant.

However, atheists tend to leap upon these contradictions as though they alone disprove Christianity. Some of them are outright ridiculous - like whether Jonah was swallowed by a fish or a whale.

That's a great site, by the way, if you're interested in finding all the tiny things that are wrong with the Bible so that you can throw them in Christians' faces.
 
Mostly, the "Christians" I've met don't seem to have ever thought about practically any part of Christianity at all.
 
arthwollipot said:
For a start, I want to make clear that I'm in no way referring to all Christians. Merely the ones of my personal acquaintance. Please do not assume that I am trying to characterise all Christians in the same way - that would be absurd, with the number of different and sometimes mutually exclusive sects and interpretations that exist around the globe.

But since you ask I will indulge you in a minor off-topic diversion. I once asked a Christian to explain why the genealogies of Jesus in Mark and Luke are so different.

Their response was "eh." They honestly hadn't thought about it, and didn't really care. There are other apparent contradictions in the Bible that they didn't seem to have thought about either. And they didn't care. To them, since they did not believe that the Bible was a source of literal truth about the world, contradictions were merely the result of the fact that it had many authors, and were therefore unimportant.

However, atheists tend to leap upon these contradictions as though they alone disprove Christianity. Some of them are outright ridiculous - like whether Jonah was swallowed by a fish or a whale.

That's a great site, by the way, if you're interested in finding all the tiny things that are wrong with the Bible so that you can throw them in Christians' faces.
Click to expand...

Some sects of Christians maintain that the Bible is literal, inerrant truth. Such Christians tend to be the ones that people wind up arguing with the most, as they also tend to be the ones most likely to demand other people follow their beliefs. If their argument is that the Bible is literal, inerrant truth, than any contradiction in the Bible defeats that argument. If their entire belief system is based on the Bible being literal, inerrant truth, than any contradiction destroys their belief system.

Most Christians aren't actually like that.
 
Cat Not Included said:
Some sects of Christians maintain that the Bible is literal, inerrant truth. Such Christians tend to be the ones that people wind up arguing with the most, as they also tend to be the ones most likely to demand other people follow their beliefs. If their argument is that the Bible is literal, inerrant truth, than any contradiction in the Bible defeats that argument. If their entire belief system is based on the Bible being literal, inerrant truth, than any contradiction destroys their belief system.
Click to expand...
Except that it doesn't. It only shows them that Satan is working through his servants, the atheists, to shake and undermine their faith, and any criticism just bounces straight off them because they see it as a signal that they must be stronger in their faith.

Cat Not Included said:
Most Christians aren't actually like that.
Click to expand...
Fortunately. That type of Christian is pretty annoying.
 
Cat Not Included said:
Some sects of Christians maintain that the Bible is literal, inerrant truth. Such Christians tend to be the ones that people wind up arguing with the most, as they also tend to be the ones most likely to demand other people follow their beliefs. If their argument is that the Bible is literal, inerrant truth, than any contradiction in the Bible defeats that argument. If their entire belief system is based on the Bible being literal, inerrant truth, than any contradiction destroys their belief system.

Most Christians aren't actually like that.
Click to expand...


Interesting that this has been your experience of Christians - it is not mine.

My brother became a born again when he was 18. I, 16 at the time, found Bertrand Russel and was born again in the opposite direction.

You can possibly imagine the arguments we had at home.

My brother was not one of the fingers in the ears chanting "I believe, because I believe, because I believe" sort however, and did try to address some of the tricky parts of his dogma. The "we can't understand the ways of God" thing was fallen back on a number of times however.

In the passing years I met many of my brothers Jesus friends, who tried to convert me and were also similar to my brother. To be honest I have more respect for this kind of believer, than the blindly following, not thinking kind.

It is my opinion this kind of believer is/was more common than you suggest and this is the reason why Christianity is crumbling in the West. (Not quite so quickly in the USA as Europe I concede.)
 
arthwollipot said:
For a start, I want to make clear that I'm in no way referring to all Christians. Merely the ones of my personal acquaintance. Please do not assume that I am trying to characterise all Christians in the same way - that would be absurd, with the number of different and sometimes mutually exclusive sects and interpretations that exist around the globe.

But since you ask I will indulge you in a minor off-topic diversion. I once asked a Christian to explain why the genealogies of Jesus in Mark and Luke are so different.

Their response was "eh." They honestly hadn't thought about it, and didn't really care. There are other apparent contradictions in the Bible that they didn't seem to have thought about either. And they didn't care. To them, since they did not believe that the Bible was a source of literal truth about the world, contradictions were merely the result of the fact that it had many authors, and were therefore unimportant.

However, atheists tend to leap upon these contradictions as though they alone disprove Christianity. Some of them are outright ridiculous - like whether Jonah was swallowed by a fish or a whale.

That's a great site, by the way, if you're interested in finding all the tiny things that are wrong with the Bible so that you can throw them in Christians' faces.
Click to expand...


Well there you go again, trying to paint me as some sort of nasty character that likes to throw stuff in others faces.
 
Thor 2 said:
Have a look at my post # 151. You must learn to pay attention.
Click to expand...
Post #151 is in no way a response to my answer to your question.

I don't require you to respond to my answer to your question, but I thought it a bit impolite to ignore the substance on it and respond only to the quip at the end. Especially since it was an answer to your question. It seems like you asked me a question, then ignored my answer. I would think at least a "thanks for your answer to my question" might be warranted.
 
arthwollipot said:
Post #151 is in no way a response to my answer to your question.

I don't require you to respond to my answer to your question, but I thought it a bit impolite to ignore the substance on it and respond only to the quip at the end. Especially since it was an answer to your question. It seems like you asked me a question, then ignored my answer. I would think at least a "thanks for your answer to my question" might be warranted.
Click to expand...


I did not think what you wrote demanded any answer from me, and I agree with much of what you said, apart from the description of the type of Christian you know. I responded to that in my reply to Cats .....

Now if what you say is true then Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and so on, are just wasting their time wring books because the ones they want to get to aren't interested. On the other hand however, Richard Dawkins for example, claims some success in converting the faithful, because of feedback.

I loaned a copy of Sam Harris's "Letter to a Christian Nation" to a friend who was wavering in her belief. She claimed it shut down her faltering faith.
 
Thor 2 said:
I did not think what you wrote demanded any answer from me, and I agree with much of what you said, apart from the description of the type of Christian you know. I responded to that in my reply to Cats .....
Click to expand...
You disagree with my description of Christians I know? Do you know the same Christians I do? I didn't know you went to the same church I did at the same time and met the same people. In what way are those individuals different from the way I am describing them?

Thor 2 said:
Now if what you say is true then Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and so on, are just wasting their time wring books because the ones they want to get to aren't interested. On the other hand however, Richard Dawkins for example, claims some success in converting the faithful, because of feedback.

I loaned a copy of Sam Harris's "Letter to a Christian Nation" to a friend who was wavering in her belief. She claimed it shut down her faltering faith.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that would be the case if I ever claimed that what I said was true for all Christians everywhere. Which I didn't - repeatedly. That's something that you appear to keep on forgetting.

The Christians I am describing would not read The God Delusion. They would not even consider reading The God Delusion because reading books by Satanists like Dawkins and Hitchens is Satanism. Hence, Dawkins' and Hitchens' books are utterly irrelevant to them and, yes, wasted if the intent was to make those people atheists.

Now my saying that does not even remotely suggest that there are no Christians on whom those books are not wasted. Do you understand?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom