Let's talk about Demons.

[arthwollipot]

You totally miss the point. I want theists to think about it and give explanations for it, in the hope they may see how silly it all is ........ got it?

Your stated purpose is evangelism?

Okay.

 

[simonxlong]

You totally miss the point. I want theists to think about it and give explanations for it, in the hope they may see how silly it all is ........ got it?

No, not really. You're posting your questions in what amounts to an atheist forum. They're aren't a lot of theist hanging around, and the ones that do stick around aren't going to be impressed by questions like these.

 

[Thor 2]

No, not really. You're posting your questions in what amounts to an atheist forum. They're aren't a lot of theist hanging around, and the ones that do stick around aren't going to be impressed by questions like these.

If you were to pay attention you would see that a good number of theists do come to these shores. Sure they are not going to be impressed by questions like these, and tend to shove them to one side, but I just want them to think about the silly stuff they believe in, and the few that do use some degree of reason may get a chink in their faith.

As our resident expert on the nature of Christian believers, arthwollipot, has told us that belief in demons is mainstream among the faithful, I want them to think about it.

 

[Thermal]

No, that is just wrong. Atheists are entirely comfortable to state right out that "I don't know" because one cannot know everything.

The true blue believers have no issue claiming that they know all of the answers, falling as usual into one of their very own seven sins. goddidit. That is all they have.

Seems pretty definitive. I suggested that perhaps theists don't have all the answers, and asked somewhat rhetorically if atheists had them all. May I ask why that is just wrong? Theists who arrogantly claim they know it all are a pretty small and annoying subset; is your experience with religious people really so universally negative? Serious question.

 

[Thermal]

If you were to pay attention you would see that a good number of theists do come to these shores. Sure they are not going to be impressed by questions like these, and tend to shove them to one side, but I just want them to think about the silly stuff they believe in, and the few that do use some degree of reason may get a chink in their faith.

As our resident expert on the nature of Christian believers, arthwollipot, has told us that belief in demons is mainstream among the faithful, I want them to think about it.

Sooooo...you don't actually want to talk about anything, but just ridicule beliefs and attempt to...what, convert? Saying that few use some degree of reason may not be the move. Insults and all, ya know.

 

[Myriad]

In the mainline Protestant churches I've attended, demons have been mostly metaphorical. They're not autonomous sentient evil spirits out to tempt or possess; they arise and exist in the self (or the "heart") as a result of temptation or sin, and act by interfering with the similarly internal heartfelt presence of the Holy Spirit that would otherwise guide the person to fortitude and happiness. Such misfortune can only happen if the person has not fully accepted the salvation of Jesus, because doing so would eliminate the heart's vulnerability to demonic usurpation. (This is symmetrical with the usual mainline Protestant version of hell, which is that the torments of hell consist entirely of separation from the presence of God.)

Metaphorical demons are usually associated with specific issues like addictions, bad habits, and antisocial behavior. Unfortunately, in the past they were also associated with mental and physical illness; even those liberal denominations tended to blame the victim by attributing various maladies to sin, and some may still do so.

Nowadays where it's usually social ills brought on by the person's own choices or behavior that give rise to demon narratives (in the developed world at least), there's not really much of a difference in practice between the two models of what-demons-are (which might be why the actual nature of demons is not often a matter of intense inter-denominational debate). One church calls (say) an addiction itself the demon, not a bad metaphor for a problem that actually does seem to actively and intensely resist any solution; while another regards the demon as an autonomous sentient being that exists only to cause problems and misery… while still ultimately blaming the demon's victim for thoughts or actions that "let the demon in."

 

[Thor 2]

Sooooo...you don't actually want to talk about anything, but just ridicule beliefs and attempt to...what, convert? Saying that few use some degree of reason may not be the move. Insults and all, ya know.

My aim is not to insult or ridicule but I want to use humor, (a very effective weapon), in my arsenal.

Arthwollipot has told us that all the Christians he knows don't think about the stuff they believe in, and that is what I was alluding to in my comment. Personally I think a good number of the faithful do think about what they believe in and this is why Christianity is crumbling in the West.

 

[Thor 2]

In the mainline Protestant churches I've attended, demons have been mostly metaphorical. They're not autonomous sentient evil spirits out to tempt or possess; they arise and exist in the self (or the "heart") as a result of temptation or sin, and act by interfering with the similarly internal heartfelt presence of the Holy Spirit that would otherwise guide the person to fortitude and happiness. Such misfortune can only happen if the person has not fully accepted the salvation of Jesus, because doing so would eliminate the heart's vulnerability to demonic usurpation. (This is symmetrical with the usual mainline Protestant version of hell, which is that the torments of hell consist entirely of separation from the presence of God.)

Metaphorical demons are usually associated with specific issues like addictions, bad habits, and antisocial behavior. Unfortunately, in the past they were also associated with mental and physical illness; even those liberal denominations tended to blame the victim by attributing various maladies to sin, and some may still do so.

Nowadays where it's usually social ills brought on by the person's own choices or behavior that give rise to demon narratives (in the developed world at least), there's not really much of a difference in practice between the two models of what-demons-are (which might be why the actual nature of demons is not often a matter of intense inter-denominational debate). One church calls (say) an addiction itself the demon, not a bad metaphor for a problem that actually does seem to actively and intensely resist any solution; while another regards the demon as an autonomous sentient being that exists only to cause problems and misery… while still ultimately blaming the demon's victim for thoughts or actions that "let the demon in."

Thanks Myriad, an interesting perspective.

Interesting the way some try to mould a concept into something more in keeping with a rational, down to earth, idea that is not so confronting to reason.

Demons that are not really demons, and a Hell that is not really Hell, but just separation from God. Some of the early founders of the Catholic Church would be most disappointed to hear of these developments.

Perhaps this is one of the ways theism is dying in the West. Some religious institutions just water down more and more, that which was taught in the past, so what is left is just a pale image of that which once was.

 

[abaddon]

Seems pretty definitive. I suggested that perhaps theists don't have all the answers, and asked somewhat rhetorically if atheists had them all. May I ask why that is just wrong? Theists who arrogantly claim they know it all are a pretty small and annoying subset; is your experience with religious people really so universally negative? Serious question.

Bit of a 50/50 question and answer. It varies from the never gave it a moments consideration to the type that requires that one back away slowly without making eye contact.

 

[arthwollipot]

As our resident expert on the nature of Christian believers, arthwollipot, has told us that belief in demons is mainstream among the faithful, I want them to think about it.

I am not and have never claimed to be an "expert". In fact, I have claimed almost the exact opposite of that. I merely have some experience, which is not something that lifelong atheists can say.

 

[arthwollipot]

Thanks Myriad, an interesting perspective.

Interesting the way some try to mould a concept into something more in keeping with a rational, down to earth, idea that is not so confronting to reason.

Demons that are not really demons, and a Hell that is not really Hell, but just separation from God. Some of the early founders of the Catholic Church would be most disappointed to hear of these developments.

Perhaps this is one of the ways theism is dying in the West. Some religious institutions just water down more and more, that which was taught in the past, so what is left is just a pale image of that which once was.

Myriad's perspective is actually not too different from mine. My Pentecostal church held demons to be somewhere between real and metaphorical. You could definitely be possessed by a demon of lust, which could be exorcised by anyone with the Holy Spirit, but at the same time it was viewed as a more-or-less metaphorical representation of lustful thoughts and emotions and the exorcism merely helped the "sufferer" to deal with those parts of their emotions. It was a bit weird.

 

[DarthFishy]

Myriad's perspective is actually not too different from mine. My Pentecostal church held demons to be somewhere between real and metaphorical. You could definitely be possessed by a demon of lust, which could be exorcised by anyone with the Holy Spirit, but at the same time it was viewed as a more-or-less metaphorical representation of lustful thoughts and emotions and the exorcism merely helped the "sufferer" to deal with those parts of their emotions. It was a bit weird.

Thinking back on my own Christian experience I agree with this. Demons were real, but I didn't actually believe in them (at least not that I can remember). It was definitely a bit weird.

And Thor 2, if you are interested in a non-biblical but definitely interesting take on Demons/Angels/Satan, check out the Lucifer TV series.

 

[Thor 2]

I am not and have never claimed to be an "expert". In fact, I have claimed almost the exact opposite of that. I merely have some experience, which is not something that lifelong atheists can say.

Well you have made comments about, "The Christians I know think this and that", so I thought you were arguing from a position of authority on the subject.

Lifelong atheists? They are a bit thin on the ground in the USA and even Australia. I am not one as I believed this stuff until I was liberated at the age of 16 by Bertrand Russell.

 

[Thor 2]

Thinking back on my own Christian experience I agree with this. Demons were real, but I didn't actually believe in them (at least not that I can remember). It was definitely a bit weird.

And Thor 2, if you are interested in a non-biblical but definitely interesting take on Demons/Angels/Satan, check out the Lucifer TV series.

Thanks for that DarthFishy and thanks for the heads up on the Lucifer TV series. Not really what I am on about however. I just want Christians, (who may be lurking around here), to think about this nonsense.

 

[Thor 2]

Myriad's perspective is actually not too different from mine. My Pentecostal church held demons to be somewhere between real and metaphorical. You could definitely be possessed by a demon of lust, which could be exorcised by anyone with the Holy Spirit, but at the same time it was viewed as a more-or-less metaphorical representation of lustful thoughts and emotions and the exorcism merely helped the "sufferer" to deal with those parts of their emotions. It was a bit weird.

Weird it certainly is, and somewhat in contradiction to what you earlier posted about demons being mainstream in Christian belief.

I mean real demons? Nasty beings that get into people?

 

[Myriad]

Thanks Myriad, an interesting perspective.

Interesting the way some try to mould a concept into something more in keeping with a rational, down to earth, idea that is not so confronting to reason.

Heliocentrism and evolution had their respective impacts on such thinking, but I think it's the germ theory of disease (more generally, understanding of disease as a physical process) that really changed everything. Imagine living before such understanding was possible. A phenomenon with no comprehensible cause threatened your life every day and (unless war or famine were prevalent in your life) killed most of the people you knew during your lifetime. Demons aren't such a bad explanation.

Demons that are not really demons, and a Hell that is not really Hell, but just separation from God. Some of the early founders of the Catholic Church would be most disappointed to hear of these developments.

They certainly were. Check into history. There have, I've heard, been a few wee little disagreements between Protestant and Catholic churches, and between different Protestant sects.

Perhaps this is one of the ways theism is dying in the West. Some religious institutions just water down more and more, that which was taught in the past, so what is left is just a pale image of that which once was.

That's probably not the case, because it is the liberal "mainline" (which is NOT a synonym for "mainstream"!) Protestant churches that have been dying in the U.S. for decades now, while more fundamentalist denominations with more simplistic theological outlooks have thrived. The result: superstition becomes more prevalent among the religious, which is increasingly rejected altogether by other segments of the culture.

Superstition ultimately just means mistaking a simplified explanation for the entirety of the reality. (Lots of other words and phrases mean essentially the same thing, including "mistaking the map for the territory.") Believing that posting the Ten Commandments on court house walls will deter crime due to the text's ability to inspire people with the excellent moral values it imparts is dubious and probably wrong, but not superstitious. Believing that posting the Ten Commandments on court house walls will deter crime because the holy power of the words will drive away demons is superstition, and many current Christian denominations in the U.S. currently verge toward the latter.

 

[Thermal]

Bit of a 50/50 question and answer. It varies from the never gave it a moments consideration to the type that requires that one back away slowly without making eye contact.

Sorry to hear that. In the States, most of the Christians I know don't treat religion as a source of all knowledge, but as a source of peace and fellowship with other people of good will, that you don't often find in a secular environment.

 

[Thermal]

Weird it certainly is, and somewhat in contradiction to what you earlier posted about demons being mainstream in Christian belief.

I mean real demons? Nasty beings that get into people?

American Southern Baptists teach that whatever angels and demons are, they are not physical in the way we are. As Myriad and arthwollipot noted, demons are (sort of) seen as personifying bad obsessions that other believers can help you get rid of (exorcising). I haven't heard of many churches that view demons as literal invasive critters. What you may call a guy being a horn-toad might be described as being possessed by a demon of lust, but the 'exorcism' would be more like behavior modification therapy, not a ritualized banishing.

(source: Grandpop was a preacher)

 

[Thor 2]

American Southern Baptists teach that whatever angels and demons are, they are not physical in the way we are. As Myriad and arthwollipot noted, demons are (sort of) seen as personifying bad obsessions that other believers can help you get rid of (exorcising). I haven't heard of many churches that view demons as literal invasive critters. What you may call a guy being a horn-toad might be described as being possessed by a demon of lust, but the 'exorcism' would be more like behavior modification therapy, not a ritualized banishing.

(source: Grandpop was a preacher)

I would suggest there are as many different ideas of what demons are, and what possession is, as there are theists that believe in this stuff.

Earlier in the thread we had some input about where demons came from, and the general consensus seemed to be, they were fallen angels in league with the Devil. Not physical in the sense that they were made of matter but definitely beings of some sort.

My nephew has told me at great length about his experiences in casting out demons, and there is no doubt he is talking about a separate entity, invading the body. He tells of a different voice emanating from the mouth of the possessed - just like in "The Exorcist" movie.

It is most confusing to accept that demons exist, (as described in religious text), that people are possessed by demons, and yet this is not actual possession by these dudes, but some personification of bad obsessions.

 

[arthwollipot]

I would suggest there are as many different ideas of what demons are, and what possession is, as there are theists that believe in this stuff.

This is certainly true.

Weird it certainly is, and somewhat in contradiction to what you earlier posted about demons being mainstream in Christian belief.

No, it isn't.

I mean real demons? Nasty beings that get into people?

I'm pretty sure you'll find that regardless of the particular interpretation, actual (not metaphorical) demons are always spiritual beings, not actual corporeal, substantial ones that are made of matter like you and me. I'm pretty sure no-one has ever claimed that you can literally punch a demon in its face.