• 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.

The Big Dog said:
you think that it is delusional to determine whether one is dealing with an illness before performing an exorcism?

Huh.

I am going to have to go ahead and kinda disagree.
Click to expand...

. . . it is important to ascertain that one is dealing with the presence of the Evil One, and not an illness.
Click to expand...
Delusional.
 
epeeist said:
You're not getting my point.
Click to expand...
Yes, I am.

Let's say A, a friend or family member, believes that their drug abuse, violence (to themselves and others) and otherwise dangerous and criminal behaviour is influenced by possession. They're happy to get psychiatric and psychological treatment after an exorcism which will give them comfort but they need you to drive them.
Click to expand...
If a person is that much a danger to themselves and/or others, I think it would be my duty as a human being to get them the most efficacious help possible in the most efficient manner. A side trip to the corner exorcist isn't any of those things

Do you push them to not get an exorcism, refuse to drive them, telling them they're indulging in "superstitious retrograde nonsense", knowing that they will then refuse to do anything to help themselves? Or do you tell them that while as they know you don't share their beliefs, you will help them so long as they promise to also get psychiatric and psychological treatment? And do you refrain from lecturing them on the drive about how idiotically superstitious they are, in your view?
Click to expand...

It seems you are less concerned with your hypothetical disturbed individual and more concerned with the vocabulary skeptics use to describe demons and demonic possession. Superstitious retrograde nonsense is a fine descriptor; idiotic is your modifier.
 
but are they excorcists certified? or authorised. or both.

you see, I only trust certified astrologists, psychics, dowsers and homeopaths. (sad, but in my country all homeopaths are medical persons. this, of course, ensures they see real troubles but the discredit...)
 
Resume said:
Delusional.
Click to expand...

Illness, especially psychological illness, is a very different matter; treating this is the concern of medical science. Therefore, before an exorcism is performed, it is important to ascertain that one is dealing with the presence of the Evil One, and not an illness.
Click to expand...

Smart
 
kayle said:
but are they excorcists certified? or authorised. or both.

you see, I only trust certified astrologists, psychics, dowsers and homeopaths. (sad, but in my country all homeopaths are medical persons. this, of course, ensures they see real troubles but the discredit...)
Click to expand...

How about Certified Attorneys, auto mechanics and Orthopedic Surgeons?

Do you trust them?
 
The Big Dog said:
Smart
Click to expand...

Were a health provider to entertain the idea that the cause of a mental illness was, in fact, "the Evil One", they would be guilty of (at least) malpractice, if not outright fraud. It would be the same if (for instance) they were to entertain the idea that the cause was "a Voodoo Curse", or "the Evil Eye", or "the Little People".
 
The Big Dog said:
How about Certified Attorneys, auto mechanics and Orthopedic Surgeons?

Do you trust them?
Click to expand...

An Attorney-at-Law who claimed that the actions of "demons" would determine the outcome of a case would not deserve trust.

An auto mechanic who identified the malfunction of a car's engine as the inimical action of unappeased pixies would not deserve trust.

An Orthopaedic Surgeon who claimed that Manu'u Legba was responsible for the functional degradation of a knee, and insisted that the "treatment" needed was to smoke a rum-soaked cigar on a full moon would not deserve trust.

A mental health practitioner who allowed that the cause of a mental illness was "demons", or "the Evil One" would not deserve trust.

ETA: capably ninja-ed by TheGoldcountry...
 
Last edited:
From what I can tell, the phrase "mental disorder" didn't exist in biblical times so every instance of abnormal behaviour would have been attributed to "demonic possession".
 
psionl0 said:
From what I can tell, the phrase "mental disorder" didn't exist in biblical times so every instance of abnormal behaviour would have been attributed to "demonic possession".
Click to expand...

And it is as incorrect an attribution as would be "the hand of the 'holy spirit' ", or the "will of 'god' ". (Or the "action of 'demons' ", or the "attention of 'the Evil One' ".)
 
Delvo said:
The church was taken to when I was a kid just didn't talk about demons much. Their existence was accepted in the background as a bunch of lesser angels who joined the Devil against the good ones, but they weren't thought to possess humans.
Click to expand...


That is my understanding too, that angels/demons/heaven/hell were not of this earth (or dimension, plane, etc) and that interaction with humans on earth was rare.
 
Illness, especially psychological illness, is a very different matter; treating this is the concern of medical science.
Click to expand...

The Big Dog said:
Smart
Click to expand...

It's nothing more than a cop-out. That statement is null and void when the options given are 'mental illness', or 'demonic possession'. And who makes this determination? An exorcist.

The deluded leading the deluded.
 
Shiner said:
It's nothing more than a cop-out. That statement is null and void when the options given are 'mental illness', or 'demonic possession'. And who makes this determination? An exorcist.

The deluded leading the deluded.
Click to expand...

Literally everything you just wrote was wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom