Thread: If you believe in Jesus

If nobody meets gods standard then it means that we are incompetent since we are the ones trying to reach for his standard.

^ I sometimes wonder if trying to reach the ultimate standard is more of a path than a goal, and if people try too hard to find permanent solace in cycles of change.

Originally Posted by Ditch

Then you must also believe in Satan, he and Jesus spoke. The Bible also mentions demonic possession, what do you think the implications are in our modern society?

That we cultivate primitive beliefs. ...I wonder how long this sort of thing can continue?

Whenever I see this thread title, I want to shout, "Clap your hands!!!"

I am not religious and therefore believe in neither, but I think believing in Jesus goes hand in hand with believing in Satan. I think it would be impossible to strive for the will of God if one did not believe in the ultimate sinner. Demonic possession on the other hand, I find a little difficult to wrap my head around.

Originally Posted by Ditch

Do you think that Hitler of say Jeffery Dahmer are examples of demonic possession?

No. Jeffrey Dahmer was a chronic sociopath who had a grim fascination with death and the collection of heads, skulls and body parts for means of sexual gratification. His murders were particularly gruesome, involving rape, dismemberment, necrophilia and cannibalism. He used the skin of his victims as lamp shades and other household decorations. He was a very sick man and there are many more just like him: John Wayne Gacy, David Berkowitz, Ted Bundy, Albert Fish, Ed Gein, Charles Manson, etc.

I am studying Criminal Psychology and have an intense desire to understand why people like these do what they do and what causes them to behave the way that they do. There are many reasons outlined, including bad childhood, abuse, etc. Demonic possession is not something that has ever been thought of. Personally I think a "not guilty due to demonic possession" plea would not stand up well in a court - how would one prove it? Serial killers have already cottoned onto a insanity plea and fortunately the courts has become wise with regard to this.

That's just my 2 cents

Originally Posted by Ditch

Do you think that Hitler ... are examples of demonic possession?

Hitler was nothing special, just a common two-bob dictator.

Originally Posted by Jinxi

I am not religious and therefore believe in neither, but I think believing in Jesus goes hand in hand with believing in Satan. I think it would be impossible to strive for the will of God if one did not believe in the ultimate sinner. Demonic possession on the other hand, I find a little difficult to wrap my head around.

Well those who believe in any of the three 'God' religions & their holy books, must also believe in witchcraft & the supernatural; for those things are in each of those faiths. At times, it's hard to find a divider between god & witchcraft, except that some are casting the spells in the name of God; which ironically is what many of the non-God spell casters do, just not to the same 'correct' god.
In essence, the '3 faiths' are in part created by 'witches' & 'witch customers' going by a different name; that is if you take value in the holy books to begin with.

That is if you believe they were casting spells in the first place....

Originally Posted by Jinxi

I am not religious and therefore believe in neither, but I think believing in Jesus goes hand in hand with believing in Satan. I think it would be impossible to strive for the will of God if one did not believe in the ultimate sinner. Demonic possession on the other hand, I find a little difficult to wrap my head around.



No. Jeffrey Dahmer was a chronic sociopath who had a grim fascination with death and the collection of heads, skulls and body parts for means of sexual gratification. His murders were particularly gruesome, involving rape, dismemberment, necrophilia and cannibalism. He used the skin of his victims as lamp shades and other household decorations. He was a very sick man and there are many more just like him: John Wayne Gacy, David Berkowitz, Ted Bundy, Albert Fish, Ed Gein, Charles Manson, etc.

I am studying Criminal Psychology and have an intense desire to understand why people like these do what they do and what causes them to behave the way that they do. There are many reasons outlined, including bad childhood, abuse, etc. Demonic possession is not something that has ever been thought of. Personally I think a "not guilty due to demonic possession" plea would not stand up well in a court - how would one prove it? Serial killers have already cottoned onto a insanity plea and fortunately the courts has become wise with regard to this.

That's just my 2 cents

Psychology can raise as many questions as it appears to provide answers. Two children can grow up in the same family, subject to the same external influences and yet still develop into opposite characters. One may grow up to be a Charles Manson while the other becomes a solid member of the community.

The schools of psychology that have grown out of Freud's original concepts tend to follow his atheist approach. The reality of spiritual experience was one of the great areas of contention between Sigmund Freud and Karl Jung. Those schools that have grown from Jungian concepts accept a spiritual reality which includes the demonic.

Like all areas of science, the direction taken, and conclusions reached, in psychological studies still depend largely on where the researcher or exponent place their faith.

Originally Posted by Custard

That is if you believe they were casting spells in the first place....

Well from (Moses &) the Egyptian Emperor's magicians, to Saul visiting a fortune teller, to magical water curing the sick, there's plenty of stuff that would make it into fantasy spell casting novels. The only difference between them & Moses's plagues, prophet's fortunes & disciple's cures is that the former group wasn't claimed for the 'one God'.
Personally, I think it's all as fraudulent as the modern day faith healers; but in essence you see the use of staffs & spell-like stuff, so yeah they're basically claims of witchlike spell casting on all sides.

Originally Posted by Jinxi

Demonic possession on the other hand, I find a little difficult to wrap my head around.

Even into the late 1980s (& 1990s), demon possession was a mainstay belief in the Catholic church, with several scandals resulting from young people being harmed from exorcisms.
http://www.nytimes.com/1998/01/21/ny...-exorcism.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anneliese_Michel
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wainuiomata_Mākutu_Lifting
http://www.trosch.org/chu/exorcism.htm

Edit : Have to correct, it's allegedly still a mainstay belief http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interna...n_of_Exorcists

I find it hard to believe anyone on WF could doubt Satan's existence. I mean, I've been posting here for a while now. It's not like I'm hiding or anything, and it's not like these horns are subtle.

Silly silly, I've been around. No need to flatter me with your Imitation; however sincere it might be.

Originally Posted by Baron

Psychology can raise as many questions as it appears to provide answers. Two children can grow up in the same family, subject to the same external influences and yet still develop into opposite characters. One may grow up to be a Charles Manson while the other becomes a solid member of the community.

Did these children have the same name, the exact same appearance, breathed the exact same air, have exactly the same composition to an atomic level, and where in the exact place and time since the exact time their atoms where formed?

No, right? Then it's unlikely that they won't develop differences. As much as we'd like to think, siblings are usually treated with some slight differences, and outside factors also have a huge effect on who we become. Unless they had the exact same friends and interacted with them in the same way, at the same times, I don't see how two people could be similar through any means beyond coincidence. Some mundane things, like what you ate for a snack or how many hours you slept, can drastically change your behavior that day. Some not so mundane things, like who was your first crush, can drastically change your personality depending on how things play out (at least, mine did, and a lot of people whom I knew were also changed drastically by how their romantic relationships played out). Things like who was blamed for breaking the jar can be a deciding factor on who becomes the problem child in the future.

Like all areas of science, the direction taken, and conclusions reached, in psychological studies still depend largely on where the researcher or exponent place their faith.

Would you be able to step out of your bed, if you couldn't trust your eyes? Would you cross a street, if you couldn't trust your ears? Would you eat your lunch, if you couldn't trust your taste?

Like all things, the foundations of our very existence is that we can trust what our senses show us. There is faith on everything, so I find your comment redundant. The important is not "faith" in itself, but the reasoning behind it.

Faith is something I remove from my body when no one else is home. Or if she asked for it on her face, still creeps me out when they did. Silly silly they were.

I was raised in a brethren school, they beat me (Obviously). Ha, stupid bastards didn't realise I had to make the crime worse than the original so I wouldn't lose my lunchtime (and obviously would instead be caned).

Back to the point however, Elite is correct. Many outcomes of our all very individual lives, effect our very being, our very fabric of humanity. I find that faith being forced down my throat, only made me wish to dribble it out my backside. Though I admit, I giggle when i think about that school, so narrow minded by their foolishness. Pity.

Originally Posted by Baron

Like all areas of science, the direction taken, and conclusions reached, in psychological studies still depend largely on where the researcher or exponent place their faith.

This is an interesting statement!

Psychological theories are much less expressible mathematically (and therefore far less scientifically mature) than even relatively newer scientific areas such as computer science. Most personality theories have more in common with philosophy than science, though they do attempt a more "scientific approach" at defining a model for human behaviour.

Many branches under the broad umbrella of science don't leave a lot of room for faith as a factor in their theories. For example, you'll reach the same organic compound from a combination of certain atoms, regardless of where the researcher places his faith.

It's not surprising that science and atheism / agnosticism are such common bedfellows.

Originally Posted by elite

Would you be able to step out of your bed, if you couldn't trust your eyes? Would you cross a street, if you couldn't trust your ears? Would you eat your lunch, if you couldn't trust your taste?

Like all things, the foundations of our very existence is that we can trust what our senses show us. There is faith on everything, so I find your comment redundant. The important is not "faith" in itself, but the reasoning behind it.

Faith, in these contexts or types of discussions, is more often used to differentiate between believing in what our senses convey to us (which is easy enough to do) and believing in what our senses CAN'T tell us (which is potentially much more difficult). That's how I imagine Baron means it, anyway.

I find it incredibly hard to understand why anybody in our modern day world could possibly believe that Jesus is real as stated by Christianity. The Christian religion is a tool of oppression and social conditioning. Both Satan & Jesus are tools of oppression through fear.