Demonology self help: Adam Blai

[xrunner]

My only point is we know much less than we think we know, especially about consciousness. Only using an open and critical mind we can tackle these topics. Today's science is a powerful tool of inquiry when it's not restricted in small philosophical corners.

If one approaches the subject with any kind of prejudice, be it based on dogmatic religion, or dogmatic scientism, it's unlikely we'll ever get closer to the truth.

It takes an enquiring and open mind to put what you believe under discussion in order to get to the truth, a truly scientific attitude. Pride is usually the greatest obstacle.
But in my case I crossed from the unbelievers camp to the believers camp only after seeing things with my own eyes. It just happened, so I didn't have to purposefully make that first step out of my comfort zone.

 

[Daffodil]

one day, i think all "demons" will end up being viruses or bacteria.

 

[PeterPositive]

one day, i think all "demons" will end up being viruses or bacteria.

Probably, when we didn't knew better we used all sorts of crazy ideas and sometimes we still do. Crazy people always existed

The question is... how come the ritual of exorcism works? Can we kill bacteria with rituals? I hardly believe so.
Next common sense answer could be the placebo effect, of course, it's a possibility, although the range of applicability is not that vast. E.g. you can't cure an infection with placebo, nor epilepsy etc...

What is difficult to reconcile is what happens with these few people that are admitted to a full rite at the Vatican for example. This is no joke. 98% of the people is simply referred to a doctor or a psychiatrist. It's the remaining 2% that doesn't fit with the usual explanations.

The level of distress these people are in is horrendous, they usually show multiple personality disorder that manifest very violently. The real person inside the body is not to be found. At times they show telepathic abilities and stuff flies around without anyone touching it... aka poltergeists.

The priests that officiate the ritual are often times beaten up or they report sudden sicknesses etc... It's not stuff for the faint of heart, and yes it sounds like folklore or outright made up, and yet there are very well documented cases in which very bizarre things happen.

I am interested in that 2% because it's a fascinating anomaly and something that hardly can be explained away with the usual tools. I think that, together with other well documented phenomena (as telepathy), speaks volumes to how little we know about consciousness.

As regards the "G" word I am completely agnostic, these rites work everywhere, no matter the creed, so it's not a prerogative of Christians. Similar rituals are officiated by Buddhists, Hindus etc... The images and symbols used in these rites seem to speak to a higher level of our consciousness. Call it the collective unconscious (as per Carl Jung's theory), higher self, soul...

 

[Wayne]

The priests that officiate the ritual are often times beaten up or they report sudden sicknesses etc.

I read a report once of how some people who work in the medical profession notice a perplexing curiosity. In this case, the report came from a nurse who worked in the cancer ward of a hospital. She noticed that uncomfortably often after a person died of cancer, one of their frequent visitors would come down with the very same kind of cancer within a relatively short period of time. I don't remember the specifics, but I seem to recall her referencing the possibility that "entities" that can create cancer in a person's body can move on to another person's body when they know their current "host" is about to die. -- Just another "story", FWIW.

 

[PeterPositive]

I read a report once of how some people who work in the medical profession notice a perplexing curiosity. In this case, the report came from a nurse who worked in the cancer ward of a hospital. She noticed that uncomfortably often after a person died of cancer, one of their frequent visitors would come down with the very same kind of cancer within a relatively short period of time. I don't remember the specifics, but I seem to recall her referencing the possibility that "entities" that can create cancer in a person's body can move on to another person's body when they know their current "host" is about to die. -- Just another "story", FWIW.

Interesting, but I wouldn't take it at face value without lots of evidence and thorough investigations.
It's a difficult subject to navigate and it's always best to keep and open but vert critical mind, a lot of weird stuff does indeed turn out to be hokum.

cheers

 

[andre79]

Probably, when we didn't knew better we used all sorts of crazy ideas and sometimes we still do. Crazy people always existed

The question is... how come the ritual of exorcism works? Can we kill bacteria with rituals? I hardly believe so.
Next common sense answer could be the placebo effect, of course, it's a possibility, although the range of applicability is not that vast. E.g. you can't cure an infection with placebo, nor epilepsy etc...

What is difficult to reconcile is what happens with these few people that are admitted to a full rite at the Vatican for example. This is no joke. 98% of the people is simply referred to a doctor or a psychiatrist. It's the remaining 2% that doesn't fit with the usual explanations.

The level of distress these people are in is horrendous, they usually show multiple personality disorder that manifest very violently. The real person inside the body is not to be found. At times they show telepathic abilities and stuff flies around without anyone touching it... aka poltergeists.

The priests that officiate the ritual are often times beaten up or they report sudden sicknesses etc... It's not stuff for the faint of heart, and yes it sounds like folklore or outright made up, and yet there are very well documented cases in which very bizarre things happen.

I am interested in that 2% because it's a fascinating anomaly and something that hardly can be explained away with the usual tools. I think that, together with other well documented phenomena (as telepathy), speaks volumes to how little we know about consciousness.

As regards the "G" word I am completely agnostic, these rites work everywhere, no matter the creed, so it's not a prerogative of Christians. Similar rituals are officiated by Buddhists, Hindus etc... The images and symbols used in these rites seem to speak to a higher level of our consciousness. Call it the collective unconscious (as per Carl Jung's theory), higher self, soul...

Very interesting. I am curious too about the exorcism ritual. Maybe in the Middle Age any psychiatrist or organic illness could be confuse with being possesed by the demons, but in our age with all the advanced techniques to test and detect diseases, it would be more difficult to ignore it. I am not saying that is impossible though.

Now, what about this 2% that the Vatican accepts to do the exorcism? What happens to these people after it's done? Are they "cured"?

If you believe in God existence, then you believe in demons, it's a two faces coin. But the existence of God has not been scientifically proven. I think the closest one human has been to prove the existence of God was Thomas Aquinas, which of course was a very smart guy but not even him could do it.

But here's the issue, to have faith in God you don't need proves, that's what's faith is all about. What i am trying to say is that there are things that has not logical, natural explanations, what we christians call miracles. Maybe the exorcism is part of that, who knows. I wouldn't dismiss the idea if i thought i had a demon inside

 

[PeterPositive]

Very interesting. I am curious too about the exorcism ritual. Maybe in the Middle Age any psychiatrist or organic illness could be confuse with being possesed by the demons, but in our age with all the advanced techniques to test and detect diseases, it would be more difficult to ignore it. I am not saying that is impossible though.

Yes indeed. We still have many things to learn so we could be making the same mistake. What is fascinating is that those rituals do indeed work.

Now, what about this 2% that the Vatican accepts to do the exorcism? What happens to these people after it's done? Are they "cured"?

Yes, more often than not. Some are healed in one go, others take longer time.
If this was all just "hocus pocus" there would be no effect and the poor subject would find no solution to their sufferings.

If you believe in God existence, then you believe in demons, it's a two faces coin. But the existence of God has not been scientifically proven. I think the closest one human has been to prove the existence of God was Thomas Aquinas, which of course was a very smart guy but not even him could do it.

Personally I am agnostic. I just don't know. The G word is such a loaded term that it is very difficult to discuss it without all the attached baggage

I prefer to think about consciousness. We have no idea what it really is, how this miracle of awareness and self reflection came into existence and what is its true nature.

Our culture is permeated by the dualistic view of a "bearded God in the sky" vs a universe with no purpose, born out some of lucky accident. I find both views extremely superficial and entrenched in their respective ideological positions. They don't really offer anything interesting to the inquiry into the big mysteries of the existence.

On the other hand there's a ton of interesting literature and research in the field of consciousness (parapsychology, anomalistic psychology) and even medicine (NDEs, hallucinogenics, multiple personality ) that suggests that consciousness acts non locally.

What happens in exorcisms seems another manifestation (perhaps extreme) of non local consciousness. Where something else, a different consciousness is apparently taking control of the human being in a somewhat violent and messy way.

There are less brutal manifestations of these phenomena which are very well known in science with names such as Multiple Personality Disorder, or Dissociative Identity Disorder.

Here's a baffling example:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...nalities-body-case-thats-baffled-experts.html

Cheers

 

[PeterPositive]

One more article about multiple personalities:
http://www.nytimes.com/1988/06/28/science/probing-the-enigma-of-multiple-personality.html

Pretty amazing how people not only change their psychological traits but also can be allergic to something in one personality and completely free of allergies in another one, or react differently to medications, even switching epilepsy on/off...

 

[xrunner]

Are they "cured"?

Last week I was speaking to a man who had a serious demonic problem in his late teens. He told me he was completely freed after eight pretty violent sessions and has remained so and well for the last thirty odd years.

If you believe in God existence, then you believe in demons

It can be the other way round. This chap I was talking to decided to change his lifestyle as he "discovered" God in the process.
A good friend of mine has been affected for over twenty years. She wasn't religious. For many years she went from doctor to doctor, had counselling, therapy etc. No treatment really helped her. She eventually discovered the origin of her health problems and about five years ago started to receive some help. It's been two years now that she has received regular monthly exorcisms and is now in a much better emotional and physical condition than the wreck she used to be although she not completely free yet. However, God is now everything for her. It seems to me that when you experience demons in your own life, you just run to God and it's not a question of faith any longer because after such an experience, the existence of demons and God become a reality.

I read animals can be affected and that exorcisms have cured horses and other animals I don't remember.
How do we explain that? I don't think we can through recourse to either faith or psychology.

 

[Esther12]

I read animals can be affected and that exorcisms have cured horses and other animals I don't remember.
How do we explain that?

Lots of people write things that aren't true.

 

[jimells]

Science is about questioning things. Religion is about not questioning things. I know which I prefer.

Even more important, religion is about obedience. In fact, our entire society is organized around obedience. Practically from the moment of birth we are ordered to OBEY.

And of course, if we don't obey, we will be made to suffer, first by parents, then by school, then by police, then by military.

 

[jimells]

She noticed that uncomfortably often after a person died of cancer, one of their frequent visitors would come down with the very same kind of cancer within a relatively short period of time.

Humans are very good at finding patterns that aren't really there. I used to suspect my migraine attacks were triggered by increasing barometric pressure, like one sees after winter storms. Then I found out about PEM and figured out that I was triggering the migraines by going out after the snow storm and shoveling snow. It wasn't quite a miracle, but I no longer have terrible migraines after every bad winter storm.

 

[adreno]

It takes an enquiring and open mind to put what you believe under discussion in order to get to the truth, a truly scientific attitude.

No, science is not about beliefs.

 

[adreno]

I agree, but "pseudo-science" is. -- There are many today who try to peddle pseudo-science as real science (often because financial incentives are involved). Each individual's responsibility is to discern which perspectives have credibility, which ones don't, and which ones we may want to defer judgment on (whether on science or anything else). It's an individual process, shaped by many factors. To each their own is my philosophy.

Demonology isn't even at the level of pseudo-science, it's pure nonsense. It's no more credible than believing in gnomes or elves. People are welcome to believe whatever they want, even nonsense, but they are not welcome to call it science.

 

[PeterPositive]

No, science is not about beliefs.

Well in part it is. Scientific materialism believes "materialism" (whatever that is) is true. This is like putting the cart beyond the horse. You can't assume something fundamental without even being able to define that something. The origin of materialism are very old and the definition of matter 200 years no longer works for today's standards.

While I agree that there must be some direction (i.e. philosophy) behind the modality of scientific inquiry, the whole edifice of the physicalist philosophy can become a huge hindrance to scientific progress, because it doesn't allow to move past the its confines.

Sometimes I feel science is impeded by its own philosophical assumptions, especially when it comes down to a field such as that of consciousness.

 

[adreno]

Well in part it is. Scientific materialism believes "materialism" (whatever that is) is true. This is like putting the cart beyond the horse. You can't assume something fundamental without even being able to define that something. The origin of materialism are very old and the definition of matter 200 years no longer works for today's standards.

Disagree. We presently accept the model of materialism because this model fits the data the most. If another model comes along that fits the data better, science will eventually adopt this as the dominant model. It is not about beliefs, though people can be caught up in paradigms. But science is about looking at the data rationally and developing models that fit the data.

 

[xrunner]

No, science is not about beliefs.

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." Albert Einstein

“Both religion and science need for their activities the belief in God, and moreover God stands for the former in the beginning, and for the latter at the end of the whole thinking. For the former, God represents the basis, for the latter – the crown of any reasoning concerning the world-view.” Max Planck

“It is the steady, ongoing, never-slackening fight against scepticism and dogmatism, against unbelief and superstition, which religion and science wage together." Max Planck

 

[PeterPositive]

Disagree. We presently accept the model of materialism because this model fits the data the most. If another model comes along that fits the data better, science will eventually adopt this as the dominant model. It is not about beliefs, though people can be caught up in paradigms. But science is about looking at the data rationally and developing models that fit the data.

I disagree too
There is no such thing as a model that best "fits the data". Dualism would perfectly "fit the data" as well... even better since it could explain stuff that materialism is incapable of dealing with. There are specific historical/cultural reasons why reductionist materialism is the dominant philosophy which have nothing to do with it being in any way "superior" to other philosophical options.

The definition of matter has changed since every major breakthrough in science and especially since Einstein's theory of relativity, which made matter and energy interchangeable and QM, which "dissolved" solid matter into a waves describing potentials.

Today Quantum field theory has dissolved particles into scalar fields of energy boiling with virtual particles and guided by abstract mathematical rules.... there's no way to pin down matter. Hence, materialism is baloney

Heisenberg, one of the fathers of quantum mechanics said these words:

The ontology of materialism rested upon the illusion that the kind of existence, the direct 'actuality' of the world around us, can be extrapolated into the atomic range. This extrapolation, however, is impossible... atoms are not things.​

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Materialism#Defining_matter

cheers

 

[xrunner]

Lots of people write things that aren't true.

That's a general statement. I make plenty of those myself and they're quite easy.

Problem is that priests like Fr Amorth, former chief exorcist of the Catholic Church, are unlikely to lie on such issue, not so much because of the possible backfiring on their respectability and credibility but because it's utterly against their beliefs system.
They would never and could never do what they do because it would seriously harm them, if you knew what battling on a daily basis against demons really meant.

 

[Esther12]

Problem is that priests like Fr Amorth, former chief exorcist of the Catholic Church, are unlikely to lie on such issue, not so much because of the possible backfiring on their respectability and credibility but because it's utterly against their beliefs system.

The words of someone as respectable and credible as the Catholic Church's chief exorcist do carry a particular weight.

There have been reports of those in the Catholic Church doing things which would seem to go against their professed belief system.