Demons, is there any evidence they even exist?

[SkepticThinker]

Ironically I'm sure you can not see the extreme bias you have to have ty write this.

You have demonstrated that post yourself, on this thread and others.

 

[F1fan]

Reasoning leads me to God every single time.

Not in a way that critical thinkers can recognize. You must be confusing ordinary thinking for reasoning. Reasoning is highly skilled thinking that follows facts to sound conclusions.

 

[ElishaElijah]

Demons are spirits without bodies and yes they are still here tormenting people, the root of witchcraft is demonic for example and their goal is to keep people from Jesus Christ, to control and manipulate people.
Believers have the ability and authority to expel them in the Name of Jesus.
There is a good movie coming out March 13th
Come Out in Jesus Name that will show demons manifesting in people and people getting set free.

 

[F1fan]

You're welcome. I noticed that you mentioned "spirit," as I quoted you in my previous post. That's why I mentioned the dead and the paranormal.

The way many theists refer to spirit is code speak for any number of concepts that are part of their particular faith system. It’s often so cartoonish that no one can take it seriously. It’s most absurd when it is far right Christo-republicans who are claiming a sort of superiority while also acting in almost complete contradiction to what Jesus taught.

 

[F1fan]

Demons are spirits without bodies and yes they are still here tormenting people, the root of witchcraft is demonic for example and their goal is to keep people from Jesus Christ, to control and manipulate people.
Believers have the ability and authority to expel them in the Name of Jesus.
There is a good movie coming out March 13th
Come Out in Jesus Name that will show demons manifesting in people and people getting set free.

See what I mean?

 

[Wildswanderer]

The one where people can demonstrate the veracity of their claims to others.

That's literally no one.

 

[Wildswanderer]

You have demonstrated that post yourself, on this thread and others.

You continue to demonstrate bias.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Not in a way that critical thinkers can recognize. You must be confusing ordinary thinking for reasoning. Reasoning is highly skilled thinking that follows facts to sound conclusions.

That's exactly the thinking that leads me to God.
These "Critical thinkers" you speak of only think they have some kind of superior knowledge.
The fact is, the universe didn't just happen. To believe that it could without a designer is madness on the level of the lunatic.

 

[ElishaElijah]

See what I mean?

No I don’t see what you mean, can you see a demon? I can see the manifestation of a demon in a person before they are expelled though.

 

[F1fan]

That's exactly the thinking that leads me to God.
These "Critical thinkers" you speak of only think they have some kind of superior knowledge.
The fact is, the universe didn't just happen. To believe that it could without a designer is madness on the level of the lunatic.

False. Critical thinking is a system that follows a set of reliable rules, and is synonymous with logic. There are also fallacies to know about.

You refer to a God as if it’s factual. Ok, show us the facts you followed that were sufficient for a rational mind to conclude one exists, or at least likely exists.

And as far as a designer, well that’s creationism with a new coat of paint. There is no evidence that any natural phenomenon is designed with intent. If you disagree I’d love to hear you explain the deliberate design of childhood cancers and birth defects.

 

[Wildswanderer]

False. Critical thinking is a system that follows a set of reliable rules, and is synonymous with logic. There are also fallacies to know about.

You refer to a God as if it’s factual. Ok, show us the facts you followed that were sufficient for a rational mind to conclude one exists, or at least likely exists.

And as far as a designer, well that’s creationism with a new coat of paint. There is no evidence that any natural phenomenon is designed with intent. If you disagree I’d love to hear you explain the deliberate design of childhood cancers and birth defects.

Let's look at your claim...as a secular humanist you no doubt simultaneously maintain that 1) naturalism is true and 2) rationality and reason are trustworthy sources for knowledge. Secular humanists maintain that rationality, reason, and scientific inquiry are the sole sources for human advancement and should be trusted above every other source of knowledge. The problem with simultaneously holding naturalism and the exaltation of reason is that the two affirmations contradict each other. The truth is if naturalism is true then humans cannot trust that their cognitive faculties are reliable!
If I'm nothing but a cog in the wheel of un unguided process, my thoughts are no more reliable than those of a madman... they are just inevitable universe farts.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I have to wonder what post you read.
Was it this... or something else?

Here are some pieces of evidence for Demons, which I accept.
1. Jesus said it. Yes. Jesus is more reliable than any scientist, on this matter. He identified their existence, and their activities.
2. The Bible said it. The Bible is more reliable than any scientist... on this matter. The Bible explains their origin, and activities.
3. The above two sources are verified by the activity we see present in the world, along with the Bible's trustworthy record.


You don't like what Jesus said, as recorded in the Bible?
Doesn't what Jesus said, count as evidence? If not, why not.
Did Jesus lie? What reasons do you have for not believing Jesus?

No. No. It is I that have to wonder what posts you are responding to.

Your responses aren't to anything I have claimed.

I think you are upset that I was so ably capable of refuting your post attempting to equate natural phenomena and scientific conclusions in some illogical syllogism to conclude evidence for demons where there is none.

I said that I have never seen a demon. I want to know how a person can know something is a demon or someone is possessed by a demon compared to ordinary causes for whatever it is that leads to the claim of demon.

I know you don't like me and I don't care. But what you are doing seems like a passage aggressive attempt to label me as "not a true Christian". It is a straw man response.

Do you consider that good witness or expression of Christian values?

Can you actually address my real points or is it going to be more straw?

Can you show me where the Bible provides answers to determine the trophic levels of invertebrate organisms in and old growth forest? It being more reliable than science and scientists, I would appreciate knowing what it says on that subject.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

False. Critical thinking is a system that follows a set of reliable rules, and is synonymous with logic. There are also fallacies to know about.

You refer to a God as if it’s factual. Ok, show us the facts you followed that were sufficient for a rational mind to conclude one exists, or at least likely exists.

And as far as a designer, well that’s creationism with a new coat of paint. There is no evidence that any natural phenomenon is designed with intent. If you disagree I’d love to hear you explain the deliberate design of childhood cancers and birth defects.

It's my belief that no one—not me, you, or anyone else—can empirically or independently demonstrate whether God or any deities are real or not. No human being has ever searched across all of space and time to give verifiable and empirical proof for the existence of deities since human beings lack omniscience, omnipotence, and the capacity to exist everywhere at once. In my opinion, we—meaning you, me, and everyone else (including Christians) make decisions on whether or not to believe in God, in other gods, or in anything else supernatural based on the limited knowledge that we have. I also believe that any claims made by Christians that "God saved me and changed my life" or "I sense God's hand in my life, so I know he is real" are anecdotal evidence and don't meet the criteria for empirical and verifiable proof, just as my belief in multiple deities is only supported by anecdotal evidence and doesn't satisfy the criteria for empirical and verifiable evidence either. I believe in many different deities, while Christians choose to believe in one God.

As a Wiccan and polytheist, I believe in multiple deities, but I know that I cannot provide sufficient empirical and verifiable evidence of their existence. By the same token, I can't provide empirical and verifiable evidence that the God of the Bible doesn't exist, just as, when I was a Christian, I couldn't provide empirical and verifiable evidence that he exists. And this is why I am an agnostic, not an atheist, when it comes to the existence of God. To be honest, I can't say with certainty that I know that any deities exist or don't exist because I'm not all-knowing and all-powerful, and I can't transcend time and be in all places at once to prove or disprove the existence of deities. I wouldn't be honest with myself or with others if I said that there aren't any gods that exist.

In my opinion, if God doesn't exist, then my sincere belief and devout faith as a Christian were in vain, and I prayed to thin air. However, if God does in fact exist, then as far as I'm concerned, he is a cold-blooded, sadistic, insane, genocidal, and abhorrent monster—exactly the antithesis of what Christians claim he is and believe about him (loving, just, merciful, and a "heavenly father"). I believe that if God is real, then he obviously doesn't give a damn about me or think I'm worth the trouble of saving because he allowed me to suffer many years of abuse, neglect, mistreatment, and bullying while I was growing up or helped me cope with the PTSD and trauma that I've dealt with for more than 30 years as an adult. If God exists, he can go to hell, as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

How does one tell the difference between demons and mental illness?

That is very much like the points and questions I have been making.

 

[Brian2]

Maybe you could explain how that works. I believe the mental conditions are only called diseases if the person can't cope with them. Also as is often the case with the medical industry the symptoms will be treated and not the cause.

People do have diseased bodies at times or imbalances in chemicals which manifest as mental problems.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

People do have diseased bodies at times or imbalances in chemicals which manifest as mental problems.

Mental illness can occur for a number of reasons including trauma, abuse, genetics and drug and alcohol abuse. The condition is a disease whether you are coping with it or not. Which I think may be what you are saying.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

You have demonstrated that post yourself, on this thread and others.

From my observations, my conclusion is that the for many, the basis of the acceptance or the rejection of scientific studies or information is whether it conflicts with their personal, political and religious views and not on any understanding or recognition of validity of the information.

 

[F1fan]

Let's look at your claim...as a secular humanist you no doubt simultaneously maintain that 1) naturalism is true and 2) rationality and reason are trustworthy sources for knowledge. Secular humanists maintain that rationality, reason, and scientific inquiry are the sole sources for human advancement and should be trusted above every other source of knowledge. The problem with simultaneously holding naturalism and the exaltation of reason is that the two affirmations contradict each other. The truth is if naturalism is true then humans cannot trust that their cognitive faculties are reliable!
If I'm nothing but a cog in the wheel of un unguided process, my thoughts are no more reliable than those of a madman... they are just inevitable universe farts.

Absurd. Naturalism is known DUE TO our senses. Your thoughts being no more reliable than those of a madman is also natural, as many do suffer from faults of false and irrational belief.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

That's literally no one.

Huh?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

That's exactly the thinking that leads me to God.
These "Critical thinkers" you speak of only think they have some kind of superior knowledge.
The fact is, the universe didn't just happen. To believe that it could without a designer is madness on the level of the lunatic.

What facts lead you to your conclusions that you can share with me?