Demons - Is There Evidence They Exist?

[nPeace]

Reliable evidence is evidence that hasn't been fabricated or misunderstood.

In my view the Bible contains both fabricated evidence such as claims of miracles, and misunderstood evidence such as ice allegedly being made from God's voice Job37:10.

Why do you call that evidence Daniel? What makes it evidence?

 

[nPeace]

Well we don't actually know so you could be correct.

So, since she could be correct, what about the writers of the Bible... Do you think they could be correct?

 

[Aupmanyav]

So let's first establish first of all, what is evil, and who decides that, since not everyone agrees on what is evil
So, how do we determine evil. For example, some believe in tit for tat - You kill my dog, I kill your cat. Period. No discussion.

What is evil and what is good is decided by the laws of society and the laws of the country.
If there is a law against killing someone's cat, then one must not do it (India has such a law). In that case, the course of action is to make a police complaint and let the courts decide it.

What makes it evidence?

Some one admittedly biased wrote something in a book 2000 years ago about something that we find does not happen now (walking on water, water changing into wine), that does not make it evidence.

So, since she could be correct, what about the writers of the Bible... Do you think they could be correct?

Her personal experience cannot be taken as evidence. What if she hallucinated or is lying?
Same with writers of Bible. They were writing much after the death of Jesus (if Jesus ever existed) and there is no corroborating evidence. They were biased, being Christians themselves. They were marketing their belief.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Reliable evidence is evidence that hasn't been fabricated or misunderstood.

In my view the Bible contains both fabricated evidence such as claims of miracles, and misunderstood evidence such as ice allegedly being made from God's voice Job37:10.

I think they are best referred to as claims without evidence.

Biblical claims about Egypt, Jerusalem, Jews and some named peoples, tribes and kingdoms some validity, due to our knowledge of the evidence of those peoples. But even within that scope there are claims for which no evidence exists to support them. Much as demons has been demonstrated by this and previous threads to be a claim without evidence.

Everything I have seen in support of demons on this and your previous thread was actually just evidence that some people believe demons exist and that they act against the interests of people. I knew that but, unfortunately, those that believe think there belief is evidence for what is believed.

I have beliefs, but these threads are not about what I believe or what others believe. They are about claims of evidence that describe and demonstrate demons. There is a lot of talk, but no demons in demonstrate. No evidence. Poor attempts to analogize demons with aspects of science we don't know that much about...yet are just glorified arguments from ignorance.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

So, since she could be correct, what about the writers of the Bible... Do you think they could be correct?

Possibilities are not actualities. Without evidence, the correctness of the writers of the Bible is balanced by the possibility they were all wrong. It is a null game you are playing.

 

[Aupmanyav]

If you show it, you won't have a problem being believed.

That is exactly what atheists say. If you show evidence for God, soul, Jesus and demons, you won't have a problem being believed.

Okay. Here you go.
What do they blame it on?

Oh, it was these Bible quotes for which you were asking for a PM to Stevicus. Even most Christians do not believe what JWs believe, what to talk of non-Christians.
Stevicus has already mentioned that - 'God did not do a good job in creating humans'.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Telling someone something, and showing it, are two different things, as you know. Action speaks louder than words.
To give an example of that... Your words are, "you flat out called me a liar". Now can you show it?
Therein lies the difference. If you show it, you won't have a problem being believed.
On the other hand, if you can't, one might wonder about your words,

Don't you think that is the problem you have in selling the idea of demons as real entities that interact with physical reality and people in negative ways. You have no evidence to show anyone.

There is an old saying about being careful what you ask for.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

I wonder if my friend @Hockeycowboy has anything he would like to ask, or say, on this.

Thanks for tagging me, nPeace. I’ve been away, busy with other matters.
@Tinkerpeach , I wish you well. Just wondering, have you ever had any contact with people connected to cultures steeped in ancestor worship?

 

[Tinkerpeach]

Thanks for tagging me, nPeace. I’ve been away, busy with other matters.
@Tinkerpeach , I wish you well. Just wondering, have you ever had any contact with people connected to cultures steeped in ancestor worship?

Absolutely, that is the majority of my work.

They hire me to make contact but more than often after I investigate I find logical reasons for the strange things they have witnessed.

Communicating with the dead is extremely difficult, you never get more than two words for a response.

Now while we don't know it seems that it is extremely hard for ghosts to communicate, it apparently takes a lot of energy. When I do get a response I talk to the family and tell them to let the spirit go, the spirit isn't sticking around to hang out with the family, it is asking for help to be set free. That seems to be the case why they stick around with family. They must believe that is their best bet for absolution.

Probably about 98% of the cases I investigate turn out to have logical explanations or are hoaxes when it comes to ancestor worship. Families want to believe that their loved ones are still with them. In most cases they've moved on.

 

[HonestJoe]

So, imagine a police officer telling a surgeon how to use a scalpel, for example.

If the surgeon was on the street trying to stab people with it, I'd hope the police officer would have something to say about it.

If you read the OP, you should have seen that I used Dark Matter, to help persons understand how the description of demons can be understood.

You used the common public perception of dark matter certainly. The problem is that metaphor doesn't actually work as well as you think it does.

No. I presented the explanation for what may not be understood.
For example, why the world conditions have changed for the worst.

You've still not demonstrated that the world has changed for the worse nor have you explained how the existence of demons would actually cause such a change.

No. You didn't demonstrate that. Remember. You had no response other than to try to ignore the evidence of the explanation.

People sometimes do bad things because people are flawed. That is even concept within Christianity. Other bad things happen because of random natural events (though often influence by human behaviour too) - fire, flood, drought and disease for example. None of that requires outside intervention of demons to occur so if you're going to propose that as a factor, especially as a new or increasing factor, you need more than the fact of the effects as evidence.

What? I didn't?

No. You've talked about evidence, and introduced all sorts of complexities and diversions (like the whole "composite sign" stuff) but you've yet to present a clear hypothesis and therefore no evidence to support any hypothesis by definition. You still need to explain exactly what effects you're proposing demons and, at least in general principle, how you're propose they achieve those effects. Only then can evidence be considered to support those proposals.

 

[danieldemol]

I think they are best referred to as claims without evidence.

Biblical claims about Egypt, Jerusalem, Jews and some named peoples, tribes and kingdoms some validity, due to our knowledge of the evidence of those peoples. But even within that scope there are claims for which no evidence exists to support them. Much as demons has been demonstrated by this and previous threads to be a claim without evidence.

Everything I have seen in support of demons on this and your previous thread was actually just evidence that some people believe demons exist and that they act against the interests of people. I knew that but, unfortunately, those that believe think there belief is evidence for what is believed.

I have beliefs, but these threads are not about what I believe or what others believe. They are about claims of evidence that describe and demonstrate demons. There is a lot of talk, but no demons in demonstrate. No evidence. Poor attempts to analogize demons with aspects of science we don't know that much about...yet are just glorified arguments from ignorance.

I get where you are coming from, but unfortunately according to my understanding the dictionary does agree that testimony and the like does count as evidence. So we need to be able to sort out reliable evidence from unreliable evidence. And where there is evidence to the contrary of the claims made such as God flooding the earth for example I think it is fair to sustain the testimony of God's alleged flood as being fabricated evidence. That is why I go a step further than saying it is merely testimony or claims without evidence and even go so far as to say the Bible contains fabricated evidence because there is material evidence that refutes the testimonial evidence.

I believe @nPeace is unable to distinguish between reliable and unreliable forms of evidence.

 

[danieldemol]

Why do you call that evidence Daniel? What makes it evidence?

Ice is evidence of something - it is evidence of a low energy state between H2O molecules. The Bible authors who misunderstood the evidence testified (testimony being a type of weak or unreliable evidence) that it is God's voice that causes ice. In my view we know they are wrong because we don't hear God's voice in the freezer when we mechanically remove energy from water to convert it to ice. Thus there is reliable evidence (ie empirical evidence) that their testimony is an unreliable form of evidence known as fabricated evidence (ie they made the story up).

 

[SkepticThinker]

Telling someone something, and showing it, are two different things, as you know. Action speaks louder than words.
To give an example of that... Your words are, "you flat out called me a liar". Now can you show it?
Therein lies the difference. If you show it, you won't have a problem being believed.
On the other hand, if you can't, one might wonder about your words,

Sorry you can't remember it. I found it rather rude and dismissive. I assumed you did it because you didn't want to answer my question, so no worries.

I said to you that I want to believe in as many true things as possible while not believing in as many false things as possible.
And you told me that I don't.

And here you are implying that I'm a liar now. Cool beans.

Because I pointed out that you haven't connected the dots between "bad things are happening in the world" and "demons are responsible for bad things happening in the world. Numerous others have pointed this out to you as well.

 

[syo]

Demons are real. I was possessed by a demon.

EDIT

The proper spelling is daemon.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

I get where you are coming from, but unfortunately according to my understanding the dictionary does agree that testimony and the like does count as evidence. So we need to be able to sort out reliable evidence from unreliable evidence. And where there is evidence to the contrary of the claims made such as God flooding the earth for example I think it is fair to sustain the testimony of God's alleged flood as being fabricated evidence. That is why I go a step further than saying it is merely testimony or claims without evidence and even go so far as to say the Bible contains fabricated evidence because there is material evidence that refutes the testimonial evidence.

I believe @nPeace is unable to distinguish between reliable and unreliable forms of evidence.

And what do you think about the reliability of these detailed posts from those here who’ve had (and occasionally still have) conversations with spirits of (who they think are) dead humans?

Bogus? Or genuine?
Any atheists here that would like to chime in?

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Thanks for responding…

They hire me to make contact but more than often after I investigate I find logical reasons for the strange things they have witnessed.

Yes, I’m sure that’s probably the case, in many situations.
I mean, believing their loved one exists in another realm, provides a measure of comfort.
(So the living see or feel things that aren’t there.)

But I think it’s these same desires — to know their dead loved ones are ok, and of course the living are missing them — that are capitalized on by unwholesome, invisible entities.

I’ve done quite a bit of research on ancestor-worshipping cultures, replete with their respective witch doctors & shamans, and it seems one of the major characteristics and results of such ancestor worship is the fear that grips these societies!

I’ll continue this later.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Possibilities are not actualities.

Yes, we certainly agree on that!
Abiogenesis, anyone?

 

[danieldemol]

And what do you think about the reliability of these detailed posts from those here who’ve had (and occasionally still have) conversations with spirits of (who they think are) dead humans?

Bogus? Or genuine?
Any atheists here that would like to chime in?

I think they are a mixture of fraudulent claims from people without mental illness and genuine claims from people with mental illnesses that make it difficult to distinguish reality from delusions.

And I'm not an atheist so save me your false dichotomy.

 

[danieldemol]

Yes, we certainly agree on that!
Abiogenesis, anyone?

Abiogenesis is a probability, not a merely improbable possibility in my view.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Abiogenesis is a probability, not a merely improbable possibility in my view.

It is certainly much more possible than a global flood.