The Evangelical Universalist Forum

The Lucifer Myth

Theology Biblical Theology
#61

Michael,
I am having a discussion about scripture. The content of the package is something like “What does the Bible really say about Lucifer, Satan and demons”. Since you already have purchased or been given a bible or are reading it online then there is no “package to sell”. I am conceding that all scripture as 100% accurate for the purposes of this discussion.

Also, I wanted to address this that you wrote to me earlier in the thread:

Which was a comment about my post here:

In this post I was quoting a phrase the Christian gnostic used, it was not my phrase.

#62

So (for the purposes of this discussion) you’re conceding the existence of a personal, conscious, self-aware spirit-being, who is the prince of demons (personal, conscious, self-aware beings, who can inhabit men and animals, and who caused a herd of swine to rush off a cliff), who sinned, and who will be judged (tried unto the ages of the ages)?

Is that right Byron?

In my post I was asking you a question, and the question was

If I understand you correctly, you’re now saying that your answer to this question (if you had bothered to answer it at the time) would have been “no.”

“It would not be correct to make that assumption.”

Is that right?

May I now assume that you see the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures as the product of one and the same God?

#63

Scripturally - demons are spirits which exist and in some cases have the ability to communicate with, afflict (mentally and physically) inhabit and to influence both humans and pigs. They are spirits of infirmity, deaf and dumb spirits (I would think they can hear and speak themselves - they only cause others to be deaf or mute) and unclean spirits. Again, Peter’s reference to the ‘angels who sinned’ cannot be demons roaming free on earth since they are bound until the great judgement day. I do understand however that (in some views concerning ‘fallen angels’) there is believed to exist a constant supply of new defectors who could sign up to be deafers, muters, uncleaners and infirmity causers - even though I don’t quite grasp what the motivation would be for cheribums and seraphims and others to make the job switch.

That the accuser himself sinned from the beginning (of something) in undisputed. He was called the “prince of demons” by the pharisees even though I don’t believe their view of Beelzebub as that person is reliable. In either case - every kingdom has a ruler so the kingdom of spiritual darkness has a chief ruler, under rulers and so on. In this case it seems “Prince of demons” is a good description as any of the chief spirit of darkness.

I know just judgement is very important and remembered that it is something which heavily influences your view. I think it’s a legitimate point Michael and one worthy of more discussion.

One of my main objections is the lack of any evidence (outside the Lucifer story) of Satan or demons ever doing any good works or being restored from a place from which they have fallen. I understand that to some extent it is a conclusion by default (ie: “what else could they be besides formerly good angels?”).

My lengthy talk with the CG dude was very interesting but really, the gnostic concepts are so out there they make some of the Christian myths seem very down to earth by comparison. That the NT endorses the OT is indisputable.

Obviously the OT God is (according to the NT) the Most High Creator and the source of all things. Personally, in many many ways I see Jesus just as clearly in the OT as I do in the NT. Sorry I didn’t answer that initially but I generally avoid those sorts of topics in a scriptural discussion. In a “what is reality outside of scripture” discussion then (IMO) it would be an appropriate topic to discuss. I think there are other threads here addressing some of these things but I haven’t participated much.

#64

Not so fast.

As disembodied spirits (with only limited access to the world of sense) demons would be bound by imperceptible chains wherever they are, and there are many gloomy caverns here on earth (including the minds of unregenerate men.)

When an evil spirit comes out of a man, it goes through arid places seeking rest and does not find it. Then it says, ‘I will return to the house I left.’ When it arrives, it finds the house unoccupied, swept clean and put in order. Then it goes and takes with it seven other spirits more wicked than itself, and they go in and live there. And the final condition of that man is worse than the first. (Matt. 12:43-45.)

Jesus had commanded the evil spirit to come out of the man. Many times it had seized him, and though he was chained hand and foot and kept under guard, he had broken his chains and had been driven by the demon into solitary places. Jesus asked him, “What is your name?” “Legion,” he replied, because many demons had gone into him. And they begged him repeatedly not to order them to go into the Abyss. A large herd of pigs was feeding there on the hillside. The demons begged Jesus to let them go into them, and he gave them permission. When the demons came out of the man, they went into the pigs, and the herd rushed down the steep bank into the lake and was drowned. When those tending the pigs saw what had happened, they ran off and reported this in the town and countryside, and the people went out to see what had happened. When they came to Jesus, they found the man from whom the demons had gone out, sitting at Jesus’ feet, dressed and in his right mind; and they were afraid. Those who had seen it told the people how the demon-possessed man had been cured. Then all the people of the region of the Gerasenes asked Jesus to leave them, because they were overcome with fear. (Luke 8:29-37.)

Demons would apparently prefer the gloomy dungeon of an enslaved human host (or even a pig) to some more uncomfortable confinement (in what scripture calls “the Abyss”), but they’re hardly free.

I believe they have been cast out of haven, and they are held in imperceptible chains until the day of judgment.

Jesus accepted the view that demons have a prince over them (whom the Pharisees called Beelzebub), identified that prince as Satan, and predicated His entire argument on demons being the underlings of a Satanic kingdom.

It would be equally difficult to grasp why Adam made his “job switch” (from immortal master of the world, to a slave of sin, death, and Satan)–when oversimplified, and viewed from a distance (with the benefit of hindsight.)

The same could be said of Saul’s “job switch” (from king of Israel, to condemned man trying to hold on to a forfeited throne.)

And (more recently) Napoleon Bonaparte’s “job switch” (from Emperor of all Europe to a convict on the island of Ebla.)

Scripture explicitly says that angels sinned, and were cast out of heaven (2 Peter 2:4;Jude 6.)

So if you’re truly conceding

You’ll have to concede that point!

As to whether Tartaroo can rightly be viewed as the disembodied state of fallen angels, I ask you to consider the following:

…in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels of God in heaven. (Matt. 22:30.)

All flesh is not the same flesh, but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of animals, another of fish, and another of birds. There are also celestial bodies and terrestrial bodies; but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another. There is one glory of the sun, another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars; for one star differs from another star in glory. So also is the resurrection of the dead. The body is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption. It is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness, it is raised in power. It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. (1 Cor. 15:39-44.)

As they were saying this, Jesus himself stood among them. But they were startled and frightened, and supposed that they saw a spirit. And he said to them, “Why are you troubled, and why do questionings rise in your hearts? See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself; handle me, and see; for a spirit has not flesh and bones as you see that I have.” (Luke 24:36-39.)

For our citizenship is in heaven, from which we also eagerly wait for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will transform our lowly body that it may be conformed to His glorious body, according to the working by which He is able even to subdue all things to Himself. (Phil. 3:20-21.)

From the above, it would seem “gnostic” to deny that heavenly angels have bodies (and that fallen angels are disembodied spirits.)

BTW: The 5th ecumenical council didn’t condemn Origen for his belief in universal salvation (or even for speculating that Satan and his angels might eventually be saved.)

It condemned him because the views being propagated in his name contained gnostic elements (such as the pre-existence of souls, the temporality of bodily resurrection, and an apokatastasis that involved spherical bodies [and may have ultimately involved absorption, and loss of personal identity.])

I think this is why that same council saw no contradiction in naming Gregory of Nyssa (who explicitly taught the final salvation of wicked men, fallen angels, and Satan himself) among the Orthodox doctors of the Church.

#65

P.S. I’m not the only one who views Tartaroo as the condition of fallen angels imprisoned here on earth.

I believe some evangelical scholars hold this view, and I know one fellow universalist (with whom I often disagree) does.

godoftheages.com/site/1351515/page/686543

#66

Again, interesting points Michael. Bodied creatures are generally not called ‘spirits’ (as in ‘all ministering spirits’) but the points you’ve made are certainly worth consideration. :slight_smile:

#67

Scripture explicitly says that Jesus allowed the demons he cast out of a man to enter a herd of swine (Luke 8:31-33.)

Unlike humans (who have a greater capacity to understand the things of God) these animals were relatively innocent.

It is of our species that scripture says:

…according as it has been written, “There is not a righteous one , not even one!” “There is not one understanding; there is not one seeking God.” All turned away, they became worthless together, not one is doing goodness, not so much as one!" …for all sinned and fall short of the glory of God (Romans 3:10-18,23.)

So if you concede

You’ll have to concede that:

1.) God does allow demonic possession.

2.) Demons were cast out of a man, and allowed to enter a herd of swine by Our Lord Himself.

3.) There’s less of a moral issue involved in allowing the demonic possesion of sinful men, than allowing human and angelic sin to effect animals (which God does apparently allow.)

Besides, I didn’t say that demons were directly cast into people as a punishment for their sins.

(I don’t even believe there were people on earth when angels first sinned.)

What I said was

They were cast out of light into darkness and gloom–from the third heaven to earth and it’s atmosphere (the lowest heaven, which is why Satan is called the prince of the power of the air.)

When man was created, and sinned–this gave their Tartaroo the additional “gloomy caverns” of human minds alienated from God.

Jesus is called a life-giving Spirit.

The last Adam became a life-giving spirit. (1 Cor. 15:45.)

But He’s no disembodied spirit.

It is sown a physical body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a physical body, there is also a spiritual body. (verse 44.)

As they were saying this, Jesus himself stood among them. But they were startled and frightened, and supposed that they saw a spirit. And he said to them, “Why are you troubled, and why do questionings rise in your hearts? See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself; handle me, and see; for a spirit has not flesh and bones as you see that I have.” (Luke 24:36-39.)

For our citizenship is in heaven, from which we also eagerly wait for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will transform our lowly body that it may be conformed to His glorious body, according to the working by which He is able even to subdue all things to Himself. (Phil. 3:20-21.)

For we have known that if our earthly house of the tabernacle may be thrown down, a building from God we have, an house not made with hands – age-during – in the heavens, for also in this we groan, with our dwelling that is from heaven earnestly desiring to clothe ourselves, if so be that, having clothed ourselves, we shall not be found naked, for we also who are in the tabernacle do groan, being burdened, seeing we wish not to unclothe ourselves, but to clothe ourselves, that the mortal may be swallowed up of the life. (1 Cor. 5:1-4.)

The author of Hebrews may speak of angels as “ministering spirits,” but Luke speaks of them as distinct from spirits.

For Sadducees say that there is no resurrection–and no angel or spirit; but the Pharisees confess both. (Acts 23:8.)

This would be explained if Luke is distinguishing Holy Angels (as spirit-beings, with spiritual bodies) from disembodied spirits (i.e. fallen angels, demons.)

#68

P.S. I don’t care if “Lucifer” is ever used as a proper name in scripture (or whether Satan was ever known by this name.)

That’s a side issue I have no interest in.

What I object to is your contention that the fall of Satan is an unscriptural myth.

I believe it can be legitimately inferred from Ezekiel 28, what the book of Daniel reveals concerning the unseen rulers of nations, the existence of external (personal, conscious, self-aware) spiritual entities opposed to God, the scriptural fact that angels sinned, the very nature of personality (and God’s dealings with creatures), and the logical implications of Paul’s statement in 1 Tim. 3:6 (much of which you’ve already conceded.)

You can offer alternate interpretations of the scriptural evidence if you like, but I don’t see how can say that the traditional interpretation is unscriptural (or deny that it’s based on legitimate inferences) if you concede the 100% accuracy of scripture (as you said you did for the purpose of this discussion.)

#69

I can say it because Satan is not linked to a former life as an angel in heaven nor are demons. Satan would not be called Satan in a ‘pre-fall’ life and that’s why the Lucifer reference is so important to the theory - it gives the ‘adversary’ a pre-fall name and some perfect ways under his belt as proof. In the absence of that reference all we have is a serpent who came as a (false) messenger of enlightenment, an accuser and a ruler of spiritual wickedness in heavenly places who has already been judged and cast out (Joh 12:31, Joh 16:11) but who was still at work in Paul’s day (Eph 2:2).

#70

It’s not important at all.

We’re told that angels sinned, and we’re not told any of their pre-fall names.

Why should we be?

Why would it be at all relevant to us?

No that’s not all we have.

We have the unseen rulers of Pagan city-states mentioned in Daniel, a king of Tyre who’s spoken of as a created being (who was in Eden, and was perfect in all his outward ways “until the day iniquity was found” in him), a devil who’s called a sinner (implying that there was a time when he committed his first overt act of transgression), and an Apostolic warning not to elevate new believers to positions of authority too quickly–lest they become conceited and fall under the same judgment (1 Tim. 3:6.)

None of that may be conclussive, but it’s cumulative evidence that supports the (legitimate) scriptural inference that Satan is a fallen angel.

I object to the way you keep trying to belittle, ridicule, and pass over this evidence (apparently because you simply don’t like the idea of a personal devil–even if he is saved in the end :unamused: )

(And as to his being already “judged and cast out,” was that when the 70 were given power over demons, on the night of the last supper, at Calvary, at the resurrection, or at the ascension? )

#71

There is no mention that fallen angels are running this world, so your right - it’s not important since they are not involved in our lives at all. If Satan was formerly this amazingly wonderful person who will be redeemed by God’s grace (like us) then it does seem worth a mention, since he is running this entire world system of darkness (along with his messengers). I would like to see even one passage showing God offering a free-will about face and pardon for Satan or demons if that’s what this is all about. So my point here is that if this massive angelic rebellion is at the root of Satan’s dominion here on earth and indeed at the root of our own fall in the garden (since he deceived Eve) then it seems like the prophets and apostles and other biblical writers would have given some attention to it. Especially since these fallen angels have (in your view) been given access to literally inhabit us!

We have strong scriptural evidence that Satan and his kingdom are real, but really weak evidence about him being a former good guy. In Job (oldest reference) we see his purpose here as a tester as well as in the garden. Without temptation and adversity there is no growth or character built by overcoming.

What’s wrong with a personal devil? Just because I don’t view him as one of the good boys gone bad for awhile and making bad choices for awhile (partially because of no scriptural evidence to that effect) doesn’t mean I have a particular like or dislike for how personal or non-personal he may or may not be. That’s your vendetta, not mine. :slight_smile:

My main focus here is to show that all this is not a universe spinning out of control (which it will CONTINUE to do if your suppositions about all this are correct) by God allowing free will but it is about a plan for the experience of good and evil. My claim that the chaos would continue under your view is due to the fact that (in your view) if God were to create any new self aware creatures then they must all be given the opportunity to go through this same process, right?

So unless you are willing to live under the idea that an endless future of free-will rebellions (and the resulting chaos) lay in store it may help to understand that there is more to this than free-will.

The ascension.

#72

The salvation of the devil and his demons is not what God’s message to us “is all about,” and God didn’t consider it particularly important to reveal His plan of human salvation to angels ( even though they play some role in that plan. )

Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into. ( 1 Peter 1:12. )

If man is so central to God’s creation, it might seem that God would have revealed more of the details to angels ( especially if we’re to judge them. )

There is a mention.

( By Christ ) the all was created: in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; the all was created by him and for him. He is before the all, and in him the all holds together. And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, and through him to reconcile the all to himself, whether on earth or in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross. ( Col. 1:16-20. )

A tester who’s not just doing his job.

He’s called a sinner, remember?

If you accept the 100% accuracy of scripture ( even if just for the purpose of this discussion ), he doesn’t get a pat on the back for a job well done–he receives severe judgment ( and ultimate reconciliation, if he’s included in “the all” that’s reconciled. )

If you say so, but I must point out that you’ve been a little inconsistent on the personality issue here on this thread.

You first wrote

Then

I find it hard to believe that you weren’t initially trying to suggest that demons have no external existence ( and were simply a primitive culture’s way of understanding mental illness ), and didn’t then back off that position when I quoted Matt. 8:31-33 ( and Acts 23:8. )

I believe you did this because you saw the impossibility of arguing that internal demons ( with no existence outside the human mind ) could have the external effect of causing a herd of swine to self destruct at the exact moment that Jesus performed the recorded miracle ( and the equally impossible task of explaining why God would pepetuate wholly superstitious beliefs in a culture sufficiently advanced to question them. )

Now you say

If you want to insist that you’re not philosophically commited to the idea of an impersonal devil, that’s fine.

It just seems to me that you’ve been trying very hard to argue that the devil and his demons are impersonal forces ( which have been doing exactly what they were intended to do, and will simply cease to exist when they’ve completed their purpose ) all through this thread.

May I ask you if that’s what you personally believe Byron ( or would you like to avoid the question “for the purpose of this discussion” )? :unamused:

I don’t understand your emotional tirade here.

Didn’t you say the following?

If God were to create any new self aware creatures, wouldn’t they have to grow?

If temptation, adversity, a devil, and “all this mess” ( as you once called it ) is necessary now, wouldn’t it be just as necessary “if God were to create any new self aware creatures”? :unamused:

In what way do you think you’ve proven that your position is superior to mine? :confused:

On the contrary, this discussion is all about freewill.

And once rational creatures are perfected ( and brought to the place where they’re able to make “fully informed” freewill choices ) they themselves will by psychologically incapable of any future rebellions. :slight_smile:

( BTW: Please notice that I said “fully informed,” and we make free choices without being fully informed of all the unintended consequences all the time–it’s one of the ways we learn. :wink: )

Then Jesus was having a flash forward (as opposed to a “flashback”) when He said “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven”?

Either way ( flash forward or flash back ) the meaning of His statement goes beyond “the day’s events” ( which is somewhat different from what you said earlier in this thread. :wink: )

#73

Michael you seem to be superimposing other people’s beliefs on this to comments I made. I asked if you were open to discussing the “interpreted a certain way” angle and after it was clear you were not open to it I made the decision to keep this discussion all scripture based.

Actually I did this because (as stated above) it was decided to adhere to inerrancy for the purposes of this discussion.

I’m trying to learn and so am not committed to church dogma or liberal theology or any other ideology or dogma. I am not afraid to question anything if I have a personal conviction that they are things which need to be questioned. Religious tradition has always been the biggest adversary of core spiritual truth.

If positions on these things are set in stone then there is no room to grow.

I believe it’s narrow minded to think that this existence (even in all it’s aspects of spirituality and heaven and earth etc) is all there is. This is only one universe with a plan and purpose from the beginning for a specific experience and a specific outcome. So, no - I don’t believe the kind of anguish and suffering (as well as joys and triumphs) we are subjected to here are necessary in every creation scenario.

I am looking for a bottom line. I think what you see and what church tradition teaches is from a certain perspective which may not be what is really happening at the core.

Ignorant people always make the wrong choices unless they get lucky, right? :wink:

AISI Jesus told the disciples that He observed the adversary losing his place of authority as they went about destroying the adversary’s works. Whenever justice and righteousness prevail and oppression is broken then the adversary has no more power. In the ascension it is stated that Jesus led away imprisonment as a prisoner. Good news!

#74

Also I have observed that ‘heavens’ is used in scripture to denote rulership and ‘earth’ to denote the masses of people as in Isaiah 1:2 Hear, O ye heavens, and give ear, O earth, for the Lord hath spoken…" echoed in 1:11 as: “Hear ye rulers of Sodom, give ear to the law of our God, ye people of Gomorrha”.

I know many here are familiar with the concept (I remember Michael presenting what the different levels of ‘heaven’ are) but I think most people still have a fairytale image of clouds and an ethereal domain when they hear the word heaven as opposed to the real meaning “raised up” or “high place”. So the meaning gets paganized like the superstitious Ephesians: “Citizens of Ephesus,” he said: “Everyone knows that Ephesus is the official guardian of the great temple of Diana, whose image fell down to us from heaven”. In this way what was meant to be communicated is actually lost.

Christianity has done this number with Mat 11:23 “And thou, Capernaum, which art exalted unto heaven, shalt be brought down to hell”. To me it’s obvious Jesus is speaking of Capernaum, because of it’s corruption and callousness toward God, losing it’s lofty place as an influential community and being left in ruins - but I have heard teaching after teaching about the sinners there being cast into eternal fire. Of course in a CU community we know better than that, but some of the other superstitions seems to remain - like my example of the belief that ‘satan’ literally spoke through Peter and that Jesus addressed the person of ‘satan’ in Peter as opposed to the meaning which to me is obvious - that Peter had a wordly mindset about the situation which was opposed to God’s purpose for the crucifixion.

No one addressed this when I brought it up though. Do you folks here feel that Baalzebub possessed Peter for that moment?

#75

Hi Byron,

Actually, we hadn’t " established that Peter’s “messengers who sinned” reference cannot be demons because they are bound with chains until judgement day". But I can work with that. For example, the first century background to Peter’s angels who sinned is that those heavenly angels became the parents of the Nephilim. These angels sinned after the fall of humanity. Anyway, this still teaches that heavenly angels can sin. And you appear to ignore the evidence that angels can sin.

I can agree that there is no clear statement in the Bible that Satan ever did any thing good. But that doesn’t come close to suggesting that Satan could never make a moral decision.

First, perhaps all Bible translations should never say “Satan” but only say “the satan”. But I see no significant issue with mixing a title with a name.

Second, I have a lot a trouble following the rest of your logic above. For example, I cannot fathom how you reconcile the teachings that Satan and his angels face judgment. Do you agree that the Bible teaches that Satan and his angels face judgment? If no, then we’re light-eons apart on what the Bible teaches. If yes, then could you explain why they face judgment?

#76

Good question James. If we can back away from presuppositions enough - would you even begin to entertain the idea that the “accuser and his messengers” may not be referring to “Satan, the ruler of demons and his demons” but to “the accuser and his offspring”?

If not - how do you see “tormented in the presence of the lamb and His holy angels” relating to the Gehenna judgement (AD70) or do you see it not relating?

Matthew 25:41 "Then He will also say to those on the left hand, “Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels”

Of course we know that the mainstream view is “hell was never intended for people” but:

dia/bolov	 	from (1225)

Transliterated Word Phonetic Spelling
Diabolos dee-ab’-ol-os
Parts of Speech TDNT
Adjective 2:72,150
Definition

  1. prone to slander, slanderous, accusing falsely
    1. a calumniator, false accuser, slanderer,
  2. metaph. applied to a man who, by opposing the cause of God, may be said to act the part of the devil or to side with him

aàggelov from aggello [probably derived from (71), cf (34)] (to bring tidings)
Transliterated Word Phonetic Spelling
Aggelos ang’-el-os
Parts of Speech TDNT
Noun Masculine 1:74,12
Definition

  1. a messenger, envoy, one who is sent

2Ti 3:3 -
Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers (AKA: dia/bolov), incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,

Tit 2:3 -
The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers (AKA: dia/bolov), not given to much wine, teachers of good things;

Again, just for review DEVIL = “to cast down with words” AKA dia/bolov

which is rooted in:
diaba/llw from (1223) and (906)
Transliterated Word Phonetic Spelling
Diaballo dee-ab-al’-lo
Parts of Speech TDNT
Verb 2:71,150
Definition

  1. to throw over or across, to send over
  2. to traduce, calumniate, slander, accuse, defame

and:

Home > Lexicons > Greek Lexicon > Ballo

The New Testament Greek Lexicon

Strong’s Number: 906 ba/llw
Original Word Word Origin
ba/llw a primary word
Transliterated Word Phonetic Spelling
Ballo bal’-lo
Parts of Speech TDNT
Verb 1:526,91
Definition

  1. to throw or let go of a thing without caring where it falls
    1. to scatter, to throw, cast into
    2. to give over to one’s care uncertain about the result
    3. of fluids
      1. to pour, pour into of rivers
      2. to pour out
  2. to put into, insert
#77

Much as I am enjoying this debate I must say that it is reinforcing much about the ‘supernatural’ that I just cannot believe in.
:imp: :smiling_imp:

#78

Understood Jeff. The bright side though (AISI) is that we can all stand against the evil and oppression in the world even if we disagree as to what the source is or disagree on where things are headed.

For example, in the small Texas town where I live there is a “hell fire/Jesus loves you” church just down the road and they do a GREAT job at helping the poor and sick out here in these hills (and there are quite a few). BUT - they believe this country is doomed because of Obama and that the anti-christ will be rising up any day now and the church will fly away into the sky. Though I challenge those views (to the Pastor himself - not to his congregation :slight_smile: ) there is a mutual respect for the tasks at hand - which include clothing and feeding and visiting ‘Jesus’.

Although I have left Christianity (per-se) to do what I believe is a more pure work of God I still hold to the inspiration of scripture although I believe it is an allegory which very few grasp.

I remember your comment earlier in this thread about mental illness and I do see both sides of the issue, especially because I have worked fairly extensively with those suffering from schizophrenia and depression (not as a psychiatrist but as a minister along side of mental health professionals). One thing is for sure - both ailments absolutely destroy lives and families. In one severe case of depression this lady was harboring so much anger and hatred (and for very good legitimate reasons) it was eating her alive, she was just seething with animosity. I spoke to her almost daily, at length, about letting go and forgiveness and explained the spiritual side of what was happening. It took almost a year and a half but when she finally ‘got it’ about perfect love and forgiveness and how it works it was dynamic, something broke inside her. The psychiatrists will sometimes describe sudden shifts like this as ‘miraculous’ although they will stop short of saying it’s the work of God. :wink: She did avoid being re-institutionalized, got her kids back, takes NO MEDS for depression and is totally free of all symptoms of depression. I swear (ooops :blush: ) her countenance changed overnight - like a dark cloud was lifted from her soul. She beams with love now - even in the presence of her former abusers.

She did not become a fundamentalist Christian but is on fire for God and His love in all the ways that count. :wink: :wink: :wink: :mrgreen:

I have also seen cases where meds seem to balance things out when all else fails.

Then there’s my personal story of deliverance which I’ll share at some point.

Here’s the rub with me though Jeff - I worked (previous to my above story) with several ‘deliverance’ ministries and have seen a LOT of weird stuff but (honestly) very little (not zero - but very little) observable results. Besides the convulsions and the spitting and the screaming and the casting outing.

So maybe this is a good question for the others in this discussion - with demonic activity now (supposedly/apparently) more rampant than ever - where’s the chain breaking super human strength demoniacs? I’m not scoffing (really) I’m just asking. Like I said, I’ve been close to some strange stuff - such as a fairly petite 13 year old girl throwing her rather large dad across the room - but I’m not sure if it crossed that line beyond anger/adrenaline to the depiction of the Luke 8:26 demoniac breaking shackles with supernatural strength.

As far as the cutting, let me tell you - I’ve worked with cutters as well. Tears my heart out, no joke.

As far as schizophrenia, this one hits very close to home as it took out a family member some years ago. By ‘out’ I mean they got to a point where they didn’t even know who we were and they died in an institution. It was the saddest thing ever (trying to hold back tears as I type).

I’m working with someone suffering with this ailment right now - and it’s not going very well, at all. It’s hard when a person does not even recognize that what they think happening is not happening. Really, I’m exhausted from this. And yes, they’ve been through all the deliverance sessions (I am no longer involved in that part).

I can’t say that I’ve personally ever seen schizophrenia cured by casting out demons, although many many Christians believe demons are the cause and I’ve seen it attempted for schizophrenia, epilepsy and just about every other thing you can imagine.

I CAN say I have seen lives supernaturally transformed, without question - I believe in what God can do and am a walking miracle, as many here. But to those STILL in the literal fight with these literal spirits of deafness and dumbness and infirmity etc. How’s it going?

#79

Maybe there needs to be a new thread for this but I also worked (wouldn’t you know it?) with some big time spiritual warfare groups. Michael, are you involved with anything like that? We were really big on the principality thing, tearing down strongholds etc etc. I have close friends still doing this once a month or so even though I’ve pulled out for now.

#80

Byron,

Isn’t it strange how much personal experience counts towards our beliefs about this (and any other) world. I am always amazed at the range of human belief (and non-belief) and how much comes down to each individual’s unique path through this veil of tears. At least us uber sceptics have an archtype in the Gospels in the shape of Thomas :smiley: