What are the DEMONS intentions?

Ashley: Hmm... If demons look human- how do you know they are demons? What sets them apart from other humans who murder, steal, whatever sin you want to throw in?
*************
M*W: What sets them apart? Their extreme negativity, fear, paranoia, and loss of self-worth. They will suck the very life out of you if you let them.
 
water: One can speak the language of gnosticism without being a gnostic himself.
*************
M*W: Then wtf was your point? YOU made the accusation, because that's what you do to every other member of this forum, but you don't know shit. Your posts reflect your judgments of others, and you have nothing valid to say! You are a very negative person. That's what I'd call a demon!
*************
water: The way language develops and the way meaning is assigned to words reveals particular cultural preferences. This has nothing in specific to do with you, Medicine Woman, and I have never said it does so.
*************
M*W: But you put words in my mouth and explained to the forum what I meant in my statements! If anyone wants to know what I mean, they can ask me directly. You are NOT my spokesperson!!!

Further, you know absolutely NOTHING about my "cultural preferences," so you have NO idea what my words reveal. You should pay more attention to what YOU write than what the rest of us write.
*************
water: And she says that without ever even seeing me ...
*************
M*W: YOU said it YOURSELF, that you were "ugly," which I believe truly represents the negativity that you bring to this forum.
 
Medicine Woman said:
Ashley: Hmm... If demons look human- how do you know they are demons? What sets them apart from other humans who murder, steal, whatever sin you want to throw in?
*************
M*W: What sets them apart? Their extreme negativity, fear, paranoia, and loss of self-worth. They will suck the very life out of you if you let them.
Click to expand...
Are you a gnostic? Did you know that the Gnostic heresy has been shown to be false?

Anyway, I find your little thingy about Jesus as Myth is also erroneous. Jesus is not myth. I myself and a mythographer and classicist, and you are really going off the deep end. There is historical evidence and miracles recorded in scripture which demonstrate his divinity.
 
Lawdog: Are you a gnostic? Did you know that the Gnostic heresy has been shown to be false?

Anyway, I find your little thingy about Jesus as Myth is also erroneous. Jesus is not myth. I myself and a mythographer and classicist, and you are really going off the deep end. There is historical evidence and miracles recorded in scripture which demonstrate his divinity.
*************
M*W: Well, Lawdog, welcome to the "deep end." I'm quite sure that every member of this forum, including the xians, will wait with bated breath for you to prove Jesus' existence, and we cannot wait to see your "historical evidence!" While you're at it, please provide tangible extrabiblical evidence that the bible is true and accurate. Seeing as how this forum is a scientific one, we expect to see some scientific evidence as proof that Jesus wasn't a myth. After all, you claim to be a "mythographer." It would seem that a "mythographer" should know the irrefutable truth about the myths he decodes. For every bit of irrefutable biblical evidence you can provide, we can show you a thousand times over how wrong you are.

We're waiting...
 
Medicine Woman said:
While you're at it, please provide tangible extrabiblical evidence that the bible is true and accurate.

We're waiting...
Click to expand...

Josephus, the Jewish historian from the time of the Emperor Augustus, mentions Jesus and his execution in his history.

Josephus mentions Jesus in Antiquities, Book 18, chapter 3, paragraph 3 (this paragraph is so phenomenal, that scholars now debate the authenticity of some of the more “favorable” portions of this text):

“Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.”

Josephus mentions John the Baptist and Herod in Antiquities, Book 18, chapter 5, paragraph 2:

"Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod's army came from God, and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John, that was called the Baptist: for Herod slew him, who was a good man, and commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness towards one another, and piety towards God, and so to come to baptism; for that the washing [with water] would be acceptable to him, if they made use of it, not in order to the putting away [or the remission] of some sins [only], but for the purification of the body; supposing still that the soul was thoroughly purified beforehand by righteousness."

Josephus mentions James, the brother of Jesus, in Antiquities, Book 20, chapter 9, paragraph 1:

"Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, [or, some of his companions]; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned: but as for those who seemed the most equitable of the citizens, and such as were the most uneasy at the breach of the laws, they disliked what was done."

Josephus mentions Ananias, the High Priest, who was mentioned in Acts 23:2:

“Now as soon as Albinus was come to the city of Jerusalem, he used all his endeavors and care that the country might be kept in peace, and this by destroying many of the Sicarii. But as for the high priest, Ananias he increased in glory every day, and this to a great degree, and had obtained the favor and esteem of the citizens in a signal manner; for he was a great hoarder up of money.”
 
As far as your other demands, such as scientific evidence of Jesus, the Shroud of Turin is the best evidence, and I suggest you take up the study of the shroud.

However, if this is not enough, then I oppose your very insistance as being absurd. After all, can you prove scientifically that I exist?

It is true that myth, such as Native American or Ancient Greek Myths holds many wondrous truths. Nevertheless, that kind of spirituality can only take a person so far.

The Holy Scriptures were not written as a collection of stories, since they were considered solemn and the holy revealed word of God. Stories were not allowed to be just changed around, as you see in Homer, since they were understood to be real history.

Take for example Noah's flood. Real History. Even Jesus thought of it as a true story, and he should know.
 
Lawdog: Josephus, the Jewish historian from the time of the Emperor Augustus, mentions Jesus and his execution in his history.
*************
M*W: Josephus was born after Jesus died, so he did not know him personally but only through christians who lived in the latter part of the first century (who didn't know Jesus, either). Everything Josephus wrote was hearsay.

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/scott_oser/hojfaq.html

http://www.religious studies.uncc.edu/jdtabor/josephus-jesus.html
*************
Lawdog: Josephus mentions Jesus in Antiquities, Book 18, chapter 3, paragraph 3 (this paragraph is so phenomenal, that scholars now debate the authenticity of some of the more “favorable” portions of this text):

“Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.”
*************
M*W: It's common knowledge that there were many forged parts to Josephus' writings, especially those forgeries done by christians to 'confirm' their radical beliefs.

http://www.bede.org.uk/Josephus.htm
*************
Lawdog: Josephus mentions John the Baptist and Herod in Antiquities, Book 18, chapter 5, paragraph 2:

"Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod's army came from God, and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John, that was called the Baptist: for Herod slew him, who was a good man, and commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness towards one another, and piety towards God, and so to come to baptism; for that the washing [with water] would be acceptable to him, if they made use of it, not in order to the putting away [or the remission] of some sins [only], but for the purification of the body; supposing still that the soul was thoroughly purified beforehand by righteousness."

Josephus mentions James, the brother of Jesus, in Antiquities, Book 20, chapter 9, paragraph 1:

"Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, [or, some of his companions]; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned: but as for those who seemed the most equitable of the citizens, and such as were the most uneasy at the breach of the laws, they disliked what was done."

Josephus mentions Ananias, the High Priest, who was mentioned in Acts 23:2:

“Now as soon as Albinus was come to the city of Jerusalem, he used all his endeavors and care that the country might be kept in peace, and this by destroying many of the Sicarii. But as for the high priest, Ananias he increased in glory every day, and this to a great degree, and had obtained the favor and esteem of the citizens in a signal manner; for he was a great hoarder up of money.”
*************
M*W: Josephus mentioned a lot of things, but unfortunately, much of his works were forged by christians who used the works of Josephus to further historicalize the teachings of their religious cult.

http://home.inu.net/skeptic/exist.html

Sorry, but you're going to be shot down over this. We've already had lengthy discussions about the forgeries of Josephus' works.
 
Lapdog: As far as your other demands, such as scientific evidence of Jesus, the Shroud of Turin is the best evidence, and I suggest you take up the study of the shroud.
*************
M*W: What planet were you born on? The proofs I asked of you were not "demands," they were requests. If you think of them as "demands," that tells me that you don't have any proof for your statements. But, please don't make me laugh about the Shroud of Turin! I've been to Turin and I've seen the shroud. It's been carbon dated to the 1400s, and it's widely believed by scientists and archeologists that the shroud was created by da Vinci as if by a photographic negative or was simply a joke.
*************
Lapdog: However, if this is not enough, then I oppose your very insistance as being absurd. After all, can you prove scientifically that I exist?
*************
M*W: Ahhh, the word "absurd" is revealed by you! You must remember that this is a debate forum, not a christian forum.

Yes, I could prove that you exist, but not through mere words which means NOTHING, just like the "words" in the bible. They mean NOTHING.

I would have to see you in the flesh, look at your birth certificate (which means NOTHING as it could be forged), your drivers license (which means NOTHING as it could be forged), get a sample of your DNA and do a comparative study of your parents to prove you are who you say you are. Even so, I could prove you exist, but that wouldn't prove I knew you or what you believe to be the truth. You could state anything you chose to state (which means NOTHING as you could falsely claim your existence), but again, those are only "words" which mean nothing. To understand if you truly exist or not, I would need to spend time with you and get to know you to determine if you truly exist. From what I've seen thus far from your posts, I don't believe you exist to the fullest. Further, I wouldn't really want to get to know you.
*************
Lapdog: It is true that myth, such as Native American or Ancient Greek Myths holds many wondrous truths. Nevertheless, that kind of spirituality can only take a person so far.
*************
M*W: Those Native Americans and Greeks wouldn't agree with you. You're confused by what myth is and what is spirituality. Myth and spirituality are not the same thing.
*************
Lapdog: The Holy Scriptures were not written as a collection of stories, since they were considered solemn and the holy revealed word of God. Stories were not allowed to be just changed around, as you see in Homer, since they were understood to be real history.
*************
M*W: Seventy-five percent of the world's population does not believe the bible to be the true word of God. Even the books of the bible have forgeries! The greatest of all forgers was Paul of Tarsus.
*************
Lapdog: Take for example Noah's flood. Real History. Even Jesus thought of it as a true story, and he should know.
*************
M*W: I don't even want to go there! We've already had extensive discussion about Noah's Flood. The flood myth was plagarized from earlier Sumerian/Mesopotamian flood myths! Jesus might have believed the story to be true, and the story may have been true at a time much earlier than when the Torah was written, but the bible does not contain anything 'original.' The entirety of the written word of the bible were taken from earlier myths.

Is it me? Or are you one gullible sucker?
 
Lawdog, don't you find it a little strange that the bible's biggest selling point is that it offers any man or woman exactly what they desire most? Salvation from a life of misery and oppression. It seems a little too fabricated to me. A little too human. Human inspired. Perhaps to give us hope, but also maybe to give us a divine reason to submit to and humble ourselves before other men and women who might be oppressing us (perhaps because it made it easier to submit than to fight). Think about what life must have been like under some of the first Roman emperors. As a plebian. A slave. What would you desire? What would you create in order to get through life? To help your friends and family and other plebians persevere amidst the excesses of the elite and the oppression of the weak.

I'm not saying the principles in the Bible are not good principles, just that they are not inspired by a "God." But it does make it more appealing to think that they were. I wish I truly knew for sure, but I just can't BELIEVE anymore. Not until I see proof. In life or in death.

We all will believe what we want, in order to get through life and in order to feel that we are being true to ourselves. If YOU feel certain that God and/or Jesus are alive and omnipresent, then I applaud you for your conviction. I do not deny you that right. Just please don't deny me the right, or hate me, because of my, and our, conviction that there is no God but ourselves.

Peace brothers.
 
Medicine Woman said:
Lawdog: Josephus, the Jewish historian from the time of the Emperor Augustus, mentions Jesus and his execution in his history.
*************
M*W: Josephus was born after Jesus died, so he did not know him personally but only through christians who lived in the latter part of the first century (who didn't know Jesus, either). Everything Josephus wrote was hearsay.


Sorry, but you're going to be shot down over this. We've already had lengthy discussions about the forgeries of Josephus' works.
Click to expand...

Most folk only know of Goerge Washington by hearsay and pictures that were painted, or histories written by dead WASPS. Does that mean he was a contrivance?

It doesnt matter how much youve discussed these things. Obviously, in an unscientific way, your standards of scepticism are so high that you cannot accept simple factual evidence.

It does matter that the flood story was written as myth by other cultures, (most who believed that their myths were true) that does not detract from the actuality of the event. The events of the Fall of Troy, for example, were portrayed in mythologic trappings by Homer. Nevertheless, scholars agree that the events were based on an actual war. This has been proven by Archeology. Evenone laughed with scepticism at Schleiman in the 19th century. They now are face down in the dust and the believer justified.

Soon you and the other psuedo-scientists will see new findings about Noahs Ark, to your own dismay.

Then the Apocalypse will come. Tears and gnashing of teeth for you, the joy of Martyrdom for us.
 
lawdog said:
It doesnt matter how much youve discussed these things. Obviously, in an unscientific way, your standards of scepticism are so high that you cannot accept simple factual evidence.
Click to expand...
what factual evidence is that, please elaborate.
as you have not managed so far.
 
Last edited:
M*W.... you're so "gullible" :D :rolleyes: :) (fun word) only because sumerian and mesopotamiam scripts talk about a flood doesn't have to mean that the bible plagiarized it. the flood event was a great event... so of course... people wrote down it, and since gilgamesh and noah saw the same event, what they wrote down, is very similar.

"LAPdog"..? that's the funniest thing i've ever heard... LAWdog!... that's the funniest avatar i've seen in my life this far.

blindblindblindblind... too much sceptimism blinds... need... to be openminded too.
 
Yorda,

Being openminded is good. A healthy skepticism is good too. I consider myself an Atheist, after having been a die-hard Christian for about 30 years. I wonder sometimes whether a lot of Christians I meet and know though are openminded. In my experience, they are not. They are addicted to their beliefs in a way similar to a drug addict being addicted to his/her drug. They need their beliefs in order to stay happy. Which is okay, but I don't think it's very smart. Some non-believers too are this way, so it goes both ways. For me, though, I'm not overly concerned about my eternal salvation. If God were to tell me in person what I need to do to "save my soul," then I'm sure I would listen. He hasn't yet, though at times I thought he had. Now I just think it was my mind playing tricks on me.

Eternally wondering, CT3000.
 
mustafhakofi said:
what factual evidence is that, please elaborate.
as you have not managed so far.
Click to expand...

SEE ABOVE, MY EVIDENCE FROM JOSEPHUS, ancient historian.
 
Cottontop3000: Yorda,

Being openminded is good. A healthy skepticism is good too. I consider myself an Atheist, after having been a die-hard Christian for about 30 years. I wonder sometimes whether a lot of Christians I meet and know though are openminded. In my experience, they are not. They are addicted to their beliefs in a way similar to a drug addict being addicted to his/her drug. They need their beliefs in order to stay happy. Which is okay, but I don't think it's very smart. Some non-believers too are this way, so it goes both ways. For me, though, I'm not overly concerned about my eternal salvation. If God were to tell me in person what I need to do to "save my soul," then I'm sure I would listen. He hasn't yet, though at times I thought he had. Now I just think it was my mind playing tricks on me.
*************
M*W: Your post was riveting. I've said so very many times on this forum that religion is an addiction. In fact, religion is probably more addictive than crack cocaine! It leaves the victim with false hopes that are understood to be eternal life! There is eternal life, but it is not found through any religious salvation. Eternal life is only found through DNA. They can call it anything they want to, but christianity is still an addiction!
 
Medicine Woman,


water: One can speak the language of gnosticism without being a gnostic himself.
*************
M*W: Then wtf was your point?
Click to expand...

Among other things, that people aren't always aware of all the (crucial) meanings they convey with the words they use.

You say "I interpret "demons" to be things of "de mond" or things of the "world," i.e. "worldy things," as in "living things." Things that humans get occupied with and obsessed about, etc." " and we can surmise that something has lead you to this particular interpretation.
Demons are usually considered to be something bad or evil, and there is also the doctrine of gnosticism that says things of the world are bad. You then add up these two in your interpretation of "demons" being "the things of the world".

The gnostic understanding of the things of the world being bad is the link to the interpretation of demons (ie. evil or bad entities) being "de mond".

Maybe you aren't gnostic, but the interpretation you proposed is gnostic.


YOU made the accusation, because that's what you do to every other member of this forum, but you don't know shit. Your posts reflect your judgments of others, and you have nothing valid to say! You are a very negative person. That's what I'd call a demon!
Click to expand...

I have not accused you of anything in this thread. It is you who is so eager to be offended, so eager to find yourself accused.

I said:

Except that Medicine Woman proposed what is in linguistics called a "folk (or popular) etymology".
The word "demon" is from Greek daimon and means 'god-like being; supernatural being'; and at first, it was not reserved only for the evil, but was a summary term for all supernatural beings.

MW's popular etymology reveals a particular gnostic understanding (in short, "matter is bad, spirit is good"). Demons are "worldly things"; and demons are bad since worldly things are bad.
Click to expand...

I have not accused you of anything, I only named you as the poster who posted a certain intepretation.


water: The way language develops and the way meaning is assigned to words reveals particular cultural preferences. This has nothing in specific to do with you, Medicine Woman, and I have never said it does so.
*************
M*W: But you put words in my mouth and explained to the forum what I meant in my statements! If anyone wants to know what I mean, they can ask me directly. You are NOT my spokesperson!!!

Further, you know absolutely NOTHING about my "cultural preferences," so you have NO idea what my words reveal. You should pay more attention to what YOU write than what the rest of us write.
Click to expand...

Words mean what they mean, and that is written in the dictionary. The specific cultural preferences are those recorded in the meaning of a word, and again, they are not personal, you can trace them back with etymological dictionaries.

But if you choose a word or a phrase, and if you are to be considered a competent speaker of a language, it is the common presupposition that you know what the word means, what connotations it has, and how to use it in a certain kind of discourse.

This is interpersonally verifiable, and has nothing to do with you in particular.


Unless, of course, you wish to claim you have your own language, that is specific to you and no one else can understand it unless you explain it.
 
water: Medicine Woman,

Among other things, that people aren't always aware of all the (crucial) meanings they convey with the words they use.

You say "I interpret "demons" to be things of "de mond" or things of the "world," i.e. "worldy things," as in "living things." Things that humans get occupied with and obsessed about, etc." " and we can surmise that something has lead you to this particular interpretation. Demons are usually considered to be something bad or evil, and there is also the doctrine of gnosticism that says things of the world are bad. You then add up these two in your interpretation of "demons" being "the things of the world".

The gnostic understanding of the things of the world being bad is the link to the interpretation of demons (ie. evil or bad entities) being "de mond".

Maybe you aren't gnostic, but the interpretation you proposed is gnostic.

I have not accused you of anything in this thread. It is you who is so eager to be offended, so eager to find yourself accused.

I said:

I have not accused you of anything, I only named you as the poster who posted a certain intepretation.

Words mean what they mean, and that is written in the dictionary. The specific cultural preferences are those recorded in the meaning of a word, and again, they are not personal, you can trace them back with etymological dictionaries.

But if you choose a word or a phrase, and if you are to be considered a competent speaker of a language, it is the common presupposition that you know what the word means, what connotations it has, and how to use it in a certain kind of discourse.

This is interpersonally verifiable, and has nothing to do with you in particular.

Unless, of course, you wish to claim you have your own language, that is specific to you and no one else can understand it unless you explain it.
*************
M*W: I have never indicated that I was not 'gnostic.' Nor have I ever stated I was gnostic. As far as the hidden meanings of the christian religion, I am gnostic. That's why I hate it so. It is not up to other believers to to contradict me, nor is it up to me to contradict believers. Christianity simply does not exist as a truthful religion. It is important for all of us who see the falsities of christianity to refute it pubically. For some reason, you choose to hang onto the hopes that christianity is true. But, that doesn't serve you very well. It serves no one. It's a false doctrine. If you choose to believe it, more power to you; but, you will find that christianity holds much false doctrine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top