Ghosts and haunted houses

Status
Not open for further replies.
BayouHuguenot said:
Which is more or less what Perg and I are saying. Do "gods" exist in the sense like Zeus? Of course not. Do dark entities exist today who have mind and will? Of course. That's Biblical Supernaturalism 101.
Click to expand...
The epistles speak clearly of the activities and strategies of Satan, which is where we learn all we need to know in order to resist him. The activities and existence of the dark entities you speak of are what I think can only be speculation on our part.
 
BayouHuguenot said:
And that's all you do in these situations. You "say." You never mount an argument or offer defeaters for my exegesis.

Now, I am generally skeptical of what we call "haunted houses," but only because I have a robust angelology and theory of the supernatural.

I think most of the "haunted houses" are bunk. I do think that some areas, though, particularly those associated with satanic ritual abuse, are a different matter.
Click to expand...

The problem is when I "say" and discuss such you simply disagree and charge me with the "all I do". Your "robust angelology" should go the way of the nephilim.
 
TheInquirer said:
As the Christian worldview erodes and interest in non-Christian spirituality rises in the West, I have no doubt we are going to see an upsurge in demonic manifestation as they move from the background to the foreground. Drug use, spiritism, sexual immorality, occult practices - these all seem to occur quite a bit together and are becoming more normative at an alarming rate.
Click to expand...
Peter Jones ministry "Truth xChange" has a helpful book on this "On Global Wizardry: Techniques of Pagan Spirituality and a Christian Response"
 
earl40 said:
The problem is when I "say" and discuss such you simply disagree and charge me with the "all I do". Your "robust angelology" should go the way of the nephilim.
Click to expand...

Really? I've written dozens of pages on my blog dealing with angels, demons, and nephilim. Some of which I have posted here on the Heiser threads.
 
Jeri Tanner said:
The epistles speak clearly of the activities and strategies of Satan, which is where we learn all we need to know in order to resist him. The activities and existence of the dark entities you speak of are what I think can only be speculation on our part.
Click to expand...

Paul speaks of dominions, arche, thronoi, heights, depths, planos, etc.
 
Jeri Tanner said:
I’m speculating that perhaps at that time a certain bird was associated with that name and its links to mythology. I don’t know. Why do you say Isaiah believed in Lilith- what do you mean by that?
Click to expand...

Didn't you elsewhere charge me with speculation?

Isaiah believed in Lilith or in whatever that being's name was, since it seems he said as much
 
BayouHuguenot said:
Didn't you elsewhere charge me with speculation?

Isaiah believed in Lilith or in whatever that being's name was, since it seems he said as much
Click to expand...
I don't think I charged you with speculation, I said that many things can only be speculation. We all are free to speculate but should call it that.
 
BayouHuguenot said:
Paul speaks of dominions, arche, thronoi, heights, depths, planos, etc.
Click to expand...
Yes, he speaks of them in terms of Christ's having spoiled them, making an open show of them, and triumphing over them at the Cross. Paul also speaks of Satan's very real present activity and our response, a moral warfare only.
 
Jeri Tanner said:
Yes, he speaks of them in terms of Christ's having spoiled them, making an open show of them, and triumphing over them at the Cross. Paul also speaks of Satan's very real present activity and our response, a moral warfare only.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how that changes anything I said. And I am also not clear on what the category "a moral warfare only" actually means.
 
earl40 said:
writting about such doe not make it true.
Click to expand...

First you say that I should take my angelology all the way to the Nephilim.
I reply I have done that quite extensively.
You then reply, "Writing about it doesn't make it true."

So what, exactly? Disagreeing with me doesn't make me wrong, either.
 
BayouHuguenot said:
I'm not sure how that changes anything I said. And I am also not clear on what the category "a moral warfare only" actually means.
Click to expand...
All the information given us in the epistles about Satan is in relation to morality- to our resisting sin and temptation. In 2 Timothy, the response to those ensnared by Satan is meekness in instructing them, if God "peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will." The bondage of Satan is a moral bondage, and freedom comes not through exorcism but through the hearing of the truth and God granting repentance.
 
Jeri Tanner said:
The bondage of Satan is a moral bondage, and freedom comes not through exorcism but through the hearing of the truth and God granting repentance.
Click to expand...

Except when Paul exorcised demons in Acts. And if you posit an "invisible change" between Acts and the Letters, then that's just begging the question.

Unless by exorcism you mean the dramatic stuff Rome does, then I would certainly shy away from that. But if by exorcism you mean the type of inner healing and work that takes place in the body of Christ, then perhaps we are closer in thought. I'm all for that.
 
BayouHuguenot said:
Except when Paul exorcised demons in Acts. And if you posit an "invisible change" between Acts and the Letters, then that's just begging the question.

Unless by exorcism you mean the dramatic stuff Rome does, then I would certainly shy away from that. But if by exorcism you mean the type of inner healing and work that takes place in the body of Christ, then perhaps we are closer in thought. I'm all for that.
Click to expand...
I do believe that Acts being a narrative of the Acts of the Apostles, its descriptions of what happened aren’t necessarily meant for our emulation. The epistles are the place we go to in order to find what the Church continuing is to expect and do. The narratives of Scripture teach and instruct and edify us, but are not necessarily meant for us to expect to the same things to happen or be accomplished in post-Prophet/post-apostolic times.
 
I was once an avid consumer of the Rick Joyner etc. spiritual warfare books, so I know where all that is coming from. I came to disagree heartily with that approach and to rejoice in being delivered from it. The truth is much better.
 
BayouHuguenot said:
Except it's not my position, and you quoted a dangerously heterodox man as representative of it.
Click to expand...
I see. You seem to share some of his beliefs, such as in territorial spirits, and some other terms you've used reminded me of that genre of book. I didn't realize he's heterodox- I wouldn't necessarily have recognized that at the time I read that stuff. Forgive any inference that you would hold to any such view. I was speaking only of the matters relating to our discussion here.
 
Last edited:
Tom Hart said:
Genetic fallacy?
Click to expand...

In a reverse sort of way. But it could also be seen as setting the context. The early fathers had a robust understanding of angels, which understanding was also embedded in their liturgies, so by identifying myself with Gregory of Nazianzus (which I have more or less done over the past decade), I am entering into (participation, methexis) that liturgical outlook.

That's an entirely different claim that simply saying, "Doesn't Rick Joyner teach the same thing?"
 
Jeri Tanner said:
I do believe that Acts being a narrative of the Acts of the Apostles, its descriptions of what happened aren’t necessarily meant for our emulation. The epistles are the place we go to in order to find what the Church continuing is to expect and do. The narratives of Scripture teach and instruct and edify us, but are not necessarily meant for us to expect to the same things to happen or be accomplished in post-Prophet/post-apostolic times.
Click to expand...

I understand the reasoning. It doesn't hold up to scrutiny, though, for several reasons:

1) It's an artificial set up.
2) It's more and more obvious in NT studies that a number of Pauline epistles have narratival substructures.
3) 1 Corinthians 10 says the stories are our examples, which means a) they are teaching us, and b) presumably we should live our lives accordingly. That's more or less what I said about Acts.
4) Jude basically tells stories about fornicators and Sodom and fallen angels, yet this is also "teaching" us.
 
Serious thread. No one has brought up taking flashlights and heat sensors to a grave yard or old house.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top