Do u believe in excorsism

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
Before people who they thought had deamons were actually sick. Because maybe they were sweating, or burning up they thought they were posessed. He just took their sickness away, not demons.
 
So your saying that what the Bible saying isnt' true? That when it says "Demons" that it doesn't mean real demons?

The Healing of Two Demon-possessed Men
Matthew 8:16
When evening came, many who were demon­ possessed were brought to him, and he drove out the spirits with a word and healed all the sick.

Mark 1: 22-24
22The people were amazed at his teaching, because he taught them as one who had authority, not as the teachers of the law. 23Just then a man in their synagogue who was possessed by an evil spirit cried out, 24"What do you want with us, Jesus of Nazareth? Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are--the Holy One of God!"


The Healing of a Demon-possessed Man
Mark 5:1-20

1They went across the lake to the region of the Gerasenes. 2When Jesus got out of the boat, a man with an evil spirit came from the tombs to meet him. 3This man lived in the tombs, and no one could bind him any more, not even with a chain. 4For he had often been chained hand and foot, but he tore the chains apart and broke the irons on his feet. No one was strong enough to subdue him. 5Night and day among the tombs and in the hills he would cry out and cut himself with stones.
6When he saw Jesus from a distance, he ran and fell on his knees in front of him. 7He shouted at the top of his voice, "What do you want with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? Swear to God that you won't torture me!" 8For Jesus had said to him, "Come out of this man, you evil spirit!"
9Then Jesus asked him, "What is your name?"
10"My name is Legion," he replied, "for we are many." And he begged Jesus again and again not to send them out of the area.
11A large herd of pigs was feeding on the nearby hillside. 12The demons begged Jesus, "Send us among the pigs; allow us to go into them." 13He gave them permission, and the evil spirits came out and went into the pigs. The herd, about two thousand in number, rushed down the steep bank into the lake and were drowned.
14Those tending the pigs ran off and reported this in the town and countryside, and the people went out to see what had happened. 15When they came to Jesus, they saw the man who had been possessed by the legion of demons, sitting there, dressed and in his right mind; and they were afraid. 16Those who had seen it told the people what had happened to the demon-possessed man--and told about the pigs as well. 17Then the people began to plead with Jesus to leave their region.
18As Jesus was getting into the boat, the man who had been demon-possessed begged to go with him. 19Jesus did not let him, but said, "Go home to your family and tell them how much the Lord has done for you, and how he has had mercy on you." 20So the man went away and began to tell in the Decapolis how much Jesus had done for him. And all the people were amazed.

In these verses it clearly states words such as "demons" and "spirits." It even says that one man is possessed by a "legion of demons."

There are many other stories an scripture showing this as well.
 
Yes..it is not outside of the realm of possibility for the Bible to be wrong in some areas you know..  Which makes sense of course, as it was written centuries ago, and as a result could have fallen victim to innumerable accuracy pitfalls.  But it is true that the Bible probably the most historically accurate of the three major religions' respective texts..or so I have heard.  The point is, no, I do not think 'demons' per se exist.  It is highly likely that the cases documented in the Bible are merely various forms of insanity. People didn't know what psychology was back then..they used 'evil spirits' to explain away things they didn't understand and were thus fearful of.
 
when jesus cured the blind dude, was it a demon that was making him blind.
 
The Bible is the Word. It is God's word and God can never lie. So then why do you doubt Him?

2 Timothy 3:16
"All scripture is God breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in rightiousness,"


[b said:
Quote[/b] ]when jesus cured the blind dude, was it a demon that was making him blind.

Jo, give up the smart allic remarks please. Your 22, there's no need to give smart allic remarks anymore. This is a serious thread and I ask for your respect and maturity.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (S1lentOp @ July 16 2004,1:39)]The Bible is the Word.  It is God's word and God can never lie.  So then why do you doubt Him?  

2 Timothy 3:16
"All scripture is God breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in rightiousness,"


[b said:
Quote[/b] ]when jesus cured the blind dude, was it a demon that was making him blind.

Jo, give up the smart allic remarks please.  Your 22, there's no need to give smart allic remarks anymore.  This is a serious thread and I ask for your respect and maturity.
God may not be capable of telling falsities, but his word had to go through man's hand before getting to paper. As for Jo...I suggest that you just leave him be, since there's nothing for it. He has his own style, but I assure you it's not because he's trying to be facetious or something.
 
Alright, given your situation with the "through man's hand" thing. Why would God let a man distort His word and mislead people with His own word in the scriptures? Why would He tell us to study and meditate on scriptures that have been distorted and false?
 
the same reason eve ate an apple, free will

Edited:
Also back in biblical time they didn't know alot about health, and their body. So when u see a person that all sweaty and their temp is going up, they could of passed out, maybe their eyes turned alittle red. People thought the were posessed by demons. If u believe in the bible, it doesn't mean that Jesus didn't cure them, he did, but it wasn't a demon just the Flu. So u can still take the test as right but take it from the perspective of the writer, and the times that it was written in.
 
I'll take the Bible, a book that was written by over 40 people in a 1500+ year period by men of God, over the opinions of you two. For us to believe that any part of the Bible is wrong is denying its divine inspiration. You can call it what you want, and deny it however you want, but you cannot disprove that it occured, only speculate based on your limited knowledge that it may or may not have happened. Men may have pen'd the Bible, but its divine inspiration still stands. Whether or not you believe that is up to you.

Cory
 
Thaddius, you can believe what you want, but I do not think it is wise for you to believe that every single thing in the Bible is accurate and true. It has revised and rewritten and translated over and over and over, and over a very long period of time. There's also the bit about the Bible contradicting itself in so many areas.. You can cast it off as being the 'opinion' of 'us two' if you want, but all it is a bit of logic really.
 
I never said it was wrong, I said back then people who were just sick, were thought to be posessed. That doesn't take anything away from Jesus, he still healed the guy, but not from spirits, maybe it was cancer i don't know.
But it is a fact that people back then didn't know alot about sickness. And people who were just sick were sometimes considered posessed.
And I think it was written by one of those apostle guys so he saw what Jesus has done, he healed the guy. But it probobly wasn't a demon just cured him from some sickness.
And as u said it was written 1500+ years ago, so u have to take it in the context of the time it was written.
 
I'm not sure of any controdiction but a quick Question.
Nephilim, how could they appear both before and after the Flood?
If everyliving thing on earth died.
And I was watching some guy on tv from some shepard church and he said that noah and his family were not the only humans on the ark, is that true.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]Nephilim, how could they appear both before and after the Flood?

Several theories on this, but the most promenant is that they were fallen angels or the offspring of fallen angels and mortal women. If they are fallen angels, then it would be easy to see they would have survived the flood. (since they are immortal) Don't rightly know though 100%.

Cory
 
cool, I thought they were the children of fallen angels and daughters of the sons of god. And since they were part human they wouldn't be imortal. I have on idea.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Thaddius @ July 16 2004,10:18)]
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]There's also the bit about the Bible contradicting itself in so many areas..

Show me your contradictions please. I doubt their accuracy.

Cory
Mmm..you doubt many things.  Well, my attention was first brought to the contradictions of the bible when Timor showed me a while back.  Here is a list of such contradictions that I got off of a quick google.  There were several others, but this one seemed the most unbiased.  I honestly haven't looked into any of these, but you are more than welcome to discount them...there are quite a few tho..  The point is, the Bible is probably not quite as accurate as you may believe it to be.  Does this mean I'm saying your religion is not as 'accurate' too?  Of course not, but the Bible is a very old text, and so it's not surprising that it would have some errors and fuzzy areas.
 
And HERE is someones responce to his contradictions.

Faith, my friend, is what allows me to over look little things that I don't understand. I believe the Bible is the word of God and it is a inspired by God though written by man. Can somethings be lost in translation? When you look at the english language, its no wonder that so much is lost. Between Hebrew and Greek, there are atleast 6 words for "love" in the Bible. English, there is one word for love. A lot of context was lost when it was translated. Does that mean it is wrong? No. Does it mean that if you want to understand what you believe you have to put work into it? Sure.

Cory
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Mr.Bill @ July 16 2004,8:07)]It has revised and rewritten and translated over and over and over, and over a very long period of time.
Would you say the works of Shakespeare translated into German are materially different then the works translated into Spanish?  Would any translation be materially different for the original works?  No, not unless the originals changed.

With the bible, there are different translations (NIV, NLT, NKJV) based on colliquisims and you have different languages such as French, German and Russian.  They aren't materially different from each other and they aren't materially different from their source documents.

The source documents are ancient writtings whose authenticity has been verified more then any other writting of antiquity.
 
Back
Top