|
Exorcism..............Is it real or fake ? (pg. 9)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by sufee_b
misses:0 |
Come on now, that just proves what I'm saying. You said they were visiting this place with their Ouija board all the time. Are you now saying that they only went three times? And if not, then wouldn't every time they went other than those three count as a miss?
To even suggest that the miss count is at zero... you've stepped out of the realm of casual omission and are well into the realm of militant denial.
| quote: | Originally posted by Xavier Moriarty
nice post. at the time its impossible to prove existance of god but at the same time theres no proof that he doesnt exit. just keep in mind, somebody said that people will never be able to fly, that a computer will be so huge and expensice that there's gonna be only 5 of them in the world and so on...
we need to evolve much more just to understand. |
How can you possibly compare the existence of a God with the pace of technology? It's been known for quite some time that technology improves at an exponential rate (Moore's Law is the most well-known example), but take a tiny slice of an exponential curve and it looks like a straight line. The human mind is naturally inclined to predict the same rate of growth in 10 years that we see today.
At the time these predictions were made, they were perfectly reasonable. It was always some breakthrough or new technology that changed the landscape and invalidated the predictions.
However, the existence of a God, at least in the context described by every major religion, is ipso facto an unscientific statement. It's simply not a testable hypothesis; it's not that we lack the technology to prove or disprove it, it's that it's very carefully worded in such a way as to be impossible to prove or disprove. No scientific leaps will ever change that fact.
People are fully entitled to believe in things that are unscientific. There are plenty of scientists who believe in God. However, your assertion that we will "understand" more about God if we "evolve" more is patently incorrect. If anything, all current evidence seems to point to technological progress eroding mankind's belief in the divine and supernatural, not enhancing it. As we learn more and more about the way the world and the human mind works, occurrences that were once only explainable as a miracle or supernatural act suddenly become mundane, even boring.
If you really stop to think about that, it really proves the exact opposite of what's been suggested. We know that "modern science's inability to explain" something (if there is indeed anything to explain) is not proof of the supernatural because there's a near-infinite number of phenomena that originally could not be explained and now can.
It's highly irrational to think that we've reached the end of progress, and that anything we see today that science doesn't have a simple answer for is obviously the work of God, or spirits, or whatever. That's virtually never turned out to be true in the past, and in all likelihood it will never be true in the future. |
|
|
| sufee_b |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
Come on now, that just proves what I'm saying. You said they were visiting this place with their Ouija board all the time. Are you now saying that they only went three times? And if not, then wouldn't every time they went other than those three count as a miss?
To even suggest that the miss count is at zero... you've stepped out of the realm of casual omission and are well into the realm of militant denial.
How can you possibly compare the existence of a God with the pace of technology? It's been known for quite some time that technology improves at an exponential rate (Moore's Law is the most well-known example), but take a tiny slice of an exponential curve and it looks like a straight line. The human mind is naturally inclined to predict the same rate of growth in 10 years that we see today.
At the time these predictions were made, they were perfectly reasonable. It was always some breakthrough or new technology that changed the landscape and invalidated the predictions.
However, the existence of a God, at least in the context described by every major religion, is ipso facto an unscientific statement. It's simply not a testable hypothesis; it's not that we lack the technology to prove or disprove it, it's that it's very carefully worded in such a way as to be impossible to prove or disprove. No scientific leaps will ever change that fact.
People are fully entitled to believe in things that are unscientific. There are plenty of scientists who believe in God. However, your assertion that we will "understand" more about God if we "evolve" more is patently incorrect. If anything, all current evidence seems to point to technological progress eroding mankind's belief in the divine and supernatural, not enhancing it. As we learn more and more about the way the world and the human mind works, occurrences that were once only explainable as a miracle or supernatural act suddenly become mundane, even boring.
If you really stop to think about that, it really proves the exact opposite of what's been suggested. We know that "modern science's inability to explain" something (if there is indeed anything to explain) is not proof of the supernatural because there's a near-infinite number of phenomena that originally could not be explained and now can.
It's highly irrational to think that we've reached the end of progress, and that anything we see today that science doesn't have a simple answer for is obviously the work of God, or spirits, or whatever. That's virtually never turned out to be true in the past, and in all likelihood it will never be true in the future. |
Depends you interpret as all the time? Its not like they were going there religiously and its not like it was making predictions left and right..I think if it were they would've used it for sports betting.. And yes, hits 3, misses 0.
"There are plenty of scientists who believe in God." Majoirty of scientists also believe in Darwinism yet a major part of scienece is observation and till this day no one has observed macro-evolution. |
|
|
| Omega_M |
| quote: | Originally posted by sufee_b
And yes, hits 3, misses 0. |
Why do you insist on just these three hits ? A majority of the population on this planet has never seen ghosts. Overall the ratio of hits to misses is incredibly low. That is the reason why nobody believes you. You can cry yourself hoarse. But until this ratio improves on a global scale, you will be left to defend yourself to the skeptics who will always be in majority. |
|
|
| Provocative_boi |
| quote: | Originally posted by Omega_M
A majority of the population on this planet has never seen ghosts. Overall the ratio of hits to misses is incredibly low. |
Just because they havent seen anything doesnt mean, they dont believe in it,you can only speak for yourself....Your genrealizing to heavily on everyone having the same point of view as you. |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by sufee_b
Majoirty of scientists also believe in Darwinism yet a major part of scienece is observation and till this day no one has observed macro-evolution. |
"Observation" is a major part of science but that doesn't mean that something has to be directly observed in order to be accepted as a theory. There are other ways to test a hypothesis.
Historical theories are proven by the convergence of evidence, i.e. evidence from many different fields (geology, biology, sociology, etc.) all reach the same conclusion.
Physical theories are usually proven by tests. The "observation" is observing the results of those tests - not necessarily observing the individual particles or evolutionary changes themselves. Macro-evolution has been observed, in the fossil record and the atmospheric record and so on.
God, however, can't be proven by either one. There's no direct evidence in favour (and can never be), and there are no tests that could disprove the theory (a failed test to disprove would act in support of the theory, but such a test could never be designed).
Don't tell me you're a Young Earth Creationist... |
|
|
| Zentac_75 |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
[FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#99CCEE]How can you possibly compare the existence of a God with the pace of technology? |
Thank you for my second LOL moment of the day :haha:
@sufee...
I have trouble believing in 'god/angels/heaven' and 'devil/demons/hell' because I can not grasp the notion of 'GOOD' and 'Evil'.
Those will always be subjective terms to me. There is an awesome thread in the COR about that (more philosophical) I found a few weeks back. Moral Hazzard had many excellent posts (although it took me a while to rap my head around them....this past year I've really let myself dumb down).
I may entertain the notion of 'a creator'...but it is not the idea that some omnipowerful benevolent(sp?) being that put us here. |
|
|
| Omega_M |
| quote: | Originally posted by Provocative_boi
Just because they havent seen anything doesnt mean, they dont believe in it,you can only speak for yourself....Your genrealizing to heavily on everyone having the same point of view as you. |
belief without a) personal experience or b) proof, is meaningless. Believers who have never seen ghosts or have no proof cannot defend their position in any meaningful way. A large % of believers IMO have never seen ghosts. And I don't generalize at all. A lot of people are slowly turning away from religion. If they don't believe in God, why will they believe in ghosts ? |
|
|
| Omega_M |
This documentary talks about religion, 9/11 and federal reserves in three different parts and makes an attempt to connect the dots. Other things aside, watch the documentary from 9:35 mins - 35:53 mins, that is the first part that talks about Jesus Christ and Christianity. Pretty amazing I must say. I would actually recommend you to watch the whole movie. The documentary is controversial to say the least. Interestingly, the wikipedia article on this movie was deleted !
This has got nothing to do with Ghosts, but it just points out the glaring difference between what may be the reality and what is the belief. And this difference has been purposefully created for personal benefits.
Zeitgeist - The Movie
|
|
|
| Provocative_boi |
| quote: | Originally posted by Omega_M
belief without a) personal experience or b) proof, is meaningless. Believers who have never seen ghosts or have no proof cannot defend their position in any meaningful way. |
I know people are turning away from religion and stuff that nature,it has been an on going process nothing new there.
Since you have a south asian back ground suppose this poll was taken on a website based somewhere in Karachi or Bombay e.t.c and the people replying to it are also based in those two locations....what would you think the reply on the options given in the poll would have been? just a guess( about :-Ghost,devil,pret-aatma,angels or GOD in general ) |
|
|
| Omega_M |
| quote: | Originally posted by Provocative_boi
I know people are turning away from religion and stuff that nature,it has been an on going process nothing new there.
Since you have a south asian back ground suppose this poll was taken on a website based somewhere in Karachi or Bombay e.t.c and the people replying to it are also based in those two locations....what would you think the reply on the options given in the poll would have been? just a guess( about :-Ghost,devil,pret-aatma,angels or GOD in general ) |
Ofcourse, they would be more likely to say yes, although I am not very sure about the results if the polls were conducted on young people living in big cities. But the fact is, that even in countries like US or UK, a large percentage of people still believe in ghosts. It's really unfortunate because the belief is not based on any real objective evidence. The evidence is always highly subjective. If I were to see an unnatural phenomenon, I would be inclined to investigate it rather than jump to a conclusion based on my belief that doesn't offer any satisfactory explanation.
Having said that, I respect your belief in ghosts. But I just don't like the fact that such phenomena do not yield themselves to scientific methods of investigation. I wonder why. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Omega_M
This documentary talks about religion, 9/11 and federal reserves in three different parts and makes an attempt to connect the dots. Other things aside, watch the documentary from 9:35 mins - 35:53 mins, that is the first part that talks about Jesus Christ and Christianity. Pretty amazing I must say. I would actually recommend you to watch the whole movie. The documentary is controversial to say the least. Interestingly, the wikipedia article on this movie was deleted !
This has got nothing to do with Ghosts, but it just points out the glaring difference between what may be the reality and what is the belief. And this difference has been purposefully created for personal benefits.
Zeitgeist - The Movie
|
i wanna know why you herald this as the second coming, when you think 2/3 of it is most likely bull? |
|
|
| trewqy |
According to my dad, my aunt and my cousin were possesed by this "jinn".
I didnt believe it. I've experienced one myself, FIRST HAND, and it was by far the most made up I have ever seen. There was this Islamic female priest who was a family friend. She specializes in exorcism and she did these whole ritual thing to me too.
Heres my story u gullible sheep. No made up stuff, not WORD OF MOUTH, NO "oo i think I saw this and this happened".
My mom is a muslim but my dad is a convert. So I was kinda raised to be a muslim too. Apparently some spirit visited my house one day and my mom saw it in the reflection and freaked out and called her up.
So there I was, probably about 12, just got back from school. I was living in Singapore back then. This woman was doing this whole crazy on my mom. My mom was crying for some reason. Didnt understand a single of what was going on.
My uncle explained to me of what just happened and said that there was an "entity" who resides in my house. So then it was my turn to be "EXORCISED". She did a weird thing to me, she rubbed from the head down all the way to my feet, maybe to rid the demon out of my body though my feet. She then sucked my toe to suck out the demon and then she gave her analysis of me. She said this Jinn has been sucking on my blood and that is the reason why I was skinny.
So yeah.. guess what, I'm still thin. Theres my story.
The whole ritual thing, got me thinking on the whole religion thing. It showed me how the human brain is a powerful too, and how it can easily be brainwashed by our own fears and imaginations. |
|
|
|
|
