05-16-2007, 09:11 PM | #21 |
Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 283
|
|
05-16-2007, 09:12 PM | #22 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The People's Republic of Monsanto
Posts: 3,085
|
Not a single devil is cast out of anyone in the Gospel of John. In Mark, it happens at the drop of a hat.
__________________
"Do not despise the words of prophets, but test everything; hold fast to what is good; " 1 Thess. 5:21 (NRSV) We all trust our own unorthodoxies. |
05-16-2007, 09:14 PM | #23 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,431
|
SIEQ, do you know if Q has any "devil casting out" material in it (probably not since it is mostly sayings material)?
Last edited by pelagius; 05-16-2007 at 09:20 PM. |
05-16-2007, 09:16 PM | #24 | |
Assistant to the Regional Manager
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
|
Quote:
As the the concept of possession, it sounds theologically troubling in that it appears to impede one's agency. OTOH, if it's attributable to organic causes, then it makes more sense. I have never witnessed a perceived possession, as Europeans were too much rational to even mention such things. Usually the stories I've heard told hearken from South America where lots of weird stuff transpired.
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα |
|
05-16-2007, 09:20 PM | #25 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: the far corner of my mind
Posts: 8,711
|
Of course you do. In fact, you find it all a myth except for that little bit of spirituality that you can't bring yourself to let go of. You have admitted it here before; you believe in some sort of god, or somethign beyond yourself and us. You are unable to articulate what this is, which makes it a very convenient belief, I might add, and yet you cling to it for some unknown and certainly unproveable reason. Anything specifically articulated by others is always a myth, and you are very gracious to point that out to them, but by leaving your own spirituality nebulous and undefined, you avoid similar scrutiny. As for me, I am quite happy in my one-star world.
__________________
Sorry for th e tpyos. |
05-16-2007, 09:37 PM | #26 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,431
|
Quote:
Last edited by pelagius; 05-16-2007 at 09:41 PM. |
|
05-16-2007, 09:43 PM | #27 | |
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 10,665
|
Quote:
And in this thread we even have suggestion that apostates are possessed. Truly, this type of talk is not fit for college educated people in modern times.
__________________
Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster Last edited by SeattleUte; 05-16-2007 at 09:49 PM. |
|
05-16-2007, 09:44 PM | #28 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,431
|
Quote:
|
|
05-16-2007, 09:51 PM | #29 |
Master
|
I am sure that several of the instances where "devils" are mentioned in the scriptures were in fact not matters of possession but rather other physical or even mental maladies.
However, I also believe that demonic possession is a very real thing through experiences I care not to share here or anywhere else for that matter. Whether a devil be allowed to possess through invitation, sin, or some other organic process as Arch mentioned I do not know.
__________________
Ernie Johnson: "Auburn is a pretty good school. To graduate from there I suppose you really need to work hard and put forth maximum effort." Charles Barkley: "20 pts and 10 rebounds will get you through also!" |
05-16-2007, 09:53 PM | #30 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The People's Republic of Monsanto
Posts: 3,085
|
Quote:
Luke is actually useful here as he tells us that he gets his information from earlier, though second and third hand, sources (inferentially including Mark), and thinks he has the truth of things figured out for Theophilus. Luke includes the casting out of devils in his Gospel. Matthew doesn't sanitize Mark's casting out of devils and he is prone to rewriting Mark in the name of theology. My take on John's gospel is that while their might be a little in there that is somehow attritutable to John, it seems to have been revised and pieced together as the work of probably at least three authors. John 20 and 21 look to be two seperate and distinct endings (John 21 explaining the apostle's death--something I've never heard discussed by rank and file Mormons), and the prologue to John and other passages have the feel of neo-platonist philosophy (and even gnosticism, to my eye). The Gospel of John probably has parts that were written quite early on in Christian history (the "Signs Gospel" assumed to be the source of the seven signs material), but I don't think it took it's current form until later. Probably near the end of the First Century. Weighing all of this in with what I know of 1st century Judaism, it is fair to conclude that many early Christians believed in posession.
__________________
"Do not despise the words of prophets, but test everything; hold fast to what is good; " 1 Thess. 5:21 (NRSV) We all trust our own unorthodoxies. |
|
Bookmarks |
|
|