1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Afterlife Forums is an online, interactive community designed to give seekers direct access to prominent researchers, to afterlife literature, and to one another in order to foster both spiritual growth and public interest in life after death.

URGENT! PLEASE HELP! Are the spirits that try to communicate will us ALL demons?

Discussion in 'After-Death Communication' started by peachy4, Oct 23, 2016.

  1. RobertaGrimes

    RobertaGrimes Administrator

    Dear BlueBird, as you know, AfterlifeForums is an EVIDENCE-BASED website. No mere opinion is acceptable here, but rather if evidence is presented for someone's point of view then we are happy to discuss that evidence. At once time we did allow religious discussion, but

    (a) people treated their religious beliefs as somehow factual, rather than as mere beliefs; and

    (b) we were soon in shooting wars!

    No more. We ban religious discussions in this forum's rules, and we have learned that if we don't want another forum-clearing crisis, we must enforce those rules.
     
  2. pandora97

    pandora97 Active Member

    Roberta, perhaps we should consider adding politics to the ban?
     
  3. mac

    mac senior member Staff Member

    I disagree.

    Religion and afterlife issues are related whereas politics and afterlife issues aren't. We have here on ALF two forums for 'Off Topic' discussions, one for members only, and both specially created on the old website for the discussion of politics and any other subject not related to afterlife matters.
     
    Last edited: Feb 21, 2018
  4. bluebird

    bluebird Well-Known Member

    I do not consider this site to be evidence based, as I do not accept as evidence much of the material that you do. I am aware that you consider it to be an evidence-based site.

    I'm not sure why you are reiterating your rules regarding religion to me, though, as I'm probably the last person here to advocate for any particular faith or religion.
     
  5. RobertaGrimes

    RobertaGrimes Administrator

    Just because I was continuing on what you said; you seemed to be saying that discussion of beliefs was fine with you. And of course that's okay out in the world! It just is not allowed on ALF.
     
  6. pandora97

    pandora97 Active Member

    My mistake. Sorry:oops:
     
  7. genewardsmith

    genewardsmith Active Member

    If you think the evidence is bad, that still means it's evidence. That you reject only some of the evidence as bad makes it even more of a stretch to call out the lack of evidence. If you like, you could specifically critique what you think is bad evidence.
     
  8. bluebird

    bluebird Well-Known Member

    Thanks for your response. I do view most of what is put forth on this site (by all members/posters) regarding the afterlife, god, and related matters, as opinion, and I often enjoy reading and discussing their views. So you and I apparently view this site very differently.

    That said, even given your view of the site, I was under the impression that you are fine with opinion statements and discussions in the off-topic and/or members-only areas. Is that not the case?
     
    Last edited: Feb 21, 2018
  9. bluebird

    bluebird Well-Known Member

    No, it's not that I think it's bad, by and large, it's that I don't think it's evidence. I am using "evidence" in the sense of "proof of an afterlife", and I have never seen anything that proved to me the existence of an afterlife. I'm not saying no afterlife exists -- I hope it does -- only that I've seen nothing that to me constitutes proof. I know some other people have, and that's fine. We just have different thresholds for such things, I suppose.
     
  10. genewardsmith

    genewardsmith Active Member

    Proof exists in mathematics; when talking about empirical evidence, we can insist only proof up to a certain standard. Lawyers talk of "beyond a reasonable doubt", and scientists about testing hypotheses. What standard of proof to you would constitute evidence?
     
  11. mac

    mac senior member Staff Member

    Please, not necessary. :)
     
  12. bluebird

    bluebird Well-Known Member

    Well for myself, I think the only proof I would accept would be if my husband came to me, so that I could see and/or hear him, and we talked. I don't expect that to be proof for anyone else, though. I suppose different people would accept different things as personal proof. I think that ultimately I really don't think there is anything that would prove the existence of an afterlife 100% to everyone, but in terms of empirical evidence in general, things that might be considered by many people as at least pointing to the possible existence of an afterlife would be things that are testable and reproducible, though I don't know what things those might be.
     
  13. Bill Z

    Bill Z Active Member

    I can only speak from my own experience about "proof". I said the same thing every morning in Spanish to my fiance after She transitioned. I spoke with a very good medium and she said "Susie has something to say to you" and the medium said the same exact phrase in Spanish. She also said my brother and mother greeted Susie when She transitioned. The medium did not know my mother passed, nor did she know I had a brother, let alone a transitioned brother. To me that is proof and all the evidence I need.
     
    Sapphire likes this.
  14. Luizcarlos

    Luizcarlos New Member

    In my personal opinion there is no such thing as Demons and Angels. These are labels created by religion and religion was created by us in this mortal plane. I would like to believe that the other planes of existence are inhabited by Individual Intelligence such as we call humans and animals. That which we call demons, I would call unscrupulous, evil, ignorant individuals. Those we call Angels, I would call evolved individuals on a mission to help others. The anthropomorphic god of religion including the Savior Jesus Christ are also our own creation.


    As the mind evolves, the universe unfolds!
     
    kim marine and Amore like this.
  15. RobertaGrimes

    RobertaGrimes Administrator

    Dear, you and I both know that we've lost a lot of good members over heated discussions of people's opinions! Religion is taboo anywhere on this website, and politics is reluctantly tolerated so long as people are polite.
     
  16. bluebird

    bluebird Well-Known Member

    I do agree that we've lost a lot of good members over heated discussions of people's opinions. The difference is that I view virtually all posts/comments on this site regarding the topics of afterlife, god, reincarnation, etc. as opinions, including yours (and mine, and everyone else's).
     
  17. kim marine

    kim marine Active Member

    I think that is a good approach bluebird. I don't know why some people are so adamant about holding their opinion so dearly before commenting as you do. Many respond back so smart aleck like an adolescent. I've noticed that seems to be the over-riding attitude theme of many adults attitudes these days. That reminds me to begin to keep an eye on my attitude in correspondence and not be caught in that wave of attitude.
     
    Last edited: Feb 24, 2018
  18. dingodile

    dingodile Member

    I'd like to know more about what they deleted and added. Can you suggest something to read about this? I'm aware that the Biblical canon was "closed" at this point, but I wasn't aware that specific sayings of Jesus were added or subtracted.
     
  19. genewardsmith

    genewardsmith Active Member

    They weren't. Extensive records were kept of the Council, so we know what they did and what they didn't do. One thing they didn't do was add or subtract anything.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea#Biblical_canon
     
  20. dingodile

    dingodile Member

    Thank you. That was my impression as well, but I thought perhaps Roberta Grimes had some information I had missed. By the time of the Nicene Council there were enough copies of the gospels in circulation that it should be straightforward to say whether anything had been added or subtracted. The passage in John about the woman taken in adultery appears to have been added after the Council of Nicaea. I think the longer ending of Mark is also from after Nicaea. Not sure about that, though.

    I think Roberta's general point is that while the actual statements of Jesus can be trusted, the rest of the Bible cannot be. Since Jesus didn't say anything specifically about necromancy, or the practice of seeking communication with the dead, we shouldn't assume that it's off-limits because of admonitions found elsewhere in the Bible.

    As I understand it, it's part of the Catholic tradition that the spirits of the dead are sometimes permitted to communicate with the living, but when this happens the communication is always initiated from the other side. Mediums, in contrast, attempt to establish communication from this side, to "summon" the dead, to use an older term. This is what seems to be condemned in the Bible. I don't know if the reason for the condemnation is that one would always end up in communication with a demon or that one might do so. The practice could be condemned because of the risk, even if the risk is not 100% certain.

    I've had no personal experience with any of this, but I was impressed by Joe Fisher's book, The Siren Song of Hungry Ghosts. What was most striking to me was the fact that Fisher had no religious agenda. He was, after all, a committed "New Ager", a recognized expert on reincarnation and and enthusiastic member of a home mediumship circle. When he came to believe that the personalities he had previously come to respect and even love were not what they seemed, he didn't jump ship at once. He proceeded to investigate other mediums, and came away with an increasingly grim perspective on the whole practice.
     

Share This Page