DEMONS! Experiences With Demons While IN "The Truth?

by Hunyadi 48 Replies latest jw experiences

• 

  Flash

  Demonic harassment? Yes. Before, during and after, including the present.

  As a child I would feel a dark presence around me from time to time. There were often times, when, while asleep in my bed I would be mashed into my mattress by a heavy weight, it felt very suffocating. As I got older, became a Witness, married raising children these occurrences were few until I started pursuing my long held interest in Out of Body Experiences. From that point on the harassment became and still is routine. I've had some fun and interesting experiences though and have NO regrets in pursuing my interests.
• 

  rem

  Flash,
  
  Look up "sleep paralysis" on Google. It's quite common and happens to me too.
  
  It's not demons.
  
  rem
• 

  donkey

  Rem you are a demonic ploy. You are Satan's agent because you are trying to make others believe he doesn't exist when we all know that he does.

  Do not listen to Rem he is a dragnet of the devil seeking to catch fishers of men.
• 

  Flash

  I've had sleep paralysis, it's not unusual before an OBE.
  Tell me Rem, are you one of those people that believe there is a 'perfectly logical' explanation for anything out of the ordinary? If so, I would use an old saying, "To anyone with faith, no proof is nessasary, for anyone without faith, no proof is enough." I give you first hand experiances and you reduce them to fit your small beliefs.

  Thank you Donkey LOL...OUCH!
• 

  rem

  Flash,
  
  Your experience was a textbook case of Sleep Paralysis. How else was I supposed to interpret it? When you say you had Cheerios for breakfast should I imagine you were really eating little doughnut shaped Sprites? Why would I add a non-falsifiable hypothesis to something that is not at all out of the ordinary?
  
  I am a person who has experienced a whole host of "unexplained" things. Some things are not explainable with today's knowledge. But instead of making up explanations, such as demons, I honestly say "I don't know". Really, though, there are many things that are explainable with what we know about psychology and physics.
  
  rem
• 

  DonnieDarko

  Well, I think REM has to believe that demons do not exist. For him, everything has to fit into a neat identifiable box. It has to be DEFINED because this way, it's much easier to control. Also, there is no pain or deceit in scientific principals or theories. Logic, unlike God, doesn't hold you ultimately accountable for your actions. It doesn't judge you. And yet, his FAITH in science and logic, although absent of a god, is also a form of religion.

  This type of faith has the illusion of being concrete, stable and conservative but ultimately, this "religion" also requires the same amount of TRUST for it to be effective, right?
• 

  rem

  Donnie,
  
  Wrong.
  
  Actually I would love for there to be a spirit world and a god. I think it would be great and wonderful. I also think it would be great and wonderful if the tooth fairy existed too. You see, I only believe or disbelieve based on evidence - not wishful thinking. You know, it's that thing that kids do when they stop believing in Santa Claus.
  
  I have nothing against the concept of other dimensions or a creator that I have to be accountable to. I just haven't seen any evidence of it all yet. Till then I keep a healthy skepticism of such extraordinary claims.
  
  Convince me. I've been searching for god and the spirit world for years now.
  
  rem
• 

  DonnieDarko

  The tooth fairy huh. You seem to use that example alot rem. The concept of "God" is a little more complex, wouldn't you agree?

  It is true, I can't give you empirical proof that God exists.The set of tools you use to measure your view of reality (the need for empirical data) cannot be used to prove the existence of a supreme, all powerful creator.

  I believe there are certain "Styles of thinking" that are more inclined to think in abstracts, and thus are more inclined to believe in the existence of God without the need for empirical proof. If your more concrete and rational, in the spirit of "Aristotle" compared to the abstract Plato, then your more inclined to be rational, logical and skeptical when defining the concept and existence of a supreme diety.

  To be truthful, i haven't met to many concrete/rationals types that profess to an absolute faith in God. Maybe it's not possible? Most abstracts rely on a "noetic" (intuitive principle) in their search for God compared to the logic minded rational who requires concrete "proof" to arrive at a conclusion.

  Maybe true faith is not universal. Could it be that real faith is only for a small, select group that God chooses? Maybe that is all that's needed for this world and it's imperfect state....
• 

  rem

  Donnie,
  
  >I believe there are certain "Styles of thinking" that are more inclined to think in abstracts, and thus are more inclined to believe in the existence of God without the need for empirical proof.
  
  I agree. The problem I see with this approach, though, is that people with this "style of thinking" seem to have countless different ideas about what god is. Hindus have Brahmma and the many other gods that make up the Brahmma, Christians believe in Jesus, many believe in the Trinity, some don't. Jews believe in Yahweh. Ancient Greeks believed in Zeus, Egyptians believed in Ra and the many other gods. Pagans believe(d) in a whole host of gods - including the ancient mystery cults and their godmen.
  
  There are just so many different, conflicting ideas about god and how many gods there are and what their names are and what their personalities are like and what they expect from me. This is why I believe that this "style of thinking" does not get you any closer to the truth. All it means is you end up believing what you want to believe - even though there is nothing to back it up. It's all just glorified half-assed guesses and opinions.
  
  I just see the results of rational thought in our lives... increased living standards, increased life expectancy, decreased infant mortality, many diseases cured, instant communication around the world and to distant planets, etc. etc. etc. This all came about because people started moving away from the old style of thinking and they embraced rational thought. Rational thought led to progress (and many complications that's for sure). The point is that only rational though moved us from our superstitions to knowing that horoscopes are fake (some still don't seem to know this). Voodoo spells never cured a disease. It can't be demonstrated that god regularly answers prayers (experiments have been performed).
  
  What good is this style of thinking to me? I don't personally see a benefit, so it doesn't work for me. If it works for others, that's fine, but I'm still waiting to see the same scale of benefits it brings to humanity as rational thought has.
  
  rem