I don't know the answer to your question. And it doesn't really reflect on the argument I am making. What I do know is that you can use the existence of "demons" to rule out all evidence that refutes or contradicts your personal interpretation of the Bible. My original point is that there is significant and very impressive evidence for reincarnation. (The Old Souls book I initially referenced in this discussion.) These are stories told by very young children who "remember" previous lives. The events are verified by the author who finds people who knew the person in question in their previous existence. ALmond Branch and Nasher apparently are telling us that these children must have been posessed by demons in order to be able to do this. SO, I guess you have come up with a fool proof way of avoiding a true examination of the issue, just explain anything that doesn't fit into your world view by laying it on "demons." End of arguement! Beginning of the abandonment of all reasoning! Forget trying to find a cure for cancer, just accept that demons are the cause and pray them away. Who needs medical research? who needs to advance science? or examine any suspect phenomena if we can presuppose, before we actually even look at the evidence, that DEMONS are (must be, if it doesn't comport to our interpretation of the Bible) the real cause?

Demons still cause epilepsy and the like today. Satan allows man to think he's so technilogically advanced with his "chemical imbalances" and the like. I was speaking with Jason the other night and he brought up a really great point...If you were Satan and one of your greatest achievements was to make mankind think you didn't exist, wouldn't you back off the demons when medicine was administered? Nothing has changed between Christ's time and our time. And as a psychology major, I tell you this includes psychological disorders as well. (Physical injuries don't count...broken bones aren't demon-caused, lol.)
Going back to the very very original question, I say it doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is that we are judged, whether there is a waiting period or not, and those of us who are known by Christ reside with Him in heaven, forever praising and glorifying Him. There's a rather large house, lots of amazing food, and other brothers and sisters. It'll be a grand old time, and I can't wait. :)

_________________
Mary M.

Hi Jake
I thought I should pass a comment about why we are not connecting. Reading the postings on this thread is like listening to one of those modern plays where the actors talk past each other without connection.

The reason is that we have diametrically opposed views as to the weight of the testimony of scripture. Most of the posters on this site believe the Old and New Testament scriptures to be the final arbiter in our discussions; that's why this forum is called 'scriptural debates'. Usually we are debating and discussing different perspectives on truth but we all have the common foundation that if there is a definitive scriptural statement, that settles it.

Your perspective is different. You are using scriptures to find occasional points of reference to your preheld positions. It is perfectly possible to do this but the scriptures are not a spiritual version of the Supermarket where you can browse along the shelves and take or reject as you choose. This book is God's revelation to men and woman of things beyond their intuition and discovery. God's truth can only be known by revelation.

It is not anti-reason, but we are moving in different directions. You are reasoning in order to believe, we believe and therefore we reason. We do not recognise our intellect as the final arbiter in spiritual matters. This is not a closed circle for people of a particular disposition. All can come to Christ. The research scientist, the doctor, the academic, but they must all come as sinners to a Saviour and not as the curious to a puzzle.

_________________
Ron Bailey

philologos,

The difference in our positions on interpreting the Bible is that you do not allow for the continuing revelations of the Holy Spirit. Before he was crucified, Christ told the apostles that he would leave his Holy Spirit available to us. As a Quaker I believe that there is "that of God in every person" and that if a person atunes themselves and listens for the Holy Spirit they can discern spritual Truth that may or may not be present in the Bible. I do not depend upon reason for my Faith, but beliefs do need to be held up to the scrutiny of reason.

In fact, the Bible is full of contradictions that need to be balanced with an examination of history and the scrutiny of reason. For instance, Mathew 2:1 places the birth of Jesus under the reign of Herod. But Luke places His birth under the reign of Augustus and Herod doesn't come until the next chapter. Which is RIGHT?

My faith is in the teachings of Jesus. If followed, they can bring about the Second Coming; A time when people actually "beat their swords in to ploughshares" and love their enemies as themselves (which will mean that there will not be any enemies.)

By shutting the door on the Holy Spirit and depending entirely on the literal Bible, you are left to explaning things you don't understand by reason of DEMONS. This does a great disservice to the gift God gave us all, the ability to reason.

Jake:

In light of the fact that you and others hold rather different presuppositions, it would be best not to dwell on the present question on reincarnation. It might be more helpful to start new forum(s) discussing fundamental issues such as the inspiration, authority, and inerrancy of the Bible and the role of the Holy Spirit.

For instance, I differ from you on various points:

1) I see the biblical picture of what happens after death, i.e. resurrection, to be contradictory to the concept of reincarnation (and please note: coming from a Chinese culture, I know very well the notion of reincarnation, and in my opinion, it simply does not fit God's revelation in the Bible.)

2) I believe in the need for the work and power of the Holy Spirit. However, I see the role of the Holy Spirit as making relevant what is in the Scriptures, rather than providing extrabiblical revelation on crucial doctrines such as reincarnation, which go well beyond the written Word of God. Otherwise, it is easy to fall into the trap of subjectivism.

3) I believe reason is important, however, I take a position similar to Augustine's -- "faith seeking understanding." Faith always come first. Otherwise, we will fall into the error of the rationalists, that is, the liberal theologians.

4) The so-called "contradictions" that you have cited have been explained in various ways (which also depends on what position you hold on inerrancy). In principle, I believe in the historicity of the four gospels, however, I also believe that each was written with the author's unique theological purpose. The point is to see Christ in light of different dimensions; picking on nitty-gritty details often lead us astray.

5) Both the scriptural revelation and my own experiences point to the existence of demons. It is not right to attribute everything that we do not understand to Satan and the demons, however, that does not warrant the complete ruling out of the possibility of demonic activities.

From the above, it is quite clear that there are many presuppositions that we disagree with each other. Each point could potentially become a new topic in the forum.

_________________
Sam

Demons still cause epilepsy and the like today.

So, people affected by it should abondon medical treatment? Or, if I understand you, they should try medical treatment because then Satan will tell the demons to back off because he wants us to believe (falsely) that medical treatment might work and that he doesn't exist. WOW. Really great Point!

I will let George Fox speak for me on this one.

"The Scriptures were the prophets' words and Christ's and the Apostles' words, and what as they spoke they enjoyed and possessed and had it from the Lord. . . Then what has any to do with the Scriptures, but as they came to the Spirit that gave them forth? You will say, Christ saith this, and the apostles say this: but what canst thou say? Are thou a child of Light and hast walked in the Light, and what thou speakest, is it inwardly from God?"

"This opened me so that it cut me to the heart; and then I saw clearly we were all wrong. So I sat down in my pew again, and cried bitterly. And I cried in my spirit to the Lord, 'We are all thieves, we are all theives, we have taken the Scriptures in words and know nothing of them in ourselves'".

George Fox, founder, Religious Society of Friends (Quakers)

The way I see it, demons may cause symptoms that [i][b]resemble[/b][/i] epilepsy; they are not the direct cause of the actual disease.

The descriptions in Mark 9 of the boy possessed by demon with symptoms of epilepsy also show that there are other [i][b]supernatural[/b][/i] phenomena. According to the father's description, the evil spirit "has often thrown him into fire or water to kill him". This is not typical of epilepsy.

To cite the IVP New Testament Commentary on Matthew 17:

[i]A man brings his son to the One with power to deliver him. Some of the symptoms depicted here resemble those of epilepsy (for example, Alexander 1980:83), which may imply that demons gaining control over the human central nervous system can sometimes cause epileptic-type phenomena. This observation does not, however, mean that epilepsy is always caused by demons; both the differentiation of the two in 4:24 and the numbers of committed Christians who suffer from epilepsy invite us to distinguish the two. Some contemporary accounts of spirit possession tell of spirits seeking to make people burn themselves (Kaplan and Johnson 1964:211).[/i]

_________________
Sam

Ah Friend,
But dost thou have the seed in thee, else why doth the life that is in thee strike at the life that is in me?

Augustine once said 'Love God and please yourself', and if a man loved God as Augustine did the counsel is good. When someone knows the scriptures as well as George Fox it is safe to listen to the inward witness.

George Fox and Robert Barclay knew and taught that a true manifestation of the inward witness could never contradict the scriptures.

_________________
Ron Bailey

Philologos

I do not strike at the life in thee, but at the strict interpretation and exclusive reliance on Scripture evident in so many of the posts on this website. Barclay and Fox taught that Scriptures should be interpreted and informed by the "Light Within" and that if there was a contradiction, the present revelations of the Holy Spirit should supercede or modify Scripture. This was because the Scriptures were God's revelations to the people in the time of the Bible and if He speaks to us today, then this is a message to the recipient and present generation.

On the otherhand, where do the many Christians who swear oaths in court get their justification considering Jesus' admonishment to not do so? Presumably denominational or other authorities have given permission to do so. But what is their authority?

Jake