Here's one we haven't heard of...

Re: You've gotta be kidding....

Actually belief in ghosts probably has origins back in paleolithic times. The idea appears in just about every known human culture. So it obviously has a history.

I don't think that I literally believe in ghosts, although I do keep open the possibility.

Philosophically, I think of most things in terms of probabilities. Absolute true and false are cognitive ideals, the termini of perfect inquiry. (Which rarely are reached in practice.) And frankly, I think that I would give the existence of ghosts a higher probability at this point than the existence of Yahweh.

But even if we agree for the sake of argument that ghosts don't exist, beliefs about them remain tremendously fascinating as historical, psychological and sociological phenomena.

What's more, belief in things like ghosts is integrally associated with popular religious ideas. It's one thing for academics to study systematic theology because it's aristocratically high-toned. But scholars aren't going to get a true grasp of religion in its real-life manifestations until they are willing to address the beliefs that are active out there on the street.

So religious studies can't afford to ignore this kind of stuff.

 

Re: Re: You've gotta be kidding....

Why must the esoteric traditions, particularly those of non-Western cultures, be consistent with Biblical teaching?

Significantly, that doesn't deny the reality of the paranormal manifestations, it just tries to give them a religiously perjorative interpretation.

That approach sounds a little medieval to me. It certainly doesn't bear very much resemblance to the modernist rationalistic approach that seeks to flatly debunk these kind of things.

I think that the paranormal is a problem for conventional religious belief. On one hand, it opens up the possibility of people having unauthorized religious (or at least quasi-religious) experiences that are outside the prevailing tradition. But attempts to deny these wild encounters are apt to create skepticism about the mainline religious beliefs as well. (Paranormal and supernatural are virtual synonyms.)

We certainly see that evolution happening in early modern European history.

 

First, in order to make myself feel better I realized that I misspelled apparition throughout my entire recent post. Inserting that extra "i" seems difficult to me for some reason.

I'll attempt to address these questions as best I can:

First the esoteric view (as from the original post):

Esoteric View: The esoteric view suggests that the universe is nothing more than energy in a specific relationship and at a specific vibrational frequency. This esoteric view of reality is the essence of our basis for understanding the metaphysics of the spirit realm. During life, a person exhibits behavior characteristics, such as personality, intelligence and emotions.

As a person crosses the threshold of death, the soul or spirit retains their human characteristics, such as intelligence, attitudes, beliefs and emotions. They are not disembodied spirits without a personality, intelligence or emotions. If a departed spirit was happy in life, he/she will be happy as a spirit. Conversely, if they were angry in life, they will retain this angry disposition in death and act in the same manner.

Death does not change the intelligence, emotions, attitudes or personality of those who cross through this portal.The ‘humanism’ of each of us survives physical death. Our previous understanding of life after death is very limited. This is not a black or white approach, but is like the 256 shades of grey. Death is not black or white, but another dimension where life continues in much the same pattern as upon the earth. It is the life without the physical body, but a spiritual embodiment of the pure energy of who we were in life on earth

To DesElms:
Life beyond death is pervasive in past writing. Primitive people spoke to the dead, asking for guidance, through their priests. Servants, in Egypt, were buried with their Masters. In India, until the late 1800's wives were burned alive on their dead husbands funeral pyres. The Greeks buried their dead with a silver coin in their mouths to pay the ferryman, Charon, to take them safely across the river, Styx.

The belief of a gap between this world and the next exists in many religions. The Mormons call this gap, the “Spirit World” and the Catholics call it “Purgatory”. This strongly suggests a vibrational chasm between the visible and invisible worlds. This gap or separation has been called dimensional discontinuity. Read about Dr. Raymond Moody, Jr. whose conducted a significant amoint of scientific research into this.

Paranormal discussions can be virtually limitless (believe me I've found myself there manytimes).

One last thing: I would like to clarify that I am not attempting to impose or manipulate anyone's personal and/or philosophical beliefs.

 

They needn't be... er... well... for me, at least.

Agreed. The more appropriate position, I suppose, for Christianity to take regarding ghosts or apparitions or whatever you want to call theml; and of psychics and whatever it is they thing they're talking to, would be to just deny that any of it happens at all.

But it's a common thing for Christians -- not all Christians, mind you; and not me; but for some of the more conservative, fundamentalist variety -- to take that position. Witness this web site, just as an example.

Well, of course, Christianity doesn't see its beliefs as "supernatural;" and, in fact, are more likely to see the words "supernatural" and "paranormal" as synonymous, but having nothing whatsoever to do with Christianity. So there is no problem such as you describe. What there is, however, is the sort of thing described on the web page to which I linked you a moment ago.

 

But how could people justify that kind of flat denial without simultaneously creating doubt about God himself, the logos, the incarnation, the holy spirit, salvation, divine revelation, miracles, heaven, hell, angels, demons, Satan...

God and all the rest are just part of the natural order?

It would seem to me to be very difficult to remain a Christian while simultaneously denying the reality of the supernatural.

Denial of the supernatural creates a intellectual impetus that leads towards atheism. That kind of historical evolution is a significant part of the history of the secularization of the West during the last 500 years.

 

Which is why they don't. If you think the paradox is lost on me, think again.

Absolutely. Well... maybe not Darwin's natural order. But that's their argument, isn't it? What could be more natural than God and the fact that he created everything... natural. Or so goes their thinking.

They don't. I only wrote that if they're to maintain their position about what happens when we die, it might be easier to deny that anything supernatural ever happens; or at least maintain that none of it could possibly be Godly.

Which might be, in part, why there is atheism.

You're, to some degree, preachin' to the choir, here, Bill. I am not the right person to take-up arms on behalf of most of Chrisitianity against your kind of sophisticated and logical analysis. Don't forget that I'm an ELCA Lutheran -- the folks who removed the word "inerrant" from our description of the bible. When I talk about how Christianity tends to interpret these things, I'm talking, in largest measure, about the kind of Chrisitianity that is represented by the earlier web page to which I referred you... the kind that sometimes makes me scratch my head in disbelief and wonder, too. I was actually hoping the 'Nova would have more directly addressed the problem since I know he's got a Christian belief that I suspect tends more toward the fundimentalist end of the spectrum than my brand of faith's end; and since I've now found out that he's also into what he's said here that he's also into. I'm curious about how he reconciles those two things. That was my reason for pursuing it.

By the way, for the ELCA take on some of this stuff:

• On biblical inerrancy
  
• On reincarnation
  
• On the devil
  
• On the holy spirit
  
• On the soul's relationship with/to the body
  
• On whether we become angels when we die
  
• What Lutherans teach about angels
  
• What is the Holy Spirit
  
• What is the soul

...just to list a few things.

 

Same

Gregg,
I agree with you on quite a few topics, but religion and ghosts just don't cut it. I'm agnostic. This is not a "put-down" on anyone's belief system, just the humble opinion of someone that cannot believe, in just believing. The idea of progressing to a better place is great. But so are Santa and the Easter Bunny. The fact of not having all the facts, does not prove divine intervention.
All of our major religions are pieced together from many others. Religious holidays were celebrated to coincide with pagan etc...

Where's the beef?

People should be able to study what ever interests them. It's their dime/time. I realize there are numerous religious posters, and I would never purposely offend them, but a fact is a fact until proven wrong. I have never seen any facts, just assumptions.

Post one example of a true scientific study, by bona fide scientists, with peer review. Everything returns to belief w/o the beef.

I'm not directing this at you specifically, you are the only poster with whom I've conferred. And I know you always investigate things to the Nth degree.

My girlfriend has condemed me to hell, for being late, so I'll catch the flack when I return.
Best to all