I do not think a Christian can be possessed by a demon but since this is Traditional Theology forum I wonder if the Church father mention any thing like this?
Since we cant go into detail...i am unable to explain why.
Upvote
0
I do not think a Christian can be possessed by a demon but since this is Traditional Theology forum I wonder if the Church father mention any thing like this?
I missed the term Christian, I was referring to possession in general, not to Christians. When I said those possessed probably had damage to their spirit beforehand that implicitly excludes true Christians. Dangerously false heterodoxical doctrines would be the danger to Christians.I do not think a Christian can be possessed by a demon but since this is Traditional Theology forum I wonder if the Church father mention any thing like this?
Oh! Thank you, I didn't realize. I just thought it meant orthodox. Are there online repositories of their writings? All I can find are synopsizes and books for sale. I would especially like to read Origen's works. But I would like to be able to use keyword searches to find places to start reading.Since this is the Traditional theology forum it would be nice to post something from the Church Fathers and what they said. Note I am not talking about the Bible but the Early Church Fathers
I missed the term Christian, I was referring to possession in general, not to Christians. When I said those possessed probably had damage to their spirit beforehand that implicitly excludes true Christians. Dangerously false heterodoxical doctrines
Details of deliverance are against the rules? Or details of specific instances? Can't you make generalizations about the process?i had one and i am a Spirit Filled Christian. My father also had one. Ive done deliverance and been a part of christian deliverance. It happens.
When you especially councel and minister to those who have been a part of occult practices you often see opression and inhabitation.
Please just make sure we dont go into details...it is against the rules.
Oh, that is your argument. Do you know what the cause was? How did you fix the problem?
Details of deliverance are against the rules? Or details of specific instances? Can't you make generalizations about the process?
I know instances are. That's like therapy groups. But why not the general outline? I have no idea what you are talking about. I'm completely in the dark so I have zero context to put your statements into.Yes details are against the rules.
Instances and generalizations are against the rules.
I've been busy. You said soul and spirit are interchangeable, but they are not. There is a whole list of reasons why they are not.
Even if trichotomy is not true, soul and spirit are definitively not the same things. That is not orthodox theology, and it's not proper dualism either. It is monism.
The soul is never referred to as going upwards after death, only the spirit.Could you explain how they are different?
CHURCH FATHERS: HomeSince this is the Traditional theology forum it would be nice to post something from the Church Fathers and what they said. Note I am not talking about the Bible but the Early Church Fathers
I know instances are. That's like therapy groups. But why not the general outline? I have no idea what you are talking about. I'm completely in the dark so I have zero context to put your statements into.
I suspect you are right that anyone can be possessed to a certain extent, in the form of exacerbating negative views towards oneself or others. But putting it out there without even a theoretical basis, that even describing that is forbidden, sounds alarming. And Gnostic.
The soul is never referred to as going upwards after death, only the spirit.
Only souls can be destroyed. There is the 2nd death, but not a 3rd. The spirit of the damned suffer eternally.
"The soul is in the blood" Lev 17:14 The spirit is not associated with any part of the body.
The Greek for soul is psyche and in 1 Cor 15:44 the "natural" body is psychikos. Its primary meaning is breath just like psyche, but the rest of the meanings are very distinct.
So some lower animalistic aspect of the soul gets transformed into spirit. If soul and spirit are not distinct no such transformation is possible.
Why don’t you take the conversation to somewhere you can talk about it?
The soul is never referred to as going upwards after death, only the spirit.
Only souls can be destroyed. There is the 2nd death, but not a 3rd. The spirit of the damned suffer eternally.
"The soul is in the blood" Lev 17:14 The spirit is not associated with any part of the body.
The Greek for soul is psyche and in 1 Cor 15:44 the "natural" body is psychikos. Its primary meaning is breath just like psyche, but the rest of the meanings are very distinct. So some lower animalistic aspect of the soul gets transformed into spirit. If soul and spirit are not distinct no such transformation is possible.
I'm referring to Eccl 3:21, which talks about the spirits of beasts going downwards after death and the spirits of humans going upwards.Perhaps you're referring to Ecclesiastes 12:7? In this verse only two aspects of man are mentioned - dust and spirit. A third aspect is not mentioned. This makes sense since the concept of soul and the concept of spirit are both referring to the same thing.
"Why fear those who can destroy your body when you should fear those who can destroy both your body and soul in Hell." Explicit soul annihilation. "doubly dead" Jude 1:12What makes you think that souls can be annihilated?
It's more like spiritual DNA. That is how the sins of the father can be visited on his sons. Through the bloodline.This is an unfortunate translation. What translation are you using? ESV, NASB, NIV, and KJV all translate nephesh here as life. The life is in the blood. This is saying nothing more than a creature's vitality is tied up with its blood. This does not mean that something like a soul or spirit is literally located in hemoglobin.
In Strong's Lexicon the 1st definition of psychikos is "of or belonging to breath" and the 1st definition of pysche is breath.The Greeks have a word for "breath". It would be pneuma. Psyche is not related to breath. Furthermore, psyche and psychikos, while they sound similar, are two different words and not necessarily related in meaning. All this does nothing to establish that soul and spirit are two different things.
It's based on the assumption that you deny that the psychikos is part of the psyche.I have no idea what you're talking about here. Where are you getting this from? What's a "lower animalistic aspect of the soul"? How does it get "transformed into spirit"? This doesn't sound like the language of Scripture, but some other strange teaching.
The Beast.Can you please explain further about the animalistic aspects?
The Beast.
Here nephesh is translated as beast three times in one verse.
Here are the other verses that use psychikos:
Jas 3:15
This wisdom descendeth not from above, but is earthly, sensual, G5591 devilish.
1Co 2:14
But the natural G5591 man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
Jde 1:19
These be they who separate themselves, sensual, G5591 For where envying and strife is, there is confusion and every evil work.
I like the last verse the best because it associates psychikos with the ego and egotism.
That is the intuitive understanding of the English. What is not clear from the English is that the spirit is above the soul. I always conceived of the two the other way around and I've discussed this with many people who all say the same. In person, I have never met anyone who thinks they are the same or realized that the soul isn't the most important.So your stance is that the soul and spirit are different according to the Greek and Hebrew?