revtimothybland

Yes, he was. Most people forget that. If someone calls themselves "Son of Man" and refers to you as "Brother" or "Sister," then aren't you yourself at that point just another "Son (Daughter) of Man?" IMVHO, Yes.

That's open for debate. Jewish believe that the prophesies spoke of David, Christians believe it was Jesus. Both, according to how they acted in their respective tales, fit the bill. Thus, we have the rub. Which one is right? IMHO, neither. The prophesies spoke of a person who could help, and two showed up in Biblical Canon. This means, IMHO, that both are right, they just see things differently. Which means that "Son of Man" is not an indication of being the "Only Son of God" as most Christians take it to mean. It merely means that he came to help, and we ignored him. Or misinterpreted him. Or both.

Then my instinct about the site was correct. Sometimes, I hate when that happens. Makes me depressed.

In context, it means that he's there to do great works.

Yes, but "Son of Man" could indicate that he, like everyone else, is a child of Mankind. It is not, IMHO, an indication of him being the "Only Son of God" as most Christians tend to want to believe.

And many other mediums have done the same, but said different. Lack of reincarnation doesn't hold up to common sense. If Heaven is filled with souls as they die and we are constantly getting new souls with every birth, then it stands to reason that Heaven is unfathomably huge. However, what of the "Old Souls?" Those individuals that just seem older than they really are and seem to have an uncanny wisdom? They're not new. They've been around the block a few times, metaphysically speaking. It makes no sense, therefore, that reincarnation doesn't exist. And in my own dealings with the Celestial Spirits, I've never been told this is the wrong way for me to think.

I took a look. I don't like the "Best Answers Moved to the Top" thing. Best answer in who's opinion? Because that's all it is. Leads me to believe that anyone with a slightly different view will get pushed aside rather than be heard like they're, IMHO, supposed to be. That's why I like ULC.

Everyone looks at themselves in the mirror and doesn't like what they see at one point or another. Lugh knows I have. But Pete's right. You shouldn't be too hard on yourself. Live, Learn, Grow. Improvise, Adapt, and Overcome. We're here if you need us, as I'm sure you'd be there if we needed you.

As a Celtic Wiccan with a background in Catholicism (Or, "Pagan in Denial", as I like to jokingly refer), I must say that I agree with pretty much your whole post, not just what I quoted above. One of my favorite authors, Jim Butcher, wrote in his third Dresden Files novel "Sometimes you get what's coming to you and sometimes you ARE what's coming to someone else." Believe it or not, it was the Christian character who said it. I've always maintained that spellcasting and potion-making were just simply another way to pray, and I'm glad to see that someone agrees with the sentiment. Spells and things don't always work because it's quite simply not always "in the cards". As to my personal beliefs, I do believe in ONE Divine, the "Source" as I've mentioned on the site before. The Source has two sides, one Masculine, one Feminine. Neither is more important or better than the other. I touch upon different aspects of the Source through my "emulation", as Atwater Vitki put it, of certain older Gods and Goddesses, particularly the Celtic ones. I typically use Lugh for Masculine and the Morrigan for Feminine, both of which require "emulation", not "worship", in the more traditional Celtic way. They are teachers, not rulers. In many ways, this is similar to, say for example, following the teachings of Yeshua. Or the Buddha. I believe that Mary Magdalene is the Feminine aspect of the Source that most Christians (not all, mind you) tend to want to deny. They call her a whore when there is nothing in the Bible to indicate that she is. I feel that we shouldn't have lost touch with that. Christ never said he was the Son of God, he used metaphors to indicate that the Divine was in all of us. I DO believe he was the Son of God in the sense that we are ALL the Children of God. He wanted us to see this, and treat each other as family, but we don't listen.

I agree, FrJohnG.

First link, thank you Fawzo, it does help shed some light as to the man's own mentality, which may be real possessions, as he claims, or just a mental issue he has, such as Schizophrenia. Point is, we don't know, but the exorcisms seem to have a psychosomatic response in him. And to me, that's really what magic rituals, including exorcisms, are all about; the psychosomatic response. Self-hypnosis and the like. Effective, but no less real. As to the second link, I can't believe anyone would believe that hype. By professing to know what God likes or dislikes is by definition taking the Lord's name in vain. That means there are more sinners WITHIN the church then without. And they don't fully realize it. It's a shame, really.

I'd say that this is equally as plausible as demonic possession. The point is, none of us know for sure which one of these things was responsible for the man's response. I saw nothing in the video to indicate the man had CP, or some other condition to make him react that way. Most likely, he just had a psychosomatic religious experience. In Physics, Occam's Razor is a theory that says that the simplest solution is often the correct one, and that IS the simplest, based on evidence.

Yes, I believe that is what I said. However, just because the Catholic Church denies it doesn't mean that it didn't happen. The church has been denying just about everything except the existence of God for centuries. Even the order of exorcists under their command has had their existence denied time and again. Thus, I don't put much stock in their "expert opinion." Yes, this was in all likelyhood a purely psychological thing, for both the healed man and the "expert" who claims it was four demons being cast out. But it doesn't make it any less real. Did the Pope exorcise the man? No. The man exorcised himself by allowing his belief in the Pope's power to take effect. Did the man really have demons to get rid of? That's open for debate. But I do not see anyone who believes it was real as being ignorant.

I believe demons do exist. I believe that most are our own making, however. The human imagination is so powerful that psychosomatic solutions often work BETTER then any other. The man believed that the pope could heal him, and lo, he did. Thus, even if it wasn't a real exorcism, it was an exorcism of sorts. Thus, I do not believe it to be fair to call the so-called expert who claims it was four demons leaving the man ignorant. That's what the man felt when he studied this so-called exorcism. Anyone who claims someone who believes in spiritual matters like demons is ignorant is, in my opinion, equally ignorant.

Well, Penny IS one Hottie McCaliente, that's for sure.

Good question. I'll mention it to the next atheist who tries to tell me I'm wrong. I don't personally believe that anyone should "bow" to any Gods. I think it's more of a symbiotic relationship, not a "whom controls whom" thing.

"Real power is in the heart." "If you cannot fail, you cannot succeed." "The wind does not respect a fool." "Only fools have no fear." "Better to die on your feet then live on your knees." All Klingon proverbs. The last one was paraphrased from a Bruce Lee movie. The original line is "Better to die a broken piece of Jade then to live a life of Clay."

You didn't read the rest of the post of mine you quoted from, did you? Here, I'll re-post:

To be honest, I never use the law as benchmark for right or wrong. just legal or illegal.

Well said, Gwydion.

No, but after the age of 18, people are ASSUMED to be mature enough, and a case must be made for their inability to make proper choices on their own in order for legal contexts to deny them this.

No one can ever be truly certain if their experiences were truly divine or simply insanity. I have had experiences with the Divine, or The Source, as I call it, and it has manifested using my preferred God (Lugh) and Goddess (the Morrigan). Were my experiences delusion or true flashes of insight? Who knows. But I do know that they were RIGHT. I believe anyone can be contacted by the Source, and it will manifest in a way that makes sense to you personally. Some have visions. Some see the Gods/Goddesses they favor. Some simply, as LeopardBoy mentioned, glean feelings and insights by reading up on old legends about different cultures. It's all relative.

Of course not. But you're asking about the Age of Consent. In Law, that's 18. A simple, straightforward answer. In reality, it's deeply personal. Thus, we have a paradox. Now, you could be right in that laws are basically an excuse to avoid answering some of those personal questions. OR, the law could be in place because it's the only thing everyone agreed on as a guideline. One could argue for either explanation.

No, read my previous posts. My answer is that no one really knows because it's a deeply personal thing, and the legal limits that we've set as a society are the closest we have to a straight answer. Are you just trying to be antagonistic, or did I actually say something to offend? If I did, I apologize.

Yes, I'd imagine so. after all. polytheism usually puts an emphasis on a single God/Goddess, and only mentions the rest. In Greece, you had temples dedicated to single Gods, but you found at least a temple for each God. If one saw only A Temple when visiting, one might come to a similar conclusion as Marco Polo did about Hinduism. Perception is key to just about everything.