As Rob points out, this site has received many posts on the good vs. evil/ right vs. wrong  polarity and the demon question.  The "Newbie--Worry" thread has been interesting, but has meandered a lot and has lately focused on this question again.   The unwieldy character of that thread makes it seem prudent to start a new thread on this discussion with a narrow focus to prevent excessive repetition.  I'd like my new thread to address the question of definitions of value terms (e.g. love, hate, evil) and methods of testing New Age claims that arise from the use of these terms. 
I will begin by reposting my reply on the "Worry" thread discussion. Then in my next post I will reply to some of the relevant comments on that thread.

To me it is either meaningless or wrong to say that hate does not exist, but is rather the absence of love.  It is meaningless because acts of hate (e.g. torturing Jews or Blacks) cannot simply be explained by the absence of something.  Acts of hate are very real acts that cause intense pain and even death.  More importantly, it is wrong because of what Malachi Martin has discovered as the decisive factor that  convinces the skeptic of  the reality of demonic possession in a major exorcism. (See his analysis of several major exorcisms in "Hostage to the Devil".)

It is not the bizarre lowering of room temperature as the entity sucks up heat energy to manifest itself.  It is not the psychokinetic effects (objects being teleported around the room, etc.).  It is not the serpentine expression on the face of the possessed that psychiatrist Scott Peck, for example, tried without success for hours to imitate in a mirror.   It is not the fact that the entity knows you better than you know yourself and reveals some of your most embarrassing life moments to humiliate you at key junctures during the exorcism. 
For example, one saintly priest was greeted by the demoniac with the snide comment, "Well, if it isn't Peter the Eater."  The other priests gazed curiously at this priest's ashen face.   That expression was a dirty nickname his girlfriend had given him in his misspent youth.  The gross revelation temporarily put the demon in charge of the exorcism.

All of these symptoms can be present in a major exorcism.   So what convinces even the skeptic of the reality of demonic possession?   The searing energy of pure hatred, says Martin, an energy that sears the soul like a hot iron with effects that continue after the exorcism.  This energy is every bit as real as love.   Martin describes one case in which the energy of hate instantly killed one young athletic priest the moment he approached the bed of the possessed.  Conversely , it can be questioned whether love is properly viewed as an energy at all.   In my view, love is more properly regarded as a way of being, which may or may not be experienced as energy.

Martin is a Catholic priest. But his key observations find independent corroboration from New Age OBE adept, Robert Bruce.  Robert has confirmed the reality of hate and evil by direct experience. I quote from one of his online articles at "Astral Dynamics:"

"I have seen babies as young as nine-months-old under strong, direct psychic attack from unquestionably evil spirits.   I have seen toddlers attacked, overshadowed, possessed, and tormented.  I have stood in nurseries and seen manifestations (visible to the naked eye) that would make normal person's hair turn gray...."

"I once became possessed myself and was almost killed, while trying to exorcise a powerful entity from a five-year old boy.   I have also seen animals attacked, even possessed and driven mad by negs".

"The popular New Age model states that everyone has spirit guides and/or spirit protectors attached to them from birth to death.  But if this were true, how can babies of pre-language age and very young children be attacked and tormented, even possessed?  Where is their protection and guidance when they need it most?"
 
Don

Don,

Respectfully speaking, I think the Newbie thread did define two different camps' ideas on right/wrong and good/evil.   On the one side, there was the higher ideal that evil does not exist, and was an absence of love.  In that camp, were those who felt "there was no right or wrong, only beliefs."  This, despite the fact that there is ample evidence of divine laws, separate from physical law.

In the other camp, were those who understood the notion of PUL, but felt that in C1/reality we had to acknowledge good/evil  right/wrong, eventhough these notions may dissolve as one ascends to a higher plane of existence.  I am in this camp, for the time being.  I think you may be too.

I'm not certain that we can bring these to camps together.

BTW, I am re-reading the Swedenborg thread of yours; it is a treasure trove of insight and information.

Best,

Matthew

My "swipe" as you call it was a statement of fact.  I am an advocate for my positions; passionate as such, but never personal.  If you look at my past postings today, I did note that you and I had much in common with study of aikido and the Bhagavad Gita.....

I don't think we should get touchy about these replies.  Intellectual discourse may be directed, and done with passion, but can be friendly.  My saying, "this despite"  is meant along those lines.  And I don't think both camps need to be brought together.  I simply meant that the Newbie thread did flesh out the opposing camps.  I think that you, Kathy, myself, Don and others filled out those positions nicely.

Matthew

Hi Matthew,

As I read the descriptions of both camps, I felt like I could agree with both of these even if these appear to be separate.  I don't see duality here.  I guess I see co-existence.

Each person is free to believe as they so choose.  This has to do with their own consciousness and in this respect their beliefs are neither right, nor wrong… they simply exist.   

From a moral evolutionary standpoint the creation of right and wrong, good and evil was necessary or we would not be able to become individualized consciousness.  These things clearly exist as well.

Love, Kathy

Don-

In the absence of compelling evidence to the contrary, I too believe in the reality of evil.  There are new age folks who dismiss evil as being something we ourselves project, and that all we have to do is replace evil with love because supposedly those two things cannot exist at the same time.

That sounds great, but it is way too simplistic.  Yes, we might have a nightmare with some kind of evil looking creature staring at us and scaring us half to death.  And yes, chances are very good that it's our own projection.

But it ignores "the rest of the story."  Namely, those exorcisms where true evil was manifested, and where it physically attacked those who were trying to exorcise it and where objects were sent flying around the room, etc etc.  I would love to challenge anyone who thinks they can get rid of that kind of evil by "sending" it PUL to get involved in a real exorcism and try out their theory in that kind of scenario.  I'm convinced they would change their mind in a NY minute.

And that's the problem with so much of the new age thinking.  It is feel good stuff that works only up to a point.  The new agers are seldom confronted with a situation where they can truly test their beliefs.  They confuse nightmares with the real deal. 

I don't wish anyone to have to witness firsthand a real exorcism.  It is frightening beyond description.  What I don't understand is why there aren't more cases of demonic possession, since especially children make plentiful and easy targets.

R

Two definitions of "New Ager":
(1) "Someone who buys more books from the New Age section of book stores than from either the Religion or Inspiration sections."

(2) "Someone who believes in "I am God" theology and embraces reincarnation on the basis of modern occult teaching rather than devotion to ancient Eastern religious traditions.  New Agers typically (but not always) deny the reality of evil."  

My initial comments will be focused on this patronizing comment from Bob:

"Since you are operating within a different paradigm, I'm not going to address your specific concerns because others have tried to show you The shortcomings of your way of thinking to no avail."

What paradigm is that?  My chief criticism of New Agers is that they operate within a rigid paradigm.  I am trying to inspire research and reflection based on multiple paradigms that often conflict in key ways.  Jesuit Malachi Martin's book "Hostage to the Devil" is just one of the research-based sources I study.  I am not Catholic like him.  But his experiences are corroborated by the paranormal aspects of my own family's exorcisms and psychiatrist Scott Peck's own encounters with exorcism.    Raz's myopic prior post can be refuted by even a cursory investigation of the standard treatments of exorcism.  

Like traditional Christianity, Peck and Martin conclude that the demonic is nonhuman.  But I supplement these insights with those of Emanuel Swedenborg whose astral experience teaches him that demons are discarnate evil humans.  I respect ES's verifications and astral insights, but sharply disagree with his symbolic biblical interpretations.  Robert Bruce is a reincarnational New Ager to the core, a man (unlike myself) with lilttle respect for the historical Jesus.  Yet his terrifying observations "resonate" well with the findings of Martin, Peck, and my own family.  Like ES, RB has often encountered astral aliens, but unlike ES, RB acknowedges that angels and demons (negs) can be nonhuman entities.  Especially intriguing is RB's observation that real angels (nonhuman) can be seen in the astral, but cannot be approached and questioned.  

So what do I conclude from all this?   That one must not simply stick to one paradigm, but must rather look for common ground displayed through conflicting paradigms.  What does this mean in practice?   That the identity (human or otherwise) of demons should be tabled until it can be subjected to decisive verification tests.  Since these entities routinely lie, the researcher cannot simply take their word for it when they claim to be Satan.
Final definitions of terms like "evil", "demon", and "possession" must defer to an adequate investigation of the possession phenomenon.

This brings me to a more important point.   Bob is typical of New Agers on this site who imagine that, like themselves,  I operate within a limiting paradigm.   But at least I read authors on all sides of the question.   No one here who presumes to pontificate on evil on the basis of channeled sources has even been willing to read a standard work on exorcism like Martin's.   That ghetto mentality is a crucial aspect of what I mean by "cultic."  Rondele's post is exactly right.

Kyo's post illustrates the myopia of this ghetto mentality.  He says, "Spirit releasement therapists have noted rather curiously that even `'dark' entities themselves never call themselves demons."  This false statement illustrates how New Agers create a straw man out of rather mild oppressive experiences and then misapply generalizations to major exorcisms that they have not investigated.  In fact, demons, whatever they are, conceal their identity in the first and longest stage of an exorcism--the Pretense.   The exorcist team breaks this Pretense by addressing either the patient's healthy core personality or the demon, but "refusing to speak with some unclear mixture of two two."  Peck continues:  

"But as the team became more perceptive and steadfastly refused to be sucked in, ..these patients began to alternate between a progressively more healthy-appearing core personality and a progressively  more ugly secondary personality, UNTIL SUDDENLY THE SECONDARY PERSONALITY TOOK ON INHUMAN FEATURES  AND THE PRETENSE WAS BROKEN (Peck, "People of the Lie," 105)."

At that point, shortly before the expulsion, the demons generally acknowledge their Satanic identity, whatever that means.  The term "demon", so maligned by New Agers, derives from the Greek "daimonion" which actually has a more expansive meaning: "a deity, evil spirit, of independent beings who occupy a position somewhere between the human and the divine."  This range opens the door to a wide range of beings from elementals to aliens.

The New Age ghetto mentality is well illustrated by an eloquent New Age astral adept, Robert Bruce:

"Early new Age spritualist thought began focusing on good and denying the existence of evil for very good reasons.  Lacking the knowledge to understand evil spirits, and with no effective procedures to counteract and protect against them, extremely uncomfortable belief system insecurities arose.  It's far easier to deny evil,...and work around the problem by fostering beliefs that foster security."

"I have also consulted several reputedly advanced spirits, through their respected mediums, on these same matters.  This was done kindly and fairly...But when I have questioned more closely, citing examples concerning very young children and animals, plus my own extensive hard-life experience with psychic attack, possession and exorcism,...said spirits began contradicting their previous statements and, basically, changing the subject.   When this was respectfully pointed out, in all cases, no further spirit communication was possible. ..I was dubbed an unspiritual trouble-making liar.  The spirits I communicated with either did not know the truth of the matters in question, or did not want to discuss them.  BUT ALL THESE SPIRITS AGREED TO A CANDID AND OPEN PHILOSOPHICAL DISCUSSION BEFOREHAND, and all claimed...access to any and all higher knowledge as necessary...I was kind courteous, and non-demanding."

This is a complicated issue.  I'll have nore on the definition of key New Age terms in future posts.

Don

"

Let's look at the different side of the picture for a minute. I cannot talk other then the material what I resonate with which is well known in this such a loving community and that is Seth/Elias.

I have no idea or interest to find out how many Course of Miracle, or Ramtha or Abraham reader out there, what I do know that even 20 some year AFTER Jane Robert disengagement, and still way over 10 million Seth book sold. Both Elias site reached way over a million reader all over the world, and there is NOT ONE SINGLE CASE known  that anyone who UNDERSTAND either or both material ever comitted a homicide, killed their own children just becuse Seth/or Elias whispered in their ear and told them to do so even though they're "labeled" as deceiving evil "earthbound" low vibration spirits  by the fundamentalist ghetto.  NOT one single Seth/Elias reader EVER needed exorcism, not one children  whos parent read/understand the material see, hear or  posessed by "evil" spirit.There are NO Andrea Yate's and Susan Smiths, nor "respected church member" like the BTK killer among Seth/Elias reader IF they have discernment and clarity about the material.

Why? Because this so called *new age cookery* bring awareness to the reader, bring SELF-KNOWLEDGE, bring freedom of choices, but the same time bring tremendeous responsibility and understandings that each action  EFFECT ALL CONSCIOUSNESS. and that understanding brings INTEGRITY.

On the other hand let see what the statistic says.

Religion and  child abuse study

The violence comes full-circle now and serves to perpetuate child abuse in our nation. In a booklet written for the National Center for the Prevention and Treatment of Child Abuse and Neglect, Dr. Brandt Steele revealed that child abusers had themselves been abused as children. A pattern of violence was established early in their lives and they passed it along to their offspring.

The time has also come to recognize the painful truth that traditional Judeo-Christian moral values of pain and pleasure in human relationships have contributed substantially to child abuse and to the prevalence of physical violence in Western civilization. The religious system upon which our culture is based holds that pain, suffering and deprivation are moral and necessary to save one's soul or to make one a "good person." The crucifixion and scourging of Christ are examples. I mentioned before the biblical proverb that reflects the religious necessity to beat children with the rod to save their souls from hell.

This doctrine was dramatized in Molly Ivin's article "Whippings for God" in the January 25, 1974, issue of New Times. She reported on a home for delinquent girls operated by Lester Roloff, a former Southern Baptist minister from Texas, who was prosecuted for spanking, whipping and beating the girls. He was quoted as saying, "Better a pink bottom than a black soul." State Attorney General John Hill said: "I don't mind pink bottoms. What I do object to is black, blue and bloody."


Abuse by Christian Groups

In 1994, a three month old boy was ritually murdered in Quebec, Canada by members of the International Chivalric Order Solar Tradition, a doomsday cult. They follow a syncretistic religion, combining Roman Catholicism, homeopathic medicine and high finance. This religious group believed that the murder was required because the infant was the Anti-Christ mentioned in the Book of Revelation of the Christian Scriptures. They ritually murdered the child by driving a wooden stake through his heart. The group went on to engage in mass murders and suicides among their membership in Quebec and France.

During 1995, a young Oriental woman in California was accidentally killed during a Christian exorcism which involved extensive physical abuse. A small group of Christians were trying to drive a demon from her body. Her corpse was left for a few days before the police were called, in the hopes that she would return to life.

During 1995, an infant in Ontario Canada was tortured and accidentally killed during a Christian exorcism by her grandmother. The infant had cried a lot and was believed to have been possessed by a demon. The murderer was convicted and received a 18 month jail sentence.
Just fee of the sample.

The study reveal that

The incidence of Christian Ritual Abuse. when it results in death, it often comes to the attention of the authorities and is reported in the media. But for every known murder case, there are probably many instances of physical, emotional or psychological ritual abuse which did not result in a death; these might well have gone unreported. A massive study of ritual abuse and what was called "religious abuse" involved questioning 6000 members of the American Psychological Association. Their definition of religious abuse includes abuse which may or may not involve some degree of ritual. They concluded that of the 2,297 cases of religious abuse reported

58% involved "abuse by religious professionals"  38% abuse involved religious setting, religious shcool or daycare, 24% abuse related to get rid of "evil" spirit from the child, 14% involved abouse witholding medical care for religious reason.

These data would SEEMS  to indicate that the incidence of ritual abuse during exorcisms should be considered as a serious social problem

2003-05-13
Deanna LaJune Laney, 38, of Tyler, Texas, member of the choir at the First Assembly of God Church, beats to death her 8- and 6-year-old sons, telling authorities afterward that God told her to kill them. Her 14-month-old son was also found beaten and bloodied, but still alive, under a pillow in his crib.
The case bears similarities to that of another Texas woman, Andrea Yates, who was sentenced to life in prison for drowning her five children. Yates believed that she was possessed by Satan and that by killing her children she was sending them to heaven and saving them from the fires of hell.

London, Ontario, Canada--Walter Zepeda was possessed by the devil. His parents, devoutly religious members of a Pentecostal church that believes in such manifestations, knew that much to be true. They had seen their shy 19-year-old son engage in behaviours that could only signal the presence of Satan. So Diego Zepeda-Cordera called his friend Alex Osegueda, a fellow member of the Missionary Church of Christ and a man of equal devotion, to help him rid his son of the evil. They had no idea the seven days of forced confinement it took to drive away the devil would also, literally, drain the life out of Walter. He lost nine litres of fluid as he lay strapped with men's ties to metal chairs in the basement apartment he shared with his family in this western Ontario city. Ultimately he died of dehydration. Yesterday, the squarely cut shoulders of Mr. Zepeda-Cordero heaved silently as a judge sentenced him and Mr. Osegueda to four years in jail for the ritual that caused the teen's death.

Sometimes in the near future I'll present the official statistics brake down to the homicide/crime rate among the individuals who are regularly attend in church activities

Ok, Don, I have removed the post that I knew would offend you.   I made that post to illustrate how shocked I myself can be by the idea that, might I continue in my "freedom of expression," someone might think I need a "devil" to be cast out of me.   I find the very idea repulsive and I think such belief systems should be challenged.

Additionally, I don't use the term PUL nor new ager in any of my conversations.  I feel that labeling and defining people is "dangerous," to use a word that you often employ.

Despite this, many people, including me, enjoy your contributions.  But I will continue to speak up on occasion if I feel inclined.

blink