Demon Possession
Brian Dean bridean@worldnet.att.net
Tue, 2 Feb 1999 01:42:57 -0500 (00917959377, 19990202064041.DUWE8892@briandea)
> CREA
> Of course Matt probably thinks that opinion is sufficient in cases
like
> this. I also suspect that Matt is unfamiliar with Cotton Mather's work
> __The Wonders of the Invisible World__, in which that learned divine
> expounds at length on the Devil's assault (often by possession) on the
pious
> Christians of New England.
>
> BTW, just this morning I ran across an item that had me ROFL. Seems
some
> New-Age type is SERIOUSLY questioning the germ theory of disease. He is
> reported [briefly] as arguing that (1) infection does not INEVITABLY
follow
> introduction of the alleged pathogens, thus casting into doubt any
attempts
> to establish a causal etiology for a viable germ based theory; and (2)
> NOWHERE in ANY of the current crop of medical literature dealing with
> disease or diagnosis, is there any demonstrations, proofs or experimental
> evidence that would lead to the conclusion that that demon possession
does
> NOT cause disease. ;-)
>
Achilles
Personally I think the demon and germ theories of disease are easily
reconcilable. Aaron Rainwater has posted the harmonization several times in
his
signature, I don't remember the exact words but it has to do with a shaman
being shown some germs through a microscope... :')
BRIDEAN
Actually, they are reconcilable! All you have to do is say that all germs
are possessed or created by demons to make God fearing people sick
and lose their faith.