It’s been awhile and I figured I should post something about something.
I went to Shannon’s church Sunday. It was all right, but honestly not my thing. It seemed very dry. For my personal tastes I need something more interactive, more challenging, more thought-provoking. But it felt good to at least go to a church.
I got two new books: Cell by Stephen King and The Tipping Point by Malcolm Gladwell. My hairdresser told me about Gladwell’s book, and it sounded too interesting to pass up. It’s about trends and marketing in society. I’ll post more when I know more.
Tonight I’ll be watching The Exorcism of Emily Rose. It looks kinda scary, so we’ll see how I’m able to handle it.
**LATER
So I watched the movie. The smaller sized screen on the DVD player and Marty talking next to me both helped in keeping the movie from getting too scary, but it’s still thought provoking. There is a nice blend of people who read this journal–what are your thoughts on demonic possession? Is such a thing possible?
I did some research on Annaliese Michel, the real girl that the Emily Rose movie was based on. It seems compelling. If nothing else, the movie might make you think. But it is pretty creepy.
I didn't really like the movie much. I do believe there is such a thing as demon possession, yes. What I thought wss weird is how the lawyer and priest guy would have demonic presences in their home and stuff. That part was rather creepy.
This is Andy
I'd say it's possible, since we see examples of it in the Bible. Nowadays, it gets foggy, as some things that were once thought of as possession are understood to be chemical imbalances in the brain. And then, there's the segment of Christianity that tries to rebuke the devil for every little thing, which confuses the issue more. "I rebuke thee, devil, and tell thee to get out of mah peanut butter and out o' mah life!"
Re: This is Andy
lol
Hey 🙂
I don't really know much about it, but it's definitely on the radar a lot less in the US than it is on the other side of the world. But it seems like a lot less of it is all-out possession like in movies, and more of it is intermittent fits & stripping & stuff. The most common thing is spirits causing ailments (like some ailments are medical, some are spirit-caused, and some have both causes and don't go away unless both are addressed…weird), or death through causing sicknesses.
I don't really know how it works, either, but i wonder if humanistic and athiestic influences in the west have made overt possession not as strategic for the enemy. But in cultures that worship spirits or gods, like animistic or Hindu cultures, even a lot in Buddist cultures, they have a lot of possession, etc. Maybe there it's more strategic, because the people live in fear and slavery to the spirits, so it still works there. Even in monothiestic societies though, like in folk Islam, they acknowledge other beings and live in fear of them. So they do all this "superstitious" stuff instead of or in addition to medical care.
So when the gospel comes into these societies, there are showdowns in people's lives between the power the spirits have over the people, and the freedom Jesus offers. When people are too scared to stand up to the spirits, it results in synchrotism and the gospel doesn't spread as much. When people choose to trust Jesus for protection, sometimes there's struggle first, but they find he's stronger, and the gospel spreads a lot quicker.
So what was the movie like? I'm picturing the Exorcist 2 trailer. Was it like that at all?
The movie was interesting because it focused more on the trial of the priest. Emily Rose, a demon possessed girl, died in the care of a Catholic priest and he's on trial for negligent homicide. The story is revealed in a series of flashbacks as the trial unfolds.
Emily doesn't survive long after being possessed. I've never seen the exorcist so I can't tell you if it's like that or not.
Summed up very nicely!!