Ghosts are Proof of God

Then what are exorcisms for?

 

Expelling demons (minions of Satan).

http://www.stmichael.pair.com/exorcismschurch.html

 

You are basically asking me to prove a negative, I suggest buying the book.

You would at least realize that you must substantiate your own arguments instead of asking others to do it for you.

Never once have you proved your argument, seems rather silly to ask others to prove a negative.

 

"Exorcism (from Late Latin exorcismus, from Greek ἐξορκισμός, exorkismos - binding by oath) is the religious practice of evicting demons or other spiritual entities from a person or place which they are believed to have possessed. Depending on the spiritual beliefs of the exorcist, this may be done by causing the entity to swear an oath, performing an elaborate ritual, or simply by commanding it to depart in the name of a higher power. The practice is quite ancient and part of the belief system of many cultures and religions."

I see nothing here restricts the exorcism ritual to only non ghosts. Some ghosts have been known to be malicious, vexatious and malevolent and can only be removed from a home or other place by exorcism...http://www.theexorcisms.com/ . I suggest you do more research.

 

If you cannot account for what you are photographing then I can call your photographs anything I want.

You don't seem to have understood what I meant with epistemic value. FIRST you have to account for the phenomenon that the photo is supposed to have caught and THEN you can account for the photo itself. It's NOT the other way around. If there's something unknown appearing in a photograph then it only means that something that appears in the photo is unknown. It's not evidence of anything.

Provide evidence that there really is a phenomenon you can call a ghost and then we can discuss if that is what a certain photograph has caught on film. If not then it's a case of double exposure, a false camera obscura projection from a leak in the camera housing, a smudge on the lens AND a deliberate manipulation of grains of silver bromide. All at once or one at a time, doesn't matter.

'Unknown' does not warrant a specifically gendered pronoun.

Indeed. And most people will draw aliens as five foot tall, thin, grey humanoids with dark, almond shaped eyes when asked how an alien looks like. What's your point?

 

What more can I do to get you to actually provide a rationale for the positions that you take? This is intellectual dishonesty writ large and it's about as cowardly as it gets.

I ask you to account for your arguments... not mine! Due to your whining and whimpering I asked you to deal with just one case I documented for you...the Brown Lady of Raynham Hall.
There I took the arguments of a You Tube "debunker" and pulled them apart. It's patently apparent you have no answers to the points I raised or I would have heard them by now. Why not be a man and admit it? Or are you the coward you appear to be?

Either way if you contend the photo, taken by two professional photographers, was a hoax (for what reason no one can say) you need to explain how you know this is so (or shut up and go away). Remember...even the debunker freely admits there is a ghost at Raynham Hall that many people have seen and heard.

You asked for photographic proof and I provided it. All the onus is on you now, Zombie Boy.

 

Why does everyone go for the easy argument?
31 pages of that.

You literally took something that was refreshing and turned it into a (hilarious) battle.

Everyone is entitled to their own beliefs. Modern western fundamentalists are interesting, you know, since if we take into account Durkheim's view on society/religion, they could just hold on to bureaucracy, nation, etc. instead of God, but there is nothing wrong in supporting your beliefs. Oh well, maybe ignoring a large amount of good empirical research, but considering that an even larger amount of said research is not so reliable, no one can be blamed. You need to belong to something - do.
I do hope you receive your afterlife and face God one day.

The bad thing about promoting faith in a contemporary world is that it distracts people from the things that could actively change their lives.
But no offense. Religion is extremely important and always will be in its many many forms. Currently the belief in science appears to be promising.

 

I personally have not photographed anything but the ghost of Raynham Hall is well known (Lady Dorothy Walpole) so I wonder what your point is, and I wonder if you apply the same standards to something like the Zapruder film?

How many ghosts do you figure inhabit Raynham Hall? There is only one that has been seen countless times by so many witnesses and that is the woman who died in the hall, locked away as a prisoner of her husband.

Witnesses from King George IV of England to the two respected photographers from Country Life magazine have attested to seeing the ghost of Lady Dorothy Walpole.

If you are determined not to believe them then stop badgering me over this issue. I can do nothing for your willing lack of intellectual honesty.

Probably because her gender is known (as well as her name and history).

What's your point? That's the question. There is no doubt at all about the figure captured in the photograph taken in 1936 at Raynham Hall.

 

Yes, of course.

Please note here that the Zapruder film does not depict anything beyond probabilistic relations to real events. The discussion regarding the film concerned (or still concerns, I suppose) whether or not the film is a depiction of real events, not if the events could be real. With your claim of the Brown Lady of Raynham Hall, you're still at the first step.


By the way, I often use 'you' in the generic form, not meaning the adversary personally. I'm sorry if that caused confusion.

Evidence is not a matter of belief or disbelief. It's a matter of verifiability. Simply put, provide the same kind of evidence of the so-called ghost as you would of the staircase in the photo. As mentioned above, only THEN can we begin to discuss if that is what's been caught on the photograph.

 

I thought it was Hades Home Depot?

 

It sounds like a perfectly logical question to me, if as you say a ghost is a ghost because it has a soul, then do clothes have souls? How does a ghost make clothes? Do they have ghostly sewing machines. J. Ghostly Penny's? The person is not his or her clothes, or are they? Do ghosts wear clothes because you think their ghostly souls are obscene without clothes? How does clothing become a ghost?
Nothing funny about it, although it does point out the idiocy of believing in ghosts in the first place.

 

There is nothing in the Bible or Catholic tradition about ghosts, only demons.

 

so the holy spirit is a ghost? does it have chains? does it wear clothes? does it go BOO?

Spirit in the bible is used in three ways, as a reference to god himself, as a reference to a mans soul and as something outside of god and man. In no instance that I know of does the bible use the word spirit to mean the ghostly residue of a once living human.

 

I imagine that to anyone that actually believes in ghosts, despite there being no evidence they exist, lol, that there having clothing would seem quite reasonable, lololololololololololollo.

 

You are using an old photograph whose authenticity cannot be determined.

It is laughable.

Ghosts are not proven to exist, as much as you would like to believe so.

And no, just because a lot of people believe it to be true does not mean much.

 

Exorcisms are to alleviate the superstitious belief in DEMONS, not ghosts.

 

Did you read the information I posted about this issue?
Did you read what the people that investigated this issue reported? Did you read my comments? Until you do this, your biases are of very little interest to me.

Many many people have reported paranormal encounters with
ghosts. Which part of that is not "true"? The parts you choose to ignore?

 

Of course, because an old picture is evidence. lol

I guess we can add unverifiable images to creaking houses and open windows as "evidence".

Many many people also reported chupacabra, a falsehood.

Same with bigfoot.

...... and fairies.

 

LOL! Yep! And those words are translations.

The word is actually "pneuma," breath - or vitalizing breath.

 

This matters insofar that it points towards yet unexplained phenomena but it has no bearing whatsoever on which kinds of phenomena it points towards, let alone any evidence. The yet unexplained phenomena may well be of entirely neurological origins.

 

That's hilarious. You start with a lie and proceed to the existence of a god. Why don't you just start with the lie that "God has been detected and is know to exist."

 

Yes. Photos are evidence. Photographic evidence is actually used in court.

We can also add the fact that you've been told already that the photo is not "unverified". It was examined by an expert and if you'd read what I posted you would already know...or perhaps you did, you do and you are just pretending otherwise. Go crawl back in your hole.

If there is proof of such things bring it forward. That's what I did with the Brown Lady.

 

MANY MANY people have claimed to be god, Jesus, Buddha, demons, angels, aliens, and they have claimed to have seen god, angels, demons, ghosts, aliens, Buddha, Jesus and they are ALL nuts.

 

Interesting concept of a neurological disorder that is precisely the same for every person reporting it.

 

Who said anything about disorder?