Ouija board working a fact?

[Amandil]

IDK if id trust science that much, after all, it wasnt that long ago, that it was common knowledge that radium was a good cure all for about anything that ails a person, science backed this up too, not going to list them all, but you get the jist of this…only look at recent history to see how wrong science has been about alot of things…today, we laugh about all the things people believed in, but it will also be true, people 100 yrs from now, will be laughing at us and our science, and cant believe those goofy people back then really believed in that…the only question is what are some of these things our modern scientific world will be completely wrong about?

What’s even worse are the “laws” foisted upon us because of that “science” and their certitude that it was correct, decisions made “for science” and in the name a “future” that they cannot possibly know.

Then when the science turns out false and the damage done they shrug their shoulders and say, “how could we have known?” despite the warnings of their critics.

 

[Stylteralmaldo]

mikekle:

IDK if id trust science that much, after all, it wasnt that long ago, that it was common knowledge that radium was a good cure all for about anything that ails a person, science backed this up too, not going to list them all, but you get the jist of this…only look at recent history to see how wrong science has been about alot of things…today, we laugh about all the things people believed in, but it will also be true, people 100 yrs from now, will be laughing at us and our science, and cant believe those goofy people back then really believed in that…the only question is what are some of these things our modern scientific world will be completely wrong about?

This is very well stated. It’s laughable sometimes what science propagated as fact when later it was found to be way off base.

With that said however…

What’s even worse are the “laws” foisted upon us because of that “science” and their certitude that it was correct, decisions made “for science” and in the name a “future” that they cannot possibly know.

Then when the science turns out false and the damage done they shrug their shoulders and say, “how could we have known?” despite the warnings of their critics.

I’m not so sure that nowadays that many in the field of science propagate their theories with the certitude you propose. This may have been the case a few years back. However, I have noticed a bit more caution in how those in the field of science express the conclusions of current theories that have yet to be proven. It seems these days scientific theories are presented morso as a ‘leading theory’ rather than ‘this is how it is’ kind of scenario.

With that said however…

Most science programs still believe there was a Big Bang and stating such with certitude.

Personally, I think it all started with a very slow crack and started eventually accelerating to our present velocity. But what do I know?

Back on topic…

It seems that the way I see it is that ouija boards are ‘real’ in the sense that I believe in a spiritual world and that God may allow spirits to communicate through them. As others have stated, the board itself has no power and any power wielded through them is only available if God allows it (‘allowing’ not being the same as ‘condoning’ as I do not think a ouija board ought to be messed with).

 

[ynotzap]

What people do not realize is that the devil takes advantage of our ignorance and false beliefs. the Ouija board has no inherent powers, its just a board with symbols. But if people believe that it does, or just curious, the devil will oblige to foster the false belief. If it can convince someone that they have some undiscovered powers like ESP, clairvoyance, telekenisis, fortune telling and the like, then they might think that they have supernatural powers, be like God. We can fall into the trap of violating the first Commandment "I Am the Lord thy God, thou shalt not have false gods before me.
I have performed simple exorcisms with many witnesses these include priests, nuns, college students, and lay people. These spirit use any means that people believe in like crystals, divining sticks, black cats, horoscopes, lucky charms, and even human feats like doing seemingly imposible feats, manifestation of UFOs and so many others. Superstitions are another. Don’t mess with them or you expose yourself to the devils subtle power, he is quite astute, but it has hatred for mankind, and mostly for God Jesus came to destroy his works!

 

[JapaneseKappa]

IDK if id trust science that much, after all, it wasnt that long ago, that it was common knowledge that radium was a good cure all for about anything that ails a person, science backed this up too, not going to list them all, but you get the jist of this…only look at recent history to see how wrong science has been about alot of things…today, we laugh about all the things people believed in, but it will also be true, people 100 yrs from now, will be laughing at us and our science, and cant believe those goofy people back then really believed in that…the only question is what are some of these things our modern scientific world will be completely wrong about?

Scientific knowledge often differs from common knowledge. There have been several recent fads like homeopathy, naturopathy, and climate-change denial where it could be said that common knowledge diverges from scientific knowledge.

It’s true though, that science can and does get things wrong. That’s why there is such a strong emphasis on verification. If you think you have some way to invalidate something science currently claims to be very sure about, you would likely win a nobel prize.

That’s why it is so hard for a scientist, when discussing claims in the religious sphere, to abandon this desire to test the claims. He knows that even when people (e.g. scientists) are very intellectually careful, they can still be wrong.

 

[esieffe]

I think the evidence presented is sufficient. Yes, demonic forces are brought into play since ouija is a form of divination. No one should have or use one. It is against Church teaching.

Peace,
Ed

Maybe I should go into more detail. Before I do, I was not Catholic when we tried this, nor was I aware that this was a mortal sin, but I did know that it was really not a good idea.

If you do not believe in these…devices so much the better for you. Your salvation is not dependent on that. I however, as I have said do know for a fact it works. I stupidly let my friend who owned the board ask the questions, so he invited anything in “good or evil.” He wasn’t really taking it seriously, at least not in the beginning.

It was his board, and it had never worked. He was not using it correctly, so I showed him the proper way to use it. The devil is in the details. The planchette began to move almost immediately and smoothly in a figure 8. It was waiting for a question. We both stared at each other with wide eyes and my friend gasped and said, “are you moving it?” I was not, and I knew he was not either because the WAY it was moving was so… elegant and quick. That is the only way I can describe it. We asked a few questions. It moved with such purpose and when it stopped on a letter it did so at a perfect angle each time. I wrote the letters down as each time it would stop over a letter or number and pause. It spelled nothing but gibberish, nothing.

My friend then asked if it was evil. It hesitated and went to yes. That was enough for me. The damage had already been done, we were messing with something beyond our comprehension and it was telling us that it was evil. It was not my board, not my house but I through the thing out the front door into the front yard and insisted that my friend join me in the Lord’s prayer. I never touched another one of those things again.

One more thing. If you do ever decide to play with this thing, do understand that it is a mortal sin, and if it spurs the interest of yourself or another to delve deeper into the occult then that adds a great deal of gravity to the weight of the sin, especially if harm comes from it. I apologize for the strong language, but I feel very passionate about this sort of thing. A year or two after we did this thing my friend took his life. He was a recovering addict. I had lost touch with him, his girlfriend had left him, I doubt the two things were connected, but I will never know for sure.
Again, I don’t care if anyone believes it or not. Just don’t use it. If you are curious, be smart and be curious about something else.

 

[carn]

Scientific knowledge often differs from common knowledge.

Absolutely, there are well paid scientist telling the world that the damage caused by a CO2 reduction of 80% till 2050 is neglible compared to the damage caused by a 5°C increase till 2100.

Common knowledge of course erroneously thinks that if you task politicians with reducing world wide CO2 emissions by 80% in 35 years and bestow them the power to do so (and forbid them to drown the world in nuclear power plants), that the result would be something between the Great Leap Forward and Holodomor and that we would be far better off with 5°C than trusting politicians with such power.

But as those scientists put a real strong emphasis upon verification (i would just one day like to see how they can reliable simulate entire economy of the world 35 years into future in face of vast regulation changes to achieve 80% reduction, when they fail to spot a housing bubble 1 year beforehand), common sense must be wrong.

climate-change denial where it could be said that common knowledge diverges from scientific knowledge.

Or in other words, learn to distinguish between information based on science and information only officially claimed to be based on science, but actually being as good or bad guesswork as the average crystal ball reader achieves. For example, that CO2 increases temperature is a hard scientific fact and actually very easy to test. But practically all claims beyond that are gradually less and less scientific.

E.g. the forcings assumed to boost the CO2 temperature increase, which on its own would be only between 1 and 2°C, are somewhat scientific, though not very reliable, while the claims what the effects of temperature increases are are scientific guesswork, while the claims that its better to reduce instead of adapt are just guesswork without science. Yet, all the former stuff is routinely presented as science without any grading that some of it is of more reliable science type, while the other is less reliable science or “science”.

 

[carn]

He was not using it correctly, so I showed him the proper way to use it.

What did he do wrong (just if you think its unproblematic to share the details)?

I would suspect demons yearning for doing harm would not mind much whether some detail is correct, they would grab any chance to do harm.

 

[John_Lazarus]

Did you just suggest to include children in an experiment which aims at proving the existance of evil spirits by contacting them?

Your arguments and those of JapaneseKappa would be perfectly fine, if we assumed quija board works in some automatic and guranteed way maybe with some non-freewilled and/or harmless spirits or so.

.

As Oreoracle has “agnostic/atheist” listed under “religion”, I think s/he* is working under the assumption that it does not work at all, and therefore would pose no threat to children, anymore than stepping on a crack or wearing a shirt with the number “13” would.

From his/her* answers, I would suspect the same of JapaneseKappa.

Please correct me if I am mistaken.

*Sorry, I don’t know either of your genders, I can’t tell from the tone of your font.

 

[carn]

As Oreoracle has “agnostic/atheist” listed under “religion”, I think s/he* is working under the assumption that it does not work at all, and therefore would pose no threat to children, anymore than stepping on a crack or wearing a shirt with the number “13” would.

But that is not the right approach in light of the JREF challenge. JREF offers a guranteed payment, if a test succeeds, they have the funds ready to pay the price. So the approach is not “Lets do this tests, nobody will ever succeed, so we need not consider, what is to be done if.”

But the approach is “If applicant succeeds, then 1 million is paid. Hence, we prepare for that situation and have the 1 million ready in case someone succeeds.” and that is the approach even if JREF people are convinced that the applicant will fail. And therefore the approach would also be “If applicant succeeds, then evil supernatural entities with the power to alter/effect the human mind up to inducing acute suicidal tendencies and long-term serious mental illnesses will get in contact with at least all test participants and try to do their evil stuff. Hence, we prepare for that situation and … heck, how could we ever be prepared to deal with such a situation? Lets try to find a different test protocol that leaves out those demons.”

edit:
And of course that would at once exclude any possibility to include children in any way in such a test.

 

[mikekle]

But that is not the right approach in light of the JREF challenge. JREF offers a guranteed payment, if a test succeeds, they have the funds ready to pay the price. So the approach is not “Lets do this tests, nobody will ever succeed, so we need not consider, what is to be done if.”

But the approach is “If applicant succeeds, then 1 million is paid. Hence, we prepare for that situation and have the 1 million ready in case someone succeeds.” and that is the approach even if JREF people are convinced that the applicant will fail. And therefore the approach would also be “If applicant succeeds, then evil supernatural entities with the power to alter/effect the human mind up to inducing acute suicidal tendencies and long-term serious mental illnesses will get in contact with at least all test participants and try to do their evil stuff. Hence, we prepare for that situation and … heck, how could we ever be prepared to deal with such a situation? Lets try to find a different test protocol that leaves out those demons.”

edit:
And of course that would at once exclude any possibility to include children in any way in such a test.

Oh, I believe there are more than a handful of people out there in the world today that have supernatural abilities, but problem with offering money to prove this…Id bet all of them have no interest in the money, they know if they come forward and others learn of their abilities, they may be rich, but they may also be kept in a lab, under lock and key for the rest of their lives, being poked and prodded every day so scientists can figure out how they can do these things.

 

[vz71]

But that is not the right approach in light of the JREF challenge. JREF offers a guranteed payment, if a test succeeds, they have the funds ready to pay the price. So the approach is not “Lets do this tests, nobody will ever succeed, so we need not consider, what is to be done if.”

But the approach is “If applicant succeeds, then 1 million is paid. Hence, we prepare for that situation and have the 1 million ready in case someone succeeds.” and that is the approach even if JREF people are convinced that the applicant will fail. And therefore the approach would also be “If applicant succeeds, then evil supernatural entities with the power to alter/effect the human mind up to inducing acute suicidal tendencies and long-term serious mental illnesses will get in contact with at least all test participants and try to do their evil stuff. Hence, we prepare for that situation and … heck, how could we ever be prepared to deal with such a situation? Lets try to find a different test protocol that leaves out those demons.”

edit:
And of course that would at once exclude any possibility to include children in any way in such a test.

The success of the test bring about the demons.
It is not possible to have a safe test in this case.

 

[carn]

The success of the test bring about the demons.
It is not possible to have a safe test in this case.

Which is the reason i think this argument from “People claiming ouija boards work the way catholics claim do not claim JREF price, therefore the claims must be untrue” fails. The JREF challende is a nice tool to debunk lots of supernatural claims (think dowsing; test setup is rather simple and there were people trying to claim the price via dowsing and got “cured” by failing the pretests), but for some supernatural claims its not suited and this is one of them i think.

@mikekle

I think this argument is pretty weak, mainly because there are many, many people out there openly offering their supernatural powers for money.
britishdowsers.org/professionals/practitioners/
“Find Professional Practitioners. These members of the Society have provided references from clients or patients or such other evidence as the Council of the Society deemed appropriate. They will charge for their services and you should discuss this with them before entering into any contract.”
Why should anyone of them be hesitant to demonstrate dowsing for money, if they do dowsing for money anyway?

JREF is actually not the slightest bit interested in any explanation, why any supernatural power is supposed to work; they actually ignore such explanations as far as possible.

(Though i must add, not all dowsing would qualify as supernatural; e.g. if you stand next to a person nearly coughing to death and then use your dowsing rod and declare “Its an illness of the lungs” success would not prove anything supernatural happened; but some dowsers are clearly into supernatural claims)

 

[Nihilist]

Of course, they don’t work. It’s all stercus tauri.

But don’t mess with the stuff- don’t even experiment with it. On the stlight chance it might be true, it is forbidden in Scripture- and dangerous.

 

[JapaneseKappa]

The success of the test bring about the demons.
It is not possible to have a safe test in this case.

“I can summon demons” is not a claim the JREF would be willing to test, unless you had some prior proof of demons (or, as they put it, the demons were self-evident.)

Its the same situation with exorcisms. They wouldn’t test the claim “I can exorcise demons” unless you were able to provide prior proof that demons existed and needed to be exorcised. If you instead said: “When I perform exorcisms, people react in a way that defy natural explanation (e.g. heads spinning around)” they would be willing to test your claim.

Therefore, you would have to phrase the Ouija board test in terms of something more directly observable. Specifically, you would have to name what sorts of harmful consequences you would expect to see, and why there is no natural explanation for them.

Therefore, I ask: exactly what observable harm comes from “bringing about the demons.”

 

[ynotzap]

I am always amazed at people approach to a spiritual reality. As if science could control and even come to the knowledge of spiritual beings. It is a matter of experiencing the truths of Christian faith. Science doesn’t even have an answer except if it isn’t matter it isn’t real. ( I speak of empirical science.) I have been exposed to spiritual manifestations. I had to laugh when an observer said " That psychological" In Christianity the God-man Jesus expelled evil spirits (fallen angels) His redemption act was to destroy the works of Satan. All of this is contained in our beliefs, what some of the world hasn.t recognize is that our beliefs are based on reality. We didn’t know first and then believed, we believed first, and then came to know.
The human mind is very prone to pride, and even raise its ignorant head above the Divine. This happened to the fallen angels. What does science know about angels as if you could subject them to experiments? Human reason will never subject God to it’s demands. Faith is freely given to the humble of heart and mind. I have witnessed much arrogance from some when it comes to Faith in Jesus Christ. He is ignored as an unreal entity. We know better.
Faith is a gift from Jesus Christ who we know is real, its history, and its faith, and its reality.
Angels are far superior in knowledge and power than we are, but you won’t know this from a rational perspective unless you have Faith in Christ, then it all makes sense. In Christianity we have what is called spiritual discernment , that is the ability to be able to tell what is from and evil spirit (fallen angel) and what is from a good spirit (a holy, obedient angel) but what does the world know abou;t spiritual discernment? They know nothing. Its hysteria, or schizophrenia, or paranoia, delusional or just plain psychotic. Science will always remain in the dark about the spiritual world until is transcends to the fact there is a spiritual reality, and there is a God.

 

[carn]

Therefore, you would have to phrase the Ouija board test in terms of something more directly observable. Specifically, you would have to name what sorts of harmful consequences you would expect to see, and why there is no natural explanation for them.

Therefore, I ask: exactly what observable harm comes from “bringing about the demons.”

If demons exists, that is obviously the demons choice and not the choice of the quija board user.

Hence, i am saying since several pages, that JREF test does not provide any information here.

 

[thinkandmull]

Its weird that Ouija attract demons more then regular objects used for the same purpose

 

[carn]

As if science … even come to the knowledge of spiritual beings.

That is incorrect. Science could easily find evidence that at least some spiritual entities exist, if the spiritual entities are willing to cooperate to achieve the goal of acquiring empirical evidence of their existence.

Think of it this way, assume that a scientist had the hypotheses:

1. God does not exist.
2. No supernatural power or entities exist in any way.

Now further assume that 1. is untrue and God exists. If God wanted he could help the scientist at once to find empirical evidence that 2. is untrue. He would just have to tell him “Whenever you touch a human no longer dead than 7 days and with all major body parts present and ask me loud to bring him bakc to life, it will be done. Use this to demonstrate all your fellow scientist, that something supernatural must exist.” Scientist grabs his colleagues, they are off to the next morgue and he repeats it as often as necessary that all natural explanations can be excluded (which would not be very often, actually once bringing a human dead since 7 days beck to life under close observation would be enough), empirical evidence exists that 2. must be untrue.

The only possible reasons, why science has not found empirical evidence of supernatural entities or God?
a. they do not exist
OR
b. they do not want or are for unknown reasons unable to provide the empirical evidence

(BTW, thats my own experience with people claiming to be in contact with supernatural entities - whenever i suggested a simple test to prove their existence, people claimed that the supernatural entities see no reason why they should cooperate.)

Assuming catholicism is right about the existence of God, angels, demons and the devil, then at least God is unwilling to provide empirical evidence (being unable not being an option for Him) and angels, demons and the devil either unwilling or unable. The further conclusion would be, that since God is supposed to do everything in favor of our salvation, that He is of the opinion that lacking empirical evidence of His existence is better for our salvation than having empirical evidence. Reminds me of “Blessed are they that have not seen and yet have believed.” (assuming seen = empirical evidence is valid interpretation)

As having evidence of angels, demons or the devil would also constitute something close to existence of God (if those catholics got the angel, demon and devil thing right, their God hypotheses is suddenly rather plausible), it would be no surprise if God would order/force angels, demons and devil to also avoid providing empirical evidence.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

I am always amazed at people approach to a spiritual reality. As if science could control and even come to the knowledge of spiritual beings. It is a matter of experiencing the truths of Christian faith. Science doesn’t even have an answer except if it isn’t matter it isn’t real. ( I speak of empirical science.) I have been exposed to spiritual manifestations. I had to laugh when an observer said " That psychological" In Christianity the God-man Jesus expelled evil spirits (fallen angels) His redemption act was to destroy the works of Satan. All of this is contained in our beliefs, what some of the world hasn.t recognize is that our beliefs are based on reality. We didn’t know first and then believed, we believed first, and then came to know.
The human mind is very prone to pride, and even raise its ignorant head above the Divine. This happened to the fallen angels. What does science know about angels as if you could subject them to experiments? Human reason will never subject God to it’s demands. Faith is freely given to the humble of heart and mind. I have witnessed much arrogance from some when it comes to Faith in Jesus Christ. He is ignored as an unreal entity. We know better.
Faith is a gift from Jesus Christ who we know is real, its history, and its faith, and its reality.
Angels are far superior in knowledge and power than we are, but you won’t know this from a rational perspective unless you have Faith in Christ, then it all makes sense. In Christianity we have what is called spiritual discernment , that is the ability to be able to tell what is from and evil spirit (fallen angel) and what is from a good spirit (a holy, obedient angel) but what does the world know abou;t spiritual discernment? They know nothing. Its hysteria, or schizophrenia, or paranoia, delusional or just plain psychotic. Science will always remain in the dark about the spiritual world until is transcends to the fact there is a spiritual reality, and there is a God.

:thumbsup:Amen

 

[CHRISTINE77]

That is incorrect. Science could easily find evidence that at least some spiritual entities exist, if the spiritual entities are willing to cooperate to achieve the goal of acquiring empirical evidence of their existence.

Think of it this way, assume that a scientist had the hypotheses:

1. God does not exist.
2. No supernatural power or entities exist in any way.

Now further assume that 1. is untrue and God exists. If God wanted he could help the scientist at once to find empirical evidence that 2. is untrue. He would just have to tell him “Whenever you touch a human no longer dead than 7 days and with all major body parts present and ask me loud to bring him bakc to life, it will be done. Use this to demonstrate all your fellow scientist, that something supernatural must exist.” Scientist grabs his colleagues, they are off to the next morgue and he repeats it as often as necessary that all natural explanations can be excluded (which would not be very often, actually once bringing a human dead since 7 days beck to life under close observation would be enough), empirical evidence exists that 2. must be untrue.

The only possible reasons, why science has not found empirical evidence of supernatural entities or God?
a. they do not exist
OR
b. they do not want or are for unknown reasons unable to provide the empirical evidence

(BTW, thats my own experience with people claiming to be in contact with supernatural entities - whenever i suggested a simple test to prove their existence, people claimed that the supernatural entities see no reason why they should cooperate.)

Assuming catholicism is right about the existence of God, angels, demons and the devil, then at least God is unwilling to provide empirical evidence (being unable not being an option for Him) and angels, demons and the devil either unwilling or unable. The further conclusion would be, that since God is supposed to do everything in favor of our salvation, that He is of the opinion that lacking empirical evidence of His existence is better for our salvation than having empirical evidence. Reminds me of “Blessed are they that have not seen and yet have believed.” (assuming seen = empirical evidence is valid interpretation)

As having evidence of angels, demons or the devil would also constitute something close to existence of God (if those catholics got the angel, demon and devil thing right, their God hypotheses is suddenly rather plausible), it would be no surprise if God would order/force angels, demons and devil to also avoid providing empirical evidence.

Well, you seem to think YOU know everything!