I recently watched the video ["My deliverance testimony: **warning this will trigger many christians**"](https://youtu.be/Lm9TcYmZjMs) which recounts a former New Age practitioner's conversion to Christianity and subsequent deliverance from demonic forces. These forces were legally allowed into her life through occult practices during her New Age days. She specifically mentioned a stubborn demon, allowed in through Kundalini Yoga, which only left her after eight months of her conversion. The "controversial" aspect of her testimony, depending on one's doctrinal commitments, is that she still required demonic deliverance well after her conversion and being filled with the Holy Spirit. Despite being "on fire for Jesus," this particular demon persisted until she was fully delivered. As expected, the video is causing some controversy in the comment section. For example (quoting some comments): > I believe demons can oppress a Christian. I do not believe that they can Indwell a Christian who is saved and sealed with the Holy Spirit. If that is the case, I immediately question if one was truly converted. The notion that a demon can indwell a Christian is a lie of note. The one who the son sets free is free indeed. You are sealed with the Spirit of God. > > Many make the claim that actual Christians can be indwelled by a demon and that is a lie. There is no record of that in scripture. It also diminishes the gospel which is the power of God unto salvation. I have seen deliverance and it is dramatic. The conclusion is that they were never saved to begin with. That is tough pill to swallow as many think they are when they are not. When you respond to the gospel, God himself seals you with his spirit. His spirit helps you live out your life through sanctification, he also helps you pray and he (the Spirit) intercedes on your behalf. That alone eviscerates any claim about Christians having a demon inside of them. Lies from the devil. If you believe that, you do not understand the gospel and you need some basic sound doctrine. Basic theology is important, it helps us get crystal clear on these matters, especially the gospel (which is everything). > Thank you for sharing about this, you are right - it's controversial in the church at large to say Christians can have demons. Sadly, it's very difficult for many of us to find a church where anyone (including the pastoral team) is willing to take on anyone as a disciple, let alone believe that anyone in a church setting would need deliverance from a demon. For encouragement to anyone who may happen to read this, after fifteen years of being saved (and told I was showing the fruit of the Spirit), I began listening to the book, Pigs In The Parlor (by Frank Hammond). Well, an hour or two later I started coughing uncontrollably. I wasn't sick, had no other symptoms of sickness, but experienced a coughing fit for five or ten minutes. Afterwards, I kept thinking, That was so weird; what was that? But over the following week, I realised a thought-pattern that had bothered me for decades was gone! So I've concluded that a demon left, simply after hearing (through earbuds, by the way) the prayers that were being spoken in the audio book I was listening to! Hallelujah, God is so good! God bless you and your family 🙂 > I had a very similar experience as you…having demons and then also > having the Holy Spirit…my full deliverance took almost 2 and a half > years. 🤯 > > People don’t understand your body becomes a battlefield as you learn > to submit and be sanctified in Jesus.🤍 > > Praise God for the miracle of your life!!!!🙌🏻 Derek Prince really > helped me too!!!❤ > > Thank you for inspiring me to share this truth on my channel. I > haven’t thought of covering this topic but the body of Christ needs to > hear that Believers can house demons. They stay until they are kicked > out. > > I, like you, was so desperate. You have to FIGHT and KILL the flesh > with the Truth of God’s word, prayer, fasting and never giving up on > God. > It happened with me too! I was Holy Spirit filled and I still had demons. It took obedience and sanctification in order for them to leave me (yes, they were inside me). Few months after I got freed I started a research about the occult in order to make a video and expose the lies. But I went soo far away into that investigation that I walked out of the narrow path of Jesus (by giving almost all of my focus on the darkness) and I once again got possessed by an unclean spirit. I cried, I repented, I fasted, but it really took time to solidify my commitment to walk in holiness and obedience with the Lord. Once the Lord saw that I was committed to walking with Him in purity the spirit left me in a split of a second. What biblical texts are cited to support the belief that Christians can have demons?

As stated above. I know the out-of-pocket answer is "pride", but I'm curious. The angels all had full knowledge of the choice and the resultant consequences, yet a third rebelled. Was it exclusively pride that led them to this decision, or something else? It seems a remarkably unwise decision for a being that knows unequivocally that it will result in eternal torment and separation from God. We can make the obvious argument that this is an awful lot like us, but the angels all had far more information than us. Angels don't need faith, they've all personally met God and know who He is without any doubt. They're timeless and never experienced moments of weakness. They made the decision in utterly ideal circumstances. Was it truly pride and pride alone that led to this?

In 1 John 4:1–3, we are instructed to "test the spirits" and are told that "every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God." This passage seems to suggest that verbal confession of Jesus' incarnation is a reliable test for determining whether a spirit is from God. However, in the Gospel accounts — for example, Mark 5:7 and Luke 8:28 — we see the demonic legion that possessed the man in the region of the Gerasenes recognizing Jesus and crying out: “What have you to do with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God?” This shows that demons are capable of identifying and even verbally acknowledging who Jesus is. Given that, how should 1 John 4:1–3 be interpreted? - Can demonic spirits confess Jesus Christ in a way that appears genuine? - Is verbal confession alone a sufficient test of the spirit's origin? - How do we reconcile 1 John’s teaching with the demonic acknowledgment of Jesus in the Gospels? I’m hoping to understand whether this test is meant to be literal, theological, or deeper than just spoken words.

While having a conversation with a member of the Latter day saints. I did some independent research regarding their official account of the origin of their Faith. I did not see any similar question, if there is one I do apologize. Forgive the long build up to my question, it helps the question be properly understood. It is down below in large friendly letters. :) I found this in "Joseph Smith's History" on a very well designed website, that would display explanations for certain words and even links to specific Bible verses involved. During my reading of the first hand account of events, I intentionally did not bother with any historical details nor look up things to bias my original opinion of the text. ---------- The account does not seem to show that Joseph did anything to confirm that his vision was from God and not from the evil one. I come from an eastern orthodox perspective and it seems that Joseph neglected (perhaps due to his age) 2 out of the 3 things we are supposed to do when confronted by visions of supernatural nature. 1. Challenging the messenger, demons can perfectly imitate even divine figures and loved ones. Even various Orthodox saints were deceived by visions where demons impersonated Christ, saints, or similar. We are supposed to challenge them, who sent them, etc. (Example St. Issac of the caves was tricked into worshiping a demon that another one called Christ) 2. Test the message itself, it should align with scripture if it is from God. (Remember this for the question at the end) 3. Seek guidance from a spiritual leader. --------------- These are the issues (minor and major) that I see from reading it. 1. It seems odd that the vision starts with "overpowering darkness" preventing him from speaking. But that doesn't really pose an issue, especially if Joseph did become freed by calling out to God. 2. In the vision, one being points to the other and says "this is my son", who's son? Lucifer and God both will say that they have a son. The orthodox church accounts of visions have many instances where one demon calls another "Christ" to deceive the recipient. 3. The angel Moroni, according to Joseph misquotes scripture by changing verses entirely. This should have been a clear sign that it was false. The "angel" versions are significantly different. 4. Joseph told pastors of his vision, but the pastors he told flatly refused to acknowledge that visions could even occur. (Making it regrettably impossible for him to seek spiritual guidance) -------------------- My main question is this focused on my 3rd objection above. #### "According to the account Joseph as a young man knew the scriptures, despite this he allowed an angel that he knew **changed a text from the Bible** to guide him. How do members of the church of latter day saints reconcile for this direct sin performed by the angel Moroni? >36 After telling me these things, he commenced quoting the prophecies of the Old Testament. He first quoted part of the third chapter of Malachi; and he quoted also the fourth or last chapter of the same prophecy, **though with a little variation from the way it reads in our Bibles**. Instead of quoting the first verse as it reads in our books, he quoted it thus: > > 37 For behold, the day cometh that shall burn as an oven, and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly shall **burn** as stubble; for **they that come shall** burn them, saith the Lord of Hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch. Compare with: "For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch." (Malachi 4:1 or Malachi 3:19) ----------- > 38 And again, he quoted the fifth verse thus: Behold, I will **reveal unto you the Priesthood, by the hand of** Elijah the prophet, before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord. Compare with: "Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord:" (Malachi 4:5 or Malachi 3:24) ----------------- Changing verses is a sin, and the angel Moroni did it, and Joseph noticed and recorded it officially. > “Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you.” (Deut. 4:2.) I understand the LDS response to this already, if the first vision and angel are valid from God, then there is no issue. But the angel sinned according to the account, by changing the scriptures... > We have renounced secret and shameful ways; we do not use deception, **nor do we distort the word of God.** On the contrary, by setting forth the truth plainly we commend ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God. (2 Corinthians 4:2). > “**Your word**, LORD, **is eternal; it stands firm in the heavens**” (Psalm 119:89). > “The grass withers and the flowers fall, but **the word of our God endures forever**” (Isaiah 40:8). > “Heaven and earth will pass away, but **my words will never pass away**” (Matthew 24:35)

In Mark 4:37–39 (also in Matthew 8:23–27 and Luke 8:22–25), a violent storm arises while Jesus and His disciples are crossing the Sea of Galilee. Jesus is asleep in the boat, and when the disciples wake Him, He rebukes the wind and speaks to the waves, calming the storm: > "He got up, rebuked the wind and said to the waves, 'Quiet! Be still!' Then the wind died down and it was completely calm." — Mark 4:39 (NIV) What stands out is that Jesus rebukes the storm in the same language He often uses when dealing with demons (e.g., Mark 1:25, Luke 4:35). Shortly after this event, Jesus arrives in the region of the Gerasenes and confronts a man possessed by a legion of demons (Mark 5:1–13), who ultimately beg to be cast into a herd of pigs—which then rush into the sea and drown. Some theologians and preachers have connected these events, suggesting that: **The storm may have been a demonic attempt to kill Jesus and His disciples before He could deliver the demoniac.** Question: According to various Christian theological perspectives (e.g., evangelical, Catholic, Orthodox, etc.), is there reason to believe that the storm was caused by demonic forces rather than being a natural phenomenon? How do different traditions interpret the storm in light of the nearby exorcism and the association of demons with the sea?

Many moons ago, I was surfing through the ocean of Wikipedia and found the page for "[Great Lent](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Lent) ." While reading, I found [this quote](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Lent#:~:text=The%20Church%20Fathers%5Bwhich%3F%5D%20have%20referred%20to%20fasting%20without%20prayer%20as%20%22the%20fast%20of%20the%20demons%22%5Bcitation%20needed%5D%20since%20the%20demons%20do%20not%20eat%20according%20to%20their%20incorporeal%20nature%2C%20but%20neither%20do%20they%20pray.) : > "The Church Fathers have referred to fasting without prayer as "the fast of the demons" since the demons do not eat according to their incorporeal nature, but neither do they pray." I have absolutely fallen in love with this idea but have completely failed to find where it came from. I have a feeling it is hidden somewhere in the depths of the PG or PL and even the most advanced AIs can not find it. Does anyone happen to know where this quote has come from?

[Luke 8:2](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%208&version=ESV) and [Mark 16:9](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark+16%3A9-11&version=ESV) mention that Mary Magdalene had seven demons, which Jesus exorcised. In spiritual warfare literature, it's common to distinguish different types of demonic influence; example in the article [The Extraordinary Actions of the Devil](https://catholicexchange.com/the-extraordinary-actions-of-the-devil) . [Another](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt10864014/trivia) tries to give the following definitions: - *Demonic Possession* - It's when a demon takes over a person's body without their consent. It's what you see in most movies. It involves speaking in tongues, sudden personality changes, sudden violence, even superhuman strength. - *Physical Pain* - This is a sickness or an injury due to a demon being inside a person. It doesn't impact the soul, just the body. - *Diabolic Oppression* - This is when a demon torments a person, causing tragic events in their lives the loss of a loved one, the loss of a job, a home. Basically, the story of Job. - *Diabolical Infestation* - It's when demonic entities take over a house, an object, even an animal. - *Diabolical Subjugation* - It's when the possessed invites the demon into their lives. They do this through game play or pledging their soul to the devil. It's real in that if a human wants power, they can trade away their future for that power. - *Diabolical Obsession* - It's when a person has constant, overwhelming and irrational thoughts, making them act in perverse ways. It's hard to detect because it's the most highly functional of all the possessions. But it can lead to suicidal ideation and murder. But today, especially in Western countries, people tend to "psychologize" those demonic influence into chronic depression, etc, such as how [this article](https://ssw.edu/blog/seven-demons/) tries to contemporize Mary Magdalene's seven demons. Rather than speculating from modern / Western lens or use Western categories (like the above), my complete question is: **using the best studies of demonology in Jesus's time, what is the nature of the 7 demons oppressing Mary Magdalene in terms of how the Gospel writers would have conceptualized it?** In other words, what did the gospel writers have in mind when choosing the words to narrate what Jesus did? Is it always a spiritual entity perceived to be gone out like in the Exorcist movie? Or on the other extreme, is it an idiomatic expression for what today we call mental or physical illness? Or is it something in between? The significance of this question is to enable a more faithful interpretation of the many Gospel passages on Jesus and the Apostles casting out demons, which today's Christian groups (esp. those with Freedom ministries) use as the basis of their practice. Some groups even take Mark 16:16-18 literally as the sign of a true believer ("... in my name they **will** cast out demons...") and exhorting them to practice Jesus-given authority to regularly perceive demonic influence in yourself / others and exorcise them. ### Preliminary research 1. A 2009 PhD Dissertation [Jesus, A Jewish Galilean Exorcist: A Socio-Political and Anthropological Investigation](https://macsphere.mcmaster.ca/handle/11375/17394) by Amanda Witmer, McMaster University 2. Book Article [Exorcism or Healing?: A Korean Preacher’s Re-Reading of Mark 5:1-20](https://www.vanderbilt.edu/AnS/religious_studies/SBL2008/Chun.doc) by Sejong Chun (Vanderbilt University), reviewed [here](https://aatfweb.org/2015/02/04/article-review-sejong-chun-exorcism-or-healing-a-korean-preachers-reading-of-mark-51-20/) , part of the 2010 book [Mark: Texts @ Contexts](https://www.amazon.com/Mark-Texts-Contexts-Nicole-Duran/dp/0800659988) . This paper contains 5 plausible hermeneutical understanding of the Mark 5:1-20 story, demonstrating the horizon of interpretation we are looking for in this question. 3. [Demons and Politics: A Consideration of Jesus' Exorcisms in Mark](https://www.amazon.com/Demons-Politics-Andrew-Perry/dp/B004P9LQBE) a by Bible scholar [Andrew Perry](https://durham.academia.edu/AndrewPerry) , pdf available [here](https://www.academia.edu/32911343/Demons_and_Politics_A_Consideration_of_Jesus_Exorcisms_in_Mark) at his Academia site, commenting on three 20th century social study theories of exorcism discussed by Paul W. Hollenbach in his well-cited Journal of the American Religion 1981 article [Jesus, Demoniacs, and Public Authorities: A Socio-Historical Study](https://www.jstor.org/stable/1462450) 4. 2007 Master's Thesis [The Representation and Role of Demon Possession in Mark](https://escholarship.mcgill.ca/concern/theses/0k225g32p) by McGill Religious Studies student Eliza Rosenberg, which includes 15-page (!) list of works cited plus a 4-page list of modern exorcism accounts, mostly from news articles from 1995 to 2007.

We Christians say the devil is responsible for our sins and temptations. However, I don't see how this can coexist with scientific knowledge. Specifically, we know that life has adapted over time to surviving and reproducing as much as possible (after all, that is what causes more similar lifeforms to arise - it's called natural selection). This includes hormonal systems in the brain that create a positive response to things like reproduction (sex) or eating (gluttony), along with other behaviors like the challenging of authority, or the seeking of (evil) novelties to carry out, which positively impact the species' prosperity. However, this also extends to "rational" (non-chemical) sins as well. In the end, every lie, every insult and even every murder comes from an underlying reasoning (in the latter case, it comes from a reasoning which has been heavily corrupted by the conditions in which one has developed, but the point still holds). Bearing in mind all this, how can we say that there is an external influence "creating" these sins and temptations when it is the internal systems of the brain that are? Saying so would be like saying that demons are responsible for our survival, or like saying that they created these systems in the first place (which, inevitable as they are due to the conditions of the Earth, would imply that they would have created the Earth itself!) Where does this reasoning go wrong?

This question is regarding the Catholic view. Why did Satan and the other demons rebel against God? What do they get out of it? Demons are outside of time so they perceive everything in one eternal moment [sic]. They do not have physical inclinations that could lead them to sin. Unlike humans they perceive all of their knowledge at the same time, which means they couldn’t forget or not take into consideration the fact of God’s omnipotence and their own damnation for disobeying Him. Wouldn’t they also know that the only reason God allows them to rebel against Him is to bring some greater good out of it, which would defeat the purpose of their actions? Wouldn’t it have been in their personal interest to not rebel against God since hell is the worst thing and it far outweighs whatever they got out of rebelling? This makes it seem like they were irrational, but how can such beings be irrational? **some quotes from Catholic Answers:** > When the angels made their initial choice to love and serve the Lord or not, they perfectly saw—according to their angelic natures—the irrevocably eternal consequences of their actions. That is, they were given the power by God to make a clear and irrevocable choice to love and serve him or not. Some chose well, while others chose very badly. > They understood the world and their decisions immediately—according to Thomas Aquinas, they have no active and passive intellect (I, 54, 4)—and the exercise of their free will is instantaneous and final. I don't know whether they are strictly atemporal or not, but whatever they are, the nature of their decision was such that there was no going back despite God's infinite mercy. **Addendum**: Angels do not know the future (see ST I.57.3) Also, this question differs in no way from the question of why humans choose damnation. The answer to both questions is that there is no answer. This is because free will by definition is the *terminus ad quem* of explanation. The only explanation for an act of free will is God; there's no intervening created explanation. So the closest thing to an answer of this question is that they rebelled in order to manifest God's attribute of justice.

Jude 6 (ESV) says: > "And the angels who did not stay within their own position of authority, but left their proper dwelling, he has kept in eternal chains under gloomy darkness until the judgment of the great day" Is this saying that demons are all in jail, and we're free from them currently? I thought the consensus is that the devil and his demons are running rampant on earth doing evil things, as it says in 1 Peter 5:8 (ESV): > Be sober-minded; be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour. Which is it? Are the devil and demons currently chained in hell or are they roaming around on earth? Thanks all.

Jesus in Matthew 12 appears to give a compelling argument against the possibility of demons casting out other demons: > 22 Then they brought him a demon-possessed man who was blind and mute, and Jesus healed him, so that he could both talk and see. 23 All the people were astonished and said, “Could this be the Son of David?” > > 24 But when the Pharisees heard this, they said, “It is only by Beelzebul, the prince of demons, that this fellow drives out demons.” > > 25 Jesus knew their thoughts and said to them, “Every kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, and every city or household divided against itself will not stand. 26 **If Satan drives out Satan, he is divided against himself**. How then can his kingdom stand? 27 And if I drive out demons by Beelzebul, by whom do your people drive them out? So then, they will be your judges. 28 **But if it is by the Spirit of God that I drive out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you**. > > [Matthew 12:22-28, NIV] In other words, demons are cast out by the power of the Spirit of God, and in the case of Christians, in the name of Jesus. That said, according to the Wikipedia article on [Exorcism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exorcism) , exorcisms have been practiced since antiquity in other religions. And I find this problematic, because if we think about it, non-Christians do not have the power of the Spirit nor the name of Jesus to drive out demons during an exorcism. And they can't be using the power of Satan either, as per Jesus' argumentation in Matthew 12:22-28. So there appear to be no other options left, and we are faced with a dilemma. **Question**: How do Christians make sense of exorcisms in other religions? Are exorcisms in other religions compatible with a Christian worldview? ____ *Note: I'm not sure if I should request answers from a specific denomination or Christian group for this one. I would imagine that most Christians believe that demons exist and can be cast out, and I'm not sure if there is a specific denomination with an official position regarding exorcisms in other religions. But in any case, if this question needs editing, feel free to let me know or go ahead and edit it yourself.*

Demonic possession of course is biblical, but what about demonic paranormal activity? With some effort it's not hard to come across testimonies from Christians, and even non-Christians, telling stories of paranormal experiences, such as hearing footsteps, scratches on walls, drawers moving in and out, closets opening and closing, things flying off the shelves or walls, beds shaking, chairs moving, objects falling down, light bulbs exploding, stuff levitating, the temperature in the room suddenly dropping, horrible demonic "smell", hearing audible evil growls, etc. I'm pretty sure many of you have heard of similar experiences. Is there any biblical basis to this? Does the Bible record examples of demonic paranormal activity? Do the Scriptures support the ability of demons to manipulate objects and intervene in the physical world?

I realized today that when I used the word "demons" I was thinking of evil spirits of all varieties, including human beings that work evil from the spirit world. But others believe the word "demon" only applies to non-human spirits such as fallen angels or perhaps evil deities of some sort. In the Bible, Jesus refers to the "unclean spirit" [or spirits] that possessed the man who called himself Legion because he was tormented by so many evil spirits. > [Jesus said] “Come out of the man, you unclean spirit!” And Jesus > asked him, “What is your name?” He replied, “My name is Legion; for we > are many.” And he begged him eagerly not to send them out of the > country. Now a great herd of swine was feeding there on the > hillside; and they [the spirits] begged him, “Send us to the swine, let us enter > them.” So he gave them leave. And the unclean spirits came out, and > entered the swine; and the herd, numbering about two thousand, rushed > down the steep bank into the sea, and were drowned in the sea. (Mark > 5:9-13) But elsewhere, Jesus heals various people possessed by "demons." > That evening they brought to him many who were possessed with demons; > and he cast out the spirits with a word, and healed all who were sick. I'd like to know more about how various Christian denominations and other religions view those who do evil in the spiritual realm, and especially: do they believe that the term "demons" includes evil spirits who were once human beings. Rather than personal opinions, a good answer will provide the perspectives of several religions or experts. I would not rule out spiritualists in the latter category.

Okay so I was looking around on google for some answers about where some of the demon names that are "Biblical" came from, and I came across the Testament of Solomon . It isn't in the Bible from what I can tell. (It may be, if so, can I have some references?). It is an account of how Solomon enslaved demons using Michael's ring and made them rebuild the temple. There's something about all of this that just feels off. Does anyone know if its considered true by the majority or if its just considered untrue?

On The Patristics Project website there is [a blog post entitled "Patristic Universalism"](https://www.patristics.co/patristic-universalism/) , which provides quotes from twelve of the ancient Christian writers popularly known as the Church Fathers, regarding how they, among others, "either believed in the universal restoration of all things, or stated things with Universalist implications." The post goes into some definitions of universalism although this, I think, is best elucidated by references in the post's section "The Universalist Majority," which says: > In the work “De Asceticis,” St Basil allegedly states, “The mass of > men say there is to be an end to punishment and to those who are > punished.” St Augustine concurs by allegedly saying, “There are very > many in our day, who though not denying the Holy Scriptures, do not > believe in endless torments.” The last section of the post is titled "The Divine Liturgy," towards the end of which its author offers the following (with my own emphasis [and footnote]). > Personally, I do not identify as a Universalist, so I do not want > people to get the impression I am trying to sell it, as I am merely > presenting the objective patristic data... I have my own reasons for > disagreeing... I would probably be much more zealous in my rejection > of universalism, if it were not for the liturgy making a hypocrite out > of me. I say evil people who reject God will not be saved, yet I pray > for the salvation of those same evil people who reject God even after > they die. **I have heard that there are even monks on Mount Athos who > pray for the devil.** Is it any wonder why Fr. Sergius Bulgakov✭ > arrived at such a place? Like Moses, it is the heart of love that > persistently seeks to *change God’s mind* (so to speak) to actually > give people precisely what they *don’t* deserve (Exo 32:14). This > Mosaic prayer is constantly uttered unto God by the saints on behalf > of all humanity. The two Church Fathers who are most famous (at least in the modern era) for having been universalists, namely Origen, and Gregory of Nyssa, are incidentally also the ones known for having espoused the idea that not only all humanity was or would be saved by/through Christ, but that the devil and evil spirits/entities/demons in general, as *logikoi*, i.e. rational beings, are likewise beneficiaries of this aspect of God's grace. That being as radical as it appears to be when compared to the majority of Christian tradition over the course of history, I had never before encountered the yet more radical idea of praying ***for*** the devil, presumably for his salvation(?). (I don't see what other reason there could be to do this, at least as far as the most mainstream Christian views of the devil and his role are concerned.) As far as I have read, neither Origen nor Gregory mention such an idea. In the modern era there are both children and adults who have given the question serious enough thought to ask authority figures about it, based on the commandments and doctrine of loving and praying for one's enemies, as I discovered on [Billy Graham's website](https://billygraham.org/answer/should-we-pray-for-satan-so-hell-change-his-evil-ways/) , the [Catholic Answers website](https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/should-i-pray-for-the-devil) and the [Answers in Genesis website](https://answersingenesis.org/angels-and-demons/satan/feedback-should-we-pray-for-satan/) . I tried to contact the cited blogger for more information on my Question but have received no response, and my research on it turned up just one hit, from the St Andrew Greek Orthodox Church in South Bend, IN, USA. It has a website with a page entitled "Satan and Demons," written by the parish's priest, the Rev. Fr. George D. Konstantopoulos, Protopresbyter, who says: > It is said that Saint Paisios used to pray for the Devil, until one > day Saint Paisios saw him laughing in a distance from his cell and I > think ridiculing the Geronda (Elder). From that day Saint Paisios > stopped praying for the repentance of the Devil, since **he understood > that it was futile** [*emphasis in original*]. Paisios of Mt Athos was a Greek Orthodox ascetic (1924–1994) who spent a good chunk of his life on Mt Athos. This is the only other reference that I have found to a monk from that mountain praying for the devil, and it is the only place I have seen this story told about Paisios. Similarly to the conclusion arrived at by the paragraph which tells the story, the aforementioned websites pretty much roundly denounce the very thought of praying for the devil, for essentially the same reason. It seems to be across the board regardless of whether the specific Christian tradition in view is Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic, or Protestant, none of which is surprising. But how obscure is this idea or practice, considering that, as early as Origen (200s AD), and Gregory of Nyssa (300s AD), there were Christians who did *not* dismiss out of hand the concept that the devil would or could be saved (along with all of humanity)? Is Paisios the only Mt Athos monk who ever prayed for the devil? Are there other Christians elsewhere who have gone beyond mere inquisitiveness regarding this (see the websites above) and thought to do the same in an overt manner or an "official" capacity? ---------- ✭ Sergius/Sergey Bulgakov (1871-1944) was a Russian Orthodox theologian, philosopher and economist who apparently believed in universal reconciliation or was quite hopeful about it being the destiny of humankind.

1 Samuel 28:7-8 ESV *The Medium of Endor Raises the Spirit of Samuel* > Then Saul said to his servants, “Seek out for me a woman who is a > medium, that I may go to her and inquire of her.” And his servants > said to him, “Behold, there is a medium at Endor.” > > So Saul disguised himself and put on other garments and went, he and > two men with him. And they came to the woman by night. And he said, > “**Divine for me by a spirit and bring up for me whomever I shall name > to you**.” Luke 24:36-39 ESV *Disciples Mistake Jesus for a Spirit* > As they were talking about these things, Jesus himself stood among > them, and said to them, “Peace to you!” But **they were startled and > frightened and thought they saw a spirit**. And he said to them, “Why > are you troubled, and why do doubts arise in your hearts? See my hands > and my feet, that it is I myself. Touch me, and see. For **a spirit does > not have flesh and bones as you see that I have**.” Matthew 12:43-45 ESV *Return of an Unclean Spirit* > “**When an unclean spirit has gone out of a person, it passes through > waterless places seeking rest, but finds none**. Then it says, ‘I will > return to my house from which I came.’ And when it comes, it finds the > house empty, swept, and put in order. Then it goes and brings with it > **seven other spirits more evil than itself**, and they enter and dwell > there, and the last state of that person is worse than the first. So > also will it be with this evil generation.” The unclean spirits, demons, seek to possess a body and therefore torment people for control of their bodies to hurt themselves and others. Jesus cleansed people's souls by casting out the unclean spirits called "demons". 1. Are angels spirits which possess immortal bodies? 2. Are humans spirits which possess mortal bodies? 3. Are demons the unclean spirits of dead humans (and Nephilim) that find no rest after death? 4. Do the spirits of the righteous dead remain at rest until they are resurrected? 5. **Are unclean spirits or demons the ghosts of dead people instead of fallen angels, which have spiritual bodies? Is this why the demons, which have no bodies, seek to possess one?**

In a Christian worldview, is Satan the main force behind atheism? If so, how exactly does this occur? I'm intrigued by this conundrum because if Satan actively influences individuals to adopt atheism, he must achieve two objectives simultaneously: 1. He (or his demonic agents) must intervene in the physical world somehow to convince a person to embrace atheism. 2. He must execute this influence in a masterfully subtle manner, ensuring the individual remains completely unaware of the spiritual manipulation prompting their atheistic beliefs. Think of notable atheists, such as [Richard Dawkins](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Dawkins) , and notable agnostics, such as [Carl Sagan](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Sagan) . If Satan indeed played a role in shaping Dawkins' atheism and Sagan's agnosticism, this would suggest a sophisticated mastery of subliminal manipulation. Because both Dawkins and Sagan never acknowledged any Satanic influence behind their beliefs, and in fact, if they were presented with the hypothetical manipulation scenario I'm entertaining, they would likely dismiss it with a laugh, seeing it as nothing more than a far-fetched thought experiment. How do Satan and his demons manipulate individuals into embracing atheism (or agnosticism) while remaining completely undetected? What are the mechanisms behind this imperceptible and subconscious manipulation, and is there a means within Christianity to unveil and expose this influence, bringing it to the individual's conscious awareness?

Is it true that demons are the spirits of the giant breed that was brought forth when angels intermarried with the daughters of men while fallen angels remain to be angels in a fallen state? Is there any authoritative verse in the Bible that exposes the difference?

This [question](https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/97880/what-is-more-objectionable-to-christians-satanism-or-atheism?newreg=92f4b0da53e94471a55615d94573b328) got me thinking. I was an atheist gradually drifting into agnostic territory. But once I got into my 40s, I came to the realization that the devil does exist in many shapes and forms. Whether God exists or not I do not know and do not care so much. But I know for sure you could not be really agnostic realizing that at least in part religion is useful at least to establish some framework of reference for good and evil. This set of beliefs while non-Christian and might be off-topic in Christianity must have a name already. My question is what is it. I vaguely suspect that Christiantiy minus Christ is Judaism.

I'm asking a rather technical question here. I'm wondering where the idea comes from that a person could be "**possessed by**" a demon; as in, the demon "possesses" / "owns" the person -- as opposed to the person simply "having" / "possess**ing**" a demon which does things through and for the person. I understand that there are examples in Scripture where demons give people supernatural abilities like special knowledge or unnatural strength. I also understand that there are examples in Scripture of demons doing things to people like speaking through them or throwing them around. However, my car does things to me that I don't want it to sometimes, but it doesn't "possess" me / "own" me. I own my car. It just doesn't always do what I want it to -- it could even cause me harm (if the brakes went out or something) -- but that has more to do with it not doing what I want it to than it "owning" me. Hopefully this distinction is making sense. The reason I ask is that I looked up the Greek behind a couple of the instances of "demon possession" in Scripture (Luke 4:33; 8:27) and in both places it is **translated** to say that the person was possessed by a demon, but in both cases the **Greek** suggests that the *person* possessed the *demon*. **Is there anything explicit in Scripture which describes a person being "possessed by" a demon? If not, what is the origin of this belief?**