The Chosen - A Review

[Carborendum]

1 hour ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Why do yo believe this? Can you back up this idea with any teachings or scripture? Because I believe, if one were to look into it, that it would be pretty easy to back up the idea that anyone who is righteous would be immune to possession. But backing up the idea that, you know...say...President Nelson could be walking along and all of a sudden...whammo... Mephistopheles is now running the church.... I mean come on. (Edit: I realize you said "some" are afforded protection, and certainly included the prophet in this. But why would it only be some?)

Yeah...I know...I used a silly example. But the principle seems to apply across the board. We are promised safety in obedience...again and again and again.

We are protected from Satan and his influence by adherence to faith to and obedience in Christ. We open ourselves to the influence of Satan by disobedience to and disregard for Christ. I think finding such teachings would be pretty easy.

I think one might find a few obscure anecdotes of people being possessed even though they were being righteous...but they would only be that...stories. Stories that didn't align with known doctrinal principles to my understanding.

I see what you're saying.  And I have difficulty arguing it.  But I still argue my position.

What sticks in my mind is Mark 9:14-27.   Jesus cast out an evil spirit from a "boy".  His father said he had this spirit since he was a "child".  I know, we argue about the semantics of "boy" and "child".  And we talk about he age of accountability.  But there is something about this story, the way it is written, that makes me uncertain about such explanations.

Could the prophet be possessed?  My knee jerk reaction would say "no".  But why?  We don't know.  Maybe that is one of the protections of apostles specifically.  Maybe it is a gift of the Spirit.  Maybe it is because of some other thing that simply isn't written in scriptures or even spoken of in General Conference.

What authoritative sources are there from the apostles which address the question of this boy?

I don't claim to know everything about possession.  But I do know that we ALL should be very cautious to think we are immune.

[Carborendum]

10 minutes ago, zil2 said:

I don't think that was possession, that was Satan's presence and influence externally.

I would agree on that point.  But it is interesting to consider how the mechanism actually worked on Joseph.  I don't think we know.  That leaves us with speculation.  Nothing certain.

9 minutes ago, zil2 said:

Really, if Satan and his minions could just possess whomever, easily, regardless of the individual's agency or degree of righteousness, why on earth are we not all possessed except those special "some" who get protected?  I cannot believe Satan or his "angels" wouldn't jump at the opportunity, nor do I believe that the vast majority of the Saints are possessed.

I doubt it is "easy" except for a willing participant.  With Joseph, the "actual being from the unseen world" did not succeed partially because Joseph was fighting this being.  And Joseph felt "delivered."

Is there some protection?  I'm sure there is.  How much?  I don't think we know.  And I think it is arrogant to believe that we do know.  So very little is revealed on the subject.

How righteous is righteous?

Edited February 3, 2023 by Carborendum

[The Folk Prophet]

10 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

But I do know that we ALL should be very cautious to think we are immune.

If we have no control over it via obedience, then how, exactly, are we supposed to be cautious?

[Carborendum]

Just now, The Folk Prophet said:

If we have no control over it via obedience, then how, exactly, are we supposed to be cautious?

Good question.  I'm not sure.  But in most cases, with any question of "falling into the clutches of the adversary", simply being aware tends to act as armor.

[The Folk Prophet]

29 minutes ago, mikbone said:

JSH 1:15 After I had retired to the place where I had previously designed to go, having looked around me, and finding myself alone, I kneeled down and began to offer up the desires of my heart to God. I had scarcely done so, when immediately I was seized upon by some power which entirely overcame me, and had such an astonishing influence over me as to bind my tongue so that I could not speak. Thick darkness gathered around me, and it seemed to me for a time as if I were doomed to sudden destruction.

I'm pretty sure, if you continue reading, that this example supports the idea that we, indeed, do have control over the matter through obedience, whereas by reaching out to God in the moment, the darkness was vanquished.

Plus...I think we're getting into some strange ideas about what possession is.

[The Folk Prophet]

7 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

Good question.  I'm not sure.  But in most cases, with any question of "falling into the clutches of the adversary", simply being aware tends to act as armor.

By implication, the fact that I deny the potential that I can be possessed if I remain true and faithful, actually puts me at risk of being possessed.

[Just_A_Guy]

36 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

I see what you're saying.  And I have difficulty arguing it.  But I still argue my position.

What sticks in my mind is Mark 9:14-27.   Jesus cast out an evil spirit from a "boy".  His father said he had this spirit since he was a "child".  I know, we argue about the semantics of "boy" and "child".  And we talk about he age of accountability.  But there is something about this story, the way it is written, that makes me uncertain about such explanations.

Could the prophet be possessed?  My knee jerk reaction would say "no".  But why?  We don't know.  Maybe that is one of the protections of apostles specifically.  Maybe it is a gift of the Spirit.  Maybe it is because of some other thing that simply isn't written in scriptures or even spoken of in General Conference.

What authoritative sources are there from the apostles which address the question of this boy?

I don't claim to know everything about possession.  But I do know that we ALL should be very cautious to think we are immune.

One thing perhaps worth bearing in mind is that at that point in time and in that particular culture, pretty much *any* unexplained illness might be colloquially explained as originating with some form of “demonic possession”.

Actual demonic possession is certainly a thing—we have documented experiences with it in this dispensation (more on that below).  But I don’t know that it’s fair of me to expect John Mark (or Peter, who was apparently his source) to know the etiological difference between demonic possession and an epileptic seizure.

13 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

I'm pretty sure, if you continue reading, that this example supports the idea that we, indeed, do have control over the matter through obedience, whereas by reaching out to God in the moment, the darkness was vanquished.

Plus...I think we're getting into some strange ideas about what possession is.

Yeah, Joseph still had “free will” during this encounter with Satan; whereas (for example) the Saints present during the 1831 prayer meeting at Father Morley’s home (recounted separately by Zebedee Coltrin and Levi Hancock) seem to have had their very agency swallowed up by whatever was possessing them.  

Edited February 3, 2023 by Just_A_Guy

[The Folk Prophet]

Just now, Just_A_Guy said:

One thing perhaps worth bearing in mind is that at that point in time and in that particular culture, pretty much *any* unexplained illness might be colloquially explained as originating with some form of “demonic possession”.

Actual demonic possession is certainly a thing—we have documented experiences with it in this dispensation (more on that below).  But I don’t know that it’s fair of me to expect John Mark (or Peter, who was apparently his source) to know the etiological difference between demonic possession and an epileptic seizure.

I had the same thought. I was thinking something along those lines concerning the boy who'd been possessed that @Carborendum mentioned. Also...the whole "as far as it is translated correctly" idea.

Really in discussing possession at all, there are some semantic ideas that need to be straightened out. They have not been, doctrinally speaking. So as carb has implied...we really don't understand, so it's hard to take too firm a stance.

2 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Yeah, Joseph still had “free will” during his encounter with Satan; whereas (for example) the Saints present during the 1831 prayer meeting at Father Motley’s home seem to have had their very agency swallowed up by whatever was possessing them.  

Which, to my best understanding, is the meaning of being possessed. Agency swallowed up. That seems like a good explanation of the matter. Otherwise...it's just temptation or trial. Possession implies something more.

[Carborendum]

11 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

By implication, the fact that I deny the potential that I can be possessed if I remain true and faithful, actually puts me at risk of being possessed.

That's one way of looking at it.  Could be right.  Could be wrong.  I don't know.  And that's just it.  Do you know?

I'm not saying I know the answers here.  In fact I'm saying that I don't think anyone knows.  That's all.  I could be wrong.  But so could you.

[The Folk Prophet]

Just now, Carborendum said:

That's one way of looking at it.  Could be right.  Could be wrong.  I don't know.  And that's just it.  Do you know?

I'm not saying I know the answers here.  In fact I'm saying that I don't think anyone knows.  That's all.  I could be wrong.  But so could you.

I accept this idea about, you know...everything. But it feels a bit wishy washy. Yes, the only things I know are the feelings and thoughts I've had.

So, no...I don't "know". I very strongly believe though. That's true of pretty much every point of gospel truth.

But either way, you have to admit, this is a fascinating discussion.

 

[Carborendum]

1 hour ago, Just_A_Guy said:

One thing perhaps worth bearing in mind is that at that point in time and in that particular culture, pretty much *any* unexplained illness might be colloquially explained as originating with some form of “demonic possession”.

Actual demonic possession is certainly a thing—we have documented experiences with it in this dispensation (more on that below).  But I don’t know that it’s fair of me to expect John Mark (or Peter, who was apparently his source) to know the etiological difference between demonic possession and an epileptic seizure.

I'm familiar with that explanation.  But it doesn't explain Jesus' words and what is described:

Quote

25 When Jesus saw that the people came running together, he rebuked the foul spirit, saying unto him, Thou dumb and deaf spirit, I charge thee, come out of him, and enter no more into him.

26 And the spirit cried, and rent him sore, and came out of him: and he was as one dead; insomuch that many said, He is dead.

Was Jesus talking to a spirit of epilepsy?

1 hour ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Yeah, Joseph still had “free will” during this encounter with Satan; whereas (for example) the Saints present during the 1831 prayer meeting at Father Morley’s home (recounted separately by Zebedee Coltrin and Levi Hancock) seem to have had their very agency swallowed up by whatever was possessing them.  

Both pro and con.  This is what I've found whenever I read an account from the Latter days.  Just enough ambiguity in the description to hint at, but not really say much.  This is not a disparagement of your point.  I'm just kind of frustrated that we don't have some certainty on these types of things.

Edited February 3, 2023 by Carborendum

[Carborendum]

3 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

I accept this idea about, you know...everything. But it feels a bit wishy washy. Yes, the only things I know are the feelings and thoughts I've had.

So, no...I don't "know". I very strongly believe though. That's true of pretty much every point of gospel truth.

But either way, you have to admit, this is a fascinating discussion.

Yes, it really is an "I wonder" kind of situation.  I'm not stating my position is gospel.  I'm just saying that I have enough questions that I'm really wondering if we know as much as we think we do about possession.

I know.  The answer of "I don't really know" may sound wishy washy -- especially considering my usual idealistic certainty.  But the simple truth is that I really don't know.  And I am asking questions.

That's what is making this a worthwhile discussion for me.

[zil2]

34 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

But I do know that we ALL should be very cautious to think we are immune.

I completely agree with that.  Sorry if my earlier replies suggested I believe in easy immunity.

30 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

But it is interesting to consider how the mechanism actually worked on Joseph.  I don't think we know.

Have you never experienced what I will call a waking dream, where in said dream (if it's a dream), there is an evil spirit (not visible, but only their influence felt) in the room and you cannot move, cannot speak, and it takes all your power to think a prayer for help, and thereafter all your power to choke out words commanding said spirit to leave?  I have.  Twice, at least.  It's terrifying.  Some person of the world will say it's just a dream and the block that prevents acting out what we're dreaming (it's a thing, but I forget what it's called, like an off switch for motor signals from brain to muscles during sleep).  Anywho, I've never been sure whether it was real, or whether it was a dream to teach me that I never, ever want to be in the presence of a powerful evil spirit.  That's the long way of saying that I think that (not a dream, but a power capable of physically immobilizing you) is what Joseph experienced, just to a greater degree.

36 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

I doubt it is "easy" except for a willing participant.  With Joseph, the "actual being from the unseen world" did not succeed partially because Joseph was fighting this being.  And Joseph felt "delivered."

Is there some protection?  I'm sure there is.  How much?  I don't think we know.  And I think it is arrogant to believe that we do know.  So very little is revealed on the subject.

How righteous is righteous?

This clarifies your earlier post.  FWIW, I think what protects us from possession (specifically, since we could also talk about influence) is a combination of the whole: the grace of God, the gift of the Holy Ghost, our own rejection of evil (agency), our degree of obedience, righteous spirits on the other side of the veil fighting those evil spirits, etc. etc. - all good things that can combine in our favor protect us.  And yes, all things that can combine against us do, or at least could do, so yeah, be diligent.

[The Folk Prophet]

1 hour ago, Carborendum said:

Yes, it really is an "I wonder" kind of situation.  I'm not stating my position is gospel.  I'm just saying that I have enough questions that I'm really wondering if we know as much as we think we do about possession.

I know.  The answer of "I don't really know" may sound wishy washy -- especially considering my usual idealistic certainty.  But the simple truth is that I really don't know.  And I am asking questions.

That's what is making this a worthwhile discussion for me.

Right. I just struggle with that because of all the teaching we do have about protecting ourselves from Satan...you know...putting on the whole armor of God, etc. But it's all secretly meaningless? We're constantly taught how to protect ourselves, and the ideas you're proposing as potential via the questioning require the consideration that such teachings aren't actually meaningful. I just can't quite get on board with that, even at the level of questioning it.

I firmly believe that putting on the whole armor of God protects us. It's really that simple for me.

Edited February 3, 2023 by The Folk Prophet

[Carborendum]

1 minute ago, zil2 said:

I completely agree with that.  Sorry if my earlier replies suggested I believe in easy immunity.

No worries.  This is one of those areas where I really don't know.  So, I'm searching for information.  So, anything helps.

1 minute ago, zil2 said:

Have you never experienced what I will call a waking dream, where in said dream (if it's a dream), there is an evil spirit (not visible, but only their influence felt) in the room and you cannot move, cannot speak, and it takes all your power to think a prayer for help, and thereafter all your power to choke out words commanding said spirit to leave?  I have.  Twice, at least.  It's terrifying.  Some person of the world will say it's just a dream and the block that prevents acting out what we're dreaming (it's a thing, but I forget what it's called, like an off switch for motor signals from brain to muscles during sleep).  Anywho, I've never been sure whether it was real, or whether it was a dream to teach me that I never, ever want to be in the presence of a powerful evil spirit.  That's the long way of saying that I think that (not a dream, but a power capable of physically immobilizing you) is what Joseph experienced, just to a greater degree.

Yes, I actually recounted that experience on this forum once upon a time.  Anatess suggested that it was sleep paralysis.  That was a new concept for me.  So, I conceded that it may have been.  Since then, I've researched sleep paralysis.  That is NOT what I experienced.

1 minute ago, zil2 said:

This clarifies your earlier post.  FWIW, I think what protects us from possession (specifically, since we could also talk about influence) is a combination of the whole: the grace of God, the gift of the Holy Ghost, our own rejection of evil (agency), our degree of obedience, righteous spirits on the other side of the veil fighting those evil spirits, etc. etc. - all good things that can combine in our favor protect us.  And yes, all things that can combine against us do, or at least could do, so yeah, be diligent.

That sounds perfectly reasonable.

[Carborendum]

1 minute ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Right. I just struggle with all the teaching we do have about protecting ourselves from Satan...you know...putting on the whole armor of God, etc. But it's all secretly meaningless? We're constantly taught how to protect ourselves, and the ideas you're proposing as potential via the questioning require the consideration that such teachings aren't actually meaningful. I just can't quite get on board with that, even at the level of questioning it.

I firmly believe that putting on the whole armor of God protects us. It's really that simple for me.

Yup. That makes a lot of sense.

[zil2]

4 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

Yes, I actually recounted that experience on this forum once upon a time.  Anatess suggested that it was sleep paralysis.  That was a new concept for me.  So, I conceded that it may have been.  Since then, I've researched sleep paralysis.  That is NOT what I experienced.

Thank you.  I knew there was a term for it, I just couldn't remember it.  The world will say that's what it was.  Me, nope, not what it was, even if it was happening at the same time, that's not what it was.  It was either real, or a dream meant to teach me.

[The Folk Prophet]

6 minutes ago, zil2 said:

It was either real, or a dream meant to teach me.

Or a programming glitch in the matrix.

[zil2]

4 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Or a programming glitch in the matrix.

Pffff.

[Vort]

51 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Plus...I think we're getting into some strange ideas about what possession is.

Which is why I say that I (and, IMO, pretty much everyone else) don't understand exactly what is meant by "demonic possession". To really understand the subject, we would need to be familiar with the mechanics of spiritual/physical interactions, things like how thoughts engendered by biochemical and biophysical brain activity relates to spiritual thought—or indeed, what the phrase "spiritual thought" might actually mean. This is one of those times when having a term, like "possession" or "ADHD" or "autism" or "love", makes us think we understand something far more than we actually do.

[Vort]

27 minutes ago, zil2 said:

Have you never experienced what I will call a waking dream, where in said dream (if it's a dream), there is an evil spirit (not visible, but only their influence felt) in the room and you cannot move, cannot speak, and it takes all your power to think a prayer for help, and thereafter all your power to choke out words commanding said spirit to leave?  I have.  Twice, at least.  It's terrifying.

I have experienced that twice in my life. At the time, I wondered if it might have been some sort of terrifying evil influence. In retrospect, I think it was sleep paralysis.

[Vort]

21 minutes ago, zil2 said:

27 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

Yes, I actually recounted that experience on this forum once upon a time.  Anatess suggested that it was sleep paralysis.  That was a new concept for me.  So, I conceded that it may have been.  Since then, I've researched sleep paralysis.  That is NOT what I experienced.

Thank you.  I knew there was a term for it, I just couldn't remember it.  The world will say that's what it was.  Me, nope, not what it was, even if it was happening at the same time, that's not what it was.  It was either real, or a dream meant to teach me.

I see that once again, I am late to the party and a dollar short.

[zil2]

6 minutes ago, Vort said:

I have experienced that twice in my life. At the time, I wondered if it might have been some sort of terrifying evil influence. In retrospect, I think it was sleep paralysis.

To add to your new-found understanding: where in that clinical description (granted, I didn't read far) is the description of evil?  I was aware of a single individual who was themselves an evil spirit - again, not visually, but just aware of them as a specific person.  And that person could be commanded, and did leave.  Or so it seemed...  Lesson learned, anyway - keep far from evil spirits!

Edited February 3, 2023 by zil2

[The Folk Prophet]

28 minutes ago, Vort said:

Which is why I say that I (and, IMO, pretty much everyone else) don't understand exactly what is meant by "demonic possession". To really understand the subject, we would need to be familiar with the mechanics of spiritual/physical interactions, things like how thoughts engendered by biochemical and biophysical brain activity relates to spiritual thought—or indeed, what the phrase "spiritual thought" might actually mean. This is one of those times when having a term, like "possession" or "ADHD" or "autism" or "love", makes us think we understand something far more than we actually do.

FWIW, I actually do (arrogantly) believe I understand what possession is. But I also admit that my believing I understand it doesn't actually mean I understand it.

That being said, I don't think it means what most people think it means. I also think it's FAR more common than most people believe.

Hollywood has, for the most part, corrupted any potential people have of actually understanding the concept, I believe. They see it as a literal spirit stepping into a person's body and taking it over as if it's a meat puppet. I'll admit, the biblical descriptions of it don't help in that regard. But I don't think that has anything to do with what possession actually is, nor do I believe that has ever actually happened or is even possible. Once again....my beliefs, but think a lot of the scriptural descriptions of possession as allegorical (at least partially) more than literal.

I also see it as a general state rather than a specific, concrete thing (which is why I claim to understand it...because I see it as a concept rather than "demon literally entered into his body and controls his brain and muscles now"). It means being under the strong influence of something or someone. The how (biochemistry, brain activity, etc.) might vary.

I could expand an awful lot on my ideas...and, I'm not sure I've even fully fleshed them out. so I'll leave it at that. But I dunno...just thought I'd share.

Edited February 3, 2023 by The Folk Prophet

[Just_A_Guy]

1 hour ago, Carborendum said:

[1]I'm familiar with that explanation.  But it doesn't explain Jesus' words and what is described:

Was Jesus talking to a spirit of epilepsy?

[2]Both pro and con.  This is what I've found whenever I read an account from the Latter days.  Just enough ambiguity in the description to hint at, but not really say much.  This is not a disparagement of your point.  I'm just kind of frustrated that we don't have some certainty on these types of things.

1.  Did He chemically alter the properties of the mud He made with His spittle and used to heal a blind man?

I don’t now that it’s right to say that there was an element of theater in many of Jesus’s healings (or other actions); but . . . there were certainly elements whose value lay in their symbolism or ritual meaning rather than their mechanical effectiveness.  And He meets people at their own level.  What would the effect have been if He had said “young man, I hereby diagnose you with Posttraumatic Stress Disorder with dissociative symptoms, and accordingly change your brain structure and neurochemical levels to mirror what they would look like as though you had undergone a twelve-month course of EMDR therapy”?

2.  Completely agree! 

Edited February 3, 2023 by Just_A_Guy