Philosoft

Oops. I guess I wasn't paying attention when I wrote that. I meant to say, "... to see if perhaps Magpie can get it back on topic." Sorry Hugo, no dig at you.

Hugo Holbling

Roger that. Congratulations on becoming a philosophy moderator, Philosoft.

jpbrooks

Hello Paul.

If you are still reading the responses in this thread, I'll attempt a few serious comments.

First, it's not clear in which direction this discussion should proceed. Are you interested in discussing "spirits" from the standpoint of Christian theology? If so, then this topic would probably be more appropriately placed in the Biblical Criticism forum. Are you interested in comparing and/or contrasting views about "spirits" from religions other than Theistic ones? If so, then perhaps this topic would be better placed in the Non-Abrahamic Religions forum, and so on.

From a Christian (theological) standpoint, it is not clear how one can be certain that what have been called "ghosts" are just evil
(fallen) angels. In addition to the unclear connection between demons and angels in various books in the New Testament of the Christian Bible, there is an account in the Old Testament (in 1Samuel chapter 28, IIRC) where king Saul actually spoke to the then deceased prophet Samuel after his "spirit"(?) was conjured up by a witch. There are apparently no other Biblical passages that contradict the interpretation that Saul was actually speaking to the dead prophet. So this chapter of the Bible seems to suggest that (Biblically based) Christianity cannot hold that all "ghosts" are just fallen angels.

Since a comprehensive discussion of "ghosts" (thus) seems to be a peripheral matter to Christian theology, perhaps a serious discussion (skeptical or otherwise) of "The Paranormal", in general, might better proceed from a psychological (rather than an ontological) standpoint. After all, the historical accounts of "ghostly" encounters seem (whether "ghosts" are viewed as being merely the product of human imagination or not) to involve people communicating with them mentally or interpreting certain physical occurences as having been caused by them.

This is an example of the areas in which, in my own view, a serious discussion might proceed on this topic. There may be other possible areas of serious discussion.

(Edited to correct sentence construction.)

Philosoft

Thanks! Having very little education in philosophy and logic, I look at it as a way to force myself to try to understand what you guys are talking about.