Is Exorcism legit?

[PaleoEuropean]

The whole of the new testament was written within the first century. We have manuscripts to back that up.

Roman Catholicism occurred 900 or so years later when the great Schism occurred between east and west. Before that, there was one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. This Apostolic Church is the group that put the new testament together.

If you believe Jesus, you believe his words when he says:

Matthew 16:18 -


So what you are saying is that Jesus was wrong, and that his church he set up with Peter was corrupted. Which is blasphemy.

Repent of that Brother in humanity. Don't fall for the satanic deception you see on TV about 'bible corruption'.

Christianity wasn't a single sect until after the death of Constantine. Modern Christianity is attributed to Paul not Peter, who often criticized Peter. So there is a hole in your argument right there, Paul's criticisms even made it into the bible.

11 But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned Galatians 2:11

[PaleoEuropean]

^^
Cephas is the name Jesus gave Peter.

[PaleoEuropean]

Also, just to expand that verse, because the context is crystal clear.

When Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12 For before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. 13 The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray.

14 When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in front of them all, “You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs?

15“ We who are Jews by birth and not sinful Gentiles 16 know that a person is not justified by the works of the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law, because by the works of the law no one will be justified.

17“But if, in seeking to be justified in Christ, we Jews find ourselves also among the sinners, doesn’t that mean that Christ promotes sin? Absolutely not! 18 If I rebuild what I destroyed, then I really would be a lawbreaker.

19“For through the law I died to the law so that I might live for God. 20 I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I now live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. 21 I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!”

[Vojnik]

Christianity wasn't a single sect until after the death of Constantine. Modern Christianity is attributed to Paul not Peter, who often criticized Peter. So there is a hole in your argument right there, Paul's criticisms even made it into the bible.

11 But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned Galatians 2:11

There were heresies shooting up in the early church, but they all ended up fading away. The main body of the church, founded by Jesus, and entrusted to his Apostles, has still been preserved to this day. Thanks to the Holy Spirit.

I'd argue that Peter also played an integral role in the early church.

Galatians 2:7

On the contrary, they recognized that I had been entrusted with the task of preaching the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been to the circumcised.

Often criticized Peter? Where else other then one rebuke?

Peter at the end of the day was only human, He was not perfect. Paul, another apostle straitened him out about an issue.

This rebuke of one brother to another brother does not dispel that Jesus would preserve his church. Which he definitely has.

[Vojnik]

Also, just to expand that verse, because the context is crystal clear.

When Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12 For before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. 13 The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray.

14 When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in front of them all, “You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs?

15“ We who are Jews by birth and not sinful Gentiles 16 know that a person is not justified by the works of the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ. So we, too, have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law, because by the works of the law no one will be justified.

17“But if, in seeking to be justified in Christ, we Jews find ourselves also among the sinners, doesn’t that mean that Christ promotes sin? Absolutely not! 18 If I rebuild what I destroyed, then I really would be a lawbreaker.

19“For through the law I died to the law so that I might live for God. 20 I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I now live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. 21 I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing!”

Yeah. There were disputes at the start among the Christians in regards to some people insisting on using the ceremonial laws like circumcision, as a means of justifying oneself. While Paul reiterated the fact that justification came through the Grace of God through Christ. Not through any dietary requirements or practices like circumcision.

[Lorca]

It's legit in the sense that it is a current, albeit increasingly rare, practice of the Catholic Church.

As far as whether it's "real", I can't say for sure... I think 99% of modern exorcism cases are due to some underlying psychological issue. However, there is always that 1%...

[Celestia]

Exorcisms happen all over the world. I think the practice is a bit outdated, I think it’s more of a psychological phenomena and hysteria rather than evil controlling the body. But I have never witnessed one in person.

[Loki]

Or dangerous and do other christian denominations have it too or even other world religions or just Catholics?

Exorcism is legit, well some of it, if it's done the right way.

The quote from that priest in the pic is laughable! The devil lied to him (he is the Father of lies), and the priest believes him! How weak. The devil is not afraid of the rosary, he loves it! Because nowhere are we instructed by Jesus or the apostles to pray to Mary. It doesn't scare Satan at all! No wonder he has taken up residence at the Vatican.

[Aldaris]

Short answer is that some cases are probably legit. I'm not too quick to jump into the christian interpretation of what's going on, but something seems to be making Earth its playground from time to time.

[Mortimer]

Exorcism is legit, well some of it, if it's done the right way.

The quote from that priest in the pic is laughable! The devil lied to him (he is the Father of lies), and the priest believes him! How weak. The devil is not afraid of the rosary, he loves it! Because nowhere are we instructed by Jesus or the apostles to pray to Mary. It doesn't scare Satan at all! No wonder he has taken up residence at the Vatican.

Ok. I wont discuss this with you for two reasons, because A) I dont believe I need to force you to believe what I believe, and you can believe what you want. B) You could bann me like you banned Rethel, I think you banned him because of religion.