SolemnBoy Wrote:Okay, this thread is about exorcisms so if my skepticism is irrelevant or something and you feel like I'm hijacking the thread I'll respectfully go away.
HOWEVER, to anyone who believes in possessions and exorcisms: why do you feel like Youtube videos are sufficient evidence? [...]
I never said it was sufficient evidence and I don't think it is sufficient evidence.
I would say that it is evidence but not conclusive.
There are, however, other elements that you should also consider:
a) Ok so there's video footage, we've already mentioned that and it
is relevant - many criminal convictions these days rely on far less (e.g. purely testimonial evidence)
b) Reliable sources: we're not talking about snuff movies or anonymous videos posted on the internet, these are clips from serious journalistic pieces done by professionals, then scrutinized and endorsed by other professionals and later broadcasted by some of the biggest tv networks in the world (BBC, Antenne 2)
c) Credible eyewitnesses: Relatives and friends of the victims, as well as clergymen and Father Mathieu, the most reliable witness you could possibly ask for.
d) You speak of medical science but you forget that these exorcisms only took place because science could not provide any solution. Like I said, the Roman Ritual is very strict and a previous intervention of a doctor is mandatory
e) Countless cases of documented exorcisms and the official doctrine of the Catholic Chruch that acknowledges the existence of the devil and the possibility of possessions.