Is it wrong for Christians to use ESP talent/similar?

Let me start by saying this question is not geared to those against Christianity or a question of if Christianity is correct. It is about questioning why or even if something is considered theologically o-k according to the Bible/Christianity. So no Christian bashing.

I consider myself a Christian. Several months ago I had my palm read that was offered at a company outing. I had never done any of these sorts of things - card readers/crystal ball/tea readers, etc. before. Honestly I think these sorts of things are usually full of crap - and simply for fun - perhaps some of these people are simply very perceptive or intitive and even perhaps some may have some sort of God-given talent to predict the future or perceive things that others are oblvious to. When I told a co-worker about attending - who is a strong Christian - he alluded to it being akin to devil like.

I also had a Christian explain to me how he was very advanced at maritial arts. He became so advanced that he could "fight" while blindfolded - in a sense he was developing an ability to feel or sense when an attack was going to happen and be able to block, avoid it or attack as a result. As a Christian, he became scared - he should not be using such "skills" and stopped doing so.

I figured it is a God-given talent at best - at worst a hoax. If God has given you a talent or skill, shouldn't you use it? It doesn't have to be used for so-called black magic; it can be used to help others. What are different Christian thoughts/viewpoints on these "skills"?

I did find some interesting information regarding Deuteronomy 18:10-11 when considering the Hebrew words of what is not permitted. It seems when interpreting from Hebrew (at least from the definitions I could find), the verses would prohibit:

1) Harming or killing people by using evil sorcery,
or knot magic (which is tying and untying knots while cursing someone).
2) Engaging in foretelling by studying nature
(like how groundhog day is celebrated) or casting sticks or astrology.
3) Raising ghosts or spirits by a medium.
4) Channeling - spirit speaking through a person
5) Snake charming.

I guess I am all set with palm reading. It does strike me as odd the groundhog day thing though - although I do not believe anyone would really take that seriously.

I wish I had magic powers too.
Maybe I should switch to Christianity because atheists never get them.

Let me start by saying this question is not geared to those against Christianity or a question of if Christianity is correct. It is about questioning why or even if something is considered theologically o-k according to the Bible/Christianity. So no Christian bashing.

I consider myself a Christian. Several months ago I had my palm read that was offered at a company outing. I had never done any of these sorts of things - card readers/crystal ball/tea readers, etc. before. Honestly I think these sorts of things are usually full of crap - and simply for fun - perhaps some of these people are simply very perceptive or intitive and even perhaps some may have some sort of God-given talent to predict the future or perceive things that others are oblvious to. When I told a co-worker about attending - who is a strong Christian - he alluded to it being akin to devil like.

I also had a Christian explain to me how he was very advanced at maritial arts. He became so advanced that he could "fight" while blindfolded - in a sense he was developing an ability to feel or sense when an attack was going to happen and be able to block, avoid it or attack as a result. As a Christian, he became scared - he should not be using such "skills" and stopped doing so.

I figured it is a God-given talent at best - at worst a hoax. If God has given you a talent or skill, shouldn't you use it? It doesn't have to be used for so-called black magic; it can be used to help others. What are different Christian thoughts/viewpoints on these "skills"?

Linkat wrote:

Let me start by saying this question is not geared to those against Christianity or a question of if Christianity is correct. It is about questioning why or even if something is considered theologically o-k according to the Bible/Christianity. So no Christian bashing.

I consider myself a Christian. Several months ago I had my palm read that was offered at a company outing. I had never done any of these sorts of things - card readers/crystal ball/tea readers, etc. before. Honestly I think these sorts of things are usually full of crap - and simply for fun - perhaps some of these people are simply very perceptive or intitive and even perhaps some may have some sort of God-given talent to predict the future or perceive things that others are oblvious to. When I told a co-worker about attending - who is a strong Christian - he alluded to it being akin to devil like.

I also had a Christian explain to me how he was very advanced at maritial arts. He became so advanced that he could "fight" while blindfolded - in a sense he was developing an ability to feel or sense when an attack was going to happen and be able to block, avoid it or attack as a result. As a Christian, he became scared - he should not be using such "skills" and stopped doing so.

I figured it is a God-given talent at best - at worst a hoax. If God has given you a talent or skill, shouldn't you use it? It doesn't have to be used for so-called black magic; it can be used to help others. What are different Christian thoughts/viewpoints on these "skills"?

The martial arts guy...chances are that he's just using his God-given intuition. Nothing wrong with that. Most likely there are just things in his environment that clue his subconscious in to whether an attack is coming or not. And if he's a Christian, he should know that the devil isn't going to want to help him. So it's definitely not the devil telling him that.

Palm-readers, etc., I believe are all/almost all phonies. They say vague answers that they pick up from your body language, or from likely guesses. Ex: I think you have some big problem in your life that you don't want anyone to know. Duh! Most people do. But I do think it's possible that some could actually be getting some help from the devil. I'm willing to be convinced/proved either way. But whichever is true, it's a waste of your money. Save it up and buy yourself a pair of shoes or something.

First, you'd have to prove that "psychic abilities" actually exist before you could link them to anything.

PS. Do you spell like that on purpose?

Quote:

Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live?

Whatever happened to "Thou shalt not kill"?

Sounds rather contradictory to me.

Christianity is in the New Testament.

" Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live " is in the Old Testament,
if I 'm not mistaken.

Quote:

Anyway, Palm Reading was a Victorian Parlor Game invented for fun.

William Benham is the modern authority for it.
His system seems to get some interesting results.
Any way, its the fastest way to get a chic
to hold hands with u.
Thay line up for it.



David

Better work on your phonetics, David. "vu" is not "view"--if "shud" is "should, then "vu" is close to the French "vous", or in normal English spelling "voo". "dime" is certainly not phonetic, so "paradime" is no better than "paradigm". "paradime" if pronounced phonetically would be
pah-rah-dee-may. Or considering an e on the end would usually be unstressed in English if it weren't silent, it might be dee-muh. And of course you should spell "spelled" as "speld", which you don't. Basically it's not a significant improvement over present spelling and basically all you're doing is spreading confusion. I suggest you take a course in English phonetics before you start making these unilateral decisions.

Besides, it only works for your particular accent. I'm from Massachusetts. Here, phonetically, you drive a cah. Is that going to make things clearer and more understandable? Hah!

username wrote:

Better work on your phonetics, David. "vu" is not "view"--if "shud" is "should, then "vu" is close to the French "vous", or in normal English spelling "voo". "dime" is certainly not phonetic, so "paradime" is no better than "paradigm". "paradime" if pronounced phonetically would be
pah-rah-dee-may. Or considering an e on the end would usually be unstressed in English if it weren't silent, it might be dee-muh. And of course you should spell "spelled" as "speld", which you don't. Basically it's not a significant improvement over present spelling and basically all you're doing is spreading confusion. I suggest you take a course in English phonetics before you start making these unilateral decisions.

Besides, it only works for your particular accent. I'm from Massachusetts. Here, phonetically, you drive a cah. Is that going to make things clearer and more understandable? Hah!

I don' t wish to set myself up
as a hot shot expert on fonetics; never did.
I m perfectly willing to defer to those better than me
to polish it to a smooth, finished product,
but I am pointing out that some nonsense
( like jamming Ls into wud, cud or shud, or adding UGH to the word tho ) is idiotic
and that the old paradime deserves no respect, to the extent that it is non-fonetic,
and shud be abandoned as soon as possible.
Lay the useless burden down n forget it.

I accept English as spoken by Tom Brokaw
as the world wide standard.
Everyone else shud take diction lessons, emulating him.
( Maybe Berlitz will teach a course. )
David

Quote:

David, I don't understand the point you were trying to make.
Both of those statements are Old Testament,
the Witch one from Exodus and
the Thou Shalt Not Kill from the Ten Commandments, you know, Moses?

I didn't even mention Christianity in my note.

I was referring to the name of the
thread:

" Is it wrong for Christians to use ESP talent/similar ? "

Quote:

Good point on the hand-holding thing, though!

That has been empirically proven.
THAY LINE UP !

Its a quick way to get to know the nice ones too;
not hard to invite them for a drink.

Quote:

Also, back in the middle ages people spelled phonetically
(I even have a book printed in 1647 with weird spellings),
it made things very complicated because everyone was spelling things differently.

Yes; b4 standardization.

It wud have been OK,
if the stanardizer did not hearken back
to the Germanic origins of English,
or
if his work HAD BEEN UPDATED.

We don 't still speak like Chaucer.

Quote:

They changed it to a uniform spelling so English-speaking people wouldn't all look like idiots spelling stuff any which way that made sense to themselves. Besides, the reason English is hard to learn is NOT because of spelling, it's because of grammar.

Please note that I do not object
to standardization; I object to inconsistencies
between spelling and pronunciation,
given Tom Brokaw as the standard of English pronunciation.

David

OmSigDAVID wrote:

username wrote:

Better work on your phonetics, David. "vu" is not "view"--if "shud" is "should, then "vu" is close to the French "vous", or in normal English spelling "voo". "dime" is certainly not phonetic, so "paradime" is no better than "paradigm". "paradime" if pronounced phonetically would be
pah-rah-dee-may. Or considering an e on the end would usually be unstressed in English if it weren't silent, it might be dee-muh. And of course you should spell "spelled" as "speld", which you don't. Basically it's not a significant improvement over present spelling and basically all you're doing is spreading confusion. I suggest you take a course in English phonetics before you start making these unilateral decisions.

Besides, it only works for your particular accent. I'm from Massachusetts. Here, phonetically, you drive a cah. Is that going to make things clearer and more understandable? Hah!

I don' t wish to set myself up
as a hot shot expert on fonetics; never did.
I m perfectly willing to defer to those better than me
to polish it to a smooth, finished product,
but I am pointing out that some nonsense
( like jamming Ls into wud, cud or shud, or adding UGH to the word tho ) is idiotic
and that the old paradime deserves no respect, to the extent that it is non-fonetic,
and shud be abandoned as soon as possible.
Lay the useless burden down n forget it.

I accept English as spoken by Tom Brokaw
as the world wide standard.
Everyone else shud take diction lessons, emulating him.
( Maybe Berlitz will teach a course. )
David

Quote:

This is one of the more idiotic things I've heard -
right up there with recognizing ebonics as a "language."

Lemme know when u r opening your school
for social politeness n amity.

Quote:

User is right, "vu" in no way sounds the same as "view."

When u encounter the 21st letter of the alfabet u call it " YOU "
but u don 't find a need to jam other letters in front of it.
It is a matter recognition,
in combination with ease of writing.
I am 100% confident that u r smart enuf to figure that out.

Quote:

And he's even more correct about the differences in dialect. If we were to spell phonetically, different cities in the same state would have different spellings for the same words. I'm sure that would be much easier for children to learn.

Actually, I would say that if someone where to teach their children your way of spelling, THAT would be abuse. Well, not abuse, but a serious lack in judgement and parenting that should be addressed by the court. By teaching children that, you are only serving to make them useless in the real world - way to go.

Let Tom Brokaw be the worldwide standard.
That addresses your concerns.

Quote:

And how the hell is Spanish phonetic?
There is rr pronounced with a trill, ll pronounced as a y

THAT is the designated sound
for the LL in that language.

Quote:

Have you ever even heard Spanish?

Yes.