Final Note — last chapter of Kent’s small piece on the Ouija Board

Final Note and Invitation

By the time you get to this page you might be wanting to talk to someone about your experience with a Ouija board.

You may have some questions, or more importantly, you may be wanting demons cast out of you.

And yes, Jesus does do this today. A few years ago, we published the book, Deliver Us From Evil: How Jesus Casts Out Demons Today. And now we have a new book out which goes further into the casting out of demons. The title is, Deliverance Handbook: A Guide to Casting Out Demons for Today’s Christian. These books are a quick read, they go right to the point, and no, we are not hoping to make money off of this. You can get both books at Amazon.com. Go to the site, type in my name, then the title of the book will pop up in a list of other books.

During the 1970s in particular, I was extensively engaged in the casting out of demons because of a thesis I wrote for a master’s degree entitled, A Manual of Demonology and the Occult. In 1973 it was published by Zondervan Publishing House, and now our Earthen Vessel Media LLC has re-published it. It will also be available at Amazon.com.

As a result of the publication of the demonology manual many people came to Marin County, California wanting what we call deliverance ministry. The flood of people who arrived at our doorstep resulted in the creation of twelve two person teams to meet the demand.  

Now this whole circumstance has come around again, and now at age eighty, I hope to be able to continue to meet the needs of those who want demons cast out. And we can do it using Zoom.

Yes, Zoom. My email address is: kentphilpott@comcast.net. The whole thing might be a bit chaotic, but we will do the best we can.

Deliverance ministry is complex. Sometimes demons come out quickly and quietly, other times, the very reverse.

No Trivial Pursuit

from Kent’s book, The Best Sex

This Christianity of ours. It has to do with that which is the ultimate issue, the difference between heaven and hell.

Pastor Bob Lewis, under whose ministry I came to Christ, was passionate about reaching out with the Gospel to those who were unsaved. It was all about spreading the core message and I was all in. Then the years of the Jesus People Movement, again direct and all out evangelism. Following that awakening, 1967 to 1975, things changed, sometimes out of necessity since we had to develop congregations and engage in discipleship, but there developed a creeping pursuit of that which is essentially trivial.

Still, with pain, I recall all the meetings called to deal with various problems and as time wore on, there was far less interest in direct personal evangelism. And we see this now, today, all over so-called evangelical Christianity, which is easy to observe by reading the many and varied Christian, books, weekly and monthly magazines, and much more. This came to my attention yesterday, May 27, in a half hour discussion a director of Ligonier Ministries, the great ministry that publishes TableTalk and whose founder is R.C. Sproul. It hit me right in the gut–too much attention given to trivia.

Then this morning I woke up thinking about the situation where Jesus cast demons out of a man. Here now is the account as we find it is Luke 8:26–33.

[26] Then they sailed to the country of the Gerasenes, which is opposite Galilee. [27] When Jesus had stepped out on land, there met him a man from the city who had demons. For a long time he had worn no clothes, and he had not lived in a house but among the tombs. [28] When he saw Jesus, he cried out and fell down before him and said with a loud voice, “What have you to do with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I beg you, do not torment me.” [29] For he had commanded the unclean spirit to come out of the man. (For many a time it had seized him. He was kept under guard and bound with chains and shackles, but he would break the bonds and be driven by the demon into the desert.) [30] Jesus then asked him, “What is your name?” And he said, “Legion,” for many demons had entered him. [31] And they begged him not to command them to depart into the abyss. [32] Now a large herd of pigs was feeding there on the hillside, and they begged him to let them enter these. So he gave them permission. [33] Then the demons came out of the man and entered the pigs, and the herd rushed down the steep bank into the lake and drowned.

What caught my attention was that the demons, the Legion of them in the man, begged Jesus not to cast them into the abyss, and abyss is a synonym for hell.

For whatever reason, Jesus let them go into a herd of pigs instead of being cast into hell.

Thinking back then over the decades of engaging in the casting out of demons I recalled that this was quite usual. There we would be, casting demons out of people, and how often we would hear the very same thing. Pleas, whimpers, asking us to not cast them into hell. (Note: at the end of the age and the Day of Judgment, Satan and his angels will be cast into hell to remain forever.)

This morning then I once again realized that we dare not be mired down in trivial pursuits, however important these might seem at the time. Satan and his demonic hoard desire that they be allowed to continue their horrid work of trapping people in the bonds of hell.

We must focus on the commission set before us by Jesus Himself.  Here now I site just one admonition, that of Acts 1:8:

[8] But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.”

Let us go to the work of presenting the Gospel message as widely as we can. This is the reason we do our television work, and the reason for our publishing, and is the reason for our doing direct person to person evangelism right here where we live.

If you have never so engaged, this is a time for you to overcome your reluctance of this direct work. Yes, there is some fear to overcome, but the pleasure of doing what our Lord directs us surpasses it all.

Bill’s Pain

Chapter 4 of Why I Am A Christian

lSeveral years ago I drove to Yuba City, California to visit

some former high school friends for two days of “catch-

ing up.” On the morning of the second day, Bill said he

didn’t feel well. We thought it might be indigestion, since

we had eaten hot peppers at a Mexican restaurant the night

before. Two hours later Bill’s pain was growing steadily

worse.

Bill has periodic bouts with skin cancer and has had sur-

gery to control sleep apnea, so he handles pain well, but this

pain was making him very uncomfortable. We made a deci-

sion to take him to the emergency room at Rideout Memorial

Hospital in Yuba City.

We arrived at the hospital about 10:30 AM, by which

time the pain had Bill pleading for relief, but none was pro-

vided by the hospital staff. Nurses and a doctor prodded and

poked Bill, hoping to determine the cause of the pain. After

three hours, a nurse finally showed up with a hypodermic

needle and gave Bill a light dose of a pain-killing drug. It

barely touched the pain.

I watched my friend in agony for two more hours. He

pleaded for another shot. The doctor and the nurses seemed

indifferent, busily going about their business in a crowded

emergency room. At one point I confronted the head nurse

and pleaded for Bill’s pain relief myself. I did not prevail; Bill

continued to writhe in pain.

After a number of tests were run, a surgeon came into

the room and told Bill he would have to have his appendix

removed. He leaned over the bed and said, “Sorry about the

pain, but if there is no pain, we would be hard put to find the

cause. Painkillers hide disease.”

Bill came through the operation fine and is back at work,

although somewhat later than first projected, because the

appendix was gangrenous. Much more delay might have cost

Bill his life. But I learned something about pain and gospel

preaching.

When unconverted people hear the gospel, they will

sometimes feel rather uncomfortable. The Holy Spirit’s convicting

of sin can be most unpleasant. Hearing that repentance

to God and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ are required

may be quite shocking to the system. Pain! – a deep, existential,

soulful pain may be the result. I have often seen this and

too often I have sought to bring comfort to the anguished

sinner. I have offered counseling, suggested therapy, and

made affirming and supportive declarations. I have supplied

a painkiller, not fully realizing that sin was causing the pain

and that radical, spiritual surgery was needed to cut out the

deadly disease.

A woman who had been attending our church for over

two years made an appointment to see me. She had realized

she was not a Christian and was greatly disturbed about it.

As she sat in my office, she cried, describing the stress she

was under and saying she was at her wit’s end. My response

was to comfort her. I opened my Bible to Romans 10:9-10

and read to her about confessing Jesus as Lord. I asked her

if she wanted to confess Jesus, and she quickly said she did. I

asked, “Do you believe God raised him from the dead?” She

said, “Yes.” “Okay then, confess that Jesus is your Lord.” She

did as I recommended.

That was five years ago. Within one month of that meeting,

she left the church and has never returned. I have maintained

contact with her, sending sermon tapes and newsletters

through the mail. I came to realize that she was never

converted. I gave her false and dangerous comfort. I did not

see it at the time; I thought I was helping.

The process of conversion to Jesus may be difficult.

Certainly we know that human childbirth is painful to the

mother, and the baby usually comes out crying. Would we

expect anything less in new birth? Sometimes people enter

the kingdom of God violently. They struggle with coming to

the light that exposes their sin, then they are confronted with

letting go of sin that may have been in place for decades.

As I preach the riches of God’s grace and mercy in Christ,

I have to allow the Holy Spirit to operate; and some conditions

are worse than others. In any case, I must not be too

quick to comfort, as I do not want to mask the pain that is an

indication of the disease. Physical pain will return when the

affects of the drug wear off, but the falsely comforted sinner

may never again feel the pain. Then their condition will be

worse than before.

The Big Gamble

Chapter 3 of Why I Am A Christian

Most mornings I have to wait in line at the 7-11 store
to buy my newspaper while people place their bets
with the California lottery. A woman, anticipating
my impatience as she took an inordinate amount of time
making her choice, turned to me and defended her purchase
of twenty lottery tickets. “I have to have something to look
forward to.”
I knew what she meant. All day long she could daydream
about the millions she might win and the very notion of it
would carry her through the day.
The woman at the store was not putting all of her money
on the proverbial line, but many are putting far more than
money on the line.
The Big Gamble
There is indeed an even bigger gamble than the lottery.
Many are gambling that the grave is the end, the absolute
end of life. My guess is that this is the most common, albeit
unnamed, gamble of them all. The cessation of all life at the
termination of the biological functions of the organism –
this is the great hope of the godless. Nearly everyone who is
committed to atheistic evolutionary schemes is hoping for
this and counting on it. These people also reject any form
of reincarnation taught by Hinduism or Buddhism. (I have
observed, however, that they do not oppose Eastern religious
ideas with as much energy as they do traditional Christian
doctrines about the after-life.)
The “life ends at death” theory is powerful because of the
abundance of evidence that seems to support it. And I admit
there is plenty of information about the theory of random
occurrences flowing from the physical sciences that seems to
negate the necessity of a creator God. Evolutionary theories
and hypotheses are being confirmed, apparently, regularly.
These new discoveries seem to promise that any objections
to evolutionary theories will be met and disabled at some
point or another. There is no question that the doctrine of
life as a random event that ends at death is attractive and
powerful.
Where is the Proof?
No one committed to a life ends at death doctrine can be
absolutely sure of the truth of it. It is an article of faith and
nothing more. It is a gamble with monstrously high stakes –
nothing less than eternity.
Suppose the theories that account for life postulated by
agnostics and atheists are absolutely correct. Who is to say
there is not a God who started it all? Even if the universe
and the earth are as old as the theories suggest, does this do
away with God? Certainly not! And again, if creatures resembling
modern humans date back a million years, does this
mean God did not specially create Adam and Eve? Certainly
not! Science, many contend, can only discover the handiwork
of God. Science is not intended to be a means of judging
whether or not there is a God. Besides, experience teaches
that scientific “truth” has a habit of changing. God, on the
other hand, does not change. It is unwise to wager eternal
life on presumptions founded on scientific theories.
Would a Miracle do?
Jesus told the story of a rich man who died and went to
hell. Lazarus, a beggar who had lain at the rich man’s door,
also died, but he went to heaven. The rich man wanted God
(Abraham in the story) to send Lazarus to his family to warn
them about the terrible place of punishment and anguish.
But Lazarus was not allowed to warn the rich man’s family.
God reminded him that they had the Scriptures, and that
even if someone returned from the dead, they would not
believe (Luke 16:19-31).
It is easy to sympathize with the rich man who thought a
miracle would be persuasive. How many people have sworn:
“If I could just have a sign, if I could just know for sure, then
I would believe.”
If God would only grant miracles, it would make it easier
for all people to believe – or so it would seem. But God’s
way is faith that is placed in Jesus of Nazareth, who died in
our place on the cross and then rose from the dead. Trust,
surrender, love – this is how it works. If God were to reveal
himself through miracles all the time, then he would be just
another fact. We do not have a personal relationship with
facts.
The End of the Story
The woman at the store buying the lottery tickets was
not making an all-or-nothing bet, but so many are wagering
eternity that the grave will be their end. Like the rich man in
the parable Jesus told, they will be shocked to find that they
have lost their bet. But the truth will be discovered only after
the debt has been collected. Hell is a truth learned too late.

The Quija Board

Online Articles: Here is a 16 pager of material I found online. Might be of some value to someone. Kent

My research online yielded what I expected: none shared my viewpoint. Not all accepted that the Ouija board held anything more than a certain psychological hold on some.

Again, I did not find one article, except for a few Christian oriented pieces, that confirmed my position that the board is a demonic fortune telling device. That is about what I expected.

That said, in the three pieces following, I did come across some affirming material. I wanted to present it here to round out this ‘Little Book.’

First, from the Smithsonian Magazine, an article by Linda Rodriguez McRobbie, and the website is smithsonianmag.com, date October 27, 2013. The title of the piece is “The Strange and Mysterious History of the Ouija Board: Tool of the devil, harmless family game–or fascinating glimpse into the non-conscious mind?”

In February, 1891, the first few advertisements started appearing in papers: “Ouija, the Wonderful Talking Board,” boomed a Pittsburgh toy and novelty shop, describing a magical device that answered questions “about the past, present and future with marvelous accuracy” and promised “never-failing amusement and recreation for all the classes,” a link “between the known and unknown, the material and immaterial.” Another advertisement in a New York newspaper declared it “interesting and mysterious” and testified, “as” Proven at Patent Office before it was allowed. Price, $1.50.”

This mysterious talking board was basically what’s sold in board game aisles today: A flat board with the letters of the alphabet arrayed in two semi-circles above the numbers 0 through 9; the words “yes” and “no” in the uppermost corners, “goodbye” at the bottom; accompanied by a “planchette,” a teardrop-shaped device, usually with a small window in the body, used to maneuver about the board. The idea was that two or more people would sit around the board, place their fingertips on the planchette, pose a question, and watch, dumbfounded, as the planchette moved from letter to letter, spelling out the answers seemingly of its own accord. The biggest difference is in the materials; the board is now usually cardboard, rather than wood, and the planchette is plastic.

Though truth in advertising is hard to come by, especially in products from the 19th century, the Ouija board was “interesting and mysterious”; it actually had been “proven” to work at the Patent Office before its patent was allowed to proceed; and today, even psychologists believe that it may offer a link between the known and the unknown.

The real history of the Ouija board is just about as mysterious as how the “game” works. Ouija historian Robert Murch has been researching the story of the board since 1992; when he started his research, he says, no one really knew anything about its origins, which struck him as odd: “For such an iconic thing that strikes both fear and wonder in American culture, how can no one know where it came from?”

The Ouija board, in fact, came straight out of the American 19th century obsession with spiritualism, the belief that the dead are able to communicate with the living. Spiritualism, which had been around for years in Europe, hit America hard in 1848 with the sudden prominence of the Fox sisters of upstate New York; the Foxes claimed to receive messages from spirits who rapped on the walls in answer to questions, recreating this feat of channeling in parlors across the state. Aided by the stories about the celebrity sisters and other spiritualists in the new national press, spiritualism reached millions of adherents at its peak in the second half of the 19th century. Spiritualism worked for Americans: it was compatible with Christian dogma, meaning one could hold a séance on Saturday night and have no qualms about going to church the next day. It was an acceptable, even wholesome activity to contact spirits at séances, through automatic writing, or table turning parties, in which participants would place their hands on a small table and watch it begin shake and rattle, while they all declared that they weren’t moving it. The movement also offered solace in an era when the average life span was less than 50: Women died in childbirth; children died of disease; and men died in war. Even Mary Todd Lincoln, wife of the venerable president, conducted séances in the White House after their 11-year-old son died of a fever in 1862; during the Civil War, spiritualism gained adherents in droves, people desperate to connect with loved ones who’d gone away to war and never come home.

The Ouija Board was marketed as both mystical oracle and as family entertainment, fun with an element of other-worldly excitement. (Bettmann/CORBIS)

“Communicating with the dead was common, it wasn’t seen as bizarre or weird,” explains Murch. “It’s hard to imagine that now, we look at that and think, ‘Why are you opening the gates of hell?’”

But opening the gates of hell wasn’t on anyone’s mind when they started the Kennard Novelty Company, the first producers of the Ouija board; in fact, they were mostly looking to open Americans’ wallets.

As spiritualism had grown in American culture, so too did frustration with how long it took to get any meaningful message out of the spirits, says Brandon Hodge, Spiritualism historian. Calling out the alphabet and waiting for a knock at the right letter, for example, was deeply boring. After all, rapid communication with breathing humans at far distances was a possibility—the telegraph had been around for decades—why shouldn’t spirits be as easy to reach? People were desperate for methods of communication that would be quicker—and while several entrepreneurs realized that, it was the Kennard Novelty Company that really nailed it.

In 1886, the fledgling Associated Press reported on a new phenomenon taking over the spiritualists’ camps in Ohio, the talking board; it was, for all intents and purposes, a Ouija board, with letters, numbers and a planchette-like device to point to them. The article went far and wide, but it was Charles Kennard of Baltimore, Maryland who acted on it. In 1890, he pulled together a group of four other investors—including Elijah Bond, a local attorney, and Col. Washington Bowie, a surveyor—to start the Kennard Novelty Company to exclusively make and market these new talking boards. None of the men were spiritualists, really, but they were all of them keen businessmen and they’d identified a niche.

But they didn’t have the Ouija board yet—the Kennard talking board lacked a name. Contrary to popular belief, “Ouija” is not a combination of the French for “yes,” oui, and the German ja. Murch says, based on his research, it was Bond’s sister-in-law, Helen Peters (who was, Bond said, a “strong medium”), who supplied the now instantly recognizable handle. Sitting around the table, they asked the board what they should call it; the name “Ouija” came through and, when they asked what that meant, the board replied, “Good luck.” Eerie and cryptic—but for the fact that Peters acknowledged that she was wearing a locket bearing the picture of a woman, the name “Ouija” above her head. That’s the story that emerged from the Ouija founders’ letters; it’s very possible that the woman in the locket was famous author and popular women’s rights activist Ouida, whom Peters admired, and that “Ouija” was just a misreading of that.

According to Murch’s interviews with the descendants of the Ouija founders and the original Ouija patent file itself, which he’s seen, the story of the board’s patent request was true: Knowing that if they couldn’t prove that the board worked, they wouldn’t get their patent, Bond brought the indispensable Peters to the patent office in Washington with him when he filed his application. There, the chief patent officer demanded a demonstration—if the board could accurately spell out his name, which was supposed to be unknown to Bond and Peters, he’d allow the patent application to proceed. They all sat down, communed with the spirits, and the planchette faithfully spelled out the patent officer’s name. Whether or not it was mystical spirits or the fact that Bond, as a patent attorney, may have just known the man’s name, well, that’s unclear, Murch says. But on February 10, 1891, a white-faced and visibly shaken patent officer awarded Bond a patent for his new “toy or game.”

The first patent offers no explanation as to how the device works, just asserts that it does. That ambiguity and mystery was part of a more or less conscious marketing effort. “These were very shrewd businessmen,” notes Murch; the less the Kennard company said about how the board worked, the more mysterious it seemed—and the more people wanted to buy it. “Ultimately, it was a money-maker. They didn’t care why people thought it worked.”

And it was a money-maker. By 1892, the Kennard Novelty Company went from one factory in Baltimore to two in Baltimore, two in New York, two in Chicago and one in London. And by 1893, Kennard and Bond were out, owing to some internal pressures and the old adage about money changing everything. By this time, William Fuld, who’d gotten in on the ground floor of the fledgling company as an employee and stockholder, was running the company. (Notably, Fuld is not and never claimed to be the inventor of the board, though even his obituary in The New York Times declared him to be; also notably, Fuld died in 1927 after a freak fall from the roof of his new factory—a factory he said the Ouija board told him to build.) In 1898, with the blessing of Col. Bowie, the majority shareholder and one of only two remaining original investors, he licensed the exclusive rights to make the board. What followed were boom years for Fuld and frustration for some of the men who’d been in on the Ouija board from the beginning—public squabbling over who’d really invented it played out in the pages of the Baltimore Sun, while their rival boards launched and failed. In 1919, Bowie sold the remaining business interest in Ouija to Fuld, his protégé, for $1.

The board’s instant and now, more than 120 years later, prolonged success showed that it had tapped into a weird place in American culture. It was marketed as both mystical oracle and as family entertainment, fun with an element of other-worldly excitement. This meant that it wasn’t only spiritualists who bought the board; in fact, the people who disliked the Ouija board the most tended to be spirit mediums, as they’d just found their job as spiritual middleman cut out. The Ouija board appealed to people from across a wide spectrum of ages, professions, and education—mostly, Murch claims, because the Ouija board offered a fun way for people to believe in something. “People want to believe. The need to believe that something else is out there is powerful,” he says. “This thing is one of those things that allows them to express that belief.”

It’s quite logical then the board would find its greatest popularity in uncertain times, when people hold fast to belief and look for answers from just about anywhere, especially cheap, DIY oracles. The 1910s and ’20s, with the devastations of World War I and the manic years of the Jazz Age and prohibition, witnessed a surge in Ouija popularity. It was so normal that in May 1920, Norman Rockwell, illustrator of blissful 20th century domesticity, depicted a man and a woman, Ouija board on their knees, communing with the beyond on the cover of the Saturday Evening Post. During the Great Depression, the Fuld Company opened new factories to meet demand for the boards; over five months in 1944, a single New York department store sold 50,000 of them. In 1967, the year after Parker Brothers bought the game from the Fuld Company, 2 million boards were sold, outselling Monopoly; that same year saw more American troops in Vietnam, the counter-culture Summer of Love in San Francisco, and race riots in Newark, Detroit, Minneapolis and Milwaukee.

Strange Ouija tales also made frequent, titillating appearances in American newspapers. In 1920, national wire services reported that would-be crime solvers were turning to their Ouija boards for clues in the mysterious murder of a New York City gambler, Joseph Burton Elwell, much to the frustration of the police. In 1921, The New York Times reported that a Chicago woman being sent to a psychiatric hospital tried to explain to doctors that she wasn’t suffering from mania, but that Ouija spirits had told her to leave her mother’s dead body in the living room for 15 days before burying her in the backyard. In 1930, newspaper readers thrilled to account of two women in Buffalo, New York, who’d murdered another woman, supposedly on the encouragement of Ouija board messages. In 1941, a 23-year-old gas station attendant from New Jersey told The New York Times that he joined the Army because the Ouija board told him to. In 1958, a Connecticut court decided not to honor the “Ouija board will” of Mrs. Helen Dow Peck, who left only $1,000 to two former servants and an insane $152,000 to Mr. John Gale Forbes—a lucky, but bodiless spirit who’d contacted her via the Ouija board.

After the Civil War, one man decided there was money to be made in contacting the dead. So he invented a popular, occult board game that lives on today.

Ouija boards even offered literary inspiration: In 1916, Mrs. Pearl Curran made headlines when she began writing poems and stories that she claimed were dictated, via Ouija board, by the spirit of a 17th century Englishwoman called Patience Worth. The following year, Curran’s friend, Emily Grant Hutchings, claimed that her book, Jap Herron, was communicated via Ouija board by the late Samuel Clemens, better known as Mark Twain. Curran earned significant success, Hutchings less, but neither of them achieved the heights that Pulitzer Prize-winning poet James Merrill did: In 1982, his epic Ouija-inspired and dictated poem, The Changing Light at Sandover, won the National Book Critics Circle Award. (Merrill, for his part, publicly implied that the Ouija board acted more as a magnifier for his own poetic thoughts, rather than as hotline to the spirits. In 1979, after he wrote Mirabelle: Books of Number, another Ouija creation, he told The New York Review of Books, “If the spirits aren’t external, how astonishing the mediums become!”)

Ouija existed on the periphery of American culture, perennially popular, mysterious, interesting and usually, barring the few cases of supposed Ouija-inspired murders, non-threatening. That is, until 1973.

In that year, The Exorcist scared the pants off people in theaters, with all that pea soup and head-spinning and supposedly based on a true story business; and the implication that 12-year-old Regan was possessed by a demon after playing with a Ouija board by herself changed how people saw the board. “It’s kind of like Psycho—no one was afraid of showers until that scene… It’s a clear line,” says Murch, explaining that before The Exorcist, film and TV depictions of the Ouija board were usually jokey, hokey, and silly— “I Love Lucy,” for example, featured a 1951 episode in which Lucy and Ethel host a séance using the Ouija board. “But for at least 10 years afterwards, it’s no joke… [The Exorcist] actually changed the fabric of pop culture.”

Almost overnight, Ouija became a tool of the devil and, for that reason, a tool of horror writers and moviemakers—it began popping up in scary movies, usually opening the door to evil spirit hell-bent on ripping apart co-eds. Outside of the theatre, the following years saw the Ouija board denounced by religious groups as Satan’s preferred method of communication; in 2001 in Alamogordo, New Mexico, it was being burned on bonfires along with copies of Harry Potter and Disney’s Snow White. Christian religious groups still remain wary of the board, citing scripture denouncing communication with spirits through mediums—Catholic.com calls the Ouija board “far from harmless” and as recently as 2011, 700 Club host Pat Robertson declared that demons can reach us through the board. Even within the paranormal community, Ouija boards enjoyed a dodgy reputation—Murch says that when he first began speaking at paranormal conventions, he was told to leave his antique boards at home because they scared people too much. Parker Brothers and later, Hasbro, after they acquired Parker Brothers in 1991, still sold hundreds of thousands of them, but the reasons why people were buying them had changed significantly: Ouija boards were spooky rather than spiritual, with a distinct frisson of danger.

In recent years, Ouija is popular yet again, driven in part by economic uncertainty and the board’s usefulness as a plot device. The hugely popular Paranormal Activity 1 and 2 both featured a Ouija board; it’s popped up in episodes of “Breaking Bad,” “Castle,” “Rizzoli & Isles” and multiple paranormal reality TV programs; Hot Topic, mall favorite of Gothy teens, sells a set of Ouija board bra and underwear; and for those wishing to commune with the beyond while on the go, there’s an app (or 20) for that. This year, Hasbro released a more “mystical” version of the game, replacing its old glow-in-the-dark version; for purists, Hasbro also licensed the rights to make a “classic” version to another company. In 2012, rumors that Universal was in talks to make a film based on the game abounded, although Hasbro refused to comment on that or anything else for this story.

But the real question, the one everyone wants to know, is how do Ouija boards work?

Ouija boards are not, scientists say, powered by spirits or even demons. Disappointing but also potentially useful—because they’re powered by us, even when we protest that we’re not doing it, we swear. Ouija boards work on a principle known to those studying the mind for more than 160 years: the ideometer effect. In 1852, physician and physiologist William Benjamin Carpenter published a report for the Royal Institution of Great Britain, examining these automatic muscular movements that take place without the conscious will or volition of the individual (think crying in reaction to a sad film, for example). Almost immediately, other researchers saw applications of the ideometer effect in the popular spiritualist pastimes. In 1853, chemist and physicist Michael Faraday, intrigued by table-turning, conducted a series of experiments that proved to him (though not to most spiritualists) that the table’s motion was due to the ideomotor actions of the participants.

The effect is very convincing. As Dr. Chris French, professor of psychology and anomalistic psychology at Goldsmiths, University of London, explains, “It can generate a very strong impression that the movement is being caused by some outside agency, but it’s not.” Other devices, such as dowsing rods, or more recently, the fake bomb detection kits that deceived scores of international governments and armed services, work on the same principle of non-conscious movement. “The thing about all these mechanisms we’re talking about, dowsing rods, Ouija boards, pendulums, these small tables, they’re all devices whereby a quite a small muscular movement can cause quite a large effect,” he says. Planchettes, in particular, are well-suited for their task—many used to be constructed of a lightweight wooden board and fitted with small casters to help them move more smoothly and freely; now, they’re usually plastic and have felt feet, which also help it slide over the board easily.

“And with Ouija boards you’ve got the whole social context. It’s usually a group of people, and everyone has a slight influence,” French notes. With Ouija, not only does the individual give up some conscious control to participate—so it can’t be me, people think—but also, in a group, no one person can take credit for the planchette’s movements, making it seem like the answers must be coming from an otherworldly source. Moreover, in most situations, there is an expectation or suggestion that the board is somehow mystical or magical. “Once the idea has been implanted there, there’s almost a readiness to happen.”

But if Ouija boards can’t give us answers from beyond the Veil, what can they tell us? Quite a lot, actually.

Researchers at the University of British Columbia’s Visual Cognition Lab think the board may be a good way to examine how the mind processes information on various levels. The idea that the mind has multiple levels of information processing is by no means a new one, although exactly what to call those levels remains up for debate: Conscious, unconscious, subconscious, pre-conscious, zombie mind are all terms that have been or are currently used, and all have their supporters and detractors. For the purposes of this discussion, we’ll refer to “conscious” as those thoughts you’re basically aware that you’re having (“I’m reading this fascinating article.”) and “non-conscious” as the automatic pilot-type thoughts (blink, blink).

Two years ago, Dr. Ron Rensink, professor of psychology and computer science, psychology postdoctoral researcher Hélène Gauchou, and Dr. Sidney Fels, professor of electrical and computer engineering, began looking at exactly what happens when people sit down to use a Ouija board. Fels says that they got the idea after he hosted a Halloween party with a fortune-telling theme and found himself explaining to several foreign students, who had never really seen it before, how the Ouija works.

“They kept asking where to put the batteries,” Fels laughed. After offering up a more Halloween-friendly, mystical explanation—leaving out the ideomotor effect—he left the students to play with the board on their own. When he came back, hours later, they were still at it, although by now much more freaked out. A few days post-hangover later, Fels said, he, Rensink, and a few others began talking about what is actually going on with the Ouija. The team thought the board could offer a really unique way to examine non-conscious knowledge, to determine whether ideomotor action could also express what the non-conscious knows.

“It was one of things that we thought it probably won’t work, but if it did work, it’d be really freaking cool,” said Rensink.

Their initial experiments involved a Ouija-playing robot: Participants were told that they were playing with a person in another room via teleconferencing; the robot, they were told, mimicked the movements of the other person. In actuality, the robot’s movements simply amplified the participants’ motions and the person in the other room was just a ruse, a way to get the participant to think they weren’t in control. Participants were asked a series of yes or no, fact-based questions (“Is Buenos Aires the capital of Brazil? Were the 2000 Olympic Games held in Sydney?”) and expected to use the Ouija board to answer.

What the team found surprised them: When participants were asked, verbally, to guess the answers to the best of their ability, they were right only around 50 percent of the time, a typical result for guessing. But when they answered using the board, believing that the answers were coming from someplace else, they answered correctly upwards of 65 percent of the time. “It was so dramatic how much better they did on these questions than if they answered to the best of their ability that we were like, ‘This is just weird, how could they be that much better?’” recalled Fels. “It was so dramatic we couldn’t believe it.” The implication was, Fels explained, that one’s non-conscious was a lot smarter than anyone knew.

The robot, unfortunately, proved too delicate for further experiments, but the researchers were sufficiently intrigued to pursue further Ouija research. They divined another experiment: This time, rather than a robot, the participant actually played with a real human. At some point, the participant was blindfolded—and the other player, really a confederate, quietly took their hands off the planchette. This meant that the participant believed he or she wasn’t alone, enabling the kind of automatic pilot state the researchers were looking for, but still ensuring that the answers could only come from the participant.

It worked. Rensink says, “Some people were complaining about how the other person was moving the planchette around. That was a good sign that we really got this kind of condition that people were convinced that somebody else was there.” Their results replicated the findings of the experiment with the robot, that people knew more when they didn’t think they were controlling the answers (50 percent accuracy for vocal responses to 65 percent for Ouija responses). They reported their findings in February 2012 issue of Consciousness and Cognition.

“You do much better with the Ouija on questions that you really don’t think you know, but actually something inside you does know and the Ouija can help you answer above chance,” says Fels.

UBC’s experiments show that the Ouija could be a very useful tool in rigorously investigating non-conscious thought processes. “Now that we have some hypotheses in terms of what’s going on here, accessing knowledge and cognitive abilities that you don’t have conscious awareness of, [the Ouija board] would be an instrument to actually get at that,” Fels explains. “Now we can start using it to ask other types of questions.”

Those types of questions include how much and what the non-conscious mind knows, how fast it can learn, how it remembers, even how it amuses itself, if it does. This opens up even more avenues of exploration—for example, if there are two or more systems of information processes, which system is more impacted by neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer’s? If it impacted the non-conscious earlier, Rensink hypothesizes, indications of the illness could show up in Ouija manipulation, possibly even before being detected in conscious thought.

For the moment, the researchers are working on locking down their findings in a second study and firming up protocol around using the Ouija as a tool. However, they’re running up against a problem—funding. “The classic funding agencies don’t want to be associated with this, it seems a bit too out there,” said Rensink. All the work they’ve done to date has been volunteer, with Rensink himself paying for some of the experiment’s costs. To get around this issue, they’re looking to crowd-funding to make up the gap.

Even if they don’t succeed, the UBC team has managed to make good on one of the claims of the early Ouija advertisements: The board does offer a link between the known and the unknown. Just not the unknown that everyone wanted to believe it was.

Second from Vox, by Aia Romano@ajaromano; www.vox.com, Updated Sep 6, 2018

How Ouija boards work. (Hint: It’s not ghosts.)

No, demons will not possess you if you use one.

It’s that time of year again — the season when paranormal entities come out to play. But if you’re thinking about grabbing a Ouija board for your next conversation with the other side, you might want to think again.

Despite their long history as hoax spiritualist devices turned hit toys turned tools of the devil, Ouija boards won’t actually put you in contact with demons or spirits. Any scary firsthand reports you might hear or read of real life Ouija board horror stories are exaggerations, false claims, or a misunderstanding of how Ouija boards actually work.

That might be disappointing news if you’re hosting a Halloween sleepover, but it might also leave you asking, “How do Ouija boards work?” The answer is surprisingly simple.

RELATED

“What ‘Ouija’ actually means, and how the game has changed”[1]

Ouija boards rely on the power of your own body

If you’ve never used a Ouija board, the concept is pretty straightforward. With a group or by yourself, you place your hands lightly on a triangular pointer called a planchette. The planchette rests on the board itself, which has the words “yes” and “no” in its top corners, an alphabet in the center, and the word “goodbye” at the bottom.

The idea is to summon the spirits you want to communicate with, and they’ll move the planchette around the board to spell out answers to the questions you ask — until they or you finally say goodbye and the spirits go back to wherever they came from.

It all sounds pretty harmless, but there’s a long tradition of people believing that Ouija boards are dangerous occult gateways that can lead to demon possession or worse. After all, what happens if it’s a non-friendly spirit that’s moving the planchette without your control?

RELATED

The history of Satanic Panic in the US — and why it’s not over yet[2]

In fact, there’s a simple scientific explanation: The mysterious mechanism that powers the Ouija board is called the ideomotor effect (pronounced “idio-mo-tor” or “id-ee-aah-meh-ter”), and it’s basically a way for your body to talk to itself.

The ideomotor effect is an example of unconscious, involuntary physical movement — that is, we move when we’re not trying to move.If you’ve ever experienced the sudden feeling of jerking awake from sleep (known as the hypnic jerk), you’ve experienced a more abrupt version of the ideomotor effect: your brain signaling your body to move without your conscious awareness. The obvious difference is that the ideomotor effect happens when you’re awake, so the reflexive movements you make are much smaller.

In the case of a Ouija board, your brain may unconsciously create images and memories when you ask the board questions. Your body responds to your brain without you consciously “telling” it to do so, causing the muscles in your hands and arms to move the pointer to the answers that you — again, unconsciously — may want to receive.

There are multiple scientific studies that have shown various instances of the ideomotor effect in action. In one well-known andoft-repeated variant of the Ouija board test, blindfolded participants spell much more incoherent messages. (You can try this one at home.)

These experiments easily demonstrate that the Ouija board only works when the participants are able to manipulate the pointerthemselves. If a ghost or spirit were really in the room, it would be able to direct the planchette to spell out coherent messages without any assistance. But there is no ghost, and when the Ouija board users are deprived of their ability to spell out words they can see, the game rapidly devolves into gibberish.

The ideomotor effect is actually a powerful subconscious tool

Before Ouija boards were invented, spiritualists and other would-be ghost communicators used makeshift devices called “talking boards”that served a similar purpose. Talking boards first became popular in mid-19th-century America, when millions of people suddenly gained an interest in talking to the dead following the tremendous loss of life in the Civil War. The popularity of talking boards, and their use as a tool to exploit grieving war families, meant scientists actually started studying the ideomotor effect in the midcentury, well before Ouija boards and planchettes were patented in 1890.

Over the years, research has determined that the ideomotor effect is closely tied to subconscious awareness — and that its effect is maximized when the subject believes he has no control of his movements. Paradoxically, the less control you think you have, the more control your subconscious mind is actually exerting.

This is where the Ouija board’s triangular pointer comes in. The planchette makes it easier to subconsciously control your muscle movements, because it focuses and directs them even while you believe you aren’t in control of them. It’s also why the planchette seems to move even more effectively when multiple people are using the planchette at once: It frees everyone’s minds to subconsciously generate creepy Ouija board answers together.

The effect might also make the Ouija board an effective tool to help you tap into your own subconscious. In one study published in 2012, scientists found that using the Ouija board allowed subjects to recall factual information with more accuracy than if they weren’t using the board. Participants were instructed to answer a series of yes/no questions and to rate whether they were confident in their answers or merely guessing. Later, they were subjected to another round of questions but used a Ouija board to indicate “yes” or “no,” once again rating their confidence level in their answers. In cases where participants believed they didn’t know an answer, they were able to give more correct answers, more often, when using the Ouija board than when they believed they were only guessing on their own.

The researchers behind that study have gone on tospeculate that using the Ouija board as a technique to unlock subconscious knowledge could lead to insights about the early onset of Alzheimer’s and other neurodegenerative diseases.

In other words, the Ouija board is potentially a very powerful communication tool — just not in the way most people think.

RELATED

The great clown panic of 2016 is a hoax. But the terrifying side of clowns is real.

The ideomotor effect is behind much more than just Ouija boards — including several harmful real-life scams and “therapies”

The appeal of the ideomotor effect is that you actually may be communicating with something you can’t typically access — your own subconscious — and that the experience can feel like communicating with something paranormal or unknown.

This real physical effect causes some people to believe that seemingly miraculous or paranormal phenomena are behind certain behaviors and occurrences. It’s a common element of demon possession hoaxes, since witnesses come to believe the “possessed” person is moving without her own control. It can also convince people they have the gift of automatic writing, meaning they insist that spirits can communicate with the living through their “uncontrolled” handwriting. Often, the ideomotor effect is used to defraud people who visit exorcists, psychics, mediums, and other self-proclaimed spirit-channeling types — sometimes leading to severe financial, physical, and psychological harm.

Dowsing is another example of the ideomotor effect being exploited for financial gain. The practice, whose stated purpose is to divine water or other things located underground or concealed within something else,involves holding a special device (like a dowsing rod or a divining rod) and letting the ideomotor effect cause your hand to “mysteriously” point to the location of the desired object or substance. These devices have been scientificallytested and debunked again and again, but that hasn’t stopped their purveyors from falsely claiming they can detect everything from gold to liver disease and hepatitis to “harmful earth radiations.” In 2013, one charlatan was convicted of selling nearly $70 million in fake bomb detectors to Iraqi police.

Finally, the ideomotor effect lies behind a controversial, repeatedly debunked form of pseudoscience therapy called “facilitated communication,” which emerged as a popular therapy technique in the 1990s. Facilitated communication claims to work by allowing disabled or autistic patients to “communicate” through slight finger movements. In reality, science has proven many times over that the patients’ movements are caused by the ideomotor effect, and that their caregivers are reading meaning into nothing. One scientist even referred to facilitated communication as “Ouija board stuff.”

The disastrous effects of this fake therapy include a sex abuse case in which the caregiver claimed she used facilitated communication to obtain consent from her patient, and a devastating parental custody case where manipulative caregivers used it to suggest that the children involved had “accused” their parents of abuse. Sadly, it still exists today as a fraudulent speech therapy technique used with autism patients, disguised under various names like “rapid prompting method,” “supported typing,” or “progressive kinesthetic feedback.”

Ironically, the same factor lies at the heart of both the cause and the effects of the ideomotor phenomenon: We want to believe. Our desire to confirm the existence of ghosts, spirits, and other improbable possibilities is what convinces Ouija board users, facilitated communication proponents, and anyone else who encounters the ideomotor effect in action that they’ve experienced something real: a real visitation from another dimension, some sort of mystical sign, or an indication that a patient trapped in his own mind is suddenly able to break free and communicate.

But the marvelous thing about a Ouija board isn’t what a planchette might read or a psychic might claim the spirits are saying through it from the other side. In reality, the true wonder of the Ouija board is what lies within our own subconscious.

Third: Ouija

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Note: To conserve space, parts of this extensive treatment on the Ouija board found in Wikipedia have been removed. The reader is advised to consult the current entry on that site to see the complete article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ouija

The ouija, also known as a spirit board or talking board, is a flat board marked with the letters of the alphabet, the numbers 0–9, the words “yes”, “no”, occasionally “hello” and “goodbye”, along with various symbols and graphics. It uses a planchette (small heart-shaped piece of wood or plastic) as a movable indicator to spell out messages during a séance. Participants place their fingers on the planchette, and it is moved about the board to spell out words. “Ouija” is a trademark of Hasbro but is often used generically to refer to any talking board.

Spiritualists believed that the dead were able to contact the living and reportedly used a talking board very similar to a modern Ouija board at their camps in Ohio in 1886 to ostensibly enable faster communication with spirits. Following its commercial introduction by businessman Elijah Bond on July 1, 1890, the Ouija board was regarded as an innocent parlor game unrelated to the occult until American spiritualist Pearl Curran popularized its use as a divining tool during World War I.

Paranormal and supernatural beliefs associated with Ouija have been criticized by the scientific community and are characterized as pseudoscience. The action of the board can be parsimoniously explained by unconscious movements of those controlling the pointer, a psychophysiological phenomenon known as the ideomotor effect.

Some Christian denominations have “warned against using Ouija boards”, holding that they can lead to demonic possession. Occultists, on the other hand, are divided on the issue, with some saying that it can be a tool for positive transformation; others reiterate the warnings of many Christians and caution “inexperienced users” against it.

History

One of the first mentions of the automatic writing method used in the ouija board is found in China around 1100 AD, in historical documents of the Song Dynasty. The method was known as fuji “planchette writing”. The use of planchette writing as an ostensible means of necromancy and communion with the spirit-world continued, and, albeit under special rituals and supervisions, was a central practice of the Quanzhen School, until it was forbidden by the Qing Dynasty. Several entire scriptures of the Daozang are supposedly works of automatic planchette writing. According to one author, similar methods of mediumistic spirit writing have been practiced in ancient India, Greece, Rome, and medieval Europe.

Talking board

As a part of the spiritualist movement, mediums began to employ various means for communication with the dead. Following the American Civil War in the United States, mediums did significant business in presumably allowing survivors to contact lost relatives. The ouija itself was created and named in Baltimore, Maryland, in 1890, but the use of talking boards was so common by 1886 that news reported the phenomenon taking over the spiritualists’ camps in Ohio.

Commercial parlor game

Businessman Elijah Bond had the idea to patent a planchette sold with a board on which the alphabet was printed, much like the previously existing talking boards. Bond filed on May 28, 1890 for patent protection and thus is credited with the invention of the Ouija board. Issue date on the patent was February 10, 1891. He received U.S. Patent 446,054. Bond was an attorney and was an inventor of other objects in addition to this device.

An employee of Elijah Bond, William Fuld, took over the talking board production. In 1901, Fuld started production of his own boards under the name “Ouija”. Charles Kennard (founder of Kennard Novelty Company which manufactured Fuld’s talking boards and where Fuld had worked as a varnisher) claimed he learned the name “Ouija” from using the board and that it was an ancient Egyptian word meaning “good luck.” When Fuld took over production of the boards, he popularized the more widely accepted etymology: that the name came from a combination of the French and German words for “yes”.

The Fuld name became synonymous with the Ouija board, as Fuld reinvented its history, claiming that he himself had invented it. The strange talk about the boards from Fuld’s competitors flooded the market, and all these boards enjoyed a heyday from the 1920s.

Scientific investigation

Video caption of experiment

The ouija phenomenon is considered by the scientific community to be the result of the ideomotor response. Michael Faraday first described this effect in 1853, while investigating table-turning.

Various studies have been produced, recreating the effects of the ouija board in the lab and showing that, under laboratory conditions, the subjects were moving the planchette involuntarily. A 2012 study found that when answering yes or no questions, ouija use was significantly more accurate than guesswork, suggesting that it might draw on the unconscious mind. Skeptics have described ouija board users as ‘operators’. Some critics noted that the messages ostensibly spelled out by spirits were similar to whatever was going through the minds of the subjects. According to professor of neurology Terence Hines in his book Pseudoscience and the Paranormal (2003):

The planchette is guided by unconscious muscular exertions like those responsible for table movement. Nonetheless, in both cases, the illusion that the object (table or planchette) is moving under its own control is often extremely powerful and sufficient to convince many people that spirits are truly at work … The unconscious muscle movements responsible for the moving tables and Ouija board phenomena seen at seances are examples of a class of phenomena due to what psychologists call a dissociative state. A dissociative state is one in which consciousness is somehow divided or cut off from some aspects of the individual’s normal cognitive, motor, or sensory functions.

Ouija boards were already criticized by scholars early on, being described in a 1927 journal as “‘vestigial remains’ of primitive belief-systems” and a con to part fools from their money. Another 1921 journal described reports of ouija board findings as ‘half-truths’ and suggested that their inclusion in national newspapers at the time lowered the national discourse overall.

In the 1970s ouija board users were also described as “cult members” by sociologists, though this was severely scrutinized in the field.

Religious responses

Since early in the Ouija board’s history, it has been criticized by several Christian denominations. For example, Catholic Answers, a Roman Catholic Christian apologetics organization, states that “The Ouija board is far from harmless, as it is a form of divination (seeking information from supernatural sources).” Moreover, Catholic bishops in Micronesia called for the boards to be banned and warned congregations that they were talking to demons when using Ouija boards. In a pastoral letter, The Dutch Reformed Churches encouraged its communicants to avoid Ouija boards, as it is a practice “related to the occult”. The Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod also forbids its faithful from using Ouija boards as it teaches that such would be a violation of the Ten Commandments.

In 2001, Ouija boards were burned in Alamogordo, New Mexico, by fundamentalist groups alongside Harry Potter books as “symbols of witchcraft.” Religious criticism has also expressed beliefs that the Ouija board reveals information which should only be in God’s hands, and thus it is a tool of Satan. A spokesperson for Human Life International described the boards as a portal to talk to spirits and called for Hasbro to be prohibited from marketing them.

These religious objections to use of the Ouija board have in turn given rise to ostension type folklore in the communities where they circulate. Cautionary tales that the board opens a door to evil spirits turn the game into the subject of a supernatural dare, especially for young people.

Literature

Ouija boards have been the source of inspiration for literary works, used as guidance in writing or as a form of channeling literary works. As a result of Ouija boards’ becoming popular in the early 20th century, by the 1920s many “psychic” books were written of varying quality often initiated by ouija board use.[38]

Aleister Crowley

Aleister Crowley had great admiration for the use of the ouija board and it played a passing role in his magical workings. Jane Wolfe, who lived with Crowley at Abbey of Thelema, also used the Ouija board. She credits some of her greatest spiritual communications to use of this implement. Crowley also discussed the Ouija board with another of his students, and the most ardent of them, Frater Achad (Charles Stansfeld Jones): it is frequently mentioned in their unpublished letters. … Over the years, both became so fascinated by the board that they discussed marketing their own design. Their discourse culminated in a letter, dated February 21, 1919, in which Crowley [discusses a business proposition about it].

In popular culture

Ouija boards have figured prominently in horror tales in various media as devices enabling malevolent spirits to spook their users. Most often, they make brief appearances, relying heavily on the atmosphere of mystery the board already holds in the mind of the viewer, in order to add credence to the paranormal presence in the story being told.

Note: Wikipedia then lists Books, Movies, and Television with Ouija content


[1] https://www.vox.com/2015/6/11/8765053/ouija-board-meaning-name

[2] https://www.vox.com/2016/10/30/13413864/satanic-panic-ritual-abuse-history-explained

Jesus Be Busy

One wonders how Jesus is able to call all those who do as Sarah Young, of the Jesus Calling book series, is doing? She is talking to Jesus almost daily, and so, it would seem, are others who have embraced Young’s methods.

Is it fair to ask, just how many Jesuses are out there? It would have to be a ton, when you consider that the Jesus Calling books have for years ranked on best seller lists, both Christian and non-Christian alike. There are no group calls, just Jesus and the listener on the line. One wonders how Jesus is able fit it all in timewise. Got to be busy!

One must also ask, just what is it that Sarah Young is doing? Is she listening to Jesus, talking with Jesus, and writing down, or “journaling” what Jesus tells her? Or is it something else?

Brenna E. Scott, in her book, Christian Journaling or Psychic Channeling? A Critical Comparison of the Jesus Calling Series with Occult Training Literature, studiously and carefully makes a strong case that what Sarah Young is doing is channeling Jesus, or really, is channeling a spirit being who identifies itself as Jesus. And this is common fare in our occult-oriented psychic culture today. (You can verify this yourself, dear reader, by doing a search using the words medium, channeller, shaman, or psychic.)

Let me ask, where in Scripture does it say that Jesus will talk to us, I mean verbally, word by word, sentence by sentence? We pray to our Lord, read the inspired word from Genesis to Revelation, and think and meditate on this. But nowhere is there anything that says that Jesus will “call” us.

Brenna’s book so clearly presents the psychic channeling that Sarah Young is evangelizing and exposes it for what it is ­– demonically empowered deception. I do not think that Sarah Young is attempting to mislead readers; rather, she hears a voice that she believes is Jesus. This has been practiced in the occult world throughout history. It is so tangible and seemingly physical, in real time, and who would not be tricked.

In 1973, Zondervan Publishing House published a ThM thesis I wrote titled A Manual of Demonology and the Occult. It was the only book I wrote that actually made me some money. The result, however, was that people from all over the country, even foreign countries, showed up in Marin County, California, hoping to have demons cast out of them. And there were hundreds of these, and though the stream has trickled down considerably, it is still going on. The need was so great that we developed twelve teams of us who did this work and saw first-hand that one of the demonic kingdom’s means of seducing others, and I mean invading their being, is via the psychic practices of channeling.

It is fair to ask if I am saying that the Jesus Calling process opens one up to being possessed by a demon?

Yes, that is exactly what I am saying.

Brenna E. Scott has made herself a target with the publication of her book. As soon as I read it, I did my best to secure more copies. I urge those who read this little piece of mine to get a copy of her book, read it, and pass it along to others. It is no small undertaking.

At the heart of it is the mystery of who the “Jesus” is who is calling Sarah and all those who have been enticed into the practice through Sarah Young’s books. It will be a challenge for Christians as well as non-Christians to investigate what is at the heart of the Jesus Calling books.

By going to https://www.spiritjournaling.com/ you can click on the book image and read it or click on “Purchase” and buy it.

Kent Philpott, pastor of Miller Avenue Baptist Church in Mill Valley, CA, now in his 39th year. By going to milleravenuechurch.org you can find out more.

The Ouija Board

Where it Leads

Little by little the power behind the Ouija board takes hold:

  • It’s fun at first, even enticing.
  • Next comes empowering. It seems to give real answers—to the rate of about 65% accuracy according to some studies.
  • Next comes captivating.
  • Then controlling.
  • Dependency sets in, being fearful not to trust the guidance.
  • Can’t go out the door unless the board is consulted.

The bottom line: The demonic spirits have one goal: possess those they snare.

  • But you are not the real enemy; the Creator God is.
  • Because you are made in His image, you are the target.
  • Did you not know that Jesus said Satan is a liar, an accuser, a murderer from the beginning? (See John 8:44)

How is one freed from the unseen spirits?

  • One, throw out the board.
  • Two, repent of the sin.
  • Three, ask for forgiveness.
  • Four, command the demons to come out.

How to Become a Christian

How Does One Become A Christian?

Common Answers:

                  Join a church

                 Be a good person

                 Be kind and loving toward others

     Be baptized

                 Read the Bible

 A person may do all the above, yet this would not make one a Christian. And why is this so?

Consider the Apostle Paul. He was faithful and zealous for his faith, Judaism, as we read in Galatians 1:11–24. Here are some key verses from this letter Paul wrote to churches in the area of Galatia, now central Turkey, in about 33 A.D.

Verse 12: “For I did not receive it (the gospel) from any man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ.” (The account of this event is found in the Book of Acts, chapter 9)

Paul severely persecuted the early Christians, these Jews who believed in Jesus as the Messiah. Here is how he put it:

“For you have heard of my former life in Judaism, how I persecuted the church of God violently and tried to destroy it.” Verse 13

Then, while so engaged, God revealed Jesus to Paul and for the purpose of presenting Him to the Gentile world. (See verses 15 and 16) Paul became the Apostle to the Gentiles.

Gospel is an old English word that simply means Good News. The core of which is the crucifixion of Jesus on a cross, His burial, His resurrection, and His ascension.

The central piece being the death of Jesus on the cross. Right there all our sin, past, present, and future, was laid upon Jesus. Sin brings forth death, that is, separation from God and heaven forever. Jesus died in our place, and every sin, great or small, is removed forever.

No one can become a Christian by means of anything they believe, think, or do. It is always by grace, and grace means that God gifts us with forgiveness of our sin without anything we do. Here is how Paul put it:

“When he who had set me apart before I was born, and who called me by his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son to me…” (verses 15 and 16)

In a way we do not fully understand, and how could it be any other way, God’s Holy Spirit reveals who Jesus is to us and we accept and believe that. We become aware, often suddenly or sometimes slowly, that Jesus is our Savior, and we are attracted to Him, want to learn of Him, find a Bible and start reading, even attending gatherings of other Christians, and want to be baptized. This is how it typically goes.

How does one become a Christian? Trust that Jesus died on the cross to save you from eternal death in hell. Trust that He is your Savior.

Why I Am A Christian

Chapter 2 Legalist Grace

Hello Everyone, here is chapter 2 of Why I Am A Christian. At the time of my writing the book I was leaning more toward a Calvinistic view point, away from what is called an Armenian pain of view. This latter does not state we are chosen, more we chose. Today I am at a mid-point, seeing both are presented in Scripture. Thus a paradox, Scripture reaches both, our chosing and our being chosen. Hope this is not too confusing. Kent

It sounds like a contradiction in terms – legalistic grace – but I have been coming across the sentiment, if not the term itself, in a number of different ways. However, expressed, whether in print, sermon, television, radio, or conversation, it sounds very much like, “I am more of a Calvinist than you are.” At first I thought it was akin to an animal marking its territory, as we observe in dogs and cats. Perhaps the analogy is one of the old Calvinist guard not wanting to be marginalized or to not receive recognition for their heroic manning of the Reformed fort now that new recruits have volunteered for the front lines.

A Reforming Baptist

My own journey toward the Doctrines of Grace has been a slow one, little by little. This may have been due to the sheer glory of free grace, which must be absorbed over the course of time; or my slowness may have been due to the complexity of it all. I wonder, back in 1996, if I would have been rejected or even ridiculed for not embracing the complete collection of doctrine suddenly as a whole. But at that time and for some years to come, I knew no one who was a self-confessed Calvinist. Perhaps I was spared a rude awakening.

Coming from a Baptist background I had little exposure to the theology of those who had imbibed the traditional the­ologies handed down from Calvin, Luther, and others, mostly by way of John Knox. Instead, I learned from Billy Graham, Campus Crusade for Christ, C. S. Lewis, Watchman Nee, and other Arminian-leaning evangelicals. Then when I began reading Edwards, Owen, Spurgeon, Lloyd-Jones, I. Murray, J. I. Packer, R. C. Sproul, and others, my theological reeducation took a new and confusing turn.

In 1996 I was in the eleventh year of pastoring Miller Ave­nue Church in Mill Valley, California. I had begun research into the debate between Asahel Nettleton and Charles Fin­ney, noted evangelists during American’s Second Awakening, roughly 1799 to 1835. The research sparked a new under­standing of the differences between Calvinistic and Armin­ian points of view. For twenty-nine years of professional ministry, I had been a staunch Arminian, regularly teaching through Charles Finney’s Revival Lectures, and John Wesley was one of my heroes.

Happily, there was no pressure from my congregation or denomination to toe any doctrinal line. The people I preached to and taught had little previous exposure to Reformed the­ology, so they took to it slowly. However, though it was some time before I even mentioned the name of John Calvin or Jonathan Edwards in a sermon or Bible study, some rejected even my feeble efforts to introduce clear biblical ideas like predestination and election. As pastor I had to be careful not to drive everyone off, remembering how haltingly I myself had progressed. The plain fact is that even after fourteen years of my consistent presentation of the Doctrines of

Grace,1 only a fraction of the congregation is what I would call Reformed. Yet I am content with the progress.

Doctrinal Lists Added to the Basics

What I have been lately observing and experiencing with the emergence of the New Calvinists is a pressure to accept a whole array of doctrines and positions beyond TULIP. Many insist that to be a true Calvinist means adhering to much more that the famous five points. More or fewer of these additional doctrines are found on varying inventories: views on the inerrancy of the Bible; replacement theology – where the church replaces Israel; infant baptism and the Lord’s Supper in the context of Covenant Theology; views of last things; women and their place in the church; cessationism – whether spiritual/charismatic gifts are in operation today; applications of church discipline; using the correct forms of worship, especially having to do with music; the place of historic confessions of faith; and the list could continue. The requisites can even include political or social positions. My discovery has been that not all of those who identify with the doctrines of Grace hold essentials in harmony. So often, adherents of the Reformed tradition make a particular list of required doctrines an all-or-nothing litmus test. Surely this attitude, while it may appear to be a committed one, is likely not the firmest foundation for growing in grace; such a doc­trinaire attitude, at least in my experience, has seemed more like sectarianism than faithful biblical orthodoxy.

1 Doctrines of Grace, Reformed Theology, and Calvinism are roughly synonyms.

2 The term “New Calvinists” refers to those Christians who have more recently, say the last twenty years, and from denominations not rooted in the Reformation itself, begun to embrace the Doctrines of Grace.

3 The acronym TULIP refers to the five points of Calvinism: Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace, and the Perseverance of the Saints.

Marking out territory? Or perhaps what I have been observing is a lack of grace along with a misunderstanding of the working of the Holy Spirit. We grow up slowly. We gener­ally agree that wise parents do not demand that their young children demonstrate adult stature or maturity.

When asked to describe my theological position, I will say I am reforming rather than reformed. I have a long way to go in grasping all the ramifications of the Doctrines of Grace, since they deal with the greatness and glory of our Creator God. Early on, had I been instantly bombarded by the extent of the mercy granted me in Christ, I would have been over­whelmed, perhaps immobilized by the immensity of the real­ization. Yet, I run into people who have seemingly overnight become full five-pointers and are furthermore convinced of a number of extra points such as those listed above.

A Plea for Grace

This essay is a plea for those of us who have had the time and freedom to grow up into the Doctrines of Grace to extend this same privilege to others who are setting out on their journey.

We begin with grace, and we must continue the same way. Paul made this clear in his letter to the Galatian churches. Most Christians get the point easily enough when it comes to the salvation issue – works versus grace – and are convinced that they were helpless to attain it through their own efforts. But Calvinists, new and old, can be a blessing to those who are on the Reforming journey by not imposing unnecessary roadblocks and by not demanding doctrinal conformity in a host of other issues. If we trust that God saves us in a sover­eign way, may we not also expect that He will continue that process until the day of Jesus Christ?