The true durable solutions to the needs have nothing to do with that: they are political and technological. Do you ask for sensational miracles, or answers to the needs ? Do you want to keep needs which only God can fulfill, only for the sport to depend on Him ?
Does that bear positive fruits? Of course, as it can also happen to hypnosis or other forms of relationship to the occult spirits to bear positive fruits. Why would it be necessary for any form of possession to be a purely malefic thing? Christianity sees the spirits of beyond as being inevitably either completely white and servants of God, or completely black and servants of the devil, but why that? Can't the occult spirits be free like you and me, and want to have fun from time to time with us, while bringing some benefits to us and making us believe tales ? Considering all the people who could die under various conditions and with various personalities and their various senses of humor, why would not there be some jokers, that did not decide to leave our space and the neighborhood of the Earth, and with some desire for teasing men? Of course, they know that to be able to continue the party they must at least sometimes do things well, or at least seem to do so.
Do you believe that all spirits not sent by God necessarily want to divert men from the Gospel because they want to lose men? What for ? They are just making fun, or doing any short-sighted action. Anyway, the Gospel does not really have any major spiritual value, so it is all the same. It is funnier to masquerade as the Holy Spirit in the Christians eyes, in order for the game to last longer. For the same reason, why should necessarily God protect Christians against any influence from spirits not having the light of God, in the name of their faith in this meaningless Gospel which is not better than anyting else ? Eh what, do you wonder which can be the motivation of these spirits to maintain relations with Christians? Do they only seek to have fun, or have deeper motivations? Are these motivations good, bad or something else ?
What can happen when an enthusiastic Christian firmly rooted in biblical faith dies, the light of God appears to him, tries to explain him that all his biblical faith was useless because the Bible comes from men and that there is nothing like a need of redeeming sins by Jesus-Christ ?
Let us imagine that then, he holds on the fidelity to his faith in
Christ, that does not allow him to follow any other spirit than that of
Jesus or any of His representatives. He will thus reject any
light which would disavow the Gospel and would try to make him lose the
faith in Christ, as not being against God. Thus refusing to raise to
divine light since it is not linked to Christ, his spirit will remain
on the Earth. But, what the heck could he do on the Earth, if not
continue to follow the mission to which he had already chosen to devote
his life: to preach the Gospel of Christ to all the nations of the
Earth. As he always did all his life, he will not care to check by
other means whether it is really the will of God, because the faith is
enough for him to know that it is so. He will always seek to develop
this faith, for God's sake. Of all his terrestrial life he
continuously trained to believe that his mission wanted by God was to
preach the Gospel, disregarding any other observation to check if that
were true or not. Once on other side, after finally becoming a
pure spirit freed from the influence of the flesh, there is no reason
why he would suddenly disavow this path that he had always estimated as
the expression of the highest divine spirituality: as he always did, he
will preach the Gospel by all the means, honest or not, because the
main point for him is not to be intellectually fair and analyze and
follow the truth scrupulously,
but to save hearts by bringing them to the faith in Jesus. But the
faith is produced by means of conviction, and this end justifies
Of course, he may have troubles to completely follow on other side this path by the force of his own faith, but that is neither new: he will certainly need some pastors to encourage him in this way (possibly which can be masquerade as Christ, or more easily as an apostle of Christ, possibly after a scene with an alleged Christ), but that should not be difficult to find. In any way, who else could he go to ? If he did not engage himself in this way, his existence would lose all meaning. And the loss of meaning of one's existence is the biggest fear ever.
1) He may systematically interpret any opposite view as an influence
of the Devil even
in face of testimonies that all is natural and even very rational:
"the adversary in your head shows you...". Christians thus involve
supernatural explanations to all what do not confirm their
sights. But actually I clearly see now, thousand times more
lucidly, honestly and with the obviousness of the truth than when I was
Christian. What I know, I did not invent and nobody persuaded me.
know what I see and which is very clear, what proves
itself in a way that no fraud will ever be able to produce. It is too
easy for the Christians as for anyone to believe that they have the
ultimate truth, by "explaining" every contradicting thought
in others as
being of diabolic inspiration. Simple definition: [The thought of God
what agrees with mine; any contradicting thoughts of others are
hallucinations. Thus I am right and those who do not agree with me are
the insane people handled by the devil, no matter what]. Such is the
positions reached by some. But if the devil could thus make one mistake
things in a way which appears under such appearances of evidence,
then the Bible may be right to say that the Earth is flat because it is
only the Devil who persuades us of something else.
But then it would be even more miraculous that, contrary to others, Christians escape the collective hallucination.
But, even before any try to defend any position on this subject, I acknowledge that the proclamation of such nonsense by Christians, nearly succeeded to convince me of the existence of such an almighthy Devil manipulating people's minds, as the only possible explanation to this spectacle that they offer me, of their incredibly terrible and decided blindness and their ridiculous proclamations of monumental nonsense, which they proclaim with such a strong and serene certitude in the name of the revelation of the Holy Spirit over them.
2) Christians replied to me "What is the point of examining the question? since my words will not have any impact on you, except the power of Jesus when He appears to you ". Christians see any discussion as vain. Whan an odd conception of the human thought. A thought which without the light of Christ can be easily mistaken to the point to have a strong impression to see clear evidences for any arbitrary false claims. Namely, evidences that the Bible is only a ridiculous human manufactured work and not a word of God; evidences that man have common ancestors with apes whereas (according to the Bible) he was directly created by God (some Christians even say that the common sense of children testifies with them that the idea of man descending from the apes would be ridiculous: "man descends from the ape and the ape climbs down from the tree"); some scorn the evidence that the Earth is billion years old; a few centuries ago, the evidence that the Earth revolves around the sun. "False" evidence, whose falseness would be obvious by the grace of the Holy Spirit to the Christians without requiring any examination, but without inspiring any argument to dispute this "false" evidence successfully.
Christians may claim to know nothing of what human thought depends on. But if they claim to know nothing of why does someone else think something else, whereas that person knows for it a precise reason, who is most right/reliable: the one who claims to understand it, or the one claiming that it is the pure divine and incomprehensible mystery ? If I see my thought and that of the Christians (of which I was) as an explicit and comprehensible human mechanism whereas they perceive it as a bunch of supernatural and incomprehensible influences, who of us is enlightened of the highest lights of divine knowledge?
(Conclusion I wrote some time before I concluded that I must refuse dialogue because any try of dialogue will necessarily be a waste of time and of nerves anyway:)
In any case, if you want to speak to me, you should know that I can very well distinguish the truth, it is thus according to the truth that you should speak to me. Not according to a power of persuasion. But if there is somebody who, as you say, has the power to persuade me, let him write to me, in the condition that I can publish the dialogue. Hoping that the supposedly holy spirit which will lead him will not have the insanity to make me waste my time, making me struggle against so-called Christian positions that "true Christians" will then dismiss, to accuse me to make a false debate with wrong christians. Besides that, I think that that will not happen because it is impossible to lie and persuade (or at least to behave non-ridiculously in the public, in front of) someone who knows.