666 Revealed

666 Revealed

2006, Mystery  -   150 Comments
Ratings: 4.44/10 from 176 users.

Lucifer, Beelzebub, Belial, Prince of Darkness, The Wicked One, Old Nick, Mephistopheles, Satan... the devil goes by many names and has had many faces over the years, but who exactly is he? What does he look like? His very existence has been a source of debate within the Christian Church since its beginning. Is this supreme evil still walking the Earth, tempting, seducing and corrupting those of little faith?

All religions have devils and demons, forces of the evil that seek to harm us. According to scientists and other secular scholars these devils and demons are a means of labeling those unseen and often unjust forces of nature that cause us harm. But according to many religious people, an evil, supernatural being must surely be behind it all.

The word Satan means adversary and the term appears in both the Old and New Testaments. Since then, Satan has been attacking both God and men. He walks about like a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour.

But according to the Christian faith devil's powers are not limitless. According to the New Testament the devil's final defeat will be when Jesus Christ returns in the second coming and casts Satan into a lake of fire. Throughout the ages the devil has been represented by many and varied imagery. As a snake, as a man, a beast with horns and a tail, as a nightmare with bat's wings.

Other impressions of the devil are far less flattering but it's still an image that had stayed with us throughout the ages and certainly won't be disappearing overnight. Witches and werewolves have been part of our folklore for many centuries before the Christian Church took an interest in them but all this changed during the 15th century when the Catholic Church decided that a deal with the devil was a means by which witches gain their magical powers. This deal was called an "infernal pact."

More great documentaries

150 Comments / User Reviews

  1. This was stupid. A collosal waste of my time.

  2. Ya'll need to get off the LSD.

  3. B.C. 45 Julian calendar took effect. The modern Gregorian calendar begin adoption in 1582...long after revelation was written. Duration between 45 B.C. and 1 A.D. is 45 years since there is no 0 B.C./A.D.
    A.D. 622 someone left Mecca to settle in Medina...the year they considered as beginning of their religion.
    Duration between 1 A.D. to A.D. 622 is 621 years
    45 + 621 = 666

  4. Around 2005, a fragment from Papyrus 115, taken from the Oxyrhynchus site, was discovered at the Oxford University's Ashmolean Museum. It gave the beast's number as 616 χιϛʹ. This fragment is the oldest manuscript (about 1,700 years old) of Revelation 13

    the 666 comes from a human error, a man named Irenaus around 2nd century AD thought it was so. and since then superstition did all the rest around the number 666. So, if you really fear satan, fear 616 and not 666 ;)

    1. i have heard about this number many times ,interesting ,i think ill have a sneak peek then ?

  5. Want to see God, look in the mirror.
    Want to see Satan, look in the mirror.

  6. Interesting. Mostly laughable, when blamed on an invisible Good/Evil entity. There are those that worship the spirit and those that worship the flesh... this is all that I believe. Good/Evil are merely human traits/conditions that are not separate. One only prevails over the other in most, but entities controlling these human traits, is simply ignorance. We do not want to except the fact of the human condition... we are animals of "progress" and individuals of evolution.

  7. As a Young Girl My Grandmother told of Ole Saint Nick- and let me know saying mmm-hum was just what Lucifer answered as he walked collecting souls. I was raised in the ear of the 50's and lived through the L.S.D. Timothy Leary and Dr Spock. My Mother i assure YOU Used Dr Spock to get with the seat of MY UNDERSTANDING. as a Kid school in N.Y. i have seen person's inhabited by unclean spirits leading Persons to walk-- barefoot on the street's of the city. JESUS is Real so is Lucifer he is Broken because JESUS Broke him down.
    I follow JESUS.

    1. Did not know that walking barefoot was conducive to unclean spirits, as to the rest of your post, prove to us that YOUR jesus and YOUR lucifer is real.

    2. Walking barefoot is one of the most evil thing a man could do, I pray to NIKE every morning. :D

    3. bah, inferior materialistic religion. I pray to Reebok, the one and only. :)

    4. You are not a true worshiper: REPENT & pray that Christian Louboutin is feeling magnanimous enough not to cast you soul unto Walmart!

    5. Converse universe!

    6. yeah, but the reebok is the horned one...:)

    7. :) Nike is the Greek goddess of Victory.

    8. Believe me I'm not starting an argument here but just to be technical, the term 'greek god' is a farce and really needs to be stopped..
      There never was and is no such term as 'greek' gods.., they were simply 'Ancient gods'..
      gods do not have a nationality, and they were known all over Europe as exactly the same people/entity's/gods just by different names depending on what area..
      Speaking of nationalities greece wasn't even a country back then, at least not until 1830..
      Just a collection of City States until Germany created the modern greek state, in fact it was the Romans who coined even their name 'grecia' long afterwards for the states from that region :)
      Greeks would have you try to believe otherwise but we all know the lengths Greece goes to to avoid the actual truth on basically everything ;)

    9. Ok, Athenian gods if you prefer.

    10. lol Oh Fab you're a classic!! :)
      I wasn't correcting you brother, but not Athenian either, nothing greece related at all that was the point lol
      Just letting everyone know to try stop using a non distinct term..
      eg Greeks called their god Zeus, Romans Jupiter.
      Hercules, Heracles,
      Poseidon, Neptune etc etc..
      They don't 'belong' to greece (y) :)

    11. Would classical gods or mythic gods float your boat? :P

    12. haha I'm glad we can laugh about this..
      Some people jump straight to angry mode lol :)

    13. Your theosophy & theology NEEDS alittle sharpening.
      I.e. Neptune isn't Greek- he's was colloquially renamed 'Neptune' by ROME.. His Greek counterpart is 'Poseidon',
      Who is A Greek God..
      Because his origin, as well as the rest of the pantheon; resides within the annals of what we today classify as the culture(s) of the Greek City states.
      Where they were originally revered & or first made contact,
      regardless of their own (Alien) origin & similarities too other deity's.
      In so many words your wrong.

    14. Firstly, it's *you're, secondly it's *to.
      And no I'm not, if you read correctly, I was showing the opposing names from the apparent greek side vs roman side for the exact same deity... Sharpen your observation skills more like it. The entire point was that there are no 'greek' or 'roman' or any nation for that matter "gods". "gods" are not born on/in any country therefore canot possibly have a nationality.. :)

    15. it had your curiosity enough, must be something to it...look around, don't be foolish

    16. How exactly do you "prove" it? lmao
      It's called having 'faith' for a reason.
      There is no proof in faith that's the point.. smh

    17. This post is incomprehensible.

  8. I didn't believe in the devil until I witnessed a 14 year old boy throw 5 adult men around like rag dolls and growl in stereophonic. You are either ignorant, or a liar,

    1. Who are you writing to???

    2. why the devil? why not vampires or werewolves or Hindu demons or any of the plethora of other supernatural bad guys?

    3. ZOMBIES get my vote.

    4. Perhaps he had been bitten by a radioactive spider? Did this kid work for The Daily Bugle by any chance?

      There's been some strange things happening over at Osborn Industries lately, someone should investigate. I feel it's only a matter of time before we see a documentary about it here on TDF. The truth will out!

    5. I first started laughing but I soon realized that this is no laughing matter. Sooner or later you know that Oscorp is going to screw things up and try to cover up the mess.

    6. We'll all be laughing until Oscorp and Stark industries reveal their true intent.

    7. it's ok Thor will save us.

    8. @jaberrwokky: Yes, Spidey rules. Note: When you are speaking of Oscorp, don't you mean HAARP? Oops, sorry, that truth will never come out!

    9. you are delusional. Either you are greatly exagerrating the story or completely lying. I believe the former is true. A young boy probably fought off some men but in no way "threw them around like rag dolls" But of course you will just insist it is true and there is no way to confirm it. typical.

    10. I think you are being unreasonable - if this is Lora Lee's experience, who are you to call it a lie? Haven't seen film yet but I know 1 thing to be irrefutably true - we do not know the whole story about anything.

    11. You think im being unreasonable?

      Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

      If I say that I had cereal for breakfast that is something people can believe even without evidence. If someone claims they ate a magical unicorn for breakfast and the meat was replenishing, that would require some kind of evidence.

      when someone makes a claim like the one she did they are making an extraordinary claim that requires evidence.

      It is also safer to assume (using occams razor) that instead of a 14 year old boy getting super powers, that she is mistaken about the story whether it be due to delusion, or lying.

    12. Was he listening to Bathory by any chance?

  9. hm, i'm not sure that this video deserves the low rating it's gotten. I see this as an overall impartial analysis of the history Demons and satan as a concept rather than preaching on the threat of hell...oh well, i thought it was interesting anyway.

    1. I'm guessing you missed the part where the narrator presents us with a list of serial killers - of whom he happens to know their dates of conception, all of which are ominous dates - and then concludes that demons do indeed walk amongst us? Or the bit where Libertinism is equated with cannibalism. Or my favourite bit where in the montage near the start there's a quick shot of a guitarist on stage, the implication being that rock music is the tool of Satan no doubt?

      I can't see how you would consider this impartial :/

    2. I guess I was looking at it with my historian's hat on. Plus I kinda agree that libertarianism is cannibalism...but i'm working class so from my perspective it is. Also the whole Rock music is the music of the devil thing historicly speaking was a conspiracy theory. and pointing it out as a thing that existed isn't the same as promoting the theory as true. I certainly didn't fell like i was being preached at, perhaps it was the whole silly over the top gothicness of it all. I didn't feel as though it was taking itself seriously...although in fairness i only got about halfway through before i had to go and do something else and switched it off...

    3. Yeah, I had wondered once or twice during the viewing if they were being serious. Still not sure if there's a form of satire in the doc that I missed :(

      I could probably agree with you on your view of libertarianism but the comparison in the doc is with Libertinism. Although some would say they're also the same thing I'm personally not aware of any cannabalistic libertines ... yet.

    4. oh libertinism! lol oops i only just got that. sorry.

    5. I loved the bit at the end, when they finished off their serial killers with the scary background music, the pics of the serial killers being shown and them writing, "Who are today's Children of Satan?"..."Beware!"..."They walk among us!"..
      roll credits...
      Stole that straight from some 'Alien's are coming to get us' show.
      I had the same feeling while watching it, are they for real, or taking the piss outa... na, I think they're for real...wha??? Felt like I needed to be stoned to get it.. :)

    6. Whether intentional or not the assertions made in this doc are laughable so I guess it's a win-win scenario at the end of the day, even if laughter does incidentally fuel the persecution complex of a few misguided and gullible folk.

      Ah fuggit! If it wasn't meant as a satire, it is now. Pass the bong :)

    7. My eldest sister was born on Friday the 13th so by all accounts should I beware of her inner devil? The same fools that believe in satan think the magic man(god) is real and we all know how stupid they are.
      By all accounts logic and rational thought are beyond most of these fools who think the devil and the magic man are real.
      The older I get the less tolerant I'm getting with the stupid people that believe in such BS.

    8. Superstition and spirituality is two different things.....

    9. To me it's the same thing as there is no evidence to prove either to be true.
      They are both a part of ones imagination and should be taken with a grain of salt. Both can be dangerous if taken serious and I find it weak minded of people not to see both for what they are, a CON.
      It would appear that you have to be either brainwashed or brain dead to believe in the both of them.

    10. Ya the whole Friday 13th thing is ridiculous.. But you are the fool if you think that there is no source of evil..go ahead. Try too summon a "demon",,watch how fast you change your mind.

    11. At no stage did I mention anything about sources of evil as that is completely different than to say that there is a magic man (god) or satan.
      There are many people from past and present that could be classified as evil, but they are not satin, the devil or a demon.

      It is like the fools that believe in god there is no evidence to say that he is real as with your demons or satan.

    12. Seeing that a libertine is defined as someone unrestrained by moral concerns and primarily concerned with the pleasures of flesh- well I guess you see how someone could take the ladder point literally- ....the pleasures of "flesh". (LOL) But yeah, now that you mention it I have never even met a libertine much less a cannibalistic libertine, which would be quite rare and therefore possibly valuable. If i ever meet one I'll club him over the head and stash him with the gay republican I have in my basement- also quite the rare find. I had to track him for days before he stood still long enough for me to whack'em in the head with my copy of Oklahoma the musical, director's cut of course. Just joshing with your bones, I would never do that, he's actually in my attic. (LOL)

    13. he forgot to expose accordion players & tin whistle players: the true spawn of SATAN!

  10. Lucifer was an arch angel expelled from heaven by god when he didn't want to see humans as gods greatest creation, nothing more and nothing less. Don´t people know anything anymore?

    1. Not everyone was read the same fairy tales.

    2. Or ...
      Lucifer is the lightbringer sent amongst us to reveal the true nature of the bungling demiurge god whose name is Yaltabaoth.

      It's all in your head.

    3. Or he was a being that felt God's dictatorship over all creation was unjust, and moved to do something about it, probably not expecting god to be as jealous, Wrathful or proud as he is meant to be.

      Of all the characters in the bible, none display as many sins as God.

    4. lol ORRRRRR lucifer is an imaginary literary character.

  11. Nothing like a sex orgy to end a Satanic Black Sabbath sacrifice. The Sabbath at my church was never like that.

    1. The sex orgies were the tie-breaker for me, hence I chose the dark side. Hail satan!

  12. I wonder about this, maybe some of you noticed.
    Jesus, the representation of Christ consciousness is said to be pure love. And Satan is said to be pure evil. Does this mean the final battle beween Christ and Satan is actually just our decision to banish hatered out of our heart by replacing it with unconditional love?

    1. The final battle is well described in text with location and events. I think it was meant to be taken literally, not to be interpreted.

  13. The devils name is Marduk, was born on earth but not taken home to have his DNA edited, as the gods practiced incest and were so inbred that only psychopaths were born so had to be treated at birth, but Marduk never had this treatment, because of this Marduk was declared an animal and banished to earth, he ruled the earth cruely after the gods left until his death in 200ad, his home was in a deep cavern under the Swiss mountains, he had many offspring that populate the area from Germany to the Caucasus mountains, they are the original "white men", Marduk created the money system and the system of interest to make man mine gold as his children(bankers) would only take gold as interest payments. his children still control the money supply and collect up gold that Marduks relatives come and pick up every 200 years or so.
    LOL, now laugh or say what you will, when you look into its history and take all the mumbo jumbo out that is the story you get. Marduk looks as human as any white man from that area. he just had 44 chromosomes and not the 42 we have as those other 2 gave long lives and that is not good for gold mining slaves.

    1. Are you a physicist also?

    2. I am a 60 year old electrician.

    3. I think you may have crossed your wires one or two times too many.

    4. Nice story, though it doesn't make for a good movie yet...perhaps you could read a bit more about Babylonian mythology?

    5. That would be when Marduk appeared in them, but they were copies, so far older, the trail starts in south Africa from about 200,000 BC.

    6. I didn't realise we have solid historical evidence from that time period. Couldn't even find some wonky website about it.
      Okay, South Africa it is then, and his home was somewhere in a cave under the Swiss mountains?

    7. that was written down and you will find a description of snow capped mountains and the trees in the southern parts, I wont give you a link as you seem a bit rude to me. text is about 6000 years old.

    8. About 6000 years old, i guess that makes it pre-Sumerian. But it seems you are not willing to reference such text?

      From 200.000 to 50.000 to 6000, i'm not sure how serious i should take it.

    9. I would like a few links out of curiosity if you don't think I have been too rude...

    10. There was writing back in 200 000 BC??? As far as I know, the earliest known form of neolithic writings are carbon dated to the 6th millennium BC.

    11. I don't think so, but I never said there was, you seem intent on steering it your way and are now making things up that were not said, the south African stories are spoken, mainly by Sharman, and the site in question where the first stories come from is said to be 200,000 years old, but to my knowledge nothing was written down, but the people in the area passed the stories down.

    12. They tell the story of how man and woman came to be and why, they are very interesting and basic, showing that the grandia of the gods didn't appear until writing came along

    13. How accurate can a story be after 200 000 years of spoken tradition?

    14. that's why you take out all personal and local, and you just find it is another Adam and eve story only far far older than anything in the middle east, odd how some parts like emerging from a cave you will find in the Americas and Australia, in the oldest stories from there, again all spoken.

    15. And that is the proof you provide that a guy named Marduk is the devil, lived in a cave in Switzerland, had a different number of chromosomes, had gold mining slaves and that his descendants are bankers.

      I am sorry but spoken evidence is not sufficient for such outrageous affirmations. If it was, anyone could say Snow White or Gandalf really existed, there is even concrete written evidence which trumps spoken words any day.

    16. Were these extra 2 chromosomes reptilian?
      Where did all your information come from?

    17. it comes from many old stories including the bible, take all stories, remove all local and personnel information so you have just a basic frame work, then group all stories together and "AND" the structure so only things of the same structure are copied across, then you have a basic story that fits every story, names change but deeds don't, then put the date of the story to the oldest of them, pre Marduk can be found in stories from south Africa to north Africa, Marduk timed stories can be found in the middle east, India, china, Americas and southern Europe, would seem these people started in just Africa then when Marduk appeared spread across the world or the stories did.

    18. ...or the stories did.

    19. Someone had to tell them, so people must have moved about and judging by the description of the land told in some text "top third white, middle third brown and the bottom third white" suggest that was describing a time long before they were written and matches the planet from about 50,000 years ago.

    20. I don't understand that text "top third white, middle third brown and the bottom third white". How does it match the planet 50 000 years ago?

    21. That's a lot of ripping and rearranging of information it seems. Who did the interpretation? Where did the Switzerland cave info come from? How anyone could have ruled the world from Switzerland prior to 200 AD. The Zhou Dynasty empire in China came before that and no white man lived there.

    22. china and India come into the story after Marduk and seem to be rival empires that appear at the same time as the stories of the wars of the gods. seems china and India had their own gods and were fighting marduks family.

    23. And what were Thor and Odin doing whilst all this transpired?

    24. Or all the others...


    25. All conveniently forgotten about in this case no doubt, doesn't suit the narrative. It's like the Marvel and DC universes.

      Speaking of which. I feel that the only acceptable way to ascertain the credibility of Joseph Smith's ... no wait ... John Summers' newly revealed prophesies is if Marduk and Ultron battle to the death.

      In the mean time I think Batman can sleep safe.

    26. i'm going to laugh at you then. *laugh*

    27. @John Summers: An interesting rant you have compiled, very entertaining; however, standard humans have 46 chromosomes (23 pairs) unlike all the other 'great apes' which have 24 pairs. (48 chromosomes) Note: errors of this magnitude tend to discredit any accompanying information.

    28. yes a silly mistake, I agree, but never mind, is it important then that I am believed? what is so important about you and any of the other readers that you must only be given facts laid out in a form that you must agree with before you listen, you have done a great job in admitting there is a chromosome difference between man and every other animal, that has always been a thing that those educated in it avoid, so ty for that.

    29. Doesn't matter how many chromosomes he had, I want to know who counted them and how? Where is the DNA material that was used to do the analysis???

    30. That is written down in the Sumerian text with a talk between enki and his sister, they talk about not giving man all the chromosomes, as Marduk is the son of enki and his god wife who came to earth then Marduk has the full set, simple logic really.

    31. They knew about chromosomes in Sumerian times? I thought that was a 20th century discovery?!?! I sincerely doubt the text uses the word chromosome and gave a count.

    32. as any translation of any text never has exact words and that it is by agreement that one symbol should mean another in another language I to doubt you will get that exact word.

    33. I am shocked (and embarrassed) that anyone would take the effort to respond to your psychotic ravings.

    34. @Michael Jay Burns: Ah yes, the burdens of being a shepherd. (we are only as strong as our weakest link)

    35. please show me this text. i get the feeling that you are interpreting something to fit a preconceived idea

    36. But all the translations are interpretations with preconceived ideas, that what a translation is, it would be good for you to read the whole text from beginning to end so you have the meaning of their meeting.

    37. I agree. But you are the one making the claims. so the burden is on you to show the text that these claims are based on. Also you have a burden to show these interpretations are correct, Finally it would be great to have some actual physical/demonstrable evidence to support these claims. Now you are not required to meet these burdens. But until you do , do not be surprised if nobody believes you or takes your claims seriously. Unless you are only "preaching to the choir"

    38. @John Summers:
      It is not that I am not listening. I know the story of which you are referring to. A 7000 year old text of the ancient sumerians, written on app. 22,000 cuneiform clay tablets making reference to their gods, the Anunnaki who needed gold for the atmosphere of their dying planet. They combined their DNA with earth's neanderthal to create a better hominid (homosapien) to mine the gold for them.
      These types of historical writings will usually fall on modern day deaf ears simply because they are a translation, open to interpretation.
      It is not just your message, but the way you deliver it that will dictate the nature of the reaction you have received.
      I was only trying to convey to you that if you make obvious errors from what we know with certainty today, it will only compound the skepticism from those you are trying to reach.
      The irony is that a documentary regarding 'the devil' by it's very nature is already inflammatory, so, are you really surprised by the response you received?
      In any case, I am a very open minded person, and I only suggest that you make accuracy and delivery a priority, if you wish to engage those who are far less forgiving then me. Take care, and best wishes John!

    39. I remember you. I think you used a different name but had the same avatar. I can't quite remember the topic of discussion but you claimed to have some sort of proof of your position but were reluctant to give it up because you were afraid the moderator would not allow it for being off topic. After a great deal of coaxing on my part and assurances from the moderator that it would stand, you told us the invasion of Iraq was a quest by the Americans to steal ancient tablets to further hide the truth from mankind....along those lines. Refresh my memory if possible.

  14. When it comes to trying to understand satanist, a dumb movie quote comes to mind. The clown from Spawn asks the question "How come we get all the retards?".

  15. it's quiet funny how those who take a concrete stance against the paranormal are also the only ones who have had no experience of such, strange cause in other areas of society people who have no experience in a given area or topic are considered unqualified to lecture on such. BTW for the record... i consider you skeptic lot to be handicapped with regards to this matter. i have had one 100% beyond doubt paranormal experience which was witnessed. it happened and it was terrible. the witnesses and myself sat and tried every angle to explain what had happened ( in brief, thunderous blows on the bedroom wall, heavy scratching sounds and small specs of light assailed the room for around 2 minutes, the sounds sounded like they were coming from inside the room ) , even now 20 years on when it is brought up in conversation we still are no closer to rationalizing.
    if it makes you feel better by reducing my intelligence and then my integrity ( we all know how much you science lot love utilizing this technique to discredit and once again demonstrate to the world you are the supreme humans on this planet ) that's fine but it changes nothing, i'm a member a small group who have actually seen something disturbing and life altering and you're still a member of a large group who needs everybody around you to believe you have all the answers.....what a smart child you are;)

    1. I do not "take a concrete stance against the paranormal". But with all the claims on the internet i do not believe claims without proof.

      “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
      Christopher Hitchens

    2. +1

      "I want to believe"

    3. The problem I have with paranormal events is that they always happen when only a small number of people can vouch they happened and very little concrete evidence is available to prove it happened. Why doesn't it happen in large venues with cameras rolling? If some paranormal entity wanted to make contact, any NFL football match would make a lot more sense than some basement or attic. It also seems not correlated to how many people died in one place for "ghosts" to come back. You would expect places like Auschwitz, Stalingrad or Kigali to have tons of apparitions every year.

    4. O beleive me it will soon happen ! desguised in real incredible beautyful persons.And will indeed deceived all !

    5. lol ok, just make sure you are 100% certain before going on a shooting spree at beautiful people screaming "In the name of the Lord, Die Satan!"

    6. I M 100000000000000 % sure ! not my job to convince anyone ! Your free to beleive a lie ! its your choice after all ! ;) i ve done my homework!!

    7. Then why do you bother posting about it if you don't want to convince anyone? There is no reason to come up with a prophecy if you don't want to convince people it will happen.

    8. The Bible is full of 100% prophecy that came to pass, and other yet soon to come ! If you dont beleive the Bible,then why would you beleive me ?

    9. Close, it's full of something, but it's not 100% prophecy.... guess again...

    10. Which prophecies came to pass?

    11. Another one of those internet commenters who knows because they have done their homework but feel it isn't their job to educate others. Then why say anything? Is it that your ego can't restrain itself and must declare its infinite wisdom and knowledge to the rest of us, which you believe to be a lower form of not so intelligent life? I've asked this question so many times. Why do these alternative types always sound the same? I sometimes feel that I'm talking to the same person over and over who is using different names and avatars all over the internet.

    12. simple buddy ! if i tell you ,you wouldnt beleive, mmmmm? honestly? p.s. It s a commentary zone so i exercise my 1st amendment, 2- i always use the same name and picture, Your really blind !!! I know cause i ask the right people (the ONE who s got all the answer Jack1952--- whos hiding wath here?

    13. Try to follow along properly Patrick. He didn't say YOU had multiple accounts, he said you sound the same as so many others he's talked to online. In short, you're another garden variety, 'claim to know it all but can't share it' internet twit. Long on claims, short on evidence.

      You didn't directly answer his question, IF it's not your job to convince anyone, and IF no one would believe you if you told them anyway, why bother posting anything at all? " Is it that your ego can't restrain itself and must declare its infinite wisdom and knowledge to the rest of us, which you believe to be a lower form of not so intelligent life?"

    14. I never said that you use different names. What I said was that it was as if you did because comments coming from those with alternative views always sound the same. They are light of evidence or refuse to offer any at all. They are convinced that anyone that doesn't see things as they do are lacking in intelligence, brainwashed, close minded or "really blind". If this is how you interpret my simple comment, I have to wonder about your information gathering and processing skills.

      I'm not really sure what that question "who's hiding what here" is supposed to mean. You're the one that doesn't feel he has to convince anyone. You're the one that thinks we should accept your ideas, without question or proof.

    15. I don't know what i experienced meaning i know what happened and that it falls under the column " the unexplained ". as far as what it was, i'm in the dark as much as everybody else. all i can say it happened in 1994. i can completely understand the skeptical stance and how frustrating it must be.

    16. I've had a pretty life-altering experience too, and I was by myself (but in a crowd). No one believes the story so I never bring it up any more. People will be sceptical unless something happens to THEM.

    17. I 've had some weird experiences too, not that i consider them life altering. Though i won't go spread ridiculous statements about it, because i hardly understand it myself, nor am i going to use it as proof for this or that.
      I 'm not saying you do, but some do.
      And yes, you can only expect people to be skeptical about it.

    18. Didn't mean to sound ridiculous, but I usually do compared to all the scholars and brainiacs on this site. This event did change my life but happily for the better.

    19. I 'm not saying you do, but some do.

    20. Spoken like a true religious nut.

    21. If these things are 100% real, then prove them.

      It's not as if these theories and beliefs haven't been tested and tried, yet a hundred percent of the time the answer turns out to be not magic.

      Unfortunatly anecdotes are no good as evidence because they are untrustworthy...there's nothing to guarantee to the rest of us that you haven't either made up that story, or got stoned/drunk before having those "experiences."

      Don't say I've got a disability because i'm not gullible enough to believe you without any evidence!

      OH so there was a banging on your wall, and because you can't think of a rational reason behind it the only answer is ghosts? sorry mate but that's an argument from ignorance and it's a logical fallacy.

  16. All of our opinions are important, although this documentary is so steeped in bias it almost had me believing that one side of a holy war can win.

    It is of my opinion that all spoken or written "truths" are not in fact truths unless they stand up to both imaginative speculation (driven by an inquisitive nature, not 'straw grasping') and deductive reasoning. Vedantic texts, the Upanishads, Schopenhauer's the world as will and representation, buddhism are all examples of 'perennial philosophy':views each of the world’s religious traditions as sharing a single, universal truth on which foundation all religious knowledge and doctrine has grown.wiki, The subject matter ranges from Religion, to philosophy, and, yes my friend, PHYSICS. And all display an uncanny resemblance to each other. Most notably in their descriptions of divergent 'will's, (Will being defined as: the "for us", the subject, the separate thinking entity) That is to say an entity that has tried to decided it is "god" and should decide what reality is, thinking it has escaped a desperately illusive "other". The difference between them is one allows for all, while the other leaves a remainder, a part or quantity that is left over. We call this dualism.

    I have studied nearly all world religions and world history surrounding them, and this is the truth i have discovered. Monism is monism is monism is monism. monism: Monism is the philosophical view that a variety of existing things can be explained in terms of a single reality or substance....EDIT!!!!!!! __brain fart, what i meant to say here is, dualism is dualism, is dualism, Dualism being:the division of something conceptually into two opposed or contrasted aspects, or the state of being so divided. Monism was on my mind when i wrote this__ -wiki You can put a different bow on last years re-gifted birthday present but its still that same shit you didn't want last year. This doesn't mean that I'm right or I win, or Im wrong and I lose. It means that all or these parts make up a continuous whole. moreover it is up to you to decide the world 'is' or becomes. believe blindly, or continue to grow, learn and understand, its your choice, no one else's. I have experienced fear and I have experienced relation and acceptance, and I think you know which one I choose every time.... Relation...I felt I should clarify.

    1. i might be misunderstanding, but how does physics provide a description of a divergent will?

    2. well.. and this is a stretch of the imagination considering we are talking about theoretical principals that we can know nothing about outside of mathematical models. In short black holes, more specifically the event horizon side, and the side that emits Hawking radiation. A singularity is a point of continuity in the universe ( presumable), and arguably the reason our universe exists is because of the existence of those two opposing forces. My point is not to say that physics literally says "dualism exists", it is that it shows it through such principles. Along with ideas like matter and anti-matter, as well as any other principle that illustrates that matter can both exist 'separately', as well as have an infinite potential for change. Or all of them If you are able to see through all the lines we have drawn between things.

      With a dualist mind set( I edited my previous post, I meant to say dualism not monism, monism is perennial philosophy in a sense, so is dualism but more for understanding sake IMO), there seems to be only separateness, us as opposed to they. This is a false conclusion, although one it is all to easy to come to.

    3. Brain fart? Are you sure it was your brain? When monism and dualism are mixed up, one might get confused in such regards :)
      Okay, forgive me the silly joke.
      I guess you can agree with Herakleitos' point of view that without struggle (dualism) there can be no (phenomenal) reality. In such sense you must admit, which you seem to do, that equating matter (or anti - matter) with 'will' is quite a reach, however, understandable from a monistic point of view.
      But falling back to your clarification, i can totally agree: relation. Relative.

    4. Herakleitos, and the notion of the 'unity of opposites' is a great example that explains what we are talking about, for sure. But still an early notion, and incomplete by itself. To try and clarify my point about physics and for conversation sake i feel i should elaborate. My point is that the two ( matter/antimatter) are opposites. we could argue that matter is better, or that antimatter is better, but both arguments are of little importance when coupled with the fact that they are made for each other, opposite likenesses. An even more interesting 'physics' comparison would be a black hole. From event horizon (echoes chaos, subjectivity...) to singularity (the object of knowing, or continuity...), and then emission of hawking radiation (objectification, and solidarity or wholeness). I think that this best illustrates that without 'singularity' and relation, almost nothing can exist. while also being an answer to dualism, if you want it to be, or you can see no importance in it, or deny it altogether. I think it is with typification or typology that we can hope to really understand metaphysics, the nature of reality, or truth in general.

    5. A Black hole seems to be an interesting comparison, but for me a topic of limited
      knowledge. So i 'll look a bit further into it, without getting sucked into it, so to speak.
      For now let's carry on from here.
      Sure, typification and typology are a way towards a better understanding, though as my current understanding goes, i would say, a better understanding of the nature (or truth) of perception. Given that we would include metaphysics as part of nature, not opposite. Are they really opposites? Are monism and dualism opposites? It seems as if dualistic reality
      cannot exist without a monistic reality/nouminality. Though a monistic nouminality could exist on it's own, yet it would be imperceivable. Along Herakleitos' view i conclude, without perception no reality.
      A monistic noumenality on it's own would merely be a 'nothingness', an 'emptiness'
      (or 'fullness', it would be the same at this point) that is everywhere as well as nowhere. And for some theologists, to maneuver the conversation closer to the topic of the documentary,that seems to be the 'god argument' (prime mover). As such a 'god' is not a creature, a being perhaps, but would be just the same as a 'devil'. Of course, dualism supports as well the being of a 'god' AND a 'devil' (as separate), but not as creatures. That's only so when identity and the personification of 'the other' kicks in.

      Okay, seems like i 've strayed away from the physics question. As i regard physics to be based in perception, thus dualistic, at its extreme it can only be deductive or conclusive, bordering metaphysics. And yet again, in which perception are physics and metaphysics no more opposites?

  17. Lucifer - Satan, the Dark Spirit of SEETHING RAGE is quite real!

    As a Physicist, just to see if anything would happen, I performed an experiment - what I call "the 666 Experiment". Within a short period of time, I was able to perceive the evil presence of this extremely Dark Spirit of Seething Rage!

    The experiment itself required specific knowledge gathered from ancient texts, occult secrets and training, that the average person is not privy to. No one more than I was as shocked and astounded to the outcome of this experiment.

    The Existence of the Devil is also indirect proof of the Lord Jesus Christ, the true Bible, and God the Father.


    1. What of the scientific requirement of repeatable experimental results? Oh, excuse me that's not one of the "occult secrets".
      I just read the grounds in my coffee cup -- they told me the secret of the universe. Sorry I can't tell you what it is, it is a secret.
      Do you know the square root of 666? It's 8 something weird.

    2. I haven't watched this yet, so I can't comment on the video, but I can comment on your post. The phrase "occult secrets and training, that the average person is not privy to" is one that is typical of phrases of those who claim evidence but for some reason are not able to release it. Then, you use the evidence that you cannot prove, as evidence of existence of Jesus, God and the veracity of the Bible. The rules of evidence do not work that way.

      In other words, your entire comment lacks credibility.

    3. When one is dead, its not hard for them, they're dead and don't know it. It's hard for those around them.

      Its the same with stupid....

    4. The 666 Experiment?? If you would have read just a little bit about so called occult "secrets", you would now that the number 666 does not stand for the "Devil", contrary to popular belief. And what does it matter you're a physicist? Is that what physicist do?

    5. I'll believe your experiment is real as soon as you publish your methodology and evidence in a peer reviewed scientific publication. I am sure that as a physicist you heard of that method of scientific research. I am pretty sure that you would make the cover of Nature, Scientific American or Science with such a discovery. I urge you to submit your evidence to them as soon as possible so we can all be amazed and converted by your discovery.

      You would also get praise from the Vatican and all clergies for finally proving their assumptions. This is you chance at saving countless souls as billions will convert to the Lord Jesus Christ instantly to save their souls. As a devout Christian, you can't keep that knowledge secret as you would be doing the work of the devil by not exposing him for what he is for all to see. If you don't, I will have to come to the conclusion you are in league with the devil or a fraud.

    6. What a crock! You are no more a physicist than my doberman. He would eat your devils for breakfast.
      Prove your claims of existence of your devils, your lord jesus, your true bible, and who's your daddy, your sky god.

    7. yet another loony who needs locking up.

    8. I'd suggest that many men have indeed been "able to perceive the evil presence of this extremely Dark Spirit of Seething Rage".... we just call them ' the mother-in-law'....

    9. @docoman: Wow, you too; and here I thought I was the only one!

    10. lol, and that one can't be exorcised. Best luck to you in that courageous fight against evil!

    11. Let me play the "devil's advocate" & suggest that you are clearly Coo Coo for Coco Puffs!

      There is another commenter in this thread that this statement applies to as well. I just felt it was sufficient to post my opinion just this one time & let the remainder of those commenting decide for themselves who else it might be & if indeed it suitably applies to you.

    12. Maybe you just read too many scary books, let your imagination run away with you? That's why I can't watch horror movies, doesn't take long with the lights off before my ears prick and suddenly every sigh of the wind is the breath of a lurking weirdo. Or my daughter sneaking in late ;)

  18. Some interesting historic parts but the part that tries to link several serial murderers to the devil brings no evidence whatsoever they were satanists except for their birth dates. They even go as far as saying because one of them was born Friday the 13th is the proof he was a tool of Satan. Several millions people were born on a friday the 13th and I am certain that statistics can prove the ratio of serial killers born on that date is no different than any other date. They say you be the judge and I judge they were mentally deranged and no supernatural force had anything to do with their insanity. Weak logic and superstition is all I saw in there.

    1. My grandson was born on Friday the 13th. He is the nicest young man, polite, soft spoken, cares and spends time with his little sisters and helps his mother around the house without being asked. To actually believe that this delightful person is somehow tainted is beyond ridiculous. That is the problem with superstition. It allows prejudice on the flimsiest of reasons and asks no apologies as it can claim some sort of moral high ground when brought to task.

  19. fantasy land - live in fear of your own imagination if you must.
    time to grow up