I think I'm going to give up on beliefnet.com. It used to be a really interesting source of articles and forums about different religion but lately it's gotten away from that. There's a lot more current events on there now, and not necessarily anything that I can use. Perhaps a lot of other people can, and more power to them. They know what picante sauce tastes like.

Recently, actually a couple of days after the fact, they published an article by David Kuo who stated that it was reasonable to believe the Cho Sueng-Hui was possessed by a demon(s). Before someone gets all metaphorical and argues that we all have demons (which is a different conversation), he was saying Cho was actually possess by demons. The only basis he uses for this is that sometimes people get possessed by demons and Mother Theresa was possessed by a demon one time and he had the link from cnn.com to prove it with some dude saying they performed the exorcism. No evidence, no logical argument, nothing. Just hearsay from CNN.com and an extraordinary belief.

It's not up to the nonbeliever to reconcile himself to the same conclusion as the believer. It's up to the believer to prove his or her case. He or She should be willing and able to explain what is meant by the statement. That's the way conversations, debates, and such work. Have you ever heard the response "pray about it" or "read the Bible" to the question "what do you mean?" Is this a real answer?