What would it take to make you a Christian?

Joyousperson

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
May 1, 2019
619
102
48
Beijing
✟48,243.00
Country
China
Faith
Freethinker
Marital Status
Married
I have no problem with the idea that the mystical experience is basic to the Human experience. So from that perspective, the root cause I'd say is Human consciousness.
ALL humans has basic Human consciousness as differentiated from Primates of waning degrees down to other lower animals.
As such Human Consciousness is too general to be a critical root cause in this case.

Note you need to do more extensive research into ASC
Altered state of consciousness - Wikipedia
if you are to dig deeper into the root causes and grounds of mystical experiences by humans.

Btw, these days any normal human being can induced an ASC of the mystical and divine easily via Pharmological methods, e.g. DMT and various hallucinogens.

Note this interesting documentary;
 
Upvote 0

dlamberth

Senior Contributor
Site Supporter
Oct 12, 2003
19,239
2,829
Oregon
✟730,329.00
Faith
Other Religion
Politics
US-Others
ALL humans has basic Human consciousness as differentiated from Primates of waning degrees down to other lower animals.
As such Human Consciousness is too general to be a critical root cause in this case.
How so, I don't understand why that would be. It takes consciousness to internally "experience", which is what mysticism is basically.

Note you need to do more extensive research into ASC
Altered state of consciousness - Wikipedia
if you are to dig deeper into the root causes and grounds of mystical experiences by humans.
Well, with over 40 years digging into and exploring this subject of mysticism, I think I'm OK talking about this stuff. Have you dug into mysticism? Your trajectory here makes me think not.

Btw, these days any normal human being can induced an ASC of the mystical and divine easily via Pharmological methods, e.g. DMT and various hallucinogens.
I'm a child of the 60's. I've had a bit of experience in that area. And the psychedelic experience is different than what "I'm" trying to point towards.

Which makes me ask: What do you say about the Christian mystics? You talk about digging into something, have you done any digging into those folks? They have been around all thru Christian history, and have even helped develop a lot of Christian theology.

One of the things I've learned from the Christian Mystics about Christ is that they say that we can know "about" Christ, which is the general way of most Christians. But they say that we can also "know" Christ, which is the way of the Mystic.

I don't know why, but for some reason that I'm not understanding, mysticism is barely understood in the Protestant world.
 
Upvote 0

Joyousperson

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
May 1, 2019
619
102
48
Beijing
✟48,243.00
Country
China
Faith
Freethinker
Marital Status
Married
How so, I don't understand why that would be. It takes consciousness to internally "experience", which is what mysticism is basically.
There are many levels of consciousness.
By the time you are conscious and experience something, that is already crude and filtered by loads of human factors which are likely to be bias.
Note, it is stated subconsciousness is 90% and consciousness [human awareness] is 10%.

Well, with over 40 years digging into and exploring this subject of mysticism, I think I'm OK talking about this stuff. Have you dug into mysticism? Your trajectory here makes me think not.
Know a book by its cover?

Relative to what I know, you have not dug deep enough.
You have to dig into Altered States of Consciousness and deeper & wider. What about the psychology, related neurosciences, neuro-psychology, neuro-biology, the philosophical base, etc.

I'm a child of the 60's. I've had a bit of experience in that area. And the psychedelic experience is different than what "I'm" trying to point towards.
A bit is not enough.

Which makes me ask: What do you say about the Christian mystics? You talk about digging into something, have you done any digging into those folks? They have been around all thru Christian history, and have even helped develop a lot of Christian theology.

One of the things I've learned from the Christian Mystics about Christ is that they say that we can know "about" Christ, which is the general way of most Christians. But they say that we can also "know" Christ, which is the way of the Mystic.
I have done extensive research into religions and spirituality which would cover mysticism.
I have read the 'Cloud of the Unknowing'
The Cloud of Unknowing - Wikipedia
other related books [William Johnston, Bedde Griffiths, others] and various Christian Mystics plus mystics from all religions and spirituality.

All their experiences are reducible to neuro-psychology, various neurosciences, philosophy, etc.

I don't know why, but for some reason that I'm not understanding, mysticism is barely understood in the Protestant world.
I believe the mystics [positive ones] are the equivalent to the PhDs of religions and spirituality. I believe in the future, the various neurosciences will understand what is going on in their brain and replicate how it is done to the masses objectively in a fool proof manner. Then there will not be any mystery with mysticism.

For the Protestants, what they do is optimal to their state of being and circumstances.
 
Upvote 0

Jane_the_Bane

Gaia's godchild
Feb 11, 2004
19,359
3,426
✟168,333.00
Faith
Pagan
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Politics
UK-Greens
I'm very comfortable with the notion that mysticism happens entirely within my mindspace.
The mind is a vast, dark ocean, upon which our conscious awareness drifts like a small boat with a single lantern. We haven't even remotely started to understand the unconscious depths hiding beneath the surface, though we are keenly aware of its power. (The placebo effect, for example, speaks of a huge potential for healing.)
 
Upvote 0

dlamberth

Senior Contributor
Site Supporter
Oct 12, 2003
19,239
2,829
Oregon
✟730,329.00
Faith
Other Religion
Politics
US-Others
other related books [William Johnston, Bedde Griffiths, others] and various Christian Mystics plus mystics from all religions and spirituality.
I think your confusing the operation with the experience. There are many things that can trigger a mystical event. It may as you say be reduced to some sort of neurological phenomenon, which I'd argue is still dealing basically with Consciousness. Anything from catching the aweness of a rainbow, an automobile accident, to Love can trigger a mystical event.

William Johnston wrote about riding Love like an arrow to the Heart of God. That Love being Christ as a mystical experience. Others talk about placing their Consciousness into the Heart of Christ. Again, a mystical experience. What matters for the mystic is the event itself. gnossis might be a term used. But why would you add philosophy to the mix? Mystical experiences aren't philosophy. Mystical experiences are something a person does.

All their experiences are reducible to neuro-psychology, various neurosciences, philosophy, etc.
Yes, Consciousness is something a neurologist or other neurosciencist might be interested in exploring in the Mystic. And they may even be able to explain how in the brain it happens. But can they get into the Consciousness of a person that is actually having a mystical experience? That's where it happens. But why would you add philosophy to the mix? Mystical experiences aren't philosophy. Mystical experiences are something a person does.

Again, Reductionism misses what a mystical experience is to the person having the experience. It's like denying Love exist because some neurosciencest reduced it to some sort of neurological event. That misses the point entirely. The Poet is talking about Love.

I see things because of my eyes. Should I deny that I see because it's all really just a bunch of electrical impulses that are carried to my brain from the retinas'?

I believe the mystics [positive ones] are the equivalent to the PhDs of religions and spirituality. I believe in the future, the various neurosciences will understand what is going on in their brain and replicate how it is done to the masses objectively in a fool proof manner. Then there will not be any mystery with mysticism.
There really isn't any mystery with mysticism. Maybe a lot of miss-understanding is all.

For the Protestants, what they do is optimal to their state of being and circumstances.
That's true. Maybe you could explain that and why mysticism such taboo subject for Protestants.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zippy2006
Upvote 0

Joyousperson

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
May 1, 2019
619
102
48
Beijing
✟48,243.00
Country
China
Faith
Freethinker
Marital Status
Married
I think your confusing the operation with the experience. There are many things that can trigger a mystical event. It may as you say be reduced to some sort of neurological phenomenon, which I'd argue is still dealing basically with Consciousness. Anything from catching the aweness of a rainbow, an automobile accident, to Love can trigger a mystical event.

William Johnston wrote about riding Love like an arrow to the Heart of God. That Love being Christ as a mystical experience. Others talk about placing their Consciousness into the Heart of Christ. Again, a mystical experience. What matters for the mystic is the event itself. gnossis might be a term used. But why would you add philosophy to the mix? Mystical experiences aren't philosophy. Mystical experiences are something a person does.
Note the concept of Substance versus Forms.
The possible permutations of form will always be infinite and different from one another, but the substance or essence can be standardized and made universal.

What you are doing here is opening up the pandora box of the forms of consciousness to no end and blurring the concepts.

Yes, Consciousness is something a neurologist or other neurosciencist might be interested in exploring in the Mystic. And they may even be able to explain how in the brain it happens. But can they get into the Consciousness of a person that is actually having a mystical experience? That's where it happens. But why would you add philosophy to the mix? Mystical experiences aren't philosophy. Mystical experiences are something a person does.
As mentioned above re Substance versus Forms neuro-psychologists and others will have no problem dealing with all its form but they can be effective when they understand the universal patterns within the human brain.

On a crude basis, scientists are already able to deal with consciousness, i.e. switching it off with anaesthetic. Neuroscientists can get into more details in by understanding the mechanisms involved and refining the process by going deeper into the brain.
Note;
Human Connectome Project | Mapping the human brain connectivity
Are you familiar with this.
This The Human Connectome Project
will establish the pathway to enable neuroscientists a greater understanding of consciousness. Note the Hard Problem of Consciousness.

Why Philosophy?
The backbone of Philosophy is understanding the mechanics of gaining knowledge, 'wisdom' and optimality within constraints and thus whatever the processes of knowledge is involved, it must be overridden with wisdom. Philosophy utilize all tools available to humanity to guide humans to knowledge and wisdom. My forte is Philosophy-proper.


Again, Reductionism misses what a mystical experience is to the person having the experience. It's like denying Love exist because some neuroscientist reduced it to some sort of neurological event. That misses the point entirely. The Poet is talking about Love.
Reductionism is the gateway to deal with complexity of the forms which are infinite.
Everything that is experienced is within the human brain.
The average human brain has about 100 billion neurons.

Note humanity has already tracked the human genome which was once upon a time thought impossible.
With the brain, it is VERY complex but not impossible to trace all the 100 billion neurons within the human brain in the future given the current trend of the exponential expansion of knowledge and technology.

When humanity has made critical advances in the Human Connectome Project | Mapping the human brain connectivity
then scientists will be able to replicate whatever human experiences that are recorded. By then, it may not be optimal to yearn for those mystical experiences that you would crave for so desperately, since it can be easily repeated. This will then leave space for humans to deal with what is critical and optimal.

I see things because of my eyes. Should I deny that I see because it's all really just a bunch of electrical impulses that are carried to my brain from the retinas'?
Understanding all the necessary mechanisms and processes of the visual system will enable humans to see better, cure eye-diseases, prevent blindness, etc.

That's true. Maybe you could explain that and why mysticism such taboo subject for Protestants.
I am reasonably adept to explain but it is off topic and not interested into going into the details.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

cloudyday2

Generic Theist
Site Supporter
Jul 10, 2012
7,381
2,352
✟568,802.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
I'm very comfortable with the notion that mysticism happens entirely within my mindspace.
The mind is a vast, dark ocean, upon which our conscious awareness drifts like a small boat with a single lantern. We haven't even remotely started to understand the unconscious depths hiding beneath the surface, though we are keenly aware of its power. (The placebo effect, for example, speaks of a huge potential for healing.)
Yes, that is exactly the question that I have been wondering about lately.

First, there is the question of whether mystical experiences are actually in contact with something outside our material brains or just a state of mind that is qualitatively no different than a mood.

Second, there is the question of whether the mystic gains benefit from BELIEVING that he/she is actually contacting something external - regardless of what is really happening. If a mystic loses confidence that the experience is real contact with something beyond himself/herself then the experience becomes more like a drug trip. A person can get psychological insights into himself/herself through the mystical experience, but nothing can be learned that isn't already known inside the brain. The mystic is simply sifting and reorganizing data in his/her mental file cabinets rather than getting new data.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

dlamberth

Senior Contributor
Site Supporter
Oct 12, 2003
19,239
2,829
Oregon
✟730,329.00
Faith
Other Religion
Politics
US-Others
What you are doing here is opening up the pandora box of the forms of consciousness to no end and blurring the concepts.
Speaking only from the mystics perspective, from that perspective there are no ends of differing forms of consciousness. Bring on the Pandora Box. When Consciousness is reduced to a concept, the Human experiences goes away. We become nothing more than a bunch of Neurons and cells to be studied in the lab but which do not go into the actual Human experience, as it is experienced. Our Human senses, rather than being alive and vibrant with life and reciprocal perception become mental concepts to read about in a book and studied in a lab.

You may not know this, but diving into the Pandora Box is that place where the Mystic dwells. It's a welcomed place for the Mystic. One definition of mysticism that I've come across is that it's that point where two opposing dichotomies merge and become one. The rational mind will have a difficult time understanding that.

It's still appearing to me from all that you've written that you know about Mysticism by studying it from the outside. But that you really don't know Mysticism from the inside. That you haven't put yourself into the Consciousness of a Mystic to see what can be experienced from their perspective. I may be wrong in that, but it's sure appearing so.
 
Upvote 0

Jane_the_Bane

Gaia's godchild
Feb 11, 2004
19,359
3,426
✟168,333.00
Faith
Pagan
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
Politics
UK-Greens
Yes, that is exactly the question that I have been wondering about lately.

First, there is the question of whether mystical experiences are actually in contact with something outside our material brains or just a state of mind that is qualitatively no different than a mood.

Second, there is the question of whether the mystic gains benefit from BELIEVING that he/she is actually contacting something external - regardless of what is really happening. If a mystic loses confidence that the experience is real contact with something beyond himself/herself then the experience becomes more like a drug trip. A person can get psychological insights into himself/herself through the mystical experience, but nothing can be learned that isn't already known inside the brain. The mystic is simply sifting and reorganizing data in his/her mental file cabinets rather than getting new data.
As a post-structuralist and a post-humanist, I'd say the clear-cut dichotomy between "self" and "other" is as much of a (useful and necessary) illusion as the (actually harmful) idea that homo sapiens is somehow above and beyond the rest of biological life.
Culture and artifiality are not the antithesis of nature - they are as much a part of our species as an anthill is part of the ant colony.
Our unconscious is brimming with information that is completely unknown to us, so it is much more than just re-arranging.
 
Upvote 0

zippy2006

Dragonsworn
Nov 9, 2013
6,823
3,404
✟244,160.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
All their experiences are reducible to neuro-psychology, various neurosciences, philosophy, etc.

A materialistic paradigm is really no better at describing such religious experiences than a mystical paradigm, a psychological paradigm, a pharmacological paradigm, etc. It is simply false to claim that ASC's are demonstrably reducible to, say, neuroscience. Singling out the neuroscience interpretation of religious experience is as credible as singling out the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Joyousperson

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
May 1, 2019
619
102
48
Beijing
✟48,243.00
Country
China
Faith
Freethinker
Marital Status
Married
Speaking only from the mystics perspective, from that perspective there are no ends of differing forms of consciousness. Bring on the Pandora Box. When Consciousness is reduced to a concept, the Human experiences goes away. We become nothing more than a bunch of Neurons and cells to be studied in the lab but which do not go into the actual Human experience, as it is experienced. Our Human senses, rather than being alive and vibrant with life and reciprocal perception become mental concepts to read about in a book and studied in a lab.
I believe in both reductionalism and holism and they are imperatively complimentary, i.e. one will not be effective without the other, Yin - Yang.

Therefore it is critical to understand 'consciousness' in both its reduced parts and how it works within a framework and system that is interdependent with other systems.

As such, we are dealing both with theory and the practical in the perspective its contribution to the progress and evolution of the well being of humanity.

You may not know this, but diving into the Pandora Box is that place where the Mystic dwells. It's a welcomed place for the Mystic. One definition of mysticism that I've come across is that it's that point where two opposing dichotomies merge and become one. The rational mind will have a difficult time understanding that.
As mentioned I believed in 'Unity within Diversity' in the net positive contribution to the well being of humanity.
So it not just two opposing dichotomies but the whole gamut of same and different forces coming together with mutual interests as a team within framework and systems, i.e. Team-Humanity.

At present the mystics are an elitist group of people and many prefer to be ascetics. This is very personal and selfish, so in what way can they contribute to the majority of people.

Thus the only effective way is for researchers and dig into the mechanics and processes of the mind of the mystics to explore ways that can be easily replicated objectively for the masses to benefit.

It's still appearing to me from all that you've written that you know about Mysticism by studying it from the outside. But that you really don't know Mysticism from the inside. That you haven't put yourself into the Consciousness of a Mystic to see what can be experienced from their perspective. I may be wrong in that, but it's sure appearing so.
As mentioned I believe in theory and practice [most critical] thus I had done the necessary practices and have experienced what is to expected to be experienced of a mystic or spiritual person. Generally one will not be so absorb into the theory without the accompanying personal experiences to reinforce what is learned in theory.

Both my theory and practice is aimed with a vision at perpetual peace for the whole of humanity.
Note Kant's
Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch - Wikipedia
and my approach include the essential development of the human faculties and consciousness [brain wise] for the majority.

At present you seem to be interested in feeling mystical for your own personal interests and self?

Your interests in merely in the feelings [which is very subjective], i.e. experiencing the feelings without really understanding its essence, mechanics and processes.
The experiences of mysticism is very subjective and there is a possibility that one's experience could be due to some mental issue or even brain damage.

Note Jill Bolte Taylor's [a neuroscientist - anatomy] ASC or "mystical" experience which is one of the higher level of mysticism and spirituality.
Transcript of "My stroke of insight"

Some Buddhist experts equate that with the experiences of Nirvana.

However Jill Bolte experienced that from a serious stroke with severe damage to her brain.
That she is a neuro-anatomist, she understood that experience [envy by many] is has something to do with her brain damage from the stroke. Had she experienced that during the 1800s or prior, she could have resorted to be a mystic like St. Theresa of Avila or others.
Nevertheless the experience did make Jill Bolte [an objective scientist] a very spiritual [not religious] person.

So, that a person has experienced some sort of mystical experiences or Altered State of Consciousness does not mean s/he was a Chosen one. It is more likely to do with something happening in the brain via brain damage, mental illness, drugs, knock on the head, certain chemicals, etc.

Bottom line is, for all the talks of consciousness, how would your views contribute net-positively toward the well being of the majority of humanity?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Joyousperson

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
May 1, 2019
619
102
48
Beijing
✟48,243.00
Country
China
Faith
Freethinker
Marital Status
Married
A materialistic paradigm is really no better at describing such religious experiences than a mystical paradigm, a psychological paradigm, a pharmacological paradigm, etc. It is simply false to claim that ASC's are demonstrably reducible to, say, neuroscience. Singling out the neuroscience interpretation of religious experience is as credible as singling out the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics.
Note my post above.
I don't agree with Philosophical Materialism.

I am with both reductionalism and holism as complementary, and complementarity is the foundation of Quantum Mechanics.
Complementarity (physics) - Wikipedia
 
Upvote 0

dlamberth

Senior Contributor
Site Supporter
Oct 12, 2003
19,239
2,829
Oregon
✟730,329.00
Faith
Other Religion
Politics
US-Others
I believe in both reductionalism and holism and they are imperatively complimentary, i.e. one will not be effective without the other, Yin - Yang.
It seems to me that to more fully appreciate the holistic approach that actual experience of the mystic, from the mystics perspective would be very helpful towards that end. Otherwise your holistic approach is limited in scope. It's not complete.

And in watching your reductionist approach, which to me you have seemed pretty weighted in that direction, I've wondered if your reducing right past the Human experience to defend your point. Cause it sure looks that way to me. Which would make your Yin-Yang pretty out of balance.

Bottom line is, for all the talks of consciousness, how would your views contribute net-positively toward the well being of the majority of humanity?
Good question. Through Love, Compassion, Empathy and Service to those in need.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: zippy2006
Upvote 0

jacks

Er Victus
Site Supporter
Jun 29, 2010
3,805
3,054
Northwest US
✟672,694.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
A liberal Christian might say those things are unnecessary features of Christianity. It isn't clear to me what liberal Christians consider to be essential features. Even the historicity of the bodily Resurrection probably isn't essential for liberal Christians.

That is what has made exiting Christianity so complicated for me. What is Christianity? Everybody has a different definition. It's like the old game "whack a mole". I whack the Nativity narratives, but some other version of Christianity pops up out of another hole in the ground.

Have to admit haven't read the whole thread. (Just enough to see "Holier than Thou" can morph to "Mysticer than Thou." :))

But to address this question in my most "liberal" moments I would say a Christian could boil down to The Great Commandment(s).

Mathew 22:36-40

“Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”

Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

In it's simplest form is merely, "Realize there is something beyond the physical and don't be a jerk." :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: cloudyday2
Upvote 0

Zoness

667, neighbor of the beast
Site Supporter
Jul 21, 2008
8,384
1,654
Illinois
✟468,399.00
Country
United States
Faith
Pagan
Marital Status
Married
As a post-structuralist and a post-humanist, I'd say the clear-cut dichotomy between "self" and "other" is as much of a (useful and necessary) illusion as the (actually harmful) idea that homo sapiens is somehow above and beyond the rest of biological life.
Culture and artifiality are not the antithesis of nature - they are as much a part of our species as an anthill is part of the ant colony.
Our unconscious is brimming with information that is completely unknown to us, so it is much more than just re-arranging.

This is interesting to me; as someone who identifies with secular humanist principles, I don't think of humanity as greater than non-humanity, I think we need to be part of a greater whole. I've explored a bit of the object-oriented ontology but only scratching the surface of a sort of deep ecology philosophy that emerges from it.

All of that said I very much agree with the idea that artificiality is just as much a part of nature as things that people colloquially think of as natural. I bump up against this idea a lot of pagan-adjacent communities where there is a small streak of primitivism or the suggestion that human creations are "unnatural" and by extension, bad. As far as I am concerned, nature is all that there is so its not good or bad, it simply is.

I think there's a tendency to think of naturalism as identical to reductionist materialism and then to stereotype that as a sort of strangely joyless idea where you can't have bliss, fun or deep experiences because it's all just chemicals, man. The fact is for me, spiritual activities are all probably a part of my mind but the human mind is so vast and unexplored that one can literally spend the rest of their lives probing its depths. People seem to have a reaction of "material = bad" but the older I get the less I agree. Nature is great, but it is also indifferent, powerful and all-encompassing. We might as well focus on being integrated with it for all of our collective survival. I know I'm getting pretty far away from the point but I wanted to acknowledge it since people get divided into "spiritual" and "material" camps too easily.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

cloudyday2

Generic Theist
Site Supporter
Jul 10, 2012
7,381
2,352
✟568,802.00
Country
United States
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Single
Note my post above.
I don't agree with Philosophical Materialism.

I am with both reductionalism and holism as complementary, and complementarity is the foundation of Quantum Mechanics.
Complementarity (physics) - Wikipedia

My take is that mystical experiences are "qualia". Probably there are degrees of mystical experiences, so a person could possibly imagine what some greater mystical experiences might be like by extrapolating from his/her own lesser mystical experiences, but the key word is EXPERIENCE. A person can't claim to understand mysticism without some personal experience of mysticism. I don't think a person can learn much about mysticism by reading a book anymore than a person can learn the difference between salty and sweet by reading a book - you need to taste something salty and taste something sweet.

I haven't been following the details of your discussion with @dlamberth , so maybe I just don't get it.
 
Upvote 0

dlamberth

Senior Contributor
Site Supporter
Oct 12, 2003
19,239
2,829
Oregon
✟730,329.00
Faith
Other Religion
Politics
US-Others
At present the mystics are an elitist group of people and many prefer to be ascetics. This is very personal and selfish, so in what way can they contribute to the majority of people.
So...you don't know anything about the mind of a Mystic. That's what I'm reading here.

Very few Mystics are ascetics. And if you understood mysticism, you would see that every Human Being has Mystic abilities. So it's hardly elitist at at all. You will often find those who are mystic minded are involved in community and tending those in need. That's in response to how the mind of a Mystic works. But you haven't explored any of that. So you don't know. And it sure makes we wonder where the "selfish" comment comes from.
 
Upvote 0

dlamberth

Senior Contributor
Site Supporter
Oct 12, 2003
19,239
2,829
Oregon
✟730,329.00
Faith
Other Religion
Politics
US-Others
I haven't been following the details of your discussion with @dlamberth , so maybe I just don't get it.
Hi Cloudy. I think you just don't understand. Which really isn't surprising as most don't understand. And with so much fear around the subject along with gross miss-understanding by so many, that's not surprising.

This mystical stuff isn't a big deal really. The reason being is that it's basic to the Human experience. So for example in it's simplest form the artist totally focused and is consumed in that moment of creating art. That, for the artist would be a mystical moment. Why? Because for a that creating moment the artist is taken out of their ego self into another world as they create. Or, for another example, that moment of "aweness" upon first sight of a Rainbow. Those moments are "experienced" inwardly. And that's the part that makes it a mystical moment. It's all about the "inner experience".
 
  • Informative
Reactions: cloudyday2
Upvote 0

Joyousperson

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
May 1, 2019
619
102
48
Beijing
✟48,243.00
Country
China
Faith
Freethinker
Marital Status
Married
It seems to me that to more fully appreciate the holistic approach that actual experience of the mystic, from the mystics perspective would be very helpful towards that end. Otherwise your holistic approach is limited in scope. It's not complete.

And in watching your reductionist approach, which to me you have seemed pretty weighted in that direction, I've wondered if your reducing right past the Human experience to defend your point. Cause it sure looks that way to me. Which would make your Yin-Yang pretty out of balance.
You prefer to under-estimate me.

The default is ensure the Yin-Yang elements are balanced, plus all other opposing forces are in the optimal balance towards the holistic perpetual peace.
To do this we incorporate the iterative control feedback mechanism within a system toward continual improvements.
Control Systems/Feedback Loops - Wikibooks, open books for an open world

Simple_feedback_control_loop.png


Good question. Through Love, Compassion, Empathy and Service to those in need.
How are you to start or implement any of the above if you do not have a thorough understanding to the internal elements, the mechanics and processes within the relevant system?

My proposals will include increasing all the relevant average Quotients of all humans in the future to achieve the intended goals, i.e.

If the current average IQ of humanity is 90, then we will need to increase it to 180.
Thus the following current average Quotients will have to be increased by various number of folds, i.e.

  • Moral and Ethics Quotient 5x
  • Wisdom Quotient 3x
  • Spiritual Quotient 3x
  • Mystic Quotient 3x
  • Philosophical 5x
  • Rationality 5x
  • Science 5x
  • Love 5x
  • Empathy and compassion 5x
  • Other relevant Quotients ?x
The above quotients can only be increased by training via changes in the connectivity of neurons in the brain. This increase will be gradual and the expected results may only in achieved within the next 75, 100, 150 years or more if necessary.

See, it cannot be only talk, but you have to present realistic practical actions to achieve the various necessary goals to achieve [holistically] the vision and mission of perpetual peace and progress.

Whatever the actions taken it has to be voluntary [not forced nor dictated] and are fool proof.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Joyousperson

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
May 1, 2019
619
102
48
Beijing
✟48,243.00
Country
China
Faith
Freethinker
Marital Status
Married
So...you don't know anything about the mind of a Mystic. That's what I'm reading here.

Very few Mystics are ascetics. And if you understood mysticism, you would see that every Human Being has Mystic abilities. So it's hardly elitist at at all. You will often find those who are mystic minded are involved in community and tending those in need. That's in response to how the mind of a Mystic works. But you haven't explored any of that. So you don't know. And it sure makes we wonder where the "selfish" comment comes from.
True, DNA wise, ALL human beings has the potential to be a mystic.
But that mystic potential is not activated in all. When activated it is in degrees.

Your definition of Mysticism and mystic is too loose.
Note the general definition;

Mysticism is the practice of religious ecstasies(religious experiences during alternate states of consciousness), together with whatever ideologies, ethics, rites, myths, legends, and magic may be related to them.[web 1] It may also refer to the attainment of insight in ultimate or hidden truths, and to human transformation supported by various practices and experiences.
Mysticism - Wikipedia

In term of the mind of mystic, the critical element and feature of mystics is the altered state of consciousness in its various forms.

Note the list of female mystics;
Mystics in General;

As from the above, the mystics are in general an elitist group. Many mystics are also ascetic or prefer to be loners.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0