Can we really commnunicate directly with Christ?

[bhsmte]

I don't have an answer for you but I agree with the poster that stated that "you will know." I know it was not psychological.

I am curious, how do you know it was not psychological?

 

[john mcmillan76]

I was a very happy atheist until I got a "word" (well, several really) and then I just knew.

but what if "I just knew" that someone was possessed by a demon? It's not a good enough answer. I can't go around accusing folk of being possessed because "I just know". There are people who do that and in Britain some kids were murdered because the witch-doctor "just knew" that they were possessed by demons. Claiming that you, "just know" something is very dangerous and narrow. Remember women who were accused of being "witches" were murdered by the witch-finders who "just knew" that these women were in league with the devil.
Not good. Not good at all.

We can't "just know" anything. Centuries ago we all, "just knew" that the Earth was the centre of the universe and that the Sun revolved around us, rising in the east and setting in the west. That was an experience that we, "just knew" but with the use of telescopes and reasoning out the evidence we now know different.

 

[john mcmillan76]

How does his death 2000 years make it less likely for Him to communicate with us? Don't you know/believe that He also rose again from the dead at the third day?

Frankly I don't as I wasn't there and no one recorded it in official history books.

 

[bhsmte]

but what if "I just knew" that someone was possessed by a demon? It's not a good enough answer. I can't go around accusing folk of being possessed because "I just know". There are people who do that and in Britain some kids were murdered because the witch-doctor "just knew" that they were possessed by demons.

We can't "just know" anything. Centuries ago we all, "just knew" that the Earth was the centre of the universe and that the Sun revolved around us, rising in the east and setting in the west. That was an experience that we, "just knew" but with the use of telescopes and reasoning out the evidence we now know different.

Someone claiming; "they just know" without objective evidence to support the same, is a personal phenomenon.

The person who makes this claim, may be correct or they could very well be way off base, but the basis of the claim is generated internally and a basic review of how our minds work, can obviously bring significant question to these claims.

With that said, I would never begrudge someone who claims; "they just know" that a God exists, as long they don't claim others who disagree with them, simply haven't tried hard enough to listen or to accept God, because they are in no position to make that judgment. Also, if the believer does not claim their personal perceptions should automatically apply to all others, as well.

 

[BL2KTN]

I'm with John on this one. "I just know" is dangerous when the belief is other than benign. "I just know" doesn't cut it when it means people who don't "just know" are going to be set on fire. Substantial claims require substantial evidence.

 

[Hentenza]

Well, I see the changing of one's mind when new information is learned, a sign of strength, not weakness.

As do I.

I could be wrong and admitting the same is also a sign of a healthy mind IMO. When I ask many Christians, if they could ever be wrong about their belief, they will say absolutely not, they know 100% that they are correct. Now, I understand the psychology behind the need to claim a faith belief is 100% certain and it is common place.

My certainty about my faith has nothing to do with having a psychological "need." In fact, I was certain (but not 100%) that my atheism was correct, consequently I had no psychological reason whatsoever to seek or claim a faith belief. Heck, I was real happy reading my Tom Clancy techno-thrillers rather than dry, humorless theological treatises.

 

[bhsmte]

As do I.



My certainty about my faith has nothing to do with having a psychological "need." In fact, I was certain (but not 100%) that my atheism was correct, consequently I had no psychological reason whatsoever to seek or claim a faith belief. Heck, I was real happy reading my Tom Clancy techno-thrillers rather than dry, humorless theological treatises.

The logical next question would be:

How do you know the certainty of your belief is not psychologically driven? Do you think a mind is capable of convincing oneself, that a belief in a God has nothing to do with psychological needs?

Again, I am not saying a psychological need to believe in a God is not healthy, because in some, it can be very healthy.

 

[Hentenza]

but what if "I just knew" that someone was possessed by a demon?

Sorry but this is not the same claim and "just knowing" when God has "communicated" with me is a completely different context than that of pretending to know if someone has a demon.

It's not a good enough answer.

In the context of demon possession, I agree with you.

I can't go around accusing folk of being possessed because "I just know". <snip>

You should not, although there are people that do.

 

[bhsmte]

Sorry but this is not the same claim and "just knowing" when God has "communicated" with me is a completely different context than that of pretending to know if someone has a demon.

In the context of demon possession, I agree with you.


You should not, although there are people that do.

What if someone claims that a God communicated to them that another person was possessed by demons? It's still a person claiming they have communicated with a God, right?

I agree, the answer "I just know" is not good enough, but would expand that to all claims, without objective evidence. That answer may be good enough for the person making the claim, but why should it be good enough for others, who have not experienced the same personal perceptions?

 

[Hentenza]

The logical next question would be:

How do you know the certainty of your belief is not psychologically driven?

I do know. I don't have a answer that will placate you.

Do you think a mind is capable of convincing oneself, that a belief in a God has nothing to do with psychological needs?

While an atheist, I had absolutely no reason to convince myself about anything regarding God. No critical event happened in my life nor was I looking for "fill" an emptiness. I was pretty happy and had my Sunday mornings free to do as I pleased.

 

[BL2KTN]

Sorry but this is not the same claim and "just knowing" when God has "communicated" with me is a completely different context than that of pretending to know if someone has a demon.

But God didn't just "communicate" to you, he/she/it "communicated" something to you. And that something has led you to a belief system in which those who don't agree with you are set on fire for a trillion years.

By the way, I really do find it less than impressive that you refuse to say what was communicated to you and how. It's like a scientist saying they've invented cold fusion while refusing to say in what way. There are other Christians on this site who do similar things: Heissonear claims he saw a child's appendage grow, but he refuses to give us any readily available evidence. Such evidence would cause every non-believer here to seriously re-think their stance.

Yahweh seems to like to talk to people while also saying, "Shhh, don't tell!"

 

[NannaNae]

everything can be bigger than a man's belief , except the man.

 

[Hentenza]

What if someone claims that a God communicated to them that another person was possessed by demons? It's still a person claiming they have communicated with a God, right?

There is mental illness out there also. Many murders have been committed by those claiming that a god instructed them to kill. I am explaining MY experience which might or might not apply to anyone else.

 

[bhsmte]

I do know. I don't have a answer that will placate you.



While an atheist, I had absolutely no reason to convince myself about anything regarding God. No critical event happened in my life nor was I looking for "fill" an emptiness. I was pretty happy and had my Sunday mornings free to do as I pleased.

Fair enough.

 

[bhsmte]

There is mental illness out there also. Many murders have been committed by those claiming that a god instructed them to kill. I am explaining MY experience which might or might not apply to anyone else.

I agree.

The key point to me is; no matter how powerful a personal experience is to an individual, does not mean that it automatically applies to others, or that other people are missing the boat, if they don't seek the same personal experiences.

 

[Hentenza]

But God didn't just "communicate" to you, he/she/it "communicated" something to you.

Sure.

And that something has led you to a belief system in which those who don't agree with you are set on fire for a trillion years.

lol I don't have to justify my belief to you. You are welcomed to your opinion.

By the way, I really do find it less than impressive that you refuse to say what was communicated to you and how.

Because it is hard to explain. I think you are assuming that communication equals words but that is not necessarily true. What I do know is that I went from a very comfortable atheism to a follower of Christ in a matter few months.

It's like a scientist saying they've invented cold fusion while refusing to say in what way. <snip>

I am not trying to prove cold fusion nor am I going to write an academic paper about my experience. Also, I am, in no way, trying to convert anyone here. You need to "own" the knowledge in order to believe it and act on it.

 

[Hentenza]

I agree.

The key point to me is; no matter how powerful a personal experience is to an individual, does not mean that it automatically applies to others, or that other people are missing the boat, if they don't seek the same personal experiences.

That's the thing. I did not "seek" my experience which is why I am only advising you to keep your ears open. Also, as I said in my post just before this one to another poster, you have to "own" the knowledge in order to believe it and act on it. BTW- This applies to many kinds of knowledge not just religious.

 

[john mcmillan76]

Sorry but this is not the same claim and "just knowing" when God has "communicated" with me is a completely different context than that of pretending to know if someone has a demon.

.

It actually isn't because they are both non-verifiable unseen personalized ,subjective experience. No one, including the person experiencing these thoughts can prove what happened. Experiencing communication with Christ is just like any other thought. What we need to do , as I pointed out earlier with my example about the Sun appearing to go around the earth, is use Reason after the event. Can you see that? We experience first and then we need to apply reason after the experience to formulate a conclusion of what actually happened.

Now there is now way anyone can prove that Jesus does communicate to folk. It's guess work. It's faith. Call it what you want.

 

[bhsmte]

Sure.



lol I don't have to justify my belief to you. You are welcomed to your opinion.



Because it is hard to explain. I think you are assuming that communication equals words but that is not necessarily true. What I do know is that I went from a very comfortable atheism to a follower of Christ in a matter few months.



I am not trying to prove cold fusion nor am I going to write an academic paper about my experience. Also, I am, in no way, trying to convert anyone here. You need to "own" the knowledge in order to believe it and act on it.

Here is the only issue I have with your position:

I take no issue with your personal belief and will acknowledge, you could be right about your personal perceptions.

With that said, when I stated I had the opposite experience as you (going from long time Christian to a non-believer) your response was, keep your ears open, you may change again. To me, that tells me you feel your personal experiences should also apply to me at some point in time and I was possibly missing something. I on the other hand, never inferred the same about you and acknowledged, that if your belief works for you, then hold onto it.

You see, this is one of the main issues I have with some Christians, if there personal experience is not accepted by others, it is inferred that the other party just isn't paying attention. Now, I understand why many Christians employ this tactic, but that is a completely different discussion.

Hope that makes sense.

 

[bhsmte]

That's the thing. I did not "seek" my experience which is why I am only advising you to keep your ears open. Also, as I said in my post just before this one to another poster, you have to "own" the knowledge in order to believe it and act on it. BTW- This applies to many kinds of knowledge not just religious.

Ok, but here is the issue, personal psychology is so complex, we can't ascertain objectively whether we are consciously seeking something or not.

Again, I have heard this same thing from other Christians (I did not seek the experience) and that's fine, but the experience is still personal and there is no getting around that.