"The confusion about the experience of the certainty of God arises out of the dissimilar interpretations and relations of that experience by separate individuals and by different races of men. The experiencing of God may be wholly valid, but the discourse about God, being intellectual and philosophical, is divergent and oftentimes confusingly fallacious.
A good and noble man may be consummately in love with his wife but utterly unable to pass a satisfactory written examination on the psychology of marital love. Another man, having little or no love for his spouse, might pass such an examination most acceptably. The imperfection of the lovers insight into the true nature of the beloved does not in the least invalidate either the reality or sincerity of his love."UB
A good and noble man may be consummately in love with his wife but utterly unable to pass a satisfactory written examination on the psychology of marital love. Another man, having little or no love for his spouse, might pass such an examination most acceptably. The imperfection of the lovers insight into the true nature of the beloved does not in the least invalidate either the reality or sincerity of his love."UB
Having talked with and debated many Atheist and former Atheist over the years, it occurred to me that one of the unanticipated dilemmas for the believer is one, the spiritual experience or rebirth is not the culmination of following a path of logic that can be retraced, and two, we aren't even equipped with words to describe an experience which passes all understanding. So it's very easy to get all tangled up in the worldly weeds of intellectualism when presented with what I call "the doctrines of doubt".