True Believers

[Davian]

Spirituality is not the realm of materially verifiable objective evidence.

How do you know then that "spirituality" is not that which has simply been imagined?

 

[Colter]

How do you know then that "spirituality" is not that which has simply been imagined?

The spirit is like love, its more than mere imagination.

 

[Eudaimonist]

I don't know why your love experience was not enough for you to realize that mind is not entirely material, electrochemical, that the chemical releases represent activity around a spirit nucleus but you do seem determined to rationalize or dumb everything down to material explanations.

I don't rationalize down. I reason up.

I simply had, and still have, no reason to think that mind is anything more than an emergent natural phenomenon. I'm not a reductive materialist, and so I wouldn't call the mind "material", per se. It is better thought of as an activity or aspect of something material. This activity does not take place around a spirit nucleus. It is the spirit nucleus. I take an emergentist and dual-aspect approach to mind-body relation, which is hardly "dumbing down" anything.

If you want to "dumb down" the issue, just call mind "spirit" and leave it at that.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Archaeopteryx]

If what you say is true then it applies equally to you and your unbelief. If we are imagining things then what we have is much better than what you have to offer. Notice, it wasn't the atheist society that brought hope to the hopeless. No, its much easier to sit on your [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] and critique the world.

I disagree. Scientific explanations are often far more elegant than religious ones. They are also useful, in that those explanations often empower us to make meaningful changes, thus providing hope that we can better our situation and limit undesirable consequences. The suggestion that religion provides hope to some people may indeed be true, but that's not to say that there aren't better ways of cultivating hope.

 

[Davian]

The spirit is like love, its more than mere imagination.

I asked, how do you know that "spirituality" is not that which has simply been imagined?

 

[quatona]

It was alcohol and cocaine that I was addicted to.

Ok.

Our experience can benefit others but beyond that you don't need to do anything with it.

Yeah, that´s why I didn´t ask what I need to do with it.
I asked what you expect the effect to be, or better: What you, realistically, hope for.

On a more general note, I am not so sure that our experiences can benefit others, or at least I suspect that this option is overrated. Particularly when the reported experiences are diametrically opposite to the experiences of the receiver of the message.
I can relate to someone else´s subjective reality only insofar as there are communlalities with my subjective reality - i.e. if I can incorporate your experiences into my subjective reality. Your subjective reality won´t radically change mine. No way.
But actually and most of the time the problem is not the experience itself that we can´t relate to - it´s the interpretation and subjective framework that´s not transferrable.

There are a lot of components in your story that make a lot of sense in my reality and that match my experiences: E.g.: If you have mental problems a new outlook on life, a new meaning, a new belief, a new inspiration, a new purpose and intensity will help overcoming them.
That´s how far your experience matches mine.
Your interpretation, however, that this was God´s making doesn´t resonate with me. And, to be honest, I don´t think you can realistically hope for that.
(Granted, if I were a hopeless booze and drug addict there might be chances for you to convince me to give your cure a try - or anybody else´s for that matter who has found a new intensity in life in times of desperation, no matter what they ascribe it to)

 

[PsychoSarah]

Another good question, I think everyone who seeks finds eventually. Some people who have the gift seem to refund it, they don't want to continue on. That's what makes us alive, free will beings.

My concepts of the afterlife are different from tradition heaven going theories.

I can say that the offer of salvation and ultimate judgment is so fair that the final decree of personality destruction is not carried out until the subject themselves agrees with the fairness of the proceedings.


In my religious understanding, Lucifer, Satan, the "prince of this world" as well as millions of other celestials that fell into sin and rebellion were offered salvation. NONE of the leaders took it and only about half the celestials of various orders repented and chose salvation. My brain just cant comprehend how sin and stubborn pride could warp a bright personality into such suicide but it happens.

This all fails in light of the fact that inevitably there were some people who never heard of even the concept of the deity that you worship. Thus, they would have never thought to seek such a being out.

 

[Colter]

I don't rationalize down. I reason up.

I simply had, and still have, no reason to think that mind is anything more than an emergent natural phenomenon. I'm not a reductive materialist, and so I wouldn't call the mind "material", per se. It is better thought of as an activity or aspect of something material. This activity does not take place around a spirit nucleus. It is the spirit nucleus. I take an emergentist and dual-aspect approach to mind-body relation, which is hardly "dumbing down" anything.

If you want to "dumb down" the issue, just call mind "spirit" and leave it at that.


eudaimonia,



Mark

I didn't say mind is spirit, I said material mind has a spirit nucleus, it can be responsive to spirit. You seemed to indicate mind is both.

 

[Colter]

I asked, how do you know that "spirituality" is not that which has simply been imagined?

I don't have an answer that will satisfy the prosecutorial spirit of your question. If it ever happens to you then and there you will know and still be just as unable to answer the probing of a skeptic.

 

[bhsmte]

I don't have an answer that will satisfy the prosecutorial spirit of your question. If it ever happens to you then and there you will know and still be just as unable to answer the probing of a skeptic.

If it ever happens to him, it could be his imagination at work.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

.......
This is what Paul meant in Romans 1 when he said:
All people believe in God's existence. Indeed it's impossible to live without this belief. It's necessary to function in day to day life.
Isn't it true that your main beef with God is that you don't like him?.....

did paul say that? i don't think so, but am not sure right now (very tired after long time at work).

i think , on the 'main beef' with G-D, it is written in Scripture somewhere that people are real happy and accepting of the company of ecclesia
until
the people find out the the Living Creator that the ecclesia live for and serve
requires a very radical life change (from carnality/worldliness/ the flesh/ selfishness)
.... then they(the people who like the ecclesia up until then)
turn and gnash their teeth and get really really mad

(or repent and begin at once the total life change anew by Yhvh's Grace and as Yhvh accomplishes this)....

 

[Davian]

I don't have an answer that will satisfy the prosecutorial spirit of your question.

Then why are you so defensive when it is pointed out that "spirituality", from everything you are able to tell me, simply appears to be a placeholder for things claimed to be real but seem imaginary? Do you think it is fair to be antagonistic to myself and others, when you admit that you have nothing to delineate your experience from the imaginary?

If it ever happens to you then and there you will know and still be just as unable to answer the probing of a skeptic.

Curiously enough, I have had an experience much like you describe, here.

It was very real at the time, but ultimately it was that the inconsistency with reality that raised doubts, and then disbelief.

I admit my experience would not have much value to the skeptic, other than as an interesting example of the ability of the human brain for self-deception.

 

[Davian]

If it ever happens to him, it could be his imagination at work.

Indeed. Or it was mind-controlling elves. Pesky critters.

 

[Colter]

This all fails in light of the fact that inevitably there were some people who never heard of even the concept of the deity that you worship. Thus, they would have never thought to seek such a being out.

From the day that evolutionary man first became conscious of will God became responsive to the faintest flicker of faith.

 

[Colter]

If it ever happens to him, it could be his imagination at work.

He will know that it's not his imagination.

 

[bhsmte]

He will know that it's not his imagination.

How?

 

[Davian]

He will know that it's not his imagination.

That very much describes the experience that I linked to in post #72.

 

[Colter]

Then why are you so defensive when it is pointed out that "spirituality", from everything you are able to tell me, simply appears to be a placeholder for things claimed to be real but seem imaginary? Do you think it is fair to be antagonistic to myself and others, when you admit that you have nothing to delineate your experience from the imaginary?


Curiously enough, I have had an experience much like you describe, here.

It was very real at the time, but ultimately it was that the inconsistency with reality that raised doubts, and then disbelief.

I admit my experience would not have much value to the skeptic, other than as an interesting example of the ability of the human brain for self-deception.

They don't seem imaginary to me at all, that's an accusation that you came up with, an explanation that seems real to you because you have the need to rationalize away the experience of others rather then just take them on face value.

 

[Davian]

He will know that it's not his imagination.

How?

Let me guess: it seems real.

Let's see if I am right.

 

[bhsmte]

They don't seem imaginary to me at all, that's an accusation that you came up with, an explanation that seems real to you because you have the need to rationalize away the experience of others rather then just take them on face value.

I don't believe anyone doubts your experiences appear very real to yourself. The point being made is, the mind is capable of creating very real experiences, that are self generated. Of course, you have no objective verification for your experiences, so I can see why you want to claim they are not self generated.

Have you ever heard of the people who have claimed to have been abducted by aliens, taken aboard a space craft and probed with medical devices and then returned home? There have actually been quite a few of these experiences documented and those that have them, have passed lie detector tests and have recollected them under hypnosis.

Do you think these people were really probed with medical devices by aliens, or would you think these experiences were self generated?