Bad taste

Originally posted by scottishinnz
That could be the delusion talking.

But if he came to believe it was a delusion then how would he know if he wasn't deluding himself that he was deluded and thereby talking himself out of the truth? To say that we are capable of deluding ourselves is just a simple truism.

Originally posted by amannion
Yeah, I take your point.
I'm not so sure about the notion of a 'genuine experience' though. What is that? How do you know if you've had a genuine experience? It feels real and genuine to you - is that enough to call it genuine?
My understanding of recent brain experiments is that religious-like experiences can be indced through stimulation of particular r ...[text shortened]... n having them - but it's in the explanation for that experience that I differ from you.

Knowing God certainly produces "good feelings", we are emotional creatures after all, but they experience I'm talking about is spiritual.

Getting "saved" is primarily a spiritual experience. An awakening.

I could list "words" to describe it.

Originally posted by josephw
Knowing God certainly produces "good feelings", we are emotional creatures after all, but they experience I'm talking about is spiritual.

Getting "saved" is primarily a spiritual experience. An awakening.

I could list "words" to describe it.

Yes, but what is a spiritual experience? All of the essence of our feelings and experiences are located in our brain. When we have that sense of connection with something more, or something bigger than ourselves, this is no different - that is, an experience started somewhere in our brain.
For me, a spiritual experience is simply that - the operation of my brain on certain regions of nerves. That doesn't lessen the experience - simply gives me a different vocabulary to describe the nature of it.
I still feel impressed and full of wonder and joy and everything else. But I call it something other than 'god'.

Originally posted by amannion
Yes, but what is a spiritual experience? All of the essence of our feelings and experiences are located in our brain. When we have that sense of connection with something more, or something bigger than ourselves, this is no different - that is, an experience started somewhere in our brain.
For me, a spiritual experience is simply that - the operation of my ...[text shortened]... sed and full of wonder and joy and everything else. But I call it something other than 'god'.

This is tough. I have been sitting here for ten minutes trying to figure out how to respond to this post. I know what I want to say, but how to say it escapes me.

I'll try this. We don't think with our brains. Thoughts are spiritual. Thinking is a function of the spirit. What do you think of that amannion?

Originally posted by josephw
This is tough. I have been sitting here for ten minutes trying to figure out how to respond to this post. I know what I want to say, but how to say it escapes me.

I'll try this. We don't think with our brains. Thoughts are spiritual. Thinking is a function of the spirit. What do you think of that amannion?

Not much - sorry to be blunt.
I don't believe that there is anything separate from our brains such as a spirit or a soul. For me, everything is tied up with our brain and how it operates in conjunction physically with the rest of our body and the world around us.
That's probably not going to connect with your view - which I'm guessing will posit some sort of soul existing separate from the brain/mind.
We might well be at an impasse there ...

Originally posted by josephw
This is tough. I have been sitting here for ten minutes trying to figure out how to respond to this post. I know what I want to say, but how to say it escapes me.

I'll try this. We don't think with our brains. Thoughts are spiritual. Thinking is a function of the spirit. What do you think of that amannion?

I think you'd run into trouble trying to sell that to a (good) scientist. What evidence do you have that this "soul" exists, and that it isn't an emergent property of a complex system? What is a soul comprised of? How does it work? Where does it reside?

It just reminds me too much of the "universal ether" or mesmerism.

Originally posted by amannion
Not much - sorry to be blunt.
I don't believe that there is anything separate from our brains such as a spirit or a soul. For me, everything is tied up with our brain and how it operates in conjunction physically with the rest of our body and the world around us.
That's probably not going to connect with your view - which I'm guessing will posit some sort of soul existing separate from the brain/mind.
We might well be at an impasse there ...

Blunt is best.

It was the spiritual experience question in a previous post I was trying to answer. The bible desribes the spiritual experience as a regeneration or an awakening of the spirit to God. Without it one is spiritualy dead to God. But I suppose you know this already.

When I read Romans 1:19-21 it bewilders me why intelligent people deny the existance of God! I say this without animosity.

Originally posted by scottishinnz
I think you'd run into trouble trying to sell that to a (good) scientist. What evidence do you have that this "soul" exists, and that it isn't an emergent property of a complex system? What is a soul comprised of? How does it work? Where does it reside?

It just reminds me too much of the "universal ether" or mesmerism.

There are good scientist that believe in God and all.

The soul is what is left after the body dies.

Evidence. What evidence? Man that is a good question! It seems that all I got are words, but so far I haven't found the ones that work. As soon as I do I'll let you know. No sarcasm intended.

Originally posted by josephw
This is tough. I have been sitting here for ten minutes trying to figure out how to respond to this post. I know what I want to say, but how to say it escapes me.

I'll try this. We don't think with our brains. Thoughts are spiritual. Thinking is a function of the spirit. What do you think of that amannion?

I think it rather difficult to assess at times what is spiritual and what is otherwise. After all, we are a triune being and everything is interconnected. Also, you are attempting to describe aspects of your existence that is scientifically intangible.

The best I can describe the change in me after I became saved is that a "6th sense" was awakened if you will. I began to crave things that related to building my spiritual man and less in regards to my physical man. Reading the Bible was less a chore and more of a pleasure as it began to make more and more sesne to me. It was almost as if it was communicating directly with my awakened spiritual man after I became saved. I also became more at peace with myself and others could see a change in me as well so I know it was not all in my head. I have also witnessed similar changes in others who have become saved. What can I say, you see the manifestations of a "change" yet there are no other tangible changes you can put your finger on.

Originally posted by whodey
I think it rather difficult to assess at times what is spiritual and what is otherwise. After all, we are a triune being and everything is interconnected. Also, you are attempting to describe aspects of your existence that is scientifically intangible.

The best I can describe the change in me after I became saved is that a "6th sense" was awakened if you ...[text shortened]... festations of a "change" yet there are no other tangible changes you can put your finger on.

Everything you've described could be explained without reference to an external god, or to the actual existence of a soul.

When we become entangled in events, we humans like to explain them - so as to mediate the experience and understand them. Without explanation we become fearful.
Explanations can take many forms and often we'll choose thsoe explanations that fit with our worldview, that match our cultural and historical backgrounds, that make sense to us.
I've no doubt of the tangibility and reality of the experiences you had in being 'born again'.
You attribute these experiences to a god, and to the existence of some sort of soul. That explanation makes sense to you.
I would not. I have no doubt that I've had similar experiences to those you have had - spiritual experiences, senses of something other than myself, and so on - these are common to all of us, to one degree or another.
I explain these without reference to external gods or superantural beings or souls.

For me, this is the key difference between your viewpoint and mine.
I'm never going to change your viewpoint - nor would I attempt to. Likewise, you'll never change my perspective.
These views we differ on are hard fought and solidly built.

Originally posted by josephw
Blunt is best.

It was the spiritual experience question in a previous post I was trying to answer. The bible desribes the spiritual experience as a regeneration or an awakening of the spirit to God. Without it one is spiritualy dead to God. But I suppose you know this already.

When I read Romans 1:19-21 it bewilders me why intelligent people deny the existance of God! I say this without animosity.

I have the same thought for religious people - not of course, from a reading of Romans, but rather from a reading of the natural world around us.
I can't believe that there are many humans - yourself included - for whom the existence of a god is not only normal, but a requirement of your life.

But then there's the old saying - 'it takes all sorts' ...

Originally posted by amannion
Everything you've described could be explained without reference to an external god, or to the actual existence of a soul.

When we become entangled in events, we humans like to explain them - so as to mediate the experience and understand them. Without explanation we become fearful.
Explanations can take many forms and often we'll choose thsoe explanati ...[text shortened]... ever change my perspective.
These views we differ on are hard fought and solidly built.

I think there is some truth in what you say. Then again, there are those who have been hardened atheists in the past and then become theists and vice versa.

I think the biggest lesson from all of this is just how important it is in terms of what you believe. What you believe will determain how you process information. You process it one way and I process it another even though it is the same information.

Originally posted by josephw
There are good scientist that believe in God and all.

The soul is what is left after the body dies.

Evidence. What evidence? Man that is a good question! It seems that all I got are words, but so far I haven't found the ones that work. As soon as I do I'll let you know. No sarcasm intended.

I'm sure there are people who have discovered great things in science and believe in God, yet I would say that as long as they do not apply the scientific method to their own beliefs and to all aspects of their lives, I would have trouble classifying them as a great scientist.

I know that you'll come back with a "don't you consider Newton or Einstein great scientists then?" or similar. However, I would rebut both these points. Newton lived in a time when things like alchemy were still considered to be facts, and the scientific method wasn't yet well developed.

Einstein didn't believe in a personal God either. His God was really just the universe in disguise.

Originally posted by whodey
I think there is some truth in what you say. Then again, there are those who have been hardened atheists in the past and then become theists and vice versa.

I think the biggest lesson from all of this is just how important it is in terms of what you believe. What you believe will determain how you process information. You process it one way and I process it another even though it is the same information.

Yep, and of course, there are many religious people who become atheists. That's always going to happen.
I really think, deep down, we pretty much know what we are.
For example, I went to church and did all the usual church stuff up until my teenage years. At this point I began finding out about alternative religions and finally moved to my current position.
But if I was honest, I couldn't ever say that I was a true believer. I think I've always been an atheist - I just didn't have the language to describe my position, nor the desire to do so, until I'd matured somewhat.

Originally posted by scottishinnz
I'm sure there are people who have discovered great things in science and believe in God, yet I would say that as long as they do not apply the scientific method to their own beliefs and to all aspects of their lives, I would have trouble classifying them as a great scientist.

I know that you'll come back with a "don't you consider Newton or Einste ...[text shortened]... dn't believe in a personal God either. His God was really just the universe in disguise.

I think you forget how easy it is to quarantine aspects of our lives from others. It's so easy for anyone to hold contradictory views and not really question the nature of those contradictions.
Scientists are not some sort of superhumans (yourself included) - they are just people like everyone else, who eat and sleep and love and worry and laugh and drink and ... so on.