Originally posted by vistesd
My points, in brief (since you seem not to have read very carefully, and want brevity) are:
1. Experiences cannot be taken as self-validating of their own content without reasoned, objective examination.
2. Experiences whose content and effect are beautiful and/or powerfully evocative can (note that I didn't say anything like "necessarily do" ) seduc could not possibly take anything that I wrote as reflecting on that particular experience.
My points, in brief (since you seem not to have read very carefully, and want brevity) are:
Guilty as charged. I honed in, here and there, skimmed over other parts.
1. Experiences cannot be taken as self-validating of their own content without reasoned, objective examination.
I like you vistesd. You're so obviously smarter than me that I feel I can relax around you. No need to compete at all.
Now is this statement above (#1) your experience ?
2. Experiences whose content and effect are beautiful and/or powerfully evocative can (note that I didn't say anything like "necessarily do" ) seduce our assent to their content (e.g., with respect to a transcendant source) just as well as any other--and so must also be examined rationally.
Concerning my one communicated experience is there something you would like to examine rationally about it ?
I may not be able to help at all. But what would it be ?
3. "Bait and switch" refers to someone baiting you and then switching on you, not you switching anything. (Maybe you never heard the phrase before.)
I think you have more formal education than I.
Look, I'm feeling rather humble today. Better take advantage of it while it lasts.
4. I think I made it perfectly clear that the only reason I chose not to read your shared experience is so that you could not possibly take anything that I wrote as reflecting on that particular experience.
I do not well in digesting some of your posts. And when I do not I say to myself, "This is probably exactly how I read to a lot of other people."
I think my wife's testimony has something to do with God's foreknowledge. He knew what was going to happen.
Now this alone is fascinating in this instance to me for two reasons:
1.) She was not at all eager to find a husband.
2.) I didn't want anybody telling me who I should marry. I was very guarded about it and insisted on my choice. I had little regard to "match-makers."
Sometimes I would do the opposite of what some well meaning people suggested. So to my realization I really had my choice and mine alone.
So after being married for awhile when she gave me this testimony (that God had shown her who she was going to marry) I felt awed by the mysterious combination of my own freedom of will and choice and the foreknowledge of God.
This may have nothing to do with what you're interested in. But thanks for clarifying for me your post.
Sorry if my response was overly grumpy and defensive.