Food for thought for Christians

[ProfessorDavey]

Oh dear - and are you suggesting that your experience was totally undetermined by the dominant religion of the society in which you were brought up? If you could ever extricate your 'experience' from such societal/religious influences then one might give your particular 'revelation' a little more respect - if you were an indigenous tribeperson from the Amazon who had never encountered Christianity before - and only learned later to fit his experience with the written/spoken theology of the Christian tradition.
You learned the Christian tradition in some respects just like the rest of us in western civilisation, and are inextricably conditioned by many of its claims. Unless of course you led a remarkably sheltered life.

I would just add - since I am no stranger to such phenomena - that such things can seem so overwhelming that their veracity is not often questioned. Overwhelming mental experiences do not ipso facto indicate divine truth.

Indeed - and a question back to Vlad - so you have accepted that only some of your experiences are divinely inspired. So given that not all are therefore (even in your view) divinely inspired how do you work out which ones are and which ones aren't. And if some aren't (by your own admission) divinely inspired, how do you know that they all aren't.

Yet again Vlad's arguments and justifications are crumbling to dust before our very eyes, and this time he is the author of his own downfall.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Oh dear - and are you suggesting that your experience was totally undetermined by the dominant religion of the society in which you were brought up? If you could ever extricate your 'experience' from such societal/religious influences then one might give your particular 'revelation' a little more respect - if you were an indigenous tribeperson from the Amazon who had never encountered Christianity before - and only learned later to fit his experience with the written/spoken theology of the Christian tradition.
You learned the Christian tradition in some respects just like the rest of us in western civilisation, and are inextricably conditioned by many of its claims. Unless of course you led a remarkably sheltered life.

I would just add - since I am no stranger to such phenomena - that such things can seem so overwhelming that their veracity is not often questioned. Overwhelming mental experiences do not ipso facto indicate divine truth.

Not sure of your implied distinction between religions and other faith/life/cosmic positions based on say ontological materialism and /or humanism.

I believe there is a type who can dogmatically hold to propositions inflexibly and without doubt.
I am not of that type and so all of the cosmic/life positions get their chance to reassert themselves and yet have still managed to fail.

I'm afraid all you guys on here offer is a cosy if defensive agnosticism I left long ago coupled with an almost rabidly loony antitheism which my even cosy, defensive agnostic former self might have found quite strange. 

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Indeed - and a question back to Vlad - so you have accepted that only some of your experiences are divinely inspired. So given that not all are therefore (even in your view) divinely inspired how do you work out which ones are and which ones aren't. And if some aren't (by your own admission) divinely inspired, how do you know that they all aren't.

Yet again Vlad's arguments and justifications are crumbling to dust before our very eyes, and this time he is the author of his own downfall.

No, we are trying to establish whether we can equate an experience of Christ with a belief that a Jesus not experienced is not divine held by a person who is religion.

Particularly where an atheist can hold the latter position.

 Is the atheist experiencing this divinely? Or is the Jewish person merely holding that belief intellectually or philosophically?

[Étienne d'Angleterre]

No.............. you asked me for my experience and it was so given. You have made of it what you have.

I accept your testimony and experience as true for you. Not a problem.

There is no question of me saying that no Jew has an experience of God.
I had an experience of God before I became a Christian where I acquired an awareness of the 'voice or mind' behind religious writings.

What I am questioning now is how an experience of Jesus not being God differs from, say, your acquisition of a belief that Jesus is not God?

The position isn't different. I have no belief in a divine Jesus. People of Jewish faith have no belief in a divine Jesus.

I get it through lack of evidence.

They get it through there understanding of God..

This requires obviously the testimonial of someone you say has such a religious experience.

Just because we are religious doesn't mean that all our views are derived by direct divine experience particular if your faith partly involves having faith in the faith of your fathers.

Have you in fact contacted your friend after you said you would do so?

Unbelievable arrogance.

So if some one claims experience of God that is fine because it agrees with you. If it doesn't agree with you then the error is theirs and comes through some other route and so yours is the true one. Absolutely unbelievable, I am literally staggered by the arrogance.


I have actually I asked him how he knows there is an objective God. Further to that I have asked him why he rejects the divinity  of Christ?

I am not expecting back anything different to what he has told me before but I said I would ask so I did.

Put bluntly I suspect atheist confusion and conflation in the understanding of religion on your part and it's fair to say that I am supposed to accept your account of another's experience.

Well you expect us to accept yours.


You seem to be suprised that there is one person out there who c;aims to have an experience of God but comcludes differently to you. You are wrong there are a very great many of them. you only have to look and ask around to find out.

Anyway, even if everyone did have an experience that wa the same as yours it would get you one inch closer to moving it from subjectively true to objectively true.

[Étienne d'Angleterre]

Not sure of your implied distinction between religions and other faith/life/cosmic positions based on say ontological materialism and /or humanism.

I believe there is a type who can dogmatically hold to propositions inflexibly and without doubt.
I am not of that type and so all of the cosmic/life positions get their chance to reassert themselves and yet have still managed to fail.

I'm afraid all you guys on here offer is a cosy if defensive agnosticism I left long ago coupled with an almost rabidly loony antitheism which my even cosy, defensive agnostic former self might have found quite strange.

All that is being said is that people using their experience to tell if something is objectively true or not is not obviously reliable because people come to different conclusions.

Even if they didn't though it would still not get you from subjective to objective.


This is basic basic stuff

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I accept your testimony and experience as true for you. Not a problem.
The position isn't different. I have no belief in a divine Jesus. People of Jewish faith have no belief in a divine Jesus.

I get it through lack of evidence.

They get it through there understanding of God..

Unbelievable arrogance.

So if some one claims experience of God that is fine because it agrees with you. If it doesn't agree with you then the error is theirs and comes through some other route and so yours is the true one. Absolutely unbelievable, I am literally staggered by the arrogance.


I have actually I asked him how he knows there is an objective God. Further to that I have asked him why he rejects the divinity  of Christ?

Thank you.

[Étienne d'Angleterre]

Thank you.

And if his reply is the one he has given me before that I have already given to you, what will your response be?

Furthermore, can you answer the point about even if everyone who had a religious experience agreed with yours how would this promote it from subjective to objective?

[ProfessorDavey]

No, we are trying to establish whether we can equate an experience of Christ with a belief that a Jesus not experienced is not divine held by a person who is religion.

Particularly where an atheist can hold the latter position.

 Is the atheist experiencing this divinely? Or is the Jewish person merely holding that belief intellectually or philosophically?

No - that is your discussion with another person.

I am asking how you know which ones of your 'experiences' are divinely inspired and which aren't given that you yourself were the one who proffered the view that they could be one or the other.

And given your own admission that some aren't divinely inspired how can you be sure that they all aren't.

[Étienne d'Angleterre]

No - that is your discussion with another person.

I am asking how you know which ones of your 'experiences' are divinely inspired and which aren't given that you yourself were the one who proffered the view that they could be one or the other.

And given your own admission that some aren't divinely inspired how can you be sure that they all aren't.

He has already told you.

If they match reach the same conclusion then they are divinely inspired and true.

If they contradict his then it is still evidence of his God but the bit that doesn't agree can be dismissed because it is cultural and not a real experience.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

And if his reply is the one he has given me before that I have already given to you, what will your response be?

Furthermore, can you answer the point about even if everyone who had a religious experience agreed with yours how would this promote it from subjective to objective?

I'm sorry but so far you have said he has had a religious experience which tells him that Jesus is not God and that it is standard jewish belief.

It is standard moslem belief, Unitarian belief and atheist belief also. How then is his experience distinct from yours or a moslems or Unitarians . All of these can have religious experience of God but you cannot have and yet you have the same view.

I am entitled to press on the issue thereof as to how his conviction was arrived at.

I would also be interested in his views on my experience which seems more clear cut,
isn't mere intellectually assent( I believe in Australia although I have no experience of it).......and indeed the difference between his position on my experience and yours.

To reiterate, I am not saying he cannot have had an experience of God I only want to know where the information of Jesus not divine comes into it.

[Étienne d'Angleterre]

I'm sorry but so far you have said he has had a religious experience which tells him that Jesus is not God and that it is standard jewish belief.

It is standard moslem belief, Unitarian belief and atheist belief also. How then is his experience distinct from yours or a moslems or Unitarians . All of these can have religious experience of God but you cannot have and yet you have the same view.

I am entitled to press on the issue thereof as to how his conviction was arrived at.

I would also be interested in his views on my experience which seems more clear cut,
isn't mere intellectually assent( I believe in Australia although I have no experience of it).......and indeed the difference between his position on my experience and yours.

To reiterate, I am not saying he cannot have had an experience of God I only want to know where the information of Jesus not divine comes into it.

I have said no such thing. It would pay you to read what people are actually saying rather than what you think/want them to be saying.

He does not say he has had a divine revelation that Jesus is not divine. GOT THAT?

He claims (and in the same way I grant you your subjective truth I do the same to him, but I grant neither of you objectivity).


For the forty millionth time:

You have an experience of God. It is best explained to you by the Christian narrative.

He has an experience of God. it is best explained by the Jewish narrative. God's taking on human form is not part of this narrative.

He has done exactly the same as you. He has attached a narrative (or linguistic framework as you like to put it) to his experience. Those narratives are mutually exclusive.


I know you don't believe me but you are wrong to do so. This was one of the reasons I joined the forum my familiarity with people who claim experience as a guide to objective proof.

It's not so bad with him though because he doesn't explicitly state that I will be in trouble with the guvnor if I don't accept his claims as true for me.

[Étienne d'Angleterre]

I'm sorry but so far you have said he has had a religious experience which tells him that Jesus is not God and that it is standard jewish belief.

It is standard moslem belief, Unitarian belief and atheist belief also. How then is his experience distinct from yours or a moslems or Unitarians . All of these can have religious experience of God but you cannot have and yet you have the same view.

I am entitled to press on the issue thereof as to how his conviction was arrived at.

I would also be interested in his views on my experience which seems more clear cut,
isn't mere intellectually assent( I believe in Australia although I have no experience of it).......and indeed the difference between his position on my experience and yours.

To reiterate, I am not saying he cannot have had an experience of God I only want to know where the information of Jesus not divine comes into it.

You seem terribly confused about standard thought thing.

I have told you he believes his experience is best explained by the Jewish narrative. The question then is why YOU seem surprised that he doesn't accept the divinity of Christ.

Why is this different to my atheism? Because he accepts the existence of at least one God.

Basic basic basic stuff.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I have said no such thing. It would pay you to read what people are actually saying rather than what you think/want them to be saying.

He does not say he has had a divine revelation that Jesus is not divine. GOT THAT?
.

But I am saying that I have had an experience of Christ

[Étienne d'Angleterre]

But I am saying that I have had an experience of Christ

AARRRGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.


But what gets it from subjective to objective?


AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHh

It is a claim!!!!!!!!!!

You now need to show your claim is true if you want it to be objective fact for all.


ARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

[Walt Zingmatilder]

AARRRGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.


But what gets it from subjective to objective?


AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHh

I am not claiming that statement of my experience is anything more than sincerely offered witness statement which after all you requested. Why did you request it unless you could analyse it? You yourself must see some mileage in this stuff.

To me you seem happy with the uncertainty in the everyday material things and even whether or not the naturalistic view of everything is true but are seeking absolute certainty in respect of God.

[Étienne d'Angleterre]

I am not claiming that statement of my experience is anything more than sincerely offered witness statement which after all you requested. Why did you request it unless you could analyse it? You yourself must see some mileage in this stuff.

To me you seem happy with the uncertainty in the everyday material things and even whether or not the naturalistic view of everything is true but are seeking absolute certainty in respect of God.

I accept your statement as a true for you belief. I sincerely do.

I did not request a witness statement though. You said you had a methodology that could show an objectively true God. This is obviously not the case.

I am not seeking absolute certainty in God, just something that gets at least a millimetre beyond true for me  and only type claims.

[Leonard James]

"You said you had a methodology that could shoe an objectively true God."

Well, a shoehorn would be the first step.

[Étienne d'Angleterre]

"You said you had a methodology that could shoe an objectively true God."

Well, a shoehorn would be the first step.

corrected. Ta

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I accept your statement as a true for you belief. I sincerely do.

I did not request a witness statement though. You said you had a methodology that could show an objectively true God. This is obviously not the case.

I am not seeking absolute certainty in God, just something that gets at least a millimetre beyond true for me  and only type claims.

Stephen, you asked for me to describe my experience. That is a witness statement. I have to ask whether it is a genuine encounter. Certainly it ran counter to how I imagined things to be, I was in fact biased against God, in many respects, as in the experience of Isaiah, St Paul and Augustine  and not for him and the experience was the very opposite of ego affirming. For me then the encounter has all the hallmarks of being objective.

As Brownie has said I cannot hand you God, I cannot give you the experience but whether God is true for me only?

 Since I was once in the position you were in and am now where I am now, I cannot give you the assurance of you not experiencing Christ.

[Brownie]

Jon, I would like to hear of your experience and would be prepared to tell you mine, which was quite profound, but I am not sure this is the right place for it.  We are still unable to prove any of it, rationally or scientifically;  our experiences could be explained away rationally.  Nevertheless, the experiences were true ones (certainly for us), inexplicable to anyone who has not experienced the same.

[Sebastian Toe]

No, we are trying to establish whether we can equate an experience of Christ with a belief that a Jesus not experienced is not divine held by a person who is religion.

Particularly where an atheist can hold the latter position.

 Is the atheist experiencing this divinely? Or is the Jewish person merely holding that belief intellectually or philosophically?

I think that Sassy doesn't believe that Jesus was divine, why not ask her?

[ProfessorDavey]

For me then the encounter has all the hallmarks of being objective.

How - this is an 'experience' that you even describe as 'for me' - it is subjective.

Were you on your own? If not did the other person or persons also have the same experience. If you were do you think that had there been some other people around that they would have had the same experience too. Everything you have described to date seems consistent with an 'in my mind' type experience - like a dream or hearing voices. Very common of course, and can be very powerful as others have attested, but merely a manifestation of your own neurobiology and by definition subjective as someone else's neurobiology, even if sat right next to you, would lead them to believe that they had encountered what you encountered.

[Étienne d'Angleterre]

Jon, I would like to hear of your experience and would be prepared to tell you mine, which was quite profound, but I am not sure this is the right place for it.  We are still unable to prove any of it, rationally or scientifically;  our experiences could be explained away rationally.  Nevertheless, the experiences were true ones (certainly for us), inexplicable to anyone who has not experienced the same.

Actually I think lots of us, if not all, have quite profound experiences throughout our lives. I know I have.

The only issue comes when people insist that their subjective experiences are objectively true.

[floo]

Actually I think lots of us, if not all, have quite profound experiences throughout our lives. I know I have.

The only issue comes when people insist that their subjective experiences are objectively true.

Agreed.

[ProfessorDavey]

Agreed.

Likewise