Reexamining personal revelation

[_John D the First]

The implication of culture, neurobiology, psychology etc does not preclude God as a factor.

Since I can't have perfect knowledge, I cannot preclude the possibility, and I am open to the idea.

Just as the implication of culture, neurobiology, and psychology as mediators does not preclude influence from the objective world in more mundane perceptual experience.

I certainly hope not.

Everyone must individually decide whether they see the divine or the activity of fabulous nueropeptides in their spiritual experiences.

Must we? I think not, but many do decide whether they see the divine, but my experiences as well as those whom have confided their experiences do not necessarily suggest that the divine is needed. There are many possibilities even for the ones that I may not understand very well right now. I see now reason to put one possibility over another, although I understand that many do, usually the ones that they desire to believe, which is fine if it makes them happy or a better person.

We probably shouldn't expect our impressions to be infallible either, just like any perceptual endowment of knowledge, they can only be an approximation, a step in the right direction.

Or in the wrong direction

If I take all my impressions as a whole, and look at the outcome of each step, the grandeur of the outcome seems to vaporize mechanical reductionism (or social constructionism) as an explanation.

Seems may be the important word here, but you may also be right. I think it's fairly common for us to ignore or reinterpret the misses and overemphasize the hits when it comes to things like our impressions, feelings, inspirations, etc.

But this particular conceptual proclivity may be genetic...if so, then don't hate! I was born this way.

I don't hate anyone.

- I suppose nobody MUST decide. I meant that more to say that it was a subjective assessment the individual had to make based on the quality of their experience and what follows from it.

-That is why I used the word "seems." But its pull on my mind is so strong in that direction, it would require heavy intellectual work to convince myself that it wasn't God. I would need a really good reason to do so. The only reason I can think of to do that is that other people would think me rational.

-I'm glad you don't hate anyone. I did not mean to imply that. I just read a study in the Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion that attempted to show religious commitment was genetic. I've been waiting to pull out the born-that-way justification.

[_Themis]

- I suppose nobody MUST decide.

Nope, but sometimes we get into the your with us or against us thinking, as though there can be no middle ground(or entirely different ground) or those who remain undecided until better information is available. I guess the Bible doesn't help since that is where some of that thinking comes from.

I meant that more to say that it was a subjective assessment the individual had to make based on the quality of their experience and what follows from it.

That's fine.

-That is why I used the word "seems." But its pull on my mind is so strong in that direction, it would require heavy intellectual work to convince myself that it wasn't God. I would need a really good reason to do so. The only reason I can think of to do that is that other people would think me rational.

Also fine, although I do see others who also seem to be just as convinced about the interpretation of their experiences even though they may conflict with our own.

-I'm glad you don't hate anyone. I did not mean to imply that. I just read a study in the Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion that attempted to show religious commitment was genetic. I've been waiting to pull out the born-that-way justification.

Although religious commitment may be genetic, I doubt God would do that to some and not to others. I also wonder if it is religious commitment that they see as genetic or simply just commitment, which I can see as having certain survival benefits.

[_John D the First]

Although religious commitment may be genetic, I doubt God would do that to some and not to others.

I couldn't help but think of the venerable Mormon tradition of "believing blood" when I read this :)

[_John D the First]

Also fine, although I do see others who also seem to be just as convinced about the interpretation of their experiences even though they may conflict with our own.

I think the fine distinctions in revelatory experience, interpretation and practice among different religious traditions is often glossed in these discussions. One place to start is Susan Harding's "Convicted by the Spirit" as a primer of fundamental Baptist experiences with the numinous. Then there is Lurhman's work on the Vineyard, and any number of ethnographic accounts of Pentecostalism. There was also an interesting account I read some years ago on an Islamic group, but I can't remember the reference.

[_Themis]

I couldn't help but think of the venerable Mormon tradition of "believing blood" when I read this :)

Interesting so many with believing blood don't believe :)

[_Themis]

I think the fine distinctions in revelatory experience, interpretation and practice among different religious traditions is often glossed in these discussions.

That's because the distinctions are usually not so fine.

[_John D the First]

I think the fine distinctions in revelatory experience, interpretation and practice among different religious traditions is often glossed in these discussions.

That's because the distinctions are usually not so fine.

True. My point was is that while it is often assumed that people are interpreting the same nuero-biological experience in a culturally idiosyncratic matter, the fact is we may be dealing with different experiences entirely.

[_John D the First]

I couldn't help but think of the venerable Mormon tradition of "believing blood" when I read this :)

Interesting so many with believing blood don't believe :)

Hey man, some of you guys just may not have the force running through your veins, as much as us believers. Not everyone can be a Jedi.

[_Themis]

True. My point was is that while it is often assumed that people are interpreting the same nuero-biological experience in a culturally idiosyncratic matter, the fact is we may be dealing with different experiences entirely.

It would be hard to tell if you are having the same experience if other people have different interpretations based on culture, religion, etc (they also come in many different forms and intensities). Sure it may be a possibility that one group is having more legitimate experiences from some unseen being, but I don't see any good reasons to think that, especially for LDS since that is my background. How many of us LDS have had what we believe to be powerful numinous events which we interpreted the same way you have, and for the same kind of reasons, yet now with new understanding have re-evaluated or re-interpreted the meaning of the experiences.

[_Themis]

Hey man, some of you guys just may not have the force running through your veins, as much as us believers. Not everyone can be a Jedi.

Or maybe we have more of the force running through us helping us to see the truth better :)