MG & JLHPROF: From Whence Come Spiritual Experiences?

[_grindael]

Or, "It was heartburn after a big bowl of chili."

I don't get heartburn from chili. You are comparing spiritual experiences with heartburn/acid reflux? Of course you are.

[_Aero]

So, you admit that having knowledge does not take away or pre-empt our free will. Maybe you will stop using that argument for the need to live by faith in the future since you admit it isn't valid.

In the pre-mortal realm, that appears to have been the case. I suppose the argument comes down to whether or not it is necessary for us to live by faith while here on earth.

Then if living by faith is the default here on earth, then we no longer have true free will. Without knowledge a true choice is impossible.

Then it becomes a question of just how much knowledge is necessary in order to live by faith.

That sentence makes no sense and is contradictory. When you live by knowledge you don't need faith.

For you, apparently, full disclosure is necessary for you to believe.

No, full knowledge is necessary for me to exercise free will and make a valid decision. Once you know something, there is no need for belief.

But then would that be faith?

Faith becomes unnecessary.

What is that line between faith and knowledge? And who knows where that line should be drawn? And why.

Why? Because without knowledge, free will can't truly exist. You can either have free will or faith, but not both at the same time. Which one do you want?

[_mentalgymnast]

So, the Holy Ghost does not testify of truth to everyone that hears said truth?

That was not my experience when I served a mission years ago.

That seems to contradict the missionary message.

How so? Are there no prerequisites to receiving a testimony through the witness of the Holy Ghost?

You do believe that if everyone was listening that the Holy Ghost could reach every single person on the planet though, right?

I think that this hypothetical is totally unrealistic 'on the ground'. If your proposition fell within the realm of probability and everyone was listening, then yes, I think that would be possible.

But again, I don't see that as being probable, at all.

Wouldn't it be nice, though?

Would you be open to it?

So apparently we're moving away from the possibility of a 'face-to-face' with God now?

Soap Maker is going to be disappointed.

Regards,
MG

[Guest]

Then it becomes a question of just how much knowledge is necessary in order to live by faith. I think that may vary from person to person. For you, apparently, full disclosure is necessary for you to believe. But then would that be faith? What is that line between faith and knowledge? And who knows where that line should be drawn? And why.

You are so full of crap. Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery said,

It is necessary that you receive a testimony from heaven to yourselves; so that you can bear testimony to the truth of the Book of Mormon, and that you have seen the face of God. That is more than the testimony of an angel. When the proper time arrives, you shall be able to bear this testimony to the world. When you bear testimony that you have seen God, this testimony God will never suffer to fall, but will bear you out; although many will not give heed, yet others will. You will therefore see the necessity of getting this testimony from heaven. Never cease striving until you have seen God face to face. Strengthen your faith; cast off your doubts, your sins, and all your unbelief; and nothing can prevent you from coming to God. Your ordination is not full and complete till God has laid his hand upon you. We require as much to qualify us as did those who have gone before us; God is the same. If the Savior in former days laid his hands upon his disciples, why not in latter days?…

The time is coming when you will be perfectly familiar with the things of God. . . . You have our best wishes, you have our most fervent prayers, that you may be able to bear this testimony, that you have seen the face of God. Therefore call upon him in faith in mighty prayer till you prevail, for it is your duty and your privilege to bear such a testimony for yourselves.

In the Doctrine and Covenants,

Require not miracles, except I shall command you: except casting out devils; healing the sick; and against poisonous serpents; and against deadly poisons; and these things ye shall not do, except it be required of you, by them who desire it, that the scriptures might be fulfilled, for ye shall do according to that which is written.

Drink some deadly poison Mental. I REQUIRE IT. You have the Priesthood, right? Go on, excuse yourself out of that one.

[_mentalgymnast]

One way or the other, IHAQ, these sorts of purported spiritual phenomena are very difficult to articulate and describe. Maybe you've had similar experiences in your life? If so, have you been able to fully explain them to yourself independent of outside influence(s)?

Others?

Regards,
MG

I have had one such experience in relation to the Book of Mormon. I feel it only fair to share it.
(And regardless of what people may think, this is a genuine experience that I had)

I prayed about the Book of Mormon and I almost instantly felt what I would describe as an adrenaline rush, combined with increased heart beat, a hot flush but combined with a calming of the mind about the surety of the answer. I had that experience and I can not deny it.

Where does that leave me?

Thanks for sharing that, IHAQ. To be honest, I can't say where that leaves you. That's between you and God...if you believe in God, that is.

If not, then I think your question may be a little easier to answer.

Regards,
MG

[Guest]

One way or the other, IHAQ, these sorts of purported spiritual phenomena are very difficult to articulate and describe. Maybe you've had similar experiences in your life? If so, have you been able to fully explain them to yourself independent of outside influence(s)?

Others?

Regards,
MG

I have had one such experience in relation to the Book of Mormon. I feel it only fair to share it.
(And regardless of what people may think, this is a genuine experience that I had)

I prayed about the Book of Mormon and I almost instantly felt what I would describe as an adrenaline rush, combined with increased heart beat, a hot flush but combined with a calming of the mind about the surety of the answer. I had that experience and I can not deny it.

Where does that leave me?

Thanks for sharing that, IHAQ. To be honest, I can't say where that leaves you. That's between you and God...if you believe in God, that is.

If not, then I think your question may be a little easier to answer.

Regards,
MG

Why would my interpretation of that experience be predicated on wether or not I believed in God?
Is the conclusion about what that experience was different if I believe in God than if I don’t?

Your contribution to the thread is the premise that we can differentiate between self induced feelings and spiritual ones presumably regardless of ones pre determined belief on the basis that the two are demonstrably distinguishable one from the other. Otherwise both positions would be indistinguishable from confirmation bias because they were predicated on a pre determined belief about the experience.

[_fetchface]

Why is faith a virtue? I've never heard a satisfactory answer from the believer's standpoint, just lots of hand-waving.

From the nonbelievers standpoint the answer is obvious. Faith is a virtue because it removes responsibility from the leaders. If faith isn't a virtue, then the things the leaders say and do have to make sense. They are obliged to act consistently.

Faith removes the accountability from God/the brethren. It doesn't make sense? Well, if you're a good boy you will have faith in spite of that!

Of course, this is a toxic way to raise a child with an analytic personality like me. I couldn't muster faith in things that didn't make sense to me, so I knew I must be bad. I truly believed that about myself as a child. What a poisonous idea.

It took me way longer to break this chain than it should have but man am I glad I broke it.

[_Stem]

That's why there's nothing unique about Mormons on this. My old boss used to get inspired thoughts and feelings about new directions to take as a business group. Sometimes it seemed to work ok, other times it didn't. Revelation, spiritual experience amounts to the same experience people have when they watch Lion King or take part in innovative business practices and get enlivened or encouraged. There's nothing near exact science in this. We just pretend there is because, heck we have nothing better to do.

On the whole and in many if not most situations/experiences I'd tend to agree with you. And yes, it is puzzling why folks can either make wrong decisions and/or be led the wrong way through what they think have been spiritual influence/impressions. It does get a bit confusing and can even be somewhat disorienting at times. That's why, like I've said, I tend towards a natural skepticism in regards to much of what we refer to as the influence(s) of the Spirit. But for me, that doesn't negate the absence or non-existence of the Spirit/Holy Ghost.

And I think we can only speak for ourselves and not others.

Regards,
MG[/quote]
Good. I can get on board with this thinking.

[_mentalgymnast]

Can the Holy Ghost speak to every single individual on the planet or can't he?

Are you seeing this as a direct equivalence to God speaking "face-to-face" to everyone?

You are the one that set the arbitrary standard of a face-to-face meeting (or at least you have latched onto it and continue to present it as such).

Granted, I've been spinning of of this response earlier in the thread from The Soap Maker:

1. Would you listen and obey? Listen, yes. Obey, maybe. I would still have my agency but, the cool thing is, at least I would be getting the information straight from the source, rather than having to rely on middle-men, personal interpretation, and unreliable feelings.
2. How would you feel about being 'spoon fed'? When it comes to eternal reward/damnation, I am perfectly fine with being spoon-fed. Again, at least I would be getting the information straight from the source so I would be able to make a better decision.
3. How do you feel about 'helicopter parents'? As opposed to parents that won't even talk face-to-face with their children? Yeah, I'd take the helicopter parent any day. You would think that god could meet somewhere in the middle and at least show up on birthdays, graduations, etc. to actually speak to his kids.

So I'd love to have a face-to-face with god because I would know exactly where I stood, I would know god's expectations of me, and I would be able to clarify contradictions - all while maintaining my agency. Those reasons listed are exactly opposite of how god (allegedly) communicates with his children now. The way I see it, god isn't much different than any dead-beat dad. The difference being we give god a free pass and we blame his children.

And while I believe a truly omnipotent God could probably figure out a way to make that happen, I don't think it is necessary for God to do that in order to make sure that everyone understands his will.

I disagree with your first statement, at least as far as an individual 'face-to-face' with every individual in real time. Say, The Soap Maker, for example.

But I agree with your second statement. I think there are ways that God can organize and/or set up for people to understand His will. But I think the people have to be willing to go with what God has organized and/or set up...if indeed that's what He does...that is, set up an organization by which His will can be known.

Regards,
MG

[_Lemmie]

The closest I can come to describing some of the experiences I'm referring to is a 'burning in the bosom'. Other times have been thoughts streaming...complete sentences and coherent thought... without preexisting encouragement or causal factors. And they've been directly applicable to a situation in which I later could see I was in need of that inspiration.

However, earlier in the thread you said:

Ruminating after the fact. HIndsight is always better than foresight. There are experiences that I've had during my life in which as I look at them in hindsight it appears to me that there were other factors that may have entered into the equation other than pure chance and/or self induced/originating thought.

So if the determining factor for you differentiating between spiritual phenomena and simple constructs/fabrications of the mind is a qualitatively different ‘burning in the bosom’, how come you only ‘saw’ that ‘burning in the bosom’ in hindsight when you ruminated after the fact on the experience? Would such a qualitatively different burning in the bosom not be blatantly self evident there and then at the time you were experiencing it?

This is a key point---It takes rumination after the fact and hindsight to turn a sensation into a spiritual experience. Yet, by coincidence, the rumination and hindsight tell one only that they had an experience exactly in line with religion they grew up in and that they are most accustomed to. That indicates the experience is exactly in line with that described in the OP.