Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
First off , this is not about bashing the experiences of anyone . It is about exactly what the title says, a discussion on the validity of these experiences as evidence in a debate or discussion .
We have posters here who often get offended at disbelief in their claimed experiences , suggesting that those who won't accept them are calling them liars, and trying to portray those who don't have these experiences of God as simply " not getting anything past the physical ", as if not believing in things without evidence is a fault of some sort .
So let's look at the experiences of some , and how they stack up as evidence .
One poster here claims to meet God in deep meditation, but claims this God is not supernatural and works no supernatural miracles .
Another poster here claims to meet God in deep mediation, and this God is a supernatural God who works miracles and does healings .
Buddhists who spend their lives in deep meditation apparently meet no God there .
Catholic mystics meet Jesus, and come to know that Jesus is actually God .
Quakers meet God in their unprogrammed meetings , but apparently not the Jesus of the Catholics .
Hindus often meet Ganesh , the elephant headed God , in deep meditation. They do not believe his appearance is symbolic, but rather that his form is actually an elephant .
Bernadette Roberts met a God similar to the Void of the Buddhists , and became convinced the God she met messed up , went too far with her experiences , and nearly drove her insane . Another guy named Jim , who wrote a book ( can't remember the last name but will look it up ) describing similar experiences as BR in which he was nearly incapacitated for months on end due to his meditation experiences of God .
Obviously these are not the same experiences , yet each of them are claimed as valid, real, and the proper view or interpretation of the God they meet in these meditations .
So we immediately have a problem with accepting these as valid evidence , as they all can't be correct .
Why can't they all be correct? I have for many years believed in the personal revelatory spiritual experience that is meant for only one or a small number of people, as opposed to one person's experience being meant as the directive for entire masses down through the centuries. In my view, what you or Bernadette Peters experiences is meant for you or for Bernadette Peters, not necessarily for me. If I can read about it and gain some wisdom from it, great. If not, fine.
It is my personal belief that in a normal lifetime, we will all have at least one experience that, if not ignored or suppressed, will be our own personal revelatory experience. It is incumbent upon each of us to pay attention and recognize the divine in that experience. The more open we are, the more of these experiences we are likely to have.
John Lilly said: In the realm of mind, whatever one thinks - is real.
There is another concept applicable to any religion or faith: to each it will be given according to his faith.
So surely, what one believes into is what one approximates in meditative state.
Same willl be with "hell" and "haven".
First off , this is not about bashing the experiences of anyone . It is about exactly what the title says, a discussion on the validity of these experiences as evidence in a debate or discussion .
We have posters here who often get offended at disbelief in their claimed experiences , suggesting that those who won't accept them are calling them liars, and trying to portray those who don't have these experiences of God as simply " not getting anything past the physical ", as if not believing in things without evidence is a fault of some sort .
So let's look at the experiences of some , and how they stack up as evidence .
One poster here claims to meet God in deep meditation, but claims this God is not supernatural and works no supernatural miracles .
Another poster here claims to meet God in deep mediation, and this God is a supernatural God who works miracles and does healings .
Buddhists who spend their lives in deep meditation apparently meet no God there .
Catholic mystics meet Jesus, and come to know that Jesus is actually God .
Quakers meet God in their unprogrammed meetings , but apparently not the Jesus of the Catholics .
Hindus often meet Ganesh , the elephant headed God , in deep meditation. They do not believe his appearance is symbolic, but rather that his form is actually an elephant .
Bernadette Roberts met a God similar to the Void of the Buddhists , and became convinced the God she met messed up , went too far with her experiences , and nearly drove her insane . Another guy named Jim , who wrote a book ( can't remember the last name but will look it up ) describing similar experiences as BR in which he was nearly incapacitated for months on end due to his meditation experiences of God .
Obviously these are not the same experiences , yet each of them are claimed as valid, real, and the proper view or interpretation of the God they meet in these meditations .
So we immediately have a problem with accepting these as valid evidence , as they all can't be correct .
They can all be correct in the sense that they are real supernatural experiences. The problem is we have the great deceiver who can give people supernatural experiences and lead them to follow false gods.
I don't see how it's possible to validate. And if we believe "every" such experience, we will absolutely be overlooking a percentage of people who need mental help. What do you think of people who say Jesus told them to kill someone, for example? There is a serious danger in "just believing" such experiences. I'm sorry, but there is.
Anyone can say anything, and anyone can "think" we've seen or heard something. So even when harmless, no, there is no way to validate this. What if I told you I saw a unicorn? I can't validate it but I am sure I saw it. Do you believe me? If not, do you judge me for not believing your own "God spoke to me" story with no evidence?
On the other hand, what if I told you I saw Balrama? Literally one billion people believe in him, so he's probably more solid than a "unicorn" sighting. What if I told you Balrama told me I was wrong all along about Christianity and Jesus was a myth and never even actually existed? Would it be appropriate for everyone - including Christians, obviously - to believe my experience because although I can't validate it, I am SAYING I experienced it and therefore it's no less believable than their own reported "sightings," given the same parameters (spiritual experience/vision, non-quantifiable, but the god is supported by huge, long-time - thousands of years - following)?
They can all be correct in the sense that they are real supernatural experiences. The problem is we have the great deceiver who can give people supernatural experiences and lead them to follow false gods.
And he's trying to get us to believe there's only one way to God - Christianity - and taking us away from the true religion, which is Judaism, Hinduism, Islam or whatever?
See how this works? This is your *non-quantifiable* assertion. But an *opposite* assertion can be made, using just the same reasoning and "faith" you're using, but the logistics may conflict directly with your own belief.
What if the Great Deceiver is trying to pull people away from the older religions, such as Hinduism and Judaism, and that's his big feat on this earth - to destroy individual choice and force people to all walk one straight line of one religion, like choiceless drones? You don't know and neither do I...but that theory is JUST AS VALID as yours. There is NO difference in the potential validity (or lack thereof) there.
First off , this is not about bashing the experiences of anyone . It is about exactly what the title says, a discussion on the validity of these experiences as evidence in a debate or discussion .
We have posters here who often get offended at disbelief in their claimed experiences , suggesting that those who won't accept them are calling them liars, and trying to portray those who don't have these experiences of God as simply " not getting anything past the physical ", as if not believing in things without evidence is a fault of some sort .
So let's look at the experiences of some , and how they stack up as evidence .
One poster here claims to meet God in deep meditation, but claims this God is not supernatural and works no supernatural miracles .
Another poster here claims to meet God in deep mediation, and this God is a supernatural God who works miracles and does healings .
Buddhists who spend their lives in deep meditation apparently meet no God there .
Catholic mystics meet Jesus, and come to know that Jesus is actually God .
Quakers meet God in their unprogrammed meetings , but apparently not the Jesus of the Catholics .
Hindus often meet Ganesh , the elephant headed God , in deep meditation. They do not believe his appearance is symbolic, but rather that his form is actually an elephant .
Bernadette Roberts met a God similar to the Void of the Buddhists , and became convinced the God she met messed up , went too far with her experiences , and nearly drove her insane . Another guy named Jim , who wrote a book ( can't remember the last name but will look it up ) describing similar experiences as BR in which he was nearly incapacitated for months on end due to his meditation experiences of God .
Obviously these are not the same experiences , yet each of them are claimed as valid, real, and the proper view or interpretation of the God they meet in these meditations .
So we immediately have a problem with accepting these as valid evidence , as they all can't be correct .
When you say, "So we immediately have a problem with accepting these.....", who are you referring to as "WE"?
Maybe if whoever "WE" is learned to be more "accepting" of others that contemplate things in a different way than them, they wouldn't have so much of a "problem".
Their Religious and Spiritual contemplations are valid to THEM...that is all that matters.
I may not have those experiences myself, but I would never be so rude and disrespectful of others to question the personal experiences they have that they interpret as deeply meaningful and sacred.
Why can't they all be correct? I have for many years believed in the personal revelatory spiritual experience that is meant for only one or a small number of people, as opposed to one person's experience being meant as the directive for entire masses down through the centuries. In my view, what you or Bernadette Peters experiences is meant for you or for Bernadette Peters, not necessarily for me. If I can read about it and gain some wisdom from it, great. If not, fine.
It is my personal belief that in a normal lifetime, we will all have at least one experience that, if not ignored or suppressed, will be our own personal revelatory experience. It is incumbent upon each of us to pay attention and recognize the divine in that experience. The more open we are, the more of these experiences we are likely to have.
First off , this is not about bashing the experiences of anyone . It is about exactly what the title says, a discussion on the validity of these experiences as evidence in a debate or discussion .
We have posters here who often get offended at disbelief in their claimed experiences , suggesting that those who won't accept them are calling them liars, and trying to portray those who don't have these experiences of God as simply " not getting anything past the physical ", as if not believing in things without evidence is a fault of some sort .
So let's look at the experiences of some , and how they stack up as evidence .
One poster here claims to meet God in deep meditation, but claims this God is not supernatural and works no supernatural miracles .
Another poster here claims to meet God in deep mediation, and this God is a supernatural God who works miracles and does healings .
Buddhists who spend their lives in deep meditation apparently meet no God there .
Catholic mystics meet Jesus, and come to know that Jesus is actually God .
Quakers meet God in their unprogrammed meetings , but apparently not the Jesus of the Catholics .
Hindus often meet Ganesh , the elephant headed God , in deep meditation. They do not believe his appearance is symbolic, but rather that his form is actually an elephant .
Bernadette Roberts met a God similar to the Void of the Buddhists , and became convinced the God she met messed up , went too far with her experiences , and nearly drove her insane . Another guy named Jim , who wrote a book ( can't remember the last name but will look it up ) describing similar experiences as BR in which he was nearly incapacitated for months on end due to his meditation experiences of God .
Obviously these are not the same experiences , yet each of them are claimed as valid, real, and the proper view or interpretation of the God they meet in these meditations .
So we immediately have a problem with accepting these as valid evidence , as they all can't be correct .
For every person that claims that God told him something....there's another person that that claims God told her something contradictory. Without a standard of what is true, how would one know?
Most people that claim to be Christian, or any variation of Christian, use the Bible for at least SOME of what they believe. Even a mystic that thinks God talks to him/her in agape love will quote from the Bible when it pleases him. I do not understand why a person would think that their personal experience or feelings would trump that which we all consider to be God's inspired word.
Why can't they all be correct? I have for many years believed in the personal revelatory spiritual experience that is meant for only one or a small number of people, as opposed to one person's experience being meant as the directive for entire masses down through the centuries. In my view, what you or Bernadette Peters experiences is meant for you or for Bernadette Peters, not necessarily for me. If I can read about it and gain some wisdom from it, great. If not, fine.
It is my personal belief that in a normal lifetime, we will all have at least one experience that, if not ignored or suppressed, will be our own personal revelatory experience. It is incumbent upon each of us to pay attention and recognize the divine in that experience. The more open we are, the more of these experiences we are likely to have.
This is very similar to what I believe. Good post.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There is NO difference in the potential validity (or lack thereof) there.
