What is a spiritual experience?

[I Have Questions]

Stop deflecting. Again. I’m asking YOU what sensational qualities do spiritual experiences have, that are absent from emotional experiences? How do YOU specifically differentiate them?

I’ve already answered your question.

You've given a response, but you haven’t answered my question. Because you know you can’t.

The qualitative experience that any one individual has is only accessible to them.

That’s nonsense and you know it. If you are able to determine, reliably, what is a spiritual experience, and what is an emotional but not spiritual experience, you’d be able to relate what those key differences are.

I cannot share

That’s probably the first true thing you’ve said.

and would not share if I could, my experiences with you.

You're a terrible missionary then.

We each have to determine for ourselves the things of ‘the spirit’ and come to our own realizations and conclusions. Even if tentative conclusions for some.

So spiritual experiences are simply a case of individuals labelling an experience a “spiritual experience” on the basis of a criteria they themselves have determined. That’s confirmation bias. Again.

I think it would do you well to accept the open mindedness of Kripal rather than simply discarding the spiritual/religious experiences of others. Many of them privately held.

Yeah, UFO’s…are they spiritual or emotional?

[MG 2.0]

That’s probably the first true thing you’ve said.You're a terrible missionary then.

Pearls before swine.

That’s not actually meant as a derogatory statement. It’s only saying that it is very difficult to share something that is deeply personal in regards to those things that are very difficult to describe and understand even within one’s own mind/self, with someone that really doesn’t have a baseline of openness to receive and understand.

At least Kripal goes as far as to say that the experiences people have are to be believed. He says that he doesn’t believe their beliefs but that he believes that they truly believe.

I’m willing to let others speak for themselves rather than listening to someone, like yourself, that has a starting point of dogmatic disbelief in which the only remedy would be direct hard evidence seen and experienced through the natural senses.

As it is, you and I (along with other believers) are simply talking past each other.

Not the first time I’ve said that.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

Yeah, UFO’s…are they spiritual or emotional?

The jury is out on that one. More likely neither.

Apples and oranges anyone?

Regards,
MG

[huckelberry]

I was a bit puzzled but curious about Res Ipsa's post. I may have been diverted by feeling very sure that there was a lot more to "feeling like taking a head" than physical sensation and a word for it. I was curious but ignorant of whether this was war revenge? ,eagerness for superiority in violence? gaining power by taking from a victim?:was it a religious thing with sacrifice in view ? is an attack on the outrageous imposition upon life that death is? Naming the feeling told me nothing.

But of course that is part of Res Ipsa point we all live in culture which provides explanations and meaning to feelings we have. We are taught some things can be called spiritual and that in our culture is so broad that many things get included. Is any of that from God? It is certainly not clear. Obviously anything that is experienced by a human is as experience a human biological function. Feelings or visions or awe are human mental, nerve, processes whether initiated by music or God. If a machine can cause people to have sensations like what some might call spiritual that might tell me something about human biology but tells me nothing about whether God touches people in a special way at times.

If God slaps me upside the head telling me it is time for me to stop being so self centered the experience takes place in my nervous system but I understand it as from God because I realize the message is valuable.(and for whatever reason it felt like an authority not to be taken lightly)

I hesitate but will say it . I think it is possible the Mormon instruction on feeling the spirit may confuses the matter making it more difficult to notice the spirit by pushing people to focus on emotions unrelated . I say this only because I think it is worthwhile to question ones assumptions about the spirit.I do not claim to have sure knowledge on the matter and am sure I have had nice feelings that I hoped were from God but may well have had much more mundane sources.

One line of thought might be that we all have a subconscious awareness and connection with God and a spiritual dimension to our lives with others. A variety of experiences make us aware of that connection and that awareness causes emotions and feelings we are inclined to call spiritual.

I think you are very close to the truth. I was listening to a podcast on the way back from Missouri this week as we chose to go back there (to visit a son and his wife and a couple of grandkids) by car rather than by plane so that we could see the country rather than fly over it. It’s a large country!

Anyway, this academic in his discussion with Michael Shermer takes a middle position on those “feelings we are inclined to call spiritual”. So MANY people of all different backgrounds experience these things that we ought to give them more serious consideration according to Kripal.

https://www.skeptic.com/michael-shermer ... verything/

Well worth the time to take a listen.

Regards,
MG

Hi Mg, i hoped you enjoyed your car journey. When I was very young we lived in Missouri and each summer we took a car journey to Salt Lake City as both of my parents were from Salt lake. Family was there. I loved the journeys , I loved seeing the country , sunflowers in Kansas and the drama of finally seeing the mountains in Colorado. I suppose Salt Lake was like a pilgrimage, the journey suffused with the sense of spiritual meaning. Some of that was connected to LDS church. My grandfather lived in an apartment across from the Temple on north Temple. He had an amazing balcony which at night looked out at all the lights of the city and temple square, very impressive for a five year old. A grandmother, not LDS, lived in Park City which was when it was a mining town, no skiing . Sliver King mine works was a tall red wood building downtown with Silver King in big letters. I was always thrilled to see it. I loved being up in the mountains. Both grandparents and their locations had spiritual meaning though they had different religions and cultures.

I guess I am indulging myself iin expanding my comment about spiritual being a moment of awareness of the realities which our existence with others , with times and places with others.

I spent some ten years, or more after turning 18 as a resolved atheist. I did start to wonder on occasion about that assurance. I remember a time when I was working nights and would occasionally have dinner at a local diner at one in the morning. I was sitting at the counter and this young black man sat down and started a conversation. He was from Africa and wanted to share his faith in God with me. It was a pleasant evangelical appeal which I tolerated without argument. He explained how his Islamic faith grounded his life in the hope for better things and a direction for moral strength. I was unconverted but left reflecting how much the idea of God seemed to contribute to peoples lives all over the world and in a variety of forms.

I think the sense of God is connected to that sense of interconnectedness. I realize it is entirely possible to theorize that God has no separate existence beyond that but people have felt that the idea of God fills out , lies behind and underneath that interconnectedness we live in and hope not to loose. It is from this point of view that I think that there is only one God and there are just different ways people understand and misunderstand God.

[MG 2.0]

I think you are very close to the truth. I was listening to a podcast on the way back from Missouri this week as we chose to go back there (to visit a son and his wife and a couple of grandkids) by car rather than by plane so that we could see the country rather than fly over it. It’s a large country!

Anyway, this academic in his discussion with Michael Shermer takes a middle position on those “feelings we are inclined to call spiritual”. So MANY people of all different backgrounds experience these things that we ought to give them more serious consideration according to Kripal.

https://www.skeptic.com/michael-shermer ... verything/

Well worth the time to take a listen.

Regards,
MG

Hi Mg, i hoped you enjoyed your car journey. When I was very young we lived in Missouri and each summer we took a car journey to Salt Lake City as both of my parents were from Salt lake. Family was there. I loved the journeys , I loved seeing the country , sunflowers in Kansas and the drama of finally seeing the mountains in Colorado. I suppose Salt Lake was like a pilgrimage, the journey suffused with the sense of spiritual meaning. Some of that was connected to LDS church. My grandfather lived in an apartment across from the Temple on north Temple. He had an amazing balcony which at night looked out at all the lights of the city and temple square, very impressive for a five year old. A grandmother, not LDS, lived in Park City which was when it was a mining town, no skiing . Sliver King mine works was a tall red wood building downtown with Silver King in big letters. I was always thrilled to see it. I loved being up in the mountains. Both grandparents and their locations had spiritual meaning though they had different religions and cultures.

I guess I am indulging myself iin expanding my comment about spiritual being a moment of awareness of the realities which our existence with others , with times and places with others.

I spent some ten years, or more after turning 18 as a resolved atheist. I did start to wonder on occasion about that assurance. I remember a time when I was working nights and would occasionally have dinner at a local diner at one in the morning. I was sitting at the counter and this young black man sat down and started a conversation. He was from Africa and wanted to share his faith in God with me. It was a pleasant evangelical appeal which I tolerated without argument. He explained how his Islamic faith grounded his life in the hope for better things and a direction for moral strength. I was unconverted but left reflecting how much the idea of God seemed to contribute to peoples lives all over the world and in a variety of forms.

I think the sense of God is connected to that sense of interconnectedness. I realize it is entirely possible to theorize that God has no separate existence beyond that but people have felt that the idea of God fills out , lies behind and underneath that interconnectedness we live in and hope not to loose. It is from this point of view that I think that there is only one God and there are just different ways people understand and misunderstand God.

Now instead of sunflowers it’s large and monstrous wind turbines that dot the landscape coming across the plains of Nebraska/Wyoming. Not sure about the I-70 route across Kansas. Beautiful country when you’re on the road.

Thanks for sharing your early experiences. We’re both getting older and reflect a lot on our lives of yesteryear. That is as long as our memories hold out.

I agree that there is only one God and there are different ways that people understand and misunderstand Him. But I think that’s worked into ‘the plan’. What is important is whether or not people are choosing light over darkness. Love over hate. Good over evil. Work over sloth. Service over self serving behaviors. Morality over immorality. These modes of being bring us ALL closer to the creator in one form or fashion or another as we choose to be ‘good’.

I think God has different missions and purposes for all of his children and missions and purposes for various religious systems in order to serve the greater good. And that those that choose no religion but choose moral behaviors…think Sam Harris…also have their own part to play in moving mankind forward towards greater light and knowledge that benefits everyone.

What confuses me somewhat is what appears to be the time and resources spent by some folks that don’t believe in God in taking issue with those that do.

As I said earlier, quoting Tim Walz, “Mind your own damn business!”

Regards,
MG

[I Have Questions]

At least Kripal goes as far as to say that the experiences people have are to be believed. He says that he doesn’t believe their beliefs but that he believes that they truly believe.

Kripal is advocating that you patronise people who claim subjective spiritual experiences. So yes, I can believe that you truly believe your beliefs without believing those beliefs myself. Okay. So what? By all means believe whatever you want. But this is a discussion board. The clue is in the title. If you come here to promote your spiritual experiences as “right” then that’s going to be discussed. Get over it.

The issue for you is not that you have had spiritual experiences that have led you to a belief in God. That isn’t your backstory. You’ve maintained that you started out from a position of choosing to believe there was a God, and since then have attached things as support for that belief, whilst discounting out of hand anything that seemingly might make your choice seem errant. You’ve got a closed mind.

I’m willing to let others speak for themselves rather than listening to someone, like yourself, that has a starting point of dogmatic disbelief in which the only remedy would be direct hard evidence seen and experienced through the natural senses.

Not the only evidence. But the idea of a spiritual experience being determined by an individual’s personal subjectivity renders such experiences meaningless in terms of whether or not those experiences are driven by a super natural deity. Because people relate conflicting spiritual experiences. They can’t all be coming from the same supernatural deity. They can all be self generated emotional experiences, which is the answer that best fits all the available evidence. Kripal seemingly supports that idea.

Perhaps you’ll respond to my question about the Conference I was on the stand for, when a General Authorty’s talk produced a remarkable outpouring of feeling in the congregation. Was that a spiritual experience do you think? Was that The Spirit?

[MG 2.0]

At least Kripal goes as far as to say that the experiences people have are to be believed. He says that he doesn’t believe their beliefs but that he believes that they truly believe.

Kripal is advocating that you patronise people who claim subjective spiritual experiences. So yes, I can believe that you truly believe your beliefs without believing those beliefs myself. Okay. So what? By all means believe whatever you want. But this is a discussion board. The clue is in the title. If you come here to promote your spiritual experiences as “right” then that’s going to be discussed. Get over it.

But that’s not why I come here. I’m saying that those spiritual experiences are right for me and many others. They may not be ‘right’ for you. Again, that’s why I find it interesting that you and others seem to go against the ‘rights’ of others to have what they believe to be valid spiritual experiences.

Kripal is open and accepting of the reality that people of all stripes have spiritual/numinous experiences that they believe are real. Even though he doesn’t believe in their actual beliefs.

Period.

You seem unable to do that and then get one with your day.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

The issue for you is not that you have had spiritual experiences that have led you to a belief in God. That isn’t your backstory. You’ve maintained that you started out from a position of choosing to believe there was a God, and since then have attached things as support for that belief, whilst discounting out of hand anything that seemingly might make your choice seem errant. You’ve got a closed mind.

I did have spiritual experiences before making a choice to believe in God.

Sure, if I come across things that support my belief in God and in Mormonism I am open to that.

No, I don’t discount those things that might be troublesome to Faith. I’ve been open to this way of approaching things for many years.

I don’t have a closed mind. Only in the sense that I am more open to belief in God than disbelief.

Honestly, my experience tells me that it folks such as yourself that truly have closed minds to anything that might point you towards God.

Why that is, I can’t really say.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

But the idea of a spiritual experience being determined by an individual’s personal subjectivity renders such experiences meaningless in terms of whether or not those experiences are driven by a super natural deity. Because people relate conflicting spiritual experiences. They can’t all be coming from the same supernatural deity. They can all be self generated emotional experiences, which is the answer that best fits all the available evidence. Kripal seemingly supports that idea.

Perhaps you’ll respond to my question about the Conference I was on the stand for, when a General Authority’s talk produced a remarkable outpouring of feeling in the congregation. Was that a spiritual experience do you think? Was that The Spirit?

I think along the same line as Kripal does, that spiritual experiences that lead people towards goodness and light are all from the same source. For example, I believe that my Evangelical brothers and sisters have spiritual experiences that lead them towards Christ. As do I believe that those of the Muslim faith have spiritual experiences that lead them towards God.

Confucius led many towards greater light and truth.

You seem to get tangled up in all of this.

In answer to your question on the visiting General Authority, yes.

Regards,
MG

[MG 2.0]

Kripal is advocating that you patronise people who claim subjective spiritual experiences.

Interesting that you choose to use the word “patronize”.

If you're suggesting that Kripal believes that scholars should condescend to or treat with contempt those who claim to have had subjective spiritual experiences, then that would be an inaccurate characterization of his views. Kripal has argued for a more open-minded and respectful approach to these experiences, not a dismissive one.

Is it you who might be patronizing?

I see that around here quite a bit.

Regards,
MG