JosephM

58 minutes ago, PaulS said:

My current experience is that that experience was an illusion.

What is your current experience that makes that an illusion? Are we talking of the same kind of current experience as the past one or is your current experience based on study, reasoning and thinking that has made your past experience into an assumed illusion?

55 minutes ago, PaulS said:

In my head I’m not limiting it to the Muslim - that was just an example as a conversation starter.

I have had the very real experience of being in the presence of Jesus as God.  If you had asked me then if it was a genuine experience, I would have sounded very convincing that it was.  I could probably have said my experience was beyond any understanding of others, that I had experienced Jesus directly and that I knew the experience was genuine.

My current experience is that that experience was an illusion.

Same person, two different experiences, both of which seem completely and inarguably real.  I’m not sure seeking out our own experiences, and having them,  is actually the best measure.  Just thoughts.  Thanks for discussing.

Sometimes our experiences are limited by our understanding. The mind can make a familiar image to fit its understanding. It is no less real because it might have been the only way your mind could accept it at the time. You mentioned nothing other than the presence of God in the form of an image you were familiar with. Any other form of communication, feeling or sense?

I don't doubt that your experience was real. When i was a toddler i had experiences i couldn't process at the time and to do so would also seem today as an illusion because i could not compare it to words only symbols i was taught. But later i was able to receive in a more meaningful way. It made none of my prior experiences less real.

In my experience, God doesn't speak in words. We know and then translate to the best of our understanding. That's why it is so difficult to communicate that which has no language. It is more accurately sensed or felt in my experience. We are limited in communications to others in this realm by language and our mastery of it but words are not needed while experiencing God.

11 minutes ago, PaulS said:

Okay.  Thankyou for taking the time to explain.  I think you can entertain that personal experiences of God  differs amongst individuals - I expect some are similar to others and I know others make claims that are different.  It’s hard for me to understand how some people can say one experience is a true experience of God whilst simultaneously saying another’s experience isn’t true - like I think you are saying about the fanatical Muslim.  But I do acknowledge that maybe neither of us are actually speaking from a position of authority on that aspect of the matter as neither of us have had personal exposure to such individuals.

I don't know what the Muslim experience is and you may not either to even make a judgement . Why assume anything without personal knowlege? It seems to me better to not  compare so called experiences of others. It seems to me  better to seek out your own and then there will be understanding. Also i never said anothers experience wasn't true. I was just challenging your information that the Muslim had an experience directly from God to even use to say one was true and one not.

1 hour ago, PaulS said:

Sorry, I don’t mean to sound difficult, but I’m not asking you to explain your own experience but rather this concept, this belief or understanding that one’s experience is an accurate reflection of what there is to experience and not just our minds making it seem ‘real’.  

It's not a concept or belief. It is an experience that seems to go beyond the 5 senses we are familiar with. How do you know that this experience is accurate? You  "know" because the evidence while unseen is present and known. In fact it is sometimes verifiable by the experiencer and others present even though it can't be repeated at will.

Quote

I used the extreme example of the fanatical Muslim because I think they would also say their experience of God and what God desires, is very real to them, yet I suspect it would be different to yours.  And I just don’t see both necessarily being reconciled.  So I was interested if you had any insights into how we can understand this concept of ‘personal experience’ aside from the only point that seems to have been used so far - i.e. the experience to the user is real, so therefore it is real.

There you go .... thinking about what the "fanatical Muslim" is thinking. It seems to me you assume too much about him unless you have direct knowledge of his thinking. I have never heard a Muslim say he preformed an atrocious act because God  told him by other than his interpretation in a book. But i am open to such a testimony if you will provide one. Some Christians also say God told me and mean the Bible said it so i believe it was God because that is his word.

Quote

I’m happy if you cannot provide an answer - I was just asking to see if you could shed any further light.

Some things i believe. They are not from "knowing" .... mostly thinking and reasoning. They are not made real by my thinking and are subject to change. Some things i "know" and they were not obtained  except by experience beyond what most consider normal. If you wish me to make you understand how my experience is more accurate or real than the Muslim how can you expect me to provide an answer since i have no "fanatical Muslim" here to question and determine any differences. I can only speak or share for myself. Not trying to convince anyone what is real to them or more accurate.

On 3/7/2020 at 2:43 PM, romansh said:

I am led to believe PC is accepting of ALL, even scientific and non spiritual people? Or is there something different about this particular forum?

Even if I think it is harmful to the community?

I am sure you find some of my positions nonsense. These are the ones I would love to discuss.

This PC forum  is accepting of you Rom and it is good to have you here but i would not call your opinions nonsense even if the thought entered my mind. I hope you will consider that others don't find it compassionate to refer to their positions as nonsense even though you might not mind it yourself. It get you nowhere close to what i hope you are trying to accomplish (getting people to consider other ideas) by using such phrases. That is my opinion and one of the guidelines of etiquette on this forum. Try to be more sensitive in getting your points across.

Thanks for your presumed understanding,

JosephM (as Moderator)

1 hour ago, PaulS said:

At the end of the day if the conversation had to end with me just saying “that’s my experience” I believe I would understand why it might be stretch for the other to understand.  That’s why I was asking - to see if you had any other insights to further your explanation that perhaps could help me better understand your understanding concerning experience.

Oh. I do have further insight that might help you to form your own assumptions on the experience. They would comprise of Impressions and feelings that follow such. I just didn't perceive that you were asking with the whole Muslim thing question before.

So here goes. The experience happened numerous times while driving, while alone, while in the presence of others, while meditating, while relaxing and  flying an airplane to mention a few that come to mind. It is something i can't make happen by conscious control though there is usually a need for it whether for myself or another. In other words i have no conscious control over bringing on the experience that i am aware of. I count it a gift. During an experience there is a feeling of no separation not only between God and Self but also the other if involved. There is a sense of no fear, no locality and a sense of Home that is difficult to describe afterwards. There are no questions, nor doubt in such a state, only knowing. Sometimes one toggles back and forth so as to bring in a question the self might have. When it has returned to a more normal state there is a sense of inexplicable peace and joy. No i do not take drugs, not even aspirins , The only exception is in the last few years i use eye drops so i will not lose my eye from pressure.

That should be a start for your questions for a better understanding if such can be had without experiencing this for yourself.

2 hours ago, Elen1107 said:

I don't always agree with him either. But he's given  me enough ideas and insights that I can really appreciate him. He's one of my more favored writers from inside the Christian faith, so much so that it makes me feel bad when I do disagree. But I don't think he would want us to be going blindly along with him anyways. 

Bold Emphasis added by me. I think that is very profound. It seems to me that doing so (blindly following) is what got us locked into what we now feel the need to be free from.

18 minutes ago, PaulS said:

I think that might depend on one’s conditioning and one’s personal experience.  There are obviously others that agree with the suicide bomber/throat splitter.  Whether or not experience can be considered actual experience of God is clearly a personal thing but for somebody who doesn’t share another’s experience I think it’s reasonable to probe and question respectfully.

Notice i said obvious to "most all", not all. Very few in percentage of people agree with the throat splitter. My guess is less than 1 % and 0% on this forum. 🙂

Quote

Well, I can only tell you that I mentioned it not to refute or negate, but to question and try to understand.  Contrasting your experience with another, albeit extreme example, only serves to highlight the question I am asking about perceived reality of such experiences.  I don’t know if it is the same or not, that’s why I was asking to see if you could  provide any insight.

Yes, i believe your intentions were as you say but put yourself in the shoes of the other. If you told me you believe or experienced hell and i use an example saying people  believe in little green men from Mars to contrast your experience, what would you think? Was i probing your experience or making light of it? You be the judge. I'll stand by your verdict. Guilty or Not! 😛🙂🙂

You will never "know" God by a concept. You can believe in a concept but you can only "know" something by becoming one with it even if only for a brief moment. You can learn much about a butterfly by dedicating your life's study to it but you will never "know" the butterfly except to be one with it. In my experience it is the same with God

Quote

 

Paul Said...

No, I certainly don’t read harm into your words.  I am only asking and exploring around this concept of personal experience and possibly relying on it as an argument for one thing or another.  Sorry, I don’t mean to sound attacking in any way - for me it’s a genuine question.

 

Personal experience is not a concept that can be defended or argued for or against without being personal

42 minutes ago, PaulS said:

Sorry, I don’t see the obviousness you are referring to.  What is the agreement concerning the Muslim that leaves no doubt?

5 hours ago, PaulS said:

But Joseph, what about the fanatical Muslim who wants to slit the throats of infidels because of his innate knowing that that’s what God is about and wants?  Admittedly, I don’t personally know any throat cutting Muslims (i.e. fanatics) but I imagine they and those that are prepared to blow themselves up, might say the same thing as you.  Would you doubt their experience of God?

Read it. It ends with a question. It's obvious that most all would doubt their (the extremist Muslim) experience of God concerning sliting throats, etc.

Now why would you mention it in response to what i said was my innate experience except to refute what i said rather than to ask questions to understand it but instead by using an extreme  example as an argument to negate an experience? Or assume it is the same as the example?  😛😄

PS : No offence taken here ... just thought you needed a good tongue lashing ! 🙂

2 minutes ago, PaulS said:

No, I certainly don’t read harm into your words.  I am only asking and exploring around this concept of personal experience and possibly relying on it as an argument for one thing or another.  Sorry, I don’t mean to sound attacking in any way - for me it’s a genuine question.

The answer you were seeking is most obvious to me. It was agreement that there should be doubt concerning the Muslim and that was in response to my statement that i know there is a God.

11 minutes ago, PaulS said:

I’m only assuming his claim may be just as real as yours because he is prepared to blow himself up for his beliefs.  That seems pretty radical to me and I can only imagine something deep in their heart must speak to such people.  I imagine they feel convinced they know God.  To me it seems a bit dismissive just to say a religious suicide bomber isn’t convinced about their understanding of God.  If there experience of God gives them such strength to commit such an act, what does that mean for ‘experience’ is what I am wondering about.

Paul,

You are assuming and assuming is fine with me if that is your cup of tea. I was just sharing and was not looking for you to refute the possibility that my experience is real by comparing it to a suicide bomber. I don't know what they are thinking that makes them do what they do. There are many counterfeits in this world but that doesn't preclude the existence of the real. Perhaps you read harm or radical into my words?

3 hours ago, romansh said:

Based on your suspect experience?

Currently I would predict I would be an agnostic theist, so the answer would be I still would not know, but I would believe.

You can suspect the experiences of others all you want. 

I have nothing against your belief or your not knowing. You will never know til it happens to you.

4 hours ago, PaulS said:

But Joseph, what about the fanatical Muslim who wants to slit the throats of infidels because of his innate knowing that that’s what God is about and wants?  Admittedly, I don’t personally know any throat cutting Muslims (i.e. fanatics) but I imagine they and those that are prepared to blow themselves up, might say the same thing as you.  Would you doubt their experience of God?

WHo of them said it was innate knowing on their part? I can only speak for myself and own experience. Can you show me the Muslim that claims innate knowledge or is his just a belief from a book that says its okay? You admit you can't above so why assume his claim is the same as mine?

What claim have i made that you would compare what i said to your extremist Muslim  example?

12 minutes ago, romansh said:

I don't think so. The problem with reason is the axioms it is based on, the access to the axioms is to some degree limited. Reason gets updated as our axioms are up dated.

Well lets call this sixth sense, intuition for the moment. It was reason and logic that leads me to think my experience can be misleading. The problem for me with this argument it is my brain that is causing this experience whether of reason or that of intuition. I have no problem with intuition, apparently I rely on my intuition a lot. But ultimately intuition should be checked against reality to the best of our ability. At least that is the way I see it.

You can't by reason or by axioms know God. You can believe in God by reason but knowing is innate and doesn't require thought. In fact it is realized without thought. If i were to convince you by reason and axioms that there is a God you still would not "know".

19 hours ago, romansh said:

I am immediately reminded of Burl's recent account of his visions of heaven and hell. I accept these are very real to him, but what I am after is more in the traditional sense of real.

Reason has its limitations and the traditional sense of real can be ... well traditional ... and outdated .

19 hours ago, romansh said:

I am looking at my red kitchen chair, the marmalade tabby is sitting on it. The chair is red, that is my experience. Every neuron in my brain is screaming red. Yet the science tells me it is not red, science tells me colour is bit of an illusion. And this tells me while powerful, personal anecdote of experience can be very misleading.

Perhaps there is a sixth sense or even more  and while the world seems only real to your 5 senses,   your experience of it may be misleading as you point out. Yet,  it certainly doesn't discount the experience of those who have gone beyond that which we call reasoning using the 5 senses.

By calling ourselves progressive Christians, we mean we are Christians who…

1. Believe that following the path of the teacher Jesus can lead to healing and wholeness, a mystical connection to “God,” as well as an awareness and experience of not only the Sacred, but the Oneness and Unity of all life;

2. Affirm that the teachings of Jesus provide but one of many ways to experience “God,” the Sacredness, Oneness and Unity of life, and that we can draw from diverse sources of wisdom, including Earth, in our spiritual journey;

3. Seek and create community that is inclusive of ALL people, including but not limited to:

Conventional Christians and questioning skeptics,
Believers and agnostics,
Those of all races, cultures, and nationalities
Those of all sexual orientations and all gender identities,
Those of all classes and abilities,
Those historically marginalized,
All creatures and plant life;

4. Know that the way we behave towards one another and Earth is the fullest expression of what we believe, therefore we vow to walk as Jesus might have walked in this world with radical compassion, inclusion, and bravery to confront and positively change the injustices we experience as well as those we see others experiencing;

5. Find grace in the search for understanding and believe there is more value in questioning with an open mind and open heart, than in absolutes or dogma;

6. Work toward peace and justice among all people and all life on Earth;

7. Protect and restore the integrity of our Earth and all of Creation;

8. Commit to a path of life-long learning, compassion, and selfless love on this journey toward a personally authentic and meaningful faith.

Notes: We’ve heard you and in our many conversations with our readership, Progressive Christian pastors, theologians, scholars, visionaries, and in our observations and studies, we have co-created this updated version of our 8 Points of Progressive Christianity. Progressive Christianity is inherently always evolving and progressing. Please take these lightly but seriously. They are not dogma, they are simply a starting point to establish conversations and a foundation of values and beliefs that we have observed Progressive Christians generally share. It’s ok if you don’t agree with all the words or all the parts. We support your authentic path. You can use these in your faith communities and with family and friends to talk about what it means to you to be a Progressive Christian in today’s world. Here is to always progressing!

Copied from - ProgressiveChristianity.org by JosephM

Dee,

Progressive Christian. As Burl indicated it is a broad swath of Christian organizations. Our parent organization ProgressiveChristianity.org alone is comprised of a global network of progressive churches/ individuals listed on 194 pages on our parent site Here ----> https://progressivechristianity.org/global-network/ that can be sorted by state or country.

The latest wording of the 8 points that are general principles many use as a guide to the label of Progressive Christian on this site and the wording should be taken lightly and is found here ...

Progressive Christianity.org Discussion Board is an internet support community of individuals, mostly consisting of but not limited to those that embraces pluralism and the eight points of Progressive Christianity. An internet place of reaching out and encouragement to those for whom organized religion has proved ineffectual, irrelevant, or repressive, as well as to those who have given up on or are unacquainted with it. A safe place of discussion and sharing of ones views and thoughts concerning the journey or quest for truth and spiritual discovery. A place of challenging discussions where participants come to both share and learn. A community that gets away from systematized, exclusive absolutes, and where intellectual honesty is much more likely to be valued.

The discussion board welcomes all to participate, including but not limited to Conventional Christians and questioning skeptics, believers and agnostics, women and men, those of all sexual orientations and gender identities and those of all classes and abilities. Because of such a diversity of people and views, the discussion board is divided into individual forum each with its own guidelines and is strictly moderated without censorship or restriction of views yet with the requirement of mutual respect for others of differing views. A place where respect for the other and verbal behavior in discussions is more important than any view expressed. It’s a community of welcome without the bonds of having to accept the formal dogma and doctrines of man disguised as the church system, holy books, laws or rituals.

Tell us a little bit about yourself and join in on the discussions.

Joseph Mattioli ( Site owner in service to Progressive Christianity .org)

4 hours ago, romansh said:

In a more modern context evidence is data/observation in support of a particular position. In this case faith becomes a little circular, not having evidence for a position that is not seen, becomes evidence for that position.

Yes, however this evidence i spoke of is not  seen in a modern scientific context because the eyes / observation in your case may be limited to either the range of physical sight / equipment  or in some cases to a later direct effect observed as evidence. It would appear that faith in the context i give does become a little circular but the evidence is in the experience of the unseen that manifests itself in an inexplicable "knowing" that in the 'now' leaves absolutely no doubt in certainty. Many times this faith (outside of merely Jung's statement) has results that are indeed verifiable to the experiencer but not necessarily repeatable at will to others. Why? I can't say. It can always be explained away by one who requires evidence in the modern scientific context but to the one with the experience, no such evidence is required other than that which is given in that gift of faith..

2 hours ago, romansh said:

Being agnostically inclined … I would disagree, but that is neither here nor there in this context. The context being there are progressive Christian thinkers who say they know there is a God. I have no way of knowing what you know or don't know. But there are some who would dismiss your position as a faith statement.

I would identify as such and believe i understand your disagreement. Dismissing such a statement as a faith statement would be a most normal view, however i don't identify the word faith as most do. I identify the word most closely with the way it is described in Hebrew 11:1 which is difficult to grasp without experiencing.

 "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."

2 hours ago, thormas said:

I also get and can relate to Jung's answer but it is, I believe, a different knowing than most people mean by the word. 

Most probably it is.

I can relate to Carl Jung's answer. I would say the same thing.

7 hours ago, Elen1107 said:

It calls to mind an argument I once witnessed between a Catholic and a Lutheran. It was quite "heated" and they both were like 'I'm right and you're wrong, I have the truth and you don't'. I came down with a simple statement about the American 1st Amendment and religious freedom. They were both quite happy with and in agreement with this, and the argument stopped and everyone was friends again.

This is exactly what inclusiveness means. Communicating ones belief is part of inclusiveness but when it comes to the point of i am right and you are wrong a line is drawn. It has become personal. Getting personal will get one excluded. At that point  sometimes some thoughts are better left unsaid.

7 hours ago, Elen1107 said:

One could say, ok, you can worship your 'cannibal god', but you can't actually practice cannibalism. . . But this doesn't really set right with me either. Thing is, if one spreads this belief or anyone of these beliefs, the point comes in time where these things start spilling over into actions. If people start yammering on about how 'we believe in slavery, but don't actually practice slavery', the point can soo much more easily come where slavery again becomes a practice, even world wide practice. Seems to me this is true for all these negative practices and idologies.

Well, that seems to be the risk we take with the first amendment and to live in peace with others. To me, in my view, the alternative is not acceptable.  Beliefs are allowed to be communicated and one can state their opposing belief in response but if it reaches the point of calling names, insulting or getting personal to me it crosses the line of inclusion here and in progressive Christianity in general. I will listen to a person who believes in slavery and his /her reason/s why,  perhaps ask questions to better understand their thinking,  perhaps point out a few things they might consider which may alter their thinking, and then drop it. Why argue and escalate into something personal?(rhetorical)  It will not serve anything except to further alienate us and end an opportunity of reconciliation to a peaceful existence. In my view, the moment we become argumentative we may find our self crossing into irrational and unproductive territory.

On 3/2/2020 at 8:33 PM, Elen1107 said:

I'd like to say that I really do agree with everything else that's in the '8 Points' in a good and positive way,... It's just those two words.

Thanks

Just to explain  the one word in a different way ...... Inclusion includes people with different beliefs but is not inclusive of harmful actions. Hence the statement in that point that behavior is the fullest expression of what we believe. On this site stating your belief will not get you excluded from the community because we are inclusive of differing beliefs but not behavior such as being disrespectful to others or verbal attacks or violating our compassionate post guidelines.    That will get one excluded. One could argue we are excluding someone for their beliefs because they believe insulting others is okay or justified. However, it is the action, not the belief that would get one excluded. That's why it is best to leave somethings unsaid at times even though we might feel it is true or that we are justified in saying it.