God experience can change atheists

[atanu]

In my understanding:

We are within the singularity, in the manifest or unmanifest modes.

Reality/Singularity/Brahman/God is ‘existence-consciousness’ itself for which space-time is not definable. Everyday, in deep sleep we enter this non dual singularity.

Some can intellectually understand the above and never forget. Some require re-enforcement from non dual experience in meditation. Some can taste the non dual reality with help of entheogen. And some who experience the non dual may begin to believe that existence-consciousness is higher than the level of the ego self.

 

[Audie]

In a survey of thousands of people who reported having experienced personal encounters with God, Johns Hopkins researchers report that more than two-thirds of self-identified atheists shed that label after their encounter, regardless of whether it was spontaneous or while taking a psychedelic.

Experiences of 'ultimate reality' or 'God' confer lasting benefits to mental health


Survey of subjective "God encounter experiences": Comparisons among naturally occurring experiences and those occasioned by the classic psychedelics psilocybin, LSD, ayahuasca, or DMT

...

As I always say the stupendous taste of mango can be known only by eating a mango.

Do you ever say that what people say is
a "god experience" always is a "god experience"?

 

[Audie]

Some can intellectually understand the above and never forget. Some require re-enforcement from non dual experience in meditation. Some can taste the non dual reality with help of entheogen. And some who experience the non dual may begin to believe that existence-consciousness is higher than the level of the ego self.

Ah, you understand it! So you can explain it in plain
English, no mumbo mumbo mystic-talk.

 

[Quintessence]

Well of COURSE god exists as a honorific or title. As does teacher and doctor and daughter. The question is, are they titles for things are are REAL and exist beyond the imagination? I can provide verifiable evidence that there are people who hold the title of teacher or doctor or daughter that are genuinely REAL beings. I could ALSO provide you with 'people' who have been given those titles who are NOT genuinely REAL beings, but rather figments of someone's imagination. Dr. Watson was given the title of doctor, and the title doctor is a REAL title... but Dr. Watson is NOT a genuinely REAL person, but rather the creation of an author's imagination.

MANY things and supposed beings have been given the TITLE of God... but there is absolutely ZERO verifiable evidence that ANY of them are anything more than figments of people's imaginations.

So... wait a sec. You actually believe there is "absolutely ZERO verifiable evidence" that reality and everything in it exists? Like... seriously? You seriously believe the sun has "absolutely ZERO verifiable evidence" of being real? Along with the moon, the stars, the very planet you live on, and your own body, plus all the emotions you experience?

Are.... are you okay? I mean, until today I'd never actually met an atheist that literally denied all reality existed. Are.... are you actually being serious? I mean, because it would mean you are literally insane. I'm pretty sure that's not the case. I cannot believe you think reality and everything in it is a figment of your imagination.

 

[Audie]

So... wait a sec. You actually believe there is "absolutely ZERO verifiable evidence" that reality and everything in it exists? Like... seriously? You seriously believe the sun has "absolutely ZERO verifiable evidence" of being real? Along with the moon, the stars, the very planet you live on, and your own body, plus all the emotions you experience?

Are.... are you okay? I mean, until today I'd never actually met an atheist that literally denied all reality existed. Are.... are you actually being serious? I mean, because it would mean you are literally insane. I'm pretty sure that's not the case. I cannot believe you think reality and everything in it is a figment of your imagination.

A bit off topic and not my discussion, but-
Do you really -really think said people are having
"God" experienced?

Could that fail to be the least likely explanation?

BTW there is a theory that matb is the only thing
that "actually" exists.
Better evidenced than the "god" theory, fwiw.

 

[ecco]

I can agree with you on creationism because the concept fails logically.

Please indulge me. I'd like to hear your argument for putting precognition and telepathy in the same 'woo" category as creationism.

There are thousands of Creation Myths. For the most part "Creationists" believe in the Creation Myth as told in the Old Testament. A myth that includes Adam and Eve and Noah and a flood that covered the earth and wiped out all but a handful of humans and animals.

There is overwhelming evidence that earth's features are the result of slow natural causes and not the result of flood waters rapidly receding. There is overwhelming evidence that the current human and animal populations could not have sprung from the members of Noah's ark.



There have been numerous tests made regarding things like telepathy and precognition. No properly designed test (true double-blind) has provided evidence in favor of telepathy and precognition. In many cases, tests have shown that the people claiming to have telepathic powers or being capable of precognition are either deluded or are out and out frauds.

 

[ecco]

Good. I'm glad you've put your thinking cap on and accepted the study. If an atheist takes certain types of hallucinogenics, it's more likely they'll become theists.

From the study, how many atheists took hallucinogenics and became theists? Note: I am not asking for a ratio, I am asking for actual numbers.

 

[Audie]

There are thousands of Creation Myths. For the most part "Creationists" believe in the Creation Myth as told in the Old Testament. A myth that includes Adam and Eve and Noah and a flood that covered the earth and wiped out all but a handful of humans and animals.

There is overwhelming evidence that earth's features are the result of slow natural causes and not the result of flood waters rapidly receding. There is overwhelming evidence that the current human and animal populations could not have sprung from the members of Noah's ark.



There have been numerous tests made regarding things like telepathy and precognition. No properly designed test (true double-blind) has provided evidence in favor of telepathy and precognition. In many cases, tests have shown that the people claiming to have telepathic powers or being capable of precognition are either deluded or are out and out frauds.

Is it woo woo?
Sure is so far.

When someone can actually do it, it
will be a world wide sensation of the
highest order.

 

[joe1776]

There have been numerous tests made regarding things like telepathy and precognition. No properly designed test (true double-blind) has provided evidence in favor of telepathy and precognition.

1. In an earlier post, you claimed that the bias against funding tests of telepathy was justified because "Precognition and telepathy and creationism all fall into the same bucket - woo. That is why their proponents are not taken seriously." Now, in contradiction, you're claiming that there have been numerous failed tests. Who funded these "numerous" failed tests?

2. The fact is that the few tests on telepathy that have been done have been the topic of intense controversy because they showed positive results. If they hadn't shown positive results there would be no controversy.

For example, the positive results of the Ganzfeld tests were challenged because it was possible that the staff, without knowing it, transferred clues from the sender to the receiver (there was no evidence of cheating or a credible theory of how this transfer might have happened).

The challenge resulted in the Auto-Ganzfeld tests which automated the process and eliminated the staff. It also showed positive results which were then challenged on the math employed.

As part of this test, subjects who showed telepathic ability were tested against subjects chosen randomly. And, those with ability scored higher no matter how the math was done.

In many cases, tests have shown that the people claiming to have telepathic powers or being capable of precognition are either deluded or are out and out frauds.

I know of no such tests but your claim is common knowledge. Yes, of course, people can be deluded and others make fraudulent claims. So what? Why should this be considered evidence to support your argument that telepathy and precognition are not real phenomena?

 

[QuestioningMind]

So... wait a sec. You actually believe there is "absolutely ZERO verifiable evidence" that reality and everything in it exists? Like... seriously? You seriously believe the sun has "absolutely ZERO verifiable evidence" of being real? Along with the moon, the stars, the very planet you live on, and your own body, plus all the emotions you experience?

Are.... are you okay? I mean, until today I'd never actually met an atheist that literally denied all reality existed. Are.... are you actually being serious? I mean, because it would mean you are literally insane. I'm pretty sure that's not the case. I cannot believe you think reality and everything in it is a figment of your imagination.

Wait a sec... this is a response to MY last post? And here I thought I was communicating with someone who had at least the reading comprehension of a ten year old. Or are you purposefully misrepresenting what I wrote because you have no valid response? Below is a copy of what I ACTUALLY wrote. Let's take a look.

Well of COURSE god exists as a honorific or title. As does teacher and doctor and daughter. The question is, are they titles for things are are REAL and exist beyond the imagination? I can provide verifiable evidence that there are people who hold the title of teacher or doctor or daughter that are genuinely REAL beings. I could ALSO provide you with 'people' who have been given those titles who are NOT genuinely REAL beings, but rather figments of someone's imagination. Dr. Watson was given the title of doctor, and the title doctor is a REAL title... but Dr. Watson is NOT a genuinely REAL person, but rather the creation of an author's imagination.

MANY things and supposed beings have been given the TITLE of God... but there is absolutely ZERO verifiable evidence that ANY of them are anything more than figments of people's imaginations.

Take THIS sentence for instance: I can provide verifiable evidence that there are people who hold the title of teacher or doctor or daughter that are genuinely REAL beings.

Note how I referred to them as REAL beings that ACTUALLY exist and can be VERIFIED with evidence. Hardly sounds like I'm claiming that there is zero verifiable evidence that reality and everything in it exists... in fact, I'm saying the exact OPPOSITE. Gosh... even a 10 year old could see that.

So where SPECIFICALLY do you imagine I stated that there is zero verifiable evidence that reality and everything in it exists? What I DID say is that there is a difference between a REAL doctor and a MAKE BELIEVE doctor. The REAL doctor went to an ACTUAL medical school and earned an ACTUAL medical degree. You can talk to them and they will RESPOND. You can ever reach out and touch them by shaking their hand. This REAL kind of doctor is the kind you may have actually visited when you were sick. THEN there are FAKE doctors, like Dr. Watson from the made up Sherlock Holmes stories. THIS doctor didn't actually go to medical school, didn't earn an actual degree, will NEVER respond to you if you talk to him and CANNOT be physically touched. Dr. Watson is the figment of someone's imagination.

Hopefully this isn't too complicated for you to grasp. You see, a REAL doctor has VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE for his or her existence... a FAKE doctor like Dr. Watson DOES NOT have any verifiable evidence for his existence. It's kind of like the difference between having VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE that the sun actually exists ( it can be SEEN and MEASURED) and you having absolutely ZERO verifiable evidence for your fantastical God claim.

You see, that's how normal people differentiate between REAL things and MADE UP things. You should really try it some time.

 

[Shad]

Good. I'm glad you've put your thinking cap on and accepted the study. If an atheist takes certain types of hallucinogenics, it's more likely they'll become theists.

Sure I accept the study. It does not really mean much beside people do way too many drugs and jump to assumption about what those drugs did. Just like my example from an old HS friend doing drugs and talking to aliens.

 

[charlie sc]

From the study, how many atheists took hallucinogenics and became theists? Note: I am not asking for a ratio, I am asking for actual numbers.

Out of the 789 atheists whom took hallucinogenics, 511 became theists.

 

[charlie sc]

Sure I accept the study. It does not really mean much beside people do way too many drugs and jump to assumption about what those drugs did. Just like my example from an old HS friend doing drugs and talking to aliens.

This is a correlational study, so it doesn't look at causes

 

[atanu]

Sure I accept the study. It does not really mean much beside people do way too many drugs and jump to assumption about what those drugs did. Just like my example from an old HS friend doing drugs and talking to aliens.

There is qualitative difference between a man having a life changing-consciousness expanding experience that becomes beneficial and another man who resorts to drugs for escaping life.

IMO, your example is an exception. Why cannot you accept the statistical validity of the study?

 

[charlie sc]

Are.... are you okay? ——

I mean, because it would mean you are literally insane. I'm pretty sure that's not the case. I cannot believe you think reality and everything in it is a figment of your imagination.

Making friends I see. Not willing to understand another person’s position but you are willing to call them insane. Interesting...

 

[ecco]

Is it woo woo?
Sure is so far.

When someone can actually do it, it
will be a world wide sensation of the
highest order.

Right up there with the second (third?) coming.

 

[Audie]

Making friends I see. Not willing to understand another person’s position but you are willing to call them insane. Interesting...

Not feeling well lately perhaps.

 

[ecco]

If it still isn't clear enough, I'll add that Creationists often complain that they can't get their projects funded and risk their reputations for even showing interest.

The only thing I can guess is that you are implying that since Creationists lodge that complaint and Creationists are generally considered illogical that anyone else lodging the same complaint must therefore be illogical and their complaint unfounded --- which is nonsense.

Precognition and telepathy and creationism all fall into the same bucket - woo. That is why their proponents are not taken seriously.

1. In an earlier post, you claimed that the bias against funding tests of telepathy was justified because "Precognition and telepathy and creationism all fall into the same bucket - woo. That is why their proponents are not taken seriously." Now, in contradiction, you're claiming that there have been numerous failed tests. Who funded these "numerous" failed tests?

Do you not see the difference between funded projects and funded tests?

2. The fact is that the few tests on telepathy that have been done have been the topic of intense controversy because they showed positive results. If they hadn't shown positive results there would be no controversy.

Nonsense. People say they have found Noah's ark. There is controversy and then there are the findings that it's a lot of Bull.

People say the Grand Canyon is the result of the receding waters from The Great Flood. There are findings that that is a lot of Bull. There is still controversy.

People say they can telepathically communicate with others. True double-blind tests show they can not. The proponents say there is controversy.

There is controversy about whether Shiva or Allah is the true God.

Controversy has no bearing on whether or not there are "positive" results. Why is it that you don't understand that?

For example, the positive results of the Ganzfeld tests were challenged because it was possible that the staff, without knowing it, transferred clues from the sender to the receiver (there was no evidence of cheating or a credible theory of how this transfer might have happened).

The challenge resulted in the Auto-Ganzfeld tests which automated the process and eliminated the staff. It also showed positive results which were then challenged on the math employed.

As part of this test, subjects who showed telepathic ability were tested against subjects chosen randomly. And, those with ability scored higher no matter how the math was done.

These ganzfeld tests?

Ganzfeld experiment - Wikipedia

A ganzfeld experiment (from the German for “entire field”) is a technique used in parapsychologywhich is used to test individuals for extrasensory perception (ESP). The ganzfeld experiments are among the most recent in parapsychology for testing telepathy.[1]

Consistent, independent replication of ganzfeld experiments has not been achieved​

Ganzfeld | Psi Encyclopedia.
The above site is a site that believes telepathy. It shows with pictures and descriptions of how the process works. It should be easy for you to spot the problem with such a test. Let me know if you can't.

I know of no such tests but your claim is common knowledge.

?

Yes, of course, people can be deluded and others make fraudulent claims. So what? Why should this be considered evidence to support your argument that telepathy and precognition are not real phenomena?

Fraudulent claims are only half the argument. The other half is that there is no evidence from independent double-blind test supporting psi.

 

[sealchan]

I was also an atheist at age 19 and had been for around ten years. There is no way in the world I would have considered going to a"school associated with the Holy Cross".

Had you previously studied Genesis and the Gospels and come away with a feeling of "this is a lot of nonsense" or with a feeling of interest to find the right religious niche? Being skeptical of Christianity and religion does not make you an atheist, it makes you a skeptical person.

You didn't say at what point in your life you came to the conclusion/realization that god(s) were just the creation of man's imaginings.

I have come to something close to this conclusion after reading Jung and Joseph Campbell. That was happening in close proximity to when my two God experiences occurred.

But I think it is a little bit more complex than that gods are just the result of humanities' imagination. There is something objective in the nature of the psyche that would recreate the gods were all memory of them suddenly wiped out.

 

[ecco]

From the study, how many atheists took hallucinogenics and became theists? Note: I am not asking for a ratio, I am asking for actual numbers.

Out of the 789 atheists whom took hallucinogenics, 511 became theists.

I did say "From the study". I asked because I never saw any actual numbers in the report. I just searched the report again, the one in the OP, and there was no 789 and no 511.

So, I'll ask again...
From the study, how many atheists took hallucinogenics and became theists? Note: I am not asking for a ratio, I am asking for actual numbers.