'mystics' and there relgious experiences./?/ not buying it.

[ChristineES]

The credibility of those 'anecdotes'.

I don't try and convince anyone of my own beliefs. They are credible to me, or I wouldn't believe in my faith, but trying to convince anyone else isn't in my plans. The only thing I could do is tell people about my faith if they wish to hear about it.

 

[roger1440]

I haven't read one convincing anecdote of a religious experience by /seems either catholic, or some form of that, similar, meditative 'oneness', or whatever.//.

I'm not buying it.

Since you are "not buying it" what do you think is happening?

 

[Jumi]

Pesto pizza can be a religious experience. I think X-mas a my house might be a religious experience for many people.

Maybe, I wouldn't know about that. I thought we were discussing mystical experience, not religious. Did you think they had something to do with the supernatural? They don't.

 

[Desert Snake]

Maybe, I wouldn't know about that. I thought we were discussing mystical experience, not religious.

That's true. But, notice how it gets vague? Many ''mystical' experiences are in the category of the persons religion, should they be? You already brought that up, in fact. So, just more reason to be skeptical of many of these anecdotes, imo.

 

[Jumi]

That's true. But, notice how it gets vague?

Part of that is that you haven't defined what kind of experiences you want to talk about. What kind of anecdotes? Give us some examples.

Many ''mystical' experiences are in the category of the persons religion, should they be? You already brought that up, in fact. So, just more reason to be skeptical of many of these anecdotes, imo.

That's just their interpretation of an experience that you are skeptical of. I would be skeptical if someone thought meditation was connecting with Jesus or something supernatural in a real way, but not skeptical about how they felt about it themselves.

 

[psychoslice]

I don't try and convince anyone of my own beliefs. They are credible to me, or I wouldn't believe in my faith, but trying to convince anyone else isn't in my plans. The only thing I could do is tell people about my faith if they wish to hear about it.

I wish more thought like you.

 

[Desert Snake]

Part of that is that you haven't defined what kind of experiences you want to talk about. What kind of anecdotes? Give us some examples.


That's just their interpretation of an experience that you are skeptical of. I would be skeptical if someone thought meditation was connecting with Jesus or something supernatural in a real way, but not skeptical about how they felt about it themselves.

Skepticism, where deserved. I have no problem believing people, if their stories seem legit.
Hypothetical example.
Someone feels ''at one'' with everything. Great. Wonderful. Are they Xian? So theres the devil. Are they ''at one'' with the devil? Ok the devil is metaphor, great; many xians think that the devil isn't metaphor. So, is this person now telling people that the devil doesn't really exist? No? Why not? etc .
That is the sort of skepticism I'm talking about.

 

[Jumi]

I would be skeptical about their interpretation there as well.

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

Such experiences have been extensively documented throughout the centuries and all over the world. To dismiss the experiences of literally millions of people because you haven't had anything similar is surely a little rash.

That is not the case with me. I have had "experiences" and some of these experiences remain satisfactorily unexplained to me: visions (or hallucinations) shared by others; objects moving with no apparent physical means by which I could decipher; etc. At the time, I thought I was demonically oppressed. But to take a situation where we are unable to reason then throw in an irrational, unprovable "explanation" to these events fails.

The reductionist claim is that those who report religious experiences are in some way abnormal or pathological. This doesn't stand up to close inspection:

It doesn't stand up to inspection because a great many of us skeptics make no such claims and make no such broad statements about someone's sanity; and if they do, they do so in error.

• All human beings are susceptible to suggestion; this has been proven numerous times through several experiments all with repeatable results. It is quite normal that a person be susceptible to suggestion.
• The human mind has a way of manifesting what it most desires. This is often why we see a person we are romantically or sensually interested in, then misperceive that they are also interested in us. This is a normal phenomenon.
• All human beings are susceptible to hallucination. Just about everyone, at one point in time or another in their life, has hallucinated. Hallucinations can be auditory, visual or even tactile (I had one of those; scared the heck out of me!)
• All human beings are at greater risk of being susceptible to suggestion, manifesting what it desires and hallucinating during times of emotional stress, during times of grief, during times of fear, loss, loneliness and mood-altering experiences. A "Holy Roller" church is a mood altering experience; as is drugs, as is dancing to exhaustion, as is a great number of things. It is during these times of altered conciousness or mood-altering experiences or times of high stress, grief, loss or fear (ranging from meditation to loss of a loved one to despair, etc) that most of these "spiritual experiences" arise.

IN short, I for one am not calling one who believes they had a vision, theophany, saw a ghost, etc. "crazy" or "pathological". I am simply calling them "mistaken"; or due to suggestion or great stress, had a "pathological experience". Having a "pathological experience" does not make one pathological.

1. pathological experiences are typically disturbing and life-disrupting; religious experiences are neither.

Not always true. My brother, after my mother's death, reported seeing her watching over him with angel's wings. This brought him great comfort. The most rational explanation to this is due to him having an hallucination due to his stress, loss, grief, loneliness, etc.

2. a psychological study of people reporting religious experiences conducted in the USA showed that were were no more suggestible than normal.

I do not need a source to view this as most likely a very true statement. The perception that you have that we who are skeptics view those who have such experiences as being weak minded or ill is inaccurate. We are all susceptible to suggestion. Our minds are not as autonomous as we would like to believe that they are; and we are poor data taking beings (though we'd like to believe otherwise).

3. many who have had religious experiences have shown great common sense and practical abilities, like Teresa of Avila or Blaise Pascal.

Intelligence, aptitudes, one's personal character -- these are not defenses against falling prey to suggestion, hallucinations, or errors in thinking. In fact, I would suggest that very intelligent people are more susceptible to such things; firstly because they think they are not susceptible and secondly because of the power of their imagination and their ability to reason out a reason why they had a true experience. Knowledge (especially knowledge on the human mind) and critical thinking are our best defenses against our thinking and perception errors. Knowledge and critical thinking may be possessed by the dumbest and brightest of us; by the sanest and insanest of mankind.

 

[Jumi]

Seeing objects moving without apparent cause sounds like making a paranormal claim or probably a hallucination. I don't think most of us are talking about things like this.

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

Seeing objects moving without apparent cause sounds like making a paranormal claim or probably a hallucination. I don't think most of us are talking about things like this.

I guess I wasn't clear and I don't know how to be any clearer. These were brought up to demonstrate that I have had experiences that, to this day, defies any explanation of which I know about. I have had many other experiences that I can explain through what I have posted above -- the frailties of the human mind -- that at the time I believed were "spiritual" or "religious" experiences. Being "slain in the Holy Spirit'. Speaking in tongues. Perceiving things about others without obvious reason (that I attributed to the biblical "gift of the spirit" called "word of knowledge"). Being deeply moved during church services. The incredible feeling of bliss I experienced the day of my baptism. The incredible "joy" I felt when I said the sinner's prayer and "committed my life to God".

• All human beings are susceptible to suggestion; this has been proven numerous times through several experiments all with repeatable results. It is quite normal that a person be susceptible to suggestion.
• The human mind has a way of manifesting what it most desires. This is often why we see a person we are romantically or sensually interested in, then misperceive that they are also interested in us. This is a normal phenomenon.
• All human beings are susceptible to hallucination. Just about everyone, at one point in time or another in their life, has hallucinated. Hallucinations can be auditory, visual or even tactile (I had one of those; scared the heck out of me!)
• All human beings are at greater risk of being susceptible to suggestion, manifesting what it desires and hallucinating during times of emotional stress, during times of grief, during times of fear, loss, loneliness and mood-altering experiences. A "Holy Roller" church is a mood altering experience; as is drugs, as is dancing to exhaustion, as is a great number of things. It is during these times of altered conciousness or mood-altering experiences or times of high stress, grief, loss or fear (ranging from meditation to loss of a loved one to despair, etc) that most of these "spiritual experiences" arise.

IN short, I for one am not calling one who believes they had a vision, theophany, saw a ghost, etc. "crazy" or "pathological". I am simply calling them "mistaken"; or due to suggestion or great stress, had a "pathological experience". Having a "pathological experience" does not make one pathological.

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

ps -- hallucinations can be as extreme as ... well, we all know ... to as mild as believing you heard someone call your name, but when you turn around, no one is there. Hopefully that clarifies where I'm coming from.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

That's true. But, notice how it gets vague? Many ''mystical' experiences are in the category of the persons religion, should they be? You already brought that up, in fact. So, just more reason to be skeptical of many of these anecdotes, imo.

I think what happens is that people have an experience and then make assumptions about it based on pre-existing beliefs.

 

[psychoslice]

I think what happens is that people have an experience and then make assumptions about it based on pre-existing beliefs.

I think your right in a way, but really, how could one know if they themselves have never experienced that, like I myself experienced something after years of depression, I sort of fell into a gap, and in that that gap I realized everything, it was like what they say when you see your life flashing before you. I remember when I was shot while driving along a highway just put of town, when I got shot and lost control of my vehicle, my whole life flashed before me. It was the same when I had my experience after years of depression, but what flashed before me was not my life but life itself, I realized that we are all one, that nothing is separate, that I wasn't just this body, but all there IS.

 

[Vouthon]

I think what happens is that people have an experience and then make assumptions about it based on pre-existing beliefs.

That's exactly what happens. The Catholic mystics admit this, in a very circumspect way:

"...For, in the transformation within the Unity, all spirits fail in their own activity, and feel nothing else but a burning up of themselves in the simple Unity of God. This simple Unity of God none can feel or possess save he who maintains himself in the immeasurable radiance, and in the love which is above reason and wayless. In this transcendent state the spirit feels in itself the eternal fire of love; and in this fire of love it finds neither beginning nor end, and it feels itself one with this fire of love. The spirit for ever continues to burn in itself, for its love is eternal; and it feels itself ever more and more to be burnt up in love, for it is drawn and transformed into the Unity of God, where the spirit burns in love. If it observes itself, it finds a distinction and an otherness between itself and God; but where it is burnt up it is undifferentiated and without distinction, and therefore it feels nothing but unity; for the flame of the Love of God consumes and devours all that it can enfold in its Self...Behold! by each of these images, I show forth to God-seeing men their being and their exercise, but none else can understand them. For the contemplative life cannot be taught. But where the Eternal Truth reveals Itself within the spirit all that is needful is taught and learnt......"

- Blessed John of Ruysbroeck (1293 - 1381), The Sparkling Stone​

Note he says "if it [the person having a mystical experience] observes itself, it finds distinction and otherness between itself and God". That is, he makes an assumption based upon his knowledge of dualistic monotheism. He interprets it according to the beliefs he grew up with and the view of God he knows best. Yet when he is "burnt up", that is captured in the experience itself, beyond any reasoning or thinking, he finds himself "without distinction" vis-a-vis deity.

So the mystic is saying that his thinking mind asumes one thing, when he observes himself; while his unthinking mind during the experience itself feels pure, undifferentiated unity that "devours all" in one "Self".

The experience leads him to refine his prior understanding of God, as it did for another mystic Henry Suso:

"...In order to attain perfect union, we must free ourselves of God...The common belief about God, that He is a great Taskmaster, whose function is to reward or punish, is cast out by perfect love; and in this sense the spiritual man does divest himself of God as conceived of by most people. The intellectual where is the essential unnameable nothingness. So we must call it, because we can discover no mode of being, under which to conceive it...A man may in this life reach the point at which he understands himself to be one with that which is the nothing of all the things that one can conceive, imagine or express in words. By common agreement men call this Nothing "God" and it is in itself a most essential Something. And here a person knows himself to be one with this Nothing, and this Nothing knows itself without the activity of knowing. But this is mysteriously hidden further within..."

- Blessed Henry Suso (c. 1296-1366), German Catholic mystic & Dominican priest
​

Mystical experiences always evoke a sense of ineffability and turn out to be life-transforming.

Naturally I disagree with the OP that Catholic mystics are not, so to speak, genuine. They would not say the challenging, provocative things they say otherwise. It certainly wouldn't have made for them a comfortable existence (although the two above were beatified and are widely revered in the Church, the latter was a disciple of Meister Eckhart). Now they might be delusional, yes, yet these were very learned and intelligent men, often among the greatest intellects of their time. They had a lot to lose, yet they stuck to their guns and eventually convinced others that they were telling the truth, including the institutional church itself. I think there's something in that, personally.

Yet to understand them fully they commend one to go through a similar, life-changing experience to them. Its the only way to really 'get' them:

"...Wouldst thou know my meaning?
Lie down in the Fire
See and taste the Flowing
Godhead through thy being;
Feel the Holy Spirit
Moving and compelling
Thee within the Flowing
Fire and Light of God..."

- Saint Mechthild of Magdeburg (c. 1207 – c.1294), German Catholic mystic​