P.S. The lie to which I refer is your accusation about what I perceive as bashing.
An addendum: Poly, I like you. I agree with a lot of what you post and disagree with a lot of what you post. I just feel that what you last posted is from left-field.
Let me amend my statement to what I should have said in the first place:
Like everybody else, I have a bad habit of generalizing. And in particular it bothered me that in this case (which you do have to admit presents a touchy situation to discuss “objectively”), you would see it as “disguised witnessing,” as you alleged above. You have my sincere and heartfelt apologies for my having converted specific situations, then and now, into generalities that unjustly misrepresented you. And thank you for your tempered response…as phrased, my post probably deserved a flame that you refrained from posting. I am grateful.
Aw, shucks, Poly. We’ll never get this thread moved into the BBQ Pit getting along so well.
That’s a joke, for the humour-impaired individuals!
Thanks.
oooo… civility on a GD thread in SD???
What has this board come to? 
Beth
Tangents! Tangents! Getcher fresh tangents!
Monty - now that we’ve all kissed and made up, I’d like to move the discussion forward again. Any suggestions, or should I continue with the line of questioning I’d opened up?
Careful there, RT; talk like that will give credence to Krispy’s allegations! (That’s another joke!)
To tell you the truth, I’d think to examine this subject, we’d have to first determine why folks assume that the “illuminating experience” has to be caused by a deity instead of looking for a sequence of physical events not from the realm of miraculous.
Waddyasay, Poly?
That’s actually where I was going with the before/after questions, Monty.
Sounds good, Monty.
::: puts head on chopping block :::
First point: I have never claimed as a percept that God revealed Himself to me. Certainly I’ve made exactly that claim enough times, but it is a matter of belief that the entity that I perceived is identical to the Triune God of more-or-less-orthodox Christianity. Insofar as I can distinguish inner (Godgiven) guidance from inner (self-given) proclivity, He certainly appeared to be encouraging that identification. But what I perceived is that a “big, powerful, love-filled” entity made contact with me. (Those are adjectives that I would use to describe my perception of the characteristics exhibited by what I felt myself to be encountering. – Note: if I am at all unclear in this, I’m doing my best to communicate orally things that happened within myself and which I have not needed to sort out and verbalize. So allow me some “wiggle room” on terminology, and if something seems unclear or self-contradictory, post a question on it.)
Now, the first question in my mind as an analytical person would be, why would somebody like me believe this to be Him and not wish-fulfillment? Particularly in view of my distant relationship with my father and the fact that this entity sounds like the idealization of what I would see a father-god to be?
The answer to me includes the following:
-
There was an overwhelming sense of other-identity exuded by this entity. Just as I can tell two posters, say Gaudere and Andros ( ;)) apart by the personalities of their post, I can distinguish the person which this entity purported to be from anything I would dream up…consciously or unconsciously. And IMHO I have a pretty fair understanding of my subconscious wish-fulfillment fantasies, and how they are distinguished from external reality. This one gave every sense of being external reality and not self-fulfilling fantasy.
-
In self-actualization, I tend to be a bit of a pollyanna, noting but discounting negatives and accentuating the possible positives. Acting on (self-generated) impulse therefore often causes me some heartache when things don’t work out just as I’d hoped. The peculiar sequence of events that resulted from my “encounter with God” experiences has been self-fulfilling in ways that I could not have anticipated and largely not in a religious framework. As an example, I can trace a series of improbable, unanticipatable events that lead directly to my present generally serene emotional state and feelings of fulfillment. This sequence begins with a rather impulsive decision to befriend a young man accused of child molestation in 1990. To have come to the conclusion that this was anything other than an altruistic, feel-good-about-yourself act is attributing to my subconscious the ability to evaluate and correlate a series of decisions made by myself and other people over the next ten years, the majority of those other people ones that I had not yet met at the time I acted on this impulse. I felt then that God was leading me to do it, and the net result is that He was, and for the emotional good of a number of other people, including me, as much as for the young man in question. Now, if I have pride to overcome in myself, it is in my mental abilities, but I would never advance a claim that I’m that good at anticipating a desired future! (Especially when, at the time, the eventual results were not a future that I did desire.)
-
The immediate results of the conversion experience were those classically reported by “experiential converts” and not particularly amenable to my own mental orientation. I was an Episcopalian (and still am) – God follows logical rules, and theophanies and such are analyzable (self-referential point! :o). Instead I found myself emotionally hungry for God, saw Scripture with a different viewpoint than before, just a whole list of behaviors that did not match the pre-experience me. And that I was not consciously aware were classic post-conversion behaviors at the time.
I think I have to go with Lib’s take on the subject. I don’t much care what the theological take on Who He is ends up being. I’m certain He’s there, and that He loves me. And whether he’s Jehovah, Allah, or Mumbo Jumbo in His spare time doesn’t matter to me. My allegiance is to Him, not to a series of theological propositions concerning what He might be.
Any resemblance to a witness in the preceding post is purely coincidental… more or less
Because I’m really interested in what people have to say about this, I’m bringing this thread back to the top (from Page 2). But you’ll never catch me typing “Bump”!
::mumbling in a DavidB tone of voice::
Next thing ya know, they’ll be drinking Root Beer in Great Debates… heathens…
† Jon †
Phillipians 4:13
Jon: 
A couple of questions for people of faith inspired in part by the responses in this thread and some of the opinions expressed in the Could You Believe? thread: How much do you think your experience was influenced by your state of mind at the time?
That is, given that a religious frame of reference will dispose one toward miraculous rather than mundane explanations of events, how important is prior belief, however fleeting and unfulfilled, to interpretation of these experiences?
Have you known an atheist who had a similar experience without any prior faith?
It would seem some small propensity to believe must be present (albeit in a dormant or lapsed state) in order for these experiences to have such an effect.
Sum Ergo Cogito
I’d like to interject something here, and hopefully without hijacking the thread. If this has already been discussed in another thread, please point me there (or I can create one).
People have described, in great detail, their personal experiences in being touched by God. How does this relate to their perceptions and tenets of Religion? Some people mentioned never having known God at all, or not being church goers. A few mentioned being church members most of their lives, but not seeing the meaning until later.
I suppose it’s part of a greater question of how God and Organzied Religion relate. In most discussions, modern Christians have taken a stance of “as long as you believe in God, we won’t discuss what Religion you practice.” There are a great many Christian denominations founded on idealogical differences that people were willing to risk their immortal souls to defend. Christianity, as an off-shoot of Judaism, is the same.
And perhaps this is the inconsistancy I see in most of this discussion. Those who believe take us as far as finding their faith, and leave us there. No Religion, in my limited scope of experience, suggests that faith in God is all you need. Whole systems of moral and ethical behavoir exist, along with serious theological discourse on the nature of just who or what God is.
I believe the comment was made early on (and forgive me for not quoting properly), “what if God turns out to be Kali?” To which the response was, “it would still be God.” But who is this God?
Is it reasonable to discuss how God can touch our lives and cause miracles to happen without considering our own beliefs of why God does this? And considering further what effects these miracles have on our existing beliefs? One person is secure in knowing God is there to help shoulder their burdens - not lifting them, or averting them, but giving that person strength to carry on. Another person believes God interceded on their behalf because God has plans for their life. To me these seem like two totally different Gods. One loves you, cares for you, and is providing moral support to help guide you through life. The Other intercedes directly to see that you fulfill your part in a greater plan.
These are interpretations (specifcally mine), and may not be accurate. What I’m curious about here is how prior belief may have shaped a person’s outlook on these experiences, and further how these experiences shape a person’s future beliefs.
I hope this isn’t off-topic for this thread, or covered elsewhere. I’d be happy to move this discussion elsewhere if it is. I also hope it’s not too disjointed or rambling. Things are going so well over here, however, I wanted to post this and get people’s thoughts.
inkblot
“Stercus, stercus, stercus, moritus sum!”