[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
The thing is, so can any number of other hypothetical creatures that aren’t God. It’s not really a matter of what God can or can’t do; it’s a matter of humans being so much more limited that any number of non-gods could fool us easily.
Thing is, if you are dealing with beings of godlike power, and you even suspect that one or more of them are evil or otherwise dishonest - and the Devil exists in this scenario - then rationally, you have to doubt your own senses and judgement in dealing with any of them. If you meet God and come away without doubting it was him, that’s less an example of how convincing he is than it is of you being incautious.
[/QUOTE]
You’re positing a level of doubt which, I feel, is utterly incompatible with being a functioning theist. If you feel yourself incapable of telling which god-like creature is which, then you couldn’t justifiably worship at all, since you can’t be certain that you’re ‘targeting’ your worship at the right being.
Therefore, the fact that I’m presumed to be a theist further presumes (in my opinion) that I believe that the dieties and diety-level decievers can be at least theoretically told apart - even if this comes down to a “by their works shall you know them” thing. And yes, if the reason you’re skeptical about your divine revelation is “but God wouldn’t tell me to do something like that!”, then that’s sufficient doubt to balk.
[QUOTE=begbert2]
You’re positing a level of doubt which, I feel, is utterly incompatible with being a functioning theist. If you feel yourself incapable of telling which god-like creature is which, then you couldn’t justifiably worship at all, since you can’t be certain that you’re ‘targeting’ your worship at the right being.
[/quote]
Well, that’s honestly part of my problem with theists. Even assuming they are right, there’s no way we can tell who’s who between God and Satan, or between either of them and a third sufficiently powerful third party for that matter. It’s like the question "How do you tell the difference between reality and a perfect simulation ?'; the answer being you don’t. When the possibility of human-undetectable deception is brought into the argument, by definition we can never know what the truth is.
[QUOTE=begbert2]
Therefore, the fact that I’m presumed to be a theist further presumes (in my opinion) that I believe that the dieties and diety-level decievers can be at least theoretically told apart - even if this comes down to a “by their works shall you know them” thing. And yes, if the reason you’re skeptical about your divine revelation is “but God wouldn’t tell me to do something like that!”, then that’s sufficient doubt to balk.
[/QUOTE]
That’s pretty much been my position in this thread; all we can realistically judge is the results of the advice & commands we are given, not the identity of the giver. With the proviso that if it’s God telling me to do Bad Things, that proves we’ve been wrong about God being a good guy. Although it only proves it in the abstract, since I can’t tell it was actually God in the first place. But then, if it’s Satan giving the good advice and God the bad, I’m better off following the “wrong” guy, when you get right down to it.
Is there a difference between divine revelation and profound spiritual insight?
I’ve wondered what happens inside a person that would convince them that their experience was more than just a personal insight. In particular those who actually feel they have received direction from God.
I’ve known some groups where it was common for members to talk about receiving direction from God. “God led me to do or say X” I always found that a little disturbing. If people look for divine guidance too eagerly they are more likely to interpret their own feelings and preferences as coming from some infallible source.
Better IMHO to take personal responsibility for whatever your choices are and be open to whatever insight comes your way.
[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
Is there a difference between divine revelation and profound spiritual insight?
[/QUOTE]
A divine revelation by definition would have to come from a god, which are is typically thought of as a being or beings of some sort; “spiritual insight” could just as easily apply in a godless universe with some sort of “spiritual” component, or to an insight that happens to be made independent of God(s).
[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
Not really; that just means that whoever wrote that part lacked imagination and/or was ignorant. To be fair, we can’t really expect some bronze age guy to consider the possibility of aliens grabbing him and wiring his brain into a virtual reality simulation, after all. Or of someone using drugs or brain stimulation to force you to believe that it’s God you are talking to.
[/quote]
Well, OK, if you’re not really buying into it, even for sake of argument, that’s fine. Just let me know what your assumptions are, OK?
OK, you said good advice, not idiosyncratic but seemingly worthless, but nonetheless harmless, advice.
Again, just let me know what your assumptions are.
And this wouldn’t have been perceived as good advice, or worthless but harmless advice. It would have been perceived as crazy talk.
It’s fine if you want to discuss this based on your actual assumptions, but why don’t you just go ahead and call God the Invisible Magic Sky Pixie, and get it over with. You’re clearly uncomfortable with accepting Christian assumptions for the sake of the argument.
[QUOTE=RTFirefly]
Well, OK, if you’re not really buying into it, even for sake of argument, that’s fine. Just let me know what your assumptions are, OK?
[/quote]
I AM buying into it for the sake of argument. That doesn’t mean that all the rules of logic or facts & possibilities the writers never thought of don’t exist.
[QUOTE=RTFirefly]
OK, you said good advice, not idiosyncratic but seemingly worthless, but nonetheless harmless, advice.
[/quote]
Well, yes, I said that. Repeatedly. Is there some sort of rule that a genuine god can’t give good advice ? A god that according to the OP is trying to be convincing ?
[QUOTE=RTFirefly]
And this wouldn’t have been perceived as good advice, or worthless but harmless advice. It would have been perceived as crazy talk.
[/quote]
Until the believers in question tried it, which they would, being believers, and it actually worked.
[QUOTE=RTFirefly]
It’s fine if you want to discuss this based on your actual assumptions, but why don’t you just go ahead and call God the Invisible Magic Sky Pixie, and get it over with.
[/QUOTE]
Because I’m trying to go along with the OP. You appear to be arguing with things I’m not saying; I suggest you save it for threads where I AM calling God and his followers names. It’s not like I won’t be again sooner or later.
In my opinion, a spiritual insight would be based on things you were already aware of. But with a divine revelation, all bets are off. God might tell you something you would never have come up with on your own. To use an example from above, you could meditate on spiritual issues every day for years and never come to the insight that you should wear a blue hat every Thursday.
[QUOTE=RTFirefly]
OK, that’s a good starting place. Is the revelation consistent with what you know of Jesus in the Bible?..<snip>…Compare against the Bible, as I said above. Compare against what I believe to be my own experience with God.
[/QUOTE]
I can’t see that this makes sense - if you were having a schizophrenic episode, sufferering from ‘thought implantation’, the voices created by your dysfunctional mind would no doubt draw upon pre-existing assumptions you had of the world - so a Christian’s delusions/auditory hallucinations would likely incorporate biblical concepts or motifs, for instance.
[QUOTE=Little Nemo]
In my opinion, a spiritual insight would be based on things you were already aware of. But with a divine revelation, all bets are off. God might tell you something you would never have come up with on your own. To use an example from above, you could meditate on spiritual issues every day for years and never come to the insight that you should wear a blue hat every Thursday.
[/QUOTE]
That’s interesting. I can see that specific direction is different than insight. In the book The Cross and the Switchblade the preacher felt moved to leave what he was doing and go to the inner city to work with gangs. Based on a true story.
However, even insight , understanding and clarity of thought concerning a situation or problem, can be new information.
The NT says the spirit will lead us into all truth. I’ve come to see it as being in touch with something that is always available to us. It’s as if we’re connecting to a vast souce of knowledge and understanding. Sometimes it is so startling it seems like a personality apart fom us. Gandhi spoke of it while in prison. He was meditating on how to approach a certain issue and he heard the solution as if it was a different voice even though it came from within.
[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
That’s interesting. I can see that specific direction is different than insight. In the book The Cross and the Switchblade the preacher felt moved to leave what he was doing and go to the inner city to work with gangs. Based on a true story.
However, even insight , understanding and clarity of thought concerning a situation or problem, can be new information.
The NT says the spirit will lead us into all truth. I’ve come to see it as being in touch with something that is always available to us. It’s as if we’re connecting to a vast souce of knowledge and understanding. Sometimes it is so startling it seems like a personality apart fom us. Gandhi spoke of it while in prison. He was meditating on how to approach a certain issue and he heard the solution as if it was a different voice even though it came from within.
[/QUOTE]
Great post. I agree with all of it. In my readings and experience I have heard people say they get spiritual insights in the form of thoughts not recognized as their own. Some say the insights come to a different part of their mind and they recognized them that way, others see words impressed into their minds, and with others it is pure feelings, strong desire or pull to do something. Insights are a part of everyone’s life, and we use them sometimes without even knowing it. I disagree with the OP saying only a handful since Jesus’ time. There are spiritual insights available for anyone and everyone who truly desires them. They are plentiful. As for knowing if they are really from spiritual sources, if you know right from wrong you will know this. One more thing, you are never forced to follow these insights by anyone from the spiritual realms.
[QUOTE=lekatt]
There are spiritual insights available for anyone and everyone who truly desires them. They are plentiful. As for knowing if they are really from spiritual sources, if you know right from wrong you will know this. One more thing, you are never forced to follow these insights by anyone from the spiritual realms.
[/QUOTE]
How terribly convenient - if I don’t agree with you, then I have no sense of morality, seems to be the implication.
[QUOTE=Stealth Potato]
Actually, first I’d ask to be teleported back to a planet with a breathable atmosphere. Then I’d try to negotiate about the chocolate.
[/QUOTE] Which of course means you’re in no position to negotiate. That’s one of the annoying things about Gods/Stupendously Advanced Alien Beings.
[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
Well, that’s honestly part of my problem with theists. Even assuming they are right, there’s no way we can tell who’s who between God and Satan, or between either of them and a third sufficiently powerful third party for that matter.
[/QUOTE]
What does God need with a spaceship?
[QUOTE=lekatt]
Great post. I agree with all of it. In my readings and experience I have heard people say they get spiritual insights in the form of thoughts not recognized as their own.
[/QUOTE]
I’ve had that happen and it startled me. A thought with such clarity and impact that it seemed almost like a separate voice, or what you might imagine telepathy to be.
That’s why I asked about the difference. I think there’s been much more than a handful of people who have had a profound experience that felt like revelation. Not many that have spoken to a burning bush or had tongues of flame or doves descend from heaven.
I don’t think it’s quite that simple. There’s been far too much justified as right before the Lord. People’s emotions and personal preferences come into play and they may either misinterpret some insight or create one out of their own desires.
For me it’s boiled down to love and truth. Whatever is moving me needs to be compatible seeking those two ideals. Good intentions based on untruths cause problems as do bad intentions. I try to look at the act and the spirit behind the act without religious labels.
[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
I’ve had that happen and it startled me. A thought with such clarity and impact that it seemed almost like a separate voice, or what you might imagine telepathy to be.
That’s why I asked about the difference. I think there’s been much more than a handful of people who have had a profound experience that felt like revelation. Not many that have spoken to a burning bush or had tongues of flame or doves descend from heaven.
I don’t think it’s quite that simple. There’s been far too much justified as right before the Lord. People’s emotions and personal preferences come into play and they may either misinterpret some insight or create one out of their own desires.
For me it’s boiled down to love and truth. Whatever is moving me needs to be compatible seeking those two ideals. Good intentions based on untruths cause problems as do bad intentions. I try to look at the act and the spirit behind the act without religious labels.
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Staggerlee]
How terribly convenient - if I don’t agree with you, then I have no sense of morality, seems to be the implication.
[/QUOTE]
I don’t think that is the implication at all. Put in other words, you should use your sense of right and wrong when dealing with the spiritual world the same as you do in the physical.
[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
Well, that’s honestly part of my problem with theists. Even assuming they are right, there’s no way we can tell who’s who between God and Satan, or between either of them and a third sufficiently powerful third party for that matter. It’s like the question "How do you tell the difference between reality and a perfect simulation ?'; the answer being you don’t. When the possibility of human-undetectable deception is brought into the argument, by definition we can never know what the truth is.
That’s pretty much been my position in this thread; all we can realistically judge is the results of the advice & commands we are given, not the identity of the giver. With the proviso that if it’s God telling me to do Bad Things, that proves we’ve been wrong about God being a good guy. Although it only proves it in the abstract, since I can’t tell it was actually God in the first place. But then, if it’s Satan giving the good advice and God the bad, I’m better off following the “wrong” guy, when you get right down to it.
[/QUOTE]
We agree again. How does one know whether it is God talking, or someone else?
I believe we can rule out Satan, at least a Satan that is more powerful than yourself. If God is good He would not have created evil, and then if one of His creations went over to the dark side, doing so would not make him more powerful. This is not StarWars. So now we need to define God, which is impossible. But we can get most people to agree that God is love, and God is honest and truthful. So if you get an insight that is loving for others, that is truth, and it passes what you believe is right, then it is probable ok to act upon it.
When dealing with the spiritual or the physical the same moral rules apply.
[QUOTE=lekatt]
I believe we can rule out Satan, at least a Satan that is more powerful than yourself. If God is good He would not have created evil, and then if one of His creations went over to the dark side, doing so would not make him more powerful.
[/quote]
Of course God could be evil, or indifferent, or crazy. And since we see plenty of evil in the world we know for a fact that any God that’s out there isn’t going to stop it. And, there’s a rather larger gap between “Creator of the Cosmos” and me; plenty of room to fit in a Satan that’s far stronger than me but far less powerful than God.
[QUOTE=lekatt]
So now we need to define God, which is impossible. But we can get most people to agree that God is love, and God is honest and truthful.
[/quote]
Except by your own argument, they are wrong to say so. If we can’t define God, then we can’t say “God is love”, or honest, or truthful, or anything at all.
[QUOTE=Thudlow Boink]
What does God need with a spaceship?
[/QUOTE]
To pick up the goddesses, of course. You know how the girls dig a cool ride.
[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
I AM buying into it for the sake of argument. That doesn’t mean that all the rules of logic or facts & possibilities the writers never thought of don’t exist.
[/quote]
I’m good with the rules of logic, but concluding that possibilities the writers never thought of, trump the assumptions of Christianity, do seem to mean you’re assuming it’s mostly false anyway.
Your initial point was that believers should follow this potentially divine good advice because it was good, and then if it proved to be divine as well, then so much the better.
But that’s meaningless if the advice isn’t clearly good advice upfront.
