The Validity of Christian Religious Experiences

[Faizal_Ali]

@Michelle

First of all, God did not ask Abraham to murder Isaac, but to sacrifice Isaac. Further, this request of Abraham was to teach a couple powerful lessons. The passage first demonstrates Abrahams’ faith, his incredible trust in God. Abraham believed God’s promise that through Isaac Abraham’s descendants would become as numerous as all of the stars in the sky.

I see.

So if a Mafia boss orders one his hit men to “sacrifice” a random person as a test of the hit man’s loyalty, and promises to reward the hit man if he does so, that is not murder?

I am not convinced, sorry

In any event, that misses the point. Your claim was that one could know it was not God speaking to him if the being speaking ordered something immoral like murder. However, there is no way (in your view) to know whether the order to kill is not, instead, an order to commit a “sacrifice” which is apparently moral.

[ho_idiotes (Matt)]

Faizal, I am curious as a thought experiment. What would constitute good evidence of a genuine experience with God? Are there any conditions that could be met?

Note. This isn’t a dig at your willingness to accept or not. It is genuinely intended as an attempt to work out what is reasonable and not - is it objectively assessable on any level?

[Faizal_Ali]

@ho_idiotes

Faizal, I am curious as a thought experiment. What would constitute good evidence of a genuine experience with God? Are there any conditions that could be met?

Sure. If some giant guy appeared before us and started doing stuff that was undeniably miraculous, like poofing an entire universe out of nothing or causing dead people to come back to life, that would be convincing. I don’t know why that would be unreasonable. Christians believe he did that kind of stuff already, but for some reason only when no one was around to create a lasting reliable record of the event.

[ho_idiotes (Matt)]

That is certainly a fair one, so if we categorise that, that sounds something like a requirement for miracles and an experience of them. How would we judge that experience? Presumably the ability to scientifically test and independently validate? The reason I am wondering that is the notion of people being mentally ill / hallucinating (I know there is a term I can’t quite remember here)
Just trying to turn that back to subjective experience which is where I think this thread was based? Is there another criteria than miracles?

Sorry if this is a bad understanding, I also recognise it isn’t your burden of proof to give solid standards for these experiences. In the spirit of Christian / non-Christian musing though…

[colewd (Bill Cole)]

@Faizal_Ali

Christians believe he did that kind of stuff already, but for some reason only when no one was around to create a lasting reliable record of the event.

On what basis do you think the documented evidence is unreliable?

[Faizal_Ali]

@ho_idiotes

That is certainly a fair one, so if we categorise that, that sounds something like a requirement for miracles and an experience of them. How would we judge that experience? Presumably the ability to scientifically test and independently validate?

Yes.

@colewd

On what basis do you think the documented evidence is unreliable?

I’ve been thru this with you already. For the moment I am only interested in discussing this with people who are willing and able to engage in a reasonable and rational discussion. Thanks for understanding.

[colewd (Bill Cole)]

@Faizal_Ali

I’ve been thru this with you already. For the moment I am only interested in discussing this with people who are willing and able to engage in a reasonable and rational discussion. Thanks for understanding.

Thats fine but you should not throw out poorly supported assertions.

[ho_idiotes (Matt)]

@ho_idiotes

How would we judge that experience? Presumably the ability to scientifically test and independently validate? The reason I am wondering that is the notion of people being mentally ill / hallucinating (I know there is a term I can’t quite remember here)
Just trying to turn that back to subjective experience which is where I think this thread was based? Is there another criteria than miracles?

Sorry if this is a bad understanding, I also recognise it isn’t your burden of proof to give solid standards for these experiences. In the spirit of Christian / non-Christian musing though…

Do you have thoughts on the above Faizal?

I am guessing another criteria could be accurate foreknowledge if framed and tested properly? I am not arguing for biblical prophesy here, more looking at contemporary experience

[Mark10.45 (Mark McGowan)]

@Faizal_Ali

However, there is no way (in your view) to know whether the order to kill is not, instead, an order to commit a “sacrifice” which is apparently moral.

Developing a personal relationship with Jesus reveals the truth…

Romans 12:1-2 - I beseech[a] you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your [b]reasonable service. 2 And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.

Galatians 2:20- I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me.

Through the sacrifice of our own lives, we learn to understand the sacrifices that God makes for us, and what God wants for us. I was told very clearly (an example) to quit my job, put down my worldly pursuits and study God’s word for His purpose, not mine (though I receive greatly through that). I know it is God because the confirmation comes in the form of peace in my life, recollection of dreams, conversations with others, revelation of scripture and spiritual conviction in my heart. I am convinced it is not psychosis, convinced enough to completely reset my life and follow without questioning. I am an extreme case, I know, but it makes complete sense to me.

[Faizal_Ali]

@Mark10.45

I know it is God because the confirmation comes in the form of peace in my life, recollection of dreams, conversations with others, revelation of scripture and spiritual conviction in my heart. I am convinced it is not psychosis, convinced enough to completely reset my life and follow without questioning. I am an extreme case, I know, but it makes complete sense to me.

I also do not believe it is a psychosis.

But you still have not given reason anyone else should believe this is a “personal relationship with God” other than the fact you believe it is. If you customer is firmly convinced the duck you served him is actually unicorn, that is not good reason for you to believe him, either.

[Faizal_Ali]

@ho_idiotes

Do you have thoughts on the above Faizal?

I am guessing another criteria could be accurate foreknowledge if framed and tested properly? I am not arguing for biblical prophesy here, more looking at contemporary experience

Yes, that would work. Or causing a decapitated person to regrow a new head, or any number of other things. The possibilities are literally endless, which makes it all the more curious that not a single one of these can be demonstrated.

[colewd (Bill Cole)]

@Faizal_Ali

Yes, that would work. Or causing a decapitated person to regrow a new head, or any number of other things. The possibilities are literally endless, which makes it all the more curious that not a single one of these can be demonstrated.

How about a tiny mustard seed turning into a fully grown tree

[Mark10.45 (Mark McGowan)]

@Faizal_Ali

If you customer is firmly convinced the duck you served him is actually unicorn, that is not good reason for you to believe him, either.

I suppose I don’t feel like I need to convince him it is duck, I am ok with him thinking it is unicorn…I just want him to enjoy the dish and come back for more. We all need to be fed, he can be happy enjoying his unicorn and I can know it is duck without needing to convince him otherwise. We are both happy that way.

1 Corinthians 1:18-25 - For the [g]message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19 For it is written:

“I will destroy the wisdom of the wise,
And bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.”

20 Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the [h]disputer of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? 21 For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe. 22 For Jews request a sign, and Greeks seek after wisdom; 23 but we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a [i]stumbling block and to the [j]Greeks foolishness, 24 but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

[ho_idiotes (Matt)]

I will bow out of this for now. Maybe I will find some time to do so reading on this a bit better and be better placed to interact.
Thanks for the civil back and forth so far all

[Faizal_Ali]

@Mark10.45

I suppose I don’t feel like I need to convince him it is duck, I am ok with him thinking it is unicorn…

But that you won’t believe him is the point.

[Roy (34-year veteran)]

@colewd

@Faizal_Ali

Yes, that would work. Or causing a decapitated person to regrow a new head, or any number of other things. The possibilities are literally endless, which makes it all the more curious that not a single one of these can be demonstrated.

How about a tiny mustard seed turning into a fully grown tree

That’d do too.

You do know that mustard isn’t a tree, right?

[ho_idiotes (Matt)]

great comment, genuinly made me smile - never thought of that
alright, before this one gets into the woods, so to speak. Lexical info for the word dendron which i presume colewd was referring to as “mustard tree” (not getting back into the conversation - figured this would be relatively interesting if nothing else

LSJ
δένδρεον, δένδρον, and δένδρος, τό (late δένδρος, ὁ, Ath.Med.ap.Orib.inc.7.4), δένδρεον always in Ep. (δενδρέῳ, δενδρέων, disyll., Il. 3.152, Od.19.520), also Ion., Hdt.4.22, and Dor., IG4.951.90 (Epid., iii B.C.); Aeol. δένδριον Theoc.29.12; later Ep. δένδρειον, τό, Arat. 1008, Nic.Th.832: δένδρος, τό, nom., IG14.1934 i 3; acc., Hdt.6.79; gen. δένδοεος IG1.951.91, δένδρους Meno Iatr.32.53; dat. δένδρει, Ion. -εϊ Hp.Nat.Puer.26, Meno Iatr.33.4, Arr.Ind.7.11: nom. pl. δένδρη E.Fr.484.5, Pherecr.130.9, IG4.951.121, PHal.1.99 (iii B.C.), Ant.Lib.31.5; dat. pl δένδρεσι Hdt.2.138, Hp.Nat.Puer.26 (and so usu. in Att. Prose, as Th.2.75, Pl.Lg.625b, cf. Moer.131, and later, as BCH12.27 (Mylasa), Str.2.1.14), late δενδράσι v.l. in J.BJ6.1.1: indeterminate forms. nom. pl. δένδρεα Hecat.202(a)J., Hdt.1.17, al., E.Ba.563 (lyr.); gen. δενδρέων Hdt.1.202, al., Tab.Heracl.1.129, al.: δένδρον, τό, first in Hdt.1.193, 3.107, regul. in Att., Lys.7.28, etc., and later Gr. (exc. in dat. pl., v. supr.), cf. Ael.Dion.Fr.119:—tree: δένδρον ἐλάας an olive-tree, Ar.Av.617; δ. ἄρκτου, = ἀκτῆ, Ps.-Dsc.4.173; δένδρα fruit- or mast-bearing trees, opp. ὔλη, timber, Th.4.69; δ. ἢμερα καὶ ἄγρια Hdt.8.115; δένδρα tall plants, Id.1.193 (so of rattan, Thphr.HP5.4.7; mustard, Ev.Matt.13.32); αὖον δ. stick, Call.Fr.49.

Liddell, H. G., Scott, R., Jones, H. S., & McKenzie, R. (1996). A Greek-English lexicon (p. 378). Oxford: Clarendon Press.

BrillDAG
δένδρον -ου, τό cf. Goth. triu, AS treow; [see δρῦς] tree, plant (woody), usu. of fruit, cultivated or wild PIND. O. 3.23 HDT. 1.193.3; δ. ἐλάας olive tree ARISTOPH. Av. 617; δένδρεον αὗον dry tree, i.e. staff CALLIM. fr. 260.52 etc. Ion. epic δένδρεον; Aeol. δένδριον later epic δένδρειον | see also δένδρος.

Montanari, F. (2015). M. Goh & C. Schroeder (Eds.), The Brill Dictionary of Ancient Greek. Leiden; Boston: Brill.

BDAG
δένδρον, ου, τό (Hdt.+ [in Hom. δένδρεον]) a relatively large woody plant, tree Mt 21:8; Lk 21:29; Rv 7:1, 3; 8:7; 9:4. Freq. of fruit-bearing varieties, and in contexts pointing to fig. use: Mt 3:10; Lk 3:9 (ELohmeyer, V. Baum u. Frucht: ZST 9, ’32, 377–79); the sound tree and the rotten tree, of good and bad people (Paroem. Gr.: Diogenian. 5, 15 ἐκ τ. καρποῦ τὸ δένδρον) Mt 7:17ff; 12:33 (s. IEph 14:2); Lk 6:43f. Lacking fruit δ. φθινοπωρινὰ ἄκαρπα Jd 12. In a good sense δ. ὡραῖον B 11:10; (εἰς) δ. γίνεσθαι become a tree Lk 13:19; Mt 13:32. ὡς δένδρα ὁρῶ like trees Mk 8:24 (cp. SIG 1168, 121).—Used by Hermas in various figures Hs 2:2; 3:1, 3; 4:1–4; 8, 1, 3f; 8, 2, 7 and 9; 8, 3, 1f; 8, 6, 1; 9, 1, 9f; 9, 27, 1; 9, 28, 1 and 3.—B. 49. DELG s.v. δένδρεον. M-M.

Arndt, W., Danker, F. W., Bauer, W., & Gingrich, F. W. (2000). A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature (3rd ed., p. 217). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

[AlanFox]

@Faizal_Ali

If some giant guy appeared before us and started doing stuff that was undeniably miraculous, like poofing an entire universe out of nothing or causing dead people to come back to life, that would be convincing. I don’t know why that would be unreasonable. Christians believe he did that kind of stuff already, but for some reason only when no one was around to create a lasting reliable record of the event.

I rather suspect you would think you were going mad.

[swamidass (S. Joshua Swamidass)]

@Roy

You do know that mustard isn’t a tree, right?

Really? It seems that some are:

Salvadora persica

[Faizal_Ali]

@AlanFox

I rather suspect you would think you were going mad.

Not if everyone else saw it, too.

I have seen many things that, if someone had told me beforehand, I would never have believed them. The 9/11 attacks. A human being running 100 metres in under 9.6 seconds. Donald Trump being elected President. I believe all these things happened, because the evidence is there.

If God existed and wanted everyone to know that he existed, he could do so in an instant, easily. So that he hasn’t is an interesting theological question. Personally, I go with the simplest answer to that question.