Can a Religious Experience of a God Produce Certain Knowledge of That God?

[Sunstone]

Might your op have it the wrong way around? The example has a directional flow from experience to knowledge. Could it be that our experiences are a function of what we think we know?

I'm inclined to thinks that when we (re)construct our experiences we are always trying to do something with them. I'm not sure that there is an essence to recalled experience. I'm not sure that it even offers an afterglow.

Hey Stephen! So good to see you again! If you feel like it, PM with what you've been up to. I've missed you!

By the way, I think you've got a point there. There is a huge and hot debate among scholars of these experiences to what extent they are influenced by prior knowledge.

 

[Trailblazer]

Great. How do we go about doing such research - in an unbiased fashion?

Of course we all have biases, but if we are seeking knowledge of God we need to be aware of our biases and make a sincere effort to put them aside, and seek only truth.

“O My brother! When a true seeker determineth to take the step of search in the path leading unto the knowledge of the Ancient of Days, he must, before all else, cleanse his heart, which is the seat of the revelation of the inner mysteries of God, from the obscuring dust of all acquired knowledge, and the allusions of the embodiments of satanic fancy. He must purge his breast, which is the sanctuary of the abiding love of the Beloved, of every defilement, and sanctify his soul from all that pertaineth to water and clay, from all shadowy and ephemeral attachments. He must so cleanse his heart that no remnant of either love or hate may linger therein, lest that love blindly incline him to error, or that hate repel him away from the truth…..”
From: Tablet of the True Seeker

Satanic fancy just refers to our own propensity to follow what we want, our selfish desires. I do not believe in a being called Satan.

I never have felt bad. Religious beliefs just don't affect me. I am more interested in all the real problems that humans have without dealing with the imaginary ones.

Religion should be about the real problems that humans have... otherwise it is fit for the fire.

“Man is like unto a tree. If he be adorned with fruit, he hath been and will ever be worthy of praise and commendation. Otherwise a fruitless tree is but fit for fire. The fruits of the human tree are exquisite, highly desired and dearly cherished. Among them are upright character, virtuous deeds and a goodly utterance.”
Tablets of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 257

Nice for the messengers no doubt - but for the rest, they have to either believe they are true messengers or just charlatans and/or are just misguided. And who can tell when time effectively separates us from such individuals.

It is really not very nice for the Messengers because they get rejected and persecuted, tortured and imprisoned for the Cause of God.

We should never just believe they are “true” Messengers of God without thoroughly checking them out. There is a lot of evidence we can look at; their character, their life, their scriptures, the religion they established.

“What does it mean to investigate reality? It means that man must forget all hearsay and examine truth himself, for he does not know whether statements he hears are in accordance with reality or not. Wherever he finds truth or reality, he must hold to it, forsaking, discarding all else; for outside of reality there is naught but superstition and imagination.” – Abdu’l-Baha, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, p. 62.

A bit tough though when one voice seems to contradict others. Why on earth are there so many different faiths if God was the one talking to each, or does God just love inter-faith friction - as in our past history - or is God just a bit careless and/or not bothered?

The reason there are so many different religions is that each religion was revealed for a given age in history, to suit the needs of that age. When a religion no longer suits the needs of a successive age, God reveals a new religion, and so on and so forth, and this process of revelation has been with us from eternity and will continue throughout all of eternity, as mankind and the world he lives in changes over time.

God does not love friction but it was meant to be that religions would be separate until the “time of the end” when God would send a Messenger to unify all the religions. That time came in 1844. The problem is that the older religions do not want to be unified with a new religion because they hold fast to their own religious traditions and believe their religion is the “only way” to God. That is starting to change, but it is a long slow process, because religions have been separate all throughout history.

Well it's nice to know that God works in mysterious ways so as to inform the believers as to the purpose of creation. Shame the message seems to have initiated so many faiths, and to cause such disagreement as to what the message really is.

There is no need for disagreement because the eternal spiritual verities of all the religions are the same but the message is new and the social teachings and laws are new, and the older religions do not think we need anything new, so they reject this message. Baha’u’llah has now come to explain this, but as I said, people do not like a new religion because they are attached to their older religions and they see this new religion as a threat.

Some people are also afraid because in many ways it is very different from the older religions, but this is a new age, an age that was ushered in by the coming of a new Messenger. We can never go back to the old system of religion.

“The world’s equilibrium hath been upset through the vibrating influence of this most great, this new World Order. Mankind’s ordered life hath been revolutionized through the agency of this unique, this wondrous System—the like of which mortal eyes have never witnessed.

Immerse yourselves in the ocean of My words, that ye may unravel its secrets, and discover all the pearls of wisdom that lie hid in its depths. Take heed that ye do not vacillate in your determination to embrace the truth of this Cause—a Cause through which the potentialities of the might of God have been revealed, and His sovereignty established. With faces beaming with joy, hasten ye unto Him. This is the changeless Faith of God, eternal in the past, eternal in the future. Let him that seeketh, attain it; and as to him that hath refused to seek it—verily, God is Self-Sufficient, above any need of His creatures.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 136

I was not raised in any religion, so I did not have any bias when I stumbled upon the Baha’i Faith at age 17. I almost immediately recognized it as the Truth because of its teachings, but I did not think much about God at that time, or for many decades… God came later and that is still a work in progress. I really do try to understand how people who are attached to their older religions feel, but I can be a lose patience sometimes because it is so frustrating, since we can never have unity of the human race as long as people cling to the past and believe only their beliefs are right and everyone else is wrong.

PS I try to be courteous all the time but I am often a sinner.

Funny thing, I haven’t noticed…

 

[Trailblazer]

Well, it's true that God does not talk to us. But a spiritual experience can be a confirmation that you are on the right track. In that way it confirms and strengthens our knowledge of God.

I suppose it might strengthen your faith in God, but I agree with Subduction Zone who said “As for myself, I think the answer is that you can NOT be certain that anything you learn during a religious experience is true knowledge of deity.” And I agree for the reasons he gave in his post:
#1 Sunstone, Yesterday at 10:31 AM

That agreement is confirmed by the following passage:

“Wert thou to ponder in thine heart, from now until the end that hath no end, and with all the concentrated intelligence and understanding which the greatest minds have attained in the past or will attain in the future, this divinely ordained and subtle Reality, this sign of the revelation of the All-Abiding, All-Glorious God, thou wilt fail to comprehend its mystery or to appraise its virtue. Having recognized thy powerlessness to attain to an adequate understanding of that Reality which abideth within thee, thou wilt readily admit the futility of such efforts as may be attempted by thee, or by any of the created things, to fathom the mystery of the Living God, the Day Star of unfading glory, the Ancient of everlasting days. This confession of helplessness which mature contemplation must eventually impel every mind to make is in itself the acme of human understanding, and marketh the culmination of man’s development.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 165-166

 

[Sunstone]

That my friend was a very good post. It really takes an atheist to be objective about this God stuff, so we believers can learn a lot from atheists…

I've known plenty of atheists who are anything but objective about "this god stuff". Having said that, your comment reminds me of the words of the Dutch theologian, Miskotte, who said, "Atheists are our natural allies because they ask the right questions."

Besides that, I have always said that you atheists are probably smarter than believers on average.

As you know, on average doesn't mean squat about individuals. There's some pretty smart theists in this big, wide world.

I particularly like this part: “You do not experience the photon as it really is: That is, as a photon. Instead, you experience the photon as light. In the same way, it is possible when having an experience of your favorite god that you do not experience the god as he or she really is (which we will call here "X"). Instead, you experience them as "God".”

According to my beliefs, nobody can EVER experience God as God really is, because nobody can EVER know what God really is, so you are right on target…

I'm not convinced it's absolutely impossible to experience god as god is -- just convinced it's impossible to know that you have.

 

[Sunstone]

The same could be said for UFO experiences - where an initial misunderstanding of any visual phenomena that might have been an explanation just isn't corrected later, but a firm belief grows instead.

I think you must be conflating the popular notion of what constitutes an hallucination with what the psychologists who study hallucinations consider to be an hallucination. Just my hunch.

 

[Trailblazer]

I feel a bit smug to point this out, but from all the evidence, those who don't have any religious beliefs do tend to be at the higher levels of intelligence on the spectrum - scientists and/or intellectuals, for instance.

No, you are not smug.. That is just the stats...

 

[Sunstone]

True knowledge is both demonstrable and transferable.

It seems to me that you are defining knowledge as something "both demonstrable and transferable" without, however, demonstrating that your definition is descriptive rather than merely prescriptive. Was that your intent?

 

[Trailblazer]

Strange. You quoted me, but the quote came up attributed to someone else.

Thanks for pointing that out... That happens sometimes when I have umpteen million posts and I am dog tired.
I just fixed that post and another post to Truthseeker9 where I mentioned YOUR post. And I just took the winner from sub zone and gave it to you. He is still a winner in my eyes though...

I just posted three posts on another forum under my husband's login and I had to go back and delete them all and re-post them under my login... What a royal pain... He got in trouble for leaving himself logged in on the one computer we share, but he apologized more than once so it is all good now...

 

[Sunstone]

Thanks for pointing that out... That happens sometimes when I have umpteen million posts and I am dog tired.
I just fixed that post and another post to Truthseeker9 where I mentioned YOUR post. And I just took the winner from sub zone and gave it to you. He is still a winner in my eyes though...

I just posted three posts on another forum under my husband's login and I had to go back and delete them all and re-post them under my login... What a royal pain... He got in trouble for leaving himself logged in on the one computer we share, but he apologized more than once so it is all good now...

Sounds like you got it all worked out. By the way, thanks for being refreshingly non-egotistical.

 

[Trailblazer]

I've known plenty of atheists who are anything but objective about "this god stuff". Having said that, your comment reminds me of the words of the Dutch theologian, Miskotte, who said, "Atheists are our natural allies because they ask the right questions."

That is true, many atheists are anything but objective about God... especially when it comes to the nature of God and Messengers of God atheists can get very emotional...

As you know, on average doesn't mean squat about individuals. There's some pretty smart theists in this big, wide world.

Yeah, that is true too. I think it is smart to believe in God if you can...

I'm not convinced it's absolutely impossible to experience god as god is -- just convinced it's impossible to know that you have.

I fully agree...

 

[Sunstone]

I don't think you answered my question. You're explaining why people can't trust their experiences and know for certain that something came from God. I agree that people can and do misinterpret personal experiences. But, if there is an Omnipotent God, it's impossible that he is incapable of using communication methods that interact with the heart. mind, and soul in a way that negates all of your concerns regarding a person's certainty. Your argument assumes there is no God with this capability. So again, my question to you is, do you believe that an Omnipotent God would be capable of such communication?

Goodness! Are you professing to know the will of your God in these matters? To know for certain that your God wants to reveal Himself to you as He really is? How can anyone possibly fathom deity just as deity is?

 

[Mock Turtle]

It is really not very nice for the Messengers because they get rejected and persecuted, tortured and imprisoned for the Cause of God.

We should never just believe they are “true” Messengers of God without thoroughly checking them out. There is a lot of evidence we can look at; their character, their life, their scriptures, the religion they established.

Still all a bit subjective though, isn't it. There is no real way to discern a true messenger from a charlatan - even if we might be persuaded by their enticing messages. And, the problem just gets worse, as the original messages tend to get distorted, revised, etc., over time.

The reason there are so many different religions is that each religion was revealed for a given age in history, to suit the needs of that age. When a religion no longer suits the needs of a successive age, God reveals a new religion, and so on and so forth, and this process of revelation has been with us from eternity and will continue throughout all of eternity, as mankind and the world he lives in changes over time.

One explanation, not mine - which would be, that religions are a natural phenomena (and probably inevitable), that tend to arise when any particular grouping achieves sufficient self-awareness, of themselves and their surroundings, mostly comes from the inherent desire for humans to see meaning in all that surrounds them, and the inherent faults within us and our thinking. This, because often religions arise in isolation from others (historically, and long before the present religions), should account for all the various religions - the circumstances and environment determining much of this.

God does not love friction but it was meant to be that religions would be separate until the “time of the end” when God would send a Messenger to unify all the religions. That time came in 1844. The problem is that the older religions do not want to be unified with a new religion because they hold fast to their own religious traditions and believe their religion is the “only way” to God. That is starting to change, but it is a long slow process, because religions have been separate all throughout history.

There is no need for disagreement because the eternal spiritual verities of all the religions are the same but the message is new and the social teachings and laws are new, and the older religions do not think we need anything new, so they reject this message. Baha’u’llah has now come to explain this, but as I said, people do not like a new religion because they are attached to their older religions and they see this new religion as a threat.

Some people are also afraid because in many ways it is very different from the older religions, but this is a new age, an age that was ushered in by the coming of a new Messenger. We can never go back to the old system of religion.

That hardly makes any sense to me - given the enormous number of deaths, etc., that have come from religious beliefs, and still occur.

I was not raised in any religion, so I did not have any bias when I stumbled upon the Baha’i Faith at age 17. I almost immediately recognized it as the Truth because of its teachings, but I did not think much about God at that time, or for many decades… God came later and that is still a work in progress. I really do try to understand how people who are attached to their older religions feel, but I can be a lose patience sometimes because it is so frustrating, since we can never have unity of the human race as long as people cling to the past and believe only their beliefs are right and everyone else is wrong.

I've been stumbling for much of my life but I kicked religions out the door quite early on - never regretted it one bit.

"PS I try to be courteous all the time but I am often a sinner."

Funny thing, I haven’t noticed…

Is that the courtesy or my being a sinner?

 

[Mock Turtle]

I think you must be conflating the popular notion of what constitutes an hallucination with what the psychologists who study hallucinations consider to be an hallucination. Just my hunch.

I was meaning, that often a false belief tends to take hold from an initial impression and that it is often difficult to re-evaluate this later when our memories are often so tricky and deceptive at times.

 

[Sunstone]

I was meaning, that often a false belief tends to take hold from an initial impression and that it is often difficult to re-evaluate this later when our memories are often so tricky and deceptive at times.

That I agree with. Wholly agree with. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[Trailblazer]

Still all a bit subjective though, isn't it. There is no real way to discern a true messenger from a charlatan - even if we might be persuaded by their enticing messages. And, the problem just gets worse, as the original messages tend to get distorted, revised, etc., over time.

There is a lot of objective evidence for the Messenger I believe in, Baha’u’llah, because He came in recent history and there are a lot of books and records, history and Writings penned in His own hand. But at the end of the day, a lot of how we relate to that evidence is subjective. Some people immediately believe He is a Messenger, and some people have to study the Writings for years, and some people just do not believe that He is a Messenger even after doing some research.

One explanation, not mine - which would be, that religions are a natural phenomena (and probably inevitable), that tend to arise when any particular grouping achieves sufficient self-awareness, of themselves and their surroundings, mostly comes from the inherent desire for humans to see meaning in all that surrounds them, and the inherent faults within us and our thinking. This, because often religions arise in isolation from others (historically, and long before the present religions), should account for all the various religions - the circumstances and environment determining much of this.

In short, I believe it is God who reveals the major religions to a Messenger according to the needs of humanity at various intervals in history; so religions do not arise from anything humans do, although they are tailored to human needs so they reflect the capacity of humans to comprehend them... The Messenger only reveals what humanity needs and is capable of understanding collectively at any given time in history.

That hardly makes any sense to me - given the enormous number of deaths, etc., that have come from religious beliefs, and still occur.

I guess you are saying it does not make sense that God would allow religions to be separate and continue fighting with each other as they have for millennia? All I can say is that was part of God’s Plan, but it is over now because people have a choice to unite under one religion if they choose to, or at the very least they have a choice to at least accept religions other than their own... History and politics are not my area of expertise but I think there is a lot less fighting by way of wars since the 19th century when Baha’u’llah came, than there was in previous times in history. There are extreme groups such as ISIS bit that is not representative of religion as a whole. Many people continue arguing over their beliefs but it seems to me that people are starting to understand that it is better to at least accept other religions even if they do not change their own religion. They still banter in conversation but I think people are just working through their thoughts and feelings.

I've been stumbling for much of my life but I kicked religions out the door quite early on - never regretted it one bit.

I never had a religion early on so I never had to kick one out the door. Probably the fact that I did not have a bad experience with religion as a child is one reason I was receptive to Baha’i... Confirmation bias is real killer when one is seeking truth. Once someone has had a bad experience it is difficult to forget it.

Is that the courtesy or my being a sinner?

It is courtesy.

 

[Mock Turtle]

There is a lot of objective evidence for the Messenger I believe in, Baha’u’llah, because He came in recent history and there are a lot of books and records, history and Writings penned in His own hand. But at the end of the day, a lot of how we relate to that evidence is subjective. Some people immediately believe He is a Messenger, and some people have to study the Writings for years, and some people just do not believe that He is a Messenger even after doing some research.

In short, I believe it is God who reveals the major religions to a Messenger according to the needs of humanity at various intervals in history; so religions do not arise from anything humans do, although they are tailored to human needs so they reflect the capacity of humans to comprehend them... The Messenger only reveals what humanity needs and is capable of understanding collectively at any given time in history.

So, nothing from earlier beliefs, like sun worship or any other similar beliefs, has ever had any effect on subsequent beliefs? Or was God involved in these too?

I guess you are saying it does not make sense that God would allow religions to be separate and continue fighting with each other as they have for millennia? All I can say is that was part of God’s Plan, but it is over now because people have a choice to unite under one religion if they choose to, or at the very least they have a choice to at least accept religions other than their own...

Many, including myself, would see that as being evidence of a rather nasty, vengeful God, and not one to be worshipped in any way. But then, for us, being non-believers, it hardly matters does it, except we have to live in the world created and afflicted by so many different religious beliefs.

Atheist kicked off live Egypt TV show and told to go 'to a psychiatric hospital'

History and politics are not my area of expertise but I think there is a lot less fighting by way of wars since the 19th century when Baha’u’llah came, than there was in previous times in history. There are extreme groups such as ISIS bit that is not representative of religion as a whole. Many people continue arguing over their beliefs but it seems to me that people are starting to understand that it is better to at least accept other religions even if they do not change their own religion. They still banter in conversation but I think people are just working through their thoughts and feelings.

Timing is everything. Perhaps if we had such intervention at other times, we might not have had so many wars and/or destructive behaviour from the many religious believers.

I never had a religion early on so I never had to kick one out the door. Probably the fact that I did not have a bad experience with religion as a child is one reason I was receptive to Baha’i... Confirmation bias is real killer when one is seeking truth. Once someone has had a bad experience it is difficult to forget it.

I didn't have any negative experiences with religion, I just didn't need it. I conjectured, about the age of 11, and learning about so many different faiths, that it was likely that none were true rather than them all or one being true. Nothing changed throughout my life to alter this view.

It is courtesy.

Lack of or adequate?

If the first, then apologies to all - just me I'm afraid - being honest.

 

[syo]

Thus, one cannot be certain that a religious experience imparts true knowledge of deity.

exactly. we will never have full knowledge of any deity. we will only see an aspect of a deity, the aspect that the deity will choose to show us.

 

[Scott C.]

Goodness! Are you professing to know the will of your God in these matters? To know for certain that your God wants to reveal Himself to you as He really is? How can anyone possibly fathom deity just as deity is?

I'm not suggesting that God has reveald himself to me in some sort of entire and complete way or that I fathom the depths of his mysteries. What I am suggesting is that God has indeed revealed himself to some people throughout history and today, in a way that they can fathom him to the exact extent to which he wants to be fathomed. Your argument seems to be that nobody's experience can be trusted to validate the existence or nature of God. I disagree with you. An Omnipotent God is capable of revealing himself to anyone that he wants. This does not give special credit to the recipient for having super human gifts. Rather it places credit on God's ability to communicate effectively and in ways that mere mortals can't understand. But when a mere mortal has a prophet like, maximum revelatory experience that comes from the true God and is intended to impart absolute knowledge, that person and God both know that the message was sent and received as intended.

I think I understand your point but I don't think you understand mine. And that could be my fault for not explaining myself well. I summarize your argument as saying that since we are humans with limited capacity, every alleged divine experience can be explained away using scientific explanations of how we misinterpret experience. My point is that your argument assumes there is no omnipotent God who is indeed communicating to humans in a certain and effective way. I don't mean to irritate you, but I'm still not clear if you would accept that if there were an Omnipotent God, that he could impart certain knowledge of himself to fumbling, imperfect mortals with limited capacity. He could open their minds and souls to the heavens and to truths of eternity that under normal circumstances they would not be capable of perceiving. I believe that chosen prophets both today and in the past have received profound revelation of this nature that most of us don't get.

 

[Rational Agnostic]

Of course I've heard the "Can God create a rock...?" type question many times. It's sort of like asking if a person is infinitely strong, can he beat himself in a benchpress contest. If he can beat himself, then he is not infinitely strong, since he lost the contest to himself. Yet, if he can't beat himself then he is not Omnipotent since there is something that he can't do. I find this line of reasoning to be a silly reason to believe there can't be an Omnipotent God.

Well, I agree, it's a very silly argument against the existence of God, and certainly does not prove that a powerful God could not exist. however, it does prove that omnipotence, as defined in the English language, cannot exist without a contradiction.

 

[Truthseeker]

I suppose it might strengthen your faith in God, but I agree with Subduction Zone who said “As for myself, I think the answer is that you can NOT be certain that anything you learn during a religious experience is true knowledge of deity.” And I agree for the reasons he gave in his post:
#1 Sunstone, Yesterday at 10:31 AM

That agreement is confirmed by the following passage:

“Wert thou to ponder in thine heart, from now until the end that hath no end, and with all the concentrated intelligence and understanding which the greatest minds have attained in the past or will attain in the future, this divinely ordained and subtle Reality, this sign of the revelation of the All-Abiding, All-Glorious God, thou wilt fail to comprehend its mystery or to appraise its virtue. Having recognized thy powerlessness to attain to an adequate understanding of that Reality which abideth within thee, thou wilt readily admit the futility of such efforts as may be attempted by thee, or by any of the created things, to fathom the mystery of the Living God, the Day Star of unfading glory, the Ancient of everlasting days. This confession of helplessness which mature contemplation must eventually impel every mind to make is in itself the acme of human understanding, and marketh the culmination of man’s development.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, pp. 165-166

It's true that we cannot understand the soul or God, there are some things in religion that we can understand. The Holy Spirit can illumine our minds about such things:

But the bounty of the Holy Spirit gives the true method of comprehension which is infallible and indubitable. This is through the help of the Holy Spirit which comes to man, and this is the condition in which certainty can alone be attained.
(Abdu'l-Baha, Some Answered Questions, p. 298)

One caveat though. How does one know that one's inspiration is the Holy Spirit? Also the Holy Spirit comes through in different strengths for me, is everything I think right when the Holy Spirit only comes through faintly? I don't think so. Only for a very spiritual person or a Manifestation of God is it certain. I once was high on the Spirit, then I thought I was a prophet of God, and I knew that wasn't right. But the more the Holy Spirit comes through the more certain we can be. It still has to be weighed against all of the scriptures and reason. In another place Abdu'l-Baha also examines how we acquire knowledge and also concludes that inspiration can be faulty and doesn't mention the Holy Spirit. This indicates to me that I am on the right track. If we combine our senses, reason, scripture, and inspiration we can arrive at the truth of a matter. This is the best way.