Mystical Experiences Do Not Require a Belief in a God or Gods

[Sunstone]

The thing about mystical experiences is that they always are fit by the person into whatever beliefs that person already holds. IOW if the person is Catholic, they might believe they are experiencing Jesus. If they are Buddhist, they might believe they are experiencing a time of enlightenment. Atheists are no different. A mystical experience will not bring them to belief in God.

I believe you are talking about religious experiences, not mystical experiences.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I believe you are talking about religious experiences, not mystical experiences.

I'm talking about mystical experiences as researched and described by William James. They are noetic, transient, passive, and ineffible. That's all it takes for the classification.

 

[74x12]

Sorry I've had mystical experiences all my life, and I've never been inhabited by an evil spirit, nor do I get an inkling of one hanging around. In fact, my mystical experiences draw me near to God.

Wasn't I talking about people who use drugs?

Not anymore, which is why your argument falls flat on its face. So stop using a very very bad argument. You simply aren't making your case.

Even consulting modern Dictionaries yield secondary meanings that are in line with the Spanish and Latin roots of the word.

2.
DATED
pester or harass (someone) in an aggressive or persistent manner.
"the crowd was shouting abuse and molesting the two police officers"​

Words have meanings. Their history is relevant. The modern word for pharmacy does have a history of sorcery attached to it. I'm just pointing out the factual link between drug use and mysticism since ancient times.

I could experience the Virgin Mary in such a way that I would have no doubts too. Having no doubts is a poor diagnostic tool.

So you're admitting you could be convinced about the virgin Mary?

I'm already aware that everything that comes as Jesus is a fraud.

So if Jesus appeared to you; you'd know it was a fraud but the virgin Mary ... maybe you'd believe that?

Yet I can tell you first hand that in a mystical experience I am touched by God in a way that I simply am not in prayer. And these experiences draw me near to him, and get me worshiping and studying and praying and being faithful again. That is the opposite of what sorcery would do.

I have no idea what your mystical experiences are; so I can't say anything about them good or bad. That could be anything as far as I'm concerned. The context here is that I was discussing people who use drugs to enter an altered state of mind; where they can interact with spiritual realms.

 

[sun rise]

Oh I wouldn't call it sorcery, since it doesn't use occultic means (meaning magic, divination, or contacting the dead). I just think that using drugs for spiritual stuff is rather stupid. But then again I've never done so, so what do I know?

To me the biography of Milarepa is a classic illustration of the difference. Milarepa first used sorcery to take revenge for some deeds. Then he found a true teacher and underwent trials etc to become "Tibet's Greatest Yogi".

Sorry I've had mystical experiences all my life, and I've never been inhabited by an evil spirit, nor do I get an inkling of one hanging around. In fact, my mystical experiences draw me near to God.

That's been my experience as well.

I believe you are talking about religious experiences, not mystical experiences.

To me, what pentacostal Christians experience, speaking in tongues etc is what I'd call religious experiences.

 

[Sunstone]

I'm talking about mystical experiences as researched and described by William James. They are noetic, transient, passive, and ineffible. That's all it takes for the classification.

James is still valuable even more than a hundred years after his lectures. However a few things have happened since. For one thing, it is commonplace these days for scholars to make distinctions that James did not make. One such distinction made by many scholars is between religious, spiritual, and mystical experiences. Of course, you are not obligated to make any such distinctions yourself.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

2.

DATED
pester or harass (someone) in an aggressive or persistent manner.
"the crowd was shouting abuse and molesting the two police officers"​

The dictionary you are using specifically states that this usage is dated, meaning no longer in use.​

Words have meanings. Their history is relevant.

Only to a philologist. Not to someone in the present who simply speaks the language. I only need to know that molest means the sexual abuse of children, and a pharmacy is where I go to lawfully buy medicines that medical doctor has prescribed. The history of the word is lost in history. It has no bearing on how the word is used today.

So you're admitting you could be convinced about the virgin Mary?

Absolutely not. I simply used experiences of the Virgin Mary because so many Catholics are absolutely convinced by them. NOT because I am.

I have no idea what your mystical experiences are; so I can't say anything about them good or bad. That could be anything as far as I'm concerned. The context here is that I was discussing people who use drugs to enter an altered state of mind; where they can interact with spiritual realms.

My mystical experiences fit neatly into the description that William James uses. They are:
Ineffable, meaning I cannot put them into words (just trying to explain them to you is a lost cause. You will undoubtedly get the wrong idea.)
Noetic: they seem to convey knowledge, although it is an intuitive, non-rational knowledge (meaning it is not a set of beliefs).
Passive: although I might do things to trigger them (for me it's usually music, though other things too), once in them, I am carried away by them.
Transient: They do not last forever, indeed they cannot be artificially sustained. They last however long they last.

They bring me closer to God. They clarify my direction in life and my values. When I am depressed, they reveal to me God-given hope. If I am afraid, I find in them God-given peace. If I have fallen away from God, they bring me back to him. None of that sounds like sorcery to me.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

James is still valuable even more than a hundred years after his lectures. However a few things have happened since. For one thing, it is commonplace these days for scholars to make distinctions that James did not make. One such distinction made by many scholars is between religious, spiritual, and mystical experiences. Of course, you are not obligated to make any such distinctions yourself.

Actually I'm very curious and would be delighted if you would share. Please also include a citation.

I learned what I did back in the late 80's so it's not surprising that further work has been done on the subject.

 

[74x12]

The dictionary you are using specifically states that this usage is dated, meaning no longer in use.

In probably the last few decades the meaning has changed. But, that's not my point here. Drugs are still drugs. In ancient times it was known that you could use drugs to engage in sorcery. That is the point.

Only to a philologist. Not to someone in the present who simply speaks the language. I only need to know that molest means the sexual abuse of children, and a pharmacy is where I go to lawfully buy medicines that medical doctor has prescribed. The history of the word is lost in history. It has no bearing on how the word is used today.

There is knowledge contained in the history of words. Just as the branch that is cut off is dead without the stalk and the root. Modern language is being murdered.

Absolutely not. I simply used experiences of the Virgin Mary because so many Catholics are absolutely convinced by them. NOT because I am.

Then you didn't understand my point about Jesus. He's the truth. No lie can remain.

My mystical experiences fit neatly into the description that William James uses. They are:
Ineffable, meaning I cannot put them into words (just trying to explain them to you is a lost cause. You will undoubtedly get the wrong idea.)
Noetic: they seem to convey knowledge, although it is an intuitive, non-rational knowledge (meaning it is not a set of beliefs).
Passive: although I might do things to trigger them (for me it's usually music, though other things too), once in them, I am carried away by them.
Transient: They do not last forever, indeed they cannot be artificially sustained. They last however long they last.

They bring me closer to God. They clarify my direction in life and my values. When I am depressed, they reveal to me God-given hope. If I am afraid, I find in them God-given peace. If I have fallen away from God, they bring me back to him. None of that sounds like sorcery to me.

From your vague description; I don't see the relevance. I didn't mean to imply that all mystical experiences are sorcery.

 

[MNoBody]

Taking drugs in order to contact the spiritual realm is sorcery. pharmakeia in Greek. Same root word as pharmacy ... drugs.

It's spiritual adultery. Isaiah 57:8-9

Many people have seen various entities. The worse ones are those who transform themselves into messengers of light. (2 Cor. 11:14) They're deceptive beings. (1 Tim. 4:1)

actually pharmakeia means more the use of any means [substantial], techniques, compounds or methods to influence another for selfish purpose, not of their volition, which is the sorcery, the spirit behind it, not the mechanism.

 

[MNoBody]

responding to the OP
from personal experience, before i had heard about drugs or spirituality I had several very odd experiences [who can say what those are, really don't want to argue semantics about it]
one of which was dying in an accident [for a while] and then i wasn't dead...very odd, such things are genuinely challenging to describe to others...particularly dubious others with some agenda to discredit all talk of such oddness
very much like getting punched out of the body like in the dr. strange movie....and things in that mode of perception are very much different than regular perception....
it was these experiences in my youth that led me to explore religions and philosophies, literature, etc.
and I am still looking
cue the U2 song still haven't found what I'm looking for

 

[sun rise]

still haven't found what I'm looking for

That called the following to my consciousness - I don't know why:

"Gate Gate Pāragate Pārasamgate Bodhi Svāhā"
("Gone gone, gone beyond, gone utterly beyond, Enlightenment hail!").

 

[IndigoChild5559]

In probably the last few decades the meaning has changed. But, that's not my point here. Drugs are still drugs. In ancient times it was known that you could use drugs to engage in sorcery. That is the point.

No, it was THOUGHT that drugs involved sorcery, because the manner of drug action was not understood. This is no different from the medieval believe that epilepsy and schizophrenia were demon possession. Medical science has done a great deal to bring us out of ignorance.