Does religious experience lead to belief in God?

[Swami]

I believe that religious and mystical experiences can lead people to believe in God. I also believe that experience can lead someone to convert from one religion to another.

A good example that involves conversion from non-belief (atheism) to belief, is Dr. Eben Alexander.

A good example that involves conversion from one belief to another belief is the Apostle Paul.

I tend to make the point that many atheists have not experienced and that's the reason why they have no belief in a transcendent reality (a reality beyond the physical body and Universe). DrNoGod, a member on the science forum, disagrees with me. He has admitted that he's studied various religions but has not experienced any their gods. Maybe he think that he's justified in remaining an atheist until he experiences. But here's my rebuttal to that.

The experiences of transcendent reality in Western religions often occur spontaneously or if or when God decides. The apostle Paul had an OBE, but he did not know how it occurred, why it occurred, had no control over it. The Eastern religions are drastically different in that they provide a way to induce spiritual experiences via meditation. This is a voluntary process and anyone, including scientists can engage in it. Under the Eastern approach, you can induce the OBE state that the apostle Paul was in.

After bringing this up to DrNoGod his reasons seemed to look more like excuses because he declined to look into meditation for himself. From this I concluded that not only was he an atheist because of lack of experience, but also because he does not want to experience. A person in this case is not truly interested in seeking God.


Topics...
Is my belief correct when I say that experience leads to belief in God or some transcendent reality? Therefore, atheists disbelieve because they have not experienced?

If someone does not want to experience, then is it reasonable to say that they are not really interested in God?

[Zzyzx]

.

If you two are really looking for verification for my claims, then why not do as I suggested and explore meditation?

It is NOT up to others to verify your claims. That is YOUR responsibility.

'Do as I suggest and explore meditation (to verify my claims)' makes no more sense than "Explore Hinduism (and Shinto and Mormonism and a thousand other religions) to verify my (or their) claims'

[William]

Razorsedge : If you two are really looking for verification for my claims, then why not do as I suggested and explore meditation?

Zzyzx: It is NOT up to others to verify your claims. That is YOUR responsibility.

William: Remaining sagacious means that one has to remember that - in the context Razorsedge is suggesting - this has to do with how the human mind is able to experience alternate realities and as such - at least theoretically - those with minds can use the same techniques in order to experience for themselves, said alternate realities.

It makes no sense therefore, in the context mentioned, that one would argue that another should 'verify for them, the things of the mind'.
The whole point of the suggestion is to test it for yourself and see what might happen, because as the theory goes, the techniques mentioned by Razorsedge which can trigger the experiences FOR THE INDIVIDUAL using the said techniques, should work for those who try them - for that purpose.

As far as 'responsibility' goes - Razorsedge has done his part. He cannot both lead one to water AND drink of that water, which is what you appear to be saying he should do. It is not Rasorsedge's responsibility to tell you how the water tastes, by tasting it for you.
That won't actually 'verify' anything FOR you, except that Razorsedge thinks that the water has a wonderful taste. Why would you demand that as if in Razorsedge doing so, would provide any kind of evidence which could possibly help you?
The demand itself is senseless...

[Swami]

[Replying to post 31 by William]

Very well articulated! Couldn't have said it better. I believe very few people are convinced through debate, but I know many who have been convinced through experience. Zzyzx doesn't realize that experience is a way of verifying. I would imagine this is one way that very spiritual wise men in ancient times were able to reach people; it's by showing them or getting them to see it for themselves. Rhetoric in debates is overrated.

[Replying to post 30 by Zzyzx]
I believe I've already told you and others on the forum that I'm not interested in debating just to debate. Endless debates do not change or convince anyone. These types of debates are simply ego and excuses which does not lead to truth.

I will only engage in honest debate and discussions. Trying to pressure me to engage in some endless debate with many different people is nothing more but intimidation. It's also harassment if it continues.

[Tcg]

I believe very few people are convinced through debate, but I know many who have been convinced through experience.

And yet here you are on a debate site, debating.

I believe I've already told you and others on the forum that I'm not interested in debating just to debate.

And yet here you are on a debate site, debating.

Endless debates do not change or convince anyone. These types of debates are simply ego and excuses which does not lead to truth.

And yet here you are on a debate site, debating.

ITrying to pressure me to engage in some endless debate with many different people is nothing more but intimidation. It's also harassment if it continues.

Debating on a site dedicated to debate is neither intimidation nor is it harassment. This is true of the debate you continue to present and of the debate others present.



Tcg

[John Human]

.

If you two are really looking for verification for my claims, then why not do as I suggested and explore meditation?

It is NOT up to others to verify your claims. That is YOUR responsibility.

'Do as I suggest and explore meditation (to verify my claims)' makes no more sense than "Explore Hinduism (and Shinto and Mormonism and a thousand other religions) to verify my (or their) claims'

I'll suggest that there is a significant difference. Meditation, as opposed to any system of religious belief, involves practice without the doctrinal baggage. Of course there are those who attach particular brands of doctrinal baggage to meditation as they present it, but at the root it can be described as "spiritual technology."

[Tcg]

I'll suggest that there is a significant difference. Meditation, as opposed to any system of religious belief, involves practice without the doctrinal baggage. Of course there are those who attach particular brands of doctrinal baggage to meditation as they present it, but at the root it can be described as "spiritual technology."

Here is a list of the doctrinal baggage Razorsedge has attached to his view of religious experience:

• "I believe that religious and mystical experiences can lead people to believe in God."
  
  "I also believe that experience can lead someone to convert from one religion to another."
  
  "I tend to make the point that many atheists have not experienced and that's the reason why they have no belief in a transcendent reality (a reality beyond the physical body and Universe)."
  
  "Under the Eastern approach, you can induce the OBE state that the apostle Paul was in."
  
  "From this I concluded that not only was he an atheist because of lack of experience, but also because he does not want to experience."
  
  "A person in this case is not truly interested in seeking God."

Tcg

[Swami]

I believe very few people are convinced through debate, but I know many who have been convinced through experience.

And yet here you are on a debate site, debating.

I believe I've already told you and others on the forum that I'm not interested in debating just to debate.

And yet here you are on a debate site, debating.

Endless debates do not change or convince anyone. These types of debates are simply ego and excuses which does not lead to truth.

And yet here you are on a debate site, debating.

ITrying to pressure me to engage in some endless debate with many different people is nothing more but intimidation. It's also harassment if it continues.

Debating on a site dedicated to debate is neither intimidation nor is it harassment. This is true of the debate you continue to present and of the debate others present.



Tcg

Perhaps the problem here may be a matter of style. As I stated before, I come here for honest debate and discussion. But my style of debate is focused more on getting others to experience than on going on endless rounds of back and forth arguments. To some that may not seem like a debate but it is my style and from experience it is real effective.

I present my position. I present enough evidence and answers, as requested by members, to get my point across. Then I invite you to experience as a way of verifying.

I shouldn't have to change my style just as I don't expect you to change your style.

[Tcg]

I shouldn't have to change my style just as I don't expect you to change your style.

I never suggested that you change your style. Your style is to debate on a debate site. The fact that you claim debate is worthless causes one to wonder why you continue to engage in it, but certainly hasn't lead me to suggest you shouldn't debate on a debate site, which you of course continue to.



Tcg

[Swami]

I shouldn't have to change my style just as I don't expect you to change your style.

I never suggested that you change your style. Your style is to debate on a debate site. The fact that you claim debate is worthless causes one to wonder why you continue to engage in it, but certainly hasn't lead me to suggest you shouldn't debate on a debate site, which you of course continue to.



Tcg

I've presented enough evidence here for any reasonable person to examine. Now I'm on the experience phase. So far, the ones who are disagreeing with me the most here are unwilling to experience. Therefore, the debate is over on my part. There's nothing more I can do to convince this type of person.

I will move on to address the audience and others who are actually wanting to engage in honest discussion and debate.

[Tcg]

I've presented enough evidence here for any reasonable person to examine.

You've presented claims of evidence, not evidence.

Now I'm on the experience phase. So far, the ones who are disagreeing with me the most here are unwilling to experience.

And you are unwilling to experience our experience. That is why verifiable evidence takes priority in a debate setting. Experience and it's interpretation proves only that some have had an experience and interpret it the way they see fit. We all do that.

Therefore, the debate is over on my part. There's nothing more I can do to convince this type of person.

And yet here you are on a debate site, debating.

I will move on to address the audience and others who are actually wanting to engage in honest discussion and debate.

Everyone here has engaged in honest debate. The fact that you don't like honest debate doesn't change the fact that it is honest debate.



Tcg