I haven’t had that experience so mine is just an opinion, nothing I’m promoting. Sorry if that was disturbing for you. Fortunately most situations do pas with time. Nice to be on this side.
You’re fine. Nothing to be sorry for. I brought up the subject.
1 Like
As a heavy user I find alternatives do provide distractions that can cause us to miss it all together. The key to my success was finding solid foundations to explore from. Before then I was a leaf in the wind.
Alternatives help me distinguish what is consistent and what is peripheral. Very useful.
I consider the alternatives to start with, then make my choice. The objective observation of science doesn’t work for life which requires subjective participation. Too much skepticism and the pretense that you can live your life by objective observation alone most certainly is a disability and a delusion.
The only question is how much is too much. When I said “persistent” I obviously meant something different, because I don’t see see anything like what I meant in your description at all.
2 Likes
As we’re all demonstrating, it’s a metaphor. And I’m a morally accountable determinist.
@MarkD, good morning!
I understand from your reply above, that you are concerned about my description of cause and effect in a perceived interaction with the Holy Spirit and (in this case) a biblical text. My description appears to be deterministic, because I am attributing cause of the experience to an all-powerful outside force, i.e. the Holy Spirit.
Do I understand your concern correctly?
Assuming I’m at least close:
While I think I understand your concern related to determinism in my description of the event, the different assumptions we both bring greatly change our understanding of what I think happened. My grasp of the event is rooted in traditional Christian belief, which includes the understanding that there is a personal God, who interacts with his creation and particularly human creatures.
Granted, there is a wide breadth of thought that fits within this belief, spanning from fatalism to a near denial of divine interactions with creation. In considering the OP I’m not entirely interested in establishing a hard and fast explanation of cause and effect in God’s interaction with the physicality of humans. Rather I am more interested in the apparent challenge of how interaction takes place between the Spirit of the trinitarian God and the physical worshiper (or rather any human with whom God chooses to interact). I assume that at some point, God interacts with physical humans in ways we sense with our physical bodies, because that is how we are aware of our world.
However in that interaction – by whatever process it occurs – I do not assume the Holy Spirit as determining the outcome of the person’s experience or worship or the Spirit’s presence. I see this interaction (condescension) either as an act of kindness, love or mercy on the part of the Holy Spirit to a beloved worshiper. As with human lovers, not every token is noticed or recognized, and when perceived, the reaction isn’t forced.
Everything I’ve just written points to the enormous theological and practical challenge of understanding divine sovereignty and human will. I think you were noticing this tension in my reply to Kevin, but framing it with categories that make sense to you. I don’t think we can settle that on one in this forum after 1700 years of debate and fine-tuning of doctrine. But I recognize the reality of it. It’s an area I need to study more and that is not simple, particularly with my view of Scripture.
Stepping even farther into Christian theological concerns, which I feel I should have emphasized more in my reply to Kevin (@Trippy_Elixir ), the danger of idolatry should be a real concern for us. And I didn’t make that clear with my reference to the Jesus People. Seeking an experience we attribute to the Holy Spirit, because we want more of the experience (by whatever means it comes) is not the same thing as worshipping our God, and is idolatry. It is normal for Christians to experience worldly suffering, rather than spiritual ecstasy. It’s actually what we’re promised. Jesus calls us to continue to have faith in him, in John 17, he even prayed for his then living disciples as well as those of us who would believe through their testimony, that God the Father would sustain their/our faith. With or without dopamine.
I hope I’ve understood your concern properly and answered it in a way that makes sense. Although there are senses of it that could be made that I would prefer not be.
Standard cavaet:
I understand that everything in this post is open to scrutiny, criticism and/or debate. As is everything else that shows up in the Forum.
I’m sorry I wasn’t clearer. I was actually suggesting your appraisal could be correct. Leastwise the mere existence a biological component doesn’t rule it out since the experience itself could be eliciting it, as @Laura suggested in the first reply to Kevin. Of course, from my perspective, neither your biological response nor your own interpretation of it conclusively establish a confirmed sighting of the Holy Spirit. For that you’d require faith as well, I think. But I have no issue with you describing it as such.
I haven’t read your whole response since I think I wasn’t clear enough to begin with and have an early appointment with my dentist.
2 Likes
I didnt realize others have asked this question.
Sorry Mark. I completely misread your meaning. Learned a lot about Determinism, well, at least enough to make sure I had a clue. I confess I didn’t read the entire entry. [I really like the Plato online encyclopedia of philosophy (from Stanford) for a lay-person like me. It’s not so technical that it’s unreadable, but it’s also (at least I think) quite meaty.] So there was some fruit.
Glad to hear it. Have you read The Righteous Mind. It was recommended to me here and it is the best account of morality I’ve ever seen. I like Haidt’s analogy of the relation of the intellect to feeling (and everything other than your considered opinion) in the management of behavior as being roughly that of a mahout to the elephant he is riding. He may be a skillful rider but there can be times when what the elephant wants to do will be determinative. What follows is my riff on his Ideas.
Given that we have no way to get down off the elephant as our intellect is mounted firmly to our bodies, it behooves us to learn not just the rules of the road but also what the elephant needs to stay well disposed toward the little guy with the stick. The last thing you want is a battle of wills. Win/win works much better than zero sum. It doesn’t mean we have no free will, just that it requires skill and insight, determination to toe the line. Only a fool throws up his hands and says “not my fault, no one has any choice”.
3 Likes
I have not read it. Thanks for the title, abstract and riff.
2 Likes
Believe it was my recommendation. Hopefully not!
This topic was automatically closed 6 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.