Mysticism And Mormon Spirituality

[peteolcott]

That's weird. When you're sure about something you're not supposed to be unsure about it anymore. Why think you don't know when you know what is true?

But it can be proven beyond all possible doubt, at least for myself. I was there 5 minutes ago and I know who my Mother is.

You're speaking gibberish now and I'll know when you're being more coherent.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omphalos_hypothesis#Five-minute_hypothesis

Edited November 29, 2012 by peteolcott

[volgadon]

http://en.wikipedia....alos_hypothesis

Wikipedia has to maintain some (admittedly low) credibility, thus I reject it.

[mfbukowski]

http://en.wikipedia....nute_hypothesis

There is no conceivable better example for the utility of Pragmatism. What difference does it make if God created the world 5 minutes ago? None.

It's a distinction without a difference and is therefore useless fantasy. It makes absolutely no difference in our lives whatsoever except to some crazy person obsessed by absolute certainty which is never obtainable anyway. As I said, this is the stuff of psych wards.

[pogi]

Just because they were given to me outside of a Christian context does not make them non-Christian.

That's all I am saying!

I've reread what I wrote and am not satisfied with it, but it is hard to encapsulate a years-long conversion process in a few paragraphs that sees someone go from dreadlocked roadtripping deadhead hippie to traditional Catholic. It would be much better if we could sit down and have a drink together and share, eh? You can have 7-Up and I'll have a good oatmeal stout

I have met someone in Utah with a similar story to yours, he holds (not sure if he still does) a weekly group meditation session. Does the incense and candle thing, has a drawing of a smiling Jesus on the wall, and attracts a younger hippy type crowd. He told me that it was the practice of contemplation that brought him to Jesus. He shared with me his history of drug use and how he was an agnostic before, he told me how his mystic experiences brought him to Jesus and contemplation. He's actually the one that recommended the book "The Interior Castles" to me. You don't live in Salt Lake area and hold a weekly meditation session by chance, do you?

I prefer Root Beer...A&W, from the tap in a frosty mug.

By the way, I still love the Grateful Dead and roadtrips

This seems appropriate:

"Sometimes the light is all shining on me. Other times I can barely see. Lately it's occurred to me, what a long, strange trip it's been!"

Gotta love The Dead!

Edited November 29, 2012 by pogi

[Nathair/|\]

But simply putting strawberries in one's mouth does not guarantee having the same experience after they are in there. If someone lacks a sense of taste or smell, it is most definitely not the same experience as someone who has, for example.

As I'm sure Tao can verify, we Aspies and Auties often experience sensory data different than neurotypicals.

[peteolcott]

Wikipedia has to maintain some (admittedly low) credibility, thus I reject it.

It is not a matter of believing or disbelieving, it is a matter of comprehending or failing to comprehend.

Because it is a fact that it can not be proven beyond all possible doubt that five minutes ago ever existed, it is a fact that no human memory can be relied upon with 100% absolute certainty.

The concept of credibility and lack thereof is merely yet another sneaky way to tell a lie.

[peteolcott]

There is no conceivable better example for the utility of Pragmatism. What difference does it make if God created the world 5 minutes ago? None.

It's a distinction without a difference and is therefore useless fantasy. It makes absolutely no difference in our lives whatsoever except to some crazy person obsessed by absolute certainty which is never obtainable anyway. As I said, this is the stuff of psych wards.

It is the proof that absolutely certainty is not possible, and thus eliminates the basis for most presumption.

Because of this it is useful for breaking through erroneous belief / disbelief systems. Keeping this thought experiment in mind, tends to keep the mind much more open and receptive.

[Nathair/|\]

It is the proof that absolutely certainty is not possible, and thus eliminates the basis for most presumption.

Because of this it is useful for breaking through erroneous belief / disbelief systems. Keeping this thought experiment in mind, tends to keep the mind much more open and receptive.

Are you certain of that?

[volgadon]

Are you certain of that?

THe irony is that yes, he is certain, and thus not keeping an open mind about it.

[volgadon]

It is not a matter of believing or disbelieving, it is a matter of comprehending or failing to comprehend.

Because it is a fact that it can not be proven beyond all possible doubt that five minutes ago ever existed, it is a fact that no human memory can be relied upon with 100% absolute certainty.

The concept of credibility and lack thereof is merely yet another sneaky way to tell a lie.

It can be proven far beyond any reasonable doubt. Besides, how can it be a fact if you cannot prove it beyond all possible doubt?

Your position borders on the laughable. Now, bakc to your declaration, it is false. The vast majority of Jewish kabbalists did not believe in pantheism similar to advaita. If you claim otherwise, please provide me with the names of some of those who did.

[MiserereNobis]

It can be proven far beyond any reasonable doubt. Besides, how can it be a fact if you cannot prove it beyond all possible doubt?

This is a good point for all to remember. Just because we can possible doubt something doesn't mean that it is reasonable or rational to do so. Descartes started off with too high a criteria: beyond all possible doubt.

Your position borders on the laughable. Now, bakc to your declaration, it is false. The vast majority of Jewish kabbalists did not believe in pantheism similar to advaita. If you claim otherwise, please provide me with the names of some of those who did.

Also, Catholic mystics do not believe in pantheism.

[MiserereNobis]

But of course Mormons think that the search can continue on the other side. When we meet there, I hope we have a chance to compare notes

Deal

Though it makes me wonder, would comparing notes in heaven be some sort of correspondence bridge?

[MiserereNobis]

I have met someone in Utah with a similar story to yours, he holds (not sure if he still does) a weekly group meditation session. Does the incense and candle thing, has a drawing of a smiling Jesus on the wall, and attracts a younger hippy type crowd. He told me that it was the practice of contemplation that brought him to Jesus. He shared with me his history of drug use and how he was an agnostic before, he told me how his mystic experiences brought him to Jesus and contemplation. He's actually the one that recommended the book "The Interior Castles" to me. You don't live in Salt Lake area and hold a weekly meditation session by chance, do you?

Nope, that's not me

And actually, I tend to not like my Catholicism hippy-style. For some reason, it makes everything seem watered down. It's one reason I sought out the traditional Latin Mass early on in my conversion. I was going to Mass expecting to see this grand ceremony with incense and bells and stained glass and statues and crucifixes and beautiful vestments and Gregorian chant and Latin hymns and, well, unfortunately, most new Masses aren't that way today. Instead, you get cheesy folk music sung with guitars *sigh*.

I prefer Root Beer...A&W, from the tap in a frosty mug.

My local brewpub makes some fantastic root beer. It's yeasty, if you like the kind of RB. Yum yum!

This seems appropriate:

"Sometimes the light is all shining on me. Other times I can barely see. Lately it's occurred to me, what a long, strange trip it's been!"

Gotta love The Dead!

Always will!

[volgadon]

Deal

Though it makes me wonder, would comparing notes in heaven be some sort of correspondence bridge?

Cheat sheets.

[volgadon]

This is a good point for all to remember. Just because we can possible doubt something doesn't mean that it is reasonable or rational to do so. Descartes started off with too high a criteria: beyond all possible doubt.

I agree. Anything and everything can be doubted. Should it? A different question entirely.

Also, Catholic mystics do not believe in pantheism.

Didn't think so, but I don't know enough about them.

[mfbukowski]

It is the proof that absolutely certainty is not possible, and thus eliminates the basis for most presumption.

Because of this it is useful for breaking through erroneous belief / disbelief systems. Keeping this thought experiment in mind, tends to keep the mind much more open and receptive.

There is something self-contradictory about it though I cannot put my finger on it at the moment and it's not worth thinking more about in my opinion.

It's hard to imagine who would be helped by such a story; perhaps people who are already obsessed with minutia and certainty AND who are theists who believe that such a thing would actually be possible. But it would exclude, I would think, those who have had their own spiritual experiences since such experiences carry with them their own stamp of certainty; so the set of those helped by the story I would think would also exclude theists with any kind of mystical experience.

I would suspect that leaves a very small set of people who are fundamentalists and it is not likely that they would even be open to such dialogue in the first place.

I guess it's just hard for me to understand people like that because I came to earth doubting everything already, and if God had not decided to show me for sure that he knew me, I would have never known that.

I am probably the most skeptical person I am aware of, but God decided to wonk me upside the head on a few occasions for his own reasons.

[mfbukowski]

Are you certain of that?

[mfbukowski]

The concept of credibility and lack thereof is merely yet another sneaky way to tell a lie.

THe irony is that yes, he is certain, and thus not keeping an open mind about it.

v, you are unquestionably onto something here.

The presumption that one would use credibility to lie is most interesting especially when by even posting here, he tries to present himself as "credible" by citing all his study of the subject and his experience in meditation/contemplation etc- and then he ATTACKS the idea of seeking credibility???

Why is he so adamant about seeking credibility when he sees credibility as a lie? Suddenly the fog is lifting.....

Edited November 29, 2012 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

There is something self-contradictory about it though I cannot put my finger on it at the moment and it's not worth thinking more about in my opinion.

By Jove, I think I got it!

[mfbukowski]

Deal

Though it makes me wonder, would comparing notes in heaven be some sort of correspondence bridge?

Nah. We still will only have our own experiences to go on. The only way that could NOT be the case is if we lost our "selves" - whatever that means.

I suppose if we are little drops of divinity to be merged into the cosmic ocean of spirit, we would lose our personal ability to experience.

I suppose that could be possible, but God hasn't decided to show me that one yet.

But if we are still posting here, I think it is a pretty good indicator that no one here has been cured of having an ego yet. I don't think it is possible that we will lose our egos, but I suppose I could be wrong. It has happened before.

There was that one batch of acid in 1967......

Edited November 29, 2012 by mfbukowski

[pogi]

Just because they were given to me outside of a Christian context does not make them non-Christian. For example, every human being is given the grace of being from God minute-to-minute. That doesn't make that grace non-Christian for those who are not Christian -- they still exist by the grace and gift of God.

We are agreed then that there are occasions when God graces non-Christians with mystic experience, and that they do not always understand those experiences to be derived from the Christian God, just as they do not understnad that their very lives are a grace of that same God?

Sounds like neo-mysticism to me (at least a hybrid of it). While neo-mysticism may be most well known outside of organized religion, I think that it works quite well within religion as well, especially in Mormonism. It is simply the recognition that God endows the honest seeker of truth with hearing, in or out of Christianity.

We have the same basic belief in how God leads the honest seeker of truth to Christianity and true baptism. Our perspective simply goes beyond the grave, allowing us to not doubt out of necessity in the God derived spirituality and mystic experience of others. Even if they die without baptism.

Edited November 29, 2012 by pogi

[Kevin Christensen]

This is an interesting essay that has not yet come up, amazingly:

http://www2.ida.net/...il/spiritua.htm

I have some problems with the apparent precision in slicing and dicing and imposing definitions where arguably none are possible, but it makes some very interesting points!

Actually, I linked to a more recent version of the essay in post 8. I'm glad you find it interesting.

Best,

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

[mfbukowski]

Actually, I linked to a more recent version of the essay in post 8. I'm glad you find it interesting.

Best,

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

Missed it!

I will check it out. I voiced my objection insofar as it was one- to the earlier version. I just think it is terribly hard to slice and dice these experiences into neat categories - but I did appreciate the distinctions- I would just make the edges more fuzzy!

I also thought it was more a "scholarly" work referring to the work of others and I would like to hear what you have to say about the subject more- I am quite a fan of your stuff!

But maybe I am not remembering it well?

[volgadon]

v, you are unquestionably onto something here.

The presumption that one would use credibility to lie is most interesting especially when by even posting here, he tries to present himself as "credible" by citing all his study of the subject and his experience in meditation/contemplation etc- and then he ATTACKS the idea of seeking credibility???

Why is he so adamant about seeking credibility when he sees credibility as a lie? Suddenly the fog is lifting.....

He's posted on a different board, so this isn't my first exposure to his posts.

[peteolcott]

This is a good point for all to remember. Just because we can possible doubt something doesn't mean that it is reasonable or rational to do so. Descartes started off with too high a criteria: beyond all possible doubt.

Also, Catholic mystics do not believe in pantheism.

One can not correctly rely upon the opinions of anyone whom has not had the first-hand direct experience themselves,

Western mysticism is hidden by many layers of veils, and only a very tiny select few ever can see past these veils.