You’re absolutely right that conscious experiences in general, but most clearly ones like the things you mention seem to point toward something beyond the boundaries of pure materialism.
That said, this doesn’t really advance the case when it comes to making specific claims about the divine origin of particular religious texts you may feel connected to. If anything, to many, these experiences seem to gesture toward something that transcends those kinds of frameworks altogether. And that’s before even addressing the deeper issue: how do you explain an unchanging creative force, one without thoughts, emotions, or any kind of change, being described as having “written a book” or “promised a nation a land”? Yes, I know these questions have been addressed, (most convincingly in my opinion by mystics who have had first hand extreme experiences like you mention) but the answers are neither simple nor obviously convincing to everyone, and with good reason.
Interestingly, the one “New Atheist” who has actually had the kinds of experiences you’re referring to, Sam Harris, would agree with your point that these experiences suggest something greater than materialism alone.
Not so clear from what you've written here what your position is.
It comes across as rather muddled.
Or better yet, like a giant hydra whose base is hidden by the constant flailing of its multitudinous arms...
And it's the base that we're after.
So is it:
a. That there is no G-d;
b. That there are mystics, who, in the end, are wont to tell you anything;
c. That G-d creates worlds, not books or promises; or
d. Get the Jews!
Because you missed the point of my post almost entirely.
You wrote:
"You’re absolutely right that conscious experiences in general, but most clearly ones like the things you mention seem to point toward something beyond the boundaries of pure materialism."
"That is not it at all, That is not what I meant, at all.”
The idea was that there are experiences, like trusting Hashem, that cannot be conveyed to the uninitiated.
Period.
And no need to make the attempt, either.
As for "advancing the case...of divine origins...of texts" -- also no need.
You're either in or out.
That said, if you're trying to find your way in, there are many inside ready to assist.
But if you're trying to pull people out, better throw on that asbestos bodysuit.
Let him say it. Let him claim a perfect equality of the gawds. What difference does it make?
The final proof will only be had when Gog's horde descends upon Eretz Yisrael and the G-d of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, miraculously and against all the odds, saves the remnant and destroys all the non-believers/pagans/idol worshipers/false deities.
Our job is to provoke the sleepwalking Jews into thinking there's something worth investigating. Not to prove this or that goy wrong.
Absolutely right. And that's why the focus must always be on Jews, not goyim.
And… as you stated in a different context, sometimes a punch in the face is the only appropriate response for a Jew without a G-d. Kal v'chomer because non-believers almost always admire and are drawn to power and shows of force.
I've said in the past that the greatest method of bringing left-wing, G-d hating Jews to do teshuva would be to film Chareidim beating the tar out of Israeli police officers and soldiers. A full hour reel would do wonders.
That's what G-dless Jews understand and consider worthy of respect.
That being said, a convincing argument or two should be considered first.
(And an effective punch can also be delivered with a crisply cut sentence!)
Atheism is the ultimate in irrationality and absurdity. Those who believe in absurdities will commit atrocities.
Like the tziyoinim.
You’re absolutely right that conscious experiences in general, but most clearly ones like the things you mention seem to point toward something beyond the boundaries of pure materialism.
That said, this doesn’t really advance the case when it comes to making specific claims about the divine origin of particular religious texts you may feel connected to. If anything, to many, these experiences seem to gesture toward something that transcends those kinds of frameworks altogether. And that’s before even addressing the deeper issue: how do you explain an unchanging creative force, one without thoughts, emotions, or any kind of change, being described as having “written a book” or “promised a nation a land”? Yes, I know these questions have been addressed, (most convincingly in my opinion by mystics who have had first hand extreme experiences like you mention) but the answers are neither simple nor obviously convincing to everyone, and with good reason.
Interestingly, the one “New Atheist” who has actually had the kinds of experiences you’re referring to, Sam Harris, would agree with your point that these experiences suggest something greater than materialism alone.
Not so clear from what you've written here what your position is.
It comes across as rather muddled.
Or better yet, like a giant hydra whose base is hidden by the constant flailing of its multitudinous arms...
And it's the base that we're after.
So is it:
a. That there is no G-d;
b. That there are mystics, who, in the end, are wont to tell you anything;
c. That G-d creates worlds, not books or promises; or
d. Get the Jews!
Because you missed the point of my post almost entirely.
You wrote:
"You’re absolutely right that conscious experiences in general, but most clearly ones like the things you mention seem to point toward something beyond the boundaries of pure materialism."
"That is not it at all, That is not what I meant, at all.”
The idea was that there are experiences, like trusting Hashem, that cannot be conveyed to the uninitiated.
Period.
And no need to make the attempt, either.
As for "advancing the case...of divine origins...of texts" -- also no need.
You're either in or out.
That said, if you're trying to find your way in, there are many inside ready to assist.
But if you're trying to pull people out, better throw on that asbestos bodysuit.
And face the flames!!!
Let him say it. Let him claim a perfect equality of the gawds. What difference does it make?
The final proof will only be had when Gog's horde descends upon Eretz Yisrael and the G-d of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, miraculously and against all the odds, saves the remnant and destroys all the non-believers/pagans/idol worshipers/false deities.
Our job is to provoke the sleepwalking Jews into thinking there's something worth investigating. Not to prove this or that goy wrong.
Absolutely right. And that's why the focus must always be on Jews, not goyim.
And… as you stated in a different context, sometimes a punch in the face is the only appropriate response for a Jew without a G-d. Kal v'chomer because non-believers almost always admire and are drawn to power and shows of force.
I've said in the past that the greatest method of bringing left-wing, G-d hating Jews to do teshuva would be to film Chareidim beating the tar out of Israeli police officers and soldiers. A full hour reel would do wonders.
That's what G-dless Jews understand and consider worthy of respect.
That being said, a convincing argument or two should be considered first.
(And an effective punch can also be delivered with a crisply cut sentence!)
G-d, not numbers.