I need to explain that not all faiths are the same. You refer to C of E. I certainly disagree with the way they appear to collect such wealth, this is something that Catholics appear to do also. We may all follow the same God but I disagree with the ways that some faiths go about it, C of E being one, although I respect the good work they do.

You#re missing the point - he was presenting an opinion AS a fact.

Hmmmm...no, I think it is a statement of fact. If a non religious person can (in a laboratory) be made to have a 'religous experience' and it is shown that the experience was due to dye in the coronary arteries or by having a current (remotely) induced in a part of the brain(with an induction coil), then either we are getting God to perform on cue for our whim or we are demonstrating that there is more than one reason for a 'religious experience'.

But seeing as this has never been done, you cannot call it 'fact'.

But it has. It happened to my father.

Did he have what was considered a 'religious experience'? How could you be sure that is what it was? If that's all you are using to form your opinion then good on you but for the benefit of all of us who have experienced the very real power of God, we'll stick with what we know.

Also, I have been experimented on with an induction coil. The coil induced a current in various parts of my brain. Time was limited but we did manage to get my leg to move on it's own accord. I am sure that given enough time and patience we could have 'hit' the 'religious centre' of my brain and stimulated it. That would have been interesting.....

Scientifically, I would have to call that contentious

(haven't read whole thread though)

He felt a benign, loving presence in the room. When the dye was fully in, the feeling dissapated.

OK well as it's getting late and I'm in work early I'll leave you with your 'coil' et al.

I have experienced Godly things (and continue to 'see' things) which I have not asked for, and was not set out to look for, thus eliminating the worn-out argument of "well that's the way your brain works, if you want it to be from God then your brain will tell you it is".

You don't have to believe, everyone knows I'm not looking for convertees, merely respect for what I believe in.

With respect, unless he had studied experiences from God then just based on that I'd say he wouldn't be in a good position to say it was 'Godly'.

I know, but Russ said that it had never been done.
It has happened to thousands of people. Either God is manifesting his presence on que, or there is more than one explanation for the phenomenon.

I am sure you have, and I am not using that arguament.

Quote:

You don't have to believe, everyone knows I'm not looking for convertees, merely respect for what I believe in.

I do respect it, it is too prevalent to ignore/disrespect

Quote:

With respect, unless he had studied experiences from God then just based on that I'd say he wouldn't be in a good position to say it was 'Godly'.

Why would you have to study other experiences? It is common knowledge that religious experiences can vary from person to person and time to time.
His 'religious experience' feeling is just as valid as the next persons.

Moving legs are easy. Stimulate the motor cortex in the left hemisphere, and something will move on the right part of your body. This is also quite easy to establish objectively. Plus we understand the motor system fairly well, so behaviour is as predicted.

When it comes to religious experiences, how do you objectively establish that someone has a 'religious experience'.

Then there is the issue of cause and effect, which is quite thorny.

I don't think enough is known about emotion (let alone religion) with respect to the brain's workings, to draw any meaningful conclusions from these experiments.

you could use that as an arguament to question the validity of any 'religious experience'

Quote:

Then there is the issue of cause and effect, which is quite thorny.

It is a thorny one if you are prepared to accept that we can ask God to manifest his presence on the whim of a medic/scientist, at a given time and place. If you feel that the above is either ludicrous or beneath God, then you must accept that the phenomenon is (at least sometimes) man made and not divinely inspired.

Quote:

I don't think enough is known about emotion (let alone religion) with respect to the brain's workings, to draw any meaningful conclusions from these experiments.

Why? If you have stimulated in a subject a feeling/sensation that is also commonly associated with reported 'religious experiences', we can draw some sort of conclusions at least.


and now I'm off to bed as well, goodnight all:)

I'd say that's a fair point, though 'validity' is an odd word in this context.

The same would apply if personal memories could be triggered through 'induction'. I.e. is there a 'religious centre', or is someone reminded of religious experiences, or are you messing about with a poorly understood 'emotional centre'.

Let's just say that you'd have difficulty publishing these results in peer reviewed journals whith 'religious experiences' in the title of the paper.


Pleasant dreams ;)

...And we can't be having that now, can we?!! :devsmoke: