|
|
|
|
|
discuss the claim that religious experience is all in the mind of the believer
|
|
|
Discuss the claim that ‘Religious experience is all in the mind of the believer’ Nicholas Jay In order to explore this claim, we must first establish what we mean by religious experience. In this essay I will look at different scholars who have attempted to provide definitions such as James, Swinburne and Jung. We must take into account each scholar’s ideas and concepts and come to an informed decision based on the available information. To begin with, says William James, there are three different types of religious experience (r.e.) and these are: Numinosity, Mystical experience and Conversion. An emotion, rather than a direct engaging of our normal five senses defines a numinous experience, (Taken from ‘Varieties of Religious Experience’ p.383 William James). Those claiming to have had one usually relay a feeling that God was present or some other form of divinity depending on their faith. Such an experience is often awe-inspiring and can leave the subject feeling compelled to do something. A mystical experience is different in the sense that an apparition may be seen or a direct command given. This appeared to be the case in Bosnia 1981 where six local children of between ten and sixteen claimed to have seen the Virgin Mary in a small hamlet named Medjugorje. An article appeared in the London Times (29/12/02) relaying the experience and we are told that the six ‘seers’ remain in contact with the Virgin Mary. The concept of a conversion experience is explored and taken on board by many Christians even today and people are always talking of how, in Christianity, the Holy Spirit came into their lives and changed them. However, perhaps the best-known example is that of Saul’s conversion on the road to Damascus. In Saul’s experience, he was blinded by a flash of light and remained so for a few days and the Lord spoke to him asking why he persecuted God’s people. He became Paul and was largely responsible for the widespread development of the church. Nicky Cruz was a gangster and was very brutal with it. One day, he was about to mug a priest when the priest turned to him and said, ‘Jesus loves you.’ This changed him and he went on to become a youth worker. This constitutes a more recent conversion account. James explores mysticism as the most common of the three and attempts to produce defining characteristics of mysticism. He says that such an experience bears the attributes of: Ineffability, a noetic quality, transience and passivity. For these to exist, however, it has been deemed necessary by Hans Kung (as cited by P. J. Clarke pp.98-99) to include four presuppositions. These are as follows: There is a minor capacity for direct intuition of the divine. God is the ground of the soul (as the spark is to the flame). Only by interpretation of the self can union be achieved. The ultimate guiding principle of the mystic is love, not self-seeking. It is also necessary to look at what we mean by ‘mind’ when we ask the question of whether or not r.e. is all in the mind of the believer. At one end of the scale we have a fundamental presence of the mind when making decisions and at the other end of the scale we have the deep subconscious that has been gradually conditioned over the years by different influences and experiences in our lives. The subconscious mind is a complex thing and how this relates to r.e. could be that all the imagery and teachings that we are subject to in our relevant society play a part in the way in which we experience the divine. If, for example, we are someone who lives in a predominantly Catholic society we may be more likely to experience a vision of the Virgin Mary as was the case in Bosnia. However, if our society is eminently Islamic, this experience may be of Allah or Mohammed. This poses a difficult question because it would appear to follow logically that all genuine r.e. should come from the same God. If r.e. is not all in the mind of the believer then why do we come across this problem? It could be that God presents Himself in different ways according to the culture of the person in question but classical theists would have to postulate that such an expression shows a lack of consistency from God. A lack of consistency throws up many questions of His omnipotence when referring to the God of classical theism. However, the proposed notion of God’s many sides could relate to omniscience in that if God knows his people so well then He also knows how they want to view Him.
|
|
|
|
Still Can't Find What Your Looking For? Then Try a Essay Search!
|
