Truthfully, the rational arguments are secondary and almost certainly incomplete (I am not a psychologist, and the primary objection one may raise is psychological). I am asserting that there is a spiritual process which is in many ways superior to the rational process, and while I wish to do my best to rationally establish this, to me it seems self-evident, in the sense that an experience with it makes its veracity clear. As to my own knowledge, that is the trick: I have actually had these experiences. They are real. I can't argue with that sense of light and truth except by abandoning my axiom, because the perception is literal and just as real as sensory perception. That is a simple statement of experience: it can't make for a debating point with someone who disagrees, because in a debate you need to agree on material facts and argue consequences, but anyone who disagrees will be disagreeing about a material fact, not a consequence. I do feel an obligation to use the rational as well as the spiritual process to seek truth, and I like Descartes, so a philosophical argument such as I can formulate is requisite, but it's not the heart of it for me.
The title of this post comes from the Bible, and here is where it comes in. I believe the story is illustrative. You see, in John 9, Christ miraculously heals a man, who had been born blind, on the Sabbath. The Jews at this time were divided on whether one could legally perform healing arts on the Sabbath, and some who opposed Him, latching onto this fact, told the man who had been healed that Christ was a sinner for performing the healing. To this the man replied, "Whether he be a sinner or no, I know not: one thing I know, that, whereas I was blind, now I see" (John 9:25). The thing is that this man had never received any real education, whereas those he was arguing with had been taught for years in all the ins and outs of the Law of Moses, which was their basis for the conception of what constituted a sinner. But whatever arguments the Pharisees could make from their vast learning, they could not counter the simple fact that the man was born blind, but could see. Whatever else they might say about Jesus, He did perform that miracle. The same with me: I have had these experiences, and while (unlike the man born blind) I have been trained in reason (especially math and science), I do know what I have seen and experienced.
As a last consideration, I would like to address this beyond myself. Actually, the Book of Mormon prophets Alma and Moroni do the best job here, so I'll give you their suggestions: try the experiment. You see, that's the trick: I tried the experiment, and I got results. Those verses outline the experiment as "ask God." That's really the only way to know about God. You see, I mentioned the issue of control in passing before, and this is the biggest thing that distinguishes a spiritual or religious experiment from a scientific one. In science, we must be in control of what we are studying, whereas in religion we can't be, because we're studying God and He is all-powerful. So you've got to have an open mind and be willing to listen for His answer, but He's told us to ask, so He won't be offended if we do so sincerely. I know He's there based on my own experience. And any good scientist would be willing to perform such a simple experiment in the hopes of learning something so profound, even if he can't be sure whether he will get results.
The title of this post comes from the Bible, and here is where it comes in. I believe the story is illustrative. You see, in John 9, Christ miraculously heals a man, who had been born blind, on the Sabbath. The Jews at this time were divided on whether one could legally perform healing arts on the Sabbath, and some who opposed Him, latching onto this fact, told the man who had been healed that Christ was a sinner for performing the healing. To this the man replied, "Whether he be a sinner or no, I know not: one thing I know, that, whereas I was blind, now I see" (John 9:25). The thing is that this man had never received any real education, whereas those he was arguing with had been taught for years in all the ins and outs of the Law of Moses, which was their basis for the conception of what constituted a sinner. But whatever arguments the Pharisees could make from their vast learning, they could not counter the simple fact that the man was born blind, but could see. Whatever else they might say about Jesus, He did perform that miracle. The same with me: I have had these experiences, and while (unlike the man born blind) I have been trained in reason (especially math and science), I do know what I have seen and experienced.
As a last consideration, I would like to address this beyond myself. Actually, the Book of Mormon prophets Alma and Moroni do the best job here, so I'll give you their suggestions: try the experiment. You see, that's the trick: I tried the experiment, and I got results. Those verses outline the experiment as "ask God." That's really the only way to know about God. You see, I mentioned the issue of control in passing before, and this is the biggest thing that distinguishes a spiritual or religious experiment from a scientific one. In science, we must be in control of what we are studying, whereas in religion we can't be, because we're studying God and He is all-powerful. So you've got to have an open mind and be willing to listen for His answer, but He's told us to ask, so He won't be offended if we do so sincerely. I know He's there based on my own experience. And any good scientist would be willing to perform such a simple experiment in the hopes of learning something so profound, even if he can't be sure whether he will get results.
No comments:
Post a Comment