Are you a visionary?

Dave

Please don't think I am being facetious or dismissive - I do appreciate your candour. Clearly you have had some experience and I am interested why you think it was from god. Would you be prepared to tell me what you experienced and the circumstances surrounding and leading up to the incident - what communication occurred and whether you have had repeated or similar episodes since?

All the best

 

That's strange I did reply to this and it seems to have disapeared even tho I read it early this morning in the thread??? I'll have to redo asap.

I don't and crickey don't you give me great opportunities.

I think I have explained that before but I'm happy to iterate, as soon as I have time.

Dave

 

Mark wrote

This is the rewrite of the post that disappeared-
Yes it's a possibility and if I thought I had seen Napoleon on a fair ground donkey and he said he was Christ, or if I thought I seen a Higgs Boson Particle under my bed then I might agree since these things are extremely unlikely and uncommonly experienced. However there are millions maybe billions of people who would testify to the real experience of God, Jesus or the Holy Spirit, so by the the criteria of sufficient numbers then this is a normal experience that has been agreed upon as a an undeniable manifestation of God. So the probability that it is illusion, delusion or hallucination.

Mark did you know that Jesus was a real person? Not such a dumb question as many people think he is just a myth, a fictional character. However the man Jesus and his life is well documented in many secular or non Christian historical writings, Flavius Josephus, Tacitus even Nero wrote and complained about Jesus annoying life and how he was pleased by his death. Jesus' crucifixion, death and the disapearance of his body is documented. There is far more written about Jesus by historians of the time than there is written about apparently far more important figures like Roman Emperors.

Many, Christian and non Christian claimed to have seen the resurrection of Jesus. James, John, Peter and Paul (disciples) all saw the risen Jesus and believed Him to be the Christ/Messiah and went willingly to their deaths supporting what they believed to be true. Before seeing the risen Jesus James did not believe Jesus was Christ despite being his brother. Paul was a staunch persecutor of Christians until he too saw Jesus resurrected and then he became a believer and held that faith to death even despite the chances given by the Romans to deny Jesus as Christ and live. That is a confident test of faith with no room for doubt or probability. As I explained earlier the probability of someone, especially a group of people, supporting a lie unto death is very low. So a rational man might believe that they, Jesus' supporters, all believed the truth they stood solidly for.

Today, people like me, do have Christ revealed to them as in those early days and the reaction is a strong belief, a faith in Jesus and Christ, the Messiah. Now probably in these days no one is immediately 100% convinced and would die for that conviction but as relationship grows and the reality and love of God is revealed then there are many today who would die rather than deny their faith and in many countries they do just that.

The point is Mark, once you know Christ and understand God’s love then this is a message worth giving one’s life for.

Regards Dave

 

Thanks Dave but I'd appreciate if you could refrain from preaching a sermon alongside your response - not really what I'm getting at! Lets get back to your experience in which you claim is shared with millions or even billions of others. Given the complexity of biochemical interactions in the brain, you might concede that the shared experience might simply be a common biochemical process that has profound hallucionationary effects to variable degrees in individuals, whose subsequent reaction is such that they 'believe' they have seen a superior being. Given the religious indoctrination all of us receive from an early age, it is understandable if not obvious, that with these cases, the Jesus story (in Christian cultures) fits the bill. You turn disbelief into belief because you simply are unable to comprehend or understand the process.

Please describe your experience in detail - your life before the event and after. Did you experience any auditory sensation? Did you hear voices audibly or in your head? Visual manifestations? Whatever you felt except the hallelujahs!

 

As it's Easter, I've decided to wear my thorn of crowns.
http://maxiocio.net/ytdetail.php?id=DSs9FCoFJec

Making the most of my kingdom
http://maxiocio.net/ytdetail.php?id=L3ETpGmEi7U

 

Hallucinations are actually quite common, and may be due to various factors: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3105559/

Google: "incidence of hallucinations".

"The most common type of auditory hallucinations in psychiatric illness consists of voices. Voices may be male or female, and with intonations and accents that typically differ from those of the patient. Persons who have auditory hallucinations usually hear more than one voice, and these are sometimes recognized as belonging to someone who is familiar (such as a neighbor, family member, or TV personality) or to an imaginary character (God, the devil, an angel). Verbal hallucinations may comprise full sentences, but single words are more often reported." http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/schizophrenia/content/article/10168/1534546

"A survey suggesting a much higher incidence of voice-hearing was conducted with 375 university students, none of whom had any history of contact with psychiatric services (3). Over 71% of the students reported that they had heard voices at some point in their lives. Items endorsed included: hearing one’s thought spoken aloud (39%), hearing the voice of God (11%) and conducting conversations with voices (5%)." http://gsidley.hubpages.com/hub/voi...tory-hallucinations-in-the-general-population

etc.

Dave, I should be interested to hear how you came to the conclusion it was:

a) God showing you things / talking to you?
b) not the Devil trying to deceive you?
c) why you should become an active member in the christian faith following this experience as oppose to any other faith?

And also I should like to ask if you believe those following faiths other than the christian one are delusional? For example, what are your views on Buddhism, Shinto, etc.?

 

Ha Ha! know what you're saying Mark but that's not a sermon that is the rational explanation and original justification that validates today,s acceptance of the same experience as being real. Rational in that if you follow the historical evidence, the critical literary evidence, then there is a very good logical case for believing that Jesus was persecuted, tortured, died on the cross and most probably rose again and appeared to many. Some of that evidence is presented in my last post.

I'll get onto your request for an objective description of my revelation and all that led up to it and after it. That could be a long story and there are some things that I need to think about from my old life and whether I want to reveal them in public.

Regards Dave

 

Yes please Dave.

If a visionary is someone who is looking where no one else is, perhaps my answer should be yes.

Is it the right direction to go?

You will not know until you have had enough perception, experience and grace to get there.

Mahalo for letting me "fool" around with you on PA.
Steve

 

Here we go Mark, You asked these same questions in Oct 2012 and here at this link if you want to read it are the answers I gave:
http://www.podiatry-arena.com/podiatry-forum/showpost.php?p=281277&postcount=88

Here is a recent experience that is the result of a closer communion with the Holy Spirit i.e. the spirit of God that dwells within every Christian.

Yesterday a regular female customer (Mrs J) came in for routine chiropody. Her husband died suddenly from a stroke (CVA) 6 months ago. I enquire how she was getting on and she replied that things were still difficult.

Right then I had a lucid vision of here husband in a tiny garden digging the ground and preparing it for flowers. Then it was a bright sunny day with everything very yellow and the flowers were looking splendid, mainly yellow with a little blue and a stripe of Red on the right. The husband, 'R', then invited his wife 'J' to sit on a wooden garden chair on a small patio in front of the flowers, which she did. Then R said "I'll just go and make you (J) a cup of tea" then he walked to the garden shed and stood watching his wife and delighting in her enjoyment of the flowers he had prepared.

This was a very clear and detailed vision but I wasn't sure how to give this to Mrs J. I thought it would probably upset her so I left it for a while to ponder and then decided to start a conversation and see how it would work out.

So I asked if she had planned any holiday and she said no it would be to difficult without R at this time. Then She said "but even so I had a lovely day just recently, it was on our 59th wedding anniversary on the 6th and in between the dull snowy days we had a day of sunshine. So I went out into the garden and the crocuses were out on R's little flower garden. It's only a little garden but he loved his flower patch, anyway I decided to sit on the chair on the patio and enjoy the sun for a while. Then I noticed a flower bowl under the chair and it was full of about 20 wide open crocuses, R would have prepared that ready for spring just before he had his stroke. I pulled it out and set it with the other flowers and just sat there and enjoyed what R had done, he would have loved it".

By now I was laughing with amazement and getting a bit of a strange look from Mrs J. I proceeded to explain why and my vision. J was very encouraged (and so was I, what a privilege and blessing from God via the Holy Spirit) I prayed with J thanking God for what he has prepared for us and giving J a taste of what is to come, bringing Hope right into the present and strengthening faith.

Another earlier time a lady customer was very distressed and was relating to me her difficult life. Her husband had a chronic illness that had gone on for many years, he was not so ill that he might die but he was ill enough that he needed regular and constant care and attention. She also looked after her very elderly mother in law who lived with them and had dementia. So therefore she also had to work 3 jobs to earn enough to keep them all. The stress and shear hard work had worn her out and she could see no end to it all since she could not afford to send her Mother in law to a care Home and Her husband refused to go into care even for her to get some respite.

I prayed with her that God would sort out the situation so that she could have some rest and peace in the near future.

A few weeks later she phoned to cancel her next appointment because her husband had suddenly and unexpectedly died. A few months later she returned for chiropody and she seemed like a different woman to the one I had last seen.
When I asked her about how things were now she said that although her husband had died and she missed him, her life was much better in many ways. She explained that her husband had good life insurance and so she was able to give up work (although she still kept one part time job that she liked). She was able to afford to send her mother in law to a very good care home and she was enjoying life much more than she had for years.

My thoughts were be careful what you pray Dave, the outcome may not be exactly what you think. I felt a bit guilty that her husband had died.

Very early in my Christian life i.e. the first few months, I went to my first midnight mass. At the time I had been suffering excruciating hip pain and could not walk more tha 100 meters without a rest. Despite extensive medical and clinical investigation over a year or so with every type of test and scan available there was no diagnosis or treatment that brought any relief. Strong analgesics only gave short relief and none at all when walking any distance.
I was standing in the church in a lot of pain and feeling awkward as a stranger and not really knowing what was going on in terms of the worship ceremony i.e. at the time they were taking communion (holy sacrament) and the verger said why not go forward for a blessing no need to take bread and wine if your not comfortable.

I went forward, knelt and was blessed, stood up pain free and remained that way for over a year and even today I only get a very mild hip pain occasionally.
At a later date when I spoke to the vicar of the church she informed me that the lady who gave the blessing was the official church healer.

One summer My wife and I sat in the garden and the cat came along with a bird, a willow warbler in fact. We took the bird from the cat and it was bitten right thru its body under the right wing. The right wing and leg were contracted and only the left wing and leg worked so that when we put it on the table it just flapped and went round in circles. We tried standing it up and encouraging it to try to fly but it just fell on its side and flapped in circles.
I said to my wife, its not going to live shall I kill it, she agreed I should. But then I said or I could heal it and she said "well give it a go then" I cupped the bird in my hands and said "Lord I just say heal this bird in the name of Jesus". I opened my hands and the bird flew away over the roof top and was gone.

After spending all the church money and a bit more on refurbishing and modernising the church and its hall and offices at a cost of about £320k ( the church manse was sold to raise money) we had about £20k overdraft. Then some stone work fell of the top of the tower and investigations revealed tower repairs requiring and £85k. We got together and prayed for the funds and 1 year later when the work was finished we had £20k surplus in the bank.

Many time we, the church, myself and others have prayed for something and seen no expected results but we know that this prayer too was powerful and set things in motion that were not yet revealed to us.

These things are great but they are not our faith but magnificent manifestations of our faith in all that God can do.

For a few days I kept waking up with a tremendous pain in my right arm, one night I was laying awake for about half an hour with the pain and I realised I had not spoken to God about it. So I said, you know hat God, I could really dowithout this pain. Immediately the pain went and never returned.

sometimes I drive along looking for a parking space and then I say to God I could do with a space Lord and one opens up and I thank Him. Sometimes I don't find a parking space and have to park a long way away. But as I walk back I come across a person I haven't seen for a while and we chat and pass on and I thank God for that opportuntiy I wouldn't have had if I had found a parking space closer by.

Sometimes I get really peed off about something, I never blame God, I often apologise to him and ask how I could have done it better or if I could have the self control or foresight to be less hot headed in the future. And ofetn he changes my heart just like that and often he says I live in you so just submit to me by your own volition. It's a relationship you see, He helps but He also expetcs me to play my part.

I had a cough for about a year and a sore throat for about 3 months and acid indigestion for years. One day someone was praying for my brother who was seriously ill. I asked for prayer for my small ills because even tho I had asked God for healing in these things they had not healed. As a few gathered round to pray I heard God say, go to the doctor I have something to show you. That morning I went to the doctor, I got straight in even tho the receptionist insisted at first that I could only see the GP if I had a serious emergency condition, I said I did not but then she changed her mind ans said "Oh just pretend you do" OK I said and went in. The GP examined me, gave me a prescription for Omprazole and an request for chest x ray and blood test. I went to the local hospital straight away, wnet into x ray dept and got an x ray went round the corner to phlebotomy dept and went in straightaway. All together I was at the hospital for about ten minutes. I smiled, held up my hand and said "thanks God" as I left. Next day my cough, sore throat and acid reflux were gone.
You see what God was showing me was that He can always help but He has put lots of resources at hand and as it is a relationship and as such He expects me to play my part in it.

Yesterday I realised I loved God and never wanted to be separate from Him again - Now that is THE most amazing miracle. The miracle of Jesus is that he changes the hearts of man and He has changed my heart.

There is no objective evidence of this if you want objective to mean testable and falsifiable and without emotion or personal bias. But when your wife or girlfriend or nearest and dearest say they love you what evidence do you ask for?

This is the experience and way of life for a Christian in relationship with God.

Regards Dave

 

Aloha Dave,

May you continue to have a blessed Easter.

Mahalo,
Steve

 

What I find particularly alarming (bordering on frustration... oh heck – it is frustrating!) is that you do not provide any evidence to support your claims. You don’t provide any evidence to support your belief in evolution (despite being specifically versed on the topic & now teaching it)... & you don’t supply any evidence for the above claims either. Thus, I can understand your lack of credible (scientific) evidence to support evolution – but – if the above is specifically directed at me (as I am not interested in other co called Creationist/I.D misdemeanours’) – then can you provide evidence where I have been guilty of “misquotes, lies and half truths.” Thanks.

Oh for Pete’s sake – can you once again provide evidence for these “testable hypotheses”. Just because you keep on claiming such acts – doesn’t make them true. What’s the problem? You used the term “hypotheses” (plural) thus you should be able to supply at least one!

Oh yes, the old “publish in a proper journal” line (i.e. subject to peer review – which in itself has its problems). You really don’t know much about this topic (side issues & implications thereof) do you Rob. You hide behind such phrases (“publish in a proper journal”) instead of dealing with the real arguments. Firstly the issue of Creation/evolution are historical assumptions attempting to provide a past (& future) understanding to the data/science we observe to occur (i.e. speciation via Natural Selection). Evolution is a framework by which the data is interpreted, just like Creation is. The majority of scientists are too busy studying on the mainstream mechanisms of operational/empirical science (i.e. genetics, diseases/mutations, physiology/biomechanics, chemical reactions, physics etc...) – how it works - not fussing around with untestable conjectures/hypotheses relating to historical/philosophical assumptions relating to the observational data (as interesting this potentially can be). Thus your context of reference pertaining to “Nobel prize” is ridiculous (albeit Nobel Prize winners have had problems with Neo-Darwinism).


Let’s be aware of the implications of the scientific method: observation → induction → hypothesis → test hypothesis by experiment → proof/disproof → knowledge. Evolution fails (as the likes philosopher Karl Popper & others has noted) i.e. just look at the fossil record to observe the gaping holes relating to assumed progressive changes pertaining to form/function, biological structures/pathways etc... & as for abiogenesis (the start of it all) – evolution has no answer... & here is where true faith is required for both camps – it’s just that naturalism/materialism requires blind faith of which also violating the principle of causation (& also invoking metaphysical assumptions). Dr Stephen J Gould (paleontologist) made the following statement:
“Our ways of learning about the world are strongly influenced by the social preconceptions and biased modes of thinking that each scientist must apply to any problem. The stereotype of a fully rational and objective “scientific method”, with individual scientists as logical (and interchangeable) robots is self-serving mythology.”

Creationism requires faith in that ultimate causation entity (controversial – due to implications thereof) & subsequently the starting event (i.e. abiogenesis) of which the evidence we see around us tends to have the blue print (or finger print) of an intelligent (i.e. engineering) input of a purposeful nature i.e. the complexity (diversity) of the (initial) primordial genome of specific “kinds” of life forms (within flora of fauna) to enable diversification within the environment (i.e. Natural Selection – does not add genetic info - only the resorting of present info) along with the repercussion of the likes of mutations (doesn’t add genetic info - usually fatal & complies with genetic entropy). That’s it in a nutshell.

Anyway, as far as the... “publish in a proper journal” (& subjected to peer review) is concerned there have been many landmark scientific papers (i.e. Watson’s/Crick’s DNA research) which were not subjected to peer review. There was also the initial rejection (albeit later accepted) of Stephen Hawking’s black-hole radiation work.

The other issue that is very pertinent to this discussion is the questioning of a traditional paradigm i.e. a Neo-Darwinian paradigm. Don’t expect anyone to get research grants... let alone get their research published with the array of bias editors with lack of objectivity/open mindedness... the likes of which history has shown there have been also affiliational bias as well as ideological bias. Take a look at the issues outlined in the following paper:
Calling a spade a spade (why editors are uncomfortable to say it as it is). The very same thing has happened to creationists (and others) who wish to research/publish evidence that calls into question the scientific validity of evolution. Also, many researchers know the likely implications of any new research which challenges or threatens established ideas (i.e. no funding, loss of tenure) & hence don’t even bother to put in an application. Then there are the issues of having one’s reputation placed in jeopardy for going against the established status quo. Example here: Rethinking Darwin (link).

Peer review does not guarantee quality or correctness - recent papers discussed on this very forum have provided testimony to that i.e. the Reproducing Scientific Results thread (here) with this paper: Good Scientist! You Get a Badge (Precious research money is wasted on unreal results, but we can change the culture of science) was the thread starter. This paper revealed the poor science behind research, one of which had often been cited by evolutionists as evidence i.e. bacteria evolving to live on arsenic. Then Podiatry Arena must be fully aware of the science papers discussing the topics surrounding... running foot strikes/running foot attire/running injuries etc... appearing in reputable journals (i.e. Nature) which has been critiqued here & found to be riddled with “flaws”, “bias”, "conflicting agendas", “poor methodology” etc...

Then we have the peer review process not picking up/preventing fraud particularly in the already fickle field of archaeology/anthropology. i.e. Professor Reiner Protsch von Zieten. History of Modern Man Unravels as German scholar is Exposed as Fraud (Flamboyant Anthropologist Falsified Dating of Key Discoveries).

Don’t get me wrong, we need the peer review process... but it too has its flaws i.e. bias, poor scholarship & unscientific agendas.

Don’t use that straw man argument on this thread Rob. You really don’t understand the nature of the issues raised (or at best, biased to suit your discriminatory agenda). You don’t seem to understand the nature of “antibiotic resistance” & the implications to the topic! Evolution requires not just change, but change that increases the information content of the biosphere. Antibiotic resistance (& my previous post reference to bacteria/E.coli) does not provide this. Hence I couldn’t care less about the “they are still bacteria” slant. Bactria & the whole “antibiotic resistance” haven’t been seen to hit the ball (baseball analogy) or get to first base (if it has, it got there by default... then hasn’t got to 2nd base); let alone speculate on the untestable notion of yours... “come back in a few million years they might not be” statement (this is just poor science/reasoning). It has been shown that the issues surrounding antibiotic resistance involves switching on/off pre-existing information, losing information (i.e. mutations – copying mistakes, usually fatal; never increases information - usually decreases information & sometimes informationally neutral – rarely beneficial i.e. to the bacteria that is & only when resistant to an antibiotic).

No, that may be your perception due to your involvement in human evolution but I find real thinkers/scientists have big issues with the whole scope of evolution (i.e. Neo-Darwinism). But by all means, please reveal the... “miriad [sic] of exquisite examples”. Hence, once again – the examples please!!

Wait, wait... there looks to be examples in the next quote... ummm, no, not really – just a reference to 3 particular areas (with no further detail to substantiate “evolutionary change”). Ironically, what I usually find is that the very same evidence that evolutionists perceive as strengths of an iron-clad argument are actually their greatest weaknesses... & thank you Rob, you have just provided further evidence in the following quote to substantiate this...

Well ... putting aside the flora examples (Oak & Silversword) due to time & tolerance levels. Let’s look at the “chiclid [sic] fish from Lake Victoria”. Cichlid (note correct spelling – being that you brought the issue up) fish are just “fine examples” of the resorting of the primordial genome & the loss of genetic information – hence NOT EVOLUTION!! When will you (& others) realise the principles required (the appropriate direction for genome evolution) for your own faith to take hold, spout limbs & head in the direction it is required for “evolutionary change” (i.e. developmental transformation) to be plausible.

The above is disrespectful, dishonest, ignorant & bias against those who don’t share the same world view/philosophy as you do. I have already highlighted the issues surrounding the potential problems for scientists expressing views against the established evolutionary/naturalistic status quo. I know quite a few scientists who question evolution (some are Creationists) who have got their PhDs from highly regarded universities (i.e. UNSW & Sydney) as well as Western Australia. Some are in research &/or lecturing at these very same universities. I will not be naming them (for good reason – as highlighted above)... yet, there are others who have made it publicly known as to their anti neo-Darwinian/evolution views. Here are just a few who refute your above claims...

- Dr Jason Lisle, Astrophysicist.
- Dr D. Russell Humphreys, Physicist.
- Dr Robert V. Gentry, Physicist.
- Professor Walter Veith, Zoologist, Physiologist.
- Professor Michael Behe, Biochemist.
- Dr Werner Gitt, Information Scientist.
- Dr. Andrew Snelling, Geologist.

The above have also been subjected to academic discrimination, as well has many others.

More bankrupt statements. It should be noted that the Catholics & Anglicans are virtually in the same bed (excuse the metaphor). I (nor should anybody else) couldn’t care less what these churches feel. Their history is riddled with corruption & hypocrisy (particularly the Catholic church). The hierarchy (i.e. Papacy, Cardinals, ministers etc...) don’t even know the very book they profess to serve & subsequently draw people to an understanding of (i.e. their poor theological interpretation/bias actually drives many people away).

I saw that discussion between Cardinal Pell & Dr Dawkins (it was on the Australian ABC Q & A program – I taped it). Pell had Dawkins on the rope (look at Dawkins face/body language) right up to the question to Pell referring to human origins – Pell stumbled with his words & gave some pathetic answer inciting some primate-like ancestry. Dawkins body language changed – he was relieved because he knew he had Pell (& so he should)... as Dawkins has said... “what shall we say, sophisticated theologians are quite happy to live with evolution, I think they are deluded.” I couldn’t agree with Dawkins more – they are “deluded”. Pell should spend more time on study; if not, at least attempt to patch up what his organisation has violated as far as human rights is concerned!

There, we finish with something in common. I too am “sick to death” with “debating” an irrational philosophy & an individual who has the audacity to not provide (or at the very least expand) evidence for his pseudoscientific, neo-mythological faith... & masquerade it as science. A faith system that has very little to do with true science, operational science, laboratory work, research. In fact has been shown to be detrimental to science enlightenment i.e. the evolutionary assumptions that certain organs or features are vestigial & hence have often reduced progress (prolonged) on research into their functions... same applies to the many evolutionary assumptions in reference to so deemed “Junk DNA” (pseudogenes) of which science enlightenment have now found purposeful function (hence not “evolutionary leftovers/by-products”).

As far as the “spelling mistake” gripe. I brought to your attention a spelling mistake ages ago (in another thread about 2 years back) which at the time needed to be elaborated on. I haven’t remarked on your continual history of poor spelling/grammar since it diverts attention from the real issues (& heck – we all make mistakes don’t we). However, your sloppiness in this area does need attention as it can potentially be detrimental to your message/intentions/standing (let alone confusing for others) – see it as a helpful tip - say no more.

Crikey!!! ... with an analogy of that nature I can now start to see why you can’t debate the topic. With that aside Rob, as you say, your views are your views (without evidence provided) as are mine (of which I have provided evidence & reasoning)... yet you say... “has nothing to do with anyone else...” of which you contradict yourself with the following via the indoctrination of those views to “podiatry students”! ...

... but what concerns me is that the likes of yours views are being pushed on to “podiatry students”... then you have the arrogance to state that without evolution they... “will not be fully educated”. What a load of rubbish – your world view/bias/philosophy does not belong within the academic syllabus of Podiatry medicine – period! Enough said...

Over & out.

 

Dear Moderator, do I really have to respond to this attack? I will if you ask me to; otherwise I will leave this for the readership to make their own judgements. Rob

 

Dave

You certainly seem to have acquired a remarkable number of new skills since your experience - medium, healer, preacher, executioner and saviour - that I'm left wondering whether you should ask the HCPC to annotate your entry on the register accordingly! Whilst I'm sure a neuropsychiatrist could make some sense of your experiences, this is not my field of study - however, reading you comments from last year together with the above, I simply observe that it would appear that you have turned your life around from tragic circumstances to one of contentment - which would make most people quite euphoric. Ask people who have pushed themselves to extremes and conquered whatever they were doing if they had similar experiences they may well affirm - your brain does some strange things when it's flooded with endorphins. You think your fantastical experience was extrinsic and at the behest of a superior being. I think the explanation is physiological and its impact psychological, rather than paranormal.

These shapes of knowledge that you felt were downloaded (but inaccessible) - was this what determined your understanding? This affirmed the Christian view - over that of Islam Shintoism etc? Or are you free to interpret the "message" in whatever vein you like?

 

"What a load of rubbish – your world view/bias/philosophy does not belong within the academic syllabus of Podiatry medicine – period! Enough said..."

Sadly Matthew, I cannot agree with you.

I would suggest that Rob's view belongs as much in there as much as your own.

Picking up the element within this thread that is essential more akin to faith/belief etc.

Within my life experience there have been periods of spirituality and periods where, through conversation with people in all manner of circumstances, they have gone on to develop their own. Equally, such encounters have also left me re-evaluating and/or reinterpreting my own experience. They have not been about winning the theological battle, not least because it is not winnable, but about exploration. Equally, there have been periods where belief has meant nothing to me and those who were an inspiration and support in those times, providing insight and courage and strength were not the people of belief.

At this point, based on this thread and previous threads with similar content, if I was seeking a mind and conversation with someone who might help me explore spirituality, evolve faith more (in light of scientific insight and what it's impact upon spirituality might have) it would be Robs. (it's ok Rob, no need to panic you live too far away )

Why is that I wonder?

 

From Simon's link....

 

I have been following this discussion from a distance. Unfortunately, I think that this discussion regarding religion has now reached a point where it is not doing any one any good. In fact, such a discussion may be causing harm and ill-will among podiatric colleagues who should know better.

I suggest you all give it a rest and keep such discussions to a minimum. There really is no useful point to such discussions on an academic medical website, is there?

 

Hi Kevin

Any discussion around religion has the potential to descend into the morass - challenging beliefs can be quite traumatic. But it does not need to be so. I have to say that I have been pleasantly surprised by the civility of responses, aside from a barb or two - and I for one harbour no ill-feeling towards any of the contributors - very much the opposite, in fact. As far as relevance on a medical discussion board, I can think of no other of greater importance. If the religious experience can be attributed to varying organic changes in the brain, my, that would be progress, wouldn't it? I see little difference in this debate agin one discussing the merits of Rothbart's proprioceptive insoles and traditional functional devices. Same principles apply. I am also heartened that on Podiatry Arena we have not yet descended into using M16's and AK47's to settle our differences!

Happy Easter

Mark

 

Fair do's Kevin. This thread is in the break room where pretty well anything (that is not rude or insulting) could and should find a home.

I happen to believe that faith versus science debates tend to go nowhere but if Dave et al wish to discuss the subject then I for one do not feel empowered to deny them that right. Who knows, we might learn something.

All the best

Bill Liggins

 

So, the question becomes: is it more likely that you are having an hallucination in which "God" talks to you due to the fact that you are hallucinating because of one of the factors listed, or because "God" is really talking to you?

Sort that methodology out.

But objectively, one might want to be diagnosed as negative for all of the more common causes of hallucinations before one accepts that it's really "God" that's talking to you. At least in my world.

 

Agreed to a point. I think his thread is sailing to sadder shores:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Naw4TQgl_Zs

 

Mark

Thanks for your questioning and responses it's a courageous exploration.

As for psychological disorders - I am normal :dizzy: (for a crazy Christian, crazy for God that is!)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZXI9RJSgok

Dave

 

Thank you for your openness and honesty. Define normal. I would suggest the experiences you shared are anything but normal. If indeed you experienced an enlightenment with god, then why you and not others. Is he discriminatory. What of the thousands of church attendees who have never experienced similar? I asked a patient to read your experience this morning - he is a Canon in the CoE. He has never experienced what you had and indeed questioned the validity of your statement and suggests religious and psychological counselling. Why hasn't he experienced what you have? Surely a man of god - a devotee of the church of Christ - a man who spends much of his time in prayer, should experience something along the lines you have? I don't know the answer either Dave - but as I don't believe in a deity, I have to consider the alternative. As surely must you!

Have a good weekend, Dave.

Mark

 

Mark

You'd think eh!

But I'd like to ask one last question:

Do you think that I what I have told you is what I believe to be true?

Dave

 

Of course, why would you make it up. But the mind plays all kinds of tricks, Dave - as plenty can testify. I'd like to know your thoughts on Simon's questions when you have time.

 

"I asked a patient to read your experience this morning - he is a Canon in the CoE. He has never experienced what you had and indeed questioned the validity of your statement and suggests religious and psychological counselling. Why hasn't he experienced what you have? Surely a man of god - a devotee of the church of Christ - a man who spends much of his time in prayer, should experience something along the lines you have?"

In fairness to Dave, Mark, this would not be an uncommon reaction. It would depend on which expression of Christian faith/experience the Canon came from. Indeed within the CoE it may also depend on which wing of the CoE the Canon came from. For example, if they came from the high church wing rather than the evangelical charismatic wing then their reaction is no surprise. Equally, if they came from a none CoE pentecostal church background then Dave's position is not unusual.

Dave's position (that of claiming an experience of God that has opened the sense of close relation with him) is not a new one, nor unusual, dependent upon the church experience he is part of. Church history has examples and indeed the last 40 years saw a period of a resurgence of the evangelical/charismatic experience in some levels of the established church (non-conformist and conformist). Equally this same period saw a further development of what were once called house churches (House Church Movement) in which evangelical charismatic experiences would have been the norm.

Not referencing to Dave in the following bit. As ever, language is significant. For example by suggesting that God has spoken to a person this can mean:

• a literal voice
• that an individual suggests they might have become aware of what they perceive to be the mind of God on something.

In the case of the latter then this is sometimes expressed, often by people new to religous encounter, as "God has spoken to me" but does not mean a literal voice, rather it relates to a deep impression or awareness of what God might be wanting an individual to do. In the church context then this might be tested by other recognised individuals within that community as to its validity. That said, the experience can have been so profound and impacted so deeply into the person that the best way they can express it is to say God has spoken. (nb there is also a theological element to this that invests a creative energy into God's "Word" but that is a whole other discussion!!!.)

In the case of the former "literal voice" then this is most unusual and would need, for the reasons Simon and the Canon pointed out, to be a matter of very careful consideration.

 

Ian

:good:

But didn't God actually appear and speak to Abraham, Moses, Paul, didn't heavenly beings appear and speak to Ezekiel and John for instance, didn't they have crazy amazing visions and supernatural prophesy? Didn't Jesus appear and speak to many (over 500 it says) after he rose from the dead? Why would that be possible and a reality then but highly improbable now?

Mark

I'm feeling fairly vulnerable at being thought of a nut case but that's ok I knew that speaking the truth of my life in God would have that possible outcome. But since you believe that I speak what I believe to be the truth and therefore I am not a liar, then that only leaves you two options - either I'm nuts or I do speak actual truth and my faith is based in reality. The second option would be very difficult to accept from your current position, it would mean turning over everything that you currently believe is reality and truth. So that in all probability this only left one option open for you to conclude, which is fair enough and understandable. As you are it was impossible to change your heart and to conclude anything else but the great thing is Nothing is impossible for God.

With regard to my HCPC annotation for new abilities, I claim no power or ability in myself, everything is God the Glory is all his. My part is to ask in faith and to accept in faith that God has done these things, nothing more.

Jesus said, "Truly I tell you, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there,’ and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you.” Man's heart, the very centre of his belief system, is very heavy and immovable and covered in darkness but faith can move mountains and the light of Jesus can shine through the darkness. As I said Nothing is impossible for God.

So regarding the Canon:
Ask your priest if he believes God actually spoke to many through out the bible, more than spoke but actually appeared to, let's choose Abraham and Moses and Paul to be specific and examples that even those who are not scholars would have heard about. What does he say about those?

Ask if he believes in the reality of the visions and prophecies of Ezekiel and John in Revelations i.e. did they really have those extraordinary, supernatural visions and meetings with heavenly beings?

Does he believe that Jesus did miracles of healing and raising the dead?
Does he believe that Jesus said men who accept Jesus as saviour wil, via the Holy Spirit,l do all these things and more in His name.?

Does he believe in the crucifixion, death and resurrection of Christ and His appearance to many and His promise to send the Advocate, the Holy Spirit to dwell in all who believe in Jesus and the Messiah?

Does he accept this following text below as written in Acts 2

Because these first things are far, far more extraordinary and supernatural than any of my experiences (Read them for yourself and see). And the miracles and resurrection of Christ as being our saviour and the only gateway to the Kingdom of God, and the impartation of the Holy Spirit as a mediator between God and Man, are all far beyond the realms of rational science.

If he does then how can he think it unusual for a Christian to have these experiences and such faith when they are promised by Jesus Christ himself.

But if he does not then how can he maintain his position as a church leader, surely then all that he believes in is just nonsense, as any rational scientist will tell him. The whole Christian church is built on these premise, they are the foundation and axiom of Christian faith. If you don't believe it is real then being a priest is just a convenient job and nothing more and deserves no credibility at all.

Maybe you should ask your canon why God has not clearly spoken to Him? And for that matter does he care?

Regards Dave

 

Hi Dave
I have kept out of this and similar discussions on Pod Arena for my own reasons. I prefer not to take my involvement any further than what I am placing below.

I commented earlier, on your behalf, wanting to put the Canon's comments in a more historical and fair context. Also, at this point, I would assure you I am not putting you in the category of nutter. Far from it.

You have undergone a conversion experience that some might want to liken as a Damascus Road moment. This is not an unusual, nor uncommon experience and I have come across it many times. Your comments, enthusiasm, level of conviction fit perfectly those who have undergone such moments. So there is nothing new in what you are describing. Just as importantly, nor is there anything new in what you are communicating. So familiar is it and so often have I worked with similar situations (in a previous context) that, and I am not decrying your experience, it can be almost predictable the road of faith and understanding you will travel over the next few years.

The out working of faith is not easy and, strangely, the more the Damascus Road the conversion experience the more difficult it can be at times. But as mentioned above, there is a certain predictability to it.

As to the quoting of scripture. It means a great deal to you but to those who do not share the same values of scripture as yourself or those of your church it has little meaning or value and certainly not the authority afforded it by yourself or your church. Suffice it to say that the text you quoted is a hugely discussed text and has more than one valid theological interpretation. And this is important, a conversion experience is one thing but from that point on you are outworking it in a context (usually a church group) that has a particular theological interpretation that underpins what they do.

I wish you well Dave and can always be contacted by PM but you may find me a disappointment.

 

Dave

At no time have I ever suggested you are 'nuts' or a 'nut-case' and it's not a conclusion I expect to arrive at either. I had hoped to examine your experience rather than your beliefs - the latter stemming from the former - because debating beliefs is essentially futile. I don't know if you watched any of the interviews from Scottish Roman Catholics after Keith O'Brian confessed to having poor sexual etiquette with several young catholic priests - but what was astonishing, despite his confession, that several of those interviewed refused to believe he had committed the acts in the first place - and would never believe them no matter what anyone - including the Archbishop - said to the contrary.

Any one of us can have episodes of delusions or hallucinations. Most of us will have some form of mental illness at some point in our lives - anxiety, depression, stress-related disorders - no difference than a physical ailment in my book. That doesn't constitute an illness that is refractory.

I don't think scriptures or bible lessons are relevant - I usually find they are recited ad nauseum when questioning becomes difficult, but if you were willing to discuss the episode of your conversion and subsequent times you cite as some form of communication - then I would be more than happy to listen.

All the best
Mark

 

Ian

Thanks for your support and excellent summaries of varying attitudes of the people of some of the various denominations of the Christian Church.

Mark
I used 'nut case' as a light hearted term in comparison to mentally ill or delusional psychosis, but its often difficult to convey subtle nuance in the written word. I know or at least get the impression that you are a caring soul but at the same time like to get to the heart of the matter in a straight talking way. There was a case for me to highlight the point tho in case other readers got the wrong idea and didn't understand your subtle guidance on how I might consider my experiences in rational way and I think your reply to my 'nut case' remark has made your intent and meaning much more clear..so thanks.

Mark and Ian

I use scripture as little as possible because I realise it can just be a switch of cue for many. However in these cases I have used scripture to validate my point.

Mark wrote

That scepticism is therefore asking or rather demanding that I 'cite my sources'
So using the principle of going back to the original source I must therefore quote the relevant scripture that validate my case. The Canon may have a point of view based on biblical principles but Jesus and / or His direct apostles must have the authoritative and last word.

Regards Dave

 

Okay, lets forget the third parties in this discussion i.e. Jesus, the apostles and the Canon. What they say - or purport to have said - is not relevant to my enquiry. It is your recollection that is of interest. I'm having a long overdue day in the hills tomorrow - making the best of this glorious weather - and I'll consider further how i would like to direct my questions on the walk. Obviously you will be looking forward to tomorrow for other reasons, so have a good day and we'll talk later.

Happy Easter

 

Agreed.

 

"The Canon may have a point of view based on biblical principles but Jesus and / or His direct apostles must have the authoritative and last word."

Dave that may well be the case, for some. Sometimes however, it is the human experience, well articulated and related, that provides the window for an enquirer. Indeed, if you wish, it is the human experience that becomes the parable enabling insight for the enquirer. The enquirer may choose not to pursue the same road but they will be clearer in their choice.

In one sense, if you look at it from an incarnation perspective, the idea of God appearing in human form is about providing the human experience to enable us to peer into the unfamiliar and unknown, so that we can become familiar and knowing.

Perhaps Mark (I hope this is not putting words in Marks mouth) is asking for something of this window into your human experience as it is what will carry some weight in his thinking. It also has the ultimate biblical precedent, "..the word became flesh" John 1:14.

 

Mark and Ian

Both good points well made, I feel like I'm breathing fresh air, which you Mark will be doing quite literally in the Hills tomorrow with your camera no doubt taking some amazing photos.

Folkestone is surrounded by hills and one is called Sugar Loaf Hill rising to about 150 meters above the town (see pic)
On Good Friday morning, Folkestone Churches Together have a service in the town centre precinct and then a procession of about 400 carry a 12 foot cross to the top of Sugar loaf hill where if is planted between 2 others put there earlier and we have another service on top of the hill.




Dave

 

Guy's - Something for the weekend:

The text below is an excert from a book 'Experiencing The Holy Spirit' by Andrew Murray 1828 - 1927 and very closely mirrors my expectation and desire to have the Holy Spirit active within and manifesting without. Maybe this will put the Holy Spirit and, the need to have, the reality, the experience and the expectation of, His indwelling in perspective. Andrew Murray was a Pastor and missionary in Africa and wrote 240 Christian books.

I believe that this concept is important because until the Holy Spirit is fully active then we only strive in our own strength,which is puny by comparison. When the Holy Spirit is manifested in life then this brings evidence to the observer of change and that change elicits reaction. Evidence also brings confidence and confidence in the truth of God brings faith and as Jesus says, when you have faith you can move mountains. But as this text explains the Holy Spirit cannot be attained thru striving and hard work but by submission and that submission itself requires faith to know I am nothing and God is everything and to become everything God wants me to be I must be filled with the Spirit of God as promised by Jesus to everyone (this is validated by the scripture I posted earlier BTW ... Well read on and perhaps, I hope, you might understand better why the experience of the Holy spirit is an important and useful and natural, tho not always easy to accept and often feared or shunned, progression of the Christian journey.

Enjoy the rest of the holidays -- Dave

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Murray_(minister)

Andrew Murray talking about attainment of the Holy Spirit PS no tennis mentioned.

IV. I cannot grasp this blessing in my own power.
Whenever a Christian begins to strive for this blessing, he generally makes a variety of efforts to reach after the faith, and obedience, and humility, and submission which are the conditions of obtaining it. Then, when he does not succeed, he is tempted to blame himself, and if he does not become utterly discouraged, he rouses himself to still stronger effort and greater zeal. All this struggling is not without its value and its use. It has its use, however, in other ways than are commonly anticipated. It does the very work that the law does— that is to say, it brings us to the knowledge of our entire impotence; it leads us to that despair of ourselves in which we become willing to give to God the place that belongs to Him. This lesson is entirely indispensable. "I can neither bestow this blessing on myself nor take it. It is God alone that must work it in me." The blessing of Pentecost is a supernatural gift, a wonderful act of God in the soul. The life of God in every soul is just as truly a work of God as when that life was first manifested in Jesus Christ. A Christian can do as little to bring the full life of the Spirit to fruition in his soul as the Virgin Mary did to conceive her supernatural child. Like her, he can only receive it as the gift of God. The impartation of this heavenly blessing is as entirely an act of God as the resurrection of Christ from the dead was His divine work. As Christ Jesus had wholly and entirely to go down unto death, and lay aside utterly the life He had, in order to receive a new life from God, so must the believer abandon all power and hope of his own to receive this full blessing as a free gift of divine Omnipotence. This acknowledgement of our utter impotence, this descent into true self-despair, is indispensable if we would enjoy this supreme blessing.

V. I must have this blessing at any cost.
To get possession of the pearl of great price, the merchant man had to sell all that he had. The full blessing of Pentecost is to be obtained at no smaller price. He that would have it must sell all, must forsake all: sin to its smallest item, the love of the world in its most innocent forms, self-will in its simplest and most natural expressions, every faculty of our nature, every moment of our life, every pleasure that feeds our self-complacency, every exercise of our body, soul, and spirit— all must be surrendered to the power of the Spirit of God. In nothing can independent control or independent force have a place: everything— everything, I say— must be under the leading of the Spirit. One must indeed say: "Cost what it may, I am determined to have this blessing." Only the vessel that is utterly empty of everything can be filled and overflow with this living water. We know that there is oftentimes a great gulf betwixt the will and the deed. Even when God has wrought the willing, the doing does not always come at once. But it will come wherever a man surrenders himself to the will which God has wrought, and openly expresses his consent in the presence of God. This, accordingly, is what must be done by the soul who intends to be sincerely ready to part with everything, even though he feels that he has no power to accomplish it. The selling price is not always paid at the moment; nevertheless, the purchaser may become the possessor as soon as the sale is concluded and security is given for the payment. O my brother this very day speak the word: "Cost what it may, I will have this blessing." Jesus is surety that you will have power to abandon everything. Express your decision in the presence of God with confidence and perseverance. Repeat it before your own conscience and say: "I am a purchaser of the pearl of great price: I have offered everything to obtain the full blessing of Pentecost. I have said to God that I must, I will have it. By this decision I abide. I must, I will have it. "
VI. In faith that God accepts my surrender and bestows this blessing upon me, I appropriate it for myself.
There is a great difference betwixt the appropriation of a blessing by faith and the actual experience of it. It is because Christians do not understand this that they often become discouraged, when they do not at once experience the feeling and the enjoyment of what is promised them. Whenever in response to the offer of Christ you have said that you forsake all, and count it but loss for the full blessing of Pentecost, then from that moment you have to believe that He receives your offer and that bestows He upon you the fullness of the Spirit. Yet it may easily be that you cannot at that crisis trace any marked change in your experience. It is as if everything in you remained in its old condition. Now, however, is just the very time to persevere in faith. Learn by faith to be as sure as if you had seen it written in heaven that God has accepted your surrender of everything as a certain and completed transaction. In this faith look upon yourself as a man who is known to God as one that has sold everything to obtain this heavenly treasure. Believe that God has in heaven bestowed upon you the fullness of the Spirit. In this faith regard yourself as on the way to know the full blessing also in feeling and experience. Believe that God will order this blessing to break forth and be revealed in you. In this faith let your life be a life of joyful thanksgiving and expectation. God will not disappoint you.

VII.
Now I count upon God and, wait upon Him to reveal truly within me the blessing which He has bestowed upon me.

Faith must lead me to the actual inheritance of the promise, to the experience and enjoyment of it. Do not rest content with a belief that does not lead to experience. Rest in God by faith in the full assurance that He can make Himself known to you in a manner that is truly divine. At times the whole process may appear to you too great and too wonderful, and really impossible. Be not afraid. The more clearly you discern the amazing elements in the fact that you on your part have said to the Eternal Holy God that He on His part may have you to make you full of His Holy Spirit here on earth, the more shall you feel what a miracle of the grace of God it must be. There may be in you things you are not aware of, which hinder the breaking forth of the blessing. God is bent on putting them aside. Let them be consumed in the fire of strong burning desire. Let them be annihilated in the flame of God's countenance and His love. Let your expectation be fixed upon the Lord your God. He who in a frail woman revealed the divine life in the Infant Jesus, He that raised up the dead Jesus to the life of glory, He can— He will, indeed— just as miraculously bring this heavenly blessing to fruition in you, so that you may be filled with the Holy Spirit and that you may know, not by reasoning but by experience, that you have actually received the Holy Spirit
Beloved brother, thou who readest all this, give answer, I entreat thee, to the summons I bring thee. God promises, God desires to make you full of the Holy Spirit. He would fain have your whole nature and life under the power of the Holy Spirit. He asks if you on your part are willing, if you really desire to have it. Pray let there be in your answer no uncertain sound, but let all that is within you cry out: "Yea, Lord, with all my heart." Let this promise of your God become the chief element in your life, the most precious, the chief, the only thing you seek. Do not be content to think and pray over it, but this very enter into a transaction and a compact with God that will admit of no doubt concerning the choice you have made. When once you have made this choice, cleave firmly to what is the chief element in it— namely, the faith that expects this blessing as a miracle of divine Omnipotence. The more earnestly you exercise that faith, the more will it teach you that your heart must be entirely emptied of everything and set free from every fetter, to be filled with the Spirit, to be occupied by the indwelling Christ. Contemplate yourself in faith as a man betwixt whom and God a firm compact has been made that you must receive the full blessing. You may take it for granted that it will surely come. Amen.

Murray, Andrew (2012-01-30). Experiencing The Holy Spirit (p. 48). . Kindle Edition

 

Hi Dave
As I mentioned in an earlier post I do not wish to become too involved in the discussion beyond what I have previously written and so will step back a while now. All the best.

 

I went at random to your so called experts:

http://www.lehigh.edu/~inbios/faculty/index.htm

While we respect Prof. Behe's right to express his views, they are his alone and are in no way endorsed by the department. It is our collective position that intelligent design has no basis in science, has not been tested experimentally and should not be regarded as scientific.[12]

And his views: "My ideas about irreducible complexity and intelligent design are entirely my own. They certainly are not in any sense endorsed by either Lehigh University in general or the Department of Biological Sciences in particular. In fact, most of my colleagues in the Department strongly disagree with them."



I don't know why I bother............... and I did say that iI would have nothing more to do wtih this debate. Would you please note, that I have said nothing about about any religous position. I am merely taking an evolutionary position.

Rob

 

Hi Ian.

Really Ian? Well, there are many who would not like to see that happen Ian (hence part of the controversy). However, I want to make this point clear (& I have said this before); I have said that I feel it wise that both evolution & Creation should not be a part of the general science curriculum in any field... they are better placed within the scope of philosophy... which should be a part of the curriculum of most fields i.e. Podiatry Philosophy 101.

Ian, I have learnt many times over, not to rely too much on the actions & words of other human beings. It is about exploration (i.e. doing one’s own research)... seeking truth... as well as having the courage to go where the evidence leads despite the status quo (peers). Reminds me of a phrase: wide is the path to ......; narrow is the path to...... Sometimes “people of belief” (vague phrase, as we all have beliefs – but I think I know what you’re referring to) are the least enlightened on “spirituality” (metaphysics/philosophy).

You’re entitled to seek your chosen “spirituality” from whatever suits you (however, I have noticed it wise to step out of one’s own comfort zone from time to time – particularly for greater enlightenment). Like I said in my previous point above, re.: unreliability of people... but if you are to seek advice from another – assess their fruits (i.e. conduct/actions, words, experience etc...) What people fail to remember is that it is all about choice... views/ideas (particularly of a spiritual nature) should never be forced (indoctrinated) onto another. My objective on this thread is not to guide another’s “spirituality” (albeit, this may be a repercussion due to the scope of this discussion with its metaphysical connections). My objective is to address problems & lay down a foundation for looking at the important area of our origins with a different perspective... of which has attracted so much baggage & controversy.

Well, I can speculate why... but you tell me (us).



Hi Rob (sorry, Dr Kidd).

“Random”??? Well, Professor Behe is probably the most world renown (out of that list) for his Intelligent Design (I.D) advocacy/involvement – particularly with his bestselling book “Darwin's Black Box” as well as involvement in testifying in several court cases related to Intelligent Design.

Anyhow Rob, once again you missed the point why that list was added in my last post. You stated the following nonsense in a previous post...

The above is clearly wrong. I provided a short list (from many) who refute/question evolution of which have received their doctorates (& beyond) from various universities around the world (hence “not their own college”) of which were also not “self appointed” (into positions I presume). Professor Behe in just one of many examples, hence his inclusion. I’ll state another later.

So what – what do you expect – haven’t I previously discussed this issue in my previous post (i.e. the apparent controversy when challenging an established/traditional paradigm). Keep on bringing up similar issues which I have already addressed & I will question your comprehension ability. Ironically Rob, the further you contribute the further you help endorse my position...

... & subsequently why Professor Behe must articulate his position (due to the current climate) on a university website...

The following is why he has taken the path he has. Isn’t this is what science is all about? In the light of “little progress”... proposing “better explanations”... of which he has stated... “has proven to be extremely controversial”.

Here is another scientist Rob (who is not “self appointed” & did not get his qualifications/wards from his “own college”)...

- Professor David B. Gower is emeritus professor of steroid biochemistry at the University of London. He holds a B.S. in chemistry from the University of London, a Ph.D. in biochemistry from the University of London & was awarded a D.Sc. from the University of London for his research into the biochemical mechanisms for the control of steroid hormone formation. Professor Gower is a fellow of the Royal Society of Chemistry, a fellow of the Institute of Biology & a chartered chemist....

I’m finding it rather interesting (ironic) how we are coming to similar sentiments. I too “don’t know why I bother”... except I have a greater cause to come to that conclusion. You still don’t provide any evidence for your position & you keep rehashing material which has already been answered or hasn’t been an issue at all – like the following...

Yes, OK Rob... you’ve stated this before – I have not raised this – nor do I find it an issue. However, before I contributed to this thread you did make reference to me & do continually make uncalled for/ignorant/antiquated/bias assumptions about Creationists. Hence my involvement as I am merely taking a Creationist position (from an evidence based science perspective). As you have probably figured out, there has been a more emotional/personal/theological (i.e. Scriptural base) perspective taken up from David (which is fine)... of which I have avoided.

 

The two quotes I gave you were on the university website. One on theirs, one on his.

As for Gower, a quick Google search finds several "answers are in Genesis" type URL's, but no university URL (My own academic mentor, Professor Emeritus Charles Oxnard, now about aged 80, had an intact university entry - and he had a DSc). I do not doubt what you are saying re: his quals. A "steroid biochemist" an expert of matters of biologogical anthropology? Next time I need an opinion on matters dermatological, I will consult a paediatrician.

 

Oh - Mathew, I did find this gentlemen at the NHM - (where I have worked on and off for years), but I suspect he wil not help your case.................

http://www.nhm.ac.uk/research-curation/about-science/staff-directory/life-sciences/d-gower/

Rob

 

Dave

I would like to share a short story about something you might find of interest.

When I was growing up I was extremely fortunate to have had a fantastic grandmother, who I was very fond of. She was everything a young boy could have wanted; warm, loving, sagacious and full of fun. On the few occasions that I ran away from home, I never made it past her doorstep whereupon after a chat and a glass of juice, I would wander back home defeated but feeling triumphant at the same time. When I was thirteen she spent some time in our local hospital and some time later I learnt she had undergone a hysterectomy for suspected ovarian Ca when she was in her mid fifties. Over the coming years I occasionally accompanied her to hospital for her outpatient follow-up reviews – which seemed to fall during the school holidays. They appeared to be a waste of time to me as she looked so well and healthy – but she kept them up, year after year, always thanking the doctors for their time.

The year after I graduated – 1984 – she became quite ill rather suddenly and was admitted into hospital again and had a number of blood transfusions which helped initially, but after a few weeks, she relapsed again and was admitted once more. This time we were told she had acute myeloid leukaemia which could not be treated and after four days, on the second of October, she died.

Surprisingly, perhaps, I was not overcome with grief at the time. It was the first death in our closer family – I had been to several funerals previously – but this was the first time death had really struck to the heart of our family unit – and I had expected to feel different, but I didn’t react the way I thought I would. Yes, I was sad and I missed her over the coming months and years, but I never cried or was overwhelmed by the raw emotion that I later discovered characterised what we know as grief.

At the time, I was working as a senior podiatrist at the hospital where she had undergone her hysterectomy – and one afternoon, about a year after she had died, I dropped a request to medical records and added her name and DoB to my list of patients. The following day, her records were sent to me (they had yet to be archived) with the rest of my requisition and I sat down to read her notes. What I discovered changed my outlook on healthcare considerably. It tuned out that after her operation she was started on a regime of chemotherapeutic agents – primarily cyclophosphamide for a recommended period of 12 months. At her first and second review (6 and 12 months) it was recommended that the course be maintained for another six months, but at her 18 month review – and all following appointments – no mention was ever made in her notes regarding this agent again. In these days, the hospital would issue a letter to the patient’s GP who would arrange the medication prescription locally and this continued until the hospital doctor wrote to the GP and requested any changes. At her 18 month review, she had seen a new registrar who had omitted to consider the medication regime and had simply re-appointed her for 12 months time. The same thing happened for the next ten years until she developed AML which was to prove refractory. Cyclophosphamide is routinely given as a chemotherapeutic agent for certain types of cancer – in a similar way tamoxafen is given following Ca of the breast. The former is much more cytotoxic and inhibits white blood cell formation in bone marrow. The exposure my grandmother had completely reduced her WBC production to an irreversible state and it was this that had killed her. The Consultant Haematologist’s final entry in her notes, the day after she died read.

I discussed this with my parents and my grandfather and they decided not to raise a formal complaint – my father worked as a District Chiropodist in the same Health Board for one - and she wouldn’t have wanted to get anyone in trouble, remarked my grandfather. That was they way things were. But I did speak to the haematologist, who apologised sincerely for the mistake and assured me that he would ensure such a scenario would never happen again. Right.

I recall feeling very angry at the time – not just at the NHS, but with my own family who did not wish to pursue matters further – but by this time I was in my mid twenties starting my career and just about to get married and gradually my anger was displaced by other events, as is so often the case.

Two years later I was returning home to Fife from Edinburgh late on a Thursday night. I had been at a climbing club meeting and had just crossed the Forth Road Bridge before taking the road past my home village towards Kirkcaldy where I then lived. I was driving my Alfa Romeo GTV at the time and was probably doing well over 100mph thinking about the route we were planning to do the coming weekend on Ben Nevis when suddenly I experienced the strangest sensation. It seemed as though time had slowed down instantly and everything appeared to be in slow motion- and in silence - for two or three seconds, before motion and noise resumed as previous. But this was not what disconcerted me. In those two or three seconds something seemed to pass through me – a granular sensation. Thinking back now, I remember it felt like the sensation you experience when getting gas at the dentist – but it wasn’t restricted to my chest and airways – it was everywhere. The instant it happened I had the overwhelming sensation that it was my grandmother. I didn’t realise until the following day that at the point it had happened I was only a few hundred yards away from the cemetery where she is buried.

I burnt a lot of rubber in the following few seconds pulling up on the hard shoulder and by the time the car had stopped I was completely overcome with emotion – and was for a few hours afterwards. I have no idea what happened that night – I wasn't thinking of her at the time and it wasn't near any significant date of reminders – and I had never felt that way emotionally before. I had certainly never experienced the physical sensation I had during the two or three seconds when the car seemed to slow – and I never have again, to that degree anyway.

I grew up in a Scottish Presbyterian family – and attended Sunday School and Church for the first 12 years of my life until interest waned and I realised that for many in the Kirk – entry into heaven seemed conditional on the size of the donation you gave on a Sunday, rather on how good a person you were! By the time I was in my mid twenties I was becoming a sceptic – probably agnostic – but at no time following the incident in the car, did I ever think this was the work of God or Jesus or any other religious figure or being. If anything, the experience took me in the other direction completely.

Over the years I have kept detailed notes of interesting conversations I have had with patients and other acquaintances and what is surprising is how common such experiences are. I have two friends who are both GPs and atheists – who, when attending the funeral of a sister in Cheltenham, experienced a similar slowing of time and silencing of sound when walking back from the crematorium to their hotel. When they looked across the road they were astonished to see his mother looking back at them and smiling, which was rather surprising as she had died nine years previously. Both swore they saw her. When a van passed between them she vanished. No explanation. You might consider it strange, but they are still atheists and still offer no explanation for the occurrence.

The mind is a powerful organ – I don’t think we really know quite what its potential really is – but it certainly has the capacity to pull some stunning tricks from time to time. Whether it was this or whether it was some, as yet, unexplained altered time dimension, I have no idea. Is there something after death? I don’t know. I think probably not on the balance of available evidence – but I don’t really know for sure – the doubt stemming from my own experiences and that of others.

You will note I wrote experiences – I have had others, but not to the same intensity or degree. I’m sure some reading this will remember the redoubtable Bob Main from Edinburgh Foot Clinic and his séances and Ouija Board evenings – few will have emerged with light-hearted contentment following one of these sessions – myself included. At no time or with any experience have I ever felt a religious connotation or involvement. At no time have I ever felt the need to become religious or to study religion to explain these experiences. At no time have I ever felt any of these experiences were at the behest of god or Jesus or any other deity or religious figure.

What I find interesting is that some people experience such manifestations at some stage in their life. Sometimes it is at a time of great stress or other life-changing situation. Sometimes not. Sometimes, some people, yourself included, think it is the work of god/Jesus/Allah & etc and become converts to their particular cause. Others, including myself, don’t. To me, religion is merely an obfuscation – a distraction to what might possibly be a different dimension of which we currently know little about aside from what we experience for ourselves. For me, it is the ‘experience’ itself that holds most interest – hence my questioning on this and other threads.

I don’t think you are a ‘nut’, Dave – it is refreshing to find a religious convert with a reasonable IQ and who isn’t standing on my doorstep trying to convert me on a Saturday morning! It is your ‘experience’ that I am interested in – not your subsequent (erroneous, in my view) attribution to god or Jesus or scripture. One way or another, I guess we will all find out one day. I'll get back with some questions in the next few days. Until then,

All the best

Mark