From: Erin (macavity11@yahoo.com)
Date: Mon Oct 25 2004 - 01:55:34 BST
Sam Norton <elizaphanian@kohath.wanadoo.co.uk> wrote:
eek. That item (ii) should not have had a 'don't' in it, and should therefore have read:
> My position is:
> (ii) I think it is profoundly misleading to talk about mysticism as an 'experience';
Sam
See breaking this apart would really help me understanding what "faith" means and what it applies to. There are experiences that are observable and there are experiences that are not unobservable. Mystic experience would be an unobservable experience and so I thought it might fall under faith (even though for me personally it is an experience) but now I am told I am *allowed* to lump it under experience rather than faith So how do you draw the line....e.g., if somebody claimed to "experience" connection with a God. Since it wasn't observable to anybody but that person I thought it was faith. But how can I claim MY mystic experience is experience not faith but their experience is faith-based. I just don't get what criteria people are using to clearly distinguish whether an unobservable experience is lumped as an experience or as faith.
Erin
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Oct 25 2004 - 01:57:35 BST