Personal relationships with deities

[robvalue]

This is a phrase I've heard thrown about so much that I thought it deserved its own topic. To me, this is a sensible, loose definition of a personal relationship:

An independent observer can verify that

1) Both parties in the relationship exist, and are easily distinguishable from being imaginary.
2) Both parties have an independent intelligence.
3) Both parties directly communicate with the other party in a meaningful, observable way.

In this way, I can have personal relationship with any human, any animal that has some way to at least acknowledge my interaction with it, and arguably with an artificial intelligence. It seems to me that if these 3 criteria are not met, it is not a meaningful personal relationship. The only exception I can think of is where one party becomes unable to communicate at some point, such as a friend going into a coma. You could maybe argue that you can continue to have a personal relationship with them, based on your history together, even though they can't directly answer back.

However, it seems to me that most people's personal relationship with God/Jesus/Allah etc. satisfies not even one of these criteria. In those cases, I would expect to witness them simply sitting in a room by themselves, either talking out loud to no one or just thinking things. How can I possibly accept this as a relationship? I've asked for indirect confirmation, such as the other party telling them something they couldn't already know, but I've never received this even using very simple criteria.

If there is anyone here who thinks their relationship with a deity actually does meet all these criteria, I'd be very interested to hear about it. Do you think you could convince an independent observer of those points? If someone wants to argue you can have a relationship while not meeting any of these criteria, then feel free. Then there is the problem of people all having a personal relationship with supposedly the same being (God/Jesus etc) but then coming back with contradictory messages. This means that one of these must be the case:

(1) Most of the people who think they are having this relationship actually aren't
(2) The relationship is such that the being cannot accurately express itself in a meaningful way
(3) The being is deliberately sending out conflicting messages
(4) There is no such being and people are imagining the responses

This last point is covered well in this humorous video by Nonstampcollector.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLBDFe3mDtk

[Captain Scarlet]

Exactly. There are a lot of problems with this personal experience.

On a personal level I find it a bit creepy. You hear voices or have telepathic communication from a dead person! Also thinking you are important enough to receive messages from the creator of the universe implies a degree of arrogance and delusion that is beyond my comprehension. I have no right to question that they feel they had the experience, but to exptrapolate it beyond what we know about human pyschology as evidence for a god seems at best wishful thinking.

I would add:

- Accept it for one, accept it for all why is the sadists experience hearing "kill them all...signed Yahweh" any less objectively valid than the 40 year old librarian hearing "love everyone and especially be nice to cats...oh by the way this is Jesus".
- Accept other religions they all have personal experiences (so they are all valid...right)
- No one ever comes back with useful info. Apparently millions of people are in touch with the creator of the universe who only reveals that 1) where you lost your keys, 2) dont worry you will be ok, 3) you should get a new guitarist for the band, 4) the end of the world is nigh (then it isn't again when the date passes). Not very compelling.

[Brian37]

The only personal relationship I have is with my right hand, I can prove the existence of my right hand, I don't need to pray to it, and it has never let me down.

[drfuzzy]

I have heard this SO many times.  I heard it as a child, with the instructions "pray to Jesus without ceasing, with an honest heart, and you too will have a personal relationship with him".  Well, I prayed.  And I prayed.  For more than forty years I prayed and begged and cried and praised (one preacher said "don't ask for anything, just tell God thank you for everything").  Not one hint of a voice, of a sense of a presence, of a sense of well-being or calm or . . . anything.  SO, of course, according to those who went around talking about their wonderful personal relationship with God, I was apparently doing it wrong - - - or I had evil in my heart - - - or I had sins I wasn't confessing - - - or _____.  

People not only use this to try and tell others in their group how holy and successful and prayerful they are, they use it to put other people down.   

I don't want to admit how long it took me to realize that they were a bunch of lying assholes.

[robvalue]

I'm sorry to hear that It's only natural to believe what everyone is telling you. Learning to question things fundamentally takes courage and not everyone is up to the task. Anyone who has broken free should be proud, regardless of how long it took.

I want to know what real difference there is between talking to Jesus and talking to yourself. Getting a bunch of fuzzy feelings can easily be explained by the idea that you simply believe you're talking to Jesus. Retrofitting later events to earlier "conversations" is just kidding yourself, but the human brain is extremely vulnerable to confirmation bias.

[Drich]

I have heard this SO many times.  I heard it as a child, with the instructions "pray to Jesus without ceasing, with an honest heart, and you too will have a personal relationship with him".  Well, I prayed.  And I prayed.  For more than forty years I prayed and begged and cried and praised (one preacher said "don't ask for anything, just tell God thank you for everything").  Not one hint of a voice, of a sense of a presence, of a sense of well-being or calm or . . . anything.  SO, of course, according to those who went around talking about their wonderful personal relationship with God, I was apparently doing it wrong - - - or I had evil in my heart - - - or I had sins I wasn't confessing - - - or _____.  

People not only use this to try and tell others in their group how holy and successful and prayerful they are, they use it to put other people down.   

I don't want to admit how long it took me to realize that they were a bunch of lying assholes.

I thought we did a whole thread on this, and I was able to show you that what you called prayer infact wasn't. So the question then becomes have you even ever really prayed to God? Again asking God for stuff is not prayer it is supplication or petition. The bible is clear on what prayer is, it is you asking God to change your mind and your heart, rather than you trying to change his.

[vorlon13]

Er . .

Uh . . .

I think the LDS marriage for eternity (not time) thing is their take on a personal relationship with a deity. But with their legendary confusion and befuddlement on EVERYTHING, it's hard to know for sure.

[Longhorn]

I have a deep personal relationship with my pillow. There is no one else I cuddle that much

[Drich]

This is a phrase I've heard thrown about so much that I thought it deserved its own topic. To me, this is a sensible, loose definition of a personal relationship:

An independent observer can verify that

1) Both parties in the relationship exist, and are easily distinguishable from being imaginary.
2) Both parties have an independent intelligence.
3) Both parties directly communicate with the other party in a meaningful, observable way.

In this way, I can have personal relationship with any human, any animal that has some way to at least acknowledge my interaction with it, and arguably with an artificial intelligence. It seems to me that if these 3 criteria are not met, it is not a meaningful personal relationship. The only exception I can think of is where one party becomes unable to communicate at some point, such as a friend going into a coma. You could maybe argue that you can continue to have a personal relationship with them, based on your history together, even though they can't directly answer back.

However, it seems to me that most people's personal relationship with God/Jesus/Allah etc. satisfies not even one of these criteria. In those cases, I would expect to witness them simply sitting in a room by themselves, either talking out loud to no one or just thinking things. How can I possibly accept this as a relationship? I've asked for indirect confirmation, such as the other party telling them something they couldn't already know, but I've never received this even using very simple criteria.

If there is anyone here who thinks their relationship with a deity actually does meet all these criteria, I'd be very interested to hear about it. Do you think you could convince an independent observer of those points? If someone wants to argue you can have a relationship while not meeting any of these criteria, then feel free. Then there is the problem of people all having a personal relationship with supposedly the same being (God/Jesus etc) but then coming back with contradictory messages. This means that one of these must be the case:

(1) Most of the people who think they are having this relationship actually aren't
(2) The relationship is such that the being cannot accurately express itself in a meaningful way
(3) The being is deliberately sending out conflicting messages
(4) There is no such being and people are imagining the responses

This last point is covered well in this humorous video by Nonstampcollector.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLBDFe3mDtk

I was going to chop all of this up, and feed it back to you but upon closer inspection I agree.

That said on the flip side of that coin once you have the confirmation you seek, what then do you think your responsibility/reaction should be?

[drfuzzy]

I'm sorry to hear that It's only natural to believe what everyone is telling you. Learning to question things fundamentally takes courage and not everyone is up to the task. Anyone who has broken free should be proud, regardless of how long it took.

I want to know what real difference there is between talking to Jesus and talking to yourself. Getting a bunch of fuzzy feelings can easily be explained by the idea that you simply believe you're talking to Jesus. Retrofitting later events to earlier "conversations" is just kidding yourself, but the human brain is extremely vulnerable to confirmation bias.

Yeah rob, exactly . . . I now see prayer as talking to myself.  After all, there isn't anyone listening!!  Yakking away at the ceiling, hoping for an answer, read a few more Bible verses, yakk for a little while longer . . . yadda yadda yadda.  I couldn't convince myself that anyone was there.  But I know a lot of folks who will swear until their dying day that they were heard and answered.  (Usually that's prefaced by "oh not in words" "oh, no, I didn't hear a voice" BUT I KNOW!!!!)  I suppose a lot of folks, if they want to hear a voice desperately enough . . . oh wait, the FSM just dropped by to say hello!!!!