Are you open to religious experiences?

[Jenny A]

The only thing that interests me about religion is the art (and I'm talking old school stuff, like Bach's fugues) and architecture.

The closest I've come to a spiritual experience is looking up at a clear night sky in Yellowstone, free from light pollution. It's awe inspiring and humbling to have a clear glimpse of the scope of the universe. But, even then, I don't ascribe (prescribe? one of the scribes ) actual spirituality to it because I don't believe in spirits.

Hail lover of Bach!

I agree, the church from the late middle ages through the Renaissance produced some very fine things to look at and listen too. But then they almost had a monopoly on funding. As that ended the secular art world rose and Christian one fell.

[bennyboy]

After the Renaissance, the Christian world fell? Really?

[Jenny A]

After the Renaissance, the Christian world fell? Really?

The whole Christian world fell? No. But it's dominance over the art world began to decline with the Renascence and has continued to decline ever since. Compare Bach's secular output with Mozart's as a percentage. Then compare either with Liszt.

[bennyboy]

In my opinion, you are confusing religious institution with religious experience. Many people have had what they consider transcendent experiences when listening to more modern music-- Wagner, for example. It's semantics whether you'd call this "religious" if it's not explicitly Christian-themed-- but it produces similar changes to brain chemistry and causes similar experience.

[Elskidor]

Sure. I use to love going to Beltane now and again, depending on the year. It's like a weekend retreat with tons of activities, drums, dancing and fire walking. I thought it was a blast, but Pagans aren't prone to try and save you or preach your ear off, at least these folk didn't, but there is a lot of talk about the goddess.

[Jenny A]

In my opinion, you are confusing religious institution with religious experience. Many people have had what they consider transcendent experiences when listening to more modern music-- Wagner, for example. It's semantics whether you'd call this "religious" if it's not explicitly Christian-themed-- but it produces similar changes to brain chemistry and causes similar experience.

Ah, that's what I'd can a transcendental experience. I can get it listening to Christian music. But the feeling is not religious. If you use spiritual very broadly, that would cover it, like looking at the stars or listening to rain on a tent.

[bennyboy]

In my opinion, you are confusing religious institution with religious experience. Many people have had what they consider transcendent experiences when listening to more modern music-- Wagner, for example. It's semantics whether you'd call this "religious" if it's not explicitly Christian-themed-- but it produces similar changes to brain chemistry and causes similar experience.

Ah, that's what I'd can a transcendental experience. I can get it listening to Christian music. But the feeling is not religious. If you use spiritual very broadly, that would cover it, like looking at the stars or listening to rain on a tent.

Okay, if we are defining religious expeirence in music based on content, then I'd agree with you that it begins to fall with the Baroque. I'd say Bach was probably the first bona fide rock star in a lot of ways.

[Alex K]

I don't quite buy the steady decline in "spiritual" inspiration after the renaissance. Granted, baroque holds a special place in my heart, something older I have listened to a trillion times: Monteverdi's Vespers. Mozart doesn't speak to me as much with exceptions like the requiem (unfinished, I know). I find Bruckner (e.g. Symphonies 5, 8) has a much more "religious" and monumental feel - he's the Symphony lover's Wagner. To me, Berg's violin concerto wins in that department, though. Beethoven can also elicit that feeling.

[Thumpalumpacus]

The only religious experience I'm interested in here in America is attending the funerals of loved ones in order to pay my respects.

For spiritual experiences, they do happen to me on occasion. Being a musician, I'm not moved that much by most music (because I'm dissecting its mechanics, technique, and theory too often to lose myself in it). Bach will transport me, 'Trane too -- I get chills listening to "Naima" -- but for me, it's being in nature, and being overawed by it, that reminds me of how small I am, in a very good way.

[robvalue]

For purposes of understanding what the fuck is going on with these things, I could find it useful. As scientific research, I suppose you could say.

I have tolerated some religious proceedings for the benefit of others. As an open minded person, I'm always open to the possibility that I might have a new experience which may change the way I think about things. But I'm certainly not going to spend my time trying to obtain the same delusion other people are clearly having.

Personally, I find any external significance that people attach to "spiritual experiences" to be irrational. I don't doubt that we all have wonderful experiences, that we may not be able to explain or describe. But to jump to you own unfalsifiable explanations I find pointless, it's just indulging your imagination. Which is fine, but not if you're trying to convince someone else of the validity of your claim.