RE: Religion and Psychobiology

[Greg Crawford]

Leo,   Would we be on the same wavelength if I suggested that the effects of the consumption of alcohol should not be interpreted as a religious experience? If so, then what I am suggesting is that other substances can produce euphoric states that some would interpret as a religious experience, but which are purely chemical. Not all those chemicals originate outside the body. The release of some into the brain can be induced by particular activities.   So the question I am raising is, “how do we distinguish such chemically-induced states from genuine experiences of divinity?” What I am suggesting is that a genuine experience of the divine has more than a feeling of euphoria associated with it. It has “content”. If you experience a “daily self-revelation”, surely that is content?   Greg   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Leo Perizzolo Sent: Thursday, 29 July 2004 1:06 AM To: 'Greg Crawford'; 'insights-l' Subject: RE: Religion and Psychobiology   To say that I am “bewildered” by the contents of this discussion would be an understatement. I am, by the Grace of God, in recovery from alcoholism & addiction of  24 years, and really have to question whether the author has any understanding of addictions and the journey of faith undertaken in recovery. Why does “absence of content” indicate a fake encounter with the divine? It has been my experience, and that of many others in recovery, that “a spiritual awakening” occurs after many months, sometimes years, of “blind” faith, service and devotion to a loving God, who through His grace and the power of the Holy Spirit, has empowered me to stay clean & sober “ONE DAY AT A TIME”. I certainly have not had any psychobiological induced revelations, or for that matter, “genuine religious experiences” as St. Paul did. Does this then exclude me from encounter with God, or mean that I have an “inability to articulate” what I have encountered? I think not. What I encounter everyday is God’s awesome love  for me. I encounter it in the morning crispness, I encounter it in my family’s joy at having their husband & daddy alive, I encounter it in my church’s loving acceptance & support, I encounter it by going to AA & NA meetings, but most of all I encounter it through daily self-revelation and healing.    Perhaps I have interpreted this discussion incorrectly. If this be so, I apologise. I cannot help but wonder though, what is the point you are trying to make? Isn’t each individuals “religious” or spiritual experience a matter pertaining to their personal relationship with God? And why does there have to be such connotations attributed to people’s “encounters”? Maybe, just maybe, we Christians just aren’t accustomed to the Holy Spirit being so active and present!                                                                               Yours in Christ, Leo P.   -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Greg Crawford Sent: Wednesday, 28 July 2004 11:42 AM To: insights-l Subject: Religion and Psychobiology   Have you “met Jesus” or “had “an encounter with the Holy Spirit”? I’m sure that question is a prominent one in many Christian communities and that some people are under pressure to have such an experience.   I am also sure that many people are extremely stressed by life today and are seeking some form of relief from the tension. That is evident in the appeal of alcohol and other stress relieving “remedies”. (In saying this, I am not advocating alcohol as a stress reliever – it may cause more problems than it cures.)   In seeking to have a religious experience and at the same time relieve their stress, many people may have an “experience”, but does it have anything to do with divine reality? In recent decades we have become aware of the role of chemicals in the brain. The synapses between our nerves communicate signals chemically. By fiddling with the chemicals we can change our mental experience. Slow down the re-uptake of serotonin, for example, to make a person less depressed. Engage in all sorts of activity – from sex to long distance running – to release endorphins into the bodily system. Ah! Such relief! Such release! Such … encounter with God?   I am wondering whether much modern religious experience is in reality a chemical outburst caused by particular activities which seek a divine religious experience and relief from tension, all in one hit. In saying this, I would argue that such experiences need to be distinguished from genuine religious experiences. The latter, it seems to me, are characterised by the communication of some content. St Paul, on the Damascus Road for example, unwraps a revelation with great theological implications. However, much contemporary religious experience seems to have no content. It is just cathartic, exhaustive, orgasmic … chemical?   If such psycho-biological experiences are in fact a masking themselves as encounters with the divine, how could one identify them? Is the absence of content a clear indicator, or might that just be a symptom of a person’s inability to articulate what they have encountered?   Greg