>From Mr. Lawrence: > If alien abductions -- which are pretty rare -- are > taken as convincing proof of the existence of aliens, > shouldn't theophanies -- which are rather common, certainly > far more common than alien abductions -- be taken as > convincing proof of the existence of God? (The people who > experience them typically interpret them that way, of course.)
I think you bring up a crucial point which goes to the heart of my hypothesis. Is there really a difference between what I've called "the abduction paradigm" experience and theophany oriented experiences. I speculate: Perhaps both experiences spring from the same meta-language of universal symbols unique to homo sapiens. It would seem natural that cultural conditioning would clothe how such experiences will manifest themselves within the experiencer's psyche. IOW, it's not a matter of whether one is actually in contact with aliens or god. I think we tend to get far too lost in our attempts to interpret the experiences in literal clothing. IMO, it can never be successfully interpreted in literal terms - of being messages from aliens or god. It's the experience itself that matters, the current costume it has chosen to reveal the drama within. What's important is how the experience affects the transmitter of the tale, as well as those who chose to listen. The experience IS what it IS. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
