Pardon me, Nicole, I was really in a bad mood. What you say is well reasoned. Any direct experience provides only some knowledge, certainly not all knowledge about what is being experienced, and yes, it is subjective.

Still though, I find direct experience to be the most powerful teacher possible...far better than books and other people's opinions. That is all I was saying.

Regarding "knowing" God, you have to talk to someone who actually does...which is not me...I just believe in and know various stuff about God (as I define the word "God", which may not be someone else's definition of it). I do know God is there...but I can't prove it to anyone in their terms. That doesn't mean I know God...that's a whole further experience. If you don't believe there is such a thing as "God" (again, this depends on your definition of what you think the word "God" means, doesn't it?...), then you would not be open to fair consideration of someone else's experience of knowing God, even if they did genuinely know God, would you?

How can I talk to someone usefully about something which they are certain is completely imaginary? It would be like the alien in Amos's post above talking to the other alien about "sentient meat". A futile, and downright laughable exercise.

This is why it gets people not too far, generally, discussing these matters with people whose basic beliefs are radically different.

Basic beliefs shape everyone's reality. As you believe, so it appears...to you.

Daylia's explanation of the practical applications of believing in spiritual things is most apt, and offers up 3 useful examples of what might happen, given a certain experience and how the person interpreted it.

If your spirituality is based on positive notions such as: I am valuable, so are other people, we all have equal rights, I should treat others as kindly and fairly as I would want them to treat me, I will strive to assist others and improve myself, and so on...

Then that could be quite helpful in life, couldn't it?

If, on the other hand, it's based on bigoted notions such as: My religion is the one only true religion, it's the only way, it's the best, anyone who isn't in it is damned, I must convert others to my religion, those who aren't like me are the enemy, and so on...

Then we've seen the disasters that leads to.

I'm inclined to live and let live, and I identify with religions and groups that feel that way as well.

I agree with Bobert. You can throw out most of the Old Testament, at least as a literal guide to human conduct. It's vicious and bigoted in the extreme by modern standards. It gives me the feeling that the 12 tribes of Israel were a very cruel and violent bunch of people on the whole. The New Testament has many good teachings to offer (although I find some of the apostle Paul's stuff quite unpleasant). So do the Hindu, Buddhist, Taoist, Muslim, and Native American religions. There are certain sects in almost every religion that are fanatical, exclusivist, and extremely dangerous (like the Wahabbis in Islam)...but then, you could say that about political factions too, couldn't you?

As for debating...no, I don't really like debating much, because it becomes an ego game. I like discussing. A discussion is a cooperative effort involving mutual exploration of a subject. A debate is a competition in search of verbal victory.

Sometimes the two get mixed up together. That's troublesome. In politics, debating is outright war by means of words. I don't consider that healthy. It brings out the worst in people, and it's one of the reasons why our political system has become so corrupt. Victory is more important than truth or brotherhood in such a system. In fact, victory is all that matters. And that's war.