Thinking with You



Experience: How the Religious and the Atheists Are the Same - Part 1

I did a study once.


In fact it was a long study; at a secular university. It took up two years of my life (part-time); but, it had taken up an apartment in my head space (rent free – cheeky sod) for years before that.

It centred around the phenomenon of God and the human experience of God.


Firstly, I wanted to know how different and/or similar people’s concepts of God were.

Secondly, I was convinced that it wasn’t just religious people that held answers to this; but, maybe most fascinatingly (to me at least) that the non-religious and the Atheist held answers to this question. Answers just as deserving, as insightful, as fundamental as the religious.

Years later, if I tried to count up the number of people who have read my thesis using my ten fingers – one of my hands would get jealous.


it has framed every conversation I have had with the religious, the non-religious, and the spiritual since.

If you asked, “what was the main thing I learned?”

I’d respond by answering your question; detouring a number of times along the way; adding a number of anecdotes (that I thought were humourous … you may not have laughed on the outside, but I could tell you were on the inside); continually trying to remember the original question and after hours of waffling hoped that I didn’t sound like to much of a nerd who just geeked out on one of his favourite topics. (Wait, you left … where did you go …  … and how is it that I did not notice you were no longer standing in front of me?!).

Falling asleep gif.gif

To those who are still with me – let me boil the learnings from my thesis down to the main point relevant to this article:

“Regardless, of whether you are religious or non-religious; atheist or theist you have an articulable experience of a phenomenon that you will draw from when you engage with the label referred to as, God”.

Yes I said experience!

For every Atheist who first said, ‘… are you sure you want me involved in your study … um, because I don’t believe in God?’. I have at least 3 pages full of their detail explanation (Complete with drawings and visuals) of a clear intelligible conception of God.

The sceptic inside you might say, ‘Well, Nathan, I am willing to, MAYBE, concede your point; but, only because you are probably dealing with contaminated subjects’, i.e. they have absorbed certain notions about God from media, friends, family, religious community contact. Fair point, except that credible researchers in the area of psychology of Religion have found that children, starting as young as 2 or 3, chosen specifically because they fall into a category that indicates they haven’t been ‘contaminated’ (Your words) by religious expressions of media, friends, family, communities, i.e. brought up in environments strictly devoid of God; those children, when asked to draw a picture of God; respond to stimuli; use figurines indicating God, do so and similarly express psychological constructs that you and I (who are unlike us are not, i.e. in your words, ‘contaminated’ subjects) would do so. Let’s side step wasted time on a hypothetical that maybe there is some child, somewhere, abandoned by all other human beings who has survived only by the kindness of two wolves in a cave. Therefore, a child whose never been truly, religiously contaminated; and would be perplexed as to what to draw when prompted on the notion of God.

If you are reasonable and satisfied by arguments that have an evidentiary basis, then you’ll concede this point and if you are open as you perceive yourself to be - we can continue on and explore further the nature of the human experience of the phenomenon of God.

Despite my level of geekdom on the subject and the point that no one has ever read this thesis;

Bored Gif.gif

not one religious or non-religious person doesn’t, when my studies have come up, on some level have their interest piqued; and, particularly the non-religious, want to know:

‘What did you find?’.

 Before I tell you…

… particularly in case other academic nerds, and the fastidiously minded individuals, are amongst us I need to mention a few relevant academic house keeping notes:

Academic Questions.gif

The research included:

  • Jews, Atheists, Muslims and Christians.

  • a balance of male/female.

  • the aim to solely to describe how young adults described their experience of the phenomenon of God.

The specific methodology:

  • the methodology used to conduct the research is called phenomenography.

    (Hence, why I’ve been using the language of describing the human experience of the ‘phenomenon of God’. DO NOT confuse this with phenomenology – NOT THE SAME THING).

  • Individuals were prompt to respond to stimuli through various different mediums and open-ended questions.

  • What you see presented is a result of two years of interviews, processing and rigorous work. (After hours/days/weeks trawling over the same interviews and rigorous processing of the data categories of description emerged which authentically represented the original meaning of the participants’ interviews. This was rigorously checked by the eyes of both a University supervisor and an advisor, A PhD in Phenomenographical work; the work was not just a haphazard pulling together of the English language to present ideas that I think, ‘Like are real and … you know … represent my truth and what the universe revealed to me. You know!’)

Aims of Phenomenography:

  • Seeks to gather data on the relationship existing between a phenomenon and an individual. This is called one’s conception. An individual’s conception represents any component of the relationship of an individual and their experience of an object or phenomenon (i.e. God).

So here’s the rub,

There are five various ways in which young adults describe their experience of the phenomenon of God. These do not purport to be the only ways the phenomenon may be experienced; but, on a list of ways humans can experience God these will, non-negotiably, be on it.

 Five various ways humans describe their experience of the phenomenon of God:

1.      Interpersonal

2.      Autonomous

3.      Metaphysical

4.      Theoretical

5.      Incongruous

 These categories are not hierarchical or exclusive in experience; by this I mean:

  • one experience is not ‘better’ than the other.

  • Nor, is it that an individual only experiences one of the five.

  • It might be conceivable that one individual could experience the phenomenon of God in all five of these ways (Though none of the participants did so).

 Here is a brief explanation of these five categories of description:

Interpersonal, designates, where participants experience God as a phenomenon through a personal relational connection or transactional experience.

Autonomous, a phenomenon carrying characteristics of personality the existence of which is not contingent upon human experience.

Metaphysical, an experience that is intangible, non-physical.

Theoretical, a phenomenon experienced as a cognitive idea; and finally,

Incongruous, an impossibility in light of their experience of the world and if the phenomenon does exist, its existence is abhorrent in light of their experience of human life on earth.

Click here to continue reading Part 2 of this article.

Honours Thesis Bibliography:


Aga-­‐Oglu, M 1954, ‘Remarks on the Character of Islamic Art’, The Art Bulletin 36, No. 3 Sept, pp. 175-­‐202.

Akerlind, G 2002, ‘Principles and Practice in Phenomenographic Research’, Paper presented at the International Symposium on current Issues in Phenomenography, Canberra.

Akerlind, G 2005, ‘Learning about Phenomenography: Interviewing, Data Analysis and the Qualitative Research Paradigm’, in Bowden, J, Green, P (eds.), Doing Developmental Phenomenography of Qualitative Research Methods Series, RMIT University Press, Melbourne, pp.63-­‐73.

Akerlind, G; Bowden, JA, Green, P 2005, ‘Learning to Do Phenomenography: A Reflective Discussion.” in Bowden, J, Green, P (eds.), Doing Developmental Phenomenography of Qualitative Research Methods Series, RMIT University Press, Melbourne, pp. 74-­‐100.

Ames, Dr. ES 1910, ‘The Psychology of Religious Experience’, Houghton Mifflin Company, New York.

Armstrong, K 1993, ‘A History of God’, London, Heinemann.

Ashworth, P, Lucas, U 2000, ‘Achieving Empathy and Engagement: A practical approach to the design, conduct and reporting of phenomenographic research’, Studies in Higher Education 25, No. 3, pp. 295-­‐308.

Avery-­‐Peck, AJ 2000, ‘Idolatry in Judaism’, in Neusner, J, Avery-­‐Peck, AJ, Scott-­‐ Green, W (eds.) Encyclopedia of Judaism, Brill, Leiden, pp. 434-­‐443.

Barasch, M 1987, ‘Iconography: Jewish Iconography [First Edition]’, in Jones, L (ed.) Encyclopedia of Religion, 2nd edn, Thomas Gale, USA, pp. 4340-­‐4341.

Barry, CM, Nelson, L, Davarya, S, Urry, S, 2010, ‘Religiosity and Spirituality during the transition to adulthood’, International Journal of Behavioral Development  34, no, 4, pp. 311-­‐324.

Bennett, C 1994, ‘Islam’, in Holm, J, Bowker J (eds.) Picturing God, Pinter Publishers, London, pp. 113-­‐141.

Blair, SS, Bloom, JM 2004, ‘Art’, in Martin, RC (ed.) Encyclopedia of Islam and the Muslim World, Thomas Gale, New York, pp. 75-­‐82.

Blair, SS, Bloom, JM 2004, ‘Calligraphy’, in Martin, RC (ed.) Encyclopedia of Islam and the Muslim World, Thomas Gale, New York, pp. 123-­‐126.

Bernard, A, McCosker, H, Gerber, R 1999, ‘Phenomenography: A Qualitative Research Approach for Exploring Understanding in Health Care’, Qualitative Health Research 9, no. 2, pp. 212-­‐226.

Bowden, J 2005, ‘Reflections on the Phenomenographic Team Research Process’,    in Bowden, J, Green, P (eds.), Doing Developmental Phenomenography, RMIT University Press, Melbourne, pp. 11-­‐31.

Dall’ Alba, G 1996, ‘Reflections on Phenomenography – An Introduction’, in Dall’ Alba, G, Hasselgren, B (eds.), Reflections on Phenomenography – Toward a Methodology, Kompendict, Goteborg, 7–17.

Edward, K 1926, ‘Religious Experience: It’s Nature and Truth’, Morrison and Gibb Limited, Edinburgh.

Eisenstein, RAE, 1978, ‘Development of Some Models of God and Suggested Relationships to James Fowler’s Stages of faith Development’, Religious Education: The Official Journal of the Religious Education Association 73, no, 6, pp. 640-­‐655.

Emmons, RA, Crumpler, CA 2009, ‘Religion and Spirituality? The roles of Sanctification and the Concept of God’, International Journal for the Psychology of Religion 9, no. 1, pp. 17-­‐24.

Emmons, RA, Paloutzian, RF 2002, ‘The Psychology of Religion’ Annual Review of Psychology 54, pp. 377-­‐402.

Erikson, E 1963, ‘Childhood and Society’, Norton, 2nd edn, New York. Eshleman, AS 2005, ‘Can an Atheist Believe in God?’, Religious Studies 41, pp.


Falaturi, A 1979, ‘How can a Muslim Experience God, Given Islam’s Radical Monotheism’, in Schimmel, A, Falaturi, A (eds.) We Believe in One God: The Experience of God in Christianity and Islam, Burns & Oates, London, pp. 77-­‐ 88.

Fowler, JW 1991, ‘Stages of Faith Consciousness’, New Directions for Child Development, no, 51. pp. 27-­‐45.

Fowler, JW, 1981, ‘Stages of faith: The Psychology of Human Development and the Quest for Meaning’, Harper & Row, San Francisco, CA.

Gastwirth, P 1972, ‘Concepts of God’, Religious Studies 8, No. 2, pp. 147-­‐152. Gibbon, J 2008, ‘God is great, God is good: teaching god concepts in Turkish

Islamic sermons’, Poetics: Religion and Culture 36, No. 5-­‐6, pp. 389-­‐403 Gorsuch, RL 1968, ‘The Conceptualization of God as Seen in Adjective Ratings’,

Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 7, no, 1, pp. 56-­‐64.

Granqvist, P, Ljungdahl, C, Dickie, JR 2007, ‘God is nowhere, God is now here: Attachment activation, security of attachment, and God's perceived closeness among 5-­‐7-­‐year-­‐old children from religious and non-­‐religious homes’, Attachment & Human Development, 9, no.1, pp. 55-­‐71.

Grimes, C 2008, ‘God Image Research’, Journal of Spirituality in Mental Health 9, No. 3, pp. 11-­‐32.

Harding, TJA 2011, ‘A Study of Parents Conceptions of Their Roles as Home Educators of Their Children’, PhD thesis, Queensland University of Technology.

Harms, E 1944, ‘The Development of Religious Experience in Children’. American Journal of Sociology 50, pp. 112-­‐ 122.

Hartman, LF 1971, ‘Names of God’, in Roth, C, Wigoder, G (eds.) Encyclopaedia Judaica, Keter Publishing House, Jerusalem, pp. 674-­‐682.

Hasselgren, B, Beach, D 1997, ‘Phenomenography — a “good-­‐for-­‐nothing brother” of phenomenology? Outline of an analysis’, Higher Education Research & Development 16, No. 2, pp. 191-­‐202.

Hay, D, Socha, PM, 2005, ‘Science Look at Spirituality: Spirituality as a Natural Phenomenon: Bringing Biological and Psychological Perspectives Together’, Zygon 40, no, 3, pp. 589-­‐612.

Haywood, 2007, ‘Suggestive Symbolism in Islamic Art and Architecture’, The Muslim World 32, No. 2, pp. 154-­‐158 (April 1942).

Hendel, RS 2005, ‘Israelite Religion’, in Jones, L (ed.) Encyclopedia of Religion, 2nd edn, Thomas Gale, USA, pp. 4742-­‐4750.

Hoffman, L October 2004, ‘Cultural constructions of the god image and God concept: Implications for culture, psychology, and religion’, Paper presented at the joint meeting of the Society for the Scientific Study of Religion and Religious Research Association, Kansas City.

Hoffman, L 2005, ‘A Developmental Perspective on the God Image’, in Cox, RH, Ervin-­‐Cox, B & Hoffman (eds.), Spirituality and Psychological Health, Colorado School of Psychology Press, Colorado Springs, pp. 129-­‐147.

Hoffman, L, Grimes, CSM, Acoba, R 2005, ‘Research on the Experience of God: Rethinking Epistemological Assumptions’, Colorado School of Professional Psychology Press, Colorado Springs.

Hood, RW, Hill, PC, Spilka, B 2009, ‘The Psychology of Religion: An Empirical Approach’, 4th Edn, Gilford Press, New York.

Hughes, P 2007, ‘Putting Life Together: Findings from Australian Youth Spirituality Research’, Fairfield Press, Victoria.

Janssen, J, De Hart, J and Gerardts, M 1994, ‘Images of God in Adolescence’,

International Journal for the Psychology of Religion 4, No. 2, pp. 105-­‐121. King, Dr. I 1910, ‘The Development of Religion: A Study of Anthropology and

Social Psychology’, The Macmillan Company, New York.

Kunkel, MA, Cook, S, Meshel, DS, Daughtry, D, Hauenstein, A 1999, ‘God Images: A Concept Map’, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 38. No. 2 (June 1999): 193-­‐202.

Kohlberg, L 1981, ‘Essays on Moral Development: The Philosophy of Moral Development’, Vol. 1, Harper and Row, San Francisco.

Lawrence, RT 1997, ‘Measuring the Image of God: The God Image Inventory And the God Image Scales’, Journal of Psychology and Theology 25, no, 2, pp. 214-­‐ 226.

Maroney, M 2008, ‘An Exploration of a Contemporary Youth spirituality Among Senior Students in Three Catholic Schools’, PhD thesis, Australian Catholic University.

Marton, F 1986, ‘Phenomenography: A Research Approach to Investigating Different Understandings of Reality’, Journal of Thought 21, no. 3, pp. 28-­‐49.

Marton, F 1994, ‘Phenomenography’, in Husen, T, Postlethwaite, TN (eds.), The International Encyclopedia of Education, Pergamon, Oxford, pp. 4424-­‐4429.

Marton, F 2000, ‘The Structure of Awareness.’ in Bowden JA, Walsh, E (eds.),

Phenomenography, RMIT University Press, Melbourne, pp. 70-­‐79. Marton, F, Booth, S 1997, ‘Learning and Awareness’, Lawrence Erlbaum

Associates, New Jersey.

Mason, M, Singleton, A, Webber, R 2007, ‘The spirituality of young Australians’,

International Journal of children’s Spirituality 12, no. 2, pp. 149-­‐163.

Morewedge, P 2004 ‘Knowledge’, in Martin, RC (ed.) Encyclopedia of Islam and the Muslim World, Thomas Gale, New York, pp. 397-­‐402.

Moughrabi, Fouad 1995, ‘Islam and Religious Experience’ in Hood, RW Jr. (ed.) Handbook of Religious Experience, Religious Education Press, Alabama, pp. 72-­‐86.

Nelson, HM, Cheek, NH, Au, P Jr. 1985, ‘Gender Differences in Images of God’

Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 24, no. 4, pp. 396-­‐402.

Neusner, J 2000, ‘God in Judaism, The Classical Statement’, in Neusner, J, Avery-­‐ Peck, AJ, Scott-­‐Green, W (eds.) Encyclopedia of Judaism, Brill, Leiden, pp.


Osgood, CE, Suci, GJ, Tannenbuam, PH 1957, ‘Measurement of meaning’, University of Illinois Press, Illinois. 1957

Peterson, DC 2004, ‘Allah’, in Martin, RC (ed.) Encyclopedia of Islam and the Muslim World, Thomas Gale, New York, pp. 39-­‐41.

Piaget, J 1976, ‘The Child and Reality’, New York Penguin.

Piedmont, RL 2005, ‘The Role of Personality in Understanding Religious and Spiritual Constructs’, in Paloutzian, RF & Park, CL (eds.) Handbook of the Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, Gilford Press, New York, pp. 253-­‐ 273.

Piedmont, RL, Muller, J 2006, ‘Are God Image and god Concept Redundant Constructs?’ Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, New Orleans, November.

Pratt, JB 1920, The Religious Consciousness: A Psychological Study, The

Macmillan Company, New York.

Rican, P and Janosova P 2010, ‘Spirituality as a Basic Aspect of Personality: A Cross-­‐Cultural Verification of Piedmont's Model’, International Journal for the Psychology of Religion 20, no.1, pp. 2-­‐13.

Rizzuto, AM 1970, ‘Critique of the Contemporary Literature in the Scientific Study of Religion’, Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for the Scientific Study of Religion.

Rizzuto, AM 1979, ‘The birth of the living God: A psychoanalytic study’, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Robinson, N 1999, ‘Islam: A Concise Introduction’, Curzon Press, Richmond. Roof, WC, Roof JL 1984, ‘Review of the Polls: Images of God Among Americans’

Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 23. no. 2, pp. 201-­‐205.

Sherwood Y and Hart K (eds), (2005 [2000]), Epoche´ and faith: An interview with Jacques Derrida, J. Derrida, New York, Routledge..

Sinclair, J (ed.) 2006, ‘Advance Learners Dictionary’, Harper Collins Publishers, 5th edn, Glasglow, Great Britain.

Spilka, B 2010, ‘The God Image’, in Leeming, DA, Madden, K, Martin, S (eds.),

Encyclopedia of Psychology and Religion 1, Springer, New York.

Spilka, B, Armatas, P, Nussbaum, J 1964, ‘The Concept of God: A Factor-­‐Analytic Approach’, Review of Religious Research 6, no. 1, pp. 28-­‐36.

Streib, H 2001, ‘Faith Development Theory Revisited: The Religious Styles Perspective’, International Journal for the Psychology of Religion 11, no. 3, pp. 143-­‐158.

Svensson, L 1997, ‘Theoretical Foundations of Phenomenography’, Higher Education Research & Development 16, pp. 159-­‐171.

Tacey, D 2012, ‘Jacques Derrida: The enchanted atheist’, Thesis Eleven 110, no. 1, pp. 3-­‐16.

Tamm, ME 1996, ‘The Meaning of God for Children and Adolescents – a Phenomenographic Study of Drawings’, British Journal of Religious Education 19, no, 1, pp. 33-­‐44.

Taylor, SC 2009, ‘Exploring God Concepts of Christian, Muslims and New Age participants’, PhD thesis, Carlton University, Ottawa.

Trethowan, I, 1961, ‘Basis of Belief’, Hawthorne Books Inc, London. Vaughan, F 2002, ‘What is Spiritual Intelligence?’, Journal of Humanistic

Psychology 42, no, 2, pp. 16-­‐33.

Vergote, A, Tamayo, A, (Eds.) 1981, ‘The parental figures and the representation   of God’, Mouton, The Hague.

Vergote, A, Tamayo, A, Pasquali, L Bonami, M Pattyn, MR 1969, ‘Concept of God and Parental Images’, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 8, no. 1, pp. 79-­‐87

Watts, F, Williams, M 1988, ‘The Psychology of Religious Knowing’, Cambridge University Press, New York.

Nathan Harding