Ex-"New Atheist", Now Christian

[Love]

Welcome aboard, Love. You have no idea how long it's been since I last said something like that.

Thanks for sharing your interesting conversion story; I prophesy many fruitful discussions to come using that material alone.

A couple of points I'd like to pick up on for now, if I may. You mention an evil presence which took away your sense of morality etc. Could you expand on this, was it something you felt inside yourself, something you were becoming, or some kind of external perception?

You go on to say that "love, charity, morality and goodness are inexplicable by human reason and material reductionism". I'm a little confused here - are you trying to say that human feelings and emotions cannot be explained in human terms? I'm sure a case can be made to account for each of those things in purely evolutionary ways, both biologically and especially societal.

As for McGrath and Lennox being "much brighter" than Prof Dawkins (please, he earned that honorific and it's only common courtesy to use it): all I can say in answer to this is that it would make no difference who is the brighter. What matters, in fact the only thing that does matter, is the work, not the individual.

So, with all that said, I hope you enjoy your stay.

Hello Stimbo,

Thank you for the welcome.

Regarding the evil presence, I do not want to expand too much because it was an extremely terrifying experience. The best way that I can describe it is that my perception of people changed to the point where they seemed like lifeless objects devoid of any meaning. I felt as though I was losing my morality and also my capacity to empathise. It was not a conscious presence (like the way Hollywood endeavours to project the idea of Satan/demons), but rather a presence that completely infiltrated my mind and transformed my perception of reality in a rather grotesque and malevolent way. It was the most intense experience of my life (and my life has not been easy).

Even Professor Dawkins admitted in one of his interviews that "I fully accept that science will never be able to explain love". Indeed, a case could be made for love, morality et cetera in purely naturalistic terms. I am also sure that cognitive neuroscientists could derive mathematical models and neural correlates from the monoamine system that "prove" love can be reduced to biochemistry. What people seem to miss with material reductionism is the actual conscious experience of the person. Do you view yourself as a person or simply a physical structure of subatomic particles (or both)? Science isn't anywhere being close to explaining how subjective consciousness works (and never will be in my view), nor is it able to explain the totality and complexity of love.

McGrath and Lennox are also professors, in which case they deserve the honorary title also.

Cheers.