friend!

Welcome to the forum.

(April 19, 2013 at 8:38 am)Love Wrote: I no longer hold the belief that logic, science and reason can account for everything in the human experience.

That seems to be the gist of most theistic belief, in my experience. It's emotional, not rational, and thus logic/science/reason are pushed aside to make space for emotion.

(April 19, 2013 at 8:38 am)Love Wrote: I think I had an extremely simplistic view of Christianity when I was an atheist. I thought what most atheists think, such as refuting the idea that Christ died for our sins and denying the historicity of the resurrection.

Yes, I think most Atheists take this simplistic view.

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.

Thank you for the welcomes!

My views are much more based on a comprehensive theoretical reflection on the totality of univeral existence. I think, like many other atheists, I fell into the trap of believing that rationalism is the answer to everything. However, after reading extensively on philosophy and the philosophy of science, I came to realise that perceiving everything from the perspective of rationalism has the potential to enslave the mind. How can you step outside of reason to prove that reason is true? You can't, and your argument becomes circular (and I am not talking about mathematical "truth"). I disagree with the classification of love as an emotion. To me, love is beyond the scope of human reason.

When you had your subjective life experience - that you know feel comfortable calling "evidence" -what sorts of things did you first ascribe it to? Why didn't those explanations satisfy (and how did you land on christ as opposed to krishna)?

(April 19, 2013 at 9:09 am)RosaRubicondior Wrote: As an Atheist, how did you know which god to ascribe causality to and how did you eliminate all possible natural explanations for your 'experiences', please?

What specific piece of evidence convinced you <i>a priori</i> that your chosen god actually existed so you could justify including it in the explanation, please?

to you too.

from the UK

It saddens me to read that humanity has lost another mind to irrationality but I would never challenge your freedom to believe as you feel you should. I hope you don't mind if I ask a few questions.

The symptoms you describe in your 'Christmas experience' are consistent with known forms of clinical depression; did you seek any medical advice? Also, how did you end up rationalising that the Christian version of the Abrahamic god was the cause & solution to these episodes?

You say you had a simplistic view of Christianity; did you have much interaction with other atheists? I ask because the statistics demonstrate that atheists tend to have a greater knowledge of religion than the religious; certainly, many members of this forum demonstrate this on a daily basis. I'm wondering how you address that conflict between your statement and the facts?

Your views on Christianity also intrigue me. it seems that you're picking & choosing aspects of the bible which feel comfortable to you; your position necessitates dismissal of much theology, including some direct statements/instructions from God himself. Given the nature of your conversion, your direct personal experience of God, do you feel any cognitive disonance between your practice and the rules laid down by the bible?