AMA

[ZeusTKP]

OK, this is a weird question, but hopefully that makes it more interesting.
I was inspired by this thread http://www.christianforums.com/thre...claim-to-know-things-about-the-bible.7952738/ to ask:
What questions, if any, do Christians have for Atheists?

I'm an Atheist, ask me anything.

 

[faroukfarouk]

OK, this is a weird question, but hopefully that makes it more interesting.
I was inspired by this thread http://www.christianforums.com/thre...claim-to-know-things-about-the-bible.7952738/ to ask:
What questions, if any, do Christians have for Atheists?

I'm an Atheist, ask me anything.

It's nice to talk to you; but honestly I don't have any questions because the Biblical faith is all about revelation and proclaiming the Saviour of sinners; whereas - as I understand it - atheism is usually about rationality as an end in itself. So maybe I'm going to disappoint you.

 

[CodyFaith]

nvm.

 

[John Hyperspace]

OK, this is a weird question, but hopefully that makes it more interesting.
I was inspired by this thread http://www.christianforums.com/thre...claim-to-know-things-about-the-bible.7952738/ to ask:
What questions, if any, do Christians have for Atheists?

I'm an Atheist, ask me anything.

If I come along and say "God is an abstract idea that dwells in your mind, and with which you have a personal relationship of some kind; which is as conscious as you are" does that make you a theist in regards?

 

[ZeusTKP]

nvm.

I saw your questions in my email - I was making tea, and I was going to answer all of them just now. Do you still want me to answer?

edit: I liked your questions if that matters

 

[ZeusTKP]

If I come along and say "God is an abstract idea that dwells in your mind, and with which you have a personal relationship of some kind; which is as conscious as you are" does that make you a theist in regards?

I don't think so. You said "which is as conscious as you are" so that seems impossible.

 

[John Hyperspace]

I don't think so. You said "which is as conscious as you are" so that seems impossible.

Meaning, the abstract idea in your mind shares your own consciousness; so is as conscious as you are. The statement is actually a self-evident truth. I wondered if you were "atheist" in that "I will never accept anything; not even the self-evident" or if you would recognize that "atheism" is always limited to conceptualization of God.

For instance, if I were to say "God is the invisible abstract information conveyed by the written words in the literal book; which information is transformative in nature (since any information introduced into another set of information axiomatically causes transformation of the set of information)" then you would be a self-evident theist in this regard of conceptualization of God.

 

[ZeusTKP]

For instance, if I were to say "God is the invisible abstract information conveyed by the written words in the literal book; which information is transformative in nature (since any information introduced into another set of information axiomatically causes transformation of the set of information)" then you would be a self-evident theist in this regard of conceptualization of God.

If you're saying that by reading about God the idea then exists in my head, then I agree.

Meaning, the abstract idea in your mind shares your own consciousness; so is as conscious as you are. The statement is actually a self-evident truth. I wondered if you were "atheist" in that "I will never accept anything; not even the self-evident" or if you would recognize that "atheism" is always limited to conceptualization of God.

This still doesn't make sense. "the abstract idea in your mind shares your own consciousness; so is as conscious as you are" The idea is in my head, yes, but it has no consciousness.

 

[crossnote]

Question..What proof would you require to prove there is God and how would you know for sure that (it/he/she) is?

 

[ZeusTKP]

Question..What proof would you require to prove there is God and how would you know for sure that (it/he/she) is?

Roughly speaking, anything that can't be explained by anything other than God. To you guys, this includes a lot of things, but it's more specific for me. So I can narrow it down to some miracle.

A Christian who has a tiny bit of faith could literally move a mountain.
God could just appear and speak directly to me. Maybe the same way he directly spoke to Adam?

But, just seeing a complex living organism, for example, is not enough.

 

[John Hyperspace]

If you're saying that by reading about God the idea then exists in my head, then I agree.

No, I'm saying that the information conveyed through the word is the God. And everyone is a theist under this conceptualization of God since it is self-evident that information is, in fact of the matter, conveyed through the words of the book. Atheism/theism can only exist by limitation of conceptualization. Christians are generally atheist when it comes to, say, pagan gods (in fact, Christians were the first recorded group atheists, and were persecuted by Roman law for being such).

This still doesn't make sense. "the abstract idea in your mind shares your own consciousness; so is as conscious as you are" The idea is in my head, yes, but it has no consciousness.

The idea, being in your mind, has your consciousness. Imagine right now a girl in your mind, and she says, "I'm quite a radical notion, am I not?": that girl is an idea, and that idea is saying to you "I'm quite a radical notion, am I not?": that idea is as conscious as you are. Bear in mind these things are axiomatic; they're self-evident truths. If you're thinking you don't agree, then you're not actually understanding what's being said, and your disagreement is emergent from misunderstanding the words. If you're misunderstanding the words, we would have to enlighten your understanding until you realized that self-evident truths were being expressed. In such a case, the error wouldn't be in the things being said, the error would be in your understanding of the self-evident truths being expressed.

 

[ZeusTKP]

you're not actually understanding what's being said

Yeah, we're not on the same page.

First, let me describe what I think thoughts are - just so you have an idea where I'm coming from. Then I'll try to respond to what you said.

I believe that thoughts and consciousness are the product of the physical brain only. Neurons, chemicals, maybe something else, but definitely physical objects. So there's a limit to your thoughts. Any thought, takes up space. And the actual arrangement of the atoms in your brain IS the thought. So if I imagine that a teapot is orbiting Mars, that's represented by some number of particular atoms arranged in a particular way inside my head. If you had the technology to arrange the atoms in a particular way, then you could change the color of the teapot from white to red, for example, and that's the thought that I would have.

(disclaimer: this is obviously very simplified, but the main point is that the physical parts are entirely responsible for thought and consciousness)

Atheism/theism can only exist by limitation of conceptualization.

Not sure what you mean exactly, but my view of thought might BE a lot more limited than yours - just arrangements of atoms. This might be what you're talking about.

Imagine right now a girl in your mind, and she says, "I'm quite a radical notion, am I not?": that girl is an idea, and that idea is saying to you "I'm quite a radical notion, am I not?": that idea is as conscious as you are.

So before I read "Imagine right now a girl in your mind" there wasn't any group of atoms in my head that were arranged into the idea of a girl. After I read it, there WAS a group of atoms arranged into this idea. So I have some number of atoms, let's call it "N", that are in my head. The idea of the girl is some other number of atoms, let's call it "M". M is MUCH smaller than N. All of the atoms, N, is what makes up my consciousness, M by itself is just a small part of N. M is not enough atoms to be "conscious" or a "person" or a "being", etc.


I'm going to guess that you don't hold the same view about what thoughts are. I think maybe this is the deeper difference.

 

[John Hyperspace]

I believe that thoughts and consciousness are the product of the physical brain only. Neurons, chemicals, maybe something else, but definitely physical objects.

Oh, you believe ideas are physical objects? Just out of curiosity, you believe "reason" is a physical object, a "group of atoms"? Justice, is a physical object. I'm sincere when I ask, do you know what "abstract" means?

I'm going to guess that you don't hold the same view about what thoughts are. I think maybe this is the deeper difference.

True, I've never encountered the belief that ideas are comprised of molecules. Should I ask why you think ideas are comprised of molecules? Or, what specific atoms comprise an idea? Is there a "periodic table" of ideas?

But, let me ask you this: if you went back to a primitive time, and met a group of people who worshiped a literal volcano; then you wouldn't claim "I am an atheist is regards to your deity" because that would be saying "I don't believe the volcano you worship is real", do you understand? This is what I mean by these words "theist/atheist" being limited to conceptions of deity.

 

[Poppyseed78]

This looks exhausting.

 

[crossnote]

Roughly speaking, anything that can't be explained by anything other than God. To you guys, this includes a lot of things, but it's more specific for me. So I can narrow it down to some miracle.

A Christian who has a tiny bit of faith could literally move a mountain.
God could just appear and speak directly to me. Maybe the same way he directly spoke to Adam?

But, just seeing a complex living organism, for example, is not enough.

A miracle? Hope you don't fall for the coming deception...

The coming of the lawless one is by the activity of Satan with all power and false signs and wonders, and with all wicked deception for those who are perishing, because they refused to love the truth and so be saved.
(2Th 2:9-10)

 

[ZeusTKP]

Oh, you believe ideas are physical objects? Just out of curiosity, you believe "reason" is a physical object, a "group of atoms"? Justice, is a physical object. I'm sincere when I ask, do you know what "abstract" means?

The ability to reason comes from the brain as a whole, the word "reason" is some data in the brain, the concept of "reasoning" is also some of the data in the brain.

Yeah, so an abstract concept is something we can talk about but that doesn't exist in the real world. A dog is something that we can talk about and it exists in the real world. A dog is not abstract. The color red could be considered abstract. But when you think about what red is - it's a wavelength of light. Red is actually caused by individual real photons hitting the cells in your eyes. Every abstract concept is a shortcut to describe real physical things. So I might be ok saying that nothing that's purely abstract actually exists.

Yes, I understand that this is very controversial. But this is a complex topic. I can persuaded one way or another, but that's just my view currently.

True, I've never encountered the belief that ideas are comprised of molecules. Should I ask why you think ideas are comprised of molecules? Or, what specific atoms comprise an idea? Is there a "periodic table" of ideas?

Not just any molecules, very specific proteins, etc, arranged into neurons, and those are arranged into a web of neurons, at the same time all sorts of electrical pulses and chemicals are moving all around in very specific ways.

But, let me ask you this: if you went back to a primitive time, and met a group of people who worshiped a literal volcano; then you wouldn't claim "I am an atheist is regards to your deity" because that would be saying "I don't believe the volcano you worship is real", do you understand? This is what I mean by these words "theist/atheist" being limited to conceptions of deity.

I'm not trying to be difficult - but you're taking a shortcut here. You're saying "literal volcano" and "worship". Worship is a loaded word. It implies that the people believe that the volcano has supernatural powers. I can believe in the literal volcano's existence, but at the same time not believe that it has supernatural powers or that it can be worshiped. Unless you're talking about a non-standard definition of "worship"?

 

[Greg J.]

OK, this is a weird question, but hopefully that makes it more interesting.
I was inspired by this thread How do atheists rationalize their nonbelief yet claim to know things about the bible to ask:
What questions, if any, do Christians have for Atheists?

I'm an Atheist, ask me anything.

Do you believe that a chain of logic agreed upon by billions of people as logical can lead to incorrect conclusions?

Do you believe a chain of logic can be justified as logical?

 

[ZeusTKP]

Do you believe that a chain of logic agreed upon by billions of people as logical can lead to incorrect conclusions?

Yes, I think so. I think a billion people can be wrong about the chain actually being logical.

Do you believe a chain of logic can be justified as logical?

Yes, it can be. But the more complicated it is, the longer it will take to justify. Up to the point that there's not enough time in a person's lifetime.

 

[Greg J.]

What if the chain of logic is being evaluated by someone who's logic is imperfect? He could conclude a chain of logic is logical, but he could be doing so through corrupted logic.

 

[ZeusTKP]

What if the chain of logic is being evaluated by someone who's logic is imperfect? He could conclude a chain of logic is logical, but he could be doing so through corrupted logic.

Yes, I agree. You have to decide for yourself what logic is valid and who else you trust.