Apologetics is Bad (Part 1)

In the next few posts we will take a look at apologetics as a thought process and why I think it is bad. For Part 1, the apologetic thought process of Dr. William Lane Craig will be examined and I will provide a brief summary of the meaning I take from him. In the next post(s) we will expose the errors that I perceive in Craig's line of thinking.

According to Dr. Craig:
"Should a conflict arise between the witness of the Holy Spirit to the fundamental truth of the Christian faith and beliefs based on argument and evidence, then it is the former which must take precedence over the latter, not vice versa."[William Lane Craig, Reasonable Faith: Christian Truth and Apologetics, (Revised edition, Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 1994), p. 36.]

 and,
"What, then, should be our approach in apologetics? It should be something like this: 'My friend, I know Christianity is true because God's Spirit lives in me and assures me that it is true. And you can know it is true, too, because God is knocking at the door of your heart, telling you the same thing. If you are sincerely seeking God, then God will give you assurance that the gospel is true. Now, to try to show you it's true, I'll share with you some arguments and evidence that I really find convincing. But should my arguments seem weak and unconvincing to you, that's my fault, not God's. It only shows that I'm a poor apologist, not that the gospel is untrue. Whatever you think of my arguments, God still loves you and holds you accountable. I'll do my best to present good arguments to you. But ultimately you have to deal, not with arguments, but with God himself.'" [William Lane Craig, Reasonable Faith: Christian Truth and Apologetics, (Revised edition, Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 1994), p. 48.]

and,
"Therefore, when a person refuses to come to Christ it is never just because of lack of evidence or because of intellectual difficulties: at root, he refuses to come because he willingly ignores and rejects the drawing of God's Spirit on his heart. No one in the final analysis really fails to become a Christian because of lack of arguments; he fails to become a Christian because he loves darkness rather than light and wants nothing to do with God." [William Lane Craig, Reasonable Faith: Christian Truth and Apologetics, (Revised edition, Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 1994), pp. 35-36.]

-------------------------------------------------------------------
 

Here is what I just heard Dr. Craig say:

1. I already know God exists based on personal experience (the Holy Spirit assures me)
2. If you were honestly searching for truth, you would already believe in God too.
3. Even though I already have my conclusion (which should also already be yours), I also happen to have some snazzy arguments for my pre-determined conclusion!
4. If you don't think the arguments I have are good, it doesn't matter. My pre-determined conclusion is still valid, and you should agree with it.
5. Even if it seemed like you were logically correct, you aren't. Your thought process is imperfect because we live in a fallen world. Furthermore, I won't change what I believe even if what you say makes sense.

I would like to point out that this is the starting point from which Craig encourages other Christians to defend their faith. He says to start out knowing that you have the right answer, and that it does not matter if you fail to demonstrate that answer with sound logic.

In the next post we will examine in detail what I consider to be the errors of Craig's statements!

I would also like to recommend some posts which are extremely relevant concerning this topic:

http://honestsearchfortruth.blogspot.com/2011/06/fundamental-assumptions.html

http://honestsearchfortruth.blogspot.com/2011/05/golden-rule-is-universal-principle-in.html