Saturday, June 18, 2011

Apologetics is Bad (Part Two)

First I feel it would be a good thing to clarify that I do think apologetics can be the process through which valid arguments for the existence of god can be created. I also acknowledge that some apologists do not adhere to the specific mindsets that I am speaking against. That said, I disagree with the starting point "we know Christianity is correct, now let's look for evidence to support that claim," which is the mindset of most of the apologists I have studied.
If you haven't yet, go check out Part 1 of this series! That post was a summary of Dr. Craig's apologetic mindset. This post will honestly examine what Dr. Craig said, then see if he makes any unfair statements, has any assumptions that he does not justify, or makes any logical errors.
1a. "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.'" (Craig)
1b. It seems to me that Craig is relying upon personal experience for the initial justification of his claim. I disagree with using personal experience as an argument for two reasons:
  • I would not trust another persons experience to invalidate my own, and I think it would be wrong to tell a person that their experience was invalid based on mine.
  • People of every religion rely upon personal experience to validate their claim (Mormons, Muslims, etc.). If, lets say a Christian and a Mormon were to get into a discussion concerning the validity of their faith which was based on personal experience, it would go something like this: "I know my God is the real one." "No, you're wrong, my God has SHOWN me that he is the real one!" "Oh yeah? Well the HOLY SPIRIT has SHOWN ME that you are wrong and that MY God exists." See how no discussion can take place when both parties use personal experience? If, instead, logic and reason based on evidence are appealed to, progress can be made in constructively searching for truth. (See Fundamental Assumptions Parts 1 & 2)
Because Craig is in favor of making this thought process the starting point, he is advocating to Christians that they should assume that God's Spirit exists before justifying that assumption. (again, see Fundamental Assumptions Parts 1 & 2)

In order to make this blog more reader friendly, I'm going to break this up in to more posts! For the continuation of this examination, see Part 3!

No comments:

Post a Comment