I find apologetics so draining sometimes. Very interesting, but sometimes it just messes with my head. Although, going from Lee Strobel to Richard Dawkins will never do anybody any favours. I'm reading through exaggerated opinions and emotional beliefs, I practically have to claw my way through the bias. Oh objectivity, wherefore art thou?
Here's my dilemma: everything that I think I know about science or evolution, I know from reading Christian apologists. Today this struck me as... deficient. It seems deficient in that, perhaps I should be doing my own research into science and evolution to decide whether or not the conclusions of the apologist are sound. I suppose I've tried to counter Christian literature with atheist texts to give myself the impression that I'm open to objections and hearing both sides of the argument but this isn't working out quite so well. Yet the alternative would be... reading science journals, or The Origin of Species for myself, or something else incredibly boring and impossible to understand. So what's the answer?
I'm wary of confining myself exclusively to Christian texts because it seems that, anyone and everyone can keep feeding off the same information to tell them what they want to believe. I often think that atheists might understand a heck of a lot more if they didn't just read the Bible but actually studied it. I suppose they might think I'd understand a heck of a lot more if I didn't just take William Lane Craig's word for it and actually sought after some evidence for evolution. After all, who am I to dismiss it? What do I know about evolution? It seems to me that if I ever got into a discussion on the topic with someone who actually knew anything about it and I backed up my claims with "er, I read in this apologetic book that..." I'd be dismissed pretty quickly and thought of as close-minded. Not that this happens to me very often. Or that anybody I've ever spoken to seems to have been an expert on evolution, but regardless. I guess I'd like to research the topic, as it is, without Christian or atheist presuppositions. Er, evolution for dummies, anyone?
I'm in a skeptical mood at the moment. Goodness. Dawkins has messed with my head. I'm torn between knowing that God transcends the demand for extreme rationality and then being perplexed that he does. I guess it's my experience that tells me that Dawkins has it so very wrong. God changes people in a way that nothing or no one else can. His Word makes perfect sense, all of it. It surprises me how easily I seem to be able to question, but this is not nearly surprising as the fact that it doesn't take much for me to go running back. I guess sometimes you just have to accept that the truth will be offensive and a stumbling block to others. I know in my heart of hearts that Jesus is the ultimate truth. But every now and then an intellectual barrier pops its head up and needs to be dealt with. I already know what the standard response is: prayer, the Bible. I don't want to worry excessively about scientific evidence, but I want to investigate for myself. Oh, my head.
Someone please oblige with an encouraging comment or useful suggestion to a blog that sounds somewhat nonsensical but which is a truthful representation of my mixed up thoughts. Ta.
I am wearing eyeliner and it just smudged :(
ReplyDeleteThat's as complex as I am today.
They shoudl write evolution for dummies or something.
I don't know honey.
hmmm in my experience I find that Christian apologists know more about science than atheist scientist know about about theology!
ReplyDeleteWhen you say evolution do u mean the 'theory of evolution'? you have to be careful defining evolution. There's divergent (common ancester) and convergent evolution. I believe in the evolution of bacterial accessory genes that give them different phenotype BUT that doesn't change their core genomic genes (what helps define them as species). It is hard to study 'species' evolution even in bacteria...
Blogger swallowed my post the other day, but I meant to say: I feel the tension.
ReplyDeleteWhen one person with a Phd says one thing, and another person says another which is totally different, and you know they both have personal vestment in the argument, what do you do? Pick one and trust, somewhat blindly? Or go read a tonne, trace arguments through journals, and try to become familiar enough with the field to judge?
Particularly when one side raises a point which the other doesn't seem to address. Proverbs 18:17 is always in the back of mind.
I find the same tension with sexuality (nature vs. nurture) and gender (theology). And many other issues besides.
Frustrating! No easy answers. As you note: all such chattering falls silent in the shadow of the cross.