However, the reason is that I find it quite rare that I can read through a purely Christian book without experiencing a great amount of incredulity, and being rather disappointed in the level of intellectual stimulation these books provide, as well as their level of writing skill. Either, they just can’t keep my attention, or they make claims about things that are backed by insufficient evidence or poor reasoning.

But, I have to add, because this is quite important, it’s not only Christian non-fiction books that I have problems reading. I also find many secular books poorly reasoned or poorly written. A good example is The Christ Conspiracy The Greatest Story Ever Sold by Acharya S. It’s a book that attempts to show the falsity of Christianity by reference to historical scholarship and the study of mythology. It’s a book that I might find interesting, it certainly reinforces my own worldview, however many of the argument claims presented in the book were rather weak or extrapolated from poor evidence. The feeling I got while reading it was that the author would use any means to attack Christianity without regard to the validity of her arguments.

So basically, I don’t like bad arguing, whether it’s for or against a position I already profess. I am a lover of truth, no matter where it leads. I’m sure some people might not consider those examples convincing, and that’s fine, but I wanted to try to dispell any accusation that the rest of the post is overly biased.

This brings me to my main point. Recently, I fell into reading another of these Christian books, The Case for a Creator by Lee Strobel. Normally, a cursory glance through the pages would’ve let me know what a disappointing read it might’ve been and I wouldn’t have started it, but I decided to this time. I’d really be open-minded and give this one a chance and I’ll read it all the way through. Maybe it wouldn’t be as bad as I thought. Certainly thousands of Christians find this book compelling, it can’t be that awful. Unfortunately, I was wrong.

Lee Strobel’s The Case for a Creator is a poor case indeed. I haven’t quite yet finished it, I’m on the second to last chapter, but I couldn’t hold back any longer from talking about it.

First, a description of the book. The Case for a Creator is one of many “The Case For…” books which include The Case for Christ, and The Case for Faith. In these books, Lee Strobel, a former journalist attempts to reinforce Christian beliefs by way of historical studies, philosophy and science. And after making my way through this one, I can see why they might seem compelling to many Christians. Strobel uses his journalistic style of writing as an attempt to make these topics more inviting to the lay reader. Some might find it inviting, but I find it dreadful. Instead of doing research, analyzing it, and then using his own voice to convey what he’s learned, he makes a pretense at objectivity by interviewing people who already agree with his position and basically letting them speak for themselves. He interjects into what they’re saying by lobbing softball questions at them so that they can easily dismiss criticisms of their position.

I believe this journalistic style is supposed to seem objective, but it doesn’t come off that way, nor do his chosen interviewees. They include Stephen Meyer, Jonathan Wells, William Lane Craig, Guillermo Gonzales, and Michael Behe. All of which are either members of the Discovery Institute or Christians. Actual objectivity might entail him interviewing some non-Christians, or even Christians who disagree with his views, but he doesn’t. This is not journalism.

Now, this isn’t my biggest complaint. I could get past the style of writing and interviewing; my hope was that perhaps the interviewees themselves could save the day and provide some insight. I was wrong.

One thing I enjoy about secular science writing is the sense of wonder I get from it. It always seems that the more questions we answer about the universe, the more questions are raised. There are always more mysteries left to solve, and each time, the universe gets larger and more wonderful upon reflection. This has always been compelling to me. This constant thirst for knowledge as well as respect for the mysteries of the universe is something you find in the best of science writers and I believe is inimitable.

The people interviewed in this book crush that sense of wonder. They proclaim in sweeping gestures that this or that question can never be answered, or is unassailable by science. That somehow, the grand history of human inquisitiveness is at an end, there is nothing left but for us all to acknowledge that ‘God did it’ so scientists can just pack their bags and go home. They speak with such arrogance, it’s almost painful to read.

One of the most frustrating claims made in the book in this regard, and the one that made me want to sit down and write this was from J.P. Moreland, a Christian apologist and fellow of the Discovery Institute. His interview was about human consciousness and he claimed, “There will never, ever be a scientific explanation for mind and consciousness.”

Modern neuroscience is still a relatively young field, and taking into account the advances that have been made in understanding the brain in just the last few years, why would anyone make the claim that this or that will never be discovered by science? It makes the person making the claims look foolish.

I am reminded of this wonderful quote by Darwin:

It has often and confidently been asserted, that man’s origin can never be known. But ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge. It is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science.

…which is just what he asserts only a few pages later: “There will never, ever be a scientific explanation for mind and consciousness.”

If you’re going to attempt to back up your religious beliefs with science, be prepared for the consequences. History seems to indicate that scientific claims made in the advancement of a particular dogma fall short.

I can’t, in good conscience, recommend this book to anyone. Even many Christians would disagree with its claims, and its arguments against evolution are particularly poor. There’s much more to the book, and though the arguments against these claims have been made many times over, I might return to The Case for a Creator for a future post or two.

I probably picked a rather poor time in my life to start a blog. I just finished up my college degree and now I’m working on doing freelance design work. Needless to say, my free time has been cut short, and that certainly puts writing a blog on the back burner.

Yeah, I’ve probably got enough time where I could throw up links and a simple commentary every once in awhile, but I don’t really want to do that. If I’m going to write a blog, I want to make it a place worth coming to. I want to do it right.
What I really enjoy doing is taking the time to do some research, form an argument, and present it in such a way where it might help educate, or at least provoke thought in other people. I might even go through and spell-check it.

And that’s my other apprehension at writing my own blog. I’m not an expert on anything. I don’t have an advanced degree in science or philosophy. My degree is in Graphic Design. So when it comes to describing science, philosophy or the existence of god, I sometimes feel presumptuous in putting my own opinion out there as if it means something. But then again, I get some encouragement, as someone compliments my way of explaining things or ability to be objective, and I feel that maybe, little old me might be able to help spread a little bit of rational thought through the world. Or at least my neighborhood.

So I think I’m going to try again. I’m going to keep reading, keep talking to people, and keep sharing what I learn. Hopefully I’ll do it right, and in such a way that I might be able to connect with one or two people out here in cyberspace. Maybe even promote a lively debate. I’m still pressed for time, but I’ll try to give Truth and the Devil the time I can to make good use of it.

So I’ll talk to you all later.

—Shinka

The name Truth and the Devil is inspired by the story of temptation by the serpent and the pursuit of knowledge in the Garden of Eden. Adam and Eve were told by God not to eat of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil for they would surely die. The serpent told them that their eyes would be opened. The serpent was right.

Within this myth we can see a metaphor for the lack of clear distinction between right and wrong in the world. It is also interesting that this is the first time in the Bible where any human shows the beginnings of independent thought. As such, they are cast out of paradise and cursed with the burden of sin for all time.

It is interesting how a story that is the foundation for much of religious theology can be seen as an inspiration for those without an inkling of religious propensity. Doing something because someone in a position of authority told you to, especially because of fear, is the opposite of freedom. Unfortunately, most religions in the world promote this perspective as a virtue. Believing what you’re told on the flimsiest of evidence, or none at all is considered the highest calling among the devout.

Faith is not a virtue. It is a rejection of those mental faculties of doubt and learning that are the very things that have allowed humans to evolve beyond our primitive superstitions and embrace the unknown. Doubt rejects dogma, rejects authority.

Doubt is freedom.

Hopefully you’ll see some new activity in the coming days and weeks. Also beware of subtle changes that might continue be made as I work out any bugs.

Feel free to leave any comments, especially if you find any bugs.

An executive staff member at New Life Church in Colorado Springs has resigned after admitting to sexual misconduct and other mistakes – the result of an examination of the staff’s moral makeup after the ouster of senior pastor Ted Haggard, a church official said Sunday.
Christopher Beard, who headed a ministry that trained young adults in leadership skills, stepped down Friday after admitting to “a series of decisions displaying poor judgment, including one incident of sexual misconduct several years ago,” said Rob Brendle, an associate pastor at the 14,000- member church.

And…

In a tearful videotaped message Sunday to his congregation, the senior pastor of a thriving evangelical megachurch in south metro Denver confessed to sexual relations with other men and announced he had voluntarily resigned his pulpit.
A month ago, the Rev. Paul Barnes of Grace Chapel in Doug las County preached to his 2,100-member congregation about integrity and grace in the aftermath of the Ted Haggard drugs-and-gay-sex scandal.
Now, the 54-year-old Barnes joins Haggard as a fallen evangelical minister who preached that homosexuality was a sin but grappled with a hidden life.

One can only hope that with enough exposure, those who continue promote the beliefs that homosexuality is a sin, or unworthy of tolerance and dignity, will become increasingly ridiculed for their absurd ideas.

I really do not doubt that these people were trying to be good Christian men an attempting to follow the Bible as best they could, but the Bible is just not relevant to the way the world works, and especially not to any sophisticated sense of morality. Becoming a Christian will not make you straight, no matter who tries to say otherwise. It is important to keep in mind the possible suffering and guilt being felt by the many thousands or millions of individuals throughout the world who feel that they must keep their true sexual orientation secret because of the irrational religious or cultural beliefs of their society.

“… I can’t tell you the number of nights I have cried myself to sleep, begging God to take this away.”
…
In their only talk about sex, Barnes said his father took him on a drive and talked about what he would do if a “fag” approached him. Barnes thought, “‘Is that how you’d feel about me?’ It was like a knife in my heart, and it made me feel even more closed.”

(Via Pandagon)