I agree that apologetics is the Christian theologian's halfhearted attempt to justify what he believes in. Modern attempts in this direction only weaken the theologian's faith. Christians should not believe in a Great Cosmic Wizard who is all-powerful and the greatest good. The God Christians believe in has those characteristics, but is first and foremost the God of Israel, who raised Jesus from the dead.
What I'm trying to say here is that the existence of God is the least of the Christian's worries. Just because if at the end of the day, some apologist manages to "prove the existence of god" doesn't mean that he's correct about anything. Our determination of the existence of God would be to undermine God's authority to do that Himself. The more troubling question is not "How do I know that God exists?" but "How is it possible that I can't be certain that an Omnipotent God exists? If such a God were to disclose Himself, how would it be possible that I don't believe Him?" This is the question that Christians need to wrestle with.
Apologetics seems to me like just another attempt at Christian Evangelism (or a means of trying to convert other people). Even if we take apologetics out of the picture, it probably won't mean the total deconstruction of the Christian Faith. Scientific inquiry works great in some parts of Christianity (here I assume scientific inquiry to mean the determination of origins of an observable consequence, which is helpful in biblical exegesis). When it is applied to something that isn't really Christocentric (like determining the existence of God), it goes against the very nature of Christianity. Apologists can have their own fun on the side, but in my opinion should not share an equal standing with particle physicists and Biblical scholars in the university.
What I'm trying to say here is that the existence of God is the least of the Christian's worries. Just because if at the end of the day, some apologist manages to "prove the existence of god" doesn't mean that he's correct about anything. Our determination of the existence of God would be to undermine God's authority to do that Himself. The more troubling question is not "How do I know that God exists?" but "How is it possible that I can't be certain that an Omnipotent God exists? If such a God were to disclose Himself, how would it be possible that I don't believe Him?" This is the question that Christians need to wrestle with.
Apologetics seems to me like just another attempt at Christian Evangelism (or a means of trying to convert other people). Even if we take apologetics out of the picture, it probably won't mean the total deconstruction of the Christian Faith. Scientific inquiry works great in some parts of Christianity (here I assume scientific inquiry to mean the determination of origins of an observable consequence, which is helpful in biblical exegesis). When it is applied to something that isn't really Christocentric (like determining the existence of God), it goes against the very nature of Christianity. Apologists can have their own fun on the side, but in my opinion should not share an equal standing with particle physicists and Biblical scholars in the university.
It may be that when the angels go about their task of praising God, they play only Bach. I am sure, however, that when they are together en famille they play Mozart and that then too our dear Lord listens with special pleasure. ~Karl Barth
