Monday, April 13, 2015

Blind faith?

In an apologetics article recently read, the author stated:
...evolutionists by faith have to believe in [random processes producing organised information]. And because evolution is the justification for the materialistic world view atheists are indeed religious people...
 Evolution is a presuppositional belief system couched in rationalism and evidentialism. For this very reason we need to include weapons against these beliefs in our apologetics arsenal.
Aside from the belligerence of seeing conversations with non-believers as being about ‘weapons’, which is not a good footing to demonstrate love and care for another person, the quote seems to lurch from mistake to mistake, or at least is flexible in its use of words like ‘faith’ and ‘belief’.

The author seems to say that evolutionists have faith because their system makes no credible connection with the world as it is. Does this author, who is a Christian, think this of ‘faith’ when used in a biblical context? That is, is Christian faith maintained despite what the world really is? Often today, as I’ve mentioned previously, Christians mistake their faith for the faith established by ‘leap’ popularised by Soren Kierkegaard, the existentialist philosopher. Not so. In the Bible faith is a reasonable response to events and facts. Nothing ‘leapish’ about it at all. It is a result of understanding in the Bible’s ‘concrete realist’ frame, not the airy frame of disconnected fantasy (or philosophical idealism...which amounts to much the same thing).

Thus, evolutionists’ ‘faith’ is nothing like biblical faith, but is more like wishful thinking, presumption or better, ‘blind’ in nothing at all!

And that brings my objection to the strange assertion that “Evolution is a presuppositional belief system couched in rationalism and evidentialism.”  Presuppositional it may be, and it adopts the rhetoric of ‘rationalism’ and ‘evidentialism’, emptily, but has no connection with any rational consideration of the world or any evidence for its central proposition. It is a dogma held in spite of rational regard for actual evidence, special pleading and arguing in a circle all over the place.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.