Apologetics, needed?

It seems, many christians feel that apologetics is a lame category. There is no need to defend God reasonably, intellectually. You just have to believe in God, that’s all that matters. And while at first I was outraged at such an idea, even though I’m agnostic. But when you really think about it, something like christianity at least, takes some blind faith to believe. Not only this, but having to defend a religion is a huge problem. You may be able to defend from atheistic attacks (which really aren’t a problem), especially a belief which should be asking for proof rather than disproof. Apologetics many times ends up giving off incredibly crazy ass ideas to young people about what some hair brained theologian thinks about science or some soundbite he’s heard; example would be “I don’t have enough faith to be an atheist” by norm geisler. Things get distorted, such as carbon dating. A carbon dating test which showed that volcanic magma is not able to be read because of heat distortion. But this idea is taken and used as a weapon against science, to say, “Carbon dating has been thrown out”.

But hell, who cares. Why have I even brought this topic up. I’m glad christianity exists. Sure it pisses me off when christians go around saying, “look at all these losts people who need God, they just don’t know, the world has corrupted their minds and thoughts, science has gotten the best of them”, but that’s what they truly believe. And if it keeps people living right, gives people hope, doesn’t hurt our society, its’ fine by me. If I could have a purpose for my life outside of myself I’d be very happy. Instead I have to hope and wish for dreams that may never come true, live a life of disappointment, and be the damn perfectionist I was born to be.

Anyone elses thoughts would be fucking wonderful.

To save a lot of time and trouble, you might begin by defining the terms “atheist” and “agnostic” as you intend to use them in this thread.

Agnostic as in undecided, not ready to make a whole commitment as to what one believes because one is unsure.

Atheist is knowing without uncertainty that a God doesn’t exist, with no thoughts about God because he is meaningless.

Does this help you to move on with a response to the post? If this doesn’t help you can try a dictionary.

Personally, I think Jesus would have been in disagreement with this whole ‘blind faith’ concept. The way I understand faith is not the normal way its described, simply as ‘belief’. ‘Belief’ is necessary before faith can take hold. For faith is a total trust that whatever happens, everything will be fine, that nothing truly ‘bad’ can happen to you. Only if you believe in God / an afterlife already can you have faith.

Oh, and to assume that Christianity itself must be bullshit just because many Christians are ignorant is a naive thing to do, in my opinion. This is like believing that Quantum Theory is entirely made up just because lots of scientists misinterpet it, for example.

Jesus was in disagreement with the blind faith concept. But how does a person choose to believe, and consitute a faith without it being mere brainwashing self fulfillment? If the faith isn’t there, how then can the belief be there? Would we argue agnosticism is acceptable? And atheism wouldn’t be because there is a pure denial of what they deep down believe? But not all atheist feel this way, or maybe they get to an unbelief after the denial stage. So many questions need to be answered.

I don’t believe I ever said implicity or explicity that Christianity is bullshit because of what Christians do. But they make it appear to be bullshit by their own actions, that I do believe.

To ‘trust’ in God, you must ‘believe’ in God. Hence, belief has to come before faith. The word ‘faith’ is misrepresented as meaning ‘belief’ - it doesn’t. No one can truly trust in something that they aren’t convinced of. Obviously If I don’t believe that the aeroplane is in fully working order I can’t fully trust that it won’t crash.

But with this idea, there is no uncertainty about ‘belief’. You either believe in God or you do not at all. While that could be true, someone like myself would like to believe otherwise, I’d like to believe in God but I don’t have much certainty he exists right now. And trusting in God would only be something I’d blindly do, to try and belief, then trust that all the things that don’t make sense for him to exist are just my own errors and the worlds. But that seems blind doesn’t it?

I believe faith means a great certainty that God exists from many findings, teachings, and even some trust, but for it to be total trust would be total blindness. You’d be believing because you wanted to, and trusting because you wanted to. I’d like to think the entire choice be one you don’t choose but it comes to you.

I suppose there can be some semblance of uncertainty, because I don’t think anyone, even the mystic, can be 100% sure of anything - apart from perhaps “cogito ergo sum”.
To trust in God is essentially to not fear anything. If you are afraid, you don’t really have trust. Think of it analogical terms: You’re flying in an aeroplane, but you don’t really trust that its in full working condition - you are afraid. The more you trust that the aircraft is going to get you to your destination safely, the greater faith you have in it.
According to this I suppose we could consider there to be a scale of faith. There is the seriously wavering faith - like that of those Christians who feel terror at the thought of death - and that which is the closest possible to true faith - where only a tiny little fragment of almost unrecognizable uncertainty and fear exists.