I have to ask myself why we do apologetics. It seems to me that it just brings our religion into disrepute and at best makes us look at best a set of idiots and at worst a set of liars. It just isn’t possible to argue it as being rational without a set of unprovable assumptions. I grant that anyone who’s read Godel can criticise scientific rationalism on exactly the same basis. Sadly, most haven’t
Who are we seeking to convince? We aren’t going to convince any scientific rationalists. They have a different set of unprovable assumptions, which they aren’t going to abandon in a hurry.
The term “preaching to the choir” springs to mind. I’t’s easy, but it ain’t much use
This has been a critique of Elgin Hushbeck’s “Consider Christianity” series, which will continue (sorry Elgin!)