Another Former Apologist Leaves the Fold: "Confessions of a Heretic"
Here's a few excerpts of what he recently wrote:
I am a philosopher. I seek the truth. My beliefs don't matter. Truth matters. That means I'm going to submit my beliefs to the test of critical thinking. I'm going to submit everyone else’s beliefs to the same test. I have taken a couple steps back from my beliefs, to examine them apart from a desire that they be true. If I discover that something I believe is wrong, I will change my belief. If I discover that a different belief makes more sense than what I currently believe, I will change my belief. I want to know the truth – no matter what it is. I am a freethinker. I am going to do my best to draw rational conclusions. I will try to make inferences to the best explanation based on the best evidence. I won't base my conclusions on blind faith, emotional highs, fear, prejudices or wishful thinking.
Looking back at my "career" as an apologist, I realize now (I wasn't even fully aware of it then) that I had already come to my conclusions, and did a lot of "retroactive reasoning” to justify those conclusions. I already believed X, and I looked for reasons to support belief in X. It was a backwards approach. Instead of examining the data and drawing conclusions based on the premises I found based on evidence, I drew my conclusions first then went back to find any kind of premises that would make my conclusions sound true.
This is how it always seems to happen. I haven't met anyone who first examined the Bible before making a prior commitment to Christianity who came to the conclusion that the Bible is this perfect piece of literature. I haven't come across the person who, before becoming a Christian, said, "Wow, this book is absolutely flawless. What an amazingly perfect book!" Maybe they're out there - I just haven't come across any of them yet. Almost everyone who becomes a Christian had only read small portions of the Bible by the time of that person's conversion.
Link
7 comments:
I rarely see anyone post much of what they wrote back when they believed the worldview they discarded.
I'd think that could only add to their credibility. "See, just like you are today, I've been there, done that, I said exactly the same things, but I didn't yet understand X..."
I wanna read that book :D I was so uncomfortable having religious conversations with people who didn't believe exactly as I did when I was a Christian, but now that I'm a counter-apologist, I love it. As an atheist, I only have to propose questions; the apologist has to answer them, and can't do so by using truth, logic, or morality.
This corresponds to my (Not So) Divine Author thought experiment:
You are walking in a field, you come across a book you have never seen before, called "The Holy Bible".
You read it, and you are forced to ask: "Who was the lunatic that wrote this ?"
Wow, great quote! He very succinctly nails the closed mindedness of theists right on the head. I should know, I was an evangelical for 21 years.
The poster says "I seek the truth."
Hold on a minute! "the truth"!?!
You mean "the truth" exists? WT?
But I like what you wrote about "retroactive reasoning"...John Loftus excells at that,
In his book, he clearly states that he "deconverte" for three main reasons...TWO of which were emotional!
He then goes backtracks to give "retroacitve reasoning" for all of it, blaming everyone else in the process.
It is truly a fascinating case study.
I haven't come across the person who, before becoming a Christian, said, "Wow, this book is absolutely flawless. What an amazingly perfect book!"
Well I should hope not! I would be very suspect of anyone who calls the Bible flawless; it is, after all, loaded with humanity. :)
Mark
www.commonsensetheism.com
Winston - Are you suggesting truth doesn't exist?
Post a Comment