Thinking to Believe

Are same-sex attractions biologically determined?  Most people are under the impression that they are.  Organizations such as the American Psychological Association (APA), have helped propagate the idea.  For example, in the 1998 version of their “Answers to Your Questions about Sexual Orientation and Homosexuality” brochure, they say “there is considerable recent evidence to suggest that biology, including genetic or inborn hormonal factors, play a significant role in a person’s sexuality.”  The truth, however, is that no biological link has been discovered to-date. 

In an unexpected turn of events, the APA has softened its language, replacing the above sentence with a more modest claim in an updated version of their brochure (now called “Answers to Your Questions for a Better Understanding of Sexual Orientation & Homosexuality”) (click here for the HTML version).  Now it reads:

There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay, or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles; most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation.

While I think there is little reason to doubt that social influences are largely responsible for same-sex attraction, I appreciate their more honest assessment of the biological evidence.

HT: NARTH

When kids are young they will believe just about anything mom and dad tell them because mom and dad are the authority on knowledge.  When they go to school they sit under new authorities called “teachers.”  When teachers claim something is true contrary to what mom and dad said was true, the child faces a problem: who are they going to believe?

By this time in their life they no longer believe whatever they are told.  They have developed rational faculties and intuitively understand the underpinnings of logical inquiry.  Whereas they used to blindly accept the answers given them, now those answers will be questioned.  The fact that various authorities differ on issues of ultimate truth demonstrates to them that authority cannot be trusted as the sole arbiter of truth.  So when it comes down to believing mom/dad or the teacher, who are they going to believe?  Chances are that they will believe the teacher over against their parents.  There are two reasons for this.

First, most kids see their teachers as smarter than their parents.  They reason that chances are the teacher is right and the parent(s) is wrong since teachers know more than parents.  Secondly, parents often fail to give any reasons to believe what they told their children to believe, whereas the teacher is giving reasons to believe the contrary belief.  People believe what they have (better) reason to believe.  So let’s look at the score here.  Who’s smarter?: teacher.  Who supplies reasons to believe?: teacher.  The score is 2-0 in favor of the teacher, and then we wonder why children lose their faith in the school system.

(more…)

Many Christians face times in their lives in which they find themselves seriously questioning some aspect of their faith, if not the whole epistemological foundation of Christianity itself: How do I know God exists? How do I know a man named Jesus ever existed?  How do I know Jesus rose from the dead?  How do I know my moral values are the correct ones?  How do I know the Bible is the Word of God?  How do I know that I can even know anything? Many experience this cognitive dissonance while in college—when their faith comes under assault by a host of anti-Christian philosophies at the helm of leftist professors.  While some are able to recover, others are not.  Those who do make it through this process without losing their faith often do so at the expense of giving up their quest to find the answers they sought.  They simply determined by sheer will to continue to believe in Christ even if they have insufficient reasons to do so, and good reasons to abandon that belief in favor of some contrary belief.  When these same people encounter other Christians engaged in the same struggle they found themselves in they encourage them to “just believe” on experiential and existential grounds, simply dismissing their unresolved questions about the faith.

Needless to say this response/advice is not healthy, nor is it necessary.  While I rejoice in the fact that their faith in Christ was not abandoned for error, I bemoan how they were forced to maintain their faith.  We should not feel it necessary to turn off our minds to believe in Christ.  We need not check our brains in at the door when we come to church.  Faith is not the absence of reason, nor is faith incompatible with reason.  Good reasons exist to reject non-Christian philosophies, and good reasons exist in support of the Christian worldview.  Interestingly enough there are Christians who are fully aware of the existence of such answers, and yet they feel no need to inoculate their fellow brethren with this knowledge.  But if there are answers out there for our deepest questions about truth, why not provide them to those who are asking questions? Why not help them resolve their questions rather than encourage them to simply dismiss them?  Why not provide the answers even to those who aren’t yet asking the questions so that they will never find themselves experiencing cognitive dissonance to begin with?  Sure, many people come to faith, and even maintain their faith in spite of large intellectual obstacles without knowledge of those answers, but not everyone.  The “rest” are who I am concerned about.  There is no reason to let even one sheep perish when it is within our means to protect and/or save them from error.  Again, if there are answers why aren’t we providing them?