The Problem of Critical thinking

[Swami]

Many skeptics pride themselves in not believing in God because of critical thinking. In my perspective, the problem is critical thinking. To truly understand something requires that you experience it. Skeptics spend too much time thinking and not experiencing. Many skeptics, even the strongest types, have converted to theism after experience. Very few have converted because of debate or critical thinking.


Should Christian apologetics be more focused on explaining how to experience God?

Is it bad to engage in too much critical thinking?

[brunumb]

Should Christian apologetics be more focused on explaining how to experience God?

Yes. But first one would need to establish clearly defined criteria for distinguishing between actually experiencing God and imagining that one was experiencing God.

[bjs1]

Should Christian apologetics be more focused on explaining how to experience God?

Certainly. Speaking only for myself, I enjoy sharpening my mind in debate but I do not expect anyone to be converted because of it. People come to Christ when he meets the needs of their soul. Faith itself is an act of trust, not just mental assent.

Is it bad to engage in too much critical thinking?

Critical thinking is inherently good, but anything that is done to the degree that other important acts are neglected becomes a bad thing.

[bluegreenearth]

Critical thinking is not at the expense of understanding through experience. To suggest otherwise is to misrepresent how critical thinking functions to enhance and refine understanding through experience.

[William]

Should Christian apologetics be more focused on explaining how to experience God?

Yes. But first one would need to establish clearly defined criteria for distinguishing between actually experiencing God and imagining that one was experiencing God.

Do you have such clearly defined criteria for what is imagined and what is actual, when it comes to 'experiencing God'?

I do not think any religion can instruct an individual so. I have encountered skeptics who claimed that all experience which couldn't be empirically verified, are likely experiences of the imagination. Unfortunately that which is designated 'imagination' is considered to be 'unreal' as a consequence.

Yet we know the mind [imagination] is vital to being human and without it we would not have been able to advance ourselves with scientific method.

I would argue that imagination is key and see no reason why the creator would not use that aspect of the human being to engage with said human being.

I would also argue that imagination can be used in a forced manner and beliefs built upon that use, and in a non forced manner - where experience comes naturally.

But mainly I would argue that applying critical thinking in regard to what little we do know of the process of imagination, we move away from the habit of automatically assigning imagination to 'woo woo'.

[William]

Many skeptics pride themselves in not believing in God because of critical thinking. In my perspective, the problem is critical thinking. To truly understand something requires that you experience it. Skeptics spend too much time thinking and not experiencing. Many skeptics, even the strongest types, have converted to theism after experience. Very few have converted because of debate or critical thinking.


Should Christian apologetics be more focused on explaining how to experience God?

Is it bad to engage in too much critical thinking?

What is 'too much' critical thinking? Perhaps you are conflating critical thinking with being perpetually critical - having a critical attitude - always criticizing, putting things down etc?

[1213]

...
Should Christian apologetics be more focused on explaining how to experience God?

Is it bad to engage in too much critical thinking?

Experiences have the problem that "critical" person can explain them in many ways.

I would say better is to be reasonable. For example, it is not really meaningful to make person to believe that God is real, because the point in the Bible is that people would be righteous. And righteousness is about right understanding. And the question is really, does person want to love others. If yes, that is good enough. Even if person would believe Jesus and God are real, but he would not love as they have taught, the belief would not be useful.

[Dimmesdale]

Too much of anything gives you a one-sided view of reality in my opinion. That goes for pretty much anything. You know a lot about very little. On the other hand, you can know very little about all kinds of things.

Critical thinking... that also needs to be defined. Thinking in general is more than analytical thinking. There is continental thinking. There is artistic thinking. There is intuition.

I think that "critical thinking" can also be mixed up with "elitist" or "hyper-skeptical" or "politically correct" or "ivory-tower" thinking. Such "thinkings" have their own baggages and biases. No one is free of blind spots. In that sense, the truly perennial problem is IMPROVING our thinking, not avoiding it. And if we can think CLEARLY we won't have to be lost in the (often times endless) mazes of delusion, and thus include room for balance: namely, true mysticism and the experience of God's love.....

[Willum]

So the issue I see is that all and every God claim should be dismissed by critical thinking without some immediate support.
God raised the dead?
Applied critical thinking: No that is impossible.
God is omnipotent?
Applied critical thinking: No, why?
God spiritually boinked a girl and had a son?
No, she had a naughty tryst and blamed religion.

Etc..
Critical thinking dismisses god-things out of hand, until they are demonstrated, not just claimed.

[unknown soldier]

Many skeptics pride themselves in not believing in God because of critical thinking. In my perspective, the problem is critical thinking. To truly understand something requires that you experience it. Skeptics spend too much time thinking and not experiencing. Many skeptics, even the strongest types, have converted to theism after experience. Very few have converted because of debate or critical thinking.

Should Christian apologetics be more focused on explaining how to experience God?

What do you mean by "experience God"?

Is it bad to engage in too much critical thinking?

I've never had any trouble with critical thinking, so no, I don't think there's such a thing as too much critical thinking.