OK, I'm hearing a lot of "burden of proof is on the person making the claim." So you're saying that in order for you to believe in God someone would have to be able to logically prove His existence to you, and you're not seeing that. A very Modernist approach to be sure, appeal to universal truth, very Descartes. I'm hoping you'll indulge me with one more question. It seems to me that this way of thinking assumes the Modernist meta-narrative of the the privileged status of science and the Modernist idea of a definite truth that everyone is working towards. How do you see Lyotard's work on suspicion towards meta-narratives, and Derrida's statement that there is nothing but the text? It's just something I've long wondered about the "burden of proof" stance, though I do agree with the basic premise that everyone will tend to believe what they believe until there is a significant reason to change their mind.
Also I believe someone asked me to define "God" as I see Him (I use the masculine solely because "it" sounds impersonal). Good move, always useful to define your terms. God is the almighty and all-knowing being who created the universe and created the people within it. Since He created everything He is superior to natural laws, but sustains them in His continued work in creation at the quantum level (see: Nancey Murphy, “Divine Action in the Natural Order: Buridan’s Ass and Schrodinger’s Cat”). God has chosen to reveal Himself to His creation through His words in the Bible, and through His personal contact with His people. God is completely good and Holy, and He has already carried out His plan to save His suffering creation. First by sending Jesus to save the world and the people in it, and next by His kingdom on earth. God's kingdom on earth consists of God Himself working to restore creation right now, and the those in His Church that believe in doing what He says (Disciples) are also working. Christ's disciples have a mission to save the world by following the teachings of Jesus, which show us how to make the world a better place and care for our fellow humans. At some point God will completely fix the world, and the Kingdom will be complete. This is very brief definition, and I didn't get to include all the theology I wanted to, but I think it will serve us.
Good input everyone! I didn't expect the answers to be so unanimous! This is definitely a Modernist forum.
Also I believe someone asked me to define "God" as I see Him (I use the masculine solely because "it" sounds impersonal). Good move, always useful to define your terms. God is the almighty and all-knowing being who created the universe and created the people within it. Since He created everything He is superior to natural laws, but sustains them in His continued work in creation at the quantum level (see: Nancey Murphy, “Divine Action in the Natural Order: Buridan’s Ass and Schrodinger’s Cat”). God has chosen to reveal Himself to His creation through His words in the Bible, and through His personal contact with His people. God is completely good and Holy, and He has already carried out His plan to save His suffering creation. First by sending Jesus to save the world and the people in it, and next by His kingdom on earth. God's kingdom on earth consists of God Himself working to restore creation right now, and the those in His Church that believe in doing what He says (Disciples) are also working. Christ's disciples have a mission to save the world by following the teachings of Jesus, which show us how to make the world a better place and care for our fellow humans. At some point God will completely fix the world, and the Kingdom will be complete. This is very brief definition, and I didn't get to include all the theology I wanted to, but I think it will serve us.
Good input everyone! I didn't expect the answers to be so unanimous! This is definitely a Modernist forum.
