Posted by PS on July 13, 2005 at 05:27:36:
In Reply to: However- posted by Dave on July 11, 2005 at 23:16:40:
: The burden of "proof," if you want to call it that, is on those who claim God is an infinite yet personal being who cares tenderly about our finite needs here on this tiny planet (including the "need" to live).
The burden is spread equally, at least if we are talking about a truly fair debate (not the clash of sociological, scientific, or evangelical agendas, etc.). It is just as impossible to prove that the teleological models that we see in natural creation are random as it is to prove the existence or the nature of the creator. Neither side of the argument really has any means to prove their hypotheses. In the end, people decide what they believe. Societal, familial, educational, professional, and religious sensibilities play large roles in these decisions, and the politically correct conclusions of the many weigh heavily upon those who are at the point of decision in their midst. The premise here seems to be that no absolute verifiable data can be found that transcends these contexts.
Still, some find assurance. And for them it is absolute, and it is verified, again and again. The science that denies God cannot be relevant to them because it denies them--their experience, their faith, their hope, their eternal soul--and reckons the unprovable to be nonexistent.
Faith in the Creator and his love for his creatures is not based on scientific proofs or empirically repeatable results. But it is most certainly NOT blind faith, without any evidence. I have seen what I cannot describe, much less prove, and I have experienced what I cannot deny nor forget. My belief is based on the Creator revealing himself to me. Thus, the evidence I have to offer is my experience. My experience of Him is how I know He is, and how I know he seeks me. Everything in the Bible may be in complete agreement with what I have seen, but the Bible cannot produce the experience of His Presence. Everything in science may be against the possibility of such a revelation, but it cannot destroy the experience of His Presence.
GOD alone reveals himself to whom he will. How he does that, why, when, and for how long, I cannot predict or explain. No, I cannot "prove" my experience, but no one can talk me out of it. Some may say I am insane, but we know the rules of their sanity: we may not believe in anything that THEY cannot see and examine themselves. With these minimalists it is fruitless to debate; their unwritten laws demand that the burden of proof always be on the one who believes, and the experience of the believer is disqualified.
We put the burden of proof on God, if on anyone. And he is unimpressed with our demands that he make his case before our judgment and submit to our science. He continues to reveal himself to one hungry soul here, another there, a few at a time or many, as he pleases.
The burden of action is on those whom he calls. I bear the burden to respond to him, to love him, to obey him, and to love others as he leads me. I do not bear the burden to prove him to anyone. I only share what I have experienced. This good news is called "gospel."