Dec 19, 2023·edited Dec 19, 2023Liked by Ragged Clown
Isn’t it… obvious? St Anselm needed the argument for himself. He was the one doubting. He was the one without evidence. He knew he’s never been to Tenerife. And this was unbearable.
So he put every power of his intelligence, logic, and piety to create an unassailable proof. For himself.
People experiencing God may be having very different spiritual experiences. Some may have visual manifestations such as the Virgin Mary appearing before them. Some may have powerful thoughts intruding on their mind which they take to be God answering their prayers. Having seen the Virgin Mary, it would be hard to doubt the evidence of your own senses. Descartes did precisely that. Evil demons aside, it might be possible to hallucinate the mother of God with or without the use of narcotics.
God speaking to you in answer to your prayers, either audibly or through the power of thought, is more susceptible to doubt. A leap of faith may be necessary.
Right. That's kind of my argument in the original post too. If you have seen the Mother of God, you don't need a rational proof. If you have heard the voice of God, you don't need the cosmological proof.
Sure, you might be mistaken and you should use the usual standards for verifying evidence — but the philosophical proofs of God are not much help.
Isn’t it… obvious? St Anselm needed the argument for himself. He was the one doubting. He was the one without evidence. He knew he’s never been to Tenerife. And this was unbearable.
So he put every power of his intelligence, logic, and piety to create an unassailable proof. For himself.
People experiencing God may be having very different spiritual experiences. Some may have visual manifestations such as the Virgin Mary appearing before them. Some may have powerful thoughts intruding on their mind which they take to be God answering their prayers. Having seen the Virgin Mary, it would be hard to doubt the evidence of your own senses. Descartes did precisely that. Evil demons aside, it might be possible to hallucinate the mother of God with or without the use of narcotics.
God speaking to you in answer to your prayers, either audibly or through the power of thought, is more susceptible to doubt. A leap of faith may be necessary.
This is a good point which, I think, kind of strengthens my argument? A bit?
If St. Anselm had seen Mother of God he wouldn’t need to construct an elaborate proof. He’d known he’d been to Tenerife.
Right. That's kind of my argument in the original post too. If you have seen the Mother of God, you don't need a rational proof. If you have heard the voice of God, you don't need the cosmological proof.
Sure, you might be mistaken and you should use the usual standards for verifying evidence — but the philosophical proofs of God are not much help.
Thanks, John. yes, I agree that there are various 'strengths' of experience and some might require more backup than others.
Your images are so cool!!