A lot of people wouldn’t believe you without anything to prove your point. One good example is law. An individual or a group of people can be sued only if there is real proof or evidence, a witness, and/or a motive to do the wrong. If these things aren’t present then they cannot be sued or proven guilty. But in Anselm’s point of view, why and how would people believe in the divine Lord if we had not seen him yet even once? When we have said that we only believe what we can see… If you think about the quote made by man, “To see is to believe.” And how men believe in God, they’re two contradicting thoughts. We don’t see god, therefore why should we believe in him? What caused God to live from generations to generations when we can’t even see him, has anyone seen him besides the prophets?
We know that we have friends, neighbors, teachers, parents, siblings, and other people around us because we see them physically with us. But when a child says that he has a friend which we cannot see or what we know as an “imaginary friend” do we believe them? Why don’t we? Because we can’t see them physically, but why do children believe in them? Do they only occur on kids? Does this also mean that God can only show himself to children? Why? Are grown up people not worthy to see God? Do the priests, bishops, cardinals, so on and so forth see God? If they do and they had proof, then St. Anselm wouldn’t have a thought about seeing God to believe more in God. He wants to see God like how we see our neighbors. Like how can we love our neighbors how God loves us when we don’t even see how God does it.
This has really given me a thought, a new point of view in things, but my faith hasn’t changed. It’s all very intriguing and interesting to me. This is all very refreshing for the mind and soul.
“What shall he do, most high Lord, what shall this exile do, far away from you as he is ? What shall your servant do, tormented by love of you and...