OST is closed for business but its spirit survives on my blog.
Jacob - I enjoyed the delicate thrust of this: that Dawkins and the ‘Modern’ believers are batting on the same side with respect to knowledge. But by speaking of a faith which is a ‘lived commitment’, how would postmoderns escape Dawkins’ criticism that they are committed to something which ‘they just know’ - providing thereby no further substance for what they assert to be true?
Isn’t it the case that to believe, in the Christian sense, involves both reasonable evidence, which Dawkins dismisses without any hint anywhere that he might have carefully explored what that might be, as well as inner confidence, which might also be described as the assurance of faith brought by the Holy Spirit, which so infuriates Dawkins because it won’t submit to his own intellectual reasoning?
In other words, the Christian believer is like the teacher of the law in the parable, who brings out of his store old things and new, modern and postmodern, without having to resort to the rhetorician’s tactic of the ‘either/or’ dichotomy.