In a recent discussion, a theist named Will shares his insights on the problem of divine hiddenness, arguing that God prefers a relational approach to belief. He suggests that God hides to allow for genuine belief choices, while Matt Dillahunty and Paulogia challenge this view, emphasizing the need for evidence and the implications of divine hiddenness on personal belief. The conversation delves into the nature of belief, evidence, and the relationship between God and humanity.
In a recent discussion, a theist named Will called in to share his thoughts on the problem of divine hiddenness, a philosophical issue that questions why God does not make His existence more evident to humanity. This conversation, featuring Matt Dillahunty and Paulogia, delves into the complexities of belief, evidence, and the nature of a relationship with God.
Will identifies as a theist and has struggled with the concept of divine hiddenness for many years. He recalls a challenge posed by Paulogia on social media, where he invited theists to pray and discover a specific phrase he had in mind. Will admits he does not remember the phrase but expresses curiosity about it.
Will shares that he has spent 40 years grappling with the issue of divine hiddenness, which he believes is one of the strongest arguments against many propositions of God. He suggests that God, as a relational being, is more interested in allowing individuals to choose to believe rather than forcing belief upon them. This perspective raises the question: if God exists, why does He not make His presence more obvious?
The conversation shifts to the definition of belief. Will argues that belief is a choice, while Dillahunty counters that belief is a state of being convinced of something's truth. Will cites his experiences in anti-abortion activism, where he found that presenting stark truths often elicited negative reactions rather than acceptance. This leads him to conclude that God may choose to remain hidden to foster genuine belief.
Dillahunty challenges Will's reasoning, questioning whether God’s hiddenness is justified. He argues that if God desires a relationship with humanity, He should provide sufficient evidence of His existence. Will responds by suggesting that God has learned from past interactions with humanity, where overt displays of power led to rejection and hostility.
The discussion continues with a focus on the necessity of evidence for belief. Will asserts that for any relationship to exist, there must be mutual acknowledgment of existence. He emphasizes that without evidence, he cannot make an informed choice about a relationship with God. Dillahunty and Paulogia agree that evidence is crucial for belief but challenge Will's assertion that God has provided adequate evidence.
Will expresses concern that if he were to meet God after death, he would not have a valid excuse for not believing. Dillahunty counters this by stating that if God is truly omniscient, He would understand Will's sincere search for truth and the intellectual honesty behind his skepticism. This leads to a broader discussion about the implications of divine hiddenness on the atheist position.
As the conversation progresses, Dillahunty addresses the idea of using God as an explanation for phenomena that currently lack scientific understanding, such as abiogenesis. He argues that just because science does not yet have an answer does not mean that God should automatically be considered a candidate explanation. This point highlights the importance of evidence and the dangers of falling into the God of the gaps fallacy.
The discussion concludes with a recognition of the complexities surrounding belief in God and the problem of divine hiddenness. Will maintains that God’s hiddenness allows for genuine belief choices, while Dillahunty and Paulogia emphasize the need for evidence and the moral implications of a God who would judge individuals for their lack of belief in the absence of clear evidence.
This conversation illustrates the ongoing debate between theism and atheism, highlighting the challenges both sides face in understanding the nature of belief, evidence, and the divine. As the dialogue continues, it becomes clear that the question of divine hiddenness remains a profound and complex issue that invites further exploration and discussion.
