Divine Hiddenness: If a loving God existed, would God ensure we know it (to foster relationship)?
Clarifying the question
- J.L. Schellenberg (philosophy professor at Mount Saint Vincent University) is the primary advancer of the hiddenness argument against theism, and he replaces “everyone” with “all creatures capable of explicit and positively meaningful relationship with God who have not freely shut themselves off from God.” However, even with his modification, are premises 4-6 true?
- The problem of divine hiddenness targets the existence of God as defined in western philosophy. It does not presuppose the existence of an afterlife, salvation, or anything unique to Christianity. That said, some Christians argue that this problem can quickly reduce to a question of why God does not bring more people into a saving relationship with Him (where they are saved from their sins: see the Gospel):
>• William Wainwright (Philosophy professor at Wisconsin-Milwaukee): “…the primary value of knowledge of God consists in the fact that it is needed to establish a proper relationship with Him, and [mere knowledge that God exists] won’t further that end. There is no reason, then, why God should increase it. There does appear to be a reason why God would wish to distribute saving knowledge more widely. But ... asking why God hasn’t made Himself savingly known to more people is equivalent to asking why He hasn’t bestowed the gift of salvation more widely. The problem of God’s hiddenness is thus not really a problem of evidence but of grace: Why does God bestow it on some and not others?” [“Jonathan Edwards and the Hiddenness of God,” Divine Hiddenness: New Essays (Cambridge, 2002), 106.]
The is the so-called problem of divine hiddenness, or the "argument from non-belief" features primarily in the debate over whether God exists. It essentially argues that non-believers exist, and that this proves there is no God. Why? Because there were a good and loving God, then that God would have ensured everyone at least knows he exists.
So the most popular version can be roughly simplified like this:
1. If God exists (a greatest possible being), then God is all-good.
2. If God is all-good, then God is perfectly loving.
3. So if God exists, then God is perfectly loving.
4. But a perfectly loving God would ensure everyone1 is always able to be in relationship with God just by trying.2
5. And that ability requires belief that God exists.
6. So, if God exists, then God would ensure all believe.
7. So, if God exists, all persons believe God exists.
8. But not everyone believes that.
9. So no God has ensured everyone believes it.
10. So no God has ensured everyone is able to be in such relationship just by trying.
11. So no perfectly loving God exists.
12. So no all-good God exists.
13. So God does not exist.
Are premises (4)-(6) true? Are there any kinds of individuals who a perfectly loving God might choose to allow to be in non-belief, temporarily or permanently?
Resources / Bibliography
- Aijaz, I., & Weidler, M. (2007). Some Critical Reflections on the Hiddenness Argument. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, 61, 1–23.
Andrews, M. (2014). Divine Hiddenness and Affective Forecasting. Res Cogitans 5 (1):102-110.
Coffman, E. & & Cervatez, J. (2011). Hiddenness, Evidence, and Idolatry. In Raymond VanArragon & Kelly James Clark (eds.), Evidence and Religious Belief.
Cullison, A. (2010). Two Solutions to the Problem of Divine Hiddenness. American Philosophical Quarterly, 47, 119–134.
Cuneo, T. (2013). Another Look at Divine Hiddenness. Religious Studies 49 (2):151-164.
Drange, T. (1993). The Argument From Non-belief. Religious Studies, 29, 417–432.
Drange, T. (1998). Nonbelief and Evil: An Argument for the Nonexistence of God. New York: Amherst Prometheus.
Dumsday, T. (2012). Divine Hiddenness and Creaturely Resentment. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 72 (1):41-51.
Dumsday, T. (2014). Divine Hiddenness and Divine Humility. Sophia 53 (1):51-65.
Dumsday, T. (2014). Divine Hiddenness and the Opiate of the People.
International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 76 (2):193-207.
Dumsday, T. (2010). Divine Hiddenness and the Responsibility Argument. Philosophia Christi 12 (2):357-371.
Dumsday, T. (2014). Divine Hiddenness as Deserved. Faith and Philosophy 31 (3):286-302.
Dumsday, T. (2011). Divine Hiddenness as Divine Mercy. Religious Studies 48 (2):183-198.
Dumsday, T. (2010). Divine Hiddenness, Free-will, and the Victims of Wrongdoing. Faith and Philosophy, 27 (4):423-438.
Dumsday, T. (2015). Divine Hiddenness and Special Revelation. Religious Studies 51 (2):241-259.
Dumsday, T. (2015). Divine Hiddenness and Alienation. Heythrop Journal 57 (1)
Dumsday, T. (forthcoming). Divine Hiddenness and the One Sheep. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion:1-18.
Dumsday, T. (forthcoming). Anti-Theism and the Problem of Divine Hiddenness. Sophia:1-17.
Evans, C.S. (2006). Can God Be Hidden and Evident at the Same Time? Some Kierkegaardian Teflections. Faith and Philosophy, 23, 241–253.
Henry, D. (2008). Reasonable Doubts About Reasonable Nonbelief. Faith and Philosophy, 25 (3):276-289.
Henry, D. (2001). Does Reasonable Nonbelief Exist?. Faith and Philosophy, Faith and Philosophy 18 (1):75-92.
Howard-Snyder, D. (1996). The Argument From Divine Hiddenness. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 26 (3):433-453.
Howard-Snyder, D. & Moser, P. (2002). Introduction: The Hiddenness of God. In D. Howard-Snyder & P. Moser (eds.), Divine Hiddenness: New Essays. Cambridge University Press
Keller, J. (1995). The Hiddenness of God and the Problem of Evil. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, 37, 13–24.
King, R. (2008). Obstacles to Revelation: God and the Reorientation of Human Reason. London:Continuum.
Lehe, R. (2004). A Response to the Argument From the Reasonableness of Nonbelief,” Faith and Philosophy, 21 (2):159-174.
Maitzen, S. (2006). Divine Hiddenness and the Demographics of Theism. Religious Studies, 42, 177–191.
McBrayer, J., & Swenson, P. (2011). Scepticism About The Argument From Divine Hiddenness. Religious Studies.
McKim, R. (2001). Religious Ambiguity and Religious Diversity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Meister, C. & Dew J. (2013) “Evil and the Hiddenness of God” in (eds.) C. Meister & J. Dew, God and Evil: The Case for God in a World Filled with Pain InterVarsity Press.
Moser, P. (2008).The Elusive God: Reorienting Religious Epistemology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Moser, P. (2004). Divine Hiddenness Does Not Justify Atheism. In M. Peterson & R. VanArragon (eds.), Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Religion. Blackwell Pub. 42.
Murray, M. (2002). Deus Absconditus. In D. Howard-Snyder & P. Moser (eds.), Divine Hiddenness: New Essays (pp. 62–82). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Oakes, R. (2008). Life, Death, and the Hiddenness of God. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, 64, 155–160.
Poston, T., & Dougherty, T. (2007). Divine Hiddenness and the Nature of Belief. Religious Studies, 43, 183–198.
Rea, M. (2009). Narrative, Liturgy, and the Hiddenness of God. In K. Timpe (ed.), Metaphysics and God: Essays in Honor of Eleonore Stump 76–96. London: Routledge.
Schellenberg, J. (2015) The Hiddenness Argument: Philosophy's New Challenge to Belief in God. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Schellenberg, J. (2007). On Not Unnecessarily Darkening the Glass: A Reply to Poston and Dougherty. Religious Studies 43 (2):199-204.
Schellenberg, J. (2005) On Reasonable Nonbelief and Perfect Love: Replies to Henry and Lehe. Faith and Philosophy 22 (3):330-342.
Schellenberg, J. (2005) The Hiddenness Argument Revisited (I). Religious Studies 41 (2):201-215.
Schellenberg, J. (2005). The Hiddenness Argument Revisited (II). Religious Studies 41 (3):287-303.
Schellenberg, J. (2008). Reply to Aijaz and Weidler on Hiddenness. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 64 (3):135-140.
Swinburne, R. (2004). The Existence of God (2nd ed.). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Tucker, C. (2008). Divine Hiddenness and the Value of Divine-Creature Relationships. Religious Studies, 44, 269–287.
van Inwagen, P. (2006). The Problem of Evil. Oxford: Clarendon Press
van Inwagen, P. (2002). “What Is the Problem of the Hiddenness of God?” in (eds) P. Moser & D. Howard-Snyder Divine Hiddenness: New Essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
There has been a relative explosion of publications on this topic in recent years.1
Some would just immediately reject relationship
- After all, “even the demons believe” (James 2:19), and God ostensibly has no interest in securing from persons mere mental assent of His existence.
>• Paul Moser (Philosophy professor at Loyola Chicago): “This means that God wants us to love God and thus to treasure God, not just to believe that God exists (see Deuteronomy 6:5; Mark 12:30; James 2:19). The Hebraic God wants all people to enter lovingly into God’s life, in action as well as thought. So production of mere reasonable belief that God exists does not meet God’s higher aim for humans. For our own good, God is after something more profound and more transforming than simple reasonable belief. As all-loving, God will not settle for anything less.” [“Divine Hiddenness Does Not Justify Atheism” (eds) M. L. Peterson, R. J. Vanarragon Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Religion (Blackwell, 2004), 44.]
• Robert T. Lehe (Philosophy professor at North Central College): “Given the complicated psychology of the process of moving toward religious commitment, it is by no means obvious that the most effective way for God to move a person to desire conversion involves the shortest possible path to belief that God exists.” [“A Response to the Argument from the Reasonableness of Nonbelief,” Faith and Philosophy 21(2) (2004): 163.]
• Travis Dumsday (Philosophy professor at Concordia): “…it is worth recalling something that all parties to the debate grant, namely that God’s aim is supposed to be that of enabling us to have a positive relationship with Him. His aim is not merely to convince us of His reality, but to allow for such a relationship.” [“Divine hiddenness and creaturely resentment” International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 72 (2012): 43.]
Some resistant non-theists, upon coming to belief, would immediately reject loving relationship.
• …many testify that they'd resist
• …many historical examples exist
But so what?
• …God would reveal Himself to haters anyways.
• …God wouldn't have created a world with people who would resist.[Forthcoming]
Some would just have an improper relationship (evil)
- • Paul Moser (Philosophy professor at Loyola Chicago): “God is exonerated from the charge of irresponsibly refraining from entertaining signs, so long as God reveals God’s presence to anyone suitably receptive.” [“Divine Hiddenness Does Not Justify Atheism” in (eds.) M. Peterson & R. VanArragon Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Religion (Blackwell, 2004) 52.]
Some non-theists would just form a perpetually improper relationship with God if, in their current state, they suddenly believed and even entered into a kind of relationship with God.
• …the human does not recognize God as Good
• …the human rejects moral transformation
• …the human lacks right desire for God (e.g. praising, praying etc.…
• …just for gifts,
• …religious experiences, or
• …escaping punishment.)
• …the human is jealous of God's power
• …the human considers himself authority in its formation
Some would just abandon the relationship later in life
**Some non-theists, if they became theists, would enter proper relationship with God but then abandon it later in life.
• …because of disbelief in God's goodness
• …because of a growing jealousy of God
• …because hatred of God's allowing suffering
• …because of a love of sin
But so what?
• …that short time would be worth it to a loving God.
Greater goods of relationship obtain with divine silence
Plausibly, greater relationship goods ultimately obtain with God's existence being unclear to some non-believers
• …a greater total number of everlasting relationships
• …a greater total of everlasting quality in relationships
• …a greater total of everlasting quality in the relationship under review
Total, greater goods obtain with divine silence
Greater goods around the world ultimately obtain with God's existence being unclear to some non-believers
• …more relationship goods[See above]
• …more justice
• …more mercy
• …more moral knowledge
• …more seeking of God
• …more uncoerced moral choices
God can have relationship with some during their disbelief
- One thing to note here is that the pros and cons of divine hiddenness are often weighed against each other. Even if it is granted that a non-theist cannot have a deep reciprocal relationship with God while disbelieving (which is not necessarily granted), it can radically affect the equation. No longer is relationship being sacrificed, but rather just a temporary depth of relationship, and that is far easier to outweigh for the sake of other goods than permanently and entirley cutting off the opportunity for relationship.
God can have relationship with someone just fine even while the person is a non-theist. [Full article.]. This is relevant because the reason God allegedly would prove his existence is in order to allow for relationship—that reason would be gone.
But so what?
• …belief is required for a relationship that is deep and reciprocal.1
Greatest love seeks relationship first (like a mother)
- • J.L. Schellenberg: “In examining [the] concept [of God's perfect love], [we must] develop our understanding of it … by reference to what is best in human love. [“Does Divine Hiddenness Justify Atheism” in M. L. Peterson & R. J. Van Arragon (Eds.), Contemporary debates in the philosophy of religion (Blackwell, 2004), 39.]
• J.L. Schellenberg: “…reflection on the concept of divine love shows that a perfectly loving God would necessarily seek personal relationship with all individuals [who are not resistant] … [because] the seeking of personal relationship is an essential part of the best human love …[Therefore] Something similar must apply to God’s love for us. [“Divine Hiddenness Justifies Atheism” in (Ed.) M. Read, Evil and the Hiddenness of God (Cengage, 2015) 69.]
The greatest kind of love is Earthly/motherly love.1(Forthcoming) This is relevant because,
>• J.L. Schellenberg: “The possibility of some form of personal interaction with the parent will (insofar as she is able to ensure it) always be there. What loving parent would ever willingly allow this possibility to be taken completely away? Parental love will not permit this to occur when it can be prevented.” [“What the Hiddenness of God Reveals,” Divine Hiddenness: New Essays (Cambridge, 2002), 24.]