Cold Case Christianity: Why Is God So Hidden?

This is my reply to an article by J. Warner Wallace entitled

Why Is God So Hidden?

Posted: 22 Sep 2017 01:15 AM PDT

286As a young atheist, I denied the existence of God for practical, experiential reasons. During my elementary school years, I found it difficult to understand why anyone would believe in God without visible evidence.

Probably because, in the real world, failure to prove an allegedly life-changing proposition with visible evidence rationally justifies skepticism toward it. 

I knew my parents, teachers and friends were real, because I could see them and I could see their impact on the world around me.

That's apparently also the reason the apostles believed Jesus rose from the dead, so if God was willing to cater to the human desire for empirical proof back then, then we are justified to believe something is wrong with this god if we find there is no such visible confirmation available today for God's existence.

God, however, seemed completely hidden. I often thought, “If God exists, why would He hide in this way? Why wouldn’t God just come right out and make it obvious to everyone He exists?” As I examined these questions many years later, I began to consider other factors and considerations, particularly related to the nature of “love”.

Yeah, sometimes love really wants you to avoid a danger, but chooses to not notify you of such danger except through fortune cookie-means like ancient scripture, whose adherents have disagreed with each other for 2,000 years over what it means and what it implies.  Yeah that makes sense.  

If I see your child drowning in your swimming pool, maybe the godly way for me to warn you is to knock on your door and talk to you about how terrible death is for a family?  Gee, physically going to the pool and jerking your child out of the water, well that might not necessarily be the most loving thing I could do, eh?  And yet your bible characterizes evangelism similarly as you pulling the unbeliever out of the fire, Jude 1:23.

I held love and compassion in high regard, even as an unbeliever. These were values I embraced as essential to our survival as a species, and values I considered to be foundational to human “flourishing” (as many atheists commonly describe it). But love requires a certain kind of world,

Is this the part where you invite a 5-point Calvinist Christian into the discussion so your audience recognizes that your ideas about love and freewill are rejected by other equally born-again Christian teachers?

Or do you say no 5-Point Calvinist can be a real Christian?

Or do you say not even being genuinely born again can protect one against believing heresy for a whole lifetime, in which case we legitimately ask why we should believe God has ANY part to play in ANYTHING.

and if loving God does exist, it is reasonable that He would create a universe in which love is possible; a universe capable of supporting humans with the ability to love God and love one another. This kind of universe requires a number of pre-requisites, however, and these pre-requisites are best achieved when God is “hidden” in the way He often seems to be:

Love Requires Freedom

True love cannot be coerced.

Which means the God of Ezekiel 38:4 cannot be true love.

We love our children and we want them to love us. We cannot, however, force them to do so.

Correct, but we would still jerk them out of the street if they refused our command and some drunk was barreling toward them in a speeding car.  We wouldn't be stupid like god and say "well if you don't love me, I won't protect you", we instinctively love our children even if their own stupidity evinces their lack of love for us.  It's the wise mature thing to do, and remains the case even despite our inability to know the future or exert infinite power.

When we give our kids direction and ask them to accept this direction as a reflection of their love for us, we must step away and give them the freedom to respond (or rebel) freely.

Love also forces the loved one against their will when the loved one's stupidity or rebellion is headed for certain destruction.  So if we are on our way to hell, God's "love" would imply he'd force us to believe, not that he'd just stand there telling us to read the bible like a robotic emotionless idiot. 

If we are “ever-present”, their response will be coerced;

Is God "ever-present", yes or no?

they will behave in a particular way not because they love us, but because they know we are present (and they fear the consequence of rebellion).

That's exactly the motive God wants the Israelites to act under:  they better obey him, or he will kill them, see Deuteronomy 28:15 ff.

If God exists, it is reasonable that He would remain hidden (to some degree) to allow us the freedom to respond from a position of love, rather than fear.

That's not what other spiritually alive Christians called 5-point Calvinists say.  They say our sinful acts are always in conformity to God's "secret" will even if they conflict with God's revealed will.

What now?  Will J. Warner Wallace admit that somebody can be sincerely born again and yet go their entire lives holding to heretical absurd theology?   Could that possibly provide rational justification for saying the Christian god is fake?

Love Requires Faith

Love requires a certain amount of trust;

Not from the parent's point of view.  If our 5 year old doesn't love us and runs out into the street in willful rebellion, we will go to jail if that child gets hurt and it can be proved we only did what God does, and stood there issuing warnings without doing anything to force them out of the street.  Love does not always shrink back from using force.

we must trust the person who loves us has our best interest in mind,

You mean after they PROVE that they love us?  Sure.  But not before.

even in times of doubt.

If you have already had their love demonstrated to you personally and empirically, then yes.  If not, then no, doubts will be justified.  You don't just blindly trust that somebody loves you if they've never demonstrated any such thing, which is precisely the case with your alleged god who allegedly chooses to remain so hidden, that your choice to be a Christian appears to be nothing more spiritual or special than anybody else's choice to join some religion.

There are occasions when trust requires us to accept something as true, even though we can’t immediately see this to be the case.

But this proceeds from your biblically faulty premise that God wants us to love him freely, when in fact plenty of conservative Christian scholars deny the libertarian sense of freewill that you adopt.

In essence, trust often requires “hiddenness” on the part of the “lover” if love is to be confident, powerful and transformational.

Well gee, then the disciples could have been mightily transformed by a hidden resurrected Christ, and not just one that provided empirical proof?  If so, why did Jesus bother to provide empirical proof, as alleged in Acts 1:3?  Did he think remaining "hidden" would reduce the transformative effect?

Love Requires Evidence

Love does, however, require sufficient evidence. While we may not want to coerce our children, we do need to give them sufficient reason to believe we exist, support and love them.

But as already stated, sometimes our kids do things that require us to force them, if we love them, against their will to protect them from the consequences of their own rebellion or lack of love for us.  Ezekiel 38:4 shows God will force people to do things, even force them to sin, so the more you deny the meaning of this verse, the more your whole "love requires freewill" business becomes bunk.

While many non-believers may deny there is any evidence for the existence of God, the natural world has provided us with sufficient (albeit non-coercive) evidence God exists.

You are doing nothing but preaching the choir.  If God really did think atheists were in danger of hell-fire and really seriously desired them to avoid this fate, he already knows from the first century that empircally proving himself to their empirical senses works wonders, so he has nobody to blame if a different result is achieved with us because he refuses to act today consistent with how he allegedly acted back in the first century. 

We have the ability, however, to deny this evidence if we choose.

Other spiritually alive genuinely born again Christians such as 5 Point Calvinists disagree, and you are a fool to expect spiritually dead unbelievers to figure out which of you correctly understands the bible here.

Love Requires Response

In the end, we do need to show our children our promises have been reliable and their love and trust in us has been well placed.

And if we give them godly love and qualify that our love for them doesn't necessarily mean we'll always be willing to protect them from rape and murder, they would be rationally justified to call 911, got into foster care,  and stop experiencing our "love".

Even though we may have to be “hidden” at times in their lives,

Yes, but our children drown in pools because we aren't there to protect them, and if it were proven we knew they were drowning and could have saved them, and didn't, the more we claim at the parental neglect trial that we had a godly love for our children, the more the jury will find us insane.

at the end of the day, love requires us to make a visible response. The Christian Worldview maintains that God will respond visibly at “the end of the day”. While He may sometimes seem “hidden”, He will ultimately be evident to all of us.

Tell that to the 5 year old girl who is being raped, whose live depends on a protector refusing to stay hidden.

Under biblical logic, it would be blasphemy for a Christian woman to curse god after she had been raped.  For this reason, you'd have biblical authority to rebuke her sharply...but could you seriously blame her?

If God exists, it is reasonable He would personify and fulfill the requirements of love, as described in Christian scripture:

Romans 1:20

For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they (we) are without excuse.

Hebrews 11:1

Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.

Yup, you don't give one rat's ass about answering skeptical objections here, you are just preaching to the choir.

God created a world reflecting His holy nature:

No, he tried and it went to shit, by his own reluctant admission, Genesis 6:6-7

We live in a universe where love is possible.

We also live in a universe with a bible that teaches God sometimes forces people to sin, Ezekiel 38:4.

This kind of universe can sometimes be a scary place, because it requires un-coerced human freedom. God offers us this dangerous liberty (and often remains hidden) so our love will be genuine.

And a solid half of conservative Christianity disagrees with you and says godly love on our part does NOT require the type of libertarian freewill you say it does.