Here’s an argument showing divine revelation isn’t good for humans — Tweet Reflections

An unexpected consequence of a difficult problem

“That Atheist” posted an interesting tweet a few days ago. It was an argument on the problem of divine hiddenness:

For some Christmas fun, I will briefly interact with each premise, provide what I imagine are the available Christian responses, and then give my opinion as to whether the responses work.

Premise 1

An omnipotent God could unambiguously reveal itself.

It seems this premise is obviously true. We can easily imagine a million different ways God could make it absolutely clear he exists, while demonstrating his personality traits.

He could overwhelm our senses with evidence of all sorts – from extraordinary objective physical feats that are able to be studied and compared against natural phenomena to deeply subjective revelations that are unable to be rationally denied.

Premise 2

If divine revelation has a positive affect on humans, a good God would unambiguously reveal itself to humans.

The main thrust of this premise also seems true. Why would a good God ultimately remain hidden if revealing himself unambiguously would equal a net positive for humans?

I do think the antecedent of this statement should be modified with what I perceive to be a key word for the whole argument. My modified premise would be:

If unambiguous divine revelation has a positive affect on humans, a good God would unambiguously reveal itself to humans.

Conclusion

Therefore, either a good God does not exist or [unambiguous] divine revelation has no positive affect on humans.

Once “unambiguous” is added, I think we have a powerful argument. It’s an intriguing dilemma. Both horns are not good for the Christian.

1. If the first horn of the dilemma is true, then Christianity is certainly false because a good God’s existence is a fundamental tenet of Christian belief.
2. If the second horn of the dilemma is true, then Christians are affirming a seemingly obvious false statement — which means Christianity is false.

Here’s how I think the Christian could and would respond to this dilemma.

Response 1: God has unambiguously revealed himself.

Premise one of the argument assumes that God hasn’t unambiguously revealed himself. Some Christians would challenge that premise directly by asserting he in fact has.

They may cite the Bible as unambiguous historical evidence, or the universe being created as unambiguous scientific evidence, or a particular theological view as unambiguous logical evidence.

Response 2: God doesn’t need to unambiguously reveal himself.

That Atheist’s entire argument is assuming that God’s “goodness” is connected to doing things that have a positive impact on humans. Some Christians would just deny that understanding of “good”.

They could say something like: God’s will defines the good, and if his will doesn’t include unambiguously revealing himself to some people, then it’s good for him to not unambiguously reveal himself to those people — even if it would be “good” for them.

Response 3: God shouldn’t unambiguously reveal himself.

Another assumption of the argument is that there is no other good achieved by God not revealing himself unambiguously. Some Christians may conclude a greater good couldn’t be achieved otherwise.

They could say something like: For creatures like us, it’s a greater good to build relationship with God on faith and hope. You couldn’t have a faith-filled relationship with God if he revealed himself unambiguously.

Response 4: God can’t unambiguously reveal himself.

A fourth consideration is whether or not it’s even possible for God to reveal himself unambiguously. Some Christians could assert that all the ways we imagine God could conclusively demonstrate his existence are not actually possible.

They may argue that the gulf between the sort of being God is and the sort of beings we are is too wide. God’s existence is such that it’s not logically possible for humans to “see” it unambiguously.

Response 5: God will unambiguously reveal himself.

The argument’s potency hinges on the binary predicament presented by the dilemma. Some Christians would avoid the dilemma by asserting that in time God will unambiguously reveal himself to all humans.

They would admit that, for many, divine revelation is currently ambiguous at best. But, it won’t always be that way. So, the argument is sound for now. It’s just not the situation humans will always be in.

My Take: Do the Christian responses work?

For me, four responses fail and the fifth isn’t that satisfying.

• Response one fails because it’s just not the case the Bible, science, theology, or anything else I’m aware of unambiguously reveals God. All of it is veiled behind one mystery or another. An unambiguous thing is the table I’m writing this blog on — God hasn’t revealed himself to me like the table has been revealed to me.
• Response two fails because it relies on a completely counter-intuitive redefinition of the common-sensical notion of “good”. It makes God “good” for making his existence ambiguous to some, even if it would be objectively good for them if God unambiguously revealed himself.
• Response three fails because it’s not the case all humans get a chance to have this greater good of a faith-filled relationship. Perhaps they were mentally handicapped. Maybe they died as a baby. Point is, their heaven is not going to be worse because of those unfortunate realities. If they ultimately end up in an equivalent heavenly state, then God veiling himself ultimately wasn’t necessary.
• Response four fails because of the incarnation of Jesus. According to orthodox Christian doctrine, he’s close enough to our human existence that he can assume our nature in a hypostatic union without destroying it. There’s no closer relationship between the nature of God and the nature of humanity than the Christian concept of incarnation.
• Response five can possibly work if it extends to every single person that has ever existed and will ever exist. If even one person doesn’t get the opportunity to experience unambiguous divine revelation — prior to any negative consequences that may come from choices made in relative ambiguity — then Christianity is false because God isn’t all good.

If I’m right that the best Christian response to this argument is God will, at some point, unambiguously reveal himself, then as a Christian I must also affirm the following statement about myself and anyone else who shares my current status:

Right now on this Christmas Day, it’s better God’s existence and incarnation remains ambiguous to me.

Not very satisfying, but it is what it is. That’s the Christmas consequence of divine hiddenness.