Academic Connections, International

Readings

     Podcast

          On-Line Resources

   In short, the alleged problem is, as J. L. Schellenberg asks, ‘“...why, if a loving god exists, are there “reasonable nonbelievers,” people who fail to believe in God but through no fault of their own?”’ Though formulated like this in contemporary times, the kernel idea of the objection has been around for some time. Certainly our Hebrew tradition in the Old Testament gives us the story of Job that may shed some light on the issue. For instance, what was hidden about God from Job was not that God existed, but rather what was hidden were the morally sufficient reasons for God’s allowing his treatment. With the relevant changes one could ask what are God’s reasons for keeping Himself hidden from believers and non-believers in various ways.

    The subject of divine hiddenness is also brought up in the New Testament itself  where we see Paul speak of it in his Mars Hill lecture found in Acts 17 (below):

Acts 17:16 While Paul was waiting for them in Athens, he was greatly distressed to see that the city was full of idols.  17 So he reasoned in the synagogue with the Jews and the God-fearing Greeks, as well as in the marketplace day by day with those who happened to be there.  18 A group of Epicurean and Stoic philosophers began to dispute with him. Some of them asked, “What is this babbler trying to say?” Others remarked, “He seems to be advocating foreign gods.” They said this because Paul was preaching the good news about Jesus and the resurrection.  19 Then they took him and brought him to a meeting of the Areopagus, where they said to him, “May we know what this new teaching is that you are presenting?  20 You are bringing some strange ideas to our ears, and we want to know what they mean.”  21 (All the Athenians and the foreigners who lived there spent their time doing nothing but talking about and listening to the latest ideas.) 

Acts 17:22 Paul then stood up in the meeting of the Areopagus and said: “Men of Athens! I see that in every way you are very religious.  23 For as I walked around and looked carefully at your objects of worship, I even found an altar with this inscription: TO AN UNKNOWN GOD. Now what you worship as something unknown I am going to proclaim to you. 

Acts 17:24 “The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands.  25 And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else.  26 From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live.  27 God did this so that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us.  28 ‘For in him we live and move and have our being.’ As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are his offspring.’ 

Acts 17:29 “Therefore since we are God’s offspring, we should not think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone—an image made by man’s design and skill.  30 In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent.  31 For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to all men by raising him from the dead.” 

Acts 17:32 When they heard about the resurrection of the dead, some of them sneered, but others said, “We want to hear you again on this subject.”  33 At that, Paul left the Council.  34 A few men became followers of Paul and believed. Among them was Dionysius, a member of the Areopagus, also a woman named Damaris, and a number of others.

---------------

    Notice that Paul speaks of the people of Athens as being religious in every way, but what they worshipped in ignorance he was going to proclaim. One question that could be raised is whether the ignorance they had was caused by their “hardened heart” for which you would expect in that case, they would be be culpable, or was their ignorance an historical accident?

In Verse 27 ff he further says, 

“.... 27 God did this so that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us.  28 ‘For in him we live and move and have our being.’ As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are his offspring.’ 

Acts 17:29     “Therefore since we are God’s offspring, we should not think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone—an image made by man’s design and skill.  30 In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent.

----------------

    Interestingly Paul directly asserts in verse 29 that in the past “God overlooked such ignorance, but now commands all people everywhere to repent.” Implied in that was that there is such a thing as non-culpable ignorance, but now, at least, since he is proclaiming the good news to them, he seems to moving his hearers into a knowledgable and culpable status relative to the gospel.

    He describes their relationship with God in terms of His being “not far from each one of us” but also in terms that God doing what He does in order that people “would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him.” Implied in that is that for whatever reasons (resistant or non-resistant), God has in some sense been hidden—at least in the sense of not being fully known to some people, at certain times.  So there shouldn’t be too much argument as to whether God has been hidden, the question is how so and why.

    Since the knowledge of God seems to be so intrinsically valuable we must wonder why God would allow such a thing to be and this puzzle has been formulated into arguments.

The argument from divine hiddenness (DHA) has been formalized in these terms:

1. If there is a perfectly loving God, all creatures capable of explicit and positively meaningful relationship with God who have not freely shut themselves off from God are in a position to participate in such relationships. And,
2. No one can be in a position to participate in such relationships without believing that God exists. So,
3. If there is a perfectly loving God, all creatures capable of explicit and positively meaningful relationship with God who have not freely shut themselves off from God believe that God exists. And,
4. It is not the case that all creatures capable of explicit and positively meaningful relationship with God who have not freely shut themselves off from God believe that God exists: there is nonresistant non-belief. So,
5. It is not the case that there is a perfectly loving God. And,
6. If God exists, God is perfectly loving. Therefore,
7. It is not the case that God exists.

-----------------

    Christian theists have responded to this kind of argument in a number of ways.  

    One way has been to deny in premise (4) that there is such a thing as nonresistant non-belief. Support for that view can be found in oft quoted Romans 1 passage where Paul asserts:

Rom. 1:18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness,  19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them.  20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. 

Rom. 1:21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.  22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles. 

Rom. 1:24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another.  25 They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen. 

------------------

    Some Christians have argued that such people are open to eternal conscious punishment (some call it torture), others have argued that the torture is metaphorical and if anything, the “torture” would be the knowledge they missed the boat.

    Still others have argued that some or all of these people will be possibly given second chances, while other Christians still have argued that after final judgment these people will be annihilated. (Presumably the last case better handles the objection to eternal punishment for finite sins.)  

    Another way Christian theists have responded to this line of argumentation is to assert that while it is the case (or for the sake of argument might be true) that there is such a thing as non-resistant non-belief at a particular time and particular place, if a person’s heart is right before God, in some manner of fashion God will get to that person what it takes to be aware of Him and the possibility of a relationship with Him. And further that person needs to respond correctly to the light given to him or her.  In the end God will judge that person fairly because 1) He is not willing that any would perish and 2) that judgment will be according to the light afforded.

    So in this case the rejoinder would be that even if there is something like non-resistant non-belief, God is able through various means to get light to that person and for that light, each person is, according to a sliding scale, accountable. Christians who have taken this means of argumentation vary on whether any will be thus saved. Some argue that by means of God’s middle knowledge (knowledge of the free acts that people would make in any particular circumstance “c,” would allow him to condemn those who do not have any light or little light because He knew they would refuse it in a particular circumstance “c” anyway. This view is maintained even though they would not for that matter refuse in just any circumstance or in all circumstances.  

    In effect, they argue that persons who didn’t hear or become aware of God were in that state because He knew they would NOT respond positively to the light in any viable possible world God could create and thus it is not necessary for Him to reveal Himself to them. They are still culpable for their unbelief even if they didn’t get the chance to hear because they would not have responded to it freely.

    This line of argumentation is buttressed to some degree with the additional belief (Christian doctrine) that God is perfectly good being that would have morally justified reasons for allowing non-resistant non-belief. So, if it was allowed there would be good reasons...even if we could not discern exactly what were His good reasons. All this would be explained and worked out--justice be done--at the final judgment and for all to see.  

    Still others Christian theists have argued that people who never hear the gospel will be definitely saved in a way similar to children who die before the age of accountability, while still others argue that it is very likely that those who do not hear are given other chances to respond positively to the gospel even after their physical death, but before a final judgment.

    So there are a lot of options and sub-options out there to think through for a response to this objection to Christian faith. In general it can be argued that God has morally sufficient reasons, even if we do not know what they exactly are, for allowing for non-resistant non-belief--at least for a time. Taken that way, the problem of divine hiddenness is a specie of the problem of evil: why does God allow THIS apparent or real evil to exist?  We have already talked about that generally in the first question on this list of questions and we refer you back to that if need be.

    In any case, the resources organized here should help you in thinking this through and providing a response to this problem. Remember we are not “giving you a fish” (that is, giving your the “right” answer), rather we are “teaching you to fish."