Divine Hiddenness

[arewethereyet]

Back to divine hiddenness, it's enough to say that we are not omniscient beings, and so the reason why a deity chooses to reveal itself through means other than direct physical reality might be beyond our understanding.

Why can't atheists accept that some things a deity chooses to do can be beyond us ? Apparently they have trouble getting past their own ego...

---

Bold mine - 

Who is "we"?  Are there a lot of you in that head of yours?

Well, by we I am referring to the vast majority of people endorsing abrahamic religions.

And you speak for them all?

Yeah, okay.

[The Architect Of Fate]

Yes, and they are too hard for you to fathom. Now proceed to bang your head against the wall

Nah it's just you repeating "mysterious ways " as a lazy inability to actually come up with an answer. Now proceed wriggle and wiggle like a worm on a hook.

That's all we need to answer your stupid objections to hiddenness.

Nope, not even close. It's really just an apologetic confession that you can't actually answer the objections.

Well, you may notice that there are too many "lols", "Hehe", and "you fail" in your answer. I mean clearly, it has everything to do with ego.

The number of lol's, Hehe and you fails in my answer is of no relevance. Nor does it clearly show "ego " But whatever you need to tell yourself.

---

Maybe God stays hidden because he’s got bad teeth and is self-conscious about it.

No sillier that any other ‘explanation’.

Boru

Isn't the power of make-believe fun

[HappySkeptic]

By infinitely good, I mean good in every way that is logically possible, or maximally good. The limits you're talking about are logical possibility. These minutiae notwithstanding, I think it's still accurate to use the term infinite.

I think a "maximally good" being would have no free will.  It would be forced, by its nature, to only do what is maximally good.  No other choice would be possible.

Therefore, the current state of the world is the only possible result of a maximally-good god, or else we must assume that the god is impotent.

[LadyForCamus]

Within the framework of Christianity knowledge of God’s existence should matter. Sure, believers disobeyed and rebelled, but one has no ability to either obey or disobey an entity that they aren’t convinced exists in the first place.

I don't think that's entirely true. Consider the following verses—the entire premise implies that a Christian who knows about God can be lost, while an atheist that's never heard about God or His laws can be saved:

"For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified. For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus" (Romans 2:15, ESV).

Except that Ephesians 2:4-9 says:

But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved), And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus, That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus. For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.

[John 6IX Breezy]

Except that Ephesians 2:4-9 says:

What am I looking for here?

[Ranjr]

Again it comes down to the ego measuring contest.  Well, okay.

puhlumpht

Now you, God.

[GUBU]

I was speaking with a long-time friend of the family, who is a practicing Jew, about prayer and why god doesn’t reveal himself to his creation. His explanation was one that I actually had never heard before. Assuming free will for the sake of the argument, I’d say it’s one of the more reasonable (maybe I should say least irrational) explanations for god’s hiddenness that I’ve heard. If our parents followed us around everywhere we went, would we ever really be free to break the rules? Thoughts? 

“Just as God's purpose does not allow man to be a physical prisoner, neither does it permit him to exist in an intellectual prison. How would man behave if God were to constantly reveal Himself? Would he really be free? If man were constantly made aware that he was standing in the King's presence, could he go against His will? If God's existence were constantly apparent, this awareness would make man a prisoner.“

A god revealing himself is logically impossible

So allah is a false god because muhammed the alleged prophet revealed him.

[Mister Agenda]

The power of our senses is limited. We can't even see a laser beam how can we possibly detect a deity, and even we see what resembles a deity, there is no way to confirm it through senses alone.

Pretty sure that part of the portfolio of an omnipotent being is being able to convince a mere mortal that's what they are. If God can't convince me he/she/it/they exist, God is not omnipotent, Q.E.D.

---

As I understand it, belief in God's existence has never been the most important variable:

"You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe—and tremble!" (James 2:19, NKJV).

And in one of the parables the analogy was given of a dead man asking to be sent back from the grave so that people might see him and repent. The response was this:

"He said to him, ‘If they do not hear Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be convinced if someone should rise from the dead" (Like 16:31, ESV).

Obviously this is New Testament and your friend is Jewish, but it echoes his point in a sightly different way. It argues that nothing of value changes by believing He exists. Almost every story in the Bible, from Adam and Eve onwards, involves people who saw or experienced God in some way, and nevertheless betrayed Him.

So this adds to your friends argument, which I think is good as well.

So it's not important whether someone believes God exists. That's what I've been saying!

[The Grand Nudger]

Isn't it interesting that in the concept of divine hiddenness, by any name, and regardless of whatever superstitious explanation a given cultist might provide for this state of affairs - they are explicitly agreeing with an atheists sole contention?

They, like us, can derive no evidence of the divine through their senses. Their world is as godless in their own apprehension as any atheist's.

[Mister Agenda]

I can’t think of a scenario where more information about a subject would limit someone’s intellectual freedom rather than the other way around.

Almost every psychological study involves withholding certain information from the subjects, otherwise their choices are compromised and the research is invalid.

That sounds like you're implying that God isn't omniscient and therefore needs to conduct studies to make sure he/she/its/their research is valid.

---

Great; and do you realize that religious people, regardless of being convinced of God's existence, nevertheless act in ways inconsistent with that belief?

You do as well—its normal human behavior. You procrastinate despite knowing your work is due. You don't eat right or exercise despite knowing the consequences. The list goes on—knowledge does not equal behavioral change. This work of fiction seems to have nailed it on the head don't you agree?

It would be a poor fiction writer who couldn't hit major observable foibles of humanity on the head, don't you agree?

---

As to the OP, it's striking that YHWH repeatedly revealed himself in the OT in multiple ways on multiple occassions, having conversations, performing massive miracles like flooding the entire planet, plaguing Egypt spectacularly, and holding the sun still in the sky for the convenience of a battle, smiting folks, setting a booby trap on the Ark of the Convenant....why the policy change on YHWH's hiddenness?