Do Atheists Have a Solid Case Here?

[POI]

For many atheists, the go-to topic for debate, is "divine hiddenness". I do not see it spoke about much here? I figured it would be worthy of discussion. Below is a theist's response/rebuttal to the argument:



For Debate:

1. In claim #1, the theist states Abraham, Joseph, and Jesus have their requests ultimately fulfilled at a later date. Why do countless victims of rape, torture, AND murder go unfulfilled in their requests to be saved?

2. In claim #2, the theist states hiddenness does seem to promote a relationship in the long run. This is clearly not the case, as many will die as atheists -- (likely me, unless He is going to reveal Himself to me later in a way for which I will not doubt His mere existence).

3. In claim #3, God remains hidden from the ones who would rebel. I guess this means if I never feel I received His presence, then that means I would have rebelled anyways? Well then, should I ignore the Bible, where He presented Himself to many who reject Him then?

I'll stop here... The theist mentions other stuff, but nothing seemingly worthy of intellectual discussion.

I hope you theists can come up with BETTER reasons than the ones given in the video?

Or, in conclusion, apply Occam's Razor for the following question: Why doesn't God intervene, when prayed upon, where ultimate finite tragedy strikes?

A): Because God does not exist... One assumption

OR

B): God does exist, but.... Commence additional assumptions

******************************

A) needs only one assumption, B) needs more....

[POI]

This doesn't make sense.
Lucifer knew your god, and yet was still able to choose to rebel.

(S)he touches on this in post 148, FYI. But yes, it still does not make sense.

[AquinasForGod]

[Replying to POI in post #149]

Sure, I guess it could... But then you would FIRST need to PROVE that your specific scenario is even real. Can you do that? Remember, the argument of "the problem of divine hiddenness" is to demonstrate the likelihood that God is not hiding, but instead does not even exist. You are instead asking me to accept that 'angels' exist; which I do not. Can you first prove the existence of angels? If you cannot, then your starting point here is unfounded. Let's stick with what we know -- Provided we share the same reality

I only brought up angels to answer your question about Satan. I do not need angels to exist in order to show why God hides.

the reason divine hiddenness is not a defeater for God is that it doesn't show God cannot exist. If there are reasons why God would in general hide from the world, then showing he hides doesn't show God is unreal. Do you think divine hiddenness proves God cannot exist?

You have demonstrated my point for me. It's not a choice. Your level of belief hinges upon the preponderance of the given available examined evidence.

It remains a choice if the evidence can be doubted. For example, I have some evidence that ghosts exist, based on my personal experiences. One some occasions, I have other eye witnesses. However, it takes faith for me to believe in ghosts because there are reasons for me to doubt the evidence.

my belief in the Christian God is <1%

If you have 1% belief in the Christian God, then you do not believe divine hiddenness is a slam dunk. It is not evidence that the Christian God cannot exist. That is all the Christian needs in order to disagree with the argument. The argument might be a reason for you to disbelieve, though, especially if you never experienced God on any level.

You will one day be presented with enough evidence to rationally believe, so if you do end up in some state of suffering, it will be because despite that evidence you still refuse to accept God's grace.

1. Why isn't everyone certain that the Christian God exists?

Because, as is in your case, you haven't experienced enough evidence. But you will eventually, even if that is while in purgatory, according to the church.

2. Knowing that the Christian God exists still allows for one's "free will", to follow or reject Him, right?

It is not about obeying God. It is about us overcoming all manners of evil, which can only be done if we doubt God's existence. I have gone over why more than once on why this is the case.

Is this because of one of the (3) reasons given in the OP video, or are you going to continue sticking with your story, which also presents as being illogical?

I am sticking to my story, which I do not see has been shown to be illogical. Maybe you could lay it out in a clear way showing how it is illogical for God to mostly hide as it serves his will for Maximal Goodness.

I say He has never revealed Himself to me. Is this because 'evil' is blocking the request, or am I too stupid, or maybe He isn't there?

I am not God, so I can only think up reasons why God might not have revealed himself to you. Maybe it is not befitting to reveal himself to you yet because by doing so doesn't work out for your maximal goodness. All things in their proper time. Maybe God doesn't mind that you remain an atheist for however long you do. I doubt it is because evil is blocking your request. Paul was destroying Christians and Christ revealed himself to him, but he also had a plan for Paul, a plan he probably doesn't have for you or me.

Would you like a good argument as to why God is more likely than not? - https://www.freelymeditate.com/single-p ... ing-at-all Just in case the answer is yes.

[AquinasForGod]

Because in order for us to really choose God, then God cannot be so evident.

What difference does it make?

Are these real questions? That is a real question, btw. I really want to know if you are asking serious questions.

I would not be choosing to believe in my mom, for example, because her existence is overtly evident.

This doesn't make sense.
Lucifer knew your god, and yet was still able to choose to rebel.

But he wasn't able to choose to believe in God.

[brunumb]

You will one day be presented with enough evidence to rationally believe, so if you do end up in some state of suffering, it will be because despite that evidence you still refuse to accept God's grace.

It never fails to surface! Better believe because if you don't you are eventually going to suffer for it. Spare us please.

Divine hiddenness is not an argument for the impossibility of God but rather what one would expect if God did not actually exist.

[POI]

the reason divine hiddenness is not a defeater for God is that it doesn't show God cannot exist.

The beauty about your belief, is that it is unfalsifiable. Please take note of the "Russel's Teapot" analogy here.... So yea, there exists no argument to 'defeat' god, per se. I'm saying "the problem of divine hiddenness" appears to be one of the best to demonstrate severe doubt reasonably (i.e.) to believe at a very low level -- like I do with unicorns, fairies, big foot, etc.....

If there are reasons why God would in general hide from the world, then showing he hides doesn't show God is unreal. Do you think divine hiddenness proves God cannot exist?

Answered directly above...

It remains a choice if the evidence can be doubted.

Negative... You can choose what evidence you wish to allow to be addressed. Meaning, you can shield or protect yourself from provided evidence.

Case/point:

Your best friend tells you your spouse is cheating on you. You do not want to believe him. He states he has evidence. You may then want to believe she is faithful, so you choose not to explore his provided evidence. Why? If the evidence is presented, you may infer/apprehend this new evidence, which is NOT a choice. Hence, you may choose to preserve your current belief for fear of apprehending new incoming data -- (which you do not choose to infer/apprehend).

(YOU) For example, I have some evidence that ghosts exist, based on my personal experiences. One some occasions, I have other eye witnesses. However, it takes faith for me to believe in ghosts because there are reasons for me to doubt the evidence.

(ME) In this instance, you are applying 'faith' where there is lack of inference. You might infer/apprehend that ghosts exist, at 25%, and apply faith to the other 75%. But faith can be applied to any UNFOUNDED claim. The question then remains, why apply faith to some unfounded claims, and not others? Probably because you either want something to be true, or not. Meaning, you want ghosts to exist, so you apply faith; especially since you do not completely infer that ghosts exist.

(YOU) You will one day be presented with enough evidence to rationally believe, so if you do end up in some state of suffering, it will be because despite that evidence you still refuse to accept God's grace.

(ME) Thank you for the baseless claim. Which, BTW, can be made equally about practically anything... (i.e.)

Someday (Apollo) will appear and everyone will know. Some day (Tyr) will appear and everyone will know. etc etc etc......... Just cut/paste the appropriate invented god within the brackets, and off you go

(YOU) It is not about obeying God. It is about us overcoming all manners of evil, which can only be done if we doubt God's existence. I have gone over why more than once on why this is the case.

(ME) Your response makes no sense. You cannot overcome 'evil' while on earth, according to the Bible. No matter what. According to the Bible, you are filled with sin. Your deeds are filthy rags. Or, as you Catholics like to confess, 'I have committed the sin of impurity.'

Further, don't you know god exists in Heaven? And yet, there exists no sin there, right?

Furthermore, are you saying EVERYONE who overcomes evil has doubt for God's existence? This means, again according the the Bible, that they are not saved. Why? It's kind of hard to love something above yourself, if you doubt it exists. And since the Bible tells you, over and over again, to put God first, you are now in a conundrum.

Would you like a good argument as to why God is more likely than not?

Well, you never confirmed or denied my prior points. So let's not go there quite yet. Is your answer YES to all of the following?:

- Do you believe in the Christian God? (yes or no)
- Can your God manifest in our reality, if He wants to? (yes or no)
- Does your God want a relationship with His creation? (yes or no)
- Does your God want you to know He even exists? (yes or no)
- Does your God know what would convince anyone/everyone that He exists? (yes or no)
- Is your God capable of doing such convincing? (yes or no)
- Is your God reported to intervene with His creation? (yes or no)

If so, what answer requires the least amount of assumption(s)?:

A) God does not exist <-- HINT
B) God exists, but.....

[AquinasForGod]

the reason divine hiddenness is not a defeater for God is that it doesn't show God cannot exist.

The beauty about your belief, is that it is unfalsifiable. Please take note of the "Russel's Teapot" analogy here.... So yea, there exists no argument to 'defeat' god, per se. I'm saying "the problem of divine hiddenness" appears to be one of the best to demonstrate severe doubt reasonably (i.e.) to believe at a very low level -- like I do with unicorns, fairies, big foot, etc.....

If there are reasons why God would in general hide from the world, then showing he hides doesn't show God is unreal. Do you think divine hiddenness proves God cannot exist?

Answered directly above...

It remains a choice if the evidence can be doubted.

Negative... You can choose what evidence you wish to allow to be addressed. Meaning, you can shield or protect yourself from provided evidence.

Case/point:

Your best friend tells you your spouse is cheating on you. You do not want to believe him. He states he has evidence. You may then want to believe she is faithful, so you choose not to explore his provided evidence. Why? If the evidence is presented, you may infer/apprehend this new evidence, which is NOT a choice. Hence, you may choose to preserve your current belief for fear of apprehending new incoming data -- (which you do not choose to infer/apprehend).

(YOU) For example, I have some evidence that ghosts exist, based on my personal experiences. One some occasions, I have other eye witnesses. However, it takes faith for me to believe in ghosts because there are reasons for me to doubt the evidence.

(ME) In this instance, you are applying 'faith' where there is lack of inference. You might infer/apprehend that ghosts exist, at 25%, and apply faith to the other 75%. But faith can be applied to any UNFOUNDED claim. The question then remains, why apply faith to some unfounded claims, and not others? Probably because you either want something to be true, or not. Meaning, you want ghosts to exist, so you apply faith; especially since you do not completely infer that ghosts exist.

(YOU) You will one day be presented with enough evidence to rationally believe, so if you do end up in some state of suffering, it will be because despite that evidence you still refuse to accept God's grace.

(ME) Thank you for the baseless claim. Which, BTW, can be made equally about practically anything... (i.e.)

Someday (Apollo) will appear and everyone will know. Some day (Tyr) will appear and everyone will know. etc etc etc......... Just cut/paste the appropriate invented god within the brackets, and off you go

(YOU) It is not about obeying God. It is about us overcoming all manners of evil, which can only be done if we doubt God's existence. I have gone over why more than once on why this is the case.

(ME) Your response makes no sense. You cannot overcome 'evil' while on earth, according to the Bible. No matter what. According to the Bible, you are filled with sin. Your deeds are filthy rags. Or, as you Catholics like to confess, 'I have committed the sin of impurity.'

Further, don't you know god exists in Heaven? And yet, there exists no sin there, right?

Furthermore, are you saying EVERYONE who overcomes evil has doubt for God's existence? This means, again according the the Bible, that they are not saved. Why? It's kind of hard to love something above yourself, if you doubt it exists. And since the Bible tells you, over and over again, to put God first, you are now in a conundrum.

Would you like a good argument as to why God is more likely than not?

Well, you never confirmed or denied my prior points. So let's not go there quite yet. Is your answer YES to all of the following?:

- Do you believe in the Christian God? (yes or no)
- Can your God manifest in our reality, if He wants to? (yes or no)
- Does your God want a relationship with His creation? (yes or no)
- Does your God want you to know He even exists? (yes or no)
- Does your God know what would convince anyone/everyone that He exists? (yes or no)
- Is your God capable of doing such convincing? (yes or no)
- Is your God reported to intervene with His creation? (yes or no)

If so, what answer requires the least amount of assumption(s)?:

A) God does not exist <-- HINT
B) God exists, but.....

A few things. I do not agree with your interpretation of the bible, so it should not be used as some counter. I would have to accept your understanding before it would be important.

You said I made a baseless claim. I made a statement of my belief that you will be presented with enough evidence one day. I could have made that more clear so you did not mistake it for a claim.

Further, don't you know god exists in Heaven? And yet, there exists no sin there, right?

This question shows a lack of understanding Classical Theism. We do not believe God exists in a place. God has no spacial extension. The way in which God is omnipresent is by his power causing all things to subsist. But to try to adapt your question to my actual beliefs, would be something like, but does sin exist in other places but earth? Most likely. Can sin exist with God? No. If you are found with sin then you will not be with God, which is why after Satan sinned in his Pride he was no longer found to be with God. By with God, I do not mean in a place.

The least amount of assumptions does not = truth, so the question is flawed. However, we both make 1 assumption, but I do not say God exists but. I say God exists. The but applies to us both if we wish to explain why we think what we think. Your butt might be, well why does God hide from us? I think if God existed he would make himself known to everyone equally. Okay, but why would he do that?

[POI]

A few things. I do not agree with your interpretation of the bible, so it should not be used as some counter. I would have to accept your understanding before it would be important.

Looks like you are already trying to duck out of the debate. Let' try this again. Please address the points, which do not matter whether I am a Catholic, Protestant, atheist, or other:

1) Any god belief is unfalsifiable, just like "Russel's teapot", agreed? If so, then you get carte blanche to make all the baseless claims you wish, and I have to 'take it'

2) What you believe is NOT a choice. You cannot choose what you do and do not infer. But you can choose to protect an existing belief. Hence, your entire argument about us having a choice to believe, is FALSE. You can only choose to protect an existing belief, by avoiding new evidence. If my current inferences stand, I cannot simply will/choose to believe my skin is made of pudding.

3) Faith can be applied to ANY claim. The reason you likely apply faith to some claims, is based upon the hope that it is true. -- Because you want it to be true.

4) All people who overcome evil, have some doubt of god's existence? Are you sure?

5) It's funny how the only assumption you refuse to entertain, as valid, is that "god does not exist" --- as it relates to "the problem of divine hiddessness." Even though this assumption carries with it the least amount of extra baggage..?.?

You said I made a baseless claim. I made a statement of my belief that you will be presented with enough evidence one day. I could have made that more clear so you did not mistake it for a claim.

Right, so it's baseless. Just like when you hear someone else making an alternative threatening god claim to you

The least amount of assumptions does not = truth, so the question is flawed.

The least amount of assumptions is to be preferred. I'm not making a truth claim.

However, we both make 1 assumption, but I do not say God exists but.

Yes you do. You are required to make additional assumptions.

My one assumption requires no additional assumptions. Yours does. Case/point:

(ME) Goes does not reveal himself because he does not exist.

(YOU) " am not God, so I can only think up reasons why God might not have revealed himself to you. Maybe it is not befitting to reveal himself to you yet because by doing so doesn't work out for your maximal goodness. All things in their proper time. Maybe God doesn't mind that you remain an atheist for however long you do. I doubt it is because evil is blocking your request. Paul was destroying Christians and Christ revealed himself to him, but he also had a plan for Paul, a plan he probably doesn't have for you or me." <-- This is you in post 152.

[AquinasForGod]

[Replying to POI in post #157]

Looks like you are already trying to duck out of the debate. Let' try this again. Please address the points, which do not matter whether I am a Catholic, Protestant, atheist, or other:

This sounds like you believe you have something new to offer me that I have not heard many times before, or that it gives me pause for thought, and I go, hmm, maybe God is not real. I can assure you, none of that is true. I just want to be sure we are on the same page here.

1) Any god belief is unfalsifiable, just like "Russel's teapot", agreed? If so, then you get carte blanche to make all the baseless claims you wish, and I have to 'take it'

I do not agree. It is not just like Russel's Teapot because Russel said the teapot was tiny and not that it was metaphysical, thus in principle we could scientifically discover said teapot. However, with God, who is metaphysical, we can never discover God via any scientific methodology any more than we could discover plastic hidden in the sand if our method was to use a metal detector.

We would need to see what is the best method to try to determine if metaphysical things like God exist. For this, I would turn to philosophy.

2) What you believe is NOT a choice. You cannot choose what you do and do not infer. But you can choose to protect an existing belief. Hence, your entire argument about us having a choice to believe, is FALSE. You can only choose to protect an existing belief, by avoiding new evidence. If my current inferences stand, I cannot simply will/choose to believe my skin is made of pudding.

We must not agree on what it means to choose. If I am riding my bike down a trail, and before me I see two paths I can take. One path looks scary and dangerous. The other path doesn't look so scary and dangerous. I must make a choice to either do nothing, take the left or right path, take neither path and instead go back from where I came, etc. It doesn't matter if I have evidence that one path seems safer than the other. I am still making a choice.

So choices deal with actions. We do not choose beliefs when we are convinced of something. If I am convinced the earth is round, then I did not choose to believe it is round. I was convinced it is round. If I have no beliefs about ghosts, and some evidence comes my way but it is not enough to convince me ghosts exist, then I can choose to believe in ghosts or not because I am not convinced either way. I can use my ability to reason and go, hmm, I think this evidence leans more toward the idea of ghosts existing, so I choose to believe in ghosts until more evidence comes to me.

In my ghost example, it is not the case that I would be choosing to protect a belief because before the experience I did not believe in ghosts. If I were to protect any belief, it would be in my lack of belief in ghosts.

3) Faith can be applied to ANY claim. The reason you likely apply faith to some claims, is based upon the hope that it is true. -- Because you want it to be true.

Define what you mean by faith. And what is wrong with wanting something to be true? And a theist could easily claim that an atheist disbelieves because they desire God not be true because if God be true they are responsible for all their actions in the the afterlife. Maybe the idea of living forever scared the hell out of them.

4) All people who overcome evil, have some doubt of god's existence? Are you sure?

I am not sure, but I am also not sure I said they have some doubt, but rather that they have reasons to doubt.

5) It's funny how the only assumption you refuse to entertain, as valid, is that "god does not exist" --- as it relates to "the problem of divine hiddessness." Even though this assumption carries with it the least amount of extra baggage..?.?

Maybe because the claim that it has the least baggage is incorrect. I did say it is possible God doesn't exist, but divine hiddenness doesn't convince me he doesn't.

Right, so it's baseless. Just like when you hear someone else making an alternative threatening god claim to you

It was not a threatening claim. Did you take it that way?

The least amount of assumptions is to be preferred. I'm not making a truth claim.

It can be preferred, but not a necessity.

Yes you do. You are required to make additional assumptions.

Maybe you can demonstrate how that is the case?

You: Goes does not reveal himself because he does not exist.
Me: God does not reveal himself (to all) because it is not in his will.

You seem to want to better understand his will, thus the explanations, but those explanations are not additional assumptions. They are to explain the one assumption I just stated.

Concerning just the existence of God, if we wish to call it an assumption, then I assume God is and you assume God isn't.

[brunumb]

And what is wrong with wanting something to be true? And a theist could easily claim that an atheist disbelieves because they desire God not be true because if God be true they are responsible for all their actions in the the afterlife. Maybe the idea of living forever scared the hell out of them.

It becomes problematic when one believes something is true because they want it to be true. Wishful thinking. That path leads to anything and everything being on the table for belief as true. An utter waste of time. The same applies to the absurd notion that someone disbelieving in God would somehow render God non-existent so that everything will be hunky-dory. As an atheist I would prefer there to be a benevolent God granting an afterlife of bliss and happiness. I can't believe in God because there is nothing compelling, as far as I am concerned, to indicate that to be the case. I take full responsibility for my actions here and now.

[AquinasForGod]

And what is wrong with wanting something to be true? And a theist could easily claim that an atheist disbelieves because they desire God not be true because if God be true they are responsible for all their actions in the the afterlife. Maybe the idea of living forever scared the hell out of them.

It becomes problematic when one believes something is true because they want it to be true. Wishful thinking. That path leads to anything and everything being on the table for belief as true. An utter waste of time. The same applies to the absurd notion that someone disbelieving in God would somehow render God non-existent so that everything will be hunky-dory. As an atheist I would prefer there to be a benevolent God granting an afterlife of bliss and happiness. I can't believe in God because there is nothing compelling, as far as I am concerned, to indicate that to be the case. I take full responsibility for my actions here and now.

So if you would prefer God to be true, then you are an example it not being bad to want something to be true. Just because we want something to be true doesn't mean we will necessarily believe it is true. Now, I do not want it to be true God exists because I am convinced God is real. I can not want God to be real any more than I want my mom to be real.

At least, it seems to me, if you are convinced of something then you don't think about wanting it to be the case because you feel it is the case.

I agree that you being atheist probably follows from your experiences with the world. Suppose, though, that God came to you, not in some visible way, but you experience this great peace and comfort, understanding, and something you just cannot put into words. You just understand this is God. The experience is beyond comprehension and words. If you still rejected God completely, I would no longer think you were being rational.