In precis, without the logical jargon, this is the argument: If God exists, He would not allow anyone receptive to His existence to remain ignorant of Him. There is at least one capable finite person S and time t such that S is or was at t nonresistantly in a state of nonbelief in relation to the proposition that God exists.

Necessarily, if for any capable finite person S and time t, God is at t open to being in a positively meaningful and reciprocal conscious relationship with S at t, then, for any capable finite person S and time t, it is not the case that S is at t nonresistantly in a state of nonbelief in relation to the proposition that God exists. Necessarily, if God perfectly loves such finite persons as there may be, then, for any capable finite person S and time t, God is at t open to being in a positively meaningful and reciprocal conscious relationship with S at t. Necessarily, if God exists, then God perfectly loves such finite persons as there may be. This is a standard form of the argument from Divine Hiddenness against God’s existence: What is the argument for atheism from God’s Hiddenness? So this is a good forum to look at that argument in more detail.

We didn’t have a chance to go into that argument in detail in the debate, and Dillahunty is unwilling to have any more debates with me ( even if he’s paid, apparently). In my recent debate with Matt Dillahunty about the existence of God, Dillahunty invoked his favorite argument against God’s existence - the Divine Hiddenness argument. Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Flipboard Print arroba Email

Edward feser five proofs