Sunday, September 15, 2013

Why Doesn't God Give Us More Evidence?

This is an objection that I hear often:

If God really wants everyone to believe in Him, then why doesn't He give us some more evidence?

William Lane Craig provides a brilliant response.


  1. WLC should sell double glazing or cars. With doublespeak nonsense like that, I'm sure he'd do well.
    "Proving his existence would make less people interested in God". Absolute twaddle.

    If this is what constitutes a "brilliant response" to you, then apologetics is in a worse state than I thought.

  2. You missed the point, entirely. Craig is providing a response to what philosophers of religion have termed, "The Hiddenness of God." If God wants us to believe in Him, then why not provide us with more evidence? Craig thinks that the question is misleading because people do not believe IN God because they have evidence for his existence. Mere evidence of God's existence would establish THAT God exists, but it is a different matter, entirely, to talk about belief IN God. Belief in God is constituted by more than mere acknowledgement of the fact that He is--it encompasses sincere love, praise, and delight in Him. What use is it to simply add God as another piece of metaphysical furniture to our ontological paradigm (borrowing Craig's metaphor)? The New Testament also gives us the picture of the kingdom of God being likened to a precious pearl: the man looked for it and found it. It was precious to him because he sought it and found it. God is a treasure in a similar respect: those who truly desire Him will find Him. Pascal argued similarly in that God has provided enough evidence for those who are earnestly seeking, but for those who do not want God, he has provided them with enough absence of evidence to build their own gallows, so to speak.