Invitation part 11: The Hiddenness of God 3

In his fine book, The Reason for God, Timothy Keller suggests that God doesn't offer proof of his existence.

Rather, he leaves clues.

Why not proof? Why the cat and mouse?

Why not make himself blatantly obvious to every single person in human history, given that the stakes -- eternity in heaven or hell -- are so high?

Why leave anything to chance?

Reply. In my view, the reason is just this: God does not coerce faith. He doesn't force himself upon anyone.

Thus there is no flaming neon cross hurling through the sky for all to see. No letters embossed boldly on the face of the moon declaring, "Made by Jesus."

The clues God leaves of his existence and love provide just enough evidence to stimulate faith in the open-hearted.

But not enough to overturn the skepticism of the obstinate.

Another way to say this is that God does not submit himself to the human demand for proof, nor is he obligated to do so.

Hence the clue strategy.

If you truly seek him with an open heart, you'll find him. But if you cross your arms and make a rule that God must meet your standards before you'll ever believe in him, you could be waiting a long time.

Jesus said, "He who has ears to hear, let him hear."

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

Next week: A sampling of God's clues.

See you in a week or two

I'm at InterVarsity's Cedar Campus on the U. P. of Michigan for two weeks.

700 college students coming through camp.

And ooo, it's chilly up here on Lake Huron.

Talk to ya in a week or two.

Invitation Part 10: The Hiddenness of God 2

In my last post I asked the question of whether God's two main forms of revelation -- general and special -- make God sufficiently obvious, to the point where you couldn't miss him.

General revelation, as you'll recall, is God's self-disclosure in nature and conscience.

Special revelation is his disclosure through Christ and the Scriptures.

The skeptic, however, can explain away these supposed revelations as being subject to other interpretations, and therefore do not qualify as making God obvious at all.

In nature the skeptic sees only the impersonal laws of physics, in conscience, social and cultural conditioning. The Bible is mythology, Christ the central myth.

Such naturalistic explanations, often put forth by the well-educated, show that God's existence is not conclusive, his self-disclosure not obvious.

One could easily miss him.

The Miss-able God

It seems to me we have plenty of Scriptural evidence to suggest that God is not necessarily trying to make himself "plain" to everyone -- at least as humanly defined. Three examples among dozens that could be cited:

• My God, why have you forsaken me? . . . You do not answer me (Psalm 22:1-2).
• You have hidden these things from the wise and learned, and revealed them to little children (Luke 10:21).
• Jesus warned [the blind men who received their sight] sternly, "See to it that no one knows about this." (Matt 9:30-31)

So the first thing to be said to the skeptic who objects that God -- if he exists -- is not showcasing himself blatantly to every person on the planet is this:

That's correct. He's not.

Surely though, this is not the end of the story?

To be continued . . . 

credit for image: http://blog.ted.com/2013/04/22/12-talks-to-watch-this-earth-day/