What god could have done to show himself:
- He could have left incontrovertible evidence of his existence.
- He could have made it impossibly evident that mankind has been here only 6000 years, not the 200,000 give or take, that fossil evidence supports.
- He could have provided evidence through Jesus to millions of non-believers, instead of focusing on a small band of fanatical followers eager to point to 'the messiah'.
- He could at any time, being the ultimate of beings, just simply show himself in the sky, speak to millions instead of to the lonely occasional deluded sheepherder in the desert, or provide miracles to millions of us as observers - part the ocean, cure cancer and announce it from heaven in a clear unmistakable voice, or instantaneously stop starvation and plague in it's tracks.
- He could have provided more than anecdotal 'proof' of his existence and involvement in 'creation'.
- As the supposed most powerful of all supernatural beings, he could have provided unmistakable real evidence seen daily, instead of 'evidence' that can be easily explained by non-supernatural science.
Why did god hide the evidence that would clearly mark his handiwork. Why is the universe set up to appear precisely as if god were never involved in it's 'creation'? Why do the natural laws, including natural selection, make it so difficult to identify god in the processes? Why is complete acceptance of god dependent, not on logical evidence and rational conclusion, but on something called 'Faith'? And isn't 'faith' just another way of stating a willingness to bypass the evidence in order to show preference to an unprovable conclusion?
Believers can demand that there really is a god. They can demand that he wants us to believe him. They might insist that 'salvation', whatever that means to their particular set of beliefs, is dependent on 'faith' in god, instead of objective proof of god. This is the believers' desire. Believers often invent elaborate imagery for god, and insistence on his existence. They often construct elaborate reasons for keeping himself so well disguised.
Then the believer must create mental gymnastics and justifications in order to make the whole story plausible with the scientific evidence to the contrary.
I have to just ask simply: Why? Why faith instead of evidence? Are those who believes in god due to 'faith' better servants of god in some obtuse manner? Why would god withhold solid incontrovertible evidence and prefer than one who would believe in god due to 'faith' alone?
The believer could simply ask himself this question:
Could it just be that the world looks just like there is no God because there is no God? Could it appear that what seems delusion is just delusion?
Jeff
