Skip to main content
Some links on this page are Amazon affiliate links. We may earn a small commission from qualifying purchases.

Why is God so Hard to Find?



Christianity does not just claim that a god exists somewhere beyond the universe. It describes a God who knows us, loves us, wants to be known, and invites us into a relationship. Jesus tells people to ask, seek, and knock. James says that those who draw near to God will find God drawing near to them.


Yet many people sincerely search and find no clear response.


They pray, study scripture, attend church, and ask for guidance. Some spend years trying to hold on to a faith they do not want to lose. Still, what they were taught to recognize as God never becomes clearly distinguishable from their own thoughts, emotions, hopes, or coincidences.


This is the problem of divine hiddenness: If a perfectly loving God wants a relationship with people, why do sincere and willing people so often fail to find him? [1][2]






What Christianity Says God Wants


The argument starts with Christianity’s own claims, not with an atheist demanding constant miracles.


The Bible repeatedly says that God wants to be known. Jeremiah declares, “And ye shall seek me, and find me, when ye shall search for me with all your heart.” Jesus says, “Seek, and ye shall find.” James writes, “Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you.” [3]


These promises create an expectation. People do not need exhaustive knowledge of God or a vision every Tuesday afternoon. But if God wants a relationship, his existence should be clear enough that a willing person is not left wondering whether anyone is there at all.




Nonresistant Nonbelief


Philosopher J. L. Schellenberg focuses on nonresistant nonbelief. This is not someone who knows God exists and angrily refuses to obey. It is someone who does not believe but would be open to a relationship with God if God were real. [1]


That category includes lifelong skeptics, people raised outside Christian cultures, and former believers who fought to keep their faith. Belief is not something people can simply switch on. A person can choose to pray, read, or attend church. They cannot decide that weak evidence now feels convincing.


The argument can be put simply:


    1. A perfectly loving God would be open to relationship with every capable person.

    2. A conscious relationship with God requires believing that God exists.

    3. Some people are open to that relationship and still reasonably lack belief.

    4. Therefore, a perfectly loving God does not exist.


The Stanford Encyclopedia summarizes the key claim bluntly: “God’s existence entails there’s never any nonresistant nonbelief.” [2] Andrew Blanton’s recent study argues that this kind of nonbelief is “relatively common” and often comes from circumstances unrelated to deliberate opposition to God. [4]


The argument does not require every atheist to be sincere. It only requires some. Former ministers, missionaries, and committed believers who tried to keep believing make it difficult to say that all unbelief is secret rebellion.


Are Unbelievers Just Resisting God?


Romans 1 says that God is “clearly seen” through creation and that unbelievers are “without excuse.” Some Christians take this to mean that everyone already knows God exists but suppresses that knowledge because of sin. [3]


The problem is that this explanation cannot be tested. A former believer can say, “I prayed for years and wanted faith to survive,” and the response is that he secretly resisted. A person raised in another religion can say Christianity never seemed credible, and the response is that she already knew better.


At that point, unbelievers are not allowed to describe their own mental states. Any denial becomes more evidence of denial.


Some people certainly resist evidence. Believers and unbelievers can both protect conclusions they prefer. But the hiddenness argument only needs the modest claim that at least some nonbelievers are honest, open, and unconvinced.


Would Clear Evidence Destroy Free Will?


A common defense says God stays hidden to protect human freedom. If God were undeniable, people would be forced to believe or obey.


But belief and obedience are different. Knowing that someone exists does not force love, trust, or friendship. The Bible itself makes this point. Pharaoh sees signs and still resists. Judas knows Jesus and betrays him. James writes that “the devils also believe, and tremble.” [3]


Within Christianity’s own story, clear knowledge of God does not eliminate rebellion. God could make his existence obvious while leaving people free to reject his authority or refuse a relationship. Clear evidence would remove ignorance, not freedom.


Many Christians also claim unmistakable experiences of God without thinking their freedom has been destroyed. If certainty is compatible with freedom for believers, uncertainty cannot be necessary for everyone else.


Has God Already Revealed Enough?


Christians may reply that God is not hidden. Creation shows his power, conscience reveals morality, scripture records his words, and Jesus reveals his character.


From inside Christianity, these pieces reinforce one another. Scripture says nature points to God. Spiritual experience confirms scripture. Scripture then supplies the language used to interpret the experience.


From outside the system however, the evidence is much less specific. Nature may inspire wonder, but it does not identify the Trinity, the incarnation, the resurrection, or salvation through Christ. The same universe has supported deism, pantheism, polytheism, and naturalism.


Scripture does not fully solve the problem. Christians who read the same Bible disagree about salvation, baptism, predestination, sacraments, hell, biblical authority, and church government. Sincere prayer and careful reading do not reliably produce one clear divine correction.


The geography of religion adds to the problem. Pew found that in 2020 the world was about 28.8 percent Christian, 25.6 percent Muslim, 14.9 percent Hindu, and 24.2 percent religiously unaffiliated. These groups remain heavily concentrated by region. About 95 percent of the world’s Hindus live in India. [5]


Children inherit religious names, stories, rituals, scriptures, authorities, and ways of interpreting experience. A Christian child may learn that peace during prayer is the Holy Spirit. Children in other traditions learn different sacred categories and may grow into equally sincere adults.


That is what we would expect if religions spread mainly through families, communities, language, and history. It is harder to explain if one God is giving everyone fair access to one saving revelation.


Conflicting Religious Experience


Many believers say they know God through direct experience. These experiences can be sincere, powerful, and life-changing. But a real experience is not automatically a reliable interpretation.


Members of incompatible religions report peace, presence, guidance, visions, healing, and certainty. Anthropologist T. M. Luhrmann said, “I was startled by how real God could be for people.” Her work shows how prayer, expectation, imagination, and community can shape what divine presence feels like. [6]


That does not prove God is absent. It does mean that religious experience resembles known features of human psychology and usually arrives in the language of the believer’s existing tradition. Explanations involving culture, emotion, and expectation must be considered for Christian experiences as well as rival ones.


Could God Have Reasons to Stay Hidden?


Some theists argue that God may have good reasons to delay. Searching might develop humility, independence, or moral seriousness. Luke Teeninga argues that if “some great good” requires nonresistant nonbelief, then God may allow it. Andrew Loke argues that Schellenberg is “mistaken about the burden of proof” and calls the argument “unsound.” [7][8]


This is possible. A finite person cannot rule out every reason an omniscient God might have. But possibility is not much of an explanation.


Silence can make sense inside an established relationship. A parent may stay quiet while a child solves a problem. But the child already knows the parent exists. Silence before first contact is different. Some people spend their whole lives without reaching belief. Others seek for decades and conclude that no one answered.


The appeal to unknown reasons can protect theism from contradiction, but it weakens its explanatory power. If someone finds God, God was lovingly reaching out. If someone finds nothing, God was lovingly developing the seeker. Opposite outcomes receive the same explanation.


What Hiddenness Counts Against


Divine hiddenness does not disprove every possible god. A distant creator might not care whether humans know it exists. A deistic god might never communicate. An impersonal ground of being would not be expected to answer prayer.


The argument targets a more recognizably Christian claim: an all-knowing, all-powerful, perfectly loving personal God who wants people to know him and can communicate without error.


Christianity can reduce the problem by revising some of its claims. Perhaps God does not seek conscious relationship with everyone during this life. Perhaps sincere nonbelievers are saved without explicit faith. Perhaps hell is rejected or people receive opportunities after death. These views may produce a more humane theology, but they move away from the claim that God has already made himself clear and leaves unbelievers without excuse.


When Silence Becomes Evidence


No footprints in fresh snow count against the claim that someone crossed the yard. No response after years of messages counts against the claim that someone urgently wants contact. Persistent divine silence counts against Christianity because Christianity does not describe a God who prefers anonymity. 


Naturalism offers a simpler explanation for what we see. People inherit local religions, interpret private experiences through learned expectations, disagree sincerely, and sometimes call into the silence without receiving an answer.


That does not prove every religious experience is mistaken. It does suggest that our world looks more like one without a perfectly loving divine communicator than one governed by a God who wants every willing person to know him.





Sources


[1] Schellenberg, J. L. Divine Hiddenness and Human Reason. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1993. (affiliate link)


[2] Howard-Snyder, Daniel, and Adam Green. “Hiddenness of God.” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University.


[3] The Holy Bible, King James Version. Jeremiah 29:13; Matthew 7:7-8; Romans 1:18-20; James 2:19; James 4:8.


[4] Blanton, Andrew. “Non-resistant Non-belief Is Pervasive.” Religious Studies, published online October 28, 2025.


[5] Pew Research Center. “How the Global Religious Landscape Changed From 2010 to 2020.” June 9, 2025.


[6] Luhrmann, T. M. When God Talks Back: Understanding the American Evangelical Relationship with God. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2012. (affiliate link)


[7] Teeninga, Luke. “Divine Hiddenness, Greater Goods, and Accommodation.” Sophia 56 (2017): 589-603.


[8] Loke, Andrew Ter Ern. “An Evaluation of Schellenberg’s Arguments Regarding Divine Hiddenness and the No-Delay Condition Concerning Relationship with God.” Asian Journal of Philosophy 4 (2025), article 43.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Mormon Blood and the Esther Cohen-Tizer-Epstein Letter

With the recent release of nearly 3.5 million pages of the Epstein files, there have been several connections made regarding Jeffery Epstein paying tuition for several students at BYU. The most notable of which is presented in what is known as the Esther Cohen-Tizer-Epstien Letter.    Some are questioning the authenticity of the letter, but some clues seem to point us to a woman named   Esther Cohen .  Lets look at a few connections. Note that these connections are not an attempt at making any accusations and are simply connections made through publicly available information. I will be updating this page as I find more information. EFTA00129111  Reference to the Seven Bowls School of Nutrition From Esther's website: alchemyofnourishment.com (Update March 04, 2026: The site seems to have been taken down) She began studying nutrition as a teenager: Which also seems to align with her site. Alchemy of Nourishment Along with the claim of residing in Colorado Alc...

How the Book of Mormon Has Changed Since 1830

     Discussion of changes to the Book of Mormon often settles into two opposing claims: either the book has remained essentially unchanged since 1830, or later editors rewrote it beyond recognition. The reality is that both positions carry a bit of truth. Although the main narrative remains recognizable, the book has changed in several distinct ways. Its wording and grammar were revised in the early editions.⁶ , ⁷ The chapter and verse system was reorganized in 1879, while chapter summaries were added in 1920.¹⁹ Those summaries and other study aids were revised again in 2013 and 2025.²⁰ , ²¹ Following these changes in chronological order makes their differences easier to see. The history begins with dictation in 1829 and continues through the original and printer’s manuscripts, the 1830 printing, Joseph Smith’s revisions, and the later editorial committees that produced the modern edition. Tracing that sequence also makes it possible to distinguish changes to the script...

The "Mormon" Trademark is About to Expire

 The request for Mormon Stories to rebrand has spread quickly through Mormon spaces. Followers learned that om November 14th 2025, the LDS Church had reached out with claims that the podcast was infringing on the “Mormon” trademark. The demand leaned on the legal idea that the Church owns the word.  The request was shared on social media by @mormstories, but those posts seem to have been removed. Fortunately, copies of the email were  shared on reddit. But there is a significant detail sitting behind this entire dispute. The Church will have to renew the "Mormon" trademark in the 2026 to 2027 window.  Source: USPTO database When that time comes, they must prove that they still use the word “Mormon” in active commerce. USPTO rules are clear on this point. A trademark only survives if the owner can show that it is still printed on actual goods or services that are still being sold or distributed. The official guidelines spell it out at uspto.gov under “ Keeping your r...

Everything You Need to Know About the Salt Lake Temple

  The Salt Lake Temple will open to the public from April 5 through October 1, 2027, before it is rededicated and again restricted to Latter-day Saints with temple recommends. [2] Reservations opened on September 1, 2026, and one million tour spaces were claimed in less than 24 hours. [1] The Church describes the event as only the second public open house in the temple’s 134-year history. [2] The building visitors will enter is both old and substantially new. [12] [13] Construction began in 1853 and ended with the temple’s dedication in April 1893, but the interior has been altered repeatedly since then. [3] [20] The current renovation adds about 100,000 square feet of underground space, two baptistries instead of one, five instruction rooms, and 22 sealing rooms instead of 13. [12] The temple now rests on 98 base isolators about 20 feet below the structure, part of a seismic system designed to allow substantial horizontal movement during a major earthquake. [14] [24] The chan...

Candon Dahle to Marry After Child Abuse Conviction

Former BYU baseball player Candon Dahle is expected to marry this week, less than a year after receiving a plea deal that allowed him to avoid sex offender registration despite admitting guilt to two felony counts involving the abuse of a child. News of the wedding has reignited criticism online, where many argue Dahle's return to ordinary life has come far too quickly in light of the allegations against him.  The topic was recently discussed on Instagram by  @justinthenickofcrime View this post on Instagram A post shared by Justin (@justinthenickofcrime) Dahle first made headlines in February 2025 when he was charged in Fremont County, Idaho, with felony lewd conduct with a child under the age of 16. According to the probable cause affidavit summarized by East Idaho News , prosecutors alleged Dahle sexually abused an 11-year-old girl and covered her mouth during one of the assaults. Authorities also filed a separate juvenile case in neighboring Bing...

Mormon Stories Fires Back: The Core Defenses Against the LDS Lawsuit

In April 2026, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and its intellectual property arm, Intellectual Reserve, filed a federal lawsuit against the Open Stories Foundation and John Dehlin. The complaint alleges trademark infringement, copyright infringement, and consumer confusion arising from the use of the name Mormon Stories, its branding, and its use of Church-related images.      The Church portrays the case as a straightforward effort to protect its trademarks and prevent confusion among people seeking information about the faith. Mormon Stories sees the case very differently. In its response and counterclaim , the organization argues that the Church is attempting to claim ownership over a word that belongs to an entire religious movement while using intellectual property law against one of its most visible critics. Here are the major arguments at the center of the dispute.

Mormonism's Complicated History With Caffeine

Ask whether Latter-day Saints can drink caffeine and the current answer is yes. The Church’s own historical summary says caffeine has been “left to the judgment of individual Saints” and is not prohibited as a condition for receiving a temple recommend. [3] That answer is clearer today than it was for much of the twentieth century. Church leaders and publications repeatedly discussed caffeine as a drug, a poison, a potentially habit-forming substance, and at times as the apparent reason coffee and tea were objectionable. Some leaders extended that reasoning directly to cola drinks. In 1965, the First Presidency even told a bishop that decaffeinated coffee did not violate the Word of Wisdom and should not disqualify an otherwise worthy member from a temple recommend.[5] The result was a long period in which formal policy, medical explanation, and everyday Mormon culture did not always point in exactly the same direction. That history helps explain why older and younger Latter-day Saints...

No. The Mormon Church is Not Suddenly Opposed to Gambling

Almost immediately after President D. Todd Christofferson said, “Gambling is morally wrong,” during the October 2026 General Conference, the LDS apologetic account @allthoseinfavor reacted as though the Church had just drawn a new moral line on gambling. Which personally is a bit concerning, seeing as the account runs a podcast discussing all aspects of Mormonism, including the history of the church. So I find it hard to believe that they haven't ever encountered the anti-gambling position of the church in their studies. Christofferson’s talk was certainly timely. He described a world in which smartphones have made sports betting, casino-style games, and prediction markets available almost anywhere, and he warned against treating an occasional wager as harmless entertainment.[1] But the moral judgment itself was not new. In fact, the Church had used almost the same words more than a century earlier. In August 1908, Church President Joseph F. Smith addressed speculation and gambling...

John Corrill followed Joseph Smith for six years. This was his conclusion.

  John Corrill’s 1839 history is easy to quote as an anti-Mormon source. That misses what makes it useful. Corrill did not spend the early years of Joseph Smith’s movement standing outside it. He joined after trying to disprove it, defended the Saints against accusations he thought were false, served in church leadership, and eventually decided that the movement was a false religion. [1] [2] What changed his mind was a pattern which he had watched develop from the inside: failed plans, financial collapse, pressure against dissenters, escalating militancy, and promises of divine protection that always ended in disaster. [1] That makes Corrill’s story more useful than a simple hostile exposé. It records both why an intelligent early convert believed and why he later stopped believing. The complete 1839 text is available in the Lucifer’s Lantern Full Text Library, including Corrill’s own account of his conversion, church service, the Missouri conflict, and his final remarks to the S...

Mormonism and the Satanic Ritual Abuse Scare of the 1980s

       All right. So, for this post today, I’m going to be talking about a pretty sensitive subject. And that’s going to be satanic ritual abuse and potential ties to leadership of the Mormon church.      It should go without saying that this is going to be a little bit more of a sensitive subject. I’ll say up front that I have no intention of diving into specific examples—detailed descriptions of what satanic ritual abuse looks like—outside of broad definitions. My goal is just to give an idea of what makes ritual abuse a little bit different than regular abuse (for lack of a better word). Consider this your heads up that this is going to be a sensitive subject.      I typically wouldn’t really give this type of subject very much attention. I certainly never planned on making a post about it. But I did have an interesting conversation the other day with an LDS content creator that I message with sometimes. I was a little surprised whe...