Q&A: Why Does God Need Ambiguity Regarding His Existence?
Why Does God Need Ambiguity Regarding His Existence?
Question
If God's purpose was to put us to a test of following His instructions in the face of our inclinations—a test of loyalty—or, according to Rabbi Kook's theory, to cause us to strive to improve ourselves, that still doesn't explain why His existence is not more openly apparent to us.
If we knew for certain that God exists and wants certain things from us, we could face a real test: would we follow His instructions blindly, or would we give in to our urges?
Answers like “ask Him” are a bit odd, because you do use intuitions about Him—for example, when you argue that someone who creates something probably wants something, you are assuming that God has a mode of thought similar to ours: when human beings create something, they want that thing to serve some purpose. From that you infer that if God created a world, then He wants something from it. But when it comes to questions like the one I'm asking, to then say that this cannot be assumed is a bit of an evasion.
Answer
I make reasonable assumptions about Him, including assumptions drawn from our world. But when there is evidence that those assumptions are not correct, I have no problem with that.
Beyond that, the assumption that if someone does something, he has a purpose is much stronger and more universal than the assumption that someone who wants to be worshipped should not leave ambiguity.
And finally, in my view there is no ambiguity. The ambiguity is a result of inclination and tendentiousness. To my mind, it is obvious that God exists.
Discussion on Answer
Indeed. But you were talking about the ambiguity regarding His existence. That ambiguity is resolved through interpretation.
You wrote that you make assumptions about the Holy One, blessed be He, including assumptions drawn from our world.
1. As for the idea that He acts for a purpose—isn't that a genuine insight that stands on its own even without assumptions drawn from our world (it doesn't seem reasonable that one would create a world for no purpose at all)?
2. Why is it possible at all to draw assumptions from our world about Him, and why assume that the Holy One, blessed be He, acts similarly to human beings? If a human being is composed of good and evil, would it then be reasonable to say that the Holy One, blessed be He, is also composed of good and evil?
Sometimes the world is a source of inspiration for a priori insights. Insights that do not depend specifically on human nature can also be applied to other beings. The discussion here is too general and therefore pointless. If there is something specific, ask about it.
I'm asking about your claim that if God created a world, then He probably has a purpose, and about that you wrote that you draw this from our world, where human beings act that way too. So I'm asking:
1. Is this a claim that rests only on the fact that human beings and the world work this way, or can one say that it is a good claim regardless of the world—that if He created, then He probably wants something?
2. If the world works this way, how do you know that God works this way too?
I answered that it is a good claim in itself, even if we drew it from experience in the world.
But surely there is still great ambiguity about what He wants from us?!