How often do we hear the critique, I cannot believe in a god that allows so much suffering to exist in the world. This statement actually expresses the thought that I can only believe in a god that thinks the way that I think (i.e. because I would end suffering if I were God). I confidently expect that such person knows his/her own unhinged psyche and would not accept a god who was so fallible. So the lead statement also expresses: I would not be a suitable god seeing that I am powerless to effect the change that I desire of the world. So this person wants a god that thinks as one human thinks, that does as one human would do, but wields power that no human will possess. If superhuman power is the litmus of God’s existence, then what inferior mortal may demand that the superior superhuman be made to prove its existence? That’s like a dog that demands its human master to prove superior intellect by speaking. Even if its human master indulged the dog, the dog would not comprehend the speech and thus not perceive the proof. A god whose ways were comprehensible to humans would be a god equal to humans, or worse, inferior to humans. Therefore, God cannot be perceived rationally by the human mind. That is why, in contrast to non-revealed religions, Christianity relies on faith which is “the evidence of things not seen” (Hebrews 11:1).
“For my thoughts are not your thoughts,
neither are your ways my ways,” declares the Lord.
“As the heavens are higher than the earth,
so are my ways higher than your ways
and my thoughts than your thoughts.”
Isaiah 55:8-9
We are as capable of understanding God’s reasons as we are capable of teaching advanced math to dogs and cats, chickens and ostriches, alligators and turtles. No matter how zealously we endeavor to teach them, their brains will never grasp an abstract greater than themselves. Neither will we.
I love this.
Thank you.