The
Analogy Argument
1.
A
loving mother would not be hidden from her child in circumstances like those
mentioned if she could help it because: (a) A loving mother would consider each of her child’s serious requests important and seek to provide a quick response.
(b) A loving mother would wish to spare her child needless trauma, or, more positively, woud wish to foster her child’s physical and emotional well-being.
(c) A loving mother would seek to avoid encouraging in her child false or misleading thoughts about herself or about their relationship.
(d) A loving mother would want personal interaction with her child whenever possible, for the joy it brings as well as for its own sake.
(e) A loving mother would miss her child if separated from her.
2. In the actual world, there are circumstances involving God/seeker very similar to those mentioned in the mother/child stories.
3. God would not be hidden from any of God’s children (i.e., all human beings) in circumstances like those mentioned if God could help it because:
(a) God would consider each serious request submitted by any of God’s human children important and seek to provide a quick response.
(b) God would wish to spare all human beings needless trauma, or, more positively, woud wish to foster their physical and emotional well-being.
(c) God would seek not to encourage in any human being false or misleading thoughts about God or about the divine-human relationship.
(d) God would want personal interaction with all human beings whenever possible, for the joy it brings as well as for its own sake.
(e) God would miss such personal interaction if it were absent.
4. God is hidden from many human beings.
5. If (1)-(4), then either God does not exist or God can’t help but be hidden.
6. Therefore, either God does not exist or God can’t help but be hidden. (1-5)
7. But God can help but be hidden.
8. Therefore, God does not exist. (6, 7)
Shellenberg entertains a number of objections to this argument. He replies to those objections. Which of these objections do you think is most compelling? What do you make of his reply (or replies) to that objection? Are there better objections to The Analogy Argument that Shellenberg doesn't consider? What are they? How might he reply?
Enjoy a good, rigorous discussion of this argument. Be sure to interact with each other.
