Rivendale, checking your phrase "epistemic distance theodicy"I find my thinking falls in that general realm but differs from your statement. I understand the freedom in question is opportunity to learn not just exercise something called faith. The distance referred to is the fact that evidence for god is not conclusive proof. You appear to equate lack of conclusive proof with lack of evidence. I think we learn about god and ourselves through exploration of living.Rivendale wrote: ↑Tue Mar 29, 2022 11:16 pmThe epistemic distance theodicy assumes this.huckelberry wrote: ↑Tue Mar 29, 2022 9:23 pmI am sure I have missed some counterexample sometime but the only people I recall proposing that "faith can only be true faith if you have no evidence" are agnostics or atheists.(to characterize believers)It is only within this framework of epistemic distance that it is possible for humans to genuinely have free will to exercise faith. For indeed, if God’s existence were undeniable, then faith would mean nothing and people would have no choice but to believe. Human persons cannot be free unless “placed at an epistemic distance”
If god produced the proof you are thinking of, whatever that could be, it would not give people the material to understand which God wishes us to develop. God would be stuck in the role of just being a big power over us.
God wants us to gain understanding through our relationships with each other and ourselves.(those being the active part of a relationship with God)
evidence, not proof, lies in these areas I think.
existence of people
existence of the marvel of order in the universe which produces thinking beings and a marvel of the natural world.
Revelation and inspiration both personal and communal. (these are more of a call to learn than a bunch of dogmas so yes they have left a wide range for different peoples contradictory understandings)