I have written little of metaphysical aspects of truth, perhaps due to its complexity especially in terms of answering the question: Is there a God? Having read some Kierkegaard lately, I have reflected on the issue of the lack of concrete evidence in terms of the proposed and supposed omnipotent being and it would seem that if such a being did exist, It should have no qualms of manifesting Itself for the sake of its creatures. The argument goes that because It does not show Itself, It cannot exist or It does not care and therefore, we have no obligation nor prerogative to practice faith. I will not endeavour to prove Its existence, but rather to reflect on scenarios in the event that such a being were supposed to exist.
It occurs to me that if such a being chose to reveal Itself in all Its power to the limited human mind but in such a way as to be comprehended, we would have no choice but to fulfill our obligations to It, knowing it is our alpha and omega, as it were, in terms of existence. It would seem the motive for such an unquestionable revelation of authority would be to demand servitude or manipulation in some form, whether cruel or neutral we cannot say. In any case, such a Being would have a very immanent, but dominant role among its creatures, forcing them to a robotic nature in their actions due to the constant revelation of the cosmological being.
Now I turn to my Kierkegaard. Suppose then this Being chose to not reveal itself for the motive of not exhausting the limited human mind or out of a desire to be honoured and respected by the free choice of its creatures, perhaps even loved (both cases assume the Being’s concern with Its creatures’ welfare). In such a case, the Being hazards doubt, rejection, and dishonour by its creatures, but at the same time, true honour and love cannot be forced. Why such a Being should want or need to be loved or hazard such doubt for the free choice of Its creatures is beyond reason essentially, but to illustrate this mystery, Kierkegaard often compared faith to one who was violently in love. For example, there are cases where a girl may ask her boyfriend why he loves her, but he honestly cannot tell her why. Though he gives her no concrete reason for his love, should she doubt it exists? It would appear that the actions or motives of such a higher being could not be rationally justifiable nor comprehensible by the human mind and here is where our frustration lies for those of us who love to explain phenomena through the senses and scientific observation.
Therefore, if we posit that a higher being does exist in this reality, we must assume that the second scenario is a possibility, whereas the first is obviously not the case.