John Hick ,that everyready rationalizer^, rationalizes why people might not find God with his epistemic distance argument that God has made ambiguous the evidence for Him. No, no ambuguity can exist,because as Lamberth’s teleonomic argument notes, no divine intent exists for Him to do so!
Anyway, why would it matter were their clear evidence for His very existence. Hick claims that such would overwhelm oour free wills. Not necessarily,because people could still ignore Him. That is what could count were it not for the fact that He would have no claim over us for us to worship Him anyway as we are free beings! Hick, advanced theologian, cannot comprehend that!
Faith doth that to people!
God would also not have the right to punish us but instead would have put us in the first place in a safer place forever- that one-way street that Fr.Meslier’s the problem of Heaven makes.
Hick claims that we need God for salvation from our self-centerdness, but, no, no evidence suggests that as the religious have that problem themselves- and he knows that!
We hardly need divine intent to overcome that, because we can draw on our inner resources to get through life anyway! That is just what those who claim that faith in Him gets them to do – He being a crutch, placebo or inspiration.
Thus, not only is Strato right about not using divine intent in science but also in other matters!