Uploaded June 2022 | Updated September 2026, 6 days ago
0:00 Introduction
01:40 How did you get interested in the Problem of Divine Hiddenness?
03:16 The Main Argument from Hiddenness
05:48 Defense of Premise 1 of the Argument from Hiddenness
09:28 First thought experiment (Turing Chat Room) that attempts to provide a counterexample to Premise 4
11:36 Two possible rebuttals to the Turing Chat room thought experiment
13:30 Second thought experiment (Hallucination Scenario) that attempts to provide a counterexample to Premise 4
15:29 Possible rebuttals to the Hallucination scenario thought experiment
19:18 Responses to the fictional character rebuttal
21:16 What is the weaker claim of Premise 1 of the Argument from Hiddenness?
23:44 How do you respond to the weaker claim of Premise 1
28:41 How do you respond to the third claim of Premise 1 - belief significantly increases the chance of a personal relationship?
31:20 Second Response to Schellenberg’s Problem of Divine Hiddenness argument
37:52 Other philosophers’ responses to the Problem of Divine Hiddenness
41:33 How to interpret Matthew 27:46?
46:28 If belief isn’t required for a relationship with God, what are the implications for someone’s salvation or saving faith in God?
53:53 Conclusion
In this interview, Dr. Andrew Cullison (a professor of philosophy at the University of Cincinnati) lays out two unique solutions to Schellenberg's Problem of Divine Hiddenness. His first solution attacks the assumption that belief is required to have a personal relationship with God. His second solution casts doubt on the claim that the greatest good is a personal relationship with God. For more on Dr. Cullison's arguments, check out his paper linked below.
philpapers.org/rec/CULTST
For more on Dr. Cullison, check out his website:
andrewcullison.com
Please consider becoming a patron. Go to patreon.com/theanalyticchristian
For merch and more, go to theanalyticchristian.com
0:00 Introduction
01:40 How did you get interested in the Problem of Divine Hiddenness?
03:16 The Main Argument from Hiddenness
05:48 Defense of Premise 1 of the Argument from Hiddenness
09:28 First thought experiment (Turing Chat Room) that attempts to provide a counterexample to Premise 4
11:36 Two possible rebuttals to the Turing Chat room thought experiment
13:30 Second thought experiment (Hallucination Scenario) that attempts to provide a counterexample to Premise 4
15:29 Possible rebuttals to the Hallucination scenario thought experiment
19:18 Responses to the fictional character rebuttal
21:16 What is the weaker claim of Premise 1 of the Argument from Hiddenness?
23:44 How do you respond to the weaker claim of Premise 1
28:41 How do you respond to the third claim of Premise 1 - belief significantly increases the chance of a personal relationship?
31:20 Second Response to Schellenberg’s Problem of Divine Hiddenness argument
37:52 Other philosophers’ responses to the Problem of Divine Hiddenness
41:33 How to interpret Matthew 27:46?
46:28 If belief isn’t required for a relationship with God, what are the implications for someone’s salvation or saving faith in God?
53:53 Conclusion
In this interview, Dr. Andrew Cullison (a professor of philosophy at the University of Cincinnati) lays out two unique solutions to Schellenberg's Problem of Divine Hiddenness. His first solution attacks the assumption that belief is required to have a personal relationship with God. His second solution casts doubt on the claim that the greatest good is a personal relationship with God. For more on Dr. Cullison's arguments, check out his paper linked below.
philpapers.org/rec/CULTST
For more on Dr. Cullison, check out his website:
andrewcullison.com
Please consider becoming a patron. Go to patreon.com/theanalyticchristian
For merch and more, go to theanalyticchristian.com
