“Hard wired” does not equal free will. It’s really just that simple.
I think the better answer is that He didn’t because it wouldn’t achieve the affect of ensuring no one would choose against Him, and it would also diminish our ability to chose Him freely.
We know that absolute knowledge of God wouldn’t remove our free will because the Angels had absolute knowledge of Him, and some of them still chose to reject Him. That being said, it
would slightly diminish the freedom of choice.
To the OP, my personal opinion on the matter is that it’s because our love given in faith is superior to a love given through knowledge. If we KNOW He exists, then there is no faith, only knowledge. While that knowledge can result in a positive type of love, I would argue that the love given through faith is the greater love. If we love Him more, then He is able to reciprocate to a greater degree.
Ultimately, those who attain the Beatific Vision through faith will have a greater capacity to love God than had they simple made a choice based on their knowledge of Him. In short, the gain (a greater love for God) is greater than what is lost (the temporal knowledge of His existence.) Even if this choice of faith over knowledge produces an infinitesimally small increase in our capacity to love Him, those who do so will be loving Him for eternity, so it will amount to a literally-infinite increase in our love for Him.
In response to the argument that if more people know Him, more people will chose Him, I wold point out that this is not necessarily true, and what evidence we do have on the subject actually contradicts that assumption.
All throughout scripture there have been people who know God in the absolute sense. Adam and Eve are a prime example of this. They knew God existed beyond any shadow of a doubt, and yet they still chose to sin. Similarly, let’s look at the Apostles. Judas Iscariot knew all that the other Apostles knew, he saw the same miracles, heard all the same teachings, and yet he still chose to reject Jesus. Consider Kings Saul, David, and Solomon. Each of them knew God intimately. They spoke with Him regularly at at least one point in their lives. Yet, of the three of them, two fell into grievous sin, and suffered greatly for it. There are many, many other examples of people who have direct knowledge of God’s existence ultimately seeming to reject Him.
So, what are we to make of this? Simply that knowledge of God does not increase the likelihood that someone will choose God.
What
does that knowledge do?
It increases our culpability and our obligation to God.
Jesus Himself says that had He never preached, the people who rejected Him would not have sinned; however, since He did preach, their sin remains. (I apologize, I cannot remember the specific verse. Can someone help me out here?) This shows us that a greater degree of knowledge results in a greater obligation and culpability. (“To whom much is given, much will be expected.”). If it is the case that simply
hearing the word of God makes us liable to judgment if we reject it, how much more severe would the punishment be if we KNOW God and still reject Him?
Taking all this into account, I would say that God’s decision not to make Himself absolutely know to us is more a gift than a curse. It allows those who do come to Him to have a greater love for Him, and it spares those who reject Him of an even greater eternal torment.
Edit: Ooh, this is post #5,000 for me. i think this is a pretty good on to hit a round number like that one. Woohoo!
