I think we might have talked about this earlier. I'm inclined to a Platonism that understands the world such that God is manifest in the very fact that anything is. So for me I simply dismiss the argument out of hand, for by God I mean 'being' and being is the most present of all.

Thus I simply have to explain atheism- which is a kind of confusion -and the origin of the argument- which is a confusion between two ways of knowing. I suspect I would have to argue that we know God as we know the law of non-contradiction or the very presence of the world, not as a deductive or inductive inference but as directly seen by the intellect. The reason that this argument can occur if because people confuse looking for the evidence of special acts of God- miracles, special creation, the intelligent design of creation -for looking for God himself.

While the above two respones may be legitimate, I'm not sure they'd be very satisfying to those not already committed to theism. I think an approach that attempts to meet the objection rather than dismiss it is more helpful. My answer would be to say that God loves humanity, and that means that he wants our ultimate good and to be in union with us (and since he is the good, to be in union with him is our ultimate good). But to be in union with God, to love him, requires a great deal more than just knowing he exists. Were he more obviously present we might in our sinfulness find him overbearing and chafe at his presence, or we might flee in terror and shame from his holiness. Neither reaction would advance God's desire for our good, and thus he chooses instead to speak to us through his prophets, his Word, his Church, and his Spirit.

Mark wrote:

While the above two respones may be legitimate, I'm not sure they'd be very satisfying to those not already committed to theism.

I agree but the conclusion I suggest one ought to draw from this is that Divine Hiddenness is only a problem if we have no intendent prior reasons for thinking God exists i.e. theistic proofs.

Mark wrote:

I think an approach that attempts to meet the objection rather than dismiss it is more helpful. My answer would be to say that God loves humanity, and that means that he wants our ultimate good and to be in union with us (and since he is the good, to be in union with him is our ultimate good). But to be in union with God, to love him, requires a great deal more than just knowing he exists.

The standard response to the reply that God remains hidden because he wants humans to choose Him freely is how can one be expected to choose freely if one has no knowledge of the veracity and nature of what one is choosing? That can be partly answered with the above though.

This relates to what you say later on in your post but if we could see, not just know but see, God's existence then I don't think earthly human existence would even be possible; in fact drawing on the Platonic tradition I would say our 'humanly' existence just is our being in a metaxic state.