Honest Atheism?

[seer]

I thought I would post this in general questions rather than the atheist thread. A few proof texts first:

Ps.19
The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork. Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge. There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard. Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world.

Acts 14:

But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard this, they tore their clothes and ran in among the multitude, crying out and saying, “Men, why are you doing these things? We also are men with the same nature as you, and preach to you that you should turn from these useless things to the living God, who made the heaven, the earth, the sea, and all things that are in them, who in bygone generations allowed all nations to walk in their own ways. Nevertheless He did not leave Himself without witness, in that He did good, gave us rain from heaven and fruitful seasons, filling our hearts with food and gladness.

Rom.1

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened.

It seems clear that all men do know God at some level, so does that exclude there being an "honest" atheist? Can such a person exist?

[Paidion]

In ancient days, the explanation of the Universe, and of natural processes, was to propose a God, or a number of gods who created the universe and nature.

In our day, evolutionary theory, both terrestial and celestial, is thought to be an adequate explanation. So yes, it would seem that there are many honest atheists.

[seer]

In ancient days, the explanation of the Universe, and of natural processes, was to propose a God, or a number of gods who created the universe and nature.

In our day, evolutionary theory, both terrestial and celestial, is thought to be an adequate explanation. So yes, it would seem that there are many honest atheists.

Paidion, why do you always seem to side against scripture? Are you a stealth atheist? Anyways, your point just doesn't follow, many greeks of Paul's day believed the universe was eternal - did that give them an excuse to deny their maker? No - just as invented man made theories of today offer no excuse.

[TK]

I think Paidion's answer is absolutely correct.

The scripture says that God makes himself known through nature. Granted.

Honest atheists consider this evidence, find it lacking, and move on to scientific explanations.

The scripture does not say that people automoatically BELIEVE the natural evidence; simply that there is evidence. For example, a jury can disregard evidence if there is better evidence to consider. Of course I dont think this way when it comes to God, but some people do.

Seer, your comment about Paidion always siding against scripture is condescending at best and nasty at worst.

TK

[Jill]

.

[seer]

I think Paidion's answer is absolutely correct.

The scripture says that God makes himself known through nature. Granted.

Honest atheists consider this evidence, find it lacking, and move on to scientific explanations.

The scripture does not say that people automoatically BELIEVE the natural evidence; simply that there is evidence. For example, a jury can disregard evidence if there is better evidence to consider. Of course I dont think this way when it comes to God, but some people do.

Seer, your comment about Paidion always siding against scripture is condescending at best and nasty at worst.

TK

Scripture says so that they are without excuse, because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God,

They know God, not that they find "evidence" lacking. And yes, I do find Paidion often siding against scripture. He should know better.

[Jill]

.

[seer]

I find Paidion "THINKING" and "REASONING", and "my church" would never shame him for doing so, and neither would I. Seer- you should know better.

If Paidion's thinking and reasoning leads him away from the great truths of scripture then it is vain and futile. He has set his own fallible understanding above divine revelation. That can never be a good thing...

[darinhouston]

I find Paidion "THINKING" and "REASONING", and "my church" would never shame him for doing so, and neither would I. Seer- you should know better.

I agree fully.

If Paidion's thinking and reasoning leads him away from the great truths of scripture then it is vain and futile. He has set his own fallible understanding above divine revelation. That can never be a good thing...

This is unfortunately a fairly typical Reformed manner of dealing with those who hold different doctrine. I have always respected the way Jim seems to seek truth above all else but has trouble making it over this doctrinal hump. But, it is just unfair to say you side against Scripture simply because they disagree with you. Its a pretty proud position to say you're so certain with a scriptural understanding that someone who sees it differently is against the scripture. If we go down that road, I would have to say that it is the Calvinist that puts their fallible understanding above divine revelation. You really should know better than this.

As for the merits of the point being discussed -- I don't think "know" in this regard has to imply what you are implying, Jim. One accepted definition of ginosko is to "know about" "have knowledge of" or "understand." From the context, it seems to be saying to me that they knew about God enough to be judged in their failure to glorify Him. There are definitely degrees of "knowing" and familiarity -- if someone truly knew God the way I do, they would glorify Him, but I don't think this verse means they know Him in this way.

[seer]

I have always respected the way Jim seems to seek truth above all else but has trouble making it over this doctrinal hump. But, it is just unfair to say you side against Scripture simply because they disagree with you.Its a pretty proud position to say you're so certain with a scriptural understanding that someone who sees it differently is against the scripture.

You can respect a man who denies scripture, I choose not to. I suppose you respect the cults too...

If we go down that road, I would have to say that it is the Calvinist that puts their fallible understanding above divine revelation. You really should know better than this.

Get real Darin, what other false teaching will you accept? Pass on? I don't put my trust in my fallible understanding - I put my trust in Revelation and God's ability to communicate those truths to my mind.