Honest Atheism?

[steve]

Jim,

Thanks for responding to me with an explanation. I still am bothered by the personal attacks, and I believe they mar your arguments as well as this thread. Paidion is a brother, and an older brother than you or me, which means that Paul tells us to address any disagreements that we may have with him in the manner that we would address "a father" (1 Tim.5:1).

I, too, have strong differences with Paidion about his view of the Old Testament—probably on just the same points that you are bothered by. However, I think it is too simplistic to say that his view is an outright denial of the Old Testament. He can speak for himself, but I believe he would agree to some kind of "inspiration" operating in the Old Testament writers. Paul does not specify exactly what "God-breathed" means (though we may assume we know). In any case, even if Paidion, or anyone else did require being "silenced" (as per the scripture you quoted), the scripture I cited tells how such confrontations should be conducted. I am not asking that you refrain from presenting strong arguments against anyone here with whose views you disagree. I am only saying that there is a bar of civility that we choose to maintain here, and that I would like for you and everyone else to honor it. I still enjoy coming to this forum. I don't want it to turn into a place I feel the need to avoid.

I think you asked me if I believe there are any honest atheists. SteveF answered quite agreeably with my own thoughts. But speaking only for myself, I really don't know every atheist, and as for the ones I do know, I cannot vouch for their total honesty or dishonesty. I really don't have a technique for reading minds that I can count on. I think your question really is, Do I think that the Bible teaches that all Atheists are dishonest? I do not think the Bible ever makes a sweeping statement encompassing all Atheists (I asked you to provide me with one that says all atheists formerly knew God, and I am still waiting). The closest to a general statement about atheists that I know of simply asserts that they are fools (Ps.14:1)—though it is stated more as a sweeping statement about fools than about atheists. In other words, it does not say, "He who says there is no God is a fool" (which would be a comment about atheists), but it says, "the fool has said in his heart there is no God" (which is a comment about fools). Whether a person can be an honest fool or not is another question, which I am not able to answer—since foolishness and dishonesty are not exactly identical concepts.

[darinhouston]

Jim, you have chosen to adhere stricly to (your understanding of) the narrow text of Titus 1:11 while failing to follow the larger principles in Matthew 18. This may explain the differences in how we approach Scripture.

I recognize this is not a traditional Christian "church meeting," with offices and the like, but it is in many ways the modern equivalent as a "micro-fellowship" of sorts, and so I do think that while we don't have established "positions" of eldership among us, the principles remain -- who is it that is failing to follow the rebuke of the "eldership" in this fellowship? is it Paidion? or is it yourself?

[darinhouston]

I believe I will sign off from this thread. I will gladly rejoin Jim or others on other topics in other topics.

[seer]

I, too, have strong differences with Paidion about his view of the Old Testament—probably on just the same points that you are bothered by. However, I think it is too simplistic to say that his view is an outright denial of the Old Testament. He can speak for himself, but I believe he would agree to some kind of "inspiration" operating in the Old Testament writers. Paul does not specify exactly what "God-breathed" means (though we may assume we know). In any case, even if Paidion, or anyone else did require being "silenced" (as per the scripture you quoted), the scripture I cited tells how such confrontations should be conducted. I am not asking that you refrain from presenting strong arguments against anyone here with whose views you disagree. I am only saying that there is a bar of civility that we choose to maintain here, and that I would like for you and everyone else to honor it. I still enjoy coming to this forum. I don't want it to turn into a place I feel the need to avoid.

Ok, perhaps I was a bit harsh, but I spend most of my online time debating atheists. And we don't need, nor should we see a "brother" in Christ giving them ammo by questioning the truthfulness of the OT. It's just wrong...

I think you asked me if I believe there are any honest atheists. SteveF answered quite agreeably with my own thoughts. But speaking only for myself, I really don't know every atheist, and as for the ones I do know, I cannot vouch for their total honesty or dishonesty. I really don't have a technique for reading minds that I can count on. I think your question really is, Do I think that the Bible teaches that all Atheists are dishonest? I do not think the Bible ever makes a sweeping statement encompassing all Atheists (I asked you to provide me with one that says all atheists formerly knew God, and I am still waiting). The closest to a general statement about atheists that I know of simply asserts that they are fools (Ps.14:1)—though it is stated more as a sweeping statement about fools than about atheists. In other words, it does not say, "He who says there is no God is a fool" (which would be a comment about atheists), but it says, "the fool has said in his heart there is no God" (which is a comment about fools). Whether a person can be an honest fool or not is another question, which I am not able to answer—since foolishness and dishonesty are not exactly identical concepts.

Then Steve, natural revelation my not be enough to show that God exists? The atheist may in fact have an excuse? Is that what you are suggesting? And back to Romans one:

18For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. 19For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. 20For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. 21For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened.

His divine nature has been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made, for what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them.This is clearly universal. Who escapes this revelation?

[RND]

Ok, perhaps I was a bit harsh, but I spend most of my online time debating atheists.

Why? How do you help draw 'atheists' to God by arguing and debating with them? I'd say that if you are being rightly called out by a Christian board regarding your approach towards those that should be considered brothers that maybe your approach with 'atheist' may cause more to rebel from God than to draw near to Him.

And we don't need, nor should we see a "brother" in Christ giving them ammo by questioning the truthfulness of the OT. It's just wrong...

How truthful do you consider the OT to be when you deny it's very instructions?

[mdh]

Jim,

Sorry to intrude into your conversation. I just wanted to say that I appreciate this forum because it allows for people with differing views to express those views (and the reasons they hold them) in an atmosphere of mutual respect. People of all views are allowed to express themselves as long as they do it without attacking those who disagree with them. I personally believe this should include Paidion, who I do not alway agree with, but I definitely appreciate what he has to say and he generally makes me stop and think and consider my own views. I do not wish to have him silenced. If you wish to disagree with him, please do. My desire is that you explain clearly and with humility why his views are wrong rather than try to silence him.

BTW: I agree with Steve G, that if the bible teaches anything about the status of the atheist, it is that he is foolish rather than that he is a liar. Perhaps this is what you meant by dishonest? I believe in the passage you are quoting (Romans 1) that it teaches that God's judgment on those who knew Him but failed to acknowledge Him as God was to give them over to their foolishness and allowed this to darken their hearts.

I would also like to mention that we should keep reading into chapter 2 for a warning about judging others. Sounds like we need to be very careful.

Blessings!
Mike

[seer]

I would like to know from the Christians in this discussion - where, if ever, do you draw the line? At what point would you question one's claim to being a Christian? Will you accept any false doctrine with grace? Does truth matter? Or does only behavior matter? If he's nice then it's all ok?

[steve]

[Posts are being added to this thread so rapidly that the following response is to a much earlier post of Seer's. In answer to your last post, Seer, you might be interested in this former discussion: http://www.wvss.com/forumc/viewtopic.ph ... essentials which is also found here: http://www.theos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=65&t=416]

Jim (Seer),

Seems to me that God has revealed Himself in nature very unmistakably—but then, I have not been taken-in by pseudoscientific evolutionary claims that "science" can now explain all these things. A simple-minded "fool" (Ps.14:1), when reading Dawkins' "The Blind Watchmaker," may be honestly deceived by his arguments (he is slick). Also, someone who believes that there is evidence for God in nature might feel that the evidence against God lies in other considerations—e.g., the presence of senseless evil and suffering in the world, the hypocrisy of everyone they have met who claims to have met God, etc. These are not really compelling reasons to reject theism, but a simple-minded soul might actually think that they are compelling.

Romans one, of course, never makes a single statement about "all atheists" nor "all unbelievers." It tells us of some people that God's wrath has been revealed against (Rom.1:18). I believe it is the unbelieving Jews (cf. 1Thess.2:16). He tells us several things about them that may or may not apply to every sinner (Paul does not indicate that they do apply to every sinner). The things he lays to their charge are:

1. God's wrath is revealed from heaven against them because of their suppression of the truth (v.18). The exact thing is said about the unbelieving Jews in 1 Thessalonians 2:15-16.

2. God revealed Himself to them (v.19)

3. They have seen in nature the evidence of His divine attributes (cf. Psalm 19:1-6)

3. They formerly knew God, but hated that knowledge, and did not honor Him (v.21). Compare Prov.1:29-30/ Mal.1:6

4. Their thoughts became futile and their hearts foolish and darkened (v.21) Compare Isaiah 44:25/Jer.10:8/ Rom.11:7

5. They "changed the glory" of God for idols (v.23) Compare Jeremiah 2:11

6. God "gave them up" to their own evil ways (vv.24, 26, 28) Compare Psalm 81:12

7. They exchanged the truth of God for "the lie" (v.25) Compare Isaiah 44:20

8. They began to indulge in every hedonistic practice, including homosexuality (vv.27, 29-31)

9. Though they ignored it, they knew the righteous judgment of God (v.32)

10. Paul tells the Jews that he is speaking about them (Rom.2:1, 17)

Thus, Paul, in making his case in Romans, tells us exactly who it is against whom he is making his case—unbelieving Israel. He describes their apostasy in terms drawn directly from their own prophets' denunciations of them, and then tells them directly that they are the culprits he is describing. He is not telling us anything about other unbelievers (though he may well have had a similar opinion of some of them as well). The point is, nothing resembling exegesis can make Romans 1 to be a description of humanity in general.

When I tried to point these obvious facts out to Dr. White, he apparently felt that he was about to lose one of his primary proofs for total depravity, and refused to continue the dialogue on the passage. He insisted on jumping to Romans 3 (which he similarly misunderstands), rather than dealing with Paul's actual words in the passage under consideration (such cross-referencing is a practice that he abhors when non-Calvinists do it—like cross-referencing John 17:6 with John 6:37). Ironically, the only way to properly understand Romans 3 is to follow Paul's earlier argument up to that point, which means understanding first what case he is making in chapter one.

In any case, I will invite you (as I invited Dr. White, though he declined the invitation) to show me something in Romans 1 that speaks of all unbelievers. I am beginning to think no such evidence is going to be presented (of course, I knew that before extending the invitation).

[RND]

I would like to know from the Christians in this discussion - where, if ever, do you draw the line? At what point would you question one's claim to being a Christian?

Where are we as Christians told to "draw the line?" Our job is to keep the commandments of Christ; love our God, and love our neighbor with true agape love. That's not always easy, especially apart from the Holy Spirit.

Jim, have you ever asked yourself why Jesus never required anyone to repent and say the "sinner's prayer" before healing them?

Will you accept any false doctrine with grace? Does truth matter? Or does only behavior matter? If he's nice then it's all ok?

Is it your job to plant seeds or harvest the crop?

[seer]

[Posts are being added to this thread so rapidly that the following response is to a much earlier post of Seer's. In answer to your last post, Seer, you might be interested in this former discussion: http://www.wvss.com/forumc/viewtopic.ph ... essentials which is also found here: http://www.theos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=65&t=416]

Jim (Seer),

Seems to me that God has revealed Himself in nature very unmistakably—but then, I have not been taken-in by pseudoscientific evolutionary claims that "science" can now explain all these things. A simple-minded "fool" (Ps.14:1), when reading Dawkins' "The Blind Watchmaker," may be honestly deceived by his arguments (he is slick). Also, someone who believes that there is evidence for God in nature might feel that the evidence against God lies in other considerations—e.g., the presence of senseless evil and suffering in the world, the hypocrisy of everyone they have met who claims to have met God, etc. These are not really compelling reasons to reject theism, but a simple-minded soul might actually think that they are compelling.

Romans one, of course, never makes a single statement about "all atheists" nor "all unbelievers." It tells us of some people that God's wrath has been revealed against (Rom.1:18). I believe it is the unbelieving Jews (cf. 1Thess.2:16). He tells us several things about them that may or may not apply to every sinner (Paul does not inticate that they do apply to every sinner). The things he lays to their charge are:

1. God's wrath is revealed from heaven against them because of their suppression of the truth (v.18). The exact thing is said about the unbelieving Jews in 1 Thessalonians 2:15-16.

2. God revealed Himself to them (v.19)

3. They have seen in nature the evidence of His divine attributes (cf. Psalm 19:1-6)

3. They formerly knew God, but hated that knowledge, and did not honor Him (v.21). Compare Prov.1:29-30/ Mal.1:6

4. Their thoughts became futile and their hearts foolish and darkened (v.21) Compare Isaiah 44:25/Jer.10:8/ Rom.11:7

5. They "changed the glory" of God for idols (v.23) Compare Jeremiah 2:11

6. God "gave them up" to their own evil ways (vv.24, 26, 28) Compare Psalm 81:12

7. They exchanged the truth of God for "the lie" (v.25) Compare Isaiah 44:20

8. They began to indulge in every hedonistic practice, including homosexuality (vv.27, 29-31)

9. Though they ignored it, they knew the righteous judgment of God (v.32)

10. Paul tells the Jews that he is speaking about them (Rom.2:1, 17)

Thus, Paul, in making his case in Romans, tells us exactly who it is against whom he is making his case—unbelieving Israel. He describes their apostasy in terms drawn directly from their own prophets' denunciations of them, and then tells them directly that they are the culprits he is describing. He is not telling us anything about other unbelievers (though he may well have had a similar opinion of some of them as well). The point is, nothing resembling exegesis can make Romans 1 to be a description of humanity in general.

When I tried to point these obvious facts out to Dr. White, he apparently felt that he was about to lose one of his primary proofs for total depravity, and refused to continue the dialogue on the passage. He insisted on jumping to Romans 3 (which he similarly misunderstands), rather than dealing with Paul's actual words in the passage under consideration (such cross-referencing is a practice that he abhors when non-Calvinists do it—like cross-referencing John 17:6 with John 6:37). Ironically, the only way to properly understand Romans 3 is to follow Paul's earlier argument up to that point, which means understanding first what case he is making in chapter one.

In any case, I will invite you (as I invited Dr. White, though he declined the invitation) to show me something in Romans 1 that speaks of all unbelievers. I am beginning to think no such evidence is going to be presented (of course, I knew that before extending the invitation).

Steve you seem to be hedging a bit. Do you believe that there are honest atheists? That they really do have an excuse? I understand your point on Romans one, but I think you clearly limit it's scope: "For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse."

God invisible attributes have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world. Steve can you tell me of any peoples that escape this revelation? Even if Paul is not specifically dealing with all unbelievers (which I believe he is) this revelation can not be limited to the Jewish people. It is clearly universal and natural, and goes back to the creation of the world.

And in Romans one Paul goes on the say these people are practicing idol worship and homosexuality - are you saying that these behaviors were wide spread in the Israel of Paul's day? And since the Jews had the light of the Torah and scripture in general I doubt that he would be making a case about natural revelation to the Jews.