while you and i are very close on this subject, there may remain one subtle, but important, difference.
we may agree on the verse's interpretation, and we may both agree that it is in fact true.
we may agree that, if this verse is true, then someone who has never read any bible should be able to come to the same conclusion. W/o ever having heard of the jewish or christian faiths, the verse says a person should be able to know god exists, has eternal power and a divine nature, and that, furthermore, that convicts them of wrongdoing.
I think where we may differ is that you seem quick to ascribe to atheists (as a representative group of all who deny the conclusions of rom 1:19-20) something that they would not ascribe to themselves.
But Rom 1:19-20 suggests that there is something in here that atheists
would would willing admit to. There's some personal knowledge on their part of the truth of god and the rejection of that truth. Something that atheist would self-report. So, if it's possible to construct a re-statement of rom 1:19-20 that atheists would sign up for, then i feel we've got a closer understanding of this verse.
Altho i must take into account 1:21 which says, in part, "their senseless hearts were darkened." So it may be that once someone rejects god, they lose the mental faculty to see the truth of where they have once been.
But i think we can account for that, too, w/ the right choice of words.
your word choice in your statement gave me some ideas:
tfbw wrote:
They describe this sense of awe as a numinous feeling, but they do not allow the feeling to give rise to belief in deities. Rather, they treat it as a pleasant intellectual curiosity: a nice sensation to have, but lacking any real consequence. (emphasis mine)
Not sure you gave those words as much attn when you wrote them as i'm giving them now. But they are action words, words expressing choice.
your words imply that there is some
natural tendency for the numinous feeling to give rise to deities. That the sensation of awe
naturally feels consequential.
Note it would be a very different thing to say "the sense of awe does not give rise to belief in deities" than to say "they dont allow the sense of awe give rise to belief in deities". The first phrasing does not support rom 1:19-20. The second does.
And i find it is consistent with what i see. the sense of awe appears to be a window to some greater other. One can recognize a pull from the other side of that window. Just as easily (or even more easily) one can dismiss the pull of that window, and rather re-interpret the window as no more than a picture, a representation of something that doesnt really exist.
With this we may be getting closer to something that atheists, even w/ their darkened hearts, might agree with.
So here's my take on a statement that atheists would willing sign their names to, and would yet support Rom 1:19-20:
Quote:
The experience of numinous awe in the human mind seems to draw one into the great beyond, but i reject that.