Signs Of God?

Started by Storm3 pages

Signs Of God?

Theists claim to find signs and evidence of God all around us: in trees, clouds, and in life itself. However, are such interpretations of nature reliable enough to take very seriously? After all, unless we know what we mean by God, how can we justifiably say that something is a "sign" of God, rather than a "sign" of something else entirely?

Different people will turn to different things they believe in, supernaturally.

These "signs" are nothing but signs of something exterior. To assume that it is God would be a personal assumption.

I suppose one should establish what the nature of God is first. However this is impossible because one cannot collect evidence which are observable, for something which by nature cannot be observed.

Thus the signs are elevant to what you deem as God.

For me, for example, God is Universe itself and everything in it, including ourselves.
For someone else God is a woman warrior. For someone else it is Jesus, for another person it is a being without a form, for someone else it is an Alien, or another person it might be nature, for someone else is something entirely different.

That is the beauty of Theism. Noone can tell you what God is. God is whatever YOU want it to be.

God: the Ultimate Rorschach Test. You see what you want/need to see.

Actually, I've often wondered: if a being with powers appeared before me and claimed to be God, what test could I ask it to do to validate its claim? After all, any technology sufficiently advanced is indistinquishible from magic. Heck, it could even be just a master of illusion.

On the other hand, wouldn't God's Presence be "obvious," ie, you would "just know it"? Personally, I couldn't tell ya.

Re: Signs Of God?

Originally posted by Storm
Theists claim to find signs and evidence of God all around us: in trees, clouds, and in life itself. However, are such interpretations of nature reliable enough to take very seriously? After all, unless we know what we mean by God, how can we justifiably say that something is a "sign" of God, rather than a "sign" of something else entirely?

I tend to find theists a bit more rational and logical than atheists when presenting their views, particularly since the former's beliefs aren't limited to man's perceptions of the natural world.

Re: Re: Signs Of God?

Originally posted by Thundar
I tend to find theists a bit more rational and logical than atheists when presenting their views, particularly since the former's beliefs aren't limited to man's perceptions of the natural world.

That was a not a rational or logical statement.

I see evidence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster in the trees, clouds and in life itself. It's all around us.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
I see evidence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster in the trees, clouds and in life itself. It's all around us.

Cool.

It's so bootylicious.

I see signs that contradict him everywhere... Like my appendix.

Why should God speak to us in signs, when he or she could make its presence known to us directly ?

Signs are actually generally kept for those who believe which is something I have always found very interesting. Jesus would not perform miracles for those that would not believe and so the verse:
"We live by faith, not be sight".

Originally posted by Dusty
Different people will turn to different things they believe in, supernaturally.

These "signs" are nothing but signs of something exterior. To assume that it is God would be a personal assumption.

Yes, the "signs" are so badly detailed, they could be anything. Same with astrological patterns.

Originally posted by Nellinator
Signs are actually generally kept for those who believe which is something I have always found very interesting. Jesus would not perform miracles for those that would not believe and so the verse:
"We live by faith, not be sight".

The idea of hidden knowledge is for the realm of the occult. Are you saying that Christianity is an occult?

Its not hidden knowledge though. And CHristianity would be a cult not an occult if it was 😛

Originally posted by Lord Urizen
Why should God speak to us in signs, when he or she could make its presence known to us directly ?
Because what I would call god is bigger than words.....One just has to see. I get signs all the time to my certain questions. I meditate and ask for a sign. If I get it, it's yes, if I don't then it's no...I ask yes or no questions....Simple. It's quite amazing actually....And since I am not a Christian and get signs who or what is answering me? I would suppose that it is what IS and it doesn't have a name and as I've said we are all part of this IT, or universe and each other......This is why I believe people should be good to each other because we are PART of each other and when people realize that hurting someone or something is also indirectly hurting yourself......cause and effect, sowing and reaping...then people will be more mindful of their own thoughts and actions....They are powerful. Thoughts though many don't think so are VERY powerful...

Thoughts are the beginning of creation which could even be put into Biblical words as "The word spoke and it was." Jesus also taught that IF one had the faith of a mustard seed then one could tell the mountain to throw its self into the sea. Faith equals the power of a thought in action. This is why there are miracles of all faiths and beliefs. It's the intent of the thought about the wanted action. Seeing it as done, and so it is. The problem with this is that most don't realize this and more radical people do such as religious fanatics...Their thoughts/faith are so strong that it can produce actions as in Quantum physics, but it's their strong belief that does so...That's what does it for them. Most people have the same potential yet don't realize it. It's not religion, it only part of the creative process instituted from the start.........Oh, and if we are made in gods image then we are also part of this.

Re: Re: Re: Signs Of God?

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
That was a not a rational or logical statement.

I think for one to call themselves rationale and logical, they'll be open to considering all of the positions presented before them, regardless of whether or not these positions are based on the natural or supernatural.

Strict atheists are limited to just explaining life by using the natural world, while even the strictest theists will acknowledge some natural explanations of the world around them.

and really strict theist will ignore all natural explanations for the world and just say "it was God". There are gradations in everything.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
and really strict theist will ignore all natural explanations for the world and just say "it was God". There a gradations for everything.

The hypothesis taken by the strict theistic scientist is "I know God did it, but now I want to know how he did it"...while the strict atheist scientist's position is "God didn't do it, but I know nature can tell me who/what did."

So technically speaking the theist is correct, which is why history has generally demonstrated theists to be the more revolutionary scientists. If one wants to get a complete and correct answer to a problem, then logically..they first need to start with a correct premise.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Signs Of God?

Originally posted by Thundar
I think for one to call themselves rationale and logical, they'll be open to considering all of the positions presented before them, regardless of whether or not these positions are based on the natural or supernatural.

Strict atheists are limited to just explaining life by using the natural world, while even the strictest theists will acknowledge some natural explanations of the world around them.

Don't be so open minded that your brain falls out. 😄