Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Originally posted by Thundar
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."


No, extreme thesists don't want to know whats not in the bible. Thats why extreme right-wing christians deny evolution.

Besides both arguments are identical you're ignoring the extremes that theim can go to (just look at some of marchello's posts).

Originally posted by Thundar

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.

Technically the theist is correct. But in the real world he's wrong.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
No, extreme thesists don't want to know whats not in the bible. Thats why extreme right-wing christians deny evolution.



Besides both arguments are identical you're ignoring the extremes that theim can go to (just look at some of marchello's posts).



Technically the theist is correct. But in the real world he's wrong.

Being strict and being extreme are definitely two different things. However, even if both scientists were extremists..the theistic one will still possess the more complete and beneficial position.

As physical beings we live in a physical world. So logically there are some natural things one has to accept while living within it. For example, one has to eat each day if they want to continue living. Both scientists are forced to accept this obvious natural truth.

But what happens when all food resources have been exhausted for both individuals, and there are no natural, artificial, or technological ways to replace these resources?

The theist can pray to his God to give him more food
(of course we're obviously assuming that God exists within this scenario). Unfortunately the atheist must immediately resign his life as just another one taken away, due to the logical pecking order of nature.

Extremism is something that I don't advocate. But it is quite glaringly apparent that a theistic view of the world..is generally the most logical, rational, beneficial and complete one.

Originally posted by Nellinator
Signs are actually generally kept for those who believe which is something I have always found very interesting.

I don't find it interesting. I find it convenient. Convenient and illogical.

God's Sign is actually a drawing of a penis inside a vagina. Thats how God create life.

wrong, one have to eat occasionally

or the atheist just steal whatever food given to the believer by this god that we obvious assume exists.......man what a piss ass lousy example you came up with here

so god created life by a drawing and not action then

Originally posted by finti


so god created life by a drawing and not action then

"Its a Sign and Sign is just a drawing. But the action is an act of and the manifestation of the Sign. Thus creating life."

Holy Scriptures of Orgasmism. Chapter 69 Clause 53X

well a 69 wont create life nor will a Chevy 57, but it might lead to and help towards the action that can create life

Lol im creating a bible.

you taking a dump???

Originally posted by Smiter
God's Sign is actually a drawing of a penis inside a vagina. Thats how God create life.




Well you're partially correct. That's how God allows man to create life. I believe his "word"(Jesus) is the primary author of life though.

Here is a sign from god!

signs of god can be faked

http://graphics2.snopes.com/photos/natural/graphics/godhands.jpg

or semi-real(this was the aftermath of a hurricane that destroyed homes and ripped tress out of the ground but only did specific damage to this billboard to rip away to this ad campaign)
http://msgboard.snopes.com/photos/signs/graphics/charley.jpg

ignore that the links broke

Whats with that funny, little bit scary green face? oO

Orgasm is the true sign of the Divine

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Here is a sign from god!
Everyone hates lawyers.

Originally posted by Nellinator
Everyone hates lawyers.

Finally someone got my joke.

Shaky Here is the true meaning of scripture.........Fits well....And people wonder why many leave the faith.........

crazy

Why do people say God told me this and God told me that ? Look look around you And ddin't they sell their property in the year 100 AD looking for the return? So many did that it was recorded..

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Finally someone got my joke.
I think people never took the time to click on it so they could read the sign.

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?


There's no alternative to God. That "something else" you refer to really is something else which has never revealed its word, or itself for that matter.

There is only one God.

Originally posted by Up In Flames
There's no alternative to God. That "something else" you refer to really is something else which has never revealed its word, or itself for that matter.

There is only one God.



I think you missed her point entirely

Originally posted by Up In Flames
There's no alternative to God. That "something else" you refer to really is something else which has never revealed its word, or itself for that matter.

There is only one God.

If God exists, why has He not directly revealed Himself to anyone in the past 2,000 years?

And the sign said "Long-haired freaky people need not apply"
So I tucked my hair up under my hat and I went in to ask him why
He said "You look like a fine upstanding young man, I think you'll do"
So I took off my hat, I said "Imagine that. Huh! Me workin' for you!"
Whoa-oh-oh

Sign, sign, everywhere a sign
Blockin' out the scenery, breakin' my mind
Do this, don't do that, can't you read the sign?

And the sign said anybody caught trespassin' would be shot on sight
So I jumped on the fence and-a yelled at the house, "Hey! What gives you
the
right?"
"To put up a fence to keep me out or to keep mother nature in"
"If God was here he'd tell you to your face, Man, you're some kinda sinner"

Sign, sign, everywhere a sign
Blockin' out the scenery, breakin' my mind
Do this, don't do that, can't you read the sign?

Now, hey you, mister, can't you read?
You've got to have a shirt and tie to get a seat
You can't even watch, no you can't eat
You ain't supposed to be here
The sign said you got to have a membership card to get inside
Ugh!



And the sign said, "Everybody welcome. Come in, kneel down and pray"
But when they passed around the plate at the end of it all, I didn't have a
penny to pay
So I got me a pen and a paper and I made up my own little sign
I said, "Thank you, Lord, for thinkin' 'bout me. I'm alive and doin' fine."
Wooo!

Sign, sign, everywhere a sign
Blockin' out the scenery, breakin' my mind
Do this, don't do that, can't you read the sign?

Sign, sign, everywhere a sign
Sign
Sign, sign

Originally posted by Up In Flames
There's no alternative to God. That "something else" you refer to really is something else which has never revealed its word, or itself for that matter.

There is only one God.

In your mind.

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
If God exists, why has He not directly revealed Himself to anyone in the past 2,000 years?





Cuz we're not worthy



Do you see how convienent these answers are ?

Originally posted by Magee
Whats with that funny, little bit scary green face? oO

I tried to link to some images on snopes server im not sure wether it works now or not its on and off

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
If God exists, why has He not directly revealed Himself to anyone in the past 2,000 years?

He gets a kick for being ambiguous towards us mortals.

Originally posted by Templares
He gets a kick for being ambiguous towards us mortals.

Manifesting as burning bushes and pillars of fire is hardly ambiguous. Why does He not do it anymore?

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Manifesting as burning bushes and pillars of fire is hardly ambiguous. Why does He not do it anymore?

he still does . . . but nowadays we put those people in psychwards or ignore them

I saw God....



In the mirror