12 Answers

  1. The ancient Egyptians considered the Pharaohs to be gods. Does science deny the existence of Egyptian pharaohs? The ancient Romans considered emperors to be gods. Does science deny the existence of Roman emperors? In most ancient religions, the gods are thunder and lightning, sun and moon, sky and earth, ocean and wind, war and time, sex and death. Does science deny the existence of these phenomena?

    Signs of God are those hopes and fears that people place on certain beings, entities, elements, phenomena, relationships, and principles. These very beings, essences, elements, phenomena, relations, and principles are already given to us in experience. The only question is whether we worship them, whether we are inspired by them, whether we expect from them the decisive benefits or evils of our lives.

  2. If this happens in our world, rest assured, this person will be anyone, but not God (as it is understood by the main religions of the Earth). Our world doesn't need God, He's already been crucified once.

  3. Atheism is the absence of contact with the divine and the absence of the need for such contacts. The absence of need here is primary, “there is no God” not because his existence is not proven and not because his description is contradictory, “there is no God” because I do not need him. And being unnecessary, he will remain so for me even if he personally appears before me.

  4. Signs of God have any face that looks like a person. Not even necessarily reasonable.

    The main thing is that not all of its movements are unambiguously predetermined. Not predicted by science. Such creatures exist, don't they?

    Whether science can prove their existence is another matter. This is a serious question, because until now, science has not dealt with such things (except for mathematical objects).

    In general, existence is a philosophical category. To paraphrase one of the local authors (Vasiliev, I think), either you exist or you can be proved.

    The reason is clear stump.

    It's high time to quit.

    That's a scary word; drug addiction sounds nicer… in alcoholism, at least there is alcohol… and here is one “ism”, without any pleasure. Do you want to spend your life on it?

  5. Signs of God (with a lowercase letter) are found without much work and evidence, and there is no point in waiting for the assistance of any science.

    Atheism has nothing to do with these gods, nor, to that matter, with the sciences.

  6. No. This is a reason to stop studying science.

    The domain of science definition is within the laws of the world.

    God, by definition, does not enter into the laws of the world as a being, but creates them.

    God is transcendental . (if you're talking about the biblical God)

    Therefore, by definition, it is impossible to prove the transcendental by the scientific method of thinking.

    “Having proved” the existence of God, science lied, so it is no longer science, because the scientific method of knowledge is violated.

  7. Certainly. If God for once finds scientific, objective and verifiable grounds, facts that will be impossible to deny, when he becomes as obvious as day and night, it will no longer be faith in God, but knowledge of God, and in such a situation it will be simply impossible to remain an atheist. For example, there are no Apomidorists, those who deny the existence of tomatoes, because it is easy to verify the existence of tomatoes) But with God, who by definition is beyond space, time, and matter, this is basically impossible. Therefore, science does not need such a hypothesis. Nothing to do with it. It cannot be proved or disproved. By the way, there are a lot of such non-provable and non-refutable things. Fairies, for example, gnomes, Russell's teapot, parallel worlds, invisible green men, etc. can be continued indefinitely.

  8. First, let's find out what they are-these SIGNS of GOD?

    We know three main signs::




    Moreover, they must be present in God in full force. Otherwise, there is no point in hoping and relying on God. There is no point in praying and expecting forgiveness. Expect a MIRACLE!

    But these qualities are fundamentally INCOMPATIBLE in a real object-subject. At least because people are different, everyone has their own truth, even in a banal neighborhood boundary dispute. And because the miracle itself is incompatible with objective reality, being a violation of the laws of nature.

    Therefore, even the ASSUMPTION of the presence of a person with signs of God is already absurd.

    Modern atheism is not an elementary DENIAL of the EXISTENCE of different gods, it is a scientific and materialistic WORLDVIEW, methodologically connected with the rejection of FAITH as an uncritical way of accepting information. This includes religious information about gods, miracles, and prophecies…

    At the same time, an atheist is always open to evidence and facts. If it is PROVED that God exists, then atheists will KNOW it! And you won't have to BELIEVE it anymore. That's all!

    This will not be a reason to ABANDON critical thinking, it will only expand the field of knowledge.

  9. Let's say you were born in the Siberian hinterland, and you were told a lot about the wonderful Pineapple, how delicious it is, how healthy it is, even showed photos, etc. etc. There were even people in your village who not only saw it, but also tasted it. You just had to believe it.

    And here you are suddenly lucky enough to leave your Zabolotsk, and get to the regional center, and taste the wonderful fruit. What other evidence do you need?

    There is no longer any doubt, and reality no longer needs any proof. I will repeat once again the hackneyed truth – the right one does not prove, and the one who proves is wrong.

  10. Given the fact that most of the world's population is atheist or Buddhist, and even within Christianity there are a lot of different branches that differ on a number of key issues for Christians, such as” immaculate conception “and” crucifixion ” (not all branches of Christianity recognize these events), it is quite obvious that God as described by the Orthodox Church does not exist and cannot exist. Also, the available scientific data unequivocally refute the biblical tales about the rotation of the Sun around the Earth and about the creation of the world in 7 days. At the same time, it is completely impossible to exclude the existence of some intelligent force that participated in the origin or evolution of the observable universe. However, this power, if it exists , is not the mythical god that the church priests talk about. And this force is definitely not antopomorphic. This is obvious at least from the fact that a person cannot create his own kind without the participation of a second person, and all the biosphere necessary for the life of both. Therefore, God, whatever is meant by this, is definitely not a material biological object like a human being.

  11. This is a reason to get involved in science, since a person who is a god by definition violates the laws of nature, making them meaningless.

    In general, what do you mean by signs of God? Purely logically, many attributes come into conflict with each other or even with themselves, the famous omnipotence paradox. At the same time, as you know, advanced technology is no different from magic, to the ancient people you would have passed for a god with a gun. So when you meet a powerful enough creature, you don't have to fall into theological ecstasy, maybe it's just a curious alien kid who ran away from a school party with a new gadget that his mother bought him.

  12. “Let's say that science has proved the existence of a person who has the attributes of God. Is this a reason to stop being an atheist?”

    First of all, science does not engage in such nonsense, otherwise it is no longer science.

    For example, a certain A. I. Osipov – dokhtur, a pro-professor of the Russian Orthodox Church's unnatural “sciences”, sharply criticized the term ” theology “only because it means”the science of god” in Russian.

    He said that Orthodoxy does not deal with any “sciences”, especially about “God”, but deals with “theology”.

    That is, talking about “God”.

    That's it!

    Secondly, the “talkers about God” themselves, among the signs of their virtual, call it “unknowability”.

    That is, it is such a certain “entity” about which it is impossible to find out anything at all-in principle!

    But they immediately claim that they know everything about him, even what he supposedly wants, and even what he thinks about!

    But that's what they're talkers for, so what's the use of them?

Leave a Reply