Expecting Signs—A Practical Guide

How to tell if you’re an imposter, or a true messenger from god?

We were promised signs, but when we ask to see them it is “a wicked and perverse generation that seeks a sign”. But we are told signs follow them that believe, so what’s up?

When I ask for signs I am simply looking for confirmation that these people are indeed the people of God, and not impostors. Needless to say they don’t want people to know this. They’re all literally driving without a license. Should we wonder at the corruption, the subterfuges, the lies which are the real signs that accompany those who claim to believe?

When I believed I made it a condition of my faith that these signs would accompany me and manifest through me as a given. When it steadfastly did not happen I was given no choice but to quit. You can’t work a job if you are given neither the tools nor the sustenance to make it happen. The alternative is to fake it….Sha’Tara Here for full comment. It’s a gem!

Apologetics has developed special wording to cover the truth of the gospel—a gospel that is neither true nor useful must be buried in a mound of excuse. It is clothed now in pride alone.


Author: jimoeba

Alternatives to big box religions and dogmas

41 thoughts on “Expecting Signs—A Practical Guide”

  1. To truly understand the purpose of apologetics one needs to appreciate the word “obtuse” and all of its synonyms. In the holy text words are but metaphors the conveniently mesh with the time and culture that you feel comfortable believing what the words should mean. See, all better. Just don’t forget the going to Hell part and your special place if you are willing to rely on faith for defining your reality. Just say’n.

    Liked by 2 people

  2. I’ve been discussing claims of signs and prayers that work with a pair of Christians. Oy, what a pile of excuses. They certainly get upset if I point out that their god doesn’t require only “faith”, and that this god supposedly was completely fine with giving evidence to Gideon and Thomas.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I did like Sha’Taras take on this. One prayer is all it takes, show me you are not an imposter. Problem is so many never bother to check what they actually are supposed to be believing. There is a blog I have followed since before my deconversion. I pointed out a little catholic fact to her and her reply? Oh, I don’t really know about the details. I know Jesus and he knows me.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. The problem with apologetics is that it never actually answers any questions. It seems to. Sometimes. Sort of. But if you sit down and actually analyze the semantic content of what they say, all they are really doing is indulging in circular reasoning, self-referential arguments, and argumentative gymnastics that twists logic into a convoluted mess. And they have to do that because when it comes right down to it, they don’t have the answers. They don’t even have a solid basis for their entire belief system.

    Liked by 3 people

  4. Quote: “a gospel that is neither true nor useful must be buried in a mound of excuse. It is clothed now in pride alone.” How true… you’ve been there too huh?

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Unfortunately I was there too. It nice to be in the wide open air, but the view is now concerning. I think Paul stumbled upon something few can resist. Even when the promises fail they prop it up with more volumes of drivel. How much time is reasonable for an idea to reach its objective? Hopefully humanity will survive the self fulfilled prophecy. It’s getting warmer. That should make them happy.


      1. Heh! With a grain of salt here, I think (well, OK, I know!) that those who think that climate change is another of those “unmistakable” signs that the second coming is nigh, are in for another serious disappointment and a whole lot of re-writing of end times prophecy! What an unholy crock organized religion has foisted upon the world. I’m going to repeat something I read today that is so true: “It is a lot easier to fool people than it is to try to convince them that they’ve been fooled.” As an unashamed and unrepentant conspiracy theorist I know that for a fact, and that is why Religion remains viable and popular with nothing at all to stand on except what I call cartoons.

        Liked by 1 person

  5. https://isthatinthebible.wordpress.com/2016/05/20/jesus-the-shapeshifter-in-early-christian-tradition/

    I recall someone mentioning that Jesus is never once given a physical description in the New Testament. Anyone that was curious about that, read this for a summary of that issue.

    I first came across this issue myself when I read Justin Martyr. Justin Martyr used passages from Isaiah(nothing directly to do with Jesus) to conclude that Jesus was ugly. Not once did Justin consider quoting someone that had a chain of associations back to Jesus, or some story about what he looked like. I found that strange, and realized that Jesus is never described in the texts. Then I found that all sorts of strange views were held by Christians on that issue. Jesus appeared in various forms to different people, to sum it up. Apparently he could even appear differently to people that were all present with him at the same time, like a kind of illusion or glamor.

    Liked by 1 person

      1. I wouldn’t go that far… ha ha.

        Just kidding. It made me feel all warm and excited in my no-no special place.


    1. True. A fact-based Christianity would be an improvement. Doing away with faith and it’s side effects would be serious progress.


          1. Yes, that would be the end of it. As Shelley said, the ignorance of Nature gave us gods, knowledge of it will kill the gods. That is why the sphere of influence for religion has been reducing with our grasp of nature

            Liked by 1 person

        1. I “see” a fact-based religion, any religion, as a complete contradiction in terms. Faith-based is diametrically opposed to fact-based. “Oh faith is faith and facts are facts and never the twain shall meet.” (Apologies to Rudyard Kipling). And we all know that when two “twains” meet head-on there is a massive derailment… (admittedly not my best material… it’s late!)

          Liked by 2 people

            1. My main argument has been that when you have the facts, you don’t need faith. Even the “good book” (OK, gag me on that one!) makes that claim in Hebrews 11.

              Liked by 1 person

            2. I argued once that apologists are not doing their colleagues any good. They ought to choose one; faith or facts. Both will get them in a mix they can’t get out of

              Liked by 2 people

      1. Good question. I gave up on religion in my mid teens because it didn’t make sense and failed to deliver on its promises; so the only words that truly changed my mind were the ones expressed by my inner voice of doubt. Does that match your own experience?

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Well not really. I was carefully indoctrinated to accept doubt as a test of faith. My will didn’t match the lords will and he had a higher purpose. “Doubts will come, little Jimmy, but that’s normal. God is helping you mature in your faith”

          Liked by 1 person

          1. Interesting. I was told that doubt was Satan’s tool to lead us away from God — which led made me wonder why God was less powerful than Satan and increased the level of doubt. It appears your indoctrination was more convincingly presented than mine.

            Liked by 1 person

            1. They used freewill a lot. But when your so thoroughly schooled in what “we” believe, they’ve taken your freewill away. You can only think in Christian


            2. The whole “free will” thing never made sense to me either. How could there be “free will” if you are born “a slave to sin”? As the late Christopher Hitchens put it:

              “Once you assume a creator and a plan, it makes us objects in a cruel experiment whereby we are created sick and commanded to be well.”

              Liked by 1 person

  6. Just for fun, I picked an explanation from the first apologetics website that came up in a search for “a wicked and perverse generation that seeks a sign”.

    Not surprisingly, he argues that the verse is frequently quoted out of context because Jesus had just fed the multitudes, so the Pharisees and Sadducees had no reason to ask for more signs. However, the chronological order of events claims the miracle was performed on a mountainside and the people asking were most likely located elsewhere (i.e. in the vicinity of Magadan per Mat. 15:39) and had no firsthand experience of these miracles. It also glosses over the fact that they asked for a “sign from Heaven” — not another run-of-the-mill magic trick.

    He then proof-texts John 12:37 (“Even after Jesus had performed so many signs in their presence, they still would not believe in him.”) by completely ignoring the context given by the immediately following verses (38 – 40):

    This was to fulfill the word of Isaiah the prophet: “Lord, who has believed our message and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?”

    For this reason they could not believe, because, as Isaiah says elsewhere: “He has blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts, so they can neither see with their eyes, nor understand with their hearts, nor turn—and I would heal them.”

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: