Are theists asking too much of people?

wynn

˙
Valued Senior Member
Generally, theists, directly or indirectly, request that people take up a serious practice regimen, for the rest of their lives.

Some atheists object to this, saying "it's asking too much of anyone to devote their entire life to something when it may or may not ultimately benefit them any more than any other philosophy or way of life".


Question:

But why is that too much?
I'm not saying it isn't, I would just like to look into what the possible answers are why this is too much.
Why does it seem so egregious to be requested that one devote one's life to something one has no certainty of, but which is advertised as being the solution to biggest problem of life?
 
The cognitive dissonance required to follow theism will drive a person insane. Just look at any evangelical in public office, they are hypocritical sociopaths.
 
It is clearly a myth of a wish that an invisible unknown be a certain sure thing.

Finally, the myth is disproved since a Being cannot be first, that the basis of all was forever, precluding a Creator, and that there is literally nothing to make basics stuff out of. Add to this that what is supposed to be everywhere is seen nowhere. Science can even explain why some are prone to believe. 5:0.


P.S. It is not myth that will save the world [from the problems of myth defended].
 
Why does it seem so egregious to be requested that one devote one's life to something one has no certainty of, but which is advertised as being the solution to biggest problem of life?

The bottom line is that no-one can speak with any kind of authority on this matter simply because no one person can ever dedicate their entire existence to more than one religion or philosophy.
 
The bottom line is that no-one can speak with any kind of authority on this matter simply because no one person can ever dedicate their entire existence to more than one religion or philosophy.

Conversely, this would also suggest that no one person should ever be considered as a reliable source about knowledge of God. Which would suggest that all discussions about theistic topics are essentially useless, off-base as far as knowledge of God is concerned ...
 
I think theism had it a lot easier when people were more ignorant. To be an intelligent theist must be quite a challenge.
 
"But why is that too much?"

'cos I'm lazy, enjoy my creature comforts and deserve a lie in on a Sunday morning.

Oh and I don't believe in god.

Dee Cee
 
"To be an intelligent theist must be quite a challenge. "

Agreed.
Smacks of intellectual hypocrisy.

Dee Cee
 
How does one pretend to believe in something?

Or are you saying we should just go through the ceremonial motions, just in case? (ignoring the dilemma of having to choose which ceremony is right)
 
Conversely, this would also suggest that no one person should ever be considered as a reliable source about knowledge of God. Which would suggest that all discussions about theistic topics are essentially useless, off-base as far as knowledge of God is concerned ...

Yes, essentially useless, and even negatively useless, for these irrational beliefs vary, depending on the social, geographical, or familial source and thus conflict, causing problems, the others mere existence seeming to lessen one's own credibility of belief, so, 6:0.

I grant that on balance, in between wars, silliness, and disputes, one can gain some amount of emotional comfort, so 6:1, but the '1' is exaggerated in amount, since it is not even near a proof.

Point, game, set, match, and tournament.
 
How does one pretend to believe in something?

Or are you saying we should just go through the ceremonial motions, just in case? (ignoring the dilemma of having to choose which ceremony is right)

At this point, I'm not saying what anyone should do.

I just want to know why those who think that theists are asking too much, think so.
 
No-God has been proved to some, while God has not been proved at all, they going with God only by faith, with the rest perhaps either not caring or saying that they can’t know.

All are free to choose whatever meaning they can out of life, even the believers, for God is what they chose.

The firm believers may just go on pronouncing and proclaiming their notion as truth and fact, so 7:1. They may further try to affect laws with it, so 8:1. They indoctrinate young or unsuspecting people, so 9:1.

9:1 is asking way too much.
 
Legislating against thoughtcrime is especially too much. It's not enough that you don't sleep with your neighbor's wife, you can't even think about it.
 
Legislating against thoughtcrime is especially too much. It's not enough that you don't sleep with your neighbor's wife, you can't even think about it.

OK, such as when Jimmy Carter had lust. Religions cause bad psychological influence, so 10:1.

Now, religions may often be charitable, so 10:2, which is a real bonus, for people in general can be charitable; it's just that churches may funnel it better, after they pay their own huge expenses.
 
And you can't covert their ass. 10:1

Dee Cee

Moses tied his ass to a tree. (It says that in the Bible)

Yes, they are obstinate, for not only have some become immune to logical learning, they have an emotional groove on top of that, preventing it.

Since they are now two level away from reason, there is no traversing the gap, so, 11:2.
 
So, it can be predicted that we may see, as usual, from believers, nothing but a wide expanse of fables, faith, hoaxes, lies, imaginations, fictions, guesses, foggy notions, concoctions, phantasms, fantasies, falsehoods, conceptions, decrees, fiats, misrepresentations, dead ideas, magic, proclamations, wild tales, anecdotes, revelations, untruths, revelations, hearsay, scrap heaps, yarns, and fish stories stated as beliefs in that unseeable supernatural station through faith’s without knowledge ration—all figmentations of the imagination.
 
"Drag, 'cus my neighbor's wife has a nice ass."

Athiests can covet all day long. C'mon over to the dark side gmilam you know it makes sense.

Dee Cee
 
Back
Top