If faith is what is required

shadowcomplex

then wouldnt God make it difficult?hence why its easier to be an athiest

coffee_cake

shadowcomplex

bluewolf wrote: »

I suppose its easier to make jokes

coffee_cake

your post just doesn't make much sense

MagicMarker

shadowcomplex wrote: »

I suppose its easier to make jokes

Holy shít, you posted more than once in one of your own threads, are you feeling okay?

Helix

shadowcomplex wrote: »

then wouldnt God make it difficult?hence why its easier to be an athiest

its easier to believe that what you do has no consequence, since you can repent and get into a magical utopia

its easier to believe that when your family die, they go to heaven where you'll see them again

its easier to believe that theres a magic sky fairy looking out for your best interests all that time

i wouldnt have said being an atheist was the easiest one at all

eire4

Helix wrote: »

its easier to believe that what you do has no consequence, since you can repent and get into a magical utopia

its easier to believe that when your family die, they go to heaven where you'll see them again

its easier to believe that theres a magic sky fairy looking out for your best interests all that time

i wouldnt have said being an atheist was the easiest one at all

Some good points there.

shadowcomplex

Helix wrote: »

its easier to believe that what you do has no consequence, since you can repent and get into a magical utopia

its easier to believe that when your family die, they go to heaven where you'll see them again

its easier to believe that theres a magic sky fairy looking out for your best interests all that time

i wouldnt have said being an atheist was the easiest one at all

nicer maybe, but not easier

MagicMarker

shadowcomplex wrote: »

nicer maybe, but not easier

Explain.

Dades

shadowcomplex wrote: »

If faith is what is required...then wouldnt God make it difficult?hence why its easier to be an athiest

Faith is what's required because the reality is there's no evidence, not because of some daft notion of God making it difficult to believe.

Fbjm

I'm still undecided as to whether these threads are entertaining or annoying. They pop up every now and again, and one thing I've come to realise (through the powers of casual observation :pac:) is that it's impossible to argue any case on an atheistic mindset with these people. So here's the most useful contribution I can make to this thread:





Blast faith with piss :cool:

CiaranMT

shadowcomplex wrote: »

nicer maybe, but not easier

Cheers for the laugh!

Newsite

Fbjm wrote: »

I'm still undecided as to whether these threads are entertaining or annoying. They pop up every now and again, and one thing I've come to realise (through the powers of casual observation :pac:) is that it's impossible to argue any case on an atheistic mindset with these people. So here's the most useful contribution I can make to this thread:





Blast faith with piss :cool:

We've no doubt you're correct.

Fbjm

Newsite wrote: »

We've no doubt you're correct.

*The most useful contribution anyone can make to this thread. :rolleyes:

shadowcomplex

Fbjm wrote: »

I'm still undecided as to whether these threads are entertaining or annoying. They pop up every now and again, and one thing I've come to realise (through the powers of casual observation :pac:) is that it's impossible to argue any case on an atheistic mindset with these people. So here's the most useful contribution I can make to this thread:





Blast faith with piss :cool:

whats the point in an atheist forum

strobe

shadowcomplex wrote: »

then wouldnt God make it difficult?hence why its easier to be an athiest

shadowcomplex wrote: »

nicer maybe, but not easier

MagicMarker wrote: »

Explain.

I'm feeling uncharacteristically altruistic (might have something to do with being stuck at home alone and sober at 10pm on a Friday night, not sure.) so...

What Shadowcomplex means is 'Faith is a difficult thing to maintain, God made that a reality on purpose so it could act as a test. I think it's easier to live your life without taking things on blind faith than to live your life while trying to maintain this faith.'

Of course he then extends this to saying 'it's easier to be an atheist' which would mean that not taking the God thing on faith is the only difference between being an atheist and a hobgodling. Which as Helix points out is not the only thing to take into account if you are in the humour for arguing over which is easier to be.

But despite his extension, if we take his original assertion in isolation i.e 'It's harder to take something on blind faith than to believe the thing when it's supported with strong evidence', I think I would probably agree with him (at least it is for me, I'm sure others find it easier). It would be harder for me to believe a stranger if he walked up to me on the street and told me "if you give me a thousand euro I will invest it for you and then track you down in three weeks and give you the one hundred thousand profits I will make for you" than it would be to believe a professional stock broker with a proven empirical track record of making ten fold returns telling me there was a good chance he could get me similar returns to the ones he usually gets for others.

So in conclusion, the statement that 'it's easier to be an atheist' is a matter of opinion and not one I particularly agree with but I would agree that for me personally, yes, it is harder to believe something purely on faith than to believe something with evidence behind it... obviously, I would have thought.

MagicMarker

shadowcomplex wrote: »

whats the point in an atheist forum

There is no atheist forum.

Turtwig

shadowcomplex wrote: »

then wouldnt God make it difficult?hence why its easier to be an athiest

What do you mean by faith?
Am I allowed to assume I can understand the actions or thought process of an infinite being? (If you allow God to be infinite.)

shadowcomplex

strobe wrote: »

I'm feeling uncharacteristically altruistic (might have something to do with being stuck at home alone and sober at 10pm on a Friday night, not sure.) so...

What Shadowcomplex means is 'Faith is a difficult thing to maintain, God made that a reality on purpose so it could act as a test. I think it's easier to live your life without taking things on blind faith than to live your life while trying to maintain this faith.'

Of course he then extends this to saying 'it's easier to be an atheist' which would mean that not taking the God thing on faith is the only difference between being an atheist and a hobgodling. Which as Helix points out is not the only thing to take into account if you are in the humour for arguing over which is easier to be.

But despite his extension, if we take his original assertion in isolation i.e 'It's harder to take something on blind faith than to believe the thing when it's supported with strong evidence', I think I would probably agree with him (at least it is for me, I'm sure others find it easier). It would be harder for me to believe a stranger if he walked up to me on the street and told me "if you give me a thousand euro I will invest it for you and then track you down in three weeks and give you the one hundred thousand profits I will make for you" than it would be to believe a professional stock broker with a proven empirical track record of making ten fold returns telling me there was a good chance he could get me similar returns to the ones he usually gets for others.

So in conclusion, the statement that 'it's easier to be an atheist' is a matter of opinion and not one I particularly agree with but I would agree that for me personally, yes, it is harder to believe something purely on faith than to believe something with evidence behind it... obviously, I would have thought.

no i didnt

strobe

shadowcomplex wrote: »

no i didnt

What?

shadowcomplex wrote: »

its easier to be an athiest

You're adorable.

Littlehorny

Was once asked by a holy joe once "if you have no faith then why be nice to people?"
They just looked at me with total bewilderment cause i started laughing, could not fathom that you dont need a god to have love in your heart.

shadowcomplex

strobe wrote: »

What?



You're adorable.

oh yea, gotta give a guy a break , its a friday night and im on my 2nd bottle of wine

strobe

shadowcomplex wrote: »

oh yea, gotta give a guy a break , its a friday night and im on my 2nd bottle of wine

It's cool man.

Helix

strobe wrote: »

I'm feeling uncharacteristically altruistic (might have something to do with being stuck at home alone and sober at 10pm on a Friday night, not sure.) so...

What Shadowcomplex means is 'Faith is a difficult thing to maintain, God made that a reality on purpose so it could act as a test. I think it's easier to live your life without taking things on blind faith than to live your life while trying to maintain this faith.'

Of course he then extends this to saying 'it's easier to be an atheist' which would mean that not taking the God thing on faith is the only difference between being an atheist and a hobgodling. Which as Helix points out is not the only thing to take into account if you are in the humour for arguing over which is easier to be.

But despite his extension, if we take his original assertion in isolation i.e 'It's harder to take something on blind faith than to believe the thing when it's supported with strong evidence', I think I would probably agree with him (at least it is for me, I'm sure others find it easier). It would be harder for me to believe a stranger if he walked up to me on the street and told me "if you give me a thousand euro I will invest it for you and then track you down in three weeks and give you the one hundred thousand profits I will make for you" than it would be to believe a professional stock broker with a proven empirical track record of making ten fold returns telling me there was a good chance he could get me similar returns to the ones he usually gets for others.

So in conclusion, the statement that 'it's easier to be an atheist' is a matter of opinion and not one I particularly agree with but I would agree that for me personally, yes, it is harder to believe something purely on faith than to believe something with evidence behind it... obviously, I would have thought.

what you're saying would be true if religion was some new thing. it would obviously be a lot harder for johnny random to say to people "here, there's this god lad, and if you do what he says, you go to a utopia. all you need to do is believe and live according to this book" and have them believe him than it is for people to simply fall in line with millennium old dogma that is so ingrained in people's psyches that the vast majority of believers believe without question

Helix

Littlehorny wrote: »

Was once asked by a holy joe once "if you have no faith then why be nice to people?"
They just looked at me with total bewilderment cause i started laughing, could not fathom that you dont need a god to have love in your heart.

those people are the only sensible argument for religion that i can think of. there are plenty of these people who simply cannot fathom that you can be a decent person, and not run around stealing, raping and murdering without fearing that you'll be punished by god for it

these people are potentially very, very dangerous imo, so if it takes a fairy tale to keep them in check, then fine. the problem is that the leaders in their fairy tale world have too much power and say in how the world is.

strobe

Helix wrote: »

what you're saying would be true if religion was some new thing. it would obviously be a lot harder for johnny random to say to people "here, there's this god lad, and if you do what he says, you go to a utopia. all you need to do is believe and live according to this book" and have them believe him than it is for people to simply fall in line with millennium old dogma that is so ingrained in people's psyches that the vast majority of believers believe without question

Oh, I agree man. My point was, that 'faith' (not particularly faith in god or x or y) when taken as an idea in isolation is harder to maintain than it is to demand evidence. Which is why I started rambling about stock brokers and stuff.

The Quadratic Equation

Helix wrote: »

there are plenty of these people who simply cannot fathom that you can be a decent person, and not run around stealing, raping and murdering without fearing that you'll be punished by god for it

these people are potentially very, very dangerous imo.

Well spotted, and not discussed often enough.
In my opinion there is a huge percentage of the population exactly like that.
Survival of the fittest and achievement of their own and famailies material goals at any cost, would be their default mode. As far as they would be concerned, if there is no external moral standard and no day of reckoning, they would invent their own to suit each any every circumstance, and the ends would always justify the means.

Dades

The Quadratic Equation wrote: »

Well spotted, and not discussed often enough.
In my opinion there is a huge percentage of the population exactly like that.
Survival of the fittest and achievement of their own and famailies material goals at any cost, would be their default mode. As far as they would be concerned, if there is no external moral standard and no day of reckoning, they would invent their own to suit each any every circumstance, and the ends would always justify the means.

Your post, quoting the post you did, makes no sense. Only makes me fear for your continuation in this forum.

Want to explain?

Helix

quoting my post it does make sense, he's talking about where i refer to people who need something like an all seeing god to keep them on the straight and narrow. take god out of the equation, by removing religion, and these people become seriously dangerous

now im not talking about them all, just those who bring up the "if you dont believe in god why dont you do what you want" argument. those who cant understand that being a decent person and being religious are not the same thing

granted, im a good person for selfish reason. i think everyone else to a certain extent. ive seen enough of the world to know that if im an utter bastard to people, my life will be a lot harder. or if i go around braking loads of laws, im likely to get chucked in jail. ultimately, i dont want that, so i adhere to the rules

Dades

Wait, so TQE is suggesting a large amount of the population need a god to keep them on the straight and narrow?

The Mad Hatter

Dades wrote: »

Wait, so TQE is suggesting a large amount of the population need a god to keep them on the straight and narrow?

"Not discussed often enough." :rolleyes: