Stephen Fry on confronting god after death

K4t · 31-01-2015 05:47PM

Tell me who was the last person charged and sentenced under any blasphemy law here? People make a fuss about it as if it was something used.

You've just proved my point with regards the blasphemy law. It has worked to perfection, people have had to be careful with what they say about religion and be "responsible" in their speech and expression when it comes to religion and god aka the flying tea pot. A recent example of this is Dr Selim's threats of using the law in the aftermath of Charlie Hebdo.

RobertKK · 31-01-2015 05:49PM

K4t wrote: »

You've just proved my point with regards the blasphemy law. It has worked to perfection, people have had to be careful with what they say about religion and be "responsible" in their speech and expression when it comes to religion and god aka the flying tea pot. A recent example of this is Dr Selim's threats of using the law in the aftermath of Charlie Hebdo.

Really?

Have you not read posts on this site that could be regarded as blasphemous?

I don't see anyone here afraid to post their opinion.

K4t · 31-01-2015 06:00PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Have you not read posts on this site that could be regarded as blasphemous?

Fortunately I have.

I don't see anyone here afraid to post their opinion.

Some are as there is a blasphemy law written into our constitution.

You can read all the posts you like that you consider blasphemous but you cannot read the mind of anyone. As long as there is a blasphemy law, there is potentially someone afraid of voicing their opinion or expressing their views on god or religion. That is a crime against humanity.

The_Valeyard · 31-01-2015 06:05PM

shruikan2553 wrote: »

You took your time. Busy today?

Sadly we dont get virgins or eternal paradise so we'll have to settle for medals.

Saturday matches. You know yourself. Who would want virgins anyhow, messy.

haveringchick · 31-01-2015 06:15PM

K4t wrote: »

Stop for a moment, forget that this thread is about religion or god, read what you have typed and try to tell me it is rational, logical thinking.

If we just ignored everything we disagreed with and gave up on reason and critical thinking we would be in a much worse place than we are right now. Of course I will not force my neighbour to give up his beliefs but don't ever tell me I am doing some kind of wrong or there is no point trying to engage in rational discussion with that person. Discourse is never wrong.

Sorry but im one of the mmost rational logical pragmatic and practical people you will ever meet but for the life of me I will never understand why you feel the need to impress your opinion of his belief system on him. Would uou feel similarly compelled to try and change his mind about his flower beds or his child rearing policy?

RobertKK · 31-01-2015 06:17PM

K4t wrote: »

Fortunately I have.

Some are as there is a blasphemy law written into our constitution.

You can read all the posts you like that you consider blasphemous but you cannot read the mind of anyone. As long as there is a blasphemy law, there is potentially someone afraid of voicing their opinion or expressing their views on god or religion. That is a crime against humanity.

Here is a definition of blasphemy: is the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence for God, to religious or holy persons or things, or toward something considered sacred or inviolable.

Do you think it is 'fortunate' that people feel the need to insult others or what they believe?
One could argue it was this kind of contempt that was used in Germany before WW2 that allowed the horrors of the holocaust.
There was certainly no blasphemy law to protect Jews.
Western countries with blasphemy laws - Ireland, Australia, Germany, Austria, Finland, Greece, Iceland, Israel, Italy, Norway Switzerland. Then other countries have laws that are against hate towards religion that would cause social trouble.

I think the problem is and you see it here and elsewhere, there is a lack of tolerance towards religion or religious people, and the people with these lack of tolerance views towards religion expect tolerance and which they deserve towards their non beliefs.

shruikan2553 · 31-01-2015 06:21PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Here is a definition of blasphemy: is the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence for God, to religious or holy persons or things, or toward something considered sacred or inviolable.

Do you think it is 'fortunate' that people feel the need to insult others or what they believe?
One could argue it was this kind of contempt that was used in Germany before WW2 that allowed the horrors of the holocaust.
There was certainly no blasphemy law to protect Jews.
Western countries with blasphemy laws - Ireland, Australia, Germany, Austria, Finland, Greece, Iceland, Israel, Italy, Norway Switzerland. Then other countries have laws that are against hate towards religion that would cause social trouble.

I think the problem is and you see it here and elsewhere, there is a lack of tolerance towards religion or religious people, and the people with these lack of tolerance views towards religion expect tolerance and which they deserve towards their non beliefs.

Incitement to hatred laws would cover that. Religious beliefs dont need anymore protection than any other belief.

Any lack of tolerance towards religion tends to be from when a religion starts poking its nose into the lives of those outside of their club.

threeball · 31-01-2015 06:23PM

RobertKK wrote: »

Here is a definition of blasphemy: is the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence for God, to religious or holy persons or things, or toward something considered sacred or inviolable.

Do you think it is 'fortunate' that people feel the need to insult others or what they believe?
One could argue it was this kind of contempt that was used in Germany before WW2 that allowed the horrors of the holocaust.
There was certainly no blasphemy law to protect Jews.
Western countries with blasphemy laws - Ireland, Australia, Germany, Austria, Finland, Greece, Iceland, Israel, Italy, Norway Switzerland. Then other countries have laws that are against hate towards religion that would cause social trouble.

I think the problem is and you see it here and elsewhere, there is a lack of tolerance towards religion or religious people, and the people with these lack of tolerance views towards religion expect tolerance and which they deserve towards their non beliefs.

I would see it the other way round. It is religion that has had and still has a lack of tolerance towards people who don't believe or have no interest. Everything from inquisitions to crusades, to persecution of scientists who dared question the religions view of the world, most of which resulted in people being murdered and tortured to enforce said religions belief. Its still happening today.

Adamantium · 31-01-2015 06:29PM

Autonomous Cowherd wrote: »

There often seems to be a very limited view of what ''God'' is. The Bible - which is the cosmogony of one tribe, and which happened for political reasons to become the most popular ''book on God'' in the west - portrays a particular kind of Abrahamical god. Same with the Koran and Talmud and so on. There are many other books on ''God'' or the idea of an inexplicable force behind the world of appearances, some of them quite ancient like the Tao Teh Ching, or Vigyana Bhairava Tantra, or the Gnostic Gospels, or the works of Hermes Trismegistus, and many evolving ideas presented in the literature of various disciplines throughout the world. Many ideas of ''God'' belong to oral shamanic traditions, which could arguably be the primal well-spring of our very idea of God. I find it quite limiting that people argue about God's existence based on limited literature, based on a limited tradition (Christianity for example) which like most religious traditions has been modified/warped due to political/cultural changes and aims. The idea of some unknown or even unknowable substratum that has shaped the complex existence we experience, even pure maths for example, cannot be proved or disproved using reference to one limited middle eastern text. Surely?

I'm not religious but I've found religious people far open and frank to have a conversation about the unknowable, it's the height of ego and arrogance to think we have all the answers.

To tell you the truth it's so rare to have these deep conversations nowadays that are anything beyond work based canteen talk, that when they happen I think "Now why doesn't this happen more often", why does it always have to be what was on TV, football, lowest common denominator stuff. It's the mechanistic total lack of appreciation or even curiosity that younger people have for the big questions. (And people always say that young people are the most curious, I have found among my peers to the exact opposite)

We say we aren't religious but we make religions all the time out of everything. We can't help it for whatever reason Consumerism, technology, sports teams, franchise films, our habits, our opinions, drink, drugs. We just replaced one with another IMO, Are we that much happier really?

We'll always be searching, for that is the price you pay for being human, and all the possibility that goes along with it.

I heard my grandfather years ago say "Every generation finds God in its own way"

So we better we better be sure we're not inadvertingly worshipping the wrong ones

NotASheeple · 31-01-2015 06:30PM

Who knows what's after all of this, but lets say there definitely is something. Then Earth must surely be the realm of Satan.

suicide_circus · 31-01-2015 06:32PM

As someone with over 50% of my life left to live, I wouldn't knock anyone who is approaching the end of their life and is frightened and looking for answers and takes comfort in the notion of a god.

31-01-2015 07:02PM

Call Me Jimmy wrote: »

gay byrne looks like kermit the frog now

...but that's none of my business.

Buona Fortuna · 31-01-2015 07:35PM

Ghost Buster wrote: »

Well then hes crap at communicating with the beings he loves and created in his own image and all that. very sloppy for an uberbring

That's true - I suppose these days he'd do an AMA.

Howabout it Dav, any good connections?

AryaStark · 31-01-2015 07:44PM

suicide_circus wrote: »

As someone with over 50% of my life left to live, I wouldn't knock anyone who is approaching the end of their life and is frightened and looking for answers and takes comfort in the notion of a god.

I think that anybody over the age of 50 and religious is fine, I respect them and have no problems with their beliefs. Anybody under the age of 50 is a problem for me. I cannot respect anybody who is religious and thinks that they are intelligent. If you can think clearly then you should direct that at your religion. Its such a joke when you break it down that it shocks me when I find out that somebody I know actually believes in god!

suicide_circus · 31-01-2015 07:55PM

AryaStark wrote: »

I think that anybody over the age of 50 and religious is fine, I respect them and have no problems with their beliefs.

How generous of you, I'm sure they'll be relieved.

AryaStark · 31-01-2015 08:00PM

suicide_circus wrote: »

How generous of you, I'm sure they'll be relieved.

Probably not but not my problem!!! Its only my personal view. And I don't really have much in common with religious people so it is usually not a problem and we don't mix.
I was brought up as an atheist and used to argue my point and try to get it across but it usually is a waste of time. Now I don't bother arguing and just try to stay away from the madness.

conorh91 · 31-01-2015 08:07PM

What I find even most ridiculous is the application of human traits to God. Stephen Fry talks about God like He's some sort of abusive father burning His children with lit cigarettes. God never claimed to be a human being, and the Roman Catholic Church has always taught that original justice pervaded until it was usurped by man himself, acting freely.

In fact, atheists and Christians have this much in common: the evil in the world is largely the work of man acting freely. Evil prevails when man forfeits justice, which he does on a daily basis. God has set in train a mechanical world where consequences fall like dominoes, and the same processes that cause healing can also cause suffering (such as cell division, with its life-giving and cancer-causing possibilities).

namloc1980 · 31-01-2015 08:13PM

conorh91 wrote: »

What I find even most ridiculous is the application of human traits to God. Stephen Fry talks about God like He's some sort of abusive father burning His children with lit cigarettes. God never claimed to be a human being, and the Roman Catholic Church has always taught that original justice pervaded until it was usurped by man himself, acting freely.

In fact, atheists and Christians have this much in common: the evil in the world is largely the work of man acting freely. Evil prevails when man forfeits justice, which he does on a daily basis. God has set in train a mechanical world where consequences fall like dominoes, and the same processes that cause healing can also cause suffering (such as cell division, with its life-giving and cancer-causing possibilities).

Ah the "free will" excuse. It usually goes like this: something good happens and it's God at work, but something bad happens and it's put down to evil man acting freely / Satan at work.

conorh91 · 31-01-2015 08:18PM

namloc1980 wrote: »

It usually goes like this: something good happens and it's God at work, but something bad happens and it's put down to evil man acting freely / Satan at work.

Well that's reasonable in its own way. If God represents perfect virtue, it would appear sensible to conclude that He is responsible for inculcating the human condition with virtious traits which in turn give rise to virtuous acts, and not evil traits and evil acts.

Free will is free will. The good outcomes of free will derive from God; the adverse outcomes ultimately derive from man supplanting original justice.

Well, so the teaching goes.

PopePalpatine · 31-01-2015 08:22PM

AryaStark wrote: »

Probably not but not my problem!!! Its only my personal view. And I don't really have much in common with religious people so it is usually not a problem and we don't mix.
I was brought up as an atheist and used to argue my point and try to get it across but it usually is a waste of time. Now I don't bother arguing and just try to stay away from the madness.

There's no gods but death, am I right?

RobertKK · 31-01-2015 08:26PM

namloc1980 wrote: »

Ah the "free will" excuse. It usually goes like this: something good happens and it's God at work, but something bad happens and it's put down to evil man acting freely / Satan at work.

Sometimes something bad happens but the overall consequences of the bad is better than if the bad stuff hadn't happened.
Just from experience.

yipeeeee · 31-01-2015 08:26PM

Free will is an illusion, and the biggest con mankind has ever been sold.

Donkey Oaty · 31-01-2015 08:36PM

One thing I have learnt from experience is that people espousing the kind of patronising cod-theology we are getting on this thread will at some point recognise that they are losing, and will then try and halt the discussion by pulling out a guitar and singing a song about Jesus.

K4t · 31-01-2015 08:39PM

haveringchick wrote: »

Sorry but im one of the mmost rational logical pragmatic and practical people you will ever meet but for the life of me I will never understand why you feel the need to impress your opinion of his belief system on him. Would uou feel similarly compelled to try and change his mind about his flower beds or his child rearing policy?

I cannot believe you based on your arguments. If his flower beds or his child rearing policy influenced life and the way people think then yes. By your argument, the guy who believes in rape and murder as virtouous and normal acceptable behaviour should be left alone to hold his beliefs without anyone ever questioning them. And not only that but he should be left alone to instill his beliefs on others and run for government on those beliefs without anyone questioning the rationality or logic behind said beliefs. We should leave him and his followers alone and not "impress our opinion of his belief system on him or his potentially many followers". Spare me your "leave them alone they never harmed anyone" liberal attempt at seeming tolerant and accepting of religion.

billyhead · 31-01-2015 08:57PM

AryaStark wrote: »

I think that anybody over the age of 50 and religious is fine, I respect them and have no problems with their beliefs. Anybody under the age of 50 is a problem for me. I cannot respect anybody who is religious and thinks that they are intelligent. If you can think clearly then you should direct that at your religion. Its such a joke when you break it down that it shocks me when I find out that somebody I know actually believes in god!

Such a stupid statement. Freewill and all that. Its none of your business what age someone is who believes in a God in whatever form. They are probaly a better person because of it.

Venus In Furs · 31-01-2015 09:01PM

billyhead wrote: »

Such a stupid statement. Freewill and all that. Its none of your business what age someone is who believes in a God in whatever form. They are probaly a better person because of it.

I disagree too with sneering at someone aged under 50 for being religious, but I can't see how the probability of them being a better person increases.

billyhead · 31-01-2015 09:06PM

Venus In Furs wrote: »

I disagree too with sneering at someone aged under 50 for being religious, but I can't see how the probability of them being a better person increases.

Well if they are Catgolics and act upon what they preach i.e 10 commandments surely it keeps them on the straight and narrow.

Venus In Furs · 31-01-2015 09:08PM

billyhead wrote: »

Well if they are Catgolics and act upon what they preach i.e 10 commandments surely it keeps them on the straight and narrow.

And if they don't? :pac:
I don't know anyone religious who follows all the teachings. They believe in god and go to mass (when not hungover), that's about it.
They're nice people but no nicer than those I know who don't believe. They are voting yes on gay marriage and are pro-choice - those go against their religion.

RobertKK · 31-01-2015 09:09PM

I believe in a God, I'm under 40, I love science and it is not for me to judge others on what they believe or don't believe, whatever helps one get through this life.

Captain Chaos · 31-01-2015 09:10PM

billyhead wrote: »

Well if they are Catgolics and act upon what they preach i.e 10 commandments surely it keeps them on the straight and narrow.

What if they follow the early part of the bible with God going around killing and being vengeful just cause he can.

It's nice being able to pick out the parts of religion you want and forget the rest. Like a kid at a pick and mix in a sweet shop all for the sake of feeling good.

Stephen Fry on confronting god after death

Comments