Stephen Fry on confronting god after death

Terrlock · 03-02-2015 07:02PM

Arne_Saknussem wrote: »

Ah ok, Trolly Troll

How is that trolling?

Donkey Oaty · 03-02-2015 07:03PM

If anyone wants to take spiritual guidance from some Arab lad who lived in the desert many centuries ago, I can recommend the poet Al-Ma'arri (973-1057), noted atheist.

Here's a sample:

What is religion?
A maid kept close that no eye may view her;
The price of her wedding gifts and dowry baffles the wooer.
Of all the goodly doctrine that I from the pulpit heard
My heart has never accepted so much as a single word.

Want to hear another? Yeah, you do...you do...

They all err—Moslems, Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians:
Humanity follows two world-wide sects:
One, man intelligent without religion,
The second, religious without intellect.

He was in the news a while back - see paras 4, 5 and six of this Fisk report on Syria from The Independent in December 2013.

Terrlock · 03-02-2015 07:03PM

danrua01 wrote: »

Sorry but I thought you said earlier that the word "Jew" only describes religion, not a race, peoples...? And you didn't answer my question!

No I never said anything about religion, maybe it was some one else.

What question did I not answer?

K4t · 03-02-2015 07:04PM

kunst nugget wrote: »

It is because it robs us of rationalism and pragmatism and encourages oppression.

Also if you read my posts, instead of perhaps reading other's replies to them, you will know that I support a secular state, and that I actively oppose religious oppression. I do however extremely encourage the freedom to criticise and even hate the idea of religion and religious belief. That does not mean that I support the oppression of any person(s), especially not because of what they believe or how they practice that belief and so on, if that is what you mean by your sentence. Mostly I just want separation of church and state.

danrua01 · 03-02-2015 07:05PM

Terrlock wrote: »

Just going back through your posts are you referring to these Law in the OT?

There are some great things that are banned by the OT...:

- not being circumcised;
- breaking the Sabbath;
- being a town that believes in another god;
- eating anything that mixes meat and dairy;
- eating fat
- working on the Sabbath;
- being a stubborn, rebellious, and drunkard son;
- planting more than one kind of seed in a field;
- cutting the hair on the sides of our head;
- living in a city that failed to surrender to the israelites

let's not forget the NT disallows women from speaking in church.

If you read the NT especially acts you see that these Laws don't apply to the Gentiles.

Also Jesus refers to the circumcision of your heart not your flesh.

Also for Gays getting married?

Marriage is a blessing from God uniting Man and women as one.

That's its purpose. Scripture talks about towards end times there will be more and more people coming out as gay and this shows how fallen and corrupt man has become to even the extent as his own nature is corrupt.

God won't unite two men or women in marriage no matter how much anyone would want him too. There isn't much that I or anyone can do to persuade him otherwise I'd imagine.

Not applicable. Convenient. Who do they apply to, then? And what about before it was specified in the NT?

You also said you weren't forcing your religion on anyone, but you will pray that Jesus makes that other poster believe...

jobbridge4life · 03-02-2015 07:06PM

K4t wrote: »

Also if you read my posts, instead of perhaps reading other's replies to them, you will know that I support a secular state, and that I actively oppose religious oppression. I do however extremely encourage the freedom to criticise and even hate the idea of religion and religious belief. That does not mean that I support the oppression of any person(s), especially not because of what they believe or how they practice that belief and so on, if that is what you mean by your sentence. Mostly I just want separation of church and state.

With respect your capacity to be 'moderate' in your extremism doesn't preclude the truthful application of Danrua's point to wider society and certainly doesn't nullify the inherent dangers of extremism.

floggg · 03-02-2015 07:08PM

TireeTerror wrote: »

Offence is a very personal thing. You should not allow yourself to be offended by the opinion of another.

The whole "you should respect what others believe" is nonsense, its pandering to the weak of mind. It is precisely this kind of sentimentality which is damaging to the advancement of society.

There is as much truth in the belief of Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy as there ought to be in religion. The notion that a grown adult genuinely believes in Santa Claus would be ridiculed and people would consider them to have mental issues. Believing in an entirely man made fiction such as religion is just as insane.

I genuinely pity people who have wasted their short time on this planet devoting themselves to a cult like Christianity or every other form of the insipid bile contained in various bibles.

I imagine an alien species coming to earth and asking me to explain religion and all I would feel is shame and I could only explain it as the weakest part of humanity.

In reality, the human species is pretty vile and disgusting. Only yesterday I saw a news report on ISIS throwing a blindfolded man from a rooftop several stories from the ground. The victim did not die from the fall, however the baying crowd then stoned him to death. His crime? Well he was alleged to have been gay.

I think no further words need to be said to said to prove how vile all religion is.

That whole "offence is a personal thing"/don't let yourself be offended thing is nonsense.

If somebody comes up and whacks you over the head with a bat, nobody would say don't choose to be hurt by it.

However, while words don't cause physical pain, they can hurt all the same, whether you want to or not. So you can't really choose what does or does not offend you (though you can pick and choose your examples).

Would you tell a black person who was racially abused to get over himself and don't let himself be offended for example?

The issue isn't people choosing to be offended, its that people placing too much importance on some things in live, and not being able to separate criticism of something they choose to do/believe from criticism of them as a person.

kunst nugget · 03-02-2015 07:10PM

K4t wrote: »

Also if you read my posts, instead of perhaps reading other's replies to them, you will know that I support a secular state, and that I actively oppose religious oppression. I do however extremely encourage the freedom to criticise and even hate the idea of religion and religious belief. That does not mean that I support the oppression of any person(s), especially not because of what they believe or how they practice that belief and so on, if that is what you mean by your sentence. Mostly I just want separation of church and state.

I was reading your posts. I was merely pointing out why I think a statement like 'extremism isn't necessarily a bad thing' is completely wrong imo.

floggg · 03-02-2015 07:10PM

dark crystal wrote: »

With all due respect, I don't put any store in what The Bible says any more than I put any store in What the Qu'ran says or what Hans Christian Anderson says.

At least I've actually seen cygnets grow into graceful swans.

K4t · 03-02-2015 07:13PM

kunst nugget wrote: »

I'll be honest in saying I can't tell where the irony is here. I'm an atheist and am critical of the practices of different religions and my desire is to live in a secular state.

This was the irony I meant as I share your desire for a secular state.

That doesn't mean I want to live in a state free of religion

I do want this, not through oppression, but through reason and logic and education and enlightenment. But I'm rational and realistic enough to know that it will probably never happen, at least not in my lifetime. I do not wish to force it to happen through oppression like you seem to think.

- that is oppressing people who are religious.

As said, I am just as against religious oppression as you proclaim to be.

People should have the right to believe in whatever religion they want as long as it doesn't interfere with people who are not part of that religion. If you want to live as antitheist, knock yourself out. Pragmatism comes from realising that we're all sharing this country or world and trying to some agreement that works for us all.

Agreed.

To be extreme when it comes to a sport or past time - fair enough. To be extreme in a theological or political sense - not so good.

And I disagree with you here. Extreme views are sometimes the most sensible and humane views in a society where the dominant view is evil or draconian. It's just that we usually only associate extreme views with religious extremists or left or right wing politics extremists in the western world nowadays. The moderate view has become the norm, and that isn't always a good thing either.

Donkey Oaty · 03-02-2015 07:15PM

floggg wrote: »

At least I've actually seen cygnets grow into graceful swans.

Don't forget "The Emperor's New Clothes", which is really what all these religious discussions are about.

floggg · 03-02-2015 07:17PM

TireeTerror wrote: »

I think you should have a wee cup of tea and calm down.

I wonder what you would think if I decided to write a book extolling the glory of molesting innocent children. I would promise an eternity of joy and wonder for those who tampered with children and babies. I would call it my bible. I would threaten an eternity of suffering to those who did not follow my every word.

For those that did decide to follow this "bible", would you so generously afford them the respect to carry on with their beliefs?

An extreme example for sure, but I could provide hundreds if not tens of thousands of examples of vile barbaric actions by the Catholic Church over the years, and these things are ongoing.

When believers are so willing to turn away from the truth of religion, despite their leaders abusing children in this very country, and the elders then covering it up, I will not respect them, for they are weak and worthy of no respect.

EDIT: Actually believers in religion are not necessarily weak, I have been too harsh and too quick to judge. With more thought they are actually victims themselves and they require assistance to try and awaken them from a lifetime of brainwashing. Its unlikely to help though, the best bet is to loosen the shackles of religion in the schools and eventually with each passing generation, religion will die.

That is condescending drivel. There have been stronger, smarter believers than you or I will ever be. I don't share their beliefs, but it would be arrogant and ignorant to dismiss as weak or victims simply for believing.

If it works for them fine (I wont apologise for mocking people who insist on telling me they will pray for people who clearly couldn't give two ****s for their prayers).

It is rather stupid to make assumptions of anybody just because they have a different viewpoint or belief.

Also, child abuse really has no relevance to this argument. It doesn't prove or disprove anything about religion or god - only the men that claim to be believe in him.

floggg · 03-02-2015 07:27PM

Donkey Oaty wrote: »

The best way to test the existence of God is to pray for something entirely random that would not ordinarily happen in a sane universe and see if it is granted.

For example, recently I prayed for a giant statue of The Stig from Top Gear to appear in Warsaw and also for a UKIP MP to tweet an invitation to play a game of "Hello Kitty World".

Needless to say, neither of these things have come true, otherwise I would have heard about them - but if they do, I'll start believing.

Thats not how it works.

God answers your prayers - but only if they are for things which could otherwise happen in the ordinary course without divine intervention.

He is particularly good at answering prayers where the probability of the thing prayed for occuring is reasonably high - such as your sports team winning, passing the exam you worked hard enough to achieve a passing grade in, airplanes landing safely etc.

He will also answer prayer in relation to things which are less probable to occur, such as recover from certain illnesses, missing persons turning up ok etc, but the chances of him doing so decrease in line with the odds of said event occuring.

Generally speaking though, he refuses to answer prayers relating to things which are either impossible or extremely unlikely to occur - such as lightning bolts smiting your enemy (or any form of smiting really), saving innocent people from wars or genocides or Kildare winning an All Ireland.

It's not that he can't do those things, he's just thinks those sort of requests are taking the mick a little.

K4t · 03-02-2015 07:31PM

jobbridge4life wrote: »

With respect your capacity to be 'moderate' in your extremism doesn't preclude the truthful application of Danrua's point to wider society and certainly doesn't nullify the inherent dangers of extremism.

With respect, I am only an extremist in the sense that you as a moderate see me as one. To start throwing terms such as religious oppression at me shows only the warped mind of the moderate, as I simply advocate a secular state and the freedom to criticise and hate religion, as well as the freedom to encourage that way of thinking. And all of a sudden I'm in favour of the oppression of people for their religious beliefs. (which I state again I am not). Moderates cannot get their heads around the word hate, they are in fact extreme in the way they view the word, associating it only with their own way of thinking and terms such as hate speech and hate crime. Freedom of speech means freedom to hate and a lot of moderates simply do not understand this. And neither freedom means you have a right to impose or are in any way in favour of religious oppression.

Donkey Oaty · 03-02-2015 07:32PM

floggg wrote: »

Thats not how it works.

I'm a bit confused now, because I have been alerted to this and this.

Are you saying they would have happened anyway?

TireeTerror · 03-02-2015 07:36PM

floggg wrote: »

That is condescending drivel. There have been stronger, smarter believers than you or I will ever be. I don't share their beliefs, but it would be arrogant and ignorant to dismiss as weak or victims simply for believing.

If it works for them fine (I wont apologise for mocking people who insist on telling me they will pray for people who clearly couldn't give two ****s for their prayers).

It is rather stupid to make assumptions of anybody just because they have a different viewpoint or belief.

Also, child abuse really has no relevance to this argument. It doesn't prove or disprove anything about religion or god - only the men that claim to be believe in him.

Its actually an insult to the intelligence of all of mankind to try and make sense of religion.

I honestly do not even know why I am wasting my time discussing such a silly matter, religion is a fabricated steaming pile of dog turd that does not even stand against the slightest of reasoning.

For some reason it is acceptable to have places of worship where we indoctrinate people and brainwash them into believing in a complete and total fantasy.

The Vatican should be held accountable for its sins against humanity and all places of worship raised to the ground or converted into something that betters humanity. Any establishment that shelters and covers up murders, child molestation and many more heinous crimes ought to be disbanded.

Vile corrupt evil men praying upon society's weak and vulnerable. They have managed to become so ingrained into our society even more intelligent beings have succumbed to their con. It is all a lie and anyone saying otherwise is a weak victim and is delusional.

Donkey Oaty · 03-02-2015 07:45PM

TireeTerror wrote: »

It is all a lie and anyone saying otherwise is a weak victim and is delusional.

Or possibly avoiding the sack from their school or company, being demonised in their community or indeed a bullet in the head.

floggg · 03-02-2015 07:46PM

K4t wrote: »

No. And that is quite ironic considering my argument is in opposition to religious faith. To be extreme can also be seen as farthest from the ordinary or average, and that is not always a bad thing nor does it mean any of the things you mentioned. Most people in Ireland are Catholics or atheist, I would be deemed an antitheist. That could be viewed as extreme I suppose.

You seem to evidence of his point though. You have become extreme to the point of seeming intolerance as regards religion.

To crusade against religion is as bad as to crusade for it.

floggg · 03-02-2015 07:53PM

Terrlock wrote: »

Just going back through your posts are you referring to these Law in the OT?

There are some great things that are banned by the OT...:

- not being circumcised;
- breaking the Sabbath;
- being a town that believes in another god;
- eating anything that mixes meat and dairy;
- eating fat
- working on the Sabbath;
- being a stubborn, rebellious, and drunkard son;
- planting more than one kind of seed in a field;
- cutting the hair on the sides of our head;
- living in a city that failed to surrender to the israelites

let's not forget the NT disallows women from speaking in church.

If you read the NT especially acts you see that these Laws don't apply to the Gentiles.

Also Jesus refers to the circumcision of your heart not your flesh.

Also for Gays getting married?

Marriage is a blessing from God uniting Man and women as one.

That's its purpose. Scripture talks about towards end times there will be more and more people coming out as gay and this shows how fallen and corrupt man has become to even the extent as his own nature is corrupt.

God won't unite two men or women in marriage no matter how much anyone would want him too. There isn't much that I or anyone can do to persuade him otherwise I'd imagine.

I really wasn't sure whether that was sarcasm or not until I got to the anti-gay crap.

Don't worry, I don't want god marrying me. I plan to be married before a much higher authority - a HSE official.

K4t · 03-02-2015 07:59PM

floggg wrote: »

You seem to evidence of his point though. You have become extreme to the point of seeming intolerance as regards religion.

To crusade against religion is as bad as to crusade for it.

I didn't think you would fall into that trap, and it's interesting that you would use the word crusade knowing it's historical significance. Intolerance towards religion is the favourite line thrown at those who disagree with the idea of religion. And now it is thrown at me because I hate the idea of religion, and people are viewing the word hate as being too extreme. I am tolerant of religion insofar as I would never suppress such beliefs or encourage the suppression of those beliefs, just as I would not engage in or condone religious oppression. That is not to say I will not use my right to freedom of speech and expression to dismiss and show disdain for any and all religion.There is a difference, even if it is clouded by religious believers and moderates alike. I criticise the idea and the beliefs, not the people. Never the people. And we do have laws for people who physically harm others and I support those laws.
Nobody should ever be physically harmed or oppressed, especially not for what they believe in, be it religious beliefs or any other kind.

floggg · 03-02-2015 08:00PM

Terrlock wrote: »

They didn't believe the earth was flat, the believe it was a sphere and also was in space.

I would invite you to a bible study if you wish to understand that whole passage.

Yes, somebody linked to genesis earlier where I learned about the magical Sky dome separating the sky water from the non-sky water. Great stuff.

Of course it didn't explain how a dome would cover a spherical Earth.

Probably another allegory.

Dan_Solo · 03-02-2015 08:24PM

Terrlock wrote: »

They didn't believe the earth was flat, the believe it was a sphere and also was in space.

They might have after Egyptian mathematicians, who we know measured the circumference of the earth with reasonable accuracy, told them about it.
Or you could thank the jesus ghost guy I guess.

Dan_Solo · 03-02-2015 08:34PM

Arne_Saknussem wrote: »

I remember when i was young praying long and hard to God asking him for Castle Grayskull and getting nothing, nada!

Santa, on the other hand, sorted me right out. Much less judging and much more generous Santa is.

When I was about 7 I prayed my little heart out that god would fix my broken calculator watch. Prick never even answered.
I obviously should have tried Uri Gellar instead.

Dan_Solo · 03-02-2015 08:39PM

pueblo wrote: »

A camera can't make the observation on it's own. A camera is just a proxy method for humans to view an event.

It most certainly can. The interference pattern can be generated and stored and multiple people can view it at any later time. Did all these people therefore change the original reality of the interference pattern?
At heart it's no more complex than looking at a cylinder from the top and seeing a circle and then looking at it from the side and seeing a rectangle. The reality is constant despite the observation changing.
No spirit/ghost/beards required.

Ghost Buster · 03-02-2015 09:35PM

Terrlock wrote: »

I assure you I'm not trolling and I stand by what I said.

Scripture teaches that all men know of God, however they deny his existence.

JRR Tolkien teaches of Hobbits and Bolrogs. I also deny their existence

PTH2009 · 03-02-2015 09:46PM

Priests, nuns, bishops are wasting there life's

Science has already proven there is no god, no satan, no heaven or he'll

It is all just an excuse to deal with death

jobbridge4life · 03-02-2015 09:48PM

PTH2009 wrote: »

Science has already proven there is no god, no satan, no heaven or he'll

Well now they haven't.

PTH2009 · 03-02-2015 09:52PM

jobbridge4life wrote: »

Well now they haven't.

Ur Brain die
s when u die so u can't live on without it. I have had 3 close relations die in the last year and a half and I doubt there watching over me now. I've asked god for a load of things and he has never got back to me or my family.

EazyD · 03-02-2015 09:53PM

jobbridge4life wrote: »

Well now they haven't.

2 words: Cosmic expansion

deaddonkey15 · 03-02-2015 10:21PM

Terrlock wrote: »

I assure you I'm not trolling and I stand by what I said.

Scripture teaches that all men know of God, however they deny his existence.

Which God are you talking about? The Muslim God? Ancient Greek God's? A Roman God?

Stephen Fry on confronting god after death

Comments