Stephen Fry - asked What He Would Say If He Met God

[ianb321red]

Recent clip of Stephen Fry's reaction when asked what he would say if he met God (assumed Judeo Christian variant..)

Anyone seen it?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-suvkwNYSQo

 

[Danny777]

Recent clip of Stephen Fry's reaction when asked what he would say if he met God (assumed Judeo Christian variant..)

Anyone seen it?

If, after a lifetime of professing to be an atheist, you found you were totally wrong, surely there is a more appropriate response than using insult and delivering a character assassination to the God you didn't even believe in?!

Stephen Fry keeps referring to God as evil which is bizarre - who's moral barometer does he use to accuse God of being evil?

 

[ebia]

If, after a lifetime of professing to be an atheist, you found you were totally wrong, surely there is a more appropriate response than using insult and delivering a character assassination to the God you didn't even believe in?!

Stephen Fry keeps referring to God as evil which is bizarre - who's moral barometer does he use to accuse God of being evil?

It seems a reasonable challenge, given where he's coming from and the failure of popular christianity to engage effectively with that challenge. I'm sure God can handle it.

 

[ianb321red]

If, after a lifetime of professing to be an atheist, you found you were totally wrong, surely there is a more appropriate response than using insult and delivering a character assassination to the God you didn't even believe in?!

Stephen Fry keeps referring to God as evil which is bizarre - who's moral barometer does he use to accuse God of being evil?

Yes - this is a good example of the sound reasoning and rationality that atheism is famous for.

Based on this evidence, Atheism is the equivalent of getting annoyed with kids that still believe in Father Christmas...

 

[Bungle_Bear]

If, after a lifetime of professing to be an atheist, you found you were totally wrong, surely there is a more appropriate response than using insult and delivering a character assassination to the God you didn't even believe in?!

Why wouldn't/shouldn't he ask for an explanation for all the nastiness God has created and allows to continue in the world? Do you think he should just say "Oh, well if you exist I have no need to understand what it was all about"?

Stephen Fry keeps referring to God as evil which is bizarre - who's moral barometer does he use to accuse God of being evil?

The moral barometer that says anyone who willfully causes such suffering and unpleasantness is evil. Seems a reasonable call to me.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Yes - this is a good example of the sound reasoning and rationality that atheism is famous for.

Based on this evidence, Atheism is the equivalent of getting annoyed with kids that still believe in Father Christmas...

But Christianity never answers it.....

 

[MorkandMindy]

It seems a reasonable challenge, given where he's coming from and the failure of popular christianity to engage effectively with that challenge. I'm sure God can handle it.

Epicurus made that point a few centuries BC and it is not addressed in the NT.

 

[MorkandMindy]

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then He is not omnipotent.
Is He able, but not willing? Then He is malevolent.
Is He both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is He neither able nor willing? Then why call Him God?

Epicurus (c. 341 - c. 270 BC)

 

[ebia]

Epicurus made that point a few centuries BC and it is not addressed in the NT.

IMO "why doesnt God deal with evil" is exactly the question the story of Noah addresses.

But Fry is talking about suffering that doesn't seem to stem from human evil.

 

[Danny777]

Why wouldn't/shouldn't he ask for an explanation for all the nastiness God has created and allows to continue in the world? Do you think he should just say "Oh, well if you exist I have no need to understand what it was all about"?

There is a big difference between asking for an explanation with a genuine desire to understand and the name-calling/accusatory tone that Stephen Fry displays in this clip...

The moral barometer that says anyone who willfully causes such suffering and unpleasantness is evil. Seems a reasonable call to me.

Why should God be subject to the moral standards that you or Stephen Fry wish to judge Him by? Given that we all cause others suffering and unpleasantness, we are in no position to act as accuser and judge in our capacity as created beings.

If God were to put an end to all 'evil' and 'unpleasantness' as you protest He should, where should that stop? Should our ability to participate in 'evil' and 'unpleasantness' also be withdrawn? In other words, should our freedom of thought and action also be taken away in one great swoop? I imagine you would protest this was grossly unfair if this were the case as we would effectively then have no free-will at all if you only had the capacity to do 'good'. (Nevermind the problem of defining what 'good' is without the presence of 'evil'...)

 

[Danny777]

IMO "why doesnt God deal with evil" is exactly the question the story of Noah addresses.

But Fry is talking about suffering that doesn't seem to stem from human evil.

I think you are right, but if the book of Genesis is to be believed, the existence of all suffering is due to the first occurrence of human evil. This event led to the withdrawal of God from human affairs from which stems a broken world inhabited by broken people. Only Christ can correct this and our ultimate hope is the restoration of all things when He returns...

 

[ianb321red]

It seems a reasonable challenge, given where he's coming from and the failure of popular christianity to engage effectively with that challenge. I'm sure God can handle it.

Why have you connected what Fry said about god to Christianity?

 

[ebia]

Why have you connected what Fry said about god to Christianity?

Because his picture of the God he would be addressing is in large part derived from how he has seen God and the problems of the word portrayed by those who claim to follow said God. And quite rightly so; we are called to be God's image, God's light for the world.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Why should God be subject to the moral standards that you or Stephen Fry wish to judge Him by? Given that we all cause others suffering and unpleasantness, we are in no position to act as accuser and judge in our capacity as created beings.

You mean we shouldn't judge God by the standards he has given us to judge everything else by? Do you really think God is above his own moral standards?

If God were to put an end to all 'evil' and 'unpleasantness' as you protest He should, where should that stop? Should our ability to participate in 'evil' and 'unpleasantness' also be withdrawn? In other words, should our freedom of thought and action also be taken away in one great swoop?

Are you saying there is evil in heaven? Actually, we already know there is. Doesn't that pose a bit of a problem for all eternity? How can God be sure there won't be another rebellion? Or do you lose the ability to participate in 'evil' and 'unpleasantness' when you get there? Will you lose your freedom of thought and action when you die?

I imagine you would protest this was grossly unfair if this were the case as we would effectively then have no free-will at all if you only had the capacity to do 'good'. (Nevermind the problem of defining what 'good' is without the presence of 'evil'...)

I don't claim that a perfectly "good" supernatural being created everything including, by definition, evil. It's down to you to defend your belief, not down to me to stop asking awkward questions.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Why have you connected what Fry said about god to Christianity?

The interviewer told him he was at the Pearly Gates being met by God. Which other religion would he be referring to?

 

[ianb321red]

The moral barometer that says anyone who willfully causes such suffering and unpleasantness is evil. Seems a reasonable call to me.

Everyone has a moral barometer or a conscious.

However, when this barometer makes a moral decision, there must be an objective sense or law to say something is right or wrong.

If not, then everyone has their own idea or perception of right and wrong. Where does the moral "rulebook" come from ultimately?

The argument that it comes from social consensus/ agreement may be a satisfactory explanation in 21st century Great Britain, but it doesn't explain how it ultimately came to be originally...

 

[ebia]

Everyone has a moral barometer or a conscious.

However, when this barometer makes a moral decision, there must be an objective sense or law to say something is right or wrong.

If not, then everyone has their own idea or perception of right and wrong. Where does the moral "rulebook" come from ultimately?

The argument that it comes from social consensus/ agreement may be a satisfactory explanation in 21st century Great Britain, but it doesn't explain how it ultimately came to be originally...

But "godidit", no longer a satisfactory explanation for lightning, suddenly is a satisfactory explanation for morality again?

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Everyone has a moral barometer or a conscious.

However, when this barometer makes a moral decision, there must be an objective sense or law to say something is right or wrong.

If not, then everyone has their own idea or perception of right and wrong. Where does the moral "rulebook" come from ultimately?

The argument that it comes from social consensus/ agreement may be a satisfactory explanation in 21st century Great Britain, but it doesn't explain how it ultimately came to be originally...

True. But special pleading for your chosen deity cuts even less mustard. The argument from Danny appears to be "God has a different moral barometer to humans." There is no evidence for that and no reason to believe it other than convenience.

 

[ianb321red]

The interviewer told him he was at the Pearly Gates being met by God. Which other religion would he be referring to?

It's probably more to do with the fact that he's English and living in this country...

But okay, Pearly Gates = Revelation 21:21. I'm sure they were both 100% aware of that

 

[ianb321red]

True. But special pleading for your chosen deity cuts even less mustard. The argument from Danny appears to be "God has a different moral barometer to humans." There is no evidence for that and no reason to believe it other than convenience.

Where is the special pleading?