Off Topic Stephen Fry on the concept of God!

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Toby said:
Their 'purpose', like the worms', is to survive and procreate. They have a different way of doing it, but they're not pollinating flowers to be nice to other creatures.

Those worms are surely part of the food chain too, every creature is.
Click to expand...

Comes back to what is the meaning of life doesn't it - as humans, we have no purpose as such, other than to do what all the other animals do. Just happens we are at the top of the food chain and have more developed brains (in most cases). I can't see that we have been made, merely to worship a supreme being. Which would suggest that there is indeed no such thing.
 
andytoprankin said:
I've kept myself to myself during nearly all of this. I'm reminded of the Christopher Hitchens quote:
"If religious instruction were not allowed until the child had attained the age of reason, we would be living in a quite different world."

I work for a Christian organisation that recently stated that all members of staff must take part in the prayers and singing of hymns that take place during working hours. Irrespective of one's personal belief system. Christians, Hindus, Muslims, Athiests and those who prefer not to have a religious label, like myself. Hmmm.

In regards to what I've selected to quote from Scullion, I would add two things. My Dad told me never to discuss sex, religion or politics. Perhaps a little restrictive, but I've seen things get a little heated on the boards recently with regards to two of these three. That saddens me. I am probably with cologne very much on one and very much not with him on another. But where we all meet is in our love for the Hornets.

Perhaps I shouldn't read these threads, I have been a little turned off the site recently because of the division they seem to create, whilst finding it impossible not to 'like' certain comments. I am a hypocrite, I accept that. Should these things be kept to PMs? I can understand why most would say no. At work I have been subjected to a great deal of bullying because of a whistleblowing issue, the details of which I know would cause every person here to expect me to alert appropriate authorities. I did and the results are horrible in terms of what you learn of human nature and how authority, in its various forms, is often corrupt, even if it claims to be institutionally impossible for that to be the case. I come to the site to share my unity regarding something I love. I think I need to keep to the predictions only maybe. Matej is not of an age where he would understand what I've written, thankfully. I don't think he'd come trawling through this thread anyway. <laugh>

Suffice to say, we're all Hornets ('cept Dave, and we're working on him ;)) and I hope that is where focus shifts back to. I'll sing, shoulder to shoulder, standing or sitting (whoops that's a can of worms I want to duck out of ;)) with any and all of you. Come on you Golden Boys!

Pray continue... ( :huh: ;)) I'm outta here. <ok>
Click to expand...


Although i perhaps couldn't be much further apart form you on the issue Andy I'm actually much in agreement. I have stayed away to a large extent as my views would be ripped to shreds and I have no real desire to try and defend them even if I could! Some have also made it very clear why they hold the views they do and I would never seek to challenge that - indeed if I found myself in similar circumstances I may well feel exactly the same way.

Sorry to hear about your employment woes - I sympathise as I've been treated pretty badly at work recently (and am taking a down grade just to get out of the area I'm in) and I cannot believe the way that some people act - particularly one or two who claim to be religious. Nobody should really go out of their way to screw others over but being preachy as well just seems to make it worse in my view. Just human nature I suppose but not very nice all the same.

Although the debates are heated they're still pretty polite and interesting but, as said, I don't get too involved.

Anyway - onwarads and upwards and I'm off to light a candle for for a victory on Saturday <whistle>
 
  • Like
Reactions: andytoprankin and brian_66_usa
canary-dave said:
Just seen this on Facebook! Very funny!

http://www.theguardian.com/science/...edge-to-increase-interference-with-the-church
Click to expand...

That's a funny article, this one was good too

http://www.theguardian.com/science/brain-flapping/2014/dec/12/santa-claus-father-christmas

And strangely relevant...

If someone on here kept on insisting Father Christmas was real, most people would mock them. You cannot disprove his existence...There's as much proof for the existence of God as there is for Santa.

But we have to respect peoples' religious views because...?

PS: Actually, that BBH idiot probably does believe Father Christmas is real, oops <sorry>
 
Hmmm. I too find the heated nature if some of these debates uncomfortable and generally avoid them. Having said that I find the evolution of religions interesting. I have met many religious people who are lovely, kind, wonderful people. Similarly I have met some who are not. But the same goes for every group of people. I expect that there are some lovely people who support that lot up the road, but I've just not met them yet.

The existence or non-existence of god has nothing to do with atrocities and goodness carried out in Her name. Neither has the belief in God. Hate is a consequence of power and its abuse. If God exists I don't think She has abused her power. It is only some of her followers who have done that.
 
NZHorn said:
Hmmm. I too find the heated nature if some of these debates uncomfortable and generally avoid them. Having said that I find the evolution of religions interesting. I have met many religious people who are lovely, kind, wonderful people. Similarly I have met some who are not. But the same goes for every group of people. I expect that there are some lovely people who support that lot up the road, but I've just not met them yet.

The existence or non-existence of god has nothing to do with atrocities and goodness carried out in Her name. Neither has the belief in God. Hate is a consequence of power and its abuse. If God exists I don't think She has abused her power. It is only some of her followers who have done that.
Click to expand...

Father Christmas being real is a bit more likely...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deleted 1 and brian_66_usa
Leonardo said:
Thanks to the links given above I came across a very good one by Russel Brand - yep that sounds impossible but as a Christian he tries to debunk Fry and makes some excellent points. In particular he points out three aspects of the universe - the strong force, gravity and the like which have been shown by scientists to need to be absolutely precise - had they been less than a small part of 1 % stonger or weaker the universe would fall apart. His argument is that the likelihood for these forces to have been set so precisely is infinitesimal - they would not happen at random - yet they are set at those precise levels. I think his "take" from that is then that a god must have set them. His concept of god seems to me more like Cologne's if I have understood him correctly or perhaps Fez's gnostics. I am not sure how he squares that with a "creator" god as his "forces that are in everything around us is not the same thing.

Leaving all that aside you come back to the question Scullion raised - the old if there is a god then how did he comes into being? Without the "god is a circle" non answer we find that sticking god in between nothing and the universe does not help anyone.

I think in answer to RB's laws of physics problem that some scientists argue that there are an infinite number of potential universes so that every level of force that could be set IS set in some of them. In the ones that don't "work" there is nobody to question them so inevitably it is only in those that have the precise values needed that everything comes together and we can have this discussion.
Click to expand...

Russel Brand is a complete idiot. Self promoting fool.
 
  • Like
Reactions: brian_66_usa, Toby and canary-dave
canary-dave said:
Just seen this on Facebook! Very funny!

http://www.theguardian.com/science/...edge-to-increase-interference-with-the-church
Click to expand...
Good article - very amusing.

I am sorry to learn of your views on this and the politics topic Andy and Dan too. I suspect that I am the prime "criminal" in that my debating style has always been rather confrontational. However this was described as off-topic so is not really intended for the "normal" hornet but for those of us who enjoy a good debate and we understand that it can get somewhat heated but usually stops short of boiling. I too was taught never to discuss politics and religion - and I would not in a general forum but I do here as I know most of the respondants are good decent people and that even when we disagree over a subject I think we do accept differences. There is only so much happening to Watford in a week and I find it quite pleasant to go "off topic" too.

I respect everybody's right to have different opinions and beliefs from each other. On religion nobody can ever be "proved" right or wrong as scientists cannot prove the absence of god - only to point out perhaps probabilities and theists do not try to prove god's existence as for them faith is the key importance.

It would be a shame Andy if subjects like this prevented you from participating except on the likes of the predictions thread. Surely at worst you can avoid this and politics. Ever since this forum began I have watched the level of activity. When there are no "off topic subjects the forum nearly dies - very few posts are made at times and few people contribute. When I had my year away from here I would occasionally view as a guest and was sad to see the level of chat so low.

This is again "confrontational" but I cannot see how a person can be insulted by questions about their belief or non belief. Somebody whose faith could be shattered by a few simple questions must ask themselves how strong their faith is - perhaps they must not. Many of the atheists on here have declared they too once had faith and perhaps like ex-smokers we are the most extreme in our position against what we formally thought.

If there is general consensus though that topics like this should not be aired I would be disappointed but accept it as the "general" will
 
Sorry Leo - it was a bit lazy of me to just agree with Andy. It's a fine thread and the debate is excellent. I just tend to stay out of them to a degree.
 
One of the principle reasons the "establishment" has so much power and influence , is because the great unwashed have not been encouraged to engage in intellectual debate or politics . The folk in charge are happy for the vast majority to remain blissfully ignorant sheep ... after all football is considered to be the opium of the masses . I'm pleased to see there are peacemakers here . This sort of discussion can be amusing in small doses and stimulates the juices, but its not worth any aggro .
Of course talking about religion and politics gets us ordinary people nowhere and does risk upsetting over sensitive souls and causing friction ... ( I for one am going to avoid any election coverage ...mainly because I believe those nasty Tories are going to be elected ) .
Shame we are also not allowed to talk about s.e.x ..I spent most of last year on dating websites ...and have so many tall tales to offer :emoticon-0100-smile ( reality was a often a stressful nightmare , glad I have now found a good'un ) .
 
  • Like
Reactions: brian_66_usa
I must admit that I have become rather bored with the thread now. Quite right to have it, but it seems that it has become a forum for people to restate their own view on the subject just a bit too often. Due to the nature of the ref that we had against Bournemouth and his major lash up, the match thread has had almost twice as many posts as this one, so maybe what draws us together is more important on here than the views of a man who has taken drugs and attempts suicide when he finds that belief in himself is not enough.
 
oldfrenchhorn said:
I must admit that I have become rather bored with the thread now. Quite right to have it, but it seems that it has become a forum for people to restate their own view on the subject just a bit too often. Due to the nature of the ref that we had against Bournemouth and his major lash up, the match thread has had almost twice as many posts as this one, so maybe what draws us together is more important on here than the views of a man who has taken drugs and attempts suicide when he finds that belief in himself is not enough.
Click to expand...
I would be disappointed to think that a match thread that should engage every single poster or lurker on here (especially in a controversial match) would not easily out- post a topic that at best a small minority are going to be either interested in or prepared to discuss. Having said that every topic has its day and perhaps this one's was yesterday. Probably my last post on this thread as mood seems to have swung against it.
 
I've generally stayed out of the debate too... people are free to believe what they want to but feel no one should push their own beliefs onto others or criticise just because they don't hold the same beliefs!

"Your beliefs don't make you a better person, your behaviour does"
 
  • Like
Reactions: andytoprankin, superhorns and Deleted 1
SalisburyKev said:
I've generally stayed out of the debate too... people are free to believe what they want to but feel no one should push their own beliefs onto others or criticise just because they don't hold the same beliefs!

"Your beliefs don't make you a better person, your behaviour does"
Click to expand...
I thought the debate was about sharing what opinions we hold. As an atheist I have spent my whole life being told what religious people think - especially of course Christians. I find it slightly bizarre that religious people interpret hearing an atheist's views as "attacking" them. Isn't the intention of a discussion or debate to put your views (politely of course) and hear the response so that both sides if open minded can re-evaluate their positions. I have not regarded this debate as some have of people simply restating their own position a bit too often but of examining aspects of it. The debate between Fez and myself on gnosticism was one such and I enjoyed it and learned from it.

I am pleased that people believe in god - without needing to myself. It gives comfort to millions nay billions probably and except for the tiny minority of militants or zealots does not harm others. I would never want or try to stop anyone believing in their god. In a world so full of misery as well as goodness whatever beliefs one holds are good and valid for them. I understand lots of people do not like to discuss the subject - as for sex and politics - but you only have to look at thehigh% of people who view this thread who also contribute to see that it does carry a good deal of interest.
 
Leonardo said:
I thought the debate was about sharing what opinions we hold. As an atheist I have spent my whole life being told what religious people think - especially of course Christians. I find it slightly bizarre that religious people interpret hearing an atheist's views as "attacking" them. Isn't the intention of a discussion or debate to put your views (politely of course) and hear the response so that both sides if open minded can re-evaluate their positions. I have not regarded this debate as some have of people simply restating their own position a bit too often but of examining aspects of it. The debate between Fez and myself on gnosticism was one such and I enjoyed it and learned from it.

I am pleased that people believe in god - without needing to myself. It gives comfort to millions nay billions probably and except for the tiny minority of militants or zealots does not harm others. I would never want or try to stop anyone believing in their god. In a world so full of misery as well as goodness whatever beliefs one holds are good and valid for them. I understand lots of people do not like to discuss the subject - as for sex and politics - but you only have to look at thehigh% of people who view this thread who also contribute to see that it does carry a good deal of interest.
Click to expand...

Not entirely sure why you quoted me... but when I said I have stayed out of the debate, I mean that I don't really hold a strong belief either way and I'm probably not as eloquent as most at putting my point across.

I'm fine with people having their own beliefs, praying to who they think is the 'right' god. It's when they force their beliefs on others I do have an issue with, and also performing acts in the name of 'god'. If having a belief in a god person makes you be a good person and do good things, then great.

I don't know if there is a god... but have I 'prayed' to a god when Watford are 1-0 down, yes I have!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deleted 1
Leonardo...don't waste your efforts mate ...just accept the awful truth ..ie the vast majority of the population are sheeple , grazing upon the food dished out by Rupert Murdock and his little demons .... Baa , baaaaa .. You know the sort , those that actually believe the first moon landing film footage is genuine . Ok , I drive my daughters nuts as they say there is a mirror there to measure distance between the Earth and moon .. but this was obviously left there by the moons previous inhabitants or more likely a later mission .
 
Leonardo said:
... I understand lots of people do not like to discuss the subject - as for sex and politics - but you only have to look at thehigh% of people who view this thread who also contribute to see that it does carry a good deal of interest.
Click to expand...

Jeremy Kyle gets his share of viewers, too. Not an argument for broadcasting him, IMHO. <ok>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back