Stephen Fry on god

[Len Cnut]

Think of all the things pain has taught you in this life, so to those who say how can there be pain if there is a God well the answer is its essential for there to be pain, more has been taught to human beings through pain than just about anything else in this world. In fact, you could look at human history and call it a history of the human animals response to pain and not be far wrong, how many men has pain of the heart driven to an act of passion, how many times has the pain of another led you to a noble act, how many natural beautiful human processes involve pain? And when exploring the nature of pain, how can you take it as just a negative? Like Brando says in 'The Brave' when a woman gives birth she's in profound amounts of pain but her expression is punctuated with a kind of joy, pain isn't just this standalone negative thing.

And if there truly is a God and there truly is an eternity, think about that for a second, the idea of infinitum...then what does a childs bone cancer suffering amount to, on the broader scale? The human mind can't really process infinity, there's a beginning and an end to everything for us, there's always a 'what comes after that?' for us and it's because of that that we get questions like the one you asked. Precisely because you're bound to these limitations when in reality, if there is an eternity, then the pain of bone cancer, on the broader scale, amounts to almost nothing.

i understand that you're trying to play devil's advocate, but do you really think that every negative experience makes you better? real pain breaks your back and humiliates you and makes you cynical and you come to understand that this is the game you can't win by default because sooner or later you gonna die in pain. and you gonna watch everything you love dying in pain. and reasoning about this being almost nothing compared to eternity seems like such a cold comfort.

we simply have no ability to comprehend what is eternity while we're in these shoes so to me it's nothing more than self-deception

and i can't even say that im an atheist

No, what i was proposing was that every negative experience serves a function. It leads onto something and not necessarily something good...at all. But it's part of the overall process that leads us to the end where, as per one who believes in God, the Lord picks up the slack. Like a giant 4,000 ft tapestry, there's a stitch down the other end that is part of the overall thingie that holds up a stitch down the other end, though the two are really really far removed from each other.

[magisme]

Because without an opposite it ceases to exist.

Are you even sure that pain is the opposite of pleasure? Meditate on that a bit. Think about what you mean by "opposite." I have all the faith in the world in you, Len.

Uh...I'm not sure now I guess they're both just...sensations of a kind? Maybe? Part of the same category as opposed to like...polar opposites? Maybe? I dunno

I try as best I can to think of relations, associations, affiliations, and not opposites. It's difficult because our thought has been conditioned for millennia to think in terms of opposites. But what are we talking about when we talk about opposites? One thing opposes another, you can have one or the other, let's battle to the death. But, alternatively, if, as you are saying, pain is a requirement for the very existence of pleasure, if pain in essence engenders pleasure, and vice versa, then they hardly oppose each other, at least not entirely. They are the very conditions of each other's existence. They were made for each other. They are soul mates.

[SoulMonster]

Whyh would you need to understand it when you just experience it?

Because without an opposite it ceases to exist.

An omnipotent god could easily make us experience constant happiness even without experiences any opposite feelings. Because - and wait for it -- he is omnipotent. So you are wrong.

Right but i didn't say God couldn't do it, i said it ceases to exist...as in it ceases to exist for us. What are you proposing, that God should not have made us human beings with the human capacity to feel pain and joy and happiness and all these things but instead made us this being that feels no pain, paralysed in happiness constantly?

No I have never talked about losing sensations. I have talked about how easily an omnipotent god could have created a world inwhich we would never feel pain because there wouldn't be anything there to hurt us.

So we'd have the ability to feel pain it's just there wouldn't be pain? Soooooooo...then how could we have the ability to feel something that doesn't exist? Or wait, no, pain would exist, we just can't feel it because there wouldn't be anything to hurt us. So then if there's nothing there to hurt us. So then it's the loss of sensation again, isn't it?

No, it would be a loss of one type of experience. A bad type of experience. A type of experience we would be better without.

[Len Cnut]

Again, I am not proposing anything I am demonstrating that it would be a trifle matter for an omnipotent god to create a world where we didn't have to suffer any unpleasantness.

So am i but once again, i am questioning what value there would be for us in it.

Because it hurts.

And why is that bad?

I never said pain isn't part of the human experience, and doesn't serve a function, what I am saying is that a world without pain is a better world.

How do you know that?

Because without pain we would be happier.

How do you know for sure, not having lived in an alternate universe where pain doesn't exist?

Because I know pain is bad.

No, you know that pain hurts and because you don't like pain you say it's bad...but pain in itself is not bad, pain is just a function of life, it has no morality to it, it's just pain, good has come from pain in this world therefore pain isn't bad, you're just talking about yourself and your own sensations and what is or isn't agreeable to you.

[SoulMonster]

Again, I am not proposing anything I am demonstrating that it would be a trifle matter for an omnipotent god to create a world where we didn't have to suffer any unpleasantness.

So am i but once again, i am questioning what value there would be for us in it.

Because it hurts.

And why is that bad?

I never said pain isn't part of the human experience, and doesn't serve a function, what I am saying is that a world without pain is a better world.

How do you know that?

Because without pain we would be happier.

How do you know for sure, not having lived in an alternate universe where pain doesn't exist?

Because I know pain is bad.

No, you know that pain hurts and because you don't like pain you say it's bad...but pain in itself is not bad, pain is just a function of life, it has no morality to it, it's just pain, good has come from pain in this world therefore pain isn't bad, you're just talking about yourself and your own sensations and what is or isn't agreeable to you.

Of course something good can come out of pain, no one is denying that But mostly pain is just pain.

[Len Cnut]

Whyh would you need to understand it when you just experience it?

Because without an opposite it ceases to exist.

An omnipotent god could easily make us experience constant happiness even without experiences any opposite feelings. Because - and wait for it -- he is omnipotent. So you are wrong.

Right but i didn't say God couldn't do it, i said it ceases to exist...as in it ceases to exist for us. What are you proposing, that God should not have made us human beings with the human capacity to feel pain and joy and happiness and all these things but instead made us this being that feels no pain, paralysed in happiness constantly?

No I have never talked about losing sensations. I have talked about how easily an omnipotent god could have created a world inwhich we would never feel pain because there wouldn't be anything there to hurt us.

So we'd have the ability to feel pain it's just there wouldn't be pain? Soooooooo...then how could we have the ability to feel something that doesn't exist? Or wait, no, pain would exist, we just can't feel it because there wouldn't be anything to hurt us. So then if there's nothing there to hurt us. So then it's the loss of sensation again, isn't it?

No, it would be a loss of one type of experience. A bad type of experience. A type of experience we would be better without.

No, one that YOU consider bad because you're afraid of things that hurt.

[SoulMonster]

Whyh would you need to understand it when you just experience it?

Because without an opposite it ceases to exist.

An omnipotent god could easily make us experience constant happiness even without experiences any opposite feelings. Because - and wait for it -- he is omnipotent. So you are wrong.

Right but i didn't say God couldn't do it, i said it ceases to exist...as in it ceases to exist for us. What are you proposing, that God should not have made us human beings with the human capacity to feel pain and joy and happiness and all these things but instead made us this being that feels no pain, paralysed in happiness constantly?

No I have never talked about losing sensations. I have talked about how easily an omnipotent god could have created a world inwhich we would never feel pain because there wouldn't be anything there to hurt us.

So we'd have the ability to feel pain it's just there wouldn't be pain? Soooooooo...then how could we have the ability to feel something that doesn't exist? Or wait, no, pain would exist, we just can't feel it because there wouldn't be anything to hurt us. So then if there's nothing there to hurt us. So then it's the loss of sensation again, isn't it?

No, it would be a loss of one type of experience. A bad type of experience. A type of experience we would be better without.

No, one that YOU consider bad because you're afraid of things that hurt.

Humans tend to be afraid to get hurt and think that hurt is unplesant

I can't imagine having a discussion about whether a world without pain would be better or worse I can just imagine that right now you are driving a fork into your arm or in other ways inflict pain upon your body because, after all, it IS part of the human experience.

[netcat]

Like a giant 4,000 ft tapestry, there's a stitch down the other end that is part of the overall thingie that holds up a stitch down the other end, though the two are really really far removed from each other.

that's even more absurd than the absurd itself.

i don't exclude that things that from our perspective are absolute evil, will result in something good, somewhere, sometimes, in the big picture. but we'll never know that. therefore big picture doesn't exist for us. it's kind of a delusion of grandeur if we pretend it does

Edited February 2, 2015 by netcat

[SoulMonster]

I try as best I can to think of relations, associations, affiliations, and not opposites. It's difficult because our thought has been conditioned for millennia to think in terms of opposites. But what are we talking about when we talk about opposites? One thing opposes another, you can have one or the other, let's battle to the death. But, alternatively, if, as you are saying, pain is a requirement for the very existence of pleasure, if pain in essence engenders pleasure, and vice versa, then they hardly oppose each other, at least not entirely. They are the very conditions of each other's existence. They were made for each other. They are soul mates.

An omnipotent good could easily break down the interreliance between pain and pleasure, if it really exists (which it doesn't) because, after all, he would be omnipotent

[Len Cnut]

Humans tend to be afraid to get hurt and think that hurt is unplesant

Right but they don't all then begin to propose alternations in the natural order of species and blind themselves to it's obvious essential function in the human experience.

I can't imagine having a discussion about whether a world without pain would be better or worse

Well you should do cuz you've been doing it

I can just imagine that right now you are driving a fork into your arm or in other ways inflict pain upon your body because, after all, it IS part of the human experience.

And therein lies the problem, thinking about the situation in terms of what does or doesn't serve you instead of it's broader function in the universe.

I try as best I can to think of relations, associations, affiliations, and not opposites. It's difficult because our thought has been conditioned for millennia to think in terms of opposites. But what are we talking about when we talk about opposites? One thing opposes another, you can have one or the other, let's battle to the death. But, alternatively, if, as you are saying, pain is a requirement for the very existence of pleasure, if pain in essence engenders pleasure, and vice versa, then they hardly oppose each other, at least not entirely. They are the very conditions of each other's existence. They were made for each other. They are soul mates.

An omnipotent good could easily break down the interreliance between pain and pleasure, if it really exists (which it doesn't) because, after all, he would be omnipotent

Thats undeniable but it's where the results would leave us that is the question.

Like a giant 4,000 ft tapestry, there's a stitch down the other end that is part of the overall thingie that holds up a stitch down the other end, though the two are really really far removed from each other.

that's even more absurd than the absurd itself.

i don't exclude that things that from our perspective are absolute evil, will result in something good, somewhere, sometimes, in the big picture. but we'll never know that. therefore big picture doesn't exist for us. it's kind of a delusion of grandeur if we pretend it does

But we do see it, we're talking about it now. Or rather we see the potential for A bigger picture as opposed to the specific one thats gonna come to pass.

[magisme]

I try as best I can to think of relations, associations, affiliations, and not opposites. It's difficult because our thought has been conditioned for millennia to think in terms of opposites. But what are we talking about when we talk about opposites? One thing opposes another, you can have one or the other, let's battle to the death. But, alternatively, if, as you are saying, pain is a requirement for the very existence of pleasure, if pain in essence engenders pleasure, and vice versa, then they hardly oppose each other, at least not entirely. They are the very conditions of each other's existence. They were made for each other. They are soul mates.

An omnipotent good could easily break down the interreliance between pain and pleasure, if it really exists (which it doesn't) because, after all, he would be omnipotent

I'm not talking about an omnipotent god. I took a detour. I find the omnipotent god debate banal and impertinent.

[Len Cnut]

What this whole thing amounts to is:

'God is wrong!'

'Why?'

'Cuz he didn't make the world perfect!'

'what kind of world would you like?'

'i dunno, God should just wave his magic wand and make it all better!'

Which amounts to asking for something without having the first fucking clue what it is. Because that doesn't matter to you because your point is you just wannabe away from all the things that YOU personally consider bad or that you feel hurt you as a person. Human beings can't even concieve utopia yet they feel put out that God hasn't put it on a plate for them. Humans can't even get their heads around eternity and the eternal yet they want eternal happiness. People haven't even come to truly understand how the world works...yet they wanna change it.

[SoulMonster]

Humans tend to be afraid to get hurt and think that hurt is unplesant

Right but they don't all then begin to propose alternations in the natural order of species and blind themselves to it's obvious essential function in the human experience.

I have never claimed that pain is devoid of function, not even in the human experience, just that we would be better off without it (because pain mostly serves no other purpose than to make us miserable), and particularly, that an omnipotent god could easily have created a world inwhich we never experiences misery.

I try as best I can to think of relations, associations, affiliations, and not opposites. It's difficult because our thought has been conditioned for millennia to think in terms of opposites. But what are we talking about when we talk about opposites? One thing opposes another, you can have one or the other, let's battle to the death. But, alternatively, if, as you are saying, pain is a requirement for the very existence of pleasure, if pain in essence engenders pleasure, and vice versa, then they hardly oppose each other, at least not entirely. They are the very conditions of each other's existence. They were made for each other. They are soul mates.

An omnipotent good could easily break down the interreliance between pain and pleasure, if it really exists (which it doesn't) because, after all, he would be omnipotent

I'm not talking about an omnipotent god. I took a detour. I find the omnipotent god debate banal and impertinent.

Stil, many million people actually believe in this omnipotent god.

[Len Cnut]

Humans tend to be afraid to get hurt and think that hurt is unplesant

Right but they don't all then begin to propose alternations in the natural order of species and blind themselves to it's obvious essential function in the human experience.

I have never claimed that pain is devoid of function, not even in the human experience, just that we would be better off without it (because pain mostly serves no other purpose than to make us miserable), and particularly, that an omnipotent god could easily have created a world inwhich we never experiences misery.

Men have found themselves through pain, men have claimed to've found enlightenment through pain, great works of art, great tragedys are informed by pain, pain teaches us about ourself, about our emotions and their bounds, pain serves us physically, how can you possibly sit there and say pain mostly serves no other purpose than to cause us misery, i completely disagree with that, it has the ABILITY to cause us misery, it is not 'mostly' it's function.

You're taking a human sensation and just degrading your understanding of it to a 5 yr olds level of 'ouch, hurties!' and just filing it away.

Edited February 2, 2015 by Len B'stard

[SoulMonster]

What this whole thing amounts to is:

'God is wrong!'

'Why?'

'Cuz he didn't make the world perfect!'

'what kind of world would you like?'

'i dunno, God should just wave his magic wand and make it all better!'

Which amounts to asking for something without having the first fucking clue what it is.

Have you already forgotten that this last few pages have been about an alternative world, one where humans didn't feel misery? That's what we are asking for from a good, omnipotent god. A world where no one is diagnosed with bone cancer at 5, a world where no one had to see their familes washed away, a world where people aren't mauled by animals, a world where kids don't die from diptheria, a world where no one is raped, a world where...and so on until there is no misery and pain left.

Humans tend to be afraid to get hurt and think that hurt is unplesant

Right but they don't all then begin to propose alternations in the natural order of species and blind themselves to it's obvious essential function in the human experience.

I have never claimed that pain is devoid of function, not even in the human experience, just that we would be better off without it (because pain mostly serves no other purpose than to make us miserable), and particularly, that an omnipotent god could easily have created a world inwhich we never experiences misery.

Men have found themselves through pain, men have claimed to've found enlightenment through pain, great works of art, great tragedys are informed by pain, pain teaches us about ourself, about our emotions and their bounds, pain serves us physically, how can you possibly sit there and say pain mostly serves no other purpose than to cause us misery, i completely disagree with that, it has the ABILITY to cause us misery, it is not 'mostly' it's function.

I am talking about both emotional and physical pain, and yes, the definition of this is that they DO cause misery. You are entirely right that in some cases we are able to take something good away from the pain we experience, but mostly we aren't and mostly we would be much, much, much better not having to endure it.

Edited February 2, 2015 by SoulMonster

[magisme]

Notice how the omnipotent god is asked to make things better for humans, pretty much exclusively, as if, perhaps, we thought ourselves the chosen ones.

[Len Cnut]

What this whole thing amounts to is:

'God is wrong!'

'Why?'

'Cuz he didn't make the world perfect!'

'what kind of world would you like?'

'i dunno, God should just wave his magic wand and make it all better!'

Which amounts to asking for something without having the first fucking clue what it is.

Have you already forgotten that this last few pages have been about an alternative world, one where humans didn't feel misery? That's what we are asking for from a good, omnipotent god. A world where no one is diagnosed with bone cancer at 5, a world where no one had to see their familes washed away, a world where people aren't mauled by animals, a world where kids don't die from diptheria, a world where no one is raped, a world where...and so on until there is no misery and pain left.

Right and you couldn't define this world without throwing up a million and one connundrums regarding how it wouldn't work. Put simply you're asking for something that you can't rightly concieve let alone define. You want us to not be human beings anymore and instead become being X, which doesn't feel pain, doesn't feel anything except total eternal bliss and joy for eternity, discounting the fact that the search for happiness is why we get up in the morning, why we live. Your proposal for this perfect world was akin to the entire worlds population being laid out in beds on a never ending morphine drip for eternity.

[Axls Rocket Queen]

What a lot of these arguments lack is a real understanding of who God is and his character. At the risk of way over-simplifying, here's my bite-sized attempt to explain the whole suffering issue from a Christian perspective:

God is eternal and unchanging, he is also just. In the beginning he made humans to live in perfect harmony in Heaven with God, and the price of rebelling against God (aka sin) was spiritual death/being cut off from God. The first humans did rebel and were separated from God, and all the evil in the world took hold. As God is unchanging and just, he can't just 'wave a magic wand' and go back on that, someone has to pay the price for all the sin in the world. But because he loves his creation and so wants to restore us to the perfect world he intended, he became human in the form of Jesus, and on the cross took on himself the pain and punishment for all mankind's sins forever- all that had been, were happening right then, and are to come. All that he asked in return was that we believe and follow him, and then he sets to work within us to restore the world to perfection...but we are still inherently sinful and rebellious, and the reason we have spent so long in this world with its pain and suffering (this is partly Biblical and maybe partly me) is that God is waiting and giving people time to turn to him. How long? We don't know, but on that day everything will be made right.

[netcat]

Human beings can't even concieve utopia yet they feel put out that God hasn't put it on a plate for them. Humans can't even get their heads around eternity and the eternal yet they want eternal happiness. People haven't even come to truly understand how the world works...yet they wanna change it.

and we didn't even start talking about their shortcomings

[Len Cnut]

What a lot of these arguments lack is a real understanding of who God is and his character. At the risk of way over-simplifying, here's my bite-sized attempt to explain the whole suffering issue from a Christian perspective:

God is eternal and unchanging, he is also just. In the beginning he made humans to live in perfect harmony in Heaven with God, and the price of rebelling against God (aka sin) was spiritual death/being cut off from God. The first humans did rebel and were separated from God, and all the evil in the world took hold. As God is unchanging and just, he can't just 'wave a magic wand' and go back on that, someone has to pay the price for all the sin in the world. But because he loves his creation and so wants to restore us to the perfect world he intended, he became human in the form of Jesus, and on the cross took on himself the pain and punishment for all mankind's sins forever- all that had been, were happening right then, and are to come. All that he asked in return was that we believe and follow him, and then he sets to work within us to restore the world to perfection...but we are still inherently sinful and rebellious, and the reason we have spent so long in this world with its pain and suffering (this is partly Biblical and maybe partly me) is that God is waiting and giving people time to turn to him. How long? We don't know, but on that day everything will be made right.

They're gonna chew you up over that one dearie

[SoulMonster]

What this whole thing amounts to is:

'God is wrong!'

'Why?'

'Cuz he didn't make the world perfect!'

'what kind of world would you like?'

'i dunno, God should just wave his magic wand and make it all better!'

Which amounts to asking for something without having the first fucking clue what it is.

Have you already forgotten that this last few pages have been about an alternative world, one where humans didn't feel misery? That's what we are asking for from a good, omnipotent god. A world where no one is diagnosed with bone cancer at 5, a world where no one had to see their familes washed away, a world where people aren't mauled by animals, a world where kids don't die from diptheria, a world where no one is raped, a world where...and so on until there is no misery and pain left.

Right and you couldn't define this world without throwing up a million and one connundrums regarding how it wouldn't work.

There are no conundrums here. Just you not getting it.

[Axls Rocket Queen]

What a lot of these arguments lack is a real understanding of who God is and his character. At the risk of way over-simplifying, here's my bite-sized attempt to explain the whole suffering issue from a Christian perspective:

God is eternal and unchanging, he is also just. In the beginning he made humans to live in perfect harmony in Heaven with God, and the price of rebelling against God (aka sin) was spiritual death/being cut off from God. The first humans did rebel and were separated from God, and all the evil in the world took hold. As God is unchanging and just, he can't just 'wave a magic wand' and go back on that, someone has to pay the price for all the sin in the world. But because he loves his creation and so wants to restore us to the perfect world he intended, he became human in the form of Jesus, and on the cross took on himself the pain and punishment for all mankind's sins forever- all that had been, were happening right then, and are to come. All that he asked in return was that we believe and follow him, and then he sets to work within us to restore the world to perfection...but we are still inherently sinful and rebellious, and the reason we have spent so long in this world with its pain and suffering (this is partly Biblical and maybe partly me) is that God is waiting and giving people time to turn to him. How long? We don't know, but on that day everything will be made right.

They're gonna chew you up over that one dearie

I don't even care

[SoulMonster]

Put simply you're asking for something that you can't rightly concieve let alone define.

I have already conceived it. Besides, I leave the details to the omnipotent god.

[Lithium]

The anti-religion refrain is probably the most mean spirited and arrogant presence on the forum. And I like most of you atheists, but that's just the truth. Have at it. I won't interfere anymore. Just thought that should be put out there.

How is it mean-spirited, exactly? How are we supposed to react to people still clinging to dogmatic religions from the Bronze Age in 2015? Most religious people can't help it, of course - they have been brought up in religious homes and have therefore not been left with much of a choice on the matter. Also, it's not my intention to attack their person, I'm attacking the belief itself because I find it poisonous and a huge obstacle to the evolution of humanity.

[magisme]

What a lot of these arguments lack is a real understanding of who God is and his character. At the risk of way over-simplifying, here's my bite-sized attempt to explain the whole suffering issue from a Christian perspective:

God is eternal and unchanging, he is also just. In the beginning he made humans to live in perfect harmony in Heaven with God, and the price of rebelling against God (aka sin) was spiritual death/being cut off from God. The first humans did rebel and were separated from God, and all the evil in the world took hold. As God is unchanging and just, he can't just 'wave a magic wand' and go back on that, someone has to pay the price for all the sin in the world. But because he loves his creation and so wants to restore us to the perfect world he intended, he became human in the form of Jesus, and on the cross took on himself the pain and punishment for all mankind's sins forever- all that had been, were happening right then, and are to come. All that he asked in return was that we believe and follow him, and then he sets to work within us to restore the world to perfection...but we are still inherently sinful and rebellious, and the reason we have spent so long in this world with its pain and suffering (this is partly Biblical and maybe partly me) is that God is waiting and giving people time to turn to him. How long? We don't know, but on that day everything will be made right.

A few questions. Please don't think I'm being hostile. Not my intention at all.

1. How does the unchanging thing work with him becoming Jesus? Why isn't that change?

2. You say God is just. OK. What does that mean? Is it tautological? I mean, is God just because he's God and God is just, no questions asked?

3. If God made humans "to live in perfect harmony in Heaven with God," where does the rebelliousness come from? That's one of those places where people can go, "Look, your God fucked up. But you say he can't fuck up so you contradict yourself," and so on. You see what I mean?