It has to do with the way our brain develops in childhood. Our brain first takes in things with a purpose driven focus to quickly learn what things can be used for. How to leverage the world around us. Most people never override these understandings of the world around them.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Stephen Fry on Confronting God After Death
- Thread starter ponpo
- Start date
- Status
It has to do with the way our brain develops in childhood. Our brain first takes in things with a purpose driven focus to quickly learn what things can be used for. How to leverage the world around us. Most people never override these understandings of the world around them.
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
I'm an atheist... But I always thought the answer to "why does God allow suffering" is plainly obvious.
Try writing a story without conflict.
Try programming a game without obstacles and fail conditions.
Duh.
Try writing a story without conflict.
Try programming a game without obstacles and fail conditions.
Duh.
soul creator
Member
oooh, sick Byrne
True. The problem of evil isn't a problem for a God that actually is evil (or, maybe more accurately, isn't actively evil, but doesn't actually care either way about human suffering), heh.
Of course, since a lot of people do in fact claim that God is totally awesome and loving and worthy of worship, that's when that question usually comes about.[/quote]
BocoDragon said:
True. The problem of evil isn't a problem for a God that actually is evil (or, maybe more accurately, isn't actively evil, but doesn't actually care either way about human suffering), heh.
Of course, since a lot of people do in fact claim that God is totally awesome and loving and worthy of worship, that's when that question usually comes about.[/quote]
You would already be going to hell so why not tell him to fuck off before that.
Considering his answer seems mostly directed to the mainstream Christian God, then many Christians would simply answer that evil was introduced by the actions of humankind.
Of course, it does seem odd and unjust that the consequences of the actions of Adam and Eve would trickle down to all of humanity, but they were supposed to be the perfect representatives of humanity. If the quintessential human fails the test, how can any other variety of human presume their innocence?
Note that this answer presupposes that what the Bible states in Genesis is accurate and literal (as opposed to metaphorical), because I assume that these are the established parameters of this discussion, which are always subject to change.
Of course, it does seem odd and unjust that the consequences of the actions of Adam and Eve would trickle down to all of humanity, but they were supposed to be the perfect representatives of humanity. If the quintessential human fails the test, how can any other variety of human presume their innocence?
Note that this answer presupposes that what the Bible states in Genesis is accurate and literal (as opposed to metaphorical), because I assume that these are the established parameters of this discussion, which are always subject to change.
I think "smote" is correct.
No since it still makes God seem really shitty. The punishment does not fit the 'crime' of eating some dumb apple.
Besides if you accept evolution, which you should, Adam and Eve never happened so this is not an excuse either way. Can't just pull out a fictional story to justify things.
I agree, but they were also friends and they've headlined debates together. Fry certainly picked up a phrase or two. Not like Hitchens was the first to all of his points.
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
Yeah it seems to be more of a problem that stumps "all loving/all knowing God"-believing Christians rather than philosophers.
Though I think it doesn't show the callousness of a deity so much as the practicalities of world design. Life and success has no meaning without death and failure. He can be a loving God but he has the constraint that if he wants his world to have coherence and meaning for his subjects (as opposed to being some boring formless void), then he's got to design a world with hard edges.
m_shortpants
Member
Yeah, I mean I've seen this justification many times. From a religious individuals perspective, yes, bone cancer for a child is a terrible thing, but compared to the supposed unlimited paradise of heaven it may not be in the "grand scheme". The child's burden would then be a test of character for it's parents and so on and so forth. So the parents are tested and the child gets unlimited bliss. Or something.
So God is a sadistic DM?
And the lesson in Eden was, remain ignorant and subservient above all. Literally.
Damerman
Member
so, if you were an omnipotent god, you would allow all of this pain and suffering?
m_shortpants
Member
Well, if heaven is infinite, boundless, divine paradise, then no? I don't know, I'm giving the usual religious response/justification, that's all.
Christians are sheep. I mean literally they compare themselves to lambs, their congregations to flocks and their god is a metaphorical shepard. Gee, I wonder why that is.
ActuallyHulk
Banned
Pretty much, and children are perfect in the eyes of God so they're going straight to heaven for an eternity rather than this life which in the grand scheme is as long as an eye blink. Also keep in mind that they're not actually dying to God, they're going back to him. Metaphorically, they're out somewhere and he's calling them home because the sun is going down.
It's just a bullshit way to justify anything bad that happens. You can even get some people to spin the Holocaust into something positive I'm sure.
voodoojohn
Banned
I will probably judge him poorly given the current state of the world.
If I was omnipotent I would be bored, and would hardly be thinking. It would be like browsing the web on a infinite amount number of monitors. You just kind of absorb everything, but have done so for everything past and present.
I would take no action on any particular nuance of the entirety of everything. In fact I probably wouldn't be an omnipotent god at that point I would be the abstraction of everything which is everything itself. The only representation of everything is everything. So I wouldn't be god. I wouldn't exist.
Just because some people use sheep as a pejorative doesn't mean all people do or that the metaphor isn't apt.
Yeah, I know. But it's like those insects could be thinking the same thing about us lol. I think the system is built to harbor life, and you're gonna get things bumping into each other- that is considering that evolution is still in the mix with this version of God.
Nah, I think Soriku's got you beat.
^ lol
So awesome. Perfect reaction gif material.
Of all things he has to say, he complains about THAT? worse is that he barks to the wrong tree.
I guess that geezer is but one of many who do not grow wiser as they age. life is but of many random variables. most importantly, it is not biased to either perception of good or evil.
why does he complain of variables simply playing out as intended? Life is very fair in that it favors none.
I accept both the good and the bad of this current perceived reality. I guess this shows ageing is a frightening thing.
I guess that geezer is but one of many who do not grow wiser as they age. life is but of many random variables. most importantly, it is not biased to either perception of good or evil.
why does he complain of variables simply playing out as intended? Life is very fair in that it favors none.
I accept both the good and the bad of this current perceived reality. I guess this shows ageing is a frightening thing.
The Shogun
Banned
To be fair if the Abrahamic god were real airing out grievances wouldn't help at all.
That dude has some fucked up shit coming for those that don't worship him.
Because a religion that preaches from the rooftops that it is the religion of morality and decency cannot harmonize that belief with the truth.
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
If I wanted to design an interesting universe, yes, it would include some measure of suffering.
Whether you make the universe a Dark Souls or a Kirby's Air Ride in terms of challenge is a design choice... But we can easily see how a universe with increased challenges can bring increased enjoyment with the story, the development of those who undertake these challenges, the urgency to try and succeed knowing that there is a fail condition, etc.
A universe without some struggle is incoherant... Just a formless void with no reason to do anything. Why even make creation in that case?
Yes. It's a very arrogant response. In the grand scheme of the universe we are but dust that will have come and gone in the blink of an eye.
family_guy
Member
Zeus Molecules
illegal immigrants are stealing our air
The interviewers face is classic lol
I'm just saying Fry didn't blow some new hole in Christianity that no one's ever contemplated and reasonably explained away before. Even if it is fiction, Fry's response to God within that fiction isn't that great.
And you're underselling what that "dumb apple" represents in the story. I think conceptually a god could fairly regulate knowledge given to humans while still being a god people would actually think is being reasonable.
Maybe, it depends on if you believe God considers human beings a superior type of life form over all other organisms or not. If yes, questioning seems apt. If not, it's more understandable, but still seems pretty dickish that some organism need to survive by BURROWING INTO YOUR EYES.
I mean, I think there's an argument that could be made about how we could probably exterminate them,or at the very least set up infrastructure in those parts of the world where it won't be a problem for us. That's totally possible.
Reminds me of the Bruce lee quote about praying not to change events but to be able to deal with them better or something.
Edit: it's like yeah we could be all superior and stuff but it doesn't mean that God can't have other creations that do their own thing. Idk I don't think its as good an argument as something like cancer.
The Shogun
Banned
You know what I've always found weird about Christianity? Jesus seems like such a bro and god seems like such a dick.
Like dude Jesus seems like he would be badass to hang out with. Always talking about love, chilling and hanging out with sinners, turning water into wine. Like damn bro I'd love to chill and drink a beer with him.
Then god himself is all raging about damning people, and hating on homosexuals, and killing people and stuff.
Like what?
Like dude Jesus seems like he would be badass to hang out with. Always talking about love, chilling and hanging out with sinners, turning water into wine. Like damn bro I'd love to chill and drink a beer with him.
Then god himself is all raging about damning people, and hating on homosexuals, and killing people and stuff.
Like what?
disappeared
Banned
^ lol
holy shit. I can't even
Divinely inspired
I haven't seen any Christian justify the problem of evil in a way even atheists could accept. It's always just immoral apologetics.
The punishment still doesn't fit the crime. Part of the reason God gets pissy is because A&E didn't listen to him...but I think he needed to get over himself.
The Shogun
Banned
The dude damned all of humanity to suffering and hellfire because old A&E thought a fruit looked tasty and ate it.
Da Fuq? Overreaction much?
Different time periods with different writers and intentions leading to rather different characters.
That doesn't work. You have to ask why bother in the first place. If he loves us all, doesn't want any harm to befall us, any souls led astray, every person that can be saved ending up with him, why bother with the experiment? It's very human to feel the need for conflict. It's especially fucked up when you think about him knowing how this all would play out. The suffering of mankind since the beginning has been unending. Why not just say fuck it, this free will thing is no good. Let's all just chill in heaven.
Is this a joke post? I can't tell.
This is because of the two different origins. Jesus was a reformer much like Siddhartha and Confucius. He came up in a period of bleakness and subjugation under Roman law, and inspired hope amongst the people of a better life tommorow if one acts well today. This is compared to the founding of Judaism, which was in a turbulent area of polytheism and thus the God of the Jews had to justify itself against other Gods as Baal.
we have a winner regardless of there being a force or not.
that is but one of many variables that w/e force that started this reality has little to no influence/interest over. that is of the result of even more countless variables such as environment, culture, people, events, and so much more.
there could be one correct religion or none at all. it matters not. it is all insignificant in the grand scheme of things.
too bad that bitter old fool fails to see this. the fact that he laments about perceived tragedies when he should be appreciating that such a thing is possible as it shows that our reality is capable of many possibilities and then some. that it is not limited and that variables truly has no biases leaning one way or another.
he needs to be brought back down to earth from w/e the heck he's smoking.
a reality with very limited possibilities that lead to very few predictable outcomes would be very boring and unrewarding, is it not so?
BlastProcessing
Member
But if you were actually omnipotent, you could create an interesting and beautiful universe that had no suffering. Creating a coherent universe without struggle would be child's play for an omnipotent god. That's part of the fun of omnipotence!
Side note: I actually spent the last few years making a game without fail states. Turned out pretty good. The trick is to make the player feel danger where there is none. It's a magic trick really.
The problem is in the question, not his response. You're asking someone who doesn't believe, what they would do if they were wrong but without any proof. It's hard to change your perspective, it's hard to imagine yourself believing something else, so all you'll really get is answers like this.
It's a stupid and useless question in this context.
It's a stupid and useless question in this context.
- Status