If Stephen Fry Met God . . .

[StPaulHusker]

Virgin births?

 

I refuse to buy into these strange beliefs and outrageous myths. I was raised to believe in the stork birth method. The stork banged my mom and I was born. Or at least, that's what I was taught........

 

Now you've got me questioning everything.

Is this how you explain away your webbed feet?

[walksalone]

 

Can you give me an example specifically where you have seen religion be forced on someone?

 

 

Please tell me you're joking...

 

 

[Landlord]

 

 

Can you give me an example specifically where you have seen religion be forced on someone?

 

 

Please tell me you're joking...

 

 

 

 

 

 

this was covered a while before you quoted me

[walksalone]

 

 

 

Can you give me an example specifically where you have seen religion be forced on someone?

 

 

Please tell me you're joking...

 

 

 

 

 

 

this was covered a while before you quoted me

 

 

So then are you offended by the guys in Norway that were burning churches?

[strigori]

Under the forced religion file, add the bill that passed the Oklahoma House last week that would remove the State from issuing marriage licences and put that solely on members of the clergy to grant permissions to who can marry.

[admo]

 

 

 

 

 

The thing is, christianity isn't even an original idea. There are several instances where it has been copied from a previous religion. What makes all those other religions wrong?

 

 

Examples please

 

https://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/jksadegh/A%20Good%20Atheist%20Secularist%20Skeptical%20Book%20Collection/Parallels_between_Jesus_and_Horus_an_Egyptian_God.pdf

 

This is just the similarities of the Jesus story to Horus. Not trying to start an argument, just noting that there are other religions that were around long before chrisitianity. And they all have similar ideas, so to think that 'yours' is the only right one... I just think it's kind of arrogant.

 

 

 

 

Yeah, figured you'd link something with supposed Horus parallels. They're cherrypicking straw men.

 

I won't waste my time debunking all of them, because it is, in fact, a waste of time, but just as a few examples:

 

Horus wasn't born of a virgin. He was born of a magically fashioned golden phallus by Isis, who then impregnated herself.

 

There is no "Anup the Baptizer" in any Egyptian mythos. Anywhere. That is the brain child of Gerald Massey, who happens to not have any reputable regard by pretty much anyone other than people trying to invent Christ/Horus parallels.

 

Horus was born sometime in Oct/Nov, and there is no record of when Jesus was actually born - Christians later adopted the winter solstice in order to celebrate and worship in safety from persecution.

 

Horus didn't have twelve disciples - he had four demigods that followed him around, and some traditions have 16 human followers, and some blacksmiths and stuff, but nowhere is there mention of 12 disciples or anything close.

 

Fair enough. I won't go too far into it either but it doesn't change the fact that there were religions before the 'christian' faith. What makes the christian faith right? What makes any of them right?

 

I swear, if we were all gone tomorrow and a few hundred years from now humans started evolving again we would be worshiping the X-Men as our Greek mythology and Superman would be our Jesus story.

 

 

Worshiping X-Men and Superman. Ha ha! You're probly right. They would be the new false religions. Except these new religions would have no Holy Spirit. Many of the figures in the bible who devoted their lives to God and were eventually killed for it were led by the Holy Spirit. Anyone who has not personally experienced the Holy Spirit—both Christians as well as non-Christians—have a hard time understanding the Holy Spirit. Let alone believing that it's a real part of Christianity. But it is. And people who are imbued with the Holy Spirit devote their lives to God and Jesus. They would rather be killed than renounce their faith.

 

I don't expect to change your mind by telling you this. In fact, I halfway expect ridicule. I'm just putting this out there for your consideration. The Holy Spirit is a real thing. It existed back in the days of the Apostles. And it exists today. It doesn't come to everyone. (I don't know why.) But those lucky few who experience it would never deny it. Or deny God.

 

+1

 

And because of the Holy Spirit I am armed with his gifts and in tune with God. I could go on but this is more about Fry.

 

He sounds angry towards God in a way that let's me think he doesn't really know God. Sounds like he doesn't even want to. Fry rejects Him and says cruel things since he doesn't have the answers that he presents (Why?) in front of the other person. Such questions towards God (Why?) are not likely to be answered by humans.

[strigori]

 

One thing about the Bible that I find pretty amazing is that it was written centuries before we knew most of the basic scientific concepts we know today. It amazes me that the Bible doesn't run afoul of some the basic scientific concepts that we take for granted today, but were beyond comprehension 2,000 to 3,000 years back.

 

Probably because it tends to stay out of science in general, or just throws the word "miracle" down to explain it away. And you would actually be amazed at what the ancients actually knew with some regards to science. The Egyptians didn't build the Pyramids by accident. And people are still trying to explain how they did something we would use heavy equipment to accomplish.

[NUance]

 

 

One thing about the Bible that I find pretty amazing is that it was written centuries before we knew most of the basic scientific concepts we know today. It amazes me that the Bible doesn't run afoul of some the basic scientific concepts that we take for granted today, but were beyond comprehension 2,000 to 3,000 years back.

 

Probably because it tends to stay out of science in general, or just throws the word "miracle" down to explain it away. And you would actually be amazed at what the ancients actually knew with some regards to science. The Egyptians didn't build the Pyramids by accident. And people are still trying to explain how they did something we would use heavy equipment to accomplish.

 

 

True dat. But I was thinking more of common misconceptions of the time. Like that the earth is flat. Or heavier than air flight is impossible. Given that there is a thousand pages written by umpteen different authors 2,000 to 3,000, it seems likely some odd anti-scientific stuff would have been mentioned.

 

I'm not pointing to that, saying it proves anything. Or doesn't prove anything. I just find it interesting.

[strigori]

 

 

 

One thing about the Bible that I find pretty amazing is that it was written centuries before we knew most of the basic scientific concepts we know today. It amazes me that the Bible doesn't run afoul of some the basic scientific concepts that we take for granted today, but were beyond comprehension 2,000 to 3,000 years back.

 

Probably because it tends to stay out of science in general, or just throws the word "miracle" down to explain it away. And you would actually be amazed at what the ancients actually knew with some regards to science. The Egyptians didn't build the Pyramids by accident. And people are still trying to explain how they did something we would use heavy equipment to accomplish.

 

 

True dat. But I was thinking more of common misconceptions of the time. Like that the earth is flat. Or heavier than air flight is impossible. Given that there is a thousand pages written by umpteen different authors 2,000 to 3,000, it seems likely some odd anti-scientific stuff would have been mentioned.

 

I'm not pointing to that, saying it proves anything. Or doesn't prove anything. I just find it interesting.

 

Also keep in mind the Catholic Church has done a number of edits/translations over the centuries, and a passage here or there could easily be removed if it was going to bring up issues. And that for the most part, things like flying or the planet as a whole were not going to be concepts the vast majority of people ever thought about. Science Fiction would not show up in literature for centuries yet. To say nothing of the fact that large parts of the book as a whole borrow from much older mythology and story telling.

[knapplc]

 

 

 

One thing about the Bible that I find pretty amazing is that it was written centuries before we knew most of the basic scientific concepts we know today. It amazes me that the Bible doesn't run afoul of some the basic scientific concepts that we take for granted today, but were beyond comprehension 2,000 to 3,000 years back.

 

Probably because it tends to stay out of science in general, or just throws the word "miracle" down to explain it away. And you would actually be amazed at what the ancients actually knew with some regards to science. The Egyptians didn't build the Pyramids by accident. And people are still trying to explain how they did something we would use heavy equipment to accomplish.

 

 

True dat. But I was thinking more of common misconceptions of the time. Like that the earth is flat. Or heavier than air flight is impossible. Given that there is a thousand pages written by umpteen different authors 2,000 to 3,000, it seems likely some odd anti-scientific stuff would have been mentioned.

 

I'm not pointing to that, saying it proves anything. Or doesn't prove anything. I just find it interesting.

 

 

We know the Earth could not be created in one day. Or that the whole universe did not spring into being in one week.

 

The Bible is rife with scientific inaccuracies. Like the Flood - all life on Earth, save a boatload of animals and eight people, did not perish in 40 days and nights.

 

God separated the Light from the Dark as the first Creation. He created the plants on the third day. But the Sun, which the plants needed to survive, didn't exist until the fourth day. Photosynthesis, thus, becomes a thorny issue.

 

The Biblical account of Jesus' birth tacitly endorses Astrology, which we know to be bunk. The Magi "follow a star" which led them to Jerusalem, and through investigation, to the manger.

 

The Tower of Babel, which the ancients were going to build all the way to heaven, would surely have collapsed under its own weight during construction far before any omnipotent god had any need to fear it. And that doesn't touch the problem of oxygen/space exposure, or even the location of Heaven. It's a tale told with the mind of a Bronze Age man, not remotely scientifically plausible. Yet, were the story to be believed, it was such a threat to God in Heaven that he had to confound the language of Man to stop him.

 

 

 

 

 

Regarding the Pyramids and Egyptians, there's no mystery to whether they could do it or not, we're just trying to figure out how they did. The knowledge isn't godly, it's just lost, in much the same way as I used to be able to do two- or three-digit multiplication in my head until I got my hands on Excel. Since I started relying on spreadsheets, I've lost the knack. The knowledge isn't inaccessible, I'm just out of practice.

[Landlord]

 

We know the Earth could not be created in one day. Or that the whole universe did not spring into being in one week.

 

The Bible is rife with scientific inaccuracies. Like the Flood - all life on Earth, save a boatload of animals and eight people, did not perish in 40 days and nights.

 

God separated the Light from the Dark as the first Creation. He created the plants on the third day. But the Sun, which the plants needed to survive, didn't exist until the fourth day. Photosynthesis, thus, becomes a thorny issue.

 

The Biblical account of Jesus' birth tacitly endorses Astrology, which we know to be bunk. The Magi "follow a star" which led them to Jerusalem, and through investigation, to the manger.

 

The Tower of Babel, which the ancients were going to build all the way to heaven, would surely have collapsed under its own weight during construction far before any omnipotent god had any need to fear it. And that doesn't touch the problem of oxygen/space exposure, or even the location of Heaven. It's a tale told with the mind of a Bronze Age man, not remotely scientifically plausible. Yet, were the story to be believed, it was such a threat to God in Heaven that he had to confound the language of Man to stop him.

 

 

 

Regarding the Pyramids and Egyptians, there's no mystery to whether they could do it or not, we're just trying to figure out how they did. The knowledge isn't godly, it's just lost, in much the same way as I used to be able to do two- or three-digit multiplication in my head until I got my hands on Excel. Since I started relying on spreadsheets, I've lost the knack. The knowledge isn't inaccessible, I'm just out of practice.

 

 

 

 

I'm surprised and a tiny bit disappointed to see this from you.

 

Over half your examples are from the Creation account, which can and is interpreted literally by conservatives, but is just as easily approached as an allegorical or fable story by Christians (the six days of creation, for example, showing each element of life being spoken and created by God, systematically differentiating the omnipotent monotheistic God of Abraham from all of the lesser mythological pagan gods of water/air/etc.)

 

As far as the Magi, I really have no clue, but I would say it's not unreasonable to think that the 'star' was something supernaturally and entirely different than what we understand stars as scientifically, if for no other reason than the gospels also say that the star went ahead of them.

 

The tower of Babel? That's probably the most easily explainable. The book is written from a human perspective, and doesn't mention any specifics in regards to the tower. It was probably just an ancient ziggurat or pyramid of some kind.

 

You're extrapolating a lot of inference from very basic texts.

[knapplc]

The Bible is either the inerrant Word of God or it isn't.

 

Think about what you're saying here.

[Landlord]

The Bible is either the inerrant Word of God or it isn't.

 

Think about what you're saying here.

 

 

 

Inerrant means a lot of different things to different people.

 

So basically what you're saying, at least from my understanding, is that the Bible is................something.

[walksalone]

With the bible, comes with a lot of "if's" and "maybe's"...

 

if you tell me that you're 100% positive that the bible is true, I worry about your ability to question things...

 

Who's not to say it's about some poor hapless premature balding schmuck named Bob, but because some guy writing this thing thought Bob being the son of god didn't have the "sex appeal" of some long haired dude named Jesus, we'll change it...

[strigori]

 

The Bible is either the inerrant Word of God or it isn't.

 

Think about what you're saying here.

 

 

 

Inerrant means a lot of different things to different people.

 

So basically what you're saying, at least from my understanding, is that the Bible is................something.

 

Not really. Either every word of the Bible is to be taken at face value, or not. And I can assure you it is 100% treated like a buffet where Christians pick and choose what they want to adhere to. This is not even debatable, or they would be striving to make a society that would very closely resemble what ISIS is doing.