Stephen Fry on meeting God ...

Glad that we are all on the same page now as regards the definition though.

And how does that definition mean that it risks peace?

Yes I did start the thread.
I had a look to see if Mishap was on it, as I know she has been on holiday recently. But yes, she was on it.

So going by what Ana has posted, does the Devil fall into that for Mishap?

Only you say it much more succinctly!!

x posts, Soutra.

I don't go along with your opinion, Lilygran.

I accept what you say about the Church, but I think when GN posters refer to 'fundamentalists' they mean those who accept what's written in the Bible without question - e.g. the world was created in 7 days, Eve was made out of one of Adam's ribs etc.

Oh hear, we are really going round in (ever decreasing) circles now. Have we not had a thread where you asked what is meant/understood by * fundamentalist* religious views?
I should have thought it was obvious that what you soontobe are spouting expressing exemplifies just that. Or if you still don't get it,

Slavish and literal adherence to the Bible
Total belief that it is the literal truth
Total denial of Evolution, the scientific explanation for the creation of the universe or of manknd
An unbending fixed belief that there is only one way and that is the way of that writer
An inability to back up pronouncements with any sort of rational argument

Need I go on?
If anything can give Christianity a bad name it is this "whited sepulchre" version of religion. Sad really, better brains than feature on GN(no offence to brainy grannies) have wrestled with the intricacies of faith and whether man is saved through his good works, or by grace alone. They would not recognise half of what has been uttered.

I meant to post
So why do you appear to dismiss it all

Mishap - you also say that you are agnostic. So that means that you do not know whether God exists or not?
So why do you dismiss it all?

With very few exceptions, Churches accept a God who is omniscient and everlasting, beyond time and space. They believe this God made Heaven and Earth. They believe in the Virgin birth, the Trinity (Father, Son and Holy Spirit, God in Three Persons), the crucifixion, the resurrection from the dead, the forgiveness of sins and the life everlasting. Because many posters on GN reject or, even, are amazed that anyone should believe any of this, they describe believers as 'fundamentalist'. By 'fundamentalist' they mean ignorant and superstitious. They are not. There are Christians who deny all the knowledge gained by humankind since around the 11th century in Europe but that isn't required of Christians.

What do you mean by fundamentalist religious views? The Bible?

Absent. Enjoy.

I only contradict those posts that relate fundamentalist religious views. I am agnostic and regard religious tolerance as an important factor in maintaining peace.

elegran you're right - I don't do micro management.

I don't think that anyone who starts a thread has control over where it heads (except maybe in Soop's kitchen )

I'm interested to see that this thread is still going, so I click on it, but I have nothing further to add.

Tricia

I haven't read all this thread, but have listened to the Fry interview.
I just wanted to reply to a point on the previous page which implied criticism of ill-thought-out views -
Most religions are intended to apply to all types of the population, most of whom aren't at the level of intellectual argument.
Although I'm not a Christian, I think this was Jesus' appeal - his words were clear and simple, compared to much of the earlier teachings.
In fact I used to think that God sent him because most people need to see things in a concrete personal form.

I can't understand why religious points of view expressed on GN are rubbished so comprehensively. Nearly every thread includes some ill-informed, irrational, prejudiced and otherwise laughable opinions. But posters feel it's OK having a go at perfectly reasonable religious statements. Orthodox doctrine is that 'the devil' is the personification of the evil in the world. Irreligious posters may think that's nonsense but thinking it's nonsense don't make it so.

The devil brought evil - oh dear!

I don't imagine that grannyknot wants to micro-manage the thread, it meanders on its own way.

It seems to be getting stuck in a groove.

I presume that Grannyknot is ok with the thread continuing as it has?

The suffering part is by certain people at certain times and in certain circumstances.

The majority of it is not supposed to happen. It all changed when the Devil brought Evil.

To return to original OP, I think you will find that the questions that Stephen would like to ask god are the same questions that have exercised people's brains since the beginning of time - ALL people, believers or not. They are entirely reasonable questions. We have the answers to none of them.

I cannot tell you how nauseated I am by the idea of suffering being a good thing and ordained by god to help us become more holy. We really do need a finger-down-throat icon.

Oh dear.

There are chunks to read.
Hebrews[which sounds like it should be in the Old Testament, but is actually a New Testament book] chapter 7 v 18, and all the way to the end of Hebrews chapter 10.
That is for starters.

I believe that (often taken out of context,) you can probably find a Biblical quote to justify just about anything. For instance, slavers in history could quote the Bible as examples of slavery, thus validating it.
I also like this comment from Salman Rushdie

“From the beginning men used God to justify the unjustifiable.”
― Salman Rushdie, The Satanic Verses