Naked Bible Study | A Bit of Fry and Laurie | BBC 

While I would never dare do it, I'm willing to post bail for you! 😁

Everyone should have a hobby, of course. Mine is approaching people and asking about the size of their girlfriend's breasts.

@@craigcorson3036 See Vivek's reply (above).

One of my fav actors of all time.

@Powerful Panda He's a great comedian, but YIKES! That age gap (29 years) is more than a little creepy. In his defence, his husband is middle-aged (not like the decidedly young partners of DiCaprio and Cavill) but nevertheless, quite unpleasant.

@Powerful Panda The guy's 32. Who cares? If it was a woman and a guy you'd say the woman was a gold digger, but because it's a gay guy people get weirded out and assume it's creepy.

@Powerful Panda Didn't know you have in your country the legal age of 25 years old.

@@flyingpenandpaper6119 Come on. Stephen Fry is lovely who cares the age

Since she would be entirely imaginary, I think that's probably a good bet.

@@scionofdorn9101 in the sketch she is real. Please keep up.

skyrock100 🤣🤣🤣🤣

Go..oD if you take my meaning.

I wanted to give you a thumbs up, but your count is currently at 666, and I just couldn't mess that up.

@@craigcorson3036 I think you're probably clear to like the comment now.

@@ScoopMeisterGeneral Thanks for calling that to my attention. 👌😉👍

Ego Geo Hah! Hilarious! God bless you :)

Man, that’s just a perfect comment

Ego Geo I'm Christian. THAT'S funny.

I really did laugh out loud at that.

GingerJoberton Nearly as funny as when someone states that they’re Christian. By the way, Christian who?

Secret????? Fry was so openly gay.

@@Stantheman848 Well, one might well argue that Stephen Fry is not himself here, he’s playing a role, and that role might well involve having a girlfriend with sizeable breasts.

@@generalerica4123 how enormous would you say they are?

The character isn't Stephen Fry.

Arnold :)

everyone's so used to seeing hugh laurie act like a weird pervert (see: house) that this is nothing new or exciting

Gohod

Watch Jeeves and Wooster and also a bit of Fry and Laurie.

I wouldn't know, I've never seen them jump.

@@paulakennedy2085 Neither has Glen by the sound of this conversation.

Because he's playing a character who is obsessed with God? It was very well known Fry was gay. His first play, produced while he was an undergrad at Oxford, was clearly and explictly about being gay. So it is not actually as if it was a secret well before this comedy series was even thought of.

lol!

+HEΛRTS OF SPΛCE They could still understand the concept of "Don't do that." Knowing that you're told not to do something is diifferent from knowing that if you do what you have been told not to do, then you are disobeying. Essentially, one does not need know that they are disobeying in order to disobey. It makes perfect sense because disobedience carries a connotation or implication of intending to disobey, and whereas Adam and Eve could have no such intention because they did not understand good and evil, they couldn't possibly understand the fact that eating the fruit would have been Disobedience. Essentially, it's very simple to simply know that you aren't supposed to do something. Whether or not you understand the concept of disobedience has no bearing on your capability of obeying. Knowing that you will be punished is an incentive not to disobey, sure, but not understanding what punishment is doesn't in any way affect your inherent ability to not perform whatever action you shouldn't be performing. Furthermore, Adam and Eve couldn't have had the desire to disobey, because their childish innocence would have prevented them from desiring anything at all. Desire is, after all, the beginning of rule-breaking, and because they didn't have any desire, they couldn't possibly get the idea to disobey. Essentially, punishment and disobedience go hand in hand, punishment being the incentive not to disobey. Lacking the desire necessary to disobey mean that their lack of conceptual understanding had no bearing, which is why they had to tricked by Satan in the first place. Not a Christian btw, in case it seems like I'm trying hard to defend the Bible.

James Gatz Well, I appreciate you trying to be objective about this, but I still find it to be absolutely ridiculous. The problem is that god punished all of mankind, that we should suffer during life and in the afterlife simply because our ancestors made the mistake of eating an apple. If they had no idea they were disobeying god, then why were they punished so severely? Why are we all punished so severely? It's a neat story, but it just doesn't make sense, because if god is omniscient and omni-benevolent, he would have already known they would eat the apple and he wouldn't have punished them for it. Another somewhat unrelated issue I have with the Bible's narrative is the part where Satan rebelled against god IN HEAVEN! How did he rebel in Heaven? Those kinds of thoughts and emotions supposedly can't happen there, let alone the possibility of convincing 1/3 of god's angels to go with him? It is silly, plain and simple.

HEΛRTS OF SPΛCE You're looking at it the wrong way. In response to why Adam and Eve, and subsequently all Mankind, was punished so severely, isn't supposed to be the work of God. Think about it. The apple they eat is from the "Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil." The reason we don't punish minors the same way we punish adults in western society is based on this idea of "childish innocence." The idea that a child has no true knowledge of Good or Evil, and therefore can't be responsible for their actions in the same way an adult can be held responsible. The fact is, God didn't punish Man - Man punished Man. By eating the apple, Man suddenly gained knowledge of Good and Evil. Eden was a paradise because Adam and Eve had no knowledge of Evil, and therefore no capability of doing anything bad - murder, rape, theft, etc. By unleashing the knowledge of Good and Evil into the world, Man was doomed to commit evil acts, and thus the world was no longer paradise. It's actually quite deep in my opinion, because the entire philosophy stems around the idea that Man is responsible for it's own misery, which is why Christianity stresses, like Buddhism, restraining the desires. Christanity stresses Chastity, Charity, Simpleness of Dress, and all other principles that would make the world a better place if people behaved like that. Like I said, I'm not a Christian, but if you read the Gospels you get the sense that Christ wouldn't be a bad leader.. However, I do acknowledge the fact that if God is omnipotent he would have known of the disobedience of Adam and Eve, and furthermore God also must have known about all the other bad things that happen even now, such as rape, murder, etc. Essentially, God can't not have known, and since he must therefore know, he is somewhat of a sadist. As for Satan's rebellion, I don't know what to think of that really. I guess it was inevitable from a Christian standpoint, because Lucifer adopted a sense of Pride - and because of his Pride he was unwilling to follow somebody else's orders. I don't think the Angles were unable to think for themselves, I think that until Satan rebelled, they all just kind of followed God's orders willingly.

James Gatz With enough of an apologetic spin, sure it can make sense, but if you look at it objectively and from a distance, it becomes fairly obvious that the Adam and Eve story is just that, a story. None of it makes any sense on its own, but it is necessary as a way to explain the origin of everything from the Christian perspective. The reason there are so many plot holes and continuity problems is because we are talking about a story that was written by men who pretended they were inspired by an omniscient and omnipotent being...humans possess neither of those qualities, and it's rather apparent in their writings in the Bible (oops, I mean god's writings, of course ;). As for Satan's rebellion, you're absolutely correct in saying that it was inevitable from a Christian standpoint. They needed to invent an adversary, but realized their "omni-benevolent" god wouldn't just create a bad guy, so they came up with a story about how Lucifer rebelled in Heaven and took Angels with him...all too convenient. The contradiction comes later when Heaven is described as a place where emotions like pride and envy simply do not (and cannot) exist.

HEΛRTS OF SPΛCE Well, like I said, I'm not a Christian. I'm not trying to defend Christianity by saying that it's true, I'm just saying this is how I interpret the story of Adam and Eve. I think Christianity, like all religion, is simply trying to explain the world in their own terms. I don't think that the intent of the writers of the Bible to make things up with a devious design to mislead and fool people so that they could enact some evil scheme of controlling people. Believe it or not, some people honestly believe what is written down in the Bible. It's not all just some gigantic hoax intended to control society. Not unless you're Volataire, and you believe that "The first clergyman was the first clever man who met the first fool." I think it's just a little exaggerated to believe that the Satanic rebellion is nothing more than a contrived Deus Ex Machina ( pun intended) in order to make sense of the Biblical interpretation of the Universe. I think what you mean to say is rather that, because Christianity(and religion in general) has no obvious answers to simple questions like the ones that you posed, it can be assumed(as it is assumed by Christians) that the things left out of the Bible don't matter. A Christian doesn't care about analyzing Biblical passages for plot holes, because that's what Faith is - Faith isn't dependent upon some lawyer-like analysis of evidence, but rather the belief that the evidence and minute details don't matter at all. The Faith is what's important, the details be damned.

I dunno, considering they had never worn or even known of clothes before this time, why would they even possess the concept of nudity?

I believe that and "who told you that you were naked" are quite similar, since whereever they got the concept of nakedness from made them think it was something to be ashamed about. Maybe they realised that there can be many "evil" distortions of sex.

As neither Adam nor Eve ever existed you question has no meaning

Warhammer Workshop it's not nonsense, it's an important philosophical musing from ancient times. Not quite as eloquent as Plato, but interesting nonetheless.

@@windrush104 Where has life come from if not through divine intervention?

Ye shall know them by their fruits.

Stephen Fry is jewish

He's an atheist.

Two atheists discuss god, and the breasts of a homosexual man's girlfriend

+Rob Mckennie Wait Stephen Fry is gay I must've been living under a rock

As far as I know, he's been openly gay for a many years. I couldn't find a specific reference to a year when he came out publicly, but it looks like it may have been as early as 1995.

It is a shame that they are otherwise brilliant but don't understand that the universe couldn't have made itself from nothing.

@@kasperjoonatan6014 But god can make itself from nothing?

@@byteresistor That is exactly what I don't get about religion. They say the universe is too complex to have been formed by itself. So their reasoning is that an even more complex being created it, and this being has just always existed.

@@byteresistor Who told God that what he made world of was 'nothing'???

@@kasperjoonatan6014 Ah. A salty comment from GO-o-o-od.

I should have said omniscient not omnipotent.

God forgives your mistake. But I don’t.

@@gelraldoldo5152 Not a mistake. Read the passage. God literally does not know where they are in the Garden o' Eden. Another funny thing worth exploring is the fact that, according to Genesis, what the serpent says to Adam and Eve about eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge turns out to be true and what God told them turned out to be false. God told them that as soon as they ate it they would die (which they didn't) and the serpent said that their eyes would be opened (they were) and that they would NOT die (they didn't) and that they would know good from evil (they did). God even confirms this Himself by saying afterward, "Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever" (Genesis 3:22) Christian apologists claim that what this "really" means is that they were denied everlasting life because they ate of the fruit and that that's what God meant. Yeah, right. If I were God and I told you that "The day you push this red button you will die" you would not be thinking that you'd still be living the next day after pushing it. The truth is, the serpent (not mentioned to be the devil anywhere in the Old Testament) told the truth and God did not.

He did know. He was asking them a loaded question.

Aran jumpers are traditional clothing from the West of Ireland which have been worn for centuries. Every couple of decades, they are "rediscovered" and enjoy a period of popularity outside Ireland. I imagine Banshees of Inisherin will set off a new fad but while Fry's is clearly an Irish hand-knit, what are seeing In shops is made in China from acrylic yarn.

Wait, what!? Hugh Laurie? Not "House", surely?

oh my god, shut up. don't one of those people who defames an actors role just to show that you appreciate another role. Yes, he was in House, and he was great in House, just like he was great in every other role he played. deal with it.

+Lucy G Yes, he was great portraying a doctor who would be permanently barred from practicing medicine in the first season. My mom is a retired R.T. and hates House because of the blatant malpractice the main character does almost every episode.

Just because you don't personally like the character he played (I don't either) that isn't a testament to Laurie's acting skills. Anyway, perhaps I wasn't clear enough. I wasn't responding to you, I was responding to the other comment.

+Lucy G I never said I didn't like the character. I did, but you must admit that any real doctor that practiced medicine like he did would be fired and have his license revoked permanently in the first six months, unless he owned his own private clinic in a rural area.

Could you please tell me what accent does Mr. Fry figure out in this sketch?

I am an anti-thEEist. ;)

Oh, you'd be surprised. I've known many a gay male who, while not interested in dating or having sex with a woman, thought that breasts were fascinating. I wouldn't be surprised if Fry were the same way.

So how big are your mother's brea$ts?