There is definetely a god - apparently

[Hoboh]

Only one thing to say on the subject:

Thank fxck Commie's banned!!!!!

Oh right, I thought he was on an extended Christmas break!

[Montreal Wanderer]

This really is rather bizarre. Even if the ASA succeeds in defining God to everyone's satisfaction (a clear impossibility), there is plenty of documentary evidence on both sides of the question - even if there is no proof for either. There is certainly no specific God that the majority of humanity believe in, therefore on the balance of probability, there is no specific God. Thus "probably" might well work in this situation. I have often seen the slogan "Jesus saves" posted around without any conditional qualifier - this would clearly be a greater breach of the ASA rules.. But what a storm in a teacup! Let people who believe believe and advertize their belief if they wish - and the same for non-believers.

The thing about "Jesus saves" though, is that it's probably true. I'm sure many people in times of despair have turned to the aforementioned and changed a course of action. Whether Jesus was this person born in Bethlehem and crucified on Mount Calvary is surely only one part of the story? that probably isn't majorly relevant to the person "saved" unless they happen to be a person of Faith. I'm sure those that are would attest to it being the person the Bible refers to and those that aren't might attest to it being "some other being" and some after the immediacy of the event had passed would probably put it down to their own good common sense...

Ah, but you used the qualifier "probably" which, as I noted, would make it okay. There is no doubt that faith (of any sort) helps people through difficult times. However, it could be argued that the same might be true for psychological counseling, good friends, sex or a stiff drink.

[TANGODANCER]

Ah, but you used the qualifier "probably" which, as I noted, would make it okay. There is no doubt that faith (of any sort) helps people through difficult times. However, it could be argued that the same might be true for psychological counseling, good friends, sex or a stiff drink.

No, no. Making those acceptable are the main reasons for being Atheists.

[Worthy4England]

This really is rather bizarre. Even if the ASA succeeds in defining God to everyone's satisfaction (a clear impossibility), there is plenty of documentary evidence on both sides of the question - even if there is no proof for either. There is certainly no specific God that the majority of humanity believe in, therefore on the balance of probability, there is no specific God. Thus "probably" might well work in this situation. I have often seen the slogan "Jesus saves" posted around without any conditional qualifier - this would clearly be a greater breach of the ASA rules.. But what a storm in a teacup! Let people who believe believe and advertize their belief if they wish - and the same for non-believers.

The thing about "Jesus saves" though, is that it's probably true. I'm sure many people in times of despair have turned to the aforementioned and changed a course of action. Whether Jesus was this person born in Bethlehem and crucified on Mount Calvary is surely only one part of the story? that probably isn't majorly relevant to the person "saved" unless they happen to be a person of Faith. I'm sure those that are would attest to it being the person the Bible refers to and those that aren't might attest to it being "some other being" and some after the immediacy of the event had passed would probably put it down to their own good common sense...

Ah, but you used the qualifier "probably" which, as I noted, would make it okay. There is no doubt that faith (of any sort) helps people through difficult times. However, it could be argued that the same might be true for psychological counseling, good friends, sex or a stiff drink.

I used probably in relation to a different aspect. I think that "jesus saves", could "probably" be defendable without becoming "jesus saves probably"...

[mihj]

That's just brought genuine tears of laughter to my eyes. Don't get me wrong I'm not knocking anyone's right to faith, but they are claiming that it is the BHA who has no proof HAHAHA. 'There is plenty of proof for god'.....BRILLIANT!!! This proof being some bloke reckons he's talked to him. Well i haven't, so does that count as proof he doesnt?!

Funniest thing i have read in a while, and SURELY only going to make his particular group a laughing stock?

You would not have been laughing if you were on a christian forum....I was on there and apparently they have all spoken to god

[KeeeeeeeBaaaaaaab]

Surely if he exists prrof of his existence can be produced. A passport, utilities bill, bank statement from the last three months - nothing else is acceptable.

[jimbo]

Surely if he exists prrof of his existence can be produced. A passport, utilities bill, bank statement from the last three months - nothing else is acceptable.

Could be tough. Being omnipresent, maybe he isn't of any particular nationality and so doesn't have a passport?

[keveh]

I heard an interview with the lady who came up with the idea on 5 Live last week.

She was saying her advertising campaign came about because she saw adverts on buses for a christian organisation, with a website along side it. When she went on the website there was a statement saying all those who do not believe in god will be sent to hell.

So I'd like to see them prove that hell exists and that all non-christians will go there.

No matter how serious you try and take it though, you can't help laughing at it.

[Montreal Wanderer]

So I'd like to see them prove that hell exists and that all non-christians will go there.

You never met my ex-wife, did you?

[William the White]

That's just brought genuine tears of laughter to my eyes. Don't get me wrong I'm not knocking anyone's right to faith, but they are claiming that it is the BHA who has no proof HAHAHA. 'There is plenty of proof for god'.....BRILLIANT!!! This proof being some bloke reckons he's talked to him. Well i haven't, so does that count as proof he doesnt?!

Funniest thing i have read in a while, and SURELY only going to make his particular group a laughing stock?

You would not have been laughing if you were on a christian forum....I was on there and apparently they have all spoken to god

No problem speaking TO God, surely? It's te reception from heaven is a bit dodgy round Bolton.

[TANGODANCER]

If God appeared in public just once, the whole concept of world-wide religion would change on the spot. Religion is based on faith and belief. If it were only based on evidence it would just be re-named Science.

Prayer for today:

In the name of the Richard,
And of the Dawkins,
And of the unholy science,
Amen.

Our father, who art in Oxford,
Shallow be thy name,
thy anarchy come,thy will be done,
On earth as it is on the telly,
Give us this day our daily barmcakes
And forgive us for not enough evil
As we forgive them for lots,
And lead us into all temptations,
And deliver us from Christians,
For thine is the podium
For not very long,

Amen.

[a1]

why dont they say "theres probably no allah" or are the bha frightened of anti jellands-posten style bonfires ?

chickenshit bastards.

no one goes to church anymores anyway.

[superjohnmcginlay]

why dont they say "theres probably no allah" or are the bha frightened of anti jellands-posten style bonfires ?

chickenshit bastards.

no one goes to church anymores anyway.

Not true. My mate goes to one of these modern church things. But I think he's gone a bit mad to be honest.

[a1]

Not true. My mate goes to one of these modern church things. But I think he's gone a bit mad to be honest.

some parts of bolton have loads of churches. if everyone in bolton went to church , some would still have to shut for under-attendence. its like they built too many.

[Puskas]

why dont they say "theres probably no allah" or are the bha frightened of anti jellands-posten style bonfires ?

chickenshit bastards.

no one goes to church anymores anyway.

Surely "there probably is no god" captures Allah, Yahweh, Zeus, Vishnu and any other deities people may care to invent?

You can't go round listing them all. People have invented so many, it'd take too long.

[Puskas]

If God appeared in public just once, the whole concept of world-wide religion would change on the spot. Religion is based on faith and belief. If it were only based on evidence it would just be re-named Science.

Which is why it isn't acceptable as an explanation for anything.

Faith doesn't work in any other areas of life. Would you use faith as the main criteria for deciding whether to cross the road, or would you look out for cars? Would you use faith if someone offered to sell you a very nice bridge in London, or would you look a bit further to see if they really owned it?

So why use faith for trying to determine the origins of the universe?

No reason.

[TANGODANCER]

I'm far too wise to even bother arguing what faith and belief mean. Suffice to say we've been doing it for a very long time even as Christianity which is 2000 years old. Why shouldn't Christians celebrate Christmas as the birth of Christ? That's what it's about after all. We're supposed to live in a world of equality and free speach, yet that's exactly what we aren't doing. Do you deny Christ was born? If not, why deny the right to celebrate that to believers?

It isn't just about creation; more about looking inside yourself, something that becomes progressively more important the older you get. If you can't live with the thought of a supreme being, fine, your choice.

Are you superstitious, do you believe in the occult, ghosts, why are people afraid of the dark? Surely all these things have parallels on the other side of the scale? As for churches, Jesus never advocated them and even said that people need not be seen to worship and pray. Even the history of religion is more about the word of man than that of God. You have to untangle a lot of myth and legend to even come near understanding what God is about. Atheism, to me, is a convenient excuse not to have to answer about anything to anyone but yourself. Well, fine. Carry on then. Nobody's stopping you. You'll just have to keep on wondering till the day you die, then you'll know for sure. I'll add, "One way or the other" just for your benefit.

[Lord Kangana]

Has anyone mentioned the "But Byrom puts in the rebound" gag yet?

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Atheism, to me, is a convenient excuse not to have to answer about anything to anyone but yourself. Well, fine. Carry on then. Nobody's stopping you. You'll just have to keep on wondering till the day you die, then you'll know for sure. I'll add, "One way or the other" just for your benefit.

I answer to myself and the people around me... seems fair enough to me.

If I do turn out to have been 'wrong' all along, I can't imagine that such a divine being would display the very human qualities of being jealous/egotistical/angry that I hadn't believed in it, especially when it had provided me with so little reason to do so, other than unconvincing platitudes from other mere human beings.

[Puskas]

I'm far too wise to even bother arguing what faith and belief mean.

Hmm.... admission of defeat before starting. Very wise....

Suffice to say we've been doing it for a very long time even as Christianity which is 2000 years old.

Well, Christianity was really invented in about 325AD at the Council Of Nicea. So closer to 1700 years old. But simply because something's old doesn't make it true. Where's the evidence? None? Oh, but it's old....

Why shouldn't Christians celebrate Christmas as the birth of Christ? That's what it's about after all. We're supposed to live in a world of equality and free speach, yet that's exactly what we aren't doing. Do you deny Christ was born? If not, why deny the right to celebrate that to believers?

I'm not denying them any right. I just think it's silly. As for whether there was a historical figure of Jesus. Well, possibly, but it's not clear cut. Outside of the gospel writers (at most one of whom would have been a contemporary, there's not a lot of evidence. But then there wouldn't be, so that doesn't prove much.

It isn't just about creation; more about looking inside yourself, something that becomes progressively more important the older you get. If you can't live with the thought of a supreme being, fine, your choice.

I can live with the idea of a supreme being, it's just that there's no evidence for it, I'm afraid. And superstition doesn't give one any insights into human behaviour or help in looking inside oneself - quite the opposite.

Are you superstitious

No. I've already said I don't believe in god. Why adopt any other superstition if not that one?

, do you believe in the occult, ghosts, why are people afraid of the dark? Surely all these things have parallels on the other side of the scale?

Eh? That doesn't really make sense....What scale? What parallels? Beliefs that people have with no evidence supporting them?

I
As for churches, Jesus never advocated them and even said that people need not be seen to worship and pray. Even the history of religion is more about the word of man than that of God. You have to untangle a lot of myth and legend to even come near understanding what God is about. Atheism, to me, is a convenient excuse not to have to answer about anything to anyone but yourself.

This sort of superstitus twaddle makes me vaguely irritated and is one of the reasons I get drawn into arguments with theists, despite the fact you can defeat them with the one question "Where's the evidence?"
As a non-theist, I have to answer to many people beyond myself - my friends, family, employers, the government, other people generally. I just don't have an imaginary friend to lay the blame on.

Well, fine. Carry on then. Nobody's stopping you. You'll just have to keep on wondering till the day you die, then you'll know for sure.

Except I won't. Because I'll be dead. That's sort of the point of being dead - you don't know anything. You don't exist, anymore...