Shock Horror, there's probably no God.
08 January 2009, 10:16 PM
#1
Scooby Senior
Thread Starter
iTrader: (51)
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Wherever I park my car, that's my home
Posts: 20,491
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Shock Horror, there's probably no God.
BBC NEWS | UK | 'No God' campaign draws complaint
Christians have complained that this atheist claim is unsubstantiated and therefore breaches ASA codes, oh and there is significant evidence that there is a god.
I'm not an atheist, and I had christianity rammed down my throat as a kid, but what about live and let live, free speech, and in good old fashioned christian style, turn the other cheek
Christians have complained that this atheist claim is unsubstantiated and therefore breaches ASA codes, oh and there is significant evidence that there is a god.
I'm not an atheist, and I had christianity rammed down my throat as a kid, but what about live and let live, free speech, and in good old fashioned christian style, turn the other cheek
08 January 2009, 10:41 PM
#2
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hanne Stinson, chief executive of the British Humanist Association, said: "I've sought advice from some of our key people here, but I'm afraid all I've got out of them so far is peals of laughter.
"There's probably no God..........." slogan can win its case, anyway. That's because of the word "probably". Further to that, "..........so stop worrying and enjoy your life." is not an illegal expectation and breach of any code TBH. Stop worrying and enjoying life is not against human rights LOL
The slogan challenges God-believers to prove if God exists. That's what must have put the believers at somewhat unrest, I suppose. Experience can't be personified, but one is within one's rights to imagine it as personified. Fair play, but..........
Belief is a personal thing, at the end of the day. IMO If Religious bodies can have their slogans all over the place with "God is Great" etc., anti-religious people have the same right to flag and canvass their beliefs too. At least they said- "There's probably no God." unlike saying "God made this world" with 100% affirmation and no concrete proof.
08 January 2009, 10:45 PM
#3
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: There on the stair
Posts: 10,208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Easy enough - have God pop in and make the complaint in person. I'm sure they'll withdraw the ad immediately then 
(there is NO proof of God. Proof negates faith, and all Religions are based on faith. Go look up the Babel fish and Douglas Adams for that argument )
(there is NO proof of God. Proof negates faith, and all Religions are based on faith. Go look up the Babel fish and Douglas Adams for that argument
)
Trending Topics
09 January 2009, 08:40 AM
#8
Scooby Regular
But Stephen Green, national director of Christian Voice, said: "There is plenty of evidence for God, from people's personal experience, to the complexity, interdependence, beauty and design of the natural world."
09 January 2009, 08:51 AM
#9
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: God's promised land
Posts: 80,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Worth repeating yet again. I've yet to see a better analogy, anywhere.
Originally Posted by AndyC_772
Imagine for a moment, that it were possible to take a modern luxury car back in time and give it to a tribe of stone-age people. Imagine how they might react.
Many would regard it with awe and wonder. It would be like nothing else they had ever seen. It would do amazing things, it would look and feel like nothing they had ever experienced. Everything about it would be obviously designed for the comfort and pleasure of its possessor. It would be clear, overwhelming evidence for the existence of a God.
Others might observe that it could be dangerous, and that it produced choking fumes. It would be feared and hated. In other words, not everything about it is good. They might want to destroy it.
Then there would be those who, though no less in awe than those who worshipped it, would also want to understand it. So, they'd begin to look at it more carefully, to figure out not just its most basic purpose, but what really makes it tick.
So, they might begin by taking off the wheels, thereby finding the suspension - and they'd work out that it's the suspension that's responsible for the comfy ride. They'd discover the engine and gearbox, and though they couldn't reproduce them with the tools and materials at hand, they could begin to understand their function in some detail.
On the way, they would discover metallurgy, ergonomics, synthetic materials, aerodynamics, mathematics and other sciences, and they would derive great benefits from these.
But, they'd never understand everything. They might well understand the need for the fuel injection and ignition timiing systems, and would marvel at how well they worked - but the inner workings of the ECU would be completely beyond them. The entire electrical system - consisting, as it does, of anonymous black boxes connected by wires, with its endless variety of responses to stimuli that somehow keep the whole ticking along - would be cited as evidence that the whole car could never be created by man.
They'd be wrong, of course. It might take a few thousand years, but eventually they would discover electricity, and semiconductors, and the ECU and the CD player would finally give up their secrets.
Not having all the answers, right now, does NOT constitute evidence of a God.
Originally Posted by AndyC_772
Imagine for a moment, that it were possible to take a modern luxury car back in time and give it to a tribe of stone-age people. Imagine how they might react.
Many would regard it with awe and wonder. It would be like nothing else they had ever seen. It would do amazing things, it would look and feel like nothing they had ever experienced. Everything about it would be obviously designed for the comfort and pleasure of its possessor. It would be clear, overwhelming evidence for the existence of a God.
Others might observe that it could be dangerous, and that it produced choking fumes. It would be feared and hated. In other words, not everything about it is good. They might want to destroy it.
Then there would be those who, though no less in awe than those who worshipped it, would also want to understand it. So, they'd begin to look at it more carefully, to figure out not just its most basic purpose, but what really makes it tick.
So, they might begin by taking off the wheels, thereby finding the suspension - and they'd work out that it's the suspension that's responsible for the comfy ride. They'd discover the engine and gearbox, and though they couldn't reproduce them with the tools and materials at hand, they could begin to understand their function in some detail.
On the way, they would discover metallurgy, ergonomics, synthetic materials, aerodynamics, mathematics and other sciences, and they would derive great benefits from these.
But, they'd never understand everything. They might well understand the need for the fuel injection and ignition timiing systems, and would marvel at how well they worked - but the inner workings of the ECU would be completely beyond them. The entire electrical system - consisting, as it does, of anonymous black boxes connected by wires, with its endless variety of responses to stimuli that somehow keep the whole ticking along - would be cited as evidence that the whole car could never be created by man.
They'd be wrong, of course. It might take a few thousand years, but eventually they would discover electricity, and semiconductors, and the ECU and the CD player would finally give up their secrets.
Not having all the answers, right now, does NOT constitute evidence of a God.
09 January 2009, 09:01 AM
#10
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: North Wales
Posts: 5,826
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I particularly liked...
Now that's blind faith for ya!
Geezer
But Stephen Green, national director of Christian Voice, said: "There is plenty of evidence for God, from people's personal experience, to the complexity, interdependence, beauty and design of the natural world.
"But there is scant evidence on the other side, so I think the advertisers are really going to struggle to show their claim is not an exaggeration or inaccurate, as the ASA code puts it."
"But there is scant evidence on the other side, so I think the advertisers are really going to struggle to show their claim is not an exaggeration or inaccurate, as the ASA code puts it."
Geezer
09 January 2009, 10:29 AM
#13
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,490
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suppose the only thing the advert does is remind me about the thread I posted on here about a 'Godless 'society.As with these debates it went on for quite a while.
I myself find it sad what this country and a lot of countries have become.
The main argument people always put forward are the 'prove he exists' and look how many wars religion causes.
I still preferred the time,perhaps only 20 years ago when we didn't spend so much time being abusive about God.I always think that coincidentally it started to happen when the Internet became popular.Don't know why.Maybe e bay and shopping are peoples new gods?
I myself find it sad what this country and a lot of countries have become.
The main argument people always put forward are the 'prove he exists' and look how many wars religion causes.
I still preferred the time,perhaps only 20 years ago when we didn't spend so much time being abusive about God.I always think that coincidentally it started to happen when the Internet became popular.Don't know why.Maybe e bay and shopping are peoples new gods?
09 January 2009, 10:42 AM
#14
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: North Wales
Posts: 5,826
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suppose the only thing the advert does is remind me about the thread I posted on here about a 'Godless 'society.As with these debates it went on for quite a while.
I myself find it sad what this country and a lot of countries have become.
The main argument people always put forward are the 'prove he exists' and look how many wars religion causes.
I still preferred the time,perhaps only 20 years ago when we didn't spend so much time being abusive about God.I always think that coincidentally it started to happen when the Internet became popular.Don't know why.Maybe e bay and shopping are peoples new gods?
I myself find it sad what this country and a lot of countries have become.
The main argument people always put forward are the 'prove he exists' and look how many wars religion causes.
I still preferred the time,perhaps only 20 years ago when we didn't spend so much time being abusive about God.I always think that coincidentally it started to happen when the Internet became popular.Don't know why.Maybe e bay and shopping are peoples new gods?
You only have to look at football to see how people need to belong to something and denegrate others, sometime with disasterous consequences.
Geezer
09 January 2009, 10:50 AM
#15
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Nov 1998
Posts: 11,905
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And Priests seem to want to make things less scary ...
BBC NEWS | England | Sussex | Church removes 'scary crucifix'
Steve
BBC NEWS | England | Sussex | Church removes 'scary crucifix'
Steve
09 January 2009, 10:53 AM
#16
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Derbyshire
Posts: 12,304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suppose the only thing the advert does is remind me about the thread I posted on here about a 'Godless 'society.As with these debates it went on for quite a while.
I myself find it sad what this country and a lot of countries have become.
The main argument people always put forward are the 'prove he exists' and look how many wars religion causes.
I still preferred the time,perhaps only 20 years ago when we didn't spend so much time being abusive about God.I always think that coincidentally it started to happen when the Internet became popular.Don't know why.Maybe e bay and shopping are peoples new gods?
I myself find it sad what this country and a lot of countries have become.
The main argument people always put forward are the 'prove he exists' and look how many wars religion causes.
I still preferred the time,perhaps only 20 years ago when we didn't spend so much time being abusive about God.I always think that coincidentally it started to happen when the Internet became popular.Don't know why.Maybe e bay and shopping are peoples new gods?
09 January 2009, 12:48 PM
#18
I dare them to do a slogan "There is no Allah"
Then there would be one slogan (on bus stops) "There is (now) no Bus"
I personally feel no more affinity with Christianity than I do with any other religion, its just that its familiar, as Islam is to Muslims, Christmas, Easter etc etc its all programmed into us but thats how other religions are with their particular set of rules, festivals and the like, just because we are used to it and its "Ours" it doesnt mean its any less a load of old bollocks and our religios nutters are any less nutty !
Then there would be one slogan (on bus stops) "There is (now) no Bus"
I personally feel no more affinity with Christianity than I do with any other religion, its just that its familiar, as Islam is to Muslims, Christmas, Easter etc etc its all programmed into us but thats how other religions are with their particular set of rules, festivals and the like, just because we are used to it and its "Ours" it doesnt mean its any less a load of old bollocks and our religios nutters are any less nutty !
09 January 2009, 12:53 PM
#19
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Never do names esp. Joey, spaz or Mong
Posts: 39,688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This extract from wikipedia made me laugh. I bet the opposing parties can't see what's wrong with their complaint
There has long been opposition to teaching children to believe in Santa Claus. Some Christians say the Santa tradition detracts from the religious origins and purpose of Christmas. Other critics feel that Santa Claus is an elaborate lie, and that it is unethical for parents to teach their children to believe in his existence.[6] Still others oppose Santa Claus as a symbol of the commercialization of the Christmas holiday, or as an intrusion upon their own national traditions.[7]
09 January 2009, 01:07 PM
#20
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No one can prove either the existence or not of God if that is the name one wants to put to an all powerful being.
You don't necessarily have to accept biblical teachings even if you are of the opinion that all this could not have started without someone somehow being responsible for setting it all off in the first place. You can go back as far as you like in fact, saying that the stuff of the universe has existed for ever and it just happened to get together and set off the "big bang." But where did the "stuff" come from? If it is ever possible to actually prove the big bang, it still needed a parcel of very concentrated matter or energy which cannot come from nowhere according to our present scientific laws. Let me mention as well that Darwin's theories do not basically disprove the existence of a God.
It is noticeable that all the shouting about this always seems to come from atheists. They seem to be almost fundamental in that they cannot resist shouting down anyone who might believe in the existence of a superior and all powerful being, whatever that being might actually be like.
If you do believe in a God, and you also follow some form of religion, that can be a bit inconvenient since you might be expected to attend a church etc. Is that a reason for being atheistic in many cases and wanting to justify that, even to yourself?
We are all entitled to believe what we like and just what is the point of trying to run down any such beliefs opposite to your own? As someone said in a previous post, why not live and let live and accept that others may have a different outlook, but that should not be a problem as far as you are personally concerned.
It has always been the case that such arguments lead nowhere since either case cannot be proved one way or the other. Surely then its better to just leave it alone and put your argumentative ambitions into something which can generate a more sensible discussion.
Les
You don't necessarily have to accept biblical teachings even if you are of the opinion that all this could not have started without someone somehow being responsible for setting it all off in the first place. You can go back as far as you like in fact, saying that the stuff of the universe has existed for ever and it just happened to get together and set off the "big bang." But where did the "stuff" come from? If it is ever possible to actually prove the big bang, it still needed a parcel of very concentrated matter or energy which cannot come from nowhere according to our present scientific laws. Let me mention as well that Darwin's theories do not basically disprove the existence of a God.
It is noticeable that all the shouting about this always seems to come from atheists. They seem to be almost fundamental in that they cannot resist shouting down anyone who might believe in the existence of a superior and all powerful being, whatever that being might actually be like.
If you do believe in a God, and you also follow some form of religion, that can be a bit inconvenient since you might be expected to attend a church etc. Is that a reason for being atheistic in many cases and wanting to justify that, even to yourself?
We are all entitled to believe what we like and just what is the point of trying to run down any such beliefs opposite to your own? As someone said in a previous post, why not live and let live and accept that others may have a different outlook, but that should not be a problem as far as you are personally concerned.
It has always been the case that such arguments lead nowhere since either case cannot be proved one way or the other. Surely then its better to just leave it alone and put your argumentative ambitions into something which can generate a more sensible discussion.
Les
Last edited by Leslie; 09 January 2009 at 01:09 PM.
09 January 2009, 01:08 PM
#21
Scooby Regular
Ofcourse it got complaints and rightly so, the last time I checked this was a Christian dominated country
I'm not a Christian but if i was i'd be rightly pissed. Christianity gets a raw deal over here imo, better to be a minority and have rights
I'm not a Christian but if i was i'd be rightly pissed. Christianity gets a raw deal over here imo, better to be a minority and have rights
09 January 2009, 01:12 PM
#22
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Never do names esp. Joey, spaz or Mong
Posts: 39,688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd agree up to a point les, but some religions practice and indoctrinate hatred, including christianity.
So no I don't agree people should be allowed to think or believe that's right
So no I don't agree people should be allowed to think or believe that's right
09 January 2009, 01:54 PM
#23
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The bible is the biggest bull**** story known today.A self obsessed man made bull**** story.Also the people who believe this story and said witnessed a grey old man in the sky, is mentally ill.There is no contest with religion as the biggest bull**** story.Religion didn't cause the death, destruction and the criminal activities happening today.Also the auther of the worst selling bull**** story was talking alot of ****.
Nathan.
Nathan.
09 January 2009, 02:00 PM
#26
Scooby Senior
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: North Wales
Posts: 5,826
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No one can prove either the existence or not of God if that is the name one wants to put to an all powerful being.
You don't necessarily have to accept biblical teachings even if you are of the opinion that all this could not have started without someone somehow being responsible for setting it all off in the first place. You can go back as far as you like in fact, saying that the stuff of the universe has existed for ever and it just happened to get together and set off the "big bang." But where did the "stuff" come from? If it is ever possible to actually prove the big bang, it still needed a parcel of very concentrated matter or energy which cannot come from nowhere according to our present scientific laws. Let me mention as well that Darwin's theories do not basically disprove the existence of a God.
You don't necessarily have to accept biblical teachings even if you are of the opinion that all this could not have started without someone somehow being responsible for setting it all off in the first place. You can go back as far as you like in fact, saying that the stuff of the universe has existed for ever and it just happened to get together and set off the "big bang." But where did the "stuff" come from? If it is ever possible to actually prove the big bang, it still needed a parcel of very concentrated matter or energy which cannot come from nowhere according to our present scientific laws. Let me mention as well that Darwin's theories do not basically disprove the existence of a God.
It is noticeable that all the shouting about this always seems to come from atheists. They seem to be almost fundamental in that they cannot resist shouting down anyone who might believe in the existence of a superior and all powerful being, whatever that being might actually be like.
We are all entitled to believe what we like and just what is the point of trying to run down any such beliefs opposite to your own? As someone said in a previous post, why not live and let live and accept that others may have a different outlook, but that should not be a problem as far as you are personally concerned.
Geezer
09 January 2009, 02:09 PM
#29
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Derbyshire
Posts: 12,304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You don't necessarily have to accept biblical teachings even if you are of the opinion that all this could not have started without someone somehow being responsible for setting it all off in the first place. You can go back as far as you like in fact, saying that the stuff of the universe has existed for ever and it just happened to get together and set off the "big bang." But where did the "stuff" come from? If it is ever possible to actually prove the big bang, it still needed a parcel of very concentrated matter or energy which cannot come from nowhere according to our present scientific laws.
Let me mention as well that Darwin's theories do not basically disprove the existence of a God.
It is noticeable that all the shouting about this always seems to come from atheists. They seem to be almost fundamental in that they cannot resist shouting down anyone who might believe in the existence of a superior and all powerful being, whatever that being might actually be like.
If you do believe in a God, and you also follow some form of religion, that can be a bit inconvenient since you might be expected to attend a church etc. Is that a reason for being atheistic in many cases and wanting to justify that, even to yourself?
We are all entitled to believe what we like and just what is the point of trying to run down any such beliefs opposite to your own? As someone said in a previous post, why not live and let live and accept that others may have a different outlook, but that should not be a problem as far as you are personally concerned.
It has always been the case that such arguments lead nowhere since either case cannot be proved one way or the other. Surely then its better to just leave it alone and put your argumentative ambitions into something which can generate a more sensible discussion.
Les
Les