Episode 2

Download Subtitles

Transcript

:00:43. > :00:45.Good morning. Good morning. Welcome to The Big

:00:45. > :00:49.Questions from the Pyramid in Warrington. I'm Nicky Campbell. Now,

:00:49. > :00:52.this is the Christian season of Epiphany, which is all about God

:00:52. > :00:56.revealing himself to us, just as the Christ child was revealed to

:00:56. > :01:00.the Three Wise Men. But, as the frontiers of science advance faster

:01:00. > :01:03.and faster, less and less is regarded as the work of God. So,

:01:03. > :01:08.this morning, we're asking just one very big question.

:01:08. > :01:11.Is there any evidence for God? On our front rows, we have some

:01:11. > :01:19.extremely distinguished scientists, Bible scholars, writers, men of the

:01:19. > :01:22.cloth. People whose experiences have changed their own minds about

:01:22. > :01:32.God. And they'll be cheered on and challenged by our very lively

:01:32. > :01:35.Warrington audience. At CERN, they're closer to

:01:35. > :01:39.confirming the existence of the Higgs Boson, the missing particle

:01:39. > :01:42.that would confirm the Big Bang Theory of how the universe came

:01:42. > :01:46.into being. Last month, the Kepler Space Mission discovered a planet

:01:46. > :01:49.in another galaxy, far away, where life, but not as we know it, could

:01:49. > :01:53.conceivably exist. It's a rather different story to the one in

:01:53. > :02:01.Genesis. Is there any evidence for God?

:02:01. > :02:06.Dr Andrew Pinsent, eminent physicist. A man of the cloth, as

:02:06. > :02:10.well. Now, you accept the cosmology, you see the beauty in the cosmology.

:02:10. > :02:14.You accept it, evolution, how we came to be. And you believe in God.

:02:14. > :02:17.Yes, indeed. And, in fact, it's interesting you mention the Big

:02:17. > :02:21.Bang Theory. Two of the most important theories of modern

:02:21. > :02:24.science. One is the Big Bang, and the other is genetics. It's so

:02:24. > :02:28.often a surprise to many people, they were both invented by men of

:02:28. > :02:31.the cloth. George le Maitre, the inventor of the Big Bang Theory,

:02:31. > :02:34.was a Catholic priest from Belgium. Gregor Mendel, the founder of

:02:34. > :02:37.genetics, was a monk. So clearly, they didn't see any intrinsic

:02:38. > :02:41.problem or a conflict between science and religion. There's one

:02:41. > :02:44.other thing about this story most people don't know. Both theories

:02:44. > :02:47.were rejected in the Soviet Union, the world's first atheist state.

:02:47. > :02:50.They were banned for a number of decades. So, it's interesting

:02:50. > :02:54.people think there's an intrinsic conflict. But the lesson of history

:02:54. > :02:58.is often rather different. There is this God of the Gaps idea,

:02:58. > :03:01.though, isn't there? We used to think lightning was caused by God,

:03:01. > :03:04.and thunder and earthquakes. Now we know it's tectonic plates.

:03:04. > :03:08.Evolution is a good example. We know about speciation, and all the

:03:08. > :03:13.many species that we have. And also the plane of the spheres. Newton

:03:13. > :03:17.put that down to God. We now know it was to do with gravity. And yet,

:03:17. > :03:19.the problem is, if you ascribe anything to God, once science finds

:03:19. > :03:23.out how, what did cause it, God is gone.

:03:23. > :03:27.No, it depends how you think God interacts with the world, and your

:03:27. > :03:31.image of God. So I think some people used to think God was like a

:03:31. > :03:34.watchmaker and doing every fine detail. But the image in a lot of

:03:34. > :03:37.mainstream Christianity is much more that God is like a gardener,

:03:37. > :03:40.cultivating the world. And allowing the world to develop through its

:03:40. > :03:44.own causation and changes. And that idea about how God interacts with

:03:44. > :03:45.the world was a very important fact for the origins of modern science.

:03:45. > :03:49.APPLAUSE. The eminent scientist, intelligent

:03:49. > :03:54.people who believe in God. Peter Atkins. What are you missing? What

:03:54. > :03:57.are you not getting, here? I think there's a huge amount of

:03:57. > :04:06.evidence for God in the natural world.

:04:06. > :04:10.APPLAUSE. The other, the second part of that

:04:10. > :04:15.remark is that it's evidence for lazy minds. What we have to look at

:04:15. > :04:19.is the surge that science has made in our understanding of the world.

:04:19. > :04:24.For thousands of years, people lay back and said: "Oh, God must have

:04:24. > :04:28.done it." in a sense, that was good, because they were questioning and

:04:28. > :04:32.looking for answers. But they were going down the wrong path. 300

:04:32. > :04:35.years ago, and it really is only 300 years. And think of the

:04:35. > :04:44.progress we've made in that time. Mankind, to its great credit,

:04:44. > :04:46.stumbled on the scientific method. And all the great questions of

:04:46. > :04:51.existence, which were being answered or being probed by

:04:51. > :04:56.religion, suddenly became open to the scientific method. It's quite

:04:56. > :05:03.extraordinary what progress we're making. Not one iota of that

:05:03. > :05:07.progress needs to call upon the concept of God. So God is driven

:05:08. > :05:13.right back into virtually a point we don't need him anymore.

:05:13. > :05:21.APPLAUSE. What, then, Dr Andrew Pinsent, can

:05:21. > :05:26.only be explained by God? Well, certainly, I reject a God of

:05:26. > :05:29.the Gaps. In that case, like Peter Atkins. But I think, nevertheless,

:05:29. > :05:33.civilisations that have believed in God have often been very interested

:05:33. > :05:38.in the big questions, and the search for ultimate causes. And

:05:38. > :05:40.science owes them a debt. Yes. Can I just finish? But of

:05:40. > :05:44.course, in civilisations which return to materialism, which have

:05:44. > :05:47.turned to saying there is no God and there's nothing other than the

:05:47. > :05:50.material world. They only measure goods by material things. So a lot

:05:50. > :05:54.of universities now are under attack because they're regarded as

:05:54. > :05:57.doing a lot of useless things. Why aren't they generating stuff for

:05:57. > :06:00.industry, for business and so on? And, unless we keep alive an idea

:06:00. > :06:03.that we're searching for things which are immaterial for the big

:06:04. > :06:07.questions, then we won't actually also make progress in science, as

:06:07. > :06:13.well. But, you mentioned The Big Bang?

:06:13. > :06:16.And that's a very, that's a material happening.

:06:16. > :06:19.You prefer a society in which people believe in God. You're not

:06:19. > :06:23.actually suggesting there is any evidence for God. If you look at

:06:23. > :06:26.the question in an anthropological way. In other words, you look at

:06:26. > :06:29.the way in which human beings organise themselves. There is a

:06:29. > :06:32.practically universal demand for a causal story, a foundation myth

:06:32. > :06:35.which differs from place to place. And which are usually, actually,

:06:35. > :06:37.mutually exclusive. They can't all be true, because they depend on

:06:37. > :06:40.their components, which are exclusive to themselves. And then,

:06:40. > :06:46.also, a religious dimension in order to create some form of

:06:46. > :06:49.cultural practices which regulate society. Morality. Which is

:06:49. > :06:54.morality, ethics and so on. A lot of which predates the organisations

:06:54. > :06:57.of modern states to do that kind of thing for you. In other words, the

:06:57. > :06:59.evidence is that man creates God, and continues to create God.

:06:59. > :07:02.Charles Foster. APPLAUSE.

:07:02. > :07:07.Morality comes from the fact, according to David and many people,

:07:08. > :07:14.that it was advantageous to us, as a tribe. And so we formed rules

:07:14. > :07:19.which stopped us killing each other. And then we survived and we bred.

:07:19. > :07:22.David's absolutely right. We all need a creation myth. The fact that

:07:22. > :07:25.we want that, the fact that we need it is, itself, a tremendously

:07:26. > :07:29.suggestive thing. You might want to ask yourself, more cogently than

:07:29. > :07:32.you have, why that should be the case? The search for origins

:07:32. > :07:35.suggests that there might be an origin beyond ourselves. In

:07:35. > :07:38.relation to the quest for morality. The strangest and, for biologists,

:07:38. > :07:44.most puzzling of all things about the natural world is the kindness

:07:45. > :07:50.of strangers. The fact of altruism, which is everywhere in the world.

:07:50. > :07:53.Now, there are lots... APPLAUSE.

:07:53. > :07:56.There are lots of attempts by biologists to explain this curious

:07:57. > :08:00.fact away. So, kin selection, for example. The notion that, if I'm

:08:00. > :08:10.sufficiently closely related to you, I will die in order to save you, in

:08:10. > :08:13.

:08:13. > :08:16.order to carry on in the gene pool. It might be in our interests.

:08:16. > :08:19.Now, of course it's perfectly true ,that once you've got altruism and

:08:19. > :08:23.cooperation seeded into a community, it confers a massive selective

:08:23. > :08:26.advantage. The question which you need to address yourself to is, how

:08:26. > :08:29.did natural selection allow that seed to be planted in the first

:08:29. > :08:32.place? Natural selection is very effective in going around, stamping

:08:32. > :08:36.on the seeds of altruism. Before they jump up.

:08:36. > :08:39.No, it's not a seed. In the first place, it's a gradual growth of

:08:39. > :08:43.usefulness. So there's no seed planted. But you suddenly discover,

:08:43. > :08:46.you make a mistake. What you think is, perhaps, a mistake, and it

:08:46. > :08:54.turns out to enhance your survival. And that gets welded into, into the

:08:54. > :08:56.ethological system. Peter, I'm sure, I'm sure that you

:08:56. > :08:58.know how dismal the existing biological explanations for

:08:58. > :09:01.altruism are. Doesn't mean to say that they're

:09:01. > :09:04.wrong. It implies, in the case of

:09:04. > :09:06.reciprocal altruism, for example, the notion that I scratch my back

:09:06. > :09:09.because you're scratching your back. A tremendously sophisticated

:09:09. > :09:13.calculation of benefit and detriment.

:09:13. > :09:18.Let me bring Diana in, here. You're an evolutionary biologist. And this

:09:18. > :09:20.is just your area. This is my area. So there is a

:09:21. > :09:24.great deal of evidence about kin selection, about reciprocal

:09:24. > :09:26.altruism. But we're involved in very small scale societies in which

:09:26. > :09:29.every interaction was face-to-face. And certainly, if you look at

:09:29. > :09:33.biblical texts, if you look at other religions, it's perfectly

:09:33. > :09:37.fine to kill out group members. But it's not OK to kill in group

:09:37. > :09:40.members. And if you look at how people act towards one another, in

:09:40. > :09:42.one-off interactions, people aren't very nice. There's a lot of

:09:42. > :09:45.reinforcement in society. And punishment for people who aren't

:09:46. > :09:48.nice to each other. Society, and the rules of society, have been

:09:48. > :09:51.built around our evolved psychology which enables altruism to be

:09:51. > :09:55.possible. For instance, in the military, brothers in arms. That is

:09:55. > :09:58.a way of leveraging kin selection to make people altruistic. And the

:09:58. > :10:02.whole idea that you were saying before, that biology, the fact that

:10:02. > :10:04.we all have an origin story means that there must be something true

:10:04. > :10:07.about it. Well, I think this chair is solid.

:10:07. > :10:11.But now physics has shown that there's a tremendous amount of

:10:11. > :10:14.space between, between atoms. The smartest species on this planet are

:10:14. > :10:18.all social group species. And what happens is, you have to get smart

:10:18. > :10:22.in order to be able to infer the mental states of other animals. Now,

:10:22. > :10:25.if you take that and try to explain the world that way, you will think

:10:25. > :10:29.that there's a universal consciousness that governs the

:10:29. > :10:32.world. So what we're doing is we're using our mind, which is like a

:10:33. > :10:34.hammer, to see the world like a nail. Our mind is good at inferring

:10:34. > :10:36.consciousness. Therefore we're inferring consciousness in the

:10:36. > :10:39.world. APPLAUSE.

:10:40. > :10:43.Charles. You've given a very compelling account of how, once the

:10:43. > :10:46.notion of altruism exists in a society or a community of any sort,

:10:47. > :10:51.it can generate and proliferate. What you've failed to give is an

:10:51. > :10:54.account of how it was seeded in the first place. And that's what I'm on

:10:54. > :10:57.about. Everything was by mistake. Everyone

:10:57. > :11:03.drifts into doing something. And sometimes that something turns out

:11:03. > :11:08.to enhance survival. Everything in biology is a mistake.

:11:08. > :11:12.How did we discover a cup of tea? How do you, how do we imagine that

:11:12. > :11:15.the first cup of tea, as we now know it, came to exist? It came to

:11:15. > :11:19.exist by a whole series of really absurd accidents. There's nothing

:11:19. > :11:23.obvious about the tea plant that says: "take this, infuse it with

:11:23. > :11:26.water, add some milk to it and, if you like, a little bit of sugar

:11:26. > :11:28.from a completely different plant." let's just concentrate on this idea.

:11:29. > :11:32.Consciousness, for example. The late, great Christopher Hitchens, a

:11:32. > :11:35.great atheist thinker. He said, I remember it, I saw him in YouTube

:11:35. > :11:38.saying that there's only something like half a chromosome difference

:11:38. > :11:40.between us and the chimps. But that half chromosome is just a

:11:40. > :11:44.fantastically significant, amazing difference.

:11:44. > :11:48.It means chimps can go to war with one another. But within their own

:11:48. > :11:50.in group, it's very rare that they kill each other. They kill monkeys

:11:50. > :11:53.to eat. But they don't have our levels of

:11:53. > :11:56.consciousness and art and morality. They don't have our level of

:11:56. > :11:59.consciousness, but you could say: "why don't they all kill each

:12:00. > :12:02.other?" They must have been endowed with God with an altruistic

:12:02. > :12:06.motivation. Ants will sacrifice themselves for the greater good of

:12:06. > :12:08.the colony. They must have been endowed by God with an altruistic

:12:08. > :12:11.motivation. People didn't understand how you social insects

:12:11. > :12:14.worked until very recently. Just because we don't understand how

:12:14. > :12:19.altruism might have been seeded in our human species doesn't mean that

:12:19. > :12:20.it has been endowed by anyone else. That is a great example of a God of

:12:20. > :12:23.the Gaps argument, the altruism argument.

:12:23. > :12:33.They don't talk about things that they can't see. Our consciousness

:12:33. > :12:37.

:12:37. > :12:41.is extraordinary, isn't it? Yeah, but that's because it's grown

:12:41. > :12:44.with time. And I think what you have to do is to look, also, at the,

:12:44. > :12:48.the same question comes into the question of the origins of morals,

:12:48. > :12:51.and I think, to understand the ethical system, you can either say

:12:51. > :12:54.God set an example, or you can say, look back over our evolutionary

:12:55. > :12:58.history to see what infrastructure has emerged, but then couple that

:12:58. > :13:00.with our big brains and our ability to reflect, under certain

:13:00. > :13:03.circumstances, on the consequences of our actions. So the, there's

:13:03. > :13:06.nothing mysterious about it. It, it's really the emergence of

:13:06. > :13:16.understanding that we're talking about.

:13:16. > :13:19.Adam Deen, Muslim philosopher. think appealing to evolution to

:13:19. > :13:22.answer this question, if God exists, is a red herring, because it

:13:22. > :13:25.commits the genetic fallacy, which is to invalidate a view looking at,

:13:25. > :13:30.analysing how it originates. It will not enlighten us on whether

:13:30. > :13:34.God exists or not. And one could even argue that atheism can be

:13:34. > :13:38.explained for psychological reasons. We can say that they have father

:13:38. > :13:46.issues and they see God as the father figure and they want to deny

:13:46. > :13:56.God's existence. Would be true some atheists. It wouldn't enlighten us

:13:56. > :13:59.if God exists or not. What's what's the big, the greatest piece of

:13:59. > :14:03.evidence that you can bring to the table, today? Well, for, for me,

:14:03. > :14:05.personally, I, I think the origin of the universe. I think if we

:14:06. > :14:09.probe the observable universe, we will find transcendent signposts.

:14:09. > :14:13.Science will never be able to explain We have probed the universe

:14:13. > :14:16.Science will never be able to, uh, explain how something can come from

:14:16. > :14:19.nothing. Why, why not? Because science only works in a physical

:14:19. > :14:23.realm. It can only explain to you how one physical process can happen

:14:23. > :14:27.with, to, to another physical process, governed by natural law.

:14:27. > :14:31.The Big Bang, if I may finish, is the literal origin of all space and

:14:31. > :14:37.time. Now, suppose, whilst we are speaking, now, you hear a, a loud

:14:37. > :14:40.bang. You're wrong. You hear a loud bang, and then we ask the question,

:14:40. > :14:45."what caused that bang?" and Peter says, "it happened by itself." No-

:14:45. > :14:55.one is going to accept that. That would be an unintelligible response.

:14:55. > :15:01.

:15:01. > :15:08.But the same reason applies to The You see, this is a typical

:15:08. > :15:12.anthropomorphic argument. What you're doing is you're saying, we

:15:12. > :15:16.understand, in this universe, that A causes B, B causes C, and so you,

:15:16. > :15:19.you trace it back and you trace it back to a time, if you can use that

:15:19. > :15:21.expression, before the laws of science actually existed. It is

:15:21. > :15:24.improper to extrapolate your experience of causality in this

:15:24. > :15:34.universe to before when the universe existed. It's so naive.

:15:34. > :15:38.

:15:38. > :15:41.then, how can you then argue... Adam come back. So then, how can

:15:41. > :15:44.you argue that science will come with, with an explanation of how

:15:44. > :15:47.the universe comes into existence? If there are no laws, there's no

:15:47. > :15:50.physical reality. Look how far science has come with understanding

:15:50. > :15:53.the nature of the universe. Back to a trillionth of a second after the

:15:53. > :15:56.Big Bang, in the past hundred years, compared with the progress that the

:15:56. > :16:00.likes of you... Made, I speak kindly, over the past three

:16:00. > :16:03.thousand years. But to suggest that, that science will explain something

:16:03. > :16:13.from coming from nothing. That's worse than magic, Peter. You're

:16:13. > :16:19.

:16:19. > :16:22.advocating magic. So this is the We, as rational beings, we know

:16:22. > :16:32.that whatever begins to exist needs a cause, and the universe began to

:16:32. > :16:32.

:16:32. > :16:35.David Aaronovitch. Well, I mean, it just, as straightforward, and on a

:16:35. > :16:38.logical basis, if some, everything has to have a cause, then something

:16:38. > :16:41.will have had to have created the thing that caused the cause. That's

:16:41. > :16:44.the character understanding of the argument, actually. So actually, so

:16:44. > :16:47.actually, you end up, you end up in exactly the same position as

:16:47. > :16:50.anybody else does, with the fact that you don't actually know. The

:16:50. > :16:53.difference between us is that you have a great kind of collection of

:16:53. > :16:56.intuitions which people have come and caused arguments, a little bit

:16:56. > :16:59.like my belief that if I listen to Tottenham Hotspur on the radio,

:16:59. > :17:01.they will lose. This is my superstition, or my daughter's

:17:02. > :17:05.belief that those, that those strange things on the pavement, if

:17:05. > :17:08.you walk on them, it will cause you bad luck or any other kind of

:17:08. > :17:10.superstitions. You require a causal link and you have attached to that

:17:10. > :17:14.an incredible superstructure of religious and cultural thought

:17:14. > :17:17.which you adduce to be true. Now, by and large, that is no great

:17:18. > :17:21.problem to me, and so on, but it is a great problem to you. Francesca,

:17:21. > :17:23.biblical scholar. Thank you. It illustrates, I think, this major

:17:23. > :17:26.misunderstanding about what, the main western monotheistic faiths

:17:26. > :17:29.and their creation stories are all about. What we're dealing with, it

:17:29. > :17:30.seems to me, are Muslims, Jews and Christians in a modern,

:17:30. > :17:33.contemporary, western, intellectualised mindset who want

:17:33. > :17:36.to engage with science and want to engage with telescopes that look

:17:36. > :17:39.deep, deep, deep into the universe past, but the fact is that their

:17:39. > :17:46.religion and their, their faith commitments are based on ancient

:17:47. > :17:56.texts from ancient societies... Which is supported by modern

:17:57. > :18:04.

:18:04. > :18:07.Can I finish? Can I finish? You may. Thanks. These texts weren't

:18:07. > :18:10.produced by societies that were ever interested in an original

:18:10. > :18:14.question, where are we all from. Some of them. Not, no, not even in

:18:14. > :18:16.the Koran. I mean, to be honest, a lot of these traditions that are

:18:16. > :18:19.about creation... Sorry, what's in the Koran? A lot of these

:18:19. > :18:22.traditions about creation don't image creation as a one off event

:18:22. > :18:25.at the beginning of time. No, it does, actually. God speaks about...

:18:25. > :18:28.It shows creation as happening over and over and over and over again.

:18:28. > :18:32.Mohammed, what is your, the greatest, Mohammed Hatatit, what is

:18:32. > :18:38.your greatest piece of evidence that, that you can adduce for God?

:18:38. > :18:45.Yeah, before that, let's talk about the big... No, the Big Bang, can I

:18:45. > :18:48.please, yes? The Big Bang, because to say that there, theories like

:18:48. > :18:51.the Big Bang is in the Asian books, that's not true. The Big Bang is

:18:51. > :18:54.not mentioned in either the Old or the New Testament it's only

:18:54. > :18:57.mentioned in the Koran. The difference in the Koranic Big Bang

:18:57. > :19:01.and the scientific Big Bang is as follows. The Big Bang, in science,

:19:01. > :19:04.in modern day science, is a bang that happened to, when the whole

:19:04. > :19:07.universe was a single entity that exploded. The Koran tell us that

:19:07. > :19:14.the whole universe was a single entity and then God caused it to be,

:19:14. > :19:17.it to explode but with controlled. It was controlled explosion. So

:19:17. > :19:20.this controlled explosion leads to known results. What every other

:19:20. > :19:26.explosion we know, every bang we know leads to destruction and no

:19:26. > :19:35.known results. So when we bang the Hiroshima, no new... Dr Andrew

:19:35. > :19:38.Pinsent, you're a physicist. Is he right? I can't comment, I'm, I'm

:19:38. > :19:44.not a Koranic expert, so I can't comment on whether the big bang...

:19:44. > :19:47.On the physics, though. I think, the key point, the, the key

:19:47. > :19:50.battleground about evidence for God using reason is, is really nearer

:19:50. > :19:53.philosophy more than science. Now, science shades off into philosophy

:19:53. > :19:56.at some point, but that's where the real battleground is. So it's

:19:56. > :19:59.slightly, people tend to argue past one another a little bit when it

:19:59. > :20:02.comes to just science alone. isn't that idea of the cosmological

:20:02. > :20:05.constant. This number, this tuning that has to be right within

:20:05. > :20:11.something like a hundred and twenty decimal places. Is that not a real

:20:11. > :20:14.problem for you, Peter? Oh yeah, absolutely. It's a real problem and

:20:14. > :20:16.we think we understand the nature of it, as well. The point about

:20:16. > :20:20.scientific approach to understanding the origin of the

:20:20. > :20:22.universe is that it... The fine tuning of the universe. It

:20:23. > :20:25.simplifies the kind of questions that one should ask in the

:20:26. > :20:29.expectation of getting answers, and one of them is the fine tuning.

:20:29. > :20:34.Another is to say, well, a lot of energy had to be made at the

:20:35. > :20:38.inception of the universe how much energy was made? And science, what

:20:38. > :20:45.science does and what religion does not, is to provide an answer to

:20:45. > :20:49.that second question, and it says the amount of... No, no, wait, wait,

:20:49. > :20:54.let Peter finish. The amount of energy that had to be created at

:20:54. > :20:58.the beginning was absolutely zero. So if you extrapolate that to the

:20:58. > :21:01.amount of work that God had to do at the time, you can see that he

:21:01. > :21:06.didn't have to do anything at all. What science is doing is really

:21:06. > :21:10.just getting to the core of what actually happened on day dot.

:21:10. > :21:13.this is kind of a false dichotomy, here. If you're an atheist, you're,

:21:13. > :21:20.you, you somehow support the progress of support. If you're a

:21:20. > :21:26.theist, then you want to quash it. Nno, that's not the case. He's a

:21:26. > :21:29.scientist. He understands science. They accept evolution. Absolutely.

:21:30. > :21:33.So what we're saying here, as a theist, what we're saying is that,

:21:33. > :21:35.as a theist, we hold that the universe has an origin and the

:21:36. > :21:38.universe was, fine- tuned for the existence of intelligent life. And

:21:38. > :21:41.anyone who holds that falls within mainstream science. Of course these,

:21:41. > :21:44.achievements are tentative, and they're open to change, but at the

:21:44. > :21:47.current moment, everything points to God. No, it doesn't, because

:21:47. > :21:51.there are thousand, there are many explanations of why, life, it, I,

:21:51. > :21:53.why the universe is fine tune for, for, for life. One point is that a

:21:53. > :22:03.universe couldn't come into existence except with the

:22:03. > :22:06.fundamental constants that we've now got and... Why were they fine-

:22:06. > :22:16.tuned? And it has, it is just a happy accident. Did we just get

:22:16. > :22:20.lucky, then? Another one, which is actually gaining ground, is the...

:22:20. > :22:27.So we have chance of the gaps, rather than God of the Gaps. Please

:22:27. > :22:30.be quiet while I'm answer, trying to, to put you right. But there are

:22:30. > :22:32.trillions and trillions and trillions of universes, each with,

:22:32. > :22:35.maybe, a different mix of fundamental constants... That's

:22:35. > :22:41.just... And it is not in the least surprising that one of these turns

:22:41. > :22:46.out to be appropriate for life. know, Diana, you're desperate to

:22:46. > :22:50.get in, but, and you can, you can address this questions as well.

:22:50. > :22:55.Let's move on to God in our everyday lives. I mean, that was

:22:55. > :23:00.fascinating, but God in our... David, I'll get you to answer this

:23:00. > :23:05.question. There are moments, and we all have them, when we look at

:23:05. > :23:15.someone we love and we just feel elevated. We feel a sublime

:23:15. > :23:15.

:23:15. > :23:18.transcendence. I saw it when Peter was looking across at Adam, there.

:23:18. > :23:24.A sublime transcendent moment and, or we see something utterly

:23:24. > :23:31.beautiful and we feel something incredible. Some people think that

:23:31. > :23:34.is when we're close to God. Yeah, I don't, I've heard this a lot. I

:23:34. > :23:37.mean, I was recently in hospital and I went bonkers for four days. I

:23:37. > :23:40.had four days of delusions. Those delusions, to me, were utterly and

:23:40. > :23:42.completely real. The mind is an absolutely extraordinary thing, and

:23:42. > :23:45.it's hugely, varied. It's incredibly evolved, and it is far

:23:45. > :23:50.more flexible than people believe. It is incredibly sociable. But that

:23:50. > :23:54.feeling of sheer love and transcendent beauty, that's...

:23:54. > :23:57.Sometimes, you know, you, sometimes you feel that. Sometimes you feel,

:23:57. > :24:01."My God, it's a horrible, bloody rainy day and I wish I wasn't going

:24:01. > :24:05.out in it and that person is really getting on my nerves," and so on.

:24:05. > :24:08.But the moments we don't talk about and so why should we ascribe God to

:24:08. > :24:12.the moment when we feel that kind of moment of love and not God, also,

:24:12. > :24:16.to that moment where we feel pretty crappy, for instance, which is also

:24:16. > :24:19.quite a lot of the things that we feel. I don't feel the need, in a

:24:19. > :24:22.sense, in other words, when I feel good, to think, "I feel really good,

:24:22. > :24:25.somebody must have given that to me." "Oh, I feel really bad,

:24:25. > :24:29.somebody must have given that to me." I'm not just talking about,

:24:29. > :24:32.it's not just feeling good, is it? I think, in practise, for many of

:24:32. > :24:35.us certainly for myself a sense of awe in studying the cosmos is often

:24:35. > :24:37.the beginning of, uh, a movement towards, towards, a faith. And

:24:37. > :24:39.certainly for myself, studying certain objects in mathematics and

:24:39. > :24:42.science particularly particle physics um, gave me an

:24:42. > :24:46.extraordinary sense of order. What's interesting to me is why you

:24:46. > :24:52.need that. Now that's not enough to convert someone, but often it's

:24:52. > :24:56.enough to start moving someone. For me, personally, it's not just the

:24:56. > :24:59.sense of awe, but also the sense of the fruitfulness in the world and...

:24:59. > :25:06.But what about death and the famine and the disease and, and the murder

:25:06. > :25:09.and all those things? Well, I'm talking about the, the fruitfulness,

:25:09. > :25:13.the fruitfulness of faith in so many areas in art, and in music,

:25:13. > :25:15.and in particular, the lives of the saints coz every now and again, we

:25:15. > :25:18.produce extraordinary individuals, who, I suppose, and then I'm

:25:18. > :25:21.putting on my theologians hat, who sort of show, show the face of God

:25:21. > :25:24.in some way or other. And that's amazing. But we produce

:25:24. > :25:27.extraordinary individuals in a lot of places, don't we? We produce

:25:27. > :25:30.lots and lots of, in fact, many, many more extraordinary individuals

:25:30. > :25:33.who are not saints, don't we? Martin Luther King was no saint but

:25:33. > :25:36.he was an extraordinary individual. He was certainly no saint. Well,

:25:36. > :25:39.lots of people across the room have been talking about the idea that

:25:39. > :25:42.The Big Bang and so, some of science, that God might be guiding

:25:42. > :25:45.this and I just think, if God is somehow guiding evolution and the

:25:45. > :25:49.development of the earth and all the planets, could he not have

:25:49. > :25:51.guided it in a way that had a little bit less and that didn't

:25:51. > :25:58.have motor-neurone disease and cancer and all these other things?

:25:58. > :26:01.Why is that, pastor? You address this issue, don't you, don't you?

:26:01. > :26:04.Why did God, God create, you know, E-coli and horrible diseases, the

:26:04. > :26:13.parasites that burrow into the eyes of children in Sub-Saharan Africa?

:26:13. > :26:16.Why did God create those things? Well, I believe that God exists,

:26:16. > :26:19.but there's also, we need to look at, the argument from the idea of

:26:19. > :26:22.the spiritual side. You don't just look at the physical side. If we

:26:22. > :26:25.argue from just the physical side, we have a truncated, view of

:26:25. > :26:29.reality and of the world, because there is a spiritual reality.

:26:29. > :26:32.There's also a physical reality, OK? And so the evil that we see in

:26:32. > :26:35.the world, according to what I, what I know from the biblical

:26:35. > :26:38.record is that there is an evil. Evil is real. There is Satan, there

:26:38. > :26:41.is a devil. Why do children get leukaemia, why do... Illness and

:26:41. > :26:49.sicknesses and evil are coming to the world because of sin. Because

:26:49. > :26:55.of sin? Because of sin. There is no sin is God. God is pure. So is God

:26:55. > :26:58.punishing us for, for... You don't like this, Stephen, do you? No, I

:26:58. > :27:01.don't, and, I'm, and I'm unhappy on two fronts. First of all, that,

:27:01. > :27:04.those, if you like, who are opposed to God are trying to put my

:27:04. > :27:06.understanding of God into a particular box where he's got

:27:06. > :27:13.anthropomorphic caricature, character, where he's a, a guy in

:27:13. > :27:16.the sky, almost. And I'm not interested in that, at all.

:27:16. > :27:19.Secondly, there is a desire, somehow or other, to make God into

:27:19. > :27:23.somebody who directly intervenes in the world day by day and does

:27:23. > :27:27.things to people. No, he doesn't. That's not the way in which my

:27:27. > :27:30.understanding of ultimate reality... How on earth did atheists get the

:27:30. > :27:32.impression that religious people believe that? Because some

:27:32. > :27:39.religious people do believe that, and some other religious people

:27:39. > :27:48.don't believe that. Does he answer prayers? He does. Does he answer

:27:48. > :27:51.prayers? In the way I which I understand God acting, yes he does,

:27:51. > :27:54.because he works within me to en, enable me to be, perhaps be a

:27:54. > :27:57.better person than, actually, I am. He does answer prayers. He works

:27:57. > :28:00.through the arrows, in a sense, of goodness, truth, beauty, love,

:28:00. > :28:03.which are the way in which make up that ultimate reality which I

:28:03. > :28:07.understand to be God. Lady, ladies and gentlemen, meet the Reverend

:28:07. > :28:10.Kim Goh who was put in, he was in, a former triad gangster. He's now a

:28:11. > :28:15.Methodist minister. He went to prison, 357 counts. Put your hands

:28:15. > :28:19.together for him. He found Jesus. And Jesus changed your life. The

:28:19. > :28:23.first time you were in prison... Amen to that. God, God spoke to you,

:28:23. > :28:28.didn't he? Yes, he sure did. Literally? And I wasn't looking for

:28:28. > :28:35.religion. The last thing I want to know is Christianity, God. Look

:28:35. > :28:39.after number one. But guess what, I saw him and he spoke to me. It's

:28:39. > :28:47.just like an atheist. What you believe in? Can I pose that

:28:47. > :28:57.question to you, David? What does atheist believe in? Well, no, I

:28:57. > :28:58.

:28:58. > :29:02.don't believe there's a God. It's an absence of a belief. Atheists

:29:02. > :29:07.don't believe in anything, right? I didn't interrupt you when you speak,

:29:07. > :29:10.please. You wanted to. Atheists believe in nothing. Is it still

:29:10. > :29:14.something they believe in? Nothing. When you say God spoke to you, what

:29:14. > :29:17.do you mean? Did he literally, did you hear his voice? Yes, just like

:29:17. > :29:27.you and me talking, and I thought I was hallucinating. What does he

:29:27. > :29:33.sound like? Like we're having a conversation. What language was he

:29:33. > :29:35.speaking? English. He was speaking to me in English. No, it wasn't

:29:36. > :29:45.loud. It's not thunder and lightning. It's like a normal

:29:46. > :29:48.

:29:48. > :29:51.conversation. What, what did he say? Well, because I wa seff'ing at

:29:51. > :29:55.him because of the vicar, or the chaplain and, then he said, "why

:29:55. > :29:58.are you swearing at me?" And I thought for a moment, one of the

:29:58. > :30:07.other convicts in the, over there was a ventriloquist. Which he might

:30:07. > :30:10.have been. So I was about to arrange their face. And I looked

:30:10. > :30:14.around and they were doing their own thing, smoking or, you know,

:30:14. > :30:18.talking, so I had another go at him and, I believe he got up from the

:30:18. > :30:28.wrong side of the bed that morning. He took offence to me swearing. Of

:30:28. > :30:30.

:30:30. > :30:34.Let me explain the feeling. When I swear a second time, he say: "Look,

:30:34. > :30:41.why are you swearing at me? Is it me or the chaplain who was

:30:41. > :30:48.impatient with you?" Next thing I know, I was on my knees. I didn't

:30:48. > :30:51.want to cry. Tears were running down, but I was feeling this

:30:51. > :30:57.simultaneous emotion at the same time. A feeling of, you know,

:30:57. > :31:02.sadness, and a feeling of joy. And this has revolutionised your

:31:02. > :31:05.life. You're a different person? It has. And I could not explain,

:31:05. > :31:13.until today, why I'm able to have a simultaneous emotional of feeling

:31:13. > :31:16.of joy and sadness at the same time. You try it yourself. Any of you can

:31:16. > :31:20.do that and prove it to me, that's fine.

:31:20. > :31:24.Sorry, what a shame that God didn't show up before you committed all

:31:24. > :31:28.those crimes. Wouldn't that have been a better time to have a word?

:31:29. > :31:32.Well, listen. You've got them all going. Look at this. Peter Atkins.

:31:32. > :31:38.How would you tell the difference between...

:31:38. > :31:41.Oh, you try and smoke wacky in the prison. See if you can get it.

:31:41. > :31:43.How would you tell the difference between your experience and a

:31:43. > :31:47.hallucination? How am I going to hallucinate? Can

:31:47. > :31:55.you hallucinate now, for me? I don't take no drugs then. In the

:31:55. > :31:58.prison, I got no drinks, alcohol, nothing. And I was in a mood of

:31:58. > :32:02.anger at the vicar. Yeah, it's called hallucinating in

:32:02. > :32:04.the brain? But, as a result of it, though,

:32:05. > :32:14.your life has been utterly transformed.

:32:15. > :32:18.

:32:18. > :32:21.Amen to that. One thing I'd like to know is why are you so reluctant to

:32:21. > :32:24.acknowledge the possibility of a hallucination? As I said, I had

:32:24. > :32:31.four days of hallucination. Oh, I hallucinate before. Hell, I've take

:32:31. > :32:35.LSD before. Because, I'll tell you this. I spent four days

:32:35. > :32:39.hallucinating. I thought the nurses in the hospital were going to kill

:32:39. > :32:43.me. Then I thought they were going to eat me. And I thought the people

:32:43. > :32:46.who didn't exist in the next bed were plotting to have me taken away

:32:46. > :32:49.and murdered, and so on. I absolutely believed this. It wasn't

:32:49. > :32:52.until afterwards that I could understand that these were actually

:32:52. > :32:55.hallucinations. In other words, all I'm saying is that the mind is an

:32:55. > :32:58.extraordinary thing. That was post- operative psychosis that you had,

:32:58. > :33:01.wasn't it? But Francesca, in the Bible, if we

:33:01. > :33:05.read, you know. If any Christian, any believer read an account such

:33:05. > :33:09.as Kim's in the Bible, they would say: "Oh yeah, fair go, God spoke

:33:09. > :33:11.to him, yeah." But now, there's a sort of, a level of scepticism

:33:11. > :33:18.about it. Because my story is mine. Who are

:33:18. > :33:22.you to tell me my story's not true? None of you could do that.

:33:22. > :33:24.Myriad examples in the Bible of God speaking directly to people as Kim

:33:24. > :33:27.claims God spoke directly to him, aren't there?

:33:27. > :33:30.And, given that they're in the Bible, these people and their

:33:30. > :33:33.experiences. Which I'd think broadly are primarily fictitious.

:33:33. > :33:36.But these people and their experiences are therefore special.

:33:36. > :33:39.And they become special in tradition. And they become special

:33:39. > :33:43.in the community, and I think, to a certain degree, modern day people's

:33:43. > :33:48.experience of God speaking to them makes them feel special as well.

:33:48. > :33:55.And that's not to judge it. It's simply to say that it sets you out.

:33:55. > :33:58.It sets you apart from the rest. The way I arrived in atheism was I

:33:58. > :34:02.took a course. It's called the psychoanalytic study of society.

:34:02. > :34:06.And they told us the delusions of a man named Schreber, who is a German

:34:06. > :34:09.judge. And he thought that God was going to make him a woman and

:34:09. > :34:13.inseminate him. And he showed me the allegories between the

:34:13. > :34:17.annunciation of the Virgin Mary and this man's account of how God was

:34:17. > :34:19.going to inseminate him so he could bring forth a new race of human

:34:19. > :34:22.beings. And the delusion, the schizophrenic delusion, and the

:34:22. > :34:26.story of the annunciation were so similar, that I realised that the

:34:26. > :34:31.human mind can fabricate. And I'm really glad it had such a wonderful

:34:31. > :34:35.effect on your life. And I'm no David Koresh.

:34:35. > :34:38.I think it's quite important to avoid labels like schizophrenia.

:34:38. > :34:42.But Mohammed believed, clearly, when he went, if you believe that's

:34:42. > :34:51.the word of God, you believe it's the word of God. But if you don't,

:34:51. > :35:01.you've got to say that... Well, that's the key point.

:35:01. > :35:02.

:35:02. > :35:10.Exactly. But that's the key point. It's about interpretation. But you

:35:10. > :35:12.actually said it was fictitious. Are you actually saying that

:35:12. > :35:16.people's stories within the Bible are fictitious? I'm not saying

:35:16. > :35:19.they're eye witness accounts, no. think you've got to be very careful

:35:19. > :35:23.about using that sort of language. Because those stories are people's

:35:23. > :35:26.experience, for example, of Jesus and what he did, and the way he

:35:26. > :35:29.lived. People's experience of God within the latter part of the New

:35:29. > :35:32.Testament were real to them, and important to them, and you're

:35:32. > :35:39.saying they're fictitious, they're rubbish, they're lies.

:35:39. > :35:43.I said I think that they're fictitious, ie not factual.

:35:43. > :35:50.But you've got to be very careful, I think, as a biblical scholar, of

:35:50. > :35:56.saying that they are fictitious. But only a few minutes ago. Or we

:35:56. > :35:59.shouldn't anthropomorphise God. And now you're talking about stories in

:35:59. > :36:02.the Bible being literally true. Stories in the Bible about prophets,

:36:02. > :36:05.about people meeting God. I mean, either these things are literally

:36:05. > :36:09.true and we've got an interventionist God. Or we haven't.

:36:09. > :36:15.I don't actually believe we have got an interventionist God.

:36:15. > :36:18.So they are fictitious? I actually will allow people their

:36:19. > :36:22.own experience and the right to have their own experience, and that

:36:22. > :36:26.being true to them. And in my own life, there have been things that

:36:26. > :36:31.may have happened to me which I feel are important to me. That are

:36:31. > :36:34.pointed in a sense, I like to think of a whole load of arrows that have

:36:34. > :36:39.helped get me to a disclosure situation where, actually, I

:36:39. > :36:43.suddenly take the decision. I do believe in this God.

:36:43. > :36:46.Scientists will tell us that we are pattern seeking mammals. We look

:36:46. > :36:49.for reasons and we look for patterns. But it's interesting what

:36:49. > :36:53.you said. There was some days you believe less than others. What

:36:53. > :36:57.makes you not believe? I think, like any sort of person

:36:57. > :37:00.who is searching for faith, and I hope I'm still searching for faith,

:37:00. > :37:08.you constantly try to listen to those who disagree with you. You

:37:09. > :37:13.try and grow in your faith. You try and learn more about your faith,.

:37:13. > :37:17.Why do you search for it? Because I believe that I have a

:37:17. > :37:20.spiritual dimension within me which needs to be fed, and that's one of

:37:20. > :37:24.the important things. This is the thing. And lots of

:37:24. > :37:28.people feel like there's a gap in their lives. If there happens to be

:37:28. > :37:31.a gap that God happens to fit, well, that's evidence for God. But that's

:37:31. > :37:34.not true. The existence, let me finish. The existence of a gap

:37:34. > :37:38.doesn't mean that something exists to fill that gap. That's the

:37:38. > :37:41.argument that says every colander is a bowl. It's not. Some gaps are

:37:41. > :37:45.just gaps. And yes, we all feel emptiness sometimes. That doesn't

:37:45. > :37:48.mean there's a God up there. I find this takes it back to the

:37:48. > :37:51.human need for the thing, rather than the thing itself. You have

:37:51. > :37:55.decided to search for it. Hardly surprisingly, quite often, you find

:37:55. > :37:58.it because you are actively searching for it. And in a way,

:37:58. > :38:01.that's what the distinction, here, in this discussion is about. You,

:38:01. > :38:05.on this side, you're always searching for the thing. You lean

:38:05. > :38:08.towards it. You want it, you want it to be. You conjure it into

:38:08. > :38:12.existence. You will do everything that you can to do that. Quite

:38:12. > :38:16.often, you do no harm in doing that. Sometimes you do, often that you

:38:16. > :38:18.don't. Myself, I don't have that need, so I don't search for it.

:38:19. > :38:22.Neither do I feel the need to search against it.

:38:22. > :38:25.No, that's fine, David. That belongs to you. But I actually have

:38:25. > :38:30.experienced, in my life, sometimes, transcendence. Some sense of the

:38:30. > :38:35.other. Some sense of God. Something which is out beyond me. Something

:38:35. > :38:43.which you might describe as ultimate reality. What is that

:38:43. > :38:47.feeling? Sometimes, being taken out of

:38:47. > :38:50.myself by beautiful music which has taken me way beyond any understand,

:38:50. > :38:54.taken me to a different place. Elevated me in a way that's closer

:38:54. > :39:02.to God. Sometimes, when I'm sat in a beautiful place in the country

:39:02. > :39:06.and actually thought, "what is all this about?" Touched by God.

:39:06. > :39:16.Do you think that we atheists do not feel the same sense of grandeur,

:39:16. > :39:47.

:39:48. > :39:55.and wonder at the world? Of course we do. We're looking for truth.

:39:55. > :39:58.Patsy's son was shot, Dory. Was it Jesus who found her or God? Well,

:39:58. > :40:02.now we're into a theological issue. A theological issue between Islam

:40:02. > :40:04.and Christianity. About the Holy Trinity and the single God, which

:40:04. > :40:10.we're not actually debating this morning. But Mohammed, I appreciate

:40:10. > :40:13.your contribution. Patsy. So, Dory was shot. And it would shake the

:40:14. > :40:19.faith of many people. But your life was transformed. You believe it was

:40:19. > :40:22.for a reason. Yeah. I do believe that my life was

:40:22. > :40:25.transformed after the death of my son. But I believe I actually was

:40:25. > :40:29.getting there before that. I had different experiences in my life

:40:29. > :40:34.because I believe in God. I believe he exists, and I believe what the

:40:34. > :40:44.Bible tells me. What other people... That's their way of living, OK? And

:40:44. > :40:48.no-one can tell me what I believe isn't true. I'm not telling anyone

:40:48. > :40:52.else what they believe isn't true because I think God is a personal.

:40:52. > :40:55.It's a personal thing about God, for me. So when my son was shot and

:40:56. > :40:59.killed, I was asking the God that I believed in, well, you know,

:40:59. > :41:03.couldn't you save him? Couldn't you do something? Why is he dead? But

:41:03. > :41:07.because I have faith and, one of the verses in the Bible that

:41:07. > :41:10.actually got a hold of me, it said. I think it's in Romans. It said:

:41:10. > :41:15."All things are working together for the good of those who love

:41:15. > :41:19.God." And I know I was a person who loved him, even though some people

:41:19. > :41:26.don't think he exists, I know he exists because he speaks to me as

:41:26. > :41:31.well. We have conversations on a daily basis.

:41:31. > :41:35.What do you mean? Can I explore that a little bit with you? I talk

:41:35. > :41:39.to him about my own personal life. And he talks to me about things and

:41:39. > :41:43.he reveals things to me. Do you hear a voice, or is it something

:41:43. > :41:47.more subtle than that? I think the odd times, it's more from within.

:41:47. > :41:50.Not a feeling. It's a talk, it's like you're having a conversation

:41:50. > :41:54.with someone, and you're hearing their voice, do you get my saying?

:41:54. > :41:57.That's for me, anyway. So when I looked at what has happened after

:41:57. > :42:04.that, obviously I was in pain. I really believe everything Where was

:42:04. > :42:08.he when Dory was shot? Where was God? Where was he? I think I was

:42:08. > :42:12.asked that question once before by a television person. And I said,

:42:12. > :42:14."Right, where he was when his son was being crucified for the sins of

:42:14. > :42:18.the world?" APPLAUSE. Exactly the same place. What I'm

:42:18. > :42:23.saying is that that's where he is. I personally believe that the earth

:42:23. > :42:30.actually belongs to us, ok? And, we have dominion and authority. But

:42:30. > :42:35.not only that. We are like God. That's what I believe.

:42:35. > :42:38.Why do tsunamis happen? Well, I really believe, again, it

:42:38. > :42:42.has to do with us because, according to the word, and that's

:42:42. > :42:48.what I believe, we are in charge of down here. We have a choice, you

:42:48. > :42:51.know. Psalm 82 said: "Ye are Gods, but you will die like men." So it's

:42:51. > :42:54.really important, for me, that we recognise that everything we speak

:42:54. > :42:58.and everything we say, we are creating all the time. Some people

:42:58. > :43:01.don't believe that. But I believe we are creating. We create with our

:43:02. > :43:05.lips and with our words, just like the Genesis says. "And God spoke

:43:05. > :43:07.and it was so." Do you see what I mean?

:43:07. > :43:11.Did Dory have to die for this to happen?

:43:11. > :43:14.I don't say he had to die. Everyone's going to die anyway. And

:43:14. > :43:18.there's nobody here, when we came into the world, that said, "well,

:43:18. > :43:22.you've got two years to live," or four years to live. We don't know

:43:22. > :43:26.that. We know everyone's going to die. That's where we're going. And

:43:26. > :43:30.for the Christians, we say death is the best thing. So, what I mean,

:43:30. > :43:33.when we die, we are going back to where we came from. If that is so,

:43:33. > :43:37.and that's what I believe, then I really believe everything is

:43:37. > :43:40.working. It's working. There is a plan and a purpose in everything.

:43:40. > :43:42.And, of course, one day you believe that you'll be reunited with your

:43:42. > :43:46.son. Oh, I do believe that. Because,

:43:46. > :43:50.soon after he died, I remember I was in the back garden, doing

:43:50. > :43:54.something. All of a sudden, I heard his voice and he says: "Mummy, why

:43:54. > :43:58.are you so sad?" And I looked round, first of all. He's just, you know,

:43:58. > :44:02.died maybe a couple of weeks ago. Then I said, "Because I miss you."

:44:02. > :44:06.And he said, "I'm fine. I'm all right." that actually gave me

:44:06. > :44:10.another kind of a peace within me, to go forward. To do the things

:44:10. > :44:13.that I need to do. And I'm here, today, because my son died. I

:44:13. > :44:17.really wouldn't be here. I really wouldn't be doing the things that

:44:17. > :44:21.I'm doing, you know? I would be sat in church, doing what we normally

:44:21. > :44:25.do. Go to church, read the Bible, pray. And you're helping guys

:44:25. > :44:32.reform And now, yes. So, I really believe there is a God. There's no

:44:32. > :44:37.doubt about it. She has inferred that there is a

:44:37. > :44:42.reason. I think that is a beautiful story, and it has improved alive,

:44:42. > :44:46.it is fine. I do not have a problem with people being villages unless

:44:47. > :44:51.it gives them from understanding the world rationally. -- religious.

:44:51. > :44:55.Religion, in a certain way, really encourages a certain kind of good

:44:55. > :44:59.behaviour but not other kinds. Religious morality is very

:44:59. > :45:03.circumscribed. Religious people are often good to other villages people

:45:03. > :45:07.within their fate but not good to other people, not good do animals.

:45:07. > :45:13.These are the things that are important to me. I do not believe

:45:13. > :45:17.in religion, I believe in God. I do not believe in region. Religion has

:45:17. > :45:24.caused to many problems. I believe Jesus died for me, that is what I

:45:24. > :45:28.believe. We will find out sooner or later, when we die. I believe that.

:45:28. > :45:33.You can believe in something that is not true and it can be a source

:45:33. > :45:36.of great strength. This is not evidence of the existence of God.

:45:36. > :45:41.am not giving evidence, I am telling you my personal experience

:45:41. > :45:45.and what I believe. I am not here to prove anything. Everyone on the

:45:45. > :45:50.front bench there is believing in something that is not true and

:45:50. > :45:58.taking strength from it. Hands up, what would you like to say? Good

:45:58. > :46:03.morning. I was just going to say two points. About this evidence, if

:46:03. > :46:08.there is a God, iOS just going to ask, some things exist outside the

:46:08. > :46:14.realms of science and understanding, because we have not found out about

:46:14. > :46:20.it yet. You know, the planet that was recently found... A Kepler-22b.

:46:20. > :46:25.It did not suddenly magically appear, it has always existed, but

:46:25. > :46:31.it took a time for us to find it. I think God is the same thing. It

:46:32. > :46:41.does not need our belief. I think he is real, we just have to find

:46:41. > :46:48.him. Do you think God created...? The gentleman there has raised a

:46:48. > :46:54.fascinating point. If there were to be life elsewhere, Kepler-22b or

:46:54. > :47:01.wherever, did God create that life as well? Is he there God, too?

:47:01. > :47:04.Lewis wrote a very good essay about this. In terms of us, whether there

:47:04. > :47:08.is life at there that is intelligent and suffers from the

:47:08. > :47:13.original sin, then we have got problems our hands, if they are

:47:13. > :47:18.more technologically advanced than we are. They are coming to get as!

:47:18. > :47:22.People naively think if we make more technical progress, they

:47:22. > :47:27.automatically become better, and that is not necessarily the case.

:47:27. > :47:30.That is where moral issues come back in. I was just going to say,

:47:30. > :47:36.on the point of the Bible and whether it is fictitious or not,

:47:36. > :47:40.whether or not it is fictitious it is irrelevant, because it has been

:47:40. > :47:46.edited and translated. I know how important that is to the meaning of

:47:46. > :47:49.text. Meaning can be twisted and convoluted, it is a form of control,

:47:49. > :47:55.and that is what I believe organised religion is. It is not to

:47:55. > :47:58.say you cannot be spiritual, but you can be spiritual without God. I

:47:58. > :48:03.think the universe is an amazing place, but why do I need to believe

:48:03. > :48:08.it was created by something? I know your eyes are twinkling, you are

:48:08. > :48:14.going to say that the Bible is edited, but the Koran is unaltered.

:48:14. > :48:20.Absolutely right. The word of God was not the word of God, and it is

:48:20. > :48:25.there to prove it is not... It is easy to prove that the Bible is not

:48:25. > :48:32.the word of God. There are multiple Bibles that his beat each other.

:48:32. > :48:39.But the Koran, what it says many times, this is the word of God,

:48:39. > :48:43.proved it is not. It has no contradictions. Kate wants to

:48:43. > :48:50.undergo an the Koran, and I wish her good luck! Initial point was

:48:50. > :48:55.not the Koran is the only book in the world which says, this is the

:48:55. > :48:59.word of God. Had it not been from God, it would have at discrepancies

:48:59. > :49:04.and contradictions. That is what it says. It would have had

:49:04. > :49:09.discrepancies. And it does have loads of discrepancies. Only God

:49:09. > :49:16.can say this, no human can claim this. Once you find a mistake, then

:49:16. > :49:20.you have broken the link. We have the book of God, and he describes

:49:20. > :49:27.himself, it tells a lot of things, and so far we have found nothing

:49:27. > :49:32.wrong with this book. Sorry, let me... And two mistakes in the Koran.

:49:32. > :49:37.The Trinity does not include the Virgin Mary. No. Two, Mary the

:49:37. > :49:43.mother of Jesus is not the same person as Miriam the sister of

:49:43. > :49:46.error. That is just two mistakes, there are loads and loads. Let me

:49:46. > :49:50.jump in. You are saying if we cannot find a contradiction in the

:49:50. > :49:56.Koran, it is true. I cannot find any contradictions in Harry Potter

:49:56. > :50:00.or the Lord Of The Rings, but it does not mean they are not true.

:50:00. > :50:05.Also, does it not say there should be no compulsion in religion, but

:50:05. > :50:10.later it says kill all people who are guilty of a apostasy. No. The

:50:10. > :50:19.Koran does not say that. It does not say people who are apostate.

:50:19. > :50:24.Yes, it does. No, that... Let's be civilised and the academic here. It

:50:24. > :50:29.does not say kill people who are apostate. The verses talking about

:50:29. > :50:33.fighting are to do with what we call a justified war theory. It is

:50:33. > :50:37.when you are under attack, you are allowed to defend yourself and

:50:37. > :50:41.invade countries where people are being depressed. Those

:50:41. > :50:46.contradictions that you mention, name me one spell of Islamic

:50:46. > :50:53.studies that says that is the case. I have not heard anyone. David

:50:53. > :51:00.Aaronovitch. Do you accept that if you had been born in Kerala, you

:51:00. > :51:03.would probably be in two? Yes. Exactly. So you could be having the

:51:03. > :51:07.same argument about the Hindu texts and so on. One of the big problem

:51:07. > :51:11.is that religions have is their mutual exclusivity, and we are seen

:51:11. > :51:16.some aspects of that. If your book is literally true, his book cannot

:51:16. > :51:23.be. His belief cannot be. The Hindu belief and the brothers are talking

:51:23. > :51:28.nonsense. That is a false argument. What it shows is how we create

:51:28. > :51:33.different religions that suit us at different times. What about the

:51:33. > :51:38.Book of Mormon? It has no internal contradictions. Joseph Smith at the

:51:38. > :51:41.same kind of visitation, except even more so. He could discern the

:51:41. > :51:45.golden writing of the golden plate wearing a special pair of

:51:45. > :51:49.spectacles which, from behind a screen, he would then dictate to

:51:49. > :51:54.somebody else. Mormonism is one of the fastest-growing religions in

:51:54. > :51:59.the world. So a diversity of views... Better written than the

:51:59. > :52:06.Koran? The Koran says it is a miraculous book. Harry Potter, you

:52:06. > :52:10.say! You will go viral with that. The gentleman at the back. Good

:52:10. > :52:14.morning. The majority of the debate has been based around the fact that

:52:14. > :52:20.the front row here is looking at arguments why, you know, God might

:52:20. > :52:24.not exist. What is your evidence? The way I see it, we assume that we

:52:24. > :52:31.need empirical evidence for God. The empirical evidence does not

:52:31. > :52:35.suggest that, you know, we can have God that empirical evidence. That

:52:35. > :52:45.would assume that, you know, you can definitely believe in God or

:52:45. > :52:47.

:52:47. > :52:51.you cannot. Peter says that is an and duration of intellect. It is a

:52:51. > :52:55.caricature of this old fashion sense that science is rational, and

:52:55. > :53:01.over here on the front row we have a group of irrational people.

:53:01. > :53:07.is a rational scientist who believes in God. He also nodded

:53:07. > :53:10.when I said that. There is an attempt, in a sense, too

:53:10. > :53:13.caricatured the belief as irrational. Now, there is a

:53:13. > :53:20.difference between saying that something is irrational and non-

:53:20. > :53:26.rational. You opened the show with a reference to the Higgs boson

:53:26. > :53:29.particle. There is no evidence for that. And yet there is a great deal

:53:29. > :53:33.of belief within the scientific community that it exists. And I am

:53:33. > :53:37.happy with that, science enriches my life, as does religion, and

:53:37. > :53:47.there is a sense of harmony in these things. Actually, it worries

:53:47. > :53:47.

:53:47. > :53:51.me greatly that the question, is there evidence that God exists, is

:53:51. > :53:56.using a piece of terminology, evidence, from the realm of science

:53:56. > :54:04.in a debate which also includes God. It is a bit like trying to ask a

:54:04. > :54:08.cricket umpire to apply the rules of cricket to a game of football.

:54:08. > :54:13.Why it is the alternative? The alternative is simply a discussion

:54:13. > :54:18.of assertion. You simply say, I believe it, my belief is equally

:54:18. > :54:23.valid to anybody else's, end of discussion, we all go home. Is that

:54:23. > :54:29.the way we will settle the big intellectual questions? But there

:54:29. > :54:33.is not a richness in actually sitting and shouting very loudly.

:54:33. > :54:41.We are not shouting, let's discuss. It is all very civilised, you

:54:41. > :54:45.should have seen last week show! This is very civilised. I think

:54:45. > :54:50.you're right there is a danger of just being subjective, I say, you

:54:50. > :54:53.say. There is the account are Peter Hitchens, the brother of

:54:53. > :54:59.Christopher Hitchens, describing his conversion back to Christianity.

:54:59. > :55:03.He went to the Soviet Union, and it was very interesting, he noticed a

:55:04. > :55:10.lack of empathy in everyday life. There was a lack of care, and he

:55:10. > :55:15.began to realise what a belief in God can do for a society of the

:55:15. > :55:20.centuries. Communism was a form of religion. I was brought up by Colin

:55:20. > :55:26.has pounds, and Marxism was equally structured as a system of beliefs.

:55:26. > :55:30.-- Communist parents. It claims to be scientific socialism, explaining

:55:30. > :55:36.the world. The Soviet Union had millions of people who, in a sense,

:55:36. > :55:40.were religious. You had polio when you were a boy, you lost your hand

:55:40. > :55:45.in a motorcycle accident, you tried to find God, you went to Lourdes,

:55:45. > :55:48.he was not there. I have seen no evidence in my life, no evidence

:55:48. > :55:58.today, but we have seen something of the Higgs boson last week, by

:55:58. > :56:03.the way. I could flip a coin... had a serious motorcycle accident

:56:03. > :56:06.in 1969, and previous to that I had polio. I have been to learn and I

:56:06. > :56:14.have seen all the creatures hanging up. I went with a trainload of

:56:14. > :56:19.disabled people. It did not do much for me, obviously. What astounded

:56:19. > :56:25.me was, nobody was cured, and nobody subsequently, since I have

:56:25. > :56:31.been there, has had a cure. I doubt anyone ever had a cure. It is just

:56:31. > :56:39.a sham, the whole idea of it, it is just about money. Religion is a lot

:56:39. > :56:42.about money. I have only once prayed for God. I had an accident

:56:42. > :56:49.at 9:10am on a Monday morning. The ambulance crews swore blind that I

:56:49. > :56:57.was dead. They took me to hospital. I was on the table for nine hours.

:56:57. > :57:04.On Wednesday, if you like, I rose again, on the third day. On

:57:04. > :57:09.Thursday, I was in severe agony. So much pain that I did once as for

:57:09. > :57:15.God, only once. Was he there? only ever asked for anything once

:57:15. > :57:21.in my lives, and he didn't do anything for me. This is the thing,

:57:22. > :57:26.what about those people who ask for God and he is not there? This is

:57:26. > :57:29.part of the problem. If there is an expectation that God is good is

:57:29. > :57:33.that somebody and say, you are going to have lots of pain, you are

:57:33. > :57:38.going to be healed, then we have got back to the notion of God as an

:57:38. > :57:42.old man in the sky with superpowers. What we have been talking about

:57:42. > :57:47.today, as far as I am concerned, is about a God who is more to do with

:57:47. > :57:51.the ultimate reality, the sense of transcendence, the sense of truth

:57:51. > :57:56.and beauty and goodness and love which is sometimes missing in

:57:56. > :58:02.people's lives. People on this side maybe have found that and what to

:58:02. > :58:07.identify as God. Do those people not recognise it? They choose to

:58:07. > :58:13.say, rubbish! But even they would acknowledge there is something

:58:13. > :58:18.about wonder in their lives, too, they do not identify it as God.

:58:18. > :58:28.afraid we are at the very end. Can you all applaud each other for a

:58:28. > :58:31.pretty civilised discussion? As ever, the debate will continue on