March sees the activities of the Eternity Mission kick off. For details of what’s happening where see http://www.eternitymission.org.uk/. Rico Tice, the public face of Christianity Explored www.christianityexplored.com is the main speaker. There are all sorts of events in and around the Wimbledon area. It’s not exactly far from Balham. Why not travel to hear a brilliant explanation of what Christians believe. And take your mates.

John Humphrys had some interesting things to say in response to the UCCF sponsored debate between William Lane Crag and Lewis Wolpert. See the article in full at

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/03/03/nrgod03.xml&page=1

Of note perhaps are the following things

1. Humphreys seems to understands Craig’s argument but doesn’t interact with it. Irritatingly Wolpert did the same thing. Craig presented five compelling arguments for belief in the existence of God and Wolpert rebutted none of these to mine or my atheistic guests’ satisfaction. He refused to engage with them at all. And Humphreys does the same in the article. Craig has presented an argument for teh existence of God. The atheist needs to show that these are illogical or untrue. But of course, they can’t.

2. Humphreys seems to posit a distinction without a difference. He draws a distinction between knowing God exists through proof and believing God exists through evidence. But there’s not a whole load of difference between those two statements. Craig’s response is helpful, ‘By proof what I would mean would be a cogent argument and a cogent argument philosophically would be an argument that is logically valid’. Craig talks about logic, cogency and plausibility built on true premises that make good arguments for the existence of God. Humphreys thinks the conclusions about God’s character and nature arise from a conviction in the believer that God exists.

3. Humphreys seems to have ignored the illogicallity of his own moral conclusions. Craig is right when he says that life without God is absurd. If there is no God then there can be no significance, value or purpose to human existence. Humphreys finds that conclusion unsettling. But he doesn’t see that even his own altruistic ethic is without foundation in an atheistic universe.

Two friends who travelled with me from the ’Balham borders’ said essentially the same thing. They felt that they were being sold something that they didn’t want by a slick salesman. It’s an impressionistic observation. It doesn’t engage with the issues. But it’s revealing. They used the phrase ’something they didn’t want’. That’s it. We don’t want God to exist. If He does everything changes. We’re owned and we’re accountable. We’re not the masters of our own destiny. And we’re in trouble for not treating Him as He deserves.