Indeed, Russell does not say there is no God, he merely says he is not convinced the Christian God is the correct version of an absolute beginning and end. As a philosopher, Russell finds much to be convinced about the moral validity of Christ. but, if in Christ we have the epitome of morality and goodness, then are there not universals of quality that are imbedded in other great people: Buddha, Lao-Tse, etc. If Christ is the Church, why are Christ's principles not universally practiced?
For Copleston, though, the world cannot exist without a first cause, and although that first cause is unpredictable, only the existence of God makes sense of human's moral and religious experiences and drive for understanding. The idea of God is based not just on empirical proof -- but on results. Thus, one must have faith in order to believe; faith is individual and is not proven true or false in all situations.
Russell notes that the Christian idea is that if humans can conceive...
This is reminiscent of a famous quote by the German philosopher Nietzsche, "If horses had gods, gods would be horses." Of course, humans perceive God in a certain way because humans think in a certain way. How would we conceive of something in a non-human way? For Copleston, however, God's existence is not a logical argument, but a metaphysical argument and one based on the results of creation.
As in the debate, neither side clearly "won." Humans will likely continue to ask "why are we here," and "how did we get here," because we have the capacity to ask such things. It seems we are psychologically wired to need a belief system that allows us to understand where we have been and where we are going. Thus, the debate about God will likely continue to be contentious and unsolved.
Source:
The Existence of God Debate. (1948). British Broadcasting Company. Retrieved from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXPdpEJk78E
