Antony Flew - No Longer an Atheist

Simon · Post by **Simon** » Fri Dec 10, 2004 4:02 pm

A note from Craig Hazen, Professor at Biola University:

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Perhaps you have heard the dramatic news that legendary British atheist, Antony Flew, has recently turned to belief in God. [See Southern Appeal post on this here] Well, as Paul Harvey would say, here is the rest of the story.

We have been preparing to publish a definitive interview on Flew's change of mind (an interview conducted masterfully by Dr. Gary Habermas) in the January 2005 issue of our academic journal "Philosophia Christi." At the same time, we were planning to release the news to the world-wide media and tell the whole story in the pages of our journal.

Well, as often happens, the story has broken early. ABC News and the Associated Press have posted reports of Flew's embrace of theism.

However, what the news organizations do not have is the EXCLUSIVE, DEFINITIVE INTERVIEW WITH FLEW ABOUT HIS JOURNEY. BUT WE DO!!

Here is an excerpt from the interview to entice you:

-----------------------------------------
GARY HABERMAS: You very kindly noted that our debates and discussions had influenced your move in the direction of theism. You mentioned that this initial influence contributed in part to your comment that naturalistic efforts have never succeeded . . . Which arguments for God's existence did you find most persuasive?

ANTONY FLEW: I think that the most impressive arguments for God's existence are those that are supported by recent scientific discoveries. . . . I think the argument to Intelligent Design is enormously stronger than it was when I first met it.
-----------------------------------------

To get the entire interview on line, just go to:
http://biola.edu/antonyflew/

To subscribe to the cutting-edge philosophy journal, Philosophia Christi, just go to: www.biola.edu/philchristi
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

ST88 · Post by **ST88** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 12:15 am

potwalloper. wrote:In the end it is a rather meaningless debate - without access to Flew and the necessary diagnostic material it is impossible to determine through our debate just why this has occured...

Might I suggest that being agnostic about this is the way to go?

I had hoped the debate, if you could call it that, was just how possible it was that the guy was still all there. Whether or not he was should be irrelevant to the discussion. But I guess you're right. Hmmmm. Without access to diagnostics, it wouldn't be possible to tell, would it?

richic · Post by **richic** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 12:28 am

It sounds like he's all there since he's thoughtfully accepting new evidence. Isn't that what scientists do?

Most people I know at that age are holding on a little too tight, are not open to new ideas, and tend to repeat themselves a lot.

I would guess that now that he has accepted the concept of deism, he will take the next step and become a Christian. He would be a very powerful witness so he may get a nudge. I would encourage Christians to pray for him.

Imagine the ridicule that would be unleashed if Tony Flew became a Christian?

Tigerlilly · Post by **Tigerlilly** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 12:06 am

The famous atheist never gave up atheism. He posted a rebuttle to the rumor tha twas circulating on the internet. It's not true.

Nyril · Post by **Nyril** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 1:06 am

I would guess that now that he has accepted the concept of deism, he will take the next step and become a Christian. He would be a very powerful witness so he may get a nudge. I would encourage Christians to pray for him.

Actually, I expect you will convert to Deism.

Post by **otseng** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 9:39 am

Tigerlilly wrote:The famous atheist never gave up atheism. He posted a rebuttle to the rumor tha twas circulating on the internet. It's not true.

Could you please provide a link to backup your statement?

richic wrote: Imagine the ridicule that would be unleashed if Tony Flew became a Christian?

From the interview, it's doubtful that he'll become a Christian (though not improbable).

HABERMAS: C. S. Lewis explained in his autobiography that he moved first from atheism to theism and only later from theism to Christianity. Given your great respect for Christianity, do you think that there is any chance that you might in the end move from theism to Christianity?

FLEW: I think it’s very unlikely, due to the problem of evil. But, if it did happen, I think it would be in some eccentric fit and doubtfully orthodox form: regular religious practice perhaps but without belief. If I wanted any sort of future life I should become a Jehovah’s Witness. But some things I am completely confident about. I would never regard Islam with anything but horror and fear because it is fundamentally committed to conquering the world for Islam. It was because the whole of Palestine was part of the land of Islam that Muslim Arab armies moved in to try to destroy Israel at birth, and why the struggle for the return of the still surviving refugees and their numerous descendents continue to this day.

richic · Post by **richic** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 10:55 am

Nyril wrote: Actually, I expect you will convert to Deism.

I doubt it. Doesn't deism require an impersonal God?

Tigerlilly · Post by **Tigerlilly** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 5:58 pm

http://www.secweb.org/asset.asp?AssetID=138

Sure. I hope this link works, but tell if me if does/doesn't.

ENIGMA · Post by **ENIGMA** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 6:18 pm

Tigerlilly wrote:
http://www.secweb.org/asset.asp?AssetID=138
Sure. I hope this link works, but tell if me if does/doesn't.

Uh, please note the editors note at the top of the link:

[Editor's note: This article no longer represents Flew's current position. For the most recent information, see Antony Flew Considers God...Sort Of.]

Tigerlilly · Post by **Tigerlilly** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 11:45 pm

He said in the far bottom he hasn't made any assertions yet. He's most likely Agnostic, but he says he doesn't want to say anything before further examination.

I don't know how reliable the other article is, since it's not really by him. The other one was.

There are other rumors of him being quaker too.

THe second article also refuted the claim that he supported the cosmological argument, I think it says.

He also says he's not even qualified to make a decision, not even on Deism. He doesn't have access to the necessary biological data or science, and he's no longer an expert in the field. He needs more time.

So he's really back to square one. " I don't know what I believe." "need more time" He's "He is merely considering
the possibility"

I was more responding to this article: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,141061,00.html

Which stated Flew said God is Real, which he didn't say and doesn't agree that he said.

Post by **otseng** » Tue Dec 21, 2004 10:05 am

Tigerlilly wrote: So he's really back to square one. " I don't know what I believe." "need more time" He's "He is merely considering the possibility"

Perhaps square two, but not square one. Before, he was a committed atheist, now he is not. If anything, his current view falls within the definition of a deist.

But, what he exactly believes now I do not feel is that important. What is striking to me is that a philosopher of his calibre has now seen how naturalism fails to explain life and would move towards deism to explain it.

"My one and only piece of relevant evidence [for an Aristotelian God] is the apparent impossibility of providing a naturalistic theory of the origin from DNA of the first reproducing species ... [In fact] the only reason which I have for beginning to think of believing in a First Cause god is the impossibility of providing a naturalistic account of the origin of the first reproducing organisms."