For the past half century, the leading atheist in the world was philosopher Anthony Flew. He wrote over 30 philosophical works laying the intellectual groundwork for nonbelief. He debated Christian apologists. He was widely cited in atheist literature and at atheist conventions. What distinguished Flew was how comprehensive and fully-developed his atheist philosophy was. Other philosophers, such as Bertrand Russell and Martin Heidegger, espoused atheist beliefs but those beliefs were incidental to their philosophy. Atheism was Flew's philosophy. HIs works such as Theology and Falsification and The Presumption of Atheism were considered classics of theist thought.
Then Anthony Flew became a believer, and his book There Is A God describes his intellectual journey. Go ahead and order this book, along with my new book, What's So Great About Christianity. Together the two books represent what atheism has always dreaded: historically based, philosophically rich, scientifically fluent, logically reasoned refutations of atheism.
Flew says he has a lifelong commitment to going "where the evidence leads." And now, he calmly says, the evidence leads to theism. His own past writings have been exposed as a "relic." Flew writes, "My discovery of the divine has proceeded on a purely natural level, without any reference to supernatural phenomena...It has had no connection with any of the revealed religions. Nor do I claim to have had any personal experience of God or any experience that may be called supernatural or miraculous. My discovery of the divine has been a pilgrimage of reason and not of faith."
Flew's argument for God combines science and philosophy, and I'll let you discover it for yourself in his book. What I enjoyed was the way he uses simple analogies to expose atheist illogic. For instance, leading atheists seek to prove that the mind is no more than the brain. If the brain is destroyed, they say, we can't use our minds. Therefore there is nothing to minds excerpt circuits and neurons. Flew gives the example of a child raised on a remote island who finds a satellite phone. Voices come out of the machine. The child recognizes these voices as human and is thrilled by the discovery that she has found a way to interact with other humans. Perhaps there is life outside the island! Then the elders of the tribe (if I may embellish Flew's account, let's call them Big Chief Dawkins, Grand Pooh Bah Dennett, and Witch Doctor Pinker) scorn the child and say, "Look, when we damage the instrument, the voices stop. So they're obviously nothing more than sounds produced by the unique combination of metals and circuit boards. Forget about learning about other humans. From all the evidence we have, we are the only living creatures on earth. So go back to making sandcastles." Who are the real dummies here?
Anthony Flew has been banished from the atheist community. Anthologies have been reprinted removing his essays. Atheist websites condemn him as an apostate. (Atheist toleration does not extend to former atheists.) He doesn't even make the case for Christianity, as I do. But Anthony flew out of the atheist cuckoo's nest, leaving anger and confusion among the unbelievers. And now Flew tells us why he rejects atheism. The atheist monopoly on public debate is over: the theists are striking back.
Reader Comments ( Page 2 of 23)
16. Yes Maggie, where did the rational debate go? Dinesh's constant lies prevent a rational discourse from him.
Knight_of_BAAWA at 11:14AM on Oct 10th 2007
17. That the divine is everpresent implies neither a personal God nor an eternal individual consciousness. Neuroscience does not imply materialism. There is a reason why "religion" is ultimately about personal decision - in a rational world with rational people, that is.
Stuart Steinman at 11:16AM on Oct 10th 2007
18. quote FROM ABOVE: "For the past half century, the leading atheist in the world was philosopher Anthony Flew. ...He debated Christian apologists..."
Flew's bad legacy of atheism was to promote his "situation ethics" which eager students put into practice as some of the rationale for the 1960's sexual revolution...that whole mess which damaged persons & their young...
i.e. I remember reading some of his "Situation Ethics" a bit after the sexual revolution started...His philosophy (as I remember) reduced moral choices to "whatever fits the situation".
As I know from my own self, it's easy to cook up a "situation ethic" to justify any behavior which formerly (under the 10 commandments for instance) would have been called piggish and selfish and disrespectful of others.
I hope Mr. Flew continues to follow "where the evidence leads" as he may NOW lead some lost souls out of the postmodern wilderness....
vikingmother at 11:34AM on Oct 10th 2007
19. This appears to me no more than an advertisement to sell a book. It isn't even thinly veiled, and should be labeled as such.
jmsharon2 at 11:40AM on Oct 10th 2007
20. CORRECTION Fletcher wrote "Situation Ethics". Flew's influence as a half century atheist was still significant in that the young who read his books could feel "justified"in throwing out moral absolutes.
vikingmother at 11:41AM on Oct 10th 2007
21. Thank you for bringing this topic to light. I was unaware of Anthony Flew before this article and found it fascinating. Although I've never been an athiest myself, I can empathize with Flew's natural progression from athiesm to theism. His experience was very similar to my own as far as my initial struggle to deny the idea of reincarnation until I could no longer deny it in my 40's. I would be interested in reading his book.
Linda at 11:45AM on Oct 10th 2007
22. Poor Dinesh,
An English major in college who never learned that if a word is to be used, even "god", it must be defined. Barring that, the entire claim of believing in "god" is like believing in nothing. May I direct his attention to the classic article by Martin Buber "The Eclipse of God" for the necessity of doing so?
Another chuckle from Dinesh. Poor individual. He attempts serious discourse without knowing much upon a subject. Instead, he presents us with what amounts to nothing more than personal value judgments which, the truth be told, consist of nothing more than pomposity. One would think that those associated with him in the same "think tank" at the Hoover Institute would point that out to him before he makes an even greater fool of himself. Or, could it possibly be that there is little "thinking" going on within the group?
Robert I. Laitres at 12:05PM on Oct 10th 2007
23. The atheist monopoly on public debate is over??? WOW, what planet are you on Dinesh?? Last I checked 99.9% of the planet believes in some kind of god power and George Bush has made his christian god public around the world! It is laughable that you call it a "public" debate when most of the public feels there is none!
If you are so strong in your resolution (faith)is there even a need for a debate? Leave science to the scientist's and you can have your fariy tales! No one can possibly have a productive debate with someone who denies scientific evidence and believes in the supernatural phenomenon instead.
K at 12:09PM on Oct 10th 2007
24. Seems like a sales pitch to me. If one is really interested in this, instead of buying the book go get it at the library and don't waste money. When a theist claims that his book is "historically based, philosophically rich, scientifically fluent," and "logically reasoned refutations of atheism." right off the bat you have to be suspect because when you do end up reading it lacks in all those qualities. The same goes for Francis Collins' book. He claims to offer scientific proof for the existence of God, but offers, instead, faith based assertions with no strong foundation to his argument. Only that he believes so based on some emotional experience in his life.
Theism, first off is not scientific, plain and simple, my evidence for this is that there is not ONE single peer reviewed scientific journal that even discusses god, including from theist scientists who are versed in science, say, as in Francis Collins (they write books instead in hopes to fool the ignorant). This is because god does not stand the tests of empirical analysis, only flawed metaphors and strawmen arguments. So if the claim then is faith as a philosophical principle, then I have faith that god does NOT exist. So right off the bat, I have destroyed any argument that theists use regarding faith.
Anyway, as I said, instead of buying the book, go borrow it from the library. Cheers.
Leftoflarry at 12:16PM on Oct 10th 2007
25. You see DD does not believe in God. He believes only in (Jesus - God) the dead guy that came back to life and flew off into the sky. Lots of people believe in a universal concept called God that has nothing to do with (Jesus-God) or any other local superstition.
Larry at 12:24PM on Oct 10th 2007
26. K wrote: "The atheist monopoly on public debate is over??? WOW, what planet are you on Dinesh?? Last I checked 99.9% of the planet believes in some kind of god power..."
There is good reason to believe that much more than .1% of the people on the planet do not believe in some kind of god power. Zuckerman and Paul estimate that the number of atheists in the world may have reached over 1 billion. There are 6 billion people on the planet. Here is a link to an article by them:
http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/paul07/paul07_index.html
Remember, there are 1.3 billion Chinese. Moreover, according to the New York Time: "A recent poll by East China Normal University estimated that 31.4 percent of Chinese 16 or older are religious, putting the number of believers at roughly 400 million."
There probably are a lot of people that don’t actively disbelieve in God, but they also don’t believe in God. They just don’t have a God belief.
Wes at 12:25PM on Oct 10th 2007
27. Flew was a well respected among the atheist. Now that he has changed his mind about his beliefs those who believed like him don't want to hear about it!!!
Fernando at 1:08PM on Oct 10th 2007
28. Those who criticize C.S. Lewis and Josh McDowell should read about their background. Neither of these gentlemen came from religious and both sought out to discredit christianity and those who believe in God.
Fernando at 1:07PM on Oct 10th 2007
29. Hindu Vedanta and Upanishads explain very scientifically and logically how the spirituality and God matters to this universe. There is nothing to believe…. it is the truth…. Anyone really wants to find that truth and experience its presence, should leave all personal agenda and shed down the EGO. Be broad minded and understand correctly… that is the importance of VEDANTA teaching.
Jay at 10:35AM on Oct 12th 2007
30. This article is a shameless sales pitch and a total joke as everyone has been pointing out. I imagine he won't allow comments much longer... they're pretty embarrassing. I think by the atheist "monopoly on debate" he means the comments sections of his own entries. But what does he expect when he is a such an annoying, easy target??
Michelle at 1:12PM on Oct 10th 2007