Posted on 11/03/2006 1:47:02 PM PST by SirLinksalot
Why Top Atheist Now Believes in a Creator
By Lee Strobel
11.2.06
Some news items are so staggering that they demand personal investigation. That was the case with the stunning announcement in late 2004 that the world’s most famous philosophical atheist, Dr. Antony Flew, had abandoned his skepticism and now believes in a Creator.
Finally, I was able to sit down with the Oxford-educated author of three dozen books – including The Presumption of Atheism and Atheistic Humanism – and interview him about his new conclusions. The remarkable conversation was captured on video and is now available in free clips at www.LeeStrobel.com. Here are some highlights of my chat with the spry 83-year-old professor.
Flew was warm and friendly during our conversation, offering thoughtful responses to my questions. He seemed comfortable in talking about his new beliefs, yet he was still careful in how he stated his position. It was clear that he was still thinking through some of the implications of his new-found belief in a Creator.
Asked what prompted him to so dramatically change his views, Flew focused on one particular issue. "Einstein felt that there must be intelligence behind the integrated complexity of the physical world," he said. "If that is a sound argument, the integrated complexity of the organic world is just inordinately greater – all the creatures are complicated pieces of design. So an argument that is important about the physical world is immeasurably stronger when applied to the biological world."
He said in his opinion it was "just obvious that [this] argument is much stronger now" than ever before.
Interestingly, this is some of the evidence I discuss in my book The Case for a Creator, which retraces and expands upon the scientific investigation that led me from atheism to Christianity. Included in my book is an eye-opening interview with Dr. Michael Behe, the biochemist from Lehigh University, who describes complex and interdependent biological systems that can’t be explained by Darwinian evolution and instead are better explained as the work of an Intelligent Designer.
During my interview, Flew spoke out strongly against Islam (calling it "intellectually contemptible") and made it clear that he’s not yet a Christian. Still, as I pressed him on the attributes of the God he believes in, I was struck by how they tracked so well with the Christian conception of the Creator. For instance, Flew said he thinks the Creator is an omnipotent, eternal, conscious and intelligent being.
Although Flew takes a deistic approach by saying the Creator is uninvolved with humanity, he did concede that "it’s a reasonable thing for someone to argue" that the Creator is caring toward those he created.
Concerning Christianity, Flew called Jesus "a defining case of a charismatic figure." I probed on the issue of the resurrection – a topic on which the atheist Flew had debated with Christian philosopher Gary Habermas in the past. Previously, Flew’s position was that a miraculous event like the resurrection wasn’t possible because God didn’t exist.
I pointed out that since Flew now believes in a supernatural Creator, then the possibility of Jesus’ resurrection becomes more plausible. His reply was encouraging to me: "I’m sure you’re right about this, yes," he said.
Still, Flew said he hopes there is no afterlife. "I don’t want to go on forever," he said. "Really?" I asked. "Even if there’s a heaven?" Flew replied: "Well, it would depend rather on what the activities were."
"If the Christian God exists," I said, "What would he have to do to convince you?"
As an atheist for most of his life, this wasn’t something Flew had pondered. "I’ve never thought about this at all," he said. Then he added: "But he would presumably know."
I pointed out that famous atheist Bertrand Russell said that if he were ever confronted with God, he would complain to him that he had failed to provide sufficient evidence of his existence. "But you’ve found enough evidence of an Intelligence, so you’re further along than he was."
"Yes, oh, yes," he said. "I mean, there’s been a gigantic advance in the sciences since the death of Bertrand Russell."
I asked whether it would require an encounter with God for him to believe in Christianity. "Well, yes, it would, but until you’ve had that experience, I think it’s impossible to believe it. You know, if I now had this sort of experience, it wouldn’t seem right to me. I would wonder what was going on [and whether] I was going crazy."
His biggest barrier to Christianity, he said, is the doctrine of hell. "If I had begun as a Christian believer, I should have believed in the goodness of God, and I should regard it—as I do regard it now—as totally inconsistent with the doctrine of eternal torment for anyone."
At one point, he commented: "If I had been brought up in a Catholic school [with the teaching about hell], I would presumably have been terrorized into belief."
I mentioned to him that my book The Case for Faith includes an interview with Christian philosopher J. P. Moreland on the rationality of hell. Flew said he would be willing to read the chapter if I sent it to him.
A few minutes later, as we were saying goodbye in the lobby of the hotel where the interview had taken place, someone came up to me with a copy of The Case for Faith and asked if I would sign it.
Instead, I promised to send the person another copy—and promptly took the book, marked the chapter on hell, and gave it to Flew.
No word yet on whether it has influenced his thinking.
Well...don't keep me in suspense.
Do you have a reference for that?
RAmen, brother.
Dear GraniteStateConservative,
Although I don't have the time or the inclination to expand on this, typically philosophy (and Christian theology) identify God as entirely simple.
sitetest
It does not demand fire, brimstone, the devil or anything so terrible as all that. I believe that being without God for eternity would make a fiery hell seem like a good thing.
The problem is that God is not personally present in Hell to restrain evil (because it is the place where people go to get away from Him), yet He has promised punishment and/or suffering there will be related to the sinfulness of its residents. How can He restrain evil without doing so personally?
One way would be to surround each person with just enough fire to keep them from attacking others. Periodically, they would lunge at each other, the frequency of their attacks being determined by their unrestrained level of evil. They would experience the flames in direct proportion to their own sinfulness, yet they would be protected from others' evil.
Ultimately, Hell will be populated by those who believe being apart from God is a good thing. Indeed, their frequent experience in the flames will serve to confirm that belief. The gates of Hell will be locked from the inside.
I am amazed by the complete lack of postings from the FR pro evolutionists (Patrick Henry where are all your compatriots?) zero response to this thread and already over a day old! Heve they all gone away? Have I been gone away so long that only Fester Chugabrew and Right Whale are the only ones left of your kind?
If Flew is reading Stroebels' works I wonder if anyone has referred him to Dr. Grant Jeffries book The Signature of God. It basically lays out the staggering odds of fulfilling just a few of the over 100 prophesies regarding Jesus Christ as the Messiah. Incidentally there are actually over 300 prophesies concerning the Messiah - the 'lion' prophesies yet to be fulfilled until Christs' triumphant return to set up his millenial kingdom.
If/when Flew finally comes to accept Jesus Christ as his Savior the I'd further like to see him review and critic Dr. Walt Browns' book In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood. I have not yet seen any true scientific refutation of this work - some have tried and ignored certain key pieces of what he's laid out while others have simply changed the math he presents - available online for all who are interested:
http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/
Hell #1
"My vision of hell is to be alone, without God.
It does not demand fire, brimstone, the devil or anything so terrible as all that. I believe that being without God for eternity would make a fiery hell seem like a good thing."
Hell #2
"The problem is that God is not personally present in Hell to restrain evil (because it is the place where people go to get away from Him), yet He has promised punishment and/or suffering there will be related to the sinfulness of its residents. How can He restrain evil without doing so personally?
"One way would be to surround each person with just enough fire to keep them from attacking others. Periodically, they would lunge at each other, the frequency of their attacks being determined by their unrestrained level of evil. They would experience the flames in direct proportion to their own sinfulness, yet they would be protected from others' evil."
Hell #3
I too have problems with people suffering forever in hell. Infinite punishment seems out of proportion to finite sin.
Fortunately, the Bible no where reveals people will suffer forever in hell. I have studied it carefully and it seems quite clear that the wicked will be destroyed to nothing.
Ed Fudge, a Christian apologist, has a fine book expounding on this, "The Fire That Consumes".
http://www.edwardfudge.com/home.html
Bingo!
Perhaps you'll explain, then, Jesus' quote from Mark 9:44, 47-8:
"into hell, where the fire never goes out...into hell, where "their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched."
Regarding Dawkings,he reminds me of that quote from long ago,"Those who deny God the most vociferously are those who most need Him in their lives".
Atheism is thus more a cry for help than anything else.
How long does it take to create time?
What did matter weigh before it existed?
How much space is required to create all dimensions?
How do these questions differ from the question that you ask if everything must be compared to the physical? Or are you stating that either everything physical ultimately needs a creator / or nothing physical ultimately needs a creator?
If nothing physical ultimately needs a creator than I should expect answers to these questions from – well, ultimately mindless causes…
I recall reading in a near death experience book that when we pass on to the Other Side,we are given a Life Review by God and all the pain we caused others in our lives,WE feel in God's presence and immediately become aware of how our mortal failings not only hurt uS but hurt God as well.
Honestly, how does the ‘FSM’ differ from the ultimately uncaused RM&NS ‘god’ which created mankind that Darwinism invokes?
Although whether Mr. Hawking believes in God or not has nothing to do with God's existence, see the following:
http://www.pacificnews.org/marko/hawking.html
All the world's a stage and life is just a metaphor for chemical acts./sarcasm…
Picked up their marbles and left. Don’t wanna study Evo war no more.
”If/when Flew finally comes to accept Jesus Christ as his Savior”
Ain’t gonna happen, Pilgrim. { 8^) Let’s see . . . when’s his next book due in the stores?
”I too have problems with people suffering forever in hell. Infinite punishment seems out of proportion to finite sin.”
”Fortunately, the Bible no where reveals people will suffer forever in hell. I have studied it carefully and it seems quite clear that the wicked will be destroyed to nothing.”
Fascinating! I must confess to having similar thoughts: eternal damnation, sans eternal punishment. Appropriate it would be . . . that those who deny the existence of God and believe they are destined to live their allotted three score and ten (or perhaps even just the least little bit more) and are then to be consigned to eternal oblivion, should indeed suffer that precise fate. Merciful, too . . . that they should be granted their exact expectation . . . no mental anguish at separation, no physical suffering . . . just the total cessation of all sentience. Nothing but nothing, as it were.
Have you a citation of passages you would care to pass on? I would be most grateful.
Here's a suggestion made in all seriousness. Read through the entire Bible yourself looking specifically just for all the verses on that topic. Can be done in a month or two.
Of course, if you're not already a Bible reader, then probably you wouldn't really be "most" grateful if someone else did the work for you, since you don't value it enough to do it yourself.
By the way, I know someone who reads through the entire Bible twice a year topically in this way, picking a different topic each time as the Holy Spirit leads. I'm not quite that ambitious myself, reading at more like half his pace, but with the same purpose.
bump
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.