[mike182d]

"God is dead" - Neitchze

"Atheism is dead" - science

[escapefromboston]

At 81 you may want to start making plans for the next step.

[Cold Heat]

There are never any atheist's in foxholes.

At 81, he is in the foxhole now. Kinda sad, but reality.

[isthisnickcool]

My grandfather was a self-professed Atheist all his life. Until his death at 101. Or rather, until right before his death when he changed his mind.

[wallcrawlr]

I sure hope this thread attracts the Fr-atheists, I'm waiting for their responses.

I'm praying they respond. ;-)

[Pagey]

bump for Later

[mikrofon]

One Flew, out of the "cuckoo's nest"...

[Alacarte]

"It has become inordinately difficult even to begin to think about constructing a naturalistic theory of the evolution of that first reproducing organism,"

200 years ago there was no better explanation for how man came to be than the 6 day story of creation. By today's standards, that assumption is ridiculous, in time, Flew's statement above will be too.

[munchtipq]

He accepts Darwinian evolution but doubts it can explain the ultimate origins of life.

Please, anyone who fights against the teaching of evolution in public schools, please read and understand this line.

Creationist ideas and the new "intelligent design" fad are not science. Doesn't mean they're not right, just that they make no testable predictions. More importantly, they do not conflict in any way with the concepts and teaching of evolution, which does not, despite many people's conception of it, claim any starting point or origin of life. Darwinian evolution merely describes how organisms change, not how they began. Plus, added bonus, it is scientific, which means it makes predictions about the fossil record that can then be proved or disproved. Please don't muddle the scientific education of our children with things that are not science.

Sorry to rant, but I've been distressed by the number of stories in the news lately about "evolution vs. ", when there is in fact to conflict there to speak of.

[F16Fighter]

"I'm thinking of a God very different from the God of the Christian and far and away from the God of Islam, because both are depicted as omnipotent Oriental despots, cosmic Saddam Husseins," he said.

Flew evolved from ignorant "atheist" to idiotic "deist."

It's amazing how many so-called "intellectuals" run a deficit when it comes to adding 2+2 or common sense.

[MWS]

"I'm thinking of a God very different from the God of the Christian and far and away from the God of Islam, because both are depicted as omnipotent Oriental despots, cosmic Saddam Husseins,"

Well, I do remember something about his son(s) dying...

[EdReform]

BTTT

[EdReform]

GI Ping

[lonevoice]

A very interesting read!

[stacytec]

Flew is a philosopher and as such can choose to use different schools of thought to explore problems. He has the flexibility of being able to explore ideas of creation outside of the confides of scientific methodology. He can choose to believe in things using standards of his own selection. Atheists aren't all cut from the same block of wood, some of us have different philosophical backgrounds. I've read Flew would say that his acceptance of ID seems reasonable to his standards ( which have changed through the years) but not to someone who resides staunchly in the school of modern skepticism like myself.

[jwalsh07]

He's probably gotten over hating the old man and being a smart guy realizes that calling oneself an atheist is really an untenable position.

[MeekOneGOP]

Famous Atheist Now Believes in God

Excerpt:

NEW YORK - A British philosophy professor who has been a leading champion of atheism for more than a half-century has changed his mind. He now believes in God — more or less — based on scientific evidence, and says so on a video released Thursday.

At age 81, after decades of insisting belief is a mistake, Antony Flew has concluded that some sort of intelligence or first cause must have created the universe. A super-intelligence is the only good explanation for the origin of life and the complexity of nature, Flew said in a telephone interview from England.

Please let me know if you want ON or OFF my General Interest ping list!. . .don't be shy.

[airborne]

"I'm thinking of a God very different from the God of the Christian and far and away from the God of Islam, because both are depicted as omnipotent Oriental despots, cosmic Saddam Husseins," he said.

Well, he still is wrong!

[jonno]

Bump!

[syriacus]

A super-intelligence is the only good explanation for the origin of life and the complexity of nature, Flew said in a telephone interview from England.

Carrier assured atheists that Flew accepts only a "minimal God" and believes in no afterlife.

If I've got this straight, Flew thinks he needs God, in order to explain the existence of the complex Cosmos we've found ourselves in. But Flew also thinks that same God needs to be minimal.

Hmmmm....