Friday, November 23, 2007

More on Anthony Flew's Conversion to Theism

Dinesh D'Souza has written a piece about the controversy of Flew's new book, There is a God.
Posted by at

2 comments:

Kyl Schalk said...

Dinesh D'Souza writes, “Flew's own writings of the past few years are all entirely coherent and employ sophisticated philosophical vocabulary. While Flew seems to have asked his collaborator Varghese to write a draft of his life story, it was Flew who reviewed and approved the final contents. There is nothing in the Times' article that shows Flew to be incapable of a reasoned change of mind and heart.

I realize that atheists--including those at the New York Times--are embarassed at having to surrender one of their most stalwart champions to theism. Maybe they too should consider following the evidence where it leads? Too closed-minded to consider Flew's arguments, these fellows would much rather belittle the intellectual capacity of the man they once revered. Hell hath no fury like an atheist scorned.”

It sounds like there are some people out there that should read this link:

http://atheocracy.blogspot.com/2005/08/atheist-evangelist-sam-harris-bizarre.html

Below is part of what Francis Beckwith wrote in the link I put above:

What is truly bizarre about Harris' post is that he claims there is no good reason to believe that God exists or that the unborn, from conception, are moral subjects. Granted, there may not be reasons that convince Harris. But there are plausible arguments defending both, many of which are offered by sophisticated and credential scholars. Concerning the former, the works by William Lane Craig, Alvin Plantinga, Richard Swinburne, and J. P. Moreland come to mind. In fact, Craig, Moreland, and I recently edited a volume that makes a case for Christian theism, To Everyone An Answer: A Case for the Christian Worldview (InterVarsity Press, 2004). Concerning the unborn's personhood, Patrick Lee, Moreland, Robert P. George, and I have published on this matter in academic monographs and peer-reviewed journals.

Again, we theists may not have arguments that will convince skeptics such as Harris. But he and others should not pretend as if none of us has ever offered a sophisticated argument for our point of view. He gives the false impression that people of faith are all a bunch of idiotic morons who have never reflected on the intellectual foundations of their beliefs. This, of course, is utter nonsense, as the plethora of contemporary works in Christian philosophy, to cite but on example, clearly shows.

3:15 AM
Dr. Michael Bauman said...

Doug,
You are quite right about the new atheists. They do not read, respond to, acknowledge, or refute the contributions -- or even the existence of -- sophisticated Christian thinkers. For example, I notice that Christopher Hitchens cites exactly one Christian born in the last two hundred years. Imagine what the atheist front would say were you to write a book refuting atheism and mention only one atheist since 1800.

In my view,the Harris, Hitchens, and Dawkins crowd offer up weak sauce indeed.

Best,
Michael Bauman

5:26 AM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)