Did former atheist Antony Flew commit the unpardonable sin by following the evidence wherever it leads?

As the atheists demonstrate here, Flew will not be pardoned by them for following the evidence into theism. The impossibility of a naturalistic explanation of the Big Bang, the precision of the cosmological constants, and the direction of even the simplest life by rich information, all pointed to the work of God in designing our world.

Pardoning Flew might tempt atheists into examining the evidence they presently reject out of hand. Thus, his offense remains unpardonable.

Cheers,

Bruce

I doubt he was the most famous atheist..that title will be a little holy like claim and we dont do like people who do that, This book has been the subject of controversy, following an article in the New York Times magazine alleging that Flew had mentally declined, and that Varghese was the primary author but... How can atheists can be right about the unreality of Zeus and Mythra? 5 centuries before any christian or muslim exist but..we are wrong when we say your favorite god is unreal? Amazing you share 99% of our view on false deities.

Antony Flew's conversion was not to theism, but to a weak deism, a belief that a creator set the universe in motion but has not participated in any way since (Carrier 2004).

Flew's one and only piece of relevant evidence for accepting a deistic god was the apparent improbability of a naturalistic origin for life (Carrier 2004). Flew, by his own admission, had not kept up with the relevant science and was mistaught by Gerald Schroeder, a physicist and Jewish theologian (e.g., Schroeder 2001). He later conceded, "I now realize that I have made a fool of myself by believing that there were no presentable theories of the development of inanimate matter up to the first living creature capable of reproduction" (Carrier 2005). Thus Flew's conversion is, by Flew's own admission, baseless.

Flew remains a deist but calls his belief a "very modest defection from my previous unbelief" (Carrier 2005).

The argument from authority is weak to begin with, and Flew has never been a spokesperson for atheism, much less for the unrelated subject of evolution. Nobody's unsupported beliefs, including Flew's, constitute an argument for or against evolution (nor for or against atheism). Only evidence and logical argument are legitimate reasons to accept or reject any objective position.

It is not surprising that an 81 year old man would give in to FEAR.

It is ok if we lose one...in this day and age of the Internet he will be replaced with about 10 young Atheists. Why do you think Atheists outnumber christians at YA 3 to 1? We are here for christians teenage children who are eager to ask questions their christian parents forbid them to even ask...we are here to give them the answers they seek and to plant seeds of doubt into those fertile young minds, seeds which take root in the teen years and then blossum when those teens hit the college scene and our Atheist College Professors take over the conversion from that point.

This internet is a fantastic tool for the Atheist...15 years ago I would have been lucky to have an opportunity to plant seeds of doubt into 1 christian teen a YEAR! Today I plant seeds of doubt into at least 10 christian teens a week on various sites...got one already today.

And one more thing for you to consider...Flew is a very intelligent man and somewhat well known as a lifelong Atheist...and he knows how gullible and easily led christians are. So how much MONEY did you spend on his book? Was it hard to resist buying a book with that kind of title?

Flew is raking in some hard earned christian cash right now...I will gleefully look forward to his announcement in a year when tells christians his is and always has been an Atheist but thanks them for the money to purchase his new Mansion and Ferrari with.

:-)

Anthony Flew is the world's "most notorious atheist" ? Really ? B/c until he converted to theism, I'd never heard of him. I would say that Dawkins and, before him, Darwin, are the world's most notorious atheists. Oh, and Stalin of course.

As for his 'evidence', the day I hear a decent explanation for how an omnipotent being who loves us let's us suffer and then let's us die and then sends most of us to hell for arbitrary BS, that will be the day I bother reading any further.

Wow, DE just ripped your question to shreds. You have my sympathies. Sorta.

He's not that notorious, I'd never heard of him.

"Now, is Flew guilty of committing the unpardonable sin or not?"

No, sin doesn't exist.

Here are the facts of the matter:

"Flew's one and only piece of relevant evidence for accepting a deistic god was the apparent improbability of a naturalistic origin for life (Carrier 2004). Flew, by his own admission, had not kept up with the relevant science and was mistaught by Gerald Schroeder, a physicist and Jewish theologian (e.g., Schroeder 2001). He later conceded, "I now realize that I have made a fool of myself by believing that there were no presentable theories of the development of inanimate matter up to the first living creature capable of reproduction" (Carrier 2005). Thus Flew's conversion is, by Flew's own admission, baseless."

Flew, who recently died, remained a deist but called his belief a "very modest defection from my previous unbelief" (Carrier 2005).

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA115_1.html

"After months of soul-searching, Flew concluded that research into DNA had "shown, by the almost unbelievable complexity of the arrangements which are needed to produce life, that intelligence must have been involved". Moreover, though he accepted Darwinian evolution, he felt that it could not explain the beginnings of life."

"His God was strictly minimalist – very different from "the monstrous oriental despots of the religions of Christianity and Islam", as he liked to call them."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/culture...

Again, Flew later admitted that he had not kept up with the latest research and made a fool of himself "by believing that there were no presentable theories of the development of inanimate matter up to the first living creature capable of reproduction..."

Regardless of his change of mind to Deism, he totally rejected the primitive, abhorrent tribal god of the Bible.

And the unpardonable sin is a part of Christian superstition, not atheism.

"the World's Most Notorious Atheist"? Wow, somebody loves himself.

Just out of curiosity, why do you think I would be interested in this guy's opinion? My atheism isn't based on what other people think.

the unpardonable sin is Blasphamey, this term is used TOO loosely. To commit Blasphamey is to die without profess Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior; and without proclaiming the God on High -- El Shaddai as the maker of all things

If he's the world's most notorious atheist, you @$$holes are going to drop all that Stalin Mao and Pol Pot nonsense, right?