Posted on 12/10/2004 7:08:12 AM PST by Michael_Michaelangelo
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.
(Excerpt) Read more at nynewsday.com ...
"All kinds of people who think they know whats good for others lobbied for it, it wasn't only Christians."
Certainly. But it is the perception, right or wrong, that it was Christians. At any rate, you can't deny that Christians are a very vocal, or rather certain Christian groups are very vocal in lobbing the govenrment to enforce thier beliefs on others. That causes people to stereotype against Christians. Which was my original point.
Being 81, and having one foot in the grave, has a tendency to change your views on God. He's covering his bases.
Believers,.....
Merry Christmas/Happy Hanukkah!
:-)
............................and,..... The Angel's Sing!
:-)
In his autobiography, Darwin, who also called himself an agnostic, wrote that the magnificence of the universe almost forces one to conclude that God exists. However, he continued, "Can the mind of man, which has, as I fully believe, been developed from a mind as low as that possessed by the lowest animal, be trusted when it draws such grand conclusions?" He goes on to say that the problem is compounded by "the probability that the constant inculcation in a belief in God on the minds of children has produced so strong and perhaps inherited effect on their brains, that it may now be as difficult for them to throw off their belief in God as for a monkey to throw off its instinctive fear of a snake". For this monkey at least, my great-great-grandfather was right.Randall Keynes
This insight into Darwin adheres also to many who follow him. For them, we are imago elaphe rather than imago dei, and therein lies a wrong path taken.
Funny how if God really did not exist...athiesm would not exist either. (there would be no reason for the existance of athiesm)
"And I hate to tell you this, but the burden of proof IS on you to prove why we're not entitled to certain presuppositions."
Actually you are both right/wrong ... you are equally entitled to your epistemological ground-rules, but they are equally open to question.
pnome is expressing the 'nothing is true without material evidence' ground rules. He doesnt realize that materialist philosophic assumptions (nothing is deemed true except through material evidence) will lead to materialist conclusions. He doesnt realize he has axiomatically excluded the human soul as real and thus he is merely stating premises as conclusions.
Ultimately materialism is a dead end, for its denial of the existence of the 'ought'. (the argument is too detailed for this discussion).
OTOH, he has a point. Just because some book or an authority somewhere tells you its so, how do you come to know it?
At some point, you have either a 'leap of logic' or a 'leap of faith' to get to your conclusion.
"Rational minds have logical reasons for holding certain presuppositions. "
Sure, but what are those reasons, and what are those presuppositions? Is God a conclusion of a thought process, or an axiom that one attempts to elaborate on (eg via theology)? If at some point you need 'faith' to glue your conclusions to your axioms, isn't it fair for a use-reason-only skeptic to call 'foul'?
Proof is the point.
Living is not extraordinary, being resurrected is.
You bet it is. He's the only guy ever to do it.
The question is proof, you cited it. You accept that Jesus lived I assume? You accept that Socrates existed I assume? You accept lots of things with a different standard of proof than you demand of the resurrection.
It's one thing to say you don't think it happened, it's another to demand some higher standard of proof which you don't require for other things.
What would you concider to be proof?
"Is there some Constitutional Amendment that denies the right of believers to participate in the political process?"
No, however, if my "pursuit of happiness" is different than yours, you shouldn't be forcing me to pursue happiness in the same way you do. That IS against the constitution.
Drinking wine vs. smoking pot.
Extraordinary claims, require extraordinary proof.
It presupposes something?
What are inalienable human rights, and WHY are they called inalienable?
What are self-evident moral truths, and why are they called "self-evident"?
Is the Constitution a meaningless document unless it is in place only to GUARD absolute (self-evident) moral truths?
Well said, Alamo-Girl!
Dear Sir:
Please consider who Jesus was reported to be, and his
activities on this earth as reported by the early documents.
People do have a desire to know the final ultimate truth
about their existence and their destination. When one
approachs the obvious end of their physical existence, these
questions loom LARGE.
If you really want to know who God is, take a look at
Christ. He did tell his followers, that if they see Him
they also see the Father...You said, there is no evidence
for his resurrection, but at least consider this questions,
"What would cause his scattered,defeated, and dejected followers
to go around their world, and further, and to testify to the resurrection of Christ,
and many of them accept death rather than recant?"
Could it have been mass hysteria, or a purposefully drawn up
hoax, or mendacity, or lunacy, or can an all powerful
God really raise the dead?
Thank you for your consideraton.
"At any rate, you can't deny that Christians are a very vocal, or rather certain Christian groups are very vocal in lobbing the govenrment to enforce thier beliefs on others."
So what? The NAACP, Mothers against Drunk Drivers and the Sierra Club also want to impose their beliefs on others.
And they succeed.
Do you *really* think we should discriminate against Christians and not let them participate in politics like the rest of America?
"That causes people to stereotype against Christians."
um, no, what causes people to stereotype others is hostility, bigotry, sloppy thinking and bad manners.
Originally from Saskabush, but spent more than a decade in Van. Beautiful plumage, eh?
Torture? Try watching the self-promoting, ego-driven, 48 minutes of hell they call basketball. If it was a team sport it might be palatable...might be. That's torture.
Novosibirsk is cold and north. Have a brother-in-law who lived with his family for three years in Siberia recently. Sort of like Saskatchewan except not as warm.
"if my "pursuit of happiness" is different than yours, you shouldn't be forcing me to pursue happiness in the same way you do. "
So you are against minimum wage laws, discrimation laws and drunk driving laws, correct?
"That IS against the constitution."
Where are the above forbidden in the constitution?
"Drinking wine vs. smoking pot."
Strangling cats vs. riding in a rodeo.
I can deny that they are anymore guilty than other groups.
Labor unions
Businesses
Farmers
Jews
Muslims
Legalization advocates
Gun control advocates
Gun rights people
ETC,ETC.
That causes people to stereotype against Christians.
There do so in error.
"What would cause his scattered,defeated, and dejected followers
to go around their world, and further, and to testify to the resurrection of Christ,
and many of them accept death rather than recant?"
Because that is what they truely believed. Why would a person strap dynamite to themselves and detonate in a pizza shop? Blind Faith.
I disagree.
BTW, no one is saying you must believe. No gun is to your head. You deny at your own risk.
You didn't answer the important question I asked.
I agree....I have far more success with my 12 pounder. I say, if you're gonna knock sense into 'em, use the right tool!
Proud owner of the 12 pound NAHV Bible (New American HAMMER Version)!
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.