Beggar to Beggar: Saved by Increments

BreakPoint with Charles Colson ^ | January 11, 2005 | Charles Colson

[Mr. Silverback]

A leading intellectual elaborates on why he abandoned atheism. But, surprisingly, he says his reasons were not entirely intellectual.

British philosophy professor Dr. Antony Flew has been the subject of several Weblog discussions recently. Born the son of a Methodist minister, he embraced atheism at age 15 and spent most of his life promoting unbelief. Recently, he announced that evidence is forcing him to admit that a creator-God probably does exist.

To the extent that the media have reported Flew’s change of mind, they have emphasized his cerebral cogitations, the “argument to design” logic. He reasons that DNA and other intricacies—as distant as the galaxies and as close as our own bodily structures—overwhelmingly suggest a wise creator-God. Several news dispatches mention that the Intelligent Design concept that several of my friends and I have championed has played a part in stimulating him to recognize God’s “characteristics of power and also intelligence.”

But another major factor in Prof. Flew’s change of heart showed up in his interview with Liberty University philosopher and historian Dr. Gary Habermas, published in the journal Philosophia Christi. Flew admires John and Charles Wesley, whose influence continues to uplift society more than two centuries after their deaths. Flew told Habermas, “Methodism made it impossible to build a really substantial Communist Party in Britainand provided the country with a generous supply of men and women of sterling moral character. . . . [Methodism’s] decline is a substantial part of the [cause for the] explosions both of unwanted motherhood and of crime in recent decades.” For Flew, God’s reality demonstrates itself in the lives of people who follow biblical principles.

I have found that the work that we do in Prison Fellowship to be our most powerful apologetic and witness. People can see the Gospel lived out, as Flew has done.

Flew also had long-term personal contact with C. S. Lewis. He recalls that while they were both on the Oxford faculty, they attended the weekly meetings of the Socratic Club, chaired by Lewis. Although Flew disagreed with Lewis on many issues, he remembers Lewis as “an eminently reasonable man.” Instead of raising his voice or pounding the table, Lewis spoke softly and showed respect for Flew, earning Lewis the right to be heard.

What lessons can we learn from Prof. Flew’s spiritual pilgrimage, about how to witness to atheists and skeptics? First, we need to avoid an arrogant triumphalism—a put-down attitude that comes across as “I told you so! What took you so long to recognize what has been obvious to me for years?” Second, we need to demonstrate the Gospel every opportunity we have, showing our secular friends how Christian efforts create a better society.

And finally, remember the principle of evangelism by increments. Many people do not accept Christ the first time they hear the Gospel. C. S. Lewis moved first from atheism to intellectual assent, and then later to saving faith in Christ.

Seldom does somebody move all the way from atheism to salvation, as a result of one person’s presentation on one occasion. When God gives us the privilege to carry the ball a few yards, that’s fine: He often gets someone else to carry it the rest of the way across the goal line.

[sheltonmac]

*ping*

[Mr. Silverback]

BreakPoint/Chuck Colson Ping!

If anyone wants on or off my BreakPoint Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.

[mel]

Fascinating

[Cicero]

Excellent piece, as we might expect from this writer. And very much to the point. Most conversion stories are incremental, and take place over a considerable time. St. Paul was the great exception.

Presumably Colson has read C. S. Lewis's autobiography, "Surprised by Joy," and probably Humphrey Carpenter's fascinating group biography, "The Inklings." As a boy, Lewis was relentlessly trained in logical thinking by his most influential teacher, so it's not surprising that he would have respected Flew as a man of reason. Logic is not enough in itself, but as Lewis would have said, it is based on the Logos and if properly used is never to be ignored or despised.

[Iscool]

Likely this guy rebelled against his preacher dad and spent half his life trying to justify it...And finally had to admit to himself that he couldn't do it...Not an uncommon story...

[Knitting A Conundrum]

And finally, remember the principle of evangelism by increments. Many people do not accept Christ the first time they hear the Gospel. C. S. Lewis moved first from atheism to intellectual assent, and then later to saving faith in Christ.

Boy is this how it works so often! Raised in a protestant church that I disagreed with, experimented with Wicca, Buddhism, Hinduism as a teenager but God kept calling me...As a non-Catholic kid I moved to New Orleans, got fascinated by the rosary, would say the Hail Mary. They'd run the St. Jude Novena on the radio station I listened to. I read Story of a soul and the Autobiography of St. Augustine at important points of life. I read saints lives, studied Medieval history. Saw movies about Fatima, Lourdes, St. Francis of Assisi. Bit by bit, I gave in and knew which path I was supposed to go. Medjugorje helped, Mother Teresa helped. One day, I gave in, and started attending Mass. Did it for a year, often daily mass, and finally signed up for RCIA. Although there was a lot of dross to burn off and habits to weed out, and some slipping and sliding, I have not looked back. God casts his nets wide, and keeps on calling. Most of us aren't going to have an experience like St. Paul, but he will keep trying, and if we listen, he will nurture that seed that he plants until it blooms.

[Mr. Silverback]

PING!

Former Atheist Antony Flew, Day Two.

[cspackler]

I read little bits of "The Screwtape Letters" on a regular basis. It's a great way to remind yourself of how to look at your own life critically.

[Aussie Dasher]

Only now he develops logic?

[jonestown]

Aussie Dasher wrote:

Only now he develops logic?

---

Both Atheism & Religion-ism are illogical beliefs.

Agnostics are logical. They simply admit they don't know.

[Aussie Dasher]

None of us can ever "know", but logic dictates that there is a force greater than any we experience on this earth.

For my part, I'm more than happy to accept Jesus Christ's explanation of this force.

[jonestown]

It's logical for me to be happy that you are happy.

Dispite the fact that we disagree on what logic 'dictates'.
-- May the force be with you.

[Aussie Dasher]

Well, if you're happy, I'm happy - come back and see us again!

[jonestown]

I may do just that.. Can you assure that no logic will be dictated to me?

[Aussie Dasher]

If logic doesn't occur to you, I doubt any amount of dictating it will help.

[jonestown]

Aussie Dasher wrote:
If logic doesn't occur to you, I doubt any amount of dictating it will help.

---

Now now, no fair claiming that logic may not 'occur' to me.

Logic drove me to agnosticism, much to me old mums displeasure.

[Aussie Dasher]

I'm not having a go at you. Merely pointing out that "dictating" logic to someone is far less effective than that logic occuring naturally to the dictee.

[Annie03]

ping :P

[VOA]

"But another major factor in Prof. Flew’s change of heart showed up in his interview with
Liberty University philosopher and historian Dr. Gary Habermas, published in
the journal Philosophia Christi."

The aforementioned inteview is a MUST-READ, no matter where a person falls on the
spectrum of materialist/evolutionist to Bible-thumping creationist:
http://www.biola.edu/antonyflew/
(downloadable .pdf version is linked at that site)

The interview is interesting for not only Flew's glowing mention of the Methodist
Church as an anti-communist antidote, but for his contention that the World Council of
Churches was taken over by agents of the USSR.

And his favorable comments on the notable figures of Christianity (Christ an "emminently
appealing figure"; St. Paul possessed of a "first-class philosophical mind"!)
makes his open criticism of Islam all the more pointed.

I suspect the mainstream media hasn't given Flew's comments more light because,
like Flew, they realize factual criticism of Islam puts a person on the Fatwa fast-track.
(see p. 12 of the .pdf version of the interview)

[VOA]

for fair and open discussion, I post here the URL for a thread discussing some
"backtracking" by Flew:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1318657/posts?page=1

[VOA]

bump for publicity...

[Blue Collar Christian]

I'm beginning to see Agnosticism as a religion and you as an evangelist of it. That would be counter productive to Christianity. Or perhaps are you just trying to dictate logic yourself?

I don't know, but by discernment I would say you at best are sitting on the fence. That is not being of the dark side or the light side of the "force". From where I sit, you need prayer, and I will include you in mine.

God bless you, whether you know you want it or not.

[Dimensio]

Quick vocabulary lesson:

Atheist: One who is without theism.

Agnostic: One who believes that it is impossible to know whether or not a god exists.

An atheist may assert that gods (or a specific God) do (or does) not exist, but such a declaration is not necessary for atheism. Atheism implies only a lack of belief in deities (which is different than a belief in the lack of deities).

Agnosticism is orthagonal to atheism/theism. An agnostic could decide that because the subject is unknowable, there is no point in wasting time thinking about it and thus be an agnostic theist. On the other hand, an agnostic could accept a deity "on faith" and nothing more, and thus be an agnostic theist.

I find that many people who claim to be "agnostic" (not all, but many) are actually atheists. They know that they can't say for certain that no gods exist -- which is a perfectly honest admission -- but they worship none because they also have not seen evidence that any deities do exist, but they seem to think that they have to go an extra step and positively assert that gods do not exist before they can be considered an atheist.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Thanks for the article, S. Mac.

We all walk the path God has set before us.

[xm177e2]

Agnostics are logical. They simply admit they don't know.

Are you sure about that?

[jonestown]

Both Atheism & Religion-ism are non-logical beliefs.

Agnostics are logical. They simply admit they don't know.
11 jones

---

Blue Collar Christian wrote: I'm beginning to see Agnosticism as a religion --
I don't know, but by discernment I would say you at best are sitting on the fence. That is not being of the dark side or the light side of the "force".

---

"I don't know, but ----"

From where I sit, such discernment sounds agnostic to me. Sort of like the logic of straddling that fence.

[jonestown]

Both Atheism & Religion-ism are non-logical beliefs.

Agnostics are logical. They simply admit they don't know.
11 jones

---

Dimensio wrote: Quick vocabulary lesson:

Atheist: One who is without theism.

Agnostic: One who believes that it is impossible to know whether or not a god exists.

An atheist may assert that gods (or a specific God) do (or does) not exist, but such a declaration is not necessary for atheism. Atheism implies only a lack of belief in deities (which is different than a belief in the lack of deities).
Agnosticism is orthagonal to atheism/theism. An agnostic could decide that because the subject is unknowable, there is no point in wasting time thinking about it and thus be an agnostic theist. On the other hand, an agnostic could accept a deity "on faith" and nothing more, and thus be an agnostic theist.
I find that many people who claim to be "agnostic" (not all, but many) are actually atheists. They know that they can't say for certain that no gods exist -- which is a perfectly honest admission -- but they worship none because they also have not seen evidence that any deities do exist, but they seem to think that they have to go an extra step and positively assert that gods do not exist before they can be considered an atheist.

---

Are you sure about that?

[Blue Collar Christian]

Discernment on your part might have detected mockery. The paralysis of analysis is deadly.

[jonestown]

Both Atheism & Religion-ism are non-logical beliefs.
Agnostics are logical. They simply admit they don't know.

I'm beginning to see Agnosticism as a religion --
I don't know, but by discernment I would say you at best are sitting on the fence. That is not being of the dark side or the light side of the "force".

"I don't know, but ----"
From where I sit, such discernment sounds agnostic to me. Sort of like the logic of straddling that fence.

Discernment on your part might have detected mockery.

He who mocks logic has none.

The paralysis of analysis is deadly.

Nonsense words.

[Dimensio]

Check the writings of the man who came up with the word "agnostic".