Famous British atheist Antony Flew has decided he now believes in God -- can commenter Mark be far behind?
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.
He's certainly not a Christian, but at age 81 he may still have time for further spiritual growth. So what's he saying?
There was no one moment of change but a gradual conclusion over recent months for Flew, a spry man who still does not believe in an afterlife.
Yet biologists' investigation of DNA "has shown, by the almost unbelievable complexity of the arrangements which are needed to produce (life), that intelligence must have been involved," Flew says in the new video, "Has Science Discovered God?" ...
The first hint of Flew's turn was a letter to the August-September issue of Britain's Philosophy Now magazine. "It has become inordinately difficult even to begin to think about constructing a naturalistic theory of the evolution of that first reproducing organism," he wrote.
That sounds about right. Once one acknowledges the existence of God, it becomes profitable to ponder: does God interest himself in human affairs?; how can a human learn about God?; does God expect anything from me? From the the article it appears that Dr. Flew believes in a God in such a way that his newfound revelation will have no practical effect on his life or on any other belief system, which strikes me as awfully convenient.
Flew told The Associated Press his current ideas have some similarity with American "intelligent design" theorists, who see evidence for a guiding force in the construction of the universe. He accepts Darwinian evolution but doubts it can explain the ultimate origins of life.
I've written on evolution and complexity before. I doubt this turn-about will have much effect on the overall debate, but perhaps it's indicative of the doubts that linger behind the fanaticism of modern atheism.
(HT: Donald Sensing.)