Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "Antony Flew" in English language version.
In some interviews, and in subsequent publications, Flew made it clear that he had not become a Christian; he had moved from atheism to a form of deism. This is important: it is a mistake to claim that Flew embraced classical theism in any substantial form; rather, he came to believe merely that an intelligent orderer of the universe existed. He did not believe that this "being" had any further agency in the universe, and he maintained his opposition to the vast majority of doctrinal positions adopted by the global faiths, such as belief in the after-life, or a divine being who actively cares for or loves the universe, or the resurrection of Christ, and argued for the idea of an "Aristotelian God". He explained that he, like Socrates, had simply followed the evidence, and the new evidence from science and natural theology made it possible to rationally advance belief in an intelligent being who ordered the universe. In 2006, he even added his name to a petition calling for the inclusion of intelligent design theory on the UK science curriculum.
His books God and Philosophy (1966) and The Presumption of Atheism (1976) [Flew] made the case, now followed by today's new atheists, that atheism should be the intelligent person's default until well-established evidence to the contrary arises
[The Presumption of atheism is] One of the most commonly proffered justifications of atheism has been the so-called presumption of atheism.
In this article I will show that atheism is a belief about the world and that it does require a justification in the same way that theism does.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)When Christians and atheists engage in debate concerning the question, Does God exist? atheists frequently assert that the entire burden of proof rests on the Christian.
The 'evidentialist challenge' is the gauntlet thrown down by atheist writers such as Antony Flew, Norwood Russell Hanson, and Michael Scriven. They argue that in debates over the existence of God, the burden of proof should fall on the theist. They contend that if theists are unable to provide cogent arguments for theism, i.e. arguments showing that it is at least more probable than not that God exists, then atheism wins by default.
But it is common these days to find atheists who define the term to mean "without theism"... Many of them then go on to argue that this means that the "burden of proof" is on the theist...
In "There Is a God" he explained that he now believed in a supreme intelligence, removed from human affairs but responsible for the intricate workings of the universe. In other words, the Divine Watchmaker imagined by deists like Isaac Newton, Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin.
In a letter to The Sunday Telegraph of London in 2004, he described "the God in whose existence I have belatedly come to believe" as "most emphatically not the eternally rewarding and eternally torturing God of either Christianity or Islam but the God of Aristotle that he would have defined – had Aristotle actually produced a definition of his (and my) God – as the first initiating and sustaining cause of the universe".
As he himself conceded, he had not written his book.
"This is really Roy's doing", he said, before I had even figured out a polite way to ask. "He showed it to me, and I said O.K. I'm too old for this kind of work!"
When I asked Varghese, he freely admitted that the book was his idea and that he had done all the original writing for it. But he made the book sound like more of a joint effort – slightly more, anyway. "There was stuff he had written before, and some of that was adapted to this", Varghese said. "There is stuff he'd written to me in correspondence, and I organized a lot of it. And I had interviews with him. So those three elements went into it. Oh, and I exposed him to certain authors and got his views on them. We pulled it together. And then to make it more reader-friendly, HarperCollins had a more popular author go through it".
So even the ghostwriter had a ghostwriter: Bob Hostetler, an evangelical pastor and author from Ohio, rewrote many passages, especially in the section that narrates Flew's childhood. With three authors, how much Flew was left in the book?
Politically, he was a conservative libertarian, opposed to immigration, egalitarianism, and the European Union. He explored some of these interests in "Crime or Disease?" (1973), "Sociology, Equality and Education" (1976), and "The Politics of Procrustes: Contradictions of Enforced Equality" (1981).
Another familiar strategy of atheists is to insist that the burden of proof falls on the believer.
There are very many atheists who think they have no worldview to defend.
The default position is neutral on the position of God's existence. The burden of proof is on the claim maker to justify his claim by evidence. At the least, negative atheism does not bear a burden of proof
Atheists tend to claim that the theist bears the burden of proof to justify the existence of God, whereas the theist tends to claim that both parties have an equal burden of proof.
Many atheists ... take atheism to be just the default position...Given this redefinition, most atheists are taken aback when theists demand they provide evidence for their atheism.
A notable modern view is Antony Flew's Presumption of Atheism (1984).
In "There Is a God" he explained that he now believed in a supreme intelligence, removed from human affairs but responsible for the intricate workings of the universe. In other words, the Divine Watchmaker imagined by deists like Isaac Newton, Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin.
In a letter to The Sunday Telegraph of London in 2004, he described "the God in whose existence I have belatedly come to believe" as "most emphatically not the eternally rewarding and eternally torturing God of either Christianity or Islam but the God of Aristotle that he would have defined – had Aristotle actually produced a definition of his (and my) God – as the first initiating and sustaining cause of the universe".
Politically, he was a conservative libertarian, opposed to immigration, egalitarianism, and the European Union. He explored some of these interests in "Crime or Disease?" (1973), "Sociology, Equality and Education" (1976), and "The Politics of Procrustes: Contradictions of Enforced Equality" (1981).
In the last twenty years or so atheists and theists have taken to debating on college campuses, and in town halls, all across this country. By using the above definition, atheists have attempted to shift the burden of proof.
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: unfit URL (link)The default position is neutral on the position of God's existence. The burden of proof is on the claim maker to justify his claim by evidence. At the least, negative atheism does not bear a burden of proof
Atheists tend to claim that the theist bears the burden of proof to justify the existence of God, whereas the theist tends to claim that both parties have an equal burden of proof.
In "There Is a God" he explained that he now believed in a supreme intelligence, removed from human affairs but responsible for the intricate workings of the universe. In other words, the Divine Watchmaker imagined by deists like Isaac Newton, Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin.
In a letter to The Sunday Telegraph of London in 2004, he described "the God in whose existence I have belatedly come to believe" as "most emphatically not the eternally rewarding and eternally torturing God of either Christianity or Islam but the God of Aristotle that he would have defined – had Aristotle actually produced a definition of his (and my) God – as the first initiating and sustaining cause of the universe".
Politically, he was a conservative libertarian, opposed to immigration, egalitarianism, and the European Union. He explored some of these interests in "Crime or Disease?" (1973), "Sociology, Equality and Education" (1976), and "The Politics of Procrustes: Contradictions of Enforced Equality" (1981).