I have been following the interactions in the philosophical community about the imminet atheist thinker Antony Flew. Recently the British analytic philosopher has undergone a sort of conversion - one from atheism to theism. His new view is one he describes as akin to that of Aristotle (belief in a first cause, unmoved move, designer of the universe) or perhaps the deism of American founding Father Thomas Jefferson. A God who is not a god of a revelatory religion (ie Christianity or Islam) but a god who is quite uninvolved with the world after creation. In is interesting to see the discussions taking place on the internet. I will mention the two following web sites are interesting because they take place in both corners, both camps so to speak involved with this philosopher.

First, the camp flew is leaving, that of atheism, is responding in a "don't get to worried" - Flew is old and perhaps not looked at all the relevant data...perhaps we can keep him in the fold. An article on the Internet Infidel's web site seems to be aimed at calming the nerves of the "faithful" (or faithless in this case) about one of their top thinker's departure from unbelief. Very interesting read sociologically.
Second, there is a very revealing interview between Christian philosopher Gary Habermas, who has maintained acquaintance with Flew for many years. The interview is very cordial and the collegiality of the exchange is very compelling. In the debate I witnessed two men who seem very committed to the intellectual virtues of courage (following truth where it leads - not matter who is jeering) and honesty (being internally honest as to where the truth leads).

Although it is certain that Flew is no Christian - it is an encouragement to see this recent development in his life. Makes one want to pray for open eyes for a man who once stood in much firmer in his rebellion to the beautiful, the true, the good, the holy - the only wise God - Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

It was also very good to see (in the Habermas interview) a western, European, secular, intellectual clearly understand the nature of Islam as an imperialistic, state building, theonomic religion which in my estimation must be refuted with both the sound truth and acts of compassion. And regrettably to all, defensive and forceful action.

Back to a biography of Jonathan Edwards that will probably take me a year to read.

Out...

--------