Saturday, November 10, 2007 | Reason : Commentary | print version

Antony Flew's Bogus Book

by Richard Carrier

Thanks to Nick Tattersall for the link.

Reposted from:
http://richardcarrier.blogspot.com:80/2007/11/antony-flew-bogus-book.html

letter

I'm mentioned considerably in a recent article in the New York Times Magazine about Antony Flew's new book. Fans will want to know about this, and hear some of the backstory from me, filling in some of the blanks left by the article, which was good but inevitably brief for so complicated a story. So here you go.

The Times Article

The article in question, by Mark Oppenheimer, is "The Turning of an Atheist" (New York Times Magazine, 4 November 2007, pp. 36-41). I had known of this article for over a month, as I communicated extensively with Oppenheimer (and the NYT fact-checking office), but I was politely asked not to discuss it until it appeared.Oppenheimer also procured for me an early galley proof of Flew's new "book," There Is a God: How the World's Most Notorious Atheist Changed His Mind ("co-authored" by Roy Abraham Varghese), which I was able to read a month ago and comment on for Oppenheimer (many of my fans have asked me if I knew of this book, and in fact I had already read it, I just could not discuss it until now).

As also reported by the Associated Press years ago, I'm well known for my correspondence with Flew on the matter of his conversion from weak atheism to strong Deism, and anyone who wants the full story about that can read my article on the subject (which has numerous subsequent updates appended to it): Antony Flew Considers God...Sort Of (2004). Now, after reading "Flew's" new book, I was appalled at how badly argued it was, and how obviously it was not written in his style or idiom, but in that of contemporary Christian apologetics (like someone attempting a poor imitation of the style and approach of a Lee Strobel or Gary Habermas). Moreover, from crucial omissions (and distortions of history) it was clear the author could not have been Flew. Unless Flew had gone completely insane.

Click here to continue:
http://richardcarrier.blogspot.com:80/2007/11/antony-flew-bogus-book.html

Add to del.icio.us Posted: Saturday, November 10, 2007 | Permalink

Comments 1 - 14 of 14 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #86690 by MuNky82 on November 10, 2007 at 1:17 am

And the plot thickens...

Other Comments by MuNky82

2. Comment #86691 by Russell Blackford on November 10, 2007 at 1:23 am

My reaction and some discussion (some of it off-topic) here:

http://metamagician3000.blogspot.com/2007/11/carrier-on-flew.html

Other Comments by Russell Blackford

3. Comment #86693 by Conrad on November 10, 2007 at 1:33 am

Sadly, Carrier, pushed on by those around him, got his name involved and thus added more philosophical weight than was needed in this case. Yet, even so, their naming Flew, "The Worlds Most Notorius Atheist" was simply insane.

Other Comments by Conrad

4. Comment #86765 by notsobad on November 10, 2007 at 5:36 am

Are these people conmen, who are fully aware that they lie and cheat or do they think that lying and cheating in god's name is fine by him?

Other Comments by notsobad

5. Comment #86771 by nogodsever on November 10, 2007 at 6:01 am

Although I am sure Carrier has the facts on his side, he comes off as a bit of a dick in his blog posting. "My fans"? WTF?

Other Comments by nogodsever

6. Comment #86822 by clearthinker on November 10, 2007 at 8:22 am

None of this makes sense. Carrier seems to be on some kind of ego trip - who are his fans?! Anyone with such a big ego is higly likely to be unreliable when it comes to principles of contradiction, truth etc. It sounds as though Carrier has already made his mind up and will just let 'his fans' know the 'facts' he has filtered through himself.

Flew has changed from being an atheist to a deist. So what? What difference does that make to the argument about whether there is a God or not? He is not professing to be a Christian is he? Or to believe in a personal God? I have seen a video of him where he clearly renouces his atheism and states he is a deist. So why all the fuss? And why all the attempts by some other atheists to undermine him and suggest it is only senility that would drive him that way? It does not do the atheist cause any good to be so bitchy and petty.

Other Comments by clearthinker

7. Comment #86832 by 35bluejacket on November 10, 2007 at 9:07 am

Reminds me of the time in the early 80's at a Christmas reunion when I challenged my Southern Baptist ordained brother, He said he would write me a letter. Weeks later the letter arrived, and being a fairly active reader, I could see it was almost all plagiarized, entire word for word paragraphs from a Baptise store pamplet. How heart breaking it was. How could a Christian minister, my own brother, be so deceitful. Why would anyone want to belong to an organization with such a lack of belief of truth and morals?
I have another brother minister with a church in Atlanta, that when you get him to open up in private, he spews raceism.
My family hasn't been all that sad. My Grandmother was a Christian Saint, if there ever was one, but she was driven to poverty by Oral Roberts.

Other Comments by 35bluejacket

8. Comment #86902 by stevencarrwork on November 10, 2007 at 11:59 am

Carrier does have fans.

His writings on the http://www.infidels.org/ are very popular

Certainly, Flew was quite happy to correspond with him and fill in questionnaires.

Other Comments by stevencarrwork

9. Comment #87044 by Jehanne on November 11, 2007 at 5:10 am

I am one of Richard's fans!! Richard corresponded with me at length in 2003 while I was in the process of deconverting from Roman Catholicism. I remember vividly reading one of Richard's essays at a public swimming pool in early September (the last day the pool was open) on the resurrection of Jesus ("Why I don't Buy the Resurrection Story") and thinking, "Well, it isn't true..." Richard was very helpful in understanding the Catholic "visionaries," such as those at Fatima, Bernadette, Joan of Arc ("Jehanne la Pucelle"), etc., who once were very appealing to my sense of the irrational.

Other Comments by Jehanne

10. Comment #87056 by eggplantbren on November 11, 2007 at 5:46 am

I, too, am a fan of Richard Carrier. I was impressed with his interview on Brian Flemming's film "The God Who Wasn't There", and started reading his online work and his book. It's all pretty good.

Other Comments by eggplantbren

11. Comment #87090 by stevencarrwork on November 11, 2007 at 6:56 am

In 2005, *after* his conversion, Antony Flew recommended a book containing several chapters by Richard Carrier.

The Empty Tomb: Jesus Beyond the Grave edited by Robert M. Price , Jeffery Jay Lowder

Strange how people trumpeting Flew's conversion don't tell us what books Flew recommends Christians reads.

Other Comments by stevencarrwork

12. Comment #87143 by D'Arcy on November 11, 2007 at 10:20 am

The whole thing reminds me of One Flew over the Cuckoo's Nest.

Sorry!

Other Comments by D'Arcy

13. Comment #87191 by Garnok on November 11, 2007 at 12:22 pm

clearthinker said:

Flew has changed from being an atheist to a deist. So what? What difference does that make to the argument about whether there is a God or not? He is not professing to be a Christian is he? Or to believe in a personal God? I have seen a video of him where he clearly renouces his atheism and states he is a deist. So why all the fuss? And why all the attempts by some other atheists to undermine him and suggest it is only senility that would drive him that way? It does not do the atheist cause any good to be so bitchy and petty.

I don't think it matters to many here, or to Carrier, if Flew has gone from atheist to deist. What matters, and what people are concerned about, is that a few apparently dishonest hucksters are trying to use an old man to promote their cause and claiming that he believes things he may not actually believe. Many here are used to seeing quote- mining and misrepresentations in theists writings but writing a book in someone else's name when they seem to have had nothing to do with it in the first place is a whole new level of duplicity.

Other Comments by Garnok

14. Comment #87209 by Roger Stanyard on November 11, 2007 at 1:42 pm

I think we should all start digging around about Gary Habermas. He claims to have a DD (Doctor of Divinity) from Emmanuel College, Oxford – see http://www.arn.org/arnproducts/php/video_show_item.php?id=64

Which is fine but there is no such college in Oxford. I'm told that when this was pointed out, he dropped the claim.

See http://www.garyhabermas.com/habermas_resume.htm

Which speaks volumes about Liberty University where he teaches,

Other Comments by Roger Stanyard

Reload Comments | Back to Top