Comments about ‘Rock star Brandon Flowers defends Mormon faith against famous atheist’

Return to article »

Published: Monday, Sept. 17 2012 3:00 p.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Bountiful, UT

As time goes on we will be more frequently called upon to defend our faith, as he did. Unfortunately he was blindsided but good for him in the way he handled it. Obviously he didn't appear on the show prepared with a defense arsenal or other doctrinal review as his atheistic adversary did, but he did a fine job!! He kept his head. Shame on Skavlan for setting this up and shame on Dawkins for participating in this and for his attacks. Read this month's Ensign. It looks like we will need to be as prepared as possible and keep that prayer constantly in our hearts for God's help in all difficult circumstances.

salt lake city, UT

I'm confused as to how this was deemed "defending" The second that Flowers' agent noticed he was in way over his head, he was called to the back to "prepare".

How is saying you're offended "defending" your first prophet? At the end of the interview, Flowers says he'd like a followup with Dawkins. If he were really interested in defending his faith, this should be posted.

"Still it stands"

-As a work of fiction, and poorly written at that. Dawkins was just warming up. There is absolutely no evidence for the truthfulness, or reality of what this "most correct book on earth" contains (wars, steel swords, horses, Native Americans have no Jewish DNA).

Here's how it would have gone had Dawkins been given time to expound on his arguments, and Flowers not been thrown to the bench.

(Dawkins gives some of the arguments that I listed above, maybe adding character flaws of Smith)

Flowers - "I'm not a historian. But my parents and people I trust fed me this bologna since I was born. I know the Church is true. I love my family. I love the Prophet. InnameofJesusChristAmen".

Prescott, AZ

Way to go Brandon. You handled yourself well. It is unfortunate that this program used this ambush technique. Thanks for being a gracious and kind representative of the church.

terra nova
Park City, UT

The host idly wonders, "Isn't there a profound need, a genetic need" to find God? Dawkins dodges the question. CS Lewis did not.

Lewis suggested that just as the fact that we experience thirst suggests we are creatures for whom drinking water is natural - so too, the fact that we desire something that cannot be supplied by our natural world suggests the existence of a higher or supernatural one. Dawkins says, "There is no evidence for any supernatural being of any kind." Lewis says if we are on a desert island, we may die of thirst, but that is no proof water does not exist. Rather, our thirst is evidence of the supernatural world and God.

Flowers said the "beauty of faith" is found in knowing "Heavenly Father" and the answers and comfort found in prayer.

Flowers found the well. Dawkins snorts there is no well (its all a fake). Flowers looks at his cup and takes another drink.

Evidence is everywhere. The prophets, the scriptures, the witness of friends and millions of converts, the order of the natural world. They all testify of God.

We swim in evidence. Richard Dawkins is like a fish that discovers water last.

Murrieta, CA

"In their greatest — and last — hour of need, I ask you: would these men blaspheme before God by continuing to fix their lives, their honor, and their own search for eternal salvation on a book (and by implication a church and a ministry) they had fictitiously created out of whole cloth?"

While comments on the value of martyrs plays well to believers, they are completely irrelevant in proving the truth of someone's message. Does someone willingly plowing a 747 into a building make their message valid? Of course not. Irrelevant. Millions throughout history have died for a cause. Doesn't make their cause absolute truth.

Australia, 00

Brandon, I hope you read this because I would like to say 'thank you!' for standing up for our faith!
To be fair, it looks as though Dawkins was also misled about the nature of the interview. However, his statements that science and religious faith don't mix are just nonsense. Recent (2009) statistics show that a majority of scientists (51%) do believe in God. Many if not most of our greatest scientists were/are professed believers, or were at the least agnostic. Einstein was one who refused to be labeled an atheist, stating that 'There are people who say there is no God, but what makes me really angry is that they quote me for support of such views.' (Dawkins is one who tries to use Einstein in this way.)
Interestingly, a 2012 Pew Forum study showed that 'the higher the education of the Mormon, the more active in the Church the person is' - perhaps likewise indicating that the capacity for critical and intellectual study is more rather than less likely to lead one to an acceptance of the LDS religion.

Dixon, CA

In my opinion people form beliefs based on their experiences. If Richard Dawkins had experienced what I've experienced, he'd likely come to the same conclusions I have... and maybe vice versa.

Dawkins is right, he has perceived no evidence of a supernatural being. If Richard Dawkins hasn't perceived God in his life - he has no reason to believe - it would be foolish to do so. Trying to talk him in to it seems ridiculous. Who but God can/should persuade a person to believe in Him?

I personally feel I have seen/felt evidence of God's existence in my life - not the kind you measure with instruments or quantify with with physical sensors - but evidence all the same. I have a doctorate in physical science - I'm not unfamiliar with the scientific world view. I just don't find it satisfying.

That was pretty unprofessional gamesmanship of the TV Host IMO.

faith in deed
Mesa, AZ

@ A Scientist, you make a good point actually- the fact that it "still stands", by itself, does not actually prove that it is true.

The only way to really prove that it is true is only by following the advice given in "Moroni's promise" in the Book of Mormon.

Hightstown, NJ

It was a Swedish talk show, not Norwegian. The real charlatans seemed to be the talk show. Bring in Brandon, bring in Dawkins, let Dawkins get in a few potshots, then tell Brandon he has to get ready for the band before he can really respond.

Harwich, MA

Defending myth and superstition is the way of the world.
It's why the world is in the mess it's in particularly right now looking at the Middle East.
Mormonism is no exception, neither is atheism.
It's all so silly. Humanity believes what it "wants" to believe regardless of how different it may be from others. Once an organization tells you what you want to hear, you're in.

Whos Life RU Living?
Ogden, UT

Did you guys really watch the clip?

It is apparent that Dawkins came out swinging, thinking that the show wanted a debate, but when he found out that Brandon was asked to be excused, Dawkins was very apologetic. Dawkins thought Brandon would get time to provide a rebuttal, but didn't. Dawkins was thinking that the show wanted a debate. The show should have explained more to Dawkins of what they were looking for, or at least give Brandon some time to provide a decent rebuttal.

To be honest, it was probably good that it just stopped. Brandon would have been torn apart.

Salt Lake City, UT

Atheists no more can disprove the existence of God than Christians can prove Gods existence. It's a personal choice. Modern day atheists are the new Korihor's,except far worse. They have the internet and mass media to shout their message of destruction from. They choose to go their own way and accept their own intelligence as absolute and without origin. They choose no consequence of action except what is given by the intelligence of man. They choose death as the end, and as the end of existence.

So where does dawkin's happiness originate? If he has no hope for an immortal soul, no desire to live forever, what motivates him to ridicule Christians? Christians have an answer for that question. Richard Dawkins does not. His motivation is money and notoriety.

Atheists, whether they intend to or not, have no platform. They have only a platform of ridicule. How one justifies this, is beyond me. The vast majority of us understand that wisdom doesn't include ridiculing the institutions values and religions that make people better neighbors, spouses, and individuals.

Orem, UT

Go Brandon!

Cedar Hills, UT

The first important question we have to ask ourselves is whether there is anything special about humans. If the answer is no, then Dawkins is correct. Unfortunately for Dawkins, the answer is yes. What is special about humans is agency. We are self-determined, not part of an unbroken chain of cause and effect that originated with a big bang. It is impossible for the scientific method to appropriately deal with agency and thus, it calls it an illusion.

I am not science bashing. It is very good at dealing with natural elements, but falls short when dealing with humans.

Charlottesville, VA

Dear Dr. Dawkins,
It's written in King James-style English because it's a translation. Joseph Smith rendered it in scriptural language. Duh.
The award for Most Audacious Statement goes to you for saying, "I think I have," when Flowers told you to do your research. You admitted in the same conversation that you haven't even read the whole Book of Mormon! How impressed would you be with my biology bona fides if I thought I was an expert based on having read part of one book about biology?
You're a biologist, not a theologian, and not a philosopher. Your problem is that you think yours represents the intellectual pinnacle of all disciplines, and that you therefore qualify as an expert in inferior fields such as theology despite never having studied them seriously.

houston, 00

Wow! was this a set up or what? Brandon you were amazing! Good job! Proud to be a Mormon! :)

San Diego, CA

What was he ever convicted of? I know he was arrested a number of times, but I'm pretty sure there was never any trial where he was convicted of anything.

Shenandoah, IA

@jane -- because we don't riot. "Love your enemies," etc.

It fascinates me how virtually the entire world views religious truths and scientific truths as excluding one another. But there is only truth, regardless of where it comes from, not one kind or another. The more we learn about science and biology, the more I am convinced that it didn't happen due to "natural progression" or evolution. Natural selection is not evolution; we see natural selection all the time. But not once in recorded history have we seen one species become another. To truly understand, then, we must embrace the fact that scientific truth is as much truth as any other, but fully understood, we will find at its origin a Supreme Creator, who, under the laws of physics and science (again, only a portion of which we know or understand), organized and created this Earth and all that is upon it.

Butler, AL

Very proud of this young man in a very badly "set-up" situation by this show. Shame on them! Hold fast to the rod, Brandon. God Bless you.

Mister J
Salt Lake City, UT

I have no dog in this fight but am not surprised that its devolved into what it has.

Its interesting that most people sticking up for Brandon would find his music contemptible in most every other situation.

The Killers (nice name BTW) are that whiney, artsy, emo, synthpop stuff that makes rap appear to downright brilliantbe what the primary genre heard at Mensa meetings.

The tactics used by the Scandanavian TV show were invented and perfected here in America.

per terra nova

CS Lewis? Really? Talk about Christianity's #1 apologist.

"Flowers said the "beauty of faith" is found in knowing "Heavenly Father" and the answers and comfort found in prayer.

Flowers found the well. Dawkins snorts there is no well (its all a fake). Flowers looks at his cup and takes another drink."

God exists. The well doesn't exist. Organized religion is a mirage, a tool frighten the gullible and keep them in line.

re: Capsaicin

"So where does dawkin's happiness originate?"

Pascal's wager, perhaps? A chilled glass of his favorite beverage on sunny day? Who knows?

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments