Project Reason is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit foundation devoted to spreading scientific knowledge and secular values in society. The foundation draws on the talents of prominent and creative thinkers in a wide range of disciplines to encourage critical thinking and erode the influence of dogmatism, superstition, and bigotry in our world.

Donate to Project Reason

Join the Mailing List

Sign up to receive email updates from Project Reason.

Log in

 
not a member? Join here.
Forgot your password?

Twitter and Facebook

Follow Project Reason on Twitter

The Scripture Project

Browse the Bible, Qur’an or Book of Mormon for scriptural criticism, insights and careful annotation.

Most Recently Updated Passages

Troy Jollimore on Karen Armstrong’s ‘The Case for God’

By Troy Jollimore
Posted: December 4, 2009.

Print: TruthDig

“We are talking far too much about God these days,” writes Karen Armstrong, author of “The Battle for God,” “Visions of God,” “The Changing Face of God” and “A History of God,” at the outset of her new book, “The Case for God.” Funny, I was just thinking the same thing.

Still, I think I understand: If the rest of us are suffering from a touch of God Fatigue, surely Armstrong, whose readable, literate books on particular religions and religion in general have earned her a respectable reputation, might well be sick to death of the topic.

But there is no avoiding the topic of God: It’s all the rage these days. God is under attack, and God’s attackers under counterattack, everywhere you look. Anyway, Armstrong’s real complaint is not that we are talking too much about God, but that there is too much talk of the wrong sort. We have misunderstood the very concept of God, and as a result “what we say [about God] is often facile.” She isn’t referring only to the so-called new atheists here—well, primarily she is referring to the new atheists, because they are the ones that really get her goat, but she is careful to assure us that the central modern misunderstanding of religion, which is to see it primarily as a matter of belief, is one shared by most religious adherents, and isn’t just a creation of their critics.

The complaint that the new atheists (Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, etc.) are theologically incompetent, and that a subtler appreciation for the finer points of theology would expose the shallowness of their attacks, is by now a common one. But few defenders of religion attempt actually to spell out the theological details; and the results of those attempts that have been made are, in my experience, deeply unsatisfying…

Read the full article | Print this article

Comments (7)

1. NewEnglandBob

Sorry, Karen Armstrong - there are no finer points of theology. It is all a house of cards; a fantasy built on fear of death and superstition. It is religion that is shallow in the final analysis.

posted on December 4, 2009
report this as inappropriate

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

That rape scene was tastefully done.

posted on December 4, 2009
report this as inappropriate

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

I just find it fascinating how some people claim to have such deep understandings of things that they can’t even prove exist in the first place.  Replace the word “God” in any of these books or arguments with the word “The Tooth Fairy” and one begins to understand how utterly ridiculous it all is.

posted on December 4, 2009
report this as inappropriate

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

“The magisterium of science covers the empirical realm: what is the universe made of (fact) and why does it work this way (theory)?”

This statement from the article is ignorance defined. Not only ignorance but also supreme intellectualism. Everyone has a god of sorts and the atheist god is their intellect and sometimes their snail collection. They will waste no time in telling anyone that will listen about their supreme intellect and reasoning abilities that far exceed others.

To believe that we know what the universe is made of considering we only are able to measure a small per cent of the energy in the universe is very revealing how atheism based in materialism is also based in beliefs. Beliefs are stated as facts just like the religious folks. Oh well lets just throw dark matter and dark energy out the door it is a fact we know what it is made of. No need for further research.

The best we can say about the matter in the universe when we attempt to measure it is “not this not that”. But it’s a fact we know what it is made of.

Now as far as meaning all phenomena have meaning but at this stage of our evolutionary process we know little of those meanings. Very little as Socrates so rightly stated.

Only if one is able to stand between materialism and religion can one see that they are two sides of the same coin. And the so-called religious in this country are more about Darwinism than what their “savior” taught.

Americans with their love of capitalism; well Christianity died on the cross in America. Capitalism is more about survival of the fittest than what Jesus taught. The religious folks and their economic ideologies are more about Darwinism than Christianity. And of course they don’t have a clue they are; they actually despise the atheist materialist without realizing they are one of them.

Now materialists keep thinking that all the matter in the universe was contained in the size of the head of a needle before the so called big bang implosion all the while the religious think someone had to die on the cross so they could get to heaven. Oh and their god is a god of unconditional love and grace but demanded some form of atonement.

That last statement does not pass the simplest of logic tests. Even as a child and exposed to some religious beliefs thank god grin not many of those beliefs I rejected those beliefs that were taught as truths.

Take your pick as to which scenario is most ignorant and lacks any logic or reasoning abilities. From my point of view it is a toss up. Oh as a side note that ignorance we all have has as its source in innocence. Few will understand these words very few.

posted on December 5, 2009
report this as inappropriate

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

5. John Wilkinson

Troy who? Magnificent. With a proliferation of so many bad arguments it is nice to have some other voices do some dismantling. Harris et al. are Generals. We need some more Captains and Lieutenants to dispel some of the huge apologetics market!

posted on December 5, 2009
report this as inappropriate

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

6. edward scherrer

This is a brilliant and coherent rebuttal of Armstrong.

posted on December 7, 2009
report this as inappropriate

You don't have permission to flag this entry.

7. stuartlittle

lol, superficial criticism.

posted on December 7, 2009
report this as inappropriate

You don't have permission to flag this entry.