Active RNS subscribers and members can view this content at the RNS Archives website.

(RNS) A famous atheist who harbors a secret soul. A 6-year-old Hasidic mathematical genius. A pompous and increasingly loony college professor with delusions of divine grandeur. These are the characters that populate Rebecca Newberger Goldstein’s recent novel, “36 Arguments for the Existence of God,” a thoughtful and irreverent romp through the contemporary debate between atheists […]

3 Comments

  1. What fuels both sides of the religious/atheist debate is self-evidently “the lack of a flawless proof of GodÂ’s existence”. A profound ignorance on both sides. That is about to change, for the first ‘flawless proof’ is quietly spreading on the web, and I suspect both sides of this argument will find little to be pleased about a development that leaves them both heavily exposed.

    But like it or not, the first wholly new interpretation for 2000 years of the Gospel/moral teachings of Christ is on the web. Redefining all primary elements including Faith, the Word, Law, Baptism, the Trinity and the Resurrection. This new teaching has nothing whatsoever to do with any existing religious conception known to history. It is unique in every respect.

    And for the first time in history, however unexpected, the world will now have to measure for itself, the reality of a new claim to revealed truth, a moral tenet not of human intellectual origin, offering access by faith, to absolute proof, an objective basis for moral principle and a fully rational and justifiable belief!

    Check it out, test it out for yourselves at http://www.energon.org.uk

  2. The pseudoscience of intelligent design creationism is an “argument from ignorance.” It is made almost solely by overtly or covertly religious persons. One needs only to look at the movement’s origins in the infamous “Wedge Document” and its continuing propaganda efforts, which are not aimed at the science community but the religious – primarily the right-wing fundamentalist / reconstructionist / dominionist – community.

    But just because the anti-science / anti-evolution intelligent design creationist movement is religious does not mean that actual science is anti-religious or atheistic. Actual science hypothesizes, tests and reports it findings – whatever they may be. Just because the Second Law of Thermodynamics makes resurrection impossible does not mean it is atheistic. Just because geological research proves the earth is not millions but billions of years old does mean geology is atheistic.

  3. Rats…and of course I meant the last sentence to read “Just because geological research proves the earth is not millions but billions of years old does not mean geology is atheistic.” (Any editors out there?)