Karen Armstrong rubbished

Vic Stenger will have a new book out soon, called The New Atheism: Taking a Stand for Science and Reason. (He’s retired, so he’s allowed to crank them out.)

One of the things I was not too successful in having Stenger change during the course of writing was a few passages where he relied heavily on Karen Armstrong. As far as I’m concerned, Armstrong produces drivel, full stop. You certainly can’t rely on her for history.

Apparently Armstrong now has a new book out, The Case for God, in which I’m guessing she has nothing new to say. From what I’ve run into, she bashes the New Atheism as a mirror image of fundamentalism, but nowadays that inanity passes for conventional wisdom. I expect she serves that up with her usual string of liberal religious platitudes.

Hence it gave me great pleasure to read John Crace’s rubbishing of The Case for God in The Guardian today. It’s laugh-out-loud funny, and it really is a good summary of the sort of things Armstrong says in her other books as well.

"I *think* by 'conditionally necessitated' she means that the acts of God's will are necessary, ..."

The Laws of Physics and the ..."
"Your post makes a strong assessment of the permutations of what he means by the ..."

Kreeft’s Case for God – Part ..."
"I don't know enough to argue in depth on Stump's behalf, nor do I have ..."

The Laws of Physics and the ..."
"It's very different for 'value' to be a mere approximation, than for it to be ..."

Kreeft’s Case for God – Part ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment