“Spencer seems not to understand how wacky all religions seem to the irreligious.”
Derbyshire’s review is interesting but contains a fundamental flaw. Whereas Spencer’s view of both Christianity and Islam is an educated one, I would argue that most irreligious people’s view of Christianity is an ignorant one. And I would include Mr Derbyshire in that category, although he only implies rather than honestly states his own position. Nor does he give us bona fides about his own knowledge/research etc. of religion.
Derbyshire does not define this silly notion of “magical thinking” and then conflates Muhammed’s flight on a steed with the Immaculate Conception. I would bet dollars to doughnuts that he really means the Virgin Birth..
And where the Koran is the stenographic record of Allah, the RC view of the Bible is that it is subject to interpretation because it was inspired and not dictated by God.
The rest of Mr Derbyshire’s review is hard to take seriously as the logic may be impeccable but the thesis (es) is unsound.
