Humphrys raises questions that the church needs to address. ( )

Humphrys "In God We Doubt" is a largely engaging read written by a man who's stuck in the middle. In this very personal volume Humphrys is profoundly troubled by essentially two things: 1) The problem of suffering (largely the emotional aspect) and 2) the haunting allure of love.

With regard to the former, the amount and potency of suffering in the world puts Humphrys in a position where he simply cannot believe in an omnipotent God who is love. He goes for the jugular by recounting a variety of horrible acts of evil, both man caused and otherwise. He then asks the age old question: If God is all powerful and all loving, then how could he allow even ONE of these to occur. It's a good question.

When it comes to love Humphrys faults the neo-atheist crowd for both failing to exemplify this ideal in their interactions with believers, and perhaps more importantly, for reducing much of what it is to be human to blind chemicals in motion. In Humphrys view these atheists have not satisfactorily dealt with such basic human longings as justice, beauty and love. To him the atheist program is impotent to avoid the problem of reduction (also known as the problem of "nothing but").

As one of the reviewers notes below, Humphrys is no specialist either in the field of science or theology. I would imagine I felt the same sort of frustration he did when Humphrys turned to theologizing. If you are looking profound words from the author in either of these fields you will leave disappointed. Thankfully, Humphrys theologizing is not the main point of the book (or his scientific competency for that matter). Instead, the delightful aspect of this book is Humphrys honesty. His personal struggles are always more interesting than his arguments. Furthermore, an insightful collection of other voices (from eminent theologians to a diverse selection from letters he's received) liberally sprinkles each chapter. In any case, if one can appreciate nothing else, one should at least respect the fact that he wrestles with these questions at all.

In the end John Humphrys "In God We Doubt" reads like a conversation with an honest friend who knows more about what he doesn't believe than what he does. The transparency with which he asks his questions makes it easy to see a bit of each of ourselves in his struggle. One wonders if there might be a sequel?

An interesting enough book, but quite frustrating at times. Humphrys is an agnostic, not an atheist, and would like to believe. As such, he is quite sympathetic to religion and does not set up the straw men that critics often resort to knocking down, although I don't think he gives enough attention to the vast breadth of religion and, by concentrating on a fairly narrow range, he does to some extent set up straw men.

But to my mind he concentrates too much on the rational and intellectual, although in the end it is conscience and love which lead him more towards religion than atheism. "The truth...is... found in the poetry, not the science" (p311). He does demolish some of the more common myths put forward by militant atheists (all wars are caused by religion, etc).

From time to time, he comes back to the assertion that militant atheists are effectively in intellectual ivory towers and are out of touch with the real world. "...atheists have the best arguments. What they don'thave... is much of a grasp on whatever it is that makes human beings what we are" (p280). "For them, what matters is what can be proved to be true. That's it. But in the real world, outside the walls of their intellectual ivory towers, that's not it" (p318). ( )