While written in direct and acknowledged response to Richard Dawkins and other "New Atheists", Aczel doesn't craft his argument around point by point refutation of their arguments that God is not only dead but never existed. Rather he goes to the source--the scientific and mathematical principles of cosmology, infinity, anthropism, and quantum physics to show how these leading edge and sometimes bizarre and puzzling theories and equations do not disprove God.
Notice his use of the phrase "do not": while the reader might conclude that these theories "can not" or "never will" disprove God, Aczel does not use those phrases. While I suspect he might lean in that direction in the near term, he lets the science and math speak for itself, and there are some pretty powerful theoretical limits to what these tools of the human mind "can know" today.
He is no friend of Christianity or the polar opposites and special targets of Dawkins and crew, creationists, but neither is he dismissive of any faith or belief in God as a creator or intelligent force in, outside, or pre-existent of the universe. He also doesn't use the "separate but equal" argument, which I have always found demeaning to both religion and science and as stupid and despicable as the same argument applied to civil rights.
In fact, his main line of argument reminds me of Paul's early declaration of the scientific evidence in favor of God (Romans 1:20):
For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.
How much of God and creation remain--despite man's vast knowledge and discovery about the world from the quark to the universe--invisible, eternal, divine, and unknown, even when clearly seen. By showing us the invisible, eternal, and divine outside the reaches of science, Aczel may help us more clearly see.
What did you think of this review?