This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers articles
Latest comment: 4 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I haven't read the book so maybe it does claim to look at Abrahamic religions in the paleolithic age but that seems to stretch credulity, since Abraham dates to roughly 8000 years after the end of the said age.
Tesspub (talk) 12:19, 2 September 2015 (UTC)Reply
Better now, I hope. --Hjordmån (talk) 12:20, 20 July 2019 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The book can be interpreted as an "answer to the recent claims that God does not exist" by the so called new atheists. Sure. I very much doubt, though, that this was the author's intentions. I see it more like this: she is trying to explain why we all have gotten religion wrong, atheists fundamentalists and liberals alike. I can't provide a source ATM. Possibly later. Until we can have a sourced statement regarding what the book is about (and conclusions by reviewers are not really sources here) I do think this description should go. --Hjordmån (talk) 10:23, 19 July 2019 (UTC)Reply
.jpg){kind=small}