Reply #16: Thank you.

[nemo137]

I read the article, and found it, like you said, interesting. I really don't think, whatever the weaknesses of his article, Eagleton was trying to set up a new Pascal's Wager, though. His comments about "the richest and most enduring..." were, I think, trying to set a context for discussion religion, instead of the simple "Science proves that God does not exist and therefore any discussion of religion, except as a malicious meme, is useless" that Eagleton seems to be responding to.