Why he's wrong-headed to be any kind of theist!

     That author overlooks the fact that the Big Transformation- the Bang- was just that: no real origination happened! Therefore, science provides no support for divine intent, no more than Continuous Creation did! Hoyle held to the latter wrongly as the only support for atheism!
       God requires convoluted,ad hoc assumptions- His attributes and referents that just  make for incoherence and contradictions for the former and empty referents that make Him no more than a square circle or married bachelor  that Lamberth's
  the ignostic-Ockham finds quite absurd.  
   Then he proceeds with the unsubstantiated arguments from happiness-purpose and Augustine's from angst. He merely overlooks that his inspirtation from Deity was actually his own inner resources at work! He and others should realize that they themselves have those inner resources, but should they need inspiration, then they can find that elsewhere as from friends and family. Others would credit other beliefs for their doing better.
   He has not at all overcome the objections to his Scriptures! I suspect he'd have far-fetched rationalizations for the contradictions within and without.
   He focuses on love  but overlooks that Yahweh ever commits crimes against humanity! The Deluge and Hell alone contradict his notion of love. 
   No rational and moral being would ever have another expiate for wrong-doers,and what his Scriptures call wrong are many times moral- homosexuality, for   one. And that blood sacrifice blesses evil. We should expiate for ourselves when possible. 
  No Original Sin and no requirement for that blood sacrifice exists! Michael Ruse, naturalist wrongly maintains that why, science supports the biblical metaphors. No,  humans have not devolved from that bite of that fruit. The overall metaphor reeks of barbarism! 
          
   No need exists for such accommodationist tactics
     He proffers misinterpretations of evidence for evidence as theists are wont to do! He misinterprests science for divine creation, his and others' inspiration for divine inspiration, love instead of hatred for humaity and that barbaric blood sacrifice for real expiation and love.  
     Hume would find him so credulous!