Meyer - Return of the God Hypothesis

So, I have seen a few posts about this book but none this year. Given that it has just been published (at least on kindle anyway). I was wondering if anyone has read it yet, and knows whether it contributes anything new to the discussion (whether good or not).
Not asking for a discussion about ID in general, just about the specific ideas in this book.

The Return of the God Hypothesis: Three Scientific Discoveries That Reveal the Mind Behind the Universe: Stephen C. Meyer: 9780062071507: Books

So far I’ve only seen the usual furball argument that developed on Meyers FB page. Critics are saying it diverges further from science toward religion.


Thanks. I did a brief google search for reviews and didn’t find much of anything, but your googling skills may be more advanced than mine.
Genuinely interested to see if there is anything new advanced in the bits that are more science orientated. I started my Christian life and felling into an ID binge, would be nice to see if there is advancement since then now that I am getting curmudgeonly (regardless of whether it is correct or not)
An interesting list of positive reviewers


Looks to be mostly ‘the usual suspects’ of known ID supporters and fellow travelers.

Addendum: a quick Google search makes it appear that the DI may be trying to make sure all prominent early reviews and discussion occur in friendly venues. I’m seeing no skeptical reviews as yet. This is probably ‘par for the course’ with the DI (and perhaps why they were so put out by Nick Matze raining on their parade on one of Meyer’s previous books).

Further addendum: it seems that Meyer has had this book (or at least it’s title) in mind since he wrote an article of the same name in 1999:

1 Like

Shows how far I am behind on it then, I didn’t recognise most of them!

It’s getting the usual uninterrupted parade of positive reviews over at Amazon. I haven’t bought it yet, and Amazon’s removal of review discussion threads has erased one reason I have for reviewing these books: the possibility of a good discussion at Amazon using the review as a starting point. I probably will have a go at some point but there is something genuinely tedious about Meyer: as much as one digs there never turns out to be a pony under all that sh**.


Hi Matt

Philosopher of science Stephen C. Meyer builds a clear, cogent, and compelling case for theism based on the most current findings of cosmology, physics, and biology. He bases his stunning conclusion — that the evidence points toward a personal Creator — on persuasive facts and convincing logic. This masterful book should be required reading for anyone grappling with the ultimate mysteries of the cosmos.


This review from Lee Strobel caught my attention. He is the author of a Case for Christ and a Case for a Creator. Lee was a Yale Law trained journalist who was drawn to faith through an evidentiary search.

I was very impressed with Lee’s articulation of the design arguments in a Case for a Creator. Thanks for this post I hope to get around to reading Meyer’s book.


It’s the exact same arguments he’s been making for years. Same catch-22 origin of information and fine-tuning arguments. It’s just religious now.


I’m pretty sure those are blurbs, and not excerpts from reviews.


It does appear so. The excerpts from the book that can be viewed free on Amazon are the usual. But what would one expect, with Meyer’s track record? If he wrote a book that wasn’t a stinker, it would force one to seriously consider the possibility of miracles.

1 Like

Is it “a stinker”, or is it merely a reasonably workmanlike job of ‘preaching to the choir’ (a choir that seems to be profoundly, if lamentably, impervious to Meyer’s scientific shortcomings)?

1 Like

Well, it is of course the latter. But it surely does stink. It’s the stink of dishonesty, not the stink of poor quality. To the contrary, Meyer is quite a good liar as long as the audience is sufficiently ill-informed.


I’d then say that Meyer makes an effective politician if a poor scholar. I would reserve ‘stinker’ for someone who is terrible at both (Ray Comfort and his ‘Banana Argument’ immediately comes to mind). Meyer I might term more of an ‘Artful Dodger’.

1 Like

Perhaps, but I used “stinker” to refer to the book, not the man. The man is difficult to categorize; the best summary is that he’s creationism’s David Duke.

I’ve now ordered the book. Whether I’ll actually bother to review it remains to be seen. It does, however, look like nobody has yet attempted to write a fair review of it at Amazon and so I may have to give it a go.


This topic was automatically closed 7 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.