Status Updates From Is Atheism Dead?

I am not sure how this chapter relates to anything.

A bit of history and some of the sources are the Times. I feel like that should not be a referenc in this book. As for the claims of archeology, I am not sure what to make of the chapter. I also know many of the institutions are required to sign a statement of faith...

Onto complexity. Insisting how complex a cell is. Lacks general understanding or is ignoring it. Still not sure how this proves any deity.

Abiogenesis, huh? A poor explanation of the Miller Urey experiment. Acts as if its the only one and asserts flaws. I do not have a goos understanding of chemistry but I could give more detail than this chapter presents.

More fine tuning. Yes, water and sunlight are weirder and more interesting than many people think. Why does this point to YOUR deity?

Large numbers, low probabilities (never told how they were calculated), and similar mistakes to the previous chapter. Fine tuning is only a good answer if you don't think about how harsh the universe is outside our pale blue dot.

Atheists are like cats. I don't know how I would answer the best argument for god but I diasgree with Hitch's answer. The rest of the chapter is spent trying to make god of teh gaps a problem with atheism and our insecurities or insistent the way our planet is is finely tuned for us. It's not and beside describing some unusual facts, Metaxas does not do much

Yes, scientists were skeptical of the Big Bang. The vast majority are not anymore. Why is this the argument? Also starting strong with the idea that science and faith cannot be embodied in a person. Plenty of people within various religions also accept science.

I hope you're able to justify the claims.

Not sure about the not very detailed account of relatively and the big bang. Oddly phrased