在他的书中‘God’ Reza 阿斯兰, himself a believer, asserts that religious belief necessarily requires a ‘leap of faith’. He says any believer that tells you otherwise is probably in the process of trying to convert you. Although a believer, 阿斯兰 is not evangelical.
阿斯兰 commences his book 通过 discussing theories on the origin of 宗教.
马克斯·穆勒（Max Muller）认为宗教源于人类’ early encounters with 性质. Human beings observed the skies, oceans and forests. They knew they did not create them. So they assumed someone, or something, else must have done so.
阿斯兰 argues that what these theories have in common is the assumption that 宗教 arose to answer unsolvable questions. This explanation for 宗教 remains popular today. But 阿斯兰 doubts that any of these theories provide for any adaptive advantage that might help explain 宗教 in evolutionary terms. He says there is no evidence that the existence of any emotion associated with religious belief gave rise to an evolutionary adaptive advantage.
Durkheim explains 宗教 on the basis that its religious rites and rituals help a community form a collective consciousness. He thinks 宗教 arose as a kind of social adhesive. It is not difficult to see how a more cohesive community might give an evolutionary advantage. But 阿斯兰 argues that 宗教 is just as much a dividing force as a uniting one and that kinship is a stronger primal tool for social cohesion than a common religious belief.
阿斯兰 favors neurology as providing the best evolutionary explanation for 宗教. He says 宗教 is first and foremost a neurological phenomenon. He says through evolution we have developed mental processes that lead us to assign agency to inanimate objects, to endow objects with a soul or spirit and then transmit these beliefs to succeeding generations. He is convinced that the widespread belief that we 是 embodied souls is the source of religious belief and that we do not really know where our idea of a soul comes from.
But 阿斯兰 never explains why there might not be a combination of sources for religious belief or why only a source that provides an evolutionary advantage is real. We must eat to survive. But our culinary cultures 是 not determined, or completely determined, 通过 evolutionary advantages.
阿斯兰 also fails to explain why, if religious belief is “hard wired”通过神经学在我们里面，无神论根本可以存在，即使在少数人当中也是如此。
安斯兰大部分地区’s book aims to demonstrate, which he does convincingly, that most 宗教 involves a humanized version of 神. We invent 神 in our image rather than the reverse.
阿斯兰 says 宗教 thus becomes merely a reflection of everything good or bad about us. We create a superhuman being (God) endowed with human traits but without human limitations. This explains why, throughout history, 宗教 has been a force for both good and unspeakable evil.
阿斯兰 analyses 宗教 through different epochs and civilizations to support his thesis. But it does not require such in depth analysis to conclude that 宗教 is a human construct, not a godly one. One only has to look at how the concentration of different 宗教s in different parts of the world largely corresponds to that region’的历史，尤其是征服和殖民的历史。同样，在整个历史中，宗教由于 强大的人类领袖的推动。君士坦丁’促进基督教，以统一罗马帝国在他的领导下的手段，以及伊斯兰教’军事征服也许是两个最杰出的早期例子。
阿斯兰 argues for a dehumanized version of 神.
In his own religious history he converted from Islam to Christianity, where the 神-man figure of Jesus Christ represents somewhat of a nadir for belief in a humanized 神. 阿斯兰 then converted from Christianity to Sufism, a mystical form of Islam, which he claims rejects a humanized version of 神.
阿斯兰 wants human beings to stop foisting human attributes upon 神 and to adopt what he describes as a more all encompassing, peaceful, primal form of spirituality. Hope away!
阿斯兰 favors obliterating any distinction between creator and created and supports the view there is nothing else but 神. He says we should think of 神 as light passing through a prism refracting into countless colors. Things that, on the surface, seem to be separate and distinct realities, 是 in fact a single one- what we call 神. 阿斯兰 says the modern term for his kind of religious belief is ‘pantheism’.
Caution needs to be taken with the use of this word. Pantheism can mean the belief that 神 is the universe, or the universe a manifestation of 神, which is the sense in which Aslam uses it. But its more common usage is to describe something very different- the belief in a multiplicity of 神s.
阿斯兰 acknowledges that his conception of 神 is much like that of the 17th century Dutch philosopher Baruch Spinoza. Spinoza was apparently one of Einstein’最喜欢的哲学家。斯宾诺莎（Spinoza）生于一个犹太家庭，他辩称只能存在“one substance”在宇宙中显示无限的属性，可以描述为‘nature’ or ‘God’.
阿斯兰 says his view of 神 means that his worship is not based on fear of 神 but on awe at the working of the universe. Also, that good and evil 是 not metaphysical things but 是 moral choices that should not be rooted in fear of eternal punishment or reward.
So how 是 阿斯兰’s views distinct from those of atheism, which the religious authorities also accused Spinoza of? 阿斯兰 explains this on the second last page of his book:
So then make your choice. Believe in 神 or not. Define 神 how you will. Either way…you need not fear 神.
您 是 神.”
The concept of a 神 who does these things might well seem absurd to we non-believers. But at least one can see the point of this 神 in the everyday lives of human beings. This 神 provides a moral code to live 通过 and an opiate for those who need it- 无情世界的心脏。 没有特别关注人类的纯粹的动画精神能增加人类生存的质量吗？
In the end, there is either a 神 who cares about us, an animating spirit that does not, or creation is an accident. The difference in consequences between an animating spirit that does not care about us and the accident seems negligible, if there is a difference at all.
Certainly on 阿斯兰’s own account we cannot imbue his animating spirit with that most human of attributes, consciousness, for if we do we 是 back to the humanized concept of 神.
Yet 阿斯兰 insists that his religious belief still involves a ‘leap of faith’. For me, believing in a 神可能很容易被描述为“nature’仅涉及微小的语义区分。我看不出需要任何飞跃。