I have been critical of the new atheism, but not because I am a theist (I am NOT a theist/atheist/agnostic). I think that the topic of ‘god’ has declined to such a low of metaphysical confusion as to be almost incoherent: there is no easy way to be an atheist or a theist.
http://darwiniana.com/?s=edge+of+space: We discussed the ‘nonsense’ idea of the ‘edge of space’ here (in relation to Smolin and also Krauss’ book on ‘nothing’) several times: this thinking is really a Kantian musing on the antinomial character of space-time physics which founders in a whole series of contradictions easily pointed to.
The point here is that the idea of ‘god’ in theism and atheism is an insoluble problem cousin to the ‘god’ question. In an oversimplification, we can consider that the ‘edge of space’ is or is not embedded in a larger something that is ‘orthogonal at every point’, a typical ‘higher dimension’ idea, but what we are talking about isn’t simply another dimension (not that we have any knowledge here): note that ‘god’ and ‘no god’ work equally well in this situation. ‘Something’ ‘outside’ can act (?) at any point and any time. A remarkable reconstruction of a ‘god’ idea. We can just as well say that this ‘outside’ is an antinomial phantom. There is no escape either way. And we cannot achieve knowledge here. Look at all the cosmologies dressed up in advanced theory. They all tend to ignore this issue.