Rating: 
Summary: Powerful indictment of theism
Review: Smith offers a very thought provoking argument against the existence of God or gods. He is a gifted writer and his arguments are organized, logical, and very persuasive. His arguments break down in the following manner.1. The concept of God & an examination of the Christian God I found this section of the book to be the best. He argues that the concept of God that we have become familiar with is a complete contradiction in terms. Before talking about the traits of God he effectively explains how an infinite God cannot have traits, since these would limit his character. He then lists the various characteristics of God and examines them in detail. Traits taken for granted become very questionable on careful examination: immutable, ineffable eternal, omniscient, omnipotent, all loving, all good. The negative traits (immutable, ineffable, etc.) simply are meaningless since they only describe what God is not, and makes God equivalent to nothing at all. He then demonstrates how the positive characteristics contradict one another; if God is omniscient then he's not really omnipotent since he can't change the future he sees. His arguments in this section are extremely persuasive and will provoke intense thought by the reader. He also looks at the impossibility of a finite being ever being able to comprehend an infinite Being. 2. Reason vs. Faith In comparing the vastly different realms of reason and faith, he argues for the supremacy of the former. This is also extremely persuasive as he shows that a belief that is founded on faith alone is illegitimate. Reason evaluates that which is empirical, objective, and observable. Faith, to quote the Bible, is "the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen". This is simply absurd since one can never have a conviction of things that can't be seen, measured, or tested. The unlikely alliance of skepticism and faith are also explained. Faith requires skepticism as it's predecessor, else why would one need faith? 3. The arguments for God I have to admit this section was the weakest in its examination of the cosmology argument and design argument. It is still effective and thought provoking, but is a little dated especially on the cosmological argument. As for design, if the universe requires a Designer how much more does a complex, infinite, incomprehensible God require a Designer himself. The last section examines Christian ethics, particularly that of Jesus. It's a helpful perspective to consider when examining Jesus' purported teachings. I found this book to be very intellectually stimulating with an addictive writing style. It's the type of book that is hard to put down and causes one to go back to often. It has provoked intense thought on my part. Personally, the best two arguments against the Christian God is the argument from the future and the doctrine of hell. It is a logical impossibility for God to know what I will do tomorrow, since I have not done it yet and the day has not yet arrived. How could he possibly know? On the other hand, if he is able to account for every atomic particle in the universe and calculate exactly where they will go next, then in principle he could calculate exactly what I will do tomorrow and when I will do it. However, if this is possible then I have absolutely no free will. On the other hand, the uncertainty of quantum mechanics (worth studying by the skeptic) implies that it is impossible even for God to know the future. Either way, God is not God. And the doctrine of hell and eternal punishment for an 80-year lifetime of sin: that's the most absurd concept I've ever heard in my life. And how could we ever know God, as Smith asks? Could he reveal even 0.01% of his character and being to us? What is 0.01% of infinity? It's infinity. Infinity itself seems logically absurd to me, whether one speaks of God or of an infinite universe. Definitely worth reading and owning.
Rating: 
Summary: Pop Philosophy is O.K.
Review: This is not a careful work. In the end, it will only convince those already well on the way to atheism. It ignores most of the major work in philosophy of religion going on in the world today. . . seems ignorant of it really. . . but after all it is a pop exploration of a tough topic. As such I sympathize with the limitations. . . if you are adverse to tough books in the field, this is a good place to start.
Rating: 
Summary: the most interesting book ive ever read
Review: This book truly is incredible. I am not exactly an atheist, I am simply not religious. As I read this book, the thing that really took me back was one paragraph in the first half of the book that points out and cites the sections of the bible to which they apply, the various atrocities that god and other biblical characters were responsible for. For each claim Mr. Smith makes, he always addresses the opposing argument, and pretty much crushes it. If you ever get frustrated with the seemingly arrogant and self righteous outlook on religion of Christians, this book is essential.
Rating:
Summary: I am a Christian who invites challenging my faith
Review: I haven't read the other reviewers so I must plead ignorant on what they wrote on this topic, however, I read Mr. Smith's book, and I must admit he has some challenging arguments that need to be looked at honestly. My mind was starting to feel the heat of his arguments until I got to his chapter on "Natural Theology" and "Cosmology" which in my humble opinion failed to convince me of his viewpoint completely, and re-affirmed my faith in the Theist position. P. 241 he states that the universe has always been here, which of course goes against science, not just against Theism. Mr. Smith answer of the Theist argument at least in this respect alone must sound shabby to anyone reading the book. As a matter of fact, his whole defense is wrapped up in "Don't ask Why", it seems to be a silly question. I have tried to rid myself of all pre-conceived ideas before picking up this book and taking it with an open mind, and the feeling I received after carefully reading it is was that I feel more stronger than ever for Theism. I do appreciate Mr. Smith's attempt and it should be welcomed by all who are serious in challenging their "faith". I believe we are all entitled to our opinion, and the chapters that challenged me most was his debate on reason and faith, and the varieties of faith, etc... I recommend this as a must read for all Christians
Rating:
Summary: Sound as can be
Review: This book presents sound arguments that deny a theist any possible way to reasonably justify his/her belief in God. Many arguments for God's existence have evolved a little since this book was published, but the basics for refuting them in their current state are there. I saw a review on here that said something along the lines of, "Smith can't answer why there is something as apposed to nothing at all." Well, a theist can't answer "why is there a god as apposed to nothing at all?" Anyone who still has questions after reading this book should take some time to evaluate his/her questions, because if they are valid questions, their answers are in the book. If they aren't valid questions, the reasons they are invalid are also in the book. It is extremely rare that a theist can be argued out of his/her belief, but I personally know of 3 Christians that became atheists after reading Smith's work. To continue to believe after reading it is to openly reject reason.
Rating:
Summary: A Good Treatise
Review: A very informative treatise on the various fallacies of theism. However, it offers no positive alternative for a philosophy of life other than general rationalism, and it is short on humor. For that, read "LIFE WITHOUT GOD: A Guide to Fulfillment Without Religion."
Rating:
Summary: Smith's Work is a Great Introduction to Atheism
Review: Overall, I felt that Smith's work was a superb introduction to atheism, and a powerfull argument against the existence of God. However, Atheism: The Case against God comes up short of its ultimate goal. Smith's chapter on the definition of atheism I found to be quite good. I must say that I agree with his points in the first chapter, and I would recommend the book- if for nothing else- than just as an introduction to atheism. Smith's chapter on reason vs. faith I found to be quite good, and I agree with all of his points there as well. (I define faith differently than does Smith. In the end, I agree with him that "faith" as he defines it is indeed useless.) Smith's chapter on refuting the arguments for God's existence is a bit outdated, although this is of course not Smith's fault. However, it does unfortunately render the chapter basically useless except as an introduction for someone not familiar with the issue. The final chapter, dealing with morality, tries to set up an atheistic morality. Whatever Smith's view on morality is, it is certainly not based on an objective moral code, but more of a subjective "this makes me feel happy" type of morality. Ultimately, I find this sort of morality to be essentially useless. One overriding theme I found with this book is that it targeted Christianity quite specifically. In fact, there was even a chapter dedicated to discussing biblical matters! This seems inappropriate in a book that is supposed to refute the existence of God/gods, not Christianity. Why doesn't the Hindu god get bashed at all? One has to wonder. Smith makes some great points throughout the book, and there is still quite a bit I am chewing over. However, this work contains quite a few flaws that should become apparent upon a second reading.
Rating: 
Summary: It's OK, but not very good.
Review: The trouble with these kinds of books is that they usually either get 1 star or 5 stars. This is because the reviewer is often biased towards one side. Here's my opinion on this book. True, this book does bring up some interesting criticisms against Christianity. But it fails on various accounts: 1) It focuses almost all of its attention on Christianity. What about other major religions, such as Islam?
2) It doesn't prove Christianity wrong. It may attempt to, but doesn't. And, even if it does, why turn to atheism? Why not become a Hindu or a Muslim?
3) It offers no explanation whatsoever for the phenomenon known as Near Death Experiences. None. Granted, there are some arguments against NDEs (pretty much all of which have been shot down), but this book doesn't even try. How can it try to prove there is no God when it doesn't even bother to try disproving something adding heavy weight to the existence of a God? Simply put, this book fails to accomplish its task by quite a bit. People, just put your personal prejudices aside when you write a review on this. Don't assume that just because it's a book for atheism that it is simply a great book, and don't assume that it's simply a bad book just because it is for atheism. Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying this book is wrong. It simply doesn't really come close to accomplishing its task. Even if someone does prove Christianity wrong, what's wrong with the other major religions? Even if they prove that Jesus wasn't divine, why couldn't a Christian simply become a Muslim? Atheism, quite frankly, isn't the answer, and if it is, this book has failed to prove it.
Rating:
Summary: A Proud & Confident Defense of Reason
Review: Unlike many readers of "Atheism: The Case Against God", I came to this book somewhat later on in my freethought journey; It's been years since I've flirted with the idea that any organized religion or doctrine has anything to offer a person who is pursuing happiness and wisdom on earth. This book advances the precept that any human being whose standards are grounded in reason, logic, science, ethics and philosophy should steer as clear as possible from the Bible and Christian theology. All of these basic anchors to reality are anathema to the Christian requirements of faith without evidence, blind obedience to dogma, fear of horrible supernatural retribution if one's thoughts stray to the lustful or covetous, and never questioning even the most ludicrous or offensive of Biblical assertions, under penalty of an eternal barbecue in hell with you as the entree. Prior to reading this book, I spent years enthusiastically butting heads in debate with willing Christians, fighting the good fight of science over religion, reason over faith, evolution over creationism, picking apart the Bible's contradictions and errancy, and all the rest. Now, having finished Smith's book, I have for the first time in memory lost all interest in wasting my time arguing against the enemies of reason, and the proponents of anti-intellectualism! Now, THAT'S what I call a miracle! LOL. The book reminded me that whenever a Bible passage says something the believer doesn't agree with understand or care for, the euphemistically-named Christian tool of "interpretation" comes into play, whereby the passage is made to mean whatever that person wants it to mean. A perfect example amongst thousands of these, would be the fact that in the New Testament, Jesus repeatedly told his followers that he'd be coming back to earth within their own lifetimes, whereupon the kingdom of heaven would open up for them. Needless to say, his disciples packed their toothbrushes a bit early for their journey to heaven, because Jesus didn't return, and hasn't to this day. Today's Christians must "interpret" Jesus's absolute certainty regarding his imminent return to earth in the 1st century, and factor in a few thousand extra years, and then some, so as to keep the whole basis of Christianity: his return, alive. In another superlative section of the book, Smith demonstrates that no Christian is capable of explaining or describing what they even mean by "God" in any sort of coherant, consistent, descriptive, or meaningful sense. Instead, they must pretend to possess arcane knowledge of God which only people of "faith" are privy to, and if pressed further for a description will fall back to meaningless secondary personality traits like "love" and "goodness" which could just as well be used to describe a puppy, or such supernatural descriptors as "omnipotent", "omniscient", "eternal", etc., all of which collapse into a black hole of contradictions and irrationality when pursued a few layers down into the onion skin of true-believer obfuscation. For the first time I am 100% convinced that belief in the Christian God is utterly irrational, and indefensible, and I really owe it to way the trenchantly-presented argumentation in this book, consolidated and coalesced the extensive freethought readings I've been doing for the past years! Readers with a basic familiarity with philosophic terms and ideas will find this book accessible and full of thought-provoking information. I highly recommended it!
Rating:
Summary: Flawed, but still worth a look
Review: Smith offers some very powerful arguments addressing not just the existence of god, but the very intelligibility of the notion of a god. His criticism is forceful, and the book should be read for this alone. Still, there are problems. Smith seems to be not quite current in some areas relevant to his arguments. He accepts a "justified true belief" version of knowledge, ignoring the fact that Gettier undermined this view in 1963. He is blissfully ignorant of the fact that science tells us that some things happen for no reason at all (see quantum mechanics). He takes explanation to be a philosophically unproblematic issue. Unfortunately for Smith, some of his arguments rest on these mistaken ideas. His chapter presenting a "rational morality" is a mess; for instance, he freely equivocates on meanings of the word 'ought' -- a major sin (heh heh) if one is writing a chapter on ethics. In spite of the fact that I felt Smith ran out of gas as the book wound down, I still find the strengths of the text make the work well worth reading.
|
