Can Man Live Without God :

Rating:
Summary: Objecitve review.
Review: Ravi makes some good points. Not intended for philosophy majors, but for the regular person. The simplicity of his arguements are none the less important arguements. Unfortunatly is easy for atheists to miss the point, and all too easy for christians to get it.

Rating:
Summary: Apologetics with passion
Review: Many have assumed that this book is intented for the scholorly circles, it is not. This is merely a very gifted man speaking to the heart of those who have lost hope in this world. This book is not written to be the apologetic to end all apologetic books. It is refreshing to read an apologetic book that is more than logical equations, but also a literary pleasure to read. This is not the next Francis Schaeffer. Ravi is all himself. Shaeffer would have wept over this book, and Lewis would have giggled. Ravi understands that one must speak to the heart as well as the mind.

Rating:
Summary: Can Man Live Without God?
Review: Yes. But why bother? An 18th century wit noted that all churches should have inscribed over their doors "Important If True". The 'church' of the aetheist should have inscribed "Not Important if True, A Real Problem if Not". Y'all think about it.

Rating:
Summary: An in depth look at the question... maybe too in depth.
Review: In this book, Ravi Zacharias takes a look at the possibility of men living without God. It is at times, hard to follow, and he cites every quote that he uses to absurdity. Other than that, those being really small things if you think about it, it is a great book. It looks at some things that people usually don't look at for answers and meanings. He doesn't seem aggressive, no, in fact he seems like he really wants everyone to take him seriously, and he is, at least in this book, always very civil and gentlemanly. He looks at logic, antitheism, philosophy, and theology. It is probably better to think of it as a beginner's philosophy book. Happy reading... if you dare. Ask yourself if man can read without God.

Rating:
Summary: needs to be read VERY carefully
Review: I thought this book hit things right on the mark. Some atheists charge him with attacking a straw man version of atheism, but if you read his book carefully, he deals with those accusations convincingly, both in the book and in the appendices. Yes, an atheist can be moral withoug believing in God, and can also find life enjoyable and meaningful. HOWEVER, they would not be living true to the philosophy they claim to espouse. Atheism is completely unlivable and undefendable. That is one of the reasons why we are seeing some atheists claim "I don't believe in God because I lack evidence." If atheism would take a good look at itself in the mirror, it would see Zacharias' points. One can deny God on the surface and live out life without God on the surface, but no one dares tinker with the foundations of good thinking. I'm not surprised at all that some reviewers are offended at this book--Zacharias is honest and he doesn't pull any punches.

Rating:
Summary: Can man live without god?
Review: Short answer: yes. Man could also live without this book

Rating:
Summary: An exceptional guide to defending the faith
Review: I am quite taken with this particular book. Ravi has presented a case for the Christian faith that is not easily dismissed. Some of the book's material is from his presentations at leading colleges (Yale among them I believe).

Rating:
Summary: What will happen after God is declared Dead?
Review: The 19th century philosopher Nietzsche said that "God is Dead, and we have killed him". Now a century later we can look back on the 20th century and see just what happens when man thinks he can live without God. Dr. Zacharias takes a look at atheism and extrapalates its logical outcome. Much like Nietzsche did he comes to some horrid conclusions, but then shows how those conclusions have manifested themselves in the 20th century. Ideas do have consequences: What are the consequences of the idea that "God is Dead". Read Can Man Live Without God to find out.

Rating:
Summary: Ok, but not the next Schaeffer . .
Review: I was about 15 when I read this the first time, and was mightily impressed by it. Since then I have had six years of life experience to add, and two years of Philosophy at Bristol University - and looking back on the book I can see weaknesses I was not aware of before. As stated by other reviewers, Zacharias does an awful lot of "argument from authority" and often little to back it up. He does make some good points, but they are often repeated and bulked out with numerous illustrations (which are helpful, but tend to just pad it out some of the time). If you only want to scratch the surface of philosophy then this is probably what you want - if you want to dig deep then try 'Christian Apologetics' by Norman Geisler. Habermas and Geivett's "In Defense of Miracles" provides a staunch refutation of Hume's (and by extension, Flew's) arguments against the possibility of miracles.

Rating:
Summary: not a real argument.
Review: The problem with this book is it doesn't do what it claims. It doesn't have a single argument for religion in it; it merely praises beleivers and insults non-beleivers. I can't imagine who would get something out of it.