Rating: 
Summary: One of the Best Books for Free-Thinkers I've read
Review: The book does an excellent job of exposing the contradictions and irrationality of theism and the myths of christianity in particular.I strongly recommend this book to anyone interested in understanding the illogic of theism or who is interested in obtaining more intellectual ammunition with which to combat the epidemic of primitive superstition prevalent in our society today.
Rating: 
Summary: a waste of money
Review: Having read the glowing reviews given to Smiths book, I would dissent from them. This book is so biased, that it can be dismissed from serious consideration. If this is the best that atheists can do, they have no argument at all. All his arguments are weak and can be easily refuted. For instance, Smith argues that the universe has no need for a designer, the universe simply exists of itself. He then quotes Nathaniel Branden, a psychologist, to the effect that reality just is. That is that a thing is what it is. Since the universe exists what need is there for a designer? But if there is no designer to the universe, then theres no design to anything at all, including athestic arguments. The arguments are self refuting. Yet we hear endless praise for this book, which goes to show how people will believe anything without critically examining it including the majority of christians. Having examined both sides of the existance of God debate, I can say that the arguments for God are much stronger than the arguments against them. Not one of the arguments in Smiths book stands up to critical examination, and cannot be true. By all means borrow the book and read it, but as for buying it dont waste your time and money.
Rating:
Summary: If this is the best they can do, atheism is Dead-On-Arrival.
Review: This book is destroyed by Morey's "New Atheism & the Erosion of Freedom" (also on Amazon.com at a lower price). Smith champions "weak atheism", the assertion that atheism means "without any beliefs regarding God". Thus, the most applauded book for the atheist position starts out calling itself "The Case Against God", then asserts the contradiction it has NO beliefs regarding God, then goes on for hundreds of pages delineating lots of assertions about God, all of which are flawed. And people write reviews to Amazon.com: "Yep, it's great, there is no God, so I am god and can do whatever I think best and don't have to feel bad about all things I feel so bad about...for some reason." The reason people think the logic in this book is so good is because they share the same UNEXAMINED ASSUMPTIONS of the author. By contrast, Morey's book proceeds to EXAMINE THE ASSUMPTIONS of atheism, agnostism, humanist, materialsm & empiricism and shows them to be self-refuting and incoherent.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent source of philosophical arguments against theism.
Review: This book does a great job of showing the rational arguments against theism. Theism is quickly becoming a plague on our society by suppressing free-thought and advancement in the sciences and education. Smith gives us a great reference for arguments against the myth of a supreme being. This is a great book to arm yourself with rational argument against the theocracy that thinks it has a right to control us all.
Rating: 
Summary: Good in principal - dry reading.
Review: This would have been a 5 star book if it were re-written. All of the arguements are great, it's just tough reading.
Rating:
Summary: A thorough book against theism
Review: I found this book to be a very thorough exanimation of the concept of god. It looks at the question from several viewpoints: philosophically, scientifically (the design argument, etc), logically (contradictory nature, etc.). I am amazed at a few of the reviews that appear to be written by the same person who uphold a belief in God by saying that God is all existance. I wonder if they realize they are taking a pantheistic stance, and that pantheism is very definitely not Christianity. I think Smith also dismisses the first-cause argument very well. This argument goes that everything effect needs a cause and that this chain cannot be infinite. The Christians claim the first case to be God. But then they say God was eternal and needs no cause. All they have done is moved the question back one level and then said that God needs no cause. Somehow this is more comforting than saying the universe needs no cause. It also doesn't satisify the "like from like" argument (often used to dispel evolution), since the natural world coming from supernatural does not fit the like-from-like argument. Perhaps what I liked best was the discussion of reason and faith, and why faith is not a valid means of acquiring information, and why.
Rating: 
Summary: Apparently complete source of arguments for non-theism
Review: Well done for what it is. It is a shame that other proponents of atheism do not read this book and avoid many obvious errors in their denouncement of their detractors ("nature our only example of reality" being narrow in its positivism and unnecessarily ignorant of metaphysics and ontology). Primary use as a reference book is valuable.
Rating:
Summary: Powerful & lucid; completely compelling; a must read!
Review: Those reviewers lambasting Smith for his illogic are themselves revealed as illogic personified! Every argument is logical and persuasive; I cannot recommend this book enough. I thoroughly enjoyed Smith's often candid style. This is a must read for theists and atheists alike! Although the honest theist may not be one after reading this! :-).
Rating:
Summary: Excellently written and argued!
Review: Smith's book is one of the clearest defenses of nonbelief I've read. I highly recommend it to nonbelievers and believers alike. I you believe in God, you must read this book to understand the logical problems you have to surmount to justify belief. The two latest reviews against this book claim that God is reality. Nature is the only example of reality we have. Their argument assumes that either Nature is unreal, or God is nature (pantheism). I suggest that people giving reviews point out a real flaw in Smith's book.
Rating:
Summary: Very thorough and devastating argument! A great read too!
Review: This book is the best book on atheism that I have ever read. It is very systematic and thorough. Although I wasn't convinced by *every* argument he makes, he gives several different arguments for each point, and at least one hit the mark for me. Those reviewers here who state that Smith overlooks the "God is reality itself" definition are just plain wrong. To quickly summarize Smith's argument, he shows that statements about god fall into very few categories. They can be content-free, such as "God is reality". Where they do try to be specific and give characteristics of God (omni-benevolent, personal, etc.), these characteristics are either slightly veiled content-free statements or outright contradictory. Smith takes each concept, and shows convincingly how it falls into one of those categories. A great read, and a nice demonstration of logic!
| 
