Rating: 
Summary: Insightful and well-written
Review: I, like most Christians, have heard many things great about Zacharias. I was delighted to find that they were all true in JESUS AMONG OTHER GODS. He writes with an expansive vocabulary that is just _fun_ to read, and shows great understanding of the faiths in question.Also, for those who are confused about the Eucharist, this book provides some valuable insights that greatly helped me understand it. All in all, an excellent work. I greatly anticipate the opportunity to read more of his books. Christinaphylus
Rating: 
Summary: The Defense of Christianity
Review: "Jesus Among Other Gods" was a book that not only defended Christianity against other religons, but also pointed out the flaws found in these religions. It is both an interesting read for Christians, but also for people questioning the array of faiths found in the world. It takes a firm stand for Christianity.
Rating:
Summary: A must read for every Christian Parent and Teen
Review: This book is superb. It provides a biblically based response for the most common attacks made upon Christians and Christianity today. It is scripturally sound and a wonderful tool to assist in preparing a college bound Christian teen for what lies ahead in academia. I couldn't put it down. I will be handing out several copies of this book as gifts to parents and teens.
Rating:
Summary: Good book for the already Christian believer
Review: This is a great book from a highly intellectual Christian apologetic philospher. If you are already a believer in Jesus and want to strengthen your testimony on questions such as "Why choose Christiany? Why does God allow suffering? Aren't we all just instances of random chance in a big bang universe?" This is a wonderful guide. However, it is a 'tough' book to read for the average reader. I found myself rereading many paragraphs to get the gist of what he was saying. Once I understood, great stuff, but it is not a casual read. And as another reviewer points out, other books may be better suited to those initially seeking the truth of God. I highly recomend this book. It has stregthened my testimony. Just be ready to take your time when reading and fully absorb his message.
Rating: 
Summary: Not the worst I've read but far from the best.
Review: I'm a Christian so I'm not saying this because of mere prejudice. The book in my opinion was very poorly organized and I think would fail to be of worth to anyone who is not already a Christian. The book is of slight worth to Christians, but there are far better books to spend your money on. His arguments would not convince me that any of the religions he mentions are wrong if I happened to be a member of that particular group. I wouldn't say the whole book is junk; some of it is pretty good, but is sadly overwhelmed by the the not so good. I heard many good things about Mr. Zacharias and purchased this in high hopes of some great apologetics and profound insight. He leaves much to be desired.
Rating: 
Summary: Book based on faith & not on HISTORICAL facts
Review: I admire the firm faith Mr. Zacharias has in the deity of Jesus Christ [page-3]. His soft spoken mannerism and his poetic words are laudable. At the same time, it is shocking to see a popular Christian apologetics scholar like him, writing a totally one sided "Puritan style" book ignoring facts and figures depicted in the "world history" as well as the actual statements in other religious scriptures. With all due respects to Mr. Zacharias, I cannot understand why he quotes specific Biblical verses to make a point and in the same sentence he puts down other religious beliefs with out any logic or reason and with out quoting even one verse from other religious books. 1--- To start with, he made a very grave error, when he compared Hinduism with Christianity [page-7]. Hinduism is a culture. Christianity is an organized religion. Comparing Hinduism and Christianity is exactly comparing apples and oranges. There are two great cultures in the world. One is Hinduism and another is Judaism. All western religions like Islam and Christianity came from Judaism. All eastern religions like Buddhism and Sikhism came from Hinduism. 2-- He sees Jesus as the son of God; but he failed to mention that Judaism the mother culture of Christianity and Islam the sister religion of Christianity do not see Jesus as God or as the son of God. Moses killed every one who worshiped any other god than Jehovah in the Bible; where as Hinduism looks at all gods as many manifestations of ONE & ONLY GOD. Proclamation of Apostles that Jesus is God or the Son of God is the only reason Jews wanted Christ to be crucified. Jews have and still have an aversion for calling any one God or Son of God. 3---- He sees Hindu concept of God as polytheism [page-92], with out stating the fact that Hindu scriptures talk about "ONE AND ONLY GOD BRAHMAN which expresses itself in trillion forms. Hindu Rig Veda states " EKAM SAT, VIPRAHA BAHUDHA VADANTI - There is only one Truth [God] but men describe that differently. 4-- He forgot to state that John 1:1 [page-29] is a repetition of the Hindu Vedic statement which states""prajapathi vai agre asset" IN THE BEGINNING WAS PRAJAPTHI, THE BRAHMAN-THE GOD, "Tasya Vag dvitiya Aseet" WITH WHOM WAS THE WORD; "Vag vai parama Brahman" AND THE WORD WAS VERILY THE SUPREME BRAHMAN -THE GOD." 5---He wrote about the Virgin birth of Jesus Christ [pages-38-39] adding that Mohammad, Krishna and Buddha are not virgin births. Virgin birth of Jesus Christ is part of Christian "belief system" and not a historically documented fact. Just like Jesus's birth, Budhha was born out of the side of his mother. As per the Zoroastrian religion, its founder Zoroaster had a virgin birth, after holy power descended upon his mother. If you read books relating to Egyptian civilization, you will see those books describe the god "RA" was born from the side of his mother. Even the legendary NEBUCHADNEZZAR, Babylonian king, believed that MARDUK entered his mother's womb and gave him life. Hindu scriptures state, all 12 ancient Hindu saints called PRAJAPATHI's were born from the "mind" of Lord Brahma. All Greek gods came from different parts of the body than from the womb! 5----He wrote Jesus said I AM THE WAY [page-15]. That statement is no different from what Lord Krishna said in the Gita, "CALL ME BY ANY NAME YOU LIKE; WORSHIP ME IN ANY FORM YOU LIKE; ALL THAT WORSHIP GOES TO ONE AND ONLY SUPREME REALITY. When Mr. Zacharias writes about the exclusiveness of Jesus Christ and Bible, Hinduism talks about the inclusiveness of every one on earth who worship God with all kind of names and forms. 6---He states in his book Hindus worship many gods with out admitting the fact that there is no word Trinity in the entire 66 books of the Holy Bible and Trinitarian worship was started by Roman emperor Constantine against the objections of Bishop Arius [ Ref: Arian controversy] during Nicaea Council [325 AD] . The Council of Nicaea was called by Roman emperor Constantine who even took part in the discussions as per the Encyclopedia Britannica [ book 8 --page 675] In that Council, Bishop Arius argued that Jesus Christ is A CREATED PERSON AND NOT A PRO-CREATOR. Bishop Arius was thrown out of the council and his works were destroyed and he himself was killed. Catholic Encyclopedia admits: "The doctrine of Trinity is not taught in the Old Testament. The revelation of the truth of the triune life of God was first made in the New Testament." 7 --How can he put down Hindu caste system [page-7], with out admitting the naked fact that SLAVERY is& was an accepted custom in the Holy Bible and that is the reason years ago, why church going, law obeying Christians in USA adopted slavery. "TREAT YOUR SLAVES JUSTLY AND FAIRLY, KNOWING THAT YOU ALSO HAVE A MASTER IN HEAVEN [Col. 4:11]. "THE SLAVE IS HIS MONEY" [Exodus 21:21]. St. Paul urged one slave ONESIMUS to return to his master. This book does not answer any of those questions. I hope the author remembers that Southern Baptists convention openly apologized to African American for slavery 8. To write "No way for classical Hinduism deal with the problem of evil" shows the ignorance of the author about Hindu culture. I respect the author, Bible and Jesus's immortal teachings. But this book is filled with strange comparisons and false generalizations. I hope and pray readers who read this book also will read books such as Autobiography of A Yogi, AM I A HINDU? before making up their mind regarding cultures like Hinduism.
Rating:
Summary: A Solid Defense But Could Be Better Orgainzed
Review: While the organization of Jesus Among Other Gods calls for more note taking than usual for a book of this type in order to link concepts, the defense Dr. Zacharias presents for the orthodox view of Christ is a solid one. The easiest thing for a proponent of a divergent world view is to claim that the critic of that world view has quoted sources out of context. This has been the major critique on this book by the one star folks. To those adherents of the world views being critiqued by Zacharais, his argument, complete with quotes, would read as if out of context to them because the adherent's context is rooted in belief of the system and its doctrine while the critic has another context due to a conflicting world view. To merely say that something is "out of context" is not enough to defeat an argument. When talking about a world view or belief system, using one illustration or one slice of doctrine to indentify that world view is simply inadequte. Zacharais does not do this in his book, and his critics should not do this in their reviews. In fact, Zacharias is careful not to use this formula. He shares his experience of growing up in a pluralistic society and how that society affected his early world view versus his current Christian world view which is antithetical to a pluralistic view. Jesus Among Other Gods should not be an introduction to apologetics for the casual reader or searcher. I would recommend Josh McDowell's More Than A Carpenter or the youth edition of Jesus Among Other Gods for that. Jesus Among Other Gods is a great book for those that are more advanced in their search for Truth and seek to reconcile the mind with the heart.
Rating:
Summary: Great apologist
Review: This book is a wonderful antidote for our modern epidemic notion that all religions are the same. Zacharias compares how major world religions answer six major philosophical questions. The author skillfully yet respectfully shows how world religions are not the same and how one must make honest decisions about which is true. I appreciate Zacharias' apologetic works because while he is fully capable in the area of logic, he also approaches his subject with a very human and personal touch. The section in this book on the question of evil is especially good.
Rating:
Summary: Great Disappointment
Review: I am a Christian, so I criticize this book not because I disagree with its view. This book goes on and on without presenting any forceful arguments, but is filled with a lot of unconvincing stories. Seeing the strong reputation that the author has, I don't want any Christians or non-Christians to think that this is the strongest case the Christianity can make. This book is truly an embarrassment to us all. For a worthy case for Christianity, please read works by William Lane Craig, J.P. Moreland, and Norman Geisler instead of this book.
Rating:
Summary: Popular misrepresentations
Review: I did not want to posit merely negative criticism. But the content of the book warrants it. First and foremost,those who hail this book as philosophically superior, either do not understand philosophy nor the arguments within the book. This is a popular book quoting scholars out of context and presenting the other world-views in a way that is unbelievable. Zacharias tries to show that his elementary logic(basically the four laws eg. law of non-contradiction, identity etc.)can show others to be false and Christianity true. But readers are always kept in the dark because of the big words and flowery style which makes up for the lack of content. The philosophical strength of this book is mediocre. When Zacharias critices Chopra or Shankara, he takes everything out of context. And guess what! They end up losing. For instance, When he speaks of Shankara running up a tree at the sight of the elephant, Sankara reply would seem nonsensical or simply stupid as presented by Zacharias. But taken within the whole context of Hinduism it makes perfect sense. Shankara was basically saying that he, the elephant and other "existant entities" are only perceptual and therefore can be organised and studied epistemologically. But they do not have any ontological reality. The "unreal" he referred to was in ontological categories. Here Zacharias confuses the whole matter and makes Shankara out to be a fool. This book is full of quotes and it is hard to believe that such misrepresentations thrive regardless of this supposedly tremendous amount of study. Maybe I should end with a quote from Ralph Waldo Emerson "Don't quote to me, tell me what YOU KNOW!
| 
