TLDR for the book: God is bad, Mkay?
926182
I wanted very badly to like this book. Im an atheist, between a six and seven on Dawkins own Atheism scale (which is where he reports to be), and I quite like the concept of memes (the original concept, not the picture version on the Internet), so I was hoping I would enjoy this book. However, theres a number of glaring problems with it that ruin it.
First, Dawkins is an evolutionary biologist, and the old trope If all you have is a hammer, everything is a nail fits him very well. He seems to want to fit everything into an evolutionary mold, and doesnt seem to do much reading outside of evolutionary topics (evolutionary psychology, for instance) or religion. Theres a lot of times where he tries to fit known common biases into evolutionary molds where none are required. Thinking Fast and Slow has a much better take on most of the psychology than he seems to.
All that said, the evolutionary angle, along with his brief foray into memes, is in my opinion the greatest value of the book. Its where I actually picked some ideas up, and gave me some new food for thought. So while much of it seems to be misguided, theres still some meat in there to sink your teeth into.
The second major issue with the book is that, for such a logical guy, he seems incredibly unaware of his existing biases, and how they blind him to some truths. For example, he erroneously states that the 9/11 attacks were religiously motivated on Bin Ladens part. They werent, at least not primarily. They were politically motivated, according to Bin Ladens own words (see  his "letter to the American people", reproduced in the Guardian). This is just one example of how his glaring hatred for religion has blinded him to facts that are contrary to his beliefs (Confirmation bias), but theres quite a few in here. I feel like Mr. Dawkins could use a good, hard study of the previously mentioned Thinking Fast and Slow along with a few other choice books like You are Now Less Dumb.
The final issue I have with it, is that I cant really recommend itto anyone. Im not sure who his audience was even supposed to be, himself maybe?  If you give this book to a religious person, it is not going to change their minds. In fact, it will likely just dig them in, since it is so antagonistic. Hes actually MORE hostile to agnostics than theists, so if you give it to an agnostic, it is similarly going to turn them away. If you give it to an atheist, well, you are kind of preaching to the choir, aren't you? Maybe you give them some ammo for arguments, but if you are arguing about religion, you are already lost. Besides, some of his arguments, as I mentioned earlier, have some significant holes.  So, in the end, the best way I can sum up this book is its an enormous waste of time and brain power; not only for Mr. Dawkins, but also for the rest of us.
26950
This book is probably worth as a 99 cent kindle book. It does not deserve to be printed on a book, wasting papers and ink - we better save trees and go green ;-<

It is written purely from a (moronic, not scholarly) anti-religion, anti-Bible, and anti-Christian point of view, which any body can entertain, of course. Obviously he either does not know what is meant when we say 'God' 'heaven' etc, or he understands quite different from others.  Though this book has 'Hitler' on its title, but any name would be picked up to serve his purpose very well, such as 'Stalin', etc. Even after a few years in a seminary to study the Bible, I doubt he will improve on this book.
124354
Good book.  Only the first article is written by Richard Dawkins. The anthology doesn't tell you what you know about God is wrong, but rather how the concept of God and religion has been used and abused over the ages.  Might make you think a little more critically.<a data-hook="product-link-linked" class="a-link-normal" href="/Everything-You-Know-About-God-Is-Wrong-The-Disinformation-Guide-to-Religion/dp/1932857591/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_rvw_txt?ie=UTF8">Everything You Know About God Is Wrong: The Disinformation Guide to Religion</a>
3538176
It doesn't have a story line. It's written like a bad poem. I picked it for my book club and now I have chosen the worst book. I love some quotes about God and the Bible but no substance to read other than that.
3340503
This book is terrible;  adding god to a scientific approach is ridiculous. I am admittedly atheist, which makes this even harder to swallow;the references to the christian god and usage of scripture seem like they were tacked on dip glorify the "creator.". At best this is a poor read, at worst it is thinly-veiled religious propaganda
272074
This book was written by a person who has an axe to grind, an lots of bad theology.  I am sorry I even bought this book.
4824579
At the end of the first chapter we read "the entire universe under the son's regulation and control is being manipulated by god for one purpose - to prepare and train the bride. God is lord of history." It seems that the author has not been successful in resolving certain issues and needs the reader to resolve them for him. In the first chapter of the preface we read this statement "no system of philosophy or theology is challenge - proof. The contending schools of theology, Calvinism, and Arminianism, illustrate this point."
  If the entire universe is being manipulated by god then why did the author write this book.? It seems to me that the author is attempting to synthesize logical structures  from Calvin, Wesley and Barth not realizing that Barth was attempting to resolve issues which he saw as problem areas in Calvin's theology. Wesley and the Armenian movement were doing the same.
  In one chapter titled "The determining factor in salvation" he asks " why is the spirits wooing successful in some cases and not in others." answer "Those whom  the church travails are saved. All others are lost.
  In another chapter titled "The search for a legal challenger" the author says "when Adam chose to obey Satan, he became Satins slave. Then he quotes Romans 6:16 as proof completely ignoring the fact that the text says "you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin which leads to death, or of obedience which leads to righteousness" The difference between claiming that mankind is enslaved to satin or sin is huge. Paul says that the power behind sin is the law. He is claiming that the law being good - because of mankind's fallen condition drove him to sin instead of righteousness. This author is proof texting (importing certain doctrines into and ignoring the context of scripture) all over the place.
  The Author seems to believe that Satin had some legal claim on the earth and mankind. In other words satin was some how exercising legal authority against God. This idea is absurd anyone who takes the scripture seriously knows what was at stake here, Gods very nature was on trial before the cosmos. CS Lewis refers to this as "god in the dock", when God in Jesus Christ allows himself to be crucified and raised from the dead God is vindicated. On the cross the very essence (nature) of god is on display before the whole world, that is why the roman Catholics have a body on the cross. Any accusation made against God, including the problem of evil cannot be made to stick any longer since god took the worst that Man or Satin could hurl against him and triumphed over it. How could Satin a creature have a legal claim against God the creator.
  If a person is serious about Christianity I can recommend some other authors. James (J. B.) Torrance, Alan Torrance, and Thomas (T. F.) Torrance Their books are available on Amazon and audio and video are available on youtube and grace communion international's website. These Authors like Karl Barth  are drawing off Athanasius and the church fathers, and they remain on the reformed side of the church thus combining superior reasoning skills with the reformation approach to Christianity thus avoiding the bad reasoning that we find in this book and too often was a characteristic of the reformation. Also on a popular level try Gregory Boyd, he is billiant and excentric. He says that people tell him he has autistic tendencies I think he is some kind of a savant. He has an amazing ability to put together an interpretation of scripture with its philosophical and logical implications instantly. also try  Brian Zahnd, and Brad Jersak
282382
I just finished reading this terrible book.

Bill O'Reilly cannot even define Christianity, much less bloviate on it...  Christianity is about Jesus, who is God, coming into the world to save all people from their sin, through faith in Him. He went to the cross to take the sins of the world upon himself and incur the wrath of God in our place.  Christianity is not what O'Reilly says it is, a religion that tells people to do good to others.  We do good because God enables us through the Holy Spirit to do acts of righteousness, but we are still simultaneously sinners and saints.  It is not about being good enough to get into heaven and it never was.

Jesus claimed he was God, this is why the Jewish Leaders had such a problem with him and decided to have him killed.  This had nothing to do with upsetting the money trail.

O'Reilly cannot be taken seriously because he has no background in Christianity and cannot even define it.  This is a terrible book that gets it all wrong.
4929843
Are there any good book in this entire world? People say me I should read more but when I do the books are so dumb and written by total idiots. How many idiots can there be i ask and then I read this book and find there are many more than anybody can count. this book is so dumb. The kid is a god and what he just forgot that he was and his name is just like that god he is like? I don't get it. Idiots! If you believe this book you are idiot and should puke on yourself. and i see there are many more books just like it and it will never stop. dumb idiots!
2006977
ISBN 030798902x - Well. Color me shocked. I just reviewed&nbsp;<a data-hook="product-link-linked" class="a-link-normal" href="/The-Easter-Story-Storyland-Books/dp/0794403794/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_rvw_txt?ie=UTF8">The Easter Story (Storyland Books)</a>, which is an Easter story based on Mark. I would have thought that a children's Easter book based on the bible would've been the best kind possible, but it wasn't very good. So I wasn't expecting much, at all, from a Little Golden Book. And... wow, was I wrong!

Because the story is so well-known, I'm not going to re-cap it much: Jesus and his followers go to Jerusalem to celebrate Passover, where he announces that one of them will betray him. Judas does and Jesus is crucified. Three days later, he rises from the dead and tells his mother and Mary Magdalene to bring his followers to Galilee. There, he tells his disciples to spread his teachings and promises to be with them, always.

Failings: the book doesn't mention that Jesus is a Jew, but does have him and his disciples celebrating Passover. Some parents might be bothered by "The people of Judea hated the Roman rulers..." for the use of the word "hated". When the Marys go to the tomb, they are told Jesus is not there, but they never look for themselves, which makes no sense.

Positives: The book dances around how Jesus died, but at least mentions it. "There he was crucified in the Roman fashion... This leaves out details young children don't really need to know just yet. The book explains why Judas sold out Jesus (for money), the first time I've seen it brought up in a kids' book. The mention of both Marys, as well as Joseph of Arimathea was nice, leaving the door open to more biblical teachings. The final 9 pages are dedicated to explanations.  First, Holy Week and the days that make it up, including Easter, are explained. The cross as a symbol, the Resurrection, the Madonna lily, Easter eggs... even how the name "Easter" came from a pagan (they say "ancient") celebration of spring. The last two pages have some information about Easter in other countries (outside the United States).

Author Jean Miller really did a superb job with this telling, and this is from a non-Christian! The illustrations, by Debbie Pinkney-Davis are very attractive without being cartoon-y colorful. All in all... I'm sticking with "wow!"

- AnnaLovesBooks
4310912
Well, finished the book. The pro-God religious commentary ruined it for me. The last 10 pages was a massive (literal) deus ex machina of masturbatory levels I'd rather never experience again.
1750555
I am still reading the book. This review is unethical and premature. The nature of evil evolves throughout the history of our species. At one time it was the god kings of places such as Egypt, Persia, and similar. At one time, Christianity (though utterly deluded about the nature of the universe) was fairly altruistic and positive. Once it got its hands on the levers of power, (Roman emperors, etc.), the burning people at thecross and the Inquisitions (Catholics) and the genocides (Protestants) began. The first atheists (I be one) started off on wrong foot (French Revolution) and then went downhill from there (Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Korean Kims, etc.). As the not that old song goes, "We are bad to the bone." I am worried about libertarian companies whose names start with G, with T, with M, with F and with a letter at the start of the alphabet. Will I fool the android reading this preliminary posting? Place your bet. Are any human beings left in the monkey house?

We are close to the end of history. It's not the Christian "End times." It's just a banderlog that got too smart for its own britches. Obscure Kipling JUNGLE BOOK reference.
4807722
To make sense of this book, you must be a Christian who believes in libertarian free will. The author admits this. If you do not meet these conditions (as I don't), the book will be nonsensical to you.

The author first defines God as good, and humans as evil. There are no good people. The only way anyone comes to Christ is through the working of the Holy Spirit. By ourselves, we would all reject God.

And so his answer to suffering is that we deserve everything that happens to us, and worse. We deserve hell, so we should not complain about natural disasters, or terminal illnesses, or any other suffering we might encounter in life. We live in a fallen world.

In other words, we do not understand suffering because we do not understand how evil we are.

I guess I just have such a profoundly different worldview as an agnostic/determinist that there can be little fruitful discourse on this subject between myself, and someone who thinks this way. That said, I have heard other Christian apologists (yes, I listen to them!) treat the subject of suffering in a much more comprehensive fashion. I have never heard somone simply argue that humans are sinners, and think they have solved the problem.

I have one objection to every explanation of suffering that I have heard from Christians. All of them believe that the suffering of our world is due to original sin. We were given free will, we sinned, and so creation is disordered. If there had been no original sin, there would never have been suffering.

But then Christians say that we will have free will in heaven (since without it love would be impossible), but that people there will be so overwhelmed by God's presence that they will never sin. So it's possible for there to be free will, and a complete absence of sin and suffering.

I suppose this means that when Eve sinned in the garden, God deliberately withdrew his presence from her, since the nearness of God's presence directly determines whether we behave morally, or immorally.

Why did God simply not structure our world the same way he will structure heaven, where there will be perfect free will, and no suffering?

The answer supplied in this book is - not really an answer at all. The author just argues that heaven will be different. There will be no temptations. We will see the face of God.

I see no reason why these conditions could not have existed in the garden. They must not have existed, because Eve sinned.

And so there will either be sin in heaven - or there was no need for suffering in the first place.

To the Jews who suffered through the Holocaust, died, and continued their suffering in the afterlife, the author has nothing to say - except that they could never have been happy in heaven anyway, spending eternity with the Christ that they rejected on earth. But the author doesn't seem too torn up about them, or about those loved ones that will not be in heaven with him:

"This answers another objection about hell: Could any enjoy heaven knowing that their loved ones are there? But when our loved ones' rejection of God is plain and their true attitude toward others is revealed, no Christian will wish they could spend eternity with such a person...Hell will seem oddly fitting."

(Why Does God Allow Evil?, page 103)
2808702
Awful sermon, from a man who clearly misunderstood God's nature to a high extent! Recommended book: "Mercy and Judgment" by Fredric William Farrar :) God Bless!
2431014
Sorry, folks, but I just can't go along with the "Love and follow me or you'll suffer excruciating torment for eternity" approach. It sounds a little psychopathic, not loving. Is that how Christians treat THEIR kids?

Apparently, the Guys Upstairs aren't having much luck with this approach. This book is at least the third book about this very subject (see "I Went to Hell," by Kenneth Hagin, and "A Divine Revelation of Hell," by Mary Baxter - and there are probably more I'm not aware of). I'd expect an omnipotent being to have gotten it right the first time - but then, He's been trying to fix His mistakes at least since Sodom and Gomorrah, without significant success. I'd never hire a plumber who had a similar track record.

And as for God telling Bill that He was coming "very, very soon" - it's been over nine years. Did He come, and most of us missed it?
2098957
After you read this, check out "Lies We Believe About God" if you want a discussion about the Theology behind the book.  If you want an earlier theologian with a similar look check out Scodus for Dunces (not an easy read).

Not "traditional" view of God, unless you believe in a loving God ... or study Franciscan Theology.
1778968
The author promotes instant obedience, hitting infants, small as babies, with sticks (from the Bible "rods") in God's name. How sick can it get till Amazon stop selling such mentally ill "literature"?
My heart goes to each child being raised by such mentally ill "parents". Poor children having to be controlled and abused by people who don't even know God's word or what the "rod" means. Rod in Hebrew translates from "shebet" = the one you guide children with, NOT HIT children with.