5.0 out of 5 based on 2 reviews. – Customer review on 30/10/2009

The Case for God
Karen Amstrong
Karen Amstrong has a broad historical vision as she addresses issues raised by Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens and Sam Harris in their recent books denouncing religion.
She brings together common threads that were intrinsic to the most ancient religious practices and continued to be manifest in all of the major world religions – while acknowledging that no words or definitions can adequately describe or explain God. The depth of her scholarship is breathtaking her research is painstaking and her ability to express complex ideas in accessible language makes it possible for the ordinary thinking person to experience a most intelligent and exhilarating read.

1.0 out of 5 based on 2 reviews. – Customer review on 30/09/2009

A few weeks ago I received an email from you asking for a review. Here it is below; it may not be what you would like to see.

The book, "The Case for God" shows the author, Karen Armstrong, to be a knowledgeablle person, who must have put in a huge amont of time in research, for she covers centuries of history and most of the world geographically.
However, she puts religion on par with philosophy, science, art, music and more. Religion is not a "science" limited to knowledge gained through human endeavours. It is a virtue whose purpose is to render to
God the worship due to him as the source of all being and the principle of all government of things (Catholic Encyclopedia). It is part of the cardinal virtue of justice, since by it, we give to God what is due to God. It is not an intellectual exercise. She comes close to its essence when on a number of occasions she says that religion is best learned through practice.
She does not bring in revelation when referring to Christianity, nor does she refer to Christ's teaching. I would say she is a supreme relativist; all religions seem equal: take your pick. On p. 315 she mentions "the point of religion", but she does not look beyond this life. I am afraid she misses the "point". Nowhere do I see that she has made a case for God. Perhaps we are to meditate on the book and come to that conclusion ourselves, though implicitly she puts atheism aside as non-tenable.