Mere Christianity
C.S. Lewis
I had gotten pretty good reviews of this book from both my mom and sister (non-religious and religious, respectively) and had pretty high hopes. I was disappointed to feel that they were largely unfulfilled. Lewis begins the book by “deducing” the truth of Christianity in a faux-syllogistic style that frequently covertly assumes his own conclusions. For instance, in deducing why evil is only a corrupted form of good, and not an equal and opposite power, he argues that (I’m paraphrasing) any evil power must have existence, intelligence, and will, and since those three things are inherently good, then evil must be a corrupted form of good. Even if we give him his debatable first premise, the second premise clearly assumes the very thing he is trying to prove.
I also found it frustrating that, in explaining non-intuitive assertions of Christianity, Lewis went back and forth between using folksy analogies to human life and saying “this is impossible to understand in the terms of human life” just as it suited him.
On the other hand, there were a few sections that I found particularly worthwhile, particularly his explanation of pride. But overall, the book did not really inspire me in any way.