[1] Doris Decker of Forschung Frankfurt stressed that the book does not only criticise problems, but also tries to offer solutions, "supported by an impressive line of arguments".

[2] Süddeutsche Zeitung's Alexander Kissler called the book "a true Sloterdijk, full of luster and excitement, wit and eagerness for conflict".

"In sum", Riessen wrote, "both for Sloterdijk and Cliteur, monotheist religions are not judged in their own right, but merely evaluated according to their ability to restrain the existential rage of their more extremist followers.

"[4] In Critical Quarterly, Steven Connor described the book as an elaboration of Sloterdijk's Rage and Time, published in German the year before God's Zeal.

[5] Connor wrote that Sloterdijk's work is important because it allows a "radical critique" to exist outside of the "monopoly" of "philosophical supremacism".