I feel this is a book that is short and easy to comprehend, and something a lot of people should read as there's a lot in there that makes you think for the better. I wasn't a huge fan of the thrown in Bible quotes - it made me feel less connected with Goddard's message. I can see where he was coming from with all the Christianity references, especially seeing as he interprets Christainity completely different than others in that religion. However I think it was a bit too heavy handed with this aspect.
The main focus of the book is how your consciousness shapes your reality, which is a belief I subscribe to. There was a lot I took out of this book and shared with others, and there was a lot I found helpful for myself. The concept of truly believing you are/have what you desire will then end with you being/having that said desire is also something I can get behind, but not as fully as Goddard does. I'd love to hear how he argues this rhetoric for people who do try this full-heartedly (they believe 100% just like Goddard says to do) but then they don't get what they desire. What if someone from a war-torn country follows all the steps to create their reality of being, say they desire to have war stop, but it's too grandiose for that ever to happen? I guess he'd argue that nothing is out of the realm of possibility, it's only the confines of our consciousness that hinders us, but idk. I think there are definitely a few examples out there of people not able to truly get what they desire, even if they are carrying out the methods Goddard prescribes.
Another realm to explore is this: what if there is someone who applies these methods, and their desire is in direct contradiction with what you want? Maybe you follow Goddard's teachings to become the best fashion designer in NYC, but there's someone else also following Goddard's teachings to achieve the same thing. Who prevails in this situation?
I think overall there's a lot of good material in this book, and a lot to learn from. There's just certain aspects that seem to fall flat when you examine them closely. That and the heavy-handed Christianity aspect make this book less solid in its philosophy for me.