What do you think?
Rate this book
Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview
Winner of a 2004 ECPA Gold Medallion Award! Winner of an Award of Excellence in the 2003 Chicago Book Clinic! These are fundamental questions that any thinking person wants answers to. These are questions that philosophy addresses. And the answers we give to these kinds of questions serve as the the foundation stones for constructing any kind of worldview. In Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview J.P. Moreland and William Lane Craig offer a comprehensive introduction to philosophy from a Christian perspective. In their broad sweep they seek to introduce readers to the principal subdisciplines of philosophy, including epistemology, metaphysics, philosophy of science, ethics and philosophy of religion. They do so with characteristic clarity and incisiveness. Arguments are clearly outlined, and rival theories are presented with fairness and accuracy. Philosophy, they contend, aids Christians in the tasks of apologetics, polemics and systematic theology. It reflects our having been made in the image of God, helps us to extend biblical teaching into areas not expressly addressed in Scripture, facilitates the spiritual discipline of study, enhances the boldness and self-image of the Christian community, and is requisite to the essential task of integrating faith and learning. Here is a lively and thorough introduction to philosophy for all who want to know reality.
672 pages, Hardcover
First published April 28, 2003
345 people are currently reading
2558 people want to read
About the author
J.P. Moreland
91 books256 followersJ.P. Moreland is the Distinguished Professor of Philosophy at Talbot School of Theology, Biola University in La Mirada, California. He has four earned degrees: a B.S. in chemistry from the University of Missouri, a Th.M. in theology from Dallas Theological Seminary, an M. A. in philosophy from the University of California-Riverside, and a Ph.D. in philosophy from the University of Southern California.
He has co-planted three churches, spoken and debated on over 175 college campuses around the country, and served with Campus Crusade for Christ for 10 years. For eight years, he served as a bioethicist for PersonaCare Nursing Homes, Inc. headquartered in Baltimore, Maryland.
His ideas have been covered by both popular religious and non-religious outlets, including the New Scientist and PBS’s “Closer to Truth,” Christianity Today and WORLD magazine. He has authored or co-authored 30 books, and published over 70 articles in journals, which include Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, American Philosophical Quarterly, Australasian Journal of Philosophy, Metaphilosophy, Philosophia Christi, and Faith and Philosophy.
He has co-planted three churches, spoken and debated on over 175 college campuses around the country, and served with Campus Crusade for Christ for 10 years. For eight years, he served as a bioethicist for PersonaCare Nursing Homes, Inc. headquartered in Baltimore, Maryland.
His ideas have been covered by both popular religious and non-religious outlets, including the New Scientist and PBS’s “Closer to Truth,” Christianity Today and WORLD magazine. He has authored or co-authored 30 books, and published over 70 articles in journals, which include Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, American Philosophical Quarterly, Australasian Journal of Philosophy, Metaphilosophy, Philosophia Christi, and Faith and Philosophy.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 70 reviews
January 12, 2008
This is a great introduction to philosophy in general, the philosophy of religion and Christianity in particular. If the reader masters each section, s/he will have the equivalent (almost) of an undergraduate education in philosophy, and the philosophy of religion. Broad topics discussed are: Introduction to philosophy, Introduction to Logic (very brief and scattered), Epistemology, Metaphysics, Philosophy of Science, Ethics, Philosophy of Religion and Philosophical Theology. This is achieved in 626 pages.
Even though I disagree with the authors (Moreland and Craig) in many areas (for example, freedom of the will, internalism and evidentialism with respect to justification - though they seem friendly towards externalism, Thomistic dualism (though I could be persuaded), as well as a few other areas), I can't say enough about the value this book holds for both the young Christian thinker, as well as the Christian in the pew. The Christian in the pew will be light years ahead of his co-workers if s/he reads this book. It will make you able to deal effectively with not only every day situations where critical thinking skills are important, but also objections to the faith.
The Reformed Christian will want to supplement (or skip) some of the usual suspects (libertarianism about the will, for example) and look elsewhere. Helm, Frame, Sudduth, Welty, Anderson are helpful Reformed Christians. Guys like John Fischer are helpful for the free will debate, even though Fischer isn't a Christian. If you're presuppositionally inclined, you'll want to supplement this book with writings by Bahnsen, Frame, Van Til, Oliphint, etc. My advice would be to read the entire book, though. This will help you to become conversant with libertarianism, among other things. And, reading the traditional arguments for God will at least allow you to develop defeater-defeaters, or cummulative case arguments, for God. This is beneficial even if you're a hard-core presuppositionalist.
Even though I disagree with the authors (Moreland and Craig) in many areas (for example, freedom of the will, internalism and evidentialism with respect to justification - though they seem friendly towards externalism, Thomistic dualism (though I could be persuaded), as well as a few other areas), I can't say enough about the value this book holds for both the young Christian thinker, as well as the Christian in the pew. The Christian in the pew will be light years ahead of his co-workers if s/he reads this book. It will make you able to deal effectively with not only every day situations where critical thinking skills are important, but also objections to the faith.
The Reformed Christian will want to supplement (or skip) some of the usual suspects (libertarianism about the will, for example) and look elsewhere. Helm, Frame, Sudduth, Welty, Anderson are helpful Reformed Christians. Guys like John Fischer are helpful for the free will debate, even though Fischer isn't a Christian. If you're presuppositionally inclined, you'll want to supplement this book with writings by Bahnsen, Frame, Van Til, Oliphint, etc. My advice would be to read the entire book, though. This will help you to become conversant with libertarianism, among other things. And, reading the traditional arguments for God will at least allow you to develop defeater-defeaters, or cummulative case arguments, for God. This is beneficial even if you're a hard-core presuppositionalist.
February 4, 2022
Different denominations of Christianity have varying worldviews. There are varieties of particulars within the Christian worldview, and disputes of the meaning of concepts in a Christian worldview. Certain thematic elements are common within the Christian worldview.
So, in short, a Christian worldview is an ontology or a descriptive model of the world. It should comprise these six elements:
-explanation of the world.
-eschatology.
-Values, answers to ethical questions.
-praxeology, methodology, or theory of action.
-epistemology, or theory of knowledge.
-etiology. A constructed worldview should contain an account of its own origins and construction.
The problem with Moreland´s and Craig´s account of what constitutes the Christian worldview is that it doesn´t include any of these six elements. Rather than explaining in a deeper sense the work of both philosophers, this book starts by explaining broad and general philosophical principles. Even though it focuses on theories of Truth and Knowledge, doesn´t really hit the mark in explaining how these theories apply to Christianity. It is also disappointing to see Craig at its weakest point, since he is known for making logical and deductive arguments, here, I saw three arguments for the existence of the soul, and that´s it. Moreland´s remarks are also disappointing, since he is supposed to be a specialist in Philosophy of Mind and Consciousness, yet he struggles to make sense of these two concepts. At least I didn´t see Craig quoting secular sources, as he usually does in debates. Overall, this massive brick of a book is not worth your money, and it doesn´t add anything new aside from three deductive arguments for the Soul.
Finally, I think you should keep in mind that these two authors tend to not quote the Bible at all in their works, and this is no exception.
So, in short, a Christian worldview is an ontology or a descriptive model of the world. It should comprise these six elements:
-explanation of the world.
-eschatology.
-Values, answers to ethical questions.
-praxeology, methodology, or theory of action.
-epistemology, or theory of knowledge.
-etiology. A constructed worldview should contain an account of its own origins and construction.
The problem with Moreland´s and Craig´s account of what constitutes the Christian worldview is that it doesn´t include any of these six elements. Rather than explaining in a deeper sense the work of both philosophers, this book starts by explaining broad and general philosophical principles. Even though it focuses on theories of Truth and Knowledge, doesn´t really hit the mark in explaining how these theories apply to Christianity. It is also disappointing to see Craig at its weakest point, since he is known for making logical and deductive arguments, here, I saw three arguments for the existence of the soul, and that´s it. Moreland´s remarks are also disappointing, since he is supposed to be a specialist in Philosophy of Mind and Consciousness, yet he struggles to make sense of these two concepts. At least I didn´t see Craig quoting secular sources, as he usually does in debates. Overall, this massive brick of a book is not worth your money, and it doesn´t add anything new aside from three deductive arguments for the Soul.
Finally, I think you should keep in mind that these two authors tend to not quote the Bible at all in their works, and this is no exception.
March 17, 2015
Time and a second reading, along with various shifts in worldview, can fundamentally alter one's perception of an author. My first experience with Moreland and Craig, Moreland in particular, was *Love your God with all Your Mind.* Despite the title's fluffy, evangelicalish devotional appeal, LYGWALM actually was very rigorous and probably did more for getting my intellectual life started than anything else.
I decided to read everything by Moreland (and Craig). Since *Philosophical Foundations of a Christian Worldview* had just come out in 2003, I felt it would be a good text to read.
When I got it though, I experienced several let-downs. It was waay over my head. And the parts I did understand I had to reject: Molinism and the classical arguments for the existence of God. I began studying ethics and Moreland/Craig's section on ethics, emphasizing the roles of normative, situational, and personal ethics, was outstanding.
The Book's Value:
They show the philosophical difficulties with all of Western philosophy (and theology).
The Book's Highpoints:
1. Excellent, if somewhat intellectually painful, chapter on how to do logic. Be warned, this is very, very hard to read.
2. Gives a good discussion on whether knowledge is really "justified, true belief."
3. Introduces the reader to the categories of time, substance, and space.
4. Very good internal critique of Scient(ISM)'s presuppositions. Completely defangs modern science.
5. Excellent discussion on the nature of ethical reasoning.
6. Good critique of the Western doctrine of Absolute Divine Simplicity.
Cons of the Book:
1. This book is simply too hard and inaccessible for most people.
2. I admit--I now see that their proofs for the existence of God are logically compatible. I reject the presuppositional critique of the Five ways. However, who has actually been convinced by this reasoning?
3. The chapter on Molinism is very interesting However, I am not sure Molinism isn't itself another variant of Augustinian determinism.
Conclusion:
As a reference resource, this book is outstanding. However, to fully understand what they are saying, one needs to read upper-level philosophy and theology for about a year (I had to study for three or four years) to really understand what they are saying.
I decided to read everything by Moreland (and Craig). Since *Philosophical Foundations of a Christian Worldview* had just come out in 2003, I felt it would be a good text to read.
When I got it though, I experienced several let-downs. It was waay over my head. And the parts I did understand I had to reject: Molinism and the classical arguments for the existence of God. I began studying ethics and Moreland/Craig's section on ethics, emphasizing the roles of normative, situational, and personal ethics, was outstanding.
The Book's Value:
They show the philosophical difficulties with all of Western philosophy (and theology).
The Book's Highpoints:
1. Excellent, if somewhat intellectually painful, chapter on how to do logic. Be warned, this is very, very hard to read.
2. Gives a good discussion on whether knowledge is really "justified, true belief."
3. Introduces the reader to the categories of time, substance, and space.
4. Very good internal critique of Scient(ISM)'s presuppositions. Completely defangs modern science.
5. Excellent discussion on the nature of ethical reasoning.
6. Good critique of the Western doctrine of Absolute Divine Simplicity.
Cons of the Book:
1. This book is simply too hard and inaccessible for most people.
2. I admit--I now see that their proofs for the existence of God are logically compatible. I reject the presuppositional critique of the Five ways. However, who has actually been convinced by this reasoning?
3. The chapter on Molinism is very interesting However, I am not sure Molinism isn't itself another variant of Augustinian determinism.
Conclusion:
As a reference resource, this book is outstanding. However, to fully understand what they are saying, one needs to read upper-level philosophy and theology for about a year (I had to study for three or four years) to really understand what they are saying.
December 25, 2023
Homosexuality is unnatural and the Bible warns us as such, at least this book will state such, and the philosophical truths presented in this book support that conclusion.
I enjoy watching youtube videos on deconversion stories out of Christianity. One of my favorite youtube channels is ‘harmonic atheist.’ A consistent theme in deconversion stories is that they realized that homosexuals were just born that way, and it isn’t a choice. They can’t reconcile their inherent compassion with being mean to others.
This book was published in 2004 and its grasping at windmills shows, the thinking world no longer blames homosexuals, the thinking world just accepts them (same for transgender people). The Christian philosophy presented in this book is not capable of growing. Their absolute morality won’t let them since their bible condemns them. This book’s age shows.
When your givens are absurdities, your arguments collapse. This book is full of absurdities and is a case study in how not to approach reason, logic, analysis, empirical truths, and beliefs that form our understanding about the universe.
Scientific values such as simplicity, prediction, accuracy, web of knowledge, and the narrative we tell do not need fictional myths to support them. The atheist really doesn’t dwell thinking about beliefs without evidence. They tend to think that absurdities are still absurd when the only standard is feelings based on faith. An atheist can say ‘I don’t know’, and not make-up a myth to explain. The real nihilist is the person who outsources their truth based on the goat-herders guide to the galaxy.
Kant’s proof for a God is that the moral exists. This book thinks that morality is absolute and that therefore the only way we can condemn Nazis is an appeal to a God. Absolute morality seems silly to me. Believe what you want, I’ll still condemn Nazis. When you read the complete works of Kant, you’ll realize that he starts his career with spirits and God, but he ends it such that he no longer believes in God (go ahead, read him, see for yourself).
This book is so weak in its arguments, that I would recommend it to everyone to see how not to practice philosophy. This book is that bad. Read Nietzsche, Kant, Heidegger, Plato, Aristotle, Aquinas, and so on instead of trivial crap like this book.
I enjoy watching youtube videos on deconversion stories out of Christianity. One of my favorite youtube channels is ‘harmonic atheist.’ A consistent theme in deconversion stories is that they realized that homosexuals were just born that way, and it isn’t a choice. They can’t reconcile their inherent compassion with being mean to others.
This book was published in 2004 and its grasping at windmills shows, the thinking world no longer blames homosexuals, the thinking world just accepts them (same for transgender people). The Christian philosophy presented in this book is not capable of growing. Their absolute morality won’t let them since their bible condemns them. This book’s age shows.
When your givens are absurdities, your arguments collapse. This book is full of absurdities and is a case study in how not to approach reason, logic, analysis, empirical truths, and beliefs that form our understanding about the universe.
Scientific values such as simplicity, prediction, accuracy, web of knowledge, and the narrative we tell do not need fictional myths to support them. The atheist really doesn’t dwell thinking about beliefs without evidence. They tend to think that absurdities are still absurd when the only standard is feelings based on faith. An atheist can say ‘I don’t know’, and not make-up a myth to explain. The real nihilist is the person who outsources their truth based on the goat-herders guide to the galaxy.
Kant’s proof for a God is that the moral exists. This book thinks that morality is absolute and that therefore the only way we can condemn Nazis is an appeal to a God. Absolute morality seems silly to me. Believe what you want, I’ll still condemn Nazis. When you read the complete works of Kant, you’ll realize that he starts his career with spirits and God, but he ends it such that he no longer believes in God (go ahead, read him, see for yourself).
This book is so weak in its arguments, that I would recommend it to everyone to see how not to practice philosophy. This book is that bad. Read Nietzsche, Kant, Heidegger, Plato, Aristotle, Aquinas, and so on instead of trivial crap like this book.
February 7, 2025
This is a bit like reading Paradise Lost -- but with none of the pleasure -- in that you're watching the contortions of a Christian as he struggles to deceive himself and his naive readers, and you sense that somewhere beneath all this casuistry the guy knows that what he's saying just cannot be true.
A special aspect of the disingenuous hokum in this book and others in its little posse -- the recent Christian "worldview" books, for instance To Every One An Answer by Norman Geisler, or Naming the Elephant by James Sire -- is this: they figured out that you piss people off and look dumb if you stick with the claim that your religion is uniquely true, but they remain committed to the premise that, well, their religion is uniquely true. So they creep up to the edge of the terrifying abyss of relativism (which is actually the edge of intellectual maturity) and then stop short because they're just pretending to respect other worldviews.
A special aspect of the disingenuous hokum in this book and others in its little posse -- the recent Christian "worldview" books, for instance To Every One An Answer by Norman Geisler, or Naming the Elephant by James Sire -- is this: they figured out that you piss people off and look dumb if you stick with the claim that your religion is uniquely true, but they remain committed to the premise that, well, their religion is uniquely true. So they creep up to the edge of the terrifying abyss of relativism (which is actually the edge of intellectual maturity) and then stop short because they're just pretending to respect other worldviews.
February 13, 2021
Moreland and Craig provide a rich treatise of philosophy and theology in this work. They cover a vast variety of philosophical thoughts and then slowly drift into theological discussion with them. They successfully show how Christian theology is further advanced through correct philosophical thought. The beauty of this book is the undergirding of Scripture, which guides their reasoning for accepting and rejecting certain views. It would be very difficult to read this book and argue that people who believe in the Christian God are irrational. Some of the best portions in this book are the ways of knowing, justifications for belief in God, arguments God (the Trinitarian one of the Bible, and the answer to the problem of evil put forth. Much of this book pulls from Alvin Plantinga, therefore I would argue this could be a good guide to his thoughts.
September 15, 2025
This was a challenging read. Lots of complex philosophy even for a semi introductory text. In my opinion the philosophy often seems to have higher standing than theology throughout the book. Not bad per se, but by the end l was just trying to get through it and for a large book I didn't get much out of it. 6/10
May 15, 2020
"Philosophical Foundations For A Christian Worldview" is no doubt William Lane Craig and J.P Moreland's magnum opus. This book gives a thorough treatment on a variety of different subjects that one can think of and defends philosophically the crucial tenets of Christian theology; Substance Dualism, The Existence of God, the logical coherence of the doctrine of The Trinity, the logical coherence of the incarnation of God in Christ, it refutes the logical and evidential versions of the problem of evil, and even defends the penal substitutionary view of the atonement (which as the authors said in the preface, was not in the first edition of the book but is new to the second edition). The authors do not address all of these in the order that I mentioned, but they do address them.
More than merely another Christian Apologetics book (which this undoubtedly is), I consider it to be a wonderful textbook on philosophy in general. It is by no means an easy read. They get deep into the weeds. I would not recommend this book to someone without already having a rudimentary level knowledge in philosophy. For me personally, some parts of the book were more heavy than others, and I think this can be contributed to how much I had mastered the topics under discussion. In fact, I think the book was more like walking up and down a hill. The first half was walking up and the second half was walking down.
The authors do a wonderful job of not assuming you understand the philosophical jargon, so they explain every single term before using them. In the Kindle version, these terms are always in boldface, alerting the reader that he needs to learn this word and keep it in mind for the rest of the subsection or chapter. This decreases the difficulty of learning the material by leaps and bounds, but it's still a heady tome just due to the depth of the subject matters. You can't really expect a philosophical treatment of the nature of time or the Trinity to be bedtime leasure reading, can you?
I do wish that there had been a section on the historicity of the resurrection of Jesus. I know that's not really a philosophical subject like Natural Theology, metaphysics, the mind-body problem, etc. but it would have been a nice finishing touch on what looks to be a VERY robust defense of the truth of the Christian Worldview.
I especially loved that an audiobook edition of this was available. It allowed me to "Whispersync" my Kindle version with the audiobook version and listen while I read (something that, in my experience, helps me to learn better and retain information better than reading alone or listening alone accomplishes). I would love to see more academic level books get audio editions like N.T Wright's "The Resurrection Of The Son Of God", Michael Licona's "The Resurrection Of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach", and "Understanding Scientific Theories Of Origins" by Stephen Moshier, John Walton, Larry Funk, Robert Bishop, and Raymond Lewis. Especially since the Kindle version of that last one doesn't even have Text To Speech enabled! Perhaps if the audiobook edition of "Philosophical Foundations For A Christian Worldview" does well, we can see more academic works get audiobook adaptations.
I give this book 5 stars without a second thought, and I think it ought to be required reading in every course in philosophy and Christian Apologetics.
More than merely another Christian Apologetics book (which this undoubtedly is), I consider it to be a wonderful textbook on philosophy in general. It is by no means an easy read. They get deep into the weeds. I would not recommend this book to someone without already having a rudimentary level knowledge in philosophy. For me personally, some parts of the book were more heavy than others, and I think this can be contributed to how much I had mastered the topics under discussion. In fact, I think the book was more like walking up and down a hill. The first half was walking up and the second half was walking down.
The authors do a wonderful job of not assuming you understand the philosophical jargon, so they explain every single term before using them. In the Kindle version, these terms are always in boldface, alerting the reader that he needs to learn this word and keep it in mind for the rest of the subsection or chapter. This decreases the difficulty of learning the material by leaps and bounds, but it's still a heady tome just due to the depth of the subject matters. You can't really expect a philosophical treatment of the nature of time or the Trinity to be bedtime leasure reading, can you?
I do wish that there had been a section on the historicity of the resurrection of Jesus. I know that's not really a philosophical subject like Natural Theology, metaphysics, the mind-body problem, etc. but it would have been a nice finishing touch on what looks to be a VERY robust defense of the truth of the Christian Worldview.
I especially loved that an audiobook edition of this was available. It allowed me to "Whispersync" my Kindle version with the audiobook version and listen while I read (something that, in my experience, helps me to learn better and retain information better than reading alone or listening alone accomplishes). I would love to see more academic level books get audio editions like N.T Wright's "The Resurrection Of The Son Of God", Michael Licona's "The Resurrection Of Jesus: A New Historiographical Approach", and "Understanding Scientific Theories Of Origins" by Stephen Moshier, John Walton, Larry Funk, Robert Bishop, and Raymond Lewis. Especially since the Kindle version of that last one doesn't even have Text To Speech enabled! Perhaps if the audiobook edition of "Philosophical Foundations For A Christian Worldview" does well, we can see more academic works get audiobook adaptations.
I give this book 5 stars without a second thought, and I think it ought to be required reading in every course in philosophy and Christian Apologetics.
February 10, 2021
An excellent introduction to philosophy written by two Christian intellectual heavyweights. They don't just review the positions they take, but they review other positions on a multitude of different topics and give them a fair treatment. It is probably not for everyone; those without an interest in philosophy probably won't find it very stimulating. But if you'd like to go deeper in your Christian faith, or if you're just looking for a general introduction to philosophy, this is a great book for you.
November 27, 2017
Together with the disciplines of biblical and theological studies, philosophical studies are widely recognized as an indispensable model for constructing a Christian worldview. There have been several influential works that have historically shaped the philosophical conversation, but few contemporary works have been more influential than Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview by J. P. Moreland and William Lane Craig. Now a newly revised and updated second edition of this book continues its legacy of widespread use and acclaimed reviews.
Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview is divided into six major sections: (1) Introduction, (2) Epistemology, (3) Metaphysics, (4) Philosophy of Science, (5) Ethics, and (6) Philosophy of Religion and Philosophically of Theology. Each section contains a number of important and useful chapters for constructing a Christian worldview. Throughout the book, the reader will discover a number of charts and diagrams to help illustrate the philosophical concepts being discussed. Keywords are also bolded to help readers recognize their importance in context, and each chapter ends with a summary and a checklist of terms and concepts.
Moreland and Craig close the volume with a “Suggestions for Further Reading” bibliography with specific sections for each chapter. While these have been updated and thoroughly revised, it would have been useful to see them at the end of the chapters rather than a separate chapter at the end of the volume. Additionally, what is interestingly missing from this volume, in my opinion, is the inclusion of chapter summary questions and a glossary of the terms and concepts used throughout the book. Still, the revisions and updates to this volume, while not overcoming these specific shortcomings, provide readers with substantial revision and added material and chapters—including a new chapter on the doctrine of the atonement and updated evidence related to the Kalam Cosmological argument and the Teleological argument for cosmic fine-tuning.
I’ve said this before and I will say it again, I’m admittedly not one with a very deep interest in philosophy. I recognize its importance and enjoy its various discussions, but I tend to spend more time in the arena of biblical studies and other related disciplines than philosophy. That said, I found this second edition of Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview to be equally as accessible and clear in presentation throughout as the former edition, even complex areas of epistemology and metaphysics that are detailed in nature are accessible to interested thinkers. Still, it should also be noted that this is certainly a college-level (possibly even a graduate-level) philosophy textbook and it does anticipate the reader is at least vaguely familiar with its material.
Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview (second edition) by J. P. Moreland and William Lane Craig is still a first-rate, one-stop reference work worth occupying the shelf space of any serious student of philosophy, theology, or apologetics. Moreland and Craig do a superb job guiding the reader through the subject matter. It’s not a resource that everyone will enjoy. But, for those who will, Moreland and Craig have provided a treasure-trove of philosophical riches that will effectively establish a foundation for the Christian worldview. It comes highly recommended even for owners of the first edition!
Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview is divided into six major sections: (1) Introduction, (2) Epistemology, (3) Metaphysics, (4) Philosophy of Science, (5) Ethics, and (6) Philosophy of Religion and Philosophically of Theology. Each section contains a number of important and useful chapters for constructing a Christian worldview. Throughout the book, the reader will discover a number of charts and diagrams to help illustrate the philosophical concepts being discussed. Keywords are also bolded to help readers recognize their importance in context, and each chapter ends with a summary and a checklist of terms and concepts.
Moreland and Craig close the volume with a “Suggestions for Further Reading” bibliography with specific sections for each chapter. While these have been updated and thoroughly revised, it would have been useful to see them at the end of the chapters rather than a separate chapter at the end of the volume. Additionally, what is interestingly missing from this volume, in my opinion, is the inclusion of chapter summary questions and a glossary of the terms and concepts used throughout the book. Still, the revisions and updates to this volume, while not overcoming these specific shortcomings, provide readers with substantial revision and added material and chapters—including a new chapter on the doctrine of the atonement and updated evidence related to the Kalam Cosmological argument and the Teleological argument for cosmic fine-tuning.
I’ve said this before and I will say it again, I’m admittedly not one with a very deep interest in philosophy. I recognize its importance and enjoy its various discussions, but I tend to spend more time in the arena of biblical studies and other related disciplines than philosophy. That said, I found this second edition of Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview to be equally as accessible and clear in presentation throughout as the former edition, even complex areas of epistemology and metaphysics that are detailed in nature are accessible to interested thinkers. Still, it should also be noted that this is certainly a college-level (possibly even a graduate-level) philosophy textbook and it does anticipate the reader is at least vaguely familiar with its material.
Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview (second edition) by J. P. Moreland and William Lane Craig is still a first-rate, one-stop reference work worth occupying the shelf space of any serious student of philosophy, theology, or apologetics. Moreland and Craig do a superb job guiding the reader through the subject matter. It’s not a resource that everyone will enjoy. But, for those who will, Moreland and Craig have provided a treasure-trove of philosophical riches that will effectively establish a foundation for the Christian worldview. It comes highly recommended even for owners of the first edition!
July 11, 2011
This was a textbook, and therefore not designed for light reading. As described, it is an introductory textbook to Philosophy, from a Christian perspective. The introductory chapters were excellent, and the section on logic was even enjoyable. Section 2, on Epistemology was also an excellent introduction. I found large portions of Section 3, on Metaphysics, to be dull or incomprehensible. But, it is very possible that this was entirely my fault. Section 4, Philosophy of Science was mostly excellent. As a Physicist, this was the only section that intersected with my expertise. I am impressed with the amount of reading and research the authors clearly did in order to put this section together. Unfortunately, this section did have some clear difficulties (I would be inclined to say errors), that any Physicist would balk at. As an expert in optics, I found the suggestion that “redness” was a property that was fundamental, and existent outside of the universe (like and even number, for example) to be rather shocking. On the other hand, the arguments relating to how we can trust our scientific investigations in light of either theism or atheistic naturalism were excellent. The section (5) on Ethics was also very good. The authors brutally applied logic towards the problems encountered when those who believe in relativism encounter evil. I hope to put those arguments into good use at some point. The final section (7) on Philosophy of religion was actually a letdown. Some subsections were excellent; others were dreary, while others were simply disappointing. For example the last section on Christian Particularism has so many interesting aspects associated with it. These were introduced and then almost completely glossed over. It seems as if the authors were suddenly afraid of antagonising a particular denomination (or special interest group) and losing book sales as a result. Thus their comments remained mostly ambiguous. The editing of the text was below what would be expected with spelling and grammatical errors, and even possibly some words missing. But, all told, the book was well worth reading, and I will almost certainly return to various sections again.
July 3, 2025
In this book J.P. Moreland and William Lane Craig deals with a comprehensive introduction to philosophy from a Christian perspective, seeking to introduce readers to the principal subdisciplines of philosophy, including epistemology, metaphysics, philosophy of science, ethics and philosophy of religion. They act in characteristic clarity and incisiveness. The book reflects about the reality of man been made in the image of God, helping us to extend biblical teaching into areas not expressly addressed in Scripture, facilitating the spiritual discipline of study, enhancing the boldness and self-image of the Christian community, and is requisite to the essential task of integrating faith and learning.
The content of the book is solid and helpful to all that desires to comprehend the basic foundations of philosophy. It is a dense book with a great deal of information requires from us the task of going back and forward as much time as it is necessary to understand its many ideas.
Due to my personal interest in the subject of postmodernism I got a good insight from the chapter six, THEORIES OF TRUTH AND POSTMODERNISM. The view presented of postmodernism as a loose coalition of diverse thinkers from several different academic disciplines made me realize about the great task ahead of me to improve my research in this subject. The main gain for me and my ministry in studying this material was tantamount to understand that the postmodernism is a rejection of truth, objective rationality and authorial meaning in texts. The question that raises in my mind is how can I impart truth to a generation that rejects it totally? That will be just my search for an answer.
The content of the book is solid and helpful to all that desires to comprehend the basic foundations of philosophy. It is a dense book with a great deal of information requires from us the task of going back and forward as much time as it is necessary to understand its many ideas.
Due to my personal interest in the subject of postmodernism I got a good insight from the chapter six, THEORIES OF TRUTH AND POSTMODERNISM. The view presented of postmodernism as a loose coalition of diverse thinkers from several different academic disciplines made me realize about the great task ahead of me to improve my research in this subject. The main gain for me and my ministry in studying this material was tantamount to understand that the postmodernism is a rejection of truth, objective rationality and authorial meaning in texts. The question that raises in my mind is how can I impart truth to a generation that rejects it totally? That will be just my search for an answer.
March 6, 2017
A great and fairly comprehensive overview of all the major issues in philosophy and philosophy of religion from a Christian perspective. I don't agree with every stance the authors take and they tackle many issues from a specific Christian tradition (Arminianism), but this is still an invaluable resource.
December 30, 2019
I don’t exaggerate when I say this is one of the most important and helpful books I’ve ever read. I read it as a young man, and it has proven its promise. Philosophical Foundations gave me a foundation that kept me from error and guided me into truth. I’m so glad I found it early in life.
March 13, 2016
When one thinks about philosophy and religion in America, one tends to think of an intellectual war not too dissimilar to that between science and religion, if there even is such a thing. However, one development in academia in recent years has been the philosophical resurrection of theism as a plausible intellectual alternative. Authors William Lane Craig and J.P. Moreland have been at the forefront of this movement and this textbook represents their synthesis of Western philosophical thinking and Christian theism. And when I say textbook, I mean it. This is not a very accessible book to the casual reader. In fact, the casual reader would be better off tackling Mr. Craig's On Guard: Defending Your Faith with Reason and Precision or Reasonable Faith: Christian Truth and Apologetics. This book is targeted for philosophy students at a university level, and Christian philosophy students in particular. The uninitiated will have a difficult time slogging through this book like I did with chapter 2's rules of logic and argumentation being a particularly early and high hurdle to leap over. Better to take the authors at their word and use this book more as a reference rather than as a book to be read cover to cover. That is not to say that none of this is interesting or insightful. Parts IV and VI, which deal with the philosophy of science and the philosophy of religion and philosophical theology, are particularly interesting. In some ways this is not a great textbook either. Although it has chapter summaries and lists of key words used in each chapter, there are no chapter questions to answer to aid in comprehension, nor are the key words defined at the end of the chapter, although they are bolded throughout the text, so finding their definitions shouldn't be too hard. The final word though is to try your hand at an easier book if you are not already familiar with philosophical concepts and if you are familiar to use this book as a reference book rather than a book to read casually.
August 12, 2019
I finally finished this introduction to a Christian philosophy of religion. The book is basically a crash-course in philosophy for Christians. After an introduction, there is a chapter on logic and argumentation, a section on epistemology (five chapters), a section on metaphysics (seven chapters), a section on the philosophy of science (four chapters), a section on ethics (four chapters), and a section on philosophy of religion/philosophical theology (nine chapters).
A lot of ground is covered in this 600-plus-page book. At times, that means that certain concepts are not well-defined or thoroughly explored. I give credit to the authors for the breadth of topics discussed. The section on the philosophy of science is not something that is typical of such introductions, so I credit the authors for that section. Yet why not present a section on political philosophy as well? Both science and politics are critical areas of concern for everyone, Christians included.
The writing is reasonably clear though a bit dry, and if one isn't used to philosophy, it might make for a bit of rough sledding. I don't agree with all of Moreland and Craig's theological positions, such as Molinism and monothelitism (the belief that Jesus had one will--if I recall correctly, they suggest that beyond being one person with two natures, he had one mind and one will, or something along those lines). I think their analogy of Cerberus to help readers understand the Trinity is misguided.
One more detail: I appreciate the casebound form of the book, but the oversized pages with wide margins, as well as pages that have something like 550 words per page, did not make for an easier reading experience. I think I am particularly sensitive to the size of pages and the layout of the text.
Those quibbles aside, I recommend this book. I read the first edition of the book. My understanding is that the recent second edition has at least a couple of chapters that are new. Perhaps one day I'll read those chapters and peruse an updated bibliography.
A lot of ground is covered in this 600-plus-page book. At times, that means that certain concepts are not well-defined or thoroughly explored. I give credit to the authors for the breadth of topics discussed. The section on the philosophy of science is not something that is typical of such introductions, so I credit the authors for that section. Yet why not present a section on political philosophy as well? Both science and politics are critical areas of concern for everyone, Christians included.
The writing is reasonably clear though a bit dry, and if one isn't used to philosophy, it might make for a bit of rough sledding. I don't agree with all of Moreland and Craig's theological positions, such as Molinism and monothelitism (the belief that Jesus had one will--if I recall correctly, they suggest that beyond being one person with two natures, he had one mind and one will, or something along those lines). I think their analogy of Cerberus to help readers understand the Trinity is misguided.
One more detail: I appreciate the casebound form of the book, but the oversized pages with wide margins, as well as pages that have something like 550 words per page, did not make for an easier reading experience. I think I am particularly sensitive to the size of pages and the layout of the text.
Those quibbles aside, I recommend this book. I read the first edition of the book. My understanding is that the recent second edition has at least a couple of chapters that are new. Perhaps one day I'll read those chapters and peruse an updated bibliography.
August 27, 2019
My book club read this book together over the course of a year and I would recommend reading this book in such a manner. We read it roughly chapter by chapter and then met to dicuss what we had drawn from it. This book is not friendly to those who are new to philosophy and really takes time to properly work through. The rewards of doing so are immense though as Moreland and Craig's philosophical treatment of the Christian worldview is impressive. This is a book I still think about to this day, and return to often. This book will take time to digest but is well worth the effort.
Read
July 13, 2024Such a hard book to review. Good stuff is great, but then some is heretical! It's crazy. I would not generally recommend this for new Christians as a whole, but individual chapters are suitable for some.
December 31, 2009
Excellent for Christians who desire to be intellectually engaged with their faith.
March 28, 2021
A comprehensive introduction to systematic philosophy, including logic, epistemology, metaphysics, ethics, philosophy of science and religion, etc. Contrary to the title, most parts of this tome has nothing to do with Christianity; rather, it focuses on displaying a purely philosophical world as seen from the eyes of Christians. Never meant to be neutral in the first place, this work yet retains the necessary academic rigour and fairness by presenting the best arguments of the rival thesis on each topic; after providing a response, a further criticism of the response is usually given, and the soundness of the criticism is then examined.
The last 4 chapters, however, are largely unnecessary, for they are theology rather than philosophy. Especially in the chapter discussing the Trinity, the editors seem to endorse Trinity monotheism, which holds that while the persons of the Trinity are divine, it is the Trinity as a whole that is properly God. This is directly contrary to the 6th century Athanasian Creed and should in no way be excused.
Overall, a good starting point for novices in philosophy, but be careful with the theological views held by the authors.
The last 4 chapters, however, are largely unnecessary, for they are theology rather than philosophy. Especially in the chapter discussing the Trinity, the editors seem to endorse Trinity monotheism, which holds that while the persons of the Trinity are divine, it is the Trinity as a whole that is properly God. This is directly contrary to the 6th century Athanasian Creed and should in no way be excused.
Overall, a good starting point for novices in philosophy, but be careful with the theological views held by the authors.
Read
November 28, 2025Such an excellent textbook! I will definitely be referring back to this resource in the future.
I will own I did not read it entirely (a lot of skimming) but from what I saw it is a great resource. I will refrain from rating it until I have read it in full.
I will own I did not read it entirely (a lot of skimming) but from what I saw it is a great resource. I will refrain from rating it until I have read it in full.
May 27, 2024
A WIDE-RANGING, COMPREHENSIVE TEXTBOOK OF PHILOSOPHY
The authors state in the “Invitation” to this 2003 book, “[This] is obviously a large book, covering a wide range of issues in epistemology, metaphysics, philosophy of science, ethics and philosophy of religion, as well as basic rules of reasoning… those who use the book as a text will find it fertile soul for discussions. We do not anticipate, however, that students will be expected to plow through the whole book in a single semester. Rather, the professor may choose selectively chapters to assign which mesh best with the questions he finds most interesting or important, leaving aside the rest. Of course, we hope that students’ interest will be sufficiently piqued that they will eventually return to the book at some later time to read and wrestle with the unassigned material.” (Pg.)
In the first chapter, they note, “the claim is made that human depravity has made the mind so darkened that … sin’s effect on the mind, render the human intellect incapable of knowing truth. However, this claim is an exaggeration. The Fall brought about the perversion of human faculties, but it did not destroy these faculties. Human reasoning abilities are affected but not eliminated. This can be seen in the fact that the writers of Scripture often appeal to the minds of unbelievers by citing evidence on behalf of their claims, using logical inferences in building their case and speaking in the language and thought forms of those outside the faith.” (Pg. 18)
They explain, “In some ways, this entire book is a critique and alternative to postmodernism… two objections to postmodernism should be raised [here]… The first has to do with the postmodern rejection of objective rationality on the grounds that no one achieves it because everyone is biased in some way or another… we need to draw a distinction between psychological and rational objectivity. Psychological objectivity is the absence of bias, a lack of commitment either way on a topic… most people are not psychologically objective regarding the vast majority of the things they believe. In these cases, it is crucial to observe that a lack of psychological objectivity does not matter… Because a lack of psychological objectivity does not imply a lack of rational objectivity, and it is the latter that matters most, not the former.” (Pg. 149-150)
They point out, “another philosophical relic is the much-vaunted ‘presumption of atheism.’ … this is the claim that in the absence of evidence for God, we should presume that God does not exist… such an alleged presumption seems to conflate atheism with agnosticism. The assertion ‘God does not exist’ is just as much a claim to knowledge as the assertion ‘God exists,’ and therefore the former requires justification just as the latter does. It is the agnostic who makes no knowledge claim at all with respect to God’s existence… If anything, then, one should speak at most of a presumption of agnosticism.” (Pg. 155-156)
They acknowledge, “the truly serious objection to Pascal’s wager is the so-called many gods objection. A Muslim could set up a similar payoff for belief in Allah. A Mormon could do the same thing for his god… Thus the choice is not so simple, for if I believe that the Christian God exists and it turns out that Allah exists instead, then I shall suffer infinite loss in hell for my sin of associating something (Christ) with God... we could try to limit the live options to the two at hand or to a tractable number of alternatives. This may have been Pascal’s own strategy… If the alternatives can be narrowed down in this way, then Pascal’s wager goes through successfully.” (Pg. 160)
They defend the “absolutist” (i.e., “common sense”) view of personal identity: “The absolutist view is supported by fairly commonsense intuitions, and it places great emphasis on the first-person perspective and our own introspective awareness…. One’s views about personal identity and the related mind-body problem will depend, to a significant degree, on one’s attitude about the proper order between science on the one hand and philosophy and common sense on the other… as Christians, the absolutist view would seem to be the most natural way to understand scriptural teaching about the self… the final resurrection, rewards and punishments, and so on.” (Pg. 299-300)
They argue, “strong scientism is self-refuting… [It] is not itself a proposition OF science, but a second-order proposition OF philosophy ABOUT science to the effect that only scientific propositions are true and/or rational to believe… Self-refuting propositions are necessarily false… What this means is that … no amount of scientific progress in the future will have the slightest effect on making strong scientism more acceptable… The conclusions of science cannot be more certain than the presuppositions it rests on and uses to reach these conclusions.” (Pg. 347-348)
They observe, “It is open to the atheist to [argue] that while the universe has an explanation of its existence, that explanation lies not in an external ground but in the necessity of its own nature… This is an extremely bold suggestion on the part of the atheist. We have… a strong intuition of the universe’s contingency… We generally trust our modal intuitions on other matters; if we are to do otherwise with respect to the universe’s contingency, then atheists need to provide some reason for such skepticism other than their desire to avoid theism.” (Pg. 467-468)
They note, “Students sometimes react to such illustrations as Hilbert’s Hotel by saying that we do not really understand the nature of infinity and, hence, these absurdities result. But this attitude is simply mistaken. Infinite set theory is a highly developed and well-understood branch of mathematics, and these absurdities can be seen to result precisely because we DO understand the notion of a collection with an actually infinite number of members.” (Pg. 472)
They state, “Sometimes physicists do speak of a yet-to-be-discovered ‘theory of everything’ (T.O.E.)… in the most promising candidates for a T.O.E. to date, super-string theory or M-theory, the physical universe must be 11-dimensional, but why the universe should possess just that number of dimensions is not addressed by the theory. Hence, one must not be misled by talk of a T.O.E. into thinking that the universe possesses all its fundamental constants and quantities by physical necessity. On the contrary, there is good reason to reject this alternative. For it would require us to say that only one set of constants and quantities is comparable with the laws of nature, which seems false. Even if the laws of nature were themselves necessary, one would still have to supply the initial conditions.” (Pg. 485)
They explain, “For the church fathers fatalism took on a theological coloring: if God foreknows that some event will happen, then it will necessarily happen… Undoubtedly a major source of the fatalist’s confusion is his conflating CERTAINTY with NECESSITY… Certainty is a property of persons and has nothing to do with truth… By contrast, necessity is a property of propositions, indicating that a proposition cannot possibly have a different truth value… By confusing certainty and necessity, the fatalist makes his logically fallacious argument deceptively appealing… We can be certain, given God’s foreknowledge, that the events foreknown will not fail to happen. They could fail to occur, but God knows that they will not. Therefore, we can be sure that they will happen---yet happen contingently.” (Pg. 519)
They say of the Problem of Evil, “[the] assumption, that if God is omnibenevolent, then he prefers a world without evil over a world with evil… is not necessarily true. The fact is that in many cases we allow pain and suffering to occur in a person’s life in order to bring about some greater good or because we have some sufficient reason for allowing it… Similarly, God may permit suffering in our lives in order to build us or to test us, or to build and test others, or to achieve some overriding end… Thus… [God] might well have morally sufficient reasons for permitting pain and suffering in the world.” (Pg. 539-540)
They say of miracles, “As Hume notoriously argued, perhaps it is always more rational to believe that some mistake or deception is at play than to believe on the basis of testimony that a genuine miracle occurred… But Hume’s claim is doubly erroneous. First, it fails to take into account all the probabilities involved… if one simply weighted the probability of the event against the reliability of the witness, then we should be led into denying the occurrence of events which, though highly improbable, we reasonably know to have occurred.” (Pg. 569)
They observe, “it is sometimes alleged that the Christian particularist cannot be warranted in believing that Christianity alone of all the world religions is the truth. But that is a matter for Christian apologetics to decide. In any case, this fact in and of itself would not show that Christian particularism is false… the real issue separating universalists and particularists … is the fate of unbeliever outside one’s particular religious tradition. Christian particularism consigns such persons to hell… God will not send us to hell---but we shall send ourselves… The lost… separate themselves from God despite God’s will and every effort to save them, and God grieves over their loss.” (Pg. 618-619)
They continue, “[God’s] goal… is to achieve an optimal balance … to create no more of the lost than is necessary to attain a certain number of the saved. But it is possible that the actual world…has such a balance. It is possible that in order to create this many people who will be saved, God also had to create this many people who will be lost. It is possible that had God created a world in which fewer people go to hell, then even fewer people would have gone to heaven. It is possible that in order that in order to achieve a multitude of saints, God had to accept a multitude of sinners… It is reasonable to assume that many people who never hear the gospel would not have believed the gospel if they had heard it. Suppose, then, that God has so providentially ordered the world that ALL persons who never hear the gospel are precisely such people…” (Pg. 623)
This is a VERY comprehensive, quite detailed, and generally fair overview of a huge amount of philosophical material. It will be “must reading” for serious students of Apologetics, and Christian Philosophy.
The authors state in the “Invitation” to this 2003 book, “[This] is obviously a large book, covering a wide range of issues in epistemology, metaphysics, philosophy of science, ethics and philosophy of religion, as well as basic rules of reasoning… those who use the book as a text will find it fertile soul for discussions. We do not anticipate, however, that students will be expected to plow through the whole book in a single semester. Rather, the professor may choose selectively chapters to assign which mesh best with the questions he finds most interesting or important, leaving aside the rest. Of course, we hope that students’ interest will be sufficiently piqued that they will eventually return to the book at some later time to read and wrestle with the unassigned material.” (Pg.)
In the first chapter, they note, “the claim is made that human depravity has made the mind so darkened that … sin’s effect on the mind, render the human intellect incapable of knowing truth. However, this claim is an exaggeration. The Fall brought about the perversion of human faculties, but it did not destroy these faculties. Human reasoning abilities are affected but not eliminated. This can be seen in the fact that the writers of Scripture often appeal to the minds of unbelievers by citing evidence on behalf of their claims, using logical inferences in building their case and speaking in the language and thought forms of those outside the faith.” (Pg. 18)
They explain, “In some ways, this entire book is a critique and alternative to postmodernism… two objections to postmodernism should be raised [here]… The first has to do with the postmodern rejection of objective rationality on the grounds that no one achieves it because everyone is biased in some way or another… we need to draw a distinction between psychological and rational objectivity. Psychological objectivity is the absence of bias, a lack of commitment either way on a topic… most people are not psychologically objective regarding the vast majority of the things they believe. In these cases, it is crucial to observe that a lack of psychological objectivity does not matter… Because a lack of psychological objectivity does not imply a lack of rational objectivity, and it is the latter that matters most, not the former.” (Pg. 149-150)
They point out, “another philosophical relic is the much-vaunted ‘presumption of atheism.’ … this is the claim that in the absence of evidence for God, we should presume that God does not exist… such an alleged presumption seems to conflate atheism with agnosticism. The assertion ‘God does not exist’ is just as much a claim to knowledge as the assertion ‘God exists,’ and therefore the former requires justification just as the latter does. It is the agnostic who makes no knowledge claim at all with respect to God’s existence… If anything, then, one should speak at most of a presumption of agnosticism.” (Pg. 155-156)
They acknowledge, “the truly serious objection to Pascal’s wager is the so-called many gods objection. A Muslim could set up a similar payoff for belief in Allah. A Mormon could do the same thing for his god… Thus the choice is not so simple, for if I believe that the Christian God exists and it turns out that Allah exists instead, then I shall suffer infinite loss in hell for my sin of associating something (Christ) with God... we could try to limit the live options to the two at hand or to a tractable number of alternatives. This may have been Pascal’s own strategy… If the alternatives can be narrowed down in this way, then Pascal’s wager goes through successfully.” (Pg. 160)
They defend the “absolutist” (i.e., “common sense”) view of personal identity: “The absolutist view is supported by fairly commonsense intuitions, and it places great emphasis on the first-person perspective and our own introspective awareness…. One’s views about personal identity and the related mind-body problem will depend, to a significant degree, on one’s attitude about the proper order between science on the one hand and philosophy and common sense on the other… as Christians, the absolutist view would seem to be the most natural way to understand scriptural teaching about the self… the final resurrection, rewards and punishments, and so on.” (Pg. 299-300)
They argue, “strong scientism is self-refuting… [It] is not itself a proposition OF science, but a second-order proposition OF philosophy ABOUT science to the effect that only scientific propositions are true and/or rational to believe… Self-refuting propositions are necessarily false… What this means is that … no amount of scientific progress in the future will have the slightest effect on making strong scientism more acceptable… The conclusions of science cannot be more certain than the presuppositions it rests on and uses to reach these conclusions.” (Pg. 347-348)
They observe, “It is open to the atheist to [argue] that while the universe has an explanation of its existence, that explanation lies not in an external ground but in the necessity of its own nature… This is an extremely bold suggestion on the part of the atheist. We have… a strong intuition of the universe’s contingency… We generally trust our modal intuitions on other matters; if we are to do otherwise with respect to the universe’s contingency, then atheists need to provide some reason for such skepticism other than their desire to avoid theism.” (Pg. 467-468)
They note, “Students sometimes react to such illustrations as Hilbert’s Hotel by saying that we do not really understand the nature of infinity and, hence, these absurdities result. But this attitude is simply mistaken. Infinite set theory is a highly developed and well-understood branch of mathematics, and these absurdities can be seen to result precisely because we DO understand the notion of a collection with an actually infinite number of members.” (Pg. 472)
They state, “Sometimes physicists do speak of a yet-to-be-discovered ‘theory of everything’ (T.O.E.)… in the most promising candidates for a T.O.E. to date, super-string theory or M-theory, the physical universe must be 11-dimensional, but why the universe should possess just that number of dimensions is not addressed by the theory. Hence, one must not be misled by talk of a T.O.E. into thinking that the universe possesses all its fundamental constants and quantities by physical necessity. On the contrary, there is good reason to reject this alternative. For it would require us to say that only one set of constants and quantities is comparable with the laws of nature, which seems false. Even if the laws of nature were themselves necessary, one would still have to supply the initial conditions.” (Pg. 485)
They explain, “For the church fathers fatalism took on a theological coloring: if God foreknows that some event will happen, then it will necessarily happen… Undoubtedly a major source of the fatalist’s confusion is his conflating CERTAINTY with NECESSITY… Certainty is a property of persons and has nothing to do with truth… By contrast, necessity is a property of propositions, indicating that a proposition cannot possibly have a different truth value… By confusing certainty and necessity, the fatalist makes his logically fallacious argument deceptively appealing… We can be certain, given God’s foreknowledge, that the events foreknown will not fail to happen. They could fail to occur, but God knows that they will not. Therefore, we can be sure that they will happen---yet happen contingently.” (Pg. 519)
They say of the Problem of Evil, “[the] assumption, that if God is omnibenevolent, then he prefers a world without evil over a world with evil… is not necessarily true. The fact is that in many cases we allow pain and suffering to occur in a person’s life in order to bring about some greater good or because we have some sufficient reason for allowing it… Similarly, God may permit suffering in our lives in order to build us or to test us, or to build and test others, or to achieve some overriding end… Thus… [God] might well have morally sufficient reasons for permitting pain and suffering in the world.” (Pg. 539-540)
They say of miracles, “As Hume notoriously argued, perhaps it is always more rational to believe that some mistake or deception is at play than to believe on the basis of testimony that a genuine miracle occurred… But Hume’s claim is doubly erroneous. First, it fails to take into account all the probabilities involved… if one simply weighted the probability of the event against the reliability of the witness, then we should be led into denying the occurrence of events which, though highly improbable, we reasonably know to have occurred.” (Pg. 569)
They observe, “it is sometimes alleged that the Christian particularist cannot be warranted in believing that Christianity alone of all the world religions is the truth. But that is a matter for Christian apologetics to decide. In any case, this fact in and of itself would not show that Christian particularism is false… the real issue separating universalists and particularists … is the fate of unbeliever outside one’s particular religious tradition. Christian particularism consigns such persons to hell… God will not send us to hell---but we shall send ourselves… The lost… separate themselves from God despite God’s will and every effort to save them, and God grieves over their loss.” (Pg. 618-619)
They continue, “[God’s] goal… is to achieve an optimal balance … to create no more of the lost than is necessary to attain a certain number of the saved. But it is possible that the actual world…has such a balance. It is possible that in order to create this many people who will be saved, God also had to create this many people who will be lost. It is possible that had God created a world in which fewer people go to hell, then even fewer people would have gone to heaven. It is possible that in order that in order to achieve a multitude of saints, God had to accept a multitude of sinners… It is reasonable to assume that many people who never hear the gospel would not have believed the gospel if they had heard it. Suppose, then, that God has so providentially ordered the world that ALL persons who never hear the gospel are precisely such people…” (Pg. 623)
This is a VERY comprehensive, quite detailed, and generally fair overview of a huge amount of philosophical material. It will be “must reading” for serious students of Apologetics, and Christian Philosophy.
January 12, 2022
A phenomenal textbook on the Christian worldview! Each and every chapter could be an awesome study in and of themselves, excepting only the chapters on logic. lol While logic is foundational to both the philosophy and the worldview of a Christian; I must still proclaim the subject to be boring as a topical study, but it is most definitely a necessity. An excellent book to have as one's go to reference for many subjects of the Christian Worldview. Well worth the time to read and to study.
April 11, 2020
This book is divided into six parts: Part 1: Introduction, Part 2: Epistemology, Part 3: Metaphysics, Part 4: Philosophy of Science, Part 5: Ethics, and Part 6: Philosophy of Religion and Philosophical Theology.
The introduction mainly focuses on two issues, how to do philosophy, and how to recognize an argument as well as knowing fallacies. The chapter of logic was impressive, to say the least. The amount of space Moreland and Craig spent on discussing, how to formulate an argument, in addition, to explaining logical fallacies, on top of sections on Modal Logic and explaining the Inference to the Best Explanation. This was all accomplished in under 40 pages. A word of warning because of the brevity, this chapter was notoriously hard to follow so take your time.
The section on epistemology was one of the highlights of this book, especially the chapter of postmodernism. As a huge Alvin Plantinga fan, I was very pleased to see a chapter explaining his Reformed Epistemology. This section was relatively easy to read in this book which is rare for this book.
Metaphysics which part three dealt with was one of my favorite sections. I would highly suggest to anyone reading this section revisit certain chapters and take your time. If you are struggling understanding certain concepts, you are not the only one. There is a lot of material and terms, especially the four chapters dealing with the mind-body problem.
Part four dealing with philosophy of science seemed to be the weakest section. I feel as if there were some controversial remarks made, and a reader without a background in philsophy of science would not know otherwise. But please do misunderstand me, this section was still done pretty well especially the chapter on time (which is one of my favorite chapters in the book).
Ethics in section five of the book was great! This is no surprise since both Moreland and Craig write a great deal on the metaethics. A pro of this section is that this is a bit easier to read, especially coming from the section on philosophy of science.
The last section on Philosophy of Religion and Philosophical Theology was probably the highlight of this book. Almost every chapter was masterful. The chapters on the existence of God and the Coherence of Theism being my favorite.
I suggest that any sincere seeker of truth read or use this book as a reference, though this book is very academic therefore very difficult to read. If you have a hard time comprehending this book I would suggest books such as, "Introducing Philosophy" by Robert C Solomon (this is a very thorough introduction but a bit less academic), or Geisler's book "Introduction to Philosophy: A Christain Perspective" (this is a simplistic introduction to philosophy but still remains a helpful introduction to philosophy). These books are good alternatives if you are new to the world of philosophy.
The introduction mainly focuses on two issues, how to do philosophy, and how to recognize an argument as well as knowing fallacies. The chapter of logic was impressive, to say the least. The amount of space Moreland and Craig spent on discussing, how to formulate an argument, in addition, to explaining logical fallacies, on top of sections on Modal Logic and explaining the Inference to the Best Explanation. This was all accomplished in under 40 pages. A word of warning because of the brevity, this chapter was notoriously hard to follow so take your time.
The section on epistemology was one of the highlights of this book, especially the chapter of postmodernism. As a huge Alvin Plantinga fan, I was very pleased to see a chapter explaining his Reformed Epistemology. This section was relatively easy to read in this book which is rare for this book.
Metaphysics which part three dealt with was one of my favorite sections. I would highly suggest to anyone reading this section revisit certain chapters and take your time. If you are struggling understanding certain concepts, you are not the only one. There is a lot of material and terms, especially the four chapters dealing with the mind-body problem.
Part four dealing with philosophy of science seemed to be the weakest section. I feel as if there were some controversial remarks made, and a reader without a background in philsophy of science would not know otherwise. But please do misunderstand me, this section was still done pretty well especially the chapter on time (which is one of my favorite chapters in the book).
Ethics in section five of the book was great! This is no surprise since both Moreland and Craig write a great deal on the metaethics. A pro of this section is that this is a bit easier to read, especially coming from the section on philosophy of science.
The last section on Philosophy of Religion and Philosophical Theology was probably the highlight of this book. Almost every chapter was masterful. The chapters on the existence of God and the Coherence of Theism being my favorite.
I suggest that any sincere seeker of truth read or use this book as a reference, though this book is very academic therefore very difficult to read. If you have a hard time comprehending this book I would suggest books such as, "Introducing Philosophy" by Robert C Solomon (this is a very thorough introduction but a bit less academic), or Geisler's book "Introduction to Philosophy: A Christain Perspective" (this is a simplistic introduction to philosophy but still remains a helpful introduction to philosophy). These books are good alternatives if you are new to the world of philosophy.
August 17, 2011
Keeping in mind the proviso that this is a book written with an orthodox Christian audience in mind this book does an admirable job exploring major branches of philosophy and not without some depth. This is intended for beginners so is accessible, but does delve deeper and with more complexity than most standard introductory texts. A bonus to this book is the exploration of Christian theological themes, the trinity, the incarnation, at the end.
Some drawbacks are that the book casts a very wide net, and as a result, despite the length, some topics do not get the treatment that they need, particularly since Moreland has no problem promoting particular views (i.e. his argument for substance dualism or libertarian free will or his meager presentation of b-theory of time and his overemphasis of the strength of the arguments for God's existence. Also I found his philosophy of science treatment highly controversial). I don't have an issue with that, but combined with the necessity to keep the treatment at least generally accessible can oversimplify the strength of his conclusions to a fault.
Some drawbacks are that the book casts a very wide net, and as a result, despite the length, some topics do not get the treatment that they need, particularly since Moreland has no problem promoting particular views (i.e. his argument for substance dualism or libertarian free will or his meager presentation of b-theory of time and his overemphasis of the strength of the arguments for God's existence. Also I found his philosophy of science treatment highly controversial). I don't have an issue with that, but combined with the necessity to keep the treatment at least generally accessible can oversimplify the strength of his conclusions to a fault.
July 21, 2013
The key to navigating the immense amount of information thrown at us and the purported authority that it claims, is good orderly thinking.
Moreland and Craig have put together a tome that if read will put you on the path to discernible, decisive thinking. Since reading this book I have a clearer understanding of my own presuppositions and beliefs and now have the ability to analyse an argument and determine the logic behind it. This makes all the difference when confronted with "experts" who demand we take them seriously.
This book is quite challenging since the material is not taught in common schools (although it used to be core curriculum in High School)and many of the terms were unfamiliar to me. But It was well worth the time investment and I encourage anybody who likes to think hard about reality to give it a chance.
Moreland and Craig have put together a tome that if read will put you on the path to discernible, decisive thinking. Since reading this book I have a clearer understanding of my own presuppositions and beliefs and now have the ability to analyse an argument and determine the logic behind it. This makes all the difference when confronted with "experts" who demand we take them seriously.
This book is quite challenging since the material is not taught in common schools (although it used to be core curriculum in High School)and many of the terms were unfamiliar to me. But It was well worth the time investment and I encourage anybody who likes to think hard about reality to give it a chance.
June 26, 2010
I guess this would have to be the last of my top five simply because just it and my Bible could keep me occupied on a desert island forever. I have it listed as "currently reading" because I'm always reading it and will never finish. A lot of it is way over my head and as I mentioned in my profile it's caused me to buy a number of other books in order to do some remedial work in philosophy. It has some typoes (sp?)and other errors and I hope that later editions are or have been better edited. A very valuble book.
December 12, 2008
This is a must-read for anyone with a Christian worldview who is interested in philosophy or apologetics. Craig and Moreland are top-notch Christian philosophers. Though it is introductory, it is also a moderately technical read and will take some time to get through. Some chapters are better than others and I found the logic and epistemology areas better than say metaphysics. But I got a lot out of it and re-read the book in its entirety about a year later!
February 10, 2009
An absolutely indispensable guide to the robust philosophical foundations of the Christian belief system. Examines practically every area of philosophy, from logic to epistemology to metaphysics and more. Compares numerous competing views and clearly shows why the Christian view is superior. It is impossible to overstate the value of this work. I have never stopped reading it since the day it was given to me.
September 25, 2014
This is an excellent book. There is a complete introduction to philosophy in here as well as an overview of some of the important issues in Christian theology. This book helps one see how integrated are one's beliefs in all aspects of one's life. Recommended for anyone that needs to think through their underlying assumptions when accepting certain dogmas-whether religious or otherwise.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 70 reviews