-
Views
-
Cite
Cite
Charles Taliaferro, The Christian Idea of God: A Philosophical Foundation for Faith. By Keith Ward, The Journal of Theological Studies, Volume 71, Issue 1, April 2020, Page 406, https://doi.org/10.1093/jts/flaa038
Close - Share Icon Share
Extract
Keith Ward intends this book as the completion of a trilogy that includes Morality, Autonomy, and God (One World, 2013) and Christ and the Cosmos (Cambridge, 2015), that offers a systematic defence of Christian philosophical theology. While The Christian Idea of God is the third, it is foundational for the other works, and may be read on its own. Ward defends Christian faith on the grounds of what he calls philosophical idealism, the thesis that mind is first in metaphysics (as the ground of all other beings) and in epistemology (we know mind and experience better than mind-independent beings). Philosophical idealism ‘sees the universe as the progressive and developing self-expression of God’ (p. 11). The early chapters challenge forms of naturalism that treat experience and consciousness as suspicious entities for the seamless account of reality based on the natural sciences. Arguably, there would be no science of any kind without relying on the evident reality of experience and consciousness. Ward contends that the Christian theistic idea of God as an ultimate, supremely good divine mind provides the resources for us to understand the existence and continuation of the cosmos, the emergence of finite conscious life with values and free agency, and religious experience. Those familiar with Ward’s other work will find a refreshing presentation in one volume of his views on the problem of evil, God’s affective interaction with the creation, the notion that divine revelation as Jesus of Nazareth does not preclude knowledge of the divine from non-Christian sources, and speculation on life after death. This is a clearly written book accessible to non-specialists who are looking for an overview of a sound, reasonable case for the credibility of Christian faith. Ward is keenly aware that his book cannot take on all objections: ‘To deal adequately with all the theses I defend would take a whole library’ (p. 2). I propose that Ward has succeeded in writing, in his words, ‘a book that was not too long and that was readable and accessible, while dealing with topics that are both philosophically profound and practically important’ (p. 2).
