Philosophical Foundations... (Moreland & Craig)

Not open for further replies.


Puritanboard Clerk
Moreland and Craig. Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview. IntervarsityPress, 2003.

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 Highpoints:

1. Excellent, if somewhat intellectually painful, chapter on how to do logic. Be warned, this is very, very hard to read. That being said, once you understand modal logic and possible worlds semantics, multiple levels of reality are now opened. I read the chapter eight or nine times before it "clicked." Once it did, though...

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.

Cons of the Book:
1. This book is simply too hard and inaccessible as an intro text. On the other hand, it is outstanding as a mid-level text.

2. I admit--I now see that their proofs for the existence of God are logically compatible.

3. The chapter on Molinism is very interesting. As it stands, I am not convinced. I wonder if one links middle-knowledge with Plantinga's possible-worlds semantics if it could work. Please understand. I am not endorsing middle knowledge. I think it has problems.

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
Not open for further replies.