Beilby, James. ed. For Faith and Clarity: Philosophical Contributions to Christian Theology.
This book is not an intro to apologetics. It’s not even an intermediate text. It’s more like a supplement to some theological issues in apologetics. On the whole it is of limited value. Nevertheless, there were a few outstanding essays.
J. P. Moreland: General Ontology and Theology
Moreland outlines what substance metaphysics is. The ultimate categories are substance, property, and relation (47), and these categories are in sets. “A set of categories is a set of mutually exclusive and exhaustive classifications of all entities.”
A substance is a continuant that can change by gaining new properties and losing old ones, yet retaining its identity (57). Substance are not had by other properties. They have properties. A property is an existence reality which is exemplified by a substance.
William Lane Craig: Pantheists in spite of themselves.
Craig cuts Hegelianism off at the pass. For post-Hegelians God is the Infinite, yet any concept of the infinite contains within it the concept of the finite. Therefore, the finite is just as necessary as the infinite. Therefore, God is both infinite and finite. For Neo-Hegelians, “infinite” means “all.” The problem should be evident. God and the moon both exist, so this means that God is not all. Yet we hold that God is infinite.
How does a Christian respond to this? Craig notes that the Hegelian concept of infinity is just silly and outdated. Modern mathematics uses the concept of infinity, but it never means what Hegel says it means. Take Cantor’s sets:
0, 1, 2, 3,….
1, 3, 5, 7,…..
We can extend both sets to infinity. There is one to one correspondence between two sets if the members of A can be paired with the members of B. We do not need to get into all of the paradoxes with an actual infinite, but we need only show that the Neo-Hegelian definition is false.
Richards gives 8 different senses of how divine simplicity was used in the history of the church.
- All divine properties are possessed by the same self-identical God.
- God is not composite in the sense of being made up of parts. God has no external causes.
- God’s essence is identical with his act of existing.
- All God’s essential properties are co-extensive.
- All God’s perfections are identical.
- All God’s properties are co-extensive.
- God’s essential properties and essence are (strictly) identical with God himself.
- All God’s properties are (strictly) identical with God himself..
Richards says that all Christians can accommodate P(1) – (6). Part of the difficulty is that earlier Christian thinkers were hamstrung by Platonic and medieval ontologies. For Thomas an essence of a thing is its “what it is as such” (Richards 162). Modern essentialism, by contrast, sees an entity as “exemplifying a certain essence.” For medieval realists, an entity participated (or shared) in the form of x. For modern essentialists, an entity exemplifies x.
Other essays of note are Plantinga’s evolutionary challenge and Wolterstorff’s essay on justice.