This brings us to a third and closely related problem: Ward is not only limited in the type of theological vision he presents as a valid manifestation of God, but he is also limited in the religious traditions he cites. In a book which is supposed to be a survey of the thinking about God, there are remarkably few references to non-Christian sources. Representatives of Jewish, Muslim and Indian traditions can be counted on two hands, and of course they all present the “non-personal God” perspective Ward favors.
With so many fundamental problems, one might think that I recommend against reading the book — but that is not actually true. As a matter of fact, I enjoyed the book very much, and there is a quite a lot in it which people can learn. They key is to approach the book for what it is rather than what it seems to be.
It is a survey of primarily European and American traditions of religious philosophy from Plato to Swineburne, focusing on those theologians and philosophers who have emphasized a non-personal nature to their God. These theologians and philosophers have all played an important role in the development of Christianity specifically and Western religious beliefs generally — thus, knowing more about them helps the reader learn a great deal about Western religion.
Ward presents a coherent story of philosophical and religious inquiry which is understandable to most average readers. It probably isn’t the best choice for someone just starting out to read about religion and philosophy, but it certainly doesn’t take a philosophy student to comprehend what Ward is saying.
« Back...
