Review of William Lane Craig's Systematic Philosophical Theology Volume I

For some thinkers in history, their magnum opus is only recognized long after the volume is published, many times after their own death. It is rather interesting then, when a very influential scholar today comes forth with a work which we know will be his greatest work. With the release of Volume I of William Lane Craig’s recent systematic philosophical theology, we have such a case. Because of both Craig’s significance and the importance of this work, it is well worth a review.

This systematic philosophical theology is the culmination of a long and impressive career from Craig. While best known as an apologist and debater who defends mere Christianity against its enemies, Craig’s scholarly work in both theology and philosophy is vast. Craig began his academic career resurrecting the Kalam cosmological argument, a feat which required in depth knowledge on the details of astrophysics, cosmology, and other areas of science. His other work has taken him into philosophy of law, language, evolutionary biology, history and numerous other fields. Needless to say his works are of impressive breadth and depth.

His work on this systematic philosophical theology project began several years ago. At the recommendation of wife and others, Craig decided in 2017 to put most of his philosophical and theological training into a single work covering the whole range of Protestant theology. After completing work on Christ’s atonement and Adam and Eve, Craig began work on the book in 2020. Finally, in January of this year Volume I was released publicly by Wilely-Blackwell. The whole work is set to be a V volume work covering the various loci communes or common spaces of Protestant theology.

Craig’s work can be seen as a continuation of two traditions of work. First, the most broad would be the tradition dating back to the medieval era of writing large philosophically informed systematic theological works. The most notable of these is of course St. Thomas Aquinas’ famous Summa Theologiae. In many ways, Craig’s work is similar to St. Thomas’ both in its philosophical rigor as well as many of its topics covering God’s existence, his nature, the nature of man, Christ’s work and so forth. However, Craig’s work is best understood as the continuation of a narrower stream of Christian tradition, namely, the classic Protestant stream of writing systematic theologies. Writers such as the famous Lutheran Philip Melanchton century wrote such works covering what they called the loci communes of Protestant theology: God, creation, Christ, man, grace, the Church, and the last things. Craig generally abides by this division with one exception, he adds Scripture itself as a locus rather than treating it in the prolegomena.

Volume I covers prolegomena as well as the first two loci Craig wants to discuss: scripture itself and faith. Future volumes will take up the rest of the loci starting with God and finishing with ecclesiology and the last things.

Craig begins Volume I by setting the context for the work. In particular, he draws attention to the recent renaissance in anglophone philosophy that has taken particular interest in God, both of his existence and of his attributes and other theological topics. He notes for instance that in the 1966 Time magazine famously ran a headline “Is God Dead?” detailing the paucity of theistic belief and discussion in academia at the time. However, only a short time later, after the work of groundbreaking 20th century Christian philosophers like Alvin Plantinga, Time had to print a retraction of sorts with a 1980 article “Modernizing the Case for God” outlining how “God was making a comeback” among philosophers (10).

Craig outlines the degree to which study of God by philosophers has exploded among analytic philosophers in the last half century with the astonishing result that, according to Craig, never since the high middle ages has there been such “a flourishing of philosophical theology” (21). Craig’s work then draws from both the wealth of the Christian intellectual tradition as well as from the copious amounts of work done in recent years by analytic philosophers in philosophy of religion. Laudibly, Craig tries to minimize the explicit interaction with modern scholars by name in order to give the work more longevity. The work at times still gets bogged down in the minutiae of contemporary analytic philosophy but this is likely inevitable given the nature of the work.

After setting the context, Craig uses the prolegomena to define the disciplines of theology, philosophy, and what a systematic philosophical theology is. He defines theology as the study of God and systematic theology as that field which utilizes biblical theology, the study of what the biblical authors said, with philosophy, history, and science into a coherent whole. Because systematic theology takes divine revelation as a main source of information, it requires a belief in divine revelation. Interestingly, this requirement distinguishes systematic theology from Biblical theology since even an atheist can study the nature of Paul’s doctrine of the atonement. Lastly, Craig’s work is “philosophical” in that it draws from the latest insights of the analytic tradition as part of the work to engage the various philosophical questions raised in Christian theology.

Craig finishes the prolegomena by discussing the nature of truth and argues that while Christianity does not entail any one specific philosophical view of truth, the Christianity is compatible with the classic view of truth as correspondence with reality articulated throughout the Western tradition.

After finishing the prolegomena, Craig then begins his first locus, De Scriptura Sacra. As a locus of theology, Criag uses the main source of theology, Scripture itself, to inform him on the nature of Scripture. This is not a circular endeavour for the question of what Scripture teaches about itself is distinct from whether what Scripture teaches is true. By drawing on various passages from both Old and New Testaments, Craig argues that Scripture is divine revelation itself and addresses a few objections to such a view based on various definitions of “revelation”.

Craig argues for verbal, plenary and confluent inspiration of Scripture. That is, the inspiration of the entirety (plenary) of Scripture down to the very words (verbal) consistent with the free will of the human authors (confluent). Such a notion is similar to what is taught in Dei Verbum which holds that the sacred authors while “made use of their powers and abilities” were “consigned to writing everything and only those things which He wanted.” (11) Interestingly, Craig interacts at some length with Dei Verbum and claims that the more recent Catholic view regarding the relationship between Scripture and Tradition which he calls “revisionist” is very close to a Protestant understanding of Scripture (112). This “revisionist” view is contrasted with the more traditional view that part of divine revelation is contained in Tradition alone. Craig admits that neither Trent nor Vatican I’s teachings on this regard demand one view or the other.

As a Protestant, Craig also argues for the principle of Sola Scriptura, which he holds is both taught in Scripture and traditional on the basis of 2 Tim 3:15. He quotes approvingly from the eminent reformed theologian Herman Bavinck who states that Scripture is clear enough that “a person concerned about his soul can easily, by personal reading and study, learn that truth from Scripture without the assistance and guidance of the church and the priest.” (113) Craig claims that 2 Tim 3:15 makes this an “undeniable teaching of Scripture.” (113) Considering that Paul is explicitly referring to the Old Testament alone in that passage, and given that Paul says nothing regarding ease, and individuality, Craigs claim here is rather dubious. The Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8 comes to mind as a clear counterexample. Craig’s work is of course not primarily an apologetic for Protestant theology, but at this point and others, his justifications for foundational aspects of Protestant thought are rather weak.

Perhaps the most interesting aspect of his first locus, is Craig’s use of a historically catholic theologoumenon in order to defend verbal, plenary, and confluent inspiration of Scripture. To defend the coherency of this view, Craig appeals to the historically controversial idea of middle knowledge, first invented by the 16th century Jesuit theologian Luis de Molina. Middle knowledge is a type of knowledge God is said to possess logically prior to his decree to create the world and consists of the truths of various counterfactual statements about what free creatures would do were they placed in certain circumstances. While Craig does not discuss middle knowledge itself in any length in volume I–since such a discussion will be in volume II–he does appeal to it to show how God can providentially order the world so that the sacred writers would freely write only those things which God wanted them to write. One question which such a theory raises about the inspiration of Scripture is that if God is provident over all human actions, then how is that that his providence over the writings of Scripture distinguishes their status from that of other writings over which God is sovereign? Craig only hints at an answer but this area is clearly open for further reflection.

Craig later takes up the justification for belief in Scripture as God’s word and appeals to Alvin Plantinga’s reformed epistemology to identify such belief as a properly basic belief, i.e. a belief that is not a result of argument. Craig thinks that the Holy Spirit’s testimony can be sufficient for a believer to have rational justification to believe that Scripture, both Old and New Testaments is God’s revelation. However, the justifications between one believer and another may look different as different perspectives on the historical claims of the New Testament and various other factors undoubtedly affect people’s epistemic orientations toward Scripture. A fuller discussion of reformed epistemology will be in volume IIb but its applications are mentioned both in justification for belief in Scripture and in Craig’s discussion of faith later in volume I (below).

In Locus II, Craig takes up the issue of faith. He first examines the biblical evidence and shows that the verb for believe, pisteuein, entails not only a trusting attitude but an affirmation of specific propositional content. Thus, contrary to certain contemporary scholars like William Alston, Craig takes what he calls the doxastic view and argues that in order for a person to have saving faith, they must truly believe certain truths e.g. that Jesus was raised from the dead.

After examining the nature of Faith, Craig investigates the reasonableness of such faith. In particular, Craig focuses on one of most prominent defenses of faith’s reasonableness in the modern era which is Alvin Plantinga’s so-called reformed epistemology (RO). Plantinga argued starting in the early 1990s in a series of books that Christian belief could be justified, rational, and warranted if Christianity were true. Plantinga appealed to a sensus divinitatis which was a special faculty humans had from God to grasp his essence in a basic way. To believe in something in a basic way is to believe in it without an inference of reason. In Platinga’s view then, just as I believe that there are trees in my yard because I see them, I can, through my sensus divinitatis know that God exists without appeal to arguments of natural theology.

Craig is ultimately supportive of RO but makes some helpful modifications. For one, Craig scraps Plantiga’s sensus divinitatis since it is neither in the historical sources to which Plantinga appeals nor in Scripture. Rather, Craig grounds the justification for Christian belief in the inner testimony of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit’s role in bringing about belief and assurance in the life of the believer is well attested in the New Testament. The Holy Spirit’s testimony is not some special faculty humans have, but rather God himself working in the mind of the human to bring him to true knowledge of himself.

Craig also stresses the strength of the Spirit’s testimony and how it can serve as a defeater of even powerful objections to the faith. Thus, even a person who cannot refute the argument from evil can still be warranted in believing in Christianity because of the testimony of the Holy Spirit.

Craig’s Volume I has brought together his years of research into a helpful scholarly work showcasing the outlines of the nature of Scripture and of Christian faith. Craig’s positions are mostly well attested in Scripture, and take into account the latest of modern analytic philosophy. While Craig’s work is not Catholic, his approach to theology shares in the same spirit that gave breath to the towering theological works of the middle ages: a desire to bring together faith with the sharpest tools of human reason into a coherent whole. For Catholic and Protestant alike, Craig’s Volume I is an admirable work that is worth a read.