Product Description

Is There a God? offers a powerful response to modern doubts about the existence of God. It may seem today that the answers to all fundamental questions lie in the province of science, and that the scientific advances of the twentieth century leave little room for God. Cosmologists have rolled back their theories to the moment of the Big Bang, the discovery of DNA reveals the key to life, the theory of evolution explains the development of life... and with each new discovery or development, it seems that we are closer to a complete understanding of how things are. For many people, this gives strength to the belief that God is not needed to explain the universe; that religious belief is not based on reason; and that the existence of God is, intellectually, a lost cause. Richard Swinburne, one of the most distinguished philosophers of religion of our day, argues that on the contrary, science provides good grounds for belief in God. Why is there a universe at all? Why is there any life on Earth? How is it that discoverable scientific laws operate in the universe? Professor Swinburne uses the methods of scientific reasoning to argue that the best answers to these questions are given by the existence of God. The picture of the universe that science gives us is completed by God.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #956022 in Books
• Published on: 1996-02-01
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Hardcover
• 160 pages

About the Author
Richard Swinburne has been the Nolloth Professor of the Philosophy of Christian Religion at the University of Oxford since 1985; before that for twelve years he was Professor of Philosophy at the University of Keele. He is the author of many eminent books on the philosophy of religion in general and of the philosophy of Christianity in particular.

Customer Reviews

A brief case for theism
In "Is There a God?" Swinburne seeks to provide a less sophisticated version of the case for theism which appears in his classic "The Existence of God" (1979). While accomplishing his task with great brevity, I concur with the previous reviewer that this book may not be accessible to the lay audience. Swinburne's arguments are characteristically erudite and will require considerable attention on the part of readers.

Although this book may not acheive its intended success in the mass market, I consider it an excellent introduction to Swinburne's work. From that standpoint, "Is There a God?" may be used as a primer to his more substantial scholarly writings.

In this present title, Swinburne's first ("God"), third ("The Simplicity of God") and sixth ("Why God Allows Evil") chapters are particularly noteworthy. His two-page epilogue summarizes with great clarity one's responsibilities should theism be true.

--David A. Frenz

Uneven Book of Natural Theology
Swiburne writes clearly and his arguments for God's existence are interesting and suggestive. In the end, though, they come down to the notion that God is the "simplest" explanation for things we observe in the natural world. It was never clear how postulating the existence of something unlike anything else in experience could be a "simple" explanation of the world. Maybe it's "simpler" just to take the existence of the world as an unexplained fact, a mystery. The discussion of why God allows pain and suffering is the weakest part of the book and is almost a parody of traditional theodicy. At one point in his discussion of animal suffering, Swinburne argues that forest fires aren't necessarily bad for animals because they give them an opportunity to escape danger, which he regards as a "significant intentional act." Since "significant intentional acts" are goods things, it follows that forest fires could be good for animals. This sounds like a joke but Swinburne was serious. The reader wondering why God allows suffering would be better advised to read the book of Job.

A nice piece of religious philosophy
My approach to this book is a little different to most, and hopefully I'm not going to get instantly voted unhelpful like most of the reviews of this book.

Basically I should start off by admitting that I find the conclusions of this book implausible. From a philosophical perspective Swinburne begins by shooting himself in the foot 'My topic is the claim that there is a God, understood in the way that Western religion (Christianity, Judaism, and Islam) has generally understood that claim', the problem that raises for the religious philosopher is that the gods of the Abrahamic religions come with lots of other tie in clauses. He would perhaps have been better off disassociating his argument from particular religions. It's clear he's got an agenda, indeed he ends the book with a basic appeal to the reader to get on with worshipping.

However, the reason I started reading this book was because its larger brother was on my metaphysics reading list (i'm an undergrad philosophy student), but unavailable in the library. And when I put aside considerations of his bias it turns out that his core arguments are actually quite stimulating. I particularly like his conception of god as a single substance, it adds a nice new interpretation to the argument of first cause. Sure it doesn't in any logical way lead to a belief in an imminent deity, but imminent deities aren't really what philosophy of religion is about. Philosophy is about constructing and deconstructing rational argument, Swinburne does construct a good rational argument and therefore gives me all the enjoyment of deconstructing it. I would basically therefore recommend it to those who want a good example of modern philosophical thought on the existence of god. It has actually given me something that's worth getting interested in and debating about.

So if you find the insistence of philosophers in treating all arguments, no matter how strange they may seem, with a certain credulity you're not going to like this book. But if you're prepared to accept that in philosophy some questions just don't have an answer, and you're prepared to read between the lines of Swinburnes blind faith for his actual logic you can probably get quite a bit out of it.

(as always if you don't find this review helpful please leave a comment and tell me why!)