The Sean McDowell Show - 50 Years Studying God & Philosophy: William Lane Craig’s Magnum Opus

Episode Date: March 28, 2025

William Lane Craig considers his new Systematic Philosophical Theology a gift to the church. After having read Vol. 1, I agree 100%. This interview is one of the first Dr. Craig has done on the book. We discuss why he wrote it, what he covers in this volume (and the next ones), what makes a philosophical theology unique, and what this multi-volume study means to him personally. READ: Systematic Philosophical Theology, Volume 1: Prolegomena, On Scripture, On Faith (https://amzn.to/40Qv5e4)*Get a MASTERS IN APOLOGETICS or SCIENCE AND RELIGION at BIOLA (https://bit.ly/3LdNqKf)*USE Discount Code [SMDCERTDISC] for 25% off the BIOLA APOLOGETICS CERTIFICATE program (https://bit.ly/3AzfPFM)*See our fully online UNDERGRAD DEGREE in Bible, Theology, and Apologetics: (https://bit.ly/448STKK)FOLLOW ME ON SOCIAL MEDIA: Twitter: https://x.com/Sean_McDowellTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@sean_mcdowell?lang=enInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/seanmcdowell/Website: https://seanmcdowell.org

William Lane Craig is one of the leading Christian apologists and philosophers today, and he's just releasing volume one of his long anticipated systematic philosophical Theology he has been kind enough to give us one of his first interviews about this multi-volume project To explain what it's about why it's unique what contribution he thinks it will make and what it means to him the contribution he thinks it will make and what it means to him personally. I've not given Dr. Craig these specific questions ahead of time, in part because I just want his spontaneous, genuine response in the moment.

Dr. Craig, really appreciate your partnership with us at Talbot School of Theology at Biola. Thanks for writing an excellent book and thanks for being willing to come back on the show to talk about it. Certainly, Sean, great to be with you. Well, let me start with this question. When did you first have the idea

that you wanted to write either a big systematic philosophical theology or a multi-volume systematic philosophical theology? It goes all the way back to when I was doing my doctoral work under John Hick at the University of Birmingham in the UK. I asked Professor Hick one day what his next project would be.

And he said to me, I'm thinking about writing a systematic philosophical theology. And I was so stunned by the idea. I had never heard of such a thing. And it struck me as just a brilliant and creative idea. Well, Hick never in fact undertook that project. But years later, Jan encouraged me to take up that project.

And so it was Hick in a sense that inspired it and Jan then that motivated me to do it. So if you were motivated back then, do you think you could have done it 40 years ago, 30 years ago, 10 years ago, or is there something about the season you're at right now that makes this even possible? Oh, that's so true, Sean, so true.

A key factor in my development was my failing my oral exams in systematic theology at the University of Munich when I did my doctorate there with Wolfhard Pallenbach. At the time, it seemed like a disaster. I cannot tell you how defeated and crushed I was in failing these oral exams, because I was ill-prepared for them. But as a result of that experience, I had the chance to retake those exams a year later, and the study that I invested into systematic theology during those months of preparation equipped me to deal with these issues in a way that I never would have been able to,

had I managed to somehow squeak through and pass the exam. And then subsequent to that, my own work in philosophy of religion has awakened me or alerted me to the philosophical issues that arise in each one of the major theological loci, like doctrine of God, doctrine of creation, doctrine of Christ, doctrine of salvation, and every one of these really interesting philosophical questions arise. And so it was the marriage of my study of systematic theology with my work as a philosopher of religion that put me in a position to write this book. We're going to get into some details of what it entails and why it's unique,

but let me just ask you this question broadly. What does this project mean to you just personally or professionally to see the first volume come out at this stage in kind of your career. What does it mean to you? And maybe in comparison to some of the other projects that you've done. Yeah. I don't think, Sean, honestly, that this is my best work. I think that my work on God and time or divine aseity really was my best work. But I do think that this work represents a sort of crowning achievement of my career,

in that it brings it all together into one coherent systematic whole. And so there is this tremendous sense of closure or completion or sort of crowning achievement that does go with these volumes. I love to hear you say that because I think we live in kind of a golden age of apologetics and philosophy or religion in which there's many people like yourself who for decades have been defending the faith and advancing the faith and kind of have these life tomes it seems like coming out.

I think about J.P. Morland's recent defense of substance dualism. Frank Beckwith is working on a new volume defending life. Rob Bowman and Ed Komoshevsky, their new book on the deity of Jesus. Gary Habermas on the resurrection. Craig Keener's work on miracles. Like we are seeing these tomes come out. When I heard you were working on this and having read volume one,

I really feel like this is kind of a climax. Not that we want you to be finished when you're done writing this, but it's kind of a culmination of just the work you've been doing for decades and probably your most significant contribution to the body and Christ and belong and beyond. Is that overstated or would you agree with that assessment? No, I think that that would be accurate, and I do think that this will be

my most significant contribution to the church, with a capital C. This is like a gift to the church, and it is unique in that I don't know of any other contemporary systematic philosophical theology. There are lots of systematic theologies out there, but there are no other systematic philosophical theologies. And so this is a truly unique contribution to the life of the church. I love the way you frame it as a gift for the church. I think that's exactly right. I told you ahead of time that I ordered the copy that's still coming in the mail. When we did this report, it's not out in this interview, It's not out in the US yet, but I printed out.

In fact, I have it right here. You sent me the PDF. I read all of it. And I have high expectations with you as a professor, your colleague of mine at Talbot, and it did not disappoint. I really think it's fantastic. Now, let me ask you this.

Some people are going, okay, what do you even mean by a systematic philosophical theology? So maybe explain how it's different or similar to a systematic theology, biblical theology, apologetics. What makes this volume unique? Exactly. It draws upon those different areas to combine them together. It draws on biblical theology. There's a strong exegetical emphasis in these works. It draws upon historical theology. We want to see what great figures of the past, like Aquinas and Anselm, thought about these issues. And then as Nameskin said, it's strongly philosophical. It focuses on the philosophical questions that arise in each of these great areas of systematic theology. And so its contribution distribution will be primarily philosophy, but it will be a philosophy informed by biblical exegesis and

historical theology. You make a distinction I thought was really helpful when it comes to systematic theology and systematic philosophical theology. It's not so much a positive apologetic because you're taking the text as revealed as scripture, and then somebody could do a Muslim systematic philosophical theology or a Mormon one. So it's not so much positive apologetics, but it has a kind of negative apologetics. What's that distinction? Why is that important for what people should expect in this volume? It's not a book, as you say, on positive apologetics. I'm not trying to prove that Christianity is true. Rather, as a systematic theologian, I begin

with the truth of divine revelation found in holy Scripture. And I believe that Scripture teaches that Scripture is itself a form of truth in matters of faith and morals. And so it begins with that foundation, and then attempts to develop a philosophically coherent and biblically consonant theological view on all of these different philosophical questions that arise. So it does have a kind of negative apologetic value in the sense that it presents a coherent Christian worldview and therefore would ward off objections to the coherence of Christian theism or its anti-scientific nature, for example. So in that sense, it would be, or have value as a defensive apologetic.

Bill, I'm not a betting man, but if somebody had asked me ahead of time how I thought you would arrange this systematic philosophical theology, I might have been tempted to put $100 on you beginning at creation because that's where systematic theologies often begin and you've done so much work there, but you start with scripture instead. Tell us why and how you arrange these volumes. This is a reflection of my training in systematic theology at the University of Munich in Germany. The classic post-Reformation Lutheran theologians typically dealt in their systematic theologies with a series of topics called loci, and they would typically begin with the doctrine of Scripture to lay the authoritative foundation for one's theology, and then they would move to other topics like faith and

God and creation and Christ and salvation, the church, the last things. And so I thought this was a wonderful rubric for organizing your theology. It's so systematic. And so that is the pattern that I have adopted in this. And what makes it distinctive is that in each of these loci, I unearth philosophical questions that arise with respect to, say, scripture or faith or God or creation, and try to focus on those philosophical questions that arise. That's really interesting. Maybe unpack a little bit more.

So this first one, once you give the prolegomena, you talk about Scripture and you talk about faith. Where are the rest volumes going after this? What other main loci are you going to discuss? Well the next locus is the doctrine of God, and I can see this to be really the heart of Christian theology. The subject matter of theology is God, and sometimes the doctrine of God is called theology proper, because this is the doctrine of God, and so this will be the largest volume in the series. And then the subject matter of theology is not only God, but it is other things in relation to God. And so that raises the doctrine of creation then in volume three, and the doctrine of man as created in God's image. And dealing then with the doctrine of man, that

raises the issue of man as a sinner, as estranged from God, and that leads then to the next locus, which is doctrine of Christ, including the work of Christ, his atoning death for sin, and then the doctrine of salvation, justification and sanctification. So it unfolds very logically, I think. Did anything surprise you in this first volume? I mean just researching what philosophers were saying. Did you uncover anything that kind of took you by surprise that going into it you would not have anticipated? Yes, this has happened again and again. Sean, in doing this, it has not been just a matter of summarizing or rehashing my previous work. In every case, I've tried to update it and interact with cutting-edge work

I've tried to update it and interact with cutting-edge work in the field. And in the area of the doctrine of faith, I must say I was absolutely taken aback by the debate going on among Christian philosophers as to whether faith involves belief. Now, I should have thought that faith just is belief. If you have faith in something, that's something you believe. But many Christian philosophers argue that faith does not involve belief. Even saving faith, they would say, doesn't involve belief. So in their view, you can be a Christian, you can be saved, even though you don't believe that God exists, or you don't believe that Jesus rose from the dead. And so this was really, really surprising to me, and led me into a body of literature and a discussion with which

I had no previous acquaintance. So in doing this, I have felt very much like a student again. I feel like every month I am learning new things as I explore these areas. So I bring a wealth of reading and experience to the topics, but then in every case, it does involve turning over fresh ground. How much does this energize you? I get the feeling from your response that you're energized researching this, but you think about speaking things, debating things,

writing other books. Like, do you wake up going, yes, I get to research this and learn new stuff, or is it like, I just can't wait to have the final volume done? Yeah, that's very true. And I was commenting to Jan the other day that because I'm working on these different topics,

one after another, doctrine of God, doctrine of creation, doctrine of Christ, it's constantly fresh. I don't get tired of one topic because I'm rapidly moving on to another topic. One of the challenges of doing this multi-volume work is just to finish it. I figured it would take me eight to ten years to do this, and who knows if the Lord will even allow me to live that long. So if the Lord will even allow me to live that long. So I work rapidly at a steady pace and that keeps it really fresh and exciting. So yes, I'm very passionate about it. For those watching this right now, if you would comment below, if you would specifically pray for Dr. Craig for the strength and the longevity of life to be able to produce this

I have prayed this prayer bill for Gary Habermas in particular knowing that he was working on those volumes thinking what a tragedy And shame it would be if like Pascal for example died prematurely before he could finish his People watch right now comment below take out your phone right in a reminder that you will specifically pray for Bill's health, his longevity, his strength, his clarity, because this is a gift for the church that we really need. Thank you, Sean. I just don't want to give anyone the impression

that I'm in anything other than great health, very robust, I work out every weekday. Jan feeds me very well. So I'm doing great. But as you say, the uncertainties of life are such that none of us has a claim on tomorrow. Thanks for that. That's really helpful.

Now, I'm just gonna ask you to estimate on this. You know, I helped my dad update his classic evidence that demands a verdict in 2017, and I went through and looked at the number of new chapters, how much chapters we expanded, and my careful estimate was about 75% new. No one's going to hold you to this, but if you had to guess like this first volume,

how much do you think, and maybe the next volumes is just new material versus kind of new one scene and tweaking some of the stuff you've already written? I would just give a rough estimate around say 35% would be new material. As I say, I draw upon my previous publications, but then in every case, try to update it in light of the current discussion. So I think that maybe around 35% would be fresh new material. That's helpful.

I was reading it thinking it was closer to 37, 38, but I will let readers decide exactly where. That's very, very helpful. Okay. So the first line in your book, I always find first lines interesting. And the first line, I know you thought about this and placed it there intentionally, is this, systematic philosophical theologies are rare. Why are they so rare?

Can I just say something? You said this is going to be a spontaneous interview, right? The first sentence in the book is actually not that. It's in the preface. And the preface has a wonderful first line as well. It says, In his wonderful book, Knowing God, the British theologian J.I. Packer said, The British theologian J.I. Packer said, as clowns long to play Hamlet, so I have tried to write a book about God. And I comment, if Packer had wanted

to look really foolish, he would have tried to write a systematic theology. And then I go on to explain how difficult carrying out a project like this is. But then with regard to your question in the first chapter of the book, it's true that systematic philosophical theologies are rare. About the only examples I could find would be Paul Tillich

systematic theology and Wolfhard Pollenbart's systematic theology. But neither of these theologians had the advantage of the Renaissance in Christian philosophy that has taken place in the Anglo-American realm in analytic philosophy. And so their works are done in almost complete ignorance of the Renaissance of Christian philosophy in the analytic tradition. And that's what I draw upon. All right, that's helpful. I'm looking at the table of contents here, and it does say preface to volume one. And either I didn't get that or print it out, so that is, knowing the way that you phrase that,

I think it's a perfect way to open it. I love that. That's such a good, humble way of also setting expectations for people. So I can't wait to see that preface to help as well. Now, one of the things you talk about is why this is timely. Now, I think it's timely just because your life, how much you've studied this and learned

and you're really professionally in a position to write this, but it's timely just because your life, how much you've studied this and learned and you're really professionally in a position to write this, but it's also timely in terms of where the God conversation is as it relates to philosophy. Now you talk about what's called the Renaissance in Christian philosophy that makes this unique and different than Ponderberg's and Tillich's and others. What is that renaissance, and how does it inform the writing of this book by you? Well it's generally agreed, I think, Sean, that around 1967 Christian philosophers began to come

out of the closet. The event that occasioned that was Alvin Plantinga's book, God and Other Minds. And this book made it evident that a Christian philosopher was writing on the same academic plane as the most prominent secular philosophers today in the analytic tradition. And following in planting a strain came a host of Christian philosophers that began publishing with the finest academic presses and in the best philosophical journals and reading papers in the standard philosophical societies

like the American Philosophical Association, and as a result of this the the face of Anglo-American philosophy was transformed. Now I don't want to give them this impression to our listeners that somehow the majority of philosophers are now Christians. No, of course not. Christian philosophers remain a minority among philosophers, but they now have a respected place at the table and are respected dialogue partners in these forums that I just mentioned. And this revolution is ongoing. The original genesis of the Renaissance

and Christian philosophy came through people like Alvin Plantinga, Robert Adams, William Alston, Philip Quinn, Nicholas Wolderstorf. Now the old guard is beginning to pass away. But I am so thrilled to see the host of young Christian philosophers that are stepping up and taking their place. And so I'm convinced that this revolution is ongoing

and will continue to affect the Academy in the United States and the Anglo speaking world and I hope affect the church as well. I Think you're right about young Christian philosophers As you know because you've been such a pivotal part of it the MA Phil program at Talbot has just been training and equipping Philosophers for decades. I just walked to my office two days ago, and on the door next to me, J.P.

Moreland was there with about 20 students talking about philosophy and encouraging them and training them. So if some of you are watching this, the first thing, you're like, I want to study philosophy. The first thing you got to do is get this volume one by Bill's book and study it. It's like a course in itself. Think about studying with me and with J.P. Morrill and Tim Pickavance and Scott Ray and just some other brilliant philosophers to be a part of this movement. Now, Bill, I'm curious. I just realized that there's probably other pages I didn't print out from the introduction. Do you dedicate this book to anybody in particular?

Yes, I didn't send those things to you because I guess I thought for an interview you would just want to read the chapters. That's fine. Yes, there is a dedication page. And can you guess whom I dedicated it to? Well, two people come to mind, either Jan or Alvin Plantinga. Both good choices. I dedicated it to Jan with these words,

to Jan who first inspired this monumental project and has sustained me throughout. Oh, wow. And that is an appropriate description of her role. That's beautiful. I'll never forget when I interviewed you before, you said you had prayed just for one person who would believe in you,

and that would give you the strength. And Jan was like, I wanna be that person. Like I've shared that, I don't know how many times, and it's powerful. So I love Alvin Plantinga, but I think it's even better that you dedicated this to Jane. Good job. It couldn't have really been anybody else. And she has been true to that commitment and calling that she has made now for over 50 years. Okay, so you know I've been working on the Apostles and I just finished a 10-year update

and I haven't released this yet, but I actually, studying this for a decade, have reassessed probably three of the Apostles where I think the historical evidence points in terms of their martyrdoms. Now I haven't released that yet. I'm going to start talking about it probably in March. I'm going to, but I bring that up because I'm curious. As you've studied this, have you changed your mind on anything, whether you want to release it or not,

or should we anticipate in any of the volumes, William Lane Craig coming out with a different perspective that he didn't hold going in? I do not think that I so much changed my mind in the course of writing this book. I have changed my mind over the years on certain topics, that's certainly true, but when it came to writing these volumes, I don't think off the top of my head of any major issue on which I actually changed my mind. And so I guess I would have to say no.

Yeah, that's totally fair. I'm not asking you to fish for something that's not there but was really curious. We'll see if anything changes as you're still working on the future volumes Well, let's jump into some of the content of this one. So locust number one day scriptura Sakura sacred how exactly do you say that by the way? This scriptura Sakura you noticed I used the Latin curious why these post-reformation Protestant

scholastics like Melanchstone and others that I mentioned before. I just love these Latin titles of these various loci, and so this represents my trying to connect with that wonderful post-Reformation tradition. So this first one is on Scripture. So maybe tell us what would be unique about a philosophical theological approach to Scripture, and what are some of the key points that you're really aiming to surface in advance here?

I think that the most important thing in my treatment of Scripture is that I offer a model for the inspiration of Scripture that enables us to affirm verbal, plenary, confluent inspiration. That is to say, every word of Scripture is inspired, the whole of Scripture is inspired, and yet Scripture is both the Word of Man freely written and the Word of God to us. And this is really unique, Sean, because the challenge is how can you affirm plenary verbal inspiration without falling into a dictation theory of inspiration, which no one wants to affirm. And most theologians simply lead this a mystery. They say scripture is both freely written by man and inspired by God. It's the word of both God and man, and this is an impenetrable mystery. We don't

know how this is possible. And I try to provide a model to show how that could happen. So I want to talk about that model a little bit, but I got to pause and make sure people understand what's unique about this. This is where the philosophical angle comes into play, because theologians have agreed, you point out throughout history that the Bible is divine and it's human. But they've given illustrations like say, it's like a musical instrument that God plays, which maybe keeps a little bit of the human element because you select the different instrument but airs on the side of maybe a dictation model. Others bring in the human instrument, but errs on the side of kind of maybe a dictation kind of model. Others bring in the human side, but then it remains a question of like,

why is this divine and is there a way to reconcile these? So really it's the larger question of kind of the sovereignty of God and free will, but applied specifically to the writing of scripture. And I don't know that I've seen anybody else really weigh in as detailed as you did to provide a model for this. Are you aware of anyone else who really does close to this? Not on the contemporary scene. As I say, in the chapter, I did discover historical precedence

in the work of a theologian named Lesius at the University of Louvain in Belgium, in fact, where I studied for seven years, and it created an uproar in the Catholic Church. And so I discuss a little bit of that historical debate that went on over Lesios' theories of inspiration. So maybe walk through, because your solution, which won't surprise anybody who follows your material, is a Molinist kind of middle knowledge approach that reconciles the human element with the divine element.

And let me just, let me frame it the way you ask it so people understand. In the chapter you say, if God alone were the author of scripture, its inerrancy would be unproblematic. But given that the human authors write freely, how can God guarantee that they write what He desires? Walk us through your response to this, or your model for this. As you indicated, the inspiration of Scripture is simply a case study of the wider issue of divine sovereignty and human freedom. And I became convinced many years ago that the best solution to the problem of divine sovereignty and human freedom is Molinism. That is to say,

it is the doctrine developed by the Spanish Jesuit Luis Molina in the 16th century that God knows not only everything that could happen and everything that will happen, but he also has a kind of middle knowledge in between those two. He knows everything that would happen if different circumstances were in place. So for example, he knows what you would have done had you been the procurator Judea in the first century, rather than Pontius Pilate, and you were confronted with Jesus. God knows these so-called counterfactuals of freedom about how any possible person that he could create would freely choose in any set of circumstances in which he might place them. So by choosing to create certain persons in

certain circumstances, God knows exactly what they're going to do. And so applied to the doctrine of Scripture, what this means is that God knew if he were to create an apostle Paul an apostle Paul in certain circumstances, then Paul would freely write the book of Romans. And God then appropriates Paul's freely written composition as his word to us. So the book of Romans is both divinely inspired, it is God's word to us, but it is also freely written by Paul. Now the somewhat obvious objection that you anticipate in the book is somebody might say, okay, Bill, if God selects a world in which Paul freely writes or Peter freely writes, this is also the same world in which William Lane Craig freely writes his philosophical systematic theology or Shakespeare writes his. Now we might say they're inspired in one sense, but

certainly not in a divine authoritative sense. So how does that maintain the sovereignty and authorship of God on the model you're putting forward? I think what we have to say is that scripture is special in that it is appropriated by God to be His gracious word to us, whereas my systematic theology or Shakespeare's plays are not so appropriated by God. That's helpful. So I appreciate that you walk through and you say, I'm not trying to defend that scripture is true, but I'm trying to walk through and articulate how scripture treats itself.

So maybe just somewhat briefly, how did Jesus view scripture? How did Paul view scripture? How did Peter view scripture? And is there a sense where we should take the New Testament in the same way that we take the Old Testament, even though some of the authors are writing in a way where it's not even completed, yet alone compiled yet? Yes. What I argue is that Scripture itself has a doctrine of Scripture. It teaches things about itself. Now as you say, that doesn't mean that it's true, but it does have a

doctrine of Scripture. And so just to say the Quran might claim to be a divine revelation from God, the question will be what does the Scripture, the Old and New Testament claim about itself? And I think as you just indicated, that Jesus Christ taught that the Old Testament that we have today was divinely inspired by God and was God's word to man, and therefore was absolutely authoritative in all that it taught. And Jesus taught with that same sense of divine authority. This is one of the results of the study of the historical Jesus in our day and age, the realization that Jesus the realization that Jesus conceived himself as having an authority comparable to the authority of the divinely inspired Old Testament. And he bequeathed that authority in turn to his apostles and sent them out to preach the gospel message. And so the apostles also had this sense of divine authority

in what they taught. And you can find passages in the New Testament in which the letters of Paul and the gospel of Luke are treated as Scripture on the same level with these inspired books of the Old Testament. And so I think that gives us good grounds for thinking that Scripture does have a doctrine of Scripture that it is inspired by God and is therefore authoritative and true in everything that it means to teach. The passage you're referencing, of course, I know you know and you cite in your book, is in 1 Timothy 5, I think it's verses 17, where Paul specifically cites Luke chapter 10, and I believe Deuteronomy, and refers to them as Scripture, which means by the time Paul, or whoever the author of 1 Timothy is,

is aware that these are being treated as if they are scripture and authoritative at the end of the first century. And then you give the example from, I think it's 2 Peter 3, 15 through 16. Right. Where Peter, or again, the author of 2 Peter, whomever that may be,

just give it a wink to critical scholarship, refers to the letters of Paul, even though we don't know exactly what they are, as authoritative. So you see this emergence of the letters being treated akin to the Old Testament Scripture and authority. He even calls Paul's letters Scripture. He says that the ignorant and unlearned twist what he says to say as they do the other scriptures. So it really is remarkable that by the end of the first century already these New Testament books are being regarded as authoritative divinely inspired scripture.

And I thought it was really helpful some examples from Jesus and Paul that you brought out, like Jesus in Matthew. I think it's in Matthew 12, Matthew 19, Matthew 21, Matthew 22, where he refers to something in effect of, have you not read? It is written and refers to the Old Testament and he considers it authoritative and definitive and obviously inspired. I think he said 12 or 16 times in the letter of Romans, Paul has something in effect of it is written referring to the Old Testament. So this chapter, less apologetics, is just helpful to help me have clarity on the question of,

okay, if we just take scripture on its own merit, how does scripture view itself? What is the doctrine of scripture? That part is brilliant and really, really helpful. I thought worth the price of the book. Excellent. Which is not cheap, $65. I'm not going to lie, but it's worth it, Bill. I understand the price of academic books

Sean I thought this book would cost at least 135 dollars. Okay, I did because these academic books these scholarly books have very small print runs and So they typically cost the moon and when I heard Wiley Blackwell was pricing it at $65, I was ecstatic. I could not believe that they would do it so cheaply. The first hardback of the Apostles book, I think, was double that. And it was just painful for me. I didn't anticipate it. The paperback was cheaper, etc. So you're right. When people see $65, I want you to realize to have a publisher of this merit and repute, so to speak, not a definitively Christian publisher

to get behind this and make it $65 is half of what it easily could cost for a hardback. Let's move to the second one where you talk about faith. Maybe it'd be helpful if you described, so now we're having like a doctrine of what the Bible says about faith. Right. Talk about what the Bible says about faith and whether or not propositional truth,

like believing certain things about God's character, is necessary for biblical saving faith. So when Scripture talks about faith, what I'm interested in is particularly saving faith. Faith generically is more than just saving faith. For example, when I go to the dentist and let him put his hands in my mouth, I have faith in my dentist that he'll do a good job, or a mother might have faith that her son will come home from war. I'm not interested in generic faith, I'm interested specifically in saving faith that the New Testament talks about. By grace you've been saved through faith. And the question is what is the nature of saving faith? And I

think it is dual in that it is obviously trust in a person. It is trust in God, trust in Jesus Christ. There is that element of personal commitment, so there is faith in the sense of trust. But then there is also faith in a propositional sense, that you have faith that certain things are true. So for example, Paul says, if you confess with your lips that Jesus is Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you shall be saved. So there Paul is identifying certain propositional truths that you should believe to be a Christian. It's not just to have some mushy, ill-formed trust in Christ as a person. There are certain propositions that need to be believed or need to be the object of faith. So I distinguish

personal faith from propositional faith and maintain that both of these are part of saving faith. There's so much confusion about faith inside the church and outside the church. I had a debate with an atheist a few years ago and we were supposed to surprise each other with mistakes we think the other side made. And I said, you guys need to stop calling

what we believe blind faith. You might think it's wrong, but we're appealing to evidence. This chapter nuances that faith is more than propositional belief. After all, the demons believe, but they're clearly not saved. So it's more, it's that element of trust,

but it is no less than certain propositional truths. That's really important. So we need correct belief and an act of trust. And this is what the Bible on its own merit teaches. That clarification I thought was really, really helpful. Let me shift to the section that again, I thought this was one of the more interesting sections to me.

You have a discussion about pragmatic truth dependent and truth independent arguments. So Pascal's Wager is what's a pragmatic truth dependent argument. And you argue that when we understand what's meant by truth dependent and Pascal's wager, it provides practical justification for Christian belief. Explain if you will. Well, this has been widely misunderstood by the secular community online. There is a difference between epistemic justification and pragmatic justification. Epistemic justification would concern what rational justification you have for believing that something is true, but pragmatic justification would be how you could be pragmatically justified in believing something, even though you don't

have any good reasons to believe it. And this happens all the time in ordinary life. For example, suppose someone has been diagnosed with stage four cancer, and the prognosis is grim that he probably won't survive. But suppose that his chances of survival are improved if he believes that he's going to make it. Well, in that case, it would be suicidal for him to just follow his epistemic justification,

say, I probably won't make it. I'm probably going to die. But if he has an optimistic attitude and he believes that he's going to make it, he's going to get through, he thereby improves his chances that he will get through. And so he would be pragmatically justified in believing a certain proposition. And so there are ways in which a person might have pragmatic grounds for believing Christianity to be true that are quite independent of epistemic grounds. The other one you talk about is what are truth-independent arguments, and this is more about like William James claim that

religious belief is beneficial whether or not it is true. It might be beneficial for your marriage, it might make you happier, you might have longer health, etc. Does such truth independent argument offer good epistemic reasons, practical reasons, both or neither to believe in God? Well, primarily practical reasons. That's what we're talking about in this section. Pascal's argument, as you know, was that if you believe in Christianity and it turns out to be true, then you have hugely gained an advantage. So it's hugely advantageous practically to believe in Christianity if it's true. But James's

arguments were that even if it turns out to be false, there are still great advantages to believing in Christianity's truth Because of the benefits that it might have in this life so there are both truth dependent pragmatic arguments and truth Independent pragmatic arguments and these would give a person not epistemic justification for thinking that Christianity is true, but it wouldn't give him pragmatic or practical justification for believing in Christianity.

I had a discussion with an atheist who's young, really brilliant thinker, maybe two or three years ago, and I asked him, I said, is there anything about the world that gives you pause, that makes you think there might be a God? And one thing he said was consciousness. The other thing is I forget exactly how he worded it, but it was the effect of like just kind of sociologically, religion works. It gives people meaning, it gives people purpose. And to me, it's not an argument because the way you framed it here in the sense that it's kind of truth independent.

But to me it kind of suggests something a little further. You asked the question like why is it that we flourish best when we follow a biblical prescription? Would you say that it just suggests that? Like how would you kind of parse that out a little bit? I do think that meaning, value, purpose in life can provide pragmatic justification for being a Christian. I've argued that it's impossible to live happily and consistently within an atheistic framework, and therefore leads ultimately to despair or inconsistency. So that would provide a pragmatic justification for believing in Christianity to be true. It allows you to live consistently within the framework of this worldview by furnishing meaning, value, and purpose in life. But I quite agree with you that you could try to push that argument a little further

and say, well, apprehension of moral value and of purpose in the world and of beauty in the world suggest that there is something transcendent that grounds these and may well push us beyond this world to affirming a higher reality which is God. Bill, I got a million more questions for you, but people are gonna have to pick up this volume. In fact, we could have an hour and a half discussion on each chapter here and go into incredible depth. But I think this is enough to give people a sense of what the book is about. Hopefully they're motivated to pick it up. Is there a special or a helpful place

that people buy it from? I just went to Amazon and ordered it. If they get it from your ministry or Amazon, is there a better place that maybe helps you more or does it not really matter? Dr. Craig Lovell I think that Amazon currently is the best place to get it. However, here's a preview. When we have our annual spring fundraising campaign for reasonable faith, we're planning on offering this volume as a free premium for those who become sustaining donors at $100 a month. So if you want to support the ministry, that would be a good way to get a free copy of the book. I love that. Now I saw that you

had a video, and I have to admit I didn't watch it, but it was about a launch team for the book. I love that. Now I saw that you had a video and I have to admit I didn't watch it, but it was about a launch team for this book. Is there a team of people you're getting to help promote it, spread the word? Tell us about that. Yes, this is primarily organized by the director of our reasonable faith local chapters around the world. His name is Tyson James, and he has organized a kind of reading group, a virtual group online who will read the book together, post reviews, and then I will have interviews with them in which they can ask me questions about the reading that they've been doing. So if anyone's interested in joining such a reading group, go to our website

reasonablefaith.org and contact the local chapters section on the website. I just have to emphasize, I think that's fantastic. I didn't realize that you were doing that. You know I did the MA Phil program early 2000s, and one of the best things was after a lecture, I would go to the common grounds on campus at Biola with some of my classmates, and we'd be like, okay, what did you understand? What was your takeaway from this?

Is there a weakness in this argument? How can we make it stronger? We would just talk about it. And this is probably true for learning anything, but I think especially theology and philosophy, you've got to talk about it. And this is probably true for learning anything, but I think especially theology and philosophy, you've got to talk about it. You have to dialogue about it. You got to think about it.

So I was able to read this book and I because I have a master's in philosophy, I'm able to wrestle and learn a ton. It felt like I was going through a course, but if I'm in line with 10 people or 20 people and we're interacting and then you're going to come on and answer questions with people, that's gold. So I can't encourage people enough to not only pick up a copy

but to be involved in that. I think that's what a cool thing that your ministry is offering to not only incentivize people to get a copy of the book, which they should, but also really train people effectively through it. So I love that, what a creative idea. So let me just say to our audience, if you've benefited from Dr. Craig's ministry

from reasonable faith, minimally get a copy of this book. Wherever you get it, help spread the word. Write a review online. I'm gonna write a review and my copy comes up, Bill. Get a copy somewhere. Think about joining that small group that you described to really learn this, and hopefully that would be a step to join us in the MA Phil or Apologetics program. We'd love the kind of students who join that

to take it a step further. Or even my students, if you've already done the MA Phil program, you would still benefit a ton from getting this or even this video right here. If this is helpful, share it to somebody who's wondering what is philosophy or religion about? What's this book about? Comment below. Bill, I hope everybody picks this up. I've told you many times the influence you've had on my life personally. Can't thank you enough. So I hope this really gets the

word out, helps the ministry. And we're gonna keep praying that God just gives you energy. And of course your health is great, love to hear that. But just strength and energy and creativity to finish this project for the church. Last question, if I may. Remind me, how many volumes are there? And when can we expect them roughly to come out

if you even know? Okay, I am finishing writing volume four. Okay. Now, volume two is divided into two parts, two A and two B. Two A should appear sometime this spring. It's print set. It's type set, it's ready to go. 2B still needs to have the indices prepared for it and that's a very slow process. So maybe by the end of the year 2B would be out and then probably next year sometime, volume 3 on doctrine of creation and doctrine of man should appear.

Awesome. Now when I get off this call, I'm going to send the final typescript of volume three to the Wiley Blackwell production team so that they can get going on copy editing it. That's amazing. I love to hear that. Well, I was gonna put you on the spot and see if you'd commit to coming back when each volume comes out, but I won't do that. But we will certainly invite you back and would love to help spread the word one by one.

Very good. Bill, always enjoy it. Go send that email and folks, before you leave, make sure you hit subscribe. We will have interviews coming up with Dr. Craig on a range of topics. We have apologetics, some more on near-death experiences coming up.

We have some topics on the seven best questions to ask your Muslim friend and a range of other topics as well. And if you thought about studying philosophy or apologetics, we would love to have you at Biola Talbot School of Theology, distance or online. If you're not quite ready yet, we are totally revamping our certificate program right now. And I can't wait for this to come out.

There's information below. Maybe that's a good place to start along with the reading group with Dr. Craig. Bill, always enjoy it. We'll do it again. Go send that email. Thank you, Sean. It's been my pleasure. Thank you.