Philosophia Christi 18 (2):323-332 (2016)

Katherin Rogers
University of Delaware
In Christ and the Cosmos Keith Ward hopes to “reformulate” the conciliar statements of the Trinity and Incarnation since they cannot serve our post-Enlightenment, scientific age. I dispute Ward’s motivation, noting that the differences in perspective to which he points may not be as radical as he supposes. And his “reformulation” has worrisome consequences. I am especially concerned at his point that Jesus, while very special and perfectly good, is only human. This undermines free will theodicy, and, much more troubling, makes global Christian practice for two millennia idolatry.
Keywords Contemporary Philosophy  Philosophy and Religion
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.5840/pc201618230
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 60,901
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Responses to Essays on Christ and the Cosmos.Keith Ward - 2016 - Philosophia Christi 18 (2):387-391.
Comments on Keith Ward’s Christ and the Cosmos.Stephen T. Davis - 2016 - Philosophia Christi 18 (2):307-312.
Response to Keith Ward, Christ and the Cosmos.Richard Swinburne - 2016 - Philosophia Christi 18 (2):297-305.
Medieval Views of the Cosmos.Evelyn Edson - 2004 - Bodleian Library, University of Oxford.


Added to PP index

Total views
10 ( #859,930 of 2,439,093 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #434,440 of 2,439,093 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes