Why is this so? One answer is hinted at in Levine’s quote above. That is, the limitations of the scope of the philosophy of religion may be owing to the many Christian philosophers who are motivated by “faith seeking understanding.” This, however, suggests a motivation that is perhaps more subtle and not a matter of philosophers’ intentionally ignoring alternatives.

While it may be somewhat unfair to describe Christian philosophers who are interested in problems that emerge from their own faith tradition as engaged in apologetics, such individuals have an immediate motivation to focus their attention on problems that are of deep concern to them as religious persons. What has to be made clear to such philosophers is the value of engaging with alternatives that may allow them to take one step closer to a global perspective in their work in the philosophy of religion.

We would contend that studying alternatives to classical theism is useful for anyone interested in religion, including traditional theists, atheists, and agnostics. Traditional theists can compare their own concept of God with alternative concepts to clarify the strengths and shortcomings of theirs.

Atheists and agnostics can consider alternative concepts and examine whether their atheism/agnosticism extends to alternative concepts.