Here is a first draft of a review of Crisp and Rea (eds.), Analytic Theology. If you have an interest in analytic philosophy of realigion, you'll want to read at least Rea's introduction and Wolterstorff's contribution to this volume.
As always, feedback welcome.
I rather liked Mike's intro as well. And if the Logos workshop at Notre Dame last weekend is any indication, there is hope for the "getting theologians to talk with analytic philosophers" project...
(PS: I think you're missing an apostrophe in "volumes" on the last page).
From the review I think I may have to get this just to read Rauser's contribution! My impression is that analytic philosophers would be quite happy to talk to theologians and the resistance comes from the other side. I notice that the typos tend to appear when your quoting others. Example:
"The problem isn't jus [just?] that academic [academics?]"
"conforms to the prescriptions that are distinction [distinctive?] of analytic philosophical discourse [(] {Rea, 3 and 7)."
"cut to the chase by nothing [noting?] that the God we have identified in our initial orientation is not some idol"
OK, I think I've now fixed those typos--and a few more. Thanks.
I was under the same impression as you, Matthew, about the direction of resistance, but Andrew (in his comment and then a bit more via email) suggests that this is changing, at least in some circles.