Don't buy just another philosophy of religion textbook, get the best. GOD, REASON, AND RELIGION walks you through unusual examples and new ideas on the way to explain the core issues of the philosophy of religion. Plus it's got the study tools you need and easy to follow explanations so you'll be ready for the test as well.
Steven M. Cahn, Ph.D. (Philosophy, Columbia University, 1966; A.B., Columbia College, 1963), teaches academic ethics, philosophy of religion, and philosophy of education at the Graduate Center and has published widely in the field of philosophy and education.
Cahn joined the Graduate Center as professor of philosophy and dean of graduate studies in 1983. He was named provost and vice president for academic affairs in 1984, remaining in that position until 1992. He previously taught at Dartmouth College, Vassar College, the University of Rochester, New York University, and the University of Vermont, where from 1973 to 1980 he headed the department of philosophy. He held executive positions with the Exxon Education Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the National Endowment for the Humanities, and he is longtime president of the John Dewey Foundation.
This is easily the worst philosophical book I have ever read (I have a Ph.D. in philosophy and specialize in the philosophy of religion). Three examples: first, the entire chapter on heaven is nothing but a long list of rhetorical questions, and as I teach my first-year philosophy students rhetorical questions are not arguments. Second, when he attempts to critique some philosophical argument he demonstrates his true ignorance of the subject matter almost immediately (see, for example, his truly terrible description of cosmological arguments). Finally, he almost always fails to consider counterexamples/replies to his arguments.
I'm really at a loss for how anyone would agree to publish this.
Very basic book, simply written in a concise manner about the philosophy of religion. Many elements like cosmological argument is not well explained (and also misunderstood by the author) and chapters ask many questions and rhetoric cannot be used as arguments. The chapter on religion itself manifests the lack of understanding of religion coming from the Author. I wonder how Wadsworth even agreed to publish this work!