William Rowe’s Philosophy of Religion: An Introduction.
The more one reads it, the more one questions the competency of Rowe, and wonder if he has not grown too old, his mind aged too much, to think properly. Examples of frustratingly weak arguments abound in his book, and hardly does he point out the apparent weaknesses in those arguments. It would hardly require a student of philosophy to pick out those daring flaws. Moreover, he seems to enjoy weaving sophisticated webs out of some very simple concepts; such that what could have been explained in a mere few sentences takes instead three pages to explain. Clarity is so often confused with verbosity. The true danger of parading all those poor arguments as valid is that it leads readers into a false philosophy; having them believe propositions akin to the sayings in fairy tales. This is probably why so few philosophers now take seriously the philosophy of religion – they would rather not be a part of this circus of clowns.