RICHARD RORTY commends a style which says things like 'try thinking of it this way' or 'try to ignore apparently traditional questions; substitute the following new and possibly more interesting questions.' It does not pretend to have a better candidate for doing the same old things which we did when we spoke the old way. Rather, it suggests that we might want to stop doing those things and do something else. Rorty's advice is echoed in the writings of current philosophers of every stripe as they follow the course beyond modernity charted earlier by Wittgenstein and Heidegger. In this paper I shall try to put this good advice to theological use. But I shall not espouse the hermeneutical, neopragmatist, or deconstructionist programs with which it is associated. The linguistic turn maps as slippery a path for postmodern as the subjective turn did for modern Following Rorty's advice in part, however, I shall argue here that Christian should turn from the agenda defined for it by philosophers since the Enlightenment and substitute a fresh agenda—not one posed by postmodern philosophy but one at least in part suggested by the conversation with major world religions now gathering momentum. I shall argue that this fresh agenda is likely to prove more congenial to the interests of Christian affirmation particularly as these are served by what is misleadingly called philosophical theology or natural theology. After a brief sketch of the contours of the new conversation, I shall present an analysis of the logical structure of arguments in I shall then field an interpretation of the contemporary theological scene viewed in the perspective of the history of the debate about such arguments which criticism