Richard Swinburne came highly recommended to me. Yet, after reading this book, I can say that he has greatly exceeded my expectations. I found Swinburne's argumentation to be clear, concise, and in many cases interesting. But not easy. There were several parts of his book which I had to read, and re-read, in order to fully understand his line of thought, which I expected.
Swinburne's task is to discover whether or not Theism is coherent. He concludes that it (probably) is. He doesn't argue that it's true per say merely that the Theist can not be charged with holding incoherent views. The book is split into three separate sections. In the first, Swinburne goes about defining what it means for something to be `coherent' and `incoherent.' He argues that a statement is incoherent if it entails a self-contradictory statement. He also argues that the easiest way to find a statement to be coherent is if that statement entails another statement which is coherent. He spends the rest of section 1 describing religious language--i.e. whether language describing God is used equivocally, univocally, or analogously. Throughout the book Swinburne maintains that we can describe God using words (such as "love" and "good") in their `mundane' senses without (always) appealing to analogy.
In section 2, Swinburne argues for a `contingent' god. He looks at eight different characteristics that Theists have typically used to describe God--an omnipresent spirit, free and creator of the universe, omnipotent, omniscient, perfectly good, a source of moral obligation, eternal, and immutable. He goes through each and argues first, that such notions are in fact coherent, and second such notions can be successfully defended against critiques. The bulk of the book takes up this portion. Perhaps what I found most interesting was how he indicated how several of these characteristics (for example, omnipotent and omniscient) entailed other characteristics (omnipresent spirit).
In the final section, Swinburne argues for the notion of a necessary being. He first lists different criteria for something to be necessary. Then he sees how these criteria apply to God's existence, and God's possession of these characteristics. He concludes that in order for a Theist to express what he normally expresses when saying that "God exists" the Theist must use some terms in a slightly analogous way. And since, it's not clear which terms are being analogously, and to what degree the question of coherence cannot (ultimately) be removed from the question of whether or not Theism is true. All in all, I highly recommend Swinburne's book as a fascinating read and a great defense of the coherency of theism.
This book is the first of his trilogy, the next book being "The Existence of God" and concluding with "Faith and Reason."