In my last post, I discussed Walter Sinnott-Armstrong’s argument from harm. I concluded by suggesting that his conclusion missed the point and failed to address the conditional, defended by William Lane Craig that, if theism is true then there exists a sound foundation for moral duties. In this post I will argue that the same […]
Entries from April 20th, 2009
Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, William Lane Craig and the Argument from Harm Part II
April 20th, 2009 7 Comments
Tags: Divine Command Theory · Ethics · God and Morality · Walter Sinnott-Armstrong · William Lane Craig
Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, William Lane Craig and the Argument from Harm Part I
April 18th, 2009 1 Comment
This is the first of a two-part series where I examine a recent argument criticising religious ethics by Walter Sinnott-Armstrong. In many of his publications and debates William Lane Craig has defended the contention that if theism is true then there exists a sound foundation for moral duties. In a recent article, Walter Sinnott-Armstrong has […]
Tags: Divine Command Theory · Ethics · God and Morality · Walter Sinnott-Armstrong · William Alston · William Lane Craig
Guest Post: The Virtue of Christian Dogma
April 17th, 2009 24 Comments
The following is authored by Dominic Bnonn Tennant, of the blog Dominic Bnonn Tennant – Developing the Mind of Christ. Please support Bnonn by clicking through to his site. Bnonn writes: Damian over at ‘And Slaters Go Plop’ has recently written on Dogma, arguing against its intellectual legitimacy, and asking how we can avoid it. […]
Tags: Atheism · Faith and Reason · Guest Post
The Foundations of the Alexandrian Argument against Feticide Part VI
April 16th, 2009 3 Comments
This post marks the conclusion in my series on The Alexandrian Argument. Having addressed whether Exodus 21:22-25 deals with a miscarriage or premature birth, whether the harm mentioned in verses 22 and 23 refers to the woman or the fetus and whether the punishments in the relevant clauses are qualitatively different, I will return to […]
Tags: Abortion · Ethics · Feticide · Philosophy of Religion · The Alexandrian Argument · Theology
The Foundations of the Alexandrian Argument against Feticide Part V
April 15th, 2009 7 Comments
Having previously addressed whether causing the death of a woman is a capital offence, I will now examine how Exodus 21:22-25 views feticide. Is Feticide Condemned as a Minor OffenceHarrison argues that the reference to a fine in v 22 suggests that the law considers feticide did “not constitute a major crime at that time”.[1] […]
Tags: Abortion · Ethics · Feticide · Philosophy of Religion · The Alexandrian Argument · Theology
Half April HalfDone Stats: MandM 6th Most Read Blog in New Zealand
April 15th, 2009 6 Comments
These rankings are not the official results for April, just an indication of the lay of the land and how the month is progressing for everyone. The top 10 New Zealand blogs on public discourse are shown below, the other 250 or so that made the rankings are over here. We have climbed 1 spot […]
Alvin Plantinga v Daniel Dennett: Evolution, Naturalism and Christian Theism
April 14th, 2009 5 Comments
Given how heavy and long some of our posts have been of late, I thought something more entertaining was in order (and because Matt has been asking me for weeks to put this up). Here is the February exchange at the APA between Alvin Plantinga and Daniel Dennett. By way of intro, I will quote […]
Tags: Alvin Plantinga · Daniel Dennett · Debates · Philosophy of Religion · Science and Religion
A common objection to belief in the God of the Bible is that a good, kind, and loving deity would never command the wholesale slaughter of nations. In the tradition of his popular Is God a Moral Monster?, Paul Copan teams up with Matthew Flannagan to tackle some of the most confusing and uncomfortable passages of Scripture. Together they help the Christian and nonbeliever alike understand the biblical, theological, philosophical, and ethical implications of Old Testament warfare passages.
