Thinking Matters and Evangelical Union hosted an event at the University of Auckland for Jesus Week entitled A Godless Public Square: Do ‘Private’ Christian Beliefs Have a Place in Public Life? This event was essentially a conversation between Theology, Philosophy and Law on the topic of Religion in Public Life. It featured Matthew Flannagan – Analytic Theologian, Glenn Peoples – Philosopher and Madeleine Flannagan – Legal Scholar […]
Tags: Doctrine of Religious Restraint · Freedom of Religion · Gerald Gaus · Glenn Peoples · John Rawls · MandM on Video · Pat Brittenden · Religion in Public Life · Robert Audi · Steven Smith
A few weeks ago, as part of Jesus Week at the University of Auckland, Thinking Matters and Evangelical Union hosted an event entitled A Godless Public Square: Do ‘Private’ Christian Beliefs Have a Place in Public Life? This event was a conversation between Theology, Philosophy and Law and featured Matthew Flannagan – Analytic Theologian, Glenn Peoples – Philosopher and Madeleine Flannagan – Legal Scholar. The video is still […]
Tags: Doctrine of Religious Restraint · Freedom of Religion · Jesus Week · Paul Rishworth · Religion in Public Life · Rights and Freedoms · Steven Smith · Thinking Matters
A few weeks ago, as part of Jesus Week at the University of Auckland, Thinking Matters and Evangelical Union hosted an event entitled A Godless Public Square: Do ‘Private’ Christian Beliefs Have a Place in Public Life? This event was a conversation between Theology, Philosophy and Law and featured Matthew Flannagan – Analytic Theologian, Glenn Peoples – Philosopher and Madeleine Flannagan – Legal Scholar. The video is still […]
Tags: Doctrine of Religious Restraint · Gerald Gaus · Glenn Peoples · Jesus Week · Religion in Public Life · Robert Audi · Thinking Matters
A few weeks ago, as part of Jesus Week at the University of Auckland, Thinking Matters and Evangelical Union hosted an event entitled A Godless Public Square: Do ‘Private’ Christian Beliefs Have a Place in Public Life? This event was a conversation between Theology, Philosophy and Law and featured Matthew Flannagan – Analytic Theologian, Glenn Peoples – Philosopher and Madeleine Flannagan – Legal […]
Tags: Christopher Eberle · Doctrine of Religious Restraint · Evangelical Union · Glenn Peoples · Jesus Week · Michael Tooley · Nicholas Wolterstorff · Phillip Quinn · Religion in Public Life · Richard Rorty · Robert Adams · Robert Audi · Stephen Carter · Terence Cuneo · Thinking Matters
The following appeared in a recent edition of Sunday News. As you read this, please bear in mind that what is described here is officially fictional. The line from the Commentariat is that this sort of thing never actually occurs and certainly could not exist. The official Commentariat talking points are that human beings are […]
Tags: Welfare
In my last post “Response to William Lane Craig’s Question 225: “The ‘Slaughter’ of the Canaanites Re-visited” Part I” I discussed William Lane Craig’s position on the Canaanite Conquest account (in light of the fact that Craig referred to my argument in his question of the week: “Question 225: The “Slaughter” of the Canaanites Re-visited”). I […]
Tags: Atlanta · Canaanites · Evangelical Philosophical Society · Genocide · Nicholas Wolterstorff · Old Testament Ethics · Paul Copan · Question of the Week · Society of Biblical Literature · William Lane Craig
Not too long ago I wrote a post entitled We’re Going to San Francisco! In it I announced that in November 2011 Madeleine and I will jointly be giving a paper to the Society of Biblical Literature Annual Meeting, and that I will be giving a paper to the Evangelical Philosophical Association Annual Meeting and also […]
Tags: Notre Dame · Notre Dame Center for Ethics and Culture · Religion in Public Life · San Francisco · South Bend · Vincent Phillip Muñoz
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.
Today's New Atheists proclaim themselves our culture's party of reason. It is a claim they cannot sustain. Reason is the New Atheists' weakness, not their strength and in fact, the Christian faith is a far better place to look for True Reason. Making their case accessible to the first-time inquirer as well as the serious student, this top-flight team of writers presents a sound defense and a strong introduction to the true reason uniquely found in Christianity.
The book begins by examining foundational philosophical approaches to the Bible as well as the methodological challenges those philosophies create for interpreting the Bible. It then addresses textual and historical challenges and how to deal with them. Finally it looks at ethical, scientific, and theological challenges demonstrating the Bible's moral integrity in relationship to contemporary moral emphases.
Many philosophers have considered the strengths and weaknesses of a virtue-centered approach to moral theory. Much less attention has been given to how such an approach bears on issues in applied ethics. The essays in this volume apply a virtue-centered perspective to a variety of contemporary moral issues.
The challenge of a seemingly genocidal God who commands ruthless warfare has bewildered Bible readers for generations. A range of expert contributors engage in a multidisciplinary approach that considers this issue from a variety of perspectives: biblical, ethical, philosophical and theological.
The nineteen essays here raise classical philosophical questions in fresh ways, address contemporary challenges for the church, and will deepen the thinking of the next generation of apologists. Packed with dynamic topical discussions and informed by the latest scholarship.
While New Atheists like Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and others proclaim loudly their rationality, clear thinking, and incontrovertible scientific arguments, others are beginning to wonder how genuinely rational they are. Have they proved anything? Have they argued convincingly? Have they pinpointed any real challenges to the credibility of Christian faith?