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 · 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
Is it just for a pluralistic society to ground its public policy on religious premises? What role should religion play in such a society? Debate over questions like these has figured in theology, philosophy, political science, jurisprudence and popular culture for centuries. In contemporary Western pluralistic society the debate continues. Even for those unfamiliar with […]
Tags: Christopher Eberle · Coercion Test · Doctrine of Religious Restraint · Endorsement Test · Freedom of Religion · Gerald Gaus · James Madison · John Rawls · Jürgen Habermas · Justice Scalia · Law Studies · Lee v Weisman · Lemon Test · Nicholas Wolterstorff · Philip Devine · Philip Quinn · Philosophy of Religion · Political Philosophy · Religion in Public Life · Richard Rorty · Robert Audi · Separationism · Stephen Carter · Terence Cuneo · Vincent Phillip Muñoz
Legal scholar Stephen Carter stated, One good way to end a conversation – or start an argument – is to tell a group of well educated professionals that you hold a political position (preferably a controversial one such as being against abortion or pornography) because it is required by your understanding of God’s will. In […]
Tags: Christopher Eberle · Contra Mundum · Doctrine of Religious Restraint · Investigate Magazine · Michael Tooley · Nicholas Wolterstorff · Philip Quinn · Religion in Public Life · Richard Rorty · Robert Audi · Stephen Carter · Terence Cuneo
In my last posts, beginning Religious Restraint and Public Policy: Part I, I set out the doctrine of religious restraint and critiqued some of the key arguments in support of it. I looked at the objection that the argument from respect is too thin, that applied consistently it excludes too much and Audi’s response to […]
Tags: Christopher Eberle · Doctrine of Religious Restraint · Freedom of Religion · Jurisprudence · Law Studies · Lydia McGrew · Nicholas Wolterstorff · Phillip Quinn · Philosophy of Religion · Political Philosophy · Public Policy · Religion in Public Life · Robert Audi · Stephen Carter · Terence Cuneo
In my last posts, beginning Religious Restraint and Public Policy: Part I, I set out the doctrine of religious restraint and critiqued some of the key arguments in support of it. I looked at the objection that the argument from respect is too thin, that applied consistently it excludes too much and Audi’s response to […]
Tags: Christopher Eberle · Doctrine of Religious Restraint · Freedom of Religion · Gerald Gaus · Glenn Peoples · Jurisprudence · Law Studies · Philosophy of Religion · Political Philosophy · Public Policy · Religion in Public Life · Robert Audi · Terence Cuneo
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?