This is the second part of the paper I presented to the Naturalisms in Ethics Conference at Auckland University last year. In my previous post, I noted that Robert Adams has argued that if God exists, then divine commands “best fill the role assigned to wrongness by the concept”.[1] He argues that if moral obligations are […]
Entries Tagged as 'Walter Sinnott-Armstrong'
Is Ethical Naturalism More Plausible than Supernaturalism? A Reply to Walter Sinnott-Armstrong: Part II
April 26th, 2012 7 Comments
Tags: Divine Command Theory · John Hare · Robert Adams · Stephen Layman · Walter Sinnott-Armstrong · William Lane Craig
Is Ethical Naturalism more Plausible than Supernaturalism? A Reply to Walter Sinnott-Armstrong Part I
February 7th, 2012 9 Comments
This is first half of the paper I presented to the Naturalisms in Ethics Conference at Auckland University last year. In many of his addresses and debates William Lane Craig has defended a Divine Command Theory of moral obligation (“DCT”). In a recent article Walter Sinnott-Armstrong has criticized this contention.[1] Armstrong contends that even if […]
Tags: Divine Command Theory · God and Morality · Robert Adams · Walter Sinnott-Armstrong · William Lane Craig
Back from San Francisco: A Belated Report
February 3rd, 2012 2 Comments
MandM has been quite of late, this is because Madeleine and I have been very busy. With moving house in the midst of Christmas and New Years and Madeleine working part-time in a law firm and so on, we’ve had little time to blog. We are now set up, to some extent, and so this […]
Tags: Biblioblog · David Baggett · Evangelical Philosophical Society · Jerry Walls · Paul Copan · Publication; San Francisco · Society of Biblical Literature · Walter Sinnott-Armstrong · William Lane Craig
Friday Fallacy: Equivocation
April 16th, 2011 14 Comments
In my post on Assessing Arguments I noted that a valid argument is one where it is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false. I gave the following example: Premise: All men are under 10 feet tall; Premise: John is a man; Conclusion: John is under 10 feet tall. This argument […]
Tags: Equivocation Fallacy · Fallacy Friday · Luke Muehlhauser · Walter Sinnott-Armstrong · Wes Morriston · William Wainwright
Walter Sinnott-Armstrong and the Moral Scepticism Objection to Divine Commands
September 16th, 2010 9 Comments
In responding to William Lane Craig’s advocacy of a Divine Command Theory (DCT) Walter Sinnott-Armstrong makes the objection that,“The divine command theory makes morality unknowable.” He makes the following argument for this: To see why, consider whether or not it is immoral to eat pork. If the divine command theory is correct, we cannot answer […]
Tags: Divine Command Theory · God and Morality · James Cornman · Keith Lehrer · Patrick Nowell Smith · Walter Sinnott-Armstrong · William Lane Craig
Sunday Study: Joshua and the Genocide of the Canaanites Part I
January 3rd, 2010 52 Comments
Critics of Christianity often claim that the book of Joshua teaches that God commanded genocide. Raymond Bradley for example states, In chapters 7 through 12, [the book of Joshua] treats us to a chilling chronicle of the 31 kingdoms, and all the cities therein, that fell victim to Joshua’s, and God’s, genocidal policies. Time and […]
Tags: Alvin Plantinga · Brevard Childs · Canaanites · Genocide · Hermeneutics · Joshua · Kenneth Kitchen · Nicholas Wolterstorff · Old Testament Ethics · Raymond Bradley · Sunday Study · Theology · Walter Sinnott-Armstrong
Walter Sinnott-Armstrong and Infantile Religious Morality
September 24th, 2009 71 Comments
In “Why Traditional Theism Cannot Provide an Adequate Foundation for Morality” Walter Sinnott Armstrong criticises William Lane Craig’s contention that theism, if true, provides an adequate foundation for morality. Armstrong contends that Craig’s position is “incredible”[1] and subject to a “cavalcade of devastating objections.”[2] He goes on to conclude that his criticisms do not just […]
Tags: Divine Command Theory · Ethics · God and Morality · Patrick Nowell Smith · Philosophy of Religion · Richard Mouw · Walter Sinnott-Armstrong
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.
