On 4 February 2011 the Auckland Reason and Science Society (“RSS”) hosted an event they titled “Divine Command Theory with Dr. Matthew Flannagan” at the University of Auckland. For those of you who missed the event, here is the video.
Note: This video only includes footage of the talk itself and not the Q&A that followed the talk.
Tags: Divine Command Theory · God and Morality · MandM on Video · Reason and Science Society10 Comments
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?
So basically what you are trying to say is that you can’t be good unless you believe in god? @.
M did you actually listen to the talk? He explicitly explained that there is a difference between epistemological necessity and ontological necessity, i.e. you cannot be good without God, however that doesn’t mean you have to believe in God in order to be good. I suggest listening to what he actually says.
Is my sense of humor too subtle… why do people always take an obvious jest so seriously!
Probably because blatantly missing the point is something of a habit for you.
*sigh*
Not interested in another round of exchanging insults with someone I don’t know online. Sorry.
It was a joke because Matt went to great lengths to explain that what I said was NOT what he meant – and yet I know that people will still turn around and say what I said.
The smiley face should have given it away.
Jokes become so less funny when you have to explain them to people…
I thought it was funny M.
Worst Michael Keaton movie EVA!!!
Max, try the winking smiley. 😉
It’s an easier way to get across that you’re kidding.
@ Matt:
Is there a transcript of this talk. ?
The angle of the video and the sound quality meant that I gave up as I found it difficult to follow.