Academia & Ecclesia

See Roger Olson's excellent account of the relational view of divine sovereignty:   http://www.patheos.com/blogs/rogereolson/2013/04/a-non-calivinist-relational-view-of-gods-sovereignty/ Olson, an Arminian theologian from Baylor University, is one of the most sensible evangelical theologians of our time. His theology, which he describes as Arminian, relational, and narratival, is the best antidote to the influential teachings of contemporary popularizers of Calvinism in the U.S. (such as John Piper and R.C. Sproul).

http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/04/12/kissinger_returns

What does it mean for x to depend on y? {x depends on y if and only if [x could not have been actual or possible without y or (y causes the actuality of x or y causes the condition that makes x possible)]} For example, a thought A depends on a thinking thing B if and only if A could not have been actual or possible without B, or B causes the actuality of A or B causes the condition that makes A possible. Intuitively, it appears that a thought depends on a thinking thing. Let’s now consider the following claim: “morality depends on God”. With the term “morality,” I simply mean a principle or a system of principles that rational and impartial people recognize as binding to a rational and impartial agent (assuming that such principle or principles are relevant to the agent’s situation S), who is trying to determine what needs to be done in S, in order to avoid causing any significant and unnecessary harm to herself or another living creature. Let’s suppose that Bill, an extremely we...

For a response to some aspects of Alvin Plantinga’s view on the relationship between science and Christian theism, see Hans Halvorson’s “Plantinga on Providence and Physics” [ http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/9491/1/plantinga.pdf ]. Halvorson, a respected philosopher of science from Princeton University, is qualified to evaluate Plantinga’s claims about such relationship. It appears to me that, like Plantinga, Halvorson is a Reformed Christian.  

One of the most underappreciated 20 th century philosophers is Rudolf Carnap. I’ve always been fascinated and very much influenced by his works (especially “Empiricism, Semantics, and Ontology”), although they have been overshadowed by the works of Wittgenstein and Quine, and his philosophical project has been described as a failure. I am just excited about David Chalmer’s new book, entitled Constructing the World , that attempts to bring to light and, at the same time, develop the valuable philosophical insights in Carnap’s Aufbau . I just hope that, with Michael Friedman’s Reconsidering Logical Positivism , Chalmer’s book will trigger a significant resurgence of interest in the works of Carnap. I think that Carnap deserves deep appreciation from the philosophical community.

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2011/october/how-to-read-bible.html

According to Jason Brennan, an ethicist from Georgetown University, “most people shouldn’t vote.” That might be a shocking claim from an ethicist, since many consider the act of voting as an ethical responsibility. For him, most American citizens are politically incompetent due to the fact that most of them are ignorant, irrational, or misinformed about political affairs. He claims that there is nothing necessarily immoral about being ignorant, irrational, or misinformed. However, since the stakes are high during elections, the people will be better served if most people, under the influence of ignorance, irrationality, or misinformation, will not vote. I somewhat concur. As a church member, who held leadership roles in local churches, I worry about many politically incompetent Christians who are so eager to vote. Many American Christians claim that they vote based on their moral convictions. As a matter of fact, some major evangelical denominations even directly encourage their member...