Here is a collection of articles by Glenn Peoples (or otherwise noted). All of these articles are in pdf format. All of these articles are copyrighted material.

Theology and Biblical Studies

To view some of these documents correctly, you will need the fonts greek.ttf and hebrew.ttf, which you can get here if you don’t already have them.

What did St Paul Really Say?

On the 9th of February 2013, Tom Wright and James White debated St Paul’s teaching on justification on the Unbelievable radio show. This is the transcript of that discussion. My thanks to Roy Soliman for doing the transcribing. Catch the debate at Unbelievable? here.

Has Robert Peterson Defeated Annihilationism?

Glenn Peoples

An article critiquing the arguments against annihilationism by Robert Peterson. This piece was published in JETS, June 2007, but they gave it the title “Fallacies in the Annihilationism Debate.”

Robert Peterson’s Reply

Robert Peterson

Robert Peterson was given the opportunity to reply to my critique. Read his response here.

Thoughts on Robert Peterson’s Reply

Glenn Peoples

Here are my comments on Dr Peterson’s reply. In short, I don’t think he succeeds in rescuing his arguments from my criticisms.

Athanasius, Atonement and Annihilation

Glenn Peoples

This was a presentation to the Conditional Immortality Association of New Zealand in May 2007. I argue that Athanasius’ work On The Incarnation of the Word provides a strong basis for the doctrine of annihilationism.

An Open letter to my Traditionalist Friends

Glenn Peoples

This is an open letter to those who have publicly written or spoken out against the doctrine of annihilationism and for the traditional doctrine of the eternal torment of the damned in hell. In it, I raise concerns over the way these arguments have been made, and I offer an explanation of why they are not having the desired effect.

Why I am an Annihilationist

Glenn Peoples

This is the transcript of my podcast series on the subject of hell, posted here after a number of requests.

On Tithing

Glenn Peoples

Are Christians required to tithe to their church? What does that even mean? This brief guide to the biblical issues says “no.”

Hitchens vs McGrath: A Review

Glenn Peoples

“Poison or Cure? Religious Belief in the Modern World.” A Debate between Christopher Hitchens (Atheist) and Alister McGrath (Christian). Hosted by the Ethics and Public Policy Center and the Berkley Center for Religion, Peace, and World Affairs at Georgetown University 11th October 2007. In short, Hitchens did not do nearly as well as his online fans appear to think.

David Engelsma, Christ’s Spiritual Kingdom: A Defense of Reformed Amillennialism (book Review)

Glenn Peoples

A Critical Review of David Engelsma’s book, which was an attempted critique of postmillennialism and preterism.



The Non-moral Goodness of God

Glenn Peoples

I explain how I think some Christian apologists err in saying that God’s commands are grounded in his morally good nature. It is better to think of God as non-morally good, if we are going to claim that moral duty is grounded in divine commands. Construing divine goodness this way also rebuts an objection to divine commands, namely the “independence problem.” This was a presentation made at the conference of the Australasian Association of Philosophy in 2012.

The Epistemological Objection to Divine Command Ethics

Glenn Peoples

According to Wes Morriston and others, if moral obligations were grounded in divine commands, there would be a significant problem in explaining why people who don’t believe in God still know right from wrong? But does this problem really exist? I argue that it does not. (Published in Philosophia Christi 13:2 (2011), 389-401)

Hasker at the Bridge of Death

Glenn Peoples

This paper is a critique of William Hasker’s Emergent dualism when it comes to the question of whether or not – and how – the mind can survive the death of the body. (Published in Philosophia Christi 10:2 (2008), 393-409)

A New Euthyphro

Glenn Peoples

Plato’s Euthyphro is widely thought to contain a knock down argument against theologically grounded ethics – widely thought, that is, outside of the field of philosophy of religion. The so-called Euthyphro dilemma is said to show that moral rightness cannot possibly consist in what God wills, but much of its success lies in the way the author was able to paint Euthyphro as the loser. Had Euthyphro been better informed and quicker on his feet, he would have won hands down – as he does in this revised version of the Euthyphro dialogue. A bit of philosophical fun – with a point. (Published in Think: Philosophy for Everyone 9:25 (2010).

Is There an Echo in Here? Critiques of God Based Ethics

Glenn Peoples

The field of moral philosophy has an Achilles’ heel, namely the way it treats theological grounded accounts of ethics. The same old objections keep appearing repeatedly, completely ignoring the able responses that have been offered from those who actually specialise in philosophy of religion. Here I survey some of these objections and point out that there’s an echo in here.

Wolterstorff on Divine Commands

Glenn Peoples

Nicholas Wolterstorff has said that divine command ethics are in part illuminated by an analogy between human commands and God’s commands. However, he has also argued that, given the way that human commands function in bringing about moral obligations, they really cannot illuminate the way that God creates moral obligations in the way that a divine command theorist needs them to. As such, this analogy that is supposed to illuminate divine commands, says Wolterstorff, is not really available after all. In this short piece I respond to this line of argument and show that Professor Wolterstorff has misconstrued divine command ethics and the way that it sees the human creation of divine command ethics, and that the analogy between human and divine commands only fails if divine command ethics is false, which surely cannot be assumed from the outset.

Faith in Public: A Response to Greg Dawes

Glenn Peoples

An article I had published in the Journal of Religion and Society in 2005 during my PhD studies, responding to the claim that in contemporary academia we ought to hold a “presumption of naturalism.”

Rawls, Rationality and Religion

Glenn Peoples

A paper presented to the 2006 conference of the Australasian Association of Philosophers during my PhD studies, addressing the question of whether or not religious beliefs are such that they are excluded by a Rawlsian constraint on the type of beliefs that we can presuppose in public life. Do they enjoy public justification? That depends on whether or not they are true, I argue, among other things.


Social and Political Philosophy / Issues

Chasing the Justificatory Goalpost: Public Justification and Religious

Glenn Peoples

According to some people, religious convictions should not be the sole basis of the policies we support, because those policies would then lack the right kind of public justification. This, apparently, is because religious beliefs themselves lack the right kind of justification. Just what type of justification is this, and do religious beliefs necessarily lack it?

Liberalism and Natural Law

Glenn Peoples

Based on a Paper Presented to the Department of Philosophy, University of Otago, April 2005 during my PhD studies. In most historic forms of Classical Liberalism, principles of government, and in fact the rationale for government, are based on natural law. What, exactly, is it? In particular, was it based on any kind of religious assumption, or was it a secular concept that essentially urged religion from politics and depended on reason alone?

I’m always on the lookout for good articles to host at this site, so if you’d like to contribute something, let me know!