Frame states that many passages of the Bible from the prophets, Jesus, and the apostles do not sound very “peaceful.” These men were willing to use very strong, angry language when necessary. On many occasions, however, they showed much patience and gentleness. In my view, strong language is appropriate against people who (1) claim to have some religious teaching authority, and (2) are proclaiming false doctrine on serious matters, leading believers astray, or are dishonoring orthodox doctrine by ungodly lives, and (3) have ignored clear and graciously expressed warnings that their conduct displeases God. The Protestant Reformers used similarly strong language (which can usually be justified on these principles). Most of those today who are seeking to emulate the biblical and Reformation writers in this respect are overdoing it, in my opinion. They should learn to give at least equal attention to peacemaking.
Read moreReview of Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith by Douglas Groothuis.
Antony Flew spoke with Gary Habermas about his abandonment of atheism for a minimal form of theism (or deism), Flew, while not a believer in the resurrection, made this telling point about Christianity’s claim of resurrection with respect to other miracle claims: The evidence for the resurrection is better than for claimed miracles in any other religion. It’s outstandingly different in quality and quantity, I think, from the evidence offered for the occurrence of most other supposedly miraculous events” (My Pilgrimage from Atheism to Theism: A Discussion Between Antony Flew and Gary Habermas, p. 209).
Read moreReview of Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith by Douglas Groothuis.
In the kenoticism, Jesus did not forfeit any attributes, he temporarily suspended the employment of some of his divine attributes, but without ontologically losing these attributes. For example, Michael Jordan might play a pickup basketball game with some junior high children in Chicago. In order to have fun with the lesser players, he would voluntarily suspend the use of some of his exemplary basketball skills. He would continue to possess those powers, but they would be held in check in order to play basketball with the children. However, at time Jordan might decide to dazzle the kids by showing this true stuff. Similarly, Jesus would sometimes declare that he had forgiven a person’s sins (Mark 2:1-10) or would receive worship from his followers (John 20:24-28). These are both uniquely divine prerogatives.
Read moreReview of Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith by Douglas Groothuis.
In chapter 20, The Claims, Credentials and Achievements of Jesus Christ, Groothuis proposes to focus on the story of Jesus and his unique and unparalleled identity as revealed in the New Testament as a whole.
Read moreReview of Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith by Douglas Groothuis
Craig L. Blomberg in discussing apparent contradictions comes close to denying inerrancy: “But if Matthew does not satisfy modern, scientific standards of precision, it is unfair to impose those standards on a first-century world that had not yet invented them. None of the differences affects the point of the story, which is the miraculous resurrection of the girl” (page 454). To this Blomberg adds, “No historian on any ancient document operates this way. A document that has proved generally reliable is not suddenly discounted because of just one demonstrable mistake.” So, Blomberg sounds like if the Bible has only “one demonstrable mistake” it is not out of step with other historical documents.
Read moreReview of Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith by Douglas Groothuis.
In chapter 18, Deposed Royalty: Pascal’s Anthropological Argument Groothuis puts forth Blaise Pascal anthropological argument to answer man’s deepest question, as expressed in Shakespeare’s King Lear, “Who is it who can tell me who I am?”
Read moreReview of Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith by Douglas Groothuis
In chapter 17, The Uniqueness of Humanity, Groothuis argues that Biblical anthropology teaches that man is a unity of body and soul. Philosophically, this is called substance dualism. Groothuis distinguishes between substance and property.
Biblically, man is both physical and mental. Jesus understood man as dualistic heard in His statement to the dying thief in Luke 23:43. Paul also taught this in 2 Corinthians 5:1-10. Materialism as in Darwinianism denies dualism.
Read moreReview of Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith by Douglas Groothuis
In chapter 16, The Argument from Religious Experience, Groothuis argues that because man is made in the image of God makes concourse with God possible. Groothuis also notes that the Bible and Christians have claimed that God reveals himself through various kinds of human experiences.
Read moreReview of Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith by Douglas Groothuis
In chapter 15, The Moral Argument for God, Groothuis offers a moral argument for the existence of God by establishing the existence of objective moral reality and showing that a personal and moral God is the best explanation for the existence and knowledge of objective moral reality.
Read moreReview of Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith by Douglas Groothuis
In chapter fourteen, Evidence for Intelligent Design, Groothuis, explains that advocates of Darwinism believes it is invincible because there is no replacement for it. The Intelligent Design, however, is an alternative to Darwinism.
Read moreReview of Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith by Douglas Groothuis
In chapter thirteen, Origins, Design, and Darwinism, Groothuis makes two arguments: (1) Belief in Darwinism as a comprehensive explanation for the biosphere has become a deterrent to Christian faith; thus, a cogent refutation is in order (2) Darwinism suffers from fatal flaws both logically and evidentially.
Read moreReview of Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith by Douglas Groothuis
In chapter twelve, The Design Argument: Cosmic Fine-Tuning, Groothuis states there is enough design evident at multiple levels of nature to infer that there is a Designer. However, there is also evidence of deformity, decay and disease, indicating that the design is often less than optimal. Thus, there is enough evidence to believe in a Designer, but not enough to claim a perfect creation. There is enough deformity to warrant the idea of the fall, but not enough to deface the idea of design entirely.
Read moreReview of Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith by Douglas Groothius
In chapter eleven, Cosmological Arguments: A Cause for The Cosmos, Groothius states that the question to be answered is “Why is there anything at all, rather than nothing?” This is the question asked by Christian theist Gottfried Leibniz and atheist Martin Heidegger.
Read moreReview of Christians Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith by Douglas Groothius
In chapter ten, The Ontological Argument, Groothius states that the ontological argument claims that proper reasoning about the idea of a Perfect Being generates the conclusion that God exists. St. Anselm (c. 1033-1109) created this argument to convince the fool or atheist in Psalm 14:1 as to the existence of God and to lead believers in the worship of the greatest possible being in the following prayer:
Read moreReview of Christians Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith by Douglas Groothius
In chapter nine, In Defense of Theistic Arguments, Groothius states that natural theology consists of theistic arguments (sometimes called theistic proofs). They are rational arguments for the existence of a monotheistic God that do not appeal to sacred scriptures for their cogency.
Read moreReview of Christians Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith by Douglas Groothius
In chapter eight, Faith, Risk, and Rationality: The Prudential Incentives to Christian Faith, Groothius defines Prudence as that which concerns personal benefit and detriment in matters of belief concerning Christianity. Therefore, Groothius argues, Christian apologetics should commend Christianity on a prudential basis. Groothius uses some of the insights from Blaise Pascal’s famous and much debated wager argument.
Read moreReview of Christians Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith by Douglas Groothius
In chapter Seven, Why Truth Matters Most: Searching for Truth in Postmodern Times, Groothius states that this chapter develops a general apologetic for the significance and value of both objective truth and truth seeking.
Truth, Self-Deception and Virtue
The pursuit of truth requires that we must shun sloth---one of the classical vices. Moreover, studiousness should be cultivated instead of mere curiosity. In the pursuit of truth, we must avoid self-deception. “The first principle is that you must not fool yourself---and you are the easiest person to fool. So you have to be very careful about that. After you’ve not fooled yourself, it’s easy not fool other scientists” (Richard Feynman).
Read moreReview of Christians Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith by Douglas Groothius
In chapter six, Truth Defined and Defended, Groothius states that evangelicals are abandoning objective truth because as they claim this concept limits Christian witness.
The first evangelical that Groothius critiques is Brian McLaren. McLaren rejects objective truth in favor of postmodernism. Truth must be deconstructed. There is no one “metanarrative” or worldview. Next, Robert Webber rejects the objectivity of Carl F. H. Henry. Stanley Grenz and John Franke also reject objective truth. They claim that there is no “objectivity” understood as “a static reality existing outside of, and cotemporally with, our socially and linguistically constructed reality.”
Read moreReview of Christians Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith by Douglas Groothius
In chapter five, Distortions of the Christian Worldview---Or the God I Don’t Believe In, Groothius gives a brief response to objections to the Christian worldview such as anti-intellectualism, an antiscience stance, racism, sexism, homophobia, imperialism, ecological disregard and a boring conception of the afterlife.
Read moreReview of Christians Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith by Douglas Groothius
In chapter four, The Christian Worldview, Groothius defines and delimits Christianity in order to properly defend it. Groothius thinks it is best to define Christianity according to its doctrines or its worldview. Groothius states that “a worldview is forged out of beliefs that have the most consequences for a comprehensive vision of reality…Our worldview shapes who we are and what we do. We are driven by our deepest beliefs and interpret the world according to them.”
Read more