DOCSLIB.ORG

ADDRESSING the PROBLEM of EVIL Douglas Groothuis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
ADDRESSING the PROBLEM of EVIL Douglas Groothuis CHRISTIAN RESEARCH INSTITUTE PO Box 8500, Charlotte, NC 28271 Article: JAEE324 ADDRESSING THE PROBLEM OF EVIL Douglas Groothuis This article first appeared in the Effective Evangelism column of the Christian Research Journal, volume 32, number 4 (2009). For further information or to subscribe to the Christian Research Journal go to: http://www.equip.org " One of the toughest challenges to the rationality of the Christian worldview is the existence of so much evil. We struggle to explain and cope with evils due to human agency (theft, rape, murder, racism) and evils due to natural causes (floods, famines, hurricanes, tsunamis, earthquakes, illnesses). Why does God allow it? The philosophical problem of evil is stated in these terms. 1. In the Bible, God is understood to be all-good and all-powerful. 2. If God were all-good, God would desire no evil. 3. If God were all-powerful, God would be able to prohibit evil. 4. There is evil. 5. Therefore, God either is (a) all-powerful, but not all-good, (b) all-good, but not all-powerful, or (c) does not exist. "Some philosophers have used this argument to claim that it is impossible that God exists, since God would definitely want to keep evil out of the universe and would have the power to do so. However, in the last few decades, most philosophers have abandoned this heavy-handed strategy, since all that the theist needs to claim is that God has a sufficient reason to allow this evil to occur.1 If the idea that God has a good reason for evil is even possible, then there is no contradiction in claiming that God exists and that evil exists. "Yet unbelieving philosophers have shifted the strategy to argue that, while it is not impossible that God exists given all the evil in the world, it is unlikely that God exists. This is because many evils (for example, the suffering of children) seem to serve no justifiable purpose. Therefore, these kinds of evils count against the existence of God. These evils are called gratuitous (or pointless) evils. 1. If God exists, there would be no gratuitous evils. 2. Gratuitous evils likely exist. 3. Therefore, it is likely or probable that God does not exist. "This type of argument is called the inductive or probabilistic problem of evil, and it commands the most attention among philosophers, pro and con. It is also a problem that troubles many laypeople as well, both Christians and non-Christians. We can conceive of how some evils might serve greater goods and be necessary for their achievement, yet many evils—whether great (tsunamis) or smaller (the premature death of a loved one)—appear unredeemable. How can we address this anguishing problem? "Some believers simply claim that God must have His reasons, although we are now clueless and left with a leap of faith. We can only hope that we may know the reasons for these evils in the afterlife. CRI Web: www.equip.org Tel: 704.887.8200 Fax: 704.887.8299 "However, we need some apologetic arguments so that we might have a reason for this hope when people ask us why we believe in a good and all-powerful God in the face of horrendous evils (1 Pet. 3:15– 16). "No book raises the problem of evil more grippingly than the Bible itself. Particularly in the Psalms, the writers cry out to God, asking why their enemies have triumphed, why God has not acted to deliver them when He had the power to do so. Although the biblical writers groan under the force of evil, they find reasonable hope and meaning because of their belief that God has revealed enough about Himself to be deemed trustworthy, even when all the pieces do not fit together neatly and nicely (Deut. 29:29). " Inadequate Attempts to Resolve the Problem. Let us first consider two influential worldviews that cannot deal with the problem of evil. The Bible, unlike eastern religions, does not relegate evil to the realm of illusion or unreality. We cannot transcend the appearance of evil by achieving a supposedly higher state of consciousness, as advocated by contemporary pantheistic writers such as Deepak Chopra and Eckhart Tolle. That stance is both unrealistic and cruel. We must suffer with those who hurt in a broken world, not tell them to get over their attachment to maya (the illusion of evil). Moreover, in these worldviews the illusion of evil itself becomes an evil, since it keeps people in ignorance (a bad thing). Therefore, there is evil after all! The supposed solution to the problem of evil is, therefore, both nonsensical (because we sense real evil) and illogical (because we cannot deny the existence of evil if the illusion of evil turns out to be evil itself). "Atheists, on the other hand, often invoke the problem of evil to support their atheism. Their worldview, however, cannot explain the existence of evil or give any hope for its resolution. According to many atheists, all that exists is the impersonal and unfeeling universe, controlled by “the empire of chance,” as Bertrand Russell put it.2 The cosmos was not designed; all is a matter of chance and necessity. There is no Moral Law-Giver or Source of objective moral truth, since moral ideas are only the result of chemical reactions in the brain of an evolved animal. Humans experience pain, but this is just what the impersonal and uncaring universe does to them—without reason and without recourse to any higher purpose. According to this worldview, the very categories of objective good and evil dissipate. As existentialists such as Camus and Sartre have argued, the world is absurd in itself. Good and evil are merely human constructs, destined to die with those who absurdly assert them in an absurd world. Therefore, good and evil lose their meaning, and there is no hope that good will somehow triumph over evil in the end.3 "Another atheist view claims that objective good and evil exist as bare, brute, immaterial features of an impersonal and otherwise material universe. These are set forth as moral truths. This view is called atheistic moral realism; it is a strange hybrid of atheism and theism. It captures the idea of objective moral values from theism (where such values reside in the character of a personal-infinite God), detaches them from God, and projects them as floating values in an otherwise meaningless, materialistic world. "This position is ungrounded, however, because morality requires a strong claim of obligation or “oughtness.” Consider the statement, “You ought to treat humans with respect.” This is an objective moral law. Moral law differs from scientific law because it compels reflective agents to act and live in certain ways; it is not merely descriptive in the indicative sense (what is), as are scientific laws. Moral law enjoins or commands us to conform to it. Therefore, the idea of a moral law that exists apart from a Law- giver makes less sense than the idea of a moral law that issues from the commands of a personal and moral being. This is God Himself, who as the Creator knows just how humans ought to live.4 " A Christian Answer to the Problem. Having argued briefly against pantheism and atheism as adequate accounts of the existence of reality and the problem of evil, here is a Christian answer in a few broad strokes.5 God, a personal and infinite being, is the source of the moral law, of moral obligation, and of the virtues and goals necessary to morality.6 However, humans, heeding the evil lie of Satan (Gen. 3:1– 5; Rev. 12:9) have rebelled against God (original sin) and have brought evil into God’s good world.7 While CRI Web: www.equip.org Tel: 704.887.8200 Fax: 704.887.8299 God is Lord of history, He is not the author of evil. Rather, humans brought evil into the world by warping and twisting God’s good gifts. Evil, then, is good gone wrong.8 "Evil opposes the moral will of God. Yet evil is not without final or ultimate purpose in God’s providence, since God is both perfectly good and sovereign over His universe. Given the character of God as revealed in Scripture, as well as the overall apologetic case for Christianity, we have sufficient reason to believe that whatever evils occur are not random or meaningless.9 They play a part in God’s present and future plan for the universe. As Joseph said to his brothers who sold him into slavery, “You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good” (Gen. 50:20 TNIV). "While the reason for many particular evils may be opaque or unknowable to us, these evils are not gratuitous or pointless. On the contrary, they are employed by God to bring about good outcomes that would not otherwise be possible. For example, a world fraught with risk makes courage and heroism possible. A world beset by sin makes redemption through the love of God, shown in Christ, possible. In fact, the work of Jesus Christ in history demonstrated God’s love and concern for His creation more than anything else.10 While some evils may baffle and depress us, we can trust God that they are not without justification in the story of the universe, since God is that story’s Author. Thus, some evils may be inscrutable to us, but they are not inconsistent with the Christian worldview.11 —Douglas Groothuis Douglas Groothuis is professor of philosophy at Denver Seminary.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Theological Basis of Ethics
    TMSJ 11/2 (Fall 2000) 139-153 THEOLOGICAL BASIS OF ETHICS Larry Pettegrew Professor of Theology Systematic theology must serve as a foundation for any set of moral standards that pleases God and fulfills human nature. Establishing such a set is difficult today because of the emergence of the postmodernism which denies the existence of absolute truth, absolute moral standards, and universal ethics. Advances in science, medicine, and technology increase the difficulty of creating a system of Christian ethics. The inevitable connection between ethics and systematic theology requires that one have a good foundation in systematic theology for his ethics. A separation between the two fields occurred largely as a result of the Enlightenment which caused theology to be viewed as a science. Since the study of a science must be separate from a religious perspective, theology underwent a process of becoming a profession and the responsibility for educating theologians became the responsibility of the college rather than the church. This solidified the barrier between theology and ethics. Who God is must be the root for standards of right and wrong. God’s glory must be the goal of ethics. Love for God must be the basis for one’s love for and behavior toward his fellow man. Other doctrines besides the doctrine of God, especially bibliology, play an important role in determining right ethical standards. * * * * * One of the most popular American movies last year was based on a book by John Irving entitled The Cider House Rules. The Cider House Rules tells the story of a young man eager to discover what life is like outside of the orphanage in which he has spent his childhood years.
    [Show full text]
  • Natural Theology in Evolution: a Review of Critiques and Changes
    This is the author’s preprint version of the article. The definitive version is published in the European Journal for Philosophy of Religion, Vol.9. No. 2. 83-117. Natural Theology in Evolution: A Review of Critiques and Changes Dr. Erkki Vesa Rope Kojonen University of Helsinki, Faculty of Theology Abstract The purpose of this article is to provide a broad overview and analysis of the evolution of natural theology in response to influential criticiques raised against it. I identify eight main lines of critique against natural theology, and analyze how defenders of different types of natural theology differ in their responses to these critiques, leading into several very different forms of natural theology. Based on the amount and quality of discussion that exists, I argue that simply referring to the critiques of Hume, Kant, Darwin and Barth should no longer be regarded as sufficient to settle the debate over natural theology. Introduction Adam, Lord Gifford (1820-1887), who in his will sponsored the ongoing Gifford Lectures on natural theology, defined natural theology quite broadly as “The Knowledge of God, the Infinite, the All, the First and Only Cause, the One and the Sole Substance, the Sole Being, the Sole Reality, and the Sole Existence, the Knowledge of His Nature and Attributes, the Knowledge of the Relations which men and the whole universe bear to Him, the Knowledge of the Nature and Foundation of Ethics or Morals, and of all Obligations and Duties thence arising.” Furthermore, Gifford wanted his lecturers to treat this natural knowledge of God and all of these matters “as a strictly natural science, the greatest of all possible sciences, indeed, in one sense, the only science, that of Infinite Being, without reference to or reliance upon any supposed special exceptional or so- 1 called miraculous revelation.
    [Show full text]
  • Journal of Christian Legal Thought
    Journal of Christian Legal Thought Tribes Thinking 1 THADDEUS WILLIAMS Critical Theory and the Social Justice Movement 10 NEIL SHENVI AND PAT SAWYER Law Follows Culture, Except When It Doesn’t 14 JEFFERY J. VENTRELLA Christian Citizenship and Religious Liberty 23 DOUGLAS GROOTHUIS Stand Your Ground 30 P. ANDREW SANDLIN Proposed Regulations Would Protect Religious Student 32 Groups — and Why that Matters KIM COLBY VOL. 10, NO. 1 (2020) STATEMENT OF PURPOSE The mission of theJournal of Christian Legal Thought is to equip Journal of and encourage legal professionals to seek and study biblical truth as it relates to law, the practice of law, and legal institu- tions. Christian Legal Theological reflection on the law, a lawyer’s work, and legal institutions is central to a lawyer’s calling; therefore, all Chris- Thought tian lawyers and law students have an obligation to consider the nature and purpose of human law, its sources and develop- ment, and its relationship to the revealed will of God, as well VOL. 10, NO. 1 | 2020 as the practical implications of the Christian faith for their daily work. TheJournal exists to help practicing lawyers, law students, judges, and legal scholars engage in this theological PUBLISHED BY and practical reflection, both as a professional community and The Institute for Christian Legal Studies (ICLS), as individuals. a Cooperative Ministry of Trinity Law School and Christian The Journal seeks, first, to provide practitioners and stu- Legal Society. dents a vehicle through which to engage Christian legal schol-
    [Show full text]
  • Philosophy in Seven Sentences Press
    Philosophy in Seven Sentences 1. “Man is the measure of all things.” (Protagoras) The case against Protagoras comes down to this. If we want to learn anything, if we want to improve as human beings, if we want to condemn the Ted Bundys of the world, if we want any kind of educated taste, if we desire to understand and honor humanity, then we must reject the “man is the measure” theory. Each person is indeed the measurer of some things. Some of them the individual gets right; some of them the individual gets wrong. And in this difference lies all the difference in the world, and even outside of it. —Excerpt taken from chapter one, “Protagoras” Philosophy in Seven Sentences: 2. “The unexamined life is not worth living.” (Socrates) A Small Introduction to a Vast Socrates uttered his famous phrase “The unexamined life is not worth living” while on trial Topic in Athens, charged with corrupting its youth through his philosophizing. His court oration is Available February 2016 one of the most famous of its kind. Few philosophers—or anyone else—have been given the $16, 144 pages, paperback chance to sum up their lives and defend their cause while knowingly on the edge of death. 978-0-8308-4093-9 Philosophers have been known to get into trouble, but seldom have been physically martyred for the cause.... Socrates was the first philosophical martyr. But why such drastic measures for a humble man who desired knowledge so much that he was willing to follow arguments wherever they lead? —Excerpt taken from chapter two, “Socrates” Douglas Groothuis offers an 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Morphing Marxism, Still a Bad Idea: Critical Theory and Christian Discernment
    1 Douglas Groothuis, Ph.D., Professor of Philosophy, Denver Seminary DouglasGroothuis.com Morphing Marxism, Still a Bad Idea: Critical Theory and Christian Discernment See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ (Colossians 2:8). I. Social Crisis, Christianity, and Critical Theory A. Fire in the streets and fire in the minds BLM leader, Hawk Newsome, “If this country doesn't give us what we want, then we will burn down this system and replace it.” B. The question of “social justice” and the Christian II. The Christian Worldview and Society A. Take every thought captive to obey Christ (2 Corinthians 10:3-5 Romans 12:1-2) B. Basic worldview 1. Creation (Genesis 1-2; John 1:1-2) 2. Fall (Genesis 3, Romans 3) 3. Redemption (Romans 1-8) 2 4. Consummation (Revelation 21-22) C. Specific matters 1. The State, civil government (Romans 13:1-7) a. Assumes a fallen world of trade offs b. It is essentially a restraining force, not an engine of total social change or regeneration (utopianism) c. Can go very wrong and become an idol: statism (Ezekiel 28:1-10; Revelation 13) 2. Race (Genesis 1:26-28; Galatians 3:26-28; Revelation 7:9) From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands (Acts 17:26). 3. Sexual identity and ethics (Genesis 1-2; Matthew 19:1-6; Romans 1:18-32): God-given gender, moral framework 4.
    [Show full text]
  • In Defense.Book Page 200 Thursday, August 25, 2005 1:33 PM
    In Defense.book Page 200 Thursday, August 25, 2005 1:33 PM 10 HUME AND THE MORAL ARGUMENT Paul Copan 0 David Hume’s Treatise of Human Nature purports to be a “compleat sys- tem of the sciences, built on a foundation almost entirely new, and the only one upon which they can stand with scrutiny.”1 Hume’s ambitious attempt, despite its many flaws, has exerted a powerful influence in the history of philosophy. So striking is Hume’s project that Thomas Reid observed that, prior to the Treatise, it was assumed that sensation cannot exist without a mind or sentient being: “For till that time, no man, as far as I know, ever thought either of calling in question that principle, or of giving a reason for his belief of it.”2 Undaunted by historical precedent, Hume set forth his case so forcefully that he would awaken Immanuel Kant from his “dogmatic slumber.” In more 3 4 recent days, philosophers such as J. L. Mackie, Antony Flew and Michael 1A Treatise of Human Nature, ed. L. A. Selby-Bigge (Oxford: Clarendon, 1740; reprint, 1888), p. xx. Hereafter references will be given in the text with THN and page number(s). 2Thomas Reid, An Inquiry into the Human Mind: On the Principles of Common Sense, 4th ed., ed. Derek R. Brookes (Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh, 1997), 2.6.28-30, p. 32. Regarding Hume’s denial of the self, for instance, Reid sarcastically remarks that “it is certainly a most amazing discovery, that thought and ideas may be without any thinking being.” Presumably then, the Treatise had no author after all! It is only a set of ideas which came together, and “arranged themselves by certain associations and attractions” (2.6.13-14, p.
    [Show full text]
  • "Christian Scholarship and the Philosophical Analysis Of
    JETS 41/4 (December 1998) 631–640 CHRISTIAN SCHOLARSHIP AND THE PHILOSOPHICAL ANALYSIS OF CYBERSPACE TECHNOLOGIES DOUGLAS GROOTHUIS* I. THE CHALLENGE TO THE CHRISTIAN SCHOLAR The recent explosion of cyberspace technologies in modern culture raises some salient questions for Christian scholars who endeavor to bring a Chris- tian mind to bear on the analysis of these computer-mediated forms of communication. Responsible Christian scholars should serve both the Church and the culture at large by bringing Biblical tools of cultural analysis to the matters at hand. We should emulate the Hebrew tribe of Issachar “who understood the times and knew what Israel should do” (1 Chr 12:32). As Christians we are commanded to “take every thought captive to obey Christ” (2 Cor 10:5) and to be “transformed through the renewing of our minds” (Rom 12:2) in order to know the will of God in our day. These imperatives are especially cogent for the Christian scholar, whose public role of articulating perspectives to students, peers and the population at large constitutes an im- portant teaching ministry. Although we may not teach in a local church in an o¯cial position, Christian scholars face the challenge of sober and careful thinking, writing and public speaking, for “we who teach will be judged more strictly” (Jas 3:1). Those who hold a Christian worldview need to discern the nature and function of cyberspace interactions in order to appraise rightly their signi˜- cance, worth, and potential for the Christian cause and the culture at large. Several recent philosophical and cultural analyses of cyberspace and its culture have applied various non-Christian viewpoints from postmodernism to pantheism.
    [Show full text]
  • INTRODUCTION to PHILOSOPHY of RELIGION PHIL 5300 Dr
    INTRODUCTION TO PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION PHIL 5300 Dr. Steve Lemke [email protected] Fall 2019 New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary Office – HSC 270 Phone – 504-816-8150 Texts Steve Lemke, A User-Friendly Guide to Philosophy of Religion. New Orleans: NOBTS, 1998. The User Friendly Guide is available to be accessed or downloaded free from the class Blackboard pages in the “Course Documents” section. If you would like a hard copy, you can purchase it from Dr. Lemke’s office. Ronald Nash, Faith & Reason: Searching for a Rational Faith. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1988. James K. Dew and Paul M. Gould, Philosophy: A Christian Introduction. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2019. Course Description A philosophical examination of the fundamental religious beliefs and concepts with primary focus on the claims and warrants of Christian theism. Lectures and readings address classical and contemporary perspectives on the relationship of faith and reason, the nature of religious language, arguments for the existence of God, religious experience, the nature and persistence of evil, miracles, death and immortality, and the relationships of Christianity and other religious traditions. The course constitutes a call to intellectual accountability in relation to issues of ultimate concern to Christian faith. NOBTS Mission Statement, Core Values, and Competencies The mission of NOBTS is to equip leaders to fulfill the Great Commission and the Great Commandments through the local church and its ministries. This course relates primarily to the Seminary core values of Doctrinal Integrity and Characteristic Excellence, and primarily addresses the key competency in the Seminary curriculum of being able to understand and interpret the Christian theological heritage.
    [Show full text]
  • Proofs, Pride, and Incarnation: Is Natural Theology Theologically Taboo?
    JETS 38/1 (March 1995) 67-76 PROOFS, PRIDE, AND INCARNATION: IS NATURAL THEOLOGY THEOLOGICALLY TABOO? DOUGLAS GROOTHUIS* In his Pensées, Blaise Pascal left us the memorable and often remarkable fragments of what would have been his systematic defense of the Christian religion had death not tragically intervened at age thirty-nine. Despite his apologetic ambitions Pascal was an ardent opponent of natural theology, or what he called the "metaphysical proofs"1 for God's existence. He did not argue merely that natural theology is not required for Christian belief to be rational, as does Alvin Plantinga. Pascal's claim was stronger: Natural the- ology is theologically taboo. Others such as Soren Kierkegaard, Karl Barth, Herman Bavinck and Cornelius Van Til have staked similar claims. Christians and other theists have often disagreed on the role philosophy should play in relation to the claims of revelation. Surely the faithful should avoid any philosophical method that contradicts a central tenet of the faith they are laboring to defend. Therefore for reasons of theological integrity believers should scrutinize carefully how philosophy might help or hinder faith. This paper will examine Pascal's understanding of the noetic effects of sin in relationship to theistic arguments, consider the three dimensions of pride antithetical to Christian belief, and consider whether any of the three classical kinds of arguments for God's existence would, if successful, foster a pride hostile to the Christian message. I will contend that none of these theistic arguments are conducive to an anti-Christian pride and that if any or all of the arguments are epistemi- cally effective they could provide resources for an appropriate humility be- fore the Deity for which they philosophically argue.
    [Show full text]
  • Adventist Education and the Challenge of Postmodernism
    The Foundation for Adventist Education Institute for Christian Teaching Education Department – General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists ADVENTIST EDUCATION AND THE CHALLENGE OF POSTMODERNISM Humberto M. Rasi, Ph.D. Special Projects, General Conference Department of Education 4th Symposium on the Bible and Adventist Scholarship Riviera Maya, Estado Quintana Roo, Mexico March 16-22, 2008 ADVENTIST EDUCATION AND THE CHALLENGE OF POSTMODERNISM Humberto M. Rasi, Ph.D. Special Projects, General Conference Department of Education [email protected] I need to understand my purpose in life, to see what God wants me to do, and this means that I must find a truth that is true for me, that I must find the Idea for which I can live and die. Soren Kierkegaard1 Imagine that a college teacher falls asleep in the 1950s and miraculously wakes up fifty years later, in the early 21st century. What changes will he or she notice as they reenter the educational scene and begin to experience contemporary culture? The most obvious surprise will be in response to the technological advances— lightweight portable computers, global internet communication, wireless telephones, digital media, exploration of the cosmos, 24/7 television infotainment. They will also be surprised by changes in the geopolitical scene—the powerful Soviet Union has fragmented into several independent nations with unusual names, China and India are emerging as competitive economic giants, the costly war on terrorism, and the changed demographics in the United States due to large-scale immigration. At a deeper level, however, the teacher will be puzzled and even disoriented by the way many young people think, talk, write, and view the world and life.
    [Show full text]
  • Resources Tuned in Reading the Word the Darkened Room The
    Issue #5 - 2000 A Publication of Ransom Fellowship CritiqueHelping Christians Develop Skill in Discernment In This Issue 04 TheYour DiscerningGod is Crazy Life A judge condemns himself instead of the criminal. How do you explain it? 05 OutJona ofthan TheirEdwar Mindsds A voice from the 1700s, reminding us of the importance of Bible study. 12 06 ThePray Darkeneding Warrior Fa Roomthers Drew Trotter reviews Gladiator and The Patriot. , 08 ReadingStudying fo ther all WordIt s Worth An excellent new resource for sharpening skill in studying the Bible. 02 Editor’s Note 09 ResourcesApologetics Giants Douglas Groothuis reviews a book on C.S. Lewis and Francis Schaeffer. 03 Dialogue 03 Clicks 11 Poetry by Jane Greer 12 TunedWould J Inesus Mosh? John Seel asks if heavy metal music can be truly Christian. Critique Issue #5 - 2000 Editor Denis Haack Managing Editor Marsena Konkle Contributing Editors Editor’s Note Steven Garber, R. Greg Grooms, Douglas Groothuis, ne aspect of Christian discernment that is in a work which clearly reflected a pagan world Donald Guthrie, John Mason easily overlooked is the need to distinguish view, but that did not distract Paul from reading Hodges, David John Seel, Jr., O between primary or really essential issues, it, from noting the truth the poet was asserting, Andrew H. Trotter, Jr. and secondary, tangential ones. After all, if we and from using it as a point of contact for discus- correctly identify what issues are at stake, but sion with the Athenians. The fact that Paul Board of Directors then get distracted away from the important ones appropriated this quote without debating Craig M.
    [Show full text]
  • By Douglas Groothuis
    Douglas Groothuis, Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Academic, 2011. Reviewed by Craig Parton, Santa Barbara, California A book on apologetics that claims it is presenting a “comprehensive case for biblical faith” is certainly swinging for the fences. The work of Denver Seminary professor Douglas Groothuis in this regard, however, does not make it to first base due to having committed two unpardonable sins of apologetical omission. First, the book ignores the field of literary apologetics and the work in that regard of the most important apologists of the 20th century (J.R.R. Tolkien, C.S. Lewis, G.K. Chesterton, and Dorothy Sayers). Second, Groothuis manages to also ignore legal or juridical apologetics completely and the contribution of lawyers to the defense of the faith over the past 400 years (nary a reference to the important contributions to this field by the likes of Hugo Grotius, Thomas Sherlock, Simon Greenleaf, Sir Norman Anderson, Edmund Bennett, Francis Lamb, Lord Hailsham, and especially John Warwick Montgomery). As fatal and revealing as these omissions are, the problems go even deeper. The book comes off as a kind of love fest within the faculties of Biola University and Denver Seminary. The author himself, apparently unconscious of his strange obsession with the importance of his writings, cites to his own books and articles more than he does to those of Tolkien, Lewis, Sayers, Chesterton and Montgomery combined. This telling oversight may have been made necessary
    [Show full text]