The Constructive Curmudgeon

Translation

2012-01-24T01:42:00.000-07:00

My book, Christian Apologetics, is to be translated into Korean!

Groothuis Interview

2012-01-23T10:22:00.000-07:00

Here is a short interview with me.

Thirty-Nine Years after Roe v. Wade

2012-01-21T13:35:00.000-07:00

Why I am Pro-life:

A Short, Nonsectarian Argument

Abortion is the intentional killing of a human fetus by chemical and/or surgical means. It should not be confused with miscarriage (which involves no human intention) or contraception (which uses various technologies to prohibit sperm and egg from producing a fertilized ovum after sexual intercourse). Miscarriages are natural (if sad) occurrences, which raise no deep moral issues regarding human conduct—unless the woman was careless in her pregnancy. Contraception is officially opposed by Roman Catholics and some other Christians, but I take it to be in a moral category entirely separate from abortion (since it does not involve the killing of a fetus); therefore, it will not be addressed here.[1]

Rather than taking up the legal reasoning and history of abortion in America (especially concerning Roe vs. Wade), this essay makes a simple, straightforward moral argument against abortion. Sadly, real arguments (reasoned defenses of a thesis or claim) are too rarely made on this issue. Instead, propaganda is exchanged. Given that the Obama administration is the most pro-abortion administration in the history of the United States, some clear moral reasoning is called for at this time.

The first premise of the argument is that human beings have unique and incomparable value in the world. Christians and Jews believe this is the case because we are made in God’s image and likeness. But anyone who holds that humans are special and worthy of unique moral consideration can grant this thesis (even if their worldview does not ultimately support it). Of course, those like Peter Singer who do not grant humans any special status will not be moved by this.[2] We cannot help that. Many true and justified beliefs (concerning human beings and other matters) are denied by otherwise intelligent people.

Second, the burden of proof should always be on the one taking a human life and the benefit of doubt should always be given to the human life. This is not to say that human life should never be taken. In an often cruel and unfair world, sometimes life-taking is necessary, as many people will grant. Cases include self-defense, the prosecution of a just war, and capital punishment. Yet all unnecessary and intentional life-taking is murder, a deeply evil and repugnant offense against human beings. (This would also be acknowledged by those, such as absolute pacifists, who believe that it is never justifiable to take a human life.)

Third, abortion nearly always takes a human life intentionally and gratuitously and is, therefore, morally unjustified, deeply evil, and repugnant—given what we have said about human beings. The fetus is, without question, a human being. Biologically, an entity joins its parents’ species at conception. Like produces like: apes procreate apes, rabbits procreate rabbits, and humans procreate humans. If the fetus is not human, what else could it possibly be? Could it be an ape or a rabbit? Of course not.

Some philosophers, such as Mary Anne Warren, have tried to drive a wedge between personhood and humanity. That is, there may be persons who are not human (such as God, angels, ETs—if they exist), and there may be humans that are not persons (fetuses or those who lose certain functions after having possessed them). While it is true that there may be persons who are not humans, it does not logically follow that there are humans who are not persons. The fetus is best regarded as a person with potential, not a potential person or nonperson.[3]

When we separate personhood from humanity, we make personhood an achievement based on the possession of certain qualities. But what are these person-constituting qualities? Some say a basic level of consciousness; others assert viability outside the womb; still others say a sense of self-interest (which probably does not obtain until after birth). All of these criteria would take away humanity from those in comas or other physically compromised situations.[4] Humans can lose levels of consciousness through injuries, and even infants are not viable without intense and sustained human support. Moreover, who are we to say just what qualities make for membership in the moral community of persons?[5] The stakes are very high in this question. If we are wrong in our identification of what qualities are sufficient for personhood and we allow a person to be killed, we have allowed the wrongful killing of nothing less than a person. Therefore, I argue that personhood should be viewed as a substance or essence that is given at conception. The fetus is not a lifeless mechanism that only becomes what it is after several parts are put together—as is the case with a watch or an automobile. Rather, the fetus is a living human organism, whose future unfolds from within itself according to internal principles. For example, the fertilized ovum contains a complete genetic code that is distinct from that of the mother or father. But this is not a mere inert blueprint (which is separable from the building it describes); this is a living blueprint that becomes what its human nature demands.

Yet even if one is not sure when personhood becomes a reality, one should err on the side of being conservative simply because so much is at stake. That is, if one aborts a fetus who is already a person, one commits a deep moral wrong by wrongfully killing an innocent human life. Just as we do not shoot target practice when we are told there may be children playing behind the targets, we should not abortion fetuses if they may be persons with the right not to be killed. As I have argued, it cannot be disputed that abortion kills a living, human being.

Many argue that outside considerations experienced by the mother should overrule the moral value of the human embryo. If a woman does not want a pregnancy, she may abort. But these quality of life considerations always involve issues of lesser moral weight than that of the conservation and protection of a unique human life (which considers the sanctity or innate and intrinsic value of a human life).[6] An unwanted pregnancy is difficult, but the answer is not to kill a human being in order to end that pregnancy. Moreover, a baby can be put up for adoption and bring joy to others. There are many others who do want the child and would give him or her great love and support. Furthermore, it is not uncommon for women to experience deep regrets after aborting their offspring.

The only exemption to giving priority to the life of the fetus would be if there were a real threat to the life of the mother were the pregnancy to continue. In this case, the fetus functions as a kind of intruder that threatens the woman’s life. To abort the pregnancy would be tragic but allowable in this imperfect world. Some mothers will nonetheless choose to continue the pregnancy to their own risk, but this is not morally required. It should be noted that these life-threatening situations are extremely rare.

This pro-life argument does not rely on any uniquely religious assumptions, although some religious people will find it compelling. I take it to be an item of natural law (what can be known about morality by virtue of being human) that human life has unique value. A case can be made against abortion by using the Bible (only the Hebrew Bible or both the Hebrew Bible and New Testament combined) as the main moral source, but I have not given that argument here.[7] Rather, this essay has given an argument on the basis of generally agreed upon moral principles. If the argument is to be refuted, one or more of those principles or the reasoning employed needs to be refuted.

Although at the beginning of this essay I claimed I would not take up the legal reasoning related to abortion, one simple point follows from my argument. In nearly every case, abortion should be illegal simply because the Constitution requires that innocent human life be protected from killing.[8] Anti-abortion laws are not an intrusion of the state into the family any more than laws against murdering one’s parents are an intrusion into the family.

[1] See Scott Rae, Moral Choices, 3^rd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2009), 288-291.

[2] For an exposition and critique of Singer’s thought, see Gordon R. Preece, ed., Rethinking Peter Singer (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2002).

[3] See Clifford Bajema, Abortion and the Meaning of Personhood (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1974). This book is on line at: http://www.ccel.us/personhood.toc.html.

[4] On the dangerous implications of his perspective, see Francis A. Schaeffer and C. Everett Koop, Whatever Happened to the Human Race?, revised ed. (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 1983).

[5] For a developed philosophical and legal case for including the unborn in the moral community of human beings, see Francis Beckwith, Defending Life: A Moral and Legal Case Against Abortion Choice (Cambridge University Press, 2007); and Robert P. George and Christopher Tollefsen, Embryo: A Defense of Human Life (New York: Doubleday, 2008).

[6] On the distinction between a quality of life ethic and a sanctity of life ethic, see Ronald Reagan, “Abortion and the Conscience of a Nation,” available at: http://www.nationalreview.com/document/reagan200406101030.asp. This was originally an article in the Spring, 1983 issue of The Human Life Review.

[7] See Rae, 129-133.

[8] See Beckwith, chapter two.

2012-01-19T23:58:00.001-07:00

What if hope cannot extend beyond human endeavor itself and is never answered by anything beyond it? What if the millennia of human cries echo only into the empty sky and not further? That possibility must be faced if the quest itself is to have any meaning. In the end, hope without truth is pointless. Illusions and delusions, no matter how comforting or grandiose, are the enemies of those who strive for integrity in their knowing and being. Statements such as "I like to think of the universe as having a purpose" or "The thought of an afterlife gives me peace" reflect mere wishes. These notions do not address the truth or falsity of there being purpose in the world or of our postmortem survival, because there is no genuine claim to knowledge: a warranted awareness of reality as it is. A hearty, sturdy and insatiable appetite for reality--whatever it might be--is the only engine for testing and discerning truth. (D. Groothuis, Christian Apologetics, p.16)

2012-01-19T17:54:00.001-07:00

The fall of humanity is admittedly difficult to fathom; however, once it is admitted into our worldview, the enigmas of the human condition are explained and the human landscape is illuminated as never before. Douglas Groothuis "Christian Apologetics"

Groothuis on Tebow

2012-01-18T22:06:00.000-07:00

I am quoted in this Terry Mattingly piece on Tim Tebow.

Christian Apologetics in Boulder

2012-01-18T19:00:00.001-07:00

Dr. Bradley Monton, an atheist, is using my book, Christian Apologetics, as the text in a philosophy class at the University of Colorado--Boulder called, "Theology Forum." I should be speaking to that class in late April or early May.

Book of Common Prayer

2012-01-17T15:20:00.001-07:00

In Pain

Lord Jesus Christ, by your patience in suffering you hallowed earthly pain and gave us the example of obedience to your Father's will: Be near me in my time of weakness and pain; sustain me by your grace, that my strength and courage may not fail; heal me according to your will; and help me always to believe that what happens to me here is of little account if you hold me in eternal life, my Lord and my God. Amen.

2012-01-16T23:45:00.000-07:00

Here is the sum of the matter. We must earnestly endeavor to know the truth of the biblical worldview and to make it known with integrity to as many people as possible with the best arguments available. To know God in Christ means that we desire to make Christian truth available to others in the most compelling form possible. To be created in God’s rational, moral and relational image means that our entire being should be aimed at the glorification of God in Christian witness. A significant part of that witness is Christian apologetics." - Douglas Groothuis (Christian Apologetics, p.44)

2012-01-16T00:29:00.001-07:00

The Internet is a facsimile of sociality--Rebecca Merrill Groothuis.

2012-01-14T23:18:00.001-07:00

Don't miss the Doug Groothuis interview on "Christian Apologetics" on the God Solution at 8:30 am MST Sunday, January, 15, on KDUR (91.9 and 93.9 FM in Durango and kdur.org online). -- From the host of the program, Nate Herbst.

Book of Common Prayer

2012-01-14T20:03:00.001-07:00

¶ A Litany for the Sick or Dying.

O God the Father,
Have mercy.
O God the Son,
Have mercy.
O God the Holy Ghost,
Have mercy.
Remember not, Lord, our offences.
Spare us, Good Lord.
From all evil and sin,
Good Lord, deliver him.
From the assaults of the devil,
Good Lord, deliver hint
From thy wrath, and from everlasting damnation,
Good Lord, deliver him.
In time hour of death,
Good Lord, deliver him.
In the day of judgement,
Good Lord, deliver him.
By the mystery of thine Incarnation,
Save him, O Lord.
By thy Cross and Passion,
Save him, O Lord.
thy thy Resurrection and final Triumph,
Save him, O Lord.
That it may please thee to grant him relief in pain
We beseech thee to hear us.
To give him such health as is agreeable to thy will
We beseech thee to hear us.
That it may please thee to deliver his soul
We beseech thee to hear us.
To cleanse him from his sin
We beseech thee to hear us.
That it may please thee to receive him to thyself;
We beseech thee to hear us.
To set him in a place of light and peace
We beseech thee to hear us.
To number him with thy saints and thine elect
We beseech thee to heat’ us.
Son of God;
We beseech thee to hear us.
O Lamb of God;
Have mercy upon us.
O Lamb of God;
Grant him thy peace.

Review of Christian Apologetics

2012-01-13T14:14:00.002-07:00

Dr. Steven Cowan reviews my book, Christian Apologetics, at Credo.

Mind, Brain, and You

2012-01-12T13:43:00.001-07:00

The fact that consciousness is affected by the brain and by other physical objects, such as the probe, in no way reduces consciousness to a physical property any more than a wooden oar that troubles water turns the water into wood. Douglas Groothuis in Christian Apologetics.

Groothuis on Gag(a)

2012-01-11T22:28:00.000-07:00

Here is my 20-minute interview about Lady Gaga's worldview.

Gaga and Groothuis

2012-01-11T00:24:00.001-07:00

I will be interviewed on Lady Gaga's worldview tomorrow on Issues, Etc.

2012-01-10T23:40:00.001-07:00

2012-01-05T23:19:00.003-07:00

Please read this excellent article on being kind to folks with chemical sensitivities. It is written by my friend, Sherri Connell.

The New Age Movement

2012-01-05T16:15:00.003-07:00

Many years ago (about 1989), I was part of a short video on The New Age Movement called, "The Search." This can now we seen on YouTube.

2012-01-05T12:43:00.003-07:00

Love increases both joy and suffering in this fallen world "under the son," after the Cross, and before the End.

Groothuis on Gaga

2012-01-05T01:48:00.004-07:00

Here are some blog comments about my writing and a recent article of mine on Lady Gaga.

Ic

2012-01-03T01:01:00.003-07:00

When eclectic
becomes eccentric
(and not concentric)
it gets hectic.

Christian Apologetics on Amazon

2012-01-02T21:07:00.000-07:00

My book, Christian Apologetics has been reviewed 14 times on Amazon, with 13 five-star ratings and one four-star ratings. It has been liked "81" times. If you would like to contribute to this forum, please go to Amazon.

Review of R.J. Rushdoony, To Be as God

2011-12-31T23:55:00.001-07:00

Rousas John Rushdoony, To Be as God; A Study of Modern Thought Since Marquis de Sade. Vallecito, CA: Ross House Books, 2003. 253 pages, with index.

Rev. Rushdoony's son, Mark, notes in his introduction that his father had left his book incomplete at his death in 2001. Nevertheless, a book there was and a book we have, despite the author's inability to finishing writing all he had in mind.

R.J. Rushdoony was a prolific, often profound, and equally-often idiosyncratic Christain scholar, writing on topics as varied as epistemology, history, psychology and eschatology. I know. I read about thirty of his books (including the 890-page "Institutes of Biblical Law") from the late 1970s to the early 1990s--and I have dipped back into three of his later works--including this one--in recent years. A Westminister Standards man of the Reformation, Rushdoony also championed reconstruction: the doctrine that the institution of comprehensive biblical law would be a key factor in establishing the (post-millennial) Kingdom of God on earth. The epistemology and apologetic behind this was Van Tillian presuppositionalism: one must give no inch of common ground to the unbeliever in apologetics, but must, rather, presuppose the entire Reformed worldview and use that perspective as the foundation from which to critique alien worldviews.

I was much influenced by this grand and compelling vision for several years. While I remain a Calvinist on soteriology, I have abandoned reconstructionism, although I retain a "Christ transformer of culture" model, to use Neibuhr's typology from Christ and Culture. Nor do I accept Van Til's apologetics in its entirely, as I point out in my book, Christian Apologetics.

Yet Rushdoony, the disciple of Van Til, aptly employs his mentor negative apologetic and key theological insight throughout this book: people want to be their own gods at the expense of the one true God of Scripture. In so doing, they erect impotent (if noisy) idol which ultimately turn against them and all they influence, since those who hate God love death. In some cases, they are blatant in this confession (Nietzsche); in others, the idea must be traced out through analysis. And this is what Rushdoony does by critiquing an impressive list of thinkers, including Marquis de Sade (a perverted thinker far more important than most realize), Walt Whitman, Nietzsche, Marx, and others. He was also able to apply theological categories to social and philosophical thought in way that uniquely illuminated their true roots and fruits. In addition to his deep historical knowledge and philosophical insights, Rushdoony had broad pastoral and personal experience--sources from which he draws many illustrations, some humorous.

For these reasons, the book is worth reading as an apologetic against autonomous modern thought. However, like most of Rushdoony's works, it is poorly edited, given that he seldom wrote for established publishers who would rigorously prune and purify a manuscript. Nevertheless, the book, like all of his works, is deeply footnoted. His son-in-law, Gary North (another prolific author and Reconstructionist) claims that the man read a book a day for decades. Having seen his library and read so many of his books, I believe it.

Award for "Christian Apologetics"

2011-12-29T12:05:00.001-07:00

My book, Christian Apologetics, has received an "award of merit" from Christianity Today in their annual book awards.

Biographies

2011-12-25T18:14:00.002-07:00

Of late, I have been reading a lot of biographical material about Georgia O'Keeffe (d. 1986) and her circle of friends and artists, including her photographer-impresario husband, Alfred Stieglitz (d. 1946). Both helped shape the adventurous face of artistic modernism in the Twentieth Century. Both were fascinating personalities, but hardly virtuous outside of their art work. Much of their lives, despite their artistic genius (and my fascination is with O'Keeffe far more than with Stieglitz), were marred by the sexually perverse.

In contrast, I am near finishing Basic Christian, a biography of the British evangelical pastor, author, and statesman, John Stott (d. 2011). Rev. Stott was not an artist through photographs or on canvas (although as an avid bird-watcher, he did engage in aviation photography), but rather a purveyor of biblical truth through a godly and focused personality. His call was to preaching, teaching, writing, and the truths of Scripture. He was known for his discipline, articulation, and humility. He was a model for ministry, for a life well lived under the calling of Christ. I have benefited from so many of his many works: Basic Christianity, The Cross of Christ, The Contemporary Christian, Why I am a Christian, Between Two Worlds, and others.

John Stott, I can admire. I am inspired by this faithfulness and character. O'Keeffe and her kin, on the other hand, display creativity, daring, and often (when not perverse) endearing idiosyncrasy. But they were not godly. In most ways, they cannot serve as models of moral character. And I must read and study them with a certain amount of caution, lest I imbibe unhealthy sensibilities.

Gag on Gaga

2011-12-24T22:43:00.000-07:00

Mark Sayers and I have the cover stories on Lady Gaga in the most recent Christian Research Journal.

Revelations

2011-12-24T00:10:00.002-07:00

Special revelation calls to and for general revelation:

More.

General revelation calls to and for special revelation:

More.

Introduction to Philosophy

2011-12-23T14:27:00.001-07:00

Douglas Groothuis

Texts for Intro to Philosophy

Metro State, Spring 2012

32255

1000-1250

PHI

1010

Introduction to Philosophy

D Groothuis

01/17-05/12

WC-233

Books

1. LouisPojman, Philosophy: the Pursuit of Wisdom.Wadsworth

2. Plato,The Trial and Death of Socrates. Barnesand Noble.

3. BlaisePascal, Human Happiness. Penguin.

4. BertrandRussell, The Problems of Philosophy. Barnesand Noble.

5. Ecclesiastes: Or the Preacher. Canongate Books Ltd.

ISBN-10: 0862417945

ISBN-13: 978-0862417949

Recommended:

Douglas Groothuis, On Pascal. Wadsworth.
Douglas Groothuis, On Jesus. Wadsworth

Yes, and No

2011-12-22T15:42:00.000-07:00

Wisdom knows
when to gaze,
and when to avert the eyes.

When to listen,
and when to muffle the ears.

When to touch,
and when to pull way untouched.

When to embrace,
and when to turn away.

When to ponder the past,
and when to inhabit the present fully.

Each thing, time, place
in its own measure.

Only God
can bear to know
all things
as they are--
and know them aright.

2011-12-20T02:46:00.001-07:00

a
fugitive
impresario,curator
ofthe abandonedAbsolute.

Christopher Hitchens is Dead

2011-12-16T22:22:00.001-07:00

Christopher Hitchens, the acerbic atheist and prolific author, is dead. I reviewed his book, god is not Great, a few years ago. He was a keen wit, a good writer, and a terrible philosopher of religion.

Apologetics!

2011-12-13T13:23:00.000-07:00

I am speaking at this event.

Bachmann on Gingrich

2011-12-12T18:30:00.000-07:00

“Well, I think there’s very serious concerns about Newt Gingrich as the nominee. And this is starting to get unpacked, because again we know that he has taken over $100 million. His offices are on the Rodeo Drive of Washington called K Street. He’s the king of K Street. And so for a person who has been influence peddling for over 30 years in Washington D.C. to think that Newt Gingrich is somehow an outsider, when he’s the consummate establishment insider, he’s the big government candidate just like Mitt Romney is the big government candidate, that’s not what we want in our nominee. It doesn’t even survive the falling off the chair laughing test.” -- Michele Bachmann.

2011-12-10T15:18:00.001-07:00

Dear Douglas,

Only 24 days remain until the Iowa caucuses and our campaign is ramping up its efforts! Despite what the elitist media and my establishment-backed opponents would have you believe, Iowa is still anyone’s game and we are rising in the latest polls.

With your help, I can prove to the liberal media that grassroots conservatives like you not only stood with me in Ames, Iowa, but also stand with me in the national polls and support my campaign with your generous contributions.

In fact, according to some of the latest polls, 70% of likely early primary voters are still undecided in this race!

That’s why I must raise every available dollar between now and January 3rd to ensure our hard-charging constitutional conservative campaign – not some milquetoast opponents like Mitt Romney, Rick Perry and Newt Gingrich – wins over these undecided Iowa voters.

With so much on the line for our nation, struggling Americans deserve a consistent conservative to solve our economic problems and create jobs -- not the same empty rhetoric offered up by my opponents and the Democrats. We need a proven leader who will stand up to the “Washington elite”.

I am the consistent conservative running for President, and you can always count on me to stay true to my word. Your donation of $25, $50, $100 or more today will ensure our campaign is able to stand up to the Democrat war machine.

As a mother of five and foster mother to 23, I need to prove to the liberal media that grassroots conservatives like you not only stood with me in Ames, Iowa, but also stand with me in the national polls and support my campaign with your generous contributions.

This election is the most critical of our time and it's not a year to settle for just anyone; this is the time to restore the principles that once made our nation great.

The next step on the road to the White House is the Iowa caucus, and we're going all in. Join us as we push forward to victory!

Sincerely,

Michele Bachmann

O'Keeffe in a Cup

2011-12-07T11:24:00.001-07:00

I looked, then gazed, then beheld...my coffee and milk in my cup. Yes, yes, it looked something like a Georgia O'Keeffe painting--especially the swirls, but not the colors. I thanked God, and took another gulp

2011-12-04T22:23:00.001-07:00

It is somehow our lot to lament the avoidable and the unavoidable woes of a wounded world.

From Michele Bachmann

2011-12-03T22:33:00.000-07:00

You can always count on me to stay true to my word and put America and Americans first. I am the consistent conservative who will put our nation back on a path towards prosperity and restore our values to government. In the words of Rush Limbaugh, “She's not seeking fundamental transformation of our country. She seeks to uphold the country and the Constitution."

My Original Version of an Article Published in Christianity Today

2011-12-03T00:13:00.001-07:00

Social Media and the Church

Many American assimilate and advance new communication technologies without a second (or perhaps first) thought. To invoke Marshall McLuhan, they “sleep walk through history.” Those who Jesus called “salt and light” (Matthew 5:13-16) should rather wake up and assess the nature, strengths and weaknesses of the plethora of technologies that assail us daily and hourly.

What place does social media have in the fellowship and evangelism of the local church? Is Facebook a good home for your church? Should your pastor tweet or not? To answer these pertinent questions, we need to attend to two issues: First, what is social media? Second, what is a biblical model of fellowship (or koinonia)?

Social Media

Social media are computer-mediated methods for communication. They enhance human accessibility and the speed of communication between people and groups. I can check Facebook or Twitter to learn how a friend in India (or across the street) is doing. (That is, assuming I can verify their identity—no small problem for much of social media.) However, social media both give and take away, as do all media. They extend the reach of text and images far beyond what the un-electrified, un-mediated individual may do. However, social media also restrict the human presence by subtracting the reality of “being there” and “being with.”

Social media also clutter our field of concentration, rendering our attention to any one thing at one time with any depth nearly impossible. Thus, multi-tasking becomes the norm (even though our God-given brains are not designed for it). We become scattered, flighty, not fully engaged in anything.

Biblical Fellowship

The Bible prizes the personal and face-to-face dimension of human association which is absent, but simulated, through social media. John writes at the end of his short epistle, ^“I have much to write to you, but I do not want to use paper and ink. Instead, I hope to visit you and talk with you face to face, so that our joy may be complete” (2 John 12; see also 3 John 13-14). Although God had sent prophets and inspired holy Scripture for centuries, all was not complete until “The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth” (John 1:14).

The mission of God is to make himself known and worshipped as the one true God in all the nations. To that end, Christians have ardently preached and defended the Gospel. The have copied and translated the Bible into as many languages as possible. Christ-followers have also labored to out the message through radio, television, and now the Internet, because “how can they hear [the gospel] without someone preaching to them?” (Romans 10:14). We can try to evangelize through social media and develop forums of association within the church.

Nevertheless, we should remember the shortcomings of social media. They remove the personal presence and fracture awareness. One should not receive communion while glancing at a text message. One cannot be baptized on line. As Paul said, “Test everything. Hold on to the good” (1 Thes. 5:21).

Douglas Groothuis, Professor of Philosophy at Denver Seminary is the author of Christian Apologetics (InterVarsity, 2011) and The Soul in Cyberspace (Baker, 1997).

Urgent Prayer

2011-12-02T16:49:00.001-07:00

God, who owns everything, prevail on behalf of your impoverished servant who is in danger of losing his house at the holidays. He is working for your to educate the church on Islam. Come to his aid, Oh God of mercy and provision. Oh, God, restore, renew, and bless supernaturally. Amen

2011-12-02T01:24:00.001-07:00

Sending hand-written cards to people is a way to personalize an increasingly impersonal world. "Love is kind."

Groothuis at Saddleback

2011-12-01T01:08:00.002-07:00

Here is a link to my November 27 lecture at Saddleback Church: "Putting Truth to Work: The Biblical View of Truth," along with the other lectures from that series.

Prayer

2011-12-01T00:24:00.002-07:00

Oh, God: Thank you for secular blessings (as it were),
such as the art of
John Coltrane,
Duke Ellington, and
Georgia O'Keefe--
for every good gift comes
from You.

2011-11-29T12:11:00.001-07:00

On Thursday in Denver, the temperature will drop forty degrees. Many laugh at this, but those with chronic illnesses will suffer exponentially on account of it. Pray for them, try to show mercy when they are angry and sorrowful, and be thankful you do not share their miserable plight. If you want to begin to understand, read Psalm 88--slowly and repeatedly. There are many Hemans among us. Look for them, if you have the courage and compassion.

Naturalism and Truth. See chapter 17 of my book, Christian Apologetics

2011-11-25T21:56:00.002-07:00

Patricia Churchland:

Boiled down to essentials, a nervous system enables the organism to succeed in…feeding, fleeing, fighting, and reproducing. The principle chore of nervous systems is to get the body parts where they should be in order that the organism may survive. . . . Improvements in sensorimotor control confer an evolutionary advantage: a fancier style of representing [the world] is advantageous so long as it is geared to the organism's way of life and enhances the organism's chances of survival. Truth, whatever that is, definitely takes the hindmost. [1]

Charles Darwin:

With me the horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man’s mind, which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy. Would any one trust in the convictions of a monkey’s mind, if there are any convictions in such a mind? [2]

[1] Patricia Churchland, “Epistemology in an Age of Neuroscience,” Journal of Philosophy 84 (1987), pp. 548-549; emphasis in the original.

[2] Charles Darwin to W. Graham, July 3, 1881, in The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin, ed. Francis Darwin (1897; reprint, Boston: Elibron, 2005), 1:285.

2011-11-25T19:40:00.001-07:00

For God gave us a spirit not of fear but of power and love and self-control.

–II Timothy 1:6-7, NIV

Manners, Morals

2011-11-24T22:09:00.001-07:00

Is it not rude to sending and receiving text messages at the Thanksgiving table while surrounded by family and their friends? The decline in manners means (eventually) the decline in morals. MeWorld replaces community.

2011-11-22T19:54:00.001-07:00

Why do some of my students not get the basics of an argument for P?

1. Introduce the issue and its importance.
2. Give the argument form for P
3. Give the evidence for P.
4. Respond to salient objections to P
5. Conclude.

2011-11-22T13:01:00.002-07:00

One may threaten to destroy the soul of another by one devastating insult. More common is the assassination by a thousand small complaints, a constant dripping of acid into the heart.

Duke's Music in The World to Come

2011-11-20T23:46:00.001-07:00

In my restless, eager, and perhaps exorbitant pursuance of all things Ellingtonian, I at times lament that much of Duke's early music was recorded on less than stellar equipment. The exquisite arrangements and virtuoso soling are muted, distorted, or improperly balanced--and not in stereo. Yet, the beauty speaks through it all, nonetheless--so my search continues.

Given my eschatology, I believe that the best of human culture--from every tongue, and tribe, and time--will somehow be conserved in The World to Come. I was convinced of his years ago when I read Richard Mouw's short but compelling book, When the Kings Come Marching In(now out in a second edition by Eerdmans). The chapter addressing "true beauty" in Truth Decay underscores this as well, for what it is worth.

If this is so, then, one glorious day, in the presence of the Triune God and all the redeemed (and I hope Duke is among them), we shall in some manner listen to the aesthetic apex of Duke's nonpareil orchestra form every period, whether badly recorded, well recorded, or not recorded at all. Surely the ears of heaven cannot forget such beauty--or hoard it.

Outline for My Talk at Saddleback Church, Nov. 27

2011-11-20T21:52:00.001-07:00

Douglas Groothuis, Ph.D., Professor of Philosophy, Denver Seminary

Putting Truth to Work: the Biblical View of Truth

Truth is so obscure in these days, and lies so well established, that unless we love the truth, we shall never know it.—Blaise Pascal Pensées.

I. Truth in Christian Witness: Apologetics

A. Jesus is Truth Incarnate and an apologist (John 14:1-6). See Douglas Groothuis, On Jesus, chapter 3.

B. His followers must know the truth and make it known (John 8:31-32;

1 Peter 3:15; Matthew 28:18-20).

Christian worldview: creation/fall/redemption/consummation. Christian Apologetics, chapters 2-3.

II. Truth and Today’s Culture

A. Knowing our culture, for example,

“From Issachar, men who understood the times and knew what Israel should do”—Chronicles 12:32 (see also 1 John 2:15-17).

B. Two types of unbelief

1. Postmodernism (Richard Rorty): Truth is socially constructed and variable (relativism or non-realism)

2. Philosophical materialism (Richard Dawkins): Truth is what materialistic science describes (realism); there is no supernatural realm, e.g., God, the soul, spirits, the afterlife

III. The Christian View of Truth: the Nature of Truth

A. A true statement is one that reflects or matches reality (realism or the correspondence view of truth). See Christian Apologetics, chapter 5; Groothuis, Truth Decay, chapter 4.

“And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith”—1 Corinthians 15:14.

B. Truth is objective; not merely subjective

Truth-claims stake out portions of reality through words: “Jesus Christ is Lord” (Philippians 2:5-11).

C. Truth is antithetical, either/or

"He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me scatters—Matthew 12:30.

D. The Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Truth (John 14:17; 15:26; 16:13). Depend on the Spirit to give us an intelligent and virtuous witness (Acts 1:8).

IV. Against the Postmodern View of Truth

A. Postmodernism often refutes itself: claims truth is not objective, but then claims to be the objective account of truth: “There is no objective truth.”

a. If this statement is true objectively, then it is false. It is, therefore, self-refuting, self-stultifying as an objective truth claim.

b. If the statement is true subjectively, then there no reason to hold the postmodern view of truth as the claim applies to everything as objective, universal claim.

2. Counterexamples against postmodernism showing universal, objective truths:

a. Laws of logic: identity (A=A); noncontradiction (A is not non-A).

b. Objective moral goodness or evil: Mother Theresa or Osama bin Laden; sadistic torture or famine relief; murder or love

B. Challenge postmodernists to pursue the truth and put off laziness: truth counts forever (Luke 9:25). See Christian Apologetics, chapters 6-7.

V. Against Scientific Naturalism

A. If the brain is not designed for truth, and if organisms can survive and reproduce without consciousness or rationality, there is no reason to think our material brains know the truth. Charles Darwin. See Christian Apologetics, chapter 18.

1. We were designed to know God and the world; there is a fit between our being and our knowing of the world (Genesis 1:26-28; Psalm 8).

2. Laws of logic are not physical, but universally and absolutely true ideas (that is, immaterial things).

B. Morality is more than instinct and social conditioning (materialism): values are immaterial truth beyond mere matter. See Christian Apologetics, chapter 15.

VI. Take Biblical Truth to the Streets!

A. Understand the biblical view of truth (realism) and what is true (creation/fall/redemption/consummation) as opposed to postmodernism and scientific naturalism.

B. Therefore, defend Christian truth with competence, confidence, courage, compassion, and creativity (2 Tim. 1:7). There is much at stake (Matthew 25:46).

Sources: Douglas Groothuis, Christian Apologetics A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith (InterVarsity Press, 2011); Truth Decay: Defending Christianity Against the Challenges of Postmodernism (InterVarsity Press, 2000); On Jesus (Wadsworth, 2003).

Doug Groothuis at Saddleback

2011-11-20T21:47:00.001-07:00

I will be giving the last lecture in this series of lectures on apologetics at Saddleback Church. My title is "Putting Truth to Work: The Biblical View of Truth." I will post my outline shortly.

2011-11-19T21:39:00.001-07:00

What good is it for a man to gain the whole world, and yet lose or forfeit his very self ?--Luke 9:25.

2011-11-19T00:32:00.001-07:00

What does our age of constant diversion, distraction, and dissipation lack? It lacks meaningful discipline: self-denial for a cause greater than the self. But this alone gives meaning and truth to the self, which is otherwise derelict in its own finite absorption

Roots and Fruits

2011-11-18T21:11:00.002-07:00

A write up of my recent talk, "Roots and Fruits," plus the audio, is now available at the Denver Seminary web page.

2011-11-18T13:47:00.001-07:00

Douglas Groothuis, Ph.D., Doug.Groothuis@denverseminary.edu

Denver Seminary

How to Spot a Cult

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. Discerning Truth from Error

A. Christ, the church, and the truth

1. Jesus is Truth Incarnate (John 14:1-6)

2. The church is the pillar and foundation of the truth

3. The truth about God, salvation, ethics, and history is found in the Bible (2 Timothy 3:15-16; 2 Peter 1:20-21)

B. The challenge of theological error

1. The wide road to destruction (Matthew 7:14-14)

2. Paul’s farewell address to the Ephesian elders (Acts 20:20-28)

3. Being rooted in the truth (1 John 4:1-6)

II. What is a Cult?

A. Historically: groups that split off from an established religious body

Christian cults: significant deviations from Christian orthodoxy

B. Scaling the language barrier (Walter Martin)

Cults use Christian vocabulary without using our dictionary (the Bible’s meaning of these terms)

C. Theologically: teachings deny key orthodox beliefs about God and salvation

1. Source of authority: the Bible alone (sola scriptura) or the Bible plus another source?

a. Mormonism: Book of Mormon, Pearl of Great Price, Doctrines and Covenants

b. Jehovah’s Witnesses: Watchtower Society pronouncements

c. Christian Science: Science and Health with a Key to the Scriptures

d. Other Mind science groups: Unity, Religious Science

2. Understanding of human nature

a. Cults always demote God and promote humans (Walter Martin), thus denying the need for the Cross of Christ

b. Cults deny total depravity and original sin (Mark 7:21-23; Romans 3:9-20)

3. Redefining the person and work of Jesus Christ

a. Cults diminish the work of Christ for our salvation (Galatians 1:6-11)

b. Deny his deity (John 1; Colossians 2:9)

c. Deny his full atonement for sins (Romans 5:1-8)

d. Deny his physical resurrection from the dead (1 Corinthians 15:1-8)

4. Cults deny the gospel of Jesus Christ (Galatians 1:6-11; 2 Corinthians 11:14)

a. The gospel (1 Corinthians 15:1-8; John 3:16-17; Romans 5:1-5; Ephesians 2:8-9)

b. Faith plus good works or mystical experience

Mormons: We do all we can—and God makes up the rest

c. Salvation is found only in Christ (Acts 4:12) and received only by faith (Ephesians 2:8-9)

III. Reaching Those in Cults

A. Know what you believe and why you believe it (Romans 12:1-2)

B. Be prepared for spiritual warfare (Acts 13:1-12; Ephesians 6:10-19; 1 Peter 5:8-9)

C. Be filled with the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:8)

D. Treat the cultist as a human being needing salvation, not on object for evangelism

E. Discern the cultists beliefs and gently challenge them with biblical truth and apologetics (1 Peter 3:15; Jude 3; 2 Corinthians 10:3-5)

Resources

Books

Walter Martin, The Kingdom of the Cults. Several editions.

Gordon Lewis, Confronting the Cults (P&R Publishing).

Robert Bowman, Orthodoxy and Heresy (Baker, 1992).

Ron Rhodes, The Challenge of Cults and New Religions (Zondervan, 2001).

Francis Schaeffer, True Spirituality (Tyndale) A classic on living the Christian life biblically. I have read this many times.

Magazine: The Christian Research Journal. See www.equip.org

2011-11-18T13:34:00.002-07:00

I am speaking on "How to Spot a Cult" for Logos Central Chapel tonight at 7:00 at Prince of Peace Lutheran Church in Denver.

Groothuis on Radio

2011-11-18T01:08:00.000-07:00

I will be on Crosswalk with Gino Geraci Friday from 4:00-5:00 on KRKS-FM (Denver) to discuss Christian Apologetics.

Wisdom from Timothy McGrew

2011-11-17T00:10:00.001-07:00

One of the most disastrous illusions of the internet age is that an amateur plus Google is equivalent to a scholar. A search engine offers information, more or less relevant according to the skill of the searcher. But it does not sift that information; it does not sort fact from fancy, wheat from chaff. It does not explain which facts are relevant and which are beside the point. It does not weigh the merits of competing arguments and tell the user where the balance of evidence lies. A bright amateur armed with the internet may be better informed than he would otherwise have been, and he may occasionally catch a real scholar in a factual error. But it will not turn him into a scholar himself. There is no such thing as effortless erudition.

Lecture outline for my talk at Denver Seminary today

2011-11-15T10:35:00.001-07:00

Douglas Groothuis, Ph.D.

Professor of Philosophy, Denver Seminary

November 15, 2011

Roots and Fruits:

Intellectual Influences that Shaped my Christian Calling

Follow my example, as I follow the example of Christ.—1 Corinthians 11:1

I. What is a Christian Calling? (See Os Guinness, The Call)

A. Life direction according to spiritual gifts, opportunities, and strong desires

1. What needs to be done for the Mission of God

2. What one does well

3. What gives one deep joy

B. My calling (Matthew 6:33; 1 Corinthians 10:31)

1. Defend and apply Christianity as objectively true, rationally compelling, and pertinent to all of life (Matthew 22:37-40; 1 Peter 3:15; Jude 3)

2. To do this through teaching, preaching, and writing

3. What this means: teaching at Denver Seminary, adjunct teaching and guest lecturing at secular schools; preaching in local churches; writing academic and popular works: Twelve books; two dozen peer-review academic journal articles; hundreds of articles, book reviews, and letters to the editor in dozens of magazines, journals, and elsewhere.

4. The biggest literary fruit: Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Christian Faith (InterVarsity Press, 2011)

II. The First Root: Soren Kierkegaard (1813-55)

A. The Sickness Unto Death: exegeted my own soul for me

B. Purity of Heart is to Will One Thing: solidified my calling as a Christian thinker

C. Example of an earnest, brilliant life of letters for the cause of Christ (despite his fideism)

III. The Second Root: Francis A. Schaeffer (1912-84)

A. The discovery of Schaeffer in the fall of 1976: The God Who is There (1968)

B. The gift of understanding, intellectual courage, and a life-plan

C. Schaeffer’s strengths

1. A deep compassion for the lost

2. Spiritual integrity in ministry

3. A broad understanding of the Bible, theology, culture, and history

4. A strong sense of the Lordship of Christ over all of culture

D. Schaeffer’s weaknesses

1. Over simplification

2. Lack of philosophical rigor

IV. The Third Root: Blaise Pascal (1624-1663)

A. The discovery of Pensées in 1977.

B. The genius of his view of the human condition: deposed royalty

C. The genius of the wager (properly understood)

D. His influence on all my writing and ministry

E. See my book, On Pascal (Wadsworth, 2003); chapters 7 and 19 of Christian Apologetics.

V. The Fourth Root: Os Guinness (b. 1941)

A. The Christian as astute social critic and prophet: The Dust of Death (1973); The American Hour (1992); The Case for Civility (2008); etc.

B. Guinness as a matchless orator and statesman for Christ

VI. The Fifth Root: Rebecca Merrill Groothuis

A. Rebecca and my calling

1. Prodding me to write Unmasking the New Age (1986)

2. Alerting me to spiritual warfare (Ephesians 6:10-19; 1 Peter 5:8-9)

3. Challenge to develop my views of women in the Kingdom of God.

a. “Equal in Being, Unequal in Role: Exploring the Logic of Woman’s Subordination,” in Discovering Biblical Equality (2004)

b. See Adam Omelianchuck, “Ontologically Grounded Subordination.” Philosophia Christi, Vol. 13, No. 1 (2011): 169-180. This defends Rebecca’s argument against challenges by Steven Cowan.

c. See Rebecca Merrill Groothuis, Women Caught in the Conflict (1994); Good News for Women (1997).

B. Rebecca’s editing and my writing

Episode from finishing our book, Christian Apologetics

Those also deserving mention (not in priority order):

James W. Sire, C.S. Lewis, Carl F. H. Henry, Gordon Clark, Gordon R. Lewis, R. J. Rushdoony, J.P. Moreland, William Lane Craig, Richard John Neuhaus, Arthur Holmes,

Keith Yandell, R.T. Herbert, John Calvin, The Westminster Divines, G.K. Chesterton, Jacques Ellul, Bernard Ramm, John Stott, Walter Martin, Brooks Alexander, Harry Blamires, Ronald Nash, Alvin Plantinga, Phillip Johnson, F.F. Bruce, William Dembski, Neil Postman, Marshall McLuhan.

Advice from Duke

2011-11-13T22:52:00.001-07:00

In an interview, Duke Ellington said that his "first job is to listen." See James 1:19.

Steve Jobs, Jesus, and the Problem of Evil

2011-11-12T23:01:00.003-07:00

In the best-selling biography Steve Jobs, Walter Isaacson recounts an event when a thirteen- year-old Steve Jobs is distressed by a photograph in a 1968 Life Magazine of a pair of starving children in Biafra. He then went to his Lutheran pastor, holds up one finger and asks, "Did God know I would hold up this finger before I did?" The Pastor said, "Yes, God knows everything." Then Jobs produced the Life cover photo and asks, "Well, does God know about this and what's going to happen to those children?" The Pastor replied, "Steve, I know you don't understand, but yes, God know about this."

Issacson reports that "Jobs announced that he didn't want to have anything to do with worshiping such a God, and he never went back to church." Instead, Jobs pursued Buddhism, gurus, and hallucinogenic drug use instead (pages 14-15). This is yet another tragic encounter with the problem of evil. Jobs later told Issacson that "The juice goes out of Christianity when it becomes too based on faith rather than on living like Jesus of seeing world as Jesus saw it (p. 15).

The most reliable records of Jesus life are the Four Gospels of The New Testament (see chapter 19 of Christian Apologetics). In them, we find Jesus affirming the existence of one, all-powerful God, as well as the existence of all manner of evil. That is how Jesus saw the world. But, unlike the Buddha, Jesus did not counsel his followers to detach from the world of suffering by ceasing to crave satisfaction. He rather said, "Blessed are those who hunger and thirst after righteousness, for they will be satisfied." It is inescapable that those who so hunger will also suffer: "Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted," Jesus also affirmed. (For more on Jesus's teachings, see chapter 20 ofChristian Apologetics.)

The evils of this groaning world did not detract Jesus from his mission to "seek and to save the lost" (Luke 19:10). It was this wounded and aching world that sent Jesus to a bloody and horrible death on a Roman Cross, in order that humanity and deity might be reconciled and hope restored to an erring planet. As Pascal said: "The Incarnation shows man the greatness of his wretchedness through the greatness of the remedy required" (Pensees, 352/526).

If God is perfectly good and thoroughly powerful, he will not waste the sufferings of the world. He will bring a greater good out of them not otherwise possible. This may sound theoretical, but God himself put flesh to that reality through the Incarnation: "The Word became flesh and dwelt among us, full of grace and truth" (John 1:14). That Word taught only truth, offered only love and justice, and was put to death for no legal reason. On his Cross, he forgave his accusers and finally said, "It is finished." He was buried, dead as dead could be. The universe waited...until he rose from the dead in three days time--never to die again.

At a young age, Steve Jobs faced the severity and seeming absurdity of evil. In so doing, he rejected the only answer to the suffering: Christ Jesus. Let us rather affirm with the Apostle Paul:

⁵⁵O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?

⁵⁶The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law.

⁵⁷But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.

⁵⁸Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye stedfast, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labour is not in vain in the Lord.--1 Corinthians 15:55-58, King James Version.

(For more on the problem of evil, see chapter 25 of Christian Apologetics.)

Self-promotion?

2011-11-12T00:20:00.001-07:00

Some may wonder why an author is promoting his own book (Christian Apologetics) so much. We are often suspicious of "self-promoters." Let me explain what I am doing and why.

1. The purpose of this blog is not bragging on myself, but rather promoting a work I believe in for the sake of advancing the Kingdom and Mission of God. That is why I spent over eight years writing it.

2. Further, given the rise of the Internet, the old ways of promotion are no longer adequate: adds in magazine, radio interviews, and so on. Much of the interest in books is generated on line, and the author is often the only one available to do this. That is why I started my blog about the book and why I promote the book on my social media.

3. Whatever good one finds in my book, I attribute to God's grace and faithfulness. I did not make up the Christian faith, not can I can credit for the rational defense of it. It is all of grace.

Ways to Further the Ministry

2011-11-09T13:50:00.001-07:00

Christian thinkers need to get out the word about the truth, rationality, and pertinence of Christianity. You can help me do this in several ways.

1. Become a Facebook friend to keep up with my talks, essays, views, etc. Warning: you will get a heavy dose of Groothuis views on just about everything: politics, culture, jazz, philosophy, apologetics, dogs, etc.

2. Follow me on Twitter for the same reason: @DougGroothuis.

3. Check my blogs: The Constructive Curmudgeon and Christian Apologetics (dedicated to my book of the same title).

4. If you think Christian Apologetics helps further the mission of God, you can support the book in several ways.

a. Review it on Amazon, Barnes and Noble or your blog, Facebook, and so on. “Like” it on Amazon.

b. If you are an aspiring author, review it for an academic publication or magazine.

c. Purchase a copy for your pastor, local library, or church library.

d. Teach from it in an adult education class or make it the book for a book discussion. Yes, this will take some time.

e. Recommend the book to opinion-shapers in the church and the larger culture.

5. Let me know how I might help you engage in apologetics and evangelism. I can speak to campus groups, churches, and in other public forums on all manner of apologetics and moral topics. I am happy to meet one-on-one or in small groups with unbelievers who have questions about Christianity.

6. I have a number of audio and video messages on line in various places, such as YouTube. Take advantage of these and let your friends know about them.

May it be done for the glory of God and the advancement of his Kingdom,

Doug Groothuis

Roots and Fruits

2011-11-08T21:26:00.000-07:00

You are cordially invited to the first session of the Christian Thought Colloquium 2011-12.

Our own Dr. Douglas Groothuis will present on “Roots and Fruits: The Intellectual Influences That Shaped my Christian Calling.”

The colloquium will be held on Tuesday, November 15 at noon.

The venue will be classroom 115.

After Doug’s presentation for about 40 minutes, we will have a Q&A session for 5-10 minutes.

Dr. Don Payne will serve as moderator.

2011-11-05T22:54:00.001-06:00

‎"Almighty and most merciful Father; We have erred, and strayed from thy ways like lost sheep. We have followed too much the devices and desires of our own hearts. We have offended against thy holy laws. We have left undone those things which we ought to have done; And we have done those things which we ought not to have done; And there is no health in us. But thou, O Lord, have mercy upon us, miserable offenders. Spare thou them, O God, who confess their faults. Restore thou those who are penitent; According to thy promises declared unto mankind in Christ Jesu our Lord. And grant, O most merciful Father, for his sake; That we may hereafter live a godly, righteous, and sober life, To the glory of thy holy Name. Amen."

2011-11-04T23:47:00.001-06:00

Most merciful God, we confess that we have sinned against you in thought, word, and deed, by what we have done, and by what we have left undone. We have not loved you with our whole heart; we have not loved our neighbors as ourselves. We are truly sorry and we humbly repent, for the sake of your Son Jesus Christ, have mercy on us and forgive us; that we may delight in your will, and walk in your ways, to the glory of your Name. Amen.

Episcopal Book of Common Prayer

Douglas Groothuis Lecture at Denver Seminary

2011-11-04T01:53:00.001-06:00

Professor Douglas Groothuis will be lecturing on "Roots and Fruits: The Intellectual Influences that Shaped my Christian Calling" at Denver Seminary in Classroom 115 at 12:00-12:50 PM on November 15, 2011. Among others, he will address the influences of Francis Schaeffer and Rebecca Merrill Groothuis on his life. The aim is to equip those who come to pursue their own calling with intellectual depth and seriousness.

My review of part of Nigel Warburten's "A Little History of Philosophy" (on Amazon)

2011-11-04T00:30:00.002-06:00

The author, a secularist, does not bother to treat philosophical arguments for God's existence seriously. For example, he lauds Bertrand Russell's attack on the cosmological argument (p. 185) when, in fact, Russell created a straw man. In "Why I am Not a Christian," Russell says that cosmological arguments all fail because they depend on this premise:

P1: Everything that exists has a cause

Or order to reach this conclusion along with one more premise:

P2: The universe exists.

-------------

C1: Therefore, the universe has a cause (God)

But Russell claims that C1 (God) would be subject to P1. God would require a cause for God's existence. If so, the argument fails.

This is absurd because I have never read a version of the cosmological argument (in 35 years of studying and teaching and writing about philosophy of religion) that used this argument premise. Of course, P1 will defeat a cosmological argument, but no one uses it!

For example, the kalam cosmological argument reasons this way:

P1: What every begins to exist, has a cause of its existence.

P2: The universe began to exist.

-----------

C1: Therefore, the universe has a cause (God).

Notice that the kalam's P1 differs radically from Russell's version: "Everything that exists has a cause." God, of course, did not (by definition) begin to exist, so is not subject requiring a beginning cause for God's existence. In order words, there is no reductio ad absurdum. Neither do the Thomistic or the Lebinizian cosmological arguments rely on Russell's manufactured premise.

One could go on about the cosmological argument (I devote 30 pages to it in my book, Christian Apologetics), but suffice to say that this book does not bother to critique the argument at its best, only at its worst.

That is a very bad sign indeed, but I find that many British secular philosophers are often dismissive of philosophical theism. Shame on them.

On-line Education on Trial

2011-11-04T00:12:00.002-06:00

Here is the superb first installment of a series about on-line education, written by Sarah Geis.

From The Book of Common Prayer

2011-11-01T01:28:00.000-06:00

For a Sick Person

O Father of mercies and God of all comfort, our only help in time of need: We humbly beseech thee to behold, visit and relieve thy sick servant N. for whom our prayers are desired. Look upon him with the eyes of thy mercy; comfort him with a sense of thy goodness; preserve him from the temptations of the enemy; and give him patience under his affliction. In thy good time, restore him to health, and enable him to lead the residue of hislife in thy fear, and to thy glory; and grant that finally he may dwell with thee in life everlasting; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

For Recovery from Sickness

O God, the strength of the weak and the comfort of sufferers: Mercifully accept our prayers, and grant to your servant N. the help of your power, thathis sickness may be turned into health, and our sorrow into joy; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

or this

O God of heavenly powers, by the might of your command you drive away from our bodies all sickness and all infirmity: Be present in your goodness with your servant N., that his weakness may be banished and his strength restored; and that, his health being renewed, he may bless your holy Name; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Quotes from Chapter Eight: Faith, Risk, and Rationality

2011-10-29T02:55:00.001-06:00

I should be much more afraid of being mistaken and then finding out that Christianity is true than of being mistaken in believing it to be true. (Pascal, Pensées, 387/241, p. 143; in Christian Apologetics, p. 155)

...not to believe in Christianity, either as a committed unbeliever or as an agnostic, means to forfeit the benefits promised only to the believer (eternal life), should Christianity be true. Deciding not to choose has the same result as not believing in God. (Christian Apologetics, p. 159)

If Christianity is true, the prudential benefits for believing (eternal life) far exceed those offered by believing in atheism or any other worldview (finite pleasures). The prudential detriments of not believing if Christianity is true (loss of eternal life; gaining of hell) also far outweigh the detriments of not believing atheism or another other worldview if the non-Christian view is true (loss of some finite pleasures). Pascal is right to affirm that eternal bliss outweighs any finite good, and eternal loss is far worse than mere extinction. (Christian Apologetics, p. 161)

A prudential consideration of the Christian truth claim can, when offered wisely, invoke a healthy self-interest that encourages unbelievers to inquire into Christianity. (Christian Apologetics, p. 167)

More Apologetics Teaching

2011-10-25T21:43:00.001-06:00

I am teaching on the origin of life at Crossroads Church of Denver this Sunday (October 30) at 9:00 and 10:30 AM. Here is my outline. I will be offering copies of Christian Apologetics for a discount also.

Douglas Groothuis, Ph.D., Professor of Philosophy, Denver Seminary

DougGroothuis@gmail.com

A Biblical View of the Origin of Life on Earth

I. Why Origins Matter

A. Knowing the source of something usually tells much about what it is

1. Food: Kroeger green beans are worse than any other brand

2. Automobiles: Dodge or Toyota

3. Wines, authors, drugs, and so on

B. Human origins

1. Naturalism: An impersonal, materialistic source (change and natural law) for nature, or:

2. Theism: A personal, moral, spiritual source for nature

II. The Origin of life: Two Major Worldviews in Conflict. Two stories of reality

1. Naturalism: all life arose and evolved through natural, unintelligent causes over long periods of time

a. Universe has always existed or came into being out of nothing for no reason or purpose (godless Big Bang)

Story: In the beginning were the particles and the laws of nature; these did all the arranging of matter and energy from the beginning until now. Chance and necessity

b. Abiogenesis: life from non-life without a designer

Story: On the ancient earth, lifeless matter somehow evolved into living matter according to chance and natural law

c. Speciation through natural selection (Darwinism)

Story: after the first reproducing life form came into existence, each generation varied from its predecessors sufficiently to generate all the species now in existence

d. Implication of a-c: Life has no design plan, no purpose, and no destiny

2. Christian theism

a. God created and designed the universe (Psalm 90:1-2; Genesis 1:1; John 1:1-5)

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and was God. All things were made through him…

b. God created and designed all of life (Genesis 1); each thing created according to its “kind” (see also 1 Corinthians 15:35-41)

c. Allows for change within basic kinds, but claims that God has created and designed life and has left evidence of himself (Psalm 19:1-6; Romans 1:18-23)

¹³ For you created my inmost being;
you knit me together in my mother's womb.

¹⁴ I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made;
your works are wonderful,
I know that full well. –Psalm 139:13-14

d. Implication: Life has a divine design plan, purpose, and destiny

III. Defending a Christian View of Origin of Life

A. How Christians address this:

1. Theistic evolution (Francis Collins, The Language of God, 2006; Tim Keller, The Reason for God, 2008). Darwinism explains biology: no need to appeal to intelligent causation (design)

a. Reason against this: Doesn’t fit Scripture. God has left evidence of his handiwork

b. Scientific evidence doesn’t support it

B. Intelligent design challenge to naturalism (broadly understood)

Designing intelligence is necessary to explain life and is evident in life’s forms. Naturalism cannot explain life adequately.

C. The case for intelligent design: inference to best explanation based on empirical evidence (not the Bible itself). Relies on no uniquely religious assumptions, but does have conclusions that point toward God.

1. Review: molecular machines: bacterial flagellum (First sermon in this worldview series)

Irreducible complexity cannot be explained by naturalism; it requires intelligence

2. Information argument (DNA). Film clip.10 minutes of “The Case for a Creator”

a. The cell has a tremendous amount of information in DNA

b. This information is not explained by any merely natural process (chance and natural law) because the information is highly specified and complex

The information in DNA and RNA is digital and the entire system is far more sophisticated than any computer we have designed.

“DNA is like a computer program, but far, far more advanced than any software we’ve ever created”—Bill Gates.

c. Therefore, a designing mind (an intelligent cause) is the best explanation for the information in the cell

3. Evidence for Darwinian natural selection (speciation) is inadequate

a. Evidence for micro-evolution (finch beaks) does not establish macro-evolution

b. There is no genetic mechanism to increase information required for adaptive mutations; most all mutations are harmful. (These genetic mechanism themselves are designed.)

c. There is no strong evidence for gradual Darwinian evolution in the fossil record. Rather: “sudden emergence and stasis” (Stephen Jay Gould, Darwinist, paleontologist)

IV. God, the Designer of Life

A. Naturalism fails to explain nature adequately: molecular machines, information in the cell, vast number of different species

B. Also fails to explain morality and resurrection of Jesus. See D. Groothuis, Christian Apologetics, chapters 15, 21

C. Intelligent design explains these facts logically, based on scientific evidence

D. Intelligent design points to the God of the Bible; although it does not tell us all we need to know about God. But gives good reason to investigate the biblical claims since nature does require a designer.

E. We learn the rest of God’s truth from the Bible (2 Timothy 3:15-16)

Recommended resources:

Books:

Douglas Groothuis, Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith (InterVarsity, 2011). See chapters 13-14 on Darwinism and design.
Michael Behe, Darwin’s Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution, 10 anniv. ed. (Free Press, 2006). A pivotal book for the Intelligent Design movement.
Lee Strobel, The Case for a Creator (Zondervan, 2004).
Jonathan Wells, Icons of Evolution (Moody, 2000). Images for Darwinism are bogus.
Philip Johnson, Darwin on Trial (InterVarsity Press, 1993). Logical critique.
William Dembski and Sean McDowell, Understanding Intelligent Design (Harvest House, 2008). Introductory, but excellent.
Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis (Adler and Adler, 1986). Influential scientific and secular critique of Darwinism.
Stephen Meyer, The Signature in the Cell (HarperOne, 2009). Magisterial defense of design of life. The best philosophy of science book I have read.

DVDs:

Lee Strobel, “The Case for a Creator” (Illustra Media, 2006). The various scientific arguments for God from biology, physics, cosmology.
“Unlocking the Mystery of Life” (Illustra Media, 2002). The evidence for God from biology.
“The Privileged Planet” (Illustra Media, 2004). On the special design of the earth.
“Expelled” with Ben Stein (2008). Shows how Darwinists persecute dissenters.
“Darwin’s Dilemma” (Illustra Media). On the Cambrian explosion, which Darwinists cannot explain.

Web pages: Access Research Network: www.arn.org; Discovery Institute: www.discovery.org.

Favoring Iran

2011-10-22T15:09:00.000-06:00

Withdrawl of troop from Iraq is Iran's victory.

Michele Bachmann on Obama's Big Mistake

2011-10-21T18:58:00.002-06:00

Urbandale, Iowa – Republican presidential candidate Michele Bachmann issued the following statement in response to President Obama’s announcement to pull United States troops out of Iraq by the end of the year:

“Today’s announcement that we will remove all of our forces from Iraq is a political decision and not a military one; it represents the complete failure of President Obama to secure an agreement with Iraq for our troops to remain there to preserve the peace and demonstrates how far our foreign policy leadership has fallen. In every case where the United States has liberated a people from dictatorial rule, we have kept troops in that country to ensure a peaceful transition and to protect fragile growing democracies. We will now have fewer troops in Iraq than we have in Honduras – despite a costly and protracted war.

“President Obama’s decision represents the end of the era of America’s influence in Iraq and the strengthening of Iran’s influence in Iraq with no plan to counter that influence. We have been ejected from a country by the people that we liberated and that the United States paid for with precious blood and treasure. The administration claims that we got exactly what we needed, but today’s announcement demonstrates otherwise. The United States needed a working democratic partnership in Iraq and we should have demanded that Iraq repay the full cost of liberating them given their rich oil revenues. I call on the president to return to the negotiating table with Iraq and lead from the front and not from weakness in Iraq and in the world.”

2011-10-21T17:58:00.000-06:00

I will be teaching on basic apologetics at Littleton Bible Chapel Sunday, October 23, at 6:30 PM. I will bring books to sell for $30. Hope to see you there.

Littleton Bible Chapel
6023 S Datura St.
Littleton 80130

Tozer

2011-10-21T12:15:00.001-06:00

We who preach the gospel must not think of ourselves as public relations agents sent to establish good will between Christ and the world. We must not imagine ourselves commissioned to make Christ acceptable to big business, the press, the world of sports or modern education. We are not diplomats but prophets, and our message is not a compromise but an ultimatum.--AW Tozer, "The Old Cross and the New."

Sermon Outline for my message at Crossroads Church of Denver, October 16, 2011

2011-10-15T21:18:00.001-06:00

Crossroads Church of Denver, October 16, 2011

Douglas Groothuis, Ph.D., Professor of Philosophy, Denver Seminary

DougGroothuis@gmail.com

A Short Course in Christian apologetics

I. Making Thinking a Sin (Marlene Winell, Leaving the Fold)

A. Intellectual challenges at the university

B. Wrong responses: critical thinking as sin

II. The Need for Defending Christianity as True, Rational, and Pertinent: Apologetics

A. Biblical case for rational spirituality (1 Peter 3:15-16; Jude 3; 2 Corinthians 10:3-5)

B. Defending objective truth of Christian worldview in humility and dependence on God (Luke 9:23-26)

C. Showing existential significance and consequence of Christianity

D. Being wise as serpent, innocent as a dove, bold as a lion (Matthew 10:16; Proverbs 28:1)

III. Making the Positive Case for Christianity

A. Commending the Christian Worldview

1. What is a worldview: set of assumptions about the basic make up of the world: ultimate reality, morality, human condition, and salvation

2. Christian worldview: creation, fall, redemption

The universe (originally good, now fallen and awaiting its divine judgment and restoration) was created and sustained by the Triune God, who has revealed himself in nature, humanity, conscience, Scripture, and supremely through the Incarnation for the purpose of salvation and judgment.

B. Giving the best explanation through a cumulative case

1. Best explanation: non-contradictory, factual, and livable

2. Cumulative case: combine arguments converging on God of the Bible

IV. The Three Circles of Evidence: Cosmology, Biology, and History

A. Cosmology: the universe is created, not eternal. The Big Bang cosmology. See Paul Copan and William Lane Craig, Creation Out of Nothing (Baker, 2004).

1. Scientific evidences for an absolute beginning of the universe out of

nothing. See Robert Jastrow, God and the Astronomers.

a. Einstein’s general theory of relativity (1917) contained an error (fudge factor), when corrected it predicted an expanding universe

b. In the 1920s, independent of each other, Belgian astronomer George Lemaitre and Russian mathematician Alexander Freidman corrected the error. This became the Freidman-Lemaitre model

c. In 1929, American astronomer Edwin Hubble detected the “red shift” in distant galaxies. Indicated that what was further away was moving at a greater speed. Evidence for expansion.

d. The detection of cosmic background radiation left over from initial condition of the universe.

e. Thermodynamics of the universe; second law of thermodynamics, entropy.

f. Upshot: everything be traced to an initial singularity: Barrow and Tipler: “At this singularity, space and time came into existence; literally nothing existed before the singularity, so, if the Universe originated in such a singularity, we would truly have a creation ex nihilo.” John Barrow and Frank Tipler, The Anthropic Cosmological Principle (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986), 442.

g. Alternative theories have failed: steady state and oscillating universe: lack empirical evidence and contravene known laws of physics.

B. Biology

1. Meet the bacterial flagellum

2. Universal joint, propeller, drive shaft, rotor, stator, bushings—all of which are needed for its function, none of which are expendable.

3. This is a biological motor attached to the back of a bacterium as seen through a high-powered microscope. Not built by any human.

4. Bacterial flagellum: only recently discovered to be a molecular machine. See Michael Behe, Darwin’s Black Box, 10^th anniversary ed. (Free Press, 2006), 69-72. It exhibits the marks of design.

“Irreducible complexity”: the mousetrap principle. All the integrated parts are needed for fruitful function. It is very improbable that this was built up gradually through natural selection (a naturalistic explanation). See William Dembski, The Design Revolution, chapter 40.

5. Video clip from “The Case for a Creator” (Illustra Media) featuring Dr. Michael Behe, Dr. Scott Minnich.

6. Best explanation for molecular machines, such as the bacterial flagellum—design, not mindless nature

C. History and Jesus Christ

1. Christianity and history: God reveals himself in the actions of history (John 1:14)

2. Consider the New Testament

a. Transmission of the documents (textual criticism). Nearly 6,000 Greek manuscripts of the NT with little variation; better than any other ancient text

b. Original writings: by eyewitness or those who consulted them (Luke 1:1-4; John 20:30-31)

c. Synoptic Gospels written before about 70; entire NT before 100 AD.

d. Extra-biblical writers confirm some aspects of NT history

e. Miracles are possible if creation and design (theism is established)

3. The claims of Jesus Christ and their significance

a. Forgiven sins (Mark 2:1-14); give his life for sinners

b. Lord of the Sabbath (Mark 2:15-28)

c. One with the Father (John 10:30-31)

d. Crucified and resurrected Lord (1 Corinthians 15)

1. Known burial place; Empty tomb; many appearances; changed life of the disciples

2. Best explanation: simplest, explains the most: resurrection in space-time

4. The achievements of Jesus Christ best answers the human condition (John 10:10)

Jesus is the God whom we can approach without pride and before whom we can humble ourselves without despair.—Blaise Pascal, Pensées

V. Conclusion: Reason Enough to Rationally Believe

A. Christianity as objectively true, rational and personally pertinent

B. Christianity is a better explanation of reality than any other worldview

C. We should have confidence to present Christianity in the world of ideas (Romans 1:16-17)

Further reading

1. Francis Beckwith, et al, eds. To Everyone an Answer (InterVarsity Press, 2004). Essays by leading apologetics.

2. Craig Blomberg, The Historical Reliability of the Gospels (InterVarsity, 2007).

3. William Lane Craig, Reasonable Faith, 3^rd ed. (Crossway, 2008).

4. William Dembski, The Design Revolution (InterVarsity, 2004).

5. Douglas Groothuis, On Jesus and On Pascal, both Wadsworth, 2003.

6. Douglas Groothuis, Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith (InterVarsity Press, 2011).

7. The Discovery Institute (Intelligent Design): www.discovery.org

8. J.P. Moreland, Scaling the Secular City (Baker, 1987).

9. James Sennett and Douglas Groothuis, editors, In Defense of Natural Theology (InterVarsity, 2005). More advanced work.

10. Lee Stroble, The Case for a Creator (Zondervan, 2004). See the DVD of the same name.

11. Lee Stroble, The Case for Faith (Zondervan, 2000).

12. Lee Stroble, The Case for Christ (Zondervan, 1998).

Book Sales for Christian Apologetics

2011-10-08T22:01:00.002-06:00

InterVarsity Press tells me that through September 11, 2011, Christian Apologetics has sold nearly 3,000 copies. That is quite good for a large, academic book.

My Outline for a Talk Tonight at The Word Conference

2011-10-07T13:29:00.001-06:00

Douglas Groothuis, Ph.D., Professor of Philosophy

Denver Seminary, DougGroothuis@gmail.com

Roots of Biblical skepticism on Campus

I. The Importance of the University

A. Charles Malik, A Christian Critique of the University

This great Western institution, the university, dominates the world today more than any other institution: more than the church, more than the government, more than all other institutions. All the leaders of government are graduates of universities, or at least of secondary schools or colleges whose

administrators and teachers are themselves graduates of universities. The same applies to all church leaders. How can you create economically without some technical training? But the technical schools which provide this training are some sort of mini-universities, and their administrators and instructors are

themselves graduates of colleges, universities or technical institutes. The professionals–doctors, engineers, lawyers, etc.–have all passed through the mill of the secondary school, the college and the university. And the men of the media are university trained, and some have undergone specialized, advanced instruction in communication and journalism.[1]

B. J. Gresham Machen (1881-1937)

False ideas are the greatest obstacles to the reception of the gospel. We may preach with all the fervour of a reformer and yet succeed only in winning a straggler here and there, if we permit the whole collective thought of the

nation or of the world to be controlled by ideas which, by the resistless force of logic, prevent Christianity from being regarded as anything more than a harmless delusion. Under such circumstances, what God desires us to do is

to destroy the obstacle at its root. [2]

II. Academic Culture Today

A. Secularization of the academy. See George Marsden, The Soul of the American University: From Protestant Establishment to Established Nonbelief (Oxford, 1996).

B. Academics are more secular than the general population

C. Worldview (philosophy of life)

1. Naturalism (philosophical materialism)

2. Postmodernism (Nonrealism)

D. Academic view of religion

1. Harmful or harmless delusion: naturalism

2. Relative, contingent social construction: postmodernism

3. The divided field of knowing

Faith, spirituality, subjective values (opinion)

Fact, rationality, science, objectivity (knowledge)[3]

III. Roots of Unbelief: Philosophical

A. Decline in natural theology

1. David Hume (1711-1776) skepticism about God (Dialogues on Natural Religion); unbelief in miracles (Enquiry on Human Understanding)

2. Immanuel Kant (1724-1804): God is unknowable, but a postulate of practical reason: “I have denied knowledge to make room for faith,” Critique of Pure Reason

B. Religion as a romantic ideal or feeling apart from reason (F. Schleiermacher, Soren Kierkegaard)

IV. Roots of Unbelief: Scientific Trends

A. Scientific revolution wrought by theists, many Christians: Newton, Galileo, Faraday, etc. See Rodney Stark, For the Glory of God (Princeton Univ. Press, 2004), chapter two

B. The Christian philosophical orientation to nature[4]

1. The physical universe is an objective reality, which is ontologically distinct from the Creator (Genesis 1:1; John 1:1).

2. The laws of nature exhibit order, pattern, and regularity, since they are established by an orderly God (Psalm 19:1-4).

3. The laws of nature are uniform throughout the physical universe, since God created and providentially sustains them.

4. The physical universe is intelligible because God created us to know himself, ourselves, and the rest of creation. (Genesis 1-2; Proverbs 8).

5. The world is good, valuable, and worthy of careful study, because it was created for a purpose by a perfectly good God (Genesis 1). Humans, as the unique image bearers of God, were created to discern, discover, and develop the goodness of creation for the glory of God and human betterment through work. The creation mandate (Genesis 1:26-28) includes scientific activity.[5]

6. Because the world is not divine and therefore not a proper object of worship, it can be an object of rational study and empirical observation.

7. Human beings possess the ability to discover the universe’s intelligibility, since we are made in God’s image and have been placed on earth to develop its intrinsic possibilities.

8. Because God did not reveal everything about nature, empirical investigation is necessary to discern the patterns God laid down in creation.

9. The intellectual virtues essential to carrying out the scientific enterprise (studiousness, honesty, integrity, humility, and courage) are part of God’s moral law (Exodus 20:1-17).[6]

C. Charles Darwin (1809 -1882), Origin of Species, 1859

1. Attempt to explain speciation apart from design

2. Natural selection (mutation and adaptation)

3. Theological agenda: the problem of evil in animals and humans

4. Result: methodological naturalism (metaphysical naturalism)

5. Richard Lewontin, prominent biologist

We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.[7]

V. Responding to the Challenge

A. Know the opposition (Acts 17:16-34; 2 Corinthians 10:3-5)

B. Out argue the opposition (1 Peter 3:15: Matthew 22:37-40). Next lecture.

1. Postmodernism: show that it self-destructs

2. Philosophy: defeat naturalism;: defend natural theology

3. Science: defend intelligent design, defeat Darwinism

Bibliography

James Collins, God in Modern Philosophy. Greenwood Press Reprint; New edition, 1978.
Stephen T. Davis, God, Reason, and Theistic Proofs. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1997.
Douglas Groothuis, Truth Decay. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000.
Doug Groothuis Blog: The Constructive Curmudgeon: www.theconstructivecurmudgeon.blogspot.com
Cornelius Hunter, Darwin’s God: Evolution and the Problem of Evil. Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos Books, 2002.
Charles Malik, A Christian Critique of the University. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1983.
George Marsden, The Soul of the American University: From Protestant Establishment to Established Nonbelief . New York: Oxford, 1996.
Ronald Nash, Faith and Reason. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1988.
Francis Schaeffer, How Shall We Then Live?The Rise and Fall of Western Culture Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 1976. See Doug Groothuis view at: http://www.denverseminary.edu/article/how-should-we-then-live.
Francis Schaeffer, The God Who is There, 30^th anniv. ed. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1998.
John Sommerville, The Decline of the Secular University. New York: Oxford University Press, 2006.
Rodney Stark, For the Glory of God. Princeton Univ. Press, 2004.
Nancy Pearcey, Total Truth. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2004. See Doug Groothuis review at: http://www.denverseminary.edu/article/total-truth-liberating-christianity-from-its-cultural-captivity.

[1] http://www.wardconsultation.org/Readings/Charles_Malik.pdf

[2] "The Scientific Preparation of the Minister" was delivered September 20, 1912, at the opening of the one hundred and first session of Princeton Theological Seminary. It is found in the Princeton Theological Review, Vol. XI, No. 1, 1913, p. 1.

[3] For more on this dichotomy, see Francis Schaeffer, The God Who is There, 30^th anniv. ed. (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1998); Nancy Pearcey, Total Truth (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2004).

[4] See Douglas Groothuis, Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2011), 102-103.

[5] On the significance and depth of the creation mandate, see Francis Nigel Lee, “The Roots of Culture,” chap. 1, in Lee, The Central Significance of Culture (The Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1976).

[6] On the presuppositions of science, see also J.P. Moreland, Scaling the Secular City (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1987), pp. 198-201.

[7] Richard Lewontin, ‘Billions and Billions of Demons,” The New York Review, January 9, 1997, p. 31.

Groothuis to Teach on Apologetics at Word Conference

2011-10-06T13:28:00.001-06:00

I will be giving two talks at The Word Conference, held in Denver, October 7, 8. My talks will relate to the work in Christian Apologetics, and signed copies of the book will be available for purchase.

Another Good Reason to Defeat Obama

2011-10-06T00:01:00.001-06:00

OPINION
OCTOBER 4, 2011, 10:48 P.M. ET

Washington Wants a Say Over Your Minister

The Supreme Court weighs whether the feds can decide which church employees are clergy and which aren't.

By MICHAEL W. MCCONNELL

Today, the Obama administration will invite the Supreme Court to open a new front in the culture wars. Hosanna-Tabor Evangelical Lutheran Church and School v. EEOC concerns a commissioned minister, Cheryl Perich, who taught elementary school and led chapel devotions at a small Lutheran school outside Detroit. Ms. Perich became ill and was replaced in the classroom by a substitute. In the middle of the school year she sought to return and then, instead of attempting to work out the dispute through the church's reconciliation process, she threatened to sue.

As relations broke down, the church congregation voted to withdraw her "call" to the ministry, and she ceased to be eligible for her prior job. She sued under the Americans with Disabilities Act, with the support of the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

The federal statutes outlawing employment discrimination based on race, sex, age and disability contain no express exception for church employers. But for 40 years lower courts have applied a "ministerial exception," which bars the government from any role in deciding who should be a minister. Courts have reasoned that the separation between church and state protects the ability of churches to choose their own clergy just as it protects the state from any control by churches. The Supreme Court has never spoken to the issue.

But who counts as a minister? Cheryl Perich's duties included leading students in prayer and worship, but she also taught secular subjects, using ordinary secular textbooks. The sole disagreement in the lower courts was whether her job was sufficiently religious to be considered ministerial. The Supreme Court will consider, for the first time, how to make that determination.

But the Obama Justice Department has now asked the court to disavow the ministerial exception altogether. This would mean that, in every future case, a court—and not the church—would decide whether the church's reasons for firing or not hiring a minister were good enough.

But the government, including the judiciary, is not entitled under the First Amendment to decide what qualifications a minister should have, or to weigh religious considerations against others. Is a secular court to decide, for example, whether confining Catholic priests or Orthodox rabbis to males is a correct interpretation of scripture, or merely a vestige of outmoded and stereotypical bias?

James Madison famously declared that the civil magistrate is not a "competent Judge of Religious truth." Yet every discrimination claim about the hiring of a minister necessarily comes down to the question of whether the church had a bona fide religious reason for its decision. That places the courts squarely in the business of adjudicating the validity of a church's claims about its own religious practice.

The Justice Department's brief grudgingly concedes that there may be an exception for employees performing "exclusively religious functions," but this is an illusory protection. Every church officer—even the pope—performs at least some nonreligious administrative duties. If the government's position were accepted, the courts would be embroiled in disputes about the selection of clergy at all levels and in every denomination. This would be a radical reversal of our nation's long constitutional tradition.

In the colonial era, with an established Church of England, the government controlled who would preach the gospel. The royal governor of Virginia licensed ministers in the colony, and Madison's first known writing on religious liberty was a letter protesting the jailing of Baptist ministers for preaching without a license.

When the First Amendment declared that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion," it meant that churches would support themselves and control themselves. And the separation of church and state is a two-way street: It protects the autonomy of religious institutions from governmental interference no less than it prevents advancement of religion by government power.

That tradition of church-state separation has continued to the present day. After the Civil War, for example, the framers of the 14th Amendment, which applied the Establishment Clause to the states, voted against legislation to subject churches to antidiscrimination laws, concluding this would violate the First Amendment. The Supreme Court has held (Bishop v. Amos, 1987) that religious organizations must be "free to select their own leaders, define their own doctrines, resolve their own disputes, and run their own institutions." Even EEOC guidelines a few years ago reaffirmed the ministerial exception.

Perhaps American churches should be more open to female clergy and more accommodating toward elderly pastors or disabled chaplains. But if the separation between church and state means anything, such changes must come from within.

As a lower court judge, Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote: "Federal court entanglement in matters as fundamental as a religious institution's selection or dismissal of its spiritual leaders risks an unconstitutional trespass on the most spiritually intimate grounds of a religious community's existence." It is unfortunate that the Department of Justice does not see it that way.

Mr. McConnell is the director of the Constitutional Law Center at Stanford University. He wrote a friend-of-the-court brief in this case on behalf of major Protestant denomination

My New Blog: Christian Apologetics

2011-10-04T12:10:00.001-06:00

I have started a new blog called Christian Apologetics, which features my new book of the same name. Please visit and contribute.

Interview on Christian Apologetics

2011-10-04T12:08:00.001-06:00

Lee Strobel interviews me about Christian Apologetics at Bible Gateway.

2011-10-03T01:10:00.001-06:00

David Wells - "Worldliness is that system of values, in any given age, which has at its center our fallen human perspective, which displaces God and His truth from the world, and which makes sin look normal and righteousness seem strange."

Doug Groothuis interviewed in Christianity Today

2011-09-29T11:22:00.004-06:00

I am very happy to present my Christianity Today interview on my book, Christian Apologetics (InterVarsity Press, 2011).

Iran to Execute Christian

2011-09-28T15:36:00.000-06:00

Dear Doug Groothuis,

We are asking for your urgent prayer for Youcef Nadarkhani, an Iranian pastor who may be executed within the next 24 hours if he continues to refuse to recant his faith in court.

Youcef is the pastor of a house church in Rasht, Iran, and was arrested in October 2009 for opposing the education practice that forces non-Muslim students to read the Quran in school. Youcef had argued that the Iranian constitution permits children to be raised in their parents' faith; however, for defying Iranian authorities, Youcef was charged with apostasy.

Iranian officials used pressure tactics during Youcef's imprisonment as an attempt to coerce him to renounce his Christian beliefs, which included arresting his wife and threatening to seize his children. Still, Youcef remained firm in his faith, refusing to deny the name of his Savior Jesus Christ.

On September 22, 2010, Youcef was issued the death sentence for his conversion to Christianity and for encouraging the conversions of other Muslims. Youcef appealed the decision to the Supreme Court of Iran, claiming he had never been a Muslim and therefore could not be found guilty of apostasy. However, a written verdict upholding the death penalty and ordering an investigation was handed down on June 12. A reexamination of the case to determine whether Nadarkhani will live or die began on Sunday and has continued for the past two days. Early this morning, Youcef refused to deny his faith for the fourth time in court. Technically, he must only be granted three opportunities to return to Islam before he can be executed for apostasy.

Throughout his imprisonment, Youcef has trusted in the Lord and has been a bold witness of the redeeming work of Christ in his life. Remember, Jesus did not merely warn His followers that they might be persecuted; He promised it, saying, "If the world hates you, you know that it has hated Me before it hated you... If they persecuted Me, they will also persecute you," (John 15:18-20).

Youcef has learned to delight in hardships and persecution for Christ's sake (2 Cor. 12:10)."Many attempt to flee from their spiritual tests... [but] no one will be victorious by escaping from them, but with patience and humility he will be able to overcome all the tests and gain victory," he wrote from Lakan Prison last June. "Although heaven and earth will fade, His word will still remain."

Sincerely in Christ,

Jeff King

President, ICC

International Christian Concern

www.persecution.org

2020 Pennsylvania Ave. NW

Washington, District of Columbia 20006

Just sent to the President of the United States.

2011-09-28T11:55:00.001-06:00

Dear Mr. President:

A young pastor who converted to Christianity is threatened with the death penalty in Iran. See this story on him:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/iranian-pastor-must-disavow-his-christian-faith-this-week-or-hell-be-executed/

Please send a strong message to Iran that this is morally wrong. Come to this young man's defense, I ask you.

Sincerely,

Douglas Groothuis, Ph.D.

Jazz and Apologetics

2011-09-26T22:12:00.002-06:00

Today, in Defending Christian Faith at Denver Seminary, I played two pieces of classic jazz: "Sophisticated Lady," by Duke Ellington and sung by Rosemary Clooney and "Passion Flower," an instrumental, featuring Johnny Hodges on alto saxophone. These were from the recording, "Blue Rose." We reflected on aspects of this music and how it pertained to the virtues required for Christian apologetics. What great fun that was! And our new classrooms have stereo speakers.

Review of Duke Ellington, The Private Collection, Vol. 5: The Suites: New York 1968 & 1970

2011-09-24T00:42:00.002-06:00

This long CD (over 71 minutes) is taken from Duke's capacious "vault" of recordings not released during his lifetime (d. 1974). The band would gather between gigs to rehearse new material and rework old material before taking it on the road. Duke was the producer, unlike his "official recordings." And unlike some of the other vault recordings, this has a polished and finished feel to it, rivaling that of "Such Sweet Thunder."

The first suite was composed for a film about the painting of Degas, which was never completed. However, we are graced to have the music. It is multi-layered but unified in expression. Both the ensemble work and the solos are impeccably executed. This clocks in at over twenty-minutes and is a sheer delight.

"The River," originally composed for a ballet, is the second suite is longer and much more modernist or even avant-guarde. It texture approaches chamber music at times and takes some wise chances with melody, meter, and harmony. It can swing, but not always. The "Whirlpool" movement is quite adventuresome. It startled and amazed me the first time I heard it, and continues to do so. I risk sacrilege here, but it reminds one a bit of some of Frank Zappa's best instrumental work.

A world with Duke Ellington cannot be absurd. This is a sufficient (but not necessary) condition for defeating nihilism. This work is objectively beautiful; created by a great soul. Therefore there is meaning and goodness in the world. Thank God.

Prayer, the dead

2011-09-23T00:20:00.004-06:00

Although I am a Protestant, I sometimes feel the urge to pray for the dead--the dead that are probably not in Christ. I lament the lost who are now lost to this world in death.

Yet there are finalities beyond the reach of sentiment--that one cannot alter.

I write this as I ponder the life, art, and character of Georgia O'Keefe.

2011-09-21T00:55:00.000-06:00

Here is a podcast about my essay, "A Christian Apologetics Manifesto."

2011-09-18T15:44:00.001-06:00

I will be on Backbone Radio (Denver) from 5:00-6:30 (KNUS-AM, 710) today.

Bachmann on the Constitution

2011-09-17T23:32:00.001-06:00

Michele Bachmann

The Constitution: Freedom Defined

Washington, Sep 17 -

Two hundred and twenty-four years ago today, fifty-five men presented one of the greatest documents ever conceived by man to the world. In only four pages, the Constitution of the United States set up the parameters for the greatest nation on earth and established a standard of democracy other countries have since tried to replicate. Using simple yet powerful words, the founders presented what was then a radical idea: a republic that allowed for an unprecedented amount of power to be given to its people.

Within the sacred words of this document is embedded a passion for liberty. It is evident that the delegates of the Constitutional Convention were not just concerned about establishing rules for the newly independent America; they were defining and protecting freedom itself. After losing thousands of colonists in the War of Independence, these men had the deep conviction that freedom was precious and liberty was one of the only ideas worthy of such a tremendous loss of life. In a single charter, our founding fathers manifested an ideal that has made this country the envy of the world.

Tragically though, over the years, activist judges and lawmakers have taken the Constitution’s sacred words and twisted them to include meanings the founders never intended. America, in several ways, has strayed away from our original moorings; so many have forgotten the words that guided our country’s greatness for so many years.

Yet we need not give up. The beauty of the Constitution is that it’s not just a document, it is an idea. As evidenced in history, the Constitution is always lived out best when a virtuous people take seriously the personal responsibility they have to make this country great. As we celebrate the Constitution’s anniversary today, let us remember the idea that inspired this charter of freedom and allow its words to once again inspire us to actively protect the God-given freedom it defines.

Groothuis on Backbone Radio

2011-09-17T16:49:00.001-06:00

Listen to Backbone Radio every Sunday, 5:00-8:00 pm

710 AM KNUS in Denver & 1460 AM KZNT in Colorado Springs

To listen online from anywhere, click 710knus.com

I will be on from 5:00-6:30 this Sunday.

Review of Rousas John Rushdoony, The Cure of Souls

2011-09-15T21:20:00.001-06:00

Rousas John Rushdoony, The Cure of Souls: Recovering the Biblical Doctrine of Confession (Ross House Books, 2007).

Rousas John Rushdoony (d. 2001) was a prolific, if a bit idiosyncratic, Christian writer and teacher. He wrote mostly for small publishers, so his books were not always well-edited. He advanced a thesis, Reconstructionism (or theonomy), that advocated the application of the Mosaic law to today's society.

While I heave learned much from the mind of Rushdoony, I do not hold to Reconstructionism. Nevertheless. Rushdoony was often a trenchant social critic, who was gifted in applying theological categories to contemporary issues. On this, I recommend: The Messianic Character of American Education, This Independent Republic, The Nature of the American System, and The Revolt Against Maturity, to name just a few.

In this work, Rushdoony reflects on the nature of confession. He does so in 49 short chapters (or essays), which cover a wealth of angles. His goal is to reaffirm "the biblical doctrine of confession" as opposed to secular surrogates. To that end, Rushdoony cites many stories from his own long life as well as mining church history.

Rushdoony's central thesis is astute: the biblical doctrine of confession has been largely lost in the contemporary world. Many churches do not include it in their liturgy. Those outside the church may blather on about their sins without any sense of the meaning of sin or forgiveness. Rushdoony emphasizes that confession should be linked to repentance and restitution. We confess our sins before a holy God who commands us to "bear fruit worthy of repentance," as John the Baptist put it.

I found this book to be fascinating and challenging. It is a bit marred by poor editing, but that does not detract from the wisdom it contains. Surely "the cure of souls" is impossible without a proper doctrine and practice of confession

Idea

2011-09-15T20:18:00.001-06:00

What would happen if all my 1600 Facebook friends put a link to Christian Apologetics (from Amazon or InterVarsity Press) on their Facebook page and asked five of their friends to do the same? If you can endorse the book, please consider doing this.

Groothuis Teaching on Apologetics

2011-09-15T20:00:00.004-06:00

I will be teaching on apolgetics at Crossroads Church of Denver (in Aurora) on October, 16, for both services. They will also have my book, Christian Apologetics, on sale. I hope to see you there.

A short theology of listening

2011-09-14T13:21:00.002-06:00

In a world scrambled by aimless philosophical speculation and ever-more commercial and marketable religious apostasy and crass superstition, we should exult in our knowledge that we personally bear the very image of God (imago Dei). Consequently, we have the God-given capacity to reasonably and spiritually respond to the Creator-God’s revelation and to know Him personally. We can further rejoice that our Lord Jesus Christ, through His costly grace, has died for the sin that previously blinded our eyes and deafened our ears to spiritual reality (2 Cor. 4:3-6). The Lord has spoken: in creation, in the Bible, and by his Son—and we have heard and obeyed, by His grace. Jesus preached: “I tell you the truth, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be condemned; he has crossed over from death to life” (John 5:24).

Yet how do we listen to Christ’s prophets and teachers and preachers? How do we respond to the spoken word of biblical teaching and preaching? Do we really hear?

In his classic text, Biblical Preaching, Dr. Haddon Robinson affirms the centrality and power of preaching the authoritative word. He says of the Apostle: “Preaching in Paul’s mind did not consist of a man discussing religion. Instead, God Himself spoke through the personality and the message of a preacher to confront men and women and them to himself.”

God has specially appointed teachers and prophets for equipping the saints and for the building up of the Body (Eph. 4:11, 14). They must be heeded, for they are no less than the spokespeople of God. In an age rebelling against all legitimate authority, during a time when error is enthusiastically embraced and Truth largely shunned, we must become disciplined, earnest listeners to the Truth. It is our privilege; it is our responsibility.

Our worship doesn’t end with the last hymn or chorus before the teaching; rather, our worship shifts from vocally praising God to actively listening to Him. “Hear O Israel,” cried Moses, God’s prophet, “The Lord our God, the LORD is one. Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength” (Deut. 6:4).

Listen . . . with all your might; hear the living and active word. The teaching and preaching of God’s imperishable word is truly a sacred event whereby the Truth penetrates hearts and minds, consciences are quickened, sin is disclosed, salvation is offered, wisdom is imparted . . . if we listen, if we actively engage ourselves in hearing, if we participate as the Holy Spirit works in our midst.

We are all too accustomed to being entertained and passively amused. Television often hypnotizes or anaesthetizes us; it demands little response and by its very nature stimulates stagnation, not spiritual encounter. Video games, cell phones, and internet access offers an endless source of possible distraction. But when we come together as the Body of Christ we come as participants not as spectators, we come to hear and obey the Truth not to be entertained. Neither Moses nor Paul captured their audience through eloquence or style. They were not entertainers but Truth-tellers: they spoke God’s word with a power that provoked response. Our Lord, when teaching by parable, alerted his hearers: “Therefore, consider carefully how you listen” (Luke 8:18). We are to be engaged in listening, intent on hearing.

Just as it is ethically incumbent upon the teacher or preacher to diligently hunger and thirst after an exegetically and theologically correct message (James 3:1; Matt. 12:36, 37), so it is ethically imperative that the hearers receive and respond to the word—always considering the message according to Scripture. For no human is infallible, and all must be corrected biblically; yet God in His mercy uses these earthen vessels “to show that this all-surpassing power is from God and not from us” (2 Cor. 4:7).

Sound biblical teaching and preaching when illumined by the Spirit is a transaction of grace: needed Truth is dynamically imparted to both redeemed and unredeemed sinners through the spoken word—a momentous event! It’s not just another Sunday’s half hour, not just another “religious” routine. The gracious gifts of the Spirit are to freely operate with the wind of the Spirit filling our sails and refreshing our hearts.

Practically, we must regain a biblical reverence, a fear and trembling before our Maker (Prov. 1:6). As a teacher and a preacher, I know the meaning of the congregation’s eye contact, facial expressions, and posture. Yes, in a way it is the speaker’s responsibility to provoke the interest of the hearers. But it is equally our responsibility to listen and to help the speakers by demonstrating an interest. This may require a sacrifice if you are not naturally captivated—but isn’t that the essence of following Christ—sacrifice (Romans 12:1-2)?

We obey what we have truly heard; we truly hear what we dedicate ourselves to hearing “and the message is heard through the word of Christ” (Rom. 10:17). “Hear O Israel.” “Let everyone be quick to hear” (James 1:19) that the Lord may be honored, revered, and obeyed.

2011-09-14T02:00:00.001-06:00

Black Place by Georgia O'Keefe