Book Review: Doing Philosophy as a Christian
Pages: 352
Publisher: IVP Academic
Year: 2011
Author: Garrett J. DeWeese
After a few delays (e.g. an unexpectedly massive course load) I am finally able to get to my review of Garret J. DeWeese’s recent book, Doing Philosophy as a Christian. (If you haven’t already, you can read my interview with DeWeese here.)
First things first, this book is in the “Christian Worldview Integration Series”, which as far as I can tell is a series of books devoted to the ‘topic’ of how a Christian should live as a Christian in every aspect of their lives. I must admit that it’s nice to read something with this focus, as a lot of the reading I do tends to be detached and, at times, needlessly ‘heady’.
There are four parts to Doing Philosophy as a Christian. Part one introduces the ‘topic’ of wisdom, the relationship between faith and reason and the question of Jesus as philosopher. Part two addresses the “inescapable questions”: what is real, what do I know, and what should I value? Part three follows from this and asks, who and what am I, and what is nature? Part four was unique for me (in comparison other books of philosophy I’ve read), as it discussed “philosophy and spiritual formation” — a topic usually referenced but not discussed.
With that outline in mind, who is this book for? Perhaps DeWeese can help us with this question:
First, this is not a general introduction to philosophy written from a Christian perspective. I won’t introduce the major topics in philosophy, but rather will consider how to think about them from within a Christian worldview. Second, this isn’t a general challenge to Christian students to develop a ‘Christian mind,’ to engage their learning broadly and deeply as a way to ‘love their God with all their mind.’ Third, it isn’t a book of apologetics. I won’t make arguments for Christian theism or offer defenses against objections to theism of Christianity.
The class of readers with whom I wish to engage consists first of all of Christians majoring in philosophy, or those young scholars who recently entered the profession, who have questions and concerns about how their Christian faith does, or should, affect the study and perhaps a career in philosophy… Nevertheless, I do not assume that everyone reading this book is a Christian… I believe there are ideas here that might stimulate the thinking of any budding philosopher, whatever her spiritual commitment.
I can confirm that this is indeed the case, but that is not to say that ‘non-philosophers’ can’t learn something from DeWeese. From the very beginning there is an emphasis on the practical aspect of wisdom. ‘Doing philosophy’ should have a fundamental impact on how we live our lives, as should the knowledge of Christ. To say it another way; this isn’t just a book on, e.g. “which epistemology should we adopt?” If we adopt ‘X’ epistemology, then what does that mean for our lives? This ‘practical’ element is what’s missing from many ‘Christian’ treatments of philosophy, and DeWeese hits the mark.
If I had to give one complaint, it would be that the book is as short as it is. It would have been nice to read DeWeese’s thoughts on more topics. But then again, wanting more isn’t much of a complaint. I therefore feel confident recommending this book to others: he had a target in mind and he hit it. This is an enjoyable read, a relatively easy-read, but also an important one for the emphasis it puts on practical wisdom.
Many thanks to the people at Intervarsity Press for supplying me with a copy of Doing Philosophy as a Christian for review purposes.
Book Review: “Christian Apologetics” by Douglas Groothuis
A few weeks ago I reviewed a book titled No Argument for God. As you might have guessed if you didn’t read my review — and as my review makes plainly obvious — I wasn’t a fan of this effort by John Wilkinson — what was supposed to have been a return of reason to its proper place, ended up being a rejection of apologetics. This week I’ll be reviewing a book which is the complete opposite of No Argument for God — Douglas Groothuis’ Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith. What a breathe of fresh air.
Before I continue I must note that the copy of Christian Apologetics sent to me by Intervarsity Press appears to be an uncorrected manuscript. Please keep that in mind while reading the review that follows, as any shortcomings I might note (if there are any) may be corrected before publication — unfortunately, I have no way of knowing.
Thoughts on Part One: Apologetic Preliminaries
The first section of Christian Apologetics is titled “Apologetic Preliminaries”, and explains the biblical basis for apologetics, what apologetics is, Groothuis’ methodology, and sets the stage for the arguments we’ll encounter in favor of Christian theism (in section 2 “The Case for Christian theism”).
If you’re unfamiliar with or new to apologetics, then this first section is required reading. If, however, you’ve followed the likes of William Lane Craig, J.P. Moreland, Paul Copan and others, then chances are that Groothuis will be covering familiar territory. For example, chapter three, “Evaluating Worldviews”, is reminiscent of Francis Schaeffer or Nancy Pearcy. Chapter four, “The Christian Worldview”, explains what the Christian worldview is. Chapters six and seven — “Truth defined and defended” and “Why Truth Matters Most” — criticize(s) some of the most common features of postmodernism, specifically the postmodern view of truth. Important topics to be sure, but no groundbreaking material in terms of what Groothuis has to say about them. “Apologetic Preliminaries” is well written, if at times repetitive; it’s methodical, touches upon the issues that need discussing to set a proper foundation for the book, and clearly delineates where Groothuis is heading. As an introduction to the rest of the book and apologetics, it works well.
Thoughts on Part Two: The Case for Christian Theism
Having introduced and defended apologetic methodology, Groothuis begins part two (starting at ch. 9) with a defense of natural theology. This lays the foundation for the bulk of our authors ‘case for biblical faith’.
Groothuis begins with the ontological (ch. 10), cosmological (ch. 11) and teleological arguments (ch. 12) for God’s existence. Each chapter follows the same basic pattern. A brief history of the (respective) argument is given, the argument is then presented in full and defended against the most popular / substantive objections that have been presented through history. Groothuis then changes focus to discuss the implications of Darwinism (ch. 13) and the intelligent design movement (ch. 14). This latter chapter on intelligent design interacts quite a bit with the writings of Michael Behe (irreducible complexity) and William Dembski (specified complexity) — you’ll know what to expect if you’ve read both these authors. In chapter 15 Groothuis discusses the moral argument for God’s existence, arguing in part that an objective morality presupposes God.
Chapter 16 is called the ‘argument from religious experience,’ and argues for the supernatural on the basis that all peoples and cultures express religious inclinations. Building on this foundation, Groothuis argues that the uniqueness of humanity (ch. 17) — specifically consciousness and cognition — can only be explained by means of supernatural creation, as a materialistic rise of life cannot account for what we see of human peoples. Chapter 18 is an interesting explanation of Pascal’s ‘Anthropological Argument’, that man yearns for greatness is one of the most telling indicators of his fall from grace, from a higher state. This is probably the most unique argument in the book, as I haven’t read it repeated elsewhere. Chapter 19 is written by Craig L. Bloomberg and presents a defense for the historical Jesus, while chapters 20, 21 and 23 are devoted to the ‘claims, credentials and achievements’ of Jesus, the incarnation and the resurrection (of Jesus) respectively.
Coming in at just under 400 pages, this second part of Christian Apologetics is the bulk of Groothuis’ ‘case’. The question is, is it effective?
Well, that depends on what Groothuis was trying to achieve. Whole books have been written on ontological, cosmological and teleological arguments. Whole books have been written on the historicity of Jesus, the incarnation and the resurrection. To write on all these topics in just under 400 pages results in an argument which reads much like an introduction (survey?) to these subjects rather than a ‘comprehensive case for biblical faith’. That is simply the reality of having so little space to work with considering the subject matter.
I think it’s safe to say, then, that Groothuis has quite clearly shown the need for (and biblical basis of) apologetics, but what follows reads more like an academic ‘course-text’ than an argument. As a ‘case’ it’s an alright enough place to begin, but I think more could have been said.
Thoughts on Part Three: Objections to Christian Theism
The last four chapters of Christian Apologetics (comprising section three) follow the same format as part two. In chapter 23, Religious Pluralism, Groothuis addresses the challenge of religious pluralism, perennial philosophy, etc. Chapter 24, Apologetics and the Challenge of Islam, briefly examines the Islamic system of belief, comparing it against the Christian scriptures to determine the truth of its (Islams) system. Finally, Groothuis ends with a discussion of the various answers to the problem of evil (ch. 25) and what this book means practically (ch. 26).
Additionally, there is an appendix containing two more chapters, one on the apologetic problem of Hell and the other, contributed by Richard Hess, focuses on the apologetic and interpretive problems of the Old Testament (i.e. the questionable ‘moral’ worth of some aspects of the Old Testament).
Concluding Thoughts
In closing, there are two ‘concerns’ I have with Christian Apologetics, and it’s more a problem with me than with the book. The first is that as I was reading, I kept thinking to myself, “I’ve read this before…” and the feeling never really went away. I don’t think this is a book for people already read-up on apologetics — it is more for those taking an apologetics course, or who self-study or are otherwise unaware of apologetics.
My second concern is that it seems like more could have been said. I realize the book is already quite large, and I wonder if more should have been said about less (topics).
In any case, much like I recommend William Lane Craig’s On Guard or Reasonable Faith to those looking to enter into apologetics, I likewise recommend Groothuis’ book. A word of warning to those already initiated, aside from Pascal, you might not find many new things said.
A thank you to the people at Intervarsity Press for providing me with a copy of Christian Apologetics for review purposes.
If you read Contemplations Along the Way
For the time being I will only be posting book-reviews here, on nascent thinker. Any other posts will be posted on StudyThoughts. If you’ve been following me here, you’ll want to follow me over there. There are a number of reasons for the change, regardless, it is what it is. Eventually I would like to completely change from one to the other.
The Gospel for Uganda: Seeking Help
My wife, Rebecca, is leaving soon to go to Uganda to help train and teach Ugandan Church planters. She’s looking for support, so if you’re interested in supporting her I recommend you read her recent post, Uganda Mission Trip, which also has details to get into contact with her. All donations are tax deductible.
Book Review: Every Leader’s Everest by Jim Molloy
Pages: 143
Year: 2011
Author: Jim C. Molloy
“What makes a good leader? There are three practical things: preparation, experience, and pain. A leader who hasn’t suffered is not worth following. Hope only grows in the soil of pain, and leadership without hope is weakened because leaders live in the hope that things will change.“1
I remember hearing a story once; I think Brennan Manning was the one who told it. It concerned a would-be lover, who told the object of his love that he loved her. She responded by asking, “Do you know what hurts me?” To which our would-be lover said, “Well, no, not really…” Then, replied the girl, how can you say you love me, if you don’t know what hurts me?
There is a lot that could be said about pain and suffering; have you ever wondered why so many focus on Jesus’ sharing our pain? But that is a topic for another day. Today our topic is Every Leader’s Everest, a book on insecurity and leadership by Pastor Jim Molloy of the PAOC (Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada).
Our author begins with an excellent principle, and it’s apparent from the stories he recounts that he’s had his fair share of pain and suffering. So Jim is worth listening to, but is there value (read: wisdom) in his words?
This isn’t a long book, which is nice (I just finished reading a 720 page tome). It deals with aspects of character in relation to leadership (it should be noted that people are insecure, not the concept of leadership): insecurity, reliance, pain, gifts, arrogance, bitterness, the roots of these things and the remedy — or at least the road to recovery. Each topic is addressed out of Jim’s experience: his encounters, and the way he’s dealt with his own insecurity (and the insecurity of others). This is one of those books you can read in an afternoon, but are always coming back to because Jim’s quite clever, and has fit a lot of good material in a very small space. It’s like a TARDIS, almost.
So, is there wisdom in Jim’s words? This, thankfully, isn’t an ivory-tower self-help book (if it were, I imagine Jim would be pictured on the front — sharp suit, sleek hair, indications of success in the background… Charlatan with sound-bite advice). This is a book that you can tell is rooted in Jim’s experience over his many years in ministry. It’s concise, to the point, and says what needs to be said. I never once felt as if he said too much, or said too little. It’s a practical book on leadership written out of practical ministry. There is no theorizing that isn’t matched with experience. There is wisdom here.
Everyone is insecure (I’m incredibly insecure), and if you’re willing to acknowledge that you are, then this is a worthy read. It’s one of those books you can finish and not feel as if you wasted your time. All in all, this is a book I feel safe in recommending. Here are some links for you:
Jim’s Blog: http://leaderscripts.wordpress.com/
Buy the book: http://74.53.130.96/~jim/LeaderScripts_Store/Every_Leaders_Everest.html
- Jim Molloy, Every Leader’s Everest, p. 16 ↩
Interview with Dr. Douglas Groothuis on his upcoming book, “Christian Apologetics”.
As ‘luck’ would have it, Intervarsity Press sent me a review-copy of Dr. Douglas Groothuis’ upcoming book, Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith. I’m in the process of writing that review now — I don’t recall the last time I read a 700+ page book as fast as I did this book — but in the mean time I was able to ask Dr. Groothuis a couple of questions I think you might be interested in. Douglas Groothuis is professor of philosophy at Denver Seminary, also known for teaching an apologetics class-or-two (and assigning many, many required texts).
1. The subtitle to your book is A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith. In light of the many books which cover the same or similar material, for example William Lane Craig’s On Guard or Peter Kreeft and William Tacelli’s Handbook of Christian Apologetics, what do you feel Christian Apologetics adds that readers won’t find in other books of the same type?
All good apologetics books cover some of the same topics. My book does overlap with many of the apologetics books already in print, and I often refer to them. However, in many years of teaching apologetics at Denver Seminary and elsewhere, I could never find any one or two–or even five– apologetics books to cover everything I deemed important. So, I was infamous for assigning six or seven books every time I taught apologetics. It was partly to rectify that problem that I wrote this book.
My book may be unique among apologetics texts in the time it spends addressing Eastern religions–their claim that God is impersonal, that karma is true, and so on. Other texts deal primarily, if not exclusively, with atheism as the main competitor. I address atheism in depth, but do not ignore pantheism either. Further, I have a chapter criticizing Islam, which is rare in apologetics texts. I could go on, but few apologetics book pay as much attention to Blaise Pascal’s ideas as I do either. Thus, all in all, I think I have something different to offer.
I am also very happy that my colleague Craig Blomberg wrote the chapter on the reliability of the New Testament and my colleague Richard Hess wrote a chapter on apologetic issues in the Old Testamtnt
2. In part one you commit a number of pages to defending truth, apologetics method and a proper conception of God and Christianity. In your estimation, why do so many misconceptions about God abound, and why the aversion to apologetics (cf. James Wilkinson’s, “No Argument for God”, which decries logic, reason and apologetics)?
We are a society of well-informed, hyperactive ignoramuses. People collect factiods and images, but seldom reflect deeply on philosophical matters, whether they are Christians or not. But I argue that we must seek truth through reason in order to be responsible people. Further, we should not caricature Christianity and then reject a straw man. That is why I dedicate a chapter to that issue called “Distortions of Christianity.” (No other apologetics text has such a chapter, to my knowledge). In my chapters on “The Biblical Basis for Apologetics” and “Apologetic Method,” I argue against fideism: the claim that faith and reason have little or nothing in common. This idea is deeply unbiblical and poisonous for Christian witness. It is also out of sync with the best of Christian thinking down through the centuries.
3. I’ve heard it said that a cumulative case (for a conclusion) means that no one argument is convincing by itself, and that we ought to be suspect of such arguments. How would you reply to this charge?
A cumulative case gives a collection of good arguments for the existence of the Christian God. One argument cannot establish everything for Christian theism. The same is true with respect to political theories and hypothesis in science. For example, it was a cumulative case that established big bang cosmology, not just one argument or one piece of evidence. In apologetics, a solid cosmological argument supports the claim that the universe came into existence a finite time ago and that the cause was a personal and all-powerful being. If successful, this argument destroys atheism and pantheism and polytheism. However, it does not tell us whether or not God is triune or whether God incarnated in Christ. We need other good arguments for those truth claims. And so on.
4. You include a chapter on what you call “Pascal’s Anthropological Argument,” which I found quite interesting as I hadn’t heard it offered before. If you could only put forth one argument for the truth of Biblical Faith, which or what argument would that be?
I have studied, spoken about, and written about Pascal for over thirty years. His anthropological argument is profound because, if successful, it gives strong support for a distinctively Christian view of God, humans, and salvation. But, unlike Pascal, I argue that this argument should be supported by natural theology: arguing from the creation to the Creator by using cosmological, design, moral, ontological, and religious experience arguments.
There is no one argument for the Christian faith that suits all situations. We must always interpret the worldview and concerns of our audience. So, different audiences need different arguments. I would not need to argue for the existence of God when speaking to a Muslim group. Rather, I would emphasize the identity of Christ and so on. However, if speaking to an atheist group, I would start with rational arguments for God, since they are atheists. Nevertheless, Pascal’s argument is one I have given most frequently on college campuses and elsewhere because it addresses the human condition directly. Pascal claims that Christianity alone explains our greatness (because we bear God’s image) and our misery (because we are fallen) and offers the only remedy through Jesus Christ.
5. What is your hope for this book?
I hope that “Christian Apologetics” will equip Christians to know that the Christian worldview is true, rational, and pertinent for all of life; and that they will therefore live out a competent, confident, courageous, compassionate and creative apologetic before the watching world. More specifically, I hope it stays in print long enough to come out in a second edition, since I am already thinking of ways to improve it.
Many thanks to Dr. Groothuis for taking the time to answer these questions, and many thanks to Intervarsity Press for supplying me with a review-copy of his latest book. The review will follow in a couple weeks, but in the mean time here are some important links:
Dr. Groothuis’ blog: http://theconstructivecurmudgeon.blogspot.com/
Christian Apologetics: Amazon, Google ebookstore, CBD (Christian Book Distributors).
Intervarsity Press: Christian Apologetics.
Brief Update
I figure an update is in order.
1) I’ve finished reading Dr. Douglas Groothuis Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith (see my really brief blurb review here: http://books.google.com/ebooks?id=rQ_SdH1PWyMC&sitesec=reviews). I’ve also asked — and Dr. Groothuis has answered — five (5) interview questions. So, both the interview and the review will be up in the next week or two, I just have to decide when, and which first — are interviews used for hype, or should it follow the review?
2) I’m neck-deep in reading, and it’s the mid-summer(?) rush, which means I’ve had little time for writing. By the end of August / first week of September I will have reviews of And He Dwelt Among Us, Is God a Moral Monster, Doing Philosophy as a Christian, Every Leader’s Everest (Jim C. Molloy, http://leaderscripts.wordpress.com/) and The End of Christianity published (not in that order). It took me a little less than two weeks, minus weekends, to read through Groothuis’ systematic text (720 pages), so I should be in good shape.
3) If anyone ever checks my ‘Interesting Reading’ links, they’ll see that I’ve added a new site — Study Thoughts. In fact, I’ve started “Study Thoughts” myself, and there are various reasons for that. The first is that my wife — and a few other people — insist that “nascent thinker” is too hard to remember, especially the ‘nascent’ part. I admit it’s not a commonly used word, and the double t’s throw people off at times. Readership is also sporadic (probably due to my sporadic writing), and so I never know where things stand aside from my book reviews making first page with Google results (or is that the good ole’ personalized search bubble?). In any case, I’ve got to decide what I’m going to do with “Nascent Thinker | Contemplations Along the Way” and “Study Thoughts”. My first thought is to keep posting book reviews here, while posting everything else on Study Thoughts (until views / readership on Study Thoughts improve), but I’m not sure (here is your chance for input!). In fact, there is a post or two over there that isn’t over here…
4) I’m involved with a new forum, ‘Our Christian Forum’, http://www.ourchristianforum.org/index.php. I’ll leave you to guess my username, and no telling for those who know. I’ve also volunteered myself to moderate on the Organic Themes support forums. They have great WordPress themes and awesome support (hey
), I highly recommend them.
5) My homeworld of Gallifrey has been timelocked.
6) That’s that. I may be making a very gradual transition from here to ‘Study Thoughts’, but we’ll see how things go before I make a final decision. Now if you’ll excuse me, I have some reading to do…
Wilson vs. Hitchens: Is Christianity Good for the World?
A transcript of the debate (.pdf) can be found here.
Faith as True Vis-à-vis Its Irrationality
Introduction
The following passage can be found on pages 41 and 42 of John Wilkinson’s No Argument for God: Going Beyond Reason in Conversations about Faith:
One of the central questions of this book is whether faith is actually more real because of its inability to fit into the things that we know. Think about this for a moment. What if the truest things in the world are those that are most elusive? In some sort of strange, paradoxical way perhaps the most logical thing about faith is its apparent irrationality.1
Wilkinson is suggesting we can judge how true a religious claim is by how much sense it makes — if it sounds as if it originated from within or outside human imagination. If a claim appears as if it came from a human mind, then it is not as likely to be true as the claim that appears as if it originated outside the human mind (cf. chapter 13). Wilkinson demonstrates this point by highlight differences between karma and grace; the latter so utterly against sense and reason that it is most likely the truth out of the two.
A similar ‘argument’ can be gleaned from discussions where Christianity is deemed the product of Freudian wish-fulfillment, or some such thing. Christians would be quick to point out the doctrines of hell, sin, grace and the need of a Savior as colliding with the idea of Christianity qua wish-fulfillment. One can then conceive of Wilkinson extending this argument into the realm of religious claims. But how does our author’s suggestion fair under examination?
What Makes Sense?
The first problem I foresee for Wilkinson’s ‘argument from rationality’ is the ‘anthropological problem,’ otherwise the ‘problem from human experience’. Put simply, human experience varies greatly depending on culture, geography, historical period, etc. What makes sense (is ‘rational’ is Wilkinson’s usage) to one culture might not make sense to another, and vice-versa. Consider an example; in the year 2011 I have a good understanding of how weather systems work, and that sacrificing such-and-such to this-or-that god will not result in rainfall, good crop yield, etc. In the year 800 B.c.e., however, one might reasonably believe (that is, it makes sense) that sacrificing a goat or child to this-or-that god will result in rainfall, good crop yield, etc. Given such disparity in human experience, how can one reasonably make an appeal like the one suggested by our author? …Continue Reading
- John Wilkinson, No Argument for Going: Going Beyond Reason in Conversations about Faith (Downer’s Grove: Intervarsity Press, 2011), p. 42–43. ↩
Challenging Faith
It is apparently a mystery (to some) why I still have faith.
You see, those that happen upon my collection of books sometimes express amazement that I still have my faith, with the sort of reading I do (their words). When they look into my ‘office’ (i.e. my half of the living room), the top of one of my bookshelves greets them with the following titles:
- The God Delusion by Richard Dawkins
- god is not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything by Christopher Hitchens
- The End of Faith by Sam Harris
- Letter of a Christian Nation by Sam Harris
- Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon by Daniel Dennett
- Why I am not a Christian by Bertrand Russell
- God’s Problem by Bart Ehrman
- Misquoting Jesus by Bart Ehrman
- Jesus for the non-Religious by John Shelby Spong
- The Sins of Scripture by John Shelby Spong
- The Demon Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark by Carl Sagan
- The Christian Delusion by John W. Loftus et al.
- Everything Nietzsche wrote…
- The Religious Case against Belief by James P. Carse
I have had acquaintances ask me what these books say, how they are to read, if I’d recommend them, and yet they will refuse to read them themselves (one even refused to touch The God Delusion, let alone read it).
Should it be a surprise, given my small library of ‘anti-Christian’ books, that those meandering through my living room might express surprise at my ongoing and seemingly unperturbed faith? I don’t think it should. What should be surprising is that some feel that the investigation and challenging of their faith will eventually lead to the abandonment of that faith. My concern is for truth, and I think everyone’s concern should be truth.
I would like to think that if something is true, then it is true regardless of how we might challenge it, or what case against it we might come up with. If the Christian faith is true, it is secure regardless of the challenges it faces. It is the same for any truth, and I think that only makes sense. So when I read a book like any of the above, I do a couple things: (1) I try to be as open as possible to what’s being said, (2) I try to be as objective as possible to the arguments provided, and (3) I try to give a fair hearing to the conclusions drawn, regardless of any prior commitments I hold. In other words, I read these books in the hope that they will actually challenge my faith. I want to know whether my faith is true or false, and I’m probably not going to find that out if I stick to books written by those sharing my existing beliefs.
Here’s a little known fact about myself: I went and subsequently left ‘Bible College’ (I’m now studying for a degree in Religious Studies) because there was too much agreeing and not enough challenging. It just wasn’t challenging enough, both academically and towards my beliefs.
So, that’s why I still have faith. As for those books above, I didn’t find them convincing. They were challenging and raised a slew of good questions / objections, to be sure… But they weren’t convincing. I still have my faith because I’m not afraid to challenge it and grapple with doubt. For those who don’t challenge their faith, well frankly, I don’t understand how they’ve managed to hold onto it for so long.




Recent Comments