Category Archives: Groothuis’ ‘Christian Apologetics’

Chapter 16 of Groothuis’ Christian Apologetics is on the argument from religious experience.  Several times he repeats that “religious experience claims need to be weighed  against other germane sources of evidence for or against a worldview (like Mormonism)…It should not be made to … Continue reading →

Rounding out the chs11-14 series dealing with God’s roll in creation, the goal of this chapter of Groothuis’ Christian Apologetics is to give a positive case for Intelligent Design, as well as answering objections to it.  The section “ID and the Nature of … Continue reading →

Chapters 11 thru 14 of Groothuis’ Christian Apologetics are very much related.  I am tempted to write a blog post mentioning all 4 of them together, but I already did chapter 11 (pp. 233-234) and chapter 12, and I just created an index that treats … Continue reading →

Resuming our discussion of Groothuis’ Christian Apologetics: “[Dembski’s] method of detecting intelligent causes is already accepted in several areas of science, namely, archaeology, forensic science, intellectual property law, insurance claims investigation, cryptography, random number generation and the search for extra terrestrial intelligence … Continue reading →

I very much enjoyed this chapter from Groothuis’ Christian Apologetics on cosmological arguments. There are three:  Principal of Sufficient Reason (Leibniz), Kalam Cosmological Argument (Muslim theologians, St. Bonaventure, WLC, etc.), and what I’d like to call the Non-eternal Heat Death Argument (cool YouTube … Continue reading →

This chapter from Groothuis’ Christian Apologetics on the ontological argument will probably boggle my mind forever.  Here’s what I’ve got, though. The first premise below is okay, because the idea of a perfect being is conceivable (not contradictory). Anselm’s first ontological argument:1.  God … Continue reading →

One thing I found helpful in this chapter of Groothuis’ Christian Apologetics was the distinction between general revelation and natural theology.  Not all general revelation is ‘natural’–“God may have revealed himself in a way not susceptible to argumentation.  If so, this general revelation … Continue reading →

Selected favorite quotes from Groothuis’ Christian Apologetics: p. 158:  “Pascal does not mention hell overtly in his famous argument.” p. 161:  “First, prudential matters do not determine beliefs; they merely prime the pump for investigation and consideration.  One must consider the credibility … Continue reading →