God’s Grace and the Importance of Theology: Douglas Groothuis
By jaminhubner on Sep 29, 2009 in Apologetics and Worldview, Sanctification and Christian Living
Podcast Topics: A brief snapshot into the life of one of today’s hottest Christian apologists, Douglas Groothuis. Dr. Douglas Groothuis joined the faculty of Denver Seminary in 1993 as the Professor of philosophy. He is a member of the Evangelical Theological Society, Evangelical Philosophical Society, and Society of Christian Philosophers. He received a Ph.D. and a B.S. from the University of Oregon, and an M.A. in philosophy from the University of Wisconsin–Madison. He has served as adjunct professor at Seattle Pacific University, visiting instructor in apologetics for Westminster Theological Seminary, and instructor at the University of Oregon. Dr. Groothuis is the author of Unmasking the New Age, Confronting the New Age, Revealing the New Age Jesus, Christianity That, The Soul in Cyberspace, Truth Decay, On Pascal (Wadsworth Philosopher Series), On Jesus, etc. He has publications for scholarly journals such as Religious Studies, Sophia, Research in Philosophy and Technology, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, Philosophia Christi, Trinity Journal, and Asbury Theological Journal as well as for numerous popular magazines such as Christianity Today, Moody Magazine, The Christian Research Journal, Christian Counseling Today, Modern Reformation and Perspectives. Doug also has a blog, and his wife Rebecca has written numerous scholarly books on the subject of gender.
I recently quoted from one of Dr. Groothuis’ excellent articles in a blog post on bio-ethics and the mind-body problem.
Special Guest: Dr. Douglas Groothuis
[podcast]http://www.realapologetics.org/podcast/092909.mp3[/podcast]
If Doug Groothuis “dishonors God” in his apologetics (as you clearly and repeatedly state in your early podcasts), why are you interested in interviewing him? You’ve got me completely confused.
Jody | Sep 30, 2009 | Reply
Thank you for your comments Jody.
In short, if I limited myself to interviewing only apologists/Christians who are 100% consistent to their theology and God-honoring – all of the time, 24/7 365 – I wouldn’t be interviewing anyone…not James White, Greg Koukl, Bill Craig, Sproul, Boyd, Beilby nor Groothuis…no one.
Groothuis has (generally speaking) bought into many of the faulty presuppositions underlying evidentialism (one of the several daughters of Scottish Common Sense), just like any other evidentialist or cumulative case apologist, yes. I do think that limits a person’s overall consistency and effectiveness of his work, as you know by now. You also know that I’m one of those odd-ball guys who thinks theology comes first and apologetics second, not the other way around; that is, theology determines our apologetic method. I’d be happy to debate the subject with a brother (or sister) in the Lord, granted the context, intentions, and environment would ensure spiritual edification for the church (see open debates section under “About” on this website); I obviously have no interest giving energy to the debate on apologetic method if it’s only going to generate steam. My podcast series and published works I hope have challenged Christians to be consistent – but more importantly, for skeptics to think about what they really believe (see section III in “Light Up the Darkness”), not created dissension among the brethren.
Apologetic method is nothing I’m willing to lose friends over (unless, of course, your method involves beating a King James Bible over the head of some skeptic until he bleeds). Theology is more important, and it is our theology (Covenantal and Reformed instead of Dispensational and Arminian) that Dr. Groothuis, Koukl, and others and myself have in common. Thus, I would be far more hesitant (and less interested, unless it was a debate) to interview an open-theist dispensationalist than a Calvinist evidentialist…The balance of finding how much attention should go towards inner-church disagreements can be hard to find; but I’m doing my best in that regard.
I make a big deal out of apologetic method on my podcasts and writings, yes. That’s because it matters. But I think this interview (I hope) would show that in many contexts, similarities overcome differences. Evidentialists and cumulative case apologists aren’t the devil; they just aren’t always consistent in their thinking as servants before a sovereign God.
I hope this clarifies.
Blessings,
Jamin Hubner
RealApologetics.org
jaminhubner | Sep 30, 2009 | Reply