Review: What if Jesus is Right?

Cover image of "What if Jesus is Right?" by Douglas Groothuis and Lindsey Medenwaldt

What if Jesus is Right?

What if Jesus is Right?, Douglas Groothuis and Lindsey Medenwalt. Tyndale | Elevate (ISBN: 9798400501487) 2026.

Summary Beyond the influence of Jesus, looks at what he actually said and what it would mean for us if it is true.

The recent interest in The Chosen series shows that, no matter what people think about Christianity or the church, they are fascinated by Jesus. Veteran apologist Douglas Groothuis, joined by one of his former students, Lindsey Medenwalt, would agree and contend that he is worth listening to today. Not only that, they argue in this book that what Jesus says is true and can be trusted.

But before they make their case, they engage in some ground-clearing. They maintain that along with true presentations of Jesus there are “fake Jesuses” and those who make false claims about him. First, some will say he is only a great teacher. Yet, if what Jesus says about himself is false, either he is a liar (and not good) or a lunatic (self-deceived). Neither is good. Only if he is Lord is he also truly a good teacher.

Second, they challenge the idea that he was radically inclusive. Yes, he ate with sinners, but called them out of their sin to live transformed lives. While the writers affirm LGBTQ+ persons, they do not affirm same sex intimacy, on biblical grounds. Finally, they take on the health and prosperity Jesus. They show that trusting Jesus offers no guarantees of either but the presence of Christ even in life’s hardest moments (a testimony to which Groothuis offers in an epilogue about the untimely death of his first wife, Becky).

The second part of the book turns to the positive claims of Jesus. But first they urge the reader to examine the biblical accounts of Jesus for themselves. They offer helps for reading and believe that this is the best way to determine that Jesus is trustworthy. Then they consider four sets of Jesus’ claims. First, there are the “I am” statements, language identifying Jesus with the “I am” God. Second, there is the claim that in him, God’s kingdom is at hand. The Sermon on the Mount, with its high standards, outlines life in that kingdom. Third, Jesus claims the authority to forgive sins. Not only is this audacious, but Jesus asserts that through him, life may begin anew for those who trust him. Lastly, Jesus to know the future, including predicting the fall of Jerusalem.

Groothuis and Medenwalt conclude their case by discussing the evidence for the resurrection, and hence life in his name. They also consider the evidence not only for the deity of Christ but that he, himself, taught this. All this leads up to asking the reader personally to decide, “is Jesus right?” They address points of possible resistance and how one may respond when they are ready to follow Jesus.

The book can be helpful not only for Christians who want to articulate the case for Christ but also for those seriously seeking. Each chapter offers questions for reflection as well as additional resources. Perhaps the best thing would be to read and discuss the book together with a seeking friend. Because the book challenges what the authors call “fake Jesuses” some may put it down. However, this is consistent with the idea that we must meet Jesus on his terms, for who he is, and not who we’d want him to be. That’s what it means for Jesus to be “right.”

_____________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.

Review: Did Jesus Really Say He Was God?

Cover image of "Did Jesus Really Say He Was God?" by Mikel Del Rosario

Did Jesus Really Say He Was God?

Did Jesus Really Say He Was God?, Mikel Del Rosario. IVP Academic (ISBN: 9781514011010) 2025.

Summary: Using methods of historiography, demonstrates that Jesus opponents believed him to be claiming divinity.

Christians believe Jesus was the Son of God, eternally God with the Father and the Holy Spirit. We also believe he assumed a fully human nature, God and man in one person. But did Jesus ever say he was God in those words? The honest answer is “no.” And for some, this leads to the belief that subsequent to his time on earth, the church “made” him God. However, many of us point to statements in the gospels in which Jesus implies his deity in conversation with his adversaries. They believed him to be making a blasphemous claim to deity and Jesus does not deny it. Furthermore, Jesus teaches and acts in ways consistent with a consciousness of deity. But can we trust these accounts to provide us with reliable, historical information?

That is the question that troubled Mikel Del Rosario as he encountered questions similar to those raised above. In this book Del Rosario focuses on two passages from the earliest gospel, Mark, where Jesus makes implicit claims of divinity understood in those terms by his adversaries. He uses historiographical methods to determine the probability of the different elements in these two passages and the overall probability that the implicit claims of divinity are highly evidenced facts. The two passages he considers are Mark 2:1-12, the healing of the paralytic, and Mark 14:53-65, Jesus examination before the Jewish Sanhedrin.

In the first part of the book, he discusses his historiographical methods and the rules of evidence he and other historians use in investigating Jesus. He sets out seven rules of evidence which he will apply: 1. multiple attestation; 2. dissimilarity (from both Jewish sources and subsequent church sources; 3. rejection and execution; 4. coherence; 5. embarrassment (elements that would be embarrassing to the church); 6. contextual plausibility; and 7. inherent ambiguity.

In Part Two, he examines the healing of the paralytic. He identifies five historical facts that he believes are at least highly probable: Jesus reputation as a miracle worker, the core scene, Jesus forgiveness saying, the scribal response, and Jesus authority saying. The conclusion was that it is highly probable, historically, that Jesus exercises divine authority to forgive sin.

In similar fashion he applies the rules of evidence to examine five historical facts in the Jewish examination of Jesus. Firstly, the authenticity of Jesus rejection by Jewish leaders and crucifixion, which he deems certainly historical. Then the remaining four facts are highly probable: the authenticity of the core scene, the authenticity of the high priest’s question, the authenticity of Jesus’ reply, and the authenticity of the blasphemy charge. Again, he concludes it was highly probable that Jesus spoke of himself as the Son of the Blessed. Likewise, it’s highly probable that his adversaries understood this as a blasphemous assertion of deity.

Then, in the final part of the book, he assesses this conclusion against those of Bart Ehrman, Tobias Hagerland, and Daniel Kirk. He found that in terms of plausibility, scope, explanatory power, and the use of less ad hoc, his analysis came out better than each of these. He concludes that Jesus did implicitly say he was God, and there are good historical grounds to believe this. And this was believed by the earliest Christians, not made up in later years.

All this stands and falls on the validity of his historiography. Can the probability of the core facts of these passages be established using the methods he uses? As far as I can tell, he uses methods used by others. I would like more discussion of why others reach different conclusions. I do appreciate the engagement with other prominent scholars. Above all, he gives even firmer grounds for those of us who have used these passages to argue Christ’s deity. He likewise provides a good basis for the conviction that this idea came from Jesus himself. He does all this carefully and methodically. This is a valuable and encouraging study.

_____________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.

Review: Why I’m Still a Christian

Cover image for "Why I'm Still a Christian" by Justin Brierly

Why I’m Still a Christian, Justin Brierly. Tyndale | Elevate (ISBN: 9781496466938) 2025.

Summary: After two decades of interviews with atheists and skeptics, the author explains why he still follows Christ.

Justin Brierly hosted a podcast called Unbelievable? for nearly two decades. During this time he interviewed numerous atheists, skeptics, and believers from other religions. Among his guests were Richard Dawkins, Lawrence Krauss, and Philip Pullman. They had spirited, no-holds-barred but civil conversations. Sometimes Brierly hosted dialogues between Christians and skeptics. Despite a steady diet of atheist and skeptic challenges to Christian belief, Brierly remains a Christian. In this book, he offers his reasons why, often elaborating these in the context of those conversations.

However, Brierly begins by explaining why he pursued these conversations. In short, he was tired of Christians talking to themselves in their own echo chambers. He wanted better conversations–ones that weren’t scripted but rather open-ended. He sought real dialogue between thoughtful skeptics and Christian believers. It wasn’t “safe.” He confesses that it caused him to struggle afresh with questions about his faith. But he created a space for honest discussion, something many seekers appreciated.

The next seven chapters offer Brierly’s reasons for believing in the context of issues raised in his discussions. These include:

  • God makes sense of human existence. He explores why there is something rather than nothing, the fine-tuning of the universe, and multiverse explanations.
  • God makes sense of human value. Why do we believe in human rights and dignity? Why are some things just wrong? While skeptics often concur with these judgments and live moral lives, Brierly argues Christianity provides the best explanation for why we value human beings.
  • God makes sense of human purpose. Humans are purpose-oriented creatures. But why is this so? Is it just biology? Should we worry about this or just enjoy life? The fact of our longings, as Lewis pointed out, may be best explained by the idea that we were made for another world.
  • The evidence for Jesus. Some, including Richard Dawkins, propose that the very existence of Jesus is a fiction. Others reinvent him into a guru, a zealot, or even a husband. He points to an interview with skeptic Bart Ehrman, who dismantles these claims, as well as pointing to Richard Bauckham’s work on the gospel as credible eyewitness accounts of Jesus.
  • Facts that only fit the resurrection. Perhaps the clearest evidence for the life of Jesus is the evidence of his death and his followers claims that he rose from the dead. But how is this plausible? Brierly discusses the “minimal facts” approach of Michael Licona and Gary Habermas including five facts best explained by the bodily resurrection of Jesus. He also considers objections to this approach.
  • The atheist’s greatest objection: suffering. He takes on board the serious challenge this poses and the limits of any explanation. He notes that the objection implies a moral basis to the universe and that doing away with God doesn’t do away with trying to explain suffering. He also notes the realities of human free will–that we are responsible for much of the world’s evil–and that we are in a spiritual war zone.
  • Atheism 2.0. Brierly addresses five “atheist memes” that have been raised by Richard Dawkins. One of these concerns a God who would send one to hell not being worth worshipping. We learn that Brierly is among those who would endorse an annihilationist rather than eternal conscious torment understanding of hell (as did John Stott).

In the final two chapters Brierly addresses those “deconstructing” their faith and those investigating Christianity. First, Brierly notes the reasons people “deconstruct” and then draws on a dialogue between Jon Steingard, a former Christian, and Sean McDowell. pointing the way toward reconstruction. Finally, Brierly talks about choosing to live in the Christian story, including “atheist prayer experiments,” the question of what evidence will convince someone to believe, and that above all, God seeks not belief but relationship. Ultimately, quoting Os Guinness, he asserts “The Christian faith is not true because it works; it works because it is true.”

What sets this book apart from other apologetic texts is that it roots reasons in real conversations rather than hypothetical topics. For many of us, it was conversations with skeptical friends that drove us to clarify our reasons for believing. Or it was our own investigation of Christianity, asking our own hard questions and honestly seeking answers. That’s what makes this such a helpful resource whether you are the Christian engaging a friend’s skepticism or a skeptic giving the faith an honest look.

There are no “silver bullets” or ‘lead pipe cinch” arguments here. What you have are reasons to believe that have proven sufficiently credible to sustain Brierly through two decades of conversations with skeptics. They’ve helped remove obstacles on the way to faith for some. That’s not everything. But it’s something to be reckoned with.

____________________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.

Finally, thanks for visiting Bob on Books.  I appreciate that you spent time here. Feel to “look around” – see the tabs at the top of the website, and the right hand column. And use the buttons below to share this post. Blessings! [Adapted from Enough Light, a blog I follow.]

Review; An Essay on Christian Philosophy

Cover image of "An Essay on Christian Philosophy" by Jacques Maritain

An Essay on Christian Philosophy, Jacques Maritain. Open Road Media (ISBN: 9781504081245) 2022 (first published in 1955).

Summary: Explores what is distinctive about Christian philosophy with notes on apologetics and moral philosophy.

Can there be any such thing as a “Christian” philosophy, and if so, in what does it consist? In 1931 Jacques Maritain, a Catholic philosopher delivered a paper at a conference at the University of Louvain. He addresses these questions in the context of a dialogue between Etienne Gilson, Emile Brehier, and Maurice Blondel. This occupies the first part of the essay, in which the question of whether philosophy and faith have anything to do with one another.

Maritain argues that Christian belief can enrich philosophy in offering new ideas for rational consideration including that of creation, of God subsisting in God’s self, and unique perspectives on the question of the person raised by the Triune revelation of God. Maritain argues that such insights are not removed from reason but may enrich it. He proposes that reasoning from nature provides knowledge of the existence of God but this is enriched by revealed insights.

At the same time, he contends that philosophy is always ancillary, or a handmaid, to theology. Moreover, he contends that moral philosophy in a fallen world is subalternate to theological ethics. In all this he draws heavily on both Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas, believing the latter’s work provides a foundation for Christian philosophical work.

This work also includes brief essays on Maritain’s ideas on the role of faith-informed reason in the work of apologetics, and further elaborating the ideas already touched on concerning moral philosophy.

I found this a challenging read. Some has to do with Maritain’s context, unfamiliar to me. The writing is also dense, laden with philosophical jargon. This edition helps with providing a glossary of many of the technical terms Maritain uses. This is an academic paper, given for other specialists. I hope at some point that someone will produce an annotated version. The ideas are important as a model of what it means to think Christianly about anything. Maritain significantly influenced John Paul II’s personalism. This essay is a concise summary of a significant part of his thought. It is worthy of explication.

Review: Beyond the Wager

Cover image of "Beyond the Wager" by Douglas Groothuis

Beyond the Wager: The Christian Brilliance of Blaise Pascal, Douglas Groothuis. IVP Academic (ISBN: 9781514001783) 2024.

Summary: Argues that Pascal’s brilliance extends beyond his famous “wager” to his scientific, philosophic, and Christian insights.

Justly or unjustly, Blaise Pascal is often most known for his “Wager.” He argues that faith in God is in one’s best interest. If indeed God exists and rewards belief in him, this is of infinite gain while unbelief entails infinite loss. By contrast if one believes and God does not exist, the losses are relatively minimal. In Beyond the Wager, Douglas Groothuis not only defends the Wager but argues for the brilliance of Pascal, particularly as a Christian thinker, as revealed in Pensees.

Groothuis, a noted Christian apologist, has been reading Pensees since 1977. This work is a revision and expansion on an earlier work, On Pascal, published in 2003. Specifically, he adds chapters on miracles and prophecy pertaining to Christ, the excellence of Christ, “Christianity, Muhammad, and the Jews,” and on Pascals critique of politics. In addition, he includes a delightful imagined dialogue between Pascal and Descartes.

In introducing his subject, Groothuis proposes that Pascal is both well-known and unknown. He made contributions in math and science (as well as inventing the first prototype of mass transit, the omnibus). What is less understood is his brilliance as a Christian thinker. Pascal, without jettisoning reason, recognized that belief “involved submitting the core of one’s being to a supernatural being who calls one into a transformational encounter and ongoing engagement” in response to the heart’s perception of God. This is what is behind his statement that “the heart has its reasons of which reason knows nothing.” He understands Pascal as one who lived between the Medieval Age and the Enlightenment, both a devout Catholic and yet reformer in sympathy with the Jansenists. And he was both a philosopher who endorsed much of the Cartesian world, yet never separated science from God.

After a brief biography of Pascal, who died at 39, he explores how Pascal developed our understanding of both the nature and limits of science. Then he turns to the theological controversy he engaged on behalf of the Jansenists against the Jesuits. The Jesuits argued that divine choice and human freedom were incompatible and emphasized human choice. Pascal, anticipating the Protestant Reformers, argued for compatibilism, that external determination and personal choice were compatible.

Following this discussion, Groothuis turns to the Pensees, which will occupy the remainder of the book. Noting its fragmentary and incomplete nature, Groothuis calls attention to Pascal’s basic plan for the work. Pascal divided it in two parts: the wretchedness of man without God and the happiness of man with God. He defends it as an apologetic and delineates Pascal’s three orders of being: the body, the mind, and the heart. Each are essential to knowledge of God.

Subsequently, Groothuis deals first with Pascal’s arguments for God, including his sense of the limits of natural theology. Instead he shows how our human condition as “magnificent wretches” points us not only toward God but toward our need. He explores Pascal’s ideas in the light of skepticism about the hiddenness of God and how this relates to our fallenness. Groothuis show how Pascal argues from the human condition to our need for divine revelation and redemption. He then discusses Pascal’s treatment of miracles and prophecy to attest to the uniqueness of Christ as the Savior who atoned through the cross, addressing the human condition. All of this culminates in a chapter on the excellence of Christ, captured in Pascal’s description of Christ’s “offices” in 106 words. Groothuis discusses what this means for our spiritual life, our experience of suffering and for a thinking body of Christ.

Given the contemporary challenge of Islam, Groothuis shows how Pascal argued for the superiority of Christ and the Bible. Interestingly, he outlines Pascal’s argument for Christianity from Judaism and against Islam, that Jesus, not Muhammad, is the prophet foreseen by Moses. Then, Groothuis comes to the Wager, expositing Pascal’s framing of the Wager, showing how one must wager and addressing objections to the Wager. This is followed by a chapter summarizing Pascal’s critiques of culture and politics. Pascal had a penetrating view of the pomps and pretenses of politics and culture. He argues that Christ offers the only sane point in an insane world.

Groothuis concludes by commending Pascal as a guide. He is a mentor who exemplifies ardent love for Christ. Pascal’s grasp of the human condition helps us understand both ourselves and others. His literary gifts across multiple disciplines may motivate writers to excellence. As an innovative scientist, he models a philosophy of science reflecting a biblical worldview. His biting wit as he considers culture and politics challenges us to forsake worldly embraces of pomp and power for godliness. And Pensees is a goldmine of insight for apologists.

Douglas Groothuis makes a strong case for renewed attention to the life and writing of Blaise Pascal as a Christian thinker. He brings a framework to our reading of the fragmented and unfinished Pensees, helping us to recognize the intellectual as well as devotional brilliance of this work. He defends Pascal against his detractors, including the arguments against Pascal’s Wager. But beyond all this, his discussion of the thought of Pascal shows the far-reaching character of his brilliance. Now to find my copy of Pensees….

____________________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.

Review: Persuasive Apologetics

Persuasive Apologetics, Jeffrey M. Robinson. Grand Rapids: Kregel Academic, 2023.

Summary: Discusses how we use various apologetic approaches adapted to the various people we meet, thoughtfully and gently seeking to undercut their objections, giving reasons for our hope in Christ.

Jeffrey Robinson is convinced as a pastor that there is still a need for apologetics, indeed for persuasion in seeking to call people to belief in the gospel. He believes persuading people of the truth is simply part of the call all of us have to faithful witness, that it glorifies God, and flows from the commands to love God and others with all our being, including our minds. But our demeanor is crucial, calling for integrity and gentleness.

Understanding a person’s worldview suppositions is crucial to persuasion. For one thing, often only Christians are assumed to have them, when in fact we all do. Robinson offers examples of uncovering these in conversation, exposing inconsistencies, and showing how Christian belief better addresses these, or even how other systems live off inherited Christian belief.

Robinson then discusses different apologetic approaches: fideism, classical apologetics, evidentialism, and presuppositionalism, and reformed epistemology. Rather than advocating a single approach, he would propose that an eclectic apologetic is what we need–different approaches to persuade different people. In the same chapter, as he discusses the noetic effects of sin, he cites James Spiegel’s The Making of an Atheist to talk about “father wounds”–absent, abusive, and aloof, fathers–and the many famous atheists for whom this is true (no counter-examples are listed). I found this intriguing but have also found there were “church wounds”–whether the dismissal of questions or personal observation of hypocrisy or abuse

He turns to the role of undercutting defeaters (UCDs), which rather than rebutting conclusions, undercut and reveal the flaws in a reasoning process. He shows how Jesus does this in the hypothetical of the woman with seven husbands who died, his response to being accused of casting out demons with Satan’s power (the house divided argument), and the question about paying taxes to Caesar. He then explores examples that arise including the hypocrisy in the church objection. He follows this with a discussion comparing Jesus to other religious leaders. He then concludes with reasons for hope in the incarnation and the resurrection and how the work of Christ addresses evil and death.

This work does not replace classic works on apologetics but refers the reader to these. Rather, Robinson argues for the part of persuasion, off both offering reasons to believe and gently but with conviction encouraging others to examine their own beliefs. He offers help in how we respond to and undercut objections to the faith, and how we speak to the crucial issue of hope. A willingness to contend for truth can be an act of loving well.

I found much of value here, including the reaffirmation of the importance of persuasion. At the same time, I would love to see a discussion of persuasion that includes the witness of beauty, the power of loving Christian community, and even the persuasive power of being in the presence of praying Christians. I have seen people come to faith through all of these and wonder how the author would incorporate this into his “eclectic” and “versatile” apologetic. Personally, I like the idea of using everything at our disposal to make known the wonder of God’s saving work through Christ!

____________________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.