"...Christians must see much more than the lessons of history, though we dare not miss them. We must see claims of racial superiority–and mainly that means claims of white superiority–as heresy.
That is not a word we use casually. Heresy leads to a denial of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the eclipse of the living God as revealed in the Bible. A claim of white superiority is not merely wrong, and not merely deadly. It is a denial of the glory of God in creating humanity—every single human being–in his own image. It is a rejection of God’s glory in creating a humanity of different skin pigmentation. It is a misconstrual of God’s judgment and glory in creating different ethnicities.
Most urgently, it is a rejection of the gospel of Christ–the great good news of God’s saving purpose in the atonement accomplished by Christ. A claim of racial superiority denies our common humanity, our common sinfulness, our common salvation through faith in Christ, and God’s purpose to create a common new humanity in Christ.
You cannot preach the gospel of Jesus Christ and hold to any notion of racial superiority. It is impossible."1
Clay Jones (DMin) is an associate professor of Christian apologetics at Biola University and the Chairman of the Board for Ratio Christi, an international university apologetics ministry. Previously he hosted the nationally syndicated talk radio program Contend for Truth and served on the pastoral staff of two large churches. Clay and his wife, Jean E., live in Southern California.
About the Book
If God is good and all-powerful, why doesn’t He put a stop to the evil in this world? Christians and non-Christians alike struggle with the concept of a loving God who allows widespread suffering in this life and never-ending punishment in hell. We wrestle with questions such as…
- Why do bad things happen to good people? - Why should we have to pay for Adam’s sin? - How can eternal judgment be fair?
But what if the real problem doesn’t start with God…but with us?
Clay Jones, a professor of Christian apologetics at Biola University, examines what Scripture truly says about the nature of evil and why God allows it. Along the way, he’ll help you discover the contrasting abundance of God’s grace, the overwhelming joy of heaven, and the extraordinary destiny of believers.
"I have read a number of books on the problem of evil, but this is one of the very best yet produced. Professor Clay Jones fearlessly and deftly addresses all the hard questions head-on with rational responses to them. There is no ducking of issues. Moreover, Jones skillfully weaves theology, biblical studies, and philosophy into a coherent, well-integrated book that is suited for both the scholar and the layperson. I highly recommend it."
—J.P. Moreland, Distinguished Professor of Philosophy, Talbot School of Theology, Biola University; author of The Soul: How We Know It's Real and Why It Matters
"Dr. Clay Jones doesn't shy away from tough subjects. Instead, he tackles them with honesty, diligence, and resolve. In Why Does God Allow Evil? he engages one of the most difficult questions facing believers and skeptics alike. His treatment is God-honoring, straightforward, and accessible. If you're looking for a resource that acknowledges the severity of evil and the gravity of sin while taking the justice and grace of God seriously, get this book!"
—J. Warner Wallace, senior fellow at the Colson Center for Christian Worldview, Adjunct Professor of Apologetics at Biola, author of Cold-Case Christianity
"If you are looking for one book to make sense of the problem of evil, this book is for you. Clay Jones brings a lifetime of reflection to this difficult issue. He speaks with honesty and realism, and yet offers genuine hope. Both believers and skeptics will benefit from Why Does God Allow Evil?"
—Sean McDowell, PhD, Biola University professor, speaker, author
Dr. William Lane Craig was invited to speak at the Worldview Apologetics Conference hosted at Westminster Chapel in Bellevue, WA in April of 2017.
In this lecture, Dr. Craig expounds on Leibniz's contingency argument for why anything at all exists. The presentation is followed by a Q&A session.
Leibniz's argument, as defended by Dr. Craig, is as follows:
1. Everything that exists has an explanation of its existence, either in the necessity of its own nature or in an external cause. 2. If the universe has an explanation of its existence, that explanation is God.
3. The universe exists.
4. The universe has an explanation of its existence.
5. Therefore, the explanation of the universe's existence is God.
Some people argue that Jesus never claimed to be God. I reject this claim. Now, don't misunderstand me. He didn’t use those exact words, but He clearly claimed to be God nonetheless.
Remember when God first appeared to Moses in the burning bush? Moses asked God for His name and God answered Moses as follows:
“God said to Moses, ‘I AM WHO I AM. This is what you are to say to the Israelites: I AM has sent me to you’” (Exodus 3:14).
Now, it is important to understand that at the time of this interaction between God and Moses, Israelites revered the “I AM” name of God. This beloved title was not to be given to anyone or anything other than God Himself. Now fast forward to Jesus’ time here on earth. One day the Pharisees come along and they are questioning the power, authority and teachings of Jesus. They actually accuse Him of being demon possessed! Consider John's record of what happened:
"The Jews answered him [Jesus], 'Are we not right in saying that you are a Samaritan and have a demon?' Jesus answered, 'I do not have a demon, but I honor my Father, and you dishonor me. Yet I do not seek my own glory; there is One who seeks it, and he is the judge. Truly, truly, I say to you, if anyone keeps my word, he will never see death.' The Jews said to him, 'Now we know that you have a demon! Abraham died, as did the prophets, yet you say, 'If anyone keeps my word, he will never taste death.' Are you greater than our father Abraham, who died? And the prophets died! Who do you make yourself out to be?' Jesus answered, 'If I glorify myself, my glory is nothing. It is my Father who glorifies me, of whom you say, 'He is our God.' But you have not known him. I know him. If I were to say that I do not know him, I would be a liar like you, but I do know him and I keep his word. Your father Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day. He saw it and was glad.' So the Jews said to him, 'You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?' Jesus said to them, 'Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.' So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid himself and went out of the temple.'" (John 8:48-59).
The Pharisees knew exactly what Jesus meant. He was claiming to be God. They were planning to stone him for blasphemy.
Bible teacher J. Warner Wallace explains the implications of this passage:
“When Jesus took on God’s holy title as his own, He was stating the modern equivalent of ‘I am God.' He did this repeatedly over the course of his ministry (see Mark 14:62, John 18:5-6, John 8:24 and John 8:28). So while you may not find the expression ‘I am God’ in the Gospels, you’ll certainly find the ancient equivalent. It’s no wonder that the Jewish religious leadership would eventually want Him executed.”1
Moreover, in John 10:30, Jesus makes this astonishing claim- "I and the Father are one." Here, Jesus is claiming that He and the Father are one in nature or essence. He was claiming deity. The Jews understood this completely. Why did they want to stone Him? As the Jews themselves stated, "...because you, being a man, make yourself God" (John 10:33b).
So, even enemies of Jesus understood that he was claiming to be God.
Brian Fisher of Human Coalition writes the following in the subject blog post:
Abortion hasn’t solved the problems women have faced throughout human history, and modern feminists are remiss to fantasize that unrestricted access to abortion could solve any problems today. Read his reasons for why he thinks so here. Stand firm for Christ and firm for the preborn, Chase
Recently, I had the opportunity to take part in a brief
dialogue regarding morality on social media.
Normally, I do not engage in commentary responding to someone’s blog,
but I felt a sense of obligation because of what was said and the implications
if this is what that person truly believes.
What I remember is a comment in response to the blog
basically saying that teaching your children about hell is child abuse. Now I would agree that teaching the concept
of hell as a scare tactic to get them to accept your belief is not the right
approach. But what struck me most about
the comment was that someone who I would describe as an atheist was making a moral judgement on someone’s
behavior. On atheism, how can one make a
moral judgement when objective moral values and duties do not exist?
I posed this question as a comment and was referred to an
article from the NY Times entitled Good Minus God. I read the article and noticed that it was
written by philosopher Louise Antony. I
recalled that Antony had debated Willliam Lane Craig with the question being Is God Necessary for Morality? I listened
to the debate and much of what Antony presented in the debate was restated in
her NY Times piece.
Dr. Antony believes that “good” is independent of God. If it is not, then one is faced with the
dilemma that it is arbitrary as it is dependent upon what God commands. For
example, if God said it is good to eat children, we would have to accept that
as good because God said so. This "problem" is commonly referred to as "Euthyphro's Dilemma," named after a character in Plato's socratic dialogue on the subject of goodness.
But as Dr. Craig clearly points out, this problem is actually a false dilemma. This is because there is a third option, this being that God wills something because He is good. And since goodness is part of His nature, God is the anchor for objective morality. Therefore goodness is not independent of God.
This does not mean that non-believers cannot live good a good life. I know many people who do not claim to be Christians but live decent lives. The question is, how can you define what good is without God?
The impression I got from Dr. Antony is that we as humans just recognize that good exists. We can observe this when we see sentient beings suffer. We don't need God to tell us that suffering is not good.
Let me give an example why I believe this explanation is problematic. In March of 2017, Teen Vogue published an article entitled "Planned Parenthood Videos Explain Abortion Process." These videos make abortion look like a safe and fairly harmless procedure. Contrast this with the horrific images you see in this abortion video (about 3 minutes and 26 seconds in). On Dr. Antony's view, why is it not obvious for every human being to see that defenseless babies being tortured and ripped apart is murder? I believe this shows a fatal flaw in the belief that good can exist without God. On atheism, morality is arbitrary.
However the theistic worldview, with God as the anchor of goodness, clearly appears to be the better explanation for objective moral values and duties.