Announcement

Collapse

Christianity 201 Guidelines

orthodox Christians only.

Discussion on matters of general mainstream evangelical Christian theology that do not fit within Theology 201. Have some spiritual gifts ceased today? Is the KJV the only viable translation for the church today? In what sense are the books of the bible inspired and what are those books? Church government? Modern day prophets and apostles?

This forum is primarily for Christians to discuss matters of Christian doctrine, and is not the area for debate between atheists (or those opposing orthodox Christianity) and Christians. Inquiring atheists (or sincere seekers/doubters/unorthodox) seeking only Christian participation and having demonstrated a manner that does not seek to undermine the orthodox Christian faith of others are also welcome, but must seek Moderator permission first. When defining “Christian” or "orthodox" for purposes of this section, we mean persons holding to the core essentials of the historic Christian faith such as the Trinity, the Creatorship of God, the virgin birth, the bodily resurrection of Christ, the atonement, the future bodily return of Christ, the future bodily resurrection of the just and the unjust, and the final judgment. Persons not holding to these core doctrines are welcome to participate in the Comparative Religions section without restriction, in Theology 201 as regards to the nature of God and salvation with limited restrictions, and in Christology for issues surrounding the person of Christ and the Trinity. Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 forum without such restrictions.

Additionally and rarely, there may be some topics or lines of discussion that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream orthodox doctrine (in general Christian circles or in the TheologyWeb community) or that deny certain core values that are the Christian convictions of forum leadership that may be more appropriately placed within Unorthodox Theology 201. NO personal offense should be taken by such discretionary decision for none is intended. While inerrancy is NOT considered a requirement for posting in this section, a general respect for the Bible text and a respect for the inerrantist position of others is requested.

The Tweb rules apply here like they do everywhere at Tweb, if you haven't read them, now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Enns Making Waves

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by robrecht View Post
    Why is it, if you don't mind my asking, that you generally take a posture of disagreement with his views?
    Because I find that his approach and worldview is incompatible with a presupposition of revelation that is foundational to the uniqueness of Christianity.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Scrawly View Post
      Because I find that his approach and worldview is incompatible with a presupposition of revelation that is foundational to the uniqueness of Christianity.
      Are you speaking specifically of his use of historico-critical methodologies? Or something else about his worldview or presuppositions regarding revelation?
      βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
      ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

      אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by robrecht View Post
        Are you speaking specifically of his use of historico-critical methodologies? Or something else about his worldview or presuppositions regarding revelation?
        I think his use of the critical method made provision for him to embrace views that are antithetical to the revelatory and uniquely inspired nature of scripture. Examples here include regarding Yahweh as a tribal deity that is the sum total of ancient Israel's projections, a rejection of a personal God that answers prayer, a tacit denial of the supernatural especially in regards to natural history, a view of Christianity as being a mere faith tradition not fundamentally different from other faith traditions, highly skeptical of the historical Jesus being divine etc. Now maybe I am not being as charitable as I could be, but I think if Dr. Enn's stated things bluntly, he would more-or-less affirm all of the above.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Scrawly View Post
          I think his use of the critical method made provision for him to embrace views that are antithetical to the revelatory and uniquely inspired nature of scripture. Examples here include regarding Yahweh as a tribal deity that is the sum total of ancient Israel's projections, a rejection of a personal God that answers prayer, a tacit denial of the supernatural especially in regards to natural history, a view of Christianity as being a mere faith tradition not fundamentally different from other faith traditions, highly skeptical of the historical Jesus being divine etc. Now maybe I am not being as charitable as I could be, but I think if Dr. Enn's stated things bluntly, he would more-or-less affirm all of the above.
          Wow, that surprises me. Does he still teach in a seminary? Have you ever asked him directly if those are his views? At any rate, there is nothing in the historico-critical methodologies used to interpret the scriptures that necessitates such views. Of course such views are not at all uncommon among academic scholars, but I'm surprised to hear of them among popular seminary professors.
          βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
          ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

          אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by robrecht View Post
            Wow, that surprises me. Does he still teach in a seminary? Have you ever asked him directly if those are his views? At any rate, there is nothing in the historico-critical methodologies used to interpret the scriptures that necessitates such views. Of course such views are not at all uncommon among academic scholars, but I'm surprised to hear of them among popular seminary professors.
            You can read about his academic history here. I have never personally asked him if those are his views. There was much controversy surrounding his departure from Westminster and it's interesting to follow his theological trajectory.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Scrawly View Post
              You can read about his academic history here. I have never personally asked him if those are his views. There was much controversy surrounding his departure from Westminster and it's interesting to follow his theological trajectory.
              Was he asked to leave Westminster or dismissed?

              I just took a look at the website for Eastern University, where it describes itself in with the following:
              Eastern University is a top Christian university dedicated to the preparation of undergraduate and graduate students for thoughtful and productive lives of Christian faith and service.

              On his webpage there, he says:
              WHY I TEACH AT EASTERN
              I am committed to encouraging young Christian men and women to explore their faith by engaging Scripture, and in so doing make their faith their own and mature as followers of Christ. One task that gives me great joy is to introduce students to the big picture of the biblical story and to develop insight and respect for how the Old and New Testaments are in conversation with each other. I count it a great privilege to help students keep their horizons in front of them and come to know God better on their life-journey.
              βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
              ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

              אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by robrecht View Post
                Was he asked to leave Westminster or dismissed?

                I just took a look at the website for Eastern University, where it describes itself in with the following:
                Eastern University is a top Christian university dedicated to the preparation of undergraduate and graduate students for thoughtful and productive lives of Christian faith and service.

                On his webpage there, he says:
                WHY I TEACH AT EASTERN
                I am committed to encouraging young Christian men and women to explore their faith by engaging Scripture, and in so doing make their faith their own and mature as followers of Christ. One task that gives me great joy is to introduce students to the big picture of the biblical story and to develop insight and respect for how the Old and New Testaments are in conversation with each other. I count it a great privilege to help students keep their horizons in front of them and come to know God better on their life-journey.
                According to A Message from the Board of Trustees in 2008:

                On March 26, 2008, the WTS Board of Trustees assembled for a special meeting to address theological issues related to Old Testament Professor Peter Enns’ book, Inspiration and Incarnation: Evangelicals and the Problem of the Old Testament.

                After a full day of deliberation, the Board of Trustees took the following action by decisive vote...

                “That for the good of the Seminary (Faculty Manual II.4.C.4) Professor Peter Enns be suspended at the close of this school year, that is May 23, 2008 (Constitution Article III, Section 15), and that the Institutional Personnel Committee (IPC) recommend the appropriate process for the Board to consider whether Professor Enns should be terminated from his employment at the Seminary. Further that the IPC present their recommendations to the Board at its meeting in May 2008.”


                The Board of Trustees at Westminster voted 18–9 to suspend Enns from his position. Shortly after the vote Enns left the Westminster Theological Seminary. IIRC, the nine who voted in support of him resigned from the Board of Trustees.
                Last edited by rogue06; 01-27-2017, 05:49 PM.

                I'm always still in trouble again

                "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                  According to A Message from the Board of Trustees in 2008:

                  On March 26, 2008, the WTS Board of Trustees assembled for a special meeting to address theological issues related to Old Testament Professor Peter Enns’ book, Inspiration and Incarnation: Evangelicals and the Problem of the Old Testament.

                  After a full day of deliberation, the Board of Trustees took the following action by decisive vote...

                  “That for the good of the Seminary (Faculty Manual II.4.C.4) Professor Peter Enns be suspended at the close of this school year, that is May 23, 2008 (Constitution Article III, Section 15), and that the Institutional Personnel Committee (IPC) recommend the appropriate process for the Board to consider whether Professor Enns should be terminated from his employment at the Seminary. Further that the IPC present their recommendations to the Board at its meeting in May 2008.”


                  The Board of Trustees at Westminster voted 18–9 to suspend Enns from his position. Shortly after the vote Enns left the Westminster Theological Seminary. IIRC, the nine who voted in support of him resigned from the Board of Trustees.
                  Thanks, rogue. It's interesting that the Board and the Faculty were somewhat at odds. On the page you linked to above, it also says:
                  At the December 5, 2007 regular meeting of the Board, a motion passed to call the special meeting of March 26, 2008. The purpose of this special meeting was to establish a course for resolving the persistent faculty disunity, because several years of faculty discussions had produced an evident impasse. The next day, December 6, 2007, the faculty voted 12-8 on a motion accepting Professor Enn’s views. However, the ongoing disunity in the WTS faculty and community, the desire to ensure Professor Enns be given due process, and the underlying theological controversy necessitated the Board’s March 26 actions.
                  βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
                  ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

                  אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by robrecht View Post
                    Thanks, rogue. It's interesting that the Board and the Faculty were somewhat at odds. On the page you linked to above, it also says:
                    At the December 5, 2007 regular meeting of the Board, a motion passed to call the special meeting of March 26, 2008. The purpose of this special meeting was to establish a course for resolving the persistent faculty disunity, because several years of faculty discussions had produced an evident impasse. The next day, December 6, 2007, the faculty voted 12-8 on a motion accepting Professor Enn’s views. However, the ongoing disunity in the WTS faculty and community, the desire to ensure Professor Enns be given due process, and the underlying theological controversy necessitated the Board’s March 26 actions.
                    It should be noted that it appears Enns has become increasingly liberal or perhaps more comfortable expressing his liberal viewpoints ever since leaving Westminster. If he was expressing himself back then as he is now, I think it would be safe to say the faculty would almost entirely be in favor of his dismissal.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Scrawly View Post
                      It should be noted that it appears Enns has become increasingly liberal or perhaps more comfortable expressing his liberal viewpoints ever since leaving Westminster. If he was expressing himself back then as he is now, I think it would be safe to say the faculty would almost entirely be in favor of his dismissal.
                      For example?
                      βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
                      ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

                      אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by robrecht View Post
                        For example?
                        The flagrancy with which Enns declares that Yahweh was a tribal deity similar in objective status to Chemosh when it comes to commanding "genocide", for example. Yahweh didn't actually command those things -- the Israelite's just said he did. Standard ancient tribal stuff. Enns was far less open in making these sorts of declarations when the controversy started brewing in Westminster surrounding the publication of Inspiration and Incarnation. His contract was not renewed with biologos either due to his liberal trajectory and team biologos' "literalism", according to Enns. But don't take my word for it, email him to verify the accuracy of my statements. I could be making this stuff up, after all.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Scrawly View Post
                          The flagrancy with which Enns declares that Yahweh was a tribal deity similar in objective status to Chemosh when it comes to commanding "genocide", for example. Yahweh didn't actually command those things -- the Israelite's just said he did. Standard ancient tribal stuff. Enns was far less open in making these sorts of declarations when the controversy started brewing in Westminster surrounding the publication of Inspiration and Incarnation. His contract was not renewed with biologos either due to his liberal trajectory and team biologos' "literalism", according to Enns. But don't take my word for it, email him to verify the accuracy of my statements. I could be making this stuff up, after all.
                          I don't think you're making it up, but I've no reason to contact Enns directly. If our paths cross, it might come up in conversation, but otherwise, I take him at his word. By the way, here is one of the reports prepared against him by the Historical and Theological Field Committee at Westminster and here is the minority report from those faculty members who did not support him.
                          Last edited by robrecht; 01-29-2017, 09:57 AM.
                          βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾿ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον·
                          ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην.

                          אָכֵ֕ן אַתָּ֖ה אֵ֣ל מִסְתַּתֵּ֑ר אֱלֹהֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל מוֹשִֽׁיעַ׃

                          Comment

                          Related Threads

                          Collapse

                          Topics Statistics Last Post
                          Started by Thoughtful Monk, 03-15-2024, 06:19 PM
                          35 responses
                          166 views
                          0 likes
                          Last Post Cow Poke  
                          Started by KingsGambit, 03-15-2024, 02:12 PM
                          4 responses
                          49 views
                          0 likes
                          Last Post Thoughtful Monk  
                          Started by Chaotic Void, 03-08-2024, 07:36 AM
                          10 responses
                          119 views
                          1 like
                          Last Post mikewhitney  
                          Started by Cow Poke, 02-29-2024, 07:55 AM
                          14 responses
                          71 views
                          3 likes
                          Last Post Cow Poke  
                          Started by Cow Poke, 02-28-2024, 11:56 AM
                          13 responses
                          59 views
                          0 likes
                          Last Post Cow Poke  
                          Working...
                          X