Thursday, April 10, 2008

Jim emailed me the only negative review on Enns's book at Amazon:
Peter Enns book Inspiration & Incarnation is as heretical as it is superficial.

The view of inspiration espoused by Enns in this book is not much different from the old neo-orthodoxy of Karl Barth.1 Both of them speak much about Christ's human nature, myth, legend, midrash, contextualization, etc...but at the same time deny the sinless perfection of Christ's human nature, the factual events of redemptive history and also the perfection of Holy Scripture.

Jesus said "Scripture cannot be broken." "Thy Word is truth." All Scripture is, like Christ, perfectly holy, spotless, undefiled, without sin and error, and separate from sinners. All Scripture is in Christ, for Christ, and to the glory of Christ. Christ is the Credenda and Agenda of Old Testament Scripture as well as New Testament Scripture. But for this very reason it cannot be broken. It is without error being God breathed.

Peter Enn's views of the Bible are Liberal and heretical and destructive to the Christian church. I could think of at least ten instances (just by a casual overview without buying the accursed thing) in which he directly contradicts the explicit teaching of Scripture, as well as Jesus own words in the Gospels.

He [Enns, not Christ, ed.] plainly does not believe in the Westminster Confession of Faith, nor for that matter in any of the Protestant Creeds and Confessions. He should have been fired long ago along with the feminists and Liberals of the Seminary. But then again, what can you expect from modern denominations these days - that are so full of spiritual ignorance, idolatry, sexual immorality and religious hypocrisy. They ought to read John Owen's book on Apostacy.

Sadly denominations do not believe in Scripture or in their Confessions anymore. They have almost completely rejected the infallible word of God for the pagan idolatry of modern scholarship.

Pastor Brett Woody
Pastor Woody appears to lead an "Independent Puritan and Reformed" church outside Sacramento2 with his brother? His dad? His son? Stepson, maybe? No, not a "modern denomination" he so despises, probably at least 400 years old. Good for him.

But I should wonder, if Scripture lacks completely a human side, how shall we hope to understand it?

If I speak in human and angelic tongues but do not have love, I am a resounding gong or a clashing cymbal.3

An old CT book review. I haven't read it all. Stories like this, it's hard not to be happy about not being an Evangelical (yes, I remember the sex abuse scandal! I've done my penance!)


1 Say no more!

2 "Sac-ra-men-to" - Californians have no idea!

3 Speaking of source criticism!

tags technorati :

No comments: