• CFN has a new look and a new theme

    "I bore you on eagle's wings, and brought you to Myself" (Exodus 19:4)

    More new themes will be coming in the future!

  • Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?

    Join For His Glory for a discussion on how

    https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/

  • CFN welcomes new contributing members!

    Please welcome Roberto and Julia to our family

    Blessings in Christ, and hope you stay awhile!

  • Have questions about the Christian faith?

    Come ask us what's on your mind in Questions and Answers

    https://christianforums.net/forums/questions-and-answers/

  • Read the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ?

    Read through this brief blog, and receive eternal salvation as the free gift of God

    /blog/the-gospel

  • Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need

    https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

The scandal of the evangelical heart and mind

One thing that always seems to get overlooked also is, who were the Canaanites and what were they doing?

They burned their babies to their gods, and couples would get pregnant if they were going to build a new house. when the babies were born they would burn them slowly so they would shrink to a size to fit in a jar and place that jar in one of the walls of the new house to bring good luck, and one of the laws in Canaanite society said that if the woman showed any sign of emotion that they would have to repeat the process.

Any visitors were raped, stripped and beaten. they were then left to wander the streets to slowly starve to death while the citizenry watched with amusement. And if anyone tried to help the stranger the process was repeated to that person.

Some of these strangers were given bricks of Gold and silver with their names inscribed on the bricks, and nobody would sell them food or water even with all the money the stranger had. After the stranger died they would dance around the victim in ceremony to one of their gods, And retrieve the bricks.

The firstborn were often sacrificed to Molech, a giant hollow bronze image in which a fire was built. Parents would place their children in its red hot hands and the babies would roll down into the fire. The sacrifice was invalid if the mother showed grief. She was supposed to dance and sing. The Israelites later copied this practice in a valley near Jerusalem called Gehenna. Hundreds of jars containing infant bones have been found there.

Molech was a Canaanite underworld deity represented as an upright, bullheaded idol with a human body in whose belly a fire was stoked and in whose outstretched arms a child was placed that would be burned to death. The victims were not only infants; children as old as four were sacrificed. As the flame burning the child surrounded the body, the limbs would shrivel up and the mouth would appear to grin as if laughing, until it was shrunk enough to slip into the cauldron.

There was a great deal of sexual sin among the Canaanites. They believed that cultic prostitution was important to encourage their gods, Baal and Ashtoreth to mate so that the land would be fertile and rain would come. VD was probably rampant. Many young people forced into prostitution were abused to the point of death. Even the surrounding pagan nations were appalled by Canaanite religious practices.

And what they practiced with animals, we do not need to go into detail with that.

From Sodom to Jericho was 440 plus years. The canaanites had ample time to repent, and I cannot find one verses in the bible that God has trapped all Canaanites in with no way out, anyone who repented had every opportunity to LEAVE and settle somewhere else. The people who choose not to repent were left.

In my opinion this list is probably the softer side of the Canaanites. Our imaginations probably can't comprehend what made them really wicked.

9 See the Papyrus Chester Beatty III recto (BM10683) from about 1175 BC as referenced in Lise Manniche, Sexual Life in Ancient Egypt (London: Routledge, 1987), 100.
10 Gwendolyn Leick, Sex and Eroticism in Mesopotamian Literature (New York: Routledge, 1994), 57.
11Martti Nissinen, Homoeroticism in the Biblical World: A Historical Perspective, trans. Kirsi Stjerna (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1998), 33.
12 John Gray, The Legacy of Canaan (Leiden, Netherlands: E. J. Brill, 1965), 101–2.
 
I think we all interpret all the time. What I write here in this forum can easily be taken a different way than I intended. Even when I speak face to face with people I often find they take me differently than I intended. My vocal inflections, my facial expressions, my demeanor, the way I stand or hold my head, everything about me projects some meaning and sometimes it isn't what is in my heart.

Face-to-face I have been told that I come across "brassy" and some people are put off by it. I do not come across as a very compassionate person but the truth is I would give you the shirt off my back in January if you needed it. (it's cold up here in January) So why is this? It is because people I encounter interpret me a certain way.

When I say I take what you said at "face value" it means I am talking what you mean in a common sense way. I am "not" looking for some hidden secret spiritural message within your post because common sense does not dictate I do that.

Face value is the literal common sense way to approach scritpure.

Example;

God has me in his hand. (face value tells me this is not to be taken in a literal sense based on the whole of scripture)

God is love (face value tells me this is to be taken in a literal sense--based on the whole of scripture)

Enns does not take at "face value" scripture that in a common sense way says God took their life because of their sin.

In Enns book Evolution of Adam he says, "Evolution demands that the special creation of the first Adam as described in the Bible is not literally historical.”

I take scripture concerning creation at face value. Enns believes it must be "interpeted" to find it's real meaning.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
When I say I take what you said at "face value" it means I am talking what you mean in a common sense way. I am "not" looking for some hidden secret spiritural message within your post because common sense does not dictate I do that.

Face value is the literal common sense way to approach scritpure.

Example;

God has me in his hand. (face value tells me this is not to be taken in a literal sense based on the whole of scripture)

God is love (face value tells me this is to be taken in a literal sense--based on the whole of scripture)

Enns does not take at "face value" scripture that in a common sense way says God took their life because of their sin.

In Enns book Evolution of Adam he says, "Evolution demands that the special creation of the first Adam as described in the Bible is not literally historical.”

I take scripture concerning creation at face value. Enns believes it must be "interpeted" to find it's real meaning.
This is a great opportunity for an example. Notice that you felt compelled to respond to clarify my understanding of what you mean? I suspect this is because you feel I misinterpreted your comments and you needed to clarify.
 
This is a great opportunity for an example. Notice that you felt compelled to respond to clarify my understanding of what you mean? I suspect this is because you feel I misinterpreted your comments and you needed to clarify.

Face value in the context of this thread has a specific meaning that's not up for individual interpetation.

Will you take what I say at "face value" or will you try to find some deeper meaning behind the words I used?

Keeping with the OP of this thread Enns tells me I cannot trust the "face value" of scripture and need to seek some other meaning.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Face value in the context of this thread has a specific meaning that's not up for individual interpetation.

Will you take what I say at "face value" or will you try to find some deeper meaning behind the words I used?

Keeping with the OP of this thread Enns tells me I cannot trust the "face value" of scripture and need to seek some other meaning.
I see.
 
The face value is exactly what they say.

I don't need Enns book to open up those passages to me. Enns won't help me grow in my faith. Enns will only work to destroy the very simple face value meaning of the words of most scripture.

Then don't pay attention to Enns. Hes no authority to me either, he's just another voice.

"In the beginning God created" is a simple face value quote from scripture. Enns would tell me it's a myth and I cannot trust scripture to tell me the truth.

I accept that scripture as well, but I'd be willing to bet we interpret it differently. I interpret it to mean God created time and space, the earth is over 4 billion years old, and evolution is part of the natural processes of His creation. How do you interpret it?

Remember what this thread is about:

From the OP opening lines:

What rocked Rachel’s faith wasn’t the failure of the evangelical intellectual project, but the “failure to maintain emotional integrityâ€â€“seen, for example, in the emotional detachment some show toward Canaanite genocide in the Bible. Why are so many Evangelicals “fine†with it? Because it’s in the Bible. End of discussion.


It's an attack on the way we view scripture as our final authority. (inspiration of scripture)

Why does it bother you? How does someone else's opinion "attack" you? We all work out our own salvation with fear and trembling. God is at work in his life as well as in yours and mine.
 
Then don't pay attention to Enns. Hes no authority to me
either, he's just another voice.

If we don't discuss the OP then we are off topic.


I accept that scripture as well, but I'd be willing to bet
we interpret it differently. I interpret it to mean God created time and space,
the earth is over 4 billion years old, and evolution is part of the natural
processes of His creation. How do you interpret it?



I don't



Why does it bother you? How does someone else's opinion "attack" you?
We all work out our own salvation with fear and trembling. God is at work in
his life as well as in yours and mine.

When did I say he attack me? I said Enns attacks the way we view scripture.

I don't believe God is working in Enns life. I don't have any reason to believe that is true. But what God is or is not doing in Enns life has nothing to do with this thread and discussing his doctine.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Question for you cyberjosh.

It appears to me Enns is saying the scripture cannot be trusted. It is part human product part God product.. Then he tried to tie this to Jesus being human/man. His focus in the book is about man not God.


I am aware of his Adam/Paul book. (Adam not a real person)

Do you see a book in the future that completely destroys the diety of Christ?

I did mention Peter Enns earlier but it is not connected to the post of mine that you quoted. Was that intended? I am just confused as to what you are responding to.

In any case, I only know as much as I need to about Peter Enns, and I know that he does not believe that Scripture is infallible, and therefore the Bible becomes open to his personal interpretations. I do not know his views on the deity of Christ. Enns is not a one man army, he is soundly in the liberal camp where there is a legacy of reinterpretation over the last 200 years since it first arose from Europe.

P31Woman said:
(progressive revelation - the same process taken or technique used by the ECM in McLaren's books to take the reader more and more away from God.)

Boil the frog slowly and he won't jump out of the pot or realize what's happening to him.

When I mentioned progressive revelation earlier I was referring to something different. What you seem to describe here is a human-driven operation of "progressive reinterpretation" which (as I mentioned above) has been a liberal tendency for at least 200 years. Rather I am referring to a biblical principle of God revealing certain things (He is the initiator - not man) to His creation which He chose in prior times to not reveal, according to His eternal will and purposes for human history. I quoted Hebrews 1:1-2 as an example of that.

God Bless,
~Josh
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I did mention Peter Enns earlier but it is not connected the post of mine that you quoted. Was that intended? I am just confused as to what you are responding to.

In any case, I only know as much as I need to about Peter Enns, and I know that he does not believe that Scripture is infallible, and therefore the Bible becomes open to his personal interpretations. I do not know his views on the deity of Christ. Enns is not a one man army, he is soundly in the liberal camp where there is a legacy of reinterpretation over the last 200 years since it first arose from Europe.



When I mentioned progressive revelation earlier I was referring to something different. What you seem to describe here is a human-driven operation of "progressive reinterpretation" which (as I mentioned above) has been a liberal tendency for at least 200 years. Rather I am referring to a biblical principle of God revealing certain things (He is the initiator - not man) to His creation which He chose in prior times to not reveal, according to His eternal will and purposes for human history. I quoted Hebrews 1:1-2 as an example of that.

God Bless,
~Josh

Thanks Josh!
 
I've found this article which I think really gets to the core of the issue. I'll be doing a blog on it looking at it more in depth but this was too good not to post;

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/slackt...ing-a-particularly-ugly-example-in-real-time/

But my favourite bit was actually one of the comments;

"The great irony being the Professor is showing a tremendous respect for the Bible by actually reading what it says and being willing to wrestle with it, and even argue with it to the point of disagreeing with it. You don't respect what you don't bother to engage with."
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The great irony being the Professor is showing a tremendous respect for the Bible by actually reading what it says and being willing to wrestle with it, and even argue with it to the point of disagreeing with it. You don't respect what you don't bother to engage with."
There seems to be a contradiction here. As Christians we believe the Bible is the inspired inerrant word of God. To disagree with the Bible teaching is to disagree with God himself and in so doing the Bible becomes null and void. How can one believe something he can't come to grips with?

I think not understanding it is more likely the case but to flat out disagree with scripture? If I feel I am struggling to agree with scripture I think the most likely response should be to study and find out what it is that I am not understanding.
 
There seems to be a contradiction here. As Christians we believe the Bible is the inspired inerrant word of God. To disagree with the Bible teaching is to disagree with God himself and in so doing the Bible becomes null and void. How can one believe something he can't come to grips with?

I think not understanding it is more likely the case but to flat out disagree with scripture? If I feel I am struggling to agree with scripture I think the most likely response should be to study and find out what it is that I am not understanding.

I can't get to grips with a lot of things doesn't mean I don't trust something. In this case I can't get to grips with God wiping out children. Also, I get to a point where I disagree with the bible and then go on a journey to understand why I disagree and in the process learn something. Disagreements and misunderstandings usually go hand in hand.
 
When I find myself in disagreement with scripture I have to step back and question my own faith in God. He created us. He owns us. We are the clay and He is the potter. Our ways are not His ways. No matter how we slice it, God is always in control and His will be done. We may not always like it but it is what it is. What we can do is trust that whatever He does, it is for the best.

Job:38:1: Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said,
Job:38:2: Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?
Job:38:3: Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me.
Job:38:4: Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.
Job:38:5: Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?
Job:38:6: Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;
Job:38:7: When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?
Job:38:8: Or who shut up the sea with doors, when it brake forth, as if it had issued out of the womb?
Job:38:9: When I made the cloud the garment thereof, and thick darkness a swaddlingband for it,
Job:38:10: And brake up for it my decreed place, and set bars and doors,
Job:38:11: And said, Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further: and here shall thy proud waves be stayed?
Job:38:12: Hast thou commanded the morning since thy days; and caused the dayspring to know his place;
Job:38:13: That it might take hold of the ends of the earth, that the wicked might be shaken out of it?
Job:38:14: It is turned as clay to the seal; and they stand as a garment.
Job:38:15: And from the wicked their light is withholden, and the high arm shall be broken.
Job:38:16: Hast thou entered into the springs of the sea? or hast thou walked in the search of the depth?
Job:38:17: Have the gates of death been opened unto thee? or hast thou seen the doors of the shadow of death?
Job:38:18: Hast thou perceived the breadth of the earth? declare if thou knowest it all.
Job:38:19: Where is the way where light dwelleth? and as for darkness, where is the place thereof,
Job:38:20: That thou shouldest take it to the bound thereof, and that thou shouldest know the paths to the house thereof?
Job:38:21: Knowest thou it, because thou wast then born? or because the number of thy days is great?
Job:38:22: Hast thou entered into the treasures of the snow? or hast thou seen the treasures of the hail,
Job:38:23: Which I have reserved against the time of trouble, against the day of battle and war?
Job:38:24: By what way is the light parted, which scattereth the east wind upon the earth?
Job:38:25: Who hath divided a watercourse for the overflowing of waters, or a way for the lightning of thunder;
Job:38:26: To cause it to rain on the earth, where no man is; on the wilderness, wherein there is no man;
Job:38:27: To satisfy the desolate and waste ground; and to cause the bud of the tender herb to spring forth?
Job:38:28: Hath the rain a father? or who hath begotten the drops of dew?
Job:38:29: Out of whose womb came the ice? and the hoary frost of heaven, who hath gendered it?
Job:38:30: The waters are hid as with a stone, and the face of the deep is frozen.
Job:38:31: Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?
Job:38:32: Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his season? or canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons?
Job:38:33: Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven? canst thou set the dominion thereof in the earth?
Job:38:34: Canst thou lift up thy voice to the clouds, that abundance of waters may cover thee?
Job:38:35: Canst thou send lightnings, that they may go, and say unto thee, Here we are?
Job:38:36: Who hath put wisdom in the inward parts? or who hath given understanding to the heart?
Job:38:37: Who can number the clouds in wisdom? or who can stay the bottles of heaven,
Job:38:38: When the dust groweth into hardness, and the clods cleave fast together?
Job:38:39: Wilt thou hunt the prey for the lion? or fill the appetite of the young lions,
Job:38:40: When they couch in their dens, and abide in the covert to lie in wait?
Job:38:41: Who provideth for the raven his food? when his young ones cry unto God, they wander for lack of meat.
 
When I find myself in disagreement with scripture I have to step back and question my own faith in God. He created us. He owns us. We are the clay and He is the potter. Our ways are not His ways. No matter how we slice it, God is always in control and His will be done. We may not always like it but it is what it is. What we can do is trust that whatever He does, it is for the best.

Job:38:1: Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said,
Job:38:2: Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?
Job:38:3: Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me.
Job:38:4: Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.
Job:38:5: Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?
Job:38:6: Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;
Job:38:7: When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?
Job:38:8: Or who shut up the sea with doors, when it brake forth, as if it had issued out of the womb?
Job:38:9: When I made the cloud the garment thereof, and thick darkness a swaddlingband for it,
Job:38:10: And brake up for it my decreed place, and set bars and doors,
Job:38:11: And said, Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further: and here shall thy proud waves be stayed?
Job:38:12: Hast thou commanded the morning since thy days; and caused the dayspring to know his place;
Job:38:13: That it might take hold of the ends of the earth, that the wicked might be shaken out of it?
Job:38:14: It is turned as clay to the seal; and they stand as a garment.
Job:38:15: And from the wicked their light is withholden, and the high arm shall be broken.
Job:38:16: Hast thou entered into the springs of the sea? or hast thou walked in the search of the depth?
Job:38:17: Have the gates of death been opened unto thee? or hast thou seen the doors of the shadow of death?
Job:38:18: Hast thou perceived the breadth of the earth? declare if thou knowest it all.
Job:38:19: Where is the way where light dwelleth? and as for darkness, where is the place thereof,
Job:38:20: That thou shouldest take it to the bound thereof, and that thou shouldest know the paths to the house thereof?
Job:38:21: Knowest thou it, because thou wast then born? or because the number of thy days is great?
Job:38:22: Hast thou entered into the treasures of the snow? or hast thou seen the treasures of the hail,
Job:38:23: Which I have reserved against the time of trouble, against the day of battle and war?
Job:38:24: By what way is the light parted, which scattereth the east wind upon the earth?
Job:38:25: Who hath divided a watercourse for the overflowing of waters, or a way for the lightning of thunder;
Job:38:26: To cause it to rain on the earth, where no man is; on the wilderness, wherein there is no man;
Job:38:27: To satisfy the desolate and waste ground; and to cause the bud of the tender herb to spring forth?
Job:38:28: Hath the rain a father? or who hath begotten the drops of dew?
Job:38:29: Out of whose womb came the ice? and the hoary frost of heaven, who hath gendered it?
Job:38:30: The waters are hid as with a stone, and the face of the deep is frozen.
Job:38:31: Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?
Job:38:32: Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his season? or canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons?
Job:38:33: Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven? canst thou set the dominion thereof in the earth?
Job:38:34: Canst thou lift up thy voice to the clouds, that abundance of waters may cover thee?
Job:38:35: Canst thou send lightnings, that they may go, and say unto thee, Here we are?
Job:38:36: Who hath put wisdom in the inward parts? or who hath given understanding to the heart?
Job:38:37: Who can number the clouds in wisdom? or who can stay the bottles of heaven,
Job:38:38: When the dust groweth into hardness, and the clods cleave fast together?
Job:38:39: Wilt thou hunt the prey for the lion? or fill the appetite of the young lions,
Job:38:40: When they couch in their dens, and abide in the covert to lie in wait?
Job:38:41: Who provideth for the raven his food? when his young ones cry unto God, they wander for lack of meat.

But it takes different people different amounts of time to get to that place. You can't expect someone to take a stance simply because you believe its right. I find my disagreements are less about the bible itself and more about what others say about it. Some of us look at certain passages and simply go "it must be Gods will" or similar. Some of us though have to go to God and say "ok Lord, this is deeply disturbing to me, what's going on with this passage?" I know its there for a reason but the first answer doesn't make sense to me. That's why we must be allowed to ask questions, no matter how disturbing others may find them. As I've said many times, our journeys with God are unique, no 2 are identical.
 
But it takes different people different amounts of time to get to that place. You can't expect someone to take a stance simply because you believe its right. I find my disagreements are less about the bible itself and more about what others say about it. Some of us look at certain passages and simply go "it must be Gods will" or similar. Some of us though have to go to God and say "ok Lord, this is deeply disturbing to me, what's going on with this passage?" I know its there for a reason but the first answer doesn't make sense to me. That's why we must be allowed to ask questions, no matter how disturbing others may find them. As I've said many times, our journeys with God are unique, no 2 are identical.

I understand what you are saying. I believed a lie simply because that is what I was taught. I my case that my salvation was partly a salvation that I made happen by "works". If I sinned I basically losted my salvation until I repented, begged forgiveness, then I was back in God's good graces. That's a lie from satan and I believed it for so many years simply because that is what I was taught. You keep right on searching. Just remember that God loves you, that His grace is sufficient. Search with a heart for God, in the Spirit. God's Scriptures are inerrant but sometimes it takes awhile to understand and somethings just need to be accepted because God said so but most things have been revealed that effects daily life and how we should live it. Bless you and your studies.
Can you answer this question. Why did God point out to Job all the things that He (God) could do?
 
There seems to be a contradiction here. As Christians we believe the Bible is the inspired inerrant word of God. To disagree with the Bible teaching is to disagree with God himself and in so doing the Bible becomes null and void. How can one believe something he can't come to grips with?

I think not understanding it is more likely the case but to flat out disagree with scripture? If I feel I am struggling to agree with scripture I think the most likely response should be to study and find out what it is that I am not understanding.

That's the point. Enns does not believe the Bible is the inspired inerrant word of God.
 
I understand what you are saying. I believed a lie simply because that is what I was taught. I my case that my salvation was partly a salvation that I made happen by "works". If I sinned I basically losted my salvation until I repented, begged forgiveness, then I was back in God's good graces. That's a lie from satan and I believed it for so many years simply because that is what I was taught. You keep right on searching. Just remember that God loves you, that His grace is sufficient. Search with a heart for God, in the Spirit. God's Scriptures are inerrant but sometimes it takes awhile to understand and somethings just need to be accepted because God said so but most things have been revealed that effects daily life and how we should live it. Bless you and your studies.
Can you answer this question. Why did God point out to Job all the things that He (God) could do?

It's an interesting set of passages, I'll need to pray on it. But you're right, it is about the heart. My questioning is not designed to tear God or the bible down, quite the opposite. It's to build then up and my understanding of them up. Sometimes to build you need to first dismantle the existing structure (I'm referring to the understanding)
 
Pete Enns Takes on John Piper over Scripture

By Denny Burk on July 17, 2012in Christianity, Theology/Bible

Pete Enns critiques John Piper’s recent remarks about the Jewish conquest of Canaan in the Old Testament. Piper argues that God’s judgments are just and shouldn’t be questioned. Enns objects and argues that the biblical accounts are historically inaccurate and at odds with Jesus’ ethic in the New Testament. In other words, Enns response presumes that the Bible has mistakes in it. Enns questions whether or not the conquest even happened. He writes:
Piper would need to take seriously the conclusion drawn overwhelmingly by archaeologists that the systematic slaughter of the population of Canaan around 1200 BC did not happen. As with many issues surrounding archaeology, there is further discussion to be had, and I am guessing that Piper will not be swayed but what archaeologists say.

No matter what the archeologists say, the Bible says that the conquest happened. Moreover, the Bible sets forth the conquest of Canaan as proof that God is faithful to His promises to His people. Here’s how Joshua 21:43-45 describes the matter:
So the LORD gave Israel all the land which He had sworn to give to their fathers, and they possessed it and lived in it. And the LORD gave them rest on every side, according to all that He had sworn to their fathers, and no one of all their enemies stood before them; the LORD gave all their enemies into their hand. Not one of the good promises which the LORD had made to the house of Israel failed; all came to pass.

Not only does Enns place archeological data over the plain statements of scripture, he also invokes “diversity” within the canon to show that the biblical accounts of conquest disagree with Jesus’ love ethic and indeed with other voices within the Old Testament.
Enns wants to pitch this dispute as if Piper has a deficient view of God’s sovereignty over the world. But that is not at all what this argument is about. This is about the inerrancy and authority of scripture, which Enns seems to call into question at every turn.

If your view of scripture is deficient, then it’s no surprise that your view of God’s sovereignty might be deficient as well. Enns falls short on both counts.
 
Back
Top