It doesn't get theologically geekier than this, folks…

According to Denny Burk, there’s a new kerfuffle over theology:

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.

OK, I’m sure that this is important for some reason.

Burk talks about Biblical inerrancy, historical inaccuracies, archeological data, God’ sovereignty, and authority of scriptures.

According to Burk:

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.

Ouch.

The current score:

Piper 2, Enns 1.

But my guess is the ‘this is silly’ or ‘wow, you’re deep and way to serious’ crowd will come back for the win.

Todd

10 Comments

  • Robert Barnes July 17, 2012 Reply

    This is not silly. And it’s “too” serious, not “to.”

    Enns is on a terrible trajectory. I fear for his soul and the souls that look to him for guidance.

    • Todd Rhoades July 17, 2012 Reply

      Sorry, your write. It should have been too.

      • williamguice July 17, 2012 Reply

        That maid me smile.
        Bob’s use of “fundaments” did to.

  • Bob July 17, 2012 Reply

    Those who deny that the biblical accounts of the conquest of Caanan are at odds with the ethic of Jesus have their heads up their fundaments.

  • jreighley July 18, 2012 Reply

    I think the whole Federal Vision controversy is WAY more geeky than this.

  • Barchetta July 18, 2012 Reply

    Aside from thinking it ‘ geeky ‘ Todd, what issue do you take with Burk’s comments?

    • Todd Rhoades July 18, 2012 Reply

      Nice try.

      I didn’t say that I took issue with Burk’s comments, other than the fact that it’s about disagreeing with someone’s view of the “Jewish conquest of Canaan”.

      I didn’t say that his view was silly (or that anybody’s was). I said that it’s silly that we’re fearing for someone’s soul (as Robert put it) because of a statement they made about the Jewish conquest of Canaan.

      That’s all.

      Todd

  • Barchetta July 18, 2012 Reply

    I think many of Dr. Burk’s points on are pretty solid ground Todd. It would appear, to me at least, that Dr. Enns is dismissing that narrative for lack of evidence. It would seem, again to me at least, that there are wide implications of that statement.

  • Joe July 18, 2012 Reply

    How sad…lost people dying and going to hell and “religionists” are squabbling over the veracity of the Jewish conquest of Canaan. Move on to something important.

  • Jack July 18, 2012 Reply

    Joe, in a sense I get what you’re saying, but keep in mind both Burk and Enns teach theology at seminaries. That means their views are being passed on to young men who are coming to your local hometown some day to tell your kids that the Bible can’t be trusted and that God makes mistakes, if they went to Enns’ classes, or that the Bible is God’s Word and can be trusted for everything we need for faith and godliness (in Burk’s class).

    It may not seem important to the guy handing out bread and soup to the homeless, but at another level it is extremely important. For me, now I’m off to meet and pray with a former drug addict.

Leave a Reply

0 Total Shares
Tweet
Share
Share
Pin
+1
Current Events Humor Leadership Staffing
digital-revolution-has-exposed-our-addiction-to-activity
Digital Revolution Has Exposed Our Addiction to Activity

Russell Moore writes that the greatest threat to the Christian faith...

churches-in-washington-d-c-reach-millennials
Churches in Washington D.C. Reach Millennials

Over 600 attendees at District Church in Washington D.C. are primarily...

millennials-are-more-generous-than-you-think
Millennials Are More Generous Than You Think

Millennials are much more social and personalized in their giving, and...