Closed Thread
Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Enns on the new athiests...

  1. #1
    Kevin's Avatar
    Kevin is offline. Puritanboard Professor
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Moncton NB Canada
    Posts
    5,078
    Thanks
    1,861
    Thanked 1,143 Times in 583 Posts

    Enns on the new athiests...

    I have to admit that a part of me thought that all of the uproar over Prof. Ennis was overplayed. It seemed just to much to be believed that a well known member of the faculty could be so off base to justify his dismisal.

    And then I read this.

    a time to tear down | A Time to Build Up A Thought on the ?New Atheism? and Old Testament Morality

    WOW.
    Kevin Rogers, Licentiate
    Ruling Elder
    Sovereign Community Church, PCA
    Moncton NB
    Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Kevin For This Useful Post:

    Edward (09-14-2009)

  3. #2
    Herald's Avatar
    Herald is offline. No posts for you!
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Gambrills, MD
    Posts
    13,182
    Blog Entries
    13
    Thanks
    2,281
    Thanked 3,937 Times in 1,955 Posts
    If Peter Enns is saying that the gospel is not fully understood unless we consider both testaments, he's right. But I'm not sure that's what he's saying; at least not completely.

    Yes, grace is all over the Old Testament, even to the heathen. The book of Ruth is all about grace to a heathen girl. Israel was supposed to be a "light of revelation to the gentiles" (Isaiah 42:6; Luke 2:32).

    I am resistant to shutting up the whole counsel of God because a certain group has stigmatized part of the Word of God.
    Bill Brown
    Elder
    Grace Baptist Church
    Maryland

    Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?
    Visit my BLOG Theology for the Rest of Us
    Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!

  4. #3
    Richard Tallach's Avatar
    Richard Tallach is offline. Puritanboard Junior
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Perth, Scotland UK
    Posts
    1,882
    Thanks
    384
    Thanked 614 Times in 413 Posts
    We should also note well that such a realization on our part must face squarely the notion that the Christian Bible itself presents such a moral trajectory, which means not everything written there is equally ultimate. I realize that other Christians explain the problem of OT morality differently. For example: the slaughter of the Canaanites is not a moral problem, but a preview of God’s judgment on sinful humanity. It is a demonstration of what all humanity deserves, an acting out on God’s part of what the fate of all would be were it not for his grace
    Well this is my take on the slaughter of the Canaanites. It has a valid moral purpose in the particular circumstances. God could have done it with a tidal wave but He did it by His people, in anticipation of the work of judgement and salvation that is evangelism in the New Covenant.

    Prof. Enns seems to be coming close to saying - if not saying - that God changes His moral standards - and it doesn't matter if God is a moral relativist. This would be a notable concession to NA.

    Prof. Enns fails to mention that the Israelites weren't asked to kill or go to war with all their neighbours, anyway. There was a special judgement to be carried out on certain nations in the Land which were extremely wicked, and which wickedness had been incubating for 430 years under God's common grace and patience. According to their theory atheists are unlikely to understand this as atheism cannot account for moral evil. In an atheist world all deeds should be morally neutral, although some may be more painful or unpleasant than others. Why are atheists getting morallly hot under the collar about the death of Canaanites?

    Also nations like the Philistines that threatened the Covenant people's existence and therefore opposed God, were to be fought.

    On the other hand Israel was to be a light to the other nations, and when the nations saw the laws of Israel, moral, ceremonial and civil, and realised that God was among Israel, they were to show their new found faith by adopting the laws and become incorporated into the Commonwealth of Israel.

    That this did not happen more must be put down to the responsibility of the Jews as ineffective witnesses (Deuteronomy 4:6-8). If the Israelites had been more zealous in true faith and obedience, they'd have made better neighbours to their neighbour-nations. The same goes for the Christian and his neighbours.

    Latterly this whole area of relations with the outsider or neighbouring outsider became tainted with the spirit of Pharasaism, as did everything else. Jesus corrected these distortions, not the OT itself. Of course Jesus aswell as correcting Pharasaical distortions came to introduce a new administration, the New Covenant, which was suitable for the period between the First and Second Advents.
    Richard
    communicant member, FCoS
    Perth, Scotland UK

    His Name forever shall endure;
    last like the sun it shall:
    Men shall be blessed in Him,
    and blessed all nations shall Him call (Ps. 72:17)
    Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to Richard Tallach For This Useful Post:

    christianyouth (09-18-2009)

  6. #4
    Scott1's Avatar
    Scott1 is offline. Puritanboard Doctor
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Cary, NC
    Posts
    6,039
    Thanks
    2,389
    Thanked 2,297 Times in 1,376 Posts
    I'm not familiar with the specific works of Mr. Enns, only general accounts of his dismissal.

    When we say "grace," in reformed theology, the "covenant of grace" is the term used to describe the substantial means of redemption from immediately after the Fall until the present day.

    All the Old Testament believers as well as New Testament believers are redeemed by grace through faith alone, the substance of the "covenant of grace."

    While administered somewhat differently and less explicitly revealed in the Old Testament, it is of that same substance- by grace through faith in Christ's righteousness alone (looking toward that in faith).

    The covenant of grace was and is God's plan of redemption for Old and New Testament believers.
    Scott
    PCA
    North Carolina



    "Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised)"
    Hebrews 10:23
    Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!

  7. #5
    MMasztal's Avatar
    MMasztal is offline. Puritanboard Sophomore
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Melbourne Beach, FL
    Posts
    773
    Thanks
    272
    Thanked 204 Times in 145 Posts
    In my opinion, Ennis gives too much credibility to the NAs and ignores the Biblical teaching concerning the mind of the unbeliever: Ps 14:1 The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.”" and a whole lot more verses I don't need to cite.

    He starts out early, " NA is quick to point out that no reasonable, compassionate person would model his or her morality by much of Old Testament behavior." He then gives a tilted straw-man view of how Chrisitians would respond to this criticism then Ennis notes, "I don’t think this observation by NA is cynical or driven by a blind bias (as some of their observations are). Rather the observation is correct. Here the Christian reaction, motivated as it is to defend their understanding of the Bible against criticism, is unconvincing." Ennis therefore implies that believers must be "unreasonable" and "uncompassionate".

    I don't have time to write a dissertation on repeated incidents of unbiblical thinking Ennis presents here, but I think this might be a good article for my Apologetics class to critique.
    Last edited by MMasztal; 09-18-2009 at 11:35 AM. Reason: clarification
    Michael Masztal
    Ruling Elder, Chapel By The Sea, ARP
    Melbourne Beach, FL
    Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!

  8. #6
    Zenas's Avatar
    Zenas is offline. Snow Miser
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Memphis, TN
    Posts
    3,605
    Thanks
    333
    Thanked 1,609 Times in 845 Posts
    One thing that I think is critical to understand the behavior of OT Israel and God is this:

    God was the Sovereign King of the nation of Israel, and still is the Sovereign King of spiritual Israel. As King, He had the right to direct the armies of Israel to take other lands for themselves. The lands taken were from people who were guilty before Him and rightly deserving of judgment. Israel was the tool with which that judgment was brought about.

    This wasn't an issue of "our God is better than your god", it was sheerly the King waging a campaign against His enemies, the rebels of humanity. My question then is in what way is this unjust, as well as to what standard would you hold God, who espouses the standards?
    Andrew DeShazo
    Husband of Kathryn
    Father of Phillip-Giles B. DeShazo
    Deacon
    Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church, Memphis, TN

    "From out of the depth of unbroken Infinfity arose the Question, "Who am I?" And to that Question there is the answer, "I am God!" -Meher Baba, died 1969.

    "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." Christ, died 33 AD, ressurected three days later.
    Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!

  9. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Zenas For This Useful Post:

    Backwoods Presbyterian (09-18-2009), christianyouth (09-18-2009)

  10. #7
    Jon Peters's Avatar
    Jon Peters is offline. Puritanboard Sophomore
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Folsom, CA
    Posts
    722
    Thanks
    79
    Thanked 308 Times in 178 Posts
    Part of the "problem" that Enns is attempting to address is the idea that the slaughter of innocent (relatively speaking) women and children strikes most believers as evil and unjust. Given this, we have to deal with what God did in the OT. I can follow Enns to a certain point, but I think he fails to see that the model he condemns (the "judgment on sinful humanity" model) can be used in a redemptive historical explanation of what occured. If he is implying that what was once right for God is now wrong for God (i.e., God has changed), then he is desparately wrong. If he is saying that in a certain redemptive historical context it was right under certain very narrow circumstances but is wrong generally, then I think he makes a good point.

    I do think the Bible presents some very difficult challenges with the one Enns is addressing being one of the more difficult. We can too quickly give easy, pat answers to these problems instead of recognising the challenges they present. I don't think any of us would say that what the Muslim terrorists do (targeting innocent women and children) would be okay but for the fact that God has not commanded them to do it. What they do is simply wrong. But this recognition then forces us to wrestle with parts of Scripture that seem to conflict with this ideal. Enns solution seems to be to abandon the authority of Scripture when the problems become too difficult. We cannot do this; however, we have to be willing to rethink these issues and address in light of our position in redemptive history. Perhaps we can come up with a better explanation than one given 500 years ago (then again, perhaps not).
    Jon Peters
    Member, Reformation Fellowship (OPC) (Roseville, CA)
    Folsom, CA
    Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to Jon Peters For This Useful Post:

    christianyouth (09-18-2009)

  12. #8
    kevin.carroll's Avatar
    kevin.carroll is offline. Puritanboard Junior
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Wheat Ridge, CO
    Posts
    1,092
    Thanks
    31
    Thanked 214 Times in 76 Posts
    Sounds like Enns being classically Enns-ish. "Oh sure, the Bible is inerrant, but it's chock full of errors!"

    His argument here seems to be, "Look, the Israelites were barbarians, plain and simple. There is no preview of God's judgment here, rather we need to juxtapose the horrors of the OT (none of which actually happened) with Christ."
    Rev. R. Kevin Carroll
    Pastor
    Covenant Presbyterian Church (PCA)
    Wheat Ridge, CO
    Blog: Reformed and Loving It
    Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!

  13. #9
    Richard Tallach's Avatar
    Richard Tallach is offline. Puritanboard Junior
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Perth, Scotland UK
    Posts
    1,882
    Thanks
    384
    Thanked 614 Times in 413 Posts
    I don't know anything about Enns.

    All the so-called "moral problems" of the Old Testament

    (a) Polygamy

    (b) Permission to divorce

    (c) The genocide of the Canaanites

    (d) The various wars with surrounding nations that don't fit Christian Just War Theory

    (e) The large number of offenses for which the death penalty was ascribed.

    can be accounted for in one way or another e.g. Israel was the childhood state of the New Covenant Church, the hardness of their hearts had to be accomodated. Some cases are just bad behaviour on the part of old Testament saints.

    The NAs would have to tell us how they would have been wiser than God and have arranged things differently with a New Atheist morality; which seems to be "Whatever!" as long as God doesn't approve. Then they would also have to tell us how they can account for any morality whatsoever on the basis of their worldview

    I don't see it as unjust for God to ask for the genocide of the Canaanites or for the death penalty for Sabbath-breaking. It is a revelation of God's absolute justice which He could have achieved through natural means. We may as well ask if it's just for anyone to die.

    Am I glad that I live in the more gracious New Covenant - if it is more gracious. Yes.
    Richard
    communicant member, FCoS
    Perth, Scotland UK

    His Name forever shall endure;
    last like the sun it shall:
    Men shall be blessed in Him,
    and blessed all nations shall Him call (Ps. 72:17)
    Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!

  14. #10
    Puritan Sailor's Avatar
    Puritan Sailor is offline. Puritanboard Doctor
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Lisbon, NY
    Posts
    6,127
    Thanks
    516
    Thanked 733 Times in 351 Posts
    The New Atheists would commit the same atrocities if they were in charge, just as their fathers Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot have done before them. They would gladly cut down whoever gets in their way of "progress."
    Patrick
    MDiv, RTS Jackson
    Pastor, Grace Presbyterian Church (OPC), Lisbon, NY

    "He does well, that discourses of Christ; but he does infinitely better, that by experimental knowledge, feeds and lives on Christ." Thomas Brooks.
    "Let us not please ourselves that we have deep understandings, but let us shew our understandings by our practice." Richard Sibbes
    Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to Puritan Sailor For This Useful Post:

    armourbearer (09-18-2009)

  16. #11
    Jon Peters's Avatar
    Jon Peters is offline. Puritanboard Sophomore
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Folsom, CA
    Posts
    722
    Thanks
    79
    Thanked 308 Times in 178 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Puritan Sailor View Post
    The New Atheists would commit the same atrocities if they were in charge, just as their fathers Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot have done before them. They would gladly cut down whoever gets in their way of "progress."
    An irony I suspect they would miss. Imagine that!
    Jon Peters
    Member, Reformation Fellowship (OPC) (Roseville, CA)
    Folsom, CA
    Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!

Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69