Would you be able to help me understand how Adam and Eve were not at enmity with God after disobeying him and falling into sin? Or perhaps a better question – aren’t unbelievers, prior to regeneration, at enmity with God? I’m thinking particularly of Ephesians 2:3 where the unregenerate are considered children of wrath, “among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind.”

That is episodes 7 & 8!

Just saw your reply. Thanks, I guess I don’t remember if I listened to it. I’m sure I did, but didn’t remember Enns being discussed. I’ll check it out. These Vos talks need repeated listening anyway. I actually read Vos’ Biblical Theology when I was just learning Reformed Theology and it had a strange effect. I got so much more from it than I realized at the time. And the fact that it contains so much academic type refuting of German theologian x, y, and z you’d think it wouldn’t be that type of book that stays with you, but I guess it is.

I thoroughly disagree — I LOVE the fact that this is only once a month, so I have no problem keeping up! Dan, maybe you should just wait 10 years for them to finish, and then you can listen to them all in a row!

Michael, have you listened to #3 in this series? They are more extensively and explicitly critical of Enns in that one; this time they might have had the mindset that they’ve established what’s going on with Enns, so they don’t need to further belabor it at every subsequent opportunity.

Thanks,
I’ve already red the first one, i’ll have a look on the second.
In Christ,
Dan S.

Gaffin’s article in “Biblical Hermeneutics: Five Views” is a must read. See here:

http://reformedforum.wpengine.com/redemptive-historical-hermeneutics/

I started reading “Understanding Biblical Theology: A Comparison of Theory and Practice.” It looks to be a good overview of various approaches to BT; much broader than just Vosian Redemptive Historical. It does give one a better idea of what’s out there and what sets the Redemptive Historical apart from the rest.

Actually hone in on the examples they give like one of them says it was his not being able to reconcile the two genealogies in Matthew and Luke that made him abandon an inerrant Bible. (Even Enns’ followers took the guy to task on that.) Read them all to get a sense of how silly they are.

These guys are teaching in institutions of higher learning in the name of Christian educators. I just think guys like you and people you have on this forum need to draw a line and take those guys on some rather than this silence (academic courtesy? no place for that on the spiritual battlefield) and allowing them to just coast along with no confrontation from orthodox believers in their realm.

OK, I didn’t pick up any sense or degree of approval or condemnation when you mentioned Enns, but I could have missed it in the doctrinal (or otherwise) context. I just find him to be so ridiculously (cartoonishly) off the ranch for somebody who once taught at an iconic Reformed seminary that I find it disappointing he isn’t distanced more (publicly) by his peers or former peers.

(I think one thing that really bothers me about him is when I read all the people who follow him and agree with everything he says. But it just shows it’s rare to have an on–the-mark understanding of doctrine and to be able to value it and to fear only God so that you believe in the supernatural and so on. That’s God’s grace doing that.)

Michael,

We have been quite critical of Dr. Enns’ views throughout, and I thought we were on this episode as well. Honestly, I don’t know how you could have thought we were presenting them otherwise.

If you delete this comment under some justification that Enns is “lawfully ordained” and “eminently educated” and blah, blah, blah you need to look in a mirror and say to yourself these words: “I fear the world more than I fear God.”