<body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar.g?targetBlogID\x3d14792577\x26blogName\x3dPLAIN+PATH+PURITAN\x26publishMode\x3dPUBLISH_MODE_BLOGSPOT\x26navbarType\x3dBLUE\x26layoutType\x3dCLASSIC\x26searchRoot\x3dhttp://electofgod.blogspot.com/search\x26blogLocale\x3den\x26v\x3d2\x26homepageUrl\x3dhttp://electofgod.blogspot.com/\x26vt\x3d3757314713231228019', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe" }); } }); </script>


Peter Enns is now going public with his anger

I found this comment to a blog post on the subject of the historicity of Adam to be generally revealing:

"Reasons 9 and 10 are the real reasons behind the anxiety in Reformed circles about the Adam debate. [...] The whole covenant theology apparatus collapses without a concrete man named [Adam], and then the Bible becomes a mystery again instead of an “owner’s manual” that you’ve exhaustively explained."

[The reasons 9 and 10 that he references are these:
"9. Without a historical Adam, Paul’s doctrine of original sin and guilt does not hold together.

10. Without a historical Adam, Paul’s doctrine of the second Adam does not hold together."]


See, the guy who wrote the comment resents that the Bible can actually be understood in a parts-in-relation-to-the-whole way. Because this forces him to accept what the Bible says rather than plastering his own meaning onto (or into) the Bible's mystery.

And he, and others like him, are currently using science (Peace Be Upon It) as their Trojan Horse. Only this horse is not filled with Danaan heroes. It's filled with intellectual village idiots with a sense of empowerment derived from the recent popularity of books of very aggressive, militant - and really stupid - atheism.

Darwinian evolution has been dying an agonizingly slow death since Darwin himself expressed disappointment in the fossil record regarding it giving any evidence for his theory. DNA arrived, and the evolutionists got really scared, started to run for the tall grass, then realized they could just pretend that it supported a belief in macro evolution (i.e. the belief that fish turn into race horses). Now lab work with genome theory grants has been taken up by the same village idiots as 'proof' that fish do, indeed, turn into race horses (and hence also proving that Bach's music is no better or worse than Radiohead's third album). The fact that genes behave in a mysterious manner that they can't figure out (i.e. it's like they're *alive* or something) is something they are going to have to just set on a shelf for now.

But let's end with a point about 'scale' and psychopathology. Peter Enns has recently been getting publicly angry that anyone would even think to write a *blog post* suggesting his view about how the biblical Adam is not historical, and how evolution changes how we have to read the Bible, etc. is wrong. In other words, Peter Enns is now publicly showing his developing psychopathology. One trait of this, in a Devil-addled unbeliever with a quasi-Christian academic degree, is the same trait you see in other walks of life namely an inability to discern *scale.* In Peter Enns' case it's his inability to see the psychosis of thinking his little collective blog posts just totally decimate all theology of all eras of human history prior to the birth of Peter Enns. Yes, aiding him in his belief that he is a big mountain and all of history before him is a series of little mole hills is his great weapon he calls Evolution. (It became evident in an exchange with him that he didn't even know the distinction between micro and macro evolution, which pretty much gave away he really doesn't want to know *too much* about Evolution but just wants to use it as a means to exalt himself above all history and all peoples and all theology from all eras prior to his birth.)

And to what end? He's full up to his inane academic gills with vanity and pride and self-will, and he is in rebellion to his Creator and values the self-revelation of his Creator (the Bible) about as much as he values any book with counter-arguments against macro evolution (he doesn't think they exist...he references the name 'scientist' the way some Roman Catholics reference the name 'Pope').

Where is Peter Enns now? He's living the normal life of a typically shallow and vain academic. Where will he be in the future? Like, when all the 'vitalism' in his genes disappears? Where? Peter, where will you be? You won't be in control like you think you are now. The belief that they are still in control is the last thing an inmate loses as they are being processed and introduced to the heavy, locked door of their penitentiary cell. And hell is much worse.


Post a Comment

<< Home