According to Michael J. Kruger’s review of Professor Peter Enns’ new book, The Bible Tells Me So: Why Defending Scripture Has Made Us Unable to Read It
But perhaps most illuminating was the inside flap, where the publisher describes the book’s purpose: “In The Bible Tells Me So, Enns wants to do for the Bible what Rob Bell did for hell in Love Wins.”
Not until after I read the book in its entirety did I realize how accurate this comparison actually is. Of course, Bell’s book (also published by HarperOne) challenged a core historical tenet of the Christian faith, namely the belief that hell is real and people actually will go there. Christianity has just been wrong, Bell argues, and we finally need to be set free from the fear and oppression such a belief causes. Bell positions himself as the liberator of countless Christians who have suffered far too long under such a barbaric belief system.
Likewise, Enns is pushing back against another core historical tenet of the Christian faith: our belief about Scripture—what it is and what it does. The Bible isn’t doing what we think it’s doing, he argues. It doesn’t provide basically reliable historical accounts (instead, it’s often filled with myth and rewritten stories). It doesn’t provide consistent theological instruction (about, say, the character of God). And it doesn’t provide clear teaching about how to live (ethics, morality, Christian living). Although Christians have generally always believed these things about Scripture, Enns contends that scholars now know they simply aren’t true. And when Christians try to hold onto such beliefs, it only leads to fear, stress, anxiety, and infighting. Like Bell, Enns is positioned as a liberator able to set believers free from a Bible that just doesn’t work the way they want it to.
In the end, Kruger says Enns’ book wants it both ways. Discover God in the pages of Scripture while understanding most of what’s written there is imaginary and contradictory. Repent and believe in Christ on the cross, but the Bible’s morality is untenable and inapplicable to you.
It sounds like the basic tenets of higher criticism that have been brewing in liberal seminaries for over a hundred years.
Francis Schaeffer predicted back in the 70’s that inerrancy would be the watershed issue of our generation. You can predict where a church will stand on virtually every divisive issue if you know where they stand on inerrancy.
The only thing new here is that it is coming from a formerly evangelical publisher rather then from one of the mainline denominations.
Yes, it does, but Enns doesn’t appear to be an unbeliever. Even though he rejects so much we see in Scripture, he still hopes to point to the resurrected Christ.
What do you mean HarperOne was a formerly evangelical publisher?
I was assuming it was one of the many evangelical publishers that have been bought up by major secular publishing houses in recent years. A little checking proved I was wrong. Sorry for the misinformation.