In this issue . . .
Q: Was Jesus wrong?
A: Dr. Peter Enns promotes the idea that Adam and Eve were not real, historical people. To bolster this claim, Enns relies on the discredited documentary hypothesis to say that the Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible) was written after the Babylonian exile—and therefore, not written by Moses.
Despite a wealth of biblical and historical evidence to the contrary, Enns portrays this idea as a given. In a footnote in his new book, Dr. Enns addressed one of the objections to this view—Jesus said Moses wrote about Him. Here is part of that footnote:
I do not think that Jesus’s status as the incarnate Son of God requires that statements such as John 5:46–47 be understood as binding historical judgments of authorship. Rather, Jesus here reflects the tradition that he himself inherited as a first-century Jew and that his hearers assumed to be the case.
The idea advanced by Dr. Enns here is known as the accommodation theory. This theory is very popular among liberal theologians and basically asserts that Jesus accommodated (accepted and taught) the various ideas of His day, even if they were wrong.
So what’s the big deal if Jesus accommodated the errors of His day? Well, if Jesus taught error, then He would have lied to His listeners, in which case He would have been a sinner. If He unwittingly taught error, then He would have misled His followers, making Him a false teacher. Either option leaves us with a Jesus who is sinful and less than God.
This is not a side issue. This is a false teaching that strikes right at the heart of the gospel, and it should never be accepted by those who claim to love Jesus Christ.
Continue reading to learn more about this dangerous idea and see why it is entirely contradictory to God’s Word.
News to Note Quick Look
Really most sincerely dead: Bioethicists seeking to justify harvesting vital organs before donors are “technically” dead have written an analysis entitled “What makes killing wrong?” Their article states, “If killing were wrong just because it is causing death or the loss of life, then the same principle would apply with the same strength to pulling weeds out of a garden. If it is not immoral to weed a garden, then life as such cannot really be sacred, and killing as such cannot be morally wrong.” Read more.
Origins smorgasbord: Indiana’s Senate voted 28-22 this week to pass a bill offering schools the option of requiring “various theories of the origin of life” be taught in public school science classrooms. The bill passed in extremely amended form, however. Despite the good intentions of the bill’s sponsors, a couple of aspects of the bill—in its original form and more so in its amended version—raise concerns. Read more.
Network with Us!
Note: Facebook and Twitter are both social networking sites with user-contributed content. Children should not visit the sites without parental supervision.
This Week . . .
Visit our prayer site to keep track of and pray for current ministry needs.
Please do not reply to this email. If you need help or have a question, please visit our help area.
This message was sent to you at %%$email%% because you signed up online, at an event, or through a promotional offer of the Creation Museum or Answers in Genesis. Please add email@example.com to your address book to ensure our emails reach your inbox.
Answers in Genesis