Having reread the posts on many blogs about Westminster and Peter Enns, I want to say that I would find it hard to call WTS "narrow-minded" as many have done. In my student days, our biblical studies profs had different approaches to the Bible, but all within the seminary's commitment to the Westminster Standards and the seminary's own commitment to the inspiration, infallibility and authority of Scripture. Even the Confession does not expressly state that Scripture is infallible and inerrant, it does hold a very high view of Scripture. The Confession says nothing about the way Scripture was inspired or how the canon was formed. I have heard Dr. Gaffin talk about canonicity one way, and Dr. Dillard describe it another way. Both are within the bounds of the Confession.
However, to begin to talk about Peter Enns, to question the evangelical doctrine of the inspiration of Scripture (as he does in Inspiration and Incarnation) is not a very Westminster-like thing to do.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment