Peter Enns did a recent post on the “Benefit of Doubt.” Much of what he says is true, considered in isolation. However, his post is profoundly deceptive.
1. There’s a fundamental difference between having doubts and fostering doubts. Peter Enns and his cohorts at Biologos aren’t merely sympathizing with struggling believers. No. Enns and his cohorts are doing their best to instill doubt. Make the faithful doubt God's word. That’s a subversive, diabolical activity.
2. There is also the pungent aroma of hypocrisy emanating from his post. Enns lacks a capacity for self-criticism. He’s not somebody who projects self-doubt. He’s not attempting to cultivate doubts about macroevolution, &c.
Like militant apostates generally, he exudes tremendous self-confidence as he labors to win deconverts to his cause. For Enns, doubt is only a “gift of God” when it makes a conservative believer question his faith.
3. Then there’s this bizarre statement: “Read Ecclesiastes where Qoheleth’s entire universe of meaning is crumbling before him and he shakes his fist at God himself.”
I don’t see Qohelet “shaking his first at God.” To the contrary, I see Qohelet resigned to the inscrutable providence for God. For Qohelet, this world is not enough. There must be something more. This can’t be the whole story.
It’s as if we were dropped into the middle of the story–like waking up in a strange city.