<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>a time to tear down &#124; A Time to Build Up &#187; Uncategorized</title>
	<atom:link href="http://peterennsonline.com/category/uncategorized/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://peterennsonline.com</link>
	<description>Dr. Peter Enns on the Bible and Contemporary Christian Faith</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2010 15:31:50 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>The Problem with Literalism</title>
		<link>http://peterennsonline.com/2010/09/07/the-problem-with-literalism/</link>
		<comments>http://peterennsonline.com/2010/09/07/the-problem-with-literalism/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2010 15:31:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Pete Enns</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://peterennsonline.com/?p=924</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I began a new series at BioLogos last week, and the second part is up today.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I began a new series at BioLogos <a href="http://biologos.org/blog/the-problem-with-literalism-introduction/">last week</a>, and the <a href="http://biologos.org/blog/the-problem-with-literalism-the-books-of-chronicles-1/#comments">second</a> part is up today.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://peterennsonline.com/2010/09/07/the-problem-with-literalism/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>N. T. Wright interview at BioLogos</title>
		<link>http://peterennsonline.com/2010/08/24/n-t-wright-interview-at-biologos/</link>
		<comments>http://peterennsonline.com/2010/08/24/n-t-wright-interview-at-biologos/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Aug 2010 12:15:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Pete Enns</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://peterennsonline.com/?p=915</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[My first of several video interviews of N. T. Wright is up this morning at BioLogos. This one is on the humanity of Jesus.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My <a href="http://biologos.org/blog/understanding-the-humanity-of-jesus/">first</a> of several video interviews of N. T. Wright is up this morning at BioLogos. This one is on the humanity of Jesus.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://peterennsonline.com/2010/08/24/n-t-wright-interview-at-biologos/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Giberson vs. Mohler on Darwin</title>
		<link>http://peterennsonline.com/2010/08/21/giberson-vs-mohler-on-darwin/</link>
		<comments>http://peterennsonline.com/2010/08/21/giberson-vs-mohler-on-darwin/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Aug 2010 13:11:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Pete Enns</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://peterennsonline.com/?p=913</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Karl Giberson has responded to Al Mohler&#8217;s post on Darwin and the Bible. Mohler&#8217;s choice not to engage the topic is disappointing but I am still holding out hope that some dialogue will result. Giberson&#8217;s post has links to Mohler&#8217;s original post on his own site plus previously published responses to Mohler at BioLogos.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Karl Giberson has <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/karl-giberson-phd/charles-darwin-versus-the_b_688485.html">responded</a> to Al Mohler&#8217;s post on Darwin and the Bible. Mohler&#8217;s choice not to engage the topic is disappointing but I am still holding out hope that some dialogue will result. Giberson&#8217;s post has links to Mohler&#8217;s original post on his own site plus previously published responses to Mohler at BioLogos.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://peterennsonline.com/2010/08/21/giberson-vs-mohler-on-darwin/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;Image of God&#8221; Part 4</title>
		<link>http://peterennsonline.com/2010/08/17/image-of-god-part-4/</link>
		<comments>http://peterennsonline.com/2010/08/17/image-of-god-part-4/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Aug 2010 16:14:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Pete Enns</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://peterennsonline.com/?p=910</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[My fourth and final post on the Image of God is up at BioLogos.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My fourth and final <a href="http://biologos.org/blog/what-does-image-of-god-mean-part-4/">post</a> on the Image of God is up at BioLogos.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://peterennsonline.com/2010/08/17/image-of-god-part-4/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Atheists are Believers, Too.</title>
		<link>http://peterennsonline.com/2010/08/16/atheists-are-believers-too/</link>
		<comments>http://peterennsonline.com/2010/08/16/atheists-are-believers-too/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Aug 2010 17:55:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Pete Enns</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://peterennsonline.com/?p=907</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[My latest essay is up at the Huffington Post.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My latest <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/pete-enns-phd/atheists-are-believers-to_b_681169.html">essay</a> is up at the Huffington Post.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://peterennsonline.com/2010/08/16/atheists-are-believers-too/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>11</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;Image of God&#8221; Part 3</title>
		<link>http://peterennsonline.com/2010/08/09/image-of-god-part-3/</link>
		<comments>http://peterennsonline.com/2010/08/09/image-of-god-part-3/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Aug 2010 13:20:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Pete Enns</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://peterennsonline.com/?p=884</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[My third image of God post is up on BioLogos today. Main point: the New Testament writers argue that the resurrected Christ fully embodies the image of God, thus making him more fully human than any other.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My <a href="http://biologos.org/blog/what-does-image-of-god-mean-part-3/#comments">third</a> image of God post is up on BioLogos today. Main point: the New Testament writers argue that the resurrected Christ fully embodies the image of God, thus making him more fully human than any other.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://peterennsonline.com/2010/08/09/image-of-god-part-3/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;Image of God&#8221; Part 2</title>
		<link>http://peterennsonline.com/2010/08/03/image-of-god-part-2/</link>
		<comments>http://peterennsonline.com/2010/08/03/image-of-god-part-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Aug 2010 22:21:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Pete Enns</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://peterennsonline.com/?p=881</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[My second post on the image of God is up today at BioLogos. The &#8220;image of God&#8221; in Genesis 1:26-27 refers to humanity&#8217;s role in ruling creation as God&#8217;s representatives. It does not refer to the soul or psycho-spiritual qualities like reason or consciousness. This is better that Netflix, I promise you.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My <a href="http://biologos.org/blog/what-does-image-of-god-mean-part-2/">second post </a>on the image of God is up today at BioLogos. The &#8220;image of God&#8221; in Genesis 1:26-27 refers to humanity&#8217;s role in ruling creation as God&#8217;s representatives. It does not refer to the soul or psycho-spiritual qualities like reason or consciousness. This is better that Netflix, I promise you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://peterennsonline.com/2010/08/03/image-of-god-part-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Anne Rice &#8220;Quits Christianity&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://peterennsonline.com/2010/07/30/anne-rice-quits-christianity/</link>
		<comments>http://peterennsonline.com/2010/07/30/anne-rice-quits-christianity/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2010 15:59:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Pete Enns</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://peterennsonline.com/?p=877</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Many are familiar with Anne Rice&#8217;s spiritual journey from Roman Catholicism and back again. Just today she announced that she has had it with Christianity and has quit. In her own words, from the Huffington Post article, which pasted her FB status updates: On my Facebook account&#8211;where all true theological discourse happens&#8211;I posted the link [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Many are familiar with Anne Rice&#8217;s spiritual <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Called-Out-Darkness-Spiritual-Confession/dp/0307388484/ref=sr_1_7?ie=UTF8&amp;s=books&amp;qid=1280504670&amp;sr=8-7">journey</a> from Roman Catholicism and back again. Just today she announced that she has had it with Christianity and has <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/29/anne-rice-i-quit-being-a_n_663915.html?ir=Religion">quit</a>.</p>
<p>In her own words, from the Huffington Post article, which pasted her FB status updates:</p>
<p><img src="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/187803/ANNE-RICE.jpg" alt="" /></p>
<p><img src="http://i.huffpost.com/gen/187804/ANNE-RICE.jpg" alt="" /></p>
<p>On my Facebook account&#8211;where all true theological discourse happens&#8211;I posted the link to her announcement and the responses have been mixed. Some think it is all contrived, a PR boost for her next book. Others think she is being theologically naive to think she can continue in her Christian journey alone. Others think this is both genuine and understandable.</p>
<p>Feel free to post your thoughts, in a non-disputatious manner.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://peterennsonline.com/2010/07/30/anne-rice-quits-christianity/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>13</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why Religion Pollsters Should Go to Seminary First</title>
		<link>http://peterennsonline.com/2010/07/24/why-religion-pollsters-should-go-to-seminary-first/</link>
		<comments>http://peterennsonline.com/2010/07/24/why-religion-pollsters-should-go-to-seminary-first/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jul 2010 13:03:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Pete Enns</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://peterennsonline.com/?p=862</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[My latest gentle and self-effacing article in the Huffington Post is now up. My point is the religion pollsters I mention in this post have some pretty unreflective ideas of what Christians believe. My last post resulted in mass atheist conversions&#8211;although I am not sure in which direction.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My latest gentle and self-effacing <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/pete-enns-phd/evolution-and-religion-wh_b_648514.html">article</a> in the Huffington Post is now up. My point is the religion pollsters I mention in this post have some pretty unreflective ideas of what Christians believe. My last post resulted in mass atheist conversions&#8211;although I am not sure in which direction.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://peterennsonline.com/2010/07/24/why-religion-pollsters-should-go-to-seminary-first/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Open for Comments</title>
		<link>http://peterennsonline.com/2010/07/10/open-for-comments/</link>
		<comments>http://peterennsonline.com/2010/07/10/open-for-comments/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Jul 2010 15:10:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Pete Enns</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://peterennsonline.com/?p=844</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[For a number of complex reasons, the most important of which being &#8220;I feel like it,&#8221; I am opening up comments on my posts after a two-year self-absorbed imposition of silence. We&#8217;ll see how this goes. I will do my best to interact, and don&#8217;t take it personally if I don&#8217;t. Do take it personally, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For a number of complex reasons, the most important of which being &#8220;I feel like it,&#8221; I am opening up comments on my posts after a two-year self-absorbed imposition of silence. We&#8217;ll see how this goes. I will do my best to interact, and don&#8217;t take it personally if I don&#8217;t. Do take it personally, however, if you post a rude, irrelevant, obnoxious comment and I remove it with much fanfare.</p>
<p>All kidding aside, we are engaging issues of ultimate meaning and purpose. Hearing from each other seems like a good idea.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://peterennsonline.com/2010/07/10/open-for-comments/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>14</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
