Featured A Critique of Dr. Peter Enns’ Book The Bible Tells Me So

I'm don't know what your definition of inerrant or infallible are or if Enns would be in agreement, but in the link provided by quantum Enns speaks to inerrancy, you tell me.

 

I cannot speak to this book from Dr. Enns.....I have not read it. I have read only one book by him. I would though highly suggest a book that I have almost completed by John Walton.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/083084032X/?tag=baptis04-20

BTW, I am looking forward to the following release later this month

http://www.amazon.com/dp/0830824618/?tag=baptis04-20

 

Yes, he wrote those words, but without context the paragraph doesn't really help much in understanding what Enns is fully saying. Works as a pretty good scare tactic though.

Of course it's my opinion about another authors writing while reading only one paragraph. So I guess the phrase, doctor heal thy self is ironically appropriate.

 

Well...it's a bit cheeky to say but, reading the book in full does the explaining. I think the link quantum posted a few posts previous gives a good idea about what Enns thinks about the bible being true.

 

Boy. That is a pretty fast distancing of yourself from Enns.

 

Ann,

Enns believes in the "Genesis Myth"; that the early chapters of Genesis were heavily influenced by ancient near eastern literature and tradition; ergo the creation narrative is not trustworthy. Dismiss the creation narrative and the remainder of scripture is called into question.

 

You'll have to read the book. I don't know if that will make it better for you or not.

 

Oh, probably all the ones you're thinking of. If you interpret the bible from a strictly literal, inerrancy point of view, you'll most likely not like what he has to say.

Enns developes the idea that the modern lens, how we define history and even what is true, is very different from the time the bible was written, how the ancients understood those concepts. If we are to read "accurately", we must return to ancient understandings as much as possible.

 

Don't think he would say it's not trustworthy, just not written as a be all to end all science book.

 

You have never seen me as an Enns devotee. I do appreciate his courage and willingness to ask questions. I am not "distancing" myself from him.

 

This sort of reminds me of Nancy Pelosi.....You will have to read the book to find out what is in it.

 

It does not matter whether Enns would say that or not. His view on the early chapters of Genesis causes that result.

 

You are Correct.

 

The Bible is a timeless book. It is meant to be understood by all generations. To say that we need to understand ANE tradition in order to understand Genesis is to put the scriptures in the hands of elites (think Rome). Scholarship is important but not at the expense of dumbing down the priesthood of believers.

 

You don't have to. Creation considered fact to the degree the Jews understood the story to be "fact" from the very beginning. This is not the same way we understand "fact" in our modern world.