Pete Enns is the Friday “guest voice” in the science and religion dialogue over at Science and the Sacred (the BioLogos blog).
He says this post is the first of several. Should be interesting! Check out what he has to say about Science and an Incarnational Approach to the Bible. In this first post, he sets out the problem as he sees it, then in subsequent posts he will define what he means by “incarnational model” and then will look at specific implications for reading the bible with this model in mind.
He’s already set out what he means in “Inspiration and Incarnation.”
I think Paul Helms gets to the heart of what Mr. Enns does not do in his book/argument:
“The point is, either Professor EnnsÂ’ position is a radical thesis, or it is not. It is incumbent on any scholar, in addressing a matter as fundamental as the doctrine of Scripture, not to mince his words. He should have told the reader, in words that are unmistakably clear, how radical his thesis is and what difference it will make to what Scripture is.”
Mr. Enns is a lot of things, but “clear” is not one of them. I suspect its because he fully understands the nature of his thesis.