January 1, 2012
Enns's (senior fellow, BioLogos Fdn.; Inspiration and Incarnation: Evangelicals and the Problem of the Old Testament) basic argument is this: modern creation arguments that focus on either the literal historical truth of the Bible or evolutionary perspectives are wrong. The Bible, including its creation accounts, represents a comprehensive theological worldview. It's neither a literal accounting nor is it science. And it was never intended to be either of these two things. Enns spends considerable effort outlining canonical and reception history of the Old Testament as well as using source criticism and ancient Near Eastern parallel accounts to debunk notions of Mosaic authorship. He then turns to the apostle Paul, who positions the figure of Adam as a stand-in for the universal message of Jesus. In this, claims Enns, "Christians who take Paul's theology with utmost seriousness are not also bound to accept Paul's view of Adam historically." VERDICT Academically minded Christians looking to bridge this intellectual divide will appreciate the tone and bibliographic references here.--Sandra Collins, Byzantine Catholic Seminary Lib., Pittsburgh
Copyright 2012 Library Journal, LLC Used with permission.