Enns vs. Helm vs. Beale
7 comments | Permalink
Here's the history and links:
- Paul Helm reviewed Peter Enns's book, Inspiration and Incarnation.
- Enns responded.
- Now Helm responds in kind.
- G. K. Beale, "Myth, History, and Inspiration: A Review Article of Inspiration and Incarnation," JETS 49 (2006): 287-312.
- Peter Enns, “Response to G. K. Beale’s Review Article on Inspiration and Incarnation," JETS 49 (2006): 313-326.
- G. K. Beale, "Surrejoinder to Enns's Response," SBTJ (spring 2007).
- G. K. Beale, “Did Jesus and the Apostles Preach the Right Doctrine from the Wrong Texts? Revisiting the Debate Seventeen Years Later in the Light of Peter Enns’s Book, Inspiration and Incarnation,” Themelios 32.1 (2006): 18-43.
- Peter Enns, "Response to Greg Beale," Themelios 32.3 (May 2007): 5-13.
- G. K. Beale, "Surrejoinder to Peter Enns," Themelios 32.3 (May 2007): 14-25.
posted by JT at Wednesday, January 16, 2008
7 Comments:
This post has been removed by the author.
Justin,
Reformation21 also has a review article from Carson in which he reviews Enns and finds it wanting.
here
david - did you agree or disagree with the carson review based on your reading of enns' book? in other words, did enns' book ennspire you?
I found Steve Hays' two-part review of Enns to be very helpful:
http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2006/02/inspiration-incarnation-1.html
http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2006/02/inspiration-incarnation-2.html
B-u-r-l-y,
I loathed Enns books. Even though my Dokotorvater is one of the blurbs on the back. It demonstrates to me the great weakness among Alttestamentlers, a complete lack of philosophical and theological sophistication. We far too often get stuck in back water debates without seeing the larger implications. This is why for my part I&I is found completely without anything that can amount to helpful. Hence my Schadenfreude at its strong critiques.
I think that Enns' response falls into the category of "You are reading as scholars and that is why you don't get it." The problem is that this defense holds no water in my book. Since if Greg Beale, D.A. Carson, and Paul Helm, don't get it then how can we expect people who don't have their brain power to get it. I think that the problem is that Enns is using the Wittgenstein Defense--When I wrote it two people understood it (me and God). Now only God gets it, or in this instance only Enns gets it. Because When you tell me that Helm doesn't get it, Carson doesn't get it, and Beale doesn't get it. And when I read it I came to the same place they did of course not in quite so sophisticated a manner. Then it indicates that Enns is the one who might not be getting it. I hold him no onus. I just think that it is a bad book that allows the human elements of Scripture to trump divine inspiration.
Thanks, David. I certainly need to put the book and the critiques (and then responses) at the top of my reading list.
My Thoughts on the issue. http://cdero.wordpress.com/2008/03/29/bible-monopoly/
This is plain sad.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home