a time to tear down a time to build up Â» further interactions with bruce waltke introduction...

7/29/2019 a time to tear down A Time to Build Up Further Interactions with Bruce Waltke Introduction Part 4

1/6

a time to tear down | A Time to Build Up Further Interactions with BruceWaltke: Introduction Part 4AudioPlayer.setup("http://peterennsonline.com/wordpress/wp-content/plugins/audio-player/assets/player.swf?ver=2.0.4.1",{width:"290",animation:"yes",encode:"yes",initialvolume:"60",remaining:"no",noinfo:"no",buffer:"5",checkpolicy:"no",rtl:"no",bg:"f8f8f8",text:"666666",leftbg:"eeeeee",lefticon:"666666",volslider:"666666",voltrack:"FFFFFF",rightbg:"cccccc",rightbghover:"999999",righticon:"666666",righticonhover:"ffffff",track:"FFFFFF",loader:"9FFFB8",border:"666666",tracker:"DDDDDD",skip:"666666",pagebg:"FFFFFF",transparentpagebg:"yes"});ol.footnotes li {list-style-type:decimal;} ol.footnotes{font-size:0.8em;color:#666666;} .wptable { border-width: 1 px; border-color: #E58802;border-style: solid; } .wptable th { border-width: 1px; border-color: #E58802;background-color: #E58802; border-style: solid; } .wptable td { border-width:1px; border-color: #E58802; border-style: solid; } .wptable tr.alt {background-color: #F4F4EC; }

home

aboutcvarticlesbooksi & itestimonialsreviewsodds & ennsitinerarymedia

Further Interactions with Bruce Waltke: Introduction Part 4

Posted on June 2nd, 2009 by Pete Enns

This is the fourth of several posts continuing the exchange between Bruce Waltkeand me, posted earlier on this site, that first appeared in the WestminsterTheological Journal. Click here to read Waltkes follow-up to that exchange(PDF), which has already appeared in the latest issue of WTJ (and is also postedhere with permission.)

Read Part One of my response here.Read Part Two of my response here.Read Part Three of my response hereHere is the fourth part of my response to Waltkes follow-up piece:Waltke is No FundamentalistI can understand why, in view of my previous response, Waltke would want topoint out that he holds views that are considered progressive and thereforeproblematic by fundamentalists. He is open to multi-authorship of Isaiah, an


2/6

exilic date for the final form of the Deuteronomy, and theistic evolution. I amalready aware of this, although those who look to Waltke to champion theirfundamentalist causes should take careful note how much Waltke is conceding onthese points. Waltke is to be commended for expressing himself so clearly.Still, given the groundwork that Waltke has laid thus far, I wonder if he wouldnot be more consistent if he did maintain a fundamentalist posture on theseissues. For, as Greg Beale has recently reminded us (The Erosion of Inerrancy),any talk of multi-authorship of Isaiah is to discredit the very words of Jesushimself, who quoted from various portions of the book but referred consistentlyto Isaiah. If, after all, Scripture is the very truth of God revealed, and ifthere can be no foible or misrepresentation of historical fact, must we not takeJesus testimony with utter seriousness, lest we attribute to Scripturenonsense and human error? How can we arrive at conclusions Jesus himself didnot and would not accept? The same goes for pentateuchal authorship, and mostcertainly for evolution. To accept these progressive views, even as a possibleoptions, seems to me to be more problematic for Waltke than he admits.I would suggest that for Waltke to maintain his progressive (and correct) views,he must employ a hermeneutic and derivative doctrine of Scripture that are moresubtle than the principles he employs with respect to my arguments. In otherwords, I dont think he can have it both ways. The manner in which he argues

against some of my views discredits some of his own more progressive views.

ShareThisTags: Uncategorized // Comments Off

Comments are closed.

As a medical doctor who has struggled with the issues expressed in yourbook Your book was not written in vain

RSS Subscription

Contact Peter Enns

If you have a question or would like to interact about something on thiswebsite, feel free to email me at [email protected]


3/6

Recent Comments.dsq-widget ul.dsq-widget-list { padding: 0; margin: 0; text-align: left; }img.dsq-widget-avatar { width: 32px; height: 32px; border: 0px; margin: 0px;padding: 0px 3px 3px 0px; float: left; } a.dsq-widget-user { font-weight:bold; } a.dsq-widget-thread { font-weight: bold; } p.dsq-widget-meta { clear:both; font-size: 80%; padding: 0; margin: 0; } li.dsq-widget-item { margin:15px 0; list-style-type: none; clear: both; } span.dsq-widget-clout { padding:

0 2px; background-color: #ff7300; color: #fff; } table.dsq-widget-horiz td {padding-right: 15px; }

Richard HeyduckSince I don

t buy into the divorce between the descriptiveand the normative, I don

t have trouble thinking it

s possible. I was justcurious how he did it. I guess I

ll find out when I read the book.Have Evangelicals Made the Bible Impossible? (a sociologist says yes) 19hours ago

peteennsRichard, I suppose the question is "why can

t he?" He may be in aunique position to see things more clearly. But, more importantly,publishers pick titles to grab readers attention.Have Evangelicals Made the Bible Impossible? (a sociologist says yes) 21hours ago

Richard HeyduckHow does his sociological account defend the apparentlynormative claim of his subtitle?Have Evangelicals Made the Bible Impossible? (a sociologist says yes) 3days ago

Carson T. ClarkI got linked over here from a comment under my blog post.

Glad I did. Definitely want to read this book... And if anyone wants to readthat post, here

s the link: "Miniblog #71: The Bible is...Have Evangelicals Made the Bible Impossible? (a sociologist says yes) 1week ago

peteennsIt is easily accessible--far easier than GWHW. Also, it is not abook that argues anything about the Bible from the Bible, but more observesevangelical behavior. So, comparing to GWHW and I&I is...Have Evangelicals Made the Bible Impossible? (a sociologist says yes) 1week ago

Powered by Disqus

ContentsAbout Peter EnnsArticles and EssaysBook ReviewsBooks by Peter Enns Current and ComingCan the Bible be Read both Critically and Religiously?CV


4/6

I&I Inspiration & IncarnationMediaOdds & EnnsReading the OT as Jesus Did Act 3 Biblical ForumTestimonialsWelcomeItinerary

Recent PostsHave Evangelicals Made the Bible Impossible? (a sociologist says yes)Pre-order Ecclesiastes and Evolution of AdamBrazos ad for The Evolution of AdamGunnar, Viking Theologian of the Hanging GodStarting on a New Book

Archived Posts by Date

June 2009

S

M

T

W

T

F

S

May

Sep

1

2

3

4


5/6

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30


6/6

Archived Posts by Year/MonthSelect Month July 2011 (6) June 2011 (1) May 2011 (1) April 2011 (4)

March 2011 (3) February 2011 (4) December 2010 (2) November 2010 (5)October 2010 (8) September 2010 (7) August 2010 (6) July 2010 (11) June2010 (3) May 2010 (4) April 2010 (7) March 2010 (6) February 2010 (6)January 2010 (2) December 2009 (5) November 2009 (2) October 2009 (3)September 2009 (6) June 2009 (8) May 2009 (11) April 2009 (5) March 2009(4) February 2009 (3) January 2009 (1) December 2008 (6) November 2008(8) October 2008 (6) September 2008 (4) August 2008 (6) June 2008 (5) May

2008 (1) February 2008 (4) January 2008 (4) December 2007 (4) November2007 (1)

LinksAn Evangelical Dialogue on EvolutionBeyond the FirmamentBioLogos FoundationHuffington Post on Religion and ScienceJesus Creed (Scot McKnight)Science and Theology: Exploring the Nexus

The BioLogos Forum

Site AdministrationLog inEntries RSSComments RSSWordPress.org

Copyright 2007 Dr. Peter Enns | Coffee Break Theme by Anthony Baggett |Contact the Webmaster

a time to tear down a time to build up Â» further interactions with bruce waltke introduction...

Documents