Dr. Peter Enns, formerly of BioLogos, has a new blog post today on the historical Adam debate. Apparently, he thinks he understands why there is such a difference of opinion between those who believe Adam was the literal first man and those who believe Adam is a story.
He thinks we have a different God. I’m inclined to agree, although not for the reasons he suggests.
A Daughter of the Reformation 
This whole “enter In” business is about to do me in. So our choice is a God who “enters in” vs. a God who “keeps his distance”. Apparently Enns considers himself to be on the I-see-God-as-more-personal-than-you-do team. I would argue that Enns doesn’t go far enough. God more than entered in to the human experience, He authored it. He didn’t humble himself for a little dip in the pool of the human story. He didn’t just look around for gaps in which to squeeze some of His God-ness in a culturally-friendly way. His hands, His words, His very breath shaped us from quark to soul.
You speak truth Sister, Enns’ god is quite different from ours.
LikeLike
I thought of Enns’ “different god” post today when I read another story. Apparently Jeremiah Wright feels that he and Clarence Thomas also have a different god. There seems to be a lot of that going around.
LikeLike