In this six part series, Pete Enns recognizes the potential of the “Wesleyan Quadrilateral” to contribute to the science and faith dialogue. This tool highlights the four ways by which knowledge of God can be obtained: Scripture, reason, tradition, and experience. Enns walks through the sections, defining the capacities of each to influence one’s theology. When used in its fullness, he suggests that this interpretative system will progress the discussion between science and Christianity greatly.

In this exhaustive series, Pete Enns begins with this question concerning the science and faith discussion among the Evangelical community: “How do our various theological traditions contribute to or hinder the dialogue between evolution and our Christian faith?” It all stems from the specific way in which one interprets Scripture. Though all traditions have an important voice in the matter, Enns specifically looks at that of Calvinism’s due to its wide impact on Evangelical thought. He explains John Calvin’s unique approach to interpreting Scripture and then demonstrates its impact on the conversation between Christianity and science. Furthermore, he looks at how Old Princeton thought has influenced Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism. He also explores ways in which these interpretative methods have been applied. He then highlights the hermeneutical strategies of the theologian B.B. Warfield, who took seriously the incarnation and thus the “human side” to Scriptures. In light of these strategies and interpretational tools provided by Calvinistic thought, he views the creation stories of Genesis in their historical, ancient Near Eastern context.

This series, preceded by Genesis, Creation, and Ancient Interpreters: the Garden and the Fall, closely examines the “gaps” in the stories surrounding Cain in Genesis 4, and offers some ideas that the ancient commentators formulated in response to these factually incomplete accounts. Pete Enns highlights the questions these texts raised for early interpreters, including Adam and Eve’s sexual relations, the conception and birth of Cain, and the murder of his brother Abel. Enns explains that these “gaps” in the narratives are good as they invite readers to reflect and ponder the messages of the stories.

In this lengthy series, Pete Enns engages the peculiar and unfamiliar parts of Genesis 2. He first presents the details of the story which ancient interpreters often wrestled with, and then he discusses the scholars’ conclusions and offers his own insight. He addresses such particulars as the speaking serpent that tempts Adam and Eve, the idea that the couple was naked before their act of disobedience, and the fact that Adam and Eve did not physically die when they ate the forbidden fruit.

In this series, Pete Enns explores how ancient interpreters—ones who “regularly picked up on real interpretive challenges in the biblical text that tend to pass moderns by”—thought about and solved various issues regarding the Genesis 1 account. He brings forth points that they discussed such as the creation of angels in the beginning and the plural pronoun “we” used by God when making humans in his image. Enns reminds us that the Genesis 1 text may not be so straightforward and complete as people would like to assume.

In this four part series, Pete Enns explains the logic of reading the Bible literally as well as the problems that come with it. He notes that one should only take a literal reading of an account if the text itself is making historical claims. Even then, he continues, there are some minor differences between accounts describing the same historical events. He walks through several examples with the readers as he compares and contrasts 1 and 2 Samuel and Kings to 1 and 2 Chronicles.

In this series, Pete Enns discusses what it means to be made in God’s image according to Genesis 1:26-27. These verses show that humans are made in God’s image in order to rule over all creation as representatives of God. He argues that humanity’s image is not wrapped up in their soul, but in their role as caretakers. In this discussion, he mentions that God commands Israel to make no graven images to represent God because humans are living images themselves. Ultimately, Jesus is the perfect image of God, and humans are called to live in Christ.

Pete Enns examines the Genesis flood story in light of the ancient Mesopotamian flood accounts in this short series. He highlights certain elements—the Noah figure, the animals, the large boat and a devastating flood—which they share in common. Then, Enns focuses on theological statements made by the Genesis text that differ greatly from the other two narratives. He also reminds believers that a theological statement made in the Bible is not necessarily dependent on its historicity.

This three segment series by Pete Enns highlights the discrepancies that exist between the creation stories of Genesis 1 and 2. According to his analysis, they have different time scales, views of God’s creative role, and order of events. Additionally, the two accounts bear similarities to other Ancient Near Eastern creation narratives, giving a good reason to think twice before reading these chapters as literal descriptions.

In this four part series, Pete Enns delves into Paul’s views, backgrounds, and culture to understand his views of Adam and the Old Testament scriptures. Though many would like to hold a strict, literal interpretation of the Genesis writings and Paul’s letters, Enns brings to light the various problems that inevitably arise from this view. To obtain a richer perspective on this dilemma, he takes a look at nine different pieces of the puzzle including the consequences of the Fall, the appearance of Adam in the Old Testament, Adam theology in the Old Testament, the parallels between Christ and Adam in Romans, the limitations of Paul’s time period, and the interpretative methods used by Jewish rabbis at the time.

Speaking in parables is indeed similar to an artist’s craft. They create impressions, whole new worlds of meaning intended to turn old worlds on their heads.

Old Princeton and the Dutch Calvinists understood that the human dimension of Scripture—which pervades Scripture thoroughly—is not merely tolerable of a divine book, but a necessary component of what inspiration means.

With Christ, his humanity is essential to who he is. Likewise, the Bible’s “human side” is an essential part of what Scripture is, and recognizing this has practical implications.

According to Calvin, accommodation is a pedagogical tool that God employs to communicate to human beings. If God wishes to speak to us, he must bridge the gulf by descending into our world and speaking our language. In other words, God accommodates himself to our ability to comprehend.

In this video “Conversation,” Pete Enns addresses some assumptions about ancient readers and writers that are relevant to the way we should read Genesis in the 21st century.

In this video Conversation, Peter Enns discusses why Adam and Eve seem to be at the center of the Culture Wars.

Central to all of this is the resurrection of Jesus. Rising from the dead is the true beginning of this new mode of existence in which believers—right here and now—take part. Believing in Jesus means you are benefiting from Jesus’ resurrection already now in the new life you experience by the power of the Spirit.

The theological power of these episodes is more fully appreciated when we keep before us the Old Testament “taming the water” theme they echo.

Dear Dr. Mohler, I watched your articulate presentation “Why Does the Universe Look So Old?” and I have some questions. For me, those questions concern how you approach biblical interpretation.

But like a church bell on a clear winter night, it is in the crisp darkness of doubt that God’s voice carries farther and more clearly. St. John’s great insight is that this dark night is a special sign of God’s presence, where our false sense of comfort is being stripped away and we are left naked before God and asked simply to trust.

Atrahasis is important to biblical scholars because of it similarity to Genesis 2-9. Both stories share a similar storyline: creation, population growth and rebellion, flood. They also share some important details within that storyline.

Found among the ruins was a Babylonian creation story referred to today as Enuma Elish. How people viewed Genesis would never be the same again.

An incarnational model is neither a recent trend in Christian theology, nor is it considered risky.

Passions run high because evolution seems threatening. Christians feel unsettled because evolution challenges something meaningful and non-negotiable—their scriptural understanding of God, of ultimate reality, of how the parts of their existence fit together and make sense.

Understanding the Adam story in Genesis and Paul’s use of the Adam story in Romans and 1 Corinthians is important and challenging. An informed discussion engages topics such as Old Testament views of creation and challenges in understanding Paul.

In this video conversation, Pete Enns sheds light on the key difference between the ancient and modern mind with regard to interpretation of texts. A literal understanding of Genesis from an ancient mindframe would not necessarily be the same as what we now think of as a literal reading.

In this video conversation, Old Testament scholar Peter Enns discusses the Apostle Paul and his understanding of Adam as the progenitor of the human race.

It helps us look at the Adam story from an angle that might be new to some readers here: Adam is the beginning of Israel, not humanity. I imagine this may require some explanation.

Even though the cosmic battle is over, we have not left the creation theme. Think of the exodus as God “creating” a people for himself out of a cosmic battle.

The noted atheist and evolutionary biologist Jerry Coyne has referred to BioLogos as a flea that needs to be scratched.

These themes are wonderfully interconnected from Genesis through Exodus: cosmic battle, separation of elements, and deliverance from watery fate. Creation, flood, and exodus are almost versions of the same story: the victory of Yahweh and the salvation of his people.

It is obviously important to spend a lot of time discussing the scientific data. But it is also important to deal with the biblical data. Why? Because our expectations about the Bible affect how we handle the scientific data.

The more we grasp Israel’s understanding of creation, the less likely we will be to expect from the Old Testament things it was never intended to deliver.

Genesis 1 and 2 tell the story of creation, and it says things that are at odds with what modern people know to be true of the world and universe around us. One of those issue concerns the second day of creation (Genesis 1:6-8), where God made the "expanse" or the "firmament".

BioLogos Senior Fellow Pete Enns looks at how a close reading of the book of Revelation can shed light out how we should interpret the Genesis creation account.

In part three of his series on an incarnational model of Scripture, Pete Enns explains how looking at other ancient texts help us understand what kind of a text Genesis is.

In the second entry of his multi-part series, Pete Enns discusses the merits of an incarnational model of scripture -- which holds the human aspects of Scripture to be essential to the meaning of the text.

In this introductory post of his series on an incarnational model of Scripture, Pete Enns looks at two challenges from the 19th century that have led to a rethinking on how to interpret the Bible.

In this paper, Pete Enns looks at from a unique angle to some: Adam is the beginning of Israel, not humanity. He follows through with how this line of thinking affects our reading of the Genesis account.

The Bible is no more a book dropped out of the sky than Jesus is some superman who flew down from heaven. Instead, just as Jesus is “God incarnate,” both divine and human, the Bible is a book that speaks God’s word and reflects the thoughts, ideas, and worldviews of the human authors.