Scan barcode
A review by matty_icey
Exodus for Normal People: A Guide to the Story—and History—of the Second Book of the Bible by Peter Enns
3.0
Summary: Exodus is mythicized history. There is a kernel of history that the authors build a narrative around to communicate their points. For example, while Israel was probably in Egypt at some point in their history, the authors declare through plagues and deliverance that God is bringing about salvation and a new people out of the chaos. Enns does not deny the possibility of miracles or the events described, but he states the book seems to point to the mythicized history as most plausible.
I have no problem with this idea. While it sounds like heresy, there are an abundance of clues in the text pointing to a creative fabrication in order to make a certain point. For some reason, literal history is a sacred cow. I feel many, and I once held the perspective, that the events had to happen as described in order for what the author was saying to be true. It is not about truth, but style and genre and ways of communicating.
Enns view seems to make sense of many of the Iron Age- tribal, war like views of God depicted in the OT. If the authors were adding to the histories to make a point, it makes sense that their additions would reflect how they saw the world.
What do we make of this as modern day students of the Bible and followers of Jesus? Discernment, Spirit leadings, and an embrace of theological wrestling between aged centuries and cultures and ours today.
One final note, Enns idea about what the Bible and the book of Exodus are is compelling, his commentary over Exodus, however, was weak and void of much striking insight. Lot of fluff.
I have no problem with this idea. While it sounds like heresy, there are an abundance of clues in the text pointing to a creative fabrication in order to make a certain point. For some reason, literal history is a sacred cow. I feel many, and I once held the perspective, that the events had to happen as described in order for what the author was saying to be true. It is not about truth, but style and genre and ways of communicating.
Enns view seems to make sense of many of the Iron Age- tribal, war like views of God depicted in the OT. If the authors were adding to the histories to make a point, it makes sense that their additions would reflect how they saw the world.
What do we make of this as modern day students of the Bible and followers of Jesus? Discernment, Spirit leadings, and an embrace of theological wrestling between aged centuries and cultures and ours today.
One final note, Enns idea about what the Bible and the book of Exodus are is compelling, his commentary over Exodus, however, was weak and void of much striking insight. Lot of fluff.