tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post3393569019808572692..comments2024-03-14T14:41:17.663-04:00Comments on Triablogue: Peter Enns on Paul, Adam, and EvolutionRyanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17809283662428917799noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-13009576918897780222011-11-05T07:46:54.949-04:002011-11-05T07:46:54.949-04:00FWIW, Jim Hamilton has a subsequent post here.FWIW, Jim Hamilton has a subsequent post <a href="http://jimhamilton.info/2011/11/04/three-objections-enns-makes-to-mohler-apparant-age-authority-and-world-picture" rel="nofollow">here</a>.Patrick Chanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16095377877712197984noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-27979689791602611442011-11-04T11:39:18.647-04:002011-11-04T11:39:18.647-04:00'Enns views the fact that Paul refers to Adam ...<i>'Enns views the fact that Paul refers to Adam as the first man as a problem, and he openly states that taking Adam not as the first man but as Israel “lessens the tensions with evolution.”'</i><br /><br />The crux of the issue, right here I think. Start with evolution as irrefutable fact, and interpret Paul's claims about Adam with this as your presupposition. I can see the genius in this.Steve Drakehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06281645028946507619noreply@blogger.com