Helm’s response to Enns

In a follow up to a discussion he had with Peter Enns, Paul Helm has posted some further criticisms of Enns’ controverial work Inspiration and Incarnation. You can read Helm’s post here. Helm was initially asked to write a review of Enns’ bookfor Reformation21. Since that review, Enns has posted a responded to Helm’s critique. This response can be found here.

Helm is one of the most careful analytical theologians in the church today. Even though he doesn’t reference Van Til, it is obvious that Helm is pointing out Van Til’s approach to Scripture contra Enns. What is ironic about all this is that Enns claims to be VanTillian, which somehow, we are supposed to believe, leads him to say that we have to accept God’s word as being God’s word regardless of errors that may exist in the human element of Scripture. Helm is right in pointing out that Enns comes to his examination of Scripture by attempting to find evidences to defend the inspiration of Scripture. But this is the problem, Enns presupposes that there are errors in Scripture prior to concluding that the Bible is God’s word. True presuppositionalism acknowlegdes that God’s word is the inerrant, infallible word of the living and true, Triune God because He is the living God. Evidences can be sought for only after we acknowledge the authority of God’s word. Anyway, Helm has given some very interesting thoughts.