Pete Enns provides a generous introduction to a work on OT history and faith from a group of evangelicals. While I think it fair to say that Enns doesn’t agree with many of the things espoused in the book, he does speak in a generally positive way about the effort. He makes a couple of points that are worth observing:
1) The importance of assumptions in conclusions
2) The “possibility” argument; the somewhat lazy intellectual approach that tears down another view and then suggests a different approach is “possible”, but without any real argument. I’ve seen similar arguments in other contexts, and it does make me a bit nervous when we skip the argument stage. I can’t say it actually happened in the book, since I haven’t read it – but regardless, we need to be careful to actually make positive arguments. That’s harder work, of course.
3) The publisher. I think Enns makes a good point when he observes that a publisher other than Crossway (a publisher I buy a good number of books from!) might have helped the book be taken more seriously in the larger scholarly community. I’m not sure how or who made the decision, but it could suggest a smallness of vision or simply a desire to encourage the already committed. Or perhaps, just taking the simple route (or perhaps one which was initiated by the publisher, which might suggest something about what other possible publishers have as their focus).