As I mentioned earlier, I’m watching the Olympics and so I won’t be blogging too much. But I will still try to make some new posts.
Peter Enns writes the following in relation to the conquest narratives:
It is not at all clear that these biblical stories were even written to depict “what God did.” […] The conquest stories are symbolic narratives that point to a theological truth” (source).
(HT: Steve Hays)
Notice that this is the same approach so many take on Genesis. Argue from the fact that the text has a theological claim in mind to the conclusion that the events probably never happened or at least probably never happened the way described. Apparently, we are to assume God is incapable or uninterested in actually creating history with theological significance.
Expanding the “Genesis hermeneutic” is inevitable (for most) because it’s such a convenient tool.