There has been a veritable explosion of epic proportions in the blogosphere over the issue of Peter Enns’ suspension (I’m sorry, I ran out of adjectives or other ways to lengthen my already over long sentence).
I think the fact that almost every other word in the above sentence(s) is a link to a blogger discussing the issue of Dr. Enns’ suspension is telling. I pity the person in charge of next month’s Biblical Studies Carnival, but I digress. A few links deserve to be repeated for being exceptionally lucid: David Opderbeck shares some well articulated thoughts on what things like this mean to Evangelicalism. Kevin Wilson offers a telling exposition of exactly what this reveals about Westminster’s take on things. Everyone needs to read my friend Art Boulet’s blog since he is a current student at Westminster and may be in the best position to give the facts concerning the issue. As Art rightfully points out, Peter Enns was already voted “orthodox” (that is, in agreement with the Westminster Confession of Faith) by the faculty of Westminster Theological Seminary. The issue is not his orthodoxy. I cannot stress enough the importance of Art’s blog in actually ascertaining the facts of the issue. Art may not like the decision, but he is willing to give the facts that are known, to the student body of WTS, at the present time.
My own opinion on the issue is that one should always err on the side of academic freedom. Obviously, a confessional school has the right to dismiss faculty for violating their particular confessional stance. The question, at the moment, is whether or not Dr. Enns has done that. The faculty of WTS voted that he has not violated that confessional stance. The seminary will do what it wants, of course, but the facts need to remain center-stage in our discussions of the issue.
One last comment, I realize that the blogosphere is a place where hierarchy means little or nothing. It’s one of the things I like about it. However, in this particular issue, one should certainly weigh the comments of those who are chiming in on the issue. I suggest one important criteria: has the person speaking on the issue ever taken the time to read Inspiration and Incarnation. In an ironic twist, I predict that Dr. Enns’ book will see a significant increase in sales because of this hullabaloo.
The cat, as they say, is out of the bag.
UPDATE – A special chapel was help on April 1st (if only this was all a bad April fools day joke). I have posted a link to Art Boulet’s blog, which in turn links directly to the mp3. Please take the time to download and listen.
Random Bloggings 
i didn’t even know Insp. & Incarn. was a well kept secret. chalk anohter one up to ignorance on my part.
EGB
Thanks for helping people to put this in proper perspective. I am sure that people who have not even read the book have already put a noose around Enns’ neck. I also think that there are some that have not read the book that see his suspension as a travesty. Perhaps its because the data that Enns was working with is not make-believe data. The data does exist. What does not exist is evangelical interpretation of the data which Enns was aiming to help people with.
Earl – I don’t know if I&I is a well kept secret as much as it simply wasn’t really on the radar of many people. For those already working with the data that Enns discusses it wasn’t needed. For those on the conservative end of the spectrum the data itself is ignored often times, so the book wasn’t needed in their thinking. At least that’s the impression I have.
cdero – The data does indeed exist, which is why I think I&I is such an important book for Evangelicalism in general, and specifically for Evangelical scholarship–at least if such a thing can be said to exist, or continue to exist into the future.