Pay in installments of $5.21 with
,
and
Shipping Estimate
USA
- USA
- CAN
- USA
- CAN
Ships within 48 hours · Estimated delivery Jul 22 - Jul 27
Promo Codes Available:
For Your Every Summer RSVP, with Code: SUMMER15
Description
anthurium plant air purifier Live Indoor Air Purifying Orange anthurium Plant With Pot – GreenParadiseLiveExploring the Vibrant Beauty of Orange Anthuriums from Green Paradise Nursery In the world of flora, few plants captivate the imagination quite like the Anthurium. Known for their striking, heart shaped blooms and glossy, green leaves, these tropical beauties have earned a special place in the hearts of plant enthusiasts. Among the various Anthurium cultivars, the Orange Anthurium from Green Paradise Nursery stands out as a stunning and unique
Exploring the Vibrant Beauty of Orange
Anthuriums from Green Paradise
Nursery
The Green Paradise Nursery: A Haven for Exotic Plants
Anthuriums: A Tropical Marvel
The Unique Allure of Orange Anthuriums
Here are a few reasons why Orange Anthuriums are adored by plant enthusiasts:
Striking Aesthetics:
Long-Lasting Blooms:
Easy Care:
Air-Purifying Properties:
Caring for Your Orange Anthurium
To ensure your Orange Anthurium thrives and continues to dazzle, follow these care tips:
Light:
Water:
Humidity:
Temperature:
Fertilization:
Repotting:
Shipping Notes
- Free Standard Shipping on $100+ Orders to the USA.
- Except Preorder products are shipped in 48 hours.
- Delivery to the USA:
- Standard Shipping : 3-10 business days
- If time is of the essence, please consider selecting expedited delivery for faster service.
Exchange/Return Notes
- We offer a 30-day return/exchange service after receiving.
- Final sale items are not eligible for returns or exchanges.
- To process your return/exchange, please contact us at [email protected]
- Please click here for more details>>> Return & Exchange Policy
4.6 ★★★★★
Based on 20 reviews
Sort
Product Reviews
★★★★★ 5
Opened My Eyes to a New View
Format: Kindle
Excellent book. Entirely changed the way that I have looked at the origins debate. I have been a lifelong literal creationist for most of my Christian life. But, in recent years I have begun to question this view and look a bit closer at how evolution could in fact be reconciled with the creation story. And, this book has most certainly helped with this journey.
"The Evolution of Adam" is broken up into two major parts with each part broken up into several more detailed subsets: 1) Genesis: An Ancient Story of Israelite Self-definition; 2) Understanding Paul's Adam. It is from these two parts where Enns believes he can establish an understanding about the Genesis story, Adam, and where evolution could fit into the story.
Using textual criticism, Enns makes numerous conclusions based on both biblical and extra-biblical resources. Here are just a few that I have observed: 1) The Genesis account is NOT a book about origins, but a wisdom book about Israel's identity as a chosen people. Never did the Jewish people claim or believe Genesis was about the origins of the world and humanity. 2) Enns also surmises that Genesis was likely written post-exilic by the prophet Ezra at a time when Israel had lost its identity in Babylonian captivity and were seeking a renewed national identity that had been lost. 3) The Genesis creation story closely resembles numerous other creation stories of Israel's neighboring cultures (i.e. Atrahasis, Enuma Elish, Gilgamesh). 4) That Adam was a proto-type of Israel (i.e. loved by God, disobeys Gods command, and suffers the consequences, exiled from the garden/Babylon). 5) That Paul's Adam was explained in the context of 1st century Judaism and was using Adam as a mere metaphor and example of spiritual death for both Jews and gentile alike. 6) Adam could have possibly been the first homo-sapien that became aware of his spiritual nature, but hominids could have existed prior to Adam. 7) Nowhere in the Old Testament and Jewish history was Adam known to be the conduit for which sin became an inherited nature passed on to all of mankind.
Where I think this book is lacking is where evolution comes into play. Enns spends most of his time breaking down and dissecting the creation story, but spends very little time building up the evolution process and how it fits in. Nevertheless, we cannot dismiss the science of evolution at the expense of taking the creation/Adam account literally. There is wiggle room in these two ideologies to allow for both God's divine creation and scientific evolution.
Great book. Must be read with an open mind. If you hold firmly to creationism and believe it to be the ONLY way, then this book is likely not for you. But, if you are open to the possibility that Genesis is not a scientific book about human origins, then you may find this to be quite good. Enns speaks in such a way that this book is not too academic and easy enough for the average layman to understand. it is highly recommended.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on May 17, 2014
★★★★★ 5
Very insightful
Format: Paperback
I am a materialistic atheist and I liked this book a lot. Perhaps that is why Peter Enns lost his teaching position!
I certainly would not agree with Enns on his religious views but I found his scholarship & willingness to stray from closed-minded literalism refreshing. I learned quite a bit about Paul and his modus operandi in dealing with OT passages. I was presented a way of thinking about Genesis that transcended "it's just a metaphor" or "its just an ancient myth".
Basically, my take home messages were 1) the Bible was compiled in its final form during exilic/post-exilic times though it contains some much older material 2) the OT was written as a means of self-definition & self-explanation for the Jewish people after the trauma of exile 3) the Bible is "incarnational", meaning both divine & human (those who demand it be free of its chronological & cultural milieu are being unreasonable) 4) God can "inspire" by stooping to our level & it's unwise to tell God what he can & can't do in terms of revelation 5) the Bible has no intent to be scientific and historical in early Genesis 6) Paul is a bigger obstacle to accepting evolution to many Christians than Genesis 7) by tying Adam & Eve to original sin & origin of death, Paul re-shapes/reinterprets the story in a way that seems foreign to OT writers 8) rejecting evolution means rejecting Pauline theology for many and 9) Paul, who also re-writes OT meaning in Abraham (faith vrs law; "seed(s)", uses Adam to put Jew and gentile on equal footing in needing grace/Christ's sacrifice/obedience for salvation. Christ, as second Adam, undoes damage of first Adam for ALL (Jew & gentile) willing to accept the gift of grace. Paul uses midrash/pesher arguments for his Christological interpretations with "creative engagement" of OT texts.
Again, while Enns and I probably have very little common ground for agreement, I appreciated the book & was struck by this passage at the end:
"...the light of science does not shine with equal brightness in every corner. There is mystery. There is transcendence. By faith I believe that the Christian story has deep access to a reality that materialism cannot provide and cannot be expected to know. That is a confession of faith, I readily admit, but when it comes to accessing ultimate reality, we are all in the same boat, materialistic atheists included: at some point we must trust in something or someone beyond logic and evidence, even if it is to declare that there is nothing beyond what we see."
While I wouldn't agree totally with that statement, it strikes me as very honest, sincere & open-minded.
Good book whether you agree or disagree with it.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on June 13, 2012
★★★★★ 4
For those that really Want to know!
Format: Paperback
I chose this rating because of the excellence of content. This author has chosen to give us, those who are truly seeking answers to difficult questions, the possibilities in finding closure or agreement with the very difficult task of merging Science, and all it entails, with our faith. I always feel pulled both ways with ther being no logical way to blend the two, I then felt I must have to give up one for the other but could not do so. This book has helped me begin the journey of understanding what I've always known to be true but could not put together. They do work. There are logical explanations for the seeming opposites of scripture and science. It's a Very important read. For years I have wished C.S. Lewis was still alive. He i have turned to for so many things. But with so many advances since his death, I have needed new thoughts as like minded as he . There are more Lewises out there!!
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on January 24, 2013
★★★★★ 3
Thought-provoking but misses its "target audience"
Format: Paperback
First, the good. This is a thought-provoking book that takes complex subject matter and makes it very easy to understand. In "The Evolution of Adam" Dr. Enns does an excellent job on many fronts - most notably giving a brief overview of the history of biblical criticism and its importance to the evolution debate. His ability to distill ideas down to the core was impressive. If I had to recommend to someone 50 pages on biblical criticism I might tell them to read the first portion of this book. However, as I read the book I kept wondering how the path he was taking would allow him to argue for an Evangelical perspective (as he says in the introduction). In short, he does not. Not even close.
Dr. Enns must not know his target audience very well if he thinks that this book is targeted for Evangelicals. Virtually none of the positions that he espouses in this book are even close to what an Evangelical Christian would be comfortable defending. He has little regard for any historicity behind any of the biblical accounts and frequently tosses out the phrase "most scholars agree" as a trump card. He does a good job of helping understand the culture and history that surrounded the biblical accounts yet in the end the reader is left wondering where story and history actually meet or if possibly the whole thing was simply conjured up for political reasons. In the end, I think the question the reader is left with is "does it matter if anything in the Bible ACTUALLY happened?". How you answer that may well determine how much you enjoy this book.
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on January 24, 2012
★★★★★ 5
Peter Enns "Upends" Tradition!
Format: Paperback
One cannot but deeply admire what Peter Enns has managed to produce within the span of less than 150 pages - not counting his endnotes. Kudos as well for his penetrating exegetical insights...to say nothing as regards his courage: few conservative evangelicals (and even fewer fundamentalists) will find the title "The Evolution of Adam" something that warms the heart. And yet what Enns has produced here not only is revolutionary (in a very real sense - see below) but may well prove to be one of the more controversial books on the science/theology debate of recent years.
Why so? Primarily because (according to Enns - Part Two of his book) Paul's creative use (in Romans) of the Adam and Eve story in Genesis was primarily for apologetic purposes...a matter that will be discussed in greater detail below. But we begin with Part One.
Essentially Part One (four chapters) represents Enns' understanding of the crucial importance Ancient Near Eastern influences exerted upon the biblical writers - the writer/s of the Genesis creation account in particular. Enns (correctly in my view)hammers this point repeatedly for the reader to consider - i.e., the bible (the whole of it) was not written in a cultural vacuum unsullied by the surrounding culture/s of pagan religious thought, whether ancient Sumerian, Babylonian, or Greco-Roman. Indeed, to do otherwise would have been an impossibility - somewhat like trying to walk along the Tibetan foothills while refusing to breathe its polluted 'pagan' air. None of us ever fully escapes the surrounding influences of culture - and the bible was never intended to do so; rather, God (if one believes in biblical inspiration...as Enns does) works fully within the conceptual categories of culture. Hence, the two creation accounts in Genesis come to us fully embedded with the concepts of Ancient Near Eastern thought patterns. Perhaps the most we can say here is that the Genesis accounts represent (in varying ways) the "demythologizing" of prior Ancient Near Eastern accounts: the God of Israel is not to be identified with any aspect (sun, moon, stars, etc.) of the created order.
So far so good. There's nothing really new here that hasn't been said already by any number of conservative evangelical scholars. Part Two, however, is something entirely different. Here Enns focuses his attention on Paul's creative use of the Old Testament, seeing as how the death and resurrection of Christ has caused Paul to look at the OT writings from a radically different perspective - Romans 5:12-21 in particular.
These verses have a long, long history in the Christian Church as providing the church's understanding of how sin and death entered the world of human existence:
we all "inherited" sin and death in and through the disobedience of Adam back in Eden. Not so...says Enns. And here is where his account veers off in a direction entirely different from traditional orthodox belief - for, according to Enns, Paul gave a particular 'Pauline spin' to these verses that cannot be found either in the OT itself, or in the Second Temple Judaism of which Paul himself was a part. Because the death and resurrection of Christ radically altered Paul's understanding of God's redemptive work in the world he (Paul) "found" in the Adam story an ideal explanation for why it is all Jews and Gentiles alike share in the universal experience of sin and death. Therefore, Adam's disobedience in Eden is NOT the cause of the universal human experience of sin and death (per Enns); rather, the story of Adam's disobedience served Paul's apologetic purposes...quite apart from whatever the story's original intention might have been. The true "origin" of sin and death remains a mystery, for the answer is not to be found (indeed if it can be "found" at all!) in the early Genesis account of Adam and Eve.
And here is where we encounter the book's controversial nature, for Enns' view represents a dramatic departure from the traditional view - a traditional view that has a rich theological heritage that passes directly through the Reformation all the way back to Augustine.
As previously stated, I deeply admire and respect what Enns has done here. For the most part I think he is on the right track. Furthermore, he makes mention of the fact that recent developments in biology have strongly indicated that we cannot possibly trace all modern humans back to an original "Adam and Eve." However, we knew that already...quite apart from modern biology informing us of the fact. Anthropology and paleontology had already amassed considerable evidence that proto-humans and modern humans were spread across the earth long before any conceivable Adam and Eve could have existed. Apparently, however, modern biology speaks with a more powerful voice than anthropology; thus, we are seeing a spate of books recently on the topic of whether or not Adam and Eve were historical - Enns' book being only one of a growing number. (Due to the geneologies in early Genesis we are somewhat limited in "how far back" we can place an Adam and Eve. Placing them 25 to 40 thousand years into the past in order somehow to allow them to be the true ancestors of all modern humans does a grave injustice to the geneologies that plain and simply do not allow for this sort of radical time reversal - a matter that any number of evangelicals, who have done this sort of thing, seem unwilling to appreciate. The early Genesis geneologies, even allowing for some "gaps," serve as a control against such unwarranted time expansion. An Adam and Eve of perhaps 6 to 8 thousand BC appears to be about the limit of what we can reasonably expect). In any case, Enns has raised a thorny and difficult issue in a way previous books on the question have not, and I believe his book will contribute substantially to more open theological discussion (one hopes without heated rancor) on the debate. In the meanwhile, some final thoughts.
Personally, I find it more than a tad curious that David Rohl (a somewhat controversial Egyptologist) has recently authored a book (From Eden to Exile, Greenleaf Press) in which he strongly defends an historical Adam - and yet Rohl acknowledges that he is an atheist. All this is most strange: an evangelical scholar arguing against an historical Adam while an atheistic historian argues for one! ("What fools these mortals be!")
I happen to agree with much of what Enns writes. However, I think Rohl has a point- even though how he fleshes his historical Adam out is somewhat bizarre. For one thing, I'm not entirely comfortable (despite some of Enns' powerful arguments) with a geneology of Jesus in the Gospels that would include "fictious" characters who never even existed. (I might as well inform you that my great, great grandfather was Dr. Jekyll and my great, great, great grandfather was Mr. Hyde). I don't see why getting rid of an historical Adam is at all necessary. Enns himself offers the possibility that OT Israel viewed Adam as their senior partriarch - the man who originally started the "clan." I personally see great possibilities here via leaving Adam within historical existence as Israel's original, grand patriarch.
The origin of sin and death via the Adam and Eve story is another matter entirely. Biology and anthropology together appear to just plain and simply rule it out - and sticking Adam back into the age of the Cro-Magnons and Neaderthals in order to "save" the doctrine is a clear instance of an act of sheer desperation. But I see no reason why we necessarily have to conclude that the "origin" of sin and death (if that's the right word even to use...which I'm not even sure about) can only be regarded as lost in the misty past. I think there is a possible way forward here, and even via an historical Adam, while at the same time embracing what Enns is talking about. I think there may well be a way to retain a personal Adam (perhaps 6 to 8 thousand BC), while also showing how sin and death had their origin in him...but with an entirely different understanding that is informed by Enns' book. Unfortunately, spelling all that out is - like "The Evolution of Adam" - a book unto itself. And Amazon commentary is not the place where one is allowed to "write a book" - quite apart from how lengthy my own commentary here has been.
In the meanwhile...kudos again to Enns for his truly provocative and highly insightful contribution to the cause. His vigorous defense of the incarnation, the atonement, and the resurrection is profoundly gratifying. Because of his firm stance here no one can accuse him of being unorthodox!
(NOTE: Readers interested in a critical analysis of David Rohl's "From Eden to Exile: the 5000 Year History of the People of the Bible," and why this book is of such strategic importance for Old Testament studies - scholars in particular, can easily access my recent review of this book (titled "David Rohl: A "Maverick" in Search of History") by clicking on "See All My Reviews" directly above, or by going to the book's Amazon website.
Hope you enjoy the read!
WAS THIS REVIEW HELPFUL?YesReportShare
Reviewed in the United States on January 18, 2012