John Walton: The Story of Noah
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 25 мар 2014
- seedbed.com
Seedbed's mission is to gather, connect, and resource the people of God to sow for a great awakening. // Find out more and join the awakening journey! seedbed.com
How should we understand the story of Noah in Genesis 6-9? What are some of the issues involved? Dr. John Walton of Wheaton College explains.
Get our best-selling Bible study on the Old Testament - Epic of Eden - from our store here:
>>> store.seedbed.com/products/epic-of-eden-by-sandra-richter
Might I also suggest Adam & Eve & the Big Bang? It describes in modern scientific terms the reality of the Garden of Eden.
If you can't read Hebrew, Ugaritic, Aramaic, Akkadian, and Sumerian language and aren't intimate with the literature of these cultures, you are going to fail to grasp and therefore miss much of what Walton is presenting. If you are a student of these languages and literature, you'll better appreciate his conclusions and those like him, such as Mike Heiser, Peter Gentry, David J.A. Clines, and Bruce Waltke. If you know the literature to the point where you've acquired intimacy with the languages behind the literature, (not mere familiarity with words isolated but actual inner workings of grammar.) and understand his scholarly hermeneutical framework, you'll have a greater appreciation for what he is presenting, as well as those whom I mentioned above.
Yeah I am binging the Naked Bible podcast by Heiser
You forgot Egyptian!
These concepts are actual and factual. But for the most part modern day institutional "Christendom" has little knowledge of, or the desire of the backstory here. Similar requirements such as you stated are needed in understanding "pre-adamic" earth history. Even to the attempt to exegete the "Noah" accounting. Hypothesis remains just that without understand the point of origin, or unto where it leads. Arriving at an incomplete terminus is a direct corresponding action when dispensational application is applied creationism. " Isaiah and Jeremiah" speaks to this. Blessings. " Proverbs 27: 17 "
There's a lot more here than most churches have in a years worth of services
Amen!
I once noticed a sermon series on the first Genesis Creation account that lasted three sermons, based on a literal reading. I went back and read it in the Hebrew and compared it again to other ancient literature, and mentally sketched out ten sermons, which could have expanded to at least twelve once I got rolling on them.
There is SO MUCH more meaning if you grasp it as ancient literature that can come from a literalist reading!
Thank you Mr Walton.
Dual fulfillment as well as the timelessness of Scripture demonstrate that God is capable and does at times exhibit both.
Indeed, not only duel fulfilment but potentially multiple fulfillments.
Years ago a member of the American Scientific Affiliation wrote an article in the journal Perspectives arguing that the Flood was regional, in the area of the Black Sea, although it probably seemed to the locals to be worldwide. The author also identified the town where Noah may have lived. This is not to disparage any of the symbolic meanings that may derive from the incident.
Around 1973, I was in a stressful class at a university. I had a dream and wrote a song, inspired by an editorial by Eric Sevareid of CBS News. Sevareid said Americans do not like economic pain. It's as though they let water pile up behind a dam until it breaks, instead of letting it out slowly.
Get On the Ark
Words and music by Dan Eumurian
We are damming up the rivers,
We're ignoring the overcast,
But we can't hold off God's judgment.
That barometer is falling fast.
"Get On the Ark,
The water's coming...."
But what I quite can't wrap my mind around is why the author of Genesis bothered with all the measurements. It seemed as if he were trying to make this sort of historical reconstruction.
+Nawfal Elric The world was clearly covered in a world wide flood. Even if I was not a Christian I would come to this conclusion, I would just push the event too far back to matter biblically. The Hydroplate Theory explains why the continents still resemble their shape yet are great distances apart. If the continents had moved away slowly, erosion would reshape all of the continents and no resemblance of having fit together would remain. Some calculate if we go off the evolutionary time the continents would have eroded their entire mass 7-11 times over. This never happened once, therefore they have to be young. Well how did they move so far apart in such a quick period of time ? Hydroplate theory explains that. And the icing on the cake, it matches Genesis.
The flood mut have been a real event. Given the fact that multiple cultures around the worl register a similar event it cant be just a myth or an elaborated methaphor. How Jhon walton can elaborate of the flood meaning in all the different cultures
He wasn't bothered at all, he devotes about one verse to the entire thing.
Above all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. 4They will say, "Where is this 'coming' he promised? Ever since our ancestors died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation." 5But they deliberately forget that long ago by God's word the heavens came into being and the earth was formed out of water and by water. This verse taken in it's contacts only makes sense if it was talking about people who claim to be believers and not atheist. Now Walton may not deny the second coming but he is at least lying the ground work for others to do so.
to make the thing (boat) a real thing, literal boat not just boat in name
Excellent! Thank you!
Any account that denies or spiritualizes the historicity and authenticity of the flood in Genesis 6 implies the lack of credibility of Jesus, Peter, and other biblical writers, not to mention the Holy Spirit who was the agent through whom God revealed the account to Moses. This is a serious matter, and will have eternal consequences.
Ughh sorry but that's horrible scholarship.
You would have to demonstrate that there would be no other credible 1st cent/2 temple interpretations than surface level history.
General Lee Isn’t believing in a bodily resurrection of Christ also “horrible scholarship” according to many circles?
General Lee Or how about a God who speaks the world into existence. Isn’t this “horrible scholarship”?
Mich Richards Well said God bless you
The Lord Jesus said "For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; 39and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man" Matthew 24:38. So Dr. Walton, the 2nd coming of the Lord Jesus is not literal but some kind of theological lesson?
Nothing he is saying contradicts that
Dr. Walton does not know any more than you do. He's just reading words from a book he believes was written by an invisible man in the sky.
@@JamesRichardWiley Are you an anthiest of agnostic?
For some of us, it is critical that it really happened. And the desire to bring in those far from God brings the need for scoffers to be shown the truth of the reality of God and His created world. In real life.
"far from God"?
So some of us will bring our god (who is everywhere and all powerful) to those whom god cannot reach.
Do you see the contradiction?
Good thing the dimensions happen to be highly sea worthy. To start with.
Scientifically, I have no issue with Genesis and the flood being as the ancient Hebrews and the early Church understood it. A great big historical event.
Of course postmodern science and theology does but they are of little relevance except that they are perverting Truth.
What evidence do you have that a boat of this size would be sea worthy?
the Bible does not set the timetable 'in stone' for the creation of the earth and the date of the flood.
Those who read it too literally find themselves unable to reconcile to simple and honest scientific findings re: dates and events.
Unless of course postmodern scientific (or rather philosophical materialic assumptions) interpretation has perverted true history?
Someone who makes lots of sense. Bravo!
I would appreciate knowing what Dr. Walton's view on authorship theories like the Documentary and Supplementary Hypothesis in regards to the Torah. He seems to be more interested in theological issues with Israel and the neighbors of the ANE. I doubt that he just assumes more traditional origins and authorship. Does archeology give us any indicators when the Torah was written...? Surely it can suggest that the ancient peoples of the ANE could think along the lines of the Torah and challenge these modern criticisms.
Trying to understand how rest/ order can come about through an event that didn’t happen to the whole world. If local flood then a small fraction of humanity involved.
It is not about order it is about relationships.
When it comes to historicity and scientific verification of the Genesis 1-11, I don't rely on John Walton. I turn to other scholars. I do believe that one should not limit one's understanding of the Primeval history on the function of the literature.
No one is saying he's limiting his understanding. John is simply offering his knowledge in his area of expertise.
I would like to know what John Walton believes the dimensions of the ark were
The length was 150 days which is half of 300 cubits. This 150 days = Scorpio thru Pisces and Rev. 9.5.
I could be wrong on this but I do believe that the Word Of God was meant to be understood one way and one way only. Like God, His word doesn't change just because humans, cultures, etc.. change. We as believers are told to come out of the world, not to be conformed to it, or be a part of it, etc... for His kingdom is not of this world. I have for the last 10 or so years been searching for what the word of God meant to the original audience, the ones to whom it was first presented. How did they think, and what was their culture at that time? These things do matter in the correct interpretation of God's word. When you find an interpretation that just flows, is logical, without ambiguity or contradiction, then I would suggest you are on the right path. The search for it is fun, sometimes disappointing, but very rewarding and worth the time spent searching. I do embrace the functional order that God established in Genesis one and not so much the manufacturing of material etc...For example, I was having problems with God creating light on day one (ambiguity). What was the source of that light? And if God saw that it was good then why create the sun which is the source of our light on day four (contradiction)? Did He all of a sudden change His mind about day one and so forth. God establishing time on day one makes so much more sense. The search for truth may be arduous but anything worth finding is. It isn't a treasure unless you have to dig deep.
One way and only one way? I think you mean it should be read in English using modern Western presuppositions that would not have been in the minds of Ancient Near Eastern people.
@@kwameadu0075 No, I mean the way it was originally written and meant to be understood.
Dr. Michael Heiser writes a much better account on the story of Noah than Walton does. I stronger suggest his books rather than Walton's. I have both author's complete sets. Dr. Heiser is a strong believer in the INERRANCY of Scripture, unlike Walton. Heiser is considered a more conservative theologian than Walton in every way possible.
too much, just too much over reading the text as a very complex metaphor. It might be as well but themost obvius is Genesis author was describing a REAL boat.
Amen.......
Luke 17:27 "They were eating and drinking and marrying and being given in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all." Was Jesus just telling a nice story or was he being truthful in this comment? You are obfuscating is my concern. Who was Jesus? What was His primary mission on Earth? Answering those questions will help me understand where you stand contextually.
That statement can be "true" without being "historically and scientifically precise."
First, His "primary mission on Earth" was not to impart or even comment upon historical or scientific trivia. His mission was multifaceted: to reveal God's true nature (John 14:7), to show us how to live rightly in relation to God and each other (Matt. 22:36-40), and ultimately to save us through his death and resurrection (the whole New Testament). While admittedly a generalization, one of the primary ways he accomplished the first and second parts was through parables and relatable stories, especially stories that grew out of His audience's knowledge.
For example, in Mark 4:30-32, Jesus describes a mustard seed and calls it "the smallest of all the seeds on earth" (ESV) or "smallest of all which are upon the earth" (Greek Interlinear). We know, and have known for a very long time, that mustard seeds are not the smallest seeds. We also know and understand that Jesus wasn't making a statement of botanical truth when He said it. In its context, He was using a common analogy that His audience would have recognized, and they would have understood the truth He was imparting to them without having to believe He was making a scientifically precise statement.
It's the same with the Noah story. Jesus' audience would have been very familiar with that story. He would have drawn upon that familiarity to reveal a deep truth as part of points 1 and 2 of His mission.
Now, this absolutely does not mean that the Genesis account of the Flood is not historically accurate. However, appealing to Jesus' acknowledgment of the story does NOT lend credibility to the story and should not be used as an argument for the Flood account's historical or scientific precision.
Jesus' primary mission on Earth was to die as the perfect sacrifice so that men might become reconciled to God and dwell with Him forever. When Jesus mentioned Noah in Matthew and Luke he gave a real example of a circumstance similar to an end time event that he prophesied would/will occur. Forgive me if I am wrong but I suspect that you will not believe that. God Bless.
Thing is, the ancient records from other civs come after they have rebuilt and repopulated, after they have been driven from Babel. If you get this order wrong, you're in trouble sir.
Note how he says the author of Genesis. Why not say "Moses, the author of Genesis".
Here's a concise SUMMARY of his informative book on the subject with its key takeaways: ruclips.net/video/qSeHgRp7UeY/видео.html
Dr. Walton does not seem to understand the consequences of his theological/non-historical reading of the Noahaic narrative. Jesus understood Noah's flood as historical and compared it with "the days of the Son of Man," which means his second coming. 2 Peter also alludes to the destructive deluge that destroyed the people in the world (3:6) and compares it with the judgment day. If the NT authors understood the Genesis account as both theological and historical, why should we not read it as both theological and historical? His arugment is thoroughly unbibilcal.
Joseph Jo
Walton seems to believe it was historical, theological, and *local* rather than historical, theological, and *global.* It is likely such phrases as "all the earth" were hyperbolic and told from a particular perspective, namely a flat earth and local one. If one asserts that the Bible sought to give scientific insight, one must answer whethe God revealed the science of our day or the science of tomorrow.
Paul refers to Abraham and Sarah, calling it allegory. A reference to a story does not make that story literal. I can make references to myths of Zeus and even use them as metaphors to convey a point.
He's had an interview with InspiringPhilosophy, for your curiosity, about the flood.
How is Anything he said contradicts anything what Jesus said?
@@jeshaunharrell8288 The head of the flat Earth society is an evolutionist. The myth of the flat Earth was no find out for yourself it isn't hard to do but I suspect you would have no interest in doing so.
On the other hand Yahweh could restore the perfect world he originally created in the blink of an eye.
But he won't because he has his reasons which are outside our comprehension.
This is the type of activity that leads to cognitive dissonance if you get too serious with it, looking for answers.
América is Father house john14 2 and Chile is third heaven and Paradise ⭐
Professor John Walton in this video presents his understanding of Noah's Flood and its meaning to an ancient audience. What he does not tell his viewers is that before Noah's Flood made its way to an Israelite audience, another, much earlier audience, in Mesopotamia had a very different understanding of flood events and morals and the relationship between gods and man. The Mesopotamian account is found in the Epic of Atrahasis. We are told the flood is sent to destroy man because his noise disturbs the gods, they cannot rest by day nor sleep by night due to man's unceasing clamor. Silence, and then rest, will be achieved for the gods with man's demise in a global flood. Why man's clamor? We are informed that before man was created there were two groups of gods living in Edin, the Senior gods (Annunaki) and the junior gods (Igigi). The Igigi were tasked with caring for the city-gardens in Edin which provided food for the gods to eat. The gods could die of starvation as they had bodies of flesh in the earliest myths and could be killed and wind up after death in the underworld, which was also called Edin. The Igigi clamor about the back-breaking work, night and day, without any rest, in the Edin's city-gardens and are ignored for 40 years by the Annunaki. Eventually, they rebel and threaten to kill Enlil of Nippur. He summons Enki of Eridu for help. Enki says the Annunaki are at fault, they have ignored the just clamor of the Igigi. He creates a new gardening slave of clay calling it mankind. The Igigi are given rest from toil now as already possessed by the Annunaki. At man's creation a goddess proclaims she has transferred the clamor of the Igigi onto Man! Man's clamor or noise is that of the Igigi, objecting to the back-breaking work in the gods' city-gardens in Edin. The flood hero (Atrahasis) living at Shuruppak, a city on the Euphrates, is told to build a boat and put on it the seed of man and animal-kind to re-establish life after the flood. The god who initiated the flood, Enlil of Nippur is castigated by two gods, Enki/Ea and Inanna/Ishtar for sending the flood and attempting to kill all of mankind. He should not be allowed to partake of the meal offering to the gods after the Flood made by Atrahasis! Enlil concedes he was too hasty and has over-reacted. He rewards the flood hero with immortality for sparing a remnant of mankind to once again work the gods' gardens in Edin, providing the gods food, and also alieviating the gods of earthly toil for their food. The gods had learned their lesson, they had gone hungry for 6 days and nights during the flood, never again would they attempt to destroy all of mankind, they needed man to work their gardens in edin and provide them food and rest from toil. The ancient audience's understanding? The gods were portrayed as selfish, and stupid, they didn't care about man's back-breaking work in Edin's gardens, they failed to realize with man's demise the gods would have to re-assume the back-breaking toil in edin's gardens to feed their hungry bellies! This is quite a different moral about the relationship between Man and his Creators (the gods and goddesses of Mesopotamian) as compared to the BIble!
Walter R. Mattfeld - it’s a short clip of information however, I find it interesting that Mesopotamian gods have nothing to do with anything today, not even Hollywood has figured a way to capitalize on this.
Today, as in the time Christ walked the earth as Jesus of Nazareth the Father calls (example John 6:37,44,65...) and all those the Father gives the Son are His. And Christ being the light of the world, and having Christ dwell in me, therefore I’m also a light in this world of darkness do indeed enjoy being His ambassador 2 Corinthians 5:20.
So much has changed since those Mesopotamian days would you agree? It hardly seems worth the mention.
He spend a lot of time on the Ancient near eastern flood narratives in his Genesis commentary, just not in this 7 min video. (NIVAC)
There are thousands of world side flood stories all over the world proof that it happened. Edan was a paradise.
Too long. I believe you should write a book on this topic.
John Walton says, "We need to understand the story literally, before we can understand it theologically", after he's spent six minutes telling us we don't need to bother about any of the biological, geological, hydrological etc. aspects of the story - the size of the Ark; the number of animals, or the extent of the Flood. The important thing is the theology!! How contradictory is that?
Of course we need to start by accepting the story literally. If the only important thing is the theology, why are we told the exact dimensions of the Ark - length ten times the height and six times the width - perfect for stability in stormy waters. The whole account reads like a ship's log. The exact dates on which things happened, with the time intervals, for a whole year are more detailed than for any other story in the Bible, even the account of Paul's shipwreck. Not only was there very heavy rain for 40 days and 40 nights, but 'the springs of the great deep burst forth'. In other words, there were violent tectonic upheavals, causing huge tsunamis to sweep around the globe, leading to the rapid burial of billions of plants and animals under layer upon layer of sediment. Thus, they were fossilised within a relatively short space of time - certainly not millions of years! The geological evidence for a world-wide watery cataclysm is over-whelming! In any case, if the Flood did NOT cover the entire earth, the theological comparison with Genesis 1:2, 9 becomes meaningless.
As for the number of animals, again, that's important because it's one of the challenges to the truth of the account voiced by sceptics, who ask, "How did Noah get all those animals onto the Ark? (Ha, Ha!)" Because they think it's impossible, they dismiss the account as a fairy story. However, if it can be shown, as it can, that the Ark was large enough for the number of animals Noah need to take on board, the objection collapses.
If you say the account of Noah's Flood is in the Bible only to teach us some theological truth, and the scientific and technical issues are not important, you start on a slippery, downhill slope. People will then say, as many do, that the same applies to the creation account. For wonderful evidence for the literal truth of the Flood, with explanations about the number of animals etc., see creation(dot)com or answersingenesis(dot)com
He said “literarily” as in, understanding the type and function of the literature. Not literally
Ok so you got the symbolic meaning... But do you think there was a global water flood or not? That's the core question, isn't it? And one which you worked to avoid. It's not evident that the Bible is presenting the story only as a moral fable, as we might allow for Job.
What does it matter?
Even in China there were recorded History of Great Flood but no mention of building of ark. The flood spanned 2 generations and not forty days. The people had to move to high ground.
I always believed the old testament was a collection of Historical Events with some mythological elements thrown in. Just like in Chinese mythology, it was Nu Wah who created humans from mud.
No no no. It can be a actual even. What he saying his how the story is written is to telegraph a theological message not just/only historically.
@@mojo9291 Jesus uses the days of Noah as an example of how his coming will be and he talks of the days of Noah in a manner that makes you believe he believed them to be literal.
I like John Walton a lot but he and Dr Heiser and Tim Mackie all seem to be making a similar mistake when they talk about chaos and order.
Here Walton seems to suggest that disorder and the non-order of Genesis 1 are two distinct things. I dont think the Bible writers thought that way at all considering the fact that Genesis one clearly describes God creating the sea monsters, or tannenim. The same word the prophets use to connect kings of the other nations with chaos imagery. The polemic is used because those kings were obsessed with a shallow kind of order that they saw themselves as the gods of. The prophet's message was, "You think you're upholding order but you're actually not."
I dont know how any if these guys can be this sophisticated about order chaos imagery in the Bible and have absolutely nothing to say about the sociopolitical structures that "order" our daily lives. I see a very strong connection between the Egyptian concept of Ma'at and the existence of "insurance" hedging nearly every ordinary risk we could possibly take on a daily basis.
Whenever I listen to John Walton, his goal seems to be that he wants us to distrust the literal words of the Bible and just believe in major concepts like order, function, etc, instead of what Genesis 1 is really about, the material creation of the universe. And in the case of Noah in Genesis 6-9: the wickedness of man and the judgement of God, which he doesn't even mention.
Except that's not the case: he's reading it in its original context with an understanding of the kind of literature it is and the (alien to us) worldview involved, and that IS "what Genesis 1 is really about" (and Walton just scratches the surface; the Genesis writer was brilliant and managed to make the Creation account fit two different literary types while making it a powerful polemic smashing the gods of the nations by declaring they were all just things YHWH-Elohim had made as His tools, not gods at all).
@@Traildude I wish you were right. It is important to read the Biblical text in context and yes with the culture in mind. But Walton is radically changing the meaning and purpose of the text, rather than just understanding it in the light of the culture. Its true it is used as a polemic against other gods, but Genesis chapter 1 is clearly a material creation, not just telling the order or function. He says the people of the day didn't care about material creation. I don't believe that for a second, besides the text is clearing saying that God was making and creating those things as he at the same time was telling of the order and function of those things. You have too much confidence in Walton. Someone who changes so drastically the meaning of the text cannot be trusted. Nothing that he said in any of the presentations I saw him give prove in anyway that the people of that day thought like that. He just states it is so without evidence. Some people like it because it allows them to believe in evolution, but that is not true either. Evolution never happened. It is man's idea. The Bible says nothing about evolution.
@RichyK Is it clearly about that though? Do you read the Old Testament in Hebrew or in an English text? Do you know how much nuance is lost when translating from one text to another?
@@kwameadu0075 Yes, Gen 1 is clearly about the creation of the material universe, which is something that John Walton denies. So, he is clearly wrong on that.
I read in English, but there are enough Hebrew scholars and others that refute Walton.
What does the original Hebrew text reveal about Genesis 1-11? - Dr. Steve Boyd ruclips.net/video/3txmpHQJ520/видео.html
The Lost World of Walton creation.com/lost-world-walton
Thousands of men come up with thousands of interpretation of the bible. No matter how inspiring the sermons, the songs, books, posters and videos are, but the reality is that ALL RELIGIONS ARE MASTERS OF.
John believed all the contradictions and taught them to his students. Faith can overcome all opposing facts.
Just by reading Book of YASHER alone, one can see deeper into B'RESHEET.
???
Jasher has been lost.
Modern_day, European, Education, is no matter for the God Of Israel.
The problem I have is at the end of the video Dr. Walton states the author conveys his message from God, and he is ordained to have his message to everyone. Scholars are not sure who the writers of the Bible are in many of the writings. In John's gospel alone there are at least 3 writers and possibly 5. There can be no guarantee that all these writers or even one have been God inspired. All the writings are an oral translation depending on the period of time they were written.
Larry Parker you should check out New Testament scholar Richard Bauckham recent scholarly work on the gospel of John. He goes over a lot of various views regarding John and gives good arguments for his position.
Larry Parker also I recommend checking out this video playlist, especially the video regarding oral tradition:
m.ruclips.net/p/PL1mr9ZTZb3TW70EEo4e2onJ4lq1QYSzrY
Larry Parker, 3 to 5 writers of John? Ha! No, that is unproven atheist nonsense. John was a known historical person, in a known place and time, and is well attested by the early church fathers who were contemporaries.
This preaching by human primates has been going on for thousands of years by people who do not know.
Each generation brings forth a fresh batch to start preaching and arguing the minute details of their favorite fiction.
Yawn.
7 min video that contains 6mins of justification for his way of interpreting genesis... You're telling me ancient people's can't tell the difference between a local and global flood?
Ancient people didn't have a concept of a globe. Well some could have but that view is not at all apparent in the cosmology presented in Genesis 1 if you're familiar with the cosmologies of the ancient Near East.
Oh, so what you’re saying is this corner stone story should be viewed as fictitious allegory rather than as something that makes sense historically and scientifically? Should other stories like the garden of Eden be seen as allegory also, because it’s not like there’s any evidence that that actually happened, infact there’s an abundance of evidence against it. So if the book is not meant to be a history or scientific book then is the God character simply a tool to try to instill moral values, well that can’t be, at least not with the many justifications for rape, murder, incest, and slavery within the book.... I think I get it, I think I know how the Bible can be used efficiently, as a doorstop, or as kindling on those cold nights.
rev moon and the unification church is whom you are looking for. The divine Principal
Hahaha... Sure
Dr. Walton is wrong in his attempts to reduce the Biblical stories to mere metaphors of order and disorder. He said himself on another video, "I am not a scientist." Well he's got that right, and it's obvious by how swiftly he runs away from any scientific analysis of the Biblical stories. From proposing that Adam and Eve were secondary (or a "sequel" as he calls them,) to his encouragement for everyone to simply view Noah's flood as a cycle of order and disorder, he shows his limitation to view God's word strictly from a realm of ambiguous interpretations. Fact is, the physical evidence supporting Noah's flood as being literal world-wide "restoration of order" is everywhere from the continent-wide sedimentary deposits, to the flood-refuse-like piles of fossils including dinosaur fossils found around the world. Furthermore, as if to anticipate his next lecture, the discovery of non-fossilized, in-tact tissue in dinosaur fossils in over 70 samples taken from around the world puts severe limitations on interpreting the day-age theory into the creation story in the beginning of Genesis. As such, I find little benefit from listing to someone try to dismiss the literal reading of the text as "written for an ancient age," which has as it's base assumption that people that long ago were supremely ignorant uneducated, another implication from Dr. Walton that simply does not match the available context and evidence. His mind has been unintentionally infected with the neodarwinian paradigm that was taught as fact for his entire life up until recently. As such, he has bought into the notion, if only partially, that we are someone getting bigger, better, stronger, and smarter with each generation. Fact is, each generation has all the genetic anomalies of the previous plus and average of about 100 new ones. If we, as a human race, were really as old as some would assert, our genetic degradation would have relegated us to infertility and subsequent extinction long ago. Adam came directly from the programming hand of God. He was the best and brightest. Human kind has only gradually slid backward since Adam, and will continue until everything is made new (including us.)
🤣🤣 yeah, nice try. There is 0 scientific evidence for a literal Ken Ham sized flood. None.
This is nuts. When he says science he means actual science, not whatever you are spewing.
He’s not reducing the story to metaphors. He’s saying we have to understand the message communicated in its literary form. I do believe Walton believes it was a real historical event. He’s just emphasizing what the story emphasizes.
Eeerrrhhhhhh........Why would the ark land on Mount Ararat if it is regional flood, my friend? It would have flowed to lower grounds if it is a local flood. Migratory birds have been known to fly miles and miles across a huge continent. No need to pack them on the ark. Relocation for Noah will be a solution, where God can re-create the entire race. Hm.....so strange that such reasonings can come out of Wheaton college. Long creation ages and "no global flood"was brought in by James Hutton the anti-bible deist who rejected Genesis teaching. Charles Darwin had this book "Principles of Geology" before he hypothesized about macro-evolution. All these went into American education system. John, you need to learn how to obey God's Genesis. No wonder teachers need to account for their teachings on judgement day. Don't be surprised if you are in Heaven literary!!!
The flood was around 1810 1840.
I thought Gen 6 events were the reasons for the flood. Gene pool problem
You cannot hope to understand the Genesis flood myth in isolation from the many earlier flood stories upon which it's based. You end up with sophistry masquerading as scholarly analysis.
Earlier? According to what sources?
Gilgamesh. Local flood. Plagiarism.
Gilgamesh is an ancient flood story told "around the same time" of Noah. Mt. Ararat and Mt. Nisir are the respective ark locations. Both ending up within the same region. A glance at a map shows many water ways including Lake Van, the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. So the idiot recording history would believe the WHOLE WORLD flooded when really it was the already soggy Fertile Crescent region of Asia Minor, the cradle of civilization. The Bible is an account of what happened, not a history book. However, God used unrepeatable events and people to reveal himself to us. There is original documented evidence of that found today. That is the truth and why again the Bible is an account of the truth. It is our job to unearth it.
The "whole world" according to those that wrote it. What was the whole world to them?
Christopher Zimny Why would an ark be necessary if it were a local flood? Why wouldn’t those outside of Noah’s family members simply travel to areas not affected by the local flood as a means of escape?
Good point. From the viewpoint of a single writer the entire known world flooded.
The story was padded in later versions to please those who wished to include their favorite god as the perpetrator and the reasons why it happened.
James Richard Wiley Again, an ark would have been completely unnecessary had it been a local flood. Moreover, it is highly unlikely that we would see flood accounts from virtually every culture on earth if it had been local. Even the Chinese have a flood account.
an account of what happened is "history." the Bible is a literary work, that contains nuggets of historical facts, that's it. the Bible was written between 1200bc and 165bc, that's not God inspiring, that's a story continuing throughout ages. Much like Noah, the stories surrounding the Garden of Eden, Christ, Adam and Eve you can find in Egypt, and Mesopotamia
Which country have the most all of kind animals ,Africa.and where is the story began of noah ,flood and were is the boat stranded in turkey, look were africa is and turkey,is a made up story is a lie.
The reason for the flood was what took place in Genesis 6:1-2 KJV. The sons of God (angels Job 1:6, Job 2:1, Job 38:7, Daniel 2:43, Jude 1:6-7 KJV) took wives of humans and created a hybrid race known as the NIPHILIM.
This in turn corrupted mass amounts of human DNA and the hybrids were violent to the extreme.
Jesus in Matt 24:37 warns it will take place again
That is very plausible
Be nice if we could discover a single scrap of evidence to back up this ancient paragraph written by an unknown person.
"When people began to multiply on the face of the ground, and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that they were fair; and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose. Then the Lord said, "My spirit shall not abide in mortals forever, for they are flesh; their days shall be one hundred twenty years." The Nephilim were on the earth in those days-and also afterward-when the sons of God went in to the daughters of humans, who bore children to them. These were the heroes that were of old, warriors of renown." Wikipedia.
- Genesis 6:1-4, New Revised Standard Version.
Is a lie.
Great gnostic teachings, but I'm a Christian.
Bye Bye.
@@Jonathan-si2nd Order from chaos is the epitome of Gnostic teachings.
He’s opening the door for evolution. It’s all metaphor. No, sorry, it’s real history. It happened. Get ready, Jesus is coming.
In his book on Genesis 1, he says that we should never teach that evolution is wrong--not in Sunday School, Christian Schools or colleges or universities. Never.
Craig Ewoldt You either teach evolution or you don’t get paid as a professor. Your books don’t get published. Educated but “willfully ignorant”.
Why should one be impressed by the flood story in the bible? It is at best a retelling or reinterpreting in their cultural context the older flood stories. Mr. Walton when someone drown babies and all human kind but a drunkard and company then this is a horrible claim. This shows that an all knowing and all powerful god was either to stupid to foresee the problem or not able to foresee it at all which would end the claim of all knowing right away.
The alternative solution would be to elimitate all, but God in his mercy did not wipe out mankind entirely. So original sin continued only to find a remedy through the Cross.
TorianTammas, Genesis 6 begins with the corruption of mankind by the “sons of God” (fallen angels) interbreeding with them. God wiped out this corruption with the flood, it’s a very clear narrative.
And as to how the free will of God’s creations limit His complete knowledge of some future events, look into Open Theism.
It's hard to believe Mr. Walton never noticed the part where Yahweh drowns all the unborn human babies and all the animals and plants outside the Ark when he did not need to.
Is Mr. Walton under a spell which prevents him from noticing this?
Order and stability means rest??? What otter nonsense.
Babbling nonsense!!!
biny5 it was actually pretty straight forward
Nice debate. Very courageous of you.