John Walton - "Lost World of the Flood"
Вставка
- Опубліковано 7 лют 2019
- In modern times the Genesis flood account has been probed and analyzed for answers to scientific, apologetic, and historical questions. It is a text that has called forth "flood geology", fueled searches for remnants of the ark on Mount Ararat, and inspired a full-size replica of Noah's ark in a theme park. Some claim that the very veracity of Scripture hinges on a particular reading of the flood narrative. But do we understand what we are reading? Dr. Walton urges us to ask what the biblical author might have been saying to his ancient audience. Our quest to rediscover the biblical flood requires that we set aside our own cultural and interpretive assumptions and visit the distant world of the ancient Near East.
--------------------------
This talk was delivered as part of the "Defenders Conference 2018: Did Got Really Command Genocide?" To see all the talks, visit: vimeo.com/ondemand/genocidein...
How come this only has a few thousand views? If another few million people watched this the world could change for the better.
Oh yay! I watch your videos. So nice to know you are familiar with Dr. Waltons work.
Yo the COVID whistle blower
World class lecture
Interesting! Michael Heiser was teaching the same thing... Mike died about a month ago and it seems God brings another "Mike" for us...
Thank you for the video! Keep posting! God Bless you brother!
Walton has been on the scene a long time.
I love Heiser too, but not sure where he covered the flood in detail.
What? I hadn't heard Dr. Heiser died. He is at rest with the Lord. Thank you God for the work you did through your servant.
@@blusheep2 Can you call him, can you ask him a question? You can't, it means he is dead. You Probably heard, that humans will die as a result of the original sin... read your bible, not just 4 gospels but all of it.
@@vladepast4936 Whats your problem? All I said is that I hadn't heard he died and then said a couple nice things about him and added a short prayer. Why the hostility and sarcasm? What got up your butt today?
Great lecture
This is pertaining to the 5th & Final book of his "Lost World" Series correct?
Send this to Ken Ham and Kent Hovind
The epistemology portrayed here is crucial. Well done John!
By the end of lecture, the take away seemed to be, it doesn't matter whether the flood was global or not. The point of the story is to show God's desire for a creation in which His holiness could reside. A corrupt and violent world is inhospitable to His purposes therefore He had to start over with Noah's righteous family. The issue of global or regional does not affect the reality of God's plan of salvation.
John Walton did his PhD thesis on this
I appreciate the historical context that he tries to address here. But I think it raises some questions about Providence and modern people. If one doesn't become versed in the culture of the ancient near East then understanding Genesis just isn't for you? We are foreign to the world of the Bible, yet it some sense it is for everyone universally? This is difficult to reconcile.
I think there's merit to his insight, but it's overwrought.
And sometimes he question begs a little too much on this particular subject.
There are no genuinely good reasons to think the flood could not have been global.
Saying THEIR world was flooded doesn't logically mean the whole world they didn't know about wasn't also flooded, especially in light of how topography works, the tempted incredible shifts in climate in scripture and wgat we know about the past being tropical even at the poles, mass extinctions and the rapid onset of both mass burials of tons of lifeforms as well as the rapid onset of the ice age.
It became en vogue over time to believe global geology had nothing to find either side global flood but this was never proven.
Even a fairly ignorant teenager can understand quite a bit about the ancient Near East just by reading the Bible. Also, if all you get out of the Flood is "There was a big flood; God wiped out wicked people and saved a chosen remnant," then you're getting the right message whatever your level of sophistication.
Second of all, YES, we are foreign to the world of the Bible, yet it is for all. This is actually true of any great work of literature--if you look to it for nothing more than a mirror, you are missing out on it, and yet it connects people of many ages and places in its universality and particularity. It is especially true of the Bible, which is the Word of God delivered to particular men in particular settings.
Finally, this video isn't addressed to children just learning about the flood. It's intended for those who have wrestled with the question of interpretation, and assumes a certain level of knowledge. Walton isn't looking at an audience of 5-year-olds coloring pictures of Noah and saying, "Are you aware of the differences between the ancient Hebrew cultural river and our own?"
@@heidivermette931 well said.
Well, we are happy to have the language translated form ancient languages so we can understand it. Only some people need to be linguistics experts so we can all read the text. Likewise, people like John Walton can interpret the context for us to understand more clearly.
@@ravissary79 the issue with a global flood though is that geologists in the early days of geology expected to find evidence for a global flood and looked for it but it just didn't work, if I had to believe in a global flood I think it would make it harder for me to believe the bible because I know how opposed to the scientific evidence a global flood is...of course God could have made.all the rock layers etc look misleading vs the processes that formed them but that doesn't seem in keeping with his character (and it takes the OT miracles to the level of looking more like magic rather than looking anything like the New Testament miracles, or our current experience of God's miracles), I don't believe God put fossils in rocks to give sceptics a reason to doubt and test the faith of the faithful. In any cases the core of Christianity is Jesus Christ not trying to prove geologists wrong.
His crunchy shoes noise is annoying lecture is great tho
Regarding the long lives of the patriarchs. Have desperately been looking for a scholarly answer: Jacob answered Pharaoh, “The length of my stay on earth has been 130 years. The years of my life have been few and difficult, fewer than my ancestors’ years.” Gen. 47:9 If the ages are not 'literal' then how is this allusion possible?
Jim I didn't hear him make a comment about the length of the patriarch's lives(?). Perhaps I missed it.
Age was different then if u know they added months as time went on. Who knows how that was determined
Find "Making Sense of the Numbers of Genesis" by Carol A Hill, from Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith. Convinced me.
The ages may have been honorifics. There are other contemporary stories where the originators have great ages.
The ages are symbols to show the kind of life they lived. The culture back then used numbers as symbols.
I've never accepted the idea that the languages came about as a result of God confusing people who built a tall tower.
All people’s in the world don’t love true.
what flood is this one talking about......the flood of Noah...
This reminds me of the serpent when he asked “ Did God really say…?” . I am sorry, but don’t want to give myself the time to question what God said. Satan has a field day when we do.
There's what God said, and then there's what you thought He said. They, in my case, are frequently different.
In Gen. 11:4 it says, "And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth."
It wasn't until they had begun to build it that God came down to their level in Gen 11:5 where it says, " And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded."
At marker 39:00 Mr. Walton said, the reason to build the tower was "trying to get God's presence to come down" to them instead of for them to go up. That is *NOT* what scripture says. It clearly says that they wanted to "make a name for themselves" and be more united than ever, lest something were to happen and they be scattered across the face of the earth and be nothing.
I would take what Walton said with a grain of salt considering the source, and just let the Holy Spirit guide the reader to understand what is being said in scripture. It's becoming more and more apparent how those with extensive education become foolishly stupid or dumb. Man's wisdom is likened to God's "foolishness".
Because of their rebellious natures and budding evil, God decided to confound their language that they no longer be united by such. As a result, God scattered them abroad since they refused to obey His command. You see, God wanted the people to inhabit the whole earth, not just one region of turf. Despite this group of several thousand people, there were already pockets of humanity going in different direction as Noah's children descended from the mountain region where the ark rested to make a life for themselves elsewhere, thus migrating in various directions as God directed.
After the Tower of Babel, the earth's crust was still in a state of flux from being ripped apart. As this continental drift/shift continued, people dispersed from the valley of Shinar and grouped together according to their varied languages thus they occupied various land masses before the expanding gulf widened to the point where they would have been landlocked and unable to migrate to the various land masses where these cultures are presently located.
Kevin C you’ve only heard him briefly touch on it in just a few sentences, so you should watch his other, longer lectures on Chapter 11 for a more thorough explanation and lead up to why he might say that and the evidences he tries to give for that.
You can’t listen to three sentences of a particular view and critique it. That’s no way to understand someone.
The people of the Tower of Babel wanted to make a name for themselves and that’s exactly why they wanted God to come down. In their culture, the people would use the gods to get food or win wars. They thought that if they sacrificed to the god, the god would give them what they wanted. This is what is happening. That was the purpose of the Tower of Babel. God confused their tongue because God is not a tool to be used for our well-being.
I would take what Kevin G says with a grain of salt. Man's wisdom is likened to God's "foolishness."
Absolutely right about Babel and the Tower. It was about man uniting to become like God where God said, if they be united like this nothing will be impossible for them. This is what is happening today - the resurrected Babel. Cheers
@@robertcain3426 Plus God instructed mankind to fill the earth, not bunch together as many did at Shinar; so not only did they go against His command to spread out, they decided to make a name for themselves by making the tower of Babel.
Dr. Michael Heiser writes a much better account on the story of the Flood and Noah than Walton does. I 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. Walton seems to like to mix conjecture, personal philosophy and metaphysics in his interpretations way over the top!
What if Lamentations et al were speaking about spiritual destruction, not physical? All WERE destroyed spiritually, which is why they were rejected by God. No longer is the Christ limited to one physical line, but is open to all and can be born within all who seek him with an honest heart. This interpretation would be a full admission to the validity of those prophecies /types. Full rejection and loss of privilege.
It’s not a permanent destruction in Greek IT’s apollumi and in parables it is translated as lost
25:00 yes, it can be rhetorical.
But we can immediately tell that with Joseph and the famine, it's obvious in context.
This isn't true about the Genesis flood. It's spoken about in a way that's described in exhaustive ways, and every version of the story in almost every culture agrees on this point.
When the NT references the flood, and in light of descriptions of ecological permanent changes, like rain, Rainbows, its use as an example if total destruction, an allusion by comparison and contrast to the eschatological apocalypse.
These narrative uses of the story by other biblical writers reinforce the idea that it's global.
ravissary79
, you wrote, "This isn't true about the Genesis flood. It's spoken about in a way that's described in exhaustive ways, and every version of the story in almost every culture agrees on this point."
It does seem odd that God would use such detail to promote a myth. For example:
_"In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened." -- Gen __7:11__ KJV_
What happened to "once upon a time"?
The legend of Gilgamesh, along with the 300 to 500 other flood legends around the world, have a common theme: there was a massive flood at one time in history. The Gilgamesh narrative was preserved because it was carved in clay, which was then baked to harden it. It provides no historical evidence about the timing of the flood
One thing we do find in the Gilgamesh legend is the "ark" was a cube, the stupidest design imaginable. God's design is in the dimensions of a modern supertanker: the ratio of the Ark was 10 to 1.67 to 1; the standard supertanker is 10.6 to 1.87 to 1.
Dan
@@BibleResearchTools yes, the various global alternative versions of the flood include lots of seemingly erroneous or even contrary information, clearly wrong... but it's clearly wring for a reason, it's not merely counterintuitive to put animals in a floating cube, but it's a detail that's not corroborated by the other stories.
What's interesting is what tends to be corroborated... a flood happened, it was so massive and seemingly global that efforts were made to preserve animal life so all life on earth wouldn't be wiped out.
The biblical story also includes a massive time frame for the water to subside, changes in geography before and after the flood (the relationship between eden and the 4 rivers makes no sense using ancient near eastern geography or modern geography), changes in climate (no rainbow before, comments about no rain but instead a mist, rainbows now common), around that time lifespans started to get lower and lower in the bible narrative.
This could either be symbolic and numerological, or the locate change, diet change and the narrowing of the genetic pool might have caused the human lifespan to plausibly go down... an alternative explanation is that there was a triggering event that caused the flood, abd this event shifted our orbit or some such so that the rotation of the earth was effected and the seasonal tilt and rotational speed changed, making years last longer... so it could be the human race seemed to go from crazy old to dying younger when the lifespan only went down by 30 years, but the earth climate cycle was sped up. I'm not saying anything of these are proven or that I even believe them, but unless ignored, they all make sense I might light of the flood acting as a demarcation of grand proportions between before and after, so great, the it's like we're from a totally different planet.
No local flood explains any of this on a rational level: the time scale, the inescapable warning, the NT comparison between the flood and the future eschatological apocalypse in Peter's epistles.
It's either a global apocalypse or the narrative makes no sense.
ravissary79, you wrote, "No local flood explains any of this on a rational level: the time scale, the inescapable warning, the NT comparison between the flood and the future eschatological apocalypse in Peter's epistles."
I became convinced of a global flood after a friend asked me to take a look at the rock strata. When I was told that each layer supposedly took millions of years to form, I knew that was impossible. The layers are more or less flat, uneroded, unbioturbated, and essentially uncontaminated, except perhaps with fossils. You do not get that kind of sorting except by a massive flood.
Dan
@@BibleResearchTools excellent points. The nigh universality of the strata superposition except with key exceptions demonstrates this.
Each layer would need to have been formed ar once if not more than one... perhaps all of them.
A French geologist did flume experiments in the 90s found that silt naturally separates out by type at speed into multiple layers simultaneously as it forms sideways... not separately, not layer by layer, but 3 or 4 at once sideways... like you see in river deltas.
If you've ever been to the Grand Canyon, and learned about how it supposedly formed... it doesn't add up. It's too big, the bottom parts are too shear, too old in the classical model, the top parts are too wide, too spindly and branching for the needed run off from those hills... not enough water flows in that climate. The Colorado River doesn't move that way, can't explain such a wide erosion pattern... but in a creationist global flood model? The volume of water is so much vaster. Thick layers covering whole continents makes sense in that case. It explains the huge coal beds.
The narrative, the moral of the story, the geology, the details, the broad nature of the global scale of the myth (cross culturally), how it it's used to recapitulate a second type of creating story, how it's used to presage the apocalypse.
No local version of this makes sense of any of this.
---
But note, I'm not overly criticizing Walton here.
I'm really not.
After all, he's not making the case for about old earth interpretation, he's making a case that what matters most is the larger lesson.
ravissary79, you wrote, "@Bible Research Tools excellent points. The nigh universality of the strata superposition except with key exceptions demonstrates this. Each layer would need to have been formed ar once if not more than one... perhaps all of them."
Those are my thoughts, exactly.
================
ravissary79, you wrote, "A French geologist did flume experiments in the 90s found that silt naturally separates out by type at speed into multiple layers simultaneously as it forms sideways... not separately, not layer by layer, but 3 or 4 at once sideways... like you see in river deltas."
I believe you are referring to this:
ua-cam.com/video/wFST2C32hMQ/v-deo.htmlm26s
================
ravissary79, you wrote, "If you've ever been to the Grand Canyon, and learned about how it supposedly formed... it doesn't add up. It's too big, the bottom parts are too shear, too old in the classical model, the top parts are too wide, too spindly and branching for the needed run off from those hills... not enough water flows in that climate. The Colorado River doesn't move that way, can't explain such a wide erosion pattern... but in a creationist global flood model?"
At one time I was convinced the Canyon, along with the nearby Monument Valley and other canyons, were formed by sheet erosion from flood runoff, with the world-wide runoff deposits forming the continental shelves. But later I was made aware that there was not enough sediment in the Gulf of California to account for the Canyons.
I now believe this theory may be the best one for the flood, the high mountain ranges, the plateaus, the Canyon, and most everything else:
ua-cam.com/video/sD9ZGt9UA-U/v-deo.html
Walt Brown received a PhD in Mechanical Engineering from MIT. Some of his theory sounds pretty far-fetched until you hear Brian Nickel explain it in detail from an engineering perspective. He explains Genesis 1 in a way I had never imagined. It is brilliant!
Brian's theory overview is the 4th video in the series.
================
ravissary79, you wrote, "The volume of water is so much vaster. Thick layers covering whole continents makes sense in that case. It explains the huge coal beds. The narrative, the moral of the story, the geology, the details, the broad nature of the global scale of the myth (cross culturally), how it it's used to recapitulate a second type of creating story, how it's used to presage the apocalypse. No local version of this makes sense of any of this."
The flat coal beds themselves are enough to reject uniformitarianism.
i.pinimg.com/736x/fc/3e/d5/fc3ed50a404c88462707b9d89f24f036--rock-formations-geology.jpg
www.aphotomarine.com/images/geology/rock_strata_portmissen_05-06-10_1.jpg
In the latter video, the sand/soil coal seam benches separating the thin coal layers are only a few inches thick.
================
ravissary79, you wrote, "But note, I'm not overly criticizing Walton here. I'm really not. After all, he's not making the case for about old earth interpretation, he's making a case that what matters most is the larger lesson."
I am critical. His ideology sounds like Gnosticism, to me, with the ultimate goal of marginalizing and then destroying the works of Moses, much like Charles Lyell tried to do (fairly successfully, I should add). This is Lyell:
_"I am sure you may get into Q. R. what will free the science from Moses, for if treated seriously, the party are quite prepared for it. A bishop, Buckland ascertained (we suppose Sumner), gave Ure a dressing in the 'British Critic and Theological Review.' They see at last the mischief and scandal brought on them by Mosaic systems. Eerussac has done nothing but believe in the universal ocean up to the chalk period till lately. Prevost has done a little, but is a diluvialist, a rare thing in France." [Letter to Poulett Scrope, Esq., 9 Crown Office Row, Temple, June 14, 1830, in Charles Lyell, "Life, letters and journals of Sir Charles Lyell Vol I." John Murray, 1881, Chap. XI, p.268]_
The only alternative to Moses is evolutionism, propped up by pseudoscience..
Dan
Walton certainly jumps through a lot of hoops to trick you into doubting the Word of God. He sorta reminds me of this Yale professor who uses one of Bart Ehrman's books as his textbook:
ua-cam.com/video/IvgCQG_BqEM/v-deo.html
Dan
The genuine twosters of reality are people like Kent Hovind and Ken Ham, those guys has no hesitation of perverting reality to fit their own selfish narrative.
@@nikokapanen82 Those two guys are stumbling blocks to the building and expanding of Christ's church by making a mockery of the Bible and Judeo-Christian faith with their flat out goofy assertions and antics. The Earth itself testifies to the Creation process but they twist or disregard the evidence in plain sight.
He pays close attention to the text. He is encouraging attention to the Word not just our presumptions about it.
Evan wrote, "He is encouraging attention to the Word not just our presumptions about it."
To the contrary. His books are loaded with presuppositions, by which he is encouraging his students to presume secular scientists (of whom many if not most despise Christianity) have all the answers.
Dan
@@BibleResearchTools Please give examples.
So God is just another deity conceived by ancient people. What a waste of life humanity has lived. What's next, the return of Jesus is symbolic too?
The new heavens and new earth are symbolic too?
No that is not what he said.
He points out the differences. This has meaning - if you wish to understand you need to know the context.
the bible is not inspired, just another book alongside other books in the ancient world. lol Yeah go ahead bob.
This is worse than wrong- it's dishonest. It's a lot of fluff and misdirection intended to simply imply that the Bible doesn't really mean what it says. Skip this video and probably his book, too.
Sounds like you did a lot of skipping yourself. I haven't watched it yet, but if it's anything like the rest of his material he is just bringing a historical perspective to an ancient text that most people were just guessing at for a long time. I have read his book and it is very interesting and I enjoyed it! It is foolish to disregard information you don't understand and to encourage others to do the same. It does not foster discussion, only arguments and hate. Check yourself before you wreck yourself.
@@joshuadaigle7911 well said Joshua!
Cousin Bryan, you wrote, "This is worse than wrong- it's dishonest. It's a lot of fluff and misdirection intended to simply imply that the Bible doesn't really mean what it says."
The first act of Satan was to trick man into doubting God's Word (his last act is to deceive the nations.)
Dan
It means exactly what it meant to whom it was written. You just don’t like that it wasn’t written to YOU and your culture.
You know what's dishonest? Not reading people who disagree with you. Only cultists live in echo chambers. Real rational thinkers aren't afraid of having their views challenged.
Great lecture