Це відео не доступне.
Перепрошуємо.
The Lost World of the Flood - Dr. John Walton
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 сер 2024
- I sat down with John Walton to talk about his new book on the Genesis Flood.
www.ivpress.co...
Join us at: www.inspiringph...
To help support this ministry click here: / inspiringphilosophy
About 10 years ago I read his "Lost World of Genesis One" and it changed my life.
IP, love your videos, but you always sound like you need to drink some water. Stay hydrated, man.
He's experiencing second adolescence, you guys. Be sensitive!
And loose the looser bible!
@@Micheline6918 what?
@Johnathan Ronnie Yea, have been watching on Flixzone for since november myself :D
Hey IP I am Egyptian and I love your work keep going man we need your work
Thank you so much 😊😍😍
Ha! Ran into this guy once in an elevator at wheaton college. Absolutely brilliant guy
How many levels? 🧐
I preordered this book as well should be getting it today. I'm glad that John Walton has finally tackled the flood and how there are alternatives to the young earth creationist interpretations.
Kyle Alander CivilianName295 How did you like it? I’m ordering it soon.
Before you go out and purchase this man's book and use it as an interpretation for the Genesis flood, I recommend another book along with it called "In The Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood" by Walt Brown to round out the overall interpretation of the Genesis flood. And NEVER, EVER hang your hat on one "theologian" or interpretation. Just my 2 cents.
That's true. Check out Sam Harris and Matt Dillahunty as well.
@@griffincontracting, Matt is a hack.
Henry M Morris phd The Genesis Record.
@@griffincontracting they aren't O. T. BIBLICAL SCHOLARS! LOL 😆🤣
@@P.H.888 YEC is bad exegesis of Genesis 1-11.
I ordered Dr Walton's books because IP speaks with admiration of his work....
I hate it when people say, "it clearly describes" but fail to actually show how it clearly describes something beyond other possible and reasonable alternatives.
The reason "all the world" or the "whole world" could not have been meant in the original writing is because they didn't have plastic back then. What, plastic? Yes plastic. You see when those ancient Hebrew children went to school there were no round plastic globes of the earth sitting on their teacher's desk. The concept of "world" as we understand it did not exist. A much more accurate translation would be "all the land" or "the whole land". It's all about technology, get it?
I can't tell if you're joking. It feels like you're joking... but it's the internet.
@@ravissary79 I feel like the plastic bit was a joke but the underlying point was serious. The people who origionally wrote the story only really understood the world in the contest of the land they lived in, all of the land they lived in was flooded, their was flood wherever the eye can see, so the whole world MUST have flooded, RIght?
I find it interesting that you think that the ancient near eastern way of thinking is the end all of scripture because there are truths in the scriptures that were not known to anyone till modern times, like deep sea vents that God tells Job about. Man's wisdom has nothing to do with Gods word.
@@patrickbuckley7259 why build The Ark just relocate?
You arrogantly assume that the ancients did not know that the Earth was spherical. There is ample evidence that the ancient world was aware that the planet was spherical.
While I think there is much more mythology in the Tanakh than most evangelicals give credit, I also think it's _true_ mythology. The authors weren't trying to record scientific details, but the events still recorded as described.
מה???
John Walton is amazing!
In the hyperbole thing, the author of those old books wasn't thinking about that word, they were just describing what they saw on where they are. However, the flood seems to be describe in the NT as universal.
Yeah I haven't ever heard a "local flood" scholar address this. For all the talk about context, many ancients obviously thought it was universal. Why is the story relevant to the theme of salvation if far away people not selected by God were saved by benefit of geography?
@@Jim-Mc Thank God He gave you spiritual eyes to see, Brother, unlike most of those commenting here!
There may well have been a local flood, and probably was, seeing how the Black Sea and the Dead Sea were once freshwater lakes. That being said, the layering fossils is the exact opposite of what a hypothetical global flood would yield.
InspiringPhilosophy bravely stands against Young Earthers as well as Atheists, and I admire him for that!
you should interview Dr. Michael heiser regarding the 'sons of god'
He should
The sons of God were the line of Seth, and the sons of man were line of Cain, as simple as that! No fallen angels there!
@@DyivuLee so why did God drown All The sons of God? If They were SETH & Godly?? 🧐
@@DyivuLee Keep believing lies! BTW the Bible is all about spiritual warfare beginning to end.
Right on!!! I'm glad to know that some people are actually interested in research
I think you should also look into Scholar Michael Heiser on the most accurate interpretation on things like Genesis 6:1-4
The Sethite view is not even worth consideration, as it was foreign. Genesis has to be interpreted under it's ANE context to be understood and taken seriously. 1 Enoch (the B.C.E. text) is the best way to interpret it. Even though it didn't make it into the final bible it is quoted by Jesus and the Apostles. Although not
Also, in it's ANE context, it's worth looking into Deuteronomy 32:8-9's worldview in it's original context. It is the explanation for other religions and their pantheon's, otherwise known as The Powers and Principalities. A lot of the world of the flood is only lost because our early church fathers were mostly Greek A.D. people. Alot of theological truths about God still revealed and biblical, though the supernatural world of the populace is pretty wonky.
I've read both of his books on the issue and I'm not convinced. I also do not hold to the Sethite view.
the book of enoch is not quoted by jesus or his apostles. The book of enoch wasn't included in the bible for good reason, please research this so you can know which "teachers" to listen to and which ones to write off as money grubbing false teachers.
Jude quotes the "The Lord comes with 10,000 of his saints" line. Peter quotes of angels trapped in chains for their punishment, relating to the flood. Jesus quotes a fire reserved for "The Devil and his angels" Enoch accounts for a fiery pit in Sheol, which is usually depicted as watery. Raphaim is used in for characters in Sheol, the Raphaim are related to the Anakim which come from the Nephilim in Deuteronomy.
What objections do you have, might I ask? What do you agree with and what do you disagree with?
The immediate context. Genesis 6:2 says, "the sons of God saw that the daughters of man were attractive. And they took as their wives any they chose."
So we have two groups, "sons of God" and "daughters of man". The very next verse tells us both these groups were humans. We read, "Then the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not abide in man forever, for he is flesh: his days shall be 120 years.”"
God's anger is against men, not men and angels, telling us "sons of God" and "daughters of man" were men. We have no judgment of divine beings because they were not involved.
Genesis 6:4 also just says the Nephilim were men, "The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of man and they bore children to them. These were the mighty men who were of old, the men of renown."
It directly defines them as "Mighty men." So the actual passage in context just refers to them as men, not angels.
Let GOD be true and every man be a liar. Romans 3:4. Take heed that no man deceive you.. Matthew 24.
So when *does* universal language indicate and actual universal scope? If the authors of Genesis wanted to indicate that there really was a global flood, how would they? The context indicates the meaning. The flood lasted for forty days and nights, it took months for the waters to recede, Noah and his family had to take two of each kind of animal, the ark landed on top of a mountain range, etc. If these details were never mentioned it may be possible to say it's hyperbole. But all the details surrounding point to the literal global scale of the flood. And if it was in fact only local, then God certainly would have broken his promise to never flood the world again. There have certainly been many local floods in the area since then. And without the global scale it would lose the theological significance of recreation.
It sounds more like eisegesis to say that it's local and this is what I mean: no one just reading it without any outside influence would conclude this is hyperbole. Only someone with an agenda to not want to say there was a worldwide flood would. So you haven't truly used the Bible as your starting point. You've used outside beliefs about the past as your starting point.
Eternity in Our Hearts correct
Good point on God’s promise about never flooding the world again! Applying the same logic as in the video the promise would only apply locally or “never again” was a hyperbole.
L Dov, yes that local flood explains the mass volume of sea floor fossils all the way on top of the highest mountains world wide. /sarcasm
That argument about local vs global you explained is intriguing, I'll take note of it.
Haven't heard that before.
Eternity in Our Hearts 40 days was just a saying to mean a long time. Also the ark went on top of the high hills.
Another thing back then they thought the world was much smaller. A flood that covered all the land they knew of would effectively be their world
When I get the "You don't believe the Bible" because I think the Flood was local I simply say there are too many fossils. They go what? I tell them that if the Flood deposited all the fossils we've discovered the whole ancient world would've been covered in animals on top of animals. What did they eat?
A local flood just seems non logical. If the flood was only local, why would God have Noah build a boat for 120 years (give or take a few), when He could’ve had Noah to leave the area? A local flood just doesn’t seem plausible, especially with Christ’s reference to the flood in alluding to prophetic events.
But hurt eh
Ooooo, THAT John Walton.
Oh my gosh! I love John Walton and his lost world books!
I will check out the book later. I am wondering if the flood is not universal (or: other important items), will they pose a faith problem, i.e. the sin and salvation will not be universal?
Uh oh maybe when Paul says there is no sin when there is no law he actually means it. Only Israel had God's law and nobody else. Sin is transgression of the Law and that Law is only Israel's and nobody elses.
He should do 'lost world of the tower of Babel'.
I think he speaks about that in the lost world of the flood book.
2 years later and he’s finally made a video about Babel! Rejoice!
Wow this was delicious and much needed
One thing to keep in mind about the “global” nature of the flood is that Sargon of Akkad called himself the ruler of the four corners of the universe for conquering part of Iraq. The near east was their whole world
The idea that the flood story is discredited by other flood stories seems dishonest. Why wouldn't multiple cultures around the area have some version of a story that affected their ancestors?
Alright!
IP - This is a great channel. Your work is very well researched. I want to urge caution on concluding that the flood wasn't global. The Institute for Creation Research & Answers in Genesis have done amazing work in these areas. They also do a very good job of steering clear of logical fallacies when presenting their arguments. I recommend thoroughly reviewing their work. Even though you may not agree, you will appreciated their approach and dedication to the authority of scripture.
Oh and great vid as always ;)
Do you believe it’s possible that when the flood uses universal terms they believed it was world wide, if so would this undermine the scripture? Could they have thought it was worldwide but still be local?
Noah could have, but I don't think that undermines the scriptures because Noah was not perfect.
Did all mankind descend from Noah or not? Were there human survivors in the Americas or China or Australia? Were there perhaps Neanderthals surviving in northern Europe that later bred with Noah's kind? Did some Nephilim survive elsewhere? It seems the traditional reading of the flood had as a major theme that all mankind restarts from Noah.
IP interview dr Mike Heiser !
But Zephaniah has a dual meaning. The destruction of Israel is a foreshadowing of how God will destroy the whole earth.
I think most of Genesis is talking about the land around Eden in where Israel was going to be and it's so about that locale which is one reason they wouldn't have to take every kind of animal on the ark because in other parts of the world these animals would still exist.
Regarding Gen 6, it would be good to also look at the material of Dr. Michael Heiser regarding the Nephalim.
I have extensively and I don't find his interpretation convincing.
@InspiringPhilosophy - What aspects do you not find convincing? Perhaps the comment section isn’t long enough to elaborate on, but I’d be interested in hearing your counterpoints to show why/how Dr. Heiser’s interpretation is inaccurate/unconvincing.
I don't know how to feel about the flood. I definitely think the deluge was a serious global event but that not everyone perished.
"Everyone" did not perish. Eight humans were on the ark along with at least two of each kind of land/air creatures.
@@sandraproctor854 There were probably more that survived in other places. Also it likely wasn’t a flood that flooded the entire earth as we know it. Only a large portion. There were other humans on earth that may have not been as effected and lived it out.
HI IP
Many thanks for this valuable video.
At time 21:14 in the video you claim:
"a flood event happened several thousands years ago is probably the most likely historical event behind the Genesis' Flood".
I would be thankful to have details about which precise event you are referring to:
Location, time (how many thousands years ago), size of the flooded region, supposed causes of the natural catastrophe.
Still a point: Why don't you consider the possibility of an extraordinary miraculous event?
Best wishes and keep the good work.
It was an event around 5500 BC around the black sea. Check out the book, Noah's Ark: The New Scientific Discoveries About the Event that Changed History.
That could be something to look at, but God can perform miracles through natural events, like with the destruction of Sodom. After the Exodus, it says a strong wind blew the waters to part the red sea. Paul was rescued from prison by an earthquake. So God can use natural causes.
I've heard people propose this, but I would need evidence of parallel world before I jump on that bandwagon. I am not convinced by the Many World Interpretation because of the preferred basis problem and its issues with the Born Rule, as physicist Adrian Kent has published on.
I'll have to read that, thanks. I thoroughly enjoyed your paper on the Michaelson-Morley entanglement experiment.
If the resurrection is hyperbole, what is it trying to convey? That God beats death, which leads right back to the resurrection being real. It's symbolizing it's own occurance or at the very least the complete power of God to make it happen, at which point denying it becomes a rather strange thing (unless you don't take the story seriously to begin with of course, in which case the point is moot). Any story symbolises something, so we shouldn't be afraid to understand that.
You shouldn’t encourage anybody to get that Book based on that interview. So many so many things he said there are blatantly and obviously completely unbiblical. The nephilum are angels, just as the Bible describes, they came down to try and corrupt mankind because God had said that it was through the seed of the woman that the Savior would come. So they tried to corrupt that seed. Which is why the Scripture says that Noah, was found perfect in his generations. His gene his genetic line had not been corrupted.
This is obviously true when you look at the Greeks and the Romans. The flood actually happened, Noah his son and his daughter-in-law‘s, all knew what it happened prior to the flood, once they got off the boat, they told the story to their children and their grandchildren and their great grandchildren and they’re great great grandchildren and their great great great grandchildren. Then because all of the people knew the story of the flood, they decided that they were going to build a tower up to heaven, one that couldn’t be covered by the flood. God saw how stupid what they were doing was, because he had told Noah that the rainbow was this sign a covenant between him and man that he would never again cover the earth in water. so he went down and confused the language. That caused a dispersion of people across the earth. Now the story of the Nephilum what is known by these people even though their languages were confused. So it wasn’t too ridiculous for them to come up with the idea of these gods and these guys always coming down and seducing the women. It really isn’t that difficult to figure out but first you just have to except that the Bible is literally true. And that language, is only a metaphoric if you can explain in context what then it actually means. Like when it says in Genesis six god repented that he had made men. If that’s just a metaphor, then what does it mean? I’ve yet to find anybody who can give an answer to that.
Then we get to the actual flood, where God said he is going to destroy every living thing that has the breath of life in them through their nostrils. The entire world was covered in water when the fountains of the great deep broke up. Not some local flood, an actual worldwide.
I could continue on because every single thing he said was completely and utterly wrong.
If you actually want to read a book, about the genesis flood, you need to get the book called “ in the beginning“ by Dr. Walt Brown.
Every prediction he made in that book is being scientifically proven by the secular atheists scientists. 40 years ago he predicted that comets would be made up of ice and small rounded boulders, about the size of Volkswagens and guess what they have proven that his prediction was true. Why does that matter.? Because if you’re theory is correct you should be able to correctly predict what you will find. Which is why evolution is such a farce and every new story and article comes out with scientists shocked and amazed and baffled, at what they found. Because it’s not what evolution would predict based on the theory. But never worry, they just say wow, look evolution happened different than we expected it to. The unfalsifiable paradigm.
But hurt eh?
General Lee not an argument
Need some Dr. Michael Heiser in your life :)
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?
Bible: History of the people of God from creation to Christ written in the view of the ancient Eastern culture. Works for me.
Can I just I love the depth
Isaiah 46-48 gives you the answer as to why the flood correlates to the creation. Every "day" correlates with the counsel of God. He declares His acts at the beginning.
Harken back you transgressors.....
When God told you before you could know it would come to pass. And claim you knew, or that your silly idols told you
"I am God, there is no one like Me
I am God, there is none else. ...
check out jonathan pageau's video on the Book of Enoch. Fascinating stuff!
What does he understand by order?
*Genesis 6:5-13*
"And God seeing that the wickedness of men was great *on the earth,* and that all the thought of their heart was bent upon evil at all times, 6 It repented him that he had made *man on the earth.* And being touched inwardly with sorrow of heart, 7 He said: *I will destroy man, whom I have created,* from the face of the earth, from man even to beasts, from the creeping thing even to the fowls of the air, for it repenteth me that I have made them.
8 But Noe found grace before the Lord. 9 These are the generations of Noe: Noe was a just and perfect man in his generations, he walked with God. 10 And he begot three sons, Sem, Cham, and Japheth. 11 And *the earth was corrupted before God, and was filled with iniquity.* 12 And when God had seen that the earth was corrupted (for *all flesh* had corrupted its way upon the earth,) 13 He said to Noe: The *end of all flesh* is come before me, *the earth* is filled with iniquity through them, and *I will destroy them with the earth.* "
Anyone reading this and coming away with a 'local flood' ... I ... I don't even have words.
Genesis 8:5 "And the waters continued to abate until the tenth month; in the tenth month, on the first day of the month, the tops of the mountains were seen."
Genesis 8:9, " But the dove found no place to set her foot, and she returned to him to the ark, for the waters were still on the face of the whole earth. "
So v5 came before v9. So which is it? Was the whole earth covered or could the tops of the mountains be seen?
Imagine the scene yourself. A global flood rages across the globe. Then, after many months, mountain tops can be scoped out; they threaten to become commonplace scenery again. That's still the whole earth covered. Since the bird didn't feel like landing anywhere, maybe there was still many millions of tons of water violently moving around over mountaintops: their visibility says nothing of the consistency of that visibility etc.
Nowhere does it say there aren't still deadly waves crashing and waving, leaving no safe place to roost. Your apparent need to create a contradiction is inexplicable except for a precommitment to some view of the flood not borne out by the text.
Besides, the sheer length of time and the need to preserve every kind of species proves it's not a local flood, else this part of the narrative would simply be; 'Noah, move, far away, at least to ...x location.' Not 'build the equivalent of the Titanic and move upon the punishment itself which you could have just moved away from and then start repopulating the earth as if you are the only peopleand creatures in existence [e.g. 8:17; 9:1-3 etc].'
Okay, so you agree Genesis 8:9 is not literal. So you should be able to understand where we are coming from. Walton gives other examples like this in Genesis, where "all" is hyperbole.
No, genesis 8:9 is literal, how isn't it literal? The earth can be covered, have mountaintops visible ten months in, and still be covered.
The text itself doesn't warrant this eisegesis. The ridiculousness of the eisegesis here is that the author could NEVER, WITH ANY LANGUAGE, describe a global flood, given your manner of reading this clear passage. This is a problem.
Again, any flood covering moutains is no local flood. Any flood which takes ten months to abate to the point where mountaintops BECOME visible again is no local flood. Any flood which necessitates the preservation of 'all flesh' for repopulating the earth is no local flood (he himself admits author clearly intends the readership to see a 'new creation' idea here).
I'm amazed at how you can actually read the text in this eisegetical way!
But it says "whole earth" The whole was not covered if the mountains were visible, right? You are trying to have your cake and wat it too.
Maybe the Eskimos weren't there 4000 years ago, maybe nobody had migrated that far yet. Maybe the middle East was as far as Noahs children had gone up to that time, so yeah maybe the whole world at that time did go to Joseph for food.
Dr. Walton presents Zephaniah 1:2 as if it's the same as Genesis 6. It's not.
Although Heb. "eretz" ("Ha'aretz") and Heb. "adamah" can be translated either "Land" or "Earth" depending on the CONTEXT, the context of Zephaniah clarifies that the "adamah" is Judah (Zeph. 1:4 "“I will stretch out my hand against Judah and against all the inhabitants of Jerusalem;"), while the context of Genesis 6-9 is clarified as the entire Earth (world, globe, etc.) by the CONTEXT (Gen. 7:19 "ALL the high mountains UNDER THE WHOLE HEAVEN were covered", the bringing all the animals, building a BOAT instead of traveling out of the local area, etc.).
Bible teachers, Pastors, etc. will give an account for "having a form of godliness, but DENYING THE POWER THEREOF"! (2 TIM. 3:5)
Seriously, the factor driving this absurd interpretation of a LOCAL flood (and the weak excuses for it) is the claim by those hostile to God's word telling us that they have scientifically proved God's word wrong (i.e. "the fear of man, which brings a snare").
Stop sniveling, Christians! God is God, it's HIS Universe, and He has the power to do as He wishes!
Get NT Wright next!!
First! Wow that’s my first time being first.
Sorry just never been first 😹
lol
Another great video InspiringPhilosophy. I loved that you brought him on your channel to talk about the Flood in some detail.
My view of the Flood narrative. I think it's common that most people when they read the Bible they get this notion that any "Act of God" whether it seems to punish or save is misconstrued as either "Favortism or Wrath". The Atheists will read the bible in a very typical fashion that God is threatening us with Hell or Harm unless we obey (which I see as a lazy man's theology.
I go back to the Adam and Eve Narrative when God had "Warned" Adam and Eve to not eat of the fruit and if they did X would happen. We actually see a similarity to that interpretation in the Gospels whenever Jesus is speaking of Hell. Jesus isn't threatening the audience but warning them. Example: KJV Matthew 23:33 "33Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?
In the Flood Narrative, it talks about Noah who was an upright man who "Walked with God". I see the Flood narrative similarly, the FLOOD (localized) was a destructive event that came before the Lord on whether to act against it for the benefit of humanity or not. My take on it is that the Flood event was so destructive that all flesh, living in the land, would die. I think it's important when we read the Flood account to take into account God's omniscience. God had that conversation with Abraham about Sodom when abraham questioned God "Will you destroy it for the sake of 10 righteous men". And remember the angels of God went into Sodom and got the only Righteous men and brought them out of Sodom before it's destruction. So we must attribute correctly that if God knew there were 10 righteous men during that time he would have warned them and spared them.
Could the clean animals represent Jews and unclean animals represent the gentiles?
Yeah, the accusation that Genesis is stolen or plagiarized from earlier accounts from previous civilizations is ludicrous. They were simply reiterating common knowledge from the time....and doing so more correctly.
Thank you my dear
"Watchers" fallen angels then? If not, who are the fallen angels? Also, in concern to this universal language, concerning the flood, I ask you this: How is it that all of the ancient cultures reported on a flood wiping out everyone and everything, yet it is considered part of universal language, in this case meaning, no, the entire world wasn't destroyed. Something isn't right in this thought in my humble opinion. Love the channel.
Would been intresting if u could do a video about predestination and free will in the bible.
Predestination isn't even the Greek word meaning. What a stupid belief.
..................sigh. It Was a worldwide flood. As concerning the famine in Joseph's time there most likely were no Eskimos at that time. Most, perhaps not all, the world traveled to Egypt to purchase grain. The majority of the worlds population at that time would have been in traveling distance to Egypt.
26:45
Thank you for attempting to answer the question I posed. But I don’t agree with what he says about the flood being “nothing like the Babylonian account.” In both stories ravens and doves are used to check for land. Can you explain that?
Perhaps going back to the original story and both cultures retained that part.
InspiringPhilosophy I’m just wondering how the original story was spread
Great talk but you should use cameras and have actual video!
i disagree with some points, when you stop and think that GOD did this, everything is possible. not only our most "possible" alternatives.
So, they are the cause of the Flood indirectly.
So does this guy think it wasn’t a global flood? I must have missed that part
Thing is God Himself said He will destroy all men and all animals. So it must be literal, even the highest mountain was seen covered by water by those in ark.
I love the idea of a local flood, but it creates more problems for the narrative than it solves. Why is the story relevant to the theme of salvation if far away people not selected by God were saved by benefit of geography? Why an ark at all? Anyone know Walton's response to this kind of thing?
If you read or look up the Lost 14 tablets of enki it's simply covers all of Genesis the flood the deluge tells you what the pyramids are therefore how they were built the Nephilim are the Annunaki and this is thousands of years before Christ
Uhh, actually we do know the size of the Ark....and it has been found. I recommend the book Noah's Ark written by David Fassold.
You should interview NT Wright
So the lost world was that of eden not the whole world. Interesting.
Historically what have Jews always believed? Did Jews up to the time in Jesus acknowledge it as worldwide or regional?
Regional
He assumed there were Eskimos back then
There were lol
Demonstrating that the ANE view of "all the world" was limited in scope by the limited knowledge of the speaker in no way makes a global flood the less biblical or accurate view. Simply saying this single instance might be hyperbolic because sometimes scripture is hyperbolic IN NO WAY PROVES it IS hyperbolic.
The NT use of the story clearly is still as big as they can imagine, the global reach of the story's manifestation in cultures all over the world, the comparison of the cataclysm to the eschaton by Peter, these application passages show the story is meant to be taken as global even to the NT authors.
If it's not then is the eschaton local? We're not really going to be resurrected, that's just hyperbole. We're not really being forgiven of ALL our sins, that's just hyperbole. Do you see the problem? The appeal to hyperbole has no limit if you don't restrain the appeal to hyperbole to be possible but not probable unless other clues support that view... but they DON'T. So it's a false conclusion to then appeal to it simply because it's possible. It's a liberal theological cop out to try and appease doubters and modernists who wants to say none if this REALLY happened.
Writing was not done so easily in ancient times...it was often laborious and/or expensive. It is unlikely they wrote to make things up. The writing of fiction would have been unthinkable to them.
What about the measurements given though? Surely that would be evidence saying it was literal? They just quickly brushed past this point.
Yes, that is a legitimate question. I believe the flood was global. I’m no bible scholar or theologian. Just a simple Christian. I think people put 100 on 10. Im happy that there are scientists and archeologists and scholars that say there’s room for believing the earth is “young” and the flood was global. I don’t care how old it is. I just don’t like when they say this is how you interpret things and it’s got a glaring omission. Also, in the New Testament why would it say this: “Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:”
?
It seems Peter took it seriously. And he says “That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour:”
So be mindful of the words of the apostles of the Lord and Saviour. Being mindful of Peter, I take him seriously that he meant the whole world was literally covered by water. And if people be willfully ignorant of that, let them, they have read the words as have you and I. They want to be accepted by the world. They know the commandments against being accepted by the world. There’s nothing we can do. I pray they turn their faces away from the world, and to Jesus, in the name of Jesus. Amen.
I’m not saying I’m perfect, this is one thing I am sure of though. This one thing happens to be very clear. Noah’s flood happened worldwide. Could you imagine a local flood? Why get onto the boat? Why bother building a boat if you could say, go to high ground? He had 140 years or something like that. He couldn’t get to a safe place in THAT long? Ridiculous. A local flood, and God said he would no longer make a flood to cover the whole world? A local flood, and God needed to make a rainbow for that? A local flood would make God a liar and that is blasphemy. No, I’m sorry, they’re wrong, in err, and in danger. They’re going to be the scoffers, if not already, to bible believers. Why even believe in Christ if you mock the ones who believe Him and His apostles? The Bible is not easy to believe when you’re proud and arrogant. If you believe yourself to be wise. You can’t just trust God. Like every story in the Bible. No one listened to the words of God, not even Adam and Eve who met him. Everyone flees from what He tells them to do. God says trust me don’t eat that fruit, they eat it. God tell Moses to tell pharaoh to let His people go, Moses flees to the wilderness. Saul doesn’t listen. Jonah doesn’t listen. The Israelites didn’t listen. No one listens to the word of God, and that’s a huge problem. If they can’t listen to God, how will they listen to me?
keke giles Thank you. God bless you
@@junelledembroski9183 What evidence do you have that the god you believe in exists?
R5 Zoeira BR That depends on what you deem evidence. Logic tells me that something started it all, logic tells me Christianity is the only one that makes sense. I was not a Christian my whole life, my family seemed like Christians but practiced witchcraft. Like, new age Christians back in the 80’s. But we didn’t read the Bible or go to church. We constantly had bad things happen to us, when I was around 10, my sister said to me our dad lives with a demon (I was like, yeah right). And when I told my dad he was just teasing my sister, he started screaming and yelling that she wasn’t supposed to tell me. (He didn’t live with us anymore at that point we were visiting him). My sister decided to move in with my dad, so I followed her at 11 years old. I started dabbling in dark magic by 12. I started actually seeing demons. They terrorized me all the time. I was checked out by psychologists, neurologists, optometrists nothing was wrong with me. I was hit by a truck head on but didn’t fly forward or under the car but at a 90 degree angle towards my sister and wasn’t hurt at all. Started having out of body experiences by 15 and lost at least three friends because it was scary to be around me. The things that would happen. I got a witch boyfriend by 17, he used me in ritual sex acts and had me shot at and something always saved me. I was diagnosed with polycystic ovarian syndrome and told I would never have kids. I prayed and prayed and prayed at least believing fully in Christ by this time using his name. I was healed, got pregnant, left the evil man, became catholic, never saw demons again. Tada. It’s all about personal experiences. You can say I’m crazy, but that doesn’t make sense of my evidence. I have 4 kids now, a great husband, I have kept a job for 7 years, went to college, paid off most of my student loans, and I’m a success where there was no hope because of Jesus. The out of body experiences were the worst. I couldn’t find out how not to slip through objects. Through floors. People wouldn’t see me and I could answer the door as they got there because I saw them coming before they got there. I started accidentally pulling friends into my nightmares too. They did not appreciate that. I think we can’t really explain dreams on a scientific level because it may have something to do with the spirit realm. Something science can’t touch, or study (other than our brain waves and what physically happens to our bodies). The actual material of a dream is not able to be touched. Why are some aspects of a dream controllable, and others not? Sorry, long thread, hope that helps.
Hey IP do you plan on making a response to King crocoduck accusations against you? ps love your vids keep it up.
In regards to what?
InspiringPhilosophy in his debate with Dean Esmay on the NonSequitir Show he claimed that you misrepresented and completely lied about several scientific studies in your science of the Soul series.
Sun Tzēn okay thanks
InspiringPhilosophy sorry for wasting your time
no worries: facebook.com/inspiringphilosophy/posts/1834607349953443
Henry M Morris PhD The Genesis Record.
This is really interesting, thx for sharing.
Why didn't you ask when it took place? :/
He covers that in his book.
HistoryNET I may be wrong, but I believe the number was 5,000-13,000 years ago.
He kind of looks like Salman Rushdie, maybe it's the goatee and glasses.
Hi IP, yet another great video, but I notice you have missed one thing. What about the fact that there are these global flood events described all over the world?
Well, there are some, but they are not in every culture actually.
Not in every culture, but certainly on every continent. Anyway, if you are going to make a video series on the flood (I hope you will), you should address this. This was always most puzzling theme from the bible for me. The narrative and message of the story do not change whether or not this was a world wide event, so it is not that important, but it still could be interesting to address. Maybe rapid shift from glacial to interglacial period that occurred some 10-12 thousand years ago is a better explanation of a global flood narrative.
Also, just to remind you, we are still waiting for the second part on evolution ;).
God bless IP, and keep up the good work.
I'm wondering how much this fella has looked into Genesis 6:4 he seems Clueless
I would like you to do the second episode on Evolution. Really waiting for that to come out
ua-cam.com/video/iDZ6I2TgTJc/v-deo.html
You Bio Logo folks really stretch it. Stick with proving the existence of God, but you are so invested in evolution that you hurt your witness. My opinion only. I love your proof of God arguments though.
Neither the interviewer or book writer understand the flood. He uses the Sons of Seth argument, for Nephalim, that is nonsense. Sons of Seth was a Gnostic concept that came out of the Gnostic Doctrines of the Ophites and Sethians. Furthermore the Author is using Idealism, that was rejected by the early Church. Idealism came out of Platoism, and is neither Jewish or Christian.
Yes the sons of Seth view is nonsense. However idealism is axiomatically correct from both epistemology and philosophy of mind and has substantial support from physics as well. Furthermore theism becomes completely nonsensical as a position without it and it is arguably the case that theism is logically incoherent without it due to epistemic considerations. So without idealism it wouldn't make any sense to consider Christianity as a possible option in the first place given that Christianity presupposes theism.
The Church soundly rejected idealism in the 1st Century because they were told to reject it by the Apostles. You can find this in the writings of the 1st Century Church who were the disciples of the Apostles. Scripture is actual, for example, Jesus actually rose from the dead, the food actually covered the entire earth.
God, or Elowah, is not an ideal, he is a person, he is actual.
Aaron Haskins A supreme being is not a person
Aaron Haskins That isn't modern idealism. Sorry. Also the Church wasn't really philosophical until medieval times.
Creationists turned the said event into science and history without understanding Noah's flood in it's proper A.N.E. context.
So God didn't know how to clearly say "Local flood". Maybe you can set Him straight when we stand before Him on that day, eh?
@@Bildad1976 nope not really. The writers of Genesis are limited on their scope of knowledge about the entire planet. They haven't even mentioned China, India and the Americas. The world they are talking about is the world that they knew and encountered.
@@stephencastro4723 First, if you haven't already, you must learn that the scriptures were God-breathed:
"For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit."
Secondly, I suspect you have no idea who the authorS of Genesis were (whose cuneiform writings were compiled and edited by Moses).
If you understood how ancient cuneiform colophons were mirrored in the toledoth statements woven through Genesis, you would see the authors' names revealed in each section of Genesis, and once you saw the author's "signature" for the tablet from which Genesis 1:1 - 2:4 is derived, you would withdraw your hasty criticism.
@@Bildad1976 did i say that the Bible is not inspired? What i am saying is YEC'S INTERPRETATION, READING AND EXPLANATION OF THE SCRIPTURES ARE WRONG.
@@stephencastro4723 That doesn't make sense, Stephen. How can you believe that God supernaturally-breathed the scriptures but demonstrated ignorance or error about the creation?
The catalyst for this modern inclination to explain away supernatural events of the Bible is revealed in that it coincided with the counter-claims of scientists with minds in a state of enmity with God.
For instance, you want to interject millions/billions of years into the Biblical narrative (i.e. "Day/Age", "Gap Theory", etc.)? It wasn't the result of men searching the scriptures for truth. It was in response to the claims of Charles Lyell, a man whose desire was to dethrone God's Word. (Same thing with theistic evolution, global flood was local, explaining away long lifespans until post-flood, death before Adam, etc.)
Those who love God should not believe His enemies over Him.
P.S. There was no China, Australia, etc. before the unicontinent (Gen.1-9) broke apart.
Who does God attribute the cause of the flood? Angels, Fallen angels, demons, or Man?
Genesis 6:3
"And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years."
Genesis 6:5
"And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually."
Genesis 6:6
"And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart."
Genesis 6:7
"And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repents me that I have made them."
And the Sethite view is discounted? 🤔😒
Why not the book of Jasher, Dr.? 🤔😒
IP what about the people who lived 800-900 years? How can you explain that?
They are symbolic numbers. Walton has a paper on the genealogies.
@@InspiringPhilosophy can the paper be viewed online?
@@InspiringPhilosophy The problem with that however is right after the genealogy in chapter 6 verse 3 God lowers Mankind's lifespan to 120 years. The age is in the context is that a problem? And a plain simple reading of the text seems quite clear regardless of the generation we live in. That's why this verse has always bothered me as a Christian
Not necessarily, as many who lived after that had longer ages if they are literal.
@@InspiringPhilosophy Thanks I agree 100% .. I just do not want to refer to everything supernatural as poetry to teach a lesson. Just the simple truth from scripture ..thanks
What is the Intro song called?
PullMeUnder_Version B - Piano_Full from digital juice.
InspiringPhilosophy clickable link to where I can find the song?
reiterating creation....hmmm.....I guess that sums it up.....thank you...and good bye...
But hurt eh
How do we know the Flood in the Bible ( Noah ) wasn’t a copy of the “Epic of Gilgamesh” which has a man building an ark and getting the animals for a Flood, IP?
They are all shemites gosh it isn't that important.
So many negative comments from Christians! Why attack each other when you should be testifying to atheists and other non-Christians. And you can do that using your own interpretation of the Bible...
Cause people are dumb
BTW, I am not an atheist. I am simply trying to be honest with poor interpretations. I will add that one of the worst things that Walton says is this:
"The authority of scripture is not the event, but the interpretation of the event".
I mean, yes, interpretation is important, but he is simply wrong. The anchor for everything, is the EVENT. First the event must happen as described. I am not trying to create a slippery slope argument here, but what exactly is the story of Jesus? That he EXISTED. The the things that say he did....HAPPPENED. That all those EVENTS, happened. Imagine if someone were to say the "event of Jesus living, dying and being resurrected" are not crucial. Only it's interpretation is crucial". It would be ridiculous no?
THe bible stands on real world events first. That is the authority of it. Not the interpretation of it. God exists because he exists. Not the interpretation of God. The exodus happened. That is the anchor. That is where the authority lies. The interpretation comes after.
You didn't understand Walton and are attacking strawman
The sons of God are angels. Job stated that. Mankind are not the sons of God. The angels fallen angels I mean mated with women. And they bore giants.
Believe the Bible not scholars
Scholars translated the bible into English for you....
These ones today dot even believe what they are translating
Stevie
So, you're a Flat Earth GeoCentrist then? You think children are in men's loins waiting to be planted in a womb for growing? You think Moses wrote In various types of Hebrew that didn't exist yet?
Gen 6 Apkalla are divine results on divine beings and women. word salad answer by Mr. lets only read the text.
#jesusvsbuddha
Not even a match
I’m sorry, but it’s quite evident the Hebrew account is based on the epic of Gilgamesh.
The description of the great boat and its size, loading animals on board, the land being devastated and sending out birds to find dry land, the offering of sacrifice after emerging from the boat.
Sound familiar?
Similar accounts doesn't necessarily mean one copied, they could both be based on an actual event.
InspiringPhilosophy You haven’t read both accounts then. It’s simply coincidence that both accounts describe the size and dimensions of the boat? It’s coincidence that both accounts describe a man loading his belongings and animals onto a boat at the direction of their God? It’s coincidence that upon the recession of the waters both accounts tell of birds being released to find dry land? It’s coincidence that both accounts tell of sacrifice after dry land is found?
I watch your videos, you’re smarter than that. The Hebrews clearly copied the account from Mesopotamia. I haven’t worked out what that means theologically, but it’s simply not the case the Hebrews were telling from a different perspective. I have zero doubt a localized deluge occurred, and the actual event is the source of the storytelling. This however is irrelevant when ascertaining whether or not the Hebrew account is original.
No, it is not a coincidence, which is why they are probably both talking about the same event.
InspiringPhilosophy So every flood story contains elements of Gods foretelling a cataclysmic flood, loading belongings and animals onto a boat, providing the description of the size of the boat, the released of birds to confirm dry land, and finally sacrifice to the Gods for sparing them?
That does not sound like a simple retelling of a historical event. Like I said, I’m not sure what it means theologically, as the main point of the Hebrew tale is indeed the interpretation.
That said, refusing to accept the fact the Hebrews copied the Mesopotamian story is simply burying your head in the sand.
I never said that. You are holding to something called pan-babylonianism, which has lost favor over the years. Again, having a similar story could also just mean some event actually did happen.
In his book(or in his work) does he write about adam and eve? Do they really existed?
yes, he covers that
joao skate Did they really exist? No. They are rip offs of other ancient near East myths
InspiringPhilosophy he says that yes? In the logic that hebrews have knowledge of adam and eve ad a brute fact?
John Walton does think Adam and Eve existed.
Love the way your voice cracks at times as you continue your journey through puberty...I think your videos will lose their appeal once your voice changes.