John Walton on Defending the Authority of Scripture

[Strefanasha]

let us instead obey and live the scripture as we have never done, and defense of the book wil take care of itself,

after all Jesus said Father make them one (ie love one another) THAT THE WORLD WILL KNOW you have sent the son.

when they see this, and they never have, they will not be able to criticize the biblical narrative and liberals like this speaker as well as unbelieveres, will be either silenced or totally outraged.

the rest is empty talk

[Rachella38]

@Strefanasha Amen amen amen!!!!!!!!!

[Surfxeo]

In other words he gives authority to a current popular idea of origin from a naturalistic material perspective, which is full of holes and no empirical evidence. Over against the authority of Scripture itself. I think I'll quote Scrtipture to him which destroys his assumptions.

1 Timothy 2:13

For Adam was first formed, then Eve

1 Corinthians 15:21

For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the Dead.

Read also John 1:1-14, 2 Corinthians 11:3, Revelation 12:9 etc etc etc

[aloh86]

@Surfxeo If you explained your beliefs about what scripture says to a God-fearing American slaveowner in the 1700's-1800's, they would tell you that you don't take scripture seriously, that you don't take it literally, that you don't believe in the authority of the Bible.

[Surfxeo]

@aloh86 Then by definition they would not be God fearing Americans but materialists who are looking after their own material gains than over the sovereignty of Gods word and his wrath against those forsake His word.

As Christ said "my sheep hear my voice" and where we find Christs voice is in Scripture alone.

It was God fearing Christiains who did aware from historical slavery. Just read history.

[aloh86]

@Surfxeo

You obviously don't get my point. Those people sincerely believed that the Bible has said that it was ok to own slaves. They got this understanding from a take it literally, read it plain view of scripture.

You're saying that Christians need to take scripture seriously, that we need to take it literally, and a have a plain reading of it, but your definition/interpretation of what a plain reading differs from the slaveowners. How do you know that your interpretation is right?

[Surfxeo]

@aloh86 The Bible does not say it is ok to own slaves. It does not say that at all. Have you ever read the Bible is my next question?

Why are you talking about slave owners and the Bible in the same sentence? You are not being serious here so please take it seriously.

[aloh86]

@Surfxeo

I assumed you were an American. You must not know American history. Slaveowners in the south used the Bible to justify the ownership of slaves. You're doing exactly the same thing the slaveowners accused others of: that if you don't take scripture seriously and literally, you don't believe in the authority of the Bible. These slaveowners would say that you do not take scripture seriously, so really, Surfxeo, you don't take scripture seriously either by your own standard.

[Surfxeo]

@aloh86 I know exactly what happened in the American south during the colonial period. I know that people tried to justify themselves by using any means necessary. It was not the Bible that those slave owners were moved by but material gain. You forget that the black slaves were the ones who clung to the word of God and not the slave owners. It was Darwinism that was the main claim to justify slavery.

It is written that man is created in the image of God and noone is better than anyone.

[Surfxeo]

@aloh86 I take Scripture very serious because if you corrupt what is written then God will judge you very severly. When America still had slaves Britiain banned slavery as Bible believing Christians said it was wrong to enslave another man. We in Britian sent naval ships to stop the american piracy from the African coast. It was that epidemic.

"Thou shalt not steal, kill or covet"

[Surfxeo]

@aloh86

John13:34-35

A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love one another.

By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another.

Mat 18:6

And whoever receives one such child in My name receives Me;

but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him to have a heavy millstone hung around his neck, and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.

[aloh86]

@Surfxeo

Surf...you must not be getting my point. I understand that the Bible does not condone oppressive slavery. BUT many American that time really did believe and used the Bible to justify slavery because they believed they had a literal view of it and were taking scripture seriously. Your view of scripture is, like many others, influenced by a certain view. Many protestant American for example are highly influenced by Calvin. But Calvinism isn't the gospel. It SERVES the gospel.

[Surfxeo]

@aloh86 There is no such view as a "literal" view of Scripture. That is a new phenomenon that has become popular in the last few years. It is a means of escape from the most obvious use of words to give it a meaning that is not present in the text. Post-Darwin there was no such idea of a long sequence of events for the Genesis account of creation. All Christians thought that Genesis is a 6 day 24 hour event. Now there are trying to write into the text what is not present in the text.

[aloh86]

@Surfxeo I'm a bit confused. If you have no literal view of scripture, then I don't see why you would have a problem with Walton's views. He's simply saying that the creation story is Genesis was a way for the ancient Israelites to understand where they came from and is actually how they viewed the world (flat earth, sheol, etc). That doesn't necessarily mean that, that is true in fact. That's not denying the authority of scripture in any way.

[Surfxeo]

@aloh86 I do not think of Scripture as literal or its opposite. I look at Scripture in the way the writer had in mind and not what contemperory culture paints into the text. I view it in the way that the people at the time of the writing thought of it.

People look for justification for anything but you cannot get justification for American slavery in the Bible.

Did you know that if a foreign slave came into Israel that slave would become a free person?

[Surfxeo]

@aloh86 A person could ask to become a servant of an Israelite and his family. And after 7 years that service would be finished and they were free to return home. Or to become their servant for life if they wished.

No servant was allowed to work on the Sabbath.

You forget what culture they lived in back then. There was no social state to give people money for food. It was better to work for someone than let your family starve to death.

Aren't we slaves today in this context?

[lukehase]

Interesting Video!

[mickandcindy]

Well said.

[marktwombly]

Interesting. This begs an explanation from the Scriptures as to why the narrative is 'functional' and not 'material'. Take the following as an example (particularly the use of the word 'kind'):

So God created the great sea creatures and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarm, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.

(Genesis 1:21 ESV)

Believe in authority of Scripture? Then explain from the Scripture.

[rollinglibs101]

Sounds like double talk?..If you want a better so called "scientific" expalnation read or search Gerald Schroeder..He does a much better job.

[imnotverycr8ive]

Read his book. Prof Walton makes some very good arguments in it.

[celal777]

"not an account of material origins it's an account of functional origins" -- double talk and waffle which amounts to sowing doubt on the Word of God.

[ResurrectedThinker]

@celal777 I don't think you'd be saying that if you understood Walton's arguments...

[muerpa]

I agree to the point where he says that creation was made for us, it was made for his son Jesus.

[KDaugherty15]

@muerpa Why would the world be made for Christ? Even Christ came for us. In fact, Jesus wouldn't even have a purpose if it wasn't for our creation. 

[gilesmhayward]

@KDaugherty15 Colossians 1:16 - For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and FOR him.

I think the world was made by Christ, through the mechanism of Evolution, and FOR because that is what Paul wrote in Colossians...

[ThisIsMinistry]

@gilesmhayward @muerpa I think Walton is simply making the point that God did make things for us in that some things function for our benefit and necessities. In a sense, all things were made for God, too. For example: Did God make woman for man not to be alone? Or did He make her for Christ? I convey that God did both. Just my opinion on the matter based on my limited knowledge of the Scripture.

[gilesmhayward]

@ThisIsMinistry I very much agree!