John Walton on Defending the Authority of Scripture

In this video "Conversation" John Walton, professor of Old Testament History at Wheaton College, discusses the content of Genesis 1 and how it should be read. The account in Genesis is not intended to be an account of material origins, says Walton. Therefore, if that is so, the Bible has no narrative of material origins—and if that is so, we don't need to defend the Bible's narrative of material origins against science's narrative of material origins.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• scripture
• origins
• science
• faith
• Genesis
• authority

[Rachella38]

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

[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

[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 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?

[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 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

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

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.

[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 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.