Genesis Through Ancient Eyes - John H Walton PhD (Awesome - MUST SEE!)

[random person]

Dr. John Walton delivers his origins talk on how to understand Genesis 1 in light of its ancient context.

This two hour video contains lecture, interviews, and personal testimonies from Old Testament scholar John Walton about understanding the book of Genesis in light of ancient culture.

These videos use different approaches to the material, thus I am compelled to post up both. LISTEN TO THIS MAN. John H Walton is an awesome lecturer.

 

[random person]

bump.

I am all in support of these kind of discussions of Genesis, in that there is more than meets the eye with Creation account that begs hermeneutical, linguistical, and cultural scrutiny.

This is important dialogue here.

 

[random person]

 

[random person]

The ancient Hebrews didn't know the earth's core was molten, they believed the earth's core was sheol which sat upon the Great Deep.

In essence, the ancient Hebrews believed the earth's core was flooded with water they called the Great Deep.

 

[Smidlee]

The ancient Hebrews didn't know the earth's core was molten, they believed the earth's core was sheol which sat upon the Great Deep.

In essence, the ancient Hebrews believed the earth's core was flooded with water they called the Great Deep.

I don't believe the ancient people was as dumb as we claimed they were. Again I was taught in school that people in Columbus day thought the world was flat and if it wasn't for the recorded history (thanks for the printing press) the myth would still taught as fact. It's obvious in 1 Kings 18 that Elijah had some knowledge of where clouds are formed and knew where rain came from.(waters in heaven).

The scriptures are written so a common man can understand just as Jesus spoke. Paul wrote he could have used great swelling words if he wanted to.

The scriptures are meant to be practical just like a "flat map" is more practical than a round globe. Just because we use "flat maps" today doesn't prove we believe the planet is flat. In another words I don't expect the Bible to be written like something a egghead or lawyer would write.

By the way we can only assume what in the earth's core.

Notice your drawing has a copyright while KJV Bible doesn't. Your drawing is created by modern man.

 

[Smidlee]

P.S I do agree with some of the video I watch so far that Genesis 1 is not dealing with the creation of matter (exactly what is matter is another matter) but the creation of information and order. God spoke this universe into existence just like man spoke his universe "Frozen" into existence.

While the Bible was written so ancient man could understand it in order to write it down there are hints of hidden truth that only been discovered until modern times. For examples the stars are innumerable. They could easily count the visible stars in the ancient world.
Then Hebrews 11:3 " Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear."

 

[random person]

I don't believe the ancient people was as dumb as we claimed they were. Again I was taught in school that people in Columbus day thought the world was flat and if it wasn't for the recorded history (thanks for the printing press) the myth would still taught as fact. It's obvious in 1 Kings 18 that Elijah had some knowledge of where clouds are formed and knew where rain came from.(waters in heaven).

The scriptures are written so a common man can understand just as Jesus spoke. Paul wrote he could have used great swelling words if he wanted to.

The scriptures are meant to be practical just like a "flat map" is more practical than a round globe. Just because we use "flat maps" today doesn't prove we believe the planet is flat. In another words I don't expect the Bible to be written like something a egghead or lawyer would write.

By the way we can only assume what in the earth's core.

Notice your drawing has a copyright while KJV Bible doesn't. Your drawing is created by modern man.

Well, at the earth's core is certainly not the Great Deep.

How the Ancient Hebrews envisioned the cosmos was that the earth, the moon, the sun, and the stars were all held inside a giant dome much like a snowglobe. Basically take a snowglobe emptied of water, submerge it and suspend in a aquarium or jar of water. They believe there was a dome beyond the heaven in which held back more water they called the firmament. And then above this watery firmament above the moon, the sun, and the stars was heaven where God resides.

On these grounds alone, why must science and religion come into conflict?

Just remind ourselves, take a snowglobe and suspend it in a bucket full of water. That basically replicates the ancient Hebrew cosmological model.

 

[Smidlee]

Well, at the earth's core is certainly not the Great Deep.

How the Ancient Hebrews envisioned the cosmos was that the earth, the moon, the sun, and the stars were all held inside a giant dome much like a snowglobe. Basically take a snowglobe emptied of water, submerge it and suspend in a aquarium or jar of water. They believe there was a dome beyond the heaven in which held back more water they called the firmament. And then above this watery firmament above the moon, the sun, and the stars was heaven where God resides.

It's hard to nail down what people believe today so why makes you think you can know for sure what everyone believed back then especially when we have a modern day example of what we were taught that people believed in the past was proven wrong? This is still based on the idea that our ancestors were a butch of idiots. Job seems to know the Earth hanged on nothing.

I have no doubt they had their theories just like today which over time are proven wrong. Notice your snowglobe is even copyrighted.

Just remind ourselves, take a snowglobe and suspend it in a bucket full of water. That basically replicates the ancient Hebrew cosmological model.

According to man's theory. Again not everyone today accepts evolution (UCD &naturalism) nor Big Bang theory.

 

[random person]

It's hard to nail down what people believe today so why makes you think you can know for sure what everyone believed back then especially when we have a modern day example of what we were taught that people believed in the past was proven wrong? This is still based on the idea that our ancestors were a butch of idiots. Job seems to know the Earth hanged on nothing.

I have no doubt they had their theories just like today which over time are proven wrong. Notice your snowglobe is even copyrighted.

According to man's theory. Again not everyone today accepts evolution (UCD &naturalism) nor Big Bang theory.

This model is pretty accurate representation of the ancient Hebrew cosmology, in fact, during the great flood it states God in Genesis 7:11 that God broke up the fountains of the Great Deep and opened the windows of heaven a la the windows of the skydome.

Basically, imagine our snowglobe is submerged and suspended in a ten gallon aquarium filled with water, it is saying God opened doors in the skydome of our globe and punched holes into the bottom of the globe... blurp, blurp, blurp, and flooded the inside of the snowglobe up til its highest mountains.

And in a later verse, our ancient Hebrew author states that the waters rescinded and poured back into the Great Deep in the earth's core. Our author believes all the flood water returned to the earth''s core.

Another thing, the KJV is the only Bible without a copy right. However, each version that is published in softcover, hardcover, leather, and its maps, study helps, and concordances are all copywritten.

 

[Smidlee]

Malachi 3:10 "Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the Lord of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it."

No snowglobe needed. You don't need to imagine a snow globe but just a "window".

What interesting is we in modern times have used the term "window" for a reference point when the space shuttle enters the atmosphere from space. We clearly don't believe in a solid dome.

 

[random person]

Malachi 3:10 "Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the Lord of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it." No snowglobe needed.

I believe this is not speaking of the same context as Genesis 7:11, it is speaking about the substance of blessings issueing forth from God.

 

[Smidlee]

I believe this is not speaking of the same context as Genesis 7:11, it is speaking about the substance of blessings issueing forth from God.

It's the exact same word. Do NASA believe in a solid dome just because they used the word "window"?

 

[random person]

It's the exact same word. Do NASA believe in a solid dome just because they used the word "window"?

But not the same context, have you ever heard the expression "his/her love was poured out..."

Was their love literally poured out unto the ground or poured over someone, as if it were a liquid substance?

 

[Smidlee]

But not the same context, have you ever heard the expression "his/her love was poured out..."

Was their love literally poured out unto the ground or poured over someone, as if it were a liquid substance?

The windows of heaven in all three places refer to a great pouring out: Genesis 7:11, 2 Kings 7:19 and Malachi 3:10. It's just like when we say it's raining cats and dogs. Often as I drive down the highway in my convertible I can see a "wall of rain" just as the windows of heaven opening up and let the rain fall down. I have to stop and put up my top knowing I will hit a hard rain suddenly.

 

[Catherineanne]

Dr. John Walton delivers his origins talk on how to understand Genesis 1 in light of its ancient context.

This two hour video contains lecture, interviews, and personal testimonies from Old Testament scholar John Walton about understanding the book of Genesis in light of ancient culture.

These videos use different approaches to the material, thus I am compelled to post up both. LISTEN TO THIS MAN. John H Walton is an awesome lecturer.

Those were both very interesting; thanks for sharing them.

 

[random person]

The windows of heaven in all three places refer to a great pouring out: Genesis 7:11, 2 Kings 7:19 and Malachi 3:10. It's just like when we say it's raining cats and dogs. Often as I drive down the highway in my convertible I can see a "wall of rain" just as the windows of heaven opening up and let the rain fall down. I have to stop and put up my top knowing I will hit a hard rain suddenly.

However, the Hebrew word for firmament in Genesis 1:6-8, is raqiya (#7549), they genuinely believed in a solid skydome that held beyond the moon, the sun, and the stars was a vault of water. And they believed there was a vault of water beneath they called the Great Deep. .

Raqiya`

Definition:

1. extended surface (solid), expanse, firmament

1. expanse (flat as base, support)
2. firmament (of vault of heaven supporting waters above)
   1. considered by Hebrews as solid and supporting 'waters' above

The Hebrew lexicon is Brown, Driver, Briggs, Gesenius Lexicon; this is keyed to the "Theological Word Book of the Old Testament."

Genesis 1:6-8; Genesis 1:14-15; Genesis 1:17; Genesis 1:20

http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/hebrew/kjv/raqiya.html


So I find in the Creation Science movement an element of great hypocrisy, in that it rejects both science's cosmology and the ancient Hebrew cosmology model yet clings to the literal six days of creation.

 

[random person]

Those were both very interesting; thanks for sharing them.

You're welcome

 

[Smidlee]

However, the Hebrew word for firmament in Genesis 1:6-8, is raqiya (#7549), they genuinely believed in a solid skydome that held beyond the moon, the sun, and the stars was a vault of water. And they believed there was a vault of water beneath they called the Great Deep. .

Raqiya`

Definition:

1. extended surface (solid), expanse, firmament

1. 
   
   
   • expanse (flat as base, support)
   • firmament (of vault of heaven supporting waters above)
     1. considered by Hebrews as solid and supporting 'waters' above

The Hebrew lexicon is Brown, Driver, Briggs, Gesenius Lexicon; this is keyed to the "Theological Word Book of the Old Testament."

Genesis 1:6-8; Genesis 1:14-15; Genesis 1:17; Genesis 1:20

http://www.biblestudytools.com/lexicons/hebrew/kjv/raqiya.html


So I find in the Creation Science movement an element of great hypocrisy, in that it rejects both science's cosmology and the ancient Hebrew cosmology model yet clings to the literal six days of creation.

Again this is modern day man interpretation of how man "sees" in ancient past. I gave an example of modern day interpretation of past view were proven wrong. As I pointed out even today NASA uses the word "window" yet doesn't believe in the heavens as a solid dome. Because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't mean they are hypocrites. I'm not ashamed to reject anything including science that I think is complete nonsense.

From what I've seen people of the past were extremely intelligence so I don't believe they were as dumb as some today believe their were. The idea that Raqiya must be a solid dome is itself modern day interpretation. What they know was "firm" in the night sky were the position of the stars except for the few which later we learn are planets.

I have no doubt that when Jesus said he was the door that anyone can argue by definition a door is a solid object.

 

[random person]

Again this is modern day man interpretation of how man "sees" in ancient past. I gave an example of modern day interpretation of past view were proven wrong. As I pointed out even today NASA uses the word "window" yet doesn't believe in the heavens as a solid dome. Because someone doesn't agree with you doesn't mean they are hypocrites. I'm not ashamed to reject anything including science that I think is complete nonsense.

From what I've seen people of the past were extremely intelligence so I don't believe they were as dumb as some today believe their were. The idea that Raqiya must be a solid dome is itself modern day interpretation. What they know was "firm" in the night sky were the position of the stars except for the few which later we learn are planets.

I have no doubt that when Jesus said he was the door that anyone can argue by definition a door is a solid object.

I can assure you this is not a misrepresentation of the Genesis cosmology, it is just that the English translations obscure this fact. Here are some more beautifully colorful representations of the ancient Israelite cosmology.

And this only places greater emphasis on not being a closed minded, fundamental literalists when handling and studying Genesis.

 

[Catherineanne]

I have no doubt that when Jesus said he was the door that anyone can argue by definition a door is a solid object.

But what kind of door? Does it have a letterbox; a doorbell? A Yale 5 lever lock? Does it have brass hinges, or leather ones? Is it even made out of wood, or is it PVC? It may well be a solid object, but that doesn't make it our solid object; it may even be a metaphor; language works that way.

And for that matter, what is a window?

When we think of a window we think of looking out into the world through an expanse of glass, but this is not what it meant formerly; it is a 'wind eye'. It is a hole for allowing ventilation in, quite possibly to reduce the amount of smoke and other nasty smells inside. Even when glass was eventually used, it was in very small pieces, and far too cloudy to see through. In ancient times a window is not about seeing, in other words, but allowing access from inside to outside, outside to inside. But if you were not aware of the derivation you would not know that ancients referring to windows do not mean what we mean.

This is why linguistic research is very important; without it we assume that everything is as we envisage it because we will not be informed enough to realise how wrong we are.