John Walton: Lost World of the Flood

• You always begin your books with upholding biblical authority and looking at how the text are not written to us but are for us. As we have discussed in previous episodes, we need to read the account of the flood as an ancient document. Please Remind us of what this is important.
• In Prop 2 you say that the flood was a real event in a real past. What do you mean by this?
• Next in props 3-4 you speak about the use of hyperbole in the account of the flood. We covered the “conquest” in our last episode. You talk about how Joshua 1-12 and Joshua 13-24 contradict when taken “literally”, but that they present an important theological point… talk about this and how the Bible uses hyperbole to describe historical events and what this means for the hyperbolic account of the flood.
• In prop 6 you specifically at Genesis 6-9 dealing with the local flood vs. global flood debate. Outline the arguments for these.
• At the end of prop 6 you state: “The Bible describes a worldwide flood, yet absolutely no geological evidence supports a worldwide flood. While some people believe that this means that science must be wrong if the Bible is right, we believe that if science is right, then it leads us to a better interpretation of the biblical material, the interpretation that gets us to the original intent of the biblical author.” …. we will get to the scientific side of this later, but this points to the fact that we need to examine the text in their context for better interpretations. Part 2 (props 7-8) examine the ANE background for the flood, and part 3 walks us through the literary and theological context of the flood. Please walk us through the ANE context first before we dive into the rest.
• Prop 9 is titled “A Local Cataclysmic Flood Is Intentionally Described as a Global Flood for Rhetorical Purposes and Theological Reasons”. Please explain this. (Maybe also get into the traditional vs. order and disorder perspectives here)
• I had a pastor friend asked me a question recently. He is talking with someone what has a very retributive view of God and refers to the flood as proof that God being angry, violent, and retributive. This is also a major objection by atheists to Christianity too. Also, many say point to the fact that this is not a kids story (we tell them the part about the ark and the animals but not the people that drowned). How do we respond to this and how does proper context deal with these objections and God’s character?
• You show how Genesis 1-11 is a literary unit. How does all of this work together and set up the covenant?
o Creation/Eden
o Fall
o Cain/Abel
o Seth
o Noah
o Sons of god
o Flood
o Genealogies
o Babel
• In part 4 (props 14-16) you get into the science. Dr. Stephen Moshier wrote a chapter on why geology does not support a global flood. Could you give us an overview of his argument.
• What about the flood stories from around the world? Usually organizations like AiG point to this as proof of a global flood. Why do these stories point to?
• Prop 17 is “Science Can Purify Our Religion; Religion Can Purify Science from Idolatry and False Absolutes”. This is an important chapter. Many Christians have become anti-science, thinking it disagrees with scripture, and many have also walked away from faith due to science, thinking it disproves scripture. Talk to us a little about this chapter and how science and scripture can work together.
• What would you like people to take away from this book and how can it be applied today?