Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
While controversial, John Walton from Wheaton College has some interesting insights that sort of "transcend" some of the other debates surrounding these texts over the last century or so. His "Lost World of Adam and Eve" and "Lost World of Genesis 1" is thought provoking, to say the least. It isn't Reformed, per se, but nothing there is necessarily at direct odds with Reformed thought even if his exegetical approach is a bit non-traditional.
He denies the lteral reading/understanding of Genesis though, correct?
While controversial, John Walton from Wheaton College has some interesting insights that sort of "transcend" some of the other debates surrounding these texts over the last century or so. His "Lost World of Adam and Eve" and "Lost World of Genesis 1" is thought provoking, to say the least. It isn't Reformed, per se, but nothing there is necessarily at direct odds with Reformed thought even if his exegetical approach is a bit non-traditional.
The best critique of those was by a Lutheran professor. I'll see if I can dig it up.
I must disagree with you. I would advise against reading these as it is against reformed theology. I will admit he makes some good points and is thought provoking but, overall his thesis fails. There are better works from 60 years ago by Alexander Heidel.
And Lo and behold Walton gets NT Wright to talk about Paul's view of Adam....I suppose that speaks for itself.
Some friends and I have a blog entitled Creation Without Compromise. We have lots of material on Genesis 1-3, including a couple of free e-books.
I was wondering if one had to abandon core Reformed Theology to accept his thesis.
Thanks to all for the recommendation s! It is funny that John Walton was mentioned. It is after reading two of his "Lost World" books that prompted me to post this thread.
Some of the things he mentions sound good. The idea of understanding the culture in which the text was given seems like logical idea. I was more comfortable with his ideas from Genesis 1 than 2-3. I was wondering if one had to abandon core Reformed Theology to accept his thesis. It may be my limited understanding but I don't see a way around it. I'm open to fresh eyes looking at old ideas but I found myself uncomfortable in much of his theories.
I do agree with Matt though. I am getting sick of the scholarly literature any more. I used to just love it now of you'd believe them we need a new priesthood of scholars and take the Bible out of the hand of those in the pew.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I was wondering if one had to abandon core Reformed Theology to accept his thesis.
At the core of Reformed Theology is a right view of Scripture. This includes the most basic hermeneutical principle that Scripture interprets Scripture. Walton violates this principle. He uses Ancient Near Eastern culture to interpret Scripture. This is different than the historical aspect of interpretation that requires us to understand the Bible in its historical context.
This might be of use: A Practical Guide to Primeval History
While controversial, John Walton from Wheaton College has some interesting insights that sort of "transcend" some of the other debates surrounding these texts over the last century or so. His "Lost World of Adam and Eve" and "Lost World of Genesis 1" is thought provoking, to say the least. It isn't Reformed, per se, but nothing there is necessarily at direct odds with Reformed thought even if his exegetical approach is a bit non-traditional.
The best critique of those was by a Lutheran professor. I'll see if I can dig it up.
I must disagree with you. I would advise against reading these as it is against reformed theology. I will admit he makes some good points and is thought provoking but, overall his thesis fails. There are better works from 60 years ago by Alexander Heidel.
And Lo and behold Walton gets NT Wright to talk about Paul's view of Adam....I suppose that speaks for itself.
Genesis 1-4 by C John Collins, OT professor at Covenant.
Genesis 1-4 by C John Collins, OT professor at Covenant.
Uh, no. This is not reformed. He doesn't hold to the reformed view at all. It's funny. The OP asks for Solid Reformed Sources.
And we get lots of NON-reformed resources.... Jack Collins, Meridith Kline (who also doesn't hold a reformed view - That was post #2), Henri Blocher (Post #10), Allen Ross (#10), Jack Collins again (#10), Waltke (#10), and John Walton (#11). All of these people are not reformed or don't hold to the reformed view.