Is My Local Flood View HERESY?!?

[@johannagarcia9598]

A few months ago, an ex-student of mine reached out to me. We reestablished a rapport, and after a short while she asked me about my faith, and expressed an interest, and a desire to know the Lord. As you can probably imagine, I was more than happy to share with her. However, she has also recently shared the conflict that she is experiencing and the difficulty that she sees in trying to reconcile her faith and science. I shared your videos with her, along with some other resources, and assured her that science and faith can indeed coexist to the glory of God and that we don’t have to choose between one or the other. Thanks again for your ministry and the work that you do. You are a continual blessing to me and to many others. May the Lord continue to bless you and strengthen you in your ministry.

[@dagwould]

Did you not thus tell here that the Bible is disconnected from the objective creation of God and cannot convey what happened in creation in meaningful language that is cognate with both the events of creation and our experience of the world? That is, existentially locates us in the domain of God's word? Did you not then imply that human endeavour is a disinterested pursuit of knowledge, that seeks to put aside any particular preconceptions, naturalism, for example? So, how does your student make sense of a platonized creation account that removes it from the real world, fictionalizes it, and substitutes other space-time events, which imply a completely different, grounding of reality, faith and knowledge? That is, if the creation account is not accurate to events, then something else happened, and it is this something else describes who we are, who God is, and our relation to the creation and creator.

[@grandconjunct]

Your Student only needs to Choose between the word of Ken Ham and the word of God , thats it. 🙂

[@cristinabivins2240]

How serendipitous! Today I listened to an interview Sean McDowell did with Sy Garte. He's a scientist and speaks on the "issue" of reconciling science and Scripture: kzbin.info/www/bejne/e6XMYoeuga6ri5osi=9L3Z878xsPshtjU3

[@petercollins7848]

As a Christian with a high regard for scientific discovery - it has been such a blessing in many areas to mankind; I have to say that Science can only go so far. What we are dealing with is so vast, complicated and profound, that were we to spend the next 10,000 years in cosmological and geological discovery, we would still be only scratching the surface! Just look at the recent findings in cosmology that have overturned a lot of what was believed before. Science changes and develops, the Word of God never. As the Lord Jesus Christ said; ‘Your Word is truth’. (John 17:17 Bible).

[@BillMurrey]

Well you definitely didn't do her any favors sharing THIS guys vids, the garbage he spouts will just make her more confused, not help her.

[@jonathandulin8753]

I’m concerned people don’t understand the severity of calling someone a heretic.

[@SojoX777]

I mean, one has to think how that ruler will be applied to them, and I guarantee they're not thinking in those terms.

[@wondergolderneyes]

I like Redeemed Zoomer for this reason also among many 👍

[@JonJaeden]

It's the new "racist."

[@benjaminwatt2436]

@@JonJaeden it's ugly and shocking to me how liberaly people apply heresy to anyone who happens to disagree with them. It comes down to rhetoric, demonizing your oponant is easier than facing the arguments.

[@MeanBeanComedy]

I can *guarantee* that some of the radtrad Catholics don't. 🤦🏼‍♂️ They're even calling the Pope a heretic!

[@TheGreatEbayer]

Gavin: I had never heard of this view before. But as you presented it, I went from "NO" to "I'm listening". Thanks for all you do!

[@romans1229]

Same here.

[@benjaminwatt2436]

The problem is YEC propagate that their view is the only legitimate and plausible view. And I say that as a YEC who beleives in a young earth and a global flood. That being said I find it embarrassing that YEC takes such an extreem position in that those who disagree are frequently called into questions of not beleiving the Bible, teaching false doctrine among other serious accusations. Personally I beleive we as Christians should achnowledge our limits in Biblical interpretation.

[@TrevorJamesMusic]

As a newer Christian, it's just so strange to me seeing this level of backlash towards these more in-house issues (like the flood or the age of the earth).. but then nowhere NEAR that same level of zeal from these same Christians in confronting ACTUAL unquestionable heresies like unitarianism, etc.

[@petercollins7848]

Don’t get thrown by these issues. Debates have existed from the beginning of time. As a very wise pastor has said ‘the main things are the plain things, and the plain things are the main things”. Keep on keeping on and do not let anyone or anything cause you to lose your adherence to Jesus. All things will become clear eventually when we meet him face to face. I have been a Christian for over 50 years and have heard all sorts of things in my lifetime, nothing will shake me from my absolute and complete trust in Jesus Christ’s sacrifice for my sins, and his love for me!

[@Stoneington]

The flood and the age of the earth are much more than in-house issues. They are foundational topics that call into question the integrity and reliability of Scripture itself.

[@merrym72veetee12]

We take what God gives us in his Word. We stand on his promises and his faithfulness and what he has done for us through Christ’s work on the cross and his resurrection. We will never know everything or we would be God. God does not lie. His Word is true. Pray for the Holy Spirit’s insight into the Scriptures. What we don’t understand in our limited thinking and knowledge in his Word, we take on faith. What is important is that Jesus, who is God, mentioned the flood event and Noah. We know it happened. Jesus Christ is LORD and he was raised from the dead to save those who believe. That’s what’s important. Continue in faith, loving and serving the Lord! 😊🙏🏼♥️🙌🏼✝️

[@unexpectedTrajectory]

Yes, sadly, we often are firecest towards those closest to us :( Hold fast, brother, and learn to be an example both truth and grace - we can disagree, even strongly, in love.

[@CasshernSinz1613]

To be frank it would be because those genuine heresies, #1 are pretty much settled and labeled correctly, and #2 are far more rare than the debates over the age of the Earth and creation as well as the literal nature versus metaphorical nature of Genesis. I have yet to meet an actual Unitarian but have met MANY people who question their faith because of the creation story and the flood. These things need addressing and what I find, personally, is a prioritization of modern science over scripture as is. So, while I don't think believing in a global flood is an issue of salvation I do think it strikes at a very real problem of people questioning the authority and legitimacy of scripture.

[@clarkemorledge2398]

The idea that Gavin Ortlund could be lumped into the category of "progressive Christian" is simply laughable. Gavin is always a champion of having a biblically grounded foundation..... Megan Basham's response to Gavin really takes the cake. Unreal.

[@kriegjaeger]

It all begins with "Did God REALLY say..." Take what God says plainly or seek his understanding on it, don't be doubleminded seeking the opinions of man to validate your understanding of God.

[@jamesb6818]

@@kriegjaeger🤦🏻‍♂️

[@kriegjaeger]

@@jamesb6818 Absolutely it is a facepalm situation when people cannot take God at his word.

[@jamesb6818]

@@kriegjaeger Question for you, in Exodus 10:15 it says that God brought the plague of locusts from a east wind and “they covered the face of 👉🏻the whole earth, 👈🏻so that the land was darkened;” Do you believe that North America and Australia were covered in locusts during this plague?

[@cosmictreason2242]

@@jamesb6818are there context clues in the text that say one way or the other 🤔

[@antoniotodaro4093]

I love how every second video released by Gavin is a response to criticism lol Everyone wants a piece of Ortlund

[@cosmictreason2242]

Or, everyone is obeying God and "rebuking and correcting with all long suffering" 2 Timothy 4:2

[@justinhawes1593]

@@cosmictreason2242”Rebuking and correcting” implies that they have a legitimate perspective, or knowledge that Ortlund does not have, which I have not seen. What I have seen is frankly embarrassing.

[@davidjanbaz7728]

​@@cosmictreason2242more from ignorance and indoctrination!

[@thomasglass9491]

@justinhawes1593 Stop defending an error. Dr. Ortlund is not infallible.

[@davidt0504]

​@@cosmictreason2242 That ain't it

[@fishtail1129]

Anyone who when they disagree lowers their argument to personal attacks immediately destroys their own credibility. If they believe their position is correct, argue on the merits and facts. Childish name calling just makes them look petty.

[@thegoatofyoutube1787]

Is it childish to say Ortlundism and Ortpinions? I feel like that actually honors Gavin since he basically runs his own denomination and pretends he’s Baptist.

[@jonathanw1106]

​@@thegoatofyoutube1787 tell us youre unable to think critically without saying it directly

[@thegoatofyoutube1787]

@@jonathanw1106 You want a critical thinking exercise, try this: how can individual Christians distinguish between divinely revealed truths and their own strong opinions, especially since Christian leaders disagree about what the Bible teaches? Also, how did Christians understand their faith for four centuries without a Bible and fifteen centuries of widespread illiteracy, no printing press, and hardly anyone being able to afford a Bible? Take those for a spin, Mr. Free Thinker.

[@thegoatofyoutube1787]

@@jonathanw1106 Critical thinkers don’t follow teaching movements that launched 15 centuries after their Lord started his church.

[@jonathanw1106]

@@thegoatofyoutube1787 like protestants?

[@thecatalysm5658]

😮Gavin is an absolutely incredible spokesman for Christianity. Thoughtful, well-researched, mature, and longsuffering. Most importantly, the health of the faith is his highest concern. Well done here!

[@thegoatofyoutube1787]

Spokesman for the Ortlundism wing of Christianity* A delightful and eclectic blend of views based on Gavin’s hunches. “Augustine was wrong about sacraments, C.S. Lewis was wrong about purgatory, Martin Luther was wrong about Mary, most Christians through history have been wrong about baptism.” We are truly blessed to have Gavin as our KZbin shepherd!

[@CurtosiusMaximus828]

Gavin Ortlund doesn’t speak for Christianity. He speaks for a small sect of “Christians”.

[@thecatalysm5658]

@CurtosiusMaximus828 Hmmm. Too many in the Pastorate/ Priesthood seem to have a heavy investment in division. The business of anything is about finding a niche market isn't it? Either that or absolute rule.

[@thecatalysm5658]

@thegoatofyoutube1787 Gavin's preference would be for us all to have a wisdom about theological triage. Division suits many in the Pastorate / Priesthood who are heavily invested in their niche (and there are those who miss absolute rule). Christianity needs to move past the nonsense of division. Stick to first tier doctrines and go live the Christian life. Is there a reason we have to make following God's will complicated? No, there is NO good reason for it. Anyone preoccupied with maintaining their buildings and positions in Christianity will continue to fail the faith because they are preoccupied with the temporal. The Catalysm of the Kingdom of Heaven will help you understand.

[@CurtosiusMaximus828]

@@thecatalysm5658 there didn’t used to be division. Before the Protestant revolution there were 2 churches. Thats it. The Eastern Orthodox and the Catholic Church. That’s it. Just 2. Protestants introduced a novel concept called “sola Scriptura” and now there are literally thousands of churches. The division comes from people like Gavin and other Protestants using Christianity as a play thing that they just make up as they go along based on their own subjective interpretations of scripture and history. If you want to move past division, then move past Protestantism and join the church Jesus Christ established. It’s the only way, period.

[@AlexHawker761]

Hey Gavin, I stayed with you right to the end. I’m so thankful for this discussion. It’s really helping me. I’m a “good faith onlooker” as you said. Thanks.

[@edgararevalo1685]

Although, I still believe in the global flood. You have humbled me to not be dogmatic about my personal and human interpretation of Scripture. Thank you for doing this video

[@sebastianrab8805]

Found this very helpful - thank you. I have an MA in theology and teach quite a bit in broadly Reformed Charismatic circles, and I’d never come across this view so well explained and argued. I’m much better for it! God bless and thanks for your ministry. Seb, North Yorkshire, UK

[@garnerb.3321]

People on Twitter were not charitable in their responses to your video???? I'm SHOCKED 😲 😅 Seriously, I appreciate your grace in the face of all the ad hominem attacks. Thank you for this video.

[@Karla-rf4nn]

It wasn’t even a response to the video, it was a response to the title

[@garnerb.3321]

@@Karla-rf4nn facts

[@saltshaker49]

Thanks, Gavin! Great encouragement to enter the conversation on important matters with love and charity.

[@Sanna727]

Thank you for creating respectful, productive conversation around these fascinating and at times contentious topics. Very grateful for your channel and the brave work you do.

[@johnbloedel346]

I was disheartened by Basham and Zeisloft’s response. I am always inspired by your continued charity and ability to interact with it honestly and with sincere grace.

[@yeoberry]

Basham graciously apologized. I doubt Zeisloft will

[@charlessorsby9897]

I am very happy you decided to post about this. I am of the belief that the flood was local, my wife tends to be on the whole earth flood. We both enjoyed your video because of how carefully and respectfully you handle these topics. You single handedly convinced me not to jump into Catholicism against me wife’s wishes because of certain arguments and concerns you have posted about. All in all I’m sorry for all of the pushback, but I’m very happy about you posting these informative and respectful videos.

[@ogloc6308]

God bless you and your family!Its not easy having some theological differences with your spouse but I pray that the Lord continues to give you both humility and unity in your marriage despite having some differences.❤

[@thegoatofyoutube1787]

What was your favorite point Gavin made that stopped you from being Catholic? You should continue to prayerfully explore and consider Catholicism. Gavin does not accurately portray church history (when it comes to the Catholic question). Probably the best example of that is Augustine who Ortlund claims he "only opposes with fear and trembling" while Augustine confirms countless Catholic beliefs and views that Gavin ignores or rejects.

[@charlessorsby9897]

@@thegoatofyoutube1787 Hey, I should explain myself a little bit. If I took a test that would determine where I would land it would be Catholic. I’m drawn to it, I won’t lie about that, and many people that I look up to are Catholic. I just believe that Mr. Ortlund is genuine. So when he makes points about how Protestants should look at church history, that real presence isn’t silly for example, and when he focuses on unifying Christians no matter what denomination or tradition, that really impacts me. My wife and I have theological differences, but thankfully we don’t have theological disputes. So when Gavin shows how I can unify some differences between me and my wife it’s powerful for me. But I can also say that it’s not like I have completely turned my back on the Catholic Church. I’m doing more study research and prayer than I ever have. Hope that answers some questions and I would love some prayers about all of it.

[@joshuas1834]

​@@thegoatofyoutube1787 I can't speak for the person you asked the question to but for me it was his video on the origins of icon veneration. I found his argument to be absolutely devastating and I thought the responses to it were abounding in logical fallacies and borderline dishonest.

[@thegoatofyoutube1787]

@@joshuas1834 Do you think the ancient church was concerned about people using images to remind them of the true Lord and enrich their prayer life (icons in the church) or do you think they were concerned with idolatry and scandal? Anyone who’s been steeped in Catholicism or Orthodoxy will tell you that images are not being worshipped. We have our own idols today (sex, money, entertainment, etc.)… worshipping statues and images is no longer a mainstream problem. I’ll admit that I didn’t watch his icon video because I’ve lost patience with his dishonest comments (like pretending he rarely disagrees with Augustine). Icons seem like a pretty nuanced and inconsequential hill to die on. Catholics and Orthodox Christians who don’t think that they help the Christian prayer life don’t need to use them. “I acknowledge also the holy apostles, prophets, and martyrs; and I invoke them to supplication to God, that through them, that is, through their mediation, the merciful God may be propitious to me, and that a ransom may be made and given me for my sins. Wherefore also I honor and kiss the features of their images, inasmuch as they have been handed down from the holy apostles, and are not forbidden, but are in all our churches” (Basil,Letter 360 [circa A.D. 370

[@lukeunderwood163]

Thank you for posting this - it is hugely encouraging. I have often felt guilty for not taking the flood story as global because it felt like I was doubting inerrancy. But to know that many learned and conservative Christians believe the same means I am not swimming alone.

[@BenjaminLawrence-u4t]

I think you're doing incredible work Dr. Keep it up! I can't thank you enough. You've helped me immensely in my journey towards Christ.

[@stephenmillertime]

Being raised in a pentecostal church and school, its unfortunately the same way with dispensationalism. If you even talk or preach on anything other than pre trib rapture they lose it and call you names, yet its okay for them to to teach dispensationalism. Keep up the good work Dr. Ortlund love your channel

[@andyjones1982]

Regarding 2 Peter 3, the globalness of the flood is not only indicated by the word "world", which you rightly point out can mean different things, but also the fact that the flood is associated with the creation and final destruction of the world; two other global events.

[@royhooper8080]

So appreciate you, Gavin…..just started in a 9 week study at my church, Grace Church , Greenville SC, on Genesis 1-12. You are dovetailing so well with our study with regard to the context of the culture at the time Genesis would ha been written…..very encouraging and eye opening to my faith journey . Humility is so lacking when fear dominates. Thank you for truthing with love AND humility.

[@TruthUnites]

thanks - may the Lord be with you as your church as you study!

[@MattDavis-c9v]

Hey Gavin! Thanks so much for this video. I just read Heiser’s approach to the flood in his Unseen Realm. Do you have any advice for young believers (or young church leaders) as they navigate this issue with older believers who take strong global flood positions on this issue? I currently work as a youth and college pastor (and hope to serve my church until i die or am called elsewhere). Any advice for how to encourage our other pastors (and elders) to be more open to local flood views? I have so much respect for these men and do not want to undermine their authority. Yet, I want to be faithful to the word and remove all stumbling blocks that would trip up our students. Thinking about compiling my thoughts and writing a paper… But I don’t want to present it to our leaders until I have met with our head pastor on this issue to establish a dynamic of peace and partnership.

[@thatdamchicken]

Excellent work Gavin. You are much kinder and gentler than I could ever be in your situation. I admire your humility and the pastoral heart that emanates from you in every one of your KZbin videos. I have benefited greatly from them. Because of you I have a better understanding of some of the positions my brothers and sisters in Christ hold. It precisely your earnestness, gentleness, humility, and intelligence that have attracted me to your material. Keep up the good work. You are a wonderful representative of what it is to be a a Christian. I thank God for you and that you have chosen to put yourself in a position to have a wider audience. The world needs to see Christians who are as intelligent as you and behave in the godly way that you do. Well done brother!

[@ninasju]

Dr Ortlund, I'm a "whole earth flood" person, but I SO appreciate the gracious way you disagree with people on a variety of issues. Please don't get discouraged by those who disagree in an un gracious way. The other thing I hope and pray for you, as well as myself and every other Christian, is that on issues like this, we'd be prepared always to have the Lord change our minds. Sometimes I think the vitriol we recieve when we state an unpopular opinion (I'm a Calvinist, so I've obviously had experience with this! Haha), gets into our system no matter how hard we try not to let it. And that can color our views because we don't want to be connected to the vitriol. Not that I've seen you do this, but I find it a temptation at times, and I pray it won't trip you up at any time in your ministry. God bless!

[@Superman111181]

Ok, good faith dessenter here. I have two concerns with this video (and a lot of agreement which I won't go in to): 1. The critical backlash you are getting from conservatives about 'did God really say' is a bit cynical and I agree that it's overstepping. However, the main issue is not ' you must believe my literal interpretation or you are a compromising liberal.' the main issue is: could a liberal critic use your logic to poke further holes in the text with regard to the gospel? For example, if exaggerated language is common, how do we know that the disciples meant anything modern when they said they 'saw' Jesus risen in His body? How do we know that Jesus meant that He wanted to save literally any willing person and literally for eternity? How do we know that the communicators of the NT meant anything modern about life beyond this one? This is what you should respond to when trying to desect legitimate varying views of the flood. You cannot merely assert 'well the cross is different.' you have to strengthen and harmonize the language especially when it appears similar to the exaggerated idioms you mention. 2. Your treatment of 2 Peter is appreciated but it needs more work. For example, you pointed out that Peter used the word 'world' when referring to wicked mankind. However, what about the verse right before the flood? 2 Peter 3:5-6 CSB They deliberately overlook this: By the word of God the heavens came into being long ago and the earth was brought about from water and through water. [6] Through these the world of that time perished when it was flooded. Are you suggesting that Peter did not believe that Gen 1 was talking about the whole literal planet? Because that seems to be the immediate context for his parallel to the flood. Additionally, Peter grounds his view of the destruction of the world by fire with the flood: 2 Peter 3:7,10 CSB By the same word, the present heavens and earth are stored up for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly. [10] But the day of the Lord will come like a thief; on that day the heavens will pass away with a loud noise, the elements will burn and be dissolved, and the earth and the works on it will be disclosed. What did Peter mean by this in light of a local flood? Please respond and thanks

[@petercollins7848]

Very well put! As we are dealing with a period deep in the mists of time, perhaps the whole human race existed only in the Middle East, and there were no other peoples in the far flung continents until after Babel dispersed them. Just a thought! And as I have commented elsewhere, why was in necessary for Noah to take animals into the Ark to preserve them if it was just a local flood? Just thinking, and not coming down on one side or the other in this.

[@King_of_Blades]

I’d highly encourage you watch his other videos on this topic and Genesis.

[@Tim.Foster123]

Apparently Peter means a local fire will destroy part of the world. Maybe just the middle east, apparently. I say we preemptively blame Iran. Or Israel.

[@allys257]

Your point that people are so concerned about liberalism without realizing what pressures their own subculture may be instituting is so relevant to the church’s issues today. I stumbled upon your channel a couple months ago. While I struggle with chunks of reformed theology, I appreciate your humility and approach to these topics. The literal approach to the Bible without concern for its context or literary style is very much a stumbling block and you are doing good and important work in the way you address these issues. I’m also thankful anytime someone mentions Dr. Heiser’s work as it as been so helpful in understanding the Biblical authors point of view

[@jmc9507]

Thankful for fallen angels deception?

[@kgebhardt1187]

God bless you, sir. I am learning so much from you, and your faith in Our Savior Jesus Christ is obvious in your work. Since joining your channel, I’ve been reading my bible more, praying daily, and studying church history. The Holy Spirit is at work, and I feel closer to Our Lord. I am struggling to find a church, but I know He will lead me. Thank you Dr. Ortlund for all of your videos, especially the devotional and sermon based content. May the Lord continue to guide you and protect you ❤🙏

[@capturedbyannamarie]

My husband thinks in a very similar way to you on a lot of these topics. He has forced my brain to be open to really thinking about scripture and what it truly says and not what I have been told as someone raised in Christianity.

[@psalm2764]

then why are you looking to Gavin for answers? Read what it says. Mankind was only evil continually and God flooded the whole earth with water. Why is that so hard to grasp?

[@williamnathanael412]

I'm an Indonesian, and though I still believe Noah's flood reached here, I know this issue is not a communion breaker. Local flood proponents are not heretics

[@Qwerty-jy9mj]

What's the criteria to distinguish heresy from something else?

[@theeternalsbeliever1779]

They absolutely are heretics. Gen. 6 shows God telling Noah that He was going to destroy the entire planet with water, and Gen. 7 says that _every living thing_ that was outside the ark died when the flood came. That doesn't sound like a "local flood" at all. Matter of fact, the "local flood" argument is something atheists use to discredit the Bible. If it shouldn't be tolerated when they use it, it shouldn't be tolerated when "Christians" argue in favor of it.

[@micahbannister1287]

Heresy means "incompatible". It only applies to beliefs that are incompatible with nicene orthodox Christianity. Anything else may be wrong, and even harmful, but is not heresy

[@anglicanaesthetics]

I really think some of the confusion around inerrancy stems from critiques like the one Megan launched. Your whole point is that Genesis doesn't teach a global flood, not that it does and instead we should reject its teaching for a local flood. I've never understood why this was hard for people to get

[@kevingates5851]

Agreed

[@anthonypolonkay2681]

The biggest thing for me is that along side the worldwide language dirrectly used to refer to the flood, all the descriptions of how the flood occurs pretty much eliminate a local interpretation. Like if this is a local flood what does "the fountains of the great deep bursting forth" have to do with it? And the biggest descriptor that I dont see any way around a local interpretation is it describes the floods zenith as availing above the tops of the mountains some 15 cubits. Local floods can only take place in basins of some kind, once the waters go over the boundaries of that basin, let alone any mountains around you are no longer at a local flood. The only way I've seen any local flood proponents address this is to suggest that thevdescription isn't actually describing the straitforward thing it is describing, and even though they might have no malicious intent behind it, I can't see that as anything other than disingenuously ignoring, or twisting what the text says to try to fit the local model.

[@kevingates5851]

@@anthonypolonkay2681I suppose a question for OT and Ancient Near East (ANE) scholars is: is there a precedent for writings similar to Genesis 1-11 to use hyperbolic language to prove a point? If the answer is yes, then it's possible that the Scripture is both truthful about the flood but may not have been meant to be perceived literalistically. Rather, it may communicating the completeness of the flood in accomplishing its goal. If I say, "My wife is the sun to my life, brightening my day" -- am I lying? Or is it that the style genre of my style allows for poetry (and/or hyperbole) and so the correct understanding IS NOT that my wife is a star in the universe that I'm somehow married to, but rather her presence is warm (kind) and overall blesses my life every day. Furthermore in my example, the overly literalistic reading of it misses the point completely. Now, I'm not an OT/ANE scholar but if Genesis 1-11 could continue a genre of writing that is similar to my example then it may be that the intended reading is not the overly literalistic, scientific reading but rather a communication of completeness of God's judgment.

[@metapolitikgedanken612]

@@anthonypolonkay2681 The genesis flood narrative only makes sense as a global flood. If you think genesis teaches a 'local flood' you seriously lack reading skills. Well you also lack geology skills, since the massive layers with fossils are indicators of global flooding in the past. And finally you lack history skills and are obviously ignorant of the vast amount of flood narratives in the legends of various nations prior to Christianity. Any contender against Christianity will have a field day against Christians that try to be cute, by insisting that the flood was local.

[@anthonypolonkay2681]

@@metapolitikgedanken612 do you lack reading comprehension skills? My whole comment is saying that the text is talking about a global flood, not a local one. Where did it look like I argued for a local one?

[@manutphua]

hey gavin. just watched this video together with your original video on your views on the flood story. and i just felt the need to offer some encouragement, for i can only imagine the grief you felt when you were being accused a heretic. i've been watching your videos, and above all the helpful content, i've been blessed by how charitable you are in responding to criticism (especially ones unwarranted and seemingly baseless). for that, i praise god for his work in you, through you, and in your ministry on truth unites. may we all humble our hearts to his word, and in love for one another as we grow to maturity in christ jesus. thanks for the videos! i thoroughly enjoy them!

[@psalm2764]

Jesus Christ is the Truth and He said He came to divide with the Sword of the Word. The church uniting is all about ecumenism and the fulfilment of Revelation 13.3

[@browillow]

@psalm2764 - I think the version of unity that this channel pushes forward is the one Jesus prayed for (John 17:20-23)

[@psalm2764]

@@browillow The Great White Throne will reveal all the hidden things and bring them to light.

[@anthonyalexletourneau1765]

Gavin, Stayed with you to the end. You are always gracious, encouraging and Christ centered. Don’t grow weary in doing well!

[@danpahlau16]

I started reading Bavinck a little while back and he’s been so encouraging to me! Just enough outside our modern bubble that I can still understand him and yet providing perspective I never received in the current evangelical world.

[@jumbalaya6531]

I applaud your response and video. Very thankful to God for you and I pray you continue to “unite” us around the issues that matter. I myself haven’t been married to either a local or global flood view. What matters to me is a flood happened that was massive enough to be used as God’s judgement on sinful ppl. Praying that we all learn how to have healthy debate about this without demonizing one another. It’s sad that those are the comments you received

[@carolynbillington9018]

I so appreciated your teaching on local flood questions.

[@antoninal7174]

Hi Gavin, much love from Sydney! Watched your two videos together and walked away learning more about Christian humility than whether the flood was global (not to downplay your efforts, your case is persuasive and I'd like to keep thinking about it!) I'm so sorry that you went through another Twitter war (teary as I type)! Our Lord never said that the world will know that we are His disciples if we cancel each other on Twitter. I guess with pastor Begg's recent controversy as well, I'm beginning to think harder about what godly disagreement looks like. I believe that how we disagree in the Body shows our love for one other more so than when we agree with one other all the time, because it is when we disagree that our godliness is put to the test. This is a very pastoral video for me. You often use the phrase 'irenic approach', and I'm beginning to understand what it looks like. I'm resolved to use more humble speech to evangelise to my university friends. P.S. Excited that you're doing more online ministry! Your videos increased my gospel assurance, and I aspire to be a Protestant who loves church history! Again, lots and lots of love and support from Sydney!

[@mitchelltj1]

A much needed conversation. Thank you.

[@watchnprai]

Thanks Gavin for bringing the focus back on the gospel at the end of the video. Keep persevering with your channel which has been a tremendous resource for me, and do not be discouraged. I think what is happening nowadays is that many conservative Christians are feeling a genuine threat from liberalism affecting our lives, families, schools etc. As such, there is a state of hypervigilence, figuratively speaking "swords are drawn". This leads to people being over defensive and overreactions such as labelling anyone who doesn't agree with all of their beliefs as a heretic, or the weaponizing of inerrancy of Scripture as a kind of catch-all argument against any differing viewpoint, or prematurely concluding that any argument that appeals to being loving (or to science) is a liberal lie. It also reveals how poorly the church has done in the area of teaching how to read or study the bible and church history as well. Many simply take at face value what they are taught from the pulpit. Combine that with the echo chambers of social media, noone can hear each other anymore. Taking a step back and reminding us of the gospel really helped.

[@elisabetcalas]

Your videos has been a great blessing for me. They have encouraged me to read and learn more about all topics related.

[@matthews1338]

I'm a Charismatic Evangelical Christian who also believes in a local flood. I'm also a theistic evolutionist who believes in a literal Adam and Eve. I love your channel because it shows me there are other Christians like me. I believe the essential doctrine of the faith; - Yahweh God is a Trinity, one God in three persons that are The Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. Each person is indivisible yet share one essence. Each person is 100% God, not 1/3 God. - Jesus is Yahweh God manifested in the flesh. - Jesus died on a cross paying our sin debt in full. - God the Father physically raised Jesus from the dead for our justification - Salvation is a free gift received by grace through faith in Jesus. We are saved through trusting in Jesus for salvation. - Jesus will physically return

[@adverseinperpetuity]

Repent and pray for wisdom and discernment. You are lost.

[@regpharvey]

@@adverseinperpetuity lol no.

[@scottb4579]

Yes, it's good you believe these doctrines. But, you don't believe He posesses the actual character He posesses. Or, you don't understand what the process of Darwinian evolution is all about. Neither do you believe what He has communicated in Genesis about the creation of the first man and woman. Evolution is a violation of God's character and nature to the extent He would have to violate His nature to create in that fashion. And that is one thing God cannot do.

[@gospelfreak5828]

@@scottb4579 Explain

[@tategarrett3042]

How do you reconcile a TE view with a belief in a historical Adam and Eve? Genuinely curious here since I've heard several different TE people cache this out differently.

[@dgh5391]

Great video. Helpful, charitable, and clear.

[@buckeyelevi]

This video, and the original, were incredibly helpful and well done. Thank you. I’ve stayed away from these types of apologetic discussions because it seems like so many people seek to be pushing something (like the sufficiency of scripture being at stake, or conservative Christianity or something) rather than knowing, trusting, and believing the sufficiency of scripture and trying to figure out what scripture is saying within its own context. It’s literally basic hermeneutics 101 from Stein’s book. So thank you for the way you think and the way you approach and what you’re seeking to do with these videos. You’re a blessing to the time we’re in.

[@dariabrowczenko9682]

Gavin, God bless you for your kind heart. The video was so pleasant to watch. I still do not completely agree with you on this point, as I have some questions. But I can totally understand your perspective and really appreciate the loving and peaceful way that you try to present this information with. It will certainly be of much help to many.

[@stacyjomama]

Watched to the end. Thank you for exposing us to the conversation. The conversation’s effect for me: gave me encouragement for not knowing the answers to these questions, gave me the permission to explore and enjoy researching these questions without the fear of refuting the inerrancy of the Bible, gave me the exhortation to maintain a spirit of humility. Humility seems to be the spirit behind your ministry. I love this humility lesson and witness for myself. I will pass this spirit onto my children. I’m grateful for your voice.

[@Matthew-eu4ps]

I think it's really important to let the text speak for itself, whatever it may be saying. I personally think it's unwise to try to tie that in too early to what extra-biblical evidence may inform us about what things actually happened. We may then be forcing the biblical author to say something he or she isn't saying. This seems to be a point of difference in the approach I'd lean to and the approach Dr. Ortlund is using. When I read the text for itself, I can just see two possible understandings that are reasonable and consistent. One is that the Genesis author believes and is teaching a universal flood, and it seems almost impossible for me to reconcile this with a local flood. The other is what I understand to be the mytho-history view of WL Craig, where (in my understanding, haven't read from Dr Craig on this) the author (and the Holy Spirit) are teaching true things to the audience, but is using a type of literature that need not be describing events as they actually happened, and incorporates a lot of allegory. In that case the important thing is what the flood teaches us, and the historical reality of even a local flood would I think only circumstantially be related to the text. I think trying to argue that the text literally teaches a local flood is really hard. It makes the account somewhat nonsensical. How does a local flood accomplish God's purpose to wipe from the earth people, animals and birds because he regrets he made them? (Gen 6:7) The purpose of the ark was to keep the various kinds of animals alive throughout the earth (Gen 7:3). And the covenant God makes in chapter 9 is with all the animals on earth. That would only work with a local flood if all the land animals at the time lived in one area only, which I've not heard suggested in arguments for a local flood. I also see a lot of parallels between the water of the flood over the whole earth and the water at the beginning of creation, such as 2 Pet 3:5-6, and where Noah and his family are told to be fruitful and multiply over the earth. And when the text says the water rose to cover high mountains, and stayed for over a year, there aren't many ways to think of that as being 'local'. I'm sure there are no places today where water could cover even a reasonably sized mountain (say 1000m above sea level) without also practically covering the whole earth. I think we need humility, and shouldn't force a particular scientific view. I don't think it's impossible to take the text to be describing a local flood, just really really difficult.

[@Matthew-eu4ps]

I just finished to the end of the video and thought it was really good what Dr Ortlund ended with, that while the question of a local vs global flood is valuable, the main purpose is to point us to Christ. Amen!

[@stephenglasse9756]

​@@Matthew-eu4pshow does it point us to Christ if it's false? If God can't communicate and his words cause people to believe something for thousands of years which then need to be disproved by apostates and infidels like Huxley, Lyle, Darwin how does that lead to Christ? Gavin is just delusional at best here.

[@Matthew-eu4ps]

@@TheBoredTheist the issue with this is that while the author may have taken a large regional flood to be global, the same isn't true of God. He's the one who said the purpose was to wipe mankind and the animals out completely, reversing his original creation except for those preserved on the ark. This still leaves the case where all living land dwelling beings on the earth would have to only have lived in the region affected by the flood. And I think the point about the water covering high mountains is still important here.

[@Matthew-eu4ps]

​@@TheBoredTheist There is a question here about what it means for this scriptural account to be inspired. Can we take Genesis 6:7 as being a true representation of the reasons God had for the flood? I think there is a difference between saying that the author didn't know the extent of the world and so uses global language to portray a local flood, and saying that the author gives his own ideas about God's purpose for the flood, which don't actually represent those purposes accurately. If inspiration is actually just about the theological truths taught by the account, then I think there isn't really any bound to how much of it reflects a true historical event and how much not.

[@Matthew-eu4ps]

@@TheBoredTheist I think inerrancy is usually taken to mean that whatever is being affirmed by scripture (by being affirmed by the original author) is true. Understanding what scripture says typically means understanding what the author meant to be understood. I think that if Moses intends to communicate that a flood is universal in its effects on land-dwelling animals, then based on the inerrancy of scripture we would affirm that this is actually true. In my opinion the other option is what I have understood to be Dr Craig's position, that Moses actually doesn't intend the story as a whole to be taken literally, but is writing in a style that intentionally includes allegorical language and allegorical accounts. In this case what is being affirmed by Moses is the theological truth and not the historical account, meaning that even he himself may not have believed there had been a flood. If this is true I think it would still uphold inerrancy, but probably have other challenges. I think that to say that the theological teachings of the text are true, but not the historical propositions, would be to affirm a kind of inspiration but actually to deny inerrancy. These is just my personal understanding. Hope this doesn't come across as negative or just trying to challenge your position. I think what it boils down to is that working through these things in the first part of Genesis is not easy.

[@danielklassen1513]

I think Gavin is wrong about the local flood interpretation, but I think the issue of how we treat people with whom we disagree has more immediate practical importance than the local vs. global flood issue. The urge to assess the motives of others is a temptation that we must fight against. I don’t even trust my assessment of my own deepest motives, so how unwise must it be for me to assess the motives of others. I also think theological triage is hard and we need to think carefully about it. I recommend people watch (or rewatch) Gavin’s video from a year ago called “Theological Triage: Why It Matters” where he explains a four-tiered ranking system approach to triage, and ask yourself which of the four ranks you would assign to the local vs. global flood issue. If it’s an issue of heresy vs. orthodoxy then it’s in rank 1, which would mean it’s of similar importance to the deity of Christ. Does anyone really want to say that? If so, I would be interested to understand your reasoning. Finally I would say that major young-earth creationist organizations (like AiG and CMI) repeatedly state that one can hold wrong beliefs about these issues and still be saved, and that there are other doctrines such as the resurrection that are more important. If you make the global vs local flood views an issue of orthodoxy vs. heresy you are stepping outside the mainstream of YEC views.

[@jadehart2257]

Right here with you Gavin! Keep up the amazing work. The Holy Spirit is working through you!

[@kevinteh3563]

Appreciate your heart behind these videos and providing insight on both sides of any particular issue.

[@maxpower2587]

I watched the whole video and i think the exampel tweets you showed at the end and your 'caricatures' of them made strong points and were done not with contempt but with good amounts of compassion. You being abel to respond with a humble and tender heart to criticism that can be verry vitriolic is one of the greatest gifts God has given you Gavin. Praise be God.

[@TheBibleBroadcastChannel]

Praise God for such a perspective.

[@lucidhysteria]

Such a good job, brother. Thank you for your hard work and thoughtfulness on this and other issues, and especially for the manner in which you approach them. When I am tempted to despair over the state of online Christian discourse and divisiveness, videos like these are a great comfort. Keep up the good work!

[@parsleyfarm328]

If it was a localized flood, then God gave the rainbow as a symbol that He would never do a localized flood again...

[@addisonwier7438]

Given that the flood would still be pretty massive on Gavin’s view (i.e. hundreds of thousands of square miles), I don’t see how that’s a problem (no disrespect).

[@frosty_soda]

@@addisonwier7438 do your homework on the flood. There is no heat problem, it was a global flood. It just doesn't jive well with those who reckon we're descendants of monkeys. Ridiculous idea.

[@babinbowie2846]

I just have to say, Gavin, your setup is so beautiful! The backdrop and lighting is so warm and cinematic.

[@tammywilliams-ankcorn9533]

I finally made it to the end. I don’t think we should get into fights over this issue, because it is not a salvation issue. However, my fear is that this is a slippery slope into not believing the Bible as historically accurate.

[@evanhaines1044]

How so? He does not even come close to saying the Bible is not historically accurate. He is saying that the Bible is accurately portraying a local flood. If anything, he is wanting to be true to the Bible *alone* and is pointing out that a global flood necessitates details that are NOT found in the BIble.

[@christopherbantoft4867]

Thanks Gavin. You put your arguments forward very well.

[@jocelyn4981]

I so appreciate your heart in addressing this specifically and theological triage in general. I LOVE hearing these other explanations and how they appeared throughout church history. I don't know where I stand on this specific question (but frankly, at the moment, I don't think I care to decide), but you've opened my eyes to a greater realm of scholarly minds offering differing opinions. (Here and in many of your videos) I wish more people held that kind of attitude -- it's important, it can be super interesting, but it is NOT vital for all of us to freak out over or take an official stance on, and all the time and energy involved in thoroughly studying in order to do so.

[@chandlermoore4384]

These last two videos on the flood have been some of your best yet. They are so important to people within conservative evangelicalism like myself who hold these views. Very thankful for your work, keep it up.

[@TruthUnites]

thanks a lot Chandler!

[@joshuastanley2234]

I am consistently referring people to your videos to help them learn how to think about these kinds of issues, regardless of where they land, and how to have these types of conversations with charity. Well done.

[@psalm2764]

How about asking the Holy Spirit to lead you into all truth and give you the mind of Christ?

[@joshuastanley2234]

Certainly! @@psalm2764

[@hoperising942]

This was helpful, thanks.

[@jamesbarksdale978]

You're more gracious than I am. There are a lot of modern day Pharisees out there. More people need to learn (be willing?) to think critically. I appreciate your channel!

[@theeternalsbeliever1779]

Believing what God said and loving the truth enough to defend it doesn't make someone a "Pharisee". Take your own advice and think critically.

[@Ransom747]

Gavin, thank you so much for talking about these controversial topics. They are controversial but also very important. These videos will help so many people!

[@JosiahTheSiah]

I wish that more of our brothers and sisters in Christ thought like you do, Gavin. I agree on your need for theological triage, and my heart breaks when I think of all my friends who are ready to die on every single hill. They end up swinging at phantoms, and pushing everyone away in the process.

[@peterjory7531]

I love you dude! You have done the work! You have been biblical and scholarly! Thank you!

[@tjflash60]

I appreciate this thoughtful presentation. The idea that it has to be “either” “or” and that we can’t have reasonable discussion on subjects like this became a stumbling block for me. GOD equipped humans with the ability to reason. Someone said “when GOD saves our soul, changes our heart, HE does not cut off our heads”.

[@jochemschaab6739]

Gavin, with al due respect, I don't think you really grasp the weight of the objection "why didn't Noah just move?" Noah had to build the ark, which would take a huge amount of time regardless of if you take the 100 years literal or not. In that time, he could have made it even to the southern most point of Africa (and back for that matter). Also if God had to send the animals to the ark, why not to safe land where the flood would not reach? In fact, there are only a hand-full of animal species that live exclusively in the Middle-East, so most of the species didn't need to be on the ark in the first place! Lastly, birds fly great distances all the time, so whats the deal with them? Why do they have to be on the ark? They don't need to be rescued from a local flood. I understand that local doesn't mean small, but in order to account for these objections the flood had to be so large that you might as well say it was global. Sure, you could say that it technically didn't have to cover the America's, but what do you gain with that? So we're left with two options, either you have to conclude that there is no obvious reason why Noah would have to build an ark and take 2 animals of every kind on board instead of moving, eventhough it was for a hand-full of animal species anyway, or say that Noah had to build the ark, because that was the only way to escape the disaster.

[@briandiehl9257]

He could have spent all this time leaving, but we are told he is 'a preacher of righteousness' I think is the phrase. If he left the area he wouldn't be able to call the locals to repentance. Also sort of like how Ezekiel layed on his side for 430 days, the building of an ark for all that time serves as a warning to call people to repentance. As for the animal thing I am not sure, because the ark doesn't seem to be quite the right size for either a local or global flood

[@cosmictreason2242]

He doesn't realize the weight of the objection, because he doesn't really believe the ark was built

[@jochemschaab6739]

@bettyblowtorthing3950 2 Peter 2 indeed says Noah was a preacher of righteousness, so that could explain why he had to build the ark. That is actually a good suggestion, thanks! But indeed, that doesn't explain the animals. Most creationists would say that God sent 2 of every kind, not species, so that would mean there weren't lions, tigers, and cats on board, just one pair of the feline family. If you grant that assumption, there would definitely be enough space on the ark that is over 100 meters long and 30 meters high.

[@Back2theWord]

Made it to the end. Thankful for your videos and learn so much from them, I had no idea the young earth creationism takeover was so recent. Thanks for all you do!

[@willire8811]

the creation of the world is a miracle...the salvation of our very own soul....also a miracle. can we fully understand it? no. we trust it. we must trust it.

[@thomascurry4762]

Thanks for your courage to explore, and reconcile, what is the truth rather than just parrot what some want to hear. Although we both come from a strong reformed background, you and I disagree quite substantially on how to interpret the Bible. However, I continue to watch your channel because (1.) I continue to learn from you, even where we disagree, and (2.) I trust that what you teach is not only what you believe...but is the result of substantial study, prayer, and authentic engagement with the ancient scriptures and our living God. Don't let these "critics" bog you down, Gavin!

[@jefflyell]

Thank you, Gavin

[@cjstev1]

Great video! Super helpful reminder at the end on the importance of triage! Thank you brother

[@TennisFreakHD]

Thanks for the video, Gavin. I remember years ago reading one of Michael Heiser's books or video, whom you also quote, where he briefly argued for the local flood view. I found it convincing since I wasn't really attached to any dogmatic reading of Genesis 6 (btw the Nephilim account can be even more controversial 😂). Basically, I do not find it that important whether the flood was global or regional, and so if I am contextually inclined to agree with one over the other, I'd never consider the other position heresy. I am surprised people can get that emotional over this issue. I'd understand such kind of worries if one were to view the flood as a myth, i.e. fictional.

[@johnw1743]

Hugely helpful & a confirmation of my own thought on the matter over many years.

[@thomasbuck303]

We need to not be so rash in our judgments towards other's opinions on the more minor issues of scripture. Whether someone believes in a global or local flood is not going to effect their salvation or flow into major theological issues. There is a lot in the bible that I am not 100% sure about, but I'll find out in heaven.

[@kylepetruzziello3321]

Watched to the end. Great video. I see the spirit of Paul’s message in you more than I have in any modern day Protestant and it’s inspiring. Paul was devoted to nothing more than the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the unity of all believers!

[@elkellenhabla]

Man, watching the whole video made WWUT’s tweet sound so silly. Can’t wait to laugh with brothers and sisters about this stuff when we’re in glory and everything is cleared up. But in the meantime I do hope more Christians can repent on this subject. I’m saddened by an instance I think I presented a stumbling block to friend when I believed in a young earth.

[@The-DO]

Thank you for speaking about these subjects! You are spot on!

[@dakotawallace9826]

Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. 2 Peter:3:6-7

[@aplatypusguy27]

I don't usually comment, but I just have to say how much I appreciate your videos on this topic. It is seriously such a blessing, and the wisdom and charity that you are handling it with is honoring to Christ. I was leaning in the direction of a local flood before these videos, but unsure about some things, but you have cleared up many questions and convinced me of a local flood. Thank you for your work and your eagerness to tackle controversial topics, even when you know you'll get some unwarranted criticism! Grateful for your ministry

[@c.m.granger6870]

Here's a perfect example of the harm you're causing, Gavin. You've helped this person accept their unbelief.

[@TruthUnites]

Thanks so much for the feedback! So glad it was useful to you.

[@heather602]

​@@c.m.granger6870 I think its likely deliberate. We're in the time of itching ears.

[@MatthewN07]

Taking this sort of contextualised and sober interpretation of creation and the flood actually made me become Christian (well, more or less, obviously Christ himself had a LARGE role 😂). When I first started looking into Christianity I basically took everything as metaphorical because I just didn’t see how this sort of stuff (creation in 6 days especially) could have actually happened, so I just assumed that the rest of the bible couldn’t be true, or at least couldn’t be literal . But when I found videos explaining how the first few chapters of Genesis have always had a wide range of interpretations, I then started to actually believe in Christ because these strange and ad hoc theories (the ones mentioned in the video and others about creation) weren’t packaged with it.

[@kamstewart7755]

Oh yeah I had the same thing but I was a Christian and fell from my faith partially because of genesis. I started to take genesis totally metaphorically, and it created distrust since that wasn't a valid veiw. I was raised up to think YEC was the only way. Then I doubted the account of Christ even though the gospels in my estimation were SUPER accountable. All this to say, getting into the church fathers and deeper theology, opens your eyes so much.

[@taylorbarrett384]

I grew up atheist and always accepted evolution and big bang etc as gospel. When I met the Lord I realized there were spiritual forces blinding the entire world. At that point the idea that evolution etc was a lie became quite plausible, regardless of the evidence I learned about it. I consumed a lot of creationist science and was zealous about it. These days I am agnostic about whether Genesis is history. But I don't think Gavin's approach is plausible. If Genesis was intended by God as history then it clearly teaches global flood, literal Adam and Eve, etc. If God didnt intend it to be history, then it's just a metaphore about free-will.

[@scottb4579]

If you can't imagine how Jesus created everything in 6 24 hr days, then, are you saying you don't believe he actually created whole fish and baked bread out of thin air twice when He was in Galilea? (Mat 14) Or how about healing lepers instantly? Giving sight to the blind? To saying nothing of raising Lazarus, and later, Himself, from the dead. Or how about the flour and oil which were miraculously replenished each day for Elijah and the widow he stayed with? How did Jesus command weather (Luke 8:22-25)? How does a universe with time, space, matter, and energy, just appear from nothing? Whenever Yom is used in scripture preceded by a number, or attached to the phrase, evening and morning, or evening, or morning.....it always means a 24 hour day. You just assumed God couldn't do what He actually told Moses He in fact actually did. If deep time is true, if billions of years have elapsed since the beginning, it can be shown from scripture our God doesn't exist.

[@Galmala94]

@@scottb4579 Do you believe that the body and blood of Christ are literally consumed in the Lord's Supper? Did Jesus really say about the bread "this is my body"?

[@kamstewart7755]

@@Galmala94 I mean I do believe it is literally his body but I'm also a theistic evolutionist so

[@feliperincon3687]

This content is amazing! God bless You Gavin

[@andygray5138]

Thank you ! Thank you! Thank you!

[@kamstewart7755]

It was a great video. We need to take seriously scripture in its context. Scripture should challenge us and genesis is a mystery. Don't be discouraged. Its videos like your flood video, (specifically those from someone like IP) that helped take my faith seriously in an intellectual way.

[@MichaelAChristian1]

Peter said some things Paul wrote you wrrste with so pray for understanding in Jesus name! But Peter said you would have to be WILLINGLY IGNORANT about world overflowing with water. kzbin.info/www/bejne/iHOzpXmaeZ1gjLcsi=FJWIeyfaU3kLyWFz

[@perilouspete]

Excellent video. Keep up the good work, brother.

[@racsooj456]

Thanks for all your work here Gavin. Would you consider doing a video outlining your view on the historical Adam?

[@TruthUnites]

yes! maybe in a month or two

[@racsooj456]

@@TruthUnites Great! Looking forward to it. Bless you and yours

[@renebarbier7637]

Man I freaking lpve your takes. I've not watched all of your videos but each of them that I watched clears a doubt in my mind. Please do a take on slavery in the old testament, I'm getting bugged by that

[@godslittleman5451]

If Gavin is right, no need to consider how the nephilum survived the flood. “Caesar sent out a decree that the whole world should be taxed”

[@godslittleman5451]

@Scribeintheink that may not be the only reason, “God said, my soul shall not always strive with man.” It’s a strong possibility that fathers offered their daughters up to demons and gave them in marriage. Lame he bloodline perhaps. (Speculation)

[@IsaacsCOOLwhenitsHOT]

Thank you Gavin

[@James-WM]

24:45 is underrated. So many Christians (including myself) don't fully understand how the events of the 20th century shook the Church.

[@petercollins7848]

None of it shakes me! Science can only take us so far, and I am appreciative of all science has brought us in our day, but it is not infallible, neither can it save us!

[@James-WM]

@@petercollins7848 I wasn't talking about science

[@jmfwest]

Wonderful video, thoughtful thorough treatment of the topic. I pray you stay encouraged as you pursue issues like this Dr. Ortlund. Many people are grateful for the time, energy, and knowledge you share. It’s incredible that some people actually attribute negative motives to you. I can’t help but wonder whether they even watched your earlier video, or have seen anything else you’ve produced. Your expertise; ability to research and summarize; and concern for truth, fellowship, and integrity are plain. I loved your point in this video about Christian’s not making the faith look foolish on account of their own foolishness. I share your burden about this issue. The truth and beauty of God shouldn’t be obscured for lack of understanding or humility on our part; in fact, it’s our purpose to glorify God by displaying the truth about Him. The historical survey of views you provided was also eye opening for me. You’re right that so much is unknown, even about relatively recent history. We need more people contextualizing controversial topics so that everyone can know the lay of the land. Thanks again for all your work.

[@TruthUnites]

Thanks so much, so glad it was of use!

[@brandonredin]

Love your flood videos! Your content always makes me want to dive deeper into subjects that I haven’t given as much thought to!

[@dsavagevid]

Made it to the end. You rock Gavin.!

[@davidcowell4645]

It's ironic that Answers in Genesis sent Danny Faulkner to a Flat Earth convention because they are worried about the credibility of Bible interpretations that contradict science. Does Ken Ham argue against Copernicus?

[@iGotMySniperSticky]

It is certainly an interesting topic, and I appreciate the civility and knowledge in your discussion, Gavin. How can one progress their thought if they are unwilling to entertain discussion? The reluctance to have the discussion in the first place is perhaps the main driver for some intellectuals toward atheism. It is not the orientation of the belief itself-it is the lack of conversation, and also, sometimes, the lack of cordial interaction. Good video.

[@psalm2764]

the main driver for "intellectuals" "toward atheism" is vainglorious, overweening and unjustified pride.

[@tategarrett3042]

This was interesting but I'd very much like to hear your response to Christian Combative's 20 min video discussing several serious theological issues with the local flood view. I think he makes some very good Biblical points about the problem of covenants and the relationship the flood has with God's covenants.

[@TruthUnites]

I typed a comment in response to his first video, if I am recalling correctly

[@tategarrett3042]

@@TruthUnites Yes, you did - he really appreciated it and included it in his shorter follow up video. It's about 20 mins long and covers a couple of primarily theological issues with a local flood argument. If you have the time, I think it'd be very interesting to hear your thoughts on that.

[@psalm2764]

@@tategarrett3042 the "local flood argument" does not hold water.

[@tategarrett3042]

@@psalm2764 I generally agree and I'd love to see Gavin and Perry continue their discussion on it.

[@psalm2764]

@@tategarrett3042 the point is, that if you read the Bible there is no controversy. It's plain as day.

[@Lisa-xp6yg]

Thank you very much. I can’t begin to tell you how many Evangelical churches my husband and have left due to the eccentric belief systems that evolved. We are very much Bible believing Christians and we believe in the authority of Scripture. However, we do believe in scientific discovery. What would Moses have thought of the iPhone?

[@Jim-Mc]

Having been raised in ancient Egypt he would have recognized dark sorcery when he saw it 😅

[@unexpectedTrajectory]

As a Y.E. global flood guy, your prior video left me with some questions/objections. But I'm ashamed that the "heresy" flag is being thrown and motives are being questioned or assaulted. If someone can say they don't think "it is God's reputation you are concerned with," one might wonder if it is "the faith" and "the body" they are defending, or a tradition and a tribe... Keep up the good work, brother. Let's challenge each other in love...

[@TulipTalk]

Rev. Ortlund, thank you for this and your initial video. I personally believe the Bible sets forth the account of a global flood, but I am certainly open to being mistaken. I do not see the local flood view as a heretical stance unless, of course, it is the result of a low view of scripture, which you do not have. May God bless you.

[@criticalthinkingwjake]

I was reading my son’s recent book report on some of the pilgrims and it brought this video back to my mind. In his reading, the phrase, “new world” kept occurring and he kept mentioning this in conversation about his book report. To think that the local flood view would be heresy based on the usage of world being a regionally used word is not far stretched. The people in the time of the pilgrims viewed what is now America as “a whole new world”. While not used in the exact same sense, it is a striking similarity. For them, the world was the region they knew of, the region they lived in. For us, we know the world as the planet because we can view images of earth from satellites. Even the best maps at the time were drawn from the perspective of high-points on earth. Their understanding was limited to what they at the time. Just as is ours. So no, this idea is not far stretched or “Heresy”. It is plausible.

[@LucasDZurita]

Always thankful for your content

[@zekezechman4711]

Well done Gavin. I too have wrestled with this and other creation topics for decades. Do you assign a particular genre to Genesis 1-11 other than historical narrative?