John Walton

Readers of Walton and Longman's new book are challenged to radically re-examine their presuppositions around what the Flood is really about.

Faithful interpretation may lead to more than one conclusion. And it does not require that all conclusions be classified as either right or wrong.

Biblical scholar John Walton defines “concordism” and explains why disagrees with this interpretive approach.

I am often asked some version of this question by Christians who wish to know if I share their belief in the truthfulness of Scripture. This is an important belief held by nearly all Christians, and for good reasons.

When we make distinctions between natural and supernatural activity in Scripture, not only do we push our modern categories into the Bible, but we also limit God’s action.

Readers of Walton and Longman's new book are challenged to radically re-examine their presuppositions around what the Flood is really about.

Faithful interpretation may lead to more than one conclusion. And it does not require that all conclusions be classified as either right or wrong.

Biblical scholar John Walton defines “concordism” and explains why disagrees with this interpretive approach.