I’ve watched this same video several months ago and was blown away. However, I’ve recently become skeptical of it. Michael Heiser gave the following point: "There is no New Testament passage, anywhere, that would used this Genesis 5 interpretation as giving a prophecy for the Messiah. While Chuck Missler, most certainly wouldn’t claim that he’s inspired by God, the logical conclusion would be that he is… Because Paul and Jesus make no mention of this phenomenal “prophecy hidden in the genealogy”.
I believe Carol Hill from ASA (american Scientific Affiliation) wrote a great article about interpreting the Bible, which she calls “The Worldview Approach”. She reads the early chapters of Genesis as actual history, but filtered through the lens of the Ancient Hebrews who are writing it. Like one might suggest that the people in Genesis 5 were real flesh-n-blood people, but that their ages were exaggerated (possibly following a tradition of their neighbors that make their ancestors have really long lifespans). Perhaps it’s also true that their are generation skips between the patriarchs (as can be clearly seen in Matthew’s Genealogy). Perhaps the flood miraculously took place, but it didn’t incase the whole planet.
Maybe Adam and Eve are true people, but there were other people living at the time too (for instance, Leviticus condemns incest as wicked, but if Adam and Eve are the sole original pair that means God brought about humanity through incest… Which has an inkling of inconsistent morals).
The problem with over-allegorizing people in Genesis 1-11 is that one has now real basis for when the mythological people end and the historical people begin (the book of Chronicles and Luke’s genealogy makes no such distinction).
The advantage of Worldview approach is that sees the Bible as being Truth, while also taking into account we are dealing with very ancient documents: what’s contradictory or false in how we write things is not the same sorta of contradiction as would be perceived by Ancient Hebrews.
I view Genesis 1 as poetry that describes history. All of it literally happened. But the chronological order, and timeframe were not the sole focus. In the same sense that the poem In Flanders Field describes events about World War I, we read like it is… A poem. But we DON’T discount the historical events it’s discussing. Much like Exodus 14 describes the historical event of the Exodus through the Red Sea, Exodus 15 immediately follows a song/poem describing that same event. But using language like “God’s right hand” and “the blowing of his nostrils”… It does not mean we disregard the Exodus as myth.
It is in this I believe people make too big of a distinction between history and poetry. As if one describes objective fact and the other describes “abstracts not rooted in reality”.