Sunday, January 30, 2011

Was the Flood of Noah a Myth?

It is no wonder to find nonbelievers who don't believe that the Flood of Genesis 6 - 9 actually happened. What surprises me is when I talk to other Christians and they don't believe the Flood actually took place. Some, partially believe and say that it was only a localized event in the Middle East. In this study, I hope to show you from a biblical stand point why Christians should believe that the record in Genesis is accurate and worthy of our study.


1.) If you are a believer, you should believe that the Bible is God's Word and the original wording of the text has been preserved for us by God. With this said, I do not believe that every Bible version is an accurate representation of the original Greek, Hebrew, and Chaldee texts. In addition to this, some versions of the Bible are only paraphrases (i.e. The Living Bible). I can understand only bits and pieces of Greek text, that is why I encourage anyone with $10 to $15 to buy a Strong's Concordance. The concordance will help you tremendously in your study of the word of God.

Even with some mistranslation, any believer who desires to understand God's truth can see and understand it. God is more than capable of revealing Himself and His plans to anyone (Romans 1:19-20). Any translation of the Bible that is based on the original languages should be a pretty good translation. I am more comfortable using King James because it is based on the original languages, and my ear has been trained to understand its wording. This is what God had to say about his word:

Psalms 12:1-8,

"Help, LORD; for the godly man ceaseth; for the faithful fail from among the children of men. They speak vanity every one with his neighbour: with flattering lips and with a double heart do they speak. The LORD shall cut off all flattering lips, and the tongues that speaketh proud things: Who have said, With our tongue will we prevail: our lips are our own: who is lord over us? For the oppression of the poor, for the sighing of the needy, now will I arise, saith the LORD; I will set him in safety from him that puffeth at him. The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever. The wicked walk on every side when the vilest men are exalted."

When God inspired the writers of the Bible to record the Bible, God Himself (Who is perfect) looked at every word that was to be recorded seven times to make sure that the particular word was the one He wanted to say. Not only that, God has preserved these seven-times-chosen words from the time they were recorded until forever. It is very important to God that His word is delivered to us in just the way that He meant it.

Josh McDowell (a former atheist) does a wonderful job in his work, The New Evidence That Demands A Verdict, in establishing the case for the preservation of the biblical text. In chapter three of his book he asserts that there are three basic principles of historiography (historical reliability): 1.) bibliographical test, 2.) the internal evidence test, and 3.) the external evidence test. In this chapter, McDowell puts the New Testament portion of the Bible through these three tests. I want to focus only on the first test. The bibliographic test is a way of testing the method by which a document is handed down through time. "In other words, since we do not have the original documents, how reliable are the copies we have in regard to the number of manuscripts (MSS) and the time interval between the original and extant (currently existing) copies? (McDowell p. 33-34)" According to McDowell's research, copies of the number of New Testament, that are either partial or complete versions date from the second through the fifteenth centuries, and total over 5600. If you include other language copies the number jumps to close to 25,000. The next closest contender in this test for accuracy of an ancient text is Homer's Illiad with only 643 extant manuscripts with the first of these dating only back to the thirteenth century. John Warwick Montgomery is quoted in the book to say "to be skeptical of the resultant text of the New Testament books is to allow all of the classical antiquity to slip into obscurity, for no documents of the ancient period are so well attested bibliographically as the New Testament (p. 35)." What he is saying is that if we can't trust the original text that has been handed down to us through these manuscripts of the New Testament then we can't trust any ancient manuscript as to its accuracy. This would include even the historical documents that reveal to us the history of the ancient world.

Even though Josh McDowell's focus was on the New Testament in chapter 3, he does establish the bibliographic authenticity of the Old Testament in chapter 4 of the same book. If you are interested in reading this chapter, or the entire work (which I recommend), feel free to pick up a copy. You can find it in almost any Christian bookstore.

You might say to me, "Wait a minute, didn't you just say that there are some translations of the Bible that aren't that great?" While this is true, good translations are available. Anyone who is interested in finding and reading one is more than capable of it. If you will notice that the very Psalm that I quoted refers to vanity, and flattering lips. I don't believe that this vanity or flattering lips would be limited to just secular things like science. This vanity and flattering lips would also be found in the sacred world as well. God is more than able to preserve His word. He is also more than able to preserve His people from error. He can also lead you to an accurate translation of His word.

Genesis 7:17-24:

"And the flood was forty days upon the earth; and the waters increased, and bare up the ark, and it was lift up above the earth. And the waters prevailed, and were increased greatly upon the earth; and the ark went upon the face of the waters. And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered. Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered. And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man: All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died. And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark. And the waters prevailed upon the earth an hundred and fifty days."

If God's word has been accurately handed down to us, and His words are true. Then when He states that there was a world wide flood that topped the mountains by over 20 feet, we should believe it, no matter what any man says about the matter. This is no morality story filled with exaggerations meant to scare us into being good. It is an accurate account of God's judgement on a rebellious mankind.

2.) Jesus believed in the historical reality of the Flood. In Matthew 24:37-39 (paralleled in Luke 17) Jesus states:

"But as the days of Noe (Greek spelling of Noah) were, so shall also the coming of the Son of Man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of Man be."

Either Jesus was an ignorant, backward, back-woods carpenter who was heavily influenced by His culture and prejudiced by His religion, or He was and is God Himself, Who knows all, sees all, and is all powerful. It can't be both ways. If God Almighty says that there was a flood, then there was a flood, despite anyone's opinion about it. If you are a Christian, you should accept this as truth. In addition to this, Jesus ties the events of the flood to His second coming. He treats them both with the same amount of certainty. If He is wrong about one of them, then he could be wrong about the other. If the flood is in doubt, then His return is in doubt. How could any believer that says they believe in His return doubt the flood?

3.) The prophets Isaiah and Ezekiel both believed in the Flood and Noah. Both of these prophets record God's warnings to the Nation of Israel, and in them speak of Noah and the Flood. And for that matter, God the Father believed in the flood.

Isaiah 54:9,

"For this is as the waters of Noah unto Me: for as I have sworn that the waters of Noah should no more go over the earth; so have I sworn that I would not be wroth with thee, nor rebuke thee."

Ezekiel 14:14, 20,

"Though these three men, Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it, they should deliver but their own souls by their righteousness, saith Lord GOD.

Though Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it, as I live, saith the Lord GOD, they shall deliver neither son nor daughter; they shall but deliver their own soul by their righteousness."

4.) The writer of Hebrews also believed in a literal Flood and Noah.

Hebrews 11:7,

"By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith."

5.) Peter, the apostle, believed in a literal Flood and Noah.

1 Peter 3:19-20,

"By which also He went and preached unto the spirits in prison; Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water."

2Peter2:5,

"And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the the ungodly;"

There seems to me to be little doubt from a biblical standpoint as to the reality of the Flood. It may seem to be a fantastic story that stretches our ability to imagine, but nevertheless it doesn't change the fact of the matter. Our inability to see all the facts, and our reticence to believe what has been recorded for us, are quickly alleviated if we just remember Who it is that sent the Flood in the first place. If the God of the Universe is capable of making the entire Universe FROM NOTHING, then how hard would it be to bring a world-wide flood upon the earth? It is not that our God is lacking in power, it is that we are lacking in faith. We shouldn't believe the lie that to accept the Flood is to give up all rational scientific thought. We should just realize that our belief is based in the Person who can do all things, and Who does all things, without our permission or ascent that we think it is possible. This same God walked on the water too. He changed water into wine. He parted the Red Sea and the Jordan river. He has also given to water some very amazing natural abilities that make our lives possible. Why not believe that He is capable of using it to judge us? The real reason we have trouble with the concept is that we don't like facing up to the fact that He will call each of us to give an account of ourselves. If we can disprove or otherwise ignore the judgement that others faced, it makes it easier to do the same in our own situation.

No comments:

Post a Comment