SOME DISTINCTIVE DOCTRINES OF SYSTEMATIZED HYPER PRETERISM

It is important to keep in mind that many ideas and doctrines full preterism appeals to - such as the complete end of the Old Covenant world in AD70 - are by no means distinctive to that view.   Many non HyPs believe this as well, so one need not embrace the Hyper Preterist system in order to endorse this view.   Following are exceptional doctrines which, so far as I've seen, are only taught by adherents of Hyper Preterism.:

In this paper, I shall propose an alternative view of mine, from a fresh new angle - that Noah’s Flood was only a massive flood local in the region where Noah lived in, using only scriptural verses, logical argument and sound rationale to show that it can be such. It is divided into 3 major parts. In Part 1: “A Closer Examination of Noah’s Flood”, I shall explore potential biblical inconsistencies and problems if the flood was worldwide as is now commonly believed. In Part 2: “Riddles of Noah’s Flood – Solved”, I shall expound the 3 chapters of Genesis through the verses; with new observations and analysis to show that the setting can only be local. In Part 3: “The Flood – Fad, Fallacy, Fantasy or Factual?”. I shall examine the arguments proposed by “Global Floodists” with respect to science and common sense.

Introduction

The disagreement over the nature of “Noah’s Flood”, as is commonly termed, whether it was a myth, a localized happening or a global catastrophe, is not new, having passionately been debated by many for many decades, even as early as in the times of the early church fathers.

Why should there any need to re-examine the nature of Noah’s Flood? Doesn’t the Bible show plainly and conclusively that the Flood was global? On cursory reading, it does look plain and conclusive that the Flood was global in nature. But, if one probes a little deeper into the narratives of the Flood’s account with an open mind, biblical inconsistencies and even absurdities begin to surface. And questions from the perspective of modern sciences and physical laws beg for answers. For such an immensely colossal event, the evidences of it having happened were conspicuously missing. For some, it was conveniently attributed to as a miracle by God, or rather, a year-long series of miracles. (That stops all rational arguments.) For others, gallant attempts were made to respond accordingly to the principles of science, but unfortunately with tedious assumptions, undue speculations and flawed hypothesis (which at times bring into disrepute the reliability and consistency of God’s Words!).

Admittedly, if one approaches the Bible from a rational scientific perspective, then miracles are pure follies. On the other hand, if one attributes all seemingly unanswerable problems as miracles by God, then it could make the Bible riddled with myths and mysteries! The Bible is full of normal happenings and accounts which obeyed all physical laws of science that God had instituted, except when God chose to intervene. In many instances, especially in our Old Testament, when a miracle was called for, it was usually clear from its context that it would be such. And many prophecies were fulfilled cleverly without miracles. They just occurred at the right place and at right time (which, of course may be viewed as a miracle through God’s foreknowledge), like the prophesied destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.

Was the Flood of Noah God’s most colossal miracle to date after the Creation of man or could it be just another “down-to-earth” miracle blown into enormous proportion by man, or simply a local happening just like the destruction of Jerusalem, for which both Jesus and Peter had used the Flood as a type for Christ's Parousia?

In this paper, we shall take another look at the Flood, but from a totally new angle. We shall review biblical difficulties and illogical absurdities that demand a closer investigation into the nature of Noah’s Flood. But before that, let us establish and understand the duration and timeline of Noah’s Flood.

Part 1: A Closer Examination of Noah’s Flood

A) Timeline of Noah’s Flood

1) How long were Noah and all members in the Ark?

Gen 7:11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.
Gen 7:12 And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights.
Gen 7:13 In the selfsame day entered Noah, and Shem, and Ham, and Japheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah's wife, and the three wives of his sons with them, into the ark; …

Gen 8:13 And it came to pass in the six hundredth and first year, in the first month, the first day of the month, the waters were dried up from off the earth: and Noah removed the covering of the ark, and looked, and, behold, the face of the ground was dry.
Gen 8:14 And in the second month, on the seven and twentieth day of the month, was the earth dried.
Gen 8:15 And God spake unto Noah, saying,
Gen 8:16 Go forth of the ark, thou, and thy wife, and thy sons, and thy sons' wives with thee.

Noah, his family members and all the animals, birds and insects were in the Ark for 370 days – from the 17th of the second month to the following year’s 27th day of the second month, that is, 12 months (of 30 days each), and 10 days.

2) How long was the rain upon the earth?

Gen 7:12 And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights.

This was and still is what most people think – a torrential downpour that flooded the world. This is only partially correct. If it did solely flood the world, but then we need a good answer to our next question.

3) How long did the waters prevailed (that is, did not subsided or receded)?

Gen 7:24 And the waters prevailed upon the earth an hundred and fifty days.

These 150 days included the 40 days and nights of heavy raining, starting from the day when the “waters of the flood” arrived and the water started rising, to the day it started to recede. Even after the 40 days of rains stopped, for some reason (which will be explained later) the water did not recede. They prevailed – remained at their level for another 100 days over!

4) How long did it takes for the water to recede completely off the earth?

Gen 8:3 And the waters returned from off the earth continually: and after the end of the hundred and fifty days the waters were abated.

For as long as the water had prevailed upon the earth, it took as long for the water to recede from the earth. These are two different periods of consecutive 150 days each and they fall nicely within the 370 days that Noah was in the Ark and in accordance with other events recorded.

In summary, 40 days of heavy rains flooded the earth. The water level rose quickly and prevailed for 150 days (somehow). At the end of 150 days, the water started to recede for another 150 days. All in all, Noah was in the Ark for 370 days. Note that even when all the water had receded, Noah stayed in the Ark for the last 70 days before emerging out of it.

Now, let look at what potential biblical difficulties or absurdities that could arise if the flood were global in nature (without considering hard scientific argument as yet which we shall re-examine in Part 3).

B) Potential biblical difficulties if the Flood was worldwide.

1) Did giants exist before and after the Flood?

Gen 6:4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

“There were giants in the earth in those days” obviously was referring to the time period before the Flood. The giants were resulted from the union of daughters of men and the sons of God. The “daughters of men” were of human origin, but the “sons of God” were unlikely human but possibly were fallen angelic beings (as referenced by Peter in 2Pet2:4-5) in order to produce "freakish" babies that grew up into giants. So, we were told that there were giants before the flood.

But note that it also said, “and also after that”, meaning that after the Flood, there were also giants still living! But, if all the giants were destroyed in the flood, where did those giants come from after the flood? And indeed, there were mentions of giants even to the time of Moses and Joshua in Deut 9:2 and in Num 13:33, which might point to their continued existence after the flood.

Deu 9:2 A people great and tall, the children of the Anakims, whom thou knowest, and of whom thou hast heard say, Who can stand before the children of Anak!

Num 13:33 And there we saw the giants, the sons of Anak, which come of the giants: and we were in our own sight as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight.

If all human were from the 3 sons of Noah, how did the “giant’s traits” get into their genes? I would not want to be dogmatic that the “giants” had to be from those lineages of Gen 6:4. But on the strength of “and also after that”, it is very probable. If this is correct, then this is one tangible proof that the flood was localized to one region. Other surrounding regions might not be severely impacted at all, thus allowing other surviving animals, human and even ‘giants’ to continue their heredity, yea unto the days of King David, remember Goliath?.

2) Where did so much water retreat to in just ONE DAY?

Gen 7:11-13 …, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened. And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights. In the selfsame day entered Noah,

Gen 7:20 Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.

Gen 7:24 And the waters prevailed upon the earth an hundred and fifty days.

On the 17th day of the 2nd month, water started sprouting from the great deep and heavy rains soon followed. After many days, the waters supposedly rose to about 23 feet above the highest mountains. This level of water was sustained for 150 days before God intervened (Gen 8:1) to cause the water to begin to recede (Gen 8:3). Now, 150 days from the “17th day of the 2nd month” bring us to “the 17th day of the 7th month”, the same day the Ark finally rested on the mountains of Ararat.

Gen 8:4 And the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat.

What many people may not have realized through cursory reading, is that with 23 feet of water covering over Mount Everest (which is 29,000 feet high), the Ark was able to rest on the peak of Mount Ararat that same day. But Mount Ararat is only 17,000 high at its highest point!

Of course, water had just started receding. But that was 40% of all the flood water - 12,000 feet of water – had just receded in that ONE day! That works out to about a volume of water 2.2 miles thick around the whole Earth! Just where can such great amount of sea water worldwide get siphoned off to in one day?

An argument was that both mountains were not that high then. OK, let give them to be half their present height, with Mount Everest at 14,500 feet high and Mount Ararat at 8,5000. We still have 6,000 feet of water, 20% of all the flood water, one-mile thick that disappeared in one day! (And the rest of the 80% of water took 149 days?). And that would also mean that Mount Everest has been increasing its height by 3.6 feet every year for the past 4,000 years – which would have incurred major earthquakes around the region every year if not every other month!)

3) And then the water retreated much too erratic or too slow!

Gen 8:4 And the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat.
Gen 8:5 And the waters decreased continually until the tenth month: in the tenth month, on the first day of the month, were the tops of the mountains seen.

If the Ark was resting on Mount Ararat, shouldn’t all other mountain peaks higher than Mount Ararat be visible? After all, there are many mountains around the world that are higher than 17,000 feet!

OK, let assume the inspired writer were writing from his local perspective. Hence, only Mount Ararat was visible, being the highest in the region. (Ah! Did we say “local”? If so, why were the “15 cubits upward” and the whole Flood account applied to the whole Earth?)

It is possible for the Ark to be resting on Mount Ararat and yet the peak of the mountain was not visible as the 45-foot high Ark need to have several feet of it submerged in the water to stay afloat. But this will require that the Ark indeed rest at the highest zenith of the Mount Ararat ranges! (Else other surrounding peaks or tops should be visible. If so, locating the Ark should be a simple task, should it?)

The other problem is that, it took 73 days for the water to recede enough before the mountain tops could be seen, especially the one it was resting on. Let generously give the top 1,000 feet were uncovered by the receding water and thus became visible from the Ark.

Thus, in point #2 above, we have 12,000 feet of water receded in one day. Then, we need another 73 days to reveal the top 1,000 feet of the mountain ranges in Turkey ( using "local perspective"). And what’s next? We need the remaining 77 days (out of the 150 days) to have the water totally receded off from the rest of the mountains height (16,000 feet) and off all the lands!

The manner the water was receding was just extreme and too erratic to hold water. It simply just doesn’t make coherent or logical sense.

4) Can trees survived under high pressure and without sunlight?

40 days after the tops of the mountains become visible, a dove was released out of the Ark and it “found no rest for the sole of her foot”, as “the waters were [still] on the face of the whole earth” (Gen 8:9). But 7 days later (which was 120 days after the water started receding, 30 days to go before the water was to be completed receded), the dove was able to pluck off a fresh olive leaf to bring back to Noah.

Gen 8:10 And he stayed yet other seven days; and again he sent forth the dove out of the ark;
Gen 8:11 And the dove came in to him in the evening; and, lo, in her mouth was an olive leaf pluckt off: so Noah knew that the waters were abated from off the earth.

“Pluck off” convey that it was firmly attached to a tree or branch, and certainly could not be a soggy dead brown leaf picked off from the waters. The ‘live’ leaf signified to Noah that the water level was nearing sea-level where olive trees grow. (Olive trees require a Mediterranean climate of long dry, hot summers and mild winters with a lot of sunlight and are rarely cultivated above 1,200 feet.)

From a lofty height of perhaps 16,000 feet just 47 days ago, when the mountain peaks just emerged out of the water to be seen, the water level was now down to less than 1,200 feet. Of course, we need the dove to dive about 15,000 feet down, plucked the leaf and then fly upward 15,000 feet to return to the Ark. Again, we have more than 15,000 feet of waters receded in 47 days (averaged to 320 feet per day) and for next 1,200 feet to completely recede, it took the next 23 days.

What is more baffling was that olive trees, after staying submerged under the high pressure of 29,000 feet of water (> 500 times that at sea level!) for almost 300 days without sunlight in a watery grave, remained healthy and green for its leaf to be plucked off? All trees would have died in that intense ruthless environment. If so, where did that fresh olive leaf come from?

5) Noah’s Winter Exodus

Gen 8:14 And in the second month, on the seven and twentieth day of the month, was the earth dried.
Gen 8:15 And God spake unto Noah, saying,
Gen 8:16 Go forth of the ark, thou, and thy wife, and thy sons, and thy sons' wives with thee.
Gen 8:17 Bring forth with thee every living thing that is with thee, of all flesh, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth; that they may breed abundantly in the earth, and be fruitful, and multiply upon the earth.
Gen 8:18 And Noah went forth, and his sons, and his wife, and his sons' wives with him:
Gen 8:19 Every beast, every creeping thing, and every fowl, and whatsoever creepeth upon the earth, after their kinds, went forth out of the ark.

The 1st of Tishri, the first month of the Jewish calendar is more or less equivalent to our early September period. Hence, the 2nd month would be our October. The 27th days would mean around late October to a possible early November timeframe – the beginning of winter! And at a peak of 17,000 feet, in an environment where the whole Earth had just been soaked with water, how much built-up of snow and ice would you expect to be at the mountain top? (The very reason many expeditions searching for Noah’s Ark had great difficulties with – icy wind and thick snow covering the top 3,000 feet of the mountain!)

And that is not all. Every beast, every fowl, and whatsoever that crept, went forth out of the Ark in that early winter weather and began their treacherous journey down from the 17,000 feet icy cold snow peak of Mount Ararat toward ground level. (Mountaineers will tell you it is a hazardous task, even with proper gears.) Remember, we are dealing with every species of animals from all around the world (estimated to be between 16,000 and 30,000 of them by Global Floodists). Most of them were not accustomed to that sort of weather! What about those insects?  How did they make their ways down? Do you believe that this “Winter Exodus” happened? I will leave this to your imagination….

But the point is, even within the Bible verses which give the account of Noah’s Flood, if one insists on a worldwide flood that submerged every high mountain; we do have some serious difficulties. And we have not brought in other problems from the perspective of Science – geology, ecology, archaeology and what have you, which we shall be analyze in Part 3

Is there a better explanation?

As Christians, we know that God’s Word is true. Also, unlike the sciences one or two hundred years ago, Science today does command our respect (after all, they are also immutable Laws laid down by God!) We have split atoms, searched the oceans, reached other planets, and even started cloning ‘life’. So, what could be wrong - God's Word or Science? No, it's MAN!

If God’s Word is true, and science has overwhelming evidences that a global flood 4,000 years ago was very unlikely, then it must be our current belief that is wrong. Somewhere in our reading of the Flood account, some wrong assumptions have been made, some context has been misunderstood. One error leads on to another. (Isn’t this the same reason why we have 101 denominations with 1001 diverse doctrinal differences from just ONE bible?) And in order to hold true the words of God, we had reasoned and argued (for a good cause) around Science – whatever it takes to make God words true. It need not has to be!

So, please be patient with me. I am just like one who was trying to convince the people that the world is round when all people around knew the world had to be flat – with all churches vouching for it! So, read on. I shall use only biblical evidences and internal proofs, and with sensible assumptions and logical reasoning to explain the simplicity of the nature of Noah’s Flood – the way I believe the writer of the Flood account had intended to, though in its brevity (with just 68 verses). You don’t need to be a theologian. You don’t need to be a geologist, or an ecologist or an archaeologist. Just be you, but be sincere and open to new ‘facts’ that have been missed by so many people in their zeal for God and their blind support for God’s Words (and because we were entangled inside the “global flood” box and just cannot think out of the box!).

Let prove “all things; hold fast that which is good.” (1Th 5:21). Let first examine one very important key word that have confused the whole world but will help us comprehend the true nature of Noah’s Flood. Ironically, it is the word “earth” which the whole world understands it to mean the “whole world”. Let look at its various usages in the Bible and its possible consistent translations within the account of Noah’s Flood.

Word Study of the word “earth”

Strangely, no one took Elijah’s famine of three and a half years as a worldwide event seriously, even though Apostle James said that it was “on the earth”. Why? Because we have not been taught (or led to believe) that it was a global event! We take it to be only in the land of Israel.

Jam 5:17-18 Elias was a man subject to like passions as we are, and he prayed earnestly that it might not rain: and it rained not on the earth by the space of three years and six months. And he prayed again, and the heaven gave rain, and the earth brought forth her fruit.

Of course, if everywhere on Earth – worldwide - were impacted by famine for that long a time without food and water, a catastrophe perhaps equal to that of Noah’s Flood would have resulted. All man, beast and trees alike would have perished. But since Elijah still have many people around him after the famine, Apostle James’ intention for “on the earth” must be understood to be a local happening.

The word “earth” used in Gen 6 to Gen 8 is translated from two Hebrew words, marked as Strong’s number #127 and #776. A good example is in Gen7:4 when both words are used and translated to the same English word.

Gen 7:4 For yet seven days, and I will cause it to rain upon the earth [#776] forty days and forty nights; and every living substance that I have made will I destroy from off the face of the earth [#127].

In the King James Version, Strong #127 (Hebrew ‘ad-aw-maw’ – relating to ‘soil’) is translated as “ground” 4 times between Genesis chapter 6 and 8 in Gen 7:23 and in Gen 8:8, 13 and 21 (and 5 times as “earth”). And if one studies the 43 translations of this word in the book of Genesis and the 225 times used in all the OT books - land(s)-125, earth-53, ground-43, country-1, husbandman-2, husbandry-1 – we could see that it was translated to ‘land’ and ‘ground’ 3 times more often than to “earth”. It does give a better rendering if translated as “ground” or “land” (‘a large piece of ground’) most of the times as their context require it. A few examples as follow:

Gen 2:6 But there went up a mist from the earth [#776], and watered the whole face of the ground [#127].
Gen 7:8 Of clean beasts, and of beasts that are not clean, and of fowls, and of every thing that creepeth upon the earth [#127 (ground)],
Gen 47:23 Then Joseph said unto the people, Behold, I have bought you this day and your land [#127]for Pharaoh: lo, here is seed for you, and ye shall sow the land[#127 (ground)].

As for Strong’s #776 (Hebrew ‘eh-ret’ – relating to ‘firm ground or area’), it is used 311 times in Genesis and 2504 times in the OT - land-1543, earth-712, country-140, ground-98, world-4, way-3, common-1, field-1, nations-1, wilderness-1. Whereas Strong’s #127 is more restrictive in its use, as ground or land, Strong’s #776 is more generic and expansive, from ground and land, to include also the planet Earth, the whole world as when the context demands it (as in Gen 1:1). Nevertheless, it is being translated to “land” more than twice as often as it was translated to “earth”.

In fact, we see that even the writer of the Flood account used the two words, #127 and #776 interchangeably too, and the translators had translated it rather freely into “land” and “earth” as well. This is more obvious when we compare Gen 7:8 and Gen 7:14 where both words are used for the same phrase.

Gen 7:8 Of clean beasts, and of beasts that are not clean, and of fowls, and of every thing that creepeth upon the earth [#127],
Gen 7:14 They, and every beast after his kind, and all the cattle after their kind, and every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth [#776] after his kind, and every fowl after his kind, every bird of every sort.

In many instances where it was translated as “earth”, the word “land” could be used in its place without altering its significance, sometimes even making the meaning more clear.

Exo 10:4 Else, if thou refuse to let my people go, behold, to morrow will I bring the locusts into thy coast:
Exo 10:5 And they shall cover the face of the earth [land #776], that one cannot be able to see the earth [land #776]: …
Exo 10:14 And the locusts went up over all the land [#776] of Egypt, and rested in all the coasts of Egypt: …
Exo 10:15 For they covered the face of the whole earth[land #776], so that the land [#776] was darkened; and they did eat every herb of the land[#776], … through all the land [#776] of Egypt.

Did the plague of locusts cover the whole Earth? While verse 5 and 15 state that locusts covered the whole Earth which is plainly another bungled translation in term of context as the land in discussion is the land of Egypt. And even when it states that the locusts were “over all the land of Egypt”, it should be clear to the reader that the land of Goshen where the Israelites were held captives as slaves was not affected (as declared in previous context of Ex 8:22 and Ex 9:26).

The point is, when we come across the word #776 translated as “earth” in the KJV Bible, or any other Bible translations, the likelihood of it to mean a more restrictive “land” (or “region”) is very probable. Of course, context is of utmost importance. And in many occasions, whether it is a prophecy or a narrative, it seldom involves the whole world (or Earth), even if the word does get translated as “whole earth” or the “whole world”. Here are some of the examples.

Gen 41:55 And when all the land of Egypt was famished, the people cried to Pharaoh for bread: and Pharaoh said unto all the Egyptians, Go unto Joseph; what he saith to you, do.
Gen 41:56 And the famine was over all the face of the earth [#776]: And Joseph opened all the storehouses, and sold unto the Egyptians; and the famine waxed sore in the land of Egypt.
Gen 41:57 And all countries came into Egypt to Joseph for to buy corn; because that the famine was so sore in all lands.

Did “all countries” (same Hebrew word, #776) of the world then go into Egypt, as the famine “was over all the face of the earth”? No! The context shows it to be around the land of Egypt only. It is just another translation slip-up.

And did the Babylonian Kingdom, the Persian Kingdom and the Greek Kingdom spread throughout the whole Earth? The erroneous translation seems to make the Bible seems to say so.

Jer 34:1 The word which came unto Jeremiah from the LORD, when Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, and all his army, and all the kingdoms of the earth [#776] of his dominion, and all the people, fought against Jerusalem, and against all the cities thereof, saying, … [See also Dan 2:37,38]

Dan 6:25 Then king Darius wrote unto all people, nations, and languages, that dwell in all the earth [#776]; Peace be multiplied unto you.
2Ch 36:23 Thus saith Cyrus king of Persia, All the kingdoms of the earth [#776] hath the LORD God of heaven given me; …. [See also Ezr 1:2 ]

Dan 8:5 And as I was considering, behold, an he goat came from the west on the face of the whole earth [#776], and touched not the ground: and the goat had a notable horn between his eyes.

Did king Darius write unto all people that dwell in all the earth? No! He wrote only to his people. We know from history that these kingdoms were only over “all people, nations and languages” in the surrounding region of the middle-east only, never over the whole Earth. There are ample examples in the Old Testament whereby the usages of “earth” [#776] are not appropriate if they are to carry the meaning of the “whole world” to the reader, like a few below.

Eze 32:4 Then will I leave thee [Pharaoh] upon the land, I will cast thee forth upon the open field, and will cause all the fowls of the heaven to remain upon thee, and I will fill the beasts of the whole earth [#776] with thee.

Eze 38:19 For in my jealousy and in the fire of my wrath have I spoken, Surely in that day there shall be a great shaking in the land [#127] of Israel;
Eze 38:20 So that the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the heaven, and the beasts of the field, and all creeping things that creep upon the earth [#127], and all the men that are upon the face of the earth [#127], shall shake at my presence, and the mountains shall be thrown down, and the steep places shall fall, and every wall shall fall to the ground [#776].

Given that all “the beasts of the whole earth” did not migrate to Egypt to consume up the pharaoh literally (or trample its land), or “all the fowls of the heaven” flew to and remained in Egypt then, and given how the two words #127 and #776 were so liberally translated in the verses of Eze 38:19,20, when the context was “a great shaking in the land of Israel”, we should exercise greater care when reading accounts where it seem to involve the whole wide world!

From the creation of Adam in the Garden of Eden, and whenever the geographical location was revealed, the “earth” where the events were happening was always around the “land” in the middle-east region. And even after the Flood, through Genesis and even the whole of the Old Testament, the region of focus was the middle-east region, especially the region surrounding the land of Israel. So, it is very possible that when we begin Genesis chapter 6, it was still focusing on this same region (which, in fact, was the prime focus region even in the New Testament!).

Gen 6:1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth [land #127], and daughters were born unto them, ….

What does it mean, “All flesh… under heaven… ”?

So, when it was recorded that God said in Gen 6:17, “And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die”, does it really mean ALL, full 100%, EVERY thing? Or it should be read with the context in mind, and apply accordingly - if the “earth” was to be restricted to only the middle-east region?

Gen 6:7 And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth [#127]; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.

Gen 7:21-23 And all flesh died that moved upon the earth [#776], …, 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 [#127], both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth [#776]: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.

It is obvious that “all flesh”, “every man”, “every living substance” do not include Noah, his family and ‘all’ living substances that were with him. We know that because of the context. Now, the question is then, is the context’s setting confines to the “land” that Noah was living in, just like Lot was in the land of Sodom and Gomorrah, or without a doubt, it applies to the whole wide world?

Gen 41:57 And all countries came into Egypt to Joseph for to buy corn; because that the famine was so sore in all lands.

As we have already asked above, did “all countries” of the world then go into Egypt, as the famine “was over all the face of the earth” during Joseph’s time? No! The context shows the famine to be only around the land of Egypt, and no one have any problem understanding that “all countries” refer only to those affected by the famine.

Deu 2:25 This day will I begin to put the dread of thee and the fear of thee upon the nations that are under the whole heaven, who shall hear report of thee, and shall tremble, and be in anguish because of thee.

If this promise of the Lord were that encompassing, we will not have our current middle-east conflict today. “This day” – which was several millenniums ago – the nation of Israel was to be feared by all “nations that are under the whole heaven” – but we know from context, that it was limited to nations in the surrounding region – and to only those “who shall hear report of thee”.

Dan 2:37 Thou, O king, art a king of kings: for the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, power, and strength, and glory.
Dan 2:38 And wheresoever the children of men dwell, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the heaven hath he given into thine hand, and hath made thee ruler over them all. Thou art this head of gold.

Dan 5:18 O thou king, the most high God gave Nebuchadnezzar thy father a kingdom, and majesty, and glory, and honour:
Dan 5:19 And for the majesty that he gave him, all people, nations, and languages, trembled and feared before him: whom he would he slew; and whom he would he kept alive; and whom he would he set up; and whom he would he put down.

If King Nebuchadnezzar was given by God to rule over the whole world – “wheresoever the children of men dwell”, “made thee ruler over them all” and “all people, nations, and languages” – history tells us otherwise, and that biblical ‘all’s just do not always means “all” – it must be understood in its context!

And did Babylon destroy “all the earth” in Jer 51:25? No! It was very limited to a portion of the world – within the entire known world they knew then – oblivious to the Chinese kingdom and unaware of others civilizations in other parts of the whole populated world. Did ‘all the fowls of the heaven’ and ‘the beasts of the whole earth’ go to Egypt as in Eze 32:4? No!

There are many passages in the Bible, especially pertaining to prophecies, where the vastness and completeness of its application seems worldwide but its context or actual occurrences when they become fulfilled apply only to a limited region, whether Egypt, Assyria of the land of Judah – the same region we are focusing on. Perhaps that was the Hebrew’s way of expressing enormity and intensity. Let take the example in Zephaniah 1 where the passage look almost like that of Noah’s Flood.

Zep 1:2 I will utterly consume all things from off the land [#127], saith the LORD.
Zep 1:3 I will consume man and beast; I will consume the fowls of the heaven, and the fishes of the sea, and the stumbling blocks with the wicked; and I will cut off man from off the land [#127], saith the LORD.

Here we have such strong words as “utterly consume all”, and it includes man, beast, fowls and even fishes. Verse 3 states that God “will cut off man from off the land” and in the following verse, we learn that it was just the land of Judah and particularly around Jerusalem.

Conclusion for Part 1

Oftentimes, our perceptions cloud our understanding, thinking and reasoning. So, let keep an open mind. Let allows for the possibility that the “earth” in Genesis 6 to 8 can be a restrictive large region that Noah lived in then, as in many other cases shown above, and within the context of such, that “all flesh”, “under heaven” and “upon the earth” to pertain to within that contextual region.

Allow me to reproduce the account of Noah’s Flood from the Bible, as recorded in the Book of Genesis, from chapter 6 to 8, using the King James translation. For the sake of this discourse, the word “earth” will be rendered as “ground” or “land” for #127 and consistently as “land” for #776. The original translated word used in the KJV will be shown within square brackets along with its Strong reference number. This should make the changes clear (and you can decide if the context can afford such a usage).

Along the dissertation, I will add my own “commentary” and shall give my observations and explanation of the Flood account in a logical and rational manner, within biblical context, within our physical constraints and within the physical laws and orders that God had put us all in.

Part 2: Riddles of Noah’s Flood – Solved!

Genesis Chapter 6

Gen 6:1 And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the land [earth #127], and daughters were born unto them,

The Hebrew word numbered as #127, and translated as “earth” above, is very often used in a restrictive sense to express a restricted land area or boundary. The region in discussion would probably be around the Euphrates and Tigris river vicinity, in the region of Armenian plain and Assyria, encompassing the mountain ranges of Ararat [see Gen 2:11-14]. This region has been the focal point for most part of the Old Testament, and even for the New Testament period.

Gen 6:2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
Gen 6:3 And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.
Gen 6:4 There were giants in the land [earth #776] in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

As already noted in Part 1, these giants seem to have survived the flood (an issue I would not protract on here). Just like human lifespan, their stature decreased over time. Goliath might be a possible descendant, which by the time of David, they were but 3 or 4 feet higher than normal human.

Gen 6:5 And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the land [earth #776], and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
Gen 6:6 And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the land [earth #776], and it grieved him at his heart.

This should not be a problem, as God did create Adam out of this region – the Garden of Eden – and most OT accounts have been drawn out of this region as well. It was in this particular region that God saw was particular great in wickedness.

Gen 6:7 And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the land [earth #127]; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.
Gen 6:8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.

Just as “the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven; And he overthrew those cities, and all the plain, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and that which grew upon the ground [#127]” (Gen 19:24-25) during Abraham’s time, the Lord had also did it with a Flood to another larger region much earlier on during Noah’s time.

Gen 6:9 These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God.
Gen 6:10 And Noah begat three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
Gen 6:11 The land [earth #776] also was corrupt before God, and the land [earth #776] was filled with violence.
Gen 6:12 And God looked upon the land [earth #776], and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the land [earth #776].
Gen 6:13 And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the land [earth #776] is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the land [earth #776].
Gen 6:14 Make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms shalt thou make in the ark, and shalt pitch it within and without with pitch.
Gen 6:15 And this is the fashion which thou shalt make it of: The length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, the breadth of it fifty cubits, and the height of it thirty cubits.
Gen 6:16 A window shalt thou make to the ark, and in a cubit shalt thou finish it above; and the door of the ark shalt thou set in the side thereof; with lower, second, and third stories shalt thou make it.

The Ark was a huge project by any standards, even today. Noah might have paid hires, or he might painstakingly build it piece by piece – cutting down trees, planking of wood, building up 3 tiers of deck for dens, lairs, burrows, sties and pens, etc. Noah probably also preached of the pending wrath, but it fell on deaf ears. The people around probably laughed at his dream project and at his foolishness.

Gen 6:17 And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the land [earth #776], to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the land [earth #776] shall die.
Gen 6:18 But with thee will I establish my covenant; and thou shalt come into the ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and thy sons' wives with thee.
Gen 6:19 And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they shall be male and female.
Gen 6:20 Of fowls after their kind, and of cattle after their kind, of every creeping thing of the ground [earth #127] after his kind, two of every sort shall come unto thee, to keep them alive.

Noah's was instructed to bring all manners of animals, birds and insects around his locality. And Noah just did it as recorded in Gen 6:22. With only just the local species, or even all the sub-species in the region, the Ark would be big enough for all animals to roam about and for the birds to stretch their wings.

Could Noah had done a worldwide gathering of animals, birds and insects? Even today with all our technologies, navigational skills and sciences, no one would able to do that. Even then, are we to think that Noah literally traveled throughout the whole world, trekked deep into every jungle, up every mountain and hopped onto every island to trap and drag 2 of each animal species along with him all the way until he returned back to where the Ark was? Was the Ark already been used to navigate the world before the flood? (The only other alternative was to have God ‘teleported’ all the animals, birds and insects to Noah, and Noah then guided them into the Ark - BIG miracle!)

Gen 6:21 And take thou unto thee of all food that is eaten, and thou shalt gather it to thee; and it shall be for food for thee, and for them.

Foods for the animals, birds and insects were easily obtainable locally. But if it were a worldwide affair, then Noah needed to also harvest and transport along one full year supply of food for all the captured animals and fowls as well, even if we are to believe that they were all vegetarians! The command was “thou shalt gather” and not a promise by God, “I will provide”.

Gen 6:22 Thus did Noah; according to all that God commanded him, so did he.

The question then is, Did Noah transverse the World before Magellan, reached American before Columbus, visited China before Marco Polo, or he understand the context of God’s command and “according to all that God commanded him, SO DID HE”?

Genesis Chapter 7

Gen 7:1 And the LORD said unto Noah, Come thou and all thy house into the ark; for thee have I seen righteous before me in this generation.
Gen 7:2 Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female.
Gen 7:3 Of fowls also of the air by sevens, the male and the female; to keep seed alive upon the face of all the land [earth #776].

The introduction of “clean and unclean beast” in Genesis has been a dilemma to theologians. Was a part of the Mosaic Laws already implemented then? The classification of “clean and unclean” means some animals can be eaten and some cannot, as defined in the Mosaic Laws of Leviticus 11, unless they were solely for the purpose of sacrifices and worship. But if Noah and his family were permitted to eat of “clean” animals (in the Ark or after the flood), then even 7 pairs would not last very long before they too became extincted (as all outside the Ark were wiped out by the worldwide flood).

Gen 7:4 For yet seven days, and I will cause it to rain upon the land [earth #776] forty days and forty nights; and every living substance that I have made will I destroy from off the face of the land [earth #127].
Gen 7:5 And Noah did according unto all that the LORD commanded him.

In verse 1, the Lord said, “Come… into the Ark…” and in verse 4, He further added, “For yet 7 days, and I will cause it to rain… 40 days…”. This indicates that the 40 days and 40 nights of torrential rains started 7 days after Noah entered with all the intended passengers into the Ark, and not immediately as most assumed.

Gen 7:6 And Noah was six hundred years old when the flood of waters was upon the land [earth #776].
Gen 7:7 And Noah went in, and his sons, and his wife, and his sons' wives with him, into the ark, because of the waters of the flood.
Gen 7:8 Of clean beasts, and of beasts that are not clean, and of fowls, and of every thing that creepeth upon the ground [earth #127],
Gen 7:9 There went in two and two unto Noah into the ark, the male and the female, as God had commanded Noah.
Gen 7:10 And it came to pass after seven days, that the waters of the flood were upon the land [earth #776].

Verses 6 to 10 reinforce that already mentioned by verse 1 to 4. But note that some confusion of inconsistencies might arise if we are not mindful of 3 major sources of “waters of the flood”.

In verse 7, it stated that Noah and his family went into the Ark “because of the waters of the flood”, which mean the rain water has started falling. But in verse 10, it states that “after seven days …the waters of the flood were upon the land” (as in verse 4). Exactly when did the waters appear? The answer lies in the next 3 verses below.

Gen 7:11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.
Gen 7:12 And the rain was upon the land [earth #776] forty days and forty nights.
Gen 7:13 In the selfsame day entered Noah, and Shem, and Ham, and Japheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah's wife, and the three wives of his sons with them, into the ark;

The “selfsame day” when Noah entered into the Ark, all the fountains of the great deep broke up and the windows of heaven opened (in verse 11). That particular day, when the “windows of heaven” open, it rained! This was the first “waters of the flood” that signaled to Noah and his family to get into the Ark, and they did as recorded in verse 7. This rain was a precursor built-up before the torrential rain that would poured 7 days later for 40 days and nights (verse 12) which God mentioned He would bring (Gen 6:17, Gen 7:4).

The “real” big rain did not begin right away. The “starter” rain kept the local people indoor without causing any alarm. It was just an ordinary rain. They stayed indoor unperturbed and totally unprepared for what was to come. After 6 or 7 days indoor, anxiety set in as food was running low, and the water level was slowly rising up! Anxiety turned into terror with the onslaught of the thunderstorm, but it was too late. Also be aware that the 17th day of the 2nd month would mean late autumn or early winter (our late October); temperature was getting cold and frosty. The 7 days also allowed Noah to properly put up the animals in the Ark before the heavy rains and mayhem descended.

The “windows of heaven” that opened was usually explained to mean clouds that rained for 40 days and nights immediately. That is not exactly correct. They were rain-clouds indeed [as in Mal 3:10 - “ … prove me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, ….]. They did cause rains to fall which signaled Noah to enter into the Ark that same day. It slowly developed into severe thunderstorms 7 days later catching all the people by surprise. The thunderstorms lasted supernaturally for 40 days and 40 nights. It was a special outpouring of God’s wrath – a severe ‘super-cell’ grade of heavy thunderstorms that God said He would “bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh” in Gen 6:17, 7:4, 7:10. It came so suddenly that escaping to neighboring region was made impossible. And when the thunderstorms subsided after 40 days and 40 nights on the 4th day of the 4th month (wow! all the "4"s), the rains from the “windows” continued on till the end of 150 days (Gen 7:24) when the windows were closed by God (Gen 8:1).

“All the fountains of the great deep” could refer to several other sources of waters around the region – under the sea floor of those seas surrounding that Middle-East region causing their sea level to move upward (e.g. the Caspian Sea), and geysers sprouting forth and spring heads swelling up streams and rivers(see Deut 8:7, Psa 78:15 – “He clave the rocks in the wilderness, and gave them drink as out of the great depths [springs?].”) and causing the rivers to burst their banks, and flowed into the region.

Gen 7:14 They, and every beast after his kind, and all the cattle after their kind, and every creeping thing that creepeth upon the land [earth #776] after his kind, and every fowl after his kind, every bird of every sort.
Gen 7:15 And they went in unto Noah into the ark, two and two of all flesh, wherein is the breath of life.
Gen 7:16 And they that went in, went in male and female of all flesh, as God had commanded him: and the LORD shut him in.

Notice that the Ark was probably closed from the outside, as it was the Lord who personally shut Noah in! (That’s Divine protection!)

Gen 7:17 And the flood was forty days upon the land [earth #776]; and the waters increased, and bare up the ark, and it was lift up above the land [earth #776].
Gen 7:18 And the waters prevailed, and were increased greatly upon the land [earth #776]; and the ark went upon the face of the waters.

With all the sources of waters adding up, especially the torrential thunderstorm’s rain, the water level rose rapidly and floated up the Ark – “lift
up above the earth/land”. Nothing special really, just plain physical law in action – that wood floats on water.

Gen 7:19 And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the land [earth #776]; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered.

Herein is where the second major misconception crept in. (The first one was that “earth/land” means “Earth”). Somehow, with our preconceived idea (perhaps since childhood days that Noah’s Flood submerged the whole world); we almost immediately take “all the high hills … were covered” to mean “all the high hills … were submerged”. However, when we read in newspapers or books that “all the high hills were covered with snow”, we do not even imagine for a second that the whole Earth has been submerged under snow! Why?

Think about it. With heavy continuous torrential rains, will not all the slopes of all the hills in the region be continuously covered with running waters? That certainly is one possible way to understand it. But I believe a much better meaning for it was that the mountains and hills were “covered from view” because of the heavy torrential rain. The atmosphere became water-clogged. Humidity increased. Heavy fog and mist built up in that frosty temperature. Coupled with the torrential pouring rain, visibility dropped to perhaps only few tens of feet. All the high hills and mountains under heaven (in the raining region) were covered from view – by the thick fog, by the heavy raining and by the extensive cloud gatherings – at all levels. These are typical scenes we have even today without requiring a Noah’s Flood!

Can I prove it biblically? Yes. The word “covered” [Strong’s #3680] occurs 152 times in the OT and while it was translated as “cover” 135 times, the intent was not to ‘submerge’ but to cover or to hide (from view). Let me illustrate with all its 6 other usages in the book of Genesis (beside Gen 7:19,20):

Gen 9:23 And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered [#3680] the nakedness of their father;
Gen 18:17 And the LORD said, Shall I hide [#3680] from Abraham that thing which I do;
Gen 24:65 For she had said unto the servant, What man is this that walketh in the field to meet us? And the servant had said, It is my master: therefore she took a vail, and covered [#3680] herself.
Gen 37:26 And Judah said unto his brethren, What profit is it if we slay our brother, and conceal [#3680] his blood?
Gen 38:14 And she put her widow's garments off from her, and covered [#3680] her with a vail, and wrapped herself,
Gen 38:15 When Judah saw her, he thought her to be an harlot; because she had covered [#3680] her face.

None of them convey a meaning of ‘submerge’. So, we see that when the hills and mountains were covered, it simply mean they were covered up from view, by the clouds, the rains and the fog! (See also Ex24:14,15,18 – when Moses went up Mount Sinai for 40 days and 40 nights and “the clouds covered [#3680] the Mount”.)

Gen 7:20 Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered [#3680].

Indeed, misapplication of this verse further add to the confusion when one applies the latter part of the verse onto the front portion to mean “the highest mountains in the world got covered over by more than 15 cubits (about 23 feet) of water”. But verse 20 was just trying to say, as a follow-on to the 3 preceding verses, that the water rose by 23 feet above the surrounding land (enough to float up the 45-foot high Ark) when the mountains were covered from view by the continual heavy torrential rain and the fog built-up. Whatever it is, it just did not submerge all the mountains! (Break verse 17 to 20 each into front and back clauses. You would see the beauty of the language – in “couplets”. The front clause of 17 and 18 complements each other, and so does the back clauses. The same goes for verse 19 and 20.)

Once we understand the meaning of “earth” and the meaning of “were covered”, most of the problems of Noah’s Flood seemingly dissolved away. Many obscurities become much clearer!

Also, one should not be dogmatic to insist that the flood waters rises up to a maximum of “15 cubits” only. Verse 20 is reemphasizing the previous verses, and therefore was telling us that it was at that level of flood water that the Ark floated up and the mountains could no longer be seen. Unless that happened at the very last day of the 40 days period, subsequent torrential raining would increase it further by many more cubits. Let subjectively give it 40 feet [a biblical number so commonly used in this account for trials and wraths (or even to 70 or 100 feet)] as a reference point for the highest level reached in this discussion.

Gen 7:21 And all flesh died that moved upon the land [earth #776], both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the land [earth #776], and every man:
Gen 7:22 All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died.
Gen 7:23 And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground [#127], both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the land [earth #776]: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.

But, if the waters did not submerge the whole world, how did it snuff out every living substance? First, by starting off with normal raining, most people just stayed in their house – totally unprepared. And as it stretched into the 8th day and with the sudden downpour and thunderstorms, it was simple too late for anything. As the water rose to 23 feet (or higher), many houses were submerged under. Most people would be drowned. Even if some managed to cling onto floating logs, but being drenched every moment in the early winter weather (as the second and third month of the Jewish calendar correspond to November/December period) and without food, possibly without sleep, just how long can one last, be it man, animals or fowls?

Gen 7:24 And the waters prevailed upon the land [earth #776] an hundred and fifty days.

The heavy torrential rain lasted only forty days and forty nights. But the waters prevailed for another 103 days after the torrential rains had stopped. The water level in the region was sustained by “the windows of heaven” that were still open – the conventional rains. The fountains of the deep were also open and pumping water into the region from all spring heads. The waters prevailed.

Genesis Chapter 8

Gen 8:1 And God remembered Noah, and every living thing, and all the cattle that was with him in the ark: and God made a wind to pass over the land [earth #776], and the waters asswaged;
Gen 8:2 The fountains also of the deep and the windows of heaven were stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained;

God caused a gust of wind to pass over the land and the waters which had prevailed for 150 days were pacified. The fountains and the windows of heaven were stopped. As all sources of water were closed, the water started to recede. Note that we were told “the rain from heaven was restrained”. So obviously, this rain cannot be the thunderstorm rains that poured for 40 days and nights which had ceased about 103 days ago. This rain was the typical rainfall (which continue after the thunderstorms subsided) from the opened windows of heaven (see Mal 3:10). These rainfalls came from thick cloud formations, perhaps constantly drawn from other surrounding regions, and the rainfalls were heavy enough to sustain the water level such that it prevailed for 150 days (while at the same time, waters were also being drained away, perhaps into the Euphrates and Tigris rivers, and into surrounding regions). This “clouds-rain” was restrained when God closed the windows of heaven by causing a gust of wind to disperse the clouds up high, possibly also dispersing some of the clouds downward, adding to the fog and mist, and poor visibility. This does amplified the word “pacified” (‘the waters asswaged’) – the rain stopped, so the surface of the flood water became very calm. However, the heavy fog and mist, built over the last 150 days stayed, still covering the mountains from view.

Gen 8:3 And the waters returned from off the land [earth #776] continually: and after the end of the hundred and fifty days the waters were abated.

The fact that the water level rose so fast and yet abated so slowly over 150 days probably point the region to an area enclosed by hills and mountains with few outlets. Now, we are not concerned with 29,000 feet of water, but just 23, perhaps 40 or at most 70 feet of water!

Gen 8:4 And the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat.

And on the very day that the fountains of the deep and the windows of heaven were closed, the Ark immediately rested on Mount Ararat? How can this be possible if the Ark was floating 23 feet of over the highest mountains, or just 23 feet over the land?

Note that it was “upon the mountains of Ararat” (plural). Or simply put, ‘among the mountainous areas of Ararat’. It was not on top of Mount Ararat. That was what we took for granted (erroneously). This was the enclosed region that was flooded, where the Ark was built, and this would be the place the Ark would rest once the water started receding. (The receding water movement might have nudged the Ark into some mud banks.)

If the Ark was floating on 29,000 feet of water that cover the whole world, how could it be possible that on the same day when the water stopped prevailing and started receding that the Ark rested on top of a 17,000 feet mountain? And why did it take another 73 days to the 10th month before the tops of mountains could be seen when there are many mountains higher than 17,000 feet?

[The seventeenth day of the seventh month is 17th of Nisan (or Abib), as the month of Nisan is 7 months after the first month of Tishri in the Jewish ecclesiastical year. (Tishri roughly corresponds to September but not exactly as Jewish months are based on lunar cycles. Hence Nisan roughly correspond to our April.) Now, the 14th of Nisan is the Passover on which Jesus was crucified and died. Hence, Passover usually occurs 1 to 2 weeks before or after Easter. And Jesus, our Passover Lamb, resurrected 3 days later – on the 17th of Nisan, the same day that the Ark found rest and “salvation”. In Ex12:2, God told Moses that the month of Nisan “shall be the first month of the year to you”, thus making Nisan the first month of the Jewish civil year, but Tishri remains as the first month of their ecclesiastical year.]

Gen 8:5 And the waters decreased continually until the tenth month: in the tenth month, on the first day of the month, were the tops of the mountains seen.

73 days after the water started receding, the fog and mist cleared enough to have the tops of mountains surrounding the region to be visible again to Noah. The Ark was not resting 17,000 up on Mount Ararat. It was probably around some much lower hills or plains among the mountains of Ararat. Note that on the first of the 10th month, many “tops” (plural) become visible on that one same day. Receding waters would not give that scenario. This correspond very well with Gen 7:19,20 when the heavy rain (and fog) caused the all mountains to be covered (from view almost at the same time). Now, with the fog disappearing, the mountains’ tops became visible again to all on the plains.

The “covering of mountains” and the erroneous assumption that it means “submerging” have forced so many zealous Christians to accept all sorts of ingenious rationalization in order to have the world stay submerged, putting science on the stake and casting the Words of God into doubt (depending which groups your belong to).

Gen 8:6 And it came to pass at the end of forty days, that Noah opened the window of the ark which he had made:
Gen 8:7 And he sent forth a raven, which went forth to and fro, until the waters were dried up from off the land [earth #776].
Gen 8:8 Also he sent forth a dove from him, to see if the waters were abated from off the face of the ground [#127];

We are now at the 113 days of the waters receding; with 37 days more to go before the waters were completely dried from the earth (or land). The dove was released to test if the waters were abated from off the face of the ground. The raven, released earlier, was able to fly “to and fro” until the waters were dried 37 days later. This was not a problem as the wild raven had the whole region above the flooded area to keep it alive.

Gen 8:9 But the dove found no rest for the sole of her foot, and she returned unto him into the ark, for the waters were on the face of the whole land [earth #776]: then he put forth his hand, and took her, and pulled her in unto him into the ark.

Doves feed on seeds, fruit and other soft plant stuffs on trees and those fallen on the ground. So it seems that its lower habitat was still under water as “the waters were on the face of the whole region” and “no rest for the sole of her foot”. As mentioned, we do not know the highest point the water raise up to, as it was not revealed, though we know that the waters prevailed at least 23 feet above the land to float up the Ark. The high point could be somewhat higher,40 or even up to 70 feet or more, as the 40 days of torrential rains seem to continue for some time after lifting up the Ark. Likewise, how low the water level had receded to in Gen 8:9 above is not revealed, but probably around 20 to 30 feet. After all, olive trees could grow to over 20 feet, and we know that they were not visible yet – still submerged under the waters.

Gen 8:10 And he stayed yet other seven days; and again he sent forth the dove out of the ark;
Gen 8:11 And the dove came in to him in the evening; and, lo, in her mouth was an olive leaf pluckt off: so Noah knew that the waters were abated from off the land [earth #776].

We are now at the 120 days of the waters receding; with 30 days more to go before the waters were completely dried from the land and 100 days before Noah was to emerge from the Ark. The dove was able to return with a twig of olive leaf, showing that the top portion of trees had emerged above the waters of the flood, but not enough for the dove to survive on its own. So the dove (homing pigeon?) returned.

Now, are we to think that the dove flew down 15,000 feet for a twig and flew all the way up back to Ark, ignoring all the dried land or slopes of revealed mountains and overcoming the cold and rarity of air at that height?

Herein is a great mystery if the world was submerged under more than 29,000 feet (over 5 miles!) of water for almost 300 days. The pressure (more than 500 times greater) and the lack of sunlight at that depth would have squashed and killed all plant life! How did the dove manage to “pluck” off (meaning it was growing on a twig or branch) an olive leaf? Any leaf soaked for 300 days under great pressure would have disintegrated or dissolved in the water.

But if only 40 to 70 feet of rain water covered the region, then many olive trees’ top would be submerged under by only about 20 to 30 feet. Sunlight probably can still penetrate to such depth of clear water to reach the trees. Remember, rain releases crystal-clear fresh water. But many probably died because of the long duration of 300 days under water. But once the branches emerged from the water and received stronger sunlight, small green leaves could sprout forth. Such phenomenon can be seen from chopped down trees, or seemingly dead woods (trunks), where given enough water, light and nutrients (left in the trunk), green life can still spring forth.

Gen 8:12 And he stayed yet other seven days; and sent forth the dove; which returned not again unto him any more.

Another 7 days later, some of the trees may have sprouted enough greens and more parts of the habitat have emerged and dried out enough for the dove not to return back to the Ark for its survival. Nevertheless, Noah remained in the Ark for another 3 months. This was to give the whole region to heal in order that all the animals, fowls and especially insects could survive when released.

Gen 8:13 And it came to pass in the six hundredth and first year, in the first month, the first day of the month, the waters were dried up from off the land [earth #776]: and Noah removed the covering of the ark, and looked, and, behold, the face of the ground [#127] was dry.
Gen 8:14 And in the second month, on the seven and twentieth day of the month, was the land [earth #776] dried.

On the Jewish New Year day, the 1st of Tishri, Noah removed the roof covering and was able to see that all surrounding ground around the Ark was indeed dried. Still, he stayed in the Ark for yet another 56 days! He probably could observe that the trees and vegetation have not recovered sufficiently to sustain his animals, birds and insects. But 56 days later, the whole region that was flooded had dried - healed. Grass, plants and other vegetation had grown again in the period of 70 days since the water totally receded – ensuring that all members in the Ark can safely return back to their own habitats in the region (and not around the world in pairs).

Gen 8:15 And God spake unto Noah, saying,
Gen 8:16 Go forth of the ark, thou, and thy wife, and thy sons, and thy sons' wives with thee.

It is very possible that it was God who determined the right time to release Noah and all members from the Ark. It was the Lord who “shut him in” (Gen 7:16), indicating that the Noah was locked from the outside! So, it was likely that it was God who granted the new lease of life to all – “Go forth…”.

Gen 8:17 Bring forth with thee every living thing that is with thee, of all flesh, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the land [earth #776]; that they may breed abundantly in the land [earth #776], and be fruitful, and multiply upon the land [earth #776].

When we understand that the flood was restricted only to a certain large terrain within the Turkey/Middle-East region, it became very possible and achievable for Noah to gathers all animals, fowls and insects, yea, even sub-species in the region, and housed them very comfortably within the Ark. Naturally, their food was sourced from the same region. Now, there is more than enough room for all.

Gen 8:18 And Noah went forth, and his sons, and his wife, and his sons' wives with him:
Gen 8:19 Every beast, every creeping thing, and every fowl, and whatsoever creepeth upon the land [earth #776], after their kinds, went forth out of the ark.

No, we don’t have all the animals and insects journeying down from the 17,000 feet snow-capped top of Mount Ararat. And, we don’t have the bison trekking back with the polar bears through Alaska to North America and the pole respectively. Or the koala bears hitching a ride on the back of the kangaroos as they hopped back to Australia. Or to have God to ‘teleport’ them back to their origin habitats. None of those difficulties!

Gen 8:20 And Noah builded an altar unto the LORD; and took of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl, and offered burnt offerings on the altar.

This verse can cause some problem for “Global Floodists”, but again, I would not be forcing the issue – just be a food for thought. It seems to indicate that Noah sacrificed every clean beasts and fowls as burnt offerings to the Lord! But it was argued that “of every” means a selection, likely just a pair of each out of the 7 clean pairs brought out of the Ark. But it was also stated exactly in the same manner in Gen 8:17, “Bring forth with thee every living thing that is with thee, of all flesh, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of every creeping thing that creepeth ...”. Did Noah take out only a selection of animals, fowls and insects? I don’t think so. The point is, even if Noah sacrificed all clean animals, such animals are likely to be available from surrounding un-flooded regions. The taking in of the animals and releasing it a year later was to enable the region to be repopulated in a more speedily manner. But for “Global Floodists”, it would mean the extinction of all clean animals in the world.

Gen 8:21 And the LORD smelled a sweet savour; and the LORD said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground [#127] any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done.
Gen 8:22 While the land [earth #776] remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease.

The whole context of the Flood can be summarized in the phrase Gen 8:21 “I will not again curse the land [ground #127]” – a restrictive use of “earth” – and relating to the beginning account of it - when men began to multiply on the face of the land [earth#127] – the same region that the OT had always put focus on! So, as long as the land of the Middle East remains, we will have seasons and the Earth will continue to rotate to give ‘day and night’ – that’s a promise!

Conclusion of Part 2

Well, if you have read through the above 3 chapters of Genesis, the notion of a worldwide flood should no longer be obvious in these chapters - all because of the translation for primarily one word - “earth” (Strong’s #776) and of us being told or led to believe it to be such.

Oh! That was not the end of it yet. After all the animals exited and went their way, God grant Noah some shocking allowance (at least, to the “Global Floodists’).

Gen 9:1 And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the land [earth #776].
Gen 9:2 And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the land [earth #776], and upon every fowl of the air, upon all that moveth upon the land [earth #127], and upon all the fishes of the sea; into your hand are they delivered.
Gen 9:3 Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.

I have proposed above that in Gen 8:20, Noah may have sacrificed every clean animal to God. With classification of ‘clean and unclean’, it also means that clean animals are allowed to be eaten (as defined in Lev 23). But now, it was God who said, “Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you”! If ‘every moving thing’ mean both clean and unclean, then God was allowing more than just the clean animals before the Flood. Do you know what that implies and the repercussion? If Noah and any of his family members ate any of the unclean animals, it would spell their extinction as there was only one pair of it left – one male and one female! (Some have reasoned that those animals would have reproduced after themselves. One more pair each species (or genus) will double the population on the Ark, thus adding further problems to the already crowded Ark relative to its size, the amount of food available and the maintenance effort required – which we shall look into in Part 3 of this paper).

But if there were many of these ‘unclean’ animals still around the other unaffected regions, as the flood was local, then it will not be a problem. And God knows what He was talking about. There might be another subtle clue that such was the case in Gen 9:9,10.

Gen 9:9 And I, behold, I establish my covenant with you, and with your seed after you;
Gen 9:10 And with every living creature that is with you, of the fowl, of the cattle, and of every beast of the land [earth #776] with you; from all that go out of the ark, to every beast of the land [earth #776].

Note the repeated phrase, “every beast of the earth” but one of the phrases was doubly qualified by “with you” - “all that go out of the ark”. The covenant that God made was with Noah and his seed, and “with every living creature that is with you …; FROM all that go out of the ark, TO every beast of the earth [land]”. There were two groups of beasts involved here - [from] those that were with Noah and went out of the Ark, and [to] every beast of the earth (land – other region). It does not matter how you would like to view the intent of the word “earth” here – to be the local region or to be the whole World. The fact is there were 2 groups of animals being compared - the beasts of the Ark and the beasts from other regions of the "earth"!

Why then bring all these animals on broad the Ark if there were plenty of these animals around the region? I will answer these in the closing section.

Part 3: The Flood - Fallacy, Fantasy or Factual Account?

When Science clashes with biblical understanding, we should be flexible enough to acknowledge that perhaps our biblical comprehension or interpretation might be wrong. Strong evidences demand a verdict, or at least a retrial. Of course, it could also be that scientific understanding or new discovery is wrong. Or even both can be wrong. And history has proved that both had been wrong before – man’s understanding of both the Bible and the Science (and both Bible and Science originate from God – they will always be true and complementary if understood correctly).

Naturally, Christians do get threatened (and probably offended) when new scientific discovery or data seems to challenge much treasured biblical accounts or insights. Unfortunately, in the face of such scientific discoveries, and in their zeal for God’s Word, many Christians still insisted that the 4,000 years since the ‘global flood’ cater for all the geographical and ecological events that had happened, yea, even for the dinosaurs (which some argued to be living during Noah’s time and were brought into the Ark!).

Let appraise some of the key arguments used by many people to counter or explain away the difficulties for a global flood that supposedly submerged the whole world.

Worldwide Flood – Can it really be possible?

Yes, it is certainly possible if God wanted to. But did He need to then? Undoubtedly, there were elements of miracle in Noah’s Flood – the 150 days of continuous raining and the long stretch of thunderstorms lasting 40 days in a region not known to have such. But I am averse to attributing a long list of miracles in order to support a flood that submerged the whole world – ignoring credible evidences put up by Sciences that such an event seems very improbable.

Many Global Floodist sites on the internet have used or referenced a book, titled “Noah’s Ark – A feasibility Study” by John Woodmorappe as a panacea for many problems associated with the worldwide flooding and with Noah’s Ark. (Some information, articles and briefs are available here: http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-273.htm.   Needless to say, several counter-sites also argue their viewpoints, and one good site is at http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html titled “Problems with a Global Flood” by Mark Isaak. Readers should have no difficulty finding many other sites debating upon this issue.

Global Floodists may have many rebuttals to my proposed alternative view above. And I certainly welcome the comments and rebuttals. Perhaps, in anticipation of such rebuttals, allow me to raise some of them below and questions their possibility and rationale. Probably, many of these are well known questions-answers discourse. It would not be possible to cover from every angle and in detail in this paper, but I will do a summarized reasoning and will focus on just 4 main areas.

1) Can all the ‘species’ of animals fit into the Ark?

In John Woodmorappe’s book, he figured that out of 50,000,000 species of creatures in the world, but only about 16,000 animals were on the Ark, having an average size of a rat (as probably, the small size of insects were computed together), with only 15% of the animals were sheep-sized or larger.

By pointing out that the word "specie" is not equivalent to the "created kinds" of the Genesis account, John believes it to be a higher “genus” classification such that as few as 2,000 animals are all that is required on the ark. To pad this number for error, he continues his study by showing that the ark could easily accommodate 16,000 animals. (Quoting from extract of an article in Christian Answers website http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-c013.html ).

By suggesting using “genus” instead of “species”, John successfully reduces 50 million species to just 2,000 genuses (a reduction of 3000:1). Most Global Floodists accept this willingly, of course. The Bible states it was to be “after their kind”, that is, reproducible after their own kind. All domesticated dogs are in one species. Dogs and wolves are different species, but in the same genus. Hence, it is acceptable that a mule is not necessary to be in the Ark as it could be cross-bred from a horse and a donkey anytime. But as long as any animals, birds or insects cannot be produced by cross-breeding, and can only propagate by re-producing through "their kind", they must be on the Ark or else they will go extinct. For many animals life, it is not possible to reproduce even from the same species.  If Poodle cannot come from mating Pekinese with Terrier (which are subspecies of domestic dog classified as one common species - “Canis lupus familiaris”), or jackal cannot come from wolf and coyote (as they are classified under the same genus - “canis”), then they all need to be in the Ark in order for them to survive till today. How does the Bible define "after their kind". Gen 7:14 provides us the meaning and amplification of this phrase - “and every fowl after his kind, every bird of every sort”. We probably will end up with much more than the 16,000 animals, fowls and insects.

So, it is not just ‘genus’ or ‘specie’. Even sub-species of dog like Poodle, Terrier, Alsatian, etc. and of other animals, birds and insects would need to be in the Ark to continue their lineage down to today. Evidently, 16,000 is just too low an estimate for all “sorts” of animals, birds and insects! Anyway, let continue the argument from Christian Answers website which rationalizes what species can be excluded from the Ark.

However, the vast majority of these are capable of surviving in water and would not need to be brought aboard the ark. Noah need make no provision for the 21,000 species of fish or the 1,700 tunicates (marine chordates like sea squirts) found throughout the seas of the world, or the 600 echinoderms including star fish and sea urchins, or the 107,000 mollusks such as mussels, clams and oysters, or the 10,000 coelenterates like corals and sea anemones, jelly fish and hydroids or the 5,000 species of sponges, or the 30,000 protozoans, the microscopic single-celled creatures.

One could have easily skimmed over it without giving it a thought that sea water is not the same as rain water! If the world were to be filled with 5 times more ‘new’ water, are these ‘new’ water salt water of the same salinity? Remember, it was the emphasized 40 days of rain that kept the waters prevailed over the earth. One to five time of fresh water into the seas and oceans will kill almost all salt water lives! And some marine lives along coastal regions or in brackish waters cannot survived in protracted submersion in water, especially 29,000 feet down under!

In addition, some of the mammals are aquatic. For example, the whales, seals and porpoises. The amphibians need not all have been included, nor all the reptiles, such as sea turtles, and alligators. Moreover, a large number of the arthropods numbering 838,000 species, such as lobsters, shrimp, crabs and water fleas and barnacles are marine creatures. And the insect species among arthropoda are usually very small. Also, many of the 35,000 species of worms as well as many of the insects could have survived outside the Ark.

Mixing fresh water with salt water would spell death for most species that live in either fresh or salt water. With only dead fishes and dead aquatic entities, whales, seals and porpoises would die too. What, “many of the insects could have survived outside the Ark”? This is getting ridiculous.  And how could very small insects survived outside in that heavy outpouring of rains? Would not they be washed overboard into the seas? And we have 70,000 worms crawling all over the Ark on the outside, without their usual soil-burrows and perhaps nipping on the wet gopher woods for food, oblivious to the 40 days of rain that even human could not survived? Such are the many one-liner rationales used to cut down millions of species to less than 20,000. In trying to protect the Word of God, it has turned it into a mockery. Further down the article, it continues …

But, let's be generous and add on a reasonable number to include extinct animals. Then add on some more to satisfy even the most skeptical. Let's assume 50,000 animals, far more animals than required, were on board the ark, and these need not have been the largest or even adult specimens.

We have the size of the Ark as 450 x 75 in 3 tiers giving a total floor space of 101,250 sq. feet. This would mean 50,000 animals are squeezed to just 2 square feet of space each, no bigger than 1.5 feet by 1.5 feet – all cooped up for 370 days! In one of John’s argument, the Ark’s situation is equivalent to that of intensive livestock confinement (unlike that of a spacious zoo) – it was to be a temporary confinement enough for them to survive in reasonable health! Intensive livestock confinement, that is, packed side by side, supposedly for a temporary period of only 370 days – Is that healthy? And we did not even consider room for pathway, fodder, food and fuel! The argument would then be, each tier would have shelving for smaller animals and insects – which mean enclosures, or else they will fall off. And of course, all these shelved animals, fowls and insects stayed put in that spot for the whole 370 days! The fact (and problem) is that the smaller the animal, the more fragile and thus greater care is needed. They need to be separated and protected in their own quarters in order not to be trampled upon or squashed by the larger animals. And 8 souls would provide room service for all their daily needs – 50,000 of them in one day!

The total cubic volume (of the Ark) would have been 1,518,000 cubic feet [462,686.4 cubic meters] --that would be equal to the capacity of 569 modern railroad stock cars.
… ....
Assuming the average animal to be about the size of a sheep and using a railroad car for comparison, we note that the average double-deck stock car can accommodate 240 sheep. Thus, three trains hauling 69 cars each would have ample space to carry the 50,000 animals, filling only 37% of the ark. This would leave an additional 361 cars or enough to make 5 trains of 72 cars each to carry all of the food and baggage plus Noah's family of eight people. The Ark had plenty of space.

Sound convincing, doesn’t it? But think deeper. We are now into volume – every cubic foot of space counts. To have 569 rail-car in 3-tier would mean each car has only (101250 / 569) = 178 sq. feet of space. And even if they are double-decked to make it accommodates more sheep, 240 sheep would still not fit into 355 square feet of space, unless they are ballet-trained. Of course, the original idea was not to be laid out in the 3 tiers of deck on the Ark, but was to be multi-stacked with railroad-car sized stables, side-to-side, top-to-bottom (in more than 3 tier or levels) just like sugar cubes in their packing. In attempting to find an answer, such highly compartmentalized design had to be brought in (to accommodate a greatly reduced number of species) which totally disregard the ‘3-tier design’ commanded by God. And even with such highly packed compartmentalized design, the packed animals would probably suffocate to death as there are no trees to convert carbon dioxide to oxygen in the rail-cars, and air circulation in such stacked arrangement is at its worst (especially when there was only one small window at the top that Noah need to open up to release the dove [Gen 8:6].

Take another similar argument by Lambert Dolphin in his site http://www.ldolphin.org/flood.shtml. In this interesting article, it states (under a
drawing of the Ark):

The capacity of the ark was about 522 railroad cars, (1.4 million cubic feet). Only 188 railroad cars would be required to hold a pair of each of the 17,600 species of animals presently known to man, according to Dr. John Morris of the Institute of Creation Research. (This number of cars includes food supplies for a year's subsistence). From this we can assume that many perhaps as many as two-third of the species originally created by God are already extinct.

By “a pair of each of the 17,600 species of animals”, it totals 35,200 animals. And 35,200 animals into 188 railroad cars means 188 animals were stuffed into each car – again, packed with very little space to move about. I guess all birds have their wings clipped too. Just how high will be the mortality rate - zero? What about lightings?

Those sites mean well. They tried hard to provide answers to questions challenging a global flood event. But I think God’s Word can stand on its own without us bordering into absurdity!

2) How were all animals, birds and insects gathered?

“God, of course.” That was the usual answer. Christian Answers simply states that “However, the Genesis account indicates that God gathered the animals and brought them to Noah inside the ark two by two.”

God could have brought all the animals to Noah (from the local region just as He did for Adam to name them in the Garden of Eden). But to have God teleporting “every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort” from all over the whole world along with their 1-year supply of diverse food is a little too much. No doubt God could do it just as God could have easily recreated two of each after the flood too in just one day, without having Noah toiling for 370 days.

Gen 6:21 And take thou unto thee of all food that is eaten, and thou shalt gather it to thee; and it shall be for food for thee, and for them.

God was also supposed to teleport and bundle up 1-year supply of food for 16,000 to 50,000 animals, birds and insects, all properly tagged, categorized and packed so that Noah know who eats what during his daily room service routine. (We shall not go into the problem of keeping that amount of fodder [assuming all were vegetarians] from turning brown or going bad during 370 days of storage without refrigeration or vacuum-packing.)

God also needed to cause all animals, fowls and insects to lose their natural instinct and habits for the 1 year they were cooped up in the Ark. Polar bears and penguins felt comfortable with temperate climate. Since all animals were [made?] vegetarians, they would not devour each other as food, but willingly adapted to brown dried-out vegetation as stable food for the year. The wolf and the lamb munched dried grass together, and the lion ate straw like the bullock: and wood-grain was the serpent's meat (Isa 65:25?). And the 2 worker-ants and 2 worker-bees did not need to work anymore for their queen-ant and queen-bee (as there was none!). All animals, birds and insects tried not to move about too much as there were not much space anyway. And all were toilet-trained to keep the Ark clean (to remember to flush?).

Or did the animals themselves traveled in pair of 2 or 7, males and females, over thousand of miles of totally unfamiliar terrains and surroundings, over mountains and across seas to reach the Ark, totally unmolested, in one generation of their lifespan and in the nick of time? How about species of earthworms, ants and millipedes – when did they start their journey and how on earth did they make it?

Some believed that Noah’s World then was one huge land mass. This makes the traveling easier, without the need to cross seas. (Hmmm, have you tried crossing America or Asia, coast-to-coast?) Still, it does not solve all the problems. In fact, if this one land mass idea was true, then we have only 4,000 years to move all the land masses to their current positions. As Florida is roughly 4,000 mile from the nearest coastline of Africa, this mean that they are moving away from each other at 1 mile per year. And any geologist will tell us that no one will be alive today if the platonic plates are moving at that rate.

The problem is further complicated by the ‘fact’ that the Ark landed on top of Mount Ararat at 17,000 feet high (or whatever height we want it to be then, as long as we can ensure that the platonic plate movement to push it to its present height does not cause earthquakes every other day). 16,000 to 50,000 animals and insects had to make their way down from the snow-capped mountain during the winter time before making the same journey back to re-populate the world.

Or perhaps, God did it again - by teleporting all animals, fowls and insects back to where they were first plucked from, and recreated all the floras and faunas as He did on the Third Day. The whole Earth would be barren of all trees and vegetation as they were destroyed by the intense pressure of a 29,000 feet (5.5-mile) thick water jacket covering the whole Earth, which would be more than 500 times that at sea level, and in which no sunlight could penetrate to that depth for almost 300 days.

That brings us to the next problem.

3) Where did all the waters come from?

Some people believed that the waters come mainly from the 40 days and night of heavy raining. Some believed that it was the fountains of the deep that contributed to the bulk of the waters that flooded the whole world. Many believed it could be both.

In order to cover the highest mountains, it would need 29,000 feet of water on top of the current sea level. That is about a thickness of 5.5 miles high (or deep) of water! Some estimated that if all the mountains and hills were leveled flat into our seas today, making the ocean floor flat and even, the waters will be raised 1 mile up to cover the whole world. Thus we are talking about 5 times more water than the Earth currently has in its seas and oceans to top it up to 29,000 feet.

If 40 days of raining was the key contributor to submerging the Earth, then we are talking about a rainfall of (29,000 / 40) = 725 feet of rainfall per day, or 30 feet per hour, or 6 inches per minute, or 0.1 inch per second over every square inch of the world’s surface. That cannot be termed “raining”. It was more like being hosed down worldwide with waters from heaven. They had to be sheet of waters! And continuously for every second of those 40 days!

If the fountains of the deep were to be the key contributors, we are talking of 5 times more water from under the earth’s crust which is highly pressurized and super-heated to several hundred degrees. It would poach and cook alive all in the Ark! (Just put 5 cups of boiling water into one cup of drinking water – and then slowly put your finger into it. And we are only using 100 degrees of boiling water). And really, no one knows for sure if the Earth has that much waters under its crust (without blowing its crust like a pressure cooker’s cover).

Well, choose your mix. Either way, the rainfall was way too heavy or the temperature too boiling hot to have so much waters.

The bible mentions of the breaking up of the fountains of the deep and the opening of windows in heaven. It also mentioned that the waters prevailed for 150 days. Only when the fountains were stopped and the windows closed did the waters began to recede.

If the windows of heaven were open for 150 days, does it not mean that it was raining all that while, though not as heavy as the 40 days of torrential rains? The problem with this is that with continuous rainfall everywhere (worldwide), there was just no opportunity for convection to take place, to evaporate water to give rise to clouds formation and then to rain. So, God had to unceasingly created storm clouds [water out of nowhere] to provide such non-stop rainfall everywhere around the world for 150 days. That’s another miracle.

Likewise, how the water come into being, God likewise made it disappear but at a much slower rate. We are talking about 1,000,000,000 cubic miles of water (5 times the amount of waters we now have in the world!). That’s another miracle.

Once the water receded completely, what we have left were pockets of salty water trapped everywhere (since we assume all salt water fishes and lives survived) – lakes or inland seas. But how did these saltwater lakes and seas (like the Caspian Sea) turn into fresh water? Evaporation does not remove the salts in the water. All inland salt water must be totally replaced with fresh water and fresh-water fishes somehow got introduced. Hence again, we require God to convert some of the salt water lakes that formed as a result of the receding waters (trapped by enclosed terrains) into fresh water lakes and to recreated fresh water fishes in live in them. That’s another 2 miracles.

4) How did 8 souls manage the Ark?

Ask the management of San Diego zoo, or any zoo - how many people are needed and involved every day and the cost to run the zoo for a year. And I don't believe the zoo have all species of animals there or even anywhere near to the number of animals, fowls and insects in the Ark. And here we have Noah and 7 people running a zoo collection larger than San Diego in a space smaller than any zoo and stocked with enough food to last a year for all!

If Noah and his family just slept 6 hours a day, and needed only 1 hour to eat and rest, they had 17 hours a day to upkeep the Ark menagerie of animals, birds and insects. For the sake of discussion, let continue with Christian Answers’ equivalence of 569 double-decked railroad-cars for the Ark, each with 178 sq. feet (or 355 sq. ft if double-decked) of space to accommodate 240 animals with the average size of sheep. This will work out to maintaining (569 / 17) = 33 cars per hour by 8 persons, or about 15 minutes per car per person, or 16 animals per minute per person.

It is much more than just dumping of dried straws and leaves on the floor or pouring water about for the animals nad birds to drink. Food and water needed to be fetched to each of the stacked rail cars. The animals needed to be fed and watered, may be even exercised. Both animals and car needed to be washed. In fact, disposing of excreta and waste was one major problem. Up to 12 tons of it per day was produced by all the occupants of the Ark as acknowledged in John Woodmorappe’s book. It needed to be disposed of without causing outbreak of diseases in the crowded Ark. John proposed several potentials. A) Using sloped flooring (but it thereby reduces the amount of floor space available in the already crowded Ark). And probably he presumed that the waste from animals dropped as solid balls and rolled off somewhere instead of the common “splat!”. B) Using manure gutters (as the animals were prevented from turning around. [Remember, intensive confinement for 1 year]. Or are they all toilet trained?. C) Use of various pests and decomposing controls, like ducks, mongooses and earthworms (ignoring that the Bible states there were only 1 pair (or at most 7 pairs) of it! What a smell Noah must be when he comes out of the Ark (if he and the animals did not fall sick by then).

The other problem is LIGHT in the Ark. The 8 souls needed to ensure proper lighting (in each of the rail car stacked like sugar-cubes?), to separate the “day from the night” for one whole year in a huge covered ship with 3 decks (or more). Remember, the Ark was not made of glass, so sunlight (if not already blocked by the heavy torrential rainfall) will not come into the Ark readily and moreover, the Ark was 45 feet high. Minimally, light will be needed for the lower 2 decks [for those who argued that there was a windows-slit running full circumference at the top of the Ark (Gen 6:18) – though it was mentioned that Noah need to open it (Gen 8:6)]. Perhaps, Olive oil (or some other fuel also stored on board) needed to be burnt for at least 12 hours a day over one full year, everywhere on the Ark, on all its 3 decks. I will not even venture into detail relating problems of quality of air for the multitude of animals breathing in an “intensive confinement” environment, with fire burning in the jam-packed enclosed Ark and only an opening at the top of the Ark (which probably were closed most of the time, particularly those 40 days of rains).  Perhaps, all the animals, birds, and insects lived in darkness for all 370 days?

There are still many other problems and issues to be deal with (beyond the scope of this paper) even though the animal number has been reduced by a big ratio.

God had created the Earth and all in 6 days through a series of creative miracles. But in Noah’s case, it took Him a year of flood when 2 or 3 days of recreation will do the job nicely. He had to summon all the animals, birds and insects around the world, maintained a big Ark with its collection of species of animals, and ensuring that none die. Somehow, He missed out the floras and faunas and all fresh water species which were destroyed. So after the flood, He recreated all the vegetation and fresh water fishes, among many other miracles. I am not trying to be sarcastic or cynical, but was just trying to show that many unanswered questions and difficulties get throw back onto God's lap.

Local Flood – Can it really be possible?

Gen 9:9 And I, behold, I establish my covenant with you, and with your seed after you;
Gen 9:10 And with every living creature that is with you, of the fowl, of the cattle, and of every beast of the earth with you; from all that go out of the ark, to every beast of the earth.
Gen 9:11 And I will establish my covenant with you; neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of a flood; neither shall there any more be a flood to destroy the earth.
Gen 9:12 And God said, This is the token of the covenant which I make between me and you and every living creature that is with you, for perpetual generations:

But if the flood was local, why then have the Rainbow Covenant? Whereas, if it was a global flood, it makes sense that God promised not to destroy all life again by mean of a flood. Does it really make sense? Does a promise make any sense if a would-be killer tells you, “I promise you that I will never drown you but I am going to burn you at the stake”? Unfortunately, that is exactly what many Global Floodist and Futurist brethren believe today, that God promised (to Noah and “his seed”) not to destroy all by water, but will be destroying all soon, including all descendant of Noah, by fire in “the Day of the Lord” that is believed to be soon to occur.

Let take a closer look at the Rainbow Covenant. First, it was a covenant with Noah and his seed, just like the Abrahamic Covenant (Gen 17:7 – “And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee…”) and the Mosaic Covenant was with the people of Israel during the time of Moses. It was a covenant with “every beast of the land with you; from all that go out of the ark, to every beast of the land”. It was a “covenant which I make between me and you and every living creature that is with you (in the region), for perpetual generations” – an assurance by God that Noah and his seed and “every living creature” with Noah, will not be wiped out again by flood, unlike the many lineage that had just perished. Flood had continued to destroy life since Noah’s day, but none of Noah’s line and the animals will be wipe out (get extinct) by flood. That is all there to it.

But how can a local flood happen without flooding or affecting its surrounding regions? Let use the example of a large fresh-water lake, Lake Titicaca, as an example to make explanation easier. It is one of the world's highest lakes, covering some 3,200 square miles and lying at 12,500 feet in the Andes Mountains above sea level. The Andes is over 21,000 feet around the region. The lake averages between 460 and 600 feet in depth. [From http://www.crystalinks.com/laketiticaca.html]

Let empty all its waters and have millions of people living in its relatively flat basin. The walls of the Andes surround the basin. When it starts to rain, the people stay in their house. As waters built up, it soon floods the basin. With heavy torrential rains and thunderstorms, the slopes of the mountains will be slippery and maybe even occasional avalanches may occur. The people panicked as the water rises higher, even submerging some houses. The Ark floats. Soon, all life in the basin perished under the rising water. Of course, if there are no outlets, a lake will soon be formed. In Noah’s region, we know there were outlets which accounted for the water receding, however, rather slowly. As the basin is surrounded by the mountains, mist and fog will form but are trapped within the flooded basin. As the rain continues, the mist and fog build up, covering the mountain peaks of the Andes from view. The thunderstorm stopped after 40 days, but the rain continues. And as long as the rain replaces the amount of water receding through the outlets, the water prevails, the mist and fog prevail. Once the rain stopped, the water level recedes continuously through river outlets and streams, without affecting the surrounding regions as the basin is a wholly contained valley. The Arks rested. The atmosphere also get less water-loaded over time and soon the mist and fog thinned out enough to make the mountain top visible again from the basin.

That is possibly how it might have happened the way I see it, which blends rather well with the biblical account of Noah’s Flood, and does not cause any serious physical laws to be broken other than the long stretch of rains. The Caspian Sea is one huge inland water body; with a salinity only about 1/3 that of the ocean’s. It is very possible, just my guess, that much of the Flood’s waters may have drained into this “sea”.

God has been known to be very frugal and prudent in His miracles. With big mind-boggling miracle, usually one is enough for the occasion. In Noah’s case, a flash flood of just several tens of feet of water was enough for God to accomplish His intention.

Conclusion for Part 3

Many questioned the wisdom on the need to build the Ark and gathering of animals, fowls and insects if the flood was just a massive local flood. Why not just have Noah led the animals out of the region and return after the flood? In fact, we may as well asked, why have flood at all? Why not just kill off everyone then with intense fire (be it local or worldwide), protecting just 8 souls (just like in Daniel and his 3 friends)? All that is needed is several minutes of fire. And if it was a worldwide event, then simply recreated the Earth again in 3 or 4 days – it is faster and cleaner, rather than the 1 whole year needed for the flood and more effort recreating the world!

One possible explanation was that God was using that period of time – 40 years – for Noah to preach repentance to the people, witnessed by the massive project of salvation he was constantly building. But, unfortunately, the people continue with their eating, drinking, marrying and their wicked ways. Even at the very last moment, when the animals went to Noah, the people still ignore the sign of such happening. God may also have intended for all the animals from the region in the Ark to keep Noah’s and his family company, to keep them occupied with works, and to make them grow in knowledge of His creation. At the end of it, it was also to ensure a much faster repopulation of the destroyed region too. The Flood served as an example for us, in which both Jesus and Peter had used as reference.  Hence, it poses no problem at all if Noah had indeed sacrificed all clean animals and fowls from the Ark as might be hinted in Gen 8:20, or that God allowed Noah and his family to eat of the animals immediately after the flood, as declared in Gen 9:3.

Will the Ark ever be found? I doubt so. As it was resting on low ground (and not high up on Mount Ararat), it was likely to have been dismantled and burnt for fuel or for other purposes in the past 4,000 years!

Epilogue

Preterist Relevance of Noah’s Flood

When God made the covenant with Noah, his 3 sons were already married.

Gen 6:18 But with thee will I establish my covenant; and thou shalt come into the ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and thy sons' wives with thee.

Righteous Enoch lived sixty and five years, when he begat Methuselah. This could hint that Enoch probably married around 60 or before, although many did begat at a much later age. (Incidentally, Methuselah [Noah’s grandfather] was the longest living human recorded in the bible – 969 years old. He died in the exact same year that the Flood occurred. Noah’s father, Lamech, died 5 years before the flood. Does it mean that none of Noah’s brothers and sisters survived the Flood? Not necessarily – they may have migrated to unaffected region, being forewarned by Noah!) As the Bible does not reveal more information, I would not be dogmatic to state it as fact, but will just venture to propose - Is it not possible that God established the covenant with Noah not long after his sons' marriage, probably when they were 60 years of age - 40 years before the flood? Peter called Noah “a preacher of righteousness” (2Pet 2:5). The Apostles preached the Kingdom and the Wrath to come for 40 years, from AD 30 to AD 70. Noah could be preaching the gospel of repentance and the wrath to come for 40 years prior to the flood too.

It should also make better sense for both Jesus and Peter uses of the flood of Noah and the brimstones of Lot as types for Jesus’ Parousia in A.D. 70 (in Jerusalem) – both events were sudden and local, and were never intended to be an worldwide catastrophic event. Millions died, but the world lives on.

Luk 17:26 And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of man.
Luk 17:27 They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all.
Luk 17:28 Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded;
Luk 17:29 But the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.
Luk 17:30 Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed.

2Pe 2:5 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 ungodly;
2Pe 2:6 And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample unto those that after should live ungodly;
2Pe 2:7 And delivered just Lot, vexed with the filthy conversation of the wicked:

Futurist had used this verse of Peter, especially the phrase “old world” to justify their belief in a worldwide destruction. Again, we need to understand that the “world” of Peter was the same region he was living in (and known to him) then. He was not aware of China, or of the Mayan civilization, or the Indian in North America. It was old because it was way before his time, when the flood came “upon the ‘land’ of the ungodly”. We ourselves had also used terms like the old world of Columbus (that is, without the many new lands discovered since his time) or “third world countries”.

That, basically, is the simplicity of Noah’s Flood that had confounded many for so long, if I am on the right track.

I hope I have given reasonable explanation and justification to show the soundness and cohesiveness of God's Word (and with due respect to Science) in the above discourse on the nature of Noah’s Flood. Many people continued to be atheists as they sometime find Christians “unscientific”, illogical or even unreasonable in their biblical reasoning. Some unbelievers can accept some elements of miracle; it is the way that was conveyed to them that repulsed them. I believe in miracles, but not every "miracles" that man made out of the Bible for supposedly "unanswerable" questions.

Perhaps the ONE great miracle about Noah’s Flood was that "God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty...". God uses only several tens of feet of water to accomplish His will in Noah's Flood, and not with a flood several ten of thousand feet high. And He had the wise and the mighty confounded for so many centuries.

PS: The above observations and conclusion are my personal view. I hope the above analysis will bring forth further harmony of the Bible, and (finally) identify the real cause of the Flood. Though I am a preterist, it may not necessary reflect the view and belief of other preterists. Whatever the case, please share with me your thoughts, reasons and arguments if you think I am going baloney and have not consider some other critical scriptures. (MS Cheo, Singapore [mscheo@mindexsoft.com])