Genesis 7:19 - Exposition

Was the Flood universal?

I. THE BIBLICAL ACCOUNT . Unquestionably the language of the historian appears to describe a complete submergence of the globe beneath a flood of waters, and is capable of being so understood, so far as exegesis can determine. Unquestionably also that this was the writer's meaning would never have been challenged had it not been for certain difficulties of a scientific nature, as well as of other kinds, which were gradually seen to attach to such hypothesis. But these difficulties having arisen in men's minds led to a closer and more careful investigation of the Scripture narrative, when it was found—

1. That the language of the historian did not necessarily imply that the catastrophe described was of universal extent ( vide Exposition).

2. That, if it had been only partial and local in its operation, in all probability the same, or at least closely similar, terms would have been selected to depict its appearance, as observed by a spectator.

3. That the purpose for which, according to the inspired record, the Deluge was sent could have been completely effected without the submergence of the entire globe—that purpose being the destruction of the human race, which, it is believed, had not at that time overspread the earth, but was confined to a limited region contiguous to the valley of the Euphrates, That this last conjecture is not of recent origin, but was early entertained by theologians, is proved by the facts that Aben Ezra "confuteth the opinion of some who in his days held the Deluge not to have been universal" (Willet); that Bishop Patrick notes ( Genesis 7:19 ) that "there were those anciently, and they have their successors now, who imagined the Flood was not universal,— α ̓ λλ ε ̓ ν ω ͂ͅ οι ̔ το ì τε α ̓ ì νρρωποι ω ̓ ì κουν ,—but only there where men then dwelt;" that Matthew Poole writes, "Peradventure this Flood might not be universal over the whole earth, but only over all the habitable world, where either men or beasts lived, which was as much as either the meritorious cause of the Flood, men's sins, or the end of it, the destruction of all men and beasts, required" (Synopsis, Genesis 7:19 ); and that Bishop Stillingfleet in his 'Origines Sacrae' remarks, " I cannot see any necessity, from the Scriptures, to assert that the Flood did spread itself over all the surface of the earth. That all mankind (those in the ark excepted) were destroyed by it is most certain, according to the Scriptures; but from thence follows no necessity at all of asserting the universality of it as to the globe of the earth, unless it be sufficiently proved that the earth was peopled before the Flood, which I despair of ever seeing proved". This opinion, it is almost needless to observe, has been adopted by the majority of modem scholars.

4. That subsequent Scriptural references to this primeval catastrophe are at least not decidedly at variance with the notion of a limited Deluge. Genesis 9:15 places emphasis on the fact that the waters will no more become a flood to destroy all flesh, i.e. all mankind. Isaiah 54:9 , pointing back to Genesis 9:15 , says that as God swore in the days of Noah that the earth would be no more inundated as to carry off the entire population, so did he swear then that he would not rebuke Israel. The language does not, as Wordsworth thinks, imply the universality of the Deluge. 2 Peter 2:5 ; 2 Peter 3:6 refers to the destruction of the α ̓ ρχαι ì ος κο ì σμος , i.e. the world of men, the κο ì σμος α ̓ σεβω ͂ ν specially mentioned in the former of these passages. So far then as Scripture is concerned we are not shut up to the necessity of regarding the Deluge as universal.

II. SCIENTIFIC DIFFICULTIES .

1. Astronomical . It is urged that, as there is no sufficient evidence of any general subsidence of the earth's crust, the theory proposed by some harmonists, that the land and water virtually exchanged places (this was supposed to be borne out by the existence of shells and corals at the top of high mountains), having now been completely abandoned (that the outlines of the great continental seas have been substantially the same from the beginning— vide Genesis 1:1-31 . Genesis 1:9 , Expos.), the entire surface of the globe could be covered only by a large earth's mass. Kalisch supposes eight tunes increase of water being added to the aggregate of water contained in all the seas and oceans of the earth; that this must have produced such a shock to the solar system as to have caused a very considerable aberration in the earth's orbit, of which: however, no trace can be detected; and that, consequently, it is unphilosophical to imagine that such a disturbance of the entire stellar world as would necessarily follow on that event would be resorted to in order to destroy a race of sinful beings in one of the smallest planets of the system. But—Biblical science, which recognizes an incarnation of the Word of God in order to save man, will always hesitate to pronounce anything too great for the Almighty to permit or do in connection with man.

2. Geological . At one time believed to afford incontestable evidence of a universal deluge in the drift formations, the diluvium of the earlier geologists (of late, with better reason, ascribed to the influence of a glacial, period which prevailed over the greater part of Central and Northern Europe m prehistoric times), geological science is now held to teach exactly the opposite. The extinct volcanoes of Langue-dec and Auvergne are believed to have been in operation long anterior to the time of man's appearance on the earth, the remains of extinct animals being found among their sconce; and yet the lava cones are in many instances as perfect as when first thrown up, while the dross lies loose upon their sides, which it is scarcely, supposable would be the case had they been subjected to any cataclysmal immersion such as is presupposed in the Deluge. But here the mistake is that of imagining the Noachic Flood to have been of any such violent torrential character. On the contrary, the Scripture narrative represents the waters as having risen and subsided slowly, and the whole phenomenon to have been of such a kind as, while destroying human life, to effect comparatively little change upon the face of nature; and, besides, careful scientific observers have declared that the volcanic scoriae in question is not so loose as is sometimes alleged (Smith's 'Bib. Dict.,' art. Noah).

3. Zoological . This refers to the difficulty of accommodating all the animals that were then alive. So long of course as Raleigh's computation of eighty-nine distinct species of animals was accepted as correct, the task imposed upon apologists was not of a very formidable character. But of mammalia alone there are now known to exist 1658 different species, thus making about 4000 and upwards of individuals (the clean beasts being taken in sevens or seven pairs) that required to be stalled in the ark; and when to these are added the pairs of the 6000 birds, 650 reptiles, and 550,000 insects that are now recognized by zoologists, the difficulty is seen to be immensely increased. An obvious remark, however, in connection with this is that there is a tendency among modern zoologists unnecessarily to multiply the number of species. But in truth a prior difficulty relates to the collection of these multitudinous creatures from their respective habitats. If the entire surface of the globe was submerged, then must the fauna belonging to the different continents have been conveyed across the seas and lands towards the ark, and reconducted thence again to their appropriate settlements in some way not described and impossible to imagine; whereas if the inundated region extended (through the subsidence of the earth's crust) to the Mediterranean on the west, and the Indian Ocean on the south and east, it is apparent that neither would this difficulty have proved insuperable, nor would the collection of the animals have been rendered unnecessary, the devastated country being so wide that only by preservation of the species could it have been speedily replenished.

III. The CONCLUSION , therefore, seems to be that, while Scripture does not imperatively forbid the idea of a partial Deluge, science appears to require it, and, without ascribing to all the scientific objections that are urged against the universality of the Flood that importance which their authors assign to them, it may be safely affirmed that there is considerable reason for believing that the mabbul which swept away the antediluvian men was confined to the region which they inhabited.