A Biblical Theology of the Flood

(Outline of Presentation)

 

by

Richard M. Davidson

Andrews University

 

26th Seminar on the Integration of Faith and Learning

Loma Linda, CA

Wednesday, July 19, 2000

 

Introduction

 

A.                 Terminology: mabbûl (13x) and several other terms

B.                 Extra-biblical Flood stories

1.       Flood stories are almost universal (see Nelson, Deluge in Stone)

2.       Stories nearest area of dispersion closest to Biblical account

3.       Four main flood stories from Mesopotamian sources

a.       Eridu Genesis (Sumerian, ca. 1600 B.C.)–See T. Jacobsen, JBL 100(1981): 513-529 = Creation, Antediluvian Period, Flood

b.       Atrahasis Epic (Old Babylonian version, ca. 1600 B.C.)–see W. G. Lambert and a. R. Millard, Atrahasis (Oxford, 1969) = Creation, Anediluvian, Flood

c.       Gilgamesh Epic, 11th tablet (Neo-Assyrian version, 8th-7th cen. B.C.)–see Pritchard, ANET, pp. 23-26; and Alexander Heidel, The Gilgamesh Epic and OT Parallels (Chicago: University Press, 1946) = only Flood

d.       Berossus' account (Babylonian priest 3rd cent. B.C.)–See Lamber and Millard, pp. 134-137 = just Flood

C.         Unity of the Genesis Flood Story–see accompanying photocopy from W. Shea, The Structure of the Genesis Flood Narrative and Its Implications," Origins 6 (1979):8-29.

1.       Argues for unity of narrative instead of small textual units (J & P) as suggested by Documentary Hypothesis

2.       Note matching parallel members of structure that explain apparent discrepancies in the account (see Gerhard Hasel, Understanding the Living Word of God, pp. 49-50, 150-151)

 

Theology of the Flood: Ten Subheadings

I.    Historical Nature of the Flood

A.                 The genealogical frame or envelope construction (5:32 and 9:28-29) plus secondary genealogies (6:9-10 and 9:18-19) show that the account is intended to be factual history

B.         The use of toledoth "generations" (6:9) as throughout Genesis indicates historical nature (see discussion of toledoth in theology of creation)

 

II.  Motive or Theological Cause of the Flood

A.        Contrast Ancient Near Eastern (ANE) parallels:

1.   Atrahasis Epic and Eridu Genesis–men (the slaves of the gods) are making too much noise so that the gods couldn't sleep, so Enlil decides to wipe them out

2.   Gilgamesh Epic–no motive mentioned; arbitrary action of Enlil

B.         Biblical account: the cause is man's moral depravity and sinfulness

1.   Gen 6:1-4: the "sons of God" and the "daughters of men" (see Hasel, Understanding the Living Word of God, pp. 151-152)

2.   Gen 6:5-8, 11-12: all-pervading wickedness, corruption, and violence

III  The Character of God (theodicy)

A.        ANE parallels: gods are arbitrary, acting our of unreasoning anger, selfishness, caprice; seek to deceive the people and not inform them of the coming Flood

B.         Biblical picture:

1.      God sets probationary period of 120 years during which His Spirit is striving with men to repent (6:3)

2.      God sends warning to the people through Noah, the "preacher of righteousness" (2 Pet 2:5)

3.      God Himself makes provision for the saving of man (6:14-16)

4.      God "repents" (nāham) = "breathe pantingly," be sorry, moved to pity, have compassion, suffer grief; not šûb "repent" in the sense of turning from evil, used of man (6:6)

5.      God "grieves" (āsab)–same Hebrew root as woman's "pain" and Adam's "anguish" in tilling the ground; God takes man's pain and result of the curse (6:6; cf. 3:16, 17)

6.      God "destroys" (šāhat) (vs. 13) what man had already ruined or corrupted (šāhat) (vss. 11, 12); God simply mercifully brings to an end the ruin already done by man

 

IV  Individual Responsibility

A.        Not only collective responsibility till Ezekiel (as some scholars claim)

B.         Noah's individual response of faith/faithfulness to God

1.      Gen 6:8–Noah found grace (hēn) or favor in God's sight

2.      Gen 6:9–Noah was righteous (sadîq), blameless (tamîm) and walked together with God–personal relationship

 

V   Eschatological Judgment

A.                 Gen 6:13–"I have determined to make an end [qēs]"–the "eschaton"

B.         Period of probation and investigation (6:3, 5)

C.        Retributive judgment as God's strange work (cf. Isa 28:21)

 

VI  Covenant (6:11-22; 9:8-17)

A.        God's initiative, concern, faithfulness, dependability

B.         Universal, everlasting, unconditional

C.        Personal relationship

 

VII      Remnant

A.        Gen 7:23 "Only Noah was left [šāar]"–first time mentioned in the Bible

B.                 Survivors of cosmic catastrophe depend upon right relationship with God

C.        Not based upon caprice or favoritism of the gods (as ANE)

 

VIII  Grace

A.        Gen 8:1–"God remembered Noah"–memory theology = act in deliverance

B.         Position of Grace in the heart of the chiasm; the apex of Flood theology

 

IX. Flood Typology

A.                 Gen 1-7 a paradigm for the history of the world and Israel (see handout by Gage, The Gospel of Genesis)

B.                 Reduplication in Genesis carries through only the fourth narrative, implying that the fifth will be fulfilled in cosmic judgment

C.         NT writers point to Flood as type of final eschatological judgment (Mtt 24:37-39; 2 Pet 3:5-7)

D.        Conditions of Pre-Flood morality provide signs of the end of time

 

X.   Universality of the Flood

A.        Conflicting schools of interpretation

1.       Traditional–universal catastrophe; worldwide

2.       Limited flood theory; local flood limited in geographical scope

3.       Non-literal (symbolic) non-historical account teaching theological truth (on this latter, see point I above)

B.         Biblical phraseology in Gen 6-9 indicting universality

1.       "Earth" (6:12, 13, 17)–without genitive, universal language

2.   "The face of the earth" (7:3; 8:9); link with creation (Gen 1:29) gives universal dimension

3.   "Face of the ground" (7:4, 22, 23; 8:8)–parallel with "face of all the earth" in 8:9 and link with first usage in Gen 2:6 indicate universality

4.   "All flesh" (13 times in Gen 6-9)

–"All" plus "flesh" with no article or possessive suffix (12/13x) = "totality"

–"All" + article + "flesh" = unity and entirety (Gen 7:15)

–Context (Gen 7:23) "only Noah left"

5.   "Every living thing" (Gen 6:19; 7:4, 23)

–7:4, 23 literally "all existence" (kol hayqum) = universal

6.   "Under the whole heaven" (Gen 7:19)

–Heaven can have local meaning like sky (e.g. 1 Kings 18:45)

–But "under whole heaven" always universal (see Exo 17:14; Deut 4:19)

–Context of "all the high mountains under the whole heaven" connotes universality

7.   "All the fountains of the Great Deep" (7:11 and 8:9)

–Link with the "deep" (tehom) of Gen 1:2 indicates universal

8.   The term mabbul, used exclusively in Scripture for the Noahic Flood (13x in Gen 6-9), plus Ps 29:10).

For further discussion, see G. F. Hasel, "The Biblical View of the Extent of the Flood," Origin 2 (1975): 77-95; idem, "Some Issues Regarding the Nature and Universality of the Genesis Flood Narrative," Origins (1978): 83-98; idem, "The Fountains of the Great Deep," Origins 1 (1974): 67-72.

C.         Other evidence for a universal Flood

1.       Trajectory of major themes in Gen 1-11 is universal (Creation, Fall, Plan of Redemption, Spread of Sin).

2.       Purpose of Flood is universal–I will destroy humankind (haadam)–Gen 6:7.

3.       Genealogical Lines: Exclusive

–Adam = father of pre-flood man (Gen 4:17-26; 5:1-31

–Noah = father of post-flood man (Gen 10:1-32; 11:1-9

4.       Blessing - same divine blessing to be fruitful and multiply: Adam and Noah = entire world

5.       Covenant - Gen 9:9-10 - with Noah and those with him = universal

–"With every living creature of all flesh" (9:16)

–Rainbow - universal (vss. 12-17) sign between God and all flesh on earth (9:18)

–If limited flood, then only limited covenant

6.       Promise (9:15): (cf. Isa 54:9) if local flood - then God not keep promise in other local floods (cf. Ariel Roth)

7.       Necessity of enormous Ark - why animals in ark if only local flood? (Gen 6:14-21)

8.       Covering of "all the high mountains" (Gen 7:19:20)–water seeks its own level.

9.       Duration of the Flood implies universality (Gen 7:11, 17; 8:14).

10.   Receding, oscillating activity of the water (Gen 8:3a; cf. vs. 7).

11.  NT evidence–universal language

–Matt 24:39 - "swept them all away"

–Luke 17:26, 27 - flood came and destroyed them all

–2 Pet 2:5 - flood upon world of ungodly – did not spare ancient world, but preserved Noah

–1 Pet 3:20 - few saved by water, i.e., 8

–Heb 11:7 - condemned world

12.  Typology (2 Pet 3:6,7)–worldwide flood a type of worldwide judgment by fire.

–World destroyed with water and perished

12.   The Noahic Flood is presented as nothing less than the cosmic undoing or reversal of Creation. Only a cosmic/universal Flood can theologically encompass the cosmic/universal reversal or undoing of Creation described in Genesis 6-9.

13.   The cosmic reversal of Creation is followed by a cosmic New Beginning. The successive stages of "re-creation" after the Flood parallel the seven days of Creation in Genesis 1-2:

(1) The wind over the earth and waters (Gen 8:1; cf. Gen 1:2

(2) Division of waters (Gen 8:1-5; cf. Gen 1:6-8).

(3) Appearance of plants (Gen 8:6-12; cf. Gen 1:9-13)

(4) Appearance of light (Gen 8:13-14; cf. Gen 1:14-19)

(5) Deliverance of animals (Gen 8:15-17; cf. Gen 1:20-23)

(6) Animals together with men, blessing, food for men, image of God (Gen 8:18-9:7; cf. Gen 1:24-31)

(7) Sign of covenant (Gen 9:8-17; cf. Gen 2:1-3).

Thus the overarching literary structure of "re-creation" in the Flood narrative underscores its universal dimension by parallels with the cosmic Creation account in Genesis 1-2.

 

Conclusion

The question of the extent of the Genesis flood is not just a matter of idle curiosity with little at stake for Christian faith. For those who see the days of creation in Genesis 1 and six, literal 24 hour days, a universal Flood is an absolute necessity to explain the existence of the geological column. A literal creation week is inextricably linked with a worldwide flood.

The theology of the universal Flood is the pivot of a connected but multi-faceted universal theme running through Genesis 1 - 11 and constituting an over-arching pattern for the whole rest of Scripture: world-wide creation revealing the character of the Creator and His original purpose for creation; humankind's turning from the Creator and the universal spread of sin ending in the universal "uncreation" through eschatological judgment; and re-creation, in the eschatological salvation of the faithful covenant remnant and the universal renewal of the earth.

 

For Further discussion and bibliography

See especially, Richard M. Davidson, "The Flood," in Evangelical Dictionary of Biblical Theology, ed. Walter A. Elwell (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1996), 261-263; and idem, "Biblical Evidence for the Universality of the Genesis Flood," Origins 22/2 (1995): 58-73; revised in John T. Baldwin, ed., Creation, Catastrophe, and Calvary (Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 2000), 79-92.

A Biblical Theology of Flood

by

Richard M. Davidson

Andrews University

26th Seminar on the Integration of Faith and Learning

Loma Linda, CA

Wednesday, July 19, 2000

 

Introduction

A.        Terminology

The Genesis Flood is denoted in the OT by the technical Hebrew term mabbûl (etymology uncertain [perhaps from the root ybl "to flow, to stream"]; all 13 OT occurrences of this word referring to the Genesis Flood; all in Genesis except Ps. 29:10; occurrences in the Flood narrative usually associated with mayim "waters" [hamabbûl mayim, me hamabbûl, hamayim l mabbûl]). The LXX and the NT consistently employ the Greek term katalysmos ("flood, deluge") for this event (4 times in NT, plus once using the related verbkalalyzo["flood, inundate"], 2Pet 3:6).

Besides the certain allusion to the Genesis Flood in the phrase me-Noah "waters of Noah" (Isa. 54:9), many other possible OT allusions to the Noahic Deluge utilize a variety of Hebrew expressions: zerem "inundation, flood" (Isa 28:2); mayim kabbirim "mighty waters" (Isa 28:2), mayim rabbim "great waters" (Ps 18:17 [Eng vs. 16]), or simply mayim "waters" (Isa 43:2; Job 12:15; Ps. 124:4); nāhār/neharôt "floods, streams" (Ps 93:3); rahab "storm, Rahab" (Job 26:12); sibbolet "flood, flowing steam" (Ps 69:3, 16 [Eng vss. 2, 15]); and setep "overflowing, flood" (Dan 9:26; Nah 1:8; Ps 32:6). NT allusions to the Genesis Flood employ the Greek noun hydōr "water" (1 Pet 3:20; 2 Pet 3:6).

B.        Extra-biblical Parallels.

Ancient flood stories are almost universal (up to 230 different stories known; see Frazer 1918, 1:105-361; Nelson 1931) and are by far the most frequently-given cause for past world calamities in the folk literature of antiquity (Thompson 1995, 1:182-194). The stories nearest to the area of the Dispersion at Babel are the closest in detail to the biblical account.

Four main flood stories are found in Mesopotamian sources: The Sumerrian Eridu Genesis (ca. 1600 B.C., see Jacobsen 1981), the Old Babyloian Atrahasis Epic (ca. 1600 B.C., see Lambert and Millard 1969), the Gilgamesh Epic (Neo-Assyrian version, ca. 8th-7th Cent. B.C., see Heidel 1946), and Berossus' account (Babylon, 3rd cent. B.C., see Lambert and Millard 1969, 134-137).

C.        The Unity of the Genesis Flood Account

The detailed chiastic literary structure of Genesis 6-9 argues for the unity of the Flood narrative instead of small textual units (J and P) as suggested by the Documentary Hypothesis (Cassuto 1964, 30-34; Shea 1979). A close reading of the Flood narrative as a coherent whole, with particular attention tot he chiastic structure, resolves apparent discrepancies in the Genesis account (Wenham 1978; Shea 1979; Hasel 1980, 49-50, 150-151).

 

The Theology of the Flood

The theology of the Flood may be summarized under ten headings.

I.          Theology as History: The Historical Nature of the Flood.

In the literary structure of the Flood narrative (see Shea 1979) the genealogical frame or envelope construction (Gen 5:32 and 9:28-29) plus the secondary genealogies (Gen 6:9-10 and 9:18-19) are indicators that the account is intended to be factual history. The use of the genealogical term toledoth ("generation," account") in the Flood account (6:9) as throughout Genesis (13 times, structuring the whole book), indicates the author intended this narrative to be as historically veracious as the rest of Genesis (Doukhan 1978, 167-220; Kaiser 1970). A number of references in the book of Job may allude to the then-relatively-recent Flood (Job 9:5-8; 12:14-15; 14:11-12; 22:15-17; 26:10-14; 27:20-22; 28:9; 38:8-11; see Morris 1988, 26-30). The occurrence of the Flood is an integral part of the saving/judging acts of God in redemptive history, and its historicity is assumed and essential to the theological arguments of later writers employing Flood typology (see Davidson 1981, 36-327).

II.        The Motive or Theological Cause of the Flood

In contrast with the ancient Near Eastern flood stories, in which no cause of the flood is given (Gilgamesh Epic) or the gods decide to wipe out their human slaves because they are making too much noise (Atrahasis Epic and Eridu Genesis), the biblical account provides a profound theological motivation for the Flood: humankind's moral depravity and sinfulness, the all-pervading corruption and violence of all living beings ("all flesh") on earth (Gen 6:1-8, 11-12), which demands divine punishment.

III.       The God of the Flood (Theology)

The theological motivation provides a divine justification (theodicy) for bringing the Flood. In contrast to the other ancient Near Eastern stories, in which the gods are arbitrary, acting out of unreasoning anger, selfishness, and caprice, seeking to deceive the people and not inform them of the impending flood, the biblical picture of the God of the Flood is far different. God extends a probationary period of 120 years during which His Spirit is striving with humanity to repent (Gen. 6:3) and God is warning the antediluvian world through Noah, the "preacher of righteousness" (2 Pet 2:5; cf. 1 Pet 3:19-20).

God Himself makes provision for the saving of humankind (Gen 6:14-16). He "reprents" (nāham), i.e. "Is sorry, moved to pity, having compassion, suffering grief" (Gen 6:6). God "grieves" (āsab), the same Hebrew root used of the woman's "pain" and Adam's "anguish" in the divine judgment of Genesis 3; the implication is that God Himself takes up humanity's pain and anguish (Gen 6:6; cf. 3:16, 17). The divine act of destruction is not arbitrary. God "destroys" (šāhat, vs 13) what humanity had already ruined or corrupted (šāhat, vss. 11-12); He simply mercifully brings to completion the ruin already wrought by humankind.

The God of the biblical Flood is not only just and merciful; He is also free to act according to His divine will, and He possesses sovereign power and full control over the forces of nature (in contrast to the weakness and fright of the gods during the Flood, according to ancient Near Eastern stories). Yahweh's omnipotent sovereignty seems to be the theological thrust of Ps. 29:10, the only biblical reference outside Genesis employing the term mabbûl: Yahweh sat enthroned at the Flood [mabbûl]."

The choice of divine names throughout the Flood narrative, instead of indicating separate sources, seems to highlight different aspects of God's character: the generic Elohim when His universal, transcendent sovereignty or judicial authority is emphasized; and the covenant name Yahweh when His personal, ethical dealings with Noah and humankind are in view (Cassuto 1961, 35-36; Leupold 1956, 280-281).

IV.       Human Moral Responsibility

The portrayal of humanity's moral depravity as the cause