WAS THE FLOOD GLOBAL OR REGIONAL?
Dr Joel R. BeekeFROM SWORD & TROWEL 2004 No
2
Was the Flood over the entire earth or did it cover only a certain locality in
the Middle East? Some commentators, often the more liberal ones, argue that it was
regional rather than universal, or as they put it, that it was universal within a particular
region. Even some who profess a conservative view of Scripture (such as Bernard Ramm
and Arthur Custance) think that the Flood, though very severe, was limited to the region of
the world that was inhabited by man. They conclude that though a tremendous amount of
water was involved, the Flood was still localised.
We believe that the scriptural data points to a universal flood. The following
points, when taken collectively, certainly point in this direction.
1 The need for a massive ark, which took
a century or more to build, points to a universal flood. Had the Flood been local, given the
time span, God could have warned Noah of the approaching Flood and Noah could have
moved to another region in a matter of days or weeks - and he would have had a century or
more to do it. God could have said to Noah as He said to Lot, ‘Flee this Sodom of a world!’
The fact that an ark was constructed under divine direction implies that the vessel was the
only refuge from destruction - not only for Noah, but also for the animals. If only regional
animals were on board, why make such a big ark in the first place? Or why bother even to
save them, knowing that other animals would soon migrate to Mesopotamia? Birds, in
particular, wouldn’t need to be on the ark, as they could readily fly in from other regions.
2 The uniqueness of the Hebrew word used to describe the Genesis Flood
points to a general and universal flood rather than a localised flood. This word
(mabbul) is a technical term used in Scripture on thirteen occasions. Each time
it is used only in reference to the Genesis Flood and indicates a tremendous deluge of water.
In the prophets, more ordinary floods are mentioned on several occasions, but different
words are always used there. For example, Isaiah 28.2 says:
‘Behold, the Lord hath a mighty and strong one, which as a tempest of hail
and a destroying storm, as a flood of mighty waters overflowing, shall cast down to
the earth with the hand.’
The word for flood here indicates a flood of some magnitude because it speaks of
a flood of mighty waters overflowing. But it is not the word used in Genesis
for a unique, unparalleled flood.
3 Notice that God threatened to destroy man with the earth - ‘behold, I will
destroy them [that is, all flesh] with the earth’ (Genesis 6.13b) -
not from the earth, but with the earth. The indication is that the
whole earth would be overwhelmed with water. That is confirmed by 2 Peter 3.6-
7:
‘Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
but the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store.’
It is interesting that Peter says that the world perished at the time of
the Flood, and then speaks of the earth as it exists now. That indicates that it
was a flood which impacted the entire globe.
4 Moses uses universal terms at least twenty-five times in Genesis 6-
9. He speaks of all flesh, every living thing, all the high hills. Such
words and phrases can scarcely be reconciled with the local flood theory. God uses the most
comprehensive terms to indicate something of universal proportions. That is also implied by
God’s usage of the Hebrew word for earth (erets) forty-six times in Genesis 6-9.
5 Genesis 7.18 says, ‘the waters prevailed, and were increased greatly
upon the earth,’ and verse 19 similarly says, ‘and the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the
earth.’ The word prevailed indicates that they were overflowing mightily,
covering everything. Verse 19 goes on to say that:
‘All the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered. Fifteen
cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.’
So even the high hills and the mountains were covered by at least twenty-two
feet. That certainly does not sound like a local flood.
6 Notice that the flood waters continued to rise for 150 days. Genesis
7.24 says, ‘And the waters prevailed upon the earth an hundred and fifty days.’ These
flood waters were so extensive that Genesis 8.5 says the tops of the mountains
were not visible for another two-and-a-half months. How could Noah and his family float
that long in a local flood without seeing any high hills or mountains? This is no local flood.
7 After the Flood, God promised not to flood the world again. He says:
‘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’ (Genesis 9.11).
If God’s promise applies only to a local flood, then God has repeatedly broken
His covenanted promise. The promise only has significance if the Flood was universal and
God promised never to perform such an action again by putting the whole world under
water. God even gave the rainbow as a sign of His covenanted promise, a sign that is still
seen throughout the world.
8 Noah and his family, as Peter tells us,
were the only ones to escape the waters (1 Peter 3.20). Genesis
6.17 tells us that all other flesh died. That is also confirmed by Jesus in Luke
17.26-27:
‘And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of
man. 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.’
Christ here compares the judgement which overtook the people of Noah’s day to
the judgement which will overtake people at the last day. The Flood, therefore, is a
foreshowing of the ultimate judgement - which, of course, it could not be if it was not
universal, because when Christ returns we know that men everywhere will come under
judgement. The entire world will come under judgement. This implies that the judgement in
Noah’s day was global, not limited.
9 Post-Flood, God gave Noah the same commission in Genesis
9.1 that he gave to Adam in Genesis 1.28, ‘Be fruitful, and multiply, and
replenish the earth.’ Parallel statements are also made about having dominion over the
animals (cf. Genesis 9.2 with 1.28) and about the food that man
can eat (cf. Genesis 9.4-5 with 1.29-30). These guidelines are as
universal after the Flood to the new world commencing with Noah as they were before the
Flood when the world commenced with Adam.
10 The genealogy of Genesis 10.1-32 implies that all post-Flood
people are descendants of Noah as much as the genealogy of Adam in Genesis 4.17-
5.32 implies that all pre-Flood people are descendants of Adam. Then, in
Genesis 11 we read that because these descendants of Adam refused to fill the earth
as they had been commanded, God confused their one language into many and scattered
them throughout the earth.
Finally, in addition to these ten arguments from Scripture for a global flood, let
me briefly add that secular and scientific evidence supports a global flood as well. As for
secular evidence, in his book, The Ark on Ararat, John Morris has
collected over 200 flood traditions from around the world that parallel the Genesis
account, including every habitable continent on the globe.
And scientific evidence supports this also, including items such as marine shells
found embedded in mountains 14,000 feet above sea level showing how rock strata were
laid down quickly, one after another, without significant time gaps, all round the world.
Today, we may say we have escaped the universal Flood of Noah, but we shall
not escape the universal judgement day. Are we ready to meet the living Triune God on that
day?
‘As it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be also in the days of the Son of
man.’
Dr Beeke is minister of Heritage Reformed Church, Grand Rapids, USA and
President of Puritan
Reformed Seminary.
|
