[pp. 99-102]

"[Critics maintain] that 'the rise and fall of waters of the Mosaic deluge are described to have been gradual and of short duration' and that they would have produced comparatively little change on the surface of the country they overflowed.' But what do the Scriptures have to say about the movements and effects of the Flood waters? Are they depicted in Genesis in terms of 'tranquility'? At this point we do well to ponder the words of Byron C. Nelson. After giving a literal translation of Genesis 8:3 ('and the waters were going and returning from off the earth'), he adds: 'Here is described some ebb and flow, some notable back and forth movement of the Deluge waters, as they slowly retreated into the ocean depths. Whether the ebb and flow was that of tides, or some other extraordinary movements, the Scriptures do not say... But that there were sufficient movements, tidal or otherwise, to stir up immense quantities of the soil, which perhaps covered the old earth to an enormous depth, certainly sees plain. And a little forward in the Scriptural account, in brief yet expressive narrative, it says, 'And the waters decreased continually,' or 'were going and decreasing' (Genesis 8:5)."

[Nelson, The Deluge Story in Stone, p. 5.]

Nelson then goes on to point out two other passages of Scripture which he feels must constitute 'the coup de grace to the objection that physical violence and disaster in the Flood is foreign to the Bible itself.' The first of these passages is Genesis 6:13, 'The end of all flesh is come before Me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them [together] with the earth.' H.C. Leupold observes here that 'in order to make the sweeping nature and the dread earnestness of this destruction more clearly apparent, it is His purpose to destroy men 'together with the earth.'...

The other passage referred to by Nelson is II Peter 3:6 ('the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished' )...

Today, when the continents and oceans are in a state of equilibrium, there are tremendous oceanic currents. One of these, the south equatorial current, carries six million tons of water a second northward across the Equator. But how much more powerful must the currents have been when the oceanic waters, impelled onward by the breaking up of the fountains of the great deep and suddenly swollen by the opening of 'the windows of heaven.' rose above the highest mountains of the earth within a period of forty days and then after five months began to return 'from off the earth continually.'

Nelson clearly indicates the impossibility of the tranquil theory:

'As the sea began to rise, each twice-daily current could come higher and higher up the rivers and valleys, spreading farther and wider inland each time, and would then recede. In places, doubtless, the incoming movements would be as fierce and violent as in the Bay of St. Michael or the mouth of the Amazon, and even more so. The directions of the tidal currents and their violence would change with the changing contours of the surfaces being encroached upon. We do not say that the Flood was brought on by the gradual raising of the sea bottoms, though it may have been. But that being the gentlest manner in which a universal Deluge could be brought about, shall we, in view of what we know of tides, say there could be a universal flood and no violence be done to the earth? Can we think it possible there were no currents, no movements, no motions of the waters back and forth and hither and yon?'

[Nelson, op. cit., p. 4.]

Even the relatively small amounts of water involved in river floods have caused damage that staggers the imagination. Bridges, houses, immense boulders, and trees are torn up and swept along as mere pebbles and matchsticks. Such floods seldom attain a depth of more than a few dozen feet and their main force is expended within a few days or hours. But when we begin to speak in terms of a Flood that 'grew mightily upon the earth' and 'prevailed upon the earth one hundred and fifty days' and covered 'all the high mountains which are under all the heavens.' [Gen 7:18, 19, 24] we must face the fact that we are no longer dealing with phenomena that are familiar to modern science.

It therefore cannot be denied that a universal Flood must, of absolute necessity, have accomplished a vast amount of geologic work in a relatively short period. Erosion and sedimentation must have taken place on a gigantic scale. Previous isostatic adjustments, of whatever sort they were, must have been entirely unbalanced by the great complex of hydrostatic and hudrodynamic forces unleashed in the flood waters, resulting very likely in great telluric [terrestrial] movements. Associated with the volcanic phenomena and the great rains must also have been tremendous tidal effects, windstorms, and a great complexity of currents, cross-currents, whirlpools, and other hydraulic phenomena. After the floodgates were restrained and the fountains of the great deep stopped, there must still, for a long time, have been much more geologic work accomplished as the masses of water were settling into new basins and the earth was adjusting itself to new physiographic and hydrologic balances.

Leupold insists that 'note should be taken of the tremendous geological possibilities that lie behind the breaking open of the fountains of the great deep. The vastness of these eruptions must be in proportion to the actual depth of the Flood.'

[Ibid, p. 296]

[Gen 7:18-20]:

(v. 18) "And the water prevailed and increased greatly upon the earth; and the ark floated on the surface of the water.

(v. 19) And the water prevailed exceedingly upon the earth, so that all the high mountains which were under all the heavens were covered.

(v. 20) The water prevailed fifteen cubits higher [than the mountains of the whole world, and [therefore, all] the mountains [of the whole world] were covered]

...And he adds further, with regard to the significance of Genesis 7:18-20 for modern science...

'What opportunity for working vast geologic changes lie dormant in these 'mighty' waters! The native force of gabhar

[prevailed] is enhanced by [the Hebrew word] me'odh [which means] 'exceedingly' in verse 18 and by the doubling of the same adverb.. a Hebrew superlative... in verse 19. When will geologists begin to notice these basic facts? [Ibid., p. 301]"



[pp. 16-17]

"Since the stated purpose of the Flood was the punishment of a sinful [human] race, such a purpose could not have been accomplished if only a part of humanity had been affected...

...Scriptures clearly state that the purpose of the Flood was to wipe out a sinful and degenerate humanity; and this purpose could not have been accomplished by destroying only a portion of the race..."


[p 17]

"The fact that the Flood destroyed the rest of mankind is greatly strengthened by repeated statements in Genesis, I Peter, and II Peter, to the effect that only Noah and his family were spared...

[Gen 6:5-7, 11-13]:

(v. 5) "Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

(v. 6) And the LORD was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart.

(v. 7) And the LORD said, 'I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the sky; for I am sorry that I have made them."

(v. 11) Now the earth was corrupt in the sight of God, and the earth was filled with violence.

(v. 12) And God looked on the earth, and behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted their way upon the earth.

(v. 13) then God said to Noah, 'The end of all flesh has come before Me; for the earth is filled with violence because of them; and behold, I am about to destroy them with the earth."] the Scriptures [there are]... ...repeated statements to the effect that Noah and his family were the only ones who escaped judgment waters...

[Gen 6:17-18]:

(v. 17) " 'And behold, I, even I am bringing the flood of water upon the earth, to destroy all flesh in which is the breath of life, from under heaven; everything that is on the earth shall perish.

(v. 18) But I will establish My covenant with you; and you shall enter the ark - you and your sons and your wife, and your sons' wives with you."

[I Pet 3:20]:

"...the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water."

[II Pet 2:5]:

"and [God, v.4] did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a preacher of righteousness, with seven others, when He brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly."]

"The Lord Jesus Christ clearly stated that all men were destroyed by the Flood...

[Luke 17:26-27]:

(v. 26) "[Jesus said] And just as it happened in the days of Noah, so it shall be also in the days of the Son of Man:

(v. 27) they were eating, they were drinking, they were marrying, they were being given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all."]


[Gen 9:1-17]:

(v. 1) "And God blessed Noah and his sons and said to them, 'Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth.

(v. 2) And the fear of you and the terror of you shall be on every beast of the earth and on every bird of the sky; with everything that creeps on the ground, and all the fish of the sea, into your hand they are given. (v. 3) Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you; I give all to you, as I gave the green plant.

(v. 4) Only you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood.

(v. 5) And surely I will require your lifeblood; from every beast I will require it. And from every man, from every man's brother I will require the life of man.

(v. 6) '''Whoever sheds man's blood,

By man his blood shall be shed,

For in the image of God

He made man,'''

(v. 7) And as for you, be fruitful and multiply;

Populate the earth abundantly and multiply in it.'

(v. 8) Then God spoke to Noah and to his sons with him, saying,

(v. 9) 'Now behold, I Myself do establish My covenant with you, and with your descendants after you;

(v. 10) and with every living creature that is with you, the birds, the cattle, and every beast of the earth with you; of all that comes out of the ark, even every beast of the earth.

(v. 11) And I establish My covenant with you; and all flesh shall never again be cut off by the water of the flood, neither shall there again be a flood to destroy the earth.'

(v. 12) And God said, 'This is the sign of the covenant which I am making between Me and you and every living creature that is with you, for all successive generations;

(v. 13) I set My [rain]bow in the cloud, and it shall be for a sign of a covenant between Me and the earth.

(v. 14) And it shall come about, when I bring a cloud over the earth, that the bow shall be seen in the cloud,

(v. 15) And I will remember My covenant, which is between Me and you and every living creature of all flesh; and never again shall the water become a flood to destroy all flesh.

(v. 16) When the bow is in the cloud, then I will look upon it, to remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is on the earth.'

(v. 17) And God said to Noah, 'This is the sign of the covenant which I have established between Me and all flesh that is on the earth.' "

[pp. 22-23]

"The covenant which God made with Noah after the Flood becomes meaningless if only a part of the human race had been involved... ...If God's covenant with Noah means anything at all, it must be a covenant with the entire human race. But the Scriptures repeatedly state that God made this covenant with Noah and his sons (Gen 9:1-17). Therefore the whole of humanity has descended from Noah's family and the Flood destroyed the entire antediluvian race. Samuel J. Schultz of Wheaton College has reached a similar conclusion on this crucial question:

'Had any part of the human race survived the flood outside of Noah and his family they would not have been included in the covenant God made here. The implication seems to be that all mankind descended from Noah so that the covenant with its [rain]bow in the cloud as a reminder would be for all mankind.' "

[Samuel J. Schultz, 'The Unity of the Race: Genesis 1-11,' Journal of the American Scientific Affiliation, VII (September, 1955), p. 52]


[ pp. 34-35]

"The human race could not have been confined to the Mesopotamian Valley at the time of the Flood..." [...for three main reasons]:


[ pp. 34-35]:

"...The longevity and fecundity of the antediluvians would allow for a very rapid increase in population even if only 1,656 years elapsed between Adam and the Flood; and the prevalence of strife and violence would have encouraged wide distribution rather than confinement to a single locality... [And worldwide fossil evidences support a worldwide occupation of humans before the Flood]

...The record in Genesis 5 clearly implies that men had large families in those [preFlood] days... ...The Bible implies that: (1) men typically lived for hundreds of years,

(2) their procreative powers persisted over hundreds of years,

(3) through the combined effects of long lives and large families, mankind was rapidly 'filling the earth' (Gen. 1:28; 6:1,11)...

...our estimate of a population of one billion people on the earth at the time of the Deluge is very conservative... A population of this order of magnitude would certainly have spread far beyond the Mesopotamian plains - in fact, for all practical purposes, would have 'filled the earth' as the Scripture says..."


Furthermore, Scripture maintains that the violence of people filled the whole, entire earth. Therefore the whole entire earth was filled throughout with people:

[p. 28]

"...Scriptures do say that the earth was filled with 'violence' (Gen. 6:11, 13)..

[Gen 6:11, 13]:

(v. 11) "Now the earth was corrupt in the sight of God, and the earth was filled with violence.

(v. 13) Then God said to Noah, 'The end of all flesh has come before Me; for the earth is filled with violence because of them; and behold, I am about to destroy them with the earth."]

...'the earth' was 'filled' with violence! In other words, the very proof text which... [critics] put forward in support of the limited-population view, turns out upon closer examination to be an even more effective argument for the universal distribution of antediluvian populations...

Furthermore... ...extreme sinfulness and a tendency to strife and violence in human society are factors that have favored the scattering, rather than the centralizing, of populations..."


Critics falsely maintain that the preFlood times must have been limited to a small local population, otherwise Noah's preaching would not have reached all of them, thus warning them of the impending Flood.

[p. 30]

"We must first of all recognize that nowhere in Scripture are we told that 'the preaching of Noah was within the hearing of all that generation.' Peter says that Noah was a 'preacher of righteousness'...

[II Peter 2:5]:

"And [God] did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a preacher of righteousness, with seven others, when He brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly"]

..and the author of Hebrews tells us that Noah by faith 'prepared an ark to the saving of his house; through which he condemned the world' (Heb. 11:7]. But this is not equivalent to saying that Noah preached directly to all the people of his generation!...

..During that 120 year period of grace 'when the long-suffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing' (Gen. 6:3, I Pet. 3:20), the news of Noah's remarkable activities and alarming warnings could easily have spread throughout the entire earth...

..Civilization may very well have reached great heights before the Flood, and thus communication systems may have been efficient...

..If, in addition, we allow for a possible uniformity of language before the Flood, more than a hundred years during which the report of Noah's words could have been spread abroad, and the sensational naure of his ark-building enterprise, we have more than enough reasons for assuming that everyone in the world had an opportunity to hear directly or indirectly the warnings of this mighty 'preacher of righteousness.'..."

[I Pet 3:18-20]:

This passage teaches that our Lord through the Holy Spirit through Noah proclaimed the gospel of salvation unto eternal life and unto salvation from the coming worldwide flood:

(v. 18) "For Christ died for sins once for all, the Righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive by the Spirit,

(v. 19) through Whom [the Spirit, (v. 18b)] also He [Jesus Christ, (v. 18a)] having gone [to earth in the times of Noah, (v. 20)] proclaimed [the gospel of salvation] to the spirits [i.e., to the condemned unbelievers who are NOW in spirit form] in [the] prison [of Hades as a result of their disbelief in the gospel]"

So, it was He, Jesus Christ, Who proclaimed the message of salvation to men in Noah's time. Hebrews 11:7 and 2 Pet 2:5 indicate that this message of our Lord's was brought to the people through Noah himself:

[Heb 11:7]:

"By faith Noah, being warned by God [the preincarnate Jesus Christ] about things not yet seen, in reverence prepared an ark for the salvation of his household, by which he condemned the world, and [Noah] became an heir of the righteousness which is according to faith."

Noah's testimony to the world of his time of his believing God for salvation unto eternal life and of deliverance from the coming flood was rejected by all but 8 people living on the earth at that time.

"and [Noah] became an heir of the righteousness which is according to faith." ? Noah was saved unto eternal life by faith alone in God's plan of salvation alone - the Messiah Jesus Christ, (Ro 3:21-24); and Noah was delivered from the flood. Noah was saved spiritually and physically. From the account elsewhere in Scripture it is made clear that people were informed of Noah's purpose for building the ark and the gospel of eternal salvation and deliverance from the flood that related to Noah's 120+ year task:

[2 Peter 2:5]:

"If He [God] did not spare the ancient world when He brought the flood on its ungodly people, but protected Noah, a preacher of righteousness, and seven others;"

Notice that God's Word states that Noah was not only a builder of the ark but a "preacher of righteousness" which is to say that he proclaimed the gospel of salvation which is the only way to righteousness: faith alone in the Messiah Jesus Christ alone. (Ro 3:21-31)]


[p. 54]

" ...To these arguments we may add the fact that Christian missionaries have never in the past reached all these remote tribes of the world; and even if they had, they would have preached the Gospel of salvation instead of concentrating all of their teaching upon the Genesis Flood..."


[p. 37]

"The first argument against the doctrine that all men outside of the Ark were destroyed has been expressed as follows:

If the evidence is certain that the American Indian was in America around 8,000 B.C. to 10,000 B.C., then a universal flood or a destruction of man, must be before that time, and due to Genesis and Babylonian parallels there is hardly an evangelical scholar who wishes to put the flood as early as 8,000 B.C. to 10,000 B.C.

[p. 43]

"[However] If the Flood did not occur earlier than 10,000 B.C., are we to conclude... ...that North America and the American Indians were not affected by the Deluge? By no means, for we deny [the] premise that scientific dating methods for early man are completely reliable and that the direct ancestors of American Indians were living in North America around 10,000 B.C...

...This method [of dating] rests upon doubtful presuppositions and needs to be used with great caution... ...Dr. Stuart Piggott, a British archaeologist, reports that two radiocarbon tests on a sample of charcoal indicated a date of 2620-2630 B.C. for an ancient structure at Durrington Walls in England. But absolutely compelling archaeological evidences called for a date approximately 1,000 years later! Dr. Piggott concludes that the radiocarbon date is 'archaeologically unacceptable.'....

..radiocarbon method cannot be applied to periods in the remote past, because the Biblical doctrine of a universal Deluge calls for a non-uniformitarian history of the earth's atmosphere and thus of cosmic-ray activity and radiocarbon concentrations.... [which would drastically effect the results of radiocarbon tests]

....we may conclude that American Indians migrated to this continent following the confusion of tongues at Babel, even...[had] ...the Flood occurred after 10,000 B.C."


[pp. 44-45]

"[Critics maintain that] Noah could not have had a black son, a brown son, and a white son...

[But the truth of the matter is that] in these... [8 people in the ark] ...six people were all the genes which have separated out into the modern races... ...the genes we would have to say were all there whether in evidence in the body characteristics or not."


[pp. 45-46]

"[Critics further maintain that] The Table of Nations in Genesis 10 speaks only of Caucasian peoples..

The argument against a Flood that destroyed all mankind, that the Table of Nations in Genesis 10 speaks only of Caucasian peoples, is at best merely an argument from silence... would be rash indeed to insist that the ancestors of the Negroid and Mongoloid peoples are not included in this chapter. The racial differences we know of today were probably brought about by mutations that 'occurred in small, isolated groups which, because of their small size and isolation at rather extreme positions in the Europe-Asia-Africa land area, inbred the new factor...'

[William A. Smalley, "A Christian Veiw of Anthropology," Modern Science and Christian Faith, (2nd Ed., Wheaton, Ill., Van Kampen Press, 1950), p. 114]

...Racial differences may have occurred very quickly after the judgment of the Tower of Babel because of the sudden dispersion and isolation of families and nations.


[pp. 44, 46-47]

"[Since] ...the very purpose of the Flood would have been frustrated if only a part of sinful humanity had been destroyed...

[And since] ...many passages in the Old and New Testaments emphasize that only Noah and his family were spared

[And since] ...the Lord Jesus Christ clearly stated that all men were destroyed except those in the Ark...[Mt 24:37-39]

[And since] ...the Covenant of the Rainbow would have been utterly meaningless if only a part of the human race was involved. If these Biblical arguments are cogent, then it is necessary to derive all the races of the world from Noah's sons, from a Biblical standpoint...


[pp. 44, 47-54]

"[Critics maintain] ...that the present distribution of humanity could not have been accomplished... [if there were a universal] ...Flood..." [But evidence and traditional accounts handed down over the centuries point to a rapid growth and spread of humanity all over the earth]:

[pp. 47-48]

"...Does anthropological evidence actually point to a very gradual distribution of modern races during hundreds of thousands of years? Not at all. ...[There is evidence of a] vast dispersion of races from Asia during the past several thousand years..."


[pp. 48-54]

"Scores and even hundreds of such traditions have been found in every part of the world, in both the Eastern and Western hemispheres; and common to most of them is the recollection of a great flood which once covered the earth and destroyed all but a tiny

remnant of the human race...

..Thus, anthropology has no right to decide one way or the other concerning the true significance of these flood legends. All it can do is describe them and give some cautious guesses as to how they might be explained, such guesses being unavoidably colored by the presuppositions of the one who makes them...

..if there actually was a Flood that destroyed mankind, as the Bible teaches, then universal flood traditions would be exactly what one would expect to find...

..But the real question is this: what would non-Christian anthropologists say about the Genesis Flood account if there were no legends or traditions anywhere in the world of such a Flood? Would they not use this very lack of circumstantial evidence as a weighty objection to the veracity of the Biblical account?...

[And in answer to critics' posture that missionaries were responsible for spreading the Flood account]:

...It hardly seems necessary to refute the notion that missionaries were responsible for the spread of flood legends in any appreciable way. Byron C. Nelson attacks this theory from three different directions: (1) there are no universal legends of other great miracles recorded in the Bible, such as the crossing of the Red Sea;

(2) if missionaries were responsible for flood traditions, it is difficult to explain the many important differences of emphasis and detail in these traditions, and

(3) the vast majority of flood traditions have been gathered and recorded, not by Christian missionaries, but by secular anthropologists who had no interest in verifying the Genesis account..."


[The two] ...basic arguments against an anthropologically universal Flood really come down to this: the Flood was too recent to allow for the present population of the world, in its racial types and geographical distribution, to have descended from Noah's family. In answer to this, we have shown:

(1) negatively, that there is no way of proving scientifically that the present distribution of mankind occurred at a date prior to that which the Bible suggests for the Flood, and

(2) positively, that the relatively recent distribution of races from the Asiatic mainland, together with the circumstantial evidence from universal Flood traditions, is more favorable to the concept of an anthropologically local Flood. Thus we must conclude that... [the critics'] ...arguments against a Flood that destroyed the human race in the days of Noah are inadequate, being sustained by neither science nor Scripture...."