geocreationism.com

A primary obstacle to discussing The Flood with a Young Earther has to do with how you read the scripture.  Many will say that you have to read it literally.  Personally, I find that quite appealing.  However, as you read through The Flood’s account, you immediately find yourself having to relax that rule when God says he is going to wipe out “all” of mankind… but is going to save Noah and his family.  Clearly, Noah is a man, yet God clearly separated him from the “all” that he was referring to.  Apparently, even when the word “all” is used by God, God still reserves the right to list exceptions. 

So, backing off the strictly literal method of interpretation, one can still insist that you interpret the scripture in the most straightforward manner possible. Once again, I have no problem with this, because taken as as whole, our example above becomes quite clear: God separated Noah and his family from the “all”; the rest of the “all” would still be wiped out.

But then we come across things like this: 

¹⁹ You are to bring into the ark two of all living creatures, male and female, to keep them alive with you. ²⁰ Two of every kind of bird, of every kind of animal and of every kind of creature that moves along the ground will come to you to be kept alive.

 Those were God’s instructions to Noah in Genesis 6.  Now compare them to the instructions God gave in Genesis 7…

² Take with you seven of every kind of clean animal, a male and its mate, and two of every kind of unclean animal, a male and its mate, ³ and also seven of every kind of bird, male and female, to keep their various kinds alive throughout the earth. 

 Now, how exactly are we to interpret that?  Literally?  Then how many of each kind of bird did Noah have on the ark?  Two or seven?  Do other verses in Genesis 7 help?

⁸ Pairs of clean and unclean animals, of birds and of all creatures that move along the ground, ⁹ male and female, came to Noah and entered the ark, as God had commanded Noah.

- - -

¹⁵ Pairs of all creatures that have the breath of life in them came to Noah and entered the ark. ¹⁶ The animals going in were male and female of every living thing, as God had commanded Noah.

 Hmmmm… it would seem that the birds arrived in pairs, just as God said they would.  Yet God also said to take seven of each kind of bird. This leaves several possibilities:

1. Perhaps 4 pairs of each of kind of bird came to Noah, and Noah just let one of the birds go.  That would meet verse 6:20, but would violate verse7:15.
2. Perhaps one of the birds didn’t have the breath of life?  That would meet verse 7:15, but would violate 6:20.  (I realize the idea of a dead bird flying to Noah is absurd, and frankly insulting.  However, I do occasionally run across Christian debaters — Old and Young Earther who argue like this.)
3. Perhaps only 2 birds came to Noah, and he caught 7 more.  That would meet verse 6:20 and verse 7:15 and 7:2.

So of the possibilities above, #3 is the only “biblical” one.  The problem however is that now we’re reading an act into scripture that isn’t actually recorded… catching birds! And furthermore, the total number of birds for a given kind would now be 9, which is neither 2 nor 7!  And if Noah has to catch 7 birds, then why bring Noah 2?  Why not just bring him the entire 7?  It’s attempts like this to reconcile scripture that cause a lot of skeptics to really not take us seriously when we witness to them.  And now look at where we are: We cannot interpret the scripture literally, because it says 2 then it says 7, then 2 again.  We cannot interpret the scripture in a straightforward manner, because an interpretation that results in saving 9 birds is just not straightforward.  Instead, we’re stuck with a legalistic interpretation that meets the requirements of each verse, but makes us sound silly… and isn’t the Gospel all about freeing ourselves from legalism?

 Here is my interpretation.  I believe that generally speaking, Noah only had 2 of each bird on the ark, and only 2 of each other kind of animal.  However, notice that birds are not the only kind of animal that God wanted saved in sevens… God also wanted “clean animals” saved in sevens.  Why clean animals?  Well, those were the animals that God would later tell Moses were suitable for sacrifices.  God also specified likewise for birds.  Therefore, it would seem that God was telling Noah to gather seven of each animal and bird that were suitable for sacrifices, and then two everything else.  And just as God brought Noah all of the pairs that were to go on the ark, I believe he also brought Noah all of the sets of seven that were to go on the ark as well.

This interpretation relieves us from literalism, subjectivism (as everyone disagrees on what is “straightforward”), and also relieves us of legalism.  It would seem that God was speaking in generalities and exceptions.  Generally, Noah was to save two everything, except for those that God wanted seven of.  And just in case Noah wasn’t sure which was which, God brought Noah the right amount of each.

Now, let’s bring this back around other aspects of The Flood narrative.

1. Who was killed? Generally speaking, it was Adam’s descendants who were killed.  Old and Young Earthers can agree to that.  Whether there were other human beings on the planet is beside the point, as Genesis 5 was clearly focused on Adam’s descendants, and Noah and his family were the exceptions. 
2. How much of the world was flooded? Well generally speaking, it was all of the world that mattered at that time, specifically the section of the world inhabited by Adam’s descendants.
3. How many of each animal was saved? Generally speaking, two.  Sacrificial and other to-be-kosher animals were exceptions.

The reason I go through all of this is to show that once you find yourself interpreting one part of The Flood narrative in a manner that is “generally speaking”, and not literal, not subjectively “straightforward”, and not legalistic, then perhaps it is true of those other aspects of The Flood that put Christians at such odds with each other.  You cannot give up the literal interpretation of one verse, just to insist that I am wrong for giving up a literal interpretation of another.  That said, please notice what I am doing.  I am providing a way to interpret the scripture that explains why God doesn’t explain everything.  I am pointing out the story in between the words, and showing you a God who communicates with us in generalizations, followed by exceptions.  There is nothing wrong with this.  In fact, it’s empowering, because far from robbing scripture of its meaning, it more clearly brings out its meaning, and does so in a way that is confirmed by the very science so many in the church are trying to fight.  I believe one day God will honor them for the love they show Him in their struggle, but what they may not realize is that the one they are fighting is God.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, July 14th, 2010 at 9:46 pm and is filed under Creation Week, Bible Commentary, The Flood, Young Earth, Walking with God. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.