A Brief Response to Tyler Vela Regarding the Flood

Tyler Vela and I have been back and forth regarding Young Earth Creationism dating back to a time when he was in a Presbyterian church.  In fact, I had been planning to respond to more of his interpretive work on Genesis before I learned of his departure from the Presbyterian church. In the following, I'm excerpting what I view as the relevant portions of a recent conversation, and I assume Tyler is more than capable of providing additional points via his own blog etc. (or even in the comment box here if it is working) if he feels I've left out something important.

Specifically, recently Tyler posted a graphic illustrating that Noah's ark was about half as long as the Titanic, and suggesting that it was incredible that "people REALLY think this kept alive one of every “kind” of animal (whatever ... that means) including each kind of dinosaur and all the food and everything needed to sustain them for ONE YEAR.."  

I pointed out that what we actually believe is that Ark contained two of every kind, and sevens of the clean animals:

Gen 6:19-21  And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they shall be male and female. Of fowls after their kind, and of cattle after their kind, of every creeping thing of the earth after his kind, two of every sort shall come unto thee, to keep them alive. And take thou unto thee of all food that is eaten, and thou shalt gather it to thee; and it shall be for food for thee, and for them.

Genesis 7:1-3 And the LORD said unto Noah, Come thou and all thy house into the ark; for thee have I seen righteous before me in this generation. Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female. Of fowls also of the air by sevens, the male and the female; to keep seed alive upon the face of all the earth.

Genesis 7:7-9 And Noah went in, and his sons, and his wife, and his sons' wives with him, into the ark, because of the waters of the flood. Of clean beasts, and of beasts that are not clean, and of fowls, and of every thing that creepeth upon the earth, there went in two and two unto Noah into the ark, the male and the female, as God had commanded Noah.

Tyler responded by saying: "Define a kind. This becomes wildly problematic."

To which I replied: "I don’t have a more precise definition. It’s almost always going to be problematic to go beyond revelation."

Tyler then responded: "Except the problems of taxonomy plague the narrative itself. On almost any way defining kind, there is no way they all fit on the ark, let alone fed and sustained them all. That boat wouldn’t be enough to sustain even a handful of large mammals."

A user @STulip responded: "In presenting this problem, it seems you have accepted a supernatural explanation for the flood occurring but are not leaving room for one when it comes to the ark. Please correct me if I am wrong."

Tyler responded:

It would have to be a supernatural thing for EVERYTHING related to it such that even all of the evidence from paleontology, geology, physics, biology, etc are all wrong and that God did it and only left evidence that points to the exact contrary…

So if you want to admit that the flood and everything involved is not supported by ANY evidence and despite running contrary to all the available evidence that it is just a tenant of faith to believe it, say that. That would at least be honest.

I think it would still be wrong but then at least y’all can stop completely mishandling the science and failing to offer any actual evidence outside of “for the Bible tells me so.”

My response is this:

Tyler's response seems to suggest two opposite extremes.  One extreme is that the flood was, essentially, a fully natural event that was brought on by natural causes, produced natural effects, and left natural trace evidence, such that our examination of the evidence should lead us to confirm every aspect of the Genesis narrative.  The other extreme is that the flood was an entirely supernatural event (like creation ex nihilo) that had no natural cause, produced no natural effects, and left no natural traces.  Thus, science is a wholly inadequate tool for the study of the flood.  In Tyler's understanding, the latter is more consistent because the Genesis narrative (says Tyler) "is not supported by ANY evidence" (his caps) and "contrary to all the available evidence." 

On the other hand, the Genesis account lies somewhere in between those extremes.

On the one hand, God specifically identifies the great flood as a deliberate divine punishment for sin:

Genesis 6:11-13 The earth also was corrupt before God, and the earth was filled with violence. And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth. And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth.

On the other hand, God specifically identifies natural means for the protection of life even against the flood He is bringing:

Genesis 6:14-21 Make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms shalt thou make in the ark, and shalt pitch it within and without with pitch. And this is the fashion which thou shalt make it of: The length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, the breadth of it fifty cubits, and the height of it thirty cubits. A window shalt thou make to the ark, and in a cubit shalt thou finish it above; and the door of the ark shalt thou set in the side thereof; with lower, second, and third stories shalt thou make it. And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die. But with thee will I establish my covenant; and thou shalt come into the ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and thy sons' wives with thee. And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they shall be male and female. Of fowls after their kind, and of cattle after their kind, of every creeping thing of the earth after his kind, two of every sort shall come unto thee, to keep them alive. And take thou unto thee of all food that is eaten, and thou shalt gather it to thee; and it shall be for food for thee, and for them.

Moreover, the account references natural causes:

Genesis 7:11-12 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened. And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights.

Also, the flood is indicated as providing natural effects:

Genesis 7:17-24 And the flood was forty days upon the earth; and the waters increased, and bare up the ark, and it was lift up above the earth. And the waters prevailed, and were increased greatly upon the earth; and the ark went upon the face of the waters. And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered. Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered. And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man: All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died. And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark. And the waters prevailed upon the earth an hundred and fifty days.

Just as the beginning of the flood is ascribed both to God's purpose and to natural causes, so also the end:

Genesis 8:1-5 And God remembered Noah, and every living thing, and all the cattle that was with him in the ark: and God made a wind to pass over the earth, and the waters asswaged; the fountains also of the deep and the windows of heaven were stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained; and the waters returned from off the earth continually: and after the end of the hundred and fifty days the waters were abated. and the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat. And the waters decreased continually until the tenth month: in the tenth month, on the first day of the month, were the tops of the mountains seen.

So, there is a mixture of supernatural and natural.  Noah and his family were not saved by a wall of water forming around them like the Red Sea passage, but by building a truly massive box (we assume the dimensions to be about 450 ft. long, by 75 ft. wide, by 45 ft. high, which was covered with pitch to be waterproof. The source of the water was rain and the fountains of the deep.

Moreover, contrary to Tyler's claims, it is not as though there is no evidence of this great flood.  As one Creationism apologist used to say frequently, if we saw a worldwide flood, we would expect to see dead things, buried in rock layers, laid down by water, all over the earth.  And, in fact, we do see that.  Famously, the Himalayan Mountains (presently the highest on earth) show evidence of having been underwater in the past.  This is not to suggest that folks have not offered a fully naturalistic explanation for this occurrence, without reliance on a global flood.  Likewise, it probably should not be said that this is "proof" of a global flood, just "evidence" of it.

One challenge, however, is that it is difficult to know how to evaluate the evidence we have.  People living over 600 years is something unfathomable today.  Something must have been radically different then as compared to now.  

Furthermore, what about the practical challenges Tyler mentioned? Many of these practical challenges are easily surmounted if God brought juveniles of the animals onto the ark, and if God caused the animals to, in essence, hibernate on the ark so that they did not consume much food.  However, the narrative itself, while not denying this, does not assert either of these things.

Likewise, while radiometric dating offers vastly different ages for things like the Himalayan fossils, such dating is based on an assumption of uniformity of nature.  The reliability of that assumption is called into question by the extreme old age of our antedeluvian ancestors, and if that assumption is wrong, science becomes a much less reliable tool for investigation of the evidence.

Ultimately, while scientific study of the trave evidence of the flood may be a valuable undertaking, we hold to the historical account of the flood by faith in the divine author of Scripture, both old and new.

After all, the account in Genesis is not presented as a vision or the like, but as an historical account of historical figures.  Thus, while the flood narrative itself is in Genesis 6-9, mentions of the flood as an historical event persist in Genesis 10:1 and Genesis 11:10. 

The Old Testament authors after Moses likewise treat Noah as historical (including quotations from God himself):

• 1 Chronicles 1:4 Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
• Isaiah 54:9 For this is as the waters of Noah unto me: for as I have sworn that the waters of Noah should no more go over the earth; so have I sworn that I would not be wroth with thee, nor rebuke thee.
• Ezekiel 14:14 Though these three men, Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it, they should deliver but their own souls by their righteousness, saith the Lord GOD.
• Ezekiel 14:20 Though Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it, as I live, saith the Lord GOD, they shall deliver neither son nor daughter; they shall but deliver their own souls by their righteousness.

Furthermore, the New Testament authors treat the account of Noah as historical, alongside Abel, Enoch, Abraham, Lot, Moses, etc.  

• Matthew 24:37-39 But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
• Luke 3:36 Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of Arphaxad, which was the son of Sem, which was the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech,
• 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.
• Hebrews 11:7 By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith.
• 1 Peter 3:18-20 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: by which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
• 2 Peter 2:5 And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;

Accordingly, we ought to believe the account as historical because God says it is, whether or not the scientific evidence appears to align.