Noah’s Flood – The Debate, Its History, and Consequences

Noahs Flood

Over the last ten years or so, Christianity has seen several great debaters argue emphatically about the validity and reliability of the Biblical text. Noah’s flood, in particular, has been a bit of a pet subject often referenced in these debates. In recent years, arguments between PHDs over the idea of a global flood have spilled over into the public space, becoming a bit of a cultural phenomenon.

In Christian history, there have only been a handful of debates that have broken into the realm of public discourse to the extent Noah’s Flood has. However, even with all of this attention, many people still only have a basic understanding of the views being discussed, how the debate has developed over time, and the consequences its conclusion might have for Christianity.

Three Main Points of View Surrounding Noah’s Flood

The views surrounding Noah’s food are often framed in a very black-and-white way. On one side, you have those who believe in a worldwide deluge, and on the other are the people who do not. This perspective, however, is not the most accurate way to think about the discussion as a whole.

This framing gives off the impression that the flood debate is only about the existence or non-existence of a catastrophic historical event. And…. although this is defiantly a vital aspect of the discussion, it’s really not what the argument is about.

Genre Not Just History

Fundamentally the debate is about the genre of the Biblical flood narrative. No matter how sciency the conversation gets, it constantly circles back to the text and how the evidence supports or objects to a particular way of viewing it.

Some believe that there is no evidence Noah’s flood ever happened, which, according to them, means that the story is a fable or ancient myth. On the other hand, others argue that there is evidence supporting the catastrophic event and that the text is an accurate historical account of it. Still, others believe that the story is best viewed as a historical adaptation of actual events. Since the flood debate revolves around the Bible, it’s more helpful to think about the whole situation as an argument over the genre than as an argument over just the existence of a very damp moment in history.

 The History of the Debate Over Noah’s Flood

However, by the year 1800, developments in geology cast a large shadow over the historical documentation point of view. Montgomery believes that by 1830 or 1840, the geological community had outright rejected the idea of a global flood. In his 1852 book, Religion of Geology, Edward Hitchcock wrote this regarding the geological community’s view of Noah’s flood.

Noah's flood

 “Most of these opinions and this dogmatism are now abandoned, because both nature and scripture are better understood.”

Edward Hitchcock

During this time, a concept called uniformitarianism became the mainstream view of geological history. Uniformitarianism is the idea that the intensity of catastrophic events has remained uniform or the same across history. In other words, the floods of the past were no worse than the floods of today. This point of view was dominant throughout the 18 and 19 hundreds.

Discoveries That Changed The Tide Of Debate Over Noah’s Flood

Although many people were convinced that geology had utterly discredited the historical reading of Noah’s flood, unbeknownst to the researchers of the time, evidence of a catastrophic past lay silent, scattered across the landscape, waiting to be discovered.

These discoveries began in 1923 with Dr. J Harlen Bertz’s research in Missoula, Montana. Bertz concluded that major floods, much larger than any we have seen today, decimated the region of Missoula sometime after the last ice age. Years later, more evidence of catastrophic floods began popping up worldwide. Today, researchers have found evidence of major flood events in the American Midwest, Israel, Asia, Europe, and Eurasia.

Harlen Bertz’s Noahs Flood
Harlen Bertz’s

In light of all this evidence, the idea that Noah’s flood is a fable-like story has been borderline refuted. These developments have increased the popularity of the historical adaptation view amongst the religious and non-religious alike.

Many who hold this view today suggest that the flood story was based on one or more of these local catastrophic floods and that the writers added various elements to make theological points. Consequently, Historical Adaption and Historical Documentation are the two big heavy hitters of today’s debate over Noah’s flood.

Should Christians Be Concerned About The Debate Over Noah’s Flood?

When people talk about the historicity of Noah’s flood, it is often in the context of a more extensive discussion surrounding the reliability of the Bible and the truthfulness of Christianity. Detractors will often suggest that the validity of the Bible/ Christianity and the existence of a global flood are connected in such a way that to disprove one would disgrace the other. Many Christians seem to share this point of view and consequently take the debate very seriously.

However, I believe that this idea is deeply misguided, and I’m going to say this next part as frankly and directly as possible…. Christians should not be concerned about the possible conclusions of the debate over Noah’s flood. Christianity is not such a fragile religion that it would be taken down or vindicated by the historical accuracy of Noah’s flood.

As Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15:14, Christianity falls and stands on the resurrection of Jesus. Even if we found a way to definitively prove beyond any doubt that Noah’s flood didn’t happen, this would only affect our understanding of the text’s literature style. The validity of Christianity, the authority of the scripture, and the core messages God has given us through Noah’s flood would all remain intact. Our faith is built upon the rock that is Jesus Christ, our Lord, and our God; nothing more, nothing less.

Sources And Further Reading

  1. The Rocks Don’t Lie, Michel Montgomery
  2. Religion of Geology, Edward Hitchcock
  3. The Lost World of the Flood,  John H. Walton
  4. The City of God, St. Augustine
  5. Contra Celsum, Origen
  6. New evidence for Amos’s Earthquake, an Article by LFC

Thanks For Being Awesome!

This Post Has 2 Comments

Leave a Reply