The Testimony of Noah

13 Nov
(From Google Images)

(From Google Images)

If we are trying to be honest about how the Bible interprets itself, then certainly a “high hill” like Mount Olives would conclude a global flood was necessary, if it were indeed covered with water. Moreover, the testimonies of both Jesus and Peter in the New Testament seem to point to the global nature of the flood, since it is being compared with the future prospect of Jesus’ judgment over the whole world. So, ‘honesty’ plays a part in how we view what the Bible says about the events which it describes.

In addition to the above, we need to consider the need for an ark to begin with, if the flood were a local event. For example, why couldn’t Noah simply flee the area with his family? Notice the opinion of one local flood advocate:

“Why did God make the Israelites march around Jericho for seven days prior to the wall falling down? Why did God make the Israelite look upon the bronze serpent to be healed of snake bite in the wilderness? Why did Jesus make the blind man go to the Pool of Siloam to heal his blindness? Were any of these things actually required for God to do His work? No! God could have just wiped out all the evil people in the world, as He did later to the all the Egyptians’ first-born. Maybe God had good reasons for Noah to build the ark? God has a purpose for each person of faith to join Him in preaching His message. God’s plan will be accomplished regardless of our participation in it. However, God gives obedient humans the privilege of participating in God’s plans. Likewise, God had a plan for Noah, part of which was for him and his sons to demonstrate their commitment and perseverance to the Lord.”[1]

While I agree that Noah was a preacher of righteousness and called to warn the rebellious world in which he dwelt, it does not stand to reason that this necessitated an ark. Lot was also a righteous man and the natives were aware of his righteous beliefs (Genesis 19:9). Yet, when Sodom was destroyed, all Lot and his family had to do was leave (Genesis 19:12-16). Noah’s faithfulness to God was demonstrated to the world in that he was a preacher of righteousness, not simply by building an ark. Noah tried to get others to repent, so they could be saved as well, but none paid much attention.

The building of the ark was a great testimony of the coming judgment, since it was preached for 100 years during the building of the ark. The New Testament states this idea directly, since it says that Noah was a “preacher of righteousness”[2] …(2Peter 2:4-5).

How could the building of an ark be a “great testimony of the coming judgment”, if the God’s judgment were local? As I mentioned in a previous blog, concerning the testimonies of Jesus and Peter, the context of their statements were of a global nature. Certainly Jesus is the Judge of the entire world, not just a local community. Certainly God’s coming judgment is of a global nature and not simply for a portion of the earth. If the “ark” is a testimony of a local flood, why wouldn’t Christians storing up asbestos suits for the future be a testimony against the coming judgment by fire? The fact that we don’t do such things shows that it was Noah’s preaching that was the testimony, just as ours is today.


Posted by on November 13, 2013 in Genesis Flood, Noahic Flood


Tags: , , , , , , , ,

2 responses to “The Testimony of Noah

  1. librarygeekshari

    May 27, 2015 at 03:40

    Have you read about Ron Wyatt who claimed to have discovered Noah’s ark? If so, what do you think of his claim?

    • Eddie

      May 27, 2015 at 06:08

      I haven’t read any of Ron Wyatt’s works, but I have viewed his claims on YouTube. He presents a good case, but I am unable to say, at least at this time, that I fully embrace everything he says, and the truth about some of what I hold in question may reflect upon what I find very interesting in his claims.

      Perhaps I’m being to vague here. Ron Wyatt claims that the pre-Flood era was a highly advanced community. In some ways it was more advanced than we are today, and in other ways we might be more advanced, but they weren’t cave-men-dummies. While I agree Adam’s descendents weren’t dummies, I’m not certain that I agree with Ron’s claim of scientific advancement. He makes other claims of purposeful modern destruction of proof of an earlier advanced society.

      He also makes questionable claims of a vision of an angel in a cave under the site of the crucifixion. I have determined otherwise through scripture. If I have to choose between my understanding of scripture and Ron’s claims of visions, I have to choose my understanding of scripture. If my interpretation of scripture is correct, this places Ron’s sincerity in question and, therefore, any other claim he may have made. While I am unable to judge Ron’s sincerity, I have to place it in question as long as I understand scripture in the way I do. Hope this helps.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: