It seems that every generation feels compelled to slog its way anew through debates involving the relationship between the Bible and science. Today’s animated conversations about the extent of the Noahic flood are nothing new.
But we need to maintain our balance in these discussions, a balance between legitimate diversity of opinion and illegitimate boundary crossing.
Perhaps Abraham Kuyper can help us do that. Consider these words, published near the turn from the nineteenth into the twentieth century.
An esteemed correspondent has objected to our position that the flood most probably did not cover the entire globe, and in connection with this, that predatory animals perhaps remained alive elsewhere in the world.
Let it be stated immediately that we attach very little importance to this dispute. Our only interest was to emphasize the significance of the protection of humanity against predatory animals.
For the rest, we note that Scripture itself says that “the waters prevailed so mightily on the earth that all the high mountains under the whole heaven were covered” (Gen. 7:19), after which Scripture mentions the highest mountain, Mount Ararat. Nevertheless it is clear that numerous mountains were higher than Ararat.
In the second place, that not all the animals were destroyed appears from the fact that since the flood consisted of water, the fish could not have been killed, but rather received a rare and rich prize of human and animal corpses.
Third, numerous fossils have been found in the earth’s depths, fossils of animals that did not belong to this time period.
Fourth, it is indeed true that in Genesis 8:17 we read that all the animals had to leave the ark, but a literal interpretation of this presents us with insoluble difficulties. Suppose there were eight people, together with a small number of horses, cattle, camels, sheep, goats, etc., and you let loose two lions, two tigers, two hyenas, two snakes, two wolves, two bears, and many more. How could people have defended themselves at this point? What did those animals live on? Would not the entire small stock have been killed within a short time? Were you to say that Noah and his sons might have been animal tamers, or that God might have restrained the predatory animals at that point so that they didn’t attack people, we would certainly admit that these were possible, but precisely at that point justice is not being done to Genesis 9:5.
In any case, we are facing difficulties here that arise from the brevity of the narrative. One person can posit this, while another can posit that, and those opinions should be permitted. But Genesis 8 and 9 are revealed to us not to have a dispute about them. The main point here involves God’s ordinances given to the new human race.
From De Gemeene Gratie, by A. Kuyper (Amsterdam: Boekhandel Höveker & Wormser, 1902), 1.58-59. Translated by Nelson D. Kloosterman. All rights reserved. For more information, go here.
