able, in a general sense, to account
for the continent-scale extent of many
Paleozoic and Mesozoic sedimentary
formations as well as evidence in
many of these rocks for high energy
water transport.” 5
Noah and the Ark were safe
While the Flood would have been
immensely destructive over the earth
itself, the Ark was designed to protect
its cargo. Deeper water would not have
permitted the destructive effects of the
high-speed gyres, and overall, the
Flood was very deep—if all the mountains were flattened down and ocean
bottoms raised so the solid surface
was completely even, water would
cover the whole surface to 3 km deep.
So the Ark could have mostly floated
in deep water away from the damaging
effects of gyres—and of tsunamis. A
tsunami today can travel at typical
speeds of around 700 km/h in deep
ocean water, yet be barely noticeable
to ships as it passes. As it approaches
shallow water, the wave slows down
and concomitantly gains rapidly in
height before unleashing its fury on
the land. 12
This safety element could be an
aspect of the central point of the
Flood narrative: “God remembered
Noah” (Genesis 8:1). It’s not that
God ever forgot Noah. Rather, God
‘remembering’ Noah is a Hebrew idiom
meaning that God began to act again
on his behalf. Fellow Messianic Jewish
commentator Arnold Fruchtenbaum
provides other biblical examples:
“In Genesis 19: 29, God remem-
bered Abraham with a view to saving
Lot; in Exodus 2: 24, God remembered
his covenant with the patriarchs with a
view to rescuing Israel; in Jeremiah 2: 2,
God remembered Israel with a view
toward her restoration; in Jeremiah
31: 20, God remembered Ephraim with
a view toward extending mercy to him;
and in Luke 1: 54–55, God remembered
Israel with a view toward sending the
Messiah to Israel. Furthermore, the
sense here in Genesis is that of God
remembering a covenant; though in
this case the covenant itself had not
yet been made. (God said earlier in
Genesis 6 that He would establish His
covenant with Noah.) Furthermore, in
7: 12 God remembered that the rain
would last only forty days (7: 4). All these
usages fit into the word ‘remember’.” 13
So the traditional understanding of
the global Flood fits the biblical teaching
better—and makes better sense of real
science. It is unnecessary and unscientific to add unbiblical accommodations for uniformitarian geology.
References and notes
1. Available at creation.com/s/10-2-606.
2. Johnson, J.J.S., Biblical devastation in the
wake of a ‘tranquil flood’, Acts & Facts
40( 9): 8–10, 2011; icr.org.
3. Fleming, John, The Geological Deluge,
as Interpreted by Baron Cuvier and
Professor Buckland, Inconsistent with the
Testimony of Moses and the Phenomena
of Nature, Edinburgh Philosophical
Journal 14( 28):205–239, April 1826; quote
4. For a summary, see Walker, T., A biblical
geologic model, 3rd ICC, pp. 581–592, 1994;
5. Barnette, D. W. and Baumgardner, J.R.,
Patterns of ocean circulation over the
continents during Noah’s Flood, 3rd ICC, pp.
6. Holroyd, E. W., Cavitation processes during
catastrophic floods, 2nd ICC 2:101–113, 1991.
7. Flannigan, D.J., and Suslick, K.S.,
Plasma formation and temperature
measurement during single-bubble
cavitation, Nature 434(7029): 52–55, 3
8. Lohse, D., Cavitation hots up, Nature
434(7029): 33–34, 2005.
9. Hannon, S., The 1983 Flood at Glen Canyon,
Glen Canyon Institute, glencanyon.org,
accessed 17 October 2007.
10. Catchpoole, D., Beware the bubble’s burst:
Increased knowledge about cavitation
highlights the destructive power of fast-flowing water, Creation 31( 2): 50–51, 2009;
11. Walker, T., Massive erosion on California’s
Oroville Dam: Spillway canyon
demonstrates power of flowing water,
creation.com/oroville, 23 March 2017.
12. Tsunami Facts and Information, Australian
Bureau of Meteorology, bom.gov.au/
tsunami/info, accessed 1 July 2016.
13. Fruchtenbaum, A.G., The Book of Genesis, p.
175, 2009; emphasis in original.
THE GENESIS ACCOUNT
This classic commentary on Genesis 1– 11 contains a thorough analysis of the text itself,
and has a number of features that set it apart from many other Genesis commentaries:
• It defends the biblical creationist position: creation in six consecutive normal days,
death resulting from Adam’s sin, a globe-covering Flood, confusion of languages at
Babel and, in the process, it explains how the rest of the Bible interprets Genesis in
the above straightforward manner.
• While skillfully documenting how interpreters throughout Church history have taught
the above, and that long-age death-before-sin views were a reaction to 19th-century
uniformitarian geology, it also provides cutting-edge scientific support for the
• Importantly it demonstrates that all doctrines of Christianity begin in Genesis 1– 11,
and straightforwardly answers the commonest objections to a plain understanding of
these crucial Genesis texts (available from creation.com/store).
B.Sc.(Hons.), Ph. D., F. M.
Dr Sarfati’s Ph.D. in physical chemistry is from
Victoria University, Wellington, NZ. He is the
author of some of the world’s best-known creation
books. A former NZ chess champion, he works
for Creation Ministries International (in Australia
1996–2010, thereafter in Atlanta, USA). For more:
CREATION.com 39 Creation 39( 3) 2017