And expired all flesh which moves over the earth – among birds, among livestock, among beasts, and among every swarm of insect over the earth, and all of the men. All which drew the breath of life in its nostrils, from all that which was on dry ground, died. And it snuffed out all standing over the face of the ground – from man, to livestock, to creeping thing, even unto birds of the sky. They were snuffed from the earth, and only Noah remained, and those who were with him in the ark.
Genesis 7:21-23 (my interpretation)
In my last post, I detailed how a chiasm in Genesis 7 suggested linkage between the Tower of Babel and the Great Flood.
In this post, there is nothing as revelatory, but there is, however, some interesting parallels to other parts of Scripture as we move on from the worst part of the Flood, and the death that came with it.
The first parallel is where God lumps man together with all “flesh” (basar), for He called them “just flesh” in Genesis 6:3. [Begin Rant: That is the passage about the nephilim, and I can’t stress this enough – we cannot read about the ‘nephilim‘ and think them anything other than “flesh”. People sometimes like to imagine them as half-bred angels or even space aliens – but the text calls them “flesh.” Sometimes, you just have to rely on what the Bible says. End Rant]. Now, in Genesis 7:21, God not only fulfilled what He said – ‘that His Spirit would not walk with man forever‘ (vs. 6:3) – the Scripture records man with the lowest possible terminology. A prime example is that in the text, “all of the men” is mentioned only after swarms of tiny gnats and worms. The spiritual interpretation here would be that by the time of the Flood God considered men lower than worms. Yikes!
The next parallel is determined from the phrase “all which drew breath in its nostrils” – which is an obvious callback to Eden, specifically when יָהוֶה breathed into man’s nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living being (Genesis 2:7). The interpretation is that the breath of life was designed for something else; it wasn’t supposed to be this way. Selah.
The last parallel I want to write about is a curious one, both in the chosen terminology and the order which the words appear. It’s almost a reverse mirror image of the first few lines, but this time, instead of man appearing after worms, “man” precedes the “the birds of sky“, and the birds are mentioned last. The reason? I think it’s the choice of verb!
I opined a while back that there was some connection to the birds of the sky and sons of God – and if I may shamelessly toot my own shofar, I think I’m on to something. In the first few lines, the verb “yig’wa” (from the verb gavah, meaning to breathe out, expire) is used, but in the last lines, the verb yimach is used (from the verb machah, meaning to rub out or erase. I chose ‘snuff out’ just because I can. I’m diabolical like that.) Now, when you think of any creature “expiring” – that is to say, breathing its last breath – what do you imagine? You probably envision a scene of sorrow, like a loved one bedside in the hospital, or a child weeping over a pet gone to pet heaven. Now, let’s envision “snuffing out” a creature – quite the opposite, yes? We’re not imagining house PETS anymore, now we’re thinking about house PESTS! Now we’re imagining mouse traps and bug zappers.
And so it is with these verses. In the first few lines, we almost regret what happened, with the birds and cattle being a sort of collateral damage, as God mentioned their breath before all others. The latter is the snuffing out, a bit of extermination – and who was first on the execution block? Man.
While we might say that these last verses appear to be a practical order of what creatures were first to die (based on how the Flood would affect them), spiritually speaking, I believe it underlines how evil that generation was.
If you need any more convincing, I would advise you to think about the use of the noun yekoom ( literally “standing”, but figuratively means “remaining”). There are only three places yekoom is used – the first two are with the Noah story (7:4 and 7:23, – with 7:23 being a reiteration of 7:4), but the last is with the tragedy of Dothan and Abiram (Deuteronomy 11:6), when the earth swallowed them for challenging Moses – they and all which stood (yekoom) with them.
And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered. Fifteen cubitsupward did the watersprevail; and the mountains were covered.
Genesis 7:19-20, KJV
In my last post I illustrated how the Flood was directed like a military operation, from the mustering of the waters, assaulting the enemy from two approaches, and ultimately dominating humankind and his military fortresses high in the mountains. There’s a couple of reasons this theory holds water (pardon the pun) and I’ll continue some of those analogies, though in this post we’re going to be getting much deeper (again, pardon me).
The Chiasm
This section of the Flood story is a little different because it carries a few obvious poetic chiasms, although the chiasm is a significant illustration of the Noah tract such as this earlier gem). As a reminder, a chiasm sandwiches an illustrative point between a few more menial sentences that state the same thing. So, for our keynote text, the chiasm is…
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 watersprevail; and the mountains were covered.
… which makes the meat of our chiasm sandwich “fifteen cubits“.
Another thing to consider is that we don’t really need the measurement to understand the story’s main point. If we just read – twice – that the waters completely covered the mountains (seemingly that no man could survive), why would it be necessary to precisely measure the depth of the flood?
I love these types of situations because I treat them like hidden revelations. This is like looking for buried treasure, and discovering even more proof of God’s prophetic signature.
But first, I don’t want to mislead anyone. Heights and measurements derived from Scripture do offer some practical value; they allow us to make scalable drawings or models of the Temple, arks, or giants like Goliath. In this case, the measurements suggest the Ark may have sunk to half her height (the Ark was 30 cubits tall). This could also be an explanation of how the waters were at least fifteen cubits higher than the mountain peaks (say, if the mountains never touched the bottom of the Ark it would be logical to assume so). It also implies that men could presumably not have been taller than fifteen cubits (which some measure to about 23 feet). I know that seems irrelevant to mention, but I will tell you I’ve met disciples of a certain denomination who believed the antediluvian peoples were ten stories tall (!). So, biblical measurements do have a practical use.
But measurements are even more exciting because they carry prophetic undertones, especially when they’re not exactly needed to establish a point of significance…. and extra especially when they’re buried amid a chiasm.
Here’s why I believe the fifteen cubits is one of those true revelatory gems.
The View from the Fifteenth Generation
We must realize, this is not the first time the earth was covered with water. If we recall the story of Creation, the earth was once covered with water until the dry land appeared (ref. Genesis 1:9-10). In fact, the chosen linguistics style of the Noah story remind me of one big rewind to Creation – with the animals appearing “male and female” and passing before Noah like they passed before Adam (cf. Gen. 2:19, 7:9). God had been rewinding us to the Creation story for several verses up to this point!
We must also realize the word for cubit (ammah) is derived from the same root as mother (em). So, prophetically speaking, we should consider the allusion “fifteen mothers.”
So, what would happen if we allowed ourselves to be rewound and counted “fifteen mothers upward” from the Creation story? If the fifteenth generation in any way relates to the Flood and – specifically how ‘the waters covered the mountains under the whole of heaven’ – perhaps we’ll have found our gem.
When we DO count fifteen mothers from Eve, we arrive at the generation of Peleg, who was so-named “because in his time the earth was divided.” (Genesis 10:25) The other major notable from Peleg’s fifteenth-from-Eve generation is Nimrod; these were the grandsons of Shem and Ham, respectively (cf. Gen. 10:6, 8; 11:10, 16). The division denoting Peleg’s is an obvious reference to what transpired at the beginning of Nimrod’s kingdom at Bavel, in the land of Shinar (Gen 10:10).
The events of Genesis 11:1-9 are hard to understand (and we will not delve into that now). However, if we read about “the Tower of Babel” I suggest to you the draw of a tower that “reached to the heavens” might be better understood in the context of the Great Flood. If their were sinister minds who truly wanted to rule the whole world, the best mechanism they had at their disposal was fear – and that fear was a Great flood that would reach above the mountains. There’s no greater mechanism for domination than the illusion of safety – even if safety appeared as a mighty tower built to dwarf the mountains.
I wholeheartedly invite you to study the events of the Tower of Babel with the journey of Noah – and to look for parallels between them. I’m sure you will discover other hidden revelations like this gem that’s buried in the pages of the Flood.
And of course, I will delve into those revelations myself someday, Lord willing!
In my last post I described how the phraseology of the encroaching waters reminds me of an invading army bursting through the “windows” of heaven (i.e. like Joel 2:9) or rising from “from the fountainheads” the way David captured Jerusalem from the Jebusites (cf. 2 Samuel 5:8). If the waters thus behaved like an invading army, I should probably explain the Flood as a military operation. In doing so, I will expound upon an earlier point regarding the symbolic phases of judgment [in that post I marked how the number ‘seven’ appears in texts concerning God’s judgment at the ‘end to all flesh‘ (“for in yet seven days…” /’take clean animals by sevens’, the flood began ‘on the seventeenth‘) – all symbolic language tied to God’s verdict being reached]. I invite readers to think about the flood with military terminology – i.e. how God “ordered” the waters to “muster” from their normal, “garrisoned” boundaries and “deploy” upon the kingdom of men.
Phase 0 – Shaping
I used this chart before and I think it serves to describe the Flood’s invasion. If we take a look at it, isn’t it remarkable that even when a military charts out the doctrine of war, the final product resembles a flood?
I previously posted about “Phase 0” but I’ll rehash: Phase 0 represents a military’s decisions to go to the war, and shapes how their invasion will take place through the issuance of a plan called the “Operation Plan (OPLAN)”. Compared to the Book of Genesis, God had likewise pronounced a verdict, and divulged His own “OPLAN” to Noah.
A typical military OPLAN outlines the concept of the operations to come, as well as a commander(s) intent, and vision. Noah was also divulged specific information – such as that “the flood of waters” will be Noah’s ally, and Noah of course received specific “orders” in the form of commandments to gather materials, build the Ark, and prepare his family. I will note this is exactly similar to how the military might acquire supplies, make sure their troops are prepared (a concept formally called “military readiness”), and wargame the battle in exercises. The only difference – one that I will strongly mention – is that Noah was not called to be a fighter – and that’s arguably the best part of this story – the righteous are not required to take up weapons and fight – God will fight on their behalf. Moses knew this when God parted the Red Sea, but Noah was the first to experience this. What Noah was “tasked” to do, however, was to be the chief architect of God’s deterrence phase.
Phase I – Deter
I honestly believe no war is holy, and I think all war is horrible. Even battles recorded in the Bible which feature great Hebrew army victories imply a great deal of regret and evil which accompanies them. I am thankful, however, that my country has, as part of her doctrine, a written phase that attempts to deter its enemies, and beseech them to surrender to avoid unnecessary bloodshed. This could take several forms such as leaflet drops, diplomatic negotiations, or shows of force (i.e. destroying an abandoned building from ).
The Bible blatantly tells us that despite God ruing the day he made man (v. 6:6) He offered to Mankind his own deterrence phase – Noah. The Bible says Godwaited patiently (in other words, He gave man a chance) while the Ark was being built (see 1 Peter 3:20), with Peter later calling Noah ‘a preacher of righteousness‘. Thus we must conclude Noah was preaching while with the Ark being built. Aside from this, there is additional scriptural evidence Noah attempted to garner his people’s surrender. First, the very act of constructing the ark was a sign, but if we compare Genesis 6:19 with 7:2, we understand that God originally ordered Noah to bring ‘two of every animal‘, seemingly because God wanted to save as much space as possible for anyone who might be deterred. Alas, when God saw that Noah stood as the only remaining righteous person in the land (7:1), He allowed the space filled by ‘sevens’ of every clean animal. By the way, that’s not a contradiction – it merely demonstrates what Peter said: God was patient in the days of Noah. Eventually however, that patience ran out, and God issued operational orders (OPORDs) to Noah’s allies, the water, to muster from their normal garrisons and invade the kingdom of His enemy.
Phase II – Seize Initiative
In light of the Russian-Ukraine war, news outlets recently offered definitions for “seizing the initative” . According to an ABC News Australia article, “the essence of seizing the initiative is gaining a position of advantage relative to an enemy and denying the enemy their objectives. In seizing the initiative, military commanders seek to disrupt enemy decision-making, make their plans irrelevant and, vitally, surprise and force the enemy to respond to friendly initiatives.” An example of this phase is the Air Force establishing no fly zones and limited airstrikes on key targets to keep the enemy from getting organized and making sure the ground forces can enter and dominate when they are needed.
It’s easy to see God took all by surprise in “seizing the initiative.” As Yeshua said, “as it was in the days of Noah, so will it be at the coming of the Son of Man. For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark. And they were oblivious, until the flood came and swept them all away.” (Matthew 24:37-39, BSB). We can imagine how differently things would be if men believed Noah but instead of returning to God, prepared for the Flood (That’s actually a story for another time and I won’t Babel on about it now). But there is a point to be made here; it would seem Noah preached, but the people considered it foolishness. It is what it is.
The introduction of rainfall was important because according to Scripture, rainfall as we know it today was an unfamiliar concept in the pre-Flood world. Prior to that, a “mist went from the earth to water the face of the ground“, the ground was cursed, and we did not experience the four seasons like we do today (cf. Genesis 2:5-6, 5:29, and 8:22). That initial downspout of rain very likely caused those ancients great fear and confusion. Coincidentally, that’s where “the Lord shutting Noah in” (as discussed in my last post) comes into play. I imagine the goal of that bewildering rainfall, and the Lord’s protection of the Ark was “seizing the initiative” – denying the adversary access to the ark, while keeping the adversary from doing anything except facing the next phase – which was the total domination of the floodwaters.
Phase III – Dominate
The Domination phase of modern military operations is normally the “boots on the ground” or “invasion” phase, and represents the capturing of the objectives that helps achieve victory. All of the planning and preparatory services lead up to this moment and entails the capturing of strategic objectives – which are anything giving an advantage to the invading force. This could be a government building, critical infrastructure (i.e. airports or power plants), or key terrain [A well known example of “key terrain” is Har Megiddo, aka Armageddon, because it is a plateau that any invading force must cross to invade Israel. Phase III also entails the security of vital assets (i.e. the rescue of embassy personnel). In our study of Noah, the first objective was obviously the safety and security of the vital asset – the Ark.
The flood was forty days on the earth. The waters increased, and lifted up the Ark, and it was lifted up above the earth.
Genesis 7:17
If we continue to imagine the Flood as a war, then we should consider the lifting of Noah’s Ark draws comparisons to the lifting of that other “ark” – which is of course the Ark of the Covenant. The Ark of the Covenant had its place in warfare, and it too was “lifted up” – on the shoulders of priests who took it into battle (cf. Joshua 3:3-4; 2 Samuel 11:11). It’s also important to remember that just as the Ark made by Moses was the symbol of God’s covenant with Israel, so too was Noah’s Ark the symbol of God’s covenant with him – as the Almighty told him, “With you I will establish my covenant…” (Genesis 6:18). The teaching here is, God will not turn His hand against His enemies without first keeping the promises of the covenant. Amen.
The second objective was to ‘destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life‘, and it’s quite obvious the strategic position to accomplish this was the hilltops and mountaintops.
For [the waters] overflowed exceedingly, and filled all on the face of the earth, and the ark was carried upon the waters. And the waters prevailed beyond measure upon the earth: and all the high mountains under the whole heaven were covered.
Genesis 7:18-19, D-R (my insertion)
Overcoming the mountains with a flood was the method of God’s domination, but let’s remember the real antagonists, the “Nephilim” – the mighty warriors who took for themselves harems which I believe ruined men’s sense of family, advancement and reproduction and thus “corrupted their way on the earth.” (v. 6:12). The Bible specifically called these men gibborim – warriors – and that plays into our interpretation. For starters – if you were a warrior engaged in violent conflict with other gibborim and keeping your harem from ordinary men (for the Bible says these gibborim literally took the women away), you’d need a defensive position and a place to keep your harem from other men. Logically, you’d build a defensive position on high ground, or, at the very least, a position surrounded by favorable terrain. I give you, then, the reason why God used a flood that dominated the mountains and high hills. All the fortresses, keeps and hitherto unreachable men were swept away.
The Bible mentions that the waters overcame the mountains several times. While it’s true that the mountains represent the last place humans could grasp for breath – there’s more to it than that. The mountains very probably represent places of unspeakable violence and sexual immorality (if not outright trafficking). For these reasons they, and the warriors that used them for evil, had to be dominated.
In Closing
I suggest reading the Flood like a military operation, with the Lord being the ultimate military mastermind. His apocalyptic events, like the Great Flood, will resemble a modern military operation in that they are planned, commanded, and executed in phases. I invite readers to think of the Flood, Sodom and Gomorrah, the Passover story, the Babylonian Captivity, or the return of Messiah Yeshua – to test the scriptures and prophecies surrounding these events. I’m sure you will see they read like a well-executed, well-planned military operation. Truly, during such harbinger events – which are meant to prophetically foreshadow the coming Judgment – God always His ambassadors while strategically dominating His enemies. Ω
“As Elohim commanded him, and YHVH shut him in.” (Genesis 7:16)
Much commentary exists on the fact that it was actually the LORD – Not Noach (Noah) – that closed the door of the Ark. This is certainly a powerful thought and represents the Rubicon/”times up” moment; if we take a precursory glance at the top Google results, the dominant interpretation of “the LORD shut him in” is along the lines of ‘It was God who physically closed the door behind Noah!’
I don’t necessarily think that interpretation is wrong; I just think there’s more to it than that.
First, one minor aside point to comment – did you notice the Hebrew elohim and YHVH appear here together? Does that seem like Elohim was always there, giving Noach the commandments, but YHVH ended up being the execution arm? I’ll come back to this point… kinda.
The word “close” can mean many things in English – we close bathroom doors, bedroom doors, checking accounts, court cases, investigations – even windows on our computer screen. It’s surely an ambiguous English term, as is the word “shut”. It’s also a little ambiguous in Hebrew. That word for “close” is sagar, and it’s the same word used to describe “surrendering” an item (i.e. surrendering your weapons at the door), or “delivering” (i.e. Pilate delivering over Yeshua to be crucified). In this context, we might better understand sagar by the English phrase of “handing something over”. However, sagar can also mean to “stop up” or “obfuscate” (i.e. to put an obstacle in the way/road, as David wrote in Psalm 35:3). Rashi’s commentary on the Talmud suggests that “every sagar in Scripture is an expression of “in front of.”” Now we’re getting somewhere, because even though it’s ambiguous, the common link to sagar is the presence of an authority, or barrier, to an action. We surrender weapons usually in light of an authority or law requiring us to “hand it over, Oscar.” We may close a door for privacy, but that door is in front of both ourselves and anyone who might peep on our business. In the same way, David wanted the Lord to put an obstacle in front of his adversaries. In yet another biblical example, when priests would sagar a leper, they were in fact putting the community in front of the leprosy. If a man was delivered over to execution, the action of sagar was like a door between the trial phase and the execution phase.
The question then becomes, when YHVH shut Noach in, He closed the door built into the side of the Ark (vs. 6:16), but in front of what? It’s obvious the sealing of that door kept out the breaking out of the waters from the “windows of heaven” and “fountains of the Deep” (vs. 7:11) – but the verbs used to describe the “breaking out” of those waters are used elsewhere with violent, militant-like occurrences, such as the “tearing asunder” or “breeching” of an enemy’s walls during a siege.
So if the verb choice was deliberately supposed to represent something violent, I would ask you, what do you suppose these “violent events” would do to everyone outside the Ark? I imagine it would create much panic, and considering that world seemingly understood violence as a common method of resolving matters (see vs. 6:13), would that world not have made a V-line to the Ark, killing Noach and his family without even blinking? So, when we read about the waters violently breaking forth, we must understand the first “wave” would’ve actually been a wave of violent men. Such a situation would’ve needed Divine protection. This is akin to how YHVH protected the Israelites from the Egyptians in the parted Sea. As the Egyptians said, “YHVH fights for them!” (Exodus 14:25), It is actually YHVH who fights in front of his people.
In short, I agree with the interpretations that the shutting of the Ark door represents the Rubicon “times up” moment, and while I also see YHVH physically closing the door, I see YHVH (the execution Arm) shutting that door in so He could place Himself in front of the Ark between Noah’s family and any outside mob looking to break down that door. We’re better off thinking about YHVH like a security detail protecting VIPs than merely sealing the door like its a just some symbol of finality.
Have you ever noticed that there are actually four accounts of the Great Flood, each sharing different versions of the same basic elements?
If we read Genesis 6:17 – 7:16, we are reading the events from God’s establishment of a covenant with Noah to the time YHVH closed the door of the Ark (a spiritual thought in itself, and there are many commentaries to the point that God called to Noah from inside the ark, as well as YHVH shutting him in. No need to belabor a point well established). The four stories can be found in Genesis 6:17-22; 7:1-6; 7:7-10; and 7:11-17. Though their contents do not appear in the same chronological order, all four share details of the following events:
The entrance of Noah’s household into the Ark (6:18; 7:1; 7:7; and 7:13).
Specifications of the animals which entered the Ark (6:19-20; 7:2; 7:8; and 7:14-16a).
Arrival of the flood by water or rain (6:17; 7:4; 7:10; and 7:12).
The obedience of Noah (6:22; 7:5; 7:9c; and 7:16b).
Some accounts provide details which remain unmentioned in the others – i.e. Genesis 6:21, which records Noah gathering food provisions, and 7:2-3, the only verses explaining that clean animals and birds were to come aboard in seven pairs apiece (the other accounts only mention the animals came in pairs).
If we compare the verses side by side, reading each idea from left to right, we gain some interesting, nerdy analysis:
Did you notice how, as you read from left to right, you gained a little something extra by time you reached the fourth account (7:11-7:16)?
In the fourth and final account, Noah’s sons are mentioned by name, and this runs parallel to birds becoming overemphasized as well – with the Scriptures saying “every bird of every sort” – and this is no coincidence. I believe it’s another one of those mysterious biblical codes – one which might prime us to understand some of the Bible passages that don’t quite make sense at first.
For example, when Yeshua taught about faith, He said, “It is like a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and put in his own garden. It grew, and became a large tree, and the birds of the sky lodged in its branches.” (Luke 13:19) When we read verses such as these, we understand that birds are symbolic of people, for it is souls coming home to God – not birds in nests – that Yeshua was referring.
Returning to the Ark, let’s recall the previous illustrations to birds we’ve already uncovered, such as the use of the Hebrew qiniym to denote the “nests” of the Ark (this is commonly translated as “rooms”). God also told Noah to bring seven pairs of each bird, which also shares a distinction with clean animals. (vv. 7:2-3). So, everywhere we look in the symbolism and illustrations of the Ark, we find birds, which includes being emphasized just as much as the sons of Noah, as we see in the above analysis.
Therefore, I suggest using this code to understand other passages of Scripture, to uncover the deeper meaning. We already mentioned the parable of the mustard seed (in Luke 13:19), but this rule may also apply to the parable of the sower (Matthew 13:3), and even in mysterious passages like Deuteronomy 22:6.
This subject will also play out in the next chapter of Genesis 8, where we have two interesting prophecies of the fate of nations. In the meantime, however, I hope laying out the four accounts has uncovered another mystery for us and will bring you closer to understanding God’s will.
I once explained that there is more than one history of Noah, and this is a good thing. It allows us to dissect and compare each history, in order to gain some new insights.
We have one such scenario when it comes to days before the Flood. God only knows how the Bible was ultimately assembled, but my concern is to glean revelations that get us closer to the Almighty. So, from Genesis 6:15 to about 7:4 (and slightly beyond these verses, in actuality), we have an ‘Elohim’ source (in Chapter 6) that illuminates the building of the Ark, and a ‘YHWH’ source (in Chapter 7) which describes the final week before the Flood. These sources may be disjointed chronologically, but their narratives are united through several similarities. Both describe the animals, the members of Noah’s family, and God’s judgment upon mankind. There are, however, distinct differences which I would argue are nothing short of prophetic. Both are stamped with certain numbers, which seemingly fit biblical patterns to guide our interpretations. If I’m right, they are blueprints to God’s “operations”, in some ways like the way military planners divide operations into phases. Note the following example from the Iraq War effort:
In the U.S. military, each operational phase corresponds to a doctrinal explanation of events so that planners can share a common frame of reference. For example, if military leaders announce ‘the operation has reached phase II’ officers understand the infantry is nearing Baghdad, while ‘Phase III’ might mean that Baghdad is captured.
The accounts of Noah’s life also portray the phases of an operation – or as it is phrased in the Bible, a “covenant”. The following illustrations help illuminate the phases of God’s covenant with Noah.
When we read the first account of Noah in Genesis 6:15-22, what number(s) are associated to Noah’s building of the ark?
15 This is how you shall make it. The length of the ship shall be three hundred cubits, its width fifty cubits, and its height thirty cubits. 16 You shall make a roof in the ship, and you shall finish it to a cubit upward. You shall set the door of the ship in its side. You shall make it with lower, second, and third levels. 17 I, even I, will bring the flood of waters on this earth, to destroy all flesh having the breath of life from under the sky. Everything that is in the earth will die. 18 But I will establish my covenant with you. You shall come into the ship, you, your sons, your wife, and your sons’ wives with you. 19 Of every living thing of all flesh, you shall bring two of every sort into the ship, to keep them alive with you. They shall be male and female. 20 Of the birds after their kind, of the livestock after their kind, of every creeping thing of the ground after its kind, two of every sort will come to you, to keep them alive. 21 Take with you some of all food that is eaten, and gather it to yourself; and it will be for food for you, and for them.” 22 Thus Noah did. He did all that God commanded him.
Genesis 6:15-22
I would suggest it’s the numbers 2 and 3. Besides the “two of every sort” of animals, Noah gathers food for both humans and animals (denoting two classes of living beings), the ark has three dimensions, with three levels, and there are three that partake of God’s covenant with Noah (his sons, his wife, and his son’s wives). The types of animals are also classified into three basic kinds (birds, livestock, and creeping things). Furthermore, each concept is repeated (i.e. ‘take food / it will be food for you’) – 2 or 3 times.
Now, what verbs are associated to these numbers and counts? These verbs denote building (the Ark), assembling (animals), establishing (a covenant), and gathering (food). If we think of these in terms of phases, they describe preparatory actions – the buildup to a final execution yet to come. In scripture, this pattern of 2s and 3s appears EVERYWHERE, alongside the same verbs and concepts that we just read:
“This is the third time I am coming to you – At the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established” (1 Corinthians 13:1, quoting Deuteronomy 19:15), and “Do not receive an accusation against an elder except from two or three witnesses.” (1 Timothy 5:19)
The patterns of 2s and 3s thus represents the “witness” phase, when facts are gathered and testimonies are received – not unlike Noah gathering food and materials for the Ark. We’re actually reading about two concurrent “operations”; one was a plan of salvation for Noah and the animals, the other an investigation of God’s initial accusation – that the world was evil and corrupt (vv. 6:5,11). In the “witness” phase, accusations proceed to trials, and ideas on blueprints are transformed into tangible objects (like boats).
The Scriptures also call Noah a witness through his building of the Ark (ref. 2 Peter 2:5), but when we say “Noah” we mean his entire household. They chose to stay and are the unsung heroes that deserves greater recognition for their faithfulness. Noah’s sons could’ve had harems of their own, while the wives could’ve opted for cushier lives with the Nephilim “celebrities” (see vv. 6:2-4). Indeed, Noah’s house built more than the Ark – they built a case against the human race.
Moving on to the second account ending with ‘Noah did all that was commanded him’, what number(s) or patterns stick out here?
1 The LORD said to Noah, “Come with all of your household into the ship, for I have seen your righteousness before me in this generation. 2 You shall take seven pairs of every clean animal with you, the male and his female. Of the animals that are not clean, take two, the male and his female. 3 Also of the birds of the sky, seven and seven, male and female, to keep seed alive on the surface of all the earth. 4 In seven days, I will cause it to rain on the earth for forty days and forty nights. I will destroy every living thing that I have made from the surface of the ground.”5 Noah did everything that the LORD commanded him.
Genesis 7:1-5
So this account features a few twos (or pairs) as well, but I would suggest that 7 and 40 are highlighted, as is the distinction of clean vs. unclean animals.
As I portrayed, the former account was akin to phase “2 and 3”, demonstrating the “witness” phase of God’s planning cycle, Now, however, it’s time for Phase “7”, when plans are finished, and the verdict is laid. This phase is enacted when the Ark is finished – 7 days before the Flood. This is prophetically akin to saying ‘we had our witness phase; this is the verdict’. The power of sevens is the power of judgment!
The fact that “seven” is all over the page is not coincidence. It’s often associated to completed acts, i.e. ‘And on the seventh day God ended his work’ (Genesis 2:2). But it is also associated with great judgments, such as the march around Jericho’s walls and the “seventy weeks” prophecy of Daniel (Joshua 6 and Daniel 9:24-27, respectively). In short, “seven” appears in Genesis 7 because it is prophetic symbolism of both the completion of the covenant with Noah’s house, as well as the judgment of that old world. Witnesses had offered their testimony, the facts were gathered, but God’s investigation found only Noah to be righteous (vs. 1). The verdict was in.
As for 40, that number denotes a transition from one period to the next. It is associated with fasting, which is a way for men and women to progress to a new phase of life – “putting on a new wineskin” as taught by Yeshua (Matthew 9:16-17). This is why Moses was on Mount Sinai forty days, as God transitioned Israel from Egyptian captivity to a covenant of Law (Exodus 34:28). It’s why Elijah fasted forty days after Israel returned to the Almighty (1 Kings 9:18), and why Yeshua Himself fasted forty days to mark the beginning of the Messianic age (Matthew 4:2). The forty-day rains of Noah’s time mark a similar transition – from one age to the next.
Conclusion
As we read through the Bible, we should become more sensitive to the prophetic patterns appearing in plain sight. In the case of Noah, the appearance of 2s and 3s suggest that God gave a considerable amount of time for people to listen to the witness and building of the Ark. By the time ‘sevens’ appear, this is the Rubicon phase – the final verdict, the point of no return.
Try to think about where else these patterns appear. There’s a reason Yeshua was crucified with two other criminals, and rose on the third day. Patterns of 2s and 3s suggest we are still in the witness phase, when testimonies are received in heaven, with time left to repent. However, I would also suggest there’s a reason a pattern of sevens is woven into the book of Revelation. When those days are fulfilled (whenever that may be), it will mark THE end, and we don’t want to miss our chance like the ancients missed the Ark.
15 This is how you shall make it. The length of the ship shall be three hundred cubits, its width fifty cubits, and its height thirty cubits. 16 You shall make a roof in the ship, and you shall finish it to a cubit upward. You shall set the door of the ship in its side. You shall make it with lower, second, and third levels. (Genesis 6:15-16)
It’s not always advisable to dissert why God does or does not do something, but alas, this is a blog about investigating tough or overlooked questions. Sometimes, however, the best explanation is the simplest – even when simplicity is overlooked. With respect to my key text of Genesis 6:15-16, the two-part question I ask is: why does God issue such specific instructions and why does He archive such blueprints in Scripture?
As with most biblical texts, the most simple interpretation is often accompanied by a more profound spiritual, or even prophetic, implication. A perfect example is ‘Is it oxen God is concerned about?’ (1 Cor. 9:9) to teach that ministers should benefit from the Lord’s work even more so than the simple rendering that oxen can eat a little grain here and there while it treads out grain. With this in mind, here’s how the construction of the ark fits into a larger story arc.
Before we get in depth, however, comes the practical reason for allowing specific measurements to be archived for all eternity…
Specifications show proof-of-concept. A blueprint allows later generations to analyze or even replicate it, and this has proven invaluable in reproving Scripture against misinformation. With respect to the ark, physicists and scientists come to the same conclusion: the ark could float. Granted, apologists have long touted this point and cite landmark studies like the Hong study of 1993, which concluded “the Ark had a superior level of safety in high winds and waves compared with the other hull forms studied… it could have navigated through waves higher than 30 metres.” And lest we fall into the trap of circular reasoning, secular studies (even though they go out of their way to disagree with the non-scientific aspects of the Noah account) reach similar conclusions, such as this one from Smithsonian Magazine. The ark floats! So, while specifications can demonstrate the omniscience of the Divine, they can also disprove obvious forgeries like the ‘cube of Gilgamesh’ – a cube measuring 200 x 200 x 200 cubits. Such a vessel would not be able to withstand the buoyancy of massive storm surge.
… but spiritual explanations are more fun.
It Fulfills the Divine Demand. Could it be that God issues words with specificity because He demands specificity? One of my favorite scriptures anywhere is this one:
“For most certainly, I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not even one smallest letter or one tiny pen strokeshall in any way pass away from the Torah, until all things are accomplished.Therefore, whoever shall break one of these least commandments and teach others to do so, shall be called least in the Kingdom of Heaven; but whoever shall do and teach them shall be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven.” (Matt. 5:18-19)
God is a God of specific returns, so specific obedience will reap huge dividends. Note the above quote of Yeshua – a specific zeal for mitzvot (good works) will lead to greatness. So it was for Noah. Cheating ahead a little in Genesis 6 we know “Thus Noah did. He did all that was commanded him” (vs. 22). Noah’s specific response saved his and his family’s lives. What would have happened if Noah used “Kentucky windage” and was off by a few cubits? Would the Ark have survived the crashing waves?
God is specific with us because He wants specificity.
Like I said, sometimes the best explanation is the simplest, even when simplicity is overlooked. For us, this is a simple equation frontloaded in the Bible that archives just enough to teach us a valuable lesson, setting the tone for a lesson which will be oft-repeated: if God is specific with us, we ought to respond specifically. In doing so is great reward. So, may we live specifically! Ω
Make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms shalt thou make in the ark, and shalt pitch it within and without with pitch. (Genesis 6:14, KJV)
The meaning of the Hebrew gopher is unclear, but that doesn’t stop the speculation. As the Christian apologetic ministry GotQuestions.org identifies, besides the majority opinion of “cypress”, other options are “cedar, pine, ebony, fir, wicker, juniper, acacia, bulrushes, and boxwood.” All of these appear in today’s Bible translations, in one form or another.
One compelling solution suggests gopher describes a pitching or preparation process common to ship-building. If that theory holds true, gopher would form a type of parallelism with the other words used for pitch in this verse – the verb kaphar and noun kopher.
To their credit, GotQuestions cautions against correlating gopher to either the known tree species and/or modern ship-building processes of today. This is due to several reasons, not the least of which is that the pre-Flood world was likely much different than today’s. Indeed, this warning is supported when we read the biblical verses which describe that ancient land.
Let’s not forget what Lamech said of his son Noach (Noah): “This one will comfort us in our work and in the toil of our hands, caused by the ground which the LORD has cursed.” (Genesis 5:29). The pre-Flood world was cursed. Any assumption that that ground could bear mighty cypress or cedar trees large enough for ship-building should be avoided.
I like the explanation which was offered by Emil G. Hirsch and Henry Hyvernat in the Jewish Encyclopedia (1906). The gist of the article is that gopher resembles the Assyrian giparu (“reeds”)as proposed by the late linguist Fritz Hommel. As an anecdote, the theory beckons Arabian kufa boats, which are made entirely like a basket and float when covered with pitch.
Thus, the “reeds” explanation fits better, given that Noach was building in the context of a cursed ground. There is yet another clue in Scripture, and it’s actually in our key text of Genesis 6:14.
However, before continuing, let’s ask: why all this fuss about the material? Why go for broke and use “cypress” despite the uncertainty? If God wanted the material to be known, couldn’t He have inspired a much more understandable term to be preserved for all time?
Part of me thinks the desire for a strong, durable wood like “cypress” or “cedar” is vanity. I suspect some religious types desperately want the ark to be discovered one day to become evidence of God’s judgment and existence. I suggest, however, that as contradictory as it may seem, sometimes wrapping the truth with murkiness is in God’s plan. I think this is one of those times.
When read again, God’s chief concern for the ark’s structure isn’t the material but the DESIGN:
Make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms shalt thou make in the ark, and shalt pitch it within and without with pitch. (Genesis 6:14, KJV)
The intent was to construct an ark of qiniym – literally “nests” (though translated in the KJV as “rooms”). Qiniym is frequently associated with birds, but when used with mankind, it usually has a negative, temporary connotation in that the “nest” is about to be destroyed (i.e. Job 29:18, Obadiah 1:4, Habbakuk 2:9). I suggest a similar interpretation, that any creature in the nests would dwell in hope – that one day, the flood will recede, and more permanent dwellings will be fashioned. The ark is an ark of nests; whatever gopher they are made of is secondary.
It also makes much more sense for the ark to be woven with reeds if the overall intent was to build “nests” in the first place. So given the curse upon the land and the desire to build these temporary nests, I envision the Ark was a type of giant floating basket. I also like the semblance this interpretation has to the life of Moses, who was also hidden in a basket covered with pitch (see Exodus 2:3). In both the cases, I see salvation was achieved through this sort of temporary nest.
I’m serious with this hypothesis, which is why I have to disappoint some people. The Ark will never be found. An ark made of reed nests wouldn’t survive a hundred years, let alone millennia. To reiterate, the linguistics of qiniym begs a glimpse of temporary dwellings – dwellings which were designed to be destroyed. I believe God wanted to forget the Ark the way He “forgets” our sins. Case in point, read forward and behold how God spoke to Noach after the flood.
In closing, the importance of the Ark was not its composition, but the safe passage of life. Yes, I know that every depiction of the Ark is the animals going in “two-by-two”, but in coming posts I hope to show how there were enough hammocks in that Basket Ark to carry many souls to a better world. Ω
I never realized what a foreshadowing Genesis 6:13 bore until I read it a little more closely in the Hebrew. The regular text reads something like this:
God said to Noah, “I will bring an end to all flesh, for the earth is filled with violence through them. Behold, I will destroy them and the earth.” (WMB)
However as we can clearly see in the Hebrew due to neat resources such as qbible.com, the original text uses the word panay, which literally means “face”:
The scripture portrays the end of all flesh as coming (ba, in the perfect, just completed sense) to God’s “face” (p’ney, also fanay, depending on pronunciation). The first occurrence of p’ney uses the -l proclitic, which usually denotes a “to” preposition- which is appropriate here. However, the next p’ney uses a different -min preposition. Most translations opt for “through” but -min literally means a partition, meaning from or out of something. Thus, what we’re reading here is that something – in this case chamas – comes from the faces of men up to the face of God.
I recognize that p’ney can have metaphorical interpretations, and most translations go the metaphorical route, getting to the point and omitting “face” from versions. But this is a disservice because I think we miss the symbolism and poetic foreshadowing. As I’ve written since I began analyzing each verse in-depth, every word, even letter in the Bible is by design – and I’m only in the sixth chapter of the first book!
The way I imagine it, I see chamas – which by the way can denote injustice as much as violence – spewing from the faces of men like a fountain, which rises to the face of God like… a FLOOD! It raises the question – did God feel like He was drowning in mankind’s evils?
In the very next breath, when He says “behold, I will destroy their land“, that ended with a literal flood in the way He perhaps was Himself flooded with various evils and injustices. So be it.
In addition to the above play on words, this verse also begins a pattern wherein iniquity or transgressions reaches a “boiling point” evoking God’s judgment, usually at an appointed time. This includes, but is not limited to:
The sin of the Amorites “reaching its full measure”, leading to the judgment of Canaan (cf. Gen 15:16)
The wrath of Hashem grew against Israel until there was no remedy (2 Chron. 36:16)
The time of the dead are judged in God’s wrath with similar language as used here in Genesis 6:13, “to destroy those who destroy the earth” (cf. Rev. 11:18)
When we realize that God reaches a point that feels like perhaps He’s drowning in the evils of mankind, perhaps we can better prepare for His wrath. The way this world is on course right now, I certainly do expect it. Ω
This is the history of Noah: Noah was a righteous man, blameless among the people of his time. Noah walked with God. (Genesis 6:9, in my own words)
The first eight verses of Genesis 6, as I’ve previously written, is meant to be an account of how Man left God. The Scriptures transition from referring to them as “sons of God” to meat bags (“flesh” being the exact wording), based on their mindset to find ways to work wickedness or violence (v. 5).
“This is the history of Noah” is likely an introduction from a separate scroll, and begins the same story, but this time, the account will read from Noah’s point of view. Noah is absent in the first history – but as I’ve written before, he does, at least mysteriously and mystically, show up in that first account.
When we compare the two accounts side-by-side we can see some obvious similarities. The meat-bags had children; Noah had children. God said he will not strive with Man in the first account, but in the second, he is certainly still striving (literally walking) alongside Noah. The comparison, which I color-coded to highlight similarities, looks like so:
There are some obvious takeaways, probably the most striking of which, at least for me, is that Noah found favor through work; specifically, he had to obey the commandment to build the ark. Sometimes, to accrue the Lord’s favor, we have to leave all behind and build. So be it.
Are there any similarities that stick out to you, or that maybe you haven’t noticed before? If so, by all means, please share!
Standing In The Eleventh Hour 