0

I've been studying how the biblical creation & re-creation in Genesis, from Adam to Noah, foreshadows the Exodus.

For instance, Noah is of the 10th generation of mankind. The Hebrews were slaves in Egypt for 400 years = 40 x 10 = 10 generations if we assume 40 years per generation. 10 generations of the righteous line appears to represent a certain fullness of time, after which God enacts judgement.

Anyways, what I am interested in for this post is the year of the flood (beginning and/or end) and the significance thereof. Genesis is careful to document what year each person was born in, in terms of the age of their father, up through and including Noah. It also tells us that the flood began in Noah's 600th year - and even specifies the month and day.

From my calculations, it looks like the flood began in the year 1656 (from creation) and ended in 1657 (from creation). Off hand, I don't see the significance of either number. Yet, why would the author of Genesis be so specific about these dates if there were no meaning to it? Please share your insights :)

Improve this question
6
  • 4
    Why are histories specific, period? Why did we bother to record that George Washington was born on February 22? Is there (some other) significance to this date? Does there need to be a reason other than to remind people that this is real history and not a made-up story?
    – Matthew
    Commented Jun 26 at 14:58
  • @Matthew the scriptures are highly selective about the details they record. For example: in the Exodus God wages war against Pharoah and the gods of Egypt. Only, neither Pharoah’s name nor that of any of their gods are recorded. But they do take the time to record the name of the two midwives who opposed pharoah and refused to kill the sons of Israel. When scripture decides to go into detail there’s generally significance in those details, even if it’s not immediately obvious
    – Ryan Pierce Williams
    Commented Jun 26 at 15:14
  • 3
    Since we have ten fingers and ten toes that number has significance either in regard to the completeness of either achievement of labour or of progress made. There are four points to the compass, north, south east and west, that number thus indicating the earth (or world) either this world or that to come. Six is evident (from its general usage) to represent the first humanity (short of the perfection of the number seven). Yes there is significance to numerology in the bible and it is a matter of spiritual discernment and intelligent interpretation to adequately deal with such.
    – Nigel J
    Commented Jun 26 at 18:35
  • If Methuselah died the year of the flood, and Adam was 687 when Methusalah was born...doesn't that give you a precise date for the flood?...ie 1656 after creation. That would make generations irrelevant
    – adam
    Commented Jun 28 at 22:33
  • 1
    @adam but it's not explicitly stated either that Methuselah was born when Adam was 687, or that he died the year of the Flood. Both those claims come from summing up the intervening generations (and are subject to the limitations I referenced in my answer). So even if the claims are true (and not just approximately true) it's hard for me to accept this as an argument that generations are irrelevant - that's like climbing a ladder and then kicking out the lower rungs. Personally I find 10 generations the most plausible candidate to have any numerological significance.
    – user111403
    Commented Jun 29 at 19:58

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
2

In the words of the renowned theologian Vladimir Putin, it's hard to find a black cat in a dark room, especially if the cat isn't there. This time I'm pretty sure the cat isn't there.

While I would agree that all details are recorded for a reason, sometimes the reason is just that it's real people recording real history, and looking for some symbolic significance may be unprofitable at best. Especially that's true when we're talking about things that aren't explicitly stated, just deduced from the context. In this case, the Bible doesn't say specifically that the Flood happened in year 1656. That comes from summing up the time periods in the previous chapters. But those periods are all given in whole years. Since I refuse to believe that everyone was born on January 1, that means there's some degree of fudge factor. So at best we can say that the Flood was in 1656, give or take a couple years. But if the author consistently rounds in one direction (which is likely) then the estimate is almost certainly off by several years. That being the case, I'm willing to say with confidence that 1656 is probably close to but most likely not the exact year of the Flood, and therefore the date almost certainly has no significance.

P.S. Your question makes an implicit assumption that the reason ages are given throughout Genesis is for us to calculate the date of the Flood. That seems like a major and unjustified assumption that I'm unwilling to let pass unchallenged.

Improve this answer
9
  • 1
    I'd have to assert that one reason ages are given is, indeed, to allow us to calculate the approximate year of the Flood. I'm inclined to agree that the exact year is not significant, but there is huge significance in it being ~1500 years as opposed to, say, ~150,000 years.
    – Matthew
    Commented Jun 28 at 16:45
  • Matthew - I'll acknowledge the main point, but I would say slightly differently that one of the reasons is to give us an approximate timeline, that obviously the Flood fits on, but it's not primarily about the Flood - witness the fact that the genealogy and ages continue after the Flood. In any case there's a huge difference between "we're supposed to understand that the Flood happened around here" (which I'd agree with) and "we're supposed to calculate the exact year to derive some symbolic significance".
    – user111403
    Commented Jun 28 at 17:29
  • Of course the dates continue; the point is to establish (roughly) how long between Creation and the Incarnation, and when (again, roughly) within that span the Flood occurred. I'd go so far as to argue that precise dates were the point, so far as "precise" was understood by the people of the time. (There was no universal calendar back then, so dates were almost always relative to notable people or events.) And I agree that the date with respect to Creation is probably not relevant. (OTOH, 600 is a nice round number...)
    – Matthew
    Commented Jun 28 at 18:25
  • Fair points. Interestingly, I have since learned that one theory in Judaism is that Moses used the dates and times as a means of computing when the Sabbath was supposed to be celebrated. I'm not partial to this interpretation - but it goes to show that I'm hardly the only one pondering why it goes into so much detail on the dates.
    – Ryan Pierce Williams
    Commented Jun 28 at 19:56
  • @Matthew - I'd agree that precise dates are the point, depending on what you mean by it. I believe the account is historical and accurate. When the author writes that Methuselah lived 969 years, he wants us to understand that he lived 969 years, not 968 or 970 (though for him, perhaps 968 and 3 months is 969). He tells us that the Flood happened in the 600th year of Noah, because it did, and for him that is the precise date. I don't believe he's trying to give us an exact date anno mundi, let alone send some secret signal by it.
    – user111403
    Commented Jun 28 at 21:03
0

Significance of the year of the flood?

We have to admit the possibility that there is no actual significance to the fact that the flood happened 1556 years after creation!

Why was that year chosen? It took that long before men were evil enough in the eyes of God to merit such a punishment. It is that simple!

Why the hang up on the idea that a generation equals 40 years? Biblically speaking, a generation could be 40 years. Consider the following verses:

13 And the Lord'S anger was kindled against Israel, and he made them wander in the wilderness forty years, until all the generation, that had done evil in the sight of the Lord, was consumed. - Numbers 32:13

But then we know Moses was 70 years old when his son son was born. Issac was born when Abraham was 100 years old. Thus a biblical generation could be anywhere from 35 years to 70 years or even more.

The word generation in itself has different meaning within the Scriptures.

The original languages of the Bible used at least three different words that are translated “generation” in English. The Hebrew dor can refer to a normal, physical generation, as in Exodus 1:6. But it can also be used metaphorically to identify people of a distinguishable type. For example, Psalm 78:8 says, “They should not be like their fathers, a stubborn and rebellious generation, a generation whose heart was not steadfast, whose spirit was not faithful to God” (ESV). Here the word dor is used twice to refer to a group of people through a long period of time who were characterized by rebellion and sin. The “generation” in Psalm 78:8 is not limited to a normal thirty-year period but stretches back through the history of Israel to include all who were stubborn against God.

The other Hebrew word we translate as “generation” is toledot. This doesn’t refer to the character of a group or an age but to how that age was generated. So the “generations of the heavens and the earth” in Genesis 2:4 refers to the time periods that started with creation and continued organically from that point. The “generations of Adam” in Genesis 5:1 means the civilization of people that began with him. The next “generation” is that of Noah, to include the flood and the civilizations that came after. Shem’s influence is marked as a “generation” as he was the father of the Semites (Genesis 11:10). And Terah’s, because he left Ur with his son Abram (Genesis 11:27). Later, Ishmael (Genesis 25:12) and Isaac (Genesis 25:19) were the source of new generations. In each case, the men either experienced or caused a significant event that changed the course of their family line. They generated a culture-altering event. - How long is a generation in the Bible?

Let us recall that after the flood the life span of men was greatly shortened in comparison to the first Few generation prior to Noah. Why Did People Start to Have Shorter Lives After the Flood?

In the of all this, I can not see any real significance as to why the year 1556 was chosen as the year of the flood other that the crimes of men were great enough to stir God’s anger at that particular moment in human history.

Improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .