In a recent Tidings Magazine1 an article tackled three common questions posed by those who challenge the veracity of the Bible’s flood account and Noah’s deliverance:
- Were dinosaurs on Noah’s Ark and if so what happened to them?
- How did they all, including dinosaurs, fit in the ark?
- How did all the animals make it to the Ark?
The intent of the article was three-fold. First, it was meant to acknowledge that these kinds of questions are legitimate when asked in good faith, particularly by young people and interested friends. Second, as believers in the Bible, we have a responsibility to ourselves and to those with whom we come into contact to have developed thoughtful answers to those kinds of questions. We should never let indifference to the subject be the reason we offer “just have faith” as an explanation to a reasonable question. Third, since the Bible is the inspired Word of God, we need not fear challenging questions being asked of it. It will withstand any legitimate test.
However, the article was limited in two main respects. First, due to space constraints, it did not properly acknowledge the limitations of the answers to the questions that were presented. Second, it did not state in sufficiently clear terms that while the questions posed need to be addressed, there is a need to be aware of and avoid the trap of thinking that only the historical records of science and archaeology, or our own intellect for that matter, can be used to prove the veracity of all Scripture. These two limitations will each be considered in turn to address the article’s deficiencies and to clarify its intent.
Were dinosaurs on Noah’s Ark, and if so what happened to them?
To explain the existence of dinosaurs, how they could have fit in the ark and why they became extinct in a postdiluvian Earth two different theories were discussed in the article. The first theory is commonly referred to as the “water canopy” theory. This theory, first proposed by the Quaker, Isaac Newton Vail, over 125 years ago, states that a thick layer of water vapor (or ice) blanketed parts of the antediluvian Earth’s atmosphere. This atmospheric water canopy would have been the source of the water used to flood the entire Earth during Noah’s time. Also, it is argued that this water canopy would have protected antediluvian creatures from the harmful effects of ultraviolet (UV) radiation. This protection would explain the longevity of pre-flood humanity. Animals, including dinosaurs, would have also benefited from this protection. According to those who proclaim this theory, this elongated lifespan could explain why some humans and even dinosaurs grew to be “giants” (Gen 6:4). Once this water vapor canopy precipitated and the protection was removed (i.e., the flood), some animals were particularly affected by the sudden increase in UV radiation and became extinct (e.g., dinosaurs). This theory is commonly used by some in our community in support of their understanding of the Genesis account.
Unfortunately, neither the Bible nor science directly supports the idea that a “water canopy” existed over this Earth during Noah’s time. The Hebrew word (raqia) used to describe the “expanse” or “firmament (KJV)” in Genesis 1:6-8 does not necessarily affirm the existence of a water canopy. In fact, it is used later in the same chapter to describe the place where the constellations reside (Gen 1:14), as well as the place where the birds fly (Gen 1:20). But more importantly, raqia is also used to describe a postdiluvian expanse (Psa 19:1). Therefore, the text does not provide any direct or indirect evidence of an antediluvian “water canopy”.
Scientifically, this concept also presents us with major difficulties. The presence of a thick canopy on the Earth’s atmosphere would have significantly impeded “the lights in the expanse” from being directly observed from the Earth, creating a potential contradiction of Gen 1:14. In addition, the theory also postulates that the canopy would have retained within it enough water vapor volume to cover the Earth during the flood — upwards of 22 feet — above the tallest mountains. This amount of water vapor would have dramatically increased Earth’s atmospheric pressure and the unbearable surface heat produced from this rise in pressure would have significantly hindered life on Earth. Due to space constraints, we will not be able to discuss in detail the many other scientific reasons that contradict this theory, including the effects that gravity would have had on this canopy and the obvious problems that photosynthetic organisms would have faced given the reduced amount of light capable of reaching Earth’s surface.
How did they all, including dinosaurs, fit in the ark?
The second topic discusses how dinosaurs could have possibly fit in the ark together with all the other animals. In the article it is suggested that perhaps “baby dinosaurs” were placed in the ark, thus providing a solution to the insurmountable problem posed by the size of some adult dinosaurs. The first problem with this somewhat reasonable proposition is that the vast majority of the fossil evidence unambiguously points to the pre-Adamic existence of dinosaurs thus, in all likelihood, Noah did not have to deal with this difficulty because dinosaurs were not alive during his time. But for the sake of argument, let us assume that “baby dinosaurs” made it into the ark. Why aren’t these dinosaurs with us today? There is no scientific evidence or historical record to support the hypothesis that UV radiation or any other postdiluvian climate change (i.e., within the past ~6,000 years) would have selectively eliminated this entire Order of the Reptilian Class. It is a very attractive speculation, but that is all it is. Regardless, although questions of exactly when dinosaurs first populated Earth and how they became extinct (gradual versus catastrophic) are still debated in the scientific community, the evidence consistently supports the conclusion that both of these events predated Adam and Eve. Some within our community contend that both science and Scripture support the idea of life on Earth prior to the Edenic Creation. For example, Gen 1:2 could be rendered “And the earth became waste and empty”, and this would be in harmony with Isa 45:18. In fact, some of our past brethren believed in the existence of an inhabited pre-Adamic Earth: see, for example, Elpis Israel chapter 2 by Bro. Thomas or The Christadelphian Expositor: Genesis by Bro. Mansfield.
How did all the animals make it to the Ark?
Finally, theories regarding the incredible worldwide journey that many species would have undertaken to reach the ark are not directly supported by science. For example, it is argued that perhaps distances across continents were much shorter in the antediluvian world (i.e., allowing for easy travel from one continent to the other). Great tectonic plate movements surrounding the flood event could have dramatically changed Earth’s landscape, establishing the long distances we find today between places like Australia and the Middle East. Once again this is speculative, and it is not directly supported either by science or by the Biblical account in Gen 6-9 (i.e., we may assume earthquakes but they are not mentioned in the record). No verifiable geological footprint has been found to support a global catastrophe of such magnitude. In addition, although science might be able to explain how all the animals journeyed to the ark, it is incapable of describing how they returned to their points of origin following this cataclysmic event. For example, how did some of the marsupial species found only in Australia journey all the way back to Australia following the flood? It is worth noting that the account in Genesis 6-9 does not rule out the possibility of a local flooding event, and some brethren have argued that the flood could have been, in fact, local. For example, Bro Roberts argued strongly for a local flood.2
Caution
None of us can truly conceive the appalling and awe-inspiring power of Yahweh. The article correctly states, “There are no definitive answers to these questions”. No wrong can come from this proclamation. It points us to our faith. Caution is warranted when we attempt to provide evidence-based answers to these miraculous events using “scientific” arguments, which some reasonably regard as outdated.
In the history of our Christadelphian community there has always been numerous opinions regarding the origins and age of our planet. Some brethren believe that the Earth dates back to approximately 6,000 years while others believe in a much older Earth (millions or billions of years). Opinions have also varied when it comes to our understanding of where and how the flood took place. At all times, however, we have been encouraged to seek “after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another” (Rom 14:19). For example, while the Scriptures do not necessarily reveal the age of our planet, they clearly teach us that God, our Father, is the Creator of all.
Due to space constraints, the article presented only one of the many explanations that have been offered to the questions posed. This omission of other points of view was not intended to be an indictment on those who hold them. Nor was it intended to promote indoctrination of the views contained within it.
Nevertheless, this consideration presents an opportunity to raise an important issue. In recent years, there have been Christadelphian publications and lectures where scientifically questionable presentations about creation and the flood were presented as material that must be accepted and taught by all. What is more concerning, some of the brethren who were proclaiming these theories did so while ridiculing those who make a living as scientists. This ought not to be.
We urge caution in promoting scientifically questionable theories in support of one view of creation (or the flood) to the exclusion of others. First, it could lead to unnecessary fractures in our body. As the return of our Lord nears, we ought to focus on the things that unite and edify us as a community. Second, trust is the key to teaching and preaching the truth. Using questionable theories as teaching or preaching tools can backfire and may provide an unwarranted burden on our young people or on those who have just begun seeking out the Gospel. How? In today’s world, almost anything we say and claim can be easily vetted using the vast amount of information that is readily available on the Internet. It is therefore imperative that we speak, teach and focus only on that which we believe to be true, while avoiding the use of conjectures to teach or preach the truth. That is not to say that reasoned arguments backed by scientific or archaeological evidence are to be excluded from our presentations and conversations. When properly used, they can be quite beneficial.
Let us meet the challenge with faith
“And he said to the woman, ‘Your faith has saved you; go in peace’ ” (Luke 7:50).
Faith is essential for salvation (Rom 1:16-17). There are times when the intersection of science and Scriptures can serve to strengthen that faith. But often science will challenge our belief in the veracity of Scriptures. Moreover, as discussed above, the use of scientific inaccuracies could cause even more harm than good. In these instances, it is profitable to rely on our faith. We must keep in mind that answers to our intellectual questions regarding challenging Biblical accounts (i.e., creation, the flood, the resurrection, etc.) might remain inaccessible to us until that day when all shall be revealed (Isa 40:5). Let us together meet this challenge with faith.
A complete understanding of the physics, chemistry and biology underlying God’s miraculous work will not necessarily make any of us better servants of our Almighty Father. Having tangential proof of God’s work does not necessarily lead to obedience: the Pharisees and Sadducee’s teach us this fact (e.g., Luke 16: 31). Faith and the instruction of Scripture help us become obedient. Noah, before beginning his arduous work of constructing the ark, did not need evidence or explanations of how the flood would take place. He did not need to know how the animals would get to and fit in the ark or how he would feed them. His faith in God guided and saved him (Eze 14:20, Heb 11:7). When faced with questions regarding the veracity of this account it might be helpful to not simply rely on scientific arguments or evidence but also be mindful of the beautiful lesson in faith that it teaches us.
The Origin of the Organic World – Part One