A Flood Chronology

Most students of Scripture see the flood as a significant event in Biblical history. It’s hard not to. Few people, however, see its chronology—which the Bible goes to great lengths to record—as significant, which seems a shame. (James Jordan is an exception, but then he often is.¹) For instance, consider the way in which the flood describes a deluge of divine wrath, has a new world arise from an old creation in its aftermath on the first day of a new week, and culminates in a Pentecost-like period of fifty days, at the end of which a dove takes up permanent residence in the world.

Before we pursue these considerations any further, however, we need to compile an accurate flood chronology, which I’ll try to do below.

The Data

Five features of the flood’s chronology are explicitly set out in the Biblical text. Some are explicit time-stamps—i.e., references to ‘the Nth day of the Mth month of the Yth year of Noah’s life’, here written NN/MM/YYY—while others are references to how many days elapse between two events.

• God sent rain on the earth on 17/02/600, which lasted for 40 days (Gen. 7.4, 10–12).

• 150 days later, on 17/07/600, the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat (Gen. 7.24, 8.4).

• On 01/10/600, the tops of the nearby mountains became visible to Noah (Gen. 8.5).²

• On 01/01/601, the waters had ‘dried up’ (Hebrew root Ḥ-R-B) from the earth, and so Noah removed the ark’s cover (Gen. 8.13).

• And, on 27/02/601, with the earth fully dried out (Y-Š-B), Noah left the ark, built an altar, and offered sacrifices to God (Gen. 8.14ff.).

The other features of the flood’s chronology have to be assumed.

Assumptions

Q1. How are months reckoned in the flood narrative?

Answer: The flood narrative doesn’t explicitly tell us how it reckons months, but it does provide us with an important clue. It has the flood waters break forth on 17/02/600 and prevail on the earth for 150 days (Gen. 7.10–12, 24), and afterwards it has the ark come to rest on 17/07/600 (Gen. 8.4). The flood narrative thus seems to employ a schematised 30-day-per-month chronology, which shouldn’t surprise us. Noah is unlikely to have been able to accurately observe new moons while he was in the ark.³

Q2. How are days counted in the flood narrative?

Answer: To determine exactly how the flood narrative counts days doesn’t seem possible, but, given the significance of a seven-day week in the book of Genesis, it seems reasonable to count the flood narrative’s references to ‘seven days’ exclusively. Hence, when God tells Noah it will begin to rain in seven days’ time, it seems reasonable to take God to have spoken to Noah on, say, the 1st day of a week and for it to have started to rain on the 1st day of the next week. (If we counted days inclusively, we’d have the rain start to fall on the 7th day of the same week.)

Q3. What do references to ‘the end of N days’ mean in the flood narrative?

Answer: The text of Genesis 8 contains two references to what takes place ‘at the end of a period of N days’. In Genesis 8.3 the water is said to recede from the earth ‘miqtseh 150 days’, and in 8.6 Noah is said to open the window of the ark ‘miqqets 40 days’. These two expressions thus sound similar, and seem to mean basically the same thing. The first can at least sometimes be shown to presuppose an inclusive count (i.e., to refer to ‘the end of a given period of time’ as opposed to ‘beyond the end of a given period of time’) and can never be shown to presuppose an exclusive count. For instance, the text of II Kgs. 18 has the king of Assyria besiege Samaria in the 4th year of Hezekiah’s reign (which is the 7th year of Hoshea’s reign) and capture Samaria ‘miqtseh three years’ in ‘the 6th year of Hezekiah’s reign’ (and the 9th of Hoshea’s).⁴ The same is true of the second of our expressions (‘miqqets + day-count’). For instance, in Deut. 15.1, the LORD tells the Israelites to grant their kinsmen relief from their debts ‘miqqets every seven years’, the purpose of which is to stipulate what should be done ‘in the seventh/Sabbatical year’ rather than ‘after the 7th/Sabbatical year’. (The Israelites thus enjoy their Sabbath rest along with the land; otherwise they would have to pay off their debts over the course of the Sabbatical year, which would seem counterintuitive: Lev. 25.4, etc.)

That’s not to say these expressions can’t, in the context of a narrative, look beyond the period of days to which they refer. Indeed, in the context of the flood narrative, the text of 8.3 refers to what takes place ‘at the end of a period of 150 days’ precisely in order to explain what will be the case on the 151st day. In and of themselves, however, the phrases ‘miqtseh + day-count’ and ‘miqtseh + day-count’ describe what has taken place by the end of the relevant period of days.

Q4. When did the floodwaters start to recede and for how long?

The floodwaters are the subject of six different verbs. The first three occur in chapter 7, where the floodwaters are said to:

• ‘rise’ (Hebrew root R-B-H) (Gen. 7.17, 18b),

• ‘prevail’ (G-B-R) on the earth (Gen. 7.18a, 19, 20, 24), which I take (at least) to mean ‘submerge the earth’, and

• ‘cover’ (K-S-H) the mountains (Gen. 7.20).

The last three verbs then occur in chapter 8 after the LORD has sent a wind across the earth (8.1ff.), as a result of which the floodwaters are said to:

• ‘subside’ (S-K-K) (Gen. 8.1),

• ‘return’ (Š-W-B) (Gen. 8.3a), and

• ‘decrease’ (Ḥ-S-R) (Gen. 8.3b, 5).

The general shape and structure of the flood narrative is, therefore, reasonably clear. The text of 8.1 describes a watershed moment: in the lead-up to it the waters increase and prevail, and on the far side of it the waters begin to subside. What is less clear is exactly when they do so. The events of 7.4–8.4 are set out below. (As we will see, the text of 8.3 is open to multiple interpretations. Below, I’ve paraphrased it in as neutral way as possible.)

These statements cannot describe events which occur one after the other in strict succession. We cannot have the rain fall on the earth for 40 days (from 17/02/600 to 26/03/600), and then have the waters recede from the earth for 150 days, and finally have the ark touch down on 17/07/600 (since we cannot accommodate 190 days in between 17/02/600 and 17/07/600). At least some of the states of affairs described above must, therefore, overlap with one another. Two interpretations of the text are thus possible. One is to have 8.3’s 150 days introduce an as-yet-unmentioned 150 days into the text, and the other is to take the 150 days to refer back to 7.24’s 150 days, as shown below.

While it has an attractive symmetry, however, Interpretation A is difficult since it’s hard to find a place for a second 150-day period in the flood narrative. We need the 150 days to begin some time before 01/08/600 (or they’ll continue past the point when the earth dries out, viz., 01/01/601: Gen. 8.13). We could, therefore, have them begin on, say, 17/07/600 (i.e., the end-point of the first 150 days), but we’d then need to have the ark touch down on the same day as the floodwaters start to decrease, which would be awkward. (The decrease in the world’s water-level doesn’t appear to have been very rapid since it took another two months for the tops of the nearby mountains to become visible.) Furthermore, we’d have the rain cease on 27/03/600 (8.2) and yet not have the waters decrease for another 110 days (8.3), which would undercut the text’s explanation for the decrease in the earth’s water-level.⁵ So, if we want to have a second 150-day period of time in our flood chronology, we really need it to begin on 28/03/600 (i.e., after the end of the 40 days’ rainfall), but we then run into a different problem, since 8.5 requires the waters to continue to decrease until at least 01/10/600.

In sum, then, Interpretation A is problematic one way or another, and so, by default, Interpretation B seems preferable (insofar as it posits the existence of only one 150-day period and has no obvious downside).⁶

Q5. On which day of the week did the flood begin?

Answer: The flood narrative doesn’t tell us anything about which days of the week it involves. Given its frequent references to seven-day periods, however, it doesn’t seem unreasonable to take the rain to have begun on the 1st day of the week. And, if we do so, many noteworthy details arise (which we’ll unpack below in more detail). For instance, if the events of the flood narrative ran from 10/02/600 to 27/02/601 (based on a thirty-day-per-month calendar), then they’d have covered a period of 378 days (counted inclusively), which means, if they began on the 1st day of a week, they’d have ended on the last day of a week, i.e., a Sabbath.

Q6. How long after Noah sends out a raven in Gen. 8.7 does he send out a dove?

Answer: When Noah first sends out the dove isn’t stated. It seems reasonable, however, to work backwards from Gen. 8.13 in order to obtain an answer. In Gen. 8.10–11, Noah sends out a dove which returns to him after nightfall with an olive leaf in its mouth, at which point Noah knows the waters have subsided from the earth. He then waits for seven days, sends out the dove again (which doesn’t return to him) (8.12), and removes the cover of the ark (to reveal the dry land) (8.13). The events of Gen. 8.10–12 therefore seem to have unfolded over the course of 8 days. And the events of Gen. 8.8–9 seem to have taken 15 days to transpire, since the first time Noah sends out a dove (8.8) it returns to him 7 days later (8.9), (hence Noah is said to wait for ‘another 7 days’ in Gen. 8.10). In total, then, the events of 8.8–13 appear to have taken 23 days to transpire, in which case Noah would have waited 27 days before he first sent out the dove.

Chronology

Given the above assumptions, we can compile a plausible flood chronology, as shown below.

The first thing we should note about our chronology is its neatness, particularly its thematic use of the number 27. The deluge ends on the 27th day of the 2nd month of the flood; Noah waits for 27 days before he sends out a dove (an interval we’re left to deduce for ourselves); the narrative culminates when God speaks to Noah on the 27th day of the 2nd month of Noah’s 601st year and spans a period of exactly 54 weeks, i.e., 2 x 27 weeks; and those weeks span a period of 378 days, which is the 27th triangular number.

Our chronology is also noteworthy insofar as it is exegetically and theologically significant. The flood is a story of de-creation and re-creation: the boundaries established in Creation week dissolve, and the world is thereby returned to initial state, at which point a wind/spirit once again starts to move on the face of the waters. Viewed against that backdrop, several features of our flood chronology seem significant.

• The flood covers a period of complete weeks: it thus runs from a 1st day to a 7th day, and thus culminates on a Sabbath, on which sacrifices are offered.

• A new creation begins to emerge from the depths of the flood on an appropriate day, viz. on the 1st day of the week.

• And, just as the old world of Creation Week is filled with life on Days 4, 5, and 6, so too is the new world: the ark—a microcosm of the world to come—touches down on the 4th day of the week; the dove is twice sent out on the 5th day of the week (which is when birds were created); and the dove is finally released into the earth on the 6th day of the week.

At the same time, our flood chronology contains two important allusions to the events of the New Testament. First, the wrath expressed in the 40-day downpour comes to an end on a 6th day—i.e., the day when the first Adam was put to sleep and new life came forth from his side, and the day when the last Adam was crucified—, and, second, the 90-day period from 01/10/600 to 30/12/600, over the course of which a new creation emerges from the waters, divides into a 40-day period (marked out by Noah’s release of a raven) and a 50-day period, the latter of which is distinctly Pentecostal in nature. Not only does it consist of 50 days and anticipate the firstfruits of a new harvest (hinted at in the freshly plucked olive branch brought to the ark), but it culminates in the release of a dove which takes up permanent residence in God’s new creation. Our chronology thus hints at deeper events on which they are predicated. The death of Jesus marks the death of an old world and the rise of a new one in its place—a new world which is inaugurated not by him who wills or him who runs, but by the satisfaction of wrath in the person of the Son and the dispensation of the Holy Spirit.

1. Jordan, J. B. (2001, October). A Chronological and Calendrical Commentary on the Pentateuch (Studies in Biblical Chronology No. 3). Biblical Horizons.

2. Warren Johns has recently proffered a flood chronology predicated on a variant of Gen. 8.5 (found in some Greek manuscripts) where the mountains become visible on the 1st day of the 11th rather than the 10th month. That the original text of Gen. 8.5, however, has been preserved not in the MT, Vulgate, or Peshitta, but only in certain Greek manuscripts strikes me as unlikely (as well as inconsistent with a high view of the preservation of Scripture). More likely, the relevant Greek manuscripts are the result of interpretation. A translator took the MT’s phrase ‘until the 10th month’ to mean ‘until the end of the 10th month’ and decided to tidy up the MT in the course of his translation of it. (The Hebrew terms for ‘tenth’ [עֲשִׂירִי] and ‘eleventh’ [עַשְׁתֵּי עֶשְׂרֵה] don’t look much like one another.) By way of analogy, one might Gen. 2.2 where the LXX again seems to have tidied up the MT insofar as it has God finish his work ‘on the 6th day’ rather than ‘on the 7th day’.

3. For a similar reason, the book of Revelation employs a schematised 30-day-per-month chronology where 1,260 days are equated with 42 months (Rev. 12.6, 13.5), and the book of Esther may do likewise (Est. 1.4, 2.12). A schematised 360-day-year is also known to have been employed in Mesopotamia. For instance, an administrative tablet from Ur calculates the amount of work done by 36 labourers over the course of a year as 12,960 days’ worth, i.e., 36 x 12 x 30 days’ worth. Similarly, an Old Babylonian prayer calculates the interval between the 20th day of the 1st month in one year and the same day in the next year as 6 x 60 days and 6 x 60 nights. For further details and discussion, cp. Ben-Dov, J. (2021), ‘A 360-Day Administrative Year in Ancient Israel’, Harvard Theological Review, 114(4), pp. 431–450. Note: Some scholars treat the text’s reference to ‘150 days’ as an approximation, intended to denote five months, which doesn’t strike me as very sensible. Noah is unlikely to have been able to observe new moons in the ark. What he could have observed was the passage of days and nights. To take Noah to have provided an inexact reference to what he could observe (viz. days and nights) in order to approximate what he couldn’t (viz. lunar cycles) therefore seems wrong-headed.

4. In addition, one can consider the case of Deut. 14. ‘Miqtseh three years’, God tells the Israelites, ‘you are to bring out all of the tithe of your produce in that year and lay it out within your gates/settlements…so the Levite(s) can come and eat of it and be filled’ (Deut. 14.28–29), which seems to mean, ‘At the end of every third agricultural year, that year’s produce is to be laid out within your settlements…’.

5. A paper by Barrick & Sigler therefore feels obliged to have the rains fall for a full 150 days, which repairs the logic of 8.1–4, but contradicts the text’s repeated references to only 40 days of rain. For details, cp. Barrick, W. D., & Sigler, R. (2003). Hebrew and geologic analysis of the chronology and parallelism of the Flood: Implications for interpretation of the geologic record. Proceedings of the International Conference on Creationism, 5, 397–408.

6. True, the text of 8.3 doesn’t refer to ‘the 150 days’ (חֲמִשִּׁים וּמְאַת הַיּוֹם), which, one could argue, would be a natural way to refer back to 7.24’s 150 days, but then nor does it refer to ‘another 150 days’ (חֲמִשִּׁים וּמְאַת יוֹם אַחֵר), which would be a natural way to introduce a second period of 150 days into the narrative; indeed, in Gen. 8.10 and 8.12, the text refers to ‘another seven days’ (שִׁבְעַת יָמִים אֲחֵרִים) precisely in order to designate them as a second seven days. Whether our chronology should include one or two 150-day periods must, therefore, be determined on contextual/exegetical grounds rather than by the particularities of 8.3’s Hebrew.