What do you think?
Rate this book
The Genesis Flood: The Biblical Record and its Scientific Implications
Over 250,000 copies sold. This anniversary edition celebrates 50 years of Whitcomb and Morris's biblically-based system of creationism and catastrophism that unifies and correlates scientific data from early earth history a modern creationist classic.
560 pages, Paperback
First published June 1, 1960
46 people are currently reading
857 people want to read
About the author
Henry M. Morris
132 books65 followersLibrarian Note: There is more than one author with this name in the Goodreads database.
Henry M. Morris (1918–2006) was an American engineer and young Earth creationist, widely regarded as the father of modern creation science. He founded the Institute for Creation Research.
Not to be confused with his eldest son Henry M. Morris III.
Henry M. Morris (1918–2006) was an American engineer and young Earth creationist, widely regarded as the father of modern creation science. He founded the Institute for Creation Research.
Not to be confused with his eldest son Henry M. Morris III.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 51 reviews
November 10, 2014
This book, published in 1961, is usually quoted as the founding document of modern Young Earth Creationism. Given my current interest in the relationship between science and religion, I felt duty-bound to read it.
Some negative reviewers call The Genesis Flood a collection of lies, but I don't think that's really accurate. To me, it is a better fit to the philosopher Harry Frankfurt's famous definition of bullshit, as presented in his 1986 essay. Bullshit, argues Frankfurt, often consists of lies, but need not do so. It is rather characterized by the habit of using language without caring whether it has any connection to truth. In many ways, as Frankfurt points out, this is worse than lying, since it attacks the very foundations of what constitutes meaningful communication.
The authors, Whitcomb and Morris, spend 550 pages bullshitting -- I am using this phrase in Frankfurt's precise technical sense -- about the ridiculous thesis that the Earth, contrary to all evidence, is only 10,000 years old; they claim, moreover, that it was ravaged about 5,000 years ago by a worldwide flood which destroyed all non-marine life except eight people (Noah and his immediate family) and the animals they brought with them on the Ark. Their primary source, as the title indicates, is the Book of Genesis, which they argue is literally true in all respects.
As already noted, bullshitting is not lying, and feel I need to demonstrate my impartiality by pointing out several places where W&M have got it right. They give a reasonable historical overview of the reception that the myth of the Flood has received from geologists, concentrating on the period between 1600 and 1900 when the balance of informed opinion shifted, in a series of steps, from literal acceptance of Genesis to extreme skepticism and relegation to fringe/crank status. As they are honest enough to admit, the main objections are simple. It is obviously possible to justify the story of Creation and the Flood if one is prepared to hypothesize enough miracles; but a great many miracles are required, and the narrative is implausible. It is above all difficult to square the contradictions between Scriptual and scientific evidence with the Christian belief that God is Truth. As Newton said, the Book of Nature, even more than the Bible, is God's Word. Why should God, in effect, lie to His people? It seems completely out of character; Jehovah is no Loki. The authors deny all these charges (flat-out denial is one of their favored rhetorical tropes), but they are unconvincing.
While I'm bending over backwards to demonstrate fairness, it's also interesting to see that W&M manage, more or less, to call it right on some scientific questions. They spend many pages discussing the movement of rock strata, and correctly argue that the geological processes regarded as mainstream in 1961 could not adequately explain the huge forces required to cause the observed shifts. Within another few years, most geologists were ready to concede this point, and plate tectonics emerged as the new paradigm; but that was still in the future. Similarly, W&M are right in arguing that the extinction of the dinosaurs has all the hallmarks of a catastrophic event rather than a gradual decline. Again, the discovery of the Chicxulub meteorite crater came later, and surprised many experts.
These lucky hits are, unfortunately, more than counterbalanced by some of the most absurd pseudo-scientific nonsense I have ever seen. I will look at three of the more flagrant and central claims. First, there is the question of where the waters of the Flood came from. W&M, citing a Biblical verse about "the canopy of the waters", claim that most of the water was present in the antediluvian atmosphere, in the form of a vast quantity of water vapour. There are so many things wrong with this that I hardly know where to start, but one obvious observation is that it would have made atmospheric pressure equivalent to that at the bottom of the ocean. Even though that ocean is in gaseous form, you're still under it.
Second, there is the sequence of fossil strata, where fossils from earlier periods are found under those from later ones. W&M deny that the strata were accumulated over the course of hundreds of millions of years, but claim instead that they were formed during the single year of the Flood; the fossilized creatures normally ascribed to later periods end up at the top because they were better able to look after themselves and survived longest. Again, one hardly knows where to start, but a) there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that strata can be formed at this kind of rate, indeed even a thousand times more slowly, b) the unimaginable violence of the Flood scenario seems impossible to square with the very well preserved state of many fossils, c) if the apparently more highly evolved creatures are in the top strata because they were best able to reach high ground, we would only find those fossils in a few places corresponding to antediluvian mountain peaks, and d) the explanation makes no sense for plants and other non-mobile life-forms.
Third, we have the evidence from radioisotope dating, which, as W&M point out, gives an age for the Earth measured in billions of years instead of thousands. Their answer here is so confused that I have trouble summarizing it. If I understand correctly, they say both a) that God initially created the Earth with isotope ratios apparently indicating a much greater age, and b) that the rate of decay of the radioactive elements may have been greatly accelerated during the Flood due to the presence of high levels of cosmic radiation. (a) is of course perfectly reasonable, except that similar arguments can just as easily be deployed, as Russell once pointed out, to claim that the whole Earth was created five minutes ago. (b), if it is feasible at all, would have led to Noah and his family at best dying of radiation burns in a few hours, and more likely being vapourised on the spot. Incidentally, the unusually detailed exposition in this part shows that W&M do not have the faintest idea of how radioactive decomposition works, even to the extent of not understanding the concept of a half-life.
In general, W&M reject the ability of science to pronounce on events in the past, and deploy the technique of aggressive quote-mining that has now become standard in denialist literature: they consistently look for disagreements in published papers, and suggest that, because science is uncertain about some aspect of a question, it has no understanding of it whatsoever. The most flagrant examples are in the ascription of dates. One scientist writes that our dating of a geological event is "very uncertain", by which they perhaps mean that it is not known to an accuracy of more than 20%; W&M quote this as supporting their claim that the date in question could be a hundred thousand times closer to the present than the mainstream estimate. I find this style of reasoning utterly immoral. Science thrives on freedom; it makes progress by allowing researchers to advance bold and novel hypotheses, debate them openly, and reject the ones which turn out to be mistaken. W&M remind me of totalitarian regimes which see freedom and interpret it as weakness. It is extremely regrettable that repeated attacks from creationists have made some scientists feel that they need to adopt a common line, so that internal disagreements cannot be used against them.
To conclude, this is one of the most distasteful pieces of writing I have ever come across. You may want to read it, as I did, on Don Corleone's principle of keeping your friends close and your enemies closer, and in fact I encourage you to do so. But I'm letting you know now that you will be angry, revolted, and, above all, bored senseless. Consider yourself warned.
________________________________
I am glad to see that people found this interesting! I feel repaid for the pain I have suffered :)
I should add that the review owes a considerable debt to Pigliucci and Boudry's fine collection, Philosophy of Pseudoscience . In particular, I only read The Genesis Flood because it is referred to several times there, and my comparison with Frankfurt's analysis of "bullshit" borrows from James Ladyman's Towards a Demarcation of Science from Pseudoscience.
Some negative reviewers call The Genesis Flood a collection of lies, but I don't think that's really accurate. To me, it is a better fit to the philosopher Harry Frankfurt's famous definition of bullshit, as presented in his 1986 essay. Bullshit, argues Frankfurt, often consists of lies, but need not do so. It is rather characterized by the habit of using language without caring whether it has any connection to truth. In many ways, as Frankfurt points out, this is worse than lying, since it attacks the very foundations of what constitutes meaningful communication.
The authors, Whitcomb and Morris, spend 550 pages bullshitting -- I am using this phrase in Frankfurt's precise technical sense -- about the ridiculous thesis that the Earth, contrary to all evidence, is only 10,000 years old; they claim, moreover, that it was ravaged about 5,000 years ago by a worldwide flood which destroyed all non-marine life except eight people (Noah and his immediate family) and the animals they brought with them on the Ark. Their primary source, as the title indicates, is the Book of Genesis, which they argue is literally true in all respects.
As already noted, bullshitting is not lying, and feel I need to demonstrate my impartiality by pointing out several places where W&M have got it right. They give a reasonable historical overview of the reception that the myth of the Flood has received from geologists, concentrating on the period between 1600 and 1900 when the balance of informed opinion shifted, in a series of steps, from literal acceptance of Genesis to extreme skepticism and relegation to fringe/crank status. As they are honest enough to admit, the main objections are simple. It is obviously possible to justify the story of Creation and the Flood if one is prepared to hypothesize enough miracles; but a great many miracles are required, and the narrative is implausible. It is above all difficult to square the contradictions between Scriptual and scientific evidence with the Christian belief that God is Truth. As Newton said, the Book of Nature, even more than the Bible, is God's Word. Why should God, in effect, lie to His people? It seems completely out of character; Jehovah is no Loki. The authors deny all these charges (flat-out denial is one of their favored rhetorical tropes), but they are unconvincing.
While I'm bending over backwards to demonstrate fairness, it's also interesting to see that W&M manage, more or less, to call it right on some scientific questions. They spend many pages discussing the movement of rock strata, and correctly argue that the geological processes regarded as mainstream in 1961 could not adequately explain the huge forces required to cause the observed shifts. Within another few years, most geologists were ready to concede this point, and plate tectonics emerged as the new paradigm; but that was still in the future. Similarly, W&M are right in arguing that the extinction of the dinosaurs has all the hallmarks of a catastrophic event rather than a gradual decline. Again, the discovery of the Chicxulub meteorite crater came later, and surprised many experts.
These lucky hits are, unfortunately, more than counterbalanced by some of the most absurd pseudo-scientific nonsense I have ever seen. I will look at three of the more flagrant and central claims. First, there is the question of where the waters of the Flood came from. W&M, citing a Biblical verse about "the canopy of the waters", claim that most of the water was present in the antediluvian atmosphere, in the form of a vast quantity of water vapour. There are so many things wrong with this that I hardly know where to start, but one obvious observation is that it would have made atmospheric pressure equivalent to that at the bottom of the ocean. Even though that ocean is in gaseous form, you're still under it.
Second, there is the sequence of fossil strata, where fossils from earlier periods are found under those from later ones. W&M deny that the strata were accumulated over the course of hundreds of millions of years, but claim instead that they were formed during the single year of the Flood; the fossilized creatures normally ascribed to later periods end up at the top because they were better able to look after themselves and survived longest. Again, one hardly knows where to start, but a) there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that strata can be formed at this kind of rate, indeed even a thousand times more slowly, b) the unimaginable violence of the Flood scenario seems impossible to square with the very well preserved state of many fossils, c) if the apparently more highly evolved creatures are in the top strata because they were best able to reach high ground, we would only find those fossils in a few places corresponding to antediluvian mountain peaks, and d) the explanation makes no sense for plants and other non-mobile life-forms.
Third, we have the evidence from radioisotope dating, which, as W&M point out, gives an age for the Earth measured in billions of years instead of thousands. Their answer here is so confused that I have trouble summarizing it. If I understand correctly, they say both a) that God initially created the Earth with isotope ratios apparently indicating a much greater age, and b) that the rate of decay of the radioactive elements may have been greatly accelerated during the Flood due to the presence of high levels of cosmic radiation. (a) is of course perfectly reasonable, except that similar arguments can just as easily be deployed, as Russell once pointed out, to claim that the whole Earth was created five minutes ago. (b), if it is feasible at all, would have led to Noah and his family at best dying of radiation burns in a few hours, and more likely being vapourised on the spot. Incidentally, the unusually detailed exposition in this part shows that W&M do not have the faintest idea of how radioactive decomposition works, even to the extent of not understanding the concept of a half-life.
In general, W&M reject the ability of science to pronounce on events in the past, and deploy the technique of aggressive quote-mining that has now become standard in denialist literature: they consistently look for disagreements in published papers, and suggest that, because science is uncertain about some aspect of a question, it has no understanding of it whatsoever. The most flagrant examples are in the ascription of dates. One scientist writes that our dating of a geological event is "very uncertain", by which they perhaps mean that it is not known to an accuracy of more than 20%; W&M quote this as supporting their claim that the date in question could be a hundred thousand times closer to the present than the mainstream estimate. I find this style of reasoning utterly immoral. Science thrives on freedom; it makes progress by allowing researchers to advance bold and novel hypotheses, debate them openly, and reject the ones which turn out to be mistaken. W&M remind me of totalitarian regimes which see freedom and interpret it as weakness. It is extremely regrettable that repeated attacks from creationists have made some scientists feel that they need to adopt a common line, so that internal disagreements cannot be used against them.
To conclude, this is one of the most distasteful pieces of writing I have ever come across. You may want to read it, as I did, on Don Corleone's principle of keeping your friends close and your enemies closer, and in fact I encourage you to do so. But I'm letting you know now that you will be angry, revolted, and, above all, bored senseless. Consider yourself warned.
________________________________
I am glad to see that people found this interesting! I feel repaid for the pain I have suffered :)
I should add that the review owes a considerable debt to Pigliucci and Boudry's fine collection, Philosophy of Pseudoscience . In particular, I only read The Genesis Flood because it is referred to several times there, and my comparison with Frankfurt's analysis of "bullshit" borrows from James Ladyman's Towards a Demarcation of Science from Pseudoscience.
March 6, 2023
This book has got to be the most comprehensive and in-depth work on the Genesis Flood. Phenomenal piece of work and excellently written. Dr. Henry M. Morris delves deep into the understanding of the sedimentation, tectonic plate movements, where the water came from and went to afterward, etc. Probably THE best scientifically based documentation of what is believed to have happened. Everyone has an opinion and a theory, but no one seems to like the possibility of an Intelligent Designer (ID) of the universe and all of the ramifications that such a thing entails, spiritually and morally!
January 18, 2014
This book was loaned to me by a friend who insisted it would scientificially prove the biblical account of the flood. Unfortunately I gave up on the book after merely reading the Preface to the Sixth Printing.
It is immediately clear that the authors have no intention of providing a balanced and scientific view. Instead of examining the evidence and drawing a conclusion from it, they start with the assumption that the Bible is the inerrant word of God and use it to interpret the evidence:
Worse still, they don't even think that correct interpretation of the evidence is "the real issue". They are only concerned with what the Bible has to say:
I'm at least glad that the authors were honest and up-front about their intentions because it saved me the effort of finding out the hard way.
It is immediately clear that the authors have no intention of providing a balanced and scientific view. Instead of examining the evidence and drawing a conclusion from it, they start with the assumption that the Bible is the inerrant word of God and use it to interpret the evidence:
"We believe that the Bible, as the verbally inspired and completely inerrant Word of God, gives us the true framework of historical and scientific interpretation, as well as of so-called religious truth".
- Page xxvi
Worse still, they don't even think that correct interpretation of the evidence is "the real issue". They are only concerned with what the Bible has to say:
"… the real issue is not the correctness of the interpretation of various details of the geological data, but simply what God has revealed in His Word concerning these matters".
- Page xxvii
I'm at least glad that the authors were honest and up-front about their intentions because it saved me the effort of finding out the hard way.
November 8, 2014
As usual, Manny is doing his balanced, even-handed, let's-be-fair-and-evaluate-it-on-its-merits routine. Fuck that, I think my friend MC Hawking is a whole lot closer to the truth. You can listen to him here, or if you just want the lyrics:
Ah yeah, here we go again
Damn, this is some funky shit that I be laying down on your ass
This one goes out to all my homies working in the field of evolutionary science
Check it
Fuck the damn creationists, those bunch of dumb-ass bitches
Every time I think of them my trigger finger itches
They want to have their bullshit taught in public class
Stephen Jay Gould should put his foot right up their ass
Noah and his ark, Adam and his Eve
Straight up fairy stories even children don't believe
I'm not saying there's no god, that's not for me to say
All I'm saying is the Earth was not made in a day
Fuck, fuck, fuck, fuck the creationists
Fuck, fuck, fuck, fuck the creationists
Break it down
Ah damn, this is a funky jam
I'm about ready to kick this bitch back in
Check it
Fuck the damn creationists, I say it with authority
Because kicking their punk asses be me paramount priority
Them wack-ass bitches say, "evolution's just a theory"
They best step off, them brainless fools, I'll give them cause to fear me
The cosmos is expanding every second, every day
But their minds are shrinking as they close their eyes and pray
They call their bullshit "science" like the word could give them cred
If them bitches be scientists then cap me in the head
Fuck, fuck, fuck, fuck the creationists
Fuck, fuck, fuck, fuck the creationists
Bass
Bring that shit in
Ah yeah, that's right, fuck them all motherfuckers
Fucking punk ass creationists trying to set scientific thought back 400 years
Fuck that
If them superstitious motherfuckers want to have that kind of party I'm going to put my dick in the mashed potatoes
Fucking creationists
Fuck them
December 23, 2010
A masterful refutation of old-earth, evolutionary, and uniformitarian views. For a book of mostly straight data, it is remarkably readable. I would recommend it to an interested and very committed reader.
It mentions various attempts at harmonizing the flood with uniformitarianism, all of which failed monumentally. In particular, Charles Lyell's tranquility theory, stating that the flood happened, but did not cause any geological change to the earth, is a stunning bit of pure foolishness. If a minor flood causes 8-foot clay buildups, I think we can assume that a global flood would cause bigger ones. Lyell was a brilliant man, so his theory was based not from foolishness, but from a desie to make the data conform to his beliefs and not his beliefs to the data. Please pardon me if I have wrongly attributed this theory to Lyell, I know that he was its greatest supporter but am not 100% sure that he thought it up.
It mentions various attempts at harmonizing the flood with uniformitarianism, all of which failed monumentally. In particular, Charles Lyell's tranquility theory, stating that the flood happened, but did not cause any geological change to the earth, is a stunning bit of pure foolishness. If a minor flood causes 8-foot clay buildups, I think we can assume that a global flood would cause bigger ones. Lyell was a brilliant man, so his theory was based not from foolishness, but from a desie to make the data conform to his beliefs and not his beliefs to the data. Please pardon me if I have wrongly attributed this theory to Lyell, I know that he was its greatest supporter but am not 100% sure that he thought it up.
May 31, 2009
Excellent.
July 18, 2014
a must read. there are a lot of technical details provided by the authors that demonstrate the logic and accuracy of the Genesis record. of all the flood stories around the world, only the Genesis account holds up to logic and scrutiny. it was a global flood, and one must remember that we have current evidence of tectonic plate activity with uplifting, scripture says the fountains of the deep were broken up... so with all the activity going on the water could have easily covered the planet to the depth described and then as the water receded the uplifting and shaping could have continued during that year... we see the evidence of change by glacial retreat and volcanic activity... so what we have now, compared to what was in the antediluvian world is completely plausible based on the text and what we see. The evidence of strata from South Africa being found in Switzerland inverted (if my memory of those details is correct... will find the page numbers and edit this later) demonstrates the agitation and destruction of the flood. The references to it by Jesus and end time prophecies validates the reality of it.
August 3, 2014
This book is filled with sloppy research that consists of a collection of cherry-picked "facts", out-of-context quotations by prominent evolutionary biologists, attacks on multiple straw men, and tired old arguments against evolution; some of which were disproved as long as a century ago. There's no way a man who had the credentials John C. Morris brought to the table could have perpetuated this travesty in ignorance; this has to be willful deceit on the part of the author. Even his son has admitted that the so-called mix of human and dinosaur footprints found in the Paluxy river bed near Glen Rose, Texas was a hoax, and that's just one example of many that could be given.
July 20, 2015
I'm roughly 40% of the way through this book, and I find it very interesting. I appreciate the technical approach the authors take. I'm not a geologist, but I am an engineer and I have enough training in various sciences to follow an argument that doesn't make me have to read years worth of publications just to be informed, and this book hits it just right for me.
I would have given this 5 stars, except that it hasn't been updated since 1961 (if I recall correctly). There is a 2011 preface, and I'm guessing the basic science involved hasn't really changed all that much in the last 50 years, but it would have been nice if an editor or a junior author could have addressed what changes there may have been (in dating methods, for example, or in new philosophical argumentation).
I would have given this 5 stars, except that it hasn't been updated since 1961 (if I recall correctly). There is a 2011 preface, and I'm guessing the basic science involved hasn't really changed all that much in the last 50 years, but it would have been nice if an editor or a junior author could have addressed what changes there may have been (in dating methods, for example, or in new philosophical argumentation).
April 16, 2008
I learned SO much from this book. I did my senior project on this. I recommend this book to everyone because it gives you all the answers you need for the science related to the Flood. And the Flood was hugely important, geologically speaking. The world we see today is a result of the Flood.
January 14, 2019
I guess I was expecting more but unfortunately I was disappointed. The authors claim to attempt to reconcile science with Biblical information on the Flood, but really take any scientific data that fits but reject all that doesn’t without backing up their claims. There are too many leaps of logic and trying to force the reader to accept all they write with a judicious amount of exclamanation points. As if that makes the statements more valid.
June 14, 2015
While much data has been published since the original printing of this book, the basic arguments still stand strong. This is most likely one of the best expository writings of the fallacies of modern uniformitarian and evolutionary thought while presenting a plausible explanation that follows the biblical account.
September 2, 2025
Foundational work on the Genesis Flood from a scientific perspective, but a little dated now. The more current, and more thorough treatment of the subject IMHO, is Earth's Catastrophic Past by Andrew A Snelling.
November 4, 2012
fluffy nonsense by an indoctrinated fanatic, all the evidence is against a worldwide flood bible style
October 11, 2015
Very educational, full of scientific and Biblical data. This book clarifies questions about the Flood in the days of Noah and results of such a cataclysmic event.
May 2, 2025
I wish I could give this 3.5 stars. Super informative, but so dry. Not surprising, given the scientific nature of the subject and the age of the book itself (almost 65 years old). Worth the time overall, but it's a slog to get through.
August 23, 2017
Although I read portions of this book in my younger days I finally got around to reading it all the way through. This is the book that started the modern young earth creationist movement. To be honest it was a long and rather boring read as the authors often labored on and on to make their points which ultimately fail. The book was first published in 1961 before the rise of modern big bang theory and plate tectonics which revolutionized the geological sciences. That position gave it some strength as it was often able to successfully criticize certain aspects of the science of the time.
This release contains a preface for the 50th edition of the book which gives at least one enlightening detail, namely, that Henry Morris pursued his advanced degrees for the express purpose of defending flood geology.
It's also interesting to note that there are a number of clams made in the book that creationists in the main no longer hold to. These include,
1) That the Earth was covered by a preflood vapor canopy. Whitcomb and Morris return to this idea over and over again throughout the book. Creationists attempted to create models to simulate such a canopy and finally realized that the physics didn't add up and that such a canopy would make the Earth entirely too hot for life.
2) The claim that there were human and dinosaur tracks in the Paluxy river located in Glen Rose, TX that supported the idea that humans and dinosaurs lived at the same time. This claim has now been rejected by nearly all modern young earth creationists.
For those interested I would recommend reading this book because it is the one quoted by nearly all historians related to the history of young earth creationism and it will give you a broad overview of how young earth creationists deal with science and the Bible. Just keep in mind that the information is dated and as mentioned already some ideas contained in the book are no longer held to be most contemporary young earth creationists.
This release contains a preface for the 50th edition of the book which gives at least one enlightening detail, namely, that Henry Morris pursued his advanced degrees for the express purpose of defending flood geology.
It's also interesting to note that there are a number of clams made in the book that creationists in the main no longer hold to. These include,
1) That the Earth was covered by a preflood vapor canopy. Whitcomb and Morris return to this idea over and over again throughout the book. Creationists attempted to create models to simulate such a canopy and finally realized that the physics didn't add up and that such a canopy would make the Earth entirely too hot for life.
2) The claim that there were human and dinosaur tracks in the Paluxy river located in Glen Rose, TX that supported the idea that humans and dinosaurs lived at the same time. This claim has now been rejected by nearly all modern young earth creationists.
For those interested I would recommend reading this book because it is the one quoted by nearly all historians related to the history of young earth creationism and it will give you a broad overview of how young earth creationists deal with science and the Bible. Just keep in mind that the information is dated and as mentioned already some ideas contained in the book are no longer held to be most contemporary young earth creationists.
November 25, 2023
Although I don't agree with it 100%, it is a very well research, cited/documented, and logically laid out book. I especially appreciated the summaries at the end of each chapter. The Flood is something I struggle with fitting in. I am no longer a Young Earth Creationist, but I'm not heard a term for summarizing what I currently believe. It's a little bit of theistic evolution, a little bit of day age, and a little bit of an interventionist view. I interpret at least chapters 1 and 2 as figurative, and I understand and sympathize with those who want to interpret through chapter 11 as being symbolic. I leaned towards chapters 3 through the rest of the histories as being literal, but fitting in a global flood to match the current scientific evidence is difficult. I do love that he pointed out a lot of flaws and the scientific thinking that were around the 1961 and it is interesting to see where some of his arguments have been supported, like the catastrophic extinction of the dinosaurs, and where others have been refuted. I do wish that they had done a revised and not just 50th anniversary edition for that reason. Even just a supplemental to the book or an extra appendix would be a useful update. Speaking of the appendices, appendix 2 almost completely flies in the face of the rest of the book and ignores Luke's genealogy in Chapter 3 of his Gospel. To go from insisting on the little interpretation of Genesis to saying that chapters 10 & 11 are figurative is incredibly contradictory. Overall the book does do a good job of pointing out limitations to science, how it is possible to harmonize the science and the biblical account, and how a lot of interpretation comes down to the in vogue term now "worldview". Like I said I don't agree with it 100%, but it is a good book and understand how this book kicked off the Creationist movement.
*Originally created with speech to text and edited for grammar.
*Originally created with speech to text and edited for grammar.
October 15, 2023
There are few books that are as thorough and explainitive about the flood of Noah as this one. Although it is a bit older now, the points and theories all still hold well. While much of the scientific verbage and such was a bit over my head, their explanations and general discussions of each topic helped me understand quite a bit. A great read of a profound Biblical moment. Glad I took the time to tackle it!
August 3, 2023
The Audible.com version of this book is over 20 hours long, and details how, often the “facts” of evolution are based on assumptions and conjectures that have little basis in solid research, mathematics, or actual geologic findings. The researchers typically throw out results that don’t line up with their evolutionary bias. The Biblical basis for a world wide flood is shown to be the most reliable explanation for numerous geologic conundrums. The devastating after-effects of the year long Genesis flood continued to be active for many centuries, causing ongoing changes in climate, sea levels, volcanic events, erosion, multiple layers of varied deposits, movements of coal and oil beds, land masses, the ice age, the shrinking size of many animals, the drastic shortening of human life span, and many more.
August 30, 2019
There are great nuggets in The Genesis Flood for anyone with patience or aptitude for reading very technical books. This is not a light read! (It took me three years, reading on and off). I appreciate the thoroughness and attention to detail, though.
The most fascinating sections include those on how all the animal kinds (not species, but parent kinds) could have fit on the ark, and how God instilled the hibernation instinct—not just for winter but other catastrophes like the flood. (Winter a catastrophe? Perhaps not from our point of view, but before the flood, the earth had more temperate and even climates.) Also, I appreciate the exegesis to prove that the flood was truly global and not localized. Very fascinating!
The most fascinating sections include those on how all the animal kinds (not species, but parent kinds) could have fit on the ark, and how God instilled the hibernation instinct—not just for winter but other catastrophes like the flood. (Winter a catastrophe? Perhaps not from our point of view, but before the flood, the earth had more temperate and even climates.) Also, I appreciate the exegesis to prove that the flood was truly global and not localized. Very fascinating!
September 24, 2018
Very detailed defense of Noah's Flood as described in Genesis: a global flood which completely devastated the entire earth and killed every human outside the Ark. While doing so, the authors also provide plenty of reasons to reject uniformitarianism geology and Darwinian evolution. For example, there is the problem of "overthrust", a large section of supposedly old rock that is on top of younger rock. Not just small blocks but areas up to thousands of square miles of rock (such as the Heart Mountain Thrust) with no sign of the individual layers being scrapped over each other but rather being deposited on top of each other in a normal fashion.
July 11, 2023
The book was first published in 1961, over 60 years ago at the time of this review. This was my 2nd or 3rd reading of this book that I have in Softcover. The science used in the book is still impeccable and the book logically makes the case for a "Young Earth" approach that the Bible fully supports.
September 3, 2013
It's a very interesting book but there is a lot of dry areas and things that can confuse you unless you know a lot about science terms and complex words that are used. It takes a lot to read it because of the length and amount of pages. It does have a lot of good information.
October 28, 2019
Most books are rated related to their usefulness and contributions to my research.
Overall, a good book for the researcher and enthusiast.
Read for personal research
- found this book's contents helpful and inspiring - number rating relates to the book's contribution to my needs.
Overall, a good book for the researcher and enthusiast.
Read for personal research
- found this book's contents helpful and inspiring - number rating relates to the book's contribution to my needs.
May 22, 2012
Great information - quite the deep book. If you are a scientific thinker, this book is for you. You can definitely pick chapters to read that you are interested in.
Want to read
March 13, 2016Gary Vander Hart mentions this book in an article about the possibility that Moses edited books of Noah.
July 8, 2017
A must read for every Christian. Destroys the false foundation of modern evolutionary science.
January 2, 2022
This book is a pillar in its field for good reason. It does an excellent job discussing geological implications of the flood, and was indispensable in my own teaching of Genesis.
March 17, 2025
A very decent earnest and thorough exploration of the theological argument for the Biblical Flood. The author left no stone unturned literally in his research into the evidence for some kind of catastrophic deluge in Earths past and does it respectfully and passionately.
Contrary to other reviews in this thread, the book absolutely does not claim that "the bible said it so it must be true" like other books in this field. This is an honest take on the evidence as the author sees it. Its scientific, probing, and explanatory and compares the two viewpoints directly, explaining the author's views on the pros and cons.
All the evidence of human life clearly exposes that there is more to us than purely material beings. Any attempt to deny this is strange and often accompanied by some kind of anger against a higher calling.
Only thing I will say, the book is long, and it seems to want to identify every spec of dust in history. Chapters are epic, at times I found myself exhausted with the amount of information, and some of it was hard to retain. Also, the problem I have in this debate, is that both sides can and will turn many aspects of the evidence in their favour which is human nature, but bitterly frustrating.
Lastly, the chapter titled "Problems in Biblical Geology" is wonderful, as the author exposes some of the exasperating and dreadful dogmas of high ranking athiests. They themselves denounce all non material ideals as nonsense, and then start to pontificate on human meta physics like dreams, emotions and fears.
A decent book, very respectful to the arguments and all involved. The best one I have read in this field. One that answers the nonsense of Bill Nye. Could be touch shorter though.
Contrary to other reviews in this thread, the book absolutely does not claim that "the bible said it so it must be true" like other books in this field. This is an honest take on the evidence as the author sees it. Its scientific, probing, and explanatory and compares the two viewpoints directly, explaining the author's views on the pros and cons.
All the evidence of human life clearly exposes that there is more to us than purely material beings. Any attempt to deny this is strange and often accompanied by some kind of anger against a higher calling.
Only thing I will say, the book is long, and it seems to want to identify every spec of dust in history. Chapters are epic, at times I found myself exhausted with the amount of information, and some of it was hard to retain. Also, the problem I have in this debate, is that both sides can and will turn many aspects of the evidence in their favour which is human nature, but bitterly frustrating.
Lastly, the chapter titled "Problems in Biblical Geology" is wonderful, as the author exposes some of the exasperating and dreadful dogmas of high ranking athiests. They themselves denounce all non material ideals as nonsense, and then start to pontificate on human meta physics like dreams, emotions and fears.
A decent book, very respectful to the arguments and all involved. The best one I have read in this field. One that answers the nonsense of Bill Nye. Could be touch shorter though.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 51 reviews