…for the Lord God had not made it rain on the land, and there was no man to work the ground. But mist would come up from the earth and water all the ground. Then the Lord God formed the man out of the dust from the ground and breathed the breath of life into his nostrils, and the man became a living being. [Genesis 2:5-7 (CSB)]
Earlier this week, I compared a fictional 21st century Noah with the original ark builder. Although I was told there had been no rain on earth before the Flood, since I hadn’t read it myself, I wanted to make sure before writing it. As it turns out, there is no clear decisive answer to whether or not there was rain before Noah’s day so I didn’t mention it at all.
Those who claim it never rained before the Flood occurred cite verses from Genesis and Hebrews to support their position. Genesis 2:5-7 tells us a mist covering the land watered the ground before the advent of mankind. Since rain isn’t mentioned again until Genesis 7:4 when God tells Noah He will make it rain, they assume the mist covered the earth until that time.
On the other hand, mist watering the earth prior to Adam doesn’t necessarily mean this canopy of water continued when Adam and Eve were banished from Eden. After the fall, things on earth changed radically—pain and death were introduced, the ground was cursed, and man had to toil to have food to eat. That neither rain nor drought are mentioned doesn’t necessarily mean they didn’t exist after the fall. It’s quite possible that the physical processes of water evaporation, cloud formation, and precipitation that recycle the world’s water supply today existed at the time of Noah, but we don’t know.
In Hebrews 11:7, we are told that God warned Noah “about what was not yet seen.” While that which hadn’t yet been seen could have been rain, it also could have been the phenomenon of a global catastrophe that started with a 40-day rainstorm flooding the entire earth and destroying every living thing on the earth. The event was so extraordinary that it would be one year and ten days after the rain began that Noah, his family, and the animals emerged from the ark onto dry land.
Once the waters receded, God promised that never again would floodwaters destroy all life; He confirmed His covenant with a rainbow. The timing of this post-flood rainbow is given as additional evidence that rain was a new phenomenon on earth since a rainbow requires the existence of rain. But, when God said, “I have placed my bow in the clouds,” He never said it was the first rainbow. God merely told Noah that it would serve as a reminder of His promise never to flood the earth again.
There is no way to know for sure whether there was rain prior to the flood and a case can be made for both sides of the question. Fortunately, whether or not it rained before the flood is a moot point because it doesn’t matter. Nevertheless, two valuable lessons were learned while I tried to answer that question. The first was simply to get our Bible knowledge first-hand!
The second lesson is that we should be cautious of reading more into a few Bible verses than what is there. There is a vast difference between speculation and Gospel truth and much of what occurred from the beginning of time through the 1st century AD is not mentioned in the Bible. After all, 400 years are missing between Malachi’s words and the birth of John the Baptist! Just because something isn’t stated in Scripture doesn’t necessarily mean it didn’t exist or happen! For example, Exodus mentions only two midwives by name but that doesn’t mean they were the only midwives serving several thousand Hebrew women! While we may find portions of Scripture ambiguous about peripheral issues (like rain or midwives), the Bible is quite clear about the essentials of Christian doctrine! Where Scripture is clear, we must be inflexible about the fundamentals of our faith. Let us be wary, however, of being unbending when Scripture is unclear and the issue is minor.
On the essentials, unity. On the nonessentials, liberty. In everything, charity. [Jack Hyles]
Back in 1919, pharmacist W.K. Buckley created a concoction to treat coughs, colds, and bronchitis called Buckley’s Original Mixture. Buckley’s elixir was tremendously effective but its flavor was horrid. Nevertheless, their nasty tasting blend of things like menthol, camphor, Canadian balsam, and pine needle oil is still being sold more than 100 years later. The mixture’s longevity is due as much to the company’s straightforward and humorous “awful taste” ad campaign as it is to its reputed efficacy. With the slogan, “It tastes awful. And it works!” Buckley’s is described by consumers as “the worst tasting, foulest smelling, yet most effective cough remedy.” Apparently, it is. Despite ads admitting, “People swear by it. And at it,” consumers continue to endure Buckley’s ghastly flavor. Never having used Buckley’s (and not about to try), this is not an endorsement!
“Alleluia” (or “Hallelujah”), like “Amen,” is a word familiar throughout Christendom. Meaning “Praise the Lord,” it is the transliteration of the Hebrew hallel, meaning to shine, be boastful, praise, or rejoice and Yah, an abbreviated form of the name of the Lord: YHWH (Yahweh/Jehovah). Although two distinct words, they were consistently written as one (halleluyah). In the Old Testament, this extraordinary word occurs only in Psalms. Usually found at the beginning, halleluyah was an imperative call to praise or boast in the Lord—a call to shine a light upon Him! Whether we spell this beautiful word the Latin way as “alleluia” or the Greek way as “hallelujah,” the meaning is the same. Many modern translations simply translate it as “Praise the Lord!”
In a cartoon drawn by Paul Noth, an enormous political billboard overlooks a pasture inhabited by a flock of sheep. Looking up at the picture of a grinning wolf in coat and tie saying, “I am going to eat you!” one sheep tells another, “He tells it like it is.” Would that all politicians were so forthright!
Psalm 119, the longest of the psalms, is a song in praise of the Word of God. Since we don’t read this psalm in its original Hebrew, we fail to appreciate its intricate construction. Each of its twenty-two sections begin with a letter of the Hebrew alphabet in sequence. Each of the eight verses in those twenty-two sections begin with the letter that introduced it. For example, the first word of the first section begins with alef, as do the next seven verses. In the second section, every line begins with beth. The psalm continues that way up to the 22nd (and last) section where every line begins with the final letter of the Hebrew alphabet, tav. 
Most of us breeze through (or skip altogether) the Bible’s genealogies. Nevertheless, when genealogy and all those “begats” seem so important in Scripture, what explanation is there for the difference between the genealogies of Jesus found in Luke and Matthew? Because Jews were meticulous about recording genealogies, it’s inconceivable to have two conflicting yet correct lists of Jesus’ lineage.
Devotions of the Heart 