\n
![](\"https:\/\/media.swncdn.com\/via\/images\/2023\/07\/19\/31724\/31724-gettyimages-1370501287_source_file.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
\n<\/p>\n
A theologian recently sparked debate on social media after claiming that the flood in the biblical story of Noah\u2019s Ark was regional and not global.<\/p>\n
In an interview with CBN News<\/a>, Gavin Ortlund, president of Truth Unites, explained he first made the claim<\/a> on his Youtube channel, where he contended that the Genesis 6<\/a> narrative is \u201cabout a regional event that was in a huge area of the Earth, but not all over the globe.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cI just wanted to help people understand some of the arguments for that view \u2014 help people understand that there actually are differences within orthodox Christianity,\u201d Ortlund said. \u201cHistorically, a lot of people are not aware of that.\u201d<\/p>\n At the same time, however, he clarified that he doesn\u2019t believe the regional flood was small in scope. Ortlund noted that the debate is based on one\u2019s interpretation of Genesis, such as looking at the limited scope of humanity at the time.<\/p>\n \u201cThere really is a good case, actually, that, in its original meaning, the author and the original hearers wouldn\u2019t be thinking of \u2026 all of the globe of planet Earth, so this is just a matter of interpreting Scripture,\u201d he said. \u201cHumanity, at this point, appears to also have just been regional. This is before the dispersion of human beings that happens after the tower of Babel and Genesis 10<\/a> and 11, so all of human beings are in this one portion of the Earth at this point before they had dispersed throughout the world.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Despite facing backlash for this view, Ortlund refuted the claim that he is a theological liberal or pushing beliefs not tied to Scripture.<\/p>\n \u201cI\u2019m an evangelical Christian,\u201d he said. \u201cI believe in biblical inerrancy. I think the Scripture is fully trustworthy. I think if people were to go down the line on \u2026 the average sort of testing issues of our times, they\u2019d find me pretty conservative, pretty classically Christian in my instincts.\u201d<\/p>\n He also pointed out that the biblical writers did not know about American continents or the extent of the Earth as a whole, Faithwire<\/a> reports.<\/p>\n \u201cAll of us are responding to the progress of science and knowledge about planet Earth and having to adjust our interpretation of Scripture accordingly,\u201d Ortlund said. \u201cNot because Scripture is not true, but because we\u2019re trying to interpret, \u2018What does the text mean in its original context,\u2019 viewing the world from an ancient perspective and using language that reflected that perspective.\u201d<\/p>\n The theologian added that one\u2019s view of the flood does not change anything theologically in the biblical story.<\/p>\n \u201cI don\u2019t think anything of great theological consequence is at stake in the specific matter of the extent of the water,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n Ken Ham<\/a>\u2019s Answers in Genesis ministry, among others, has rejected the notion of a regional flood.<\/p>\n \u201cWhether the Flood of Noah was global or local in extent is a crucial question,\u201d Answers in Genesis said in a statement<\/a>. \u201cThis is because, ultimately, what is at stake is the authority of all of God\u2019s Word.\u201d<\/p>\n \u00a0\u201cIndeed, if the text of Scripture in Genesis 6-8<\/a> clearly teaches that the Flood was global and we reject that teaching, then we undermine the reliability and authority of other parts of Scripture, including John 3:16<\/a>. God\u2019s Word must be trustworthy and authoritative in all that it affirms,\u201d the text added.<\/p>\n\n\n