On Human Life Spans and Windows of Grace

“Then the LORD said, ‘My Spirit shall not always abide in [or contend with] man forever, for he is flesh: his days shall be a 120 years.’”
Gen. 6:3, ESV

The verse above is notoriously difficult to translate, partly because the first part of the verse is unclear (is it “abide in” or “contend with”?). Below are the two main ways the passage is handled:

View #1: 120 years represents a shorter life span for people.

The first part of the verse is understood as: “My spirit will not always remain in man forever.”
The context is about mortality and there is the use of “his days.”
The statement “his days shall be a 120 years” is a generalization. In other words, “it may be… that the author thought of the 120 years as a maximum life-span that was only gradually implemented.”[1]
In the post-flood period, the ages steadily decline (Gen. 11) and later figures rarely exceed 120 (e.g. see Aaron as an exception in Numbers 33:39).
Why don’t we see 120 as the norm for the patriarchs? Answer: “… the patriarchs, as God’s chosen ones, enjoyed the favor of a longer endowment of the Spirit of God that gave life.”[2]
This view is not dependent on but meshes well with views that see the patriarch’s long life spans (e.g. Methuselah) as literal.
Advocates: Gordon Wenham, John Walton, Ian Provan, etc. The ESV Study Bible leans this way and this is also the modern consensus.

View #2: 120 years represents a period of grace before the flood; specifically, the span of time between this proclamation and the Flood (5:32, 7:6).

The first part of the verse is understood as: “My spirit will not always contend with man forever.”
This is a simpler translation as Noah took about 120 years to build the ark. He was 500 years old when he fathered Shem, Ham, and Japhet and 600 year old when the flood began.
Bruce Waltke says View #1 is contradicted “by the age of the postdiluvians who at first lived much longer (see Gen. 11) and then much less (see Ps. 90:10).”[3]
This view is not dependent on but meshes well with views that don’t see the long-life spans of the patriarchs as literal.[4]
Advocates: Augustine, Calvin, Luther, Derek Kidner, Bruce Waltke, etc.

As I’ve gotten older, I 1) look for Christ and themes of grace more in the Old Testament, 2) place greater weight on traditional understandings of controversial texts (e.g. Augustine, Calvin, and Luther’s support of view #2 above), and 3) favor interpretations that are in synch with mainstream science. For these reasons, I find view #2 more compelling. Further, the application is rich related to a theme I’ve recently written about regarding the importance of taking prayerful risks in sharing our faith. As 1 Peter 3:20 indicates, “the 120-year delay allows time for people to repent and provides testimony through Noah and his huge ark:”[5]

“… because they formerly did not obey, when God’s patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water.” (ESV)

In a sermon that connects the verse above with Genesis 6:3, C. H. Spurgeon gives this sobering and excellent reminder on the urgent need to respond to God’s grace:

“When I think of opportunities, I think I may liken us here tonight to a number of men in the Arctic regions. They have been frozen up for a long time, and the ship is high and dry on great masses of ice. The thaw comes on; but the thaw, however, will last but for a very short time. They set their saws to work; they see a split in the ice; there is a long and very narrow lane of water. If they can get the ship along there before the water freezes it up again, they may yet reach the shores of dear old England, and be safe; but if not, they are frozen in for another winter, and very likely will be frozen in forever. Well, now, tonight it seems just so with us. It seems as if the Spirit of God had purposely brought some of you here; and I do trust He is opening, as it were, the lane of mercy for you — causing your sins for a little time to loose their frosty hold, and opening your heart a little to the genial influences of the gospel. But, oh! if it should be frozen up again.”[6]

[1] Gordon Wehnam, Word Biblical Commentary: Genesis 1-15 (Waco, TX: Word, 1987), 142.

[2] John Walton, NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001), 296.

[3] Bruce Waltke, Genesis: A Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2001), 117.

[4] As an example, see Denis Lamoureux’s PowerPoint presentations on biblical genealogies in which he deals with their nature and connection to Adam as a literal/non-literal person in history: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17R0rsgZ_08 I don’t agree with Lamoureux on Adam; however, he makes some fascinating observations about how the Hebrews used genealogies, numbers, and the parallels between the ages of patriarchs in Genesis and Sumerian king lists.

[5] Op. Cit.

Share this:

Related