Changes

|}

|}

The two mentions of 150 days refer to the same period, and the first 40 days (7:13,17) are part of the 150 days. All this is consistent with the date in 8:4. Notice that there was no compelling reason to repeat the first 7-day figure of waiting to enter the Ark except for the corresponding two 7-day figures for the dove, nor was there any reason to repeat the 150 days except for the chiasmus. The chiastic structure explains the repetition of all these figures, whereas the radical critics, with their low view of the inspiration of Scripture, thought the repetition implied different authors or redactors. But the Flood account is not a patchwork put together by late-date editors. The artistic structure of the account shows conscious design by one author, or, alternately, by the three sons of Noah who were working closely together to record the ''toledoth'' of the Flood (Genesis 10:1, 11:10a).  

The two mentions of 150 days refer to the same period, and the first 40 days (7:13,17) are part of the 150 days. All this is consistent with the date in 8:4. Notice that there was no compelling reason to repeat the first 7-day figure of waiting to enter the Ark except for the corresponding two 7-day figures for the dove, nor was there any reason to repeat the 150 days except for the chiasmus. The chiastic structure explains the repetition of all these figures, whereas the radical critics, with their low view of the inspiration of Scripture, thought the repetition implied different authors or redactors putting something together from diverse and disagreeing accounts from long before their time. But the Flood account is not a patchwork put together by late-date editors. The artistic structure of the account shows conscious design by one author, or, alternately, by the three sons of Noah who were working closely together to record the ''toledoth'' of the Flood (Genesis 10:1, 11:10a).  

==References==

==References==

{{Reflist|1}}

{{Reflist|1}}