Noah is given a place of prominence in modern revelation, standing second to Adam in dispensational authority. The Prophet Joseph Smith taught,
The Priesthood was first given to Adam; he obtained the First Presidency, and held the keys of it from generation to generation. He obtained it in the Creation, before the world was formed, as in Genesis 1:26–28. He had dominion given him over every living creature. He is Michael the Archangel, spoken of in the Scriptures. Then to Noah, who is Gabriel: called of God to this office, and was the father of all living in this day, and to him was given the dominion. These men held keys first on earth, and then in heaven.
Gabriel (Noah) and Michael (Adam) are the only angels mentioned by name in the Bible. Gabriel interpreted Daniel’s dreams and announced the births of John the Baptist and Jesus. In Muslim teachings, Gabriel (Jibra’il) revealed God’s word to Muhammad and frequently appeared in the stories of the prophets with the devil (Iblis) as his adversary. There is also a worldwide literature concerning variously named flood heroes (Nu’u, Nuh, Nu Gua, Atrahasis, Utnapishtim, Ziusudra, Deucalion, Yima, and Manu).
Modern revelation has amplified what we know about Noah from the Bible. His birth was a fulfillment of a covenant God made with Enoch (see Moses 7:52). Noah was ordained to the priesthood at age ten (Doctrine and Covenants 107:42–51). He taught the first principles and ordinances of the gospel and announced the coming of Jesus Christ in the meridian of time (Moses 8:16, 19, 23–24). He conferred the priesthood upon his posterity (Doctrine and Covenants 84:14–15). As part of the restoration of the gospel, he visited the Prophet Joseph Smith (Doctrine and Covenants 128:21). Finally, modern revelation teaches that after the Second Coming, Noah will return to the earth to attend the marriage supper of the Lamb (Doctrine and Covenants 27:5–7).
That the story of Noah repeats, with some variation, the themes of the Creation, the Garden of Eden, and the Fall of Adam and Eve has long been recognized by Bible scholars. However, what deserves greater appreciation is the nature and depth of the relationship between these accounts and the rituals and layout of temples not only in Israel but also throughout the ancient Near East.
8:1; 5:23. “four hundred and thirty years.” Genesis 5:23 says that Enoch lived for “three hundred sixty and five years.” The difference can be accounted for by adding the age of sixty-five years referenced in Moses 6:25—when Methuselah was born and Enoch received his prophetic call (6:26)—to the three hundred sixty-five years representing the length of Enoch’s ministry during the “days of Zion” (7:69).
8:2. “for he truly covenanted with Enoch.” God’s covenant with Enoch that Noah would be his descendant is not mentioned in the Bible, nor is it mentioned in the book of Moses except in this verse. However, the book of Moses does inform us that Enoch knew Noah would be saved from the Flood (7:42–43) and that the Lord “covenanted with Enoch, and sware unto him with an oath” that “the earth might never more be covered by the floods” (7:50–51). Enoch was told that the Son of Man would come again “in the days of wickedness and vengeance” and that He would “call upon the children of Noah” (7:51, 60).
8:3. “he took glory unto himself.” Although it is tempting to conclude that Methuselah “was not taken” (8:2) with the city of Enoch because of his vaunting self-glorification (8:3), the only reason given explicitly for his continued presence on earth is “that the covenants of the Lord might be fulfilled . . . that Noah should be of the fruit of [Enoch’s] loins” (8:2). Methuselah, the son of Enoch, will become the grandfather of Noah.
8:4. “a great famine in the land.” Mosiah 1:17 explains that one purpose of famine and other afflictions is to “stir [the people] up in remembrance of their duty.” Prophets have sometimes been commanded to use their sealing power to smite the earth with famine or dearth of rain (see Helaman 10:6, for example).
8:7; 5:27. “nine hundred and sixty-nine years.” Methuselah, the oldest living human on record in the Bible, died the same year as the Flood. Adding Methuselah’s age when Lamech was born (187) to Lamech’s age when Noah was born (182) and Noah’s age when the Flood began (600), we arrive at the 969 years.
8:8; 5:28. “And Lamech lived one hundred and eighty-two years, and begat a son.” This statement signals the formal beginning of the Flood story.
8:9; 5:29. “Noah.” Noah’s name is almost certainly related to a Hebrew root meaning “to rest.” Previously, Noah’s name had been revealed to Enoch (Moses 7:42–43). Consistent with the book of Moses report, Enoch reveals the name of Noah to Lamech in 1 Enoch 106:18.
8:9; 5:29. “shall comfort us concerning the work and toil of our hands, because of the ground which the Lord hath cursed.” Regarding the cursing of the ground, see Moses 4:23. Of course, Lamech did not know that the most significant relief from work and toil eventually would come not from Noah’s labors on the land but rather from the personal part Noah would play in God’s provisionally lifting the curse. “Noah is saved in order to worship, to offer the sacrifice . . . that is a ‘rest/comforting’ (hannichoach), that turns cursing into a blessing (Genesis 8:21). Noah’s priestly mediation is the means by which relief from the toil of the cursed ground became a reality: ‘For God as well as for humanity, Noah is consolation for the fall of Adam.’”
Although the meaning of Noah’s name (“rest”) seems clear as it stands, Lamech’s explanation for it in Genesis 5:29 (“comfort” or “relief”) is problematic. In other words, the derivation of his name from the Hebrew leads us to expect the verse to read either “he called his name Noah, saying: This son shall give us rest . . .” or “he called his name Nahman, saying: This son shall comfort us.” However, “the use of the imprecise word play . . . is well within the bounds of biblical naming conventions.”
8:10; 5:30. “five hundred and ninety-five years.” From Genesis 7:6, we can infer that Lamech died five years before the Flood.
8:12; 6:10. “And Noah . . . begat Japheth; . . . Shem . . . and . . . Ham.” Though it is not specifically said that Ham had the same mother as Shem and Japheth, other references to Noah’s wife imply that the three sons shared a mother. That said, their birth order is in question. Genesis 6:10 reads, “Shem, Ham, and Japheth.” In the original Joseph Smith Translation manuscripts, OT1 and OT2, the sense of this verse was left unchanged, remaining consistent with the KJV’s statement that Shem was the oldest son. However, sometime afterward, the OT2 wording was crossed out and a revision was pinned to the manuscript. This revision unambiguously describes Japheth as the oldest son and corresponds to the current version of Moses 8:12. It is not known whether Joseph Smith authorized this change. Inexplicably, “Japheth the elder” in Genesis 10:22 was changed in the Joseph Smith Translation to read, “Shem . . . which was the elder.” Some Jewish sources specifically name Japheth as the oldest son. Japheth is listed first in the table of the nations in Genesis 10:2–5, though there is some ambiguity in the Hebrew. However, Shem is listed first in Genesis 5:32; 6:10; 7:13; 9:18; 10:1, 1 Chronicles 1:4, and Moses 8:27—a difference that may reflect his importance to the Israelites as their ancestor.
8:13. “the sons of God.” In this context, the term “sons of God” refers to individuals such as the sons of Noah who have received the fullness of the priesthood and have had their calling and election made sure, as defined in Doctrine and Covenants 76:56–60.  Unlike other priesthood ordinations performed by men, the ordinance that conveys this power is administered by God Himself: “And [the high priesthood after the order of the covenant which God made with Enoch] was delivered unto men by the calling of his [God’s] own voice” (Joseph Smith Translation, Genesis 14:29).
8:14. “these men.” This refers to the sons of Noah mentioned in verse 13.
8:14; 6:2. “the sons of men saw that those daughters were fair.” Genesis 6:2 reads, “The sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair,” a phrase that has been the source of unending controversy among scholars. However, contradicting ancient Jewish traditions that depict the unrighteous husbands of Genesis 6:2 as fallen angels, the book of Moses portrays these husbands as mere mortals, unrighteous men who married daughters of the covenant—that is, descendants of Seth and Noah.
Like the book of Moses, Islamic and Christian traditions typically reject the idea that the “sons of God” in Genesis 6:2 are fallen angels. However, in a further wrinkle, whether due to other authentic traditions or merely additional confusion, these traditions record that some of the “sons of God” (that is, covenant descendants of Seth and Noah) also entered into mismatched marriages. So, if these traditions are to be believed, we have two forms of mismatched marriages: (1) some unrighteous “sons of men” who married daughters of the covenant, as depicted in the book of Moses, and (2) some unrighteous “sons of God” who married women from outside the covenant, as described in Islamic and Christian traditions.
For example, Ephrem the Syrian interpreted Genesis 6:2 to mean that “those who lived on higher ground, who were called ‘the children of God,’ left their own region and came down to take wives from the daughters of Cain down below.” An Islamic source, in agreement with the book of Moses, likewise asserted, “But one errs and misunderstands [if] he says that ‘angels’ descended to ‘mortal women.’ Instead, it is the sons of Seth who descend from the holy mountain to the daughters of Cain the accursed. For it was on account of their saintliness [chastity?] and dwelling place upon the holy mountain that the sons of Seth were called banu ‘elohim; that is, ‘sons of God.’”
Further adding to the general disorder and confusion, note that the “sons of men” who married Noah’s granddaughters falsely proclaimed themselves as “sons of God” in mocking response to Noah’s preaching (see the commentary for Moses 8:21).
8:14. “the sons of men.” In other words, men who stood outside the oath and covenant of the priesthood.
8:14. “those daughters.” This refers to the daughters of the “sons of God” (that is, granddaughters of Noah), mortal women married to unrighteous “sons of men.” Hugh Nibley explained that the “daughters who had been initiated into a spiritual order, departed from it and broke their vows, mingling with those who observed only a carnal law.”
8:14; 6:2. “fair.” This is translated from Hebrew tobhoth, which literally means “good.” It is often used in similar contexts to mean specifically “good in appearance, beautiful,” as in Exodus 2:2.
8:14; 6:2. “took them wives.” The Hebrew expression is the normal one for legal marriage. Correcting mistaken ideas about the meaning of the phrase, Umberto Cassuto explained, “The passage contains not a single word . . . alluding to rape or adultery or to any act against the Lord’s will.”
8:14; 6:2. “even as they chose.” The corresponding phrase in Genesis 6:2 is “of all which they chose.” Perhaps the clearest translation is “just as their fancy chose.” Although these few words may seem innocuous to modern readers, they would have been evidence to ancient Israelites that the sons of men were deliberately subverting the established marriage selection process.
According to Claus Westermann, choosing a spouse is portrayed here as a process of eyeing the “many beauties who take [one’s] fancy” rather than the “discovery of a counterpart, which leads to living as one in marriage.” Leon R. Kass observed, “It would be characteristic of heroes (like Cain’s Lamech) to find and seize the beautiful daughters, almost as trophies.” God’s law is valued less than the appeal of the senses.
8:15. “The daughters of thy sons have sold themselves.” A similar phrase appears in 2 Kings 17:17, where the Israelites are accused of having “sold themselves to do evil in the sight of the Lord.” The Hebrew term wayyitmakkeru is used here in the sense of selling oneself into slavery.
8:15. “they will not hearken to my voice.” The refusal of these mismatched couples to hearken to God’s voice was the catalyst for Noah’s ministry (see Moses 8:19).
8:17; 6:3. “My Spirit shall not always strive with man, for he shall know that all flesh shall die; yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.” Genesis 6:3 reads a little differently—“for that he also is flesh” instead of “for he shall know that all flesh shall die.” A clearer translation might be, “My breath shall not abide in man forever, since he too is flesh; let the days allowed him be one hundred and twenty years.” From this perspective, the breath or spirit referred to is best explained as the “breath of life” (Moses 3:7), the presence or absence of which determines life or death.
Whereas some scholars prefer to see the one hundred twenty years as “a reference to the interval of time remaining before the Flood,” the book of Moses, consistent with the view of other scholars, seems to describe instead a limitation on the length of human life spans in succeeding generations. Genesis scholar Leon Kass commented, “Perhaps a shorter life span could limit the damage any beastly man might cause. . . . Perhaps if men learned from observing the deaths of others that they too had limited time, they would use it better.”
8:17. “My Spirit shall not always strive with man.” This phrase is often misunderstood to mean that God’s patience in working with sinners will eventually come to an end and that when this point has been reached, God will withdraw the influence of His Spirit. However, any truth to this idea has nothing to do with the meaning of this phrase in the present verse. The word “spirit” as used here should not be capitalized since it refers to the animating spirit of each individual that gives life to the body, not to the Holy Spirit. Thus, the following paraphrase seems to better convey the meaning: “My spirit [that is, the breath of life] shall not abide in mortals forever.” In modern scripture, similar phrases do seem to refer to the Holy Spirit.
8:18; 6:4. “giants.” Compare Moses 7:15; 8:26. The term “giants” corresponds to the Hebrew term nephilim. The account of Josephus in Antiquities 1:3:1 confirms the report of the book of Moses that the giants sought to take away Noah’s life: “For the tradition is that these men did what resembled the acts of those whom the Grecians call giants. But Noah was very uneasy at what they did; and being displeased at their conduct, persuaded them to change their dispositions and their acts for the better: but seeing they did not yield to him, but were slaves to their wicked pleasures, he was afraid they would kill him, together with his wife and children.”
8:19. “the Lord ordained Noah after his own order.” In other words, the Lord ordained Noah to “the Holy Priesthood, after the Order of the Son of God.”
8:19. “Gospel.” This same gospel, including its ordinances, was received and preached by Adam. Alma 13:6 confirms that it is the duty of the higher priesthood “to teach [God’s] commandments unto the children of men, that they also might enter into his rest.” Joseph Smith said, “[T]he Gospel has always been the same; the ordinances to fulfill its requirements, the same, and the officers to officiate, the same; therefore, as Noah was ‘a preacher of righteousness’ he must have been baptized and ordained to the priesthood by the laying on of hands, etc.”
8:20. “Noah called upon the children of men that they should repent.” Calling people to repentance was required by ancient biblical law “in order to establish intentionality and the degree of criminal responsibility. Their refusal to heed the call defines the degree of the criminal responsibility of the antediluvian sinners, and, consequently, the justice of their punishment.”
8:21. “we are the sons of God; have we not taken unto ourselves the daughters of men?” In sarcastically designating their wives “daughters of men,” these puffed-up sons of men are deliberately deprecating the former status of these women as “daughters of thy sons” (verse 15)—meaning daughters of the sons of Noah, who were in reality sons of God (see verse 13). In brief, the light-minded jesting of these men turns the real situation upside down. They, the sons of men, make themselves out to be the sons of God while dishonoring their wives—the daughters of the sons of God—by characterizing them as the daughters of men.
8:21. “eating and drinking, and marrying and giving in marriage.” This phrase “conveys a sense of both normalcy and prosperity”—both conditions of the mindset of the worldly in the time of Noah and in the last days (Matthew 24:37–39). Frederick Dale Bruner perceptively observed, “One of the most surprising facts in Jesus’ end-time teaching now is that the last times will be normal. According to this passage, there will be parties, gourmet meals, courtships, and weddings right into the cataclysmic coming of the Son of Man. . . . That is instructive. The Great Tribulation occurs while superficially all seems well. To the unobservant, it’s party time.”
8:21. “our wives bear unto us children.” Having been told that all mankind would be destroyed if they did not repent, these “sons of men” who styled themselves “sons of God” are said in rabbinic sources to have defiantly replied, “If this is the case, we will stop human reproduction and multiplying, and thus put an end to the lineage of the sons of men ourselves.”
8:21; 6:4. “mighty men, which are like unto men of old, men of great renown.” Parallel phrases in Genesis 6:4 read more literally in Hebrew: “the gibborim that are of old, the men of the name (ha-shem).” Perhaps the mention of the “mighty men . . . of old” refers to the gibborim of Enoch’s day. It also anticipates the person of Nimrod and the group who will build the Tower of Babel in Genesis 11.
8:22; 6:5. “God saw that the wickedness of men had become great in the earth.” The construction of this phrase is a deliberate parallel with Moses 8:14 and Genesis 6:2. Whereas “the sons of men saw that those daughters were fair” (Moses 8:14) and acted according to their corrupted judgment, “God saw that the wickedness of men had become great in the earth” and determined to “destroy man” (8:22, 26). Umberto Cassuto summarized the unhappy situation: “God blessed mankind that they should be fertile and fill [that is, replenish] the earth [Genesis 1:28; Moses 2:28], and He implemented His promise: men began to multiply on the face of the [earth] [Genesis 6:1; Moses 8:14]. Man, however, was an ingrate: he, too, increased [that is, had become great], but it was [wickedness] that he increased [Genesis 6:5; Moses 8:22]; truly, he filled the earth, but he did so with violence [Genesis 6:11, 13; Moses 8:28, 30].”
8:22; 6:5. “every man was lifted up in the imagination of the thoughts of his heart, being only evil continually.” Genesis 6:5 reads, “Every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.” Nahum M. Sarna gave this more plainly and literally as, “Every product of the thoughts of his heart was nothing but evil all the time,” because “in biblical psychology, mental phenomena fall within the sphere of the heart, which is the organ of thought, understanding, and volition, not of feeling.”
8:23. “Noah continued his preaching.” Noah’s persistence in calling his generation to repentance is highlighted by the repetition of the description of his preaching in Moses 8:16, 20, and 23. The threefold reiteration of his preaching is matched by the people’s threefold refusal to hearken (see verses 20, 21, 24). Only after we are told for the third time that the people “hearkened not” to Noah does God announce His judgment (in verse 26).
8:24. “be baptized.” Compare 6:52–53, 65–66; 7:11.
8:24. “receive the Holy Ghost, that ye may have all things made manifest.” It is through the Holy Ghost that we “may know the truth of all things” (Moroni 10:5). More specifically, however, through additional ordinances associated with the “power and authority of the higher, or Melchizedek Priesthood,” individuals may “have the privilege of receiving the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, to have the heavens opened unto them, to commune with the general assembly and church of the Firstborn, and to enjoy the communion and presence of God the Father, and Jesus the mediator of the new covenant” (Doctrine and Covenants 107:18–19).
8:25; 6:6. “it repented Noah.” Genesis reads, “It repented the Lord.” Robert J. Matthews explained:
Many passages in the King James version state that the Lord, in Old Testament times, “repented” of some deed, or some action that He had thought to do. It should be noted that in some of these instances the meaning does not imply that the Lord repented of a moral evil, but only that He was sorrowful over some consequence. In fact, the meaning of the Hebrew word nicham, which is often translated “to repent” in the King James Version, is “to sigh,” and by extension “to be sorry, moved to pity or compassion,” and also “to rue, suffer, grieve, or repent.” However, since the English word “repent” is connected in modern usage to wrongdoing, it is probably best that some other word be used in describing the doings of the God of Israel.
Joseph Smith made changes consistent with this idea throughout his translation of the Bible.
8:25; 6:6. “it grieved him at the heart.” According to Gordon J. Wenham, the three Hebrew roots respectively corresponding to Noah’s repentance or regret, the creation of humankind, and Noah’s grief (naham, asa, asabh) repeat in the same order Lamech used them in his optimistic naming speech for Noah (“comfort,” “work,” and “toil”; see Genesis 5:29; Moses 8:9). Noah’s bitter reality clashes with Lamech’s hoped-for comfort point-by-point. Wenham commented that the Hebrew root at the core of the phrase, “grieved,” “is used to express the most intense form of human emotion, a mixture of rage and bitter anguish.”
8:26; 6:7. “man and beast, and the creeping things, and the fowls of the air.” Sea creatures are not mentioned because they continued to live during the Flood.
8:27; 6:9. “just man.” The Hebrew term tsaddik, translated as “just man” and used here for the first time in the Bible, “implies one who is adjudged to be ‘in the right,’ which is its meaning in such texts as Exodus 23:7; Deuteronomy 25:1; and Proverbs 17:15. Accordingly, the term tsaddik describes one whose conduct is found to be beyond reproach by the divine Judge.” Leon Kass noted that the description of Noah’s virtues put us on notice “that it is these qualities, not heroic manliness (prized everywhere else), that are divinely favored.” For almost six hundred years, Noah had remained just in the midst of a corrupt world.
8:27; 6:9. “perfect.” The Hebrew term tamim, translated as “perfect” and also used here in Genesis for the first time in the Bible, “is mostly found in ritual contexts” and “describes a sacrificial animal that is without blemish, as in Exodus 12:5 and Leviticus 1:3, 10. Only such an animal is acceptable to God, says Leviticus 22:17–25. As applied to human beings, tamim acquired a moral dimension connoting ‘unblemished’ by moral fault—hence a person of unimpeachable integrity. Such an individual enjoys God’s fellowship, according to Psalms 15 and 101:6.”
8:27; 6:9. “he walked with God.” Noah’s high standing in the eyes of God can be compared to that of Enoch, who was the only other human in a mortal state said in scripture to have “walked with God.” Some scholars take this to mean that these two patriarchs attained the promise of eternal life while still in mortality. Moses 6:68 and 7:1 affirm that Adam and “many” others in the early patriarchal lines also received this blessing.
Enoch and Noah, whose names are mentioned together three times in the story of the Flood (Moses 8:2, 19; Joseph Smith Translation, Genesis 9:21–24), are the only two included in the genealogical list of the patriarchs whose deaths are not mentioned. John Sailhamer observed that both “found life amid the curse of death,” both were rescued from death by the hand of God, and each in his turn was a rescuer to others.
8:28; 6:11. “corrupt.” “The key Hebrew stem sh-h-t occurs seven times in the [Noah] narrative.” “In order to grasp the full significance of the verb sahath here, we must bear in mind the words of Jeremiah 18:3–4 concerning the potter: ‘So I went down to the potter’s house, and there he was working at his wheel. And the vessel he was making of clay was spoiled.’ The material did not receive the form that the potter wished to give it; it assumed another shape and the vessel was spoiled in his hand. Then the potter changed the material back into a shapeless mass, and made of it another vessel in accordance with his desire.”
8:28; 6:11. “violence.” The Hebrew term hamas corresponds to synonyms such as “‘falsehood,’ ‘deceit,’ or ‘bloodshed.’ It means, in general, the flagrant subversion of the ordered processes of law.” This description starkly contrasts the just conduct of Noah (see Moses 7:27; Genesis 6:9). Leon Kass described the deplorable state of Noah’s world, which is (according to the Gospels—Matthew 24:37) the same state we are in today:
Self-conscious men . . . betake themselves to war and to beautiful (but not good) women, seeking recognition for their superhuman prowess. Whether from rage over mortality, from jealousy and resentment, or from a desire to gain favor from beautiful women, or to avenge the stealing of their wives and daughters, proud men are moved to the love of glory, won in bloody battle with one another. The world erupts into violence, the war of each against all. What ensues is what [English philosopher Thomas] Hobbes would later call ‘the state of nature,’ that is, the state characterized by absence of clear juridical power and authority, in which the life of man is nasty, brutish, and—through violence—short. Bloody destruction covers the earth.
8:30; 6:13. “God said unto Noah.” In Mesopotamian accounts of the Flood, the supreme god consults only with his divine assembly about the Flood, and the hero learns about the impending destruction only when one of the lesser gods covertly conveys the secret to him. Here, however, the most high God decides to make Noah aware of His intentions and speaks directly to him. Because the order to board the ark seems to have occurred forty days after the New Year, it is reasonable to suppose that this first communication occurred on the first day of the New Year.
8:30; 6:13. “destroy all flesh from off the earth.” The Hebrew verb for “destroy” (mashitam) is “identical with the one used three times above in the sense of ‘corrupt’ and so inscribes a pattern of measure for measure.” What humankind has ruined, God will obliterate. Mashitam is sometimes translated “wipe out” or “blot out” because, according to Gordon J. Wenham, “it is used of erasing names from records (e.g., Exodus 17:14; 32-32-33) and wiping plates (2 Kings 21:13). Since water was sometimes used for achieving this result (Numbers 5:23), the very word chosen perhaps hints at how the complete annihilation of [humankind] will be secured.”
6:14. “Make thee an ark.” It is significant that apart from the tabernacle of Moses (Exodus 25:8–40) and the temple of Solomon (1 Chronicles 28:11–12, 19), Noah’s ark is the only man-made structure mentioned in the Bible directly designed by God. The Prophet Joseph Smith said, “The construction of the first vessel was given to Noah, by revelation. The design of the Ark was given by God, a ‘pattern’ of ‘heavenly things’ (Hebrews 8:5).” Thus, it should not be surprising to learn that Noah’s ark “was designed as a temple.” Indeed, each of the three decks of Noah’s ark was exactly “the same height as the Tabernacle and three times the area of the Tabernacle court.” Additionally, the Hebrew word mikseh was used both for the animal skin covering of the ark and for that of the tabernacle.
Strengthening the association between the ark and the tabernacle is the fact that the Hebrew term for Noah’s ark, tevah, later became the standard word for the ark of the covenant in Mishnaic Hebrew. In addition, the Septuagint used the same Greek term, kibotos, for both Noah’s ark and the ark of the covenant. The ratio of the width to the height of both these arks is 3:5 (see Genesis 6:15 and Exodus 25:10). John Tvedtnes understood tevah as a borrowing from an Egyptian term that can mean “shrine.” Such a shrine “would have functioned similarly to the Ark of the Covenant in corresponding Jerusalem temple rites that celebrated the ‘conquering power over the primeval waters.’”
The biblical account makes it clear that the ark “was not shaped like a ship and it had no oars.” Marking the similarities between the shape of the ark of the covenant and the chest-like form of Noah’s ark, Claus Westermann described Noah’s ark as “a huge, rectangular box, with a roof.”
6:14. “ark.” The Hebrew word used in Genesis for “ark” (tevah) appears only one other place in the Bible: in the story of the infant Moses, whose deliverance from death was also made possible by a watercraft (see Exodus 2:3, 5). “In both cases there is to be saved from drowning one who is worthy of salvation and is destined to bring deliverance to others.”
6:14. “gopher wood.” The meaning of the term “gopher wood”—unique in the Bible to Genesis 6:14—is uncertain. Most modern scholars think it referred to a resinous timber, and some take it to mean “cypress.” Because it is resistant to rot, cypress was the main wood used in ancient times for ships and coffins. Cypress is known for its fragrance and longevity—qualities that have linked it with the Garden of Eden in ancient literature.
Additionally, it cannot be ruled out that the author of Genesis was consciously playing with rhyme by using gopher and kopher (“pitch”) in the same verse. As Elizabeth Harper noted, to ancient readers the word kopher may have evoked “the rich cultic overtones of kaphar ‘ransom’ with its half-shekel temple atonement price (Exodus 30:11–13), kapporeth ‘mercy seat’ over the Ark of the Covenant (Exodus 25:17–22), and the verb kipper ‘to atone’ associated with so many priestly rituals (Exodus 29–30; Leviticus and Numbers passim).”
6:14. “rooms shalt thou make in the ark.” In light of parallels in Mesopotamian accounts of the great flood, a growing consensus of scholars has concluded that the Hebrew word for “rooms,” qinnim (= literally “nests”), should be read as qanim (= “reeds”). So it seems a better translation would be: “Thou shalt make the ark with reeds.” By a translation that recognizes reeds, not rooms, as the second element of the ark’s building materials, a puzzling inconsistency with the Mesopotamian accounts of the ark’s construction (in which reeds are always mentioned) can be resolved. At the same time, that translation further connects the ark with the ancient Near East temples that were made with reeds. Hugh Nibley discussed biblical parallels to reed watercraft described in Mesopotamian Flood stories and in the Jaredite account.
6:15. “three hundred cubits.” “Although a length of 300 cubits is no small measurement, yet it is not so very big when compared to the extravagant measurements of the ship given in the Babylonian tradition of the Flood. According to Berossus the length of the boat was five stadia, that is, almost a kilometer.”
6:16. “A window.” Although it is translated here as “window,” some scholars translate the obscure Hebrew term tsohar as “roof.” Consistent with ancient sources, however, Hugh Nibley proposed another attractive alternative: a reference to “shining stones.” Such stones, referenced in the Book of Mormon descriptions of the Jaredite boats, appear in Jewish traditions about Noah’s ark. Similarly, the Vara of the Avestan Flood hero Yima contained “a variety of sources of artificial light which make a year seem like a day.” Attempting to provide a scientific basis for the divine miracle of the shining stones, some Latter-day Saint scholars see research in radioluminescence as providing insights into some of the possibilities by which light could be generated over long periods without an external power source..
6:16. “in a cubit shalt thou finish it above.” Umberto Cassuto interpreted the phrase as follows: “Finish the construction of the Ark on top in such a way that there should remain a cubit’s breadth only, that is . . . that the roof should slope down on both sides along the length of the ark, leaving above, between the two sloping sides, a horizontal area one cubit wide, likewise along the whole length of the Ark.”
6:16. “the door of the ark.” Bible scholar Michael Morales argued that the centrality of the theme of entering and leaving the ark is reason “to suspect an entrance liturgy ideal at work,” with Noah, the righteous and unblemished priestly prototype, as the metaphorical door. When at last “the Lord shut [Noah] in”(Genesis 7:16), both the day “of salvation of the righteous (by entrance [to the ark])” and “the judgment of the wicked (by barred entrance)” had come.
6:16. “lower, second, and third stories.” The ark’s three decks recall both the three divisions of the tabernacle and the threefold layout of the Garden of Eden.
6:17. “flood of waters.” The Hebrew word mabbul, translated here as “flood of waters,” is used only in the Flood narrative and in Psalm 29:10, which refers to the same event. According to Jewish commentators Ibn Ezra and Radak, a “flood of waters” is specifically mentioned because mabbul is related to roots that mean “falling” and “intermingling.” Thus, it can apply to anything that falls from heaven, such as snow, fire, or hail. Could this wording deliberately echo, in measure-for-measure punishment, the intermingling of the covenant and noncovenant people that occurred because of the mismatched marriages described earlier in the same chapter?
6:18. “with thee I will establish my covenant.” The covenant mentioned here will be established in Genesis 9:1–17.
6:19. “two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark.” John Sailhamer observed that the account of the animals entering the ark seems to have been shaped to highlight the ark’s parallels with the tabernacle:
Both narratives . . . emphasize that entry into the Ark/Tabernacle is to be accompanied by an animal offering. At the close of the description of the building of the Tabernacle (Exodus 35–39), when the completion of the Tabernacle has been recorded (Exodus 39:43), the command is given for it to be set up and readied for use (Exodus 40:1–33). When it is readied and the glory of the Lord has filled the Tabernacle (Exodus 40:34–48), provisions are made for ‘drawing near’ to the Tabernacle (e.g., Leviticus 9:5). One may ‘draw near’ only by bringing an animal offering that is ‘unblemished’ (tamim) (Leviticus 1:3). Thus just as the completed Tabernacle can be entered only with the ‘unblemished animals’ as an offering, so Noah’s entry into the Ark is tied to his taking with him ‘seven pairs’ of every clean animal (Genesis 7:2).
6:20. “shall come unto thee.” Some readers mistakenly infer “that the animals would arrive spontaneously.” However, OT1 and OT2 read, “Shalt thou take into the ark,” consistent with the verb “bring” in Genesis 6:19.
6:22. “so did he.” “Noah asks no questions and raises no objections. Speechlessly, he obeys. . . . Noah takes instruction in the service of preserving not only his own life but also the life of the whole world. Though he will not be its helmsman—the Ark, being but a box, will merely float upon the waters, unguided by human art—Noah willingly accepts responsibility to manage affairs aboard the Ark, exercising dominion over the animals for their own good (2:28). In complying with God’s command, Noah vindicates his election and raises hope for the future.” OT1 appends, “Even so, Amen.”
 Joseph Smith Jr., before August 8, 1839, in Joseph Fielding Smith, comp., Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 1969), 157.
 See Daniel 10:13, 21; 12:1; Jude 1:9; Revelation 12:7.
 See Daniel 8:16; 9:21; Luke 1:19, 26.
 Though there is no evidence of Flood symbolism in the Israelite temple ritual, the Flood story lived on as part of the sacred rites of some cultures elsewhere in the world. See Jeffrey M. Bradshaw, In God’s Image and Likeness 1: Creation, Fall, and the Story of Adam and Eve, rev. ed., 2 vols. (Salt Lake City, UT: Eborn Books, 2014), 655–656; Claus Westermann, Genesis 1–11: A Continental Commentary, trans. John J. Scullion (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1994), 405.
 For the references of these ages, see Moses 8:5, 8; Genesis 7:6.
 George W. E. Nickelsburg and James C. VanderKam, 1 Enoch 1: A Commentary on the Book of 1 Enoch, Chapters 1–36; 81–108, ed. Klaus Baltzer (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2001), 536, 1 Enoch 106:18.
 David Damrosch, cited in L. Michael Morales, The Tabernacle Pre-Figured: Cosmic Mountain Ideology in Genesis and Exodus (Leuven, Belgium: Peeters, 2012), 186.
 See Elizabeth A. Harper, “Glad Tidings of Comfort and Rest—Part 1: An Exegetical Study of Genesis 5:29,” Academia.edu, 11–46, https://academia.edu/61068836/Gen_5_v_29_Give_Us_Rest, for an extended discussion on problems of interpretation in Genesis 5:29.
 Richard D. Draper, S. Kent Brown, and Michael D. Rhodes, The Pearl of Great Price: A Verse-by-Verse Commentary (Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 2005), 159.
 See Jeffrey M. Bradshaw and David J. Larsen, In God’s Image and Likeness 2: Enoch, Noah, and the Tower of Babel, 2 vols. (Orem, UT: Interpreter Foundation; Salt Lake City, UT: Eborn Books, 2014), 84; Jeffrey M. Bradshaw, Temple Themes in the Oath and Covenant of the Priesthood, rev. ed. (Salt Lake City, UT: Eborn Books, 2014), 53–65.
 For a summary of this controversy, see, for example, A. T. Wright, The Origin of Evil Spirits (Tübingen, Germany: Mohr Siebeck, 2005), 61–75; John J. Collins, “The Sons of God and the Daughters of Men,” in Sacred Marriages, ed. Martti Nissinen and Risto Uro (Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2008), 261–263.
 St. Ephrem the Syrian, Hymns on Paradise, trans. Sebastian Brock (Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1990), 81–82.
 John C. Reeves, “Eutychii Patriarchae Alexandrini Annales,” Religious Studies, The University of North Carolina at Charlotte, accessed November 21, 2021, https://pages.charlotte.edu/john-reeves/course-materials/rels-2104-hebrew-scripturesold-testament/eutychius-sad-ibn-al-bitrq-on-genesis-61-4/.
 Hugh W. Nibley, Enoch the Prophet, ed. Stephen D. Ricks, The Collected Works of Hugh Nibley 2 (Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 1986), 180.
 Umberto Cassuto, A Commentary on the Book of Genesis, vol. 1, From Adam to Noah, trans. Israel Abrahams (Jerusalem, Israel: Magnes Press, 1998), 294.
 Claus Westermann, Genesis 1–11: A Continental Commentary, trans. John J. Scullion (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1994), 364.
 Meir Zlotowitz, Bereishis/Genesis: A New Translation with a Commentary Anthologized from Talmudic, Midrashic, and Rabbinic Sources, 2nd ed. 2 vols. (New York, NY: Mesorah Publications, 1986), 1:182n2.
 Westermann, Genesis 1–11, 371. Compare Moses 3:22–24.
 Leon R. Kass, The Beginning of Wisdom: Reading Genesis (New York, NY: Free Press, 2003), 157.
 Nahum M. Sarna, Genesis: The Traditional Hebrew Text with the New JPS Translation Commentary, The JPS Torah Commentary, ed. Nahum M. Sarna and Chaim Potok (Philadelphia, PA: Jewish Publication Society, 1989), 25.
 Nahum M. Sarna, Genesis: The Traditional Hebrew Text with the New JPS Translation Commentary, The JPS Torah Commentary, ed. Nahum M. Sarna and Chaim Potok (Philadelphia, PA: Jewish Publication Society, 1989), 45–46.
 Sarna, Genesis, 46.
 Leon R. Kass, The Beginning of Wisdom: Reading Genesis (New York, NY: Free Press, 2003), 160–161.
 Ronald S. Hendel, in Adele Berlin and Marc Zvi Brettler, eds., The Jewish Study Bible, Featuring the Jewish Publication Society TANAKH Translation (Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 2004), 13, Genesis 5:3.
 See 2 Nephi 26:11; Mormon 5:16; Ether 2:15.
 Flavius Josephus, “The Antiquities of the Jews,” in The Genuine Works of Flavius Josephus, the Jewish Historian. Translated from the Original Greek, according to Havercamp’s Accurate Edition, trans. William Whiston, rev. ed. (1737; repr., Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1980), 27–28.
 Doctrine and Covenants 107:3. See Alma 13:1–2, 9; Joseph Smith Translation, Genesis 14:2.
 Richard D. Draper, S. Kent Brown, and Michael D. Rhodes, The Pearl of Great Price: A Verse-by-Verse Commentary (Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 2005), 167.
 Joseph Smith Jr., September 1, 1842, in Joseph Fielding Smith, comp., Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 1969), 264.
 Devorah Dimant, “Noah in Early Jewish Literature,” in Biblical Figures Outside the Bible, ed. Michael E. Stone and Theodore A. Bergren (Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 1998), 132.
 Richard D. Draper, S. Kent Brown, and Michael D. Rhodes, The Pearl of Great Price: A Verse-by-Verse Commentary (Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 2005), 168.
 Frederick Dale Bruner, Matthew: A Commentary, vol. 2 of 2, The Churchbook, Matthew 13–28, rev. ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2004), 524.
 Jeffrey M. Bradshaw and David J. Larsen, In God's Image and Likeness 2: Enoch, Noah, and the Tower of Babel, 2 vols. (Orem, UT: Interpreter Foundation; Salt Lake City, UT: Eborn Books, 2014), 230.
 Umberto Cassuto, A Commentary on the Book of Genesis, vol. 1, From Adam to Noah, trans. Israel Abrahams (Jerusalem, Israel: Magnes Press, 1998), 302.
 Nahum M. Sarna, Genesis: The Traditional Hebrew Text with the New JPS Translation Commentary, The JPS Torah Commentary, ed. Nahum M. Sarna and Chaim Potok (Philadelphia, PA: Jewish Publication Society, 1989), 46–47.
 See also Richard D. Draper, S. Kent Brown, and Michael D. Rhodes, The Pearl of Great Price: A Verse-by-Verse Commentary (Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 2005), 169–170.
 Robert J. Matthews, “A Plainer Translation”: Joseph Smith’s Translation of the Bible—A History and Commentary (Provo, UT: Brigham Young University Press, 1975), 311. For the Prophet’s comments on this correction, see Joseph Smith Jr., October 15, 1843, in Joseph Fielding Smith, comp., Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 1969), 327.
 For specific examples of these changes, see Moses 8:25, 26; Exodus 32:14; 1 Samuel 15:11; 2 Samuel 24:16; Psalms 135:14; Jeremiah 18:8, 10; 26:3, 13, 19; 42:10; Amos 7:3, 6; and Jonah 3:10.
 Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis 1–15, Word Biblical Commentary 1 (Waco, TX: Word Books, 1987), 144.
 Nahum M. Sarna, Genesis: The Traditional Hebrew Text with the New JPS Translation Commentary, The JPS Torah Commentary, ed. Nahum M. Sarna and Chaim Potok (Philadelphia, PA: Jewish Publication Society, 1989), 50.
 Leon R. Kass, The Beginning of Wisdom: Reading Genesis (New York, NY: Free Press, 2003), 163.
 Sarna, Genesis, 50.
 See Elizabeth A. Harper, “Glad Tidings of Comfort and Rest—Part 1: An Exegetical Study of Genesis 5:29,” Academia.edu, accessed November 21, 2021, 14n19, https://academia.edu/61068836/Gen_5_v_29_Give_Us_Rest.
 John H. Sailhamer, “Genesis,” in The Expositor's Bible Commentary, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1990), 74.
 Nahum M. Sarna, Genesis: The Traditional Hebrew Text with the New JPS Translation Commentary, The JPS Torah Commentary, ed. Nahum M. Sarna and Chaim Potok (Philadelphia, PA: Jewish Publication Society, 1989), 51.
 Umberto Cassuto, A Commentary on the Book of Genesis, vol. 2, From Noah to Abraham, trans. Israel Abrahams (Jerusalem, Israel: Magnes Press, 1997), 53.
 Sarna, Genesis, 51.
 Leon R. Kass, The Beginning of Wisdom: Reading Genesis (New York, NY: Free Press, 2003), 162.
 Cassuto, Commentary on the Book of Genesis, 2:71. Cassuto wrote: “Possibly the ancient poetic tradition related that the first Divine communication came to Noah on the first day of the first month, and that his work on the construction and equipment of the ark lasted forty days, corresponding to the periods mentioned later in our section ([Genesis] 7:4, 12, 17; 8:6). This would be in keeping with what becomes evident a little later, namely, that also according to the Bible the date of the second communication, which came to Noah at the end of his work, was the tenth day of the second month, that is, forty days after the commencement of the year.” This agrees with the conclusion of Sarna, Genesis, 51.
 Robert Alter, The Five Books of Moses: A Translation with Commentary (New York, NY: W. W. Norton, 2004), 41n13.
 Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis 1–15, Word Biblical Commentary 1 (Waco, TX: Word Books, 1987), 145.
 Joseph Smith Jr., July 15, 1842, in Joseph Fielding Smith, comp., Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 1969), 251.
 Crispin H. T. Fletcher-Louis, All the Glory of Adam: Liturgical Anthropology in the Dead Sea Scrolls (Leiden, Netherlands: Brill, 2002), 41.
 James D. G. Dunn, and John W. Rogerson, Eerdmans Commentary on the Bible (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2003), 44.
 See Exodus 26:14; 35:11; 36:19; 39:34; 40:19; Numbers 3:25; 4:8, 10, 11, 12, 25.
 See Victor P. Hamilton, The Book of Genesis: Chapters 1–17 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1990), 280.
 See Cécile Dogniez and Marguerite Harl, eds., Le Pentateuque d’Alexandrie: la bible des septante, texte grec et traduction (Paris, France: Cerf, 2001), 150, 314–315.
 John A. Tvedtness, letter to Douglas Clark on January 4, 1989, attached to message from John A. Tvedtnes to the author and the Temple Study Google group, August 2, 2012.
 Meir Zlotowitz, Bereishis/Genesis: A New Translation with a Commentary Anthologized from Talmudic, Midrashic and Rabbinic Sources, 2nd ed., 2 vols. (New York, NY: Mesorah Publications, 1986), 230.
 Claus Westermann, Genesis 1–11: A Continental Commentary, trans. John J. Scullion (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 1994), 418.
 Umberto Cassuto, A Commentary on the Book of Genesis, vol. 2, From Noah to Abraham, trans. Israel Abrahams (Jerusalem, Israel: Magnes Press, 1997), 59.
 Jehuda Feliks, “Cypress,” in Encyclopedia Judaica, ed. Fred Skolnik and Michael Berenbaum, 2nd ed., vol. 5 of 22 (New York, NY: Macmillan Reference, 2007), 346–347.
 Kyriakos Kyriakou, The Tree of the Year 2002: The Cypress (Cupressus Sempervirens) (Nicosia, Cyprus: Government Press and Information Office, 2001), 2, http://moa.gov.cy/moa/fd/fd.nsf/DE66D6BE413A3D6BC225812900295144/$file/Tree%20of%20the%20year%202002%20-%20Two%20fold%20flyer.pdf.
 Elizabeth A. Harper, “You Shall Make a Tēbāh,” Academia.edu, 57, https://www.academia.edu/61068844/You_Shall_Make.
 See, for example, Jason Michael McCann, “‘Woven-of-Reeds’: Genesis 6:14b as Evidence for the Preservation of the Reed-Hut Urheiligtum in the Biblical Flood Narrative,” in Opening Heaven’s Floodgates: The Genesis Flood Narrative, Its Context and Reception, ed. Jason M. Silverman (Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2013), 9–17.
 See Hugh W. Nibley, “The Babylonian Background,” in Lehi in the Desert, The World of the Jaredites, There Were Jaredites, ed. John W. Welch, Darrell L. Matthews, and Stephen R. Callister, The Collected Works of Hugh Nibley 5 (Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 1988), 359–364; Hugh W. Nibley, An Approach to the Book of Mormon, ed. John W. Welch, 3rd ed., The Collected Works of Hugh Nibley 6 (Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 1988), 336–337, 343–348; Hugh W. Nibley, Teachings of the Book of Mormon, 4 vols. (Provo, UT: Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies [FARMS], 2004), 4:285–288.
 Umberto Cassuto, A Commentary on the Book of Genesis, vol. 2, From Noah to Abraham, trans. Israel Abrahams (Jerusalem, Israel: Magnes Press, 1997), 62–63.
 See, for example, Victor P. Hamilton, The Book of Genesis: Chapters 1–17 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1990), 282–283; Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis 1–15, Word Biblical Commentary 1 (Waco, TX: Word Books, 1987), 173.
 This and other ancient traditions were taken up, though not always successfully, in Aronofsky’s popular film on the story of Noah. For a review that takes note of these traditions, see Jeffrey M. Bradshaw, “A Noah like No Other Before: A Look at the Latest Biblical Film from an LDS Perspective," Deseret News, April 3, 2014, https://deseret.com/2014/4/3/20538777/a-noah-like-no-other-before-a-look-at-the-latest-biblical-film-from-an-lds-perspective#the-ark-in-noah-from-paramount-pictures-and-regency-enterprises.
 See Hugh W. Nibley, “The Babylonian Background,” in Lehi in the Desert, The World of the Jaredites, There Were Jaredites, ed. John W. Welch, Darrell L. Matthews, and Stephen R. Callister, The Collected Works of Hugh Nibley 5 (Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 1988), 364–379; Hugh W. Nibley, An Approach to the Book of Mormon, ed. John W. Welch, 3rd ed., The Collected Works of Hugh Nibley 6 (Salt Lake City, UT: Deseret Book, 1988), 337–339, 348–358; Hugh W. Nibley, Teachings of the Book of Mormon, 4 vols. (Provo, UT: Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies [FARMS], 2004), 4:288–289.
 Jason M. Silverman, “It’s a Craft! It’s a Cavern! It’s a Castle! Yima’s Vara, Iranian Flood Myths, and Jewish Apocalyptic Traditions,” in Opening Heaven’s Floodgates: The Genesis Flood Narrative, Its Context and Reception, ed. Jason M. Silverman (Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2013), 195. See F. Max Müller, ed., The Zend Avesta Part I, trans. James Darmesteter. The Sacred Books of the East 4, ed. F. Max Müller (1880; repr., Whitefish, MT: Kessinger Publishing, 2004), 20.
 See Nicholas Read, Jae R. Balliff, John W. Welch, Bill Evenson, Kathleen Reynolds, and Matthew Roper, “New Light on the Shining Stones of the Jaredites,” Insights 12, no. 4 (1992): 2.
 Cassuto, Commentary on the Book of Genesis, 2:65.
 L. Michael Morales, The Tabernacle Pre-Figured: Cosmic Mountain Ideology in Genesis and Exodus (Leuven, Belgium: Peeters, 2012), 170, 174, 179–189.
 Morales, Tabernacle Pre-Figured, 178.
 See Jeffrey M. Bradshaw, “The Ark and the Tent: Temple Symbolism in the Story of Noah,” in Temple Insights: Proceedings of the Interpreter Matthew B. Brown Memorial Conference ‘The Temple on Mount Zion,’ 22 September 2012, ed. William J. Hamblin and David Rolph Seely (Salt Lake City, UT: Eborn Books; Orem, UT: Interpreter Foundation, 2014), 33–34.
 Umberto Cassuto, A Commentary on the Book of Genesis, vol. 2, From Noah to Abraham, trans. Israel Abrahams (Jerusalem, Israel: Magnes Press, 1997), 66–67.
 Meir Zlotowitz, Bereishis/Genesis: A New Translation with a Commentary Anthologized from Talmudic, Midrashic, and Rabbinic Sources, 2nd ed., 2 vols. (New York, NY: Mesorah Publications, 1986), 1:233–234n17.
 John H. Sailhamer, “Genesis,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1990), 85.
 Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis 1–15, Word Biblical Commentary 1 (Waco, TX: Word Books, 1987), 175nn19–20.
 Leon R. Kass, The Beginning of Wisdom: Reading Genesis (New York, NY: Free Press, 2003), 164.