Moses, in the last words of the seventh chapter, writes thus: “And the waters held the earth a hundred and fifty days.” It is uncertain whence this time of a hundred and fifty days ought to be counted and whence it takes its beginning: whether from the beginning of the flood — that is, from the seventeenth day of the second month, on which day the flood began to occur; or from the end of the forty-day rain, after, namely, the water had covered the earth so deeply that it surpassed even the highest mountains by fifteen cubits: so that the time during which the flood remained in that state, so deeply covering the whole earth, wa[s]…¹

…was a hundred and fifty days. St. Augustine touched on this question, but left its solution undecided, as if leaving it to the reader's judgment. For he says thus in the book of Questions on Genesis: “As to what is written, ‘The water was raised above the earth a hundred and fifty days,’ it is asked whether it grew up to this day, or whether for so many days it remained at the height to which it had grown: since other interpreters seem to say this more plainly, for Aquila said, ‘It held’; Symmachus, ‘the waters prevailed.’” So Augustine.²

The Scholastic History and Lyra count these hundred and fifty days from the beginning of the flood. And St. Ambrose seems to suggest the same, in the book On Noah and the Ark, chapter seventeen. And this is made credible by the fact that a little below Moses says that the waters of the flood, after a hundred and fifty days, began to diminish and decrease. And the time of the diminution of the waters seems [right] to be reckoned from that time at which the waters began to grow and inundate the earth, and not from that time at which the flood, its increase being now finished, remained in the same state. Of this opinion too was Hugh in the Annotations on Genesis.³

But on the contrary, many authors draw the beginning of these hundred and fifty days from the end of the forty-day rain, and think that by Moses is denoted all that time during which the flood remained at its greatest height over the lands, fifteen cubits higher than the loftiest mountains of the earth. And this opinion is that of Josephus in the first book of the Antiquities, and of Chrysostom, who, explaining these very words of Moses about the hundred and fifty days during which the flood lasted: “For so many days,” he says, “that lofty height of the waters remained.” Approvers and followers of the same opinion are Tostatus and Cajetan, and, among the Hebrews, Rabbi Solomon in this place. To which opinion that word strongly lends support: “The waters held [obtained] upon the earth”; or, as it is in Hebrew word for word, “They strengthened themselves upon the earth”; or, as the Greek translation has, “the water was raised up above the earth.” For it would not have been true to say, on the first or second day on which the flood began to occur, that the water then already held the earth, or was raised up above the earth.⁴

And so, according to this opinion, one must think that the increase of the flood was during the forty days in which the rain and the eruption of the fountains of the abyss lasted: which being finished, the flood was brought to its highest increase, so that it exceeded the highest mountains of the earth by fifteen cubits. And it remained at this great height a hundred and fifty days, which comprise the middle time between the end of the increase and the beginning of the decrease of the waters. I judge both opinions probable. But the decision of the proposed question consists chiefly, and depends most, on establishing what those words of Moses signify: “The waters held the earth.” For if that word “the earth” is understood universally — that is, both the plain and the mountainous — without doubt the second opinion will be the truer; and it will be necessary to distinguish these hundred and fifty days from those for[ty]…⁵

…from those forty days of rain, during which days the waters began gradually to grow, first inundating the plain land, then the mountainous. But if that phrase, “They held the earth,” is understood confusedly and indeterminately, of any land in any way inundated by the waters, the former opinion will be more probable: for from the time that it began to rain and the abyss to vomit forth its waters over the earth, it could truly be said that the water in some way held the earth. To me, indeed, that second opinion, because it is easier to understand and seems more congruent with the words of Moses, would also be more likely — were it not greatly hindered by this: that the months mentioned by Moses (partly in the seventh chapter, partly in the eighth) must, according to this opinion, be taken and computed variously and ambiguously — some from the beginning of the year, others from the beginning of the flood; whereas Moses, setting them down without any distinction, signified not obscurely that they all ought to be taken in the same way. But this matter will be disputed below, in book 13, the third Disputation.⁶

But, considering the long duration of that flood, great wonder comes upon one: why God willed the flood to remain unchangeably at so great a height over all the lands for a hundred and fifty days, when, for destroying the whole race of men and animals which God had decreed to destroy by the flood, a flood shorter by a single day could have been enough. But I believe indeed that it was so done, that both the monstrousness of the crimes of the human race, and the magnitude of the divine offense and anger and vengeance, might from this very thing become more manifest and illustrious; and also that God might the more test and prove the patience and constancy of Noah himself, and the virtue of his faith and trust, and commend it to all posterity.⁷