In September 2020 I listened online to Rev. Andrew Lanning’s evening sermon preached in Byron Center Protestant Reformed Church.¹ I became interested in listening to that sermon because Reverend Lanning’s sermon from the previous week on Matthew 10:20² had generated discussions among some young men in the Berean and Provident Protestant Reformed churches in the Philippines. Those men had argued against the theological position of Reverend Lanning that Noah did not build the ark, and they argued instead for the historical explanation of Noah’s building the ark.

Knowing the Protestant Reformed churches in the Philippines, I know that they have the officebearers’ support for their views. In those churches doctrinal discussions are quite lively. Men of Berean and Provident love to engage in theological discussions. I experienced being with them, and I enjoyed such activities. However, I admit that there was much more deafening noise than edification during those discussions.

I remember that Rev. Vernon Ibe invited the young men into his office to pique their interest in the Reformed faith. He welcomed theological discussions. The last topic I discussed with him was about the celebration of Christmas day with a worship service. That subject would inevitably create a chasm between Berean Protestant Reformed Church and the Protestant Reformed Church in Bulacan. Bulacan was known as a staunch critic of celebrating Christmas day with a worship service. She consistently had argued that worship services held on holidays are against the regulative principle of worship. Reverend Ibe was well aware of that, so he wanted the young men to engage in a heated discussion about Christmas day. That is why I can say that the officebearers were very much involved in discussing Reverend Lanning’s sermon about Noah’s building the ark.

Unfortunately, the young men in my church, the then Protestant Reformed Church in Bulacan, were not interested in theological discussions. We only enjoyed hearing Rev. John Flores’ jokes after the worship services. It was also customary for him to speak ill of the Protestant Reformed missionaries. Also, instead of delving into in-depth discussions of Reformed dogmas, we were busy working for him under some foreign crypto corporations, even on Sundays! Just imagine that. So rarely did I have a long discussion with Reverend Flores on Reformed distinctives. We were very carnal in that church, minding worldly cares while being unaware of the coming doctrinal unrest that began in our sister. While others in the denomination were beginning to have an interest, Bulacan was unaware. It makes sense that the Berean and Provident churches were the only places where people talked about Reverend Lanning’s sermon on Matthew 10:20, while the men in Bulacan expressed no interest.

I was still in the seminary when I learned about the sentiments of young men from the Berean and Provident churches. Just a week after the sermon about Noah was delivered, they began discussing, with preconceived accusations, that Reverend Lanning was in error. My closest friends in the denomination learned the views of those young men and relayed them to me. So I listened to the sermon; but instead of being angry with the Reverend, I was comforted that God is the sole savior of my soul. I agreed with the Reverend: Noah did not build the ark.

The Man Noah

Historically, Noah built the ark. All Reformed men can concur with this because it is a plain, biblical affirmation of redemptive history. Noah and his family worked to build the ark. We can visualize a sweating, historical Noah day in and day out, his hands calloused by hard, daily, manual work. Noah built the ark for some one hundred and twenty years. If you wanted to go down there, surely you could always come back with some evidence of a historical man with unbelievable endurance and ark-building skills. Go down there and try Noah with his fear of God, and you will see an obedient man, the last righteous man of his generation after Methuselah died. Aside from observing Noah’s ark-building, you could hear him preach. How lovely to see and hear the witness from the aged Noah’s building and preaching. I would have loved to pick up a mallet and join him in that tireless and seemingly unending labor.

After going over Noah’s history, you may always tell your children about him. Our catechism material for juniors asks, “Why did God save Noah and his family?” The answer is, “Because Noah walked with God and was righteous in a world filled with wickedness.”³ Historical Noah was saved through his historical walking with God. His whole family was saved from the flood because he walked with God. Peter says in 1 Peter 3:20, “Eight souls were saved by water.” Not even by the ark Noah built nor by his walking with God were the eight souls saved. But if you want to focus on historical Noah, his obedience and his walking with God would be all there are.

Then meeting Noah could immediately incite rage. Shaking his calloused hand would make me mad. Spending many years with him, way beyond my life expectancy, would make me impatient. I know the man and his work. I would never ignore what he had done. He had a huge undertaking that involved gathering, cutting, swinging the mallet, and all the manual labor that you could think of. I would absolutely argue that Noah did build the ark. Spending time with scripture would undoubtedly lead to such a conclusion. Thus the sentiments of the young men from the Protestant Reformed Churches in the Philippines against Reverend Lanning would make sense. All could agree with their sentiments about Noah in history. I did an exegesis of Hebrews 11:7 as part of my seminary requirements, and I arrived at the same conclusion: Noah did in fact build the ark.

But in my exegesis of the passage, I felt tired of seeing Noah. All the toiling, gathering of gopher wood, and hammering wore me out. I still felt hopeless even after I had seen that the ark was finally finished. Noah had no power to save. His activity of faith could not save him. His activity of walking could not save him. His building would eventually come to naught after the fierce judgment came against all depraved, wicked persons. Noah’s preparation of the ark was tainted with sin. He had his father and grandfather helping him, but it availed nothing. The problem of sin is generational. Sin runs through the blood of every sinful household. Noah and his family were no exception. They too were depraved sinners. Noah’s ark could never stand the coming great flood. The prediluvian period was ending, and his ark would betray his unworthy building of it. The period would end with Noah’s generation. That would be the end of him. Yes, my exegesis was historically informed. Yes, I saw the activity of Noah’s faith. And, no, I did not disregard the wonder of grace that he actually prepared an ark by faith. He consciously believed God’s word of warning.

Rev. W. Bruinsma even asserts that when God talked to Noah, it was because Noah had walked with God.⁴ But what is the point? What is the point of starting and ending in man? I could have a lecture about Noah’s ark, but I could not preach that. I could spend all day praising Noah’s mighty faith. But that surely would only tickle your ears. As regenerated children of God, you can believe, repent of your sins, and draw near to God. And you must do that. Those who do not do that will surely perish in their sins.

Herman Hoeksema says in his astounding sermon on Acts 16:30–31:

Listen. We must believe? Oh, that’s true. But is that the gospel? Is that the gospel? We must believe? We must believe? If that were the gospel, beloved, the gospel could never be realized. I say once more, to be sure we must believe. But there is no hope in that statement, and there is no salvation in that statement because if you only say that we must believe, which means of course, that nobody has the right not to believe, and nobody has the right to be an unbeliever. That we are obliged before God to believe, yes, yes, yes. There’s no hope in that. That’s not the gospel.⁵

I ask you, reader, and this is not a rhetorical question. Many who have heard this question have spewed unmitigated hate. When you hear the call of the gospel is that the gospel itself? That is, if you believe and repent, you will be saved. Is that the gospel? Is it the gospel to insist on Noah’s building the ark?

Built by Faith

Reverend Lanning taught the people of God to understand the theological significance of that account in redemptive history. He preached Jesus Christ instead of man. Noah was a man of God but a mere man—nothing but a man. His best works in this life were all imperfect and defiled with sin (Heidelberg Catechism, A 62). Thus preaching must never be about man but about God in Jesus Christ. God must always be central in the preaching of the gospel. No matter what the theme of a passage is, the Holy Spirit speaks only about God and his work. And in the case of Noah, the Spirit takes all the historical details and explains them in two words: “by faith” (Heb. 11:7). Yes, Noah prepared an ark, but he did it by faith. That is how the writer of the epistle to the Hebrews comments on Genesis 6. Through inspiration the writer makes plain that Noah’s preparation of the ark was by faith. That faith demonstrated God’s gracious attitude of favor toward Noah. Faith is of God and is the bond through which we receive Jesus Christ and all his benefits. Faith is always fixed on the person and works of Jesus Christ. Out of faith we receive the peace of justification. Through faith God silences our consciences and speaks the forgiveness of sins with our spirits, so that we are assured of our place in Jesus Christ.

Our eyes are being fixed not on Noah’s ark per se but on an ark whose builder and maker is God. That ark was God’s work, illustrating how he graciously saves his people from his wrath. That ark preserved Noah and his family, the church, so that when judgment and their salvation came, God preserved them and made his abode with them. That ark was typical of God’s blissful covenant fellowship with his people through Jesus Christ. All their needs were there and supplied by the precious blood of Jesus Christ. That ark was typical of the church as the vehicle of salvation. Out of the church there is no salvation. Outside that ark built by God, there was no salvation. Noah and his family were kept in the ark. They were antithetically living with God while they were kept in his sovereign, particular, and electing love in Jesus Christ— Christ, the only Son of man who has walked perfectly with God, so that Noah and his house could be righteous before God, could be saved not only from the flood but also ultimately from God’s temporal and eternal judgment, of which they all were as worthy as the wicked, prediluvian world.

Reverend Lanning made a clarification in his sermon on Hebrews 11:7, when he said,

It is true Noah did not build the ark. It is true that Jehovah God built the ark. In fact, that is the gospel of salvation through the Lord Jesus Christ… Noah built an ark to the saving of his house, but Noah did not save his house. God saved Noah’s house. Jehovah God has given salvation to us through faith in Jesus Christ, but we do not save ourselves through faith in Jesus Christ. God saves us through faith in Jesus Christ. There is no retracting and no retreating from the statement “Noah did not build the ark; God built the ark.”⁶

God did not save Noah and his family because Noah had walked with God. Eight souls were saved by the water that held them up in a higher state while God was condemning the world. That is Jesus Christ. Because of Jesus Christ, Noah and his family were saved. This gospel needs no apology. You cannot overemphasize this gospel that begins and ends with God in Jesus Christ. Hebrews 11:7 begins with God and ends with God. It begins with faith and ends with faith.

The Box

Reverend Lanning’s sermon was instrumental. It exposed the hearts of men in the Protestant Reformed Churches in America and in the Philippines. The fad for man’s theology was gradually being exposed, not only by classical and synodical decisions and by many man-centered sermons but also by the continued hunt for ministers who preached God-centered sermons against man’s doing for salvation. I was surprised to hear men arguing against the sermon regarding the theology of ark building. Noah prepared an ark by faith. If the historical significance of Noah and the ark he built had already been established, there should have been no reasonable argument against the insistence on the account’s theological implications.

Reverend Lanning established the historical facts of the ark-building. He said,

Genesis 6 is full of the activity of Noah, who did according to all of the commandments of God. What we are describing here is the historical fact. Noah did what God said. Noah prepared an ark. Noah built an ark. That’s a historical fact. That does not describe the theological reality. The theological reality, the doctrinal truth of the building of the ark, is explained in Hebrews 11:7. The theological reality of building the ark is this: by faith Noah prepared an ark. By faith Noah built an ark.⁷

What the majority want is man. They want the man Noah to be preached in the pulpits. They want the ark made of gopher wood and full of nails. They want to be sent home by every blow of Noah’s mallet. They want the box (ark) as a mere container of obedient people saved by Noah’s walking with God.

No, that box was a symbol of death. That box was not designed to float and to endure the great waves of the flood. That box had no steering gear or spindle! The door was shut. No one could enter or go out once the door had been shut. And God shut the door! From man’s perspective—after many years of building; seeing unimaginable, heavy rains for the first time; and receiving diverse oppositions from the wicked—that box was a casket, after all! From man’s point of view, that box was death. Every fallen man sees death in that ark. This explains why, after so many years of Noah’s preaching and building, only eight people were saved. The gospel must offend man. It must preach the death of man in its every presentation so that God remains the only sovereignly active one in the work of salvation. God has ordained the presentation of the gospel that way so that it becomes the savor of death unto death to the reprobate wicked and a savor of life unto life to the elect. In that way God is glorified. He alone deserves that. For only his power is revealed in the preaching of the gospel. Ordinarily, that proclamation is offensive.

Reverend Lanning’s preaching exposed what many in the Protestant Reformed Churches believe. They want Noah to participate actively in the work of salvation. For them Jesus Christ is not enough, and the water was not enough to save Noah and his house. They want every swing of the mallet and the calluses on the hands to make the gospel of Jesus Christ a matter of carnal things.

But this is contrary to Hebrews 11’s doctrine of faith— the evidence of things unseen. Faith itself is the evidence of our spiritual salvation. Noah’s faith, not the ark per se, already was salvation. Historically speaking, salvation was the water that was yet to come, which was yet unseen. But because Noah was given faith, he prepared an ark for his house. And the ark that he prepared was built by Jehovah to preserve Noah and his family from the coming judgment. They were saved by Jehovah himself through judgment. The church in Noah’s time was saved through judgment.

Through Reverend Lanning’s sermon I saw Jesus Christ. I was convinced that the gospel of sovereign grace requires man’s death. No matter how accurate our history is, when Jesus Christ is displaced, man will always assume Christ’s rightful place. We are always inclined to brag about our activity of believing and walking with God. Taking a tight grip on man destroys the gospel. It could destroy the box we once loved because Noah was actually dead in there. The ark was a casket. Noah could do nothing. The people in there were dead. They were rather passively waiting by faith for their salvation. But death for them was a blessing. It meant all of God and nothing of man.

This is the gospel that comforted me through that sermon. It needs no apology, not even a clarification, which the consistory of Byron Center required of Reverend Lanning. He used no vague language; he preached only the truth of Jesus Christ. The problem was men who thought themselves to be as high as the height of the ark and as sufficient as the ark. They were so quick to criticize and interrupt Jesus Christ’s speaking. They only wanted the hands of a carpenter, while forsaking the Builder who built the ark to the saving of Noah’s house. The only remedy they need is the flood, which covers even the highest mountain on earth. The baptizing blood of Jesus Christ cleanses the insurmountable sins of his people.

Amazing Obedience

Rev. W. Bruinsma was the first minister I heard refuting the ark-building theology preached in Byron Center by Reverend Lanning. Reverend Bruinsma deemed the theology of ark-building to be illogical and a spiritualization of Hebrews 11:7. He preached,

God did not build the ark. Noah built the ark. It would take quite a stretch of human logic, people of God, to say that Noah did not build the ark and that God himself personally built that ark. That Noah built the ark is a fact that is beyond dispute. Noah built the ark. The writer to the Hebrews also informs us that Noah built the ark to the saving of his house.

Now, there are those who, in some way, would like to spiritualize that “saving of his house,” so that they would relate that to the salvation now that you and I receive in Jesus Christ. That’s not the intention of the inspired writer here in Hebrews 11. Our text states a simple fact. By means of the ark, Noah was able to save—that is, literally, deliver, preserve, and keep safe his family alive in that ark. He was able to save his household. The ark saved his family from the sudden death that fell upon the entire human race. So the writer to the Hebrews does not intend to spiritualize that matter.

The Bible speaks of the salvation of the church in other passages in different terms. It speaks of the salvation of the church by means of the water of the flood. It does not speak of the church by means of the preparing of an ark. It speaks of the saving of the church at that time by means of the waters of the flood itself.⁸

Reverend Lanning did not say that God personally built the ark. Instead, when Reverend Lanning said the ark-building was by faith, that is God. How can you spiritualize that? Hebrews 11 is about faith. It is not about Abel, Enoch, and Noah. You cannot turn your head in Hebrews 11 without bumping into the fact that God is the only way to understand that section of scripture. Sure, Abel offered unto God, and Abraham obeyed God. They were active in doing that. No one is denying that. Those who believe receive life from God and have all the manifestations of being alive in Jesus Christ. Abel and Abraham evidently had those manifestations. But the intention of the writer to the Hebrews is that you see God in and through their lives. Abel offered unto God by faith, and Abraham by the same faith obeyed God. God worked in them. He took the obedience of Jesus Christ and imparted it to them. Understand then that on their own, they did not do that, nor did they have the ability to do that. The only explanation, then, is God. How else can you explain Noah’s preparing the ark? Only theologically. A theological explanation is not spiritualization but an honest and inevitable evaluation of the passage.

What the Protestant Reformed Churches want is the fact that Noah did build the ark. They still want the activity of Noah. This is against the plain teaching of Hebrews 11. Enoch was translated by faith. Through faith Sarah received strength to conceive seed. Both verbs are in the passive voice. Enoch was translated by faith, and it is beyond logic to say that the emphasis is Enoch’s activity of faith. The same holds true for Sarah, who received strength from God through faith. Receiving, in the Calvinistic perception, is very much passive. Also, Abel was already dead but still speaking. How can you explain that historically? Abel did speak! Oh, yes, but when he was dead. And according to the grammar, Abel still speaks. The only explanation is that he had to die to speak. Believers must die before they become alive. Noah and his house had to die in the box before they were saved. Hebrews 11 is clearly not emphasizing the activity of faith. Since that is the case, although Noah built the ark historically, he did not build it theologically, but God did. God built it, and this truth is evident in God’s making Noah and his house passive in the work of salvation.

Prof. Russell J. Dykstra added to the theology of the man Noah and his activity and focused on the good works and the obedience of Noah. For Professor Dykstra it is more logical and acceptable to assert this because in this way Noah is not robbed of his rightful activity, which God had determined Noah to do. For Professor Dykstra building the ark was all about Noah’s activity and his amazing obedience to God. Professor Dykstra preached this:

Now to be clear, it is not wrong to say, “God built the ark.” It wouldn’t be wrong to say that, although you would have to explain that. What do you mean by that? Certainly, if you would say, “God built the ark,” it’s not the same as God creating the heavens and the earth. God created the heavens and the earth by speaking the word, and it was. That’s not the way the ark came into existence at all. It could be said that God built the ark in the way that you could also say, “God killed Goliath.” By God preparing David—giving him the ability to use the sling and the stone and giving David the courage and the strength to stand up to Goliath and God guiding the stone and Goliath is killed—you could say, “God killed Goliath.” You could say when you go home tonight, “God preached to us tonight,” because God used a human being to preach you the word…So you can speak that way. But to say those things simply means God calls men and equips them and uses them to accomplish his purpose. And any Reformed person surely understands that. God gives faith. And by that faith God gives grace, and that grace strengthens a believer to carry out the task that God has determined. We are created, in fact, in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God has before ordained, before prepared, that we should walk in them. And he works in us the will and the to do of his good pleasure. So if you want to say, “God built the ark,” and explain it that way, that’s acceptable.

But it is dead wrong to say that Noah did not build the ark. That’s a plain contradiction of the words of the Bible. By faith Noah. He built the ark. That would be as absurd as saying that Abel did not offer a sacrifice that was pleasing to God or to say that Enoch did not walk with God, that he was not translated, or that Sarah did not receive strength to conceive seed. That’s nonsense. To say that Noah did not build the ark is to deny, to deny, the sovereign power of God to work in his people amazing obedience. That’s the seriousness of it. Not only is it a plain denial of the words of scripture, but it’s denying the power of God working in a sinner. Think about that once.⁹

This sermon was about Noah’s amazing obedience. Noah performed good works to the saving of his house. This is not absurd or illogical, they say. As long as Noah built the ark and not God, as long as Noah is presented as an active believer, that is all right. As long as you do not say that Noah was passive, that is logical.

I want to conclude with these words of Herman Hoeksema:

People say nowadays, beloved, “But we must, we must, have the activity of faith.” I don’t know how it is here, here in the West, I mean. But in the East in my church, I think elsewhere too, they like to speak of the activity of faith. “You must do something, nevertheless. You mustn’t be so passive.” That’s what they say. “The activity of faith. We are responsible creatures.” Responsible, yes. Responsible. “And our Protestant Reformed preaching has gone too passive, don’t you know? Too passive. And so it’s all right to speak of faith as a gift of God, but let’s forget that because what we really need to emphasize is our responsibility as Christians and the activity of faith. We must do something now.”

What must we do? Oh, I don’t know. They don’t know either, I think…

It’s all right, beloved, that we speak of the activity of faith. But, remember, the first activity of faith is the activity whereby through the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ we lay hold on him. That’s the activity of faith, first of all. The activity of faith does not, first of all, mean that we do great things in the world or great things in the church or that we witness for Christ and that we save souls and the like and the like. That is never the activity of faith in its first manifestation. The activity of faith in its first manifestation is that we cling to Christ. That’s active faith. And by that active faith, we receive out of him all our salvation. That first of all.

And then, oh, yes, if you have that faith and you have that active faith, then I don’t even have to talk about responsibility anymore. It isn’t even necessary. I don’t even have to talk to you anymore about being active. Oh, no. Then this is spontaneous, beloved.¹⁰

And lastly, these words of Charles H. Spurgeon:

What the Arminian wants to do is to arouse man’s activity; what we want to do is to kill it once for all, to show him that he is lost and ruined, and that his activities are not now at all equal to the work of conversion; that he must look upward.¹¹

Noah built the ark. But let us kill the man Noah and his activity of building. He did not build it. The word of God says that Noah built the ark by faith; that is, God built the ark to the saving of Noah’s house.

God alone gets the glory!