Please Support the Bible Translation Work of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV)
$5.00
 |
 |
 |
Genesis 6:3 has long stood at the center of interpretive and translational disputes, especially concerning the clause וְהָיוּ יָמָיו מֵאָה וְעֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה (“and his days shall be one hundred and twenty years”). While many readers, and even translators, have understood this phrase as establishing a new limit for the human lifespan after the Flood, a careful historical-grammatical analysis of the Hebrew text, supported by the surrounding context and post-Flood genealogical data, demonstrates that the verse instead declares a divinely fixed countdown—120 years before God would bring judgment through the Flood. The theological, textual, and translational implications of this reading are immense, and this passage serves as a prime case study for the importance of adhering to literal translation principles.
The Hebrew Text and Grammar of Genesis 6:3
The Hebrew reads:
וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה לֹא־יָדוֹן רוּחִי בָאָדָם לְעֹלָם בְּשַׁגַּם הוּא בָשָׂר וְהָיוּ יָמָיו מֵאָה וְעֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה
“Then Jehovah said, ‘My Spirit shall not remain with man forever, for he also is flesh; and his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.’” (UASV)
The key phrase in dispute is וְהָיוּ יָמָיו מֵאָה וְעֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה. Grammatically, this clause contains:
-
וְהָיוּ – waw-consecutive + Qal perfect 3rd person plural of hāyâ (“to be”). It carries a future-result nuance when joined to divine declarations (“and [they] shall be”).
-
יָמָיו – construct form “his days.” The possessive pronoun “his” refers back to haʾādām (“man”), not an individual man but mankind corporately.
-
מֵאָה וְעֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה – the numeral expression “a hundred and twenty years.” The phrase is durational, not qualitative.
Syntactically, the construction reads naturally as a time-determination rather than a normative life-expectancy statement. The Hebrew does not say, “man will live only 120 years,” but “his days [remaining] will be 120 years.”
 |
 |
 |
Contextual Considerations
The broader Genesis 6 context makes the countdown interpretation unavoidable:
-
Pre-Flood Longevity – Prior to the Flood, patriarchs lived for centuries. Adam lived 930 years (Gen. 5:5), Methuselah 969 (Gen. 5:27), and Noah himself lived 950 (Gen. 9:29). If Genesis 6:3 were a statement of maximum lifespan, Noah’s post-Flood life alone would contradict it.
-
Post-Flood Generations – Lifespans declined gradually, not abruptly to 120. Arpachshad lived 438 years, Shelah 433, and Eber 464 (Gen. 11:10–17). Even Abraham, many centuries later, lived 175 years (Gen. 25:7). Moses himself, the inspired human writer of Genesis, reached 120 years (Deut. 34:7), which shows that the phrase cannot mean an immediate imposition of a hard cap.
-
Judicial Context – The immediate context in Genesis 6 is divine judgment against human wickedness, not general biological decrees. The narrative transitions directly from God’s declaration of judgment to His decision to destroy all flesh by a Flood (Gen. 6:5–7, 11–13). The mention of “120 years” functions as part of this judicial framework.
Thus, the context aligns far more with a probationary period than a lifespan limitation.
 |
 |
 |
Comparative Textual Witnesses
The textual witnesses further reinforce this understanding:
-
Septuagint (LXX) – καὶ ἔσονται αἱ ἡμέραι αὐτοῦ ἑκατὸν εἴκοσι ἔτη (“and his days shall be 120 years”). The Greek renders it straightforwardly without implying a maximum lifespan.
-
Samaritan Pentateuch – Matches the Masoretic Text, supporting textual stability.
-
Dead Sea Scrolls (4QGenb) – Fragmentary but consistent with MT where preserved.
-
Targums – The Aramaic paraphrases likewise reflect a durational reading.
There is no textual evidence of an alternate tradition that would support the “lifespan cap” interpretation.
 |
 |
 |
Translation History and Misinterpretation
Literal versions such as the UASV preserve the durational sense, but many English Bibles historically leaned toward a lifespan interpretation. The NASB, for example, reads: “Nevertheless his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” While not incorrect literally, the phrasing in English has often been taken by readers as a statement of normative longevity.
The interpretive error became entrenched because of two factors:
-
The decline of post-Flood lifespans eventually averaging below 120 years seemed to confirm the reading.
-
Traditional commentary often assumed that God was simply reducing human longevity to restrain evil, rather than imposing a countdown to judgment.
Yet such a reading disregards the genealogical evidence and the context of divine judgment.
 |
 |
 |
The Function of the 120-Year Period
The 120 years was not an arbitrary span but a divinely determined probationary period:
-
Patience of God – As 1 Peter 3:20 states, “the patience of God was waiting in Noah’s days, while the ark was being constructed.” The duration reflects divine longsuffering, giving space for Noah’s family to grow, his sons to marry, and the ark to be built.
-
Preaching of Righteousness – During this period, Noah served as “a preacher of righteousness” (2 Pet. 2:5), warning his contemporaries of impending judgment, though they refused to repent.
-
Finality of Decree – The number “120 years” communicates not possibility but certainty. God had set a fixed end to the corrupt pre-Flood world.
Thus, the phrase functions as a judicial decree of a set countdown to destruction, not a general biological law.
 |
 |
 |
Theological and Translational Implications
-
Preserving Literal Sense – A truly literal translation must preserve the durational nature of the clause. Paraphrastic renderings that shift to “man will only live 120 years” distort the divine message.
-
Avoiding Theological Imposition – The lifespan-cap view imposes a human assumption onto the text rather than following the inspired grammar.
-
God’s Patience and Justice – The verse highlights the balance of God’s patience with His righteous judgment. His Spirit would not continue to tolerate human corruption indefinitely, but His longsuffering ensured the preservation of a righteous remnant.
 |
 |
 |
Conclusion: The Integrity of the Countdown Reading
Genesis 6:3 does not teach that mankind’s lifespan was reduced to 120 years. Rather, it records Jehovah’s judicial decree that humanity had 120 years before He would bring the Flood. The Hebrew grammar, the historical context, the textual tradition, and the post-Flood genealogical record all confirm this interpretation. The passage stands as a powerful witness both to God’s patience and to the certainty of His judgments.
 |
 |
 |
You May Also Enjoy
Genesis 6:2 and the Translation of “Sons of God” (בְּנֵי־הָאֱלֹהִים)
About the Author
CLICK LINKED IMAGE TO VISIT ONLINE STORE
