Noah's fall, a question

[larkin31]

Interesting.

I still think it is a stretch, and Hahn’s central verb phrase in the conclusion is “could be” and his point is that a maternal incest account fits 4 parameters of the context of the story better than the alternatives. I disagree, and think that the tale is mostly a justification of the well-established disdain for the Canaanites in a story of disrespectful and slightly lascivious voyeurism and mockery in comparison to the deference of the other brothers. Despite Hahn’s claim to the contrary, God has harshly punished persons (and their progeny) for other forms of disrespect. After all, all Adam and Eve did was eat a piece of fruit. Hahn’s “gravity” argument is the weakest.

 

[Hineni]

cecilia,
on that same web site Dr. Hahn has some papers he has submitted to scholarly journals for review. one of them deals specifically with the curse of canaan and the sin of ham being incest. As could be expected Dr. Hahn (and a co-author whom I forget) provide solid scriptural support for these assertions. I’ve read the paper (it’s 6 or 7 pages) and find it’s incest explanation more persuasive than other explanations for the nature of ham’s sin.

Anyway, the main point of the flood narrative is often missed by those who are out to prove the historical fact of an earth encompassing flood. Maybe this did occur, but it’s not the main point. The main point is that if one were to eliminate all of humanity save eight people in an attempt to eradicate evil from the face of the earth - that attempt would fail. Because the capacity for evil exist within humans themselves. It is not an external problem but an internal one. This idea is picked up by Jesus when he says it is not what goes into a man that defiles him, but what comes out (of his heart).

It’s man’s heart where the capacity and potential for evil resides and nowhere else.

I have been guilty of harboring this false notion corrected by the flood narrative. When I was younger, in my frustration with the homosexual community I often thought, why don’t they just put them all on an island somewhere and get them out of our lives so things can get back to normal. Naive as it is, this is a common attitude toward groups of people that irritate us. The lesson in the flood narrative corrects this line of thought with the answer that even if these frustrating evil people were all washed away by some torrent never to return - evil would remain as long as humankind walks the earth. The irritation would soon return and maybe stronger than before.

So this post-flood episode is considered a ‘fall’ because it was thought all evil would be eradicated giving humanity a fresh clean slate.
Just random thoughts.
Peterk

Then how could someone explain Sodom and Gomorrah? Since God had only saved a few, that being Lot’s family (Genesis 18:22-33 - Abraham Pleads for Sodom). In Genesis - Abraham said “Will you really sweep it away and not spare the place for the sake of the fifty righteous people in it?” 25 Far be it from you to do such a thing—to kill the righteous with the wicked, treating the righteous and the wicked alike. Far be it from you! Will not the Judge of all the earth do right?” As in the story with Noah, God saved only a few, the righteous. If the story of the flood covering the earth is doubtful - as a historical fact, the one thing that the story is demonstrating is something about mankind - evil cannot consume mankind for very long without that intervention from God to his creation – We read wonderful thoughts from the Apostle Paul in the book of Hebrews, chapter 7. Like within the garden, God is calling out to Adam, so God calls out to us. There’s a story about a German officer and a Rabbi, a German officer asked the Rabbi – If God knows all and see all, then why did God call out Adam’s name in the Garden? “ 8 Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the LORD God as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and they hid from the LORD God among the trees of the garden. 9 But the LORD God called to the man, “Where are you?” ……The Rabbi responded back, God knew where Adam was hiding in the garden; He just wanted to know if Adam knew where he was at….that same question that is quoted in scripture, Genesis “Where are you” is what God is asking out of his creation, do we know where we’re at?..When scripture states that the “Lord” saw - does God really sees or saw? I think God is within all human beings - spiritually as we read in 1 Corinthians 1:18-31 and again in 1 Corinthians 2:2-16 “The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. 11 For who knows a person’s thoughts except their own spirit within them?”

Also, when Jesus spoke about the end of days, scripture is quoted as saying in "Matt. 24:37-39: “37 But as the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. 38 For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, 39 and did not know until the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. (Gen.6-7). Since the word “Adam” is the equivalency to the word mankind, Genesis, and I would think, shows us then that mankind (and at the time of the flood, was wicked and full of violence, or you could say mankind “lived in darkness” - without reason) or in other words we no longer carried that “image” of God (light of God), to discern between both (now) good and evil - chose evil, that being our free will. Mankind lost all reasoning - it full of darkness - see scripture in John 1:5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it. (again, man was full of darkness - or in another way unable to reason) skipping down a few verses in John 1:9 The true light that gives light to everyone was coming into the world. 10 He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. 11 He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. 12 Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God—

Blessings
Mary

 

[Hineni]

cecilia,
on that same web site Dr. Hahn has some papers he has submitted to scholarly journals for review. one of them deals specifically with the curse of canaan and the sin of ham being incest. As could be expected Dr. Hahn (and a co-author whom I forget) provide solid scriptural support for these assertions. I’ve read the paper (it’s 6 or 7 pages) and find it’s incest explanation more persuasive than other explanations for the nature of ham’s sin.

Anyway, the main point of the flood narrative is often missed by those who are out to prove the historical fact of an earth encompassing flood. Maybe this did occur, but it’s not the main point. The main point is that if one were to eliminate all of humanity save eight people in an attempt to eradicate evil from the face of the earth - that attempt would fail. Because the capacity for evil exist within humans themselves. It is not an external problem but an internal one. This idea is picked up by Jesus when he says it is not what goes into a man that defiles him, but what comes out (of his heart).

It’s man’s heart where the capacity and potential for evil resides and nowhere else.

I have been guilty of harboring this false notion corrected by the flood narrative. When I was younger, in my frustration with the homosexual community I often thought, why don’t they just put them all on an island somewhere and get them out of our lives so things can get back to normal. Naive as it is, this is a common attitude toward groups of people that irritate us. The lesson in the flood narrative corrects this line of thought with the answer that even if these frustrating evil people were all washed away by some torrent never to return - evil would remain as long as humankind walks the earth. The irritation would soon return and maybe stronger than before.

So this post-flood episode is considered a ‘fall’ because it was thought all evil would be eradicated giving humanity a fresh clean slate.

Just random thoughts.
Peterk

One more thought:

In darkness, man looses all reasoning and is blind - the inability to discern the word of God - to give another example: In Numbers 16. The Israelites were uneasy with their situation, and chose to blame Moses and Aaron for it, suffering causes sin (Numbers 14:22-25). As in the casting of the blame, blindness is shown—Moses intercedes for Israel and they had been spared destruction (Numbers 14:11-20 - you can read this in Exodus 32:8-14). Moses - had repented for the Israelites - however, why didn’t the people repent themselves, they chose to declare their own self-righteousness; and overthrow God’s leadership through Moses. We call this blindness in a spiritual sense -(Matthew 6:23 and Luke 11:36 )

 

[PeterK]

Mary,

Then how could someone explain Sodom and Gomorrah? Since God had only saved a few, that being Lot’s family.

I’m not sure I understand your question, but I can say that in the context of the biblical narrative the flood and S&G are very different stories attempting to teach very different lessons. There is thematic overlap for sure, but S&G does not concern the entire world as does Noah’s story. So the scope is extremely different.

I don’t read a strong direct comparison existing between the two.

I’ll amend to my previous Noah post to say that while I believe the main point of the flood narrative to be that evil exists within man and not without, this is not at the same time a teaching that evil will go unpunished - which is what I kind of think you might have been thinking I was saying - maybe, sorta, - not sure.

Hoping peace for you,

PeterK

 

[PeterK]

One more thought: In darkness, man looses all reasoning and is blind - the inability to discern the word of God - to give another example: In Numbers 16. The Israelites were uneasy with their situation, and chose to blame Moses and Aaron for it, suffering causes sin (Numbers 14:22-25). As in the casting of the blame, blindness is shown—Moses intercedes for Israel and they had been spared destruction (Numbers 14:11-20 - you can read this in Exodus 32:8-14). Moses - had repented for the Israelites - however, why didn’t the people repent themselves, they chose to declare their own self-righteousness; and overthrow God’s leadership through Moses. We call this blindness in a spiritual sense -(Matthew 6:23 and Luke 11:36 )

Mary,
I’m sorry. I’m just not following you.

Peace,
PeterK

 

[Hineni]

Mary,
I’m not sure I understand your question, but I can say that in the context of the biblical narrative the flood and S&G are very different stories attempting to teach very different lessons. There is thematic overlap for sure, but S&G does not concern the entire world as does Noah’s story. So the scope is extremely different.

I don’t read a strong direct comparison existing between the two.

I’ll amend to my previous Noah post to say that while I believe the main point of the flood narrative to be that evil exists within man and not without, this is not at the same time a teaching that evil will go unpunished - which is what I kind of think you might have been thinking I was saying - maybe, sorta, - not sure.

Hoping peace for you,

PeterK

Hi PeterK;

I happen to write a lot - so bare with me. This will have to be in sections:

In both scenarios, there had been God’s judgment. God’s intent to give people time to repent and to return back to Him-- with the patriarchs, Noah and Abraham, I see only a slightly different scenario. Noah – was a righteous man, however, Abraham plead with God to spare humanity/or in other words – the city. Another thought, these people in both passages in Genesis, caused sufferings to others due to misuse of the law and also had lead an immoral life style, as Genesis 6:11 “ Now the earth was corrupt in God’s sight and was full of violence. 12 God saw how corrupt the earth had become, for all the people on earth had corrupted their ways”… Remember there’s a term called “Free Will” but how we chose to live our lives can/and does affect others. Human beings suffer when “we” as individuals don’t act within that image that God gave us – there are even laws to govern this We are created in God’s image (as in the essence of God). I know that we had lost that “essence” at the time of the fall, in the garden. However, scripture states in Genesis 9:6 (and afterward the fall) “6 “Whoever sheds human blood, by humans shall their blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made mankind.” So, the passage doesn’t actually say that we lost that image – in some way we still have the essence/image within all us, that passage had pertained to “Thou shall not kill” – so if we didn’t have some divine essence of God within us – I think we’d be looking deeper into chaos - or the inability to reason wisely …. We may not be created in a physical sense but in a spiritual and moral image giving us the wisdom to judge, that is, to counsel people (“judge the people with righteous judgment” Deuteronomy 16:18-20), as well as to teach people the ways/or path to God (the ways to understanding – Psalms 119:33-4, Mark 12:28-31 (Jesus uniquely joined Deuteronomy 6:4 and Leviticus 19:18 - , The entire Mosaic law hangs or hinges on these two interconnected commandments, and then Luke 10:25-37 ( “And who is my neighbor?")), we as God’s creation have the ability to forgive others as well as to show mercy (Mark 11:25) which is an aspect of the Divine presence…and the most important (I think) is that we have the ability to communicate with God everyday in prayer - to ask God for the things we need (Matthew 6:6)

So when we take a life – what are we destroying?..God’s image.

Like within any law (even Civil) we as individuals have a choice…. We as adults/sometime pre Adults come before the judge and are given time to repose (or repent) but “If” we continue not to follow in God’s ways, then what happens? We sin - and we continue to lead ourselves down a destructive path and also sometimes people (who sin) will take others with them, like within those passages - God will not allow “us” to be completely destroyed…unless, of course we don’t hearken to his voice (Hebrews 3:14-19)

When the city of Ninveh was to be punished God granted them a 40 day reprieve, giving them one last chance to repent and change their evil ways (Jonah 3:4). In the Old Testament – Hebrew bible, the way God decides to eradicate a city or nation as punishment for its sinful ways, He still allows them an extra 40-day opportunity to repent. When the Israelites sinned by serving the Golden Calf (Book of Exodus 32), God did not wipe them out immediately, as had been decreed. Rather, He gave them 40 days to repent during which Moshe prayed to God and as I pointed out:

In darkness, man looses all reasoning and is blind - the inability to discern the word of God - to give another example: In Numbers 16. The Israelites were uneasy with their situation, and chose to blame Moses and Aaron for it, suffering causes sin (Numbers 14:22-25). As in the casting of the blame, blindness is shown—Moses intercedes for Israel and they had been spared destruction (Numbers 14:11-20 - you can read this in Exodus 32:8-14). Moses - had repented for the Israelites (see also Deuteronomy 9:10) - however, why didn’t the people repent themselves, they chose to declare their own self-righteousness; and overthrow God’s leadership through Moses. We call this blindness in a spiritual sense - (Matthew 6:23 and Luke 11:36) Before bringing the Great Flood as well, God gave the world 40 days to repent. But 40 days after 1 Tishrei (September – October) only brings us to 10 Cheshvan (October–November) – why did the Flood begin only seven days later? In another seven days I will bring rain upon the earth…" (Genesis 7:4). Exact seven days after 10 Cheshvan, the Great Flood began!

 

[Hineni]

Mary,
I’m sorry. I’m just not following you.

Peace,
PeterK

I hope I made myself more understandable - but both stories do coincide with one another, I think. Mankind has the ability to chose good over evil - it’s within him to do so…“No, the word is very near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart so you may obey it. See, I set before you today life and prosperity, death and destruction.” So Moses is giving the Israelite’s a choice and in other words, Paul the Apostle, also is giving all people a choice (as well) - in Romans 10:8 “But what does it say? “The word is near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart,” that is, the word of faith we are proclaiming:That if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.” - Free will is Free - but we have to act responsible with out choices…We as God’s creation were made in His image, but we do have that right choose between which path we will walk -

Romans 6:14 For sin shall not be master over you, for you are not under law but under grace. 15 What then ? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? May it never be! 16 Do you not know that when you present yourselves to someone as slaves for obedience, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin resulting in death, or of obedience resulting in righteousness ?

 

[Hineni]

Mary,
I’m sorry. I’m just not following you.

Peace,
PeterK

I hope I made myself more understandable - but both stories do coincide with one another, I think. Mankind has the ability to chose good over evil - it’s within him to do so…“No, the word is very near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart so you may obey it. See, I set before you today life and prosperity, death and destruction.” So Moses is giving the Israelite’s a choice and in other words, Paul the Apostle, also is giving all people a choice (as well) - in Romans 10:8 “But what does it say? “The word is near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart,” that is, the word of faith we are proclaiming:That if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.” - Free will is Free - but we have to act responsible with our choices…We as God’s creation were made in His image, but we do have that right choose between which path we will walk -

Romans 6:14 For sin shall not be master over you, for you are not under law but under grace. 15 What then ? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? May it never be! 16 Do you not know that when you present yourselves to someone as slaves for obedience, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin resulting in death, or of obedience resulting in righteousness ?

Blessings
Mary

 

[PeterK]

In both scenarios, there had been God’s judgment. God’s intent to give people time to repent and to return back to Him. … When the city of Ninveh was to be punished God granted them a 40 day reprieve, giving them one last chance to repent and change their evil ways (Jonah 3:4). In the Old Testament – Hebrew bible, the way God decides to eradicate a city or nation as punishment for its sinful ways, He still allows them an extra 40-day opportunity to repent.

Hi Mary, Thanks for the response. I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree. When I read the flood narrative and the S&G narrative I see no mention of God inviting anyone to repent - their fate has been sealed as far as I can tell. While we may be able to discern a time period of 40 days before the flood there is nothing in the narrative that indicates this 40 days was one last chance at repenting for the populace. Early in the narrative God states he going to destroy all flesh. Likewise in the S&G narrative there is no call to the general population to repent as far as I can read. It seems pretty cut and dry - God’s going to wipe them out. The Nineveh detail is interesting but just because it occurred here does not mean the same happened elsewhere.

But, honestly, it does no harm to believe so. I’m just saying that idea is absent in a plain straight-forward reading of the flood and s&g narratives.

Thanks again for all the trouble you went to in explaining your ideas.

PeterK

 

[Hineni]

Hi Mary, Thanks for the response. I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree. When I read the flood narrative and the S&G narrative I see no mention of God inviting anyone to repent - their fate has been sealed as far as I can tell. While we may be able to discern a time period of 40 days before the flood there is nothing in the narrative that indicates this 40 days was one last chance at repenting for the populace. Early in the narrative God states he going to destroy all flesh. Likewise in the S&G narrative there is no call to the general population to repent as far as I can read. It seems pretty cut and dry - God’s going to wipe them out. The Nineveh detail is interesting but just because it occurred here does not mean the same happened elsewhere.

But, honestly, it does no harm to believe so. I’m just saying that idea is absent in a plain straight-forward reading of the flood and s&g narratives.

Thanks again for all the trouble you went to in explaining your ideas.

PeterK

Hi PeterK;

Reading from both biblical stories of Noah and Abraham so many times, from both Jewish and Christian points of view, that I have to look it up and also (next time) back up my notes – sorry for the delay.

The most important part of both scriptural stories – in both Noah (the flood) and Abraham (Sodom and Gomorrah) is how God judges mankind and all the earth, as a whole and even in the case of a city. The question is; Can God change in His way from judging one situation over another, so what about His promise for redemption? As stated in Isaiah 40:8 “But the word of our God stands forever” or even Isaiah 55:11 “so is my word that goes out from my mouth: It will not return to me empty, but will accomplish what I desire and achieve the purpose for which I sent it.” So when impending warnings come – and within scripture, God always gives people time to repent, before something happens. So the “effort” on our part to return our hearts back to God, is a choice we have to make, freely. I’m reflecting back on the word “Ta’am” which means to taste in the normal sense but also to taste in the sense of test, discern, or judge, as in - we “ourselves”, have to discern and judge for ourselves, even to say a choice, of returning back to God, “O Taste And See The Goodness Of The Lord” (Ps 34:8). But again the question remains “But you ask, 'How are we to return?” ……In an article, “My problem with the Amidah” it states: Repentance is a choice that we have to make out of our own free will – a choice to return back to God. God will always give us many opportunities to return back to him, which makes the reasoning’s for the birth of Jesus, so wonderful – (John 1:14, Hebrews 13:8 and Romans 3: all)

So out of the passage in 2 Peter 2:4, Noah not only built the ark, but he also preached righteousness as well. 1 Peter 3:20 and with commentary notes indicated that Noah did warn the people “20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the long suffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.” Matthew 24: 37 As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. 38 For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; 39 and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man.” With this 2nd to the last passage – Jesus tells the listeners, that the people (in Noah’s day) knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came – but in the end verse, Jesus also describes to us about how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man, we have to read the verse in Matthew 24:36, in order to understand “ "No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.” – we know that the 2nd coming will occur/or happen (like the people in Noah’s day knew about the impending flood), but we don’t know “when” – time and date, Jesus tells us to be “watchful” and “alert”, in other words “Stay alert, stand firm in the faith”…. ‘It will be in the last days, says God, that I will pour out my Spirit on all flesh. Your sons and your daughters will prophesy. Your young men will see visions. Your old men will dream dreams.

Peace of Christ - and May our faith grow in Christ Jesus
Mary

 

[Hineni]

cecilia,
on that same web site Dr. Hahn has some papers he has submitted to scholarly journals for review. one of them deals specifically with the curse of canaan and the sin of ham being incest. As could be expected Dr. Hahn (and a co-author whom I forget) provide solid scriptural support for these assertions. I’ve read the paper (it’s 6 or 7 pages) and find it’s incest explanation more persuasive than other explanations for the nature of ham’s sin.

Anyway, the main point of the flood narrative is often missed by those who are out to prove the historical fact of an earth encompassing flood. Maybe this did occur, but it’s not the main point. The main point is that if one were to eliminate all of humanity save eight people in an attempt to eradicate evil from the face of the earth - that attempt would fail. Because the capacity for evil exist within humans themselves. It is not an external problem but an internal one. This idea is picked up by Jesus when he says it is not what goes into a man that defiles him, but what comes out (of his heart).

It’s man’s heart where the capacity and potential for evil resides and nowhere else.

I have been guilty of harboring this false notion corrected by the flood narrative. When I was younger, in my frustration with the homosexual community I often thought, why don’t they just put them all on an island somewhere and get them out of our lives so things can get back to normal. Naive as it is, this is a common attitude toward groups of people that irritate us. The lesson in the flood narrative corrects this line of thought with the answer that even if these frustrating evil people were all washed away by some torrent never to return - evil would remain as long as humankind walks the earth. The irritation would soon return and maybe stronger than before.

So this post-flood episode is considered a ‘fall’ because it was thought all evil would be eradicated giving humanity a fresh clean slate.

Just random thoughts.
Peterk

I hope I can add one more paragraph - because you’ve brought up some really good thoughts and ones that I had to check on.

If you check out Genesis 4:25 (the verse prior to the beginning of Noah), “And Adam knew his wife again, and she bore a son and named him Seth, “For God has appointed another seed for me instead of Abel, whom Cain killed. 26 And as for Seth, to him also a son was born; and he named him Enosh.[c] Then men began to call on the name of the LORD.” The last line indicates – before the story of Noah, is that “men” began to call on the name of the Lord – if you read the New Living Bible (which, translation from one bible to the other – goes along way) the passage indicates “At that time people first began to worship the LORD by name.” The reason why I’m bringing this up, is because of two reasons – the people, back then, worshipped and knew the Lord by name so they could call upon Him, see Exodus 3:13 -15, and the other reason is in the next chapter, Genesis 5:29 “29 Lamech named his son Noah, for he said, “May he bring us relief from our work and the painful labor of farming this ground that the LORD has cursed.” – So actually – after the flood, we then read in scripture notes “Noah, a man of the soil” ….I’m wondering if the curse of the ground (listed in Genesis 3:17-20) was revoked? As scripture says in Genesis 8:21 The LORD smelled the pleasing aroma and said in his heart: “Never again will I curse the ground because of humans, even though every inclination of the human heart is evil from childhood. And never again will I destroy all living creatures, as I have done.” So the thought from this verse is, that “even though every inclination of the human heart is evil from Childhood” – the passage is said from childhood, and not from birth. So we know that we have original sin - from Adam and Eve, but our inclinations - is an attitude of mind, that is good versus evil, then repentance then would be a change of mind accompanied by regret and change of conduct, “change of mind and heart”-

 

[PeterK]

Mary,
Interesting thoughts. Thanks for taking the time to pass them over to me. It’s just amazing how one can keep reading this stuff and continue to see and understand more and more meanings.

PeterK

 

[Hineni]

Mary,
Interesting thoughts. Thanks for taking the time to pass them over to me. It’s just amazing how one can keep reading this stuff and continue to see and understand more and more meanings.

PeterK

Hi PeterK,

I’m sure there are many more meanings that came out of these two stories - the Great flood, was the first rains that flood the Earth (Genesis 2:5-6 (Genesis 7:11 “and the rain was upon the earth”)), also the weighing of man’s deeds, Rosh HaShanah, falls on 1 Tishri- the day of Judgment for the whole world - so this coincided with the great flood, God’s judgment. Like I said before - when the son of Seth (Enosh) was born “Then men began to call on the name of the LORD.” …so at that time, men knew the Lord by name. So, and I think, Hebrews 11: all, gives me more meaning because it’s a wonderful passage to all the prophets who had faith in God…I love reading about the Apostle Paul - he is wonderful to understand.

PeterK, I thank you for being so kind as to read these post of mine - and also I’m grateful for finding this wonderful Catholic forum. Anyway, I mostly do a lot of reading, and not so much posting - so I got my feet wet, a little bit. Again thank you!

Peace in Christ
Mary