Tuesday, January 25, 2022

The Silence of Noah

 This is the introduction to an article at Sojourners.  It shines an interesting light on current christianity and its priorities - highlighted in what we argue about.

"Why Was Noah Silent at the End of the World?

Finding the courage to argue with those who claim to speak for God. 
 
 NOAH'S ARK IS a strange children’s story.... I’ve sat on the floors of many church nurseries playing with babies and Noah’s ark toys and questioned its appropriateness. I’ve thought about Noah and his family closing the door and being sealed inside. I’ve thought about them hearing the sound of rain and the people banging desperately on those closed doors. I’ve thought about the cries and the banging becoming quieter and quieter, about the gut-wrenching silence as the voices were swallowed by the sound of rain. 

 

In a recent essay  ...Rabbi Danya Ruttenberg notes that while the Bible calls Noah a “righteous man, blameless in his generation” (Genesis 6:9), the Zohar, a Kabbalistic text that first appeared in 13th century Spain, doesn’t see him so favorably. The author ties him not to the survival of the animals but to the deaths of everyone else. “Noah did not plea for mercy on behalf of the world, and they all perished, because the Holy One ... had told him that he and his children would be saved by the ark” (Zohar 1:67b). Noah’s complicity in the people’s deaths is so bad that, in Isaiah, the floodwaters are named after him: “For this is as the waters of Noah to me; as I have sworn that the waters of Noah should no more go over the earth” (Isaiah 54:9, ).....

 I’ve wondered if this story that celebrates obedience immunizes us to the suffering of others—if it teaches us to see suffering as proof of God’s judgment. Just following orders is no excuse. Neither is thinking you are chosen......when presented with the people’s coming destruction, Noah was silent. He built his ark ...Then he packed up his family, inventoried the animals, and let God seal him in. Did he do all that he could?

 Have we?

 The Israelites were spared because Moses risked arguing with God. But most of us church people don’t argue with God. We don’t argue with our theology. We don’t argue with our teachers. Not for the sake of others, at least. (emphasis mine) We’ll argue because the pews are too hard or too soft or because we didn’t like the worship songs. We’ll argue over any number of things that inconvenience us, but we don’t argue about the things that convenience us. The Western church is too convinced of its status—of its chosenness—and so, like Noah, it preaches to the lost but does not argue about the pending judgment. In fact, I dare say that there is a certain frisson of excitement about that judgment, about being on the inside of that door when it finally slams shut, knowing that if people are outside, it’s their own fault."

 https://sojo.net/magazine/february-2022/why-was-noah-silent-end

I have often been bothered by bible stories, especially many that are in the Hebrew Scriptures. The Noah story was one, so I mostly have ignored it. This article names it - what has always stuck in my throat about this story. I didn't read many bible stories to my children because so often I didn't like the message. 

 

10 comments:

  1. I got my vaccinations. Some people didn't. So I'm in the boat as long as I don't fall out. I don't hear the unvaccinated banging on the door which is open anyway. When they get swept away by the virus, I feel bad. Some of my relatives are vehement anti-COVID vaccine people. I feel sad about it but they have been lucky. But the people in the boat live and those outside die. So get in the boat.
    Old Testament stories are pretty brutal. But they are iconic. And, as in the case of the Noah story, generate discussion.

    ReplyDelete
  2. There has been much discussion of the story of Noah (or the Deluge) on Strange Notions, the Catholic site dedicated to dialog with atheists. (I do not recommend visiting the site, and it is all but defunct now, anyway.) The debate there is about alleged cruelty of God to drown all breathing animals along with the entire human race, but more about seeming difference between the God of Genesis and the "official" God of the Catholic Church, the God of the philosophy of Thomas Aquinas and Thomists up to the present day.

    In Genesis 6: 5-7 we have:

    When the LORD saw how great the wickedness of human beings was on earth, and how every desire that their heart conceived was always nothing but evil, the LORD regretted making human beings on the earth, and his heart was grieved. So the LORD said: I will wipe out from the earth the human beings I have created, and not only the human beings, but also the animals and the crawling things and the birds of the air, for I regret that I made them.

    The problem is that for Thomists (and all classical theists), God cannot change and cannot experience emotions. When you are omniscient and outside of time, you can't have regrets, since regretting implies an initial lack of knowledge about what will become of what you do, and also a change of mind. An eternal (timeless) unchanging God cannot change his mind!

    My own references on the Bible (rejected as too "liberal" by the Strange Notions Catholics) tend to see the story of Noah as a ancient Jewish adaptation of even more ancient legends. The NAB says:

    The biblical story ultimately draws upon an ancient Mesopotamian tradition of a great flood, preserved in the Sumerian flood story, the eleventh tablet of the Gilgamesh Epic, and (embedded in a longer creation story) the Atrahasis Epic.

    I think worrying about the doomed masses of humans beating on the door of the ark and howling to be saved is perhaps unjustified. If that were meant to be our concern, it would have been part of the story. The story of the Deluge is an ancient legend, not a historical account of the adventures of Noah and his family. Still, that doesn't prevent us from wondering what to make of the alleged actions of a loving God who drowns every breathing creature on earth. And it doesn't stop us from asking classical theists why the Bible says God had regrets.

    Of course, you can't really argue with the God of classical theism like you can with the God of the Old Testament. It makes no sense to try to change the mind of the God of philosophers. This of course means that prayers of petition must be thought of in some way other than attempting to persuade God that he ought to intervene. (I miss Father Komonchak, who used to address questions like this.)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. David, it seems that many of the stories in the Bible, including in the NT, are versions of stories found in other ancient cultures.

      Delete
  3. I guess I don't lose any sleep over these Old Testament stories. Take what you can gain from them and leave the rest. The one that drives me crazy is the one which has been in the daily Mass readings lately, which is the account of Hannah and Samuel. Was there ever a worse parenting narrative? Well, I guess Isaac and Abraham is worse.

    ReplyDelete
  4. God is changeless, but our understanding of God is not, which is what the Old Testament chronicles.

    The Sojourners article strikes me as less about Noah than about two kinds of responses to God: Make an ark of the Church to keep out the sinners. Or make the Church an ark of sustanence from which to reach out to the sinners.

    I suppose that "accompaniment" is an attempt at the latter. I don't know if any of that is going on. But, then, maybe it's not something you would see.

    ReplyDelete
  5. The article attracted my attention because most evangelical Christians ( including my husband’s brother and his wife, and a couple who were among our closest friends pre- trump) focus heavily on the OT. They cherry pick from Paul ( mostly the seemingly anti- gay passages and the anti - woman passages), they like Revelation, and finally may quote a couple of cherry - picked passages from the gospels - John 3:16 and the quote that “ no one shall meet the Father except through me,” which justifies, in their minds, their belief that only christians ( qualified further as born- again christians only) can go to heaven. It is also an excuse to use the government to impose their religious beliefs on all citizens.

    I like to read commentary on the Hebrew Scriptures by contemporary Jewish scholars also. Their understandings of their own scriptures often differs from the interpretations of the same stories by Christian scholars. I like what Jean wrote.

    I read the Bible as metaphor anyway, writings that reflect how the ancient Jews and early christians interpreted the events and the creation around them. The introduction to this references a blog written by a rabbi, who brings up a less flattering interpretation by Jews who follow the Kabbalah version of Judaism. I do not consider the scriptures to be inerrant because they are a human product, not a divine product. I am not convinced that the readings on Sunday are actually “ the word of the Lord”. They are the words of those who were attempting to understand and define the creator of the universe as well as they could. There is much truth, even if it’s not literal truth but metaphor. The metaphorical nature is usually pretty clear with the OT stories ( to non- evangelicals anyway), but is true of much of the NT also.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Our Unitarian church was full of Jews and Christians of all stripes damaged by fundamentalist interpretations of Scripture.

      Some became fundamentalist-type atheists, who were utterly insufferable.

      Others learned to be comfortable with their agnosticism. They were sort of like orphans who had accepted that Daddy had bailed on them. He was not going to bail them out for being good kiddies--or punish them for being bad. Any good that was accomplished was up to them.

      The only way the rest of them found their way back to some notion of a benevolent and merciful God was through metaphor and symbol.

      As one of our visiting ministers noted, Jesus was a master at metaphorical stories with his parables.

      Delete
  6. The Noah story is part of the origins story of the people of Israel. The God of Israel who was capable of delivering Moses and Israel from an unjust Egypt through the sea was the All-Powerful God who could deliver a just man, Noah, from the destruction of an unjust humanity by the flood. By favoring certain just men and forming a people God gives them a Law to guide them toward justice.

    The image of the God of the flood who destroyed most of mankind and the animals was probably pre-biblical. The story of the rainbow, and the covenant with Noah never to destroy the world again by a flood, was an important correction to that image.

    Noah’s unwillingness to save others is very consistent with many themes in the Torah which warn Israel against getting involved with their neighbors who worshipped other gods.

    In the story of Lot, we do have a story in which Lot tries to save his neighbors, except he clearly has difficulty finding enough just ones to meet his efforts.

    ReplyDelete
  7. If we're all good people already, with no need of forgiveness and redemption, then Noah's story makes no sense. But if we're all corrupted sinners capable of murder, cruelty, heartlessness, greed, selfishness et al, then Noah's story makes at least some dramatic, mythical sense.

    ReplyDelete