|
Genesis 7:11 - 8:5 Perhaps the most famous story of antiquity is that of the great flood as found within biblical texts of the Judeo-Christian tradition. Discovered extra-canonical tablets trace the narrative through different languages and times with each modified version containing its own set of characteristics unique to that culture. Examination of extant Mesopotamian, Sumerian, and Ras Shamra accounts reveal the historical-mythological foundation upon which the Hebrew authors inevitably based their story. Thus, the Genesis redactor provides a Hebrew interpretation of God's wrath and the eschatological hope of his salvation and peace. A. Literary Context The entire Genesis account of the flood narrative starts at 6:5 and continues through 8:22. The beginning is clearly marked by God's sorrow for having made humankind because of their wickedness (6:5-6). As the story progresses, the introduction of Noah reveals that God is not finished with his creation in spite of the obvious rebellion and corruption (6:11, 13, 18). When the flood waters come, Noah, his family, and a collection of all the animals on earth rest safely inside an ark (7:12, 13, 15, 16). At the end of a one-year period, after having sent four birds in search of dry land, Noah leaves the ark together with its inhabitants and God establishes his covenant with all creation (8:6,8, 10, 12, 18, 21). In a broader context, the flood narrative is part of the primeval history (Genesis 1-11). These chapters look at the development of civilization and God's interaction with humans universally. It is not until chapter 12 that we see the beginning of the Hebrew people. The larger picture also draws close connection in ancient thought between the creation hymn of chapter 1 and the flood tradition. Contemporary scholarship recognizes the need for a proper understanding of these chapters. Evidence suggests that the authors of Genesis 1-11 never intended for their narratives to be viewed as a history of man. Rather, comparisons of ancient Near Eastern parallels reveal Genesis' polemical nature against the polytheism of neighboring peoples. If the primeval history "is…a fundamental challenge to the ideologies of civilized men and women…who like to suppose their own efforts will ultimately suffice to save them," then passages such as the one in question bear considerable theological significance.1 In source criticism of the flood narrative, authorship is generally attributed to the intertwining of the J and P passages that were redacted by a common editor. J, which derives its title from the use of the divine name "Yahweh," was probably written around the 10th or 9th centuries BCE. P, or the "priestly" source, was written around the 6th or 5th centuries BCE and receives its name from the Israelite priests' perspective from which it is composed.2. It is of theological significance to understand how J and P are combined to form a single story of importance to the Hebrew community. A look at the disentangled passage reveals that most of the J source (7:12, 16b, 17b, 22, 23a,c, 8:2b, and 3a) has been worked into the entire P (7:11, 13-16a, 17a, 18-21, 24, 8:1-2a, and 3b-5) account. While P usually consists of long blocks of text, J appears to be the interpolation of fragments from another text or editorial additions. To separate the sources correctly, scholars have employed J's use of Yahweh and P's use of Elohim, the differences in how many animals were taken onto the ark, and the numbers involving duration of rain, the water rising and falling, and total length of time.3. The structure of the passage presents itself in the form of a chiasmus. A chiasmus organization is characterized by a parallel structure where the first and last items are parallel, the second and the second to last items are parallel and so on. Wenham suggests the following configuration:
The extended chiasmus over the four chapters centers around God remembering Noah. Thus the focus becomes the action of God on behalf of Noah rather than what Noah did. Also of significance is the way the days parallel around the central point.
150 days of water waning (8:3) The literary structure of this passage points the reader towards the middle of the two halves. On one side is the death and annihilation of humankind. God has given creation back to the chaos from which it came. However, once God remembers Noah, the waters begin to recede and a commitment and promise of new life is made. The focus of the passage as a literary unit, therefore, is not about wrath or the flood. Rather, its appears to comment "on our common human pilgrimage and the way in which our common lot is decisively changed by the change wrought in God."6. Returning to the idea of Genesis 1-11 as a whole literary unit expressing a theological point, the flood story becomes the axis around which the other narratives revolve. The structure moves from chapter 1 with the creation to the destruction of life in the flood to the recreation of life that God brings when he remembers Noah. Thus, 8:1 is the turning point for not only the flood but for all of the primeval history. B. Historical Context Modern day geologists believe that a universal flood covering every bit of the world's surface would have been impossible after humankind first appeared on the earth. Extensive flooding often took place in the low-lying alluvial plain between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. However, excavations have not been able to reveal that one flood was more disastrous then another. Layers of silt deposits in Iraq from different cities of antiquity have dated from different times making anything more than a local inundation almost impossible. While archaeology does suggest that extended flooding at one time covered continents, dating indicates that all such occurrences stopped before man's first appearance.7. To suggest that the universal flood was a literal event is to presuppose that Biblical texts have been verbally inspired and must therefore reinforce science and history. However, as has already been suggested, the authors of Genesis 1-11 probably never intended to provide historical narrative. Thus, when interpreting passages like 7:11-8:5 it is not necessary to assume that all the events being described actually happened. The reality of the text is not in its historicity but in what it tells us about God and his relation to humanity. To question claims about the passages telling of literal events is not to devalue the text or to suggest that the text contain lies. Rather, when one understands the role of the story within Hebrew thought and the canon as being theological not historical, we are able to more accurately interpret and make application. To see the flood narratives as part of an ancient tradition that was transmitted into the Israelite culture and reinterpreted is to correctly place it within its historical context. For the Genesis account of the flood does not stand alone in history as a piece of literature. Rather, the flood tradition has its roots within the cultural milieu of ancient Mesopotamia. It has been suggested that the local flooding in the Tigris-Euphrates valley initiated the Babylonian tradition that passed from oral to written form and was eventually recorded in the Epic of Gilgamesh. In tablet XI, Gilgamesh, fearing his own death as he grows older, searches for Utnapishtim to find out how he earned immortal life. Utnapishtim, the Babylonian Noah, says that he and his wife won immortality by escaping destruction from a massive flood sent by the gods. Ea warns Utnapishtim of the coming disaster and tells him to tear down his house and build a boat the shape of a cube. He goes on to tell of the catastrophic nature of the flood, the settling of the boat in a mountainous region, the sending out of birds to estimate the water level, and finally the offering of a sacrifice. When En-lil discovered that someone had escaped death because of Ea’s warning he became very angry. However, he recognized the significance of what had taken place and awarded Utnapishtim and his wife with eternal life.8. There is little doubt that the Genesis and Gilgamesh accounts are based upon the same tradition. The difficulty is whether or not the Genesis author was intentionally rewriting the Babylonian narrative with a Hebrew theological interpretation or if the flood motif was simply an integral part of the Near Eastern worldview and thought. However, more important than how they are related is the polemical nature of the Genesis narrative and the theological significance it has in the life of Israel. In Genesis, when the flood begins P says "on that day all the fountains of the great deep burst forth, and the windows of the heavens were opened" (7:11). P goes on to describe how "the waters swelled and increased greatly on the earth; and the ark floated on the face of the water. The waters swelled so mightily on the earth that all the high mountains under the whole heaven were covered…but God remembered Noah and all the wild animals and all the domestic animals that were with him in the ark. And God made a wind blow over the earth, and the waters subsided; the fountains of the deep and the windows of the heavens were closed" (7:18-19, 8:1-2a). This sharply contrasts with the Gilgamesh epic where Utnapishtim says "I saw the shape of the storm, the storm was terrifying to see…even the gods were afraid of the flood-weapon. They withdrew; they went up to the heaven of Anu. The gods cowered, like dogs crouched by an outside wall. Ishtar screamed like a woman giving birth; The Mistress of the Gods, sweet of voice, was wailing."9. Thus, the Mesopotamian pantheon displays characteristics of frailty and deficiency because the destructive forces of the flood prove to be too powerful for them to control. Genesis 7, on the other hand, equally shows the cataclysmic nature of the flood as it "blotted out every living thing that was on the face of the ground" (7:23). However, the Creator that remembers Noah confirms his strength and mastery over the created in his ability to control the flood. When "God remembered Noah" he "made a wind blow over the earth, and the waters subsided; the fountains of the deep and the windows of the heavens were closed" (7:1, 2). Here we are reminded that during the chaos before creation when the earth "was a formless void and darkness covered the face of the deep…a wind from God swept over the face of the waters" (1:2). With both passages coming from P, it seems clear that the author was reinforcing the motif of the chaos before creation and the chaos of the flood and God's authority over it. Another divergence, though perhaps less significant, is the role the door of the ark has to play. P starts the sentence by saying "those that entered, male and female of all flesh, went in as God had commanded him" and J concludes "the Lord shut him in" (7:16). In Gilgamesh, however, Utnapishtim states "I went aboard the boat and closed the door."10. The epic also includes a detailed account of all that Utnapishtim does and feels about the events going on. The focusing of Genesis on God's actions and feelings rather than Noah's indicates that Noah is only significant for his obedience; the rest of the story simply tells us about God.11. C. Theological Analysis The literary and historical significance of Genesis 7:11-8:5 as well as the entire flood story illuminates important theological truths. As mimetic narrative, this passage speaks of a reality beyond history and time to truth about God's character and the peace that he has made possible for all creation. The structure of the passage clearly points the reader to God's action in remembering Noah. When this dichotomy is viewed correctly, a picture of chaos on one side and shalom on the other becomes evident. The chaotic pre-creation waters of the formless void have been released upon the earth again as "all the fountains of the great deep burst forth, and the windows of the heavens were opened" (7:11). Thus, the flood is more than the annihilation of humanity but a cataclysmic event involving the entire created realm. God, however, did not leave the earth in its formless void during the flood just as in the creation hymn. Rather, "God remembered Noah" and his wind began to abate the chaos. The restoration of shalom (peace) means that the continuing presence of God working among his people is not over. For the Creator desires to bring all creation to him that they might share in the peace he offers. Despite God's anger with humankind's sin, he provides grace and salvation. The ark becomes a symbol of that grace and God's willingness to forgive. His people deserved to die in the waters of judgement and chaos yet his mercy and commitment to humanity could not be changed. In the midst of the storm, God brings his peace to his people. The eschatological hope of the flood is the restoration of the created order. The ark is the time when: The wolf shall live with the lamb, Or even still: 'This is like the days of Noah to me: God has made his peace available to all people along with his salvation and grace. His commitment to humanity no matter how sinful they become is unrelenting. Genesis is a testimony to God's power over the chaos and his faithfulness to his covenant with Israel. Moreover, the P passages that came out of the exilic period reflect the hope that Israel needed. In a time when they thought that God had forgotten them, the Genesis story offers a picture of God committed to his people. The fact that he remembers Noah when his entire world had been destroyed serves as a reminder that even in exile God is faithful. D. Application In the world today that has been given over to the sin and rebellion of Noah's time, the deluge offers powerful visions of what the consequences might be. In a large scale, the flood narrative in 6-9 of Genesis shows us God's hatred of sin. We often find ourselves in a chaotic environment where the presence of God seems devoid. We question whether he has abandoned us just as the Israelites in exile did. We fear his judgement and wrath for the way we have turned our back on him. God's transcendence cannot be sacrificed for his immanence. We cannot forget that he is still in control and that now matter how close he may seem, we still have to obey him. However, his judgement is not without mercy for he does not leave creation to be destroyed by the chaos. Genesis reminds us that the formless void is not the final word but that peace is possible. The violence and disorder of society threatens our very survival. Yet, we can see that grace and salvation are the center of our hope in Genesis, not the preservation of the existing social order. When chaos becomes an existential reality, we can remember that God has brought us shalom in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth. God remembers Noah and the earth is filled with God's presence. Chaos may be unavoidable but God is faithful and his grace carries us through the storm. |
