3/03/19 Genesis 6:13-22 “The Law of Retaliation – reap
what you sow!”
Genesis
6:13 – And God said
unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for
the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy
them with the earth.
all flesh – as per Genesis 6:12 (for all
flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth)
destroy – same word
(different tense) as used for “corrupted” in Genesis 6:12.
This follows on from God observing in the
previous 2 verses that the earth was filled with corruption and violence. All
flesh had been corrupted and violence seemed to be the consequence. All flesh
that is, except Noah. “all” here still means all the world, with Noah
out of this equation for he and his family will be taken out of the world (in
the ark) before the flood destroys all mankind remaining.
God has observed (it has come before His
face) in the sense that the time has come for Him to deal with this, to bring
judgment upon all flesh (other than Noah). God will destroy the earth (by
flood) in order to destroy all mankind. The destruction is of the earth, while
the object of the destruction is mankind [along with all land animals, birds of
flight, and all creepie-crawlies on the earth (Genesis 6:7)].
Consequences always follow our free will
choices; yet we cannot be held responsible for any consequence without involving
our free will. That is, a just and righteous God can only condemn man on the
basis of his culpability. And to prove culpability one must demonstrate the intention
without which the action would not have been carried out.
Culpability, or
being culpable, is a measure of
the degree to which an agent, such as a person, can be held morally or legally
responsible for action and inaction. It has been noted that the word,
culpability, "ordinarily has normative force, for in nonlegal English, a
person is culpable only if he is justly to blame for his conduct".
Culpability therefore marks the dividing line between moral evil, like murder,
for which someone may be held legally responsible and a randomly occurring
event, like earthquakes, for which no human can be held responsible. One
formulation of the concept is as follows:
A person is culpable if they
cause a negative event and
(1) the act was intentional;
(2) the act and its consequences could have been controlled (i.e., the agent
knew the likely consequences, the agent was not coerced, and the agent overcame
hurdles to make the event happen); and
(3) the person provided no excuse or justification for the actions.
Culpability descends from the
Latin concept of fault (culpa). The concept of culpability is intimately
tied up with notions of agency, freedom, and free will. All are commonly held
to be necessary, but not sufficient, conditions for culpability.
(Wikipedia)
Thus if mankind is not
culpable, then mankind cannot be justly punished. I know the calvinists will
then say that God is sovereign and therefore can do what He wishes to do.
That’s true, but God is also a righteous God; He will not break His own laws.
And, God is a just God; He will not unjustly condemn man. It is the soul that
sins that shall die (Ezekiel 18:20) Therefore, in order to justly punish man
for his violence and corruption, God requires that man demonstrate his
culpability first, that is, that the crime is a consequence of man’s free will
decision independent of any influence from the One who judges. This is why God has
waited until man has demonstrated his culpability before “seeing”, “observing”,
“repenting” etc or, as in today’s passage, “is come before me”.
The calvinist God might be sovereign, but he
is neither just nor righteous if he condemns man for doing that which he has
been ordained to do!
Genesis
6:14 – Make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms shalt thou make in the ark, and
shalt pitch (1) it within and without with pitch (2).
gopher – gopher (Could mean cypress wood which
was good for such purposes)
pitch (1) – kaphar (to coat
or cover with pitch)
pitch (2) – kopher (asphalt;
pitch; price of a life; ransom) Probably natural bitumen.
within and without – inside and
outside
rooms – literally “nests”
“ark” (tebah) is apparently an archaic
word, possibly from Egyptian. It is used here (and in Genesis 6 to 9) and in
Exodus 2:3 & 5. It signifies something that floats, like a box, but not a
sailing ship of any kind.
The ark of the covenant uses a
different word altogether for “ark” (‘arown).
Pitch (bitumen) is still used today as a
waterproofing agent.
kopher (pitch) is also translated “a sum of money”
(Exodus 21:30); “a ransom” (Exodus 30:12); “bribe” (1 Samuel 12:3).
Genesis
6:15 – And this [is
the fashion] which thou shalt make it [of]: The length of the ark [shall
be] three hundred cubits, the breadth of it fifty cubits, and the height of
it thirty cubits.
Assuming a cubit to be around 1.5 feet or
45cm, the length would be 135m, width 22.5m and height 15.3m. Some have it
bigger than this. The shape was most likely rectangular, designed merely to
float rather than travel from one place to another. After all, there was really
nowhere to go anyway, so just floating was all that was necessary to keep all
life on board from drowning.
Genesis
6:16 – A window shalt
thou make to the ark, and in a cubit shalt thou finish it above; and the door
of the ark shalt thou set in the side thereof; [with] lower, second, and
third [stories] shalt thou make it.
window – tsohar (noon;
midday; roof) This can mean some kind of skylight, or merely the roof on the
top. It may have been a window opening 1 cubit high
running around the upper edge of the ark. The word “above” signifies the higher
part; upper part; above; on top of. The purpose may have been more to do with
ventilation and oxygenation than mere lighting. It would also be expected to
keep water out, so actually on top might have been a problem.
A door (= that which can be opened) was to
be put in one side, obviously to permit access of animals of all kinds. It had
3 levels or floors inside, so must also have had some means of climbing from
one level to another, although some think that the door in the side permitted
access from outside to each of the 3 levels.
Genesis
6:17 – And, behold, I,
even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh,
wherein [is] the breath of life, from under heaven; [and] every thing that [is] in the earth shall die.
flood – flood; deluge.
Only used in relation to this flood, 13 times. It is used 12 times from Genesis
6 to Genesis 11, and then once in Psalm 29:10 where it clearly refers to the
Genesis flood.
Psalm 29:10 – The Lord sitteth
upon the flood; yea, the Lord sitteth King for
ever.
destroy – destroy;
corrupt; ruin; corrupt.
God will bring a deluge of waters upon the
whole earth (erets)
in order to destroy (ruin; corrupt) all flesh. This appears to be an example of
the Law of Retaliation, where all flesh has corrupted the earth (Genesis 6:12)
and is now being paid back in kind with the corruption (destruction) of all
flesh in Genesis 6:13, and also again here in Genesis 6:17. This is literally
pay-back time. They will reap what they have sown.
Galatians 6:7-8 – 7Be
not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he
also reap. 8For he
that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth
to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.
God will treat them the same way they
treated Him. It’s known as the Golden Rule, but it is not really a rule; rather
it is a promise of what you will get!
Luke 6:31 – And as ye would that men should do to
you, do ye also to them likewise.
Matthew 7:12 – Therefore all things whatsoever ye
would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and
the prophets.
Much of biblical doctrine is based upon this
teaching: that for every free will choice you make, there is a consequential
reaction. Not one person will stand before God in the judgment and be able to
say that it’s unjust, unfair or not of their doing.
Therefore, every creature on earth that
causes violence and corruption will suffer violence and corruption, and because
“all” means “all”, then “all” flesh will suffer for their sins in this
judgment. All flesh that sows corruption will suffer
corruption; all will die.
Except Noah (and through him, his family),
who clearly did not sow corruption, but instead would reap the reward of
righteousness from the sowing of the same.
Hosea 10:12-13 – 12Sow
to yourselves in righteousness, reap in mercy; break up your fallow ground: for
[it is] time to seek the Lord, till he come and rain righteousness upon
you. 13Ye have plowed wickedness, ye have reaped iniquity; ye have eaten
the fruit of lies: because thou didst trust in thy way, in the multitude of thy
mighty men.
God has breathed the breath of life into
man, and with the flood He will take away (drown) that breath of life as easily
as He gave it.
Genesis
6:18 – But with thee
will I establish my covenant; and thou shalt come into the ark, thou, and thy
sons, and thy wife, and thy sons’ wives with thee.
But – As per Genesis 6:8 – “But
Noah ….”
this “But” provides the exception to the
rule.
Genesis 6:8 – But Noah found grace in the eyes
of the Lord.
And so this exception
excuses Noah from that Law of Retaliation. Noah was not guilty of violence and
corruption, and so Noah (and his family) would not receive the violence and
corruption due all other mankind. However, Noah is still reaping the crop he
has sown. he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life
everlasting (Galatians 6:8)
Noah and
his wife, and his 3 sons and their wives, would all be beneficiaries of Noah’s
righteousness. We know that after the flood, Ham and his descendants would be
an unrighteous branch of this family, with much of the enmity toward the
Hebrews coming from Ham’s descendants [such as Canaan, Mizraim
(Egypt), Nimrod, Babylon, Nineveh, Asshur (Assyria)]. Yet Ham is counted righteous along with
Noah and permitted on the ark with Noah. And we know nothing about any of their
wives, other than they were on the ark with Noah. The righteousness of the
family appears to rest upon Noah when it comes to being rescued from the flood.
covenant – A covenant is
an agreement or contract between 2 or more parties. Later on, God would make a
covenant with Abraham as a descendant of Shem, but whether this covenant with
Noah is similar or a precursor to the Abrahamic covenant is not made clear. It
is likely, though, that this was an agreement with Noah as a righteous man who
would carry the genealogical line (especially that of Christ) into the
post-flood era, and that God would preserve him and his family while the flood
destroyed all other mankind on earth.
However, after the flood, God makes a
covenant with Noah and his family, and with all flesh upon the earth (which
would all descend from Noah). While the covenant of Genesis 6:18 appears to be
a promise to keep those in the ark safe from destruction, this covenant does
appear to be more to do with not destroying the earth again by flood.
Genesis 9:8-17 – 8And
God spake unto Noah, and to his sons with him,
saying, 9And I,
behold, I establish my covenant with you, and with your seed after you; 10And with every living creature
that [is] with you, of the fowl, of the cattle, and of every beast of
the earth with you; from all that go out of the ark, to every beast of the
earth. 11And I will
establish my covenant with you; neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by
the waters of a flood; neither shall there any more
be a flood to destroy the earth. 12And
God said, This [is] the token of the covenant
which I make between me and you and every living creature that [is] with
you, for perpetual generations: 13I
do set my bow in the cloud, and it shall be for a token of a covenant between
me and the earth. 14And
it shall come to pass, when I bring a cloud over the earth, that the bow shall
be seen in the cloud: 15And
I will remember my covenant, which [is] between me and you and every
living creature of all flesh; and the waters shall no more become a flood to
destroy all flesh. 16And
the bow shall be in the cloud; and I will look upon it, that I may remember the
everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that [is]
upon the earth. 17And
God said unto Noah, This [is] the token of the
covenant, which I have established between me and all flesh that [is] upon
the earth.
Genesis
6:19-20 – 19And of every living thing of all
flesh, two of every [sort] shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep [them]
alive with thee; they shall be male and female. 20Of fowls after
their kind, and of cattle after their kind, of every creeping thing of the
earth after his kind, two of every [sort] shall come unto thee, to keep [them]
alive.
Of all the living creatures that will be
destroyed in the flood, 2 of each are to be brought into the ark to preserve
the species. Whether this included all species created in the beginning we do
not know. Maybe some became extinct by then, maybe not. But all life that
existed on earth at the time of the flood was to be preserved for the
post-flood world. It is clear that not one species was lost because of the
flood itself.
Genesis 7:2-4 specifies 2 of each unclean
beast and 7 of each clean beast, plus 7 of all birds of the air; both male and
female included in all species.
Noah didn’t have to go and collect them,
either, for they would come to Noah according to Vs 20 here. God is sovereign,
and if He can create all the universe in just 6 days, then He is quite capable
of gathering all the animals and bringing them to the ark.
Genesis
6:21 – And take thou
unto thee of all food that is eaten, and thou shalt gather [it] to thee;
and it shall be for food for thee, and for them.
And food had to be gathered to keep all
these creatures alive for the time on the ark as well as sufficient to keep
them alive until the vegetation grew back again. We must assume that these
animals ate a lot of food; the waters of the flood may probably have been
sufficient for drinking water. Some have suggested that all on the ark went
into some sort of hibernation, thus not requiring as much food and water, but
we aren’t told this. All we can assume is that all life on the ark was provided
for until suitable supplies could be found elsewhere after the flood.
Some say that carnivores couldn’t have been
taken on the ark, yet that would assume that God re-created these animals after
the flood. However, all animals appear to have been originally created to eat
plant products, so why couldn’t the carnivores of today have eaten hay, grain
and other plant-derived foods?
Genesis
6:22 – Thus did Noah;
according to all that God commanded him, so did he.
And Noah was obedient in carrying out
everything God commanded him to do; “all” here can be assumed to mean “all”
within reason.
Exodus 7:6 – And Moses and Aaron did as the Lord
commanded them, so did they.
As a digression, I’ll look at some
statements I recently came across online. The first comment emphasises a point
that I’ve asked calvinists for a while now: Why are there no elect among the
heathen until the missionaries get there? This seems to be a condition of
salvation. Why does the calvinist God choose so many Caucasian followers and so
few of other races if the election is truly unconditional? This recent comment
says:
One point is how geographically situated calvinists are, and their emphasis of pre-destination. If God has therefore pre-destined calvinists to be saved, then why only in countries with seminaries and a certain foundation of western education? It makes God seem sadistic and showing favoritism or something.
https://www.christianforums.com/threads/are-calvinists-christians.7984433/
Clearly whatever the calvinists teach about
the unconditional election, there’s one thing for certain: that the calvinist
election is as far from being unconditional as east is from west! The calvinist
God certainly has a sadistic problem with electing those from Arab countries,
for instance.
Also, I often see calvinist comments
remarking on how some “red-neck” non-calvinists see them as a cult. These
“unloving” non-calvinists ignore the “fact” that calvinism is just another way
of seeing the Bible, they say. Yet, when the calvinists start hitting out at
non-calvinists, they (the calvinists) make it more than abundantly clear that they
believe that calvinism is the only true Christian doctrine, and that any step
away from calvinism is a step toward unbelief. (Calvinists do love to
extensively quote their author-heroes in support of their doctrines, so note
that I, too, can quote from calvinist authors as readily as the calvinists
themselves do! Of course, I do prefer to use the Bible alone [sola scriptura]
for support of my beliefs, but then, I’m allowed to; I’m not a calvinist!)
For example: Calvinism is the Gospel and to
teach Calvinism is in fact to preach the Gospel. It is questionable whether a
dogmatic theology which is not Calvinistic is truly Christian.
Arthur C. Custance,
The Sovereignty of Grace (Phillipsburg: Presbyterian and Reformed
Publishing Co., 1979), p. 302.
Al Mohler would echo this view in claiming
that new calvinism is the only on-the-ball doctrine. Where else are they going to go? If
you’re a theological minded, deeply convictional young evangelical, if you’re
committed to the gospel and want to see the nations rejoice in the name of
Christ, if you want to see gospel built and structured committed churches, your
theology is just going end up basically being Reformed, basically something
like this new Calvinism, or you’re going to have to invent some label for what
is basically going to be the same thing, there just are not options out there,
and that’s something that frustrates some people, but when I’m asked about the
New Calvinism—where else are they going to go, who else is going to answer the
questions, where else are they going to find the resources they going to need
and where else are they going to connect.
http://www.newcalvinist.com/albert-mohler-and-hip-hop-culture/
Kenneth Talbot and W. Gary Crampton said, “any compromise of Calvinism is a step towards humanism.”
Kenneth G. Talbot and W. Gary Crampton, Calvinism,
Hyper-Calvinism and Arminianism (Edmonton: Still Waters Revival Books,
1990), p. 3
And The apostolic doctrine was that of Reformed Theology. (Ibid, p. 79)
Boettner, in The Reformed
Doctrine of Predestination says:
If the perfection of the divine
plan be denied, no consistent stopping place will be found short of atheism. P
17
Where the principles of
Calvinism are abandoned, there is a powerful tendency leading downward into the
depths of Naturalism. Some have declared—and rightly we believe—that there is
no consistent middle ground between Calvinism and Atheism. P 244
The doctrine that men are saved
only through the unmerited love and grace of God finds its full and honest
expression only in the doctrines of Calvinism. P 70
"Christ
and His apostles" were Calvinistic, according to
Milburn Cockrell.
(Cockrell,
Introduction to Abandoned Truth: The Doctrines of Grace Tom Ross, p. v.)
https://jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Doctrines/Calvinism/calvinism_and_baptists.htm
Well, did anyone think to tell Paul that? If only Paul had known that
he was supposed to be calvinist; then he wouldn’t have committed the cardinal
sin of calvinism: to offer to lose his salvation for the sake of his lost
fellow countrymen (Romans 9:1-3) who, being non-elect, could never be saved
anyway. (Or, if those Israelites were indeed elect, they would be saved anyway
while Paul lost his salvation for the sake of those ones who could never lose
their salvation!?)
As I have
said in the past, calvinism is incompatible with what I call biblical
doctrines. If they are right, then I’m never going to make heaven, for why
would a calvinist God ordain me to be saved and fail to remind me that
calvinism is the only true way to heaven? And, if I’m right and man is required
to choose this day (by his own free will) whom he will serve, then calvinism is
non-biblical indeed. The one denies the other.
Of course,
if calvinism is right, then the calvinist God has ordained that I should think
I’m a Christian, yet only with a temporary faith (an inferior operation of the
Spirit) as taught by Calvin in his Institutes Bk 3 Ch 2 Section 11. Therefore,
if calvinism is right, then the calvinist God will pull the plug on me one day
before I die in order to prevent me from going to heaven, just to make sure
that a non-calvinist won’t get to heaven.
So how many
“calvinists” are there who are so certain they’re going to heaven, yet
according to Calvin they could have a temporary faith that will end before they
get there. The calvinist teaches that the elect will persevere by God’s grace
until the end, yet it’s only by persevering to the end that can demonstrate to
them and others that they were indeed truly of the elect. The calvinist
doctrine can give no assurances of perseverance until the end is reached! It is
not the words you say but the life you live that determines your entry into calvinist
heaven!
Hoppers Crossing
Christian Church homepage