An ark wasn't necessary. God could have simply shielded those He wanted to save.
Good point on the seed, but God could have done things a myriad of ways. The ark was not necessary. And God could have come to anyone in Noah's time.
Acts 2:38 Comparison: Evangelical vs. Oneness / Baptismal-Regeneration View
- Thread starter LightBearer316
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Good point on the seed, but God could have done things a myriad of ways. The ark was not necessary. And God could have come to anyone in Noah's time.
@studier, I'm starting to see 2 kinds of faith. One is faith in a transcendant power that can do anything, and the other is faith in what God has said that has confidence he will bring his words to pass. Perhaps this is what we are seeing in the other thread where someone said having faith in God's words is not efficacious, but only faith in God himself is.
God can do anything he wants, but he decided that he was going to do it the way he did it, and that way required a man to build the ark. All of your imaginative ideas are just useless fantasy and are not faith.
Whatever you may think, Christ coming into the world was not dependent Noah's obedience.
I use many sources. Check BDB/Gesenius via Blue Letter Bible (H4672, H2580) & the TWOT‑keyed lexicon at BibleStudyTools for H2580.
They all define matsa as: to find/ to be given/to obtain & chen as ‘favor/grace. TWOT explicitly classifies chen as unmerited favor.
None of them define it as ‘instructions.
100% it was based on the path God chose. Explain within that constraint how Christ could have come into the world as the son of man?
What do you see as the difference between being human and a son of Adam?
1st: A relationship with God isn't the same as being saved from judgment. Cain had a relationship with God also.
Seems like you're confusing description with cause & relationship with redemption.
Gen 6:8 is the 1st time Noah is mentioned as receiving anything from God.
Genesis 6:8 is clear: grace comes 1st, then covenant, then instructions, then obedience.
Noah’s righteousness is the result of grace, not the cause of it.
Throughout scripture, (1) Grace (2) Faith (3) Obedience. Never the reverse!
Noah’s salvation from destruction is clearly tied to God's grace.
By grace are you saved thru faith (Eph 2:8).
Here is what the Genesis 6 text actually says:
NET Gen6:7–9 So the LORD said, “I will wipe humankind, whom I have created, from the face of the earth…”
- YHWH determines to wipe mankind from the face of the earth.
- The “but” is adversative to v.7 - In the face of announced judgment, Noah is distinguished from the rest of humanity.
- The Text now explains who Noah is - a righteous, blameless man who walked with God.
So Noah - a righteous and blameless man who was walking with God - found favor in God’s sight and was saved by grace, coupled with Noah’s obedient faith, working with God as God commanded.
It would be better if you linked to exactly where you see "to be given/to obtain" for matsa and why you are putting a passive sense here.
If it's in TWOT, BDB (full), HALOT, Holladay, I must have missed it.
I didn't question "chen" or say anything about "instructions" for "matsa"
With respect, you're really not parsing anything.
Grace - chen - charis lexically means "grace" or "favor" - "unmerited favor" is a theological gloss.
Noah is righteous, blameless, and walking with God prior to being given this grace saving him from being wiped from the earth. Do, you think those 3 words/concepts speak of Noah living a life of faith & obedience to God prior to being given this specific grace stated in Gen6:8?
This in part is why I've been asking for "faith" to be defined. There is much disagreement in what it even is and includes, and, yes, also disagreement in the object of faith. I think we both saw the problems you mention re: the theories posted elsewhere.
You’re treating the narrator’s description of Noah in Vs 9, as the CAUSE of grace received in Vs 8. This isn't the text sequence.
Vs 7, Judgment announced
Vs 8: Noah receives/GRACE. The 1st divine action toward Noah
Vs 9: A narrative introduction describing Noah, not a statement of how he EARNED grace.
Heb 11:7 interprets Noah the same way > By Faith, Not by merit.
Grace is a GIFT, not a wage owed (Eph 2:8–9; Rom 6:23; Rom 5:15–17). Gifts are given, not earned.
I think that we can safely assume that Noah had been living under grace/favor for a very long time. He was then provided with exceptional and saving grace at the time of the flood.
By the way, near Eastern narritives often requires/demands that we make assumptions to fill in the blanks so to speak.
I'm reading the verses as they are written.
v.8 Noah found grace - this is the wording in Hebrew and Greek
v.9 You're overly concerned with works - the verse speaks nothing of Noah earning grace so I said nothing about Noah earning grace - we don't need to rewrite the verses to protect grace - the verse is telling us about Noah as he was living in righteousness, walking with YHWH already when he found grace/favor in YHWH's sight when YHWH decided to wipe mankind off the earth.
Heb11:7 looks back at this event as described and tells us it's a picture of faith - so we have a Noah, a righteous, blameless man who already walked with YHWH doing what God commanded as part of his grace re: the ark for salvation - this is described in Hebrews as faith and more:
NET Hebrews 11:7 By faith Noah, when he was warned about things not yet seen, with reverent regard constructed an ark for the deliverance (salvation) of his family. Through faith he condemned the world and became an heir of the righteousness that comes by faith.
- Noah's faith is coupled with "reverence" with which he constructed the ark. Here's how Genesis describes this:
- 22 And Noah did all that God commanded him– he did indeed. (Gen. 6:22 NET)
- As the narrative continues with how Noah and creatures were functioning:
- 5 And Noah did all that the LORD commanded him. (Gen. 7:5 NET)
- 9 male and female, came into the ark to Noah, just as God had commanded him. (Gen. 7:9 NET)
- 16 Those that entered were male and female, just as God commanded him. Then the LORD shut him in. (Gen. 7:16 NET)
- This is the picture of Noah's obedient faith with reverence for YHWH through which Noah condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness that comes from faith
- This faith is elaborated in a narrative that shows it to be obedient faith coupled with reverence doing the work God commanded that resulted in the salvation of Noah and his family
I think we agree that this righteousness comes from faith. I doubt we agree on what this faith is.
Now, we can go back and say this was just physical salvation from death, but what for? Scripture says it was salvation. Peter uses it as a figure for baptism he says saves through Christ's resurrection (1Pet3:18-22), and to speak of God saving godly men vs. ungodly men in 2Pet2.
Then, we have Ezekiel that we need to contend with when we're promoting our favored systematic theologies:
NET Ezek14:12-20 The word of the LORD (YHWH) came to me: 13 "Son of man, suppose a country sins against me by being unfaithful, and I stretch out my hand against it, cut off its bread supply, cause famine to come on it, and kill both people and animals. 14 Even if these three men, Noah, Daniel, and Job, were in it, they would save only their own lives by their righteousness, declares the sovereign LORD. 15 "Suppose I were to send wild animals through the land and kill its children, leaving it desolate, without travelers due to the wild animals. 16 Even if these three men were in it, as surely as I live, declares the sovereign LORD, they could not save their own sons or daughters; they would save only their own lives, and the land would become desolate. 17 "Or suppose I were to bring a sword against that land and say, 'Let a sword pass through the land,' and I were to kill both people and animals. 18 Even if these three men were in it, as surely as I live, declares the sovereign LORD, they could not save their own sons or daughters– they would save only their own lives. 19 "Or suppose I were to send a plague into that land, and pour out my rage on it with bloodshed, killing both people and animals. 20 Even if Noah, Daniel, and Job were in it, as surely as I live, declares the sovereign LORD, they could not save their own son or daughter; they would save only their own lives by their righteousness.
Just let Scripture say what it says.
God made a promise that Eve's seed would bruise the head of the serpent, which is generally understood to mean Christ destroying the power of the devil in his death. That promise could only be fulfilled through Adam's seed; it could not be fulfilled by some other race that God could create if all of existing humanity had been destroyed in the flood.
Does that make sense? Do you still feel a need to go beyond what is written into fantasy land to try to find some loophole to the reality that God is bound by his words?
Where in Genesis 12 does it say that Abram was considered righteous by God? Here we see that Abram departed out of his country, from his family, from his father’s house to a land that God will show him, but it was not until Genesis 15:5-6 where we read that God brought him outside and said, "Look now toward heaven, and count the stars if you are able to number them." And He said to him, "So shall your descendants be." 6 And he believed in the Lord, and He accounted it to him for righteousness.
In regard to "faith without works is dead" in James 2:20, this does not mean that faith is dead until it produces works and then it becomes a living faith or that works are the source of life in faith or that we are saved by works. James is simply saying faith that is not accompanied by evidential works demonstrates that it's dead. If someone merely says-claims he has faith, but lacks resulting evidential works, then he has an empty profession of faith/dead faith and not authentic faith. (James 2:14)
In James 2:21, notice closely that James does not say that Abraham's work of offering up Isaac resulted in God accounting Abraham as righteous. The accounting of Abraham's faith as righteousness was made in Genesis 15:6, many years before his work of offering up Isaac recorded in Genesis 22. The work of Abraham did not have some kind of intrinsic merit to account him as righteous, but it showed or manifested the genuineness of his faith. That is the "sense" in which Abraham was "justified by works." He was shown to be righteous.
In James 2:22, faith made perfect or complete by works means bring to maturity, to complete like love in 1 John 4:18. It doesn't mean that Abraham was finally saved based on merits of his works after he offered up Isaac on the altar in Genesis 22. When Abraham performed the good work in Genesis 22; he fulfilled the expectations created by the pronouncement of his faith in Genesis 15:6.
In James 2:23, the scripture was fulfilled in vindicating or demonstrating that Abraham believed God and was accounted as righteous. Abraham was accounted as righteous based on his faith (Genesis 15:6) not his works (Romans 4:2-3) long before he offered up Isaac on the altar in Genesis 22.
You need to realize that James is discussing the "evidence" of faith (says-claims to have faith but has no works/I will show you my faith by my works - James 2:14-18) and not the initial act of being accounted as righteous with God. (Romans 4:2-3)