And God
blessed Noah and his sons and said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and
fill the earth. "The fear of you
and the terror of you will be on every beast of the earth and on every bird of
the sky; with everything that creeps on the ground, and all the fish of the
sea, into your hand they are given. "Every moving thing that is alive shall
be food for you; I give all to you, as I gave the green plant. "Only you shall not eat flesh with its
life, that is, its blood. "Surely I
will require your lifeblood; from every beast I will require it. And from every
man, from every man's brother I will require the life of man.
"Whoever sheds man's blood // By man his
blood shall be shed,
For in the image of God // He made man.”
"As for
you, be fruitful and multiply; Populate the earth abundantly and multiply in
it." (Genesis 9:1-7 NASB)
There are a
few imperatives in this passage, but I don’t see any of them as “laws” per se
(again, a matter of opinion). If the
criteria I established for myself in the last post are used, then none of these
verses work as a law because none of the imperatives have consequences
specified. Verses 4 and 5 along with the
poetic element in verse 6 though do have consequences, it’s just that the prohibitions
are not constructed using an imperative.
I think I need to widen my criteria to include prohibitions with
consequences.
So now my
criteria could be revised as follows: If
the text has an imperative or prohibition coupled with a consequence, whether
good or bad, I will consider that as one sort of legal text. Second, if an imperative or prohibition is
coupled with a declaration of endorsement or rational support, a reason is
given for it; I will consider that as a second sort of legal text. If I modify these criteria in this way, then
verse six fits nicely. I believe the
context also supports seeing this as a “law” since there is the establishment
of a covenant taking place as part of Noah and his family leaving the ark. Laws are often components of covenants
helping establish responsibilities of either party.
These laws
are both about blood. One is about
consuming meat with the blood still in it, and the other is about shedding the
blood of another person. The
consequences are stiff. When meat is
consumed with the blood in it, the blood of the offender will be required. But another way to look at verse 5 is as the
consequences if any person or beast (or brother) sheds the blood of a person
rather than eating the meat with the blood.
The problem I face is that if verse 5 is taken as the consequence of
taking the life blood of a person, then this “law” no longer fits my
criteria. There is no “imperative” or
prohibition with the consequence.
But there is
a third way to see verse 5 as well. It
could be that it is not a consequence but an explanation of the prohibition in
verse 4. The reason blood is not to be
consumed is that God reserves to Himself the blood of any living thing. It belongs to God, so it is not to be
consumed. This is interesting for a
variety of reasons; the cultural ones are the murkiest, but probably the most
important. I think that my
interpretation lays more this direction, viewing verse 5 as a consequence of
verse 4. Execution for eating blood in
meat seems a bit extreme, even for God.
The text of
verse six actually meets both criteria of consequence and rational
support. In this verse it is the
shedding of human blood, the violence that brought on the flood in the first
place, to which God refers. Here is laid
down the rule that killing a person forfeits the killer’s life. The rationale is that people are made in the
image of God. Therefore destroying this
image is a personal affront to the Maker of the image, God. It seems rational. In fact, it is odd that it has to be said, I
would think it would be obvious; that this law would have already been in
place. The earliest legal texts found so
far all include prohibitions against murder with stiff penalties. Perhaps they all stem from this one.
So what does
all this tell me about my Master? What
do I learn of His character? What is
important to Him? What would He have me
do in consequence?
The first
thing that strikes me is that blood is very important to God. There may be cultural issues here, but I also
see a place where sacrifice is foreshadowed, eventually leading to Jesus on the
cross. Blood is important, and here it
is used to refer to the life of a person.
The term translated “lifeblood” is taken from the literal Hebrew terms,
“your (2nd plural) bloods to/for your (2nd plural) souls.” The blood of your soul isn’t as cut and dried
as it sounds since soul isn’t always used the same way in Hebrew. Here the context supports understanding soul
as the whole person, or the living essence of the person.
This living
soul is important to my Master. Death is
a big deal to Him, and requires the punishment of death for those who
kill. I catch a glimpse of the pain my
Master felt as He felt remorse over having created people in the first
place. The choice of fruit in the Garden
of Eden had far reaching consequences, well beyond the death of Abel. Cain’s descendants were a rampant scourge on
the earth. Cain and his descendants are
not mentioned in lineages past Genesis 6.
He and all his children were eventually wiped from the face of the
earth. I see something here of the
magnitude of the importance of the image of God to my Master.
And what of
eating meat with blood in it? I see in
verse 5 that my Master reserves the blood to Himself. Even before a “sacrificial” system, my Master
claims the blood of any living thing as holy and His, without calling it holy;
by claiming it, it become holy by definition (another action defining a term
not used before). Later on I will find
that blood outside of the sanctuary profanes the person in contact with
it. Again, it belongs to God, and is
reserved to Him. Individuals in contact
with it have to be cleansed.
I cannot
take blood so lightly. I cannot take
life so lightly. Those living around me
are living people in the image of God, and they are precious to my Master. I stay away from them in fear, and keep the
light and hope within me hidden. Why? These are precious people to my Master. Their lives, their blood belong to Him. How can I not do something to bring that
vital news to them? They may not receive
it, but they might. They may not want to
have anything to do with church, but they might. It’s not about church anyway; it’s about my
Master’s love for them. Once they
experience that, they will desire church and Bible study, and all the rest.
In this
account, God makes explicit what was implicit before. He wants me and all His human creatures to
know how precious they are to Him; how painful to Him it is when we destroy
each other. Do I get that? I’m no pacifist, but it’s not hard to see the
effects of the destruction of families, of lives, and hate that. Countries are now “digging” their way out of
the pain and destruction of war. Do I
see that pain of my Master that has viewed all this as sadness and waste?
But to bring
it home to me personally, I play games that are violent. Should I?
Are these games eroding my ability to see people as precious ones to
God? That is something I really need to
take a good look at. All the ones I play
are military in nature, and that takes a lot of the stigma away. God has and I believe does lead nations to
war as punishment on other nations. I
believe He sets up and tears down rulers today in much the same way as He did
in the record of His work among the Israelites in Scripture. God commanded death, and complete and utter
destruction for some in Canaan. Again,
this is not a cut and dried answer.
Violence clearly belongs to rulers and authorities.
Something
that reflects the touch of sadness felt by my Maker is contained in verse
6. The prohibition is given a
consequence, so following it relies on a person’s self-interest. Yet the reason given is the Image of God in
each person. I detect the wish of my
Master that His image was enough to warrant holding life precious; this rule is
a concession that pains His heart to have to give. But I also see that my Master doesn’t give up
on me just because my nature is flawed.
He works with me where I am to bring me closer to His design. His Spirit within me works transformation of
me more into the image of my Master. The
Image of God lives and I represent the hopes and desires of my Master!
No comments:
Post a Comment