Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
G-d Does Not Want Obedience
Last week there was a terrible fire in a home in Israel. Two children, ages 2 and 5, were killed. Three older children in the same family, all girls, escaped. But at what cost? Can you imagine their lives going forward? How many times will they ask themselves: What could I have done? What if I had…? Why didn’t I try ….? The mere thought of it shakes me to my core. Can you imagine going through your whole life with these kinds of regrets?
The psychological name for this is “survivor’s guilt,” and it can be crippling enough when you know there was nothing else to be done. But if you even imagine there was some other way you might have saved a life, but did not, it would be crushing. Survivor’s guilt is what hammered Noah after the ordeal of the Flood – it led him to drunkenness and disgrace. Because the truth is that he actually should have felt guilt: he dropped the ball.
The Torah tells us that G-d did not merely tell Noah to build an ark. He told Noah why he was building it. More than once. Which means Noah was given an opportunity to protest, to question, to try to talk G-d down.
And then G-d even gave Noah one final opening, “In seven days I will cause it to rain.” (Gen. 7:4). This was Noah’s last chance to try to change G-d’s mind!
What does Noah say to G-d? Nothing. Not a peep. “Noah did according to all that the Lord commanded him.” (Gen. 6: 22 and 7:5)
In other words, Noah did what he was told. He did not argue, or plead or negotiate. He did not go out to other people and try to get them to change their ways. His very name, meaning “repose,” suggests passivity, and so while Noah did what he was told, he did not do anything more.
Noah paid for it with survivor’s guilt – guilt that he had earned. Noah was righteous, in himself. And he saved his family and the animals, as G-d had commanded. But Noah was not willing to take on the responsibility for other people. It was a huge failing.
The great leaders in the Torah argued with G-d. Avraham negotiated to try to save Sodom, and his conversations with G-d were seemingly always pushing for more – asking, querying, and even demanding.
Moshe’s first conversation with G-d started with a divine commandment (“Go talk to Pharoah”), but Moshe (Moses) was not having it: he rejected G-d’s command outright. Moshe was not prepared to do it. Even more incredibly, Moshe won the argument – and went on to become our greatest prophet. He went one to argue with G-d, on more than one occasion, that G-d’s desire to destroy the Jewish people was an error. He won these arguments, too.
G-d does not want obedience. If we read the Torah carefully, G-d wants engagement. As Rabbi Sacks points out, Torah Hebrew does not even have a word for obedience. G-d wants us to hear, to consider and think – but not to obey.
Avraham and Moshe did not blindly obey. They engaged: they prayed and questioned and tested. This has formed the model for the Jewish people ever since: in the Torah G-d is not primarily a father or a king; as the Torah makes it abundantly clear, the closest analogue is G-d as spouse.
Noah did not see it or act in this way. And he had to live with the guilt, with the “what if?” questions, for the rest of his life.
Our task is to learn, and not make the same mistakes: we are responsible for other people, even if that responsibility means questioning G-d’s plan. G-d Himself does not want us to merely do what we are told: He wants us, as full partners, to pull our own weight in the decisions about how to combat evil, and what to do with the world we inhabit.
Published in Religion & Philosophy
Tomorrow’s lesson title at my church: Obedience. We’ll see what angle my minister will be coming from.
Wow, thank you @iwe, I never thought of it this way before. Great post!
I’m not convinced. Obedience seems critically important – I think of Moses not being allowed to go into the Promised Land because he failed to follow God’s directions. Over and over and over again, the prophets are sent to remind the people that they are supposed to heed God’s commandments and walk in His ways.
Question? Sure. Negotiate? Fine.
After that? Obey.
However, when God doesn’t give clear specific direction, and I believe He doesn’t always do so, the choice(s) is(are) in our court. There is often more than one good/right choice. The examples in Scripture of specific direction are the exceptions not the rule. God created Man with free will and I believe He expects, even delights, when we use it well.
This is a relationship – and there are red lines in any relationship. G-d does not want us to murder or steal – those are red lines. The prophets were dealing with people who kept idols – another red line.
Think of commandments more as “direction of travel” rather than strict robotic injunctions. One cannot, by virtue of being only one person, do every commandment at the same time, and any choice to do one commandment necessarily precludes others. So it is not mere obedience; there is considerable room for discussion.
Consider: G-d tells Adam to work the land. But the offering he accepts (Abel’s) is of animals, while Cain’s offering of produce is rejected. The Torah is telling us that we are meant to push back, and certainly to explore the limits. It is a necessary part of growing up.
And even in cases of specific direction (like Noah), G-d wants a conversation. Noah could have done what he was told to do – and been squawking about it the whole time. It would not have violated G-d’s commandment, but it would have made Noah’s dissatisfaction clear.
I teach songwriting. Specifically – the craft of Christian songwriting for beginners. (It’s not that different than the craft of secular songwriting – only we have to deal with theology in our lyrics.)
So — there is a popular misconception to which many newbie Christian songwriters fall prey that says, “God gave me this song, so it must be a good song.” They assume that inspiration is what makes a song good, when in fact, it is perspiration (actual work).
My response to this innocent but misguided statement is: God gave you this song so you could work on it, shape it, edit it, rewrite it, and make it good. His inspiration was His way of asking you to join Him, the Creator of all things, in the creative process. Songwriting involves work, not merely taking dictation.
Another thought-provoking post, iWe. Thanks, as always.
This is SUPERB – I love it. Thank you!
It is the labor involved that confers ownership. Just as a master cabinet maker becomes the owner of a fine piece of work, something that started out as a tree after all, the writer of song, prose, poetry like all laborers whether by muscle or brain or both have the right to profit by what they produce through this process. They produce an increase in value by turning the raw material into something of greater value through their labor. This makes them co-laborers with the Creator. He provided all the raw materials we will ever need. And we get to take those materials and produce goods and services that enhance the lives and well-being of our fellow men. What greater occupation could there be? It is the oldest occupation, Adam was not told to lie in a hammock and eat fruit all day, he was put in the Garden to dress it. That takes work. It is the thorns, weeds and sweat that his sin brought to the equation. Man was made for work and those who take pleasure in the work they do are fulfilling this original plan to some large degree.
I must balance this by noting that recreation is also a necessary good. I’ll quote a common medieval saying, “All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. But all play and no work makes Jack a mere toy.”
Absolutely. We are co-invested in this world with G-d!
I’m not entirely convinced on your ultimate thesis, but it is intriguing that G-d does apparently want us to interact with Him.
I’m inclined to cut Noah some slack because I see no evidence for him to think that a deity might be open to a challenge to change course, especially when that change would be entirely for the benefit of people who might not hold the deity in esteem.
I find Abraham’s challenge on behalf of the people of Sodom a remarkable act of courage on Abraham’s part. If the true G-d were like the gods people around Abraham had created, Abraham could have expected a proverbial bolt of lightning in response to his impertinence.
But, through that exchange between G-d and Abraham on behalf of the people of Sodom (as a Christian, I see the first intercessory prayer) we learn a lot about G-d. I find a logic to how the nature of G-d is revealed to us in the book of Genesis. He is not revealed all at once. He is revealed incrementally through His interaction with His people.
I’ve heard this understanding, but this is the first time I have directly related to it. I understand that I am called to partner with G-d, but realizing that G-d encourages us to wrestle with his commandments if we see the need to, is so important. As always, thanks @iwe.
Yes, and: I would submit that the most insidious dimension of survivor’s guilt is admitting that, whether it’s a loved one, a dear friend, or a brother-in-arms that has fallen, there is always a small kernel of relief on the part of the Survivor. There is always some element of better you than me.
This is usually manifested as the agony of the destruction of self-image. I’m not that guy. I would’ve taken a bullet for the brother. How could I rejoice that I was spared?
People don’t begin to appropriately deal with survivor’s guilt until they get their arms around that piece, and learn that that relief is essential to being human.
Great meditation. Thanks, @iwe.
As an Evangelical Christian, I believe we are intended to “work” (in the Calvinist sense) our way to obedience. Because He created us with free will, it is in our nature to wish to go our own way.
Obedience is our giving up our own way; so I think it is also in our nature to “argue” with God when His way interferes with our own.
As we mature in our faith, our will comes more into alignment with His and the “arguments” become less frequent, without our losing our free will. (That’s what I keep hoping, anyway.)
Thanks, @iwe, for the stimulating post!
I seem to remember god telling Abraham to kill his son, like in the good old days of Ba’al. There’s never a good reason for that. He was tested specifically for his blind obedience, and to the everlasting shame of all fathers everywhere, he obeyed.
So, I’m not buying your theory. The judeo-christian and islamic god requires blind obedience to the point of killing your children if asked.
Why anyone follows this god is anyone’s guess.
I was with you until you ascribed survivor’s guilt to Noah. The word is silent on the matter of whether or not others petitioned God or Noah to board the Ark. As I understand it the process of building the Ark was quite lengthy so it’s not as if there wasn’t ample opportunity for people to ask Noah what he was building and why. Additionally it was God who sealed them in the Ark not Noah closing the door on those who would board. I find no mention of sorrow over the loss of human life and the destruction of creation being the source of his drunkenness either. I don’t find it implausible either but just lacking support.
I agree with your underlying thesis about God wanting engagement from us but I can’t get there through the example of Noah.
But it is interesting that when God told Abraham he would destroy Sodom, Abraham argued with him about it, whereas Noah had not when God told him he would destroy the world. Two very similar situations with different reactions by the character involved. This seems to be an intentional juxtaposition in the text, not a farfetched interpretation. Biblical narrative is very “lacunic” throughout, meaning that it seems to leave out details which one would expect to be included, such as in this case why Noah got drunk. It seems to intentionally ask the reader to speculate as to the answer. And perhaps the clues to the answer are in the text itself.
Laconic?
And I’m not quite sure it means what you think it means. But I like that you’re using it. It’s one of my favorite words.
And then there is this: Noah.
Lacuna: a blank space or missing part. He meant what he wrote.
Well, there you go! Learn something new every day. I’ve never seen it in the adjective form.
But when God told Abraham he would destroy Sodom, Abraham was negotiating in order to save the righteous people – notably his nephew Lot. I think Abraham was probably ok with the wicked being destroyed. In the story of Noah we are told that, with the exception of Noah who was a righteous man and walked with God, “all flesh had corrupted their way upon the earth.” In other words, two different reactions to two not similar situations.
Adam and Eve were in paradise and were given, essentially, one rule. Obey that rule and all would be great. But they disobeyed. You might even say they tried a little negotiating – or at least finger-pointing. But their lack of absolute obedience got them thrown out and we’re living with the consequences still.
From a Jewish standpoint, we are very fortunate that they did it. I suspect G-d wanted to give them a choice. Since they “died” to their divine selves by their choice, they became human, subject to the beauty of free will, and able to serve G-d as human beings, creatively. Sounds pretty good to me.
That’s looking on the bright side of things!
How do you tell the difference between those of God’s commands that are red lines and those that are merely guidelines we may ignore on our own judgment?
Didn’t Adam and Eve already have free will? That seems to be implied in God’s command not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. If they had no free will at that point, there was no point in God issuing them commands.
You posit that G-d can, by human argument, be persuaded to change His mind. Does this mean you believe He is not omniscient? That He does not know all things? That He does not know the end from the beginning?
The destruction of Sodom has been mentioned: Do you believe G-d did not know, before He came down to Abraham, before Abraham thought to negotiate with Him, just how many righteous there were in Sodom?
First, I am not speaking for @iwe or for all of Judaism. His commands are not to be ignored. For example, I do not follow all the laws; I don’t know if and how there will be a penalty for that. I can only do what I can do, and hope that G-d accepts that.
I assume they did have free will.