Noah

The Lord Fulfilleth All His Words, by Clark Kelley Price

The account of the prophet Noah as found in Genesis is a fascinating and generally misunderstood pericope which is highly symbolic and recapitulates the story of the creation and the fall. Jeffrey Bradshaw has written some very insightful material on the symbols behind the Noah story which can be found in his books and in  Meridian Magazine. Bradshaw points out a number of parallels between the creation story and the flood. In this post I will mention just a few for the sake of brevity. Additionally, Bradshaw sheds light upon the troubling story of Noah's drunkenness which seems out of character for a prophet of God. As we will see this account as it has come down to us has been subject to misunderstandings and mistranslations and when understood properly does not need to cause concern.

Creation

Ancient Hebrews conceived of the existence of a primordial sea of chaos out of which creation emerged. According to this conception the first piece of ground to emerge from chaos was the primordial hillock. Mount Moriah in Jerusalem, upon which the 1st and 2nd temples were built, was associated with this primordial hillock by the Israelites. The primordial hillock was also associated with the Garden of Eden and was considered the axis mundi or the point at which heaven and earth were joined.

Bradshaw writes that the ark built by Noah was designed as a temple with its three decks corresponding to the three areas (most holy place, holy place and outer court) of the Jerusalem temple. He also points out that other than the tabernacle and temple the ark is the only structure mentioned in the Bible whose design was revealed through revelation. 

Genesis 8 states that after drifting across the water the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat. Ararat is depicted as the primordial mountain upon which the ark/temple rests just as the temple sat upon Mount Moriah. The animals and Noah's family leaving the ark to re-populate the earth can be likened to the placing of animals and man on the earth at the creation. Upon leaving the ark the command to "multiply and replenish the earth" was renewed with Noah and his family as it was originally given to Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. (compare Gen. 1:28 & Gen 8:17)

Noah's Tent

The story of Noah's drunkenness within his tent is found in Genesis 9:20-27 and many have supposed this incident to be a moment of indiscretion by an otherwise righteous prophet. However, there may be more to the story than is suggested by our modern English translations of the Bible. Bradshaw cites the writings of Rabbi Shim'on in the Zohar where he explains that Noah's tent is to be understood as the tent of the Shekinah or the Divine Presence of Jehovah. This tent, built at the foot of Mount Ararat, therefore, is analogous to the portable Tabernacle which Moses built at the foot of Mount Sinai. (ref)

Tissot, Noah in Vision

What, then are we make of Noah's being drunken and uncovered in the tent? Bradshaw mentions a statement attributed to Joseph Smith in which the prophet explained that Noah was not drunk but was in a vision. Bradshaw's article also cites the Genesis Apocryphon which describes Noah and his family engaging in a ritual drinking of wine after which Noah is shown a vision in which he sees the destiny of his posterity. Therefore, as Bradshaw explains "Noah's drinking of the wine should be seen in a ritual context and not merely as a spontaneous indulgence that occurred at the end of a particularly wearying day." (ref)

Noah's nakedness can be explained by looking at the example of Saul when he joined Samuel's group and "stripped off his clothes also, and prophesied before Samuel in like manner, and lay down naked all that day and all that night." (1 Sam. 19:24) Bradshaw cites Robert Jamieson who explained that Saul's nakedness in this instance means that he was “divested of his armor and outer robes." (ref)

Hugh Nibley has offered another explanation that the nakedness of Noah referred to the priestly garment which he wore which was the garment of skins given to Adam which had been passed down through the generations. Nibley goes on to explain that Ham either stole the garment from Noah or made a copy of it. (Collected Works of Hugh Nibley, Vol.5, pp. 169-170). If this was the case then it would appear that Ham was cursed because he intruded into the sanctuary tent while his father was enwrapped in vision dressed in his priestly vestments. Ham then made an unauthorized copy of the garment and claimed priestly authority by virtue of possessing the counterfeit. 

Understanding the account of Noah in light of the information Jeff Bradshaw has gathered  brings greater appreciation for this story and dispels the more controversial aspects. Additionally, viewing this account in light of the temple creation drama helps the reader understand the account as it was intended to be understood.

Jachin and Boaz

Model of Solomon's temple showing the two pillars,
Jachin and Boaz.

One feature of the temple of Solomon was a set of brass pillars which sat in the ulam (אוּלם) or porch of the temple at the entrance to the holy place. These pillars were known as Jachin and Boaz and there has been a great deal of discussion about the purpose and meaning of the two columns. A description of Jachin and Boaz can be found in 1 Kings 7:13-22 which lists the following characteristics:

- Each was made of cast bronze by Phoenician craftsmen.

- Each were 18 cubits high and 12 cubits in circumference.

- Each was topped with a capital made of cast bronze 5 cubits high and decorated with a pomegranate and lotus motif.

Several theories have been put forth to explain the meaning of the pillars. Margaret Barker has written the following:

"Some have suggested that the pillars represented sacred trees, fertility symbols. There are stylized trees standing on either side of the entrance on several models of shrines which have been unearthed. Another possibility is that they were fire altars, or that they represented the pillar of fire and the pillar of cloud which led the Israelites in the desert." (Barker, Gate of Heaven p.29-30)

Matthew Brown has suggested the pillars represented the king and the Lord and has cited numerous passages from the scriptures to support this idea. (Brown, Gate of Heaven p.117-119)

Another possibility is that the pillars were analogous to the stone obelisks that stood at the entrances to Egyptian temples.

Entrance to the Luxor temple in Upper Egypt. Originally two obelisks stood at the entrance. The other is now located in the Place de la Concorde in Paris, France.

This idea was suggested by Flinders Petrie (ref) and seems possible in light of the close cultural affinity which ancient Israel shared with its neighbor. If this is the case then examining what the obelisks represented to the Egyptians may shed some light on the meaning of Jachin and Boaz.

Obelisks were associated with the sun by the Egyptians and were thought to represent the petrified rays of Aten. The pylons which stand behind the obelisks represented the hills between which the sun rose and represented the horizon. The hieroglyph for the word "horizon" was a depiction of the sun rising between the hills (see below) and could also be translated as "mountain of light". (ref)

In ancient Israel the horizon was connected with the concept of eternity (עולם - olam in Hebrew). The place beyond the horizon was distant and hidden just as eternity was. (ref) The holy place and most holy place in the temple represented this distant, hidden place where God's abode was located. Crossing the threshold from the courtyard into the holy place was crossing from profane to sacred space. Likewise in Egyptian temples. The two pillars were located in the porch or אוּלם (ulam) of the temple. This may have been word play with olam (eternity) as the two words are very similar. Therefore, it seems reasonable to suppose that the two bronze pillars, Jachin and Boaz symbolized the horizon, or the barrier between the temporal world and the eternal world just as the obelisks and pylons did in Egyptian temples.

The Pharisee and the Publican

Recently I re-read the parable found in Luke 18:10-14 commonly known as the parable of the Pharisee and the Publican. It is far and away my favorite parable out of the many found in the New Testament. It makes me think that perhaps I have a chance after all. Here it is:

Luke 18:10-14

 10 Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican.

  

11 The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican.

  

12 I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess.

  

13 And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.

  

14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.

BYU New Testament Commentary

Quote from the BYU New Testament Commentary Website:

A group of Latter-day Saint scholars has joined forces to produce a multi-volume commentary on the New Testament along with a new rendition of the Greek New Testament texts. Planned to take several years to complete, this  series will combine the best of ancient linguistic and historical scholarship with Latter-day Saint doctrinal perspectives. 

The first volume is scheduled for release this coming summer and will cover the book of Revelation. Looks very cool. Can't wait to get my hands on a copy.