Does God break his vows?

[Deeje]

The very FIRST covenant, my covenant, of Genesis 9

OK, lets explore that....

Genesis 9:1-17:
"God went on to bless Noah and his sons and to say to them: “Be fruitful and become many and fill the earth."
This is a restatement of God's mandate to Adam and his wife after their creation (Genesis 1:18)....but the one notable omission was "to subdue" the earth. When humans lost their perfection, the second part of the mandate had to wait until God had addressed the problem of man's disobedience and loss of direct access to their Creator.

"2 A fear of you and a terror of you will continue upon every living creature of the earth and upon every flying creature of the heavens, upon everything that moves on the ground and upon all the fish of the sea. They are now given into your hand."
A fear of man was now instilled into the animals, which was obviously missing prior to the flood. Being given into the hand of man, they were now vulnerable and given the ability to exercise caution with humankind and each other.

"3 Every moving animal that is alive may serve as food for you. Just as I gave you the green vegetation, I give them all to you. 4 Only flesh with its life—its blood—you must not eat."
Man was given permission to eat flesh for the first time, meaning that prior to the flood, all humans and probably all animals were vegetarians. This is the first of three prohibitions on the consumption of blood given in the scriptures. Animals were to be properly bled before being eaten. Respect for the creature's lifeblood was acknowledged by pouring it out on the earth.
In the new earth to come, prophesied by Isaiah, carnivorous animals were to go back to eating "straw like the bull". (Isaiah 11:6-9)

"5 Besides that, I will demand an accounting for your lifeblood. I will demand an accounting from every living creature; and from each man I will demand an accounting for the life of his brother. 6 Anyone shedding man’s blood, by man will his own blood be shed, for in God’s image He made man."
This was a warning about shedding human blood. God would demand an accounting.

"7 As for you, be fruitful and become many, and increase abundantly on the earth and multiply.”
Replenishing the earth now rested upon one family again, and their descendants would become many and fill the earth as God directed. All humans living now owe their lives to Noah.

"8 Then God said to Noah and to his sons with him: 9 “I am now establishing my covenant with you and with your offspring after you, 10 and with every living creature that is with you, the birds, the animals, and all the living creatures of the earth with you, all those that came out of the ark—every living creature of the earth. 11 Yes, I establish my covenant with you: Never again will all flesh be destroyed by the waters of a flood, and never again will a flood bring the earth to ruin.”
So a promise was made by God never to flood the world again....but it is obvious that humans have invented ways to do that themselves. Global warming may very well be responsible for many low lying land areas being inundated.

"12 And God added: “This is the sign of the covenant that I am making between me and you and every living creature that is with you, for all future generations. 13 I put my rainbow in the cloud, and it will serve as a sign of the covenant between me and the earth. 14 Whenever I bring a cloud over the earth, then the rainbow will certainly appear in the cloud. 15 And I will certainly remember my covenant that I made between me and you and every living creature of every kind; and never again will the waters become a flood to destroy all flesh. 16 And the rainbow will occur in the cloud, and I will certainly see it and remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of every kind on the earth.”
17 God repeated to Noah: “This is the sign of the covenant that I establish between me and all flesh that is on the earth".

Often called the "Rainbow Covenant" this was God's promise never to ruin the earth again by a flood. He regretted that man had become so wicked, so quickly due to the influence of rebellious angels producing a super race of gigantic bullies who had no right to live, so God's response was to eliminate them from existence and start again. It was only a stop-gap measure however, to bring his purpose back on track. Mankind were still suffering the effects of sin, which would only be removed by the atoning blood of a specific sacrifice to come.

This is only one of many covenants that God made with his worshippers. He has never ever broken a covenant.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Ummm.... I didn't *say* anything about Christian belief, mate.

You talked about a covenant with the god of Judaism being "nullified". If you weren't referring to Christianity, what were you referring to?

<----- see my religion label?

Not usually. The mobile layout of the site only displays a stripped-down version of the site if your screen is narrow. Most of the time, I don't see post numbers, bio info, or signatures.

Checking the site another way... okay. Now I see that you list yourself as Noachide.

That's the one I'm talking about.

Noachides think that the covenant with God has been nullified? That's a new one for me.

 

[Shem Ben Noah]

Sure they are. The Mosaic covenant was when Moses required the Jews to fulfill the 613 commandments. Before that Jews were not required to fulfill any besides the 7 and circumcision.

My point was, the 613 are an inseparable part of the Mosaic covenant and can't be voided. Just like the 7 are with the Noahide covenant.

But Noah & sons were already required to fulfill the Noahide Laws via Adam. The Noahide covenant was that G-d wouldn't destroy all of mankind again for not obeying what they were already commanded to do.

Oh, not so fast there. Adam didn't have any law concerning eating life blood, as this was a totally new thing given to Noah and an integral part of the whole covenant narrative.

That the other laws are not repeated is unimportant, as they were assumed to be there, or else there wouldn't have been a flood. This new law is added and becomes part of the covenant.

Also, it is only that by water all life is never again wiped out, but by fire we see this is used as a judgement against man and it is only Abraham that makes the outcome different.

Of course if you read a little later in my post there, you'll see that I bring the commentators who explain that G-d didn't actually void the Noahide Laws as that would be problematic in a different respect (as the Talmud notes). Rather he changed the status of fulfilling them.

It does not matter, not everything in Talmud is Law. Only specific rulings on Torah laws by the Sanhedrin are laws. Much of it is just stories, opinions, and fable. That's why it was never meant to be written down, it's oral teachings.

That God would mess around with something so fundamental is fable.

 

[Tumah]

My point was, the 613 are an inseparable part of the Mosaic covenant and can't be voided. Just like the 7 are with the Noahide covenant.

I understood your point and I refuted it.

Oh, not so fast there. Adam didn't have any law concerning eating life blood, as this was a totally new thing given to Noah and an integral part of the whole covenant narrative.

According to some opinions at least. But anyway, this proves that the Noahide Laws are seperate from the covenant. The last Law was tacked on to the other 6 and given before the Noahide covenant was made. They're in a seperate passage altogether.

That the other laws are not repeated is unimportant, as they were assumed to be there, or else there wouldn't have been a flood. This new law is added and becomes part of the covenant.

I don't understand how you are connecting this to the flood here.

Also, it is only that by water all life is never again wiped out, but by fire we see this is used as a judgement against man and it is only Abraham that makes the outcome different.

Ok.

It does not matter, not everything in Talmud is Law. Only specific rulings on Torah laws by the Sanhedrin are laws. Much of it is just stories, opinions, and fable. That's why it was never meant to be written down, it's oral teachings.

That God would mess around with something so fundamental is fable.

That's your opinion, I guess. I guess that's based on some tradition you have dating back to Noah. Otherwise I'm not sure on what basis you're arguing.

 

[muhammad_isa]

If God creates an "everlasting covenant" and some people come along later and say, 'oh no... God has nullified it'...

Almighty God does not break His covenant. However, we all have to die, and He can make a new covenant with their ancesters if He wills..

Almighty God has guided mankind from the time of Adam .. the covenant with the children of Israel is not necessarily until the end of time, and certainly only applies to the righteous who have pure intention

 

[Shem Ben Noah]

... They're in a seperate passage altogether.

Oh, then I guess every law not given at Sinai with the 10 commandments is separate from the Sinai Covenant as they're in separate passages altogether.

There's two parties in a covenant, otherwise it's not a covenant, it's just a statement.
God first tells Noah what is Man's part in this new covenant then he tells him God's part of the covenant.

But, I can see you will just deny that the 7 NOACHIDE laws have anything at all to do with the NOACHIDE covenant, so whatever.

 

[Tumah]

Oh, then I guess every law not given at Sinai with the 10 commandments is separate from the Sinai Covenant as they're in separate passages altogether.

Not exactly. Moses brought down the entire Torah when he went up to Mt. Sinai.

There's two parties in a covenant, otherwise it's not a covenant, it's just a statement.
God first tells Noah what is Man's part in this new covenant then he tells him God's part of the covenant.

This may ne true in English, but not so in Tanach. In the Torah there is a difference between a covenant that's "cut" (sorry don't know the correct translation in English), and a covenant that's "given". The former creates requirements on both parties, the latter only on the one making the covenant.
Another example of this latter form is in Num. 25:12 where G-d gives a covenant of peace with Phineas turning him and his children into priests with no requirement on Phineas part in order to maintain that status.

But, I can see you will just deny that the 7 NOACHIDE laws have anything at all to do with the NOACHIDE covenant, so whatever.

In Hebrew they're called the "7 commandments of the children of Noah", because everyone is Noah's children. The covenant is called "the covenant of Noah". Your connection doesn't exist.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

If God creates an "everlasting covenant" and some people come along later and say, 'oh no... God has nullified it'...

Who do you believe?

God didn't break or do away with the Old Covenant. He fulfilled it and extended it to all humanity, according to Christianity.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

There's two parties in a covenant, otherwise it's not a covenant, it's just a statement.

Quite right.

And since I haven't agreed to any covenant with any god, I'm not subject to one.

If any god that might pop up tries to impose rules on me, then these would just be decrees, not a covenant.

 

[ukok102nak]

. ... as it is written
:read:
2 Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

... . so as it is written
:read:
Galatians 3:15
Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man nullifies, or adds thereto.
16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He says not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to your seed, which is Christ.
17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot nullify, that it should make the promise of no effect.


:ty:



godbless unto all always

 

[Shem Ben Noah]

Not exactly. Moses brought down the entire Torah when he went up to Mt. Sinai.

He might have been given all of them, but he only brought down the tablets. Unless you think that the all 613 and oral torah was all on them.

This may ne true in English, but not so in Tanach. In the Torah there is a difference between a covenant that's "cut" (sorry don't know the correct translation in English), and a covenant that's "given". The former creates requirements on both parties, the latter only on the one making the covenant.

Yes & no. For the animals, it was given, but for man it's 'cut' or else no destruction of Sodom.

In Hebrew they're called the "7 commandments of the children of Noah", because everyone is Noah's children. The covenant is called "the covenant of Noah". Your connection doesn't exist.

Link me a pro-nochide site that divorces the nochide laws from the noahide covenant then.

 

[Tumah]

He might have been given all of them, but he only brought down the tablets. Unless you think that the all 613 and oral torah was all on them.

I don't, but I don't see how that helps your point either.

Yes & no. For the animals, it was given, but for man it's 'cut' or else no destruction of Sodom.

It goes by what how the verse phrases it, not how we want to view t.

Link me a pro-nochide site that divorces the nochide laws from the noahide covenant then.

Sorry, I go by the what is said, not what people want to say. If you want to make the claim, you need to bring proof. According to you, since non-Jews have not been following the Noahide Laws for millennia, there should have been a flood a long time ago.

 

[Shem Ben Noah]

According to you, since non-Jews have not been following the Noahide Laws for millennia, there should have been a flood a long time ago.

Come now, we both know it won't be by a flood, but by fire. That was your job, to prevent that, and since that is defaulted the time is now up. Even the generation of Noah had 70 years. I know that many fundy Christians want their apocalypse but I thought the Jews knew better, wanted to repair the world.

 

[Tumah]

Come now, we both know it won't be by a flood, but by fire.

No we don't.

That was your job, to prevent that, and since that is defaulted the time is now up.

I don't know what you're talking about, or how it relates to me. According to your belief, the covenant was that the children of Noah were required to keep the Noahide Laws and in return, G-d won't bring the flood. Even according to the loosest interpretation of the Laws to include Christianity, non-Jews hadn't been keeping them as a group until after the Second Temple. And yet there was no flood to destroy the overwhelmingly vast majority of humanity who were transgressing the Noahide Laws. Why?

Even the generation of Noah had 70 years.

Not sure where you're getting that number.

I know that many fundy Christians want their apocalypse but I thought the Jews knew better, wanted to repair the world.

There's no such concept in Judaism. G-d repairs the world, not people.

 

[First Baseman]

If God creates an "everlasting covenant" and some people come along later and say, 'oh no... God has nullified it'...

Who do you believe?

God has not broken the old covenant. Israel broke the covenant and could not keep it. As a result of this God made a new covenant with Israel and the Gentiles and indeed all of the people.

The promises God made in the Old Testament God has well kept. If Israel would not follow His commandments He would destroy them, which He did. By His grace He allowed a remnant of them to survive and so Israel exists to this day. God has not forsaken His people.

God made a new covenant based on grace. I think you are confused in your understanding of the old covenant. God never broke it. Israel broke it over and over again, in spite of God's warnings to them by the holy prophets.

 

[Shem Ben Noah]

Not sure where you're getting that number.

Noah took 70 years to build the Ark.

There's no such concept in Judaism. G-d repairs the world, not people.

Obviously you've never heard of Tekkun Olam.

OK

I've had a long talk with my spouse, and their reaction boiled down to 'what did you expect?'.

What indeed. Noachideism doesn't work, doesn't even work with the folks who made it, obviously.

I think this rabbi has it right:

Yes, I should have known better.

Ex-Noachide, signing off.

 

[Tumah]

Noah took 70 years to build the Ark.

Is that the non-Jewish interpretation of a verse from a Jewish book? I wasn't aware.

Obviously you've never heard of Tekkun Olam.

I have certainly heard of Tikkun Olam. In a Talmudic context, it refers to enactments that a ruling party makes to ensure the smooth flowing of its community. Its also used to refer to the final rectification that G-d will make in the world to restore it to its original state. There is no other type of tikkun olam to be found in Jewish sources.

OK

I've had a long talk with my spouse, and their reaction boiled down to 'what did you expect?'.

What indeed. Noachideism doesn't work, doesn't even work with the folks who made it, obviously.

Yes, I do wonder what you expected. You come and take an element that is not found in any sources outside Jewish ones, claim it for your own, reinterpret it - but don't change the name to reflect your personal spin on it, and then act as though I should accept it, I really do wonder what you expected.

I think this rabbi has it right:

Yes, I should have known better.

Ex-Noachide, signing off.

I'd be surprised if that guy was Jewish let alone a rabbi. So much for Lev. 19:27.

 

[serp777]

Well, the question is about an everlasting covenant. So, the point is not moot. IF it breaks it, He would have lied about the "everlasting" attribute. And, if I remember my lessons at Sunday school, God cannot possibly lie.

So, logically, if you believe that God promised an everlasting covenant, you cannot possibly believe the ones who said He broke it.

Ciao

- viole

But everything God does is moral so if he did end up lying then lying in various circumstances would be a moral action. God can do anything since anything he does automatically becomes a moral action. The point could be made that our parents can drink alcohol, but prevent their children from drinking. Parents drinking alcohol is immoral but children drinking alcohol is. So God is like the parents in this case. He could justify it and rationalize it however with respect to anything he did.

 

[RabbiO]

I'd be surprised if that guy was Jewish let alone a rabbi. So much for Lev. 19:27

The fellow's name is Asher Meza and this is what he claims about himself and his organization. This is condensed from his website - http://www.bejewish.org


"Rabbi Asher Meza received Rabbinical ordination at Yeshivat Nachlei Emunah under Rabbi Yitzchok Kolakowski.....

Our Goals:

*) Build Schools worldwide where our systematic Torah theology is taught.

*) Open rehabilitation centers worldwide where our systematic Torah theology is taught.

Why?

Because the proper keeping of the Judaic law code is this world’s only hope for survival.
Although it is true that remnants of this code permeate much of the monotheistic world today, yet still the world fails to progress ethically. This is due to equally widespread misunderstanding and misapplication of the Judaic code of law.....

Our systematic theological methodology:

Jewish practice and doctrinal theology stem solely from:
The Written Torah (5 books of Moses)
The Oral Torah: The Rulings of the Great Court (as codified in the Mishneh Torah of Rambam)

All other works including the books of the prophets and the writings (biblical and contemporary) exist only to reinforce the Written and Oral Torah. (No doctrine should be formulated from other books, nor do other books have the authority to alter or negate laws or theological concepts that appear in either the Written and Oral Torah.)

Restrictions within both the Written and Oral Law:

Written

All Doctrinal beliefs stem ONLY from the simple ethically contextual understanding found within the pages of Torah.
All practical instructional beliefs stem ONLY from the literal laws commanded in these books.

Oral

Concepts conveyed within the Oral Torah source texts that do not concern practical implementation of a law have the status of commentary when determining instructional doctrine.

What works do we consider doctrinally relevant:

The Tanach (The Torah, Prophets and the writings) (Completely Online)

The Rambam’s Sefer of Mitzvot (the Enumeration of the 613 commandments found in the Torah) (Completely Online)

The Rambam’s Mishneh Torah (the Codification of the Decrees of the Sanhedrin and the Oral Law as found in the Talmud) (Completely Online)

 

[metis]

God didn't break or do away with the Old Covenant. He fulfilled it and extended it to all humanity, according to Christianity.

Not all Christian denominations teach that even though the RCC and some liberal Protestant groups do (I don;t know about what the Orthodox and Coptics teach about this.

According to what's found in Torah, the Abrahamic Covenant and the Mosaiic Law are "forever" and "perpetual":

Genesis 17:[13] both he that is born in your house and he that is bought with your money, shall be circumcised. So shall my covenant be in your flesh an everlasting covenant.

Deuteronomy 7:[9] Know therefore that the LORD your God is God, the faithful God who keeps covenant and steadfast love with those who love him and keep his commandments, to a thousand generations,

Deuteronomy 29:[12] that you may enter into the sworn covenant of the LORD your God, which the LORD your God makes with you this day;
[13] that he may establish you this day as his people, and that he may be your God, as he promised you, and as he swore to your fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob.

Psalms 89:[34] I will not violate my covenant, or alter the word that went forth from my lips.

Psalms 105:[8] He is mindful of his covenant for ever,
of the word that he commanded, for a thousand generations,...

Deuteronomy 42): "your G-d…shall not add to what I have commanded you or subtract."

Dt. 13(1): "You shall be careful to observe, neither adding to it or subtracting."

Psalms 19(8): "The Law of the Lord is perfect… (10) the ordinances of the Lord are true; all of them are just."

Psalms. 119(160): "permanence is Your words chief trait, each of Your just ordinances is everlasting."