To itemize, two things in particular stood out to me at the beginning of the story of Noah’s flood. First of all, that God chose Noah to be spared among all human beings and second of all, that the Lord gave such exact details about the ark Noah was to build. These two facts stand in direct opposition to one another because the first one (that God chooses one man out of many to live) seems heavy-handed and arbitrary and the second fact represents such careful specifications and attention to detail that it is, by this point, impossible to tell not only what is important to this God, but how he makes his decisions.

Earlier in Genesis we are given that one-line statement mentioned above about God saying he is going to destroy all creatures. There is no further embellishment of why, how he came to his decision, or anything indicating that it was more than a whim brought on by anger yet on the other hand, we are given detailed information—in God’s words, no less—on how to build a boat. “Make for yourself an ark of cypress wood. Make rooms in the ark and cover it with pitch inside and out. This is how you should make it: the ark is to be four hundred fifty feet long, seventy feet wide, and forty feet high” (Genesis 6:14). Why such exactness? Come to think of it, why cypress as opposed to say, pine? This detail is more disturbing than refreshing especially since more room in the story of Noah is given over to the building specifics than is to the reasons for the boat in the first place. God finishes off this laundry list of detail by adding, almost casually, his plans. Consider the shift of tone and sentence structure here at the end of Genesis 6:16 into the beginning of 6:17: “Make a roof for the ark and finish it, leaving eighteen inches from the top. Put a door in the side of the ark, and make lower, middle and upper decks. I am about to bring floodwaters on the earth to destroy from under the sky all the living creatures that have the breath of life in them.” Complete exactness and the presentation that God has actually put some thought into a design for this boat make it seem to me like he put much more thought into the boat than his decision. I found this to be highly disturbing and again, I was reminded of God’s ability in Genesis to not only destroy, but to protect at great length for reasons of his choosing.

The descriptions for the reasons God has to make decisions are again questioned when we take into account that the only “thoughts” we have from God for why he chose Noah are mentioned in one short quote from Genesis 6:9, “Noah was a godly man; he walked with God”. That’s all we know about him and as far as the reader can tell, this is the sole reason God chooses him to survive the chaos. This seems almost strange and again, it plays with out sense of reality in several ways. First of all, it makes me question what makes someone worth saving in the eyes of a fickle God and secondly, I can’t help but wonder why, with all his destructive impulses and anger, God chooses to save anyone at all. Is Noah the only man on the earth that “walked with God” or are were there others that were swept away in the deluge?

With the story of Noah we are again given the full scope of God’s supernatural influence and power—albeit arbitrary seeming sometimes. For instance, God’s magical prowess was enough to create a flood that swamped everything, killing everything in its path, yet he also had the power, once he saw Noah’s boat drifting at the end of the flood to blow it, with the force of the wind, back to safety. In order get the best sense of this violence/protection magic, look at the language used to describe both the deaths of the floods and then the saving of Noah and his ark. “So the Lord destroyed every living thing that was on the surface of the ground, including people, animals, creatures that creep along the ground and birds of the sky. They were wiped off the earth” (Genesis 7:23) versus the almost serene sounding, “But God remembered Noah and all the wild animals and domestic animals that were with him in the ark. God caused a wind to blow over the earth and the waters receded (Genesis 8:1). In the description of flood, things are “wiped off” the earth—indicated a thorough job of killing and using, for the animals and people, the phrase “creep along”, which sound slimy, filthy, and sneaky (and come to think of it, much like a serpent). But once God remembers Noah, the animals are described as “domestic”. The imagery of both of these passages in comparison with one another is very powerful and calls God’s ways into question.

The idea of the flood and the subsequent saving of Noah seems to me to be very surreal. Again, time is played with as the Lord causes rain for “forty days and forty nights” and although there is plenty of detail for long all the stages of the flood lasted, there is little information given about how long it took Noah to gather the animals, build the boat, or anything else. While wondering these things may be asking too much of the text, it is nearly impossible for me, as a modern reader, to get past some of these time lapses and progressions.

Another example of God’s seemingly arbitrary choices in selecting the “elect” from the now repopulated earth comes in the example of Abraham. With no given reason other than that he likes him, God says to Abraham, “I will bless those who bless you, but the one who treats you lightly I must curse, and all the families of the earth will pronounce blessings on one another using your name” (Genesis 12:3). The reasons for his selection of Abraham seem to have no firm basis, yet due to God’s immense power, he seems to know whom he should choose. Given this fact, is it possible that we can add the ability to tell the future to the list of God’s magical traits? Otherwise, how would the Lord know who would be the fittest to carry his name? If it is true that there are magical/future-telling aspects to God’s powers, then I have to wonder why he didn’t foresee the fall or other calamities that might have been prevented. Although Abraham does seem quite fit, there is, again, no indication given as to why God makes this decision.

The Lord’s protection magic works for Abraham since he’s one of the selected few. In an example of God’s protection by using the supernatural, consider the example of when Abraham takes his wife to Egypt where the Pharaoh covets her. “But the Lord struck Pharaoh and his household with severe diseases because of Sarai, Abram’s wife (Genesis 12:17). Given this use of the Lord’s powers, the reader, and I can’t help but consider how medieval readers would have viewed this, directly connects the doling out of diseases as part of God’s power and even more importantly, God’s power to punish (even though in this sense it’s for the ultimate protection of Abraham’s wife).

he Lord’s protection of Abraham seems like a double-edged sword and yet, God’s destructive powers versus his protection magic are exemplified in the sacrifice of Isaac. To a new reader of the Genesis, I must say that care and concern God shows for Abraham is virtually negated. God tells Abraham, “Abraham!” Here I am!” Abraham replied. God said, “Take your son—your only son, whom you love, Isaac—and go to the land of Moriah! Offer him up there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains which I will indicate to you” (Genesis 22:2). It is stated that this is a test, but I find it troubling that a god with so many powers of his own requires such tests on his subjects. This almost seems like a cruel joke as well as a test since Abraham gets Isaac all ready to die only to have angels (if viewed in magical terms, God’s familiars) come to him and tell him that there’s no need to kill him. This was stunning and absolutely gut-wrenching and the motivations of God seem almost selfish and hard to accept. With all the magic and power that God has, the fact he relies on such “mortal” tests of devotion seem not only unnecessary, but exceedingly mean-spirited. Again, it is hard to make these judgments when you read the Old Testament as a pillar of faith, but as seen from a literary standpoint, this can absolutely qualify the “character” of the Lord in Genesis as being inconsistent at this point. Why didn’t he test Adam and Eve? Why not put poor aging Abraham through this at the beginning of his “deity internship” as it were. All the massive power of the Lord in Genesis is almost negated, at least for an instant for me when viewed in the light of this trick/test.

Another thing I find interesting about this episode is that God decides, after the test is passed, that there will be even more descendents of Abraham due to this proof of his faith. While God’s magic is so powerful as to be able to create new generations and aid in pregnancies, he still must rely on old-fashioned tests of commitment. As with several other episodes throughout Genesis, I am forced to wonder not only about the true motivations of God, but about the reasons he performs certain supernatural feats while not others. If he can cause floods, create universes, incite the population of many generations, and create and spread diseases, then how doesn’t he know who is truly faithful? After all, he seemed to know perfectly well in the case of Noah. This is just one of the many strange dichotomies that the text never answers and readers for centuries have puzzled over with varying results. I’ll add my voice to that cacophony and say that I think God sometimes uses his power in arbitrary ways and with a force so massive, the Old Testament represents him as fear inducing and even a little dangerous.

In closing, I would like to reiterate that I have tried to explore this text by analyzing it as a work of literature (that is, with characters as opposed to people that are assumed to actually exist). When taking the theological connotations out Genesis, what’s left over on the literary end is a host of complex issues to contend with, most notably, the use of the supernatural and the ways in which God chooses (or doesn’t choose) to use his powers. In the end, I’m still left with more questions than the several I had to begin with, but overall, I have found that viewing the Bible in a different, secular light has opened up new worlds of meaning to a book I thought could only be read in terms of religion. This has also given me any opportunity to think critically about characters in the Bible and for the first time, to view God himself as a fictional construct that is capable of flaws and given to inconsistencies and other, more “human” qualities.

Other essays and articles in the Main Archives related to this topic include : Thematic Comparison of The Old Testament with Crime and Punishment, The Stranger, and The Trial    •    A Critical Reading of Adam’s Fall in “Paradise Lost” by John Milton     •   Paradise Lost by Milton : Is Satan as an Epic Hero?