Monday, June 3, 2019

The Rite of Ascent - Abel and Noah


In the Hebrew Scriptures, the Yahwist tradition first uses the term מִנְחָ֖ה, “gift, present, or offering” in Genesis within the story of Cain and Abel (chap 4).  Cain, who is a gardener, brings to the Lord an offering from the fruit of the earth, and Abel, who is a shepherd, offers from the firstlings of his flock and their fat portions.  The offering of Abel was accepted by the Lord, but Cain’s was not.  The account gives no explicit reason why one offering was acceptable and the other was not, though scholars have presented various possibilities, such as 1) God prefers the offering of shepherds over gardeners, 2) animal sacrifices (with the shedding of blood?) are more acceptable than fruit of the earth; 3) the two brothers had differing motives; 4) they had different approaches to worship reflected in the quality of their offerings; and 5) it is a mystery of divine election.[1]  What is clear from the text is there is a difference in describing the offerings of the brothers.  While Abel brings the firstling of his flock, Cain, who is himself the firstborn, is described as simply bringing the fruit of the earth, and not the firstfruits (Lev 2:14). 

What is more certain from the text is the description that follows on the interior disposition of Cain and the encouragement from the Lord to do what is good.

Cain was very angry, and his countenance fell. The Lord said to Cain, “Why are you angry, and why has your countenance fallen?  If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin is lurking at the door; its desire is for you, but you must master it” (Gen 4:5-7).



In this passage, there is a constellation of words that make their first appearance in the Hebrew Scriptures, such as the word “angry” (חרה), the word “sin” (חטא),[2] which means missing the mark, or missing the way, the word “do good” (יטב), and the word “accepted” (שְׂאֵת).   If Cain would do good, be well, be pleasing,[3] then he would be lifted up or raised up.[4]  However, as the story goes Cain does rise up (קום), but he does this by doing not good, but evil against his brother whom he kills (הרג).  Did Abel become the victim and scapegoat because of human “anger,” and “sin,” and because of Cain’s misinterpretation of the Lord’s instructions?[5]  The “sin” was not without, it was within. 

Be that as it may, the account is telling for the “sacred author” points out both the importance of inner disposition in the contexts of sacred offerings and that God determines what an acceptable offering is.[6] An important dimension of this disposition is the human soul or an inner heart that is lifted up to God.

Another important narrative in which sacrifice is center stage is the story of Noah following the flood, where he offers up (יַּ֥עַל) clean (טָּהֹ֔ר; LXX, καθαρῶν) animals and birds (Gen 8:20).  This is the first time we see the term “altar” (מִזְבֵּ֖חַ) and the term “burnt offering” (עֹלֹ֖ת: עֹלָה), and “pleasing odor” (רֵ֣יחַ הַנִּיחֹחַ֒).[7]  The sacrifice is pleasing to the Lord.  How is this possible?  Noah gives back the gift of life, which is itself a gift from God.  First, the ר֣וּחַ (breath) of God was present at creation (1:2).  In the ark with Noah were two of all the flesh that had the ר֥וּחַ (breath of life) (7:15).  Perhaps with a play on words, the Lord smelled (יָּ֣רַח) the pleasing odor (רֵיחַ) of the sacrifice.[8]  It is difficult to understand how the burnt offering of living creatures is pleasing to God, unless we understand the author’s intent in using the term עֹלֹ֖ת, which means “whole burnt-offering,” “that which goes up to heaven,” the ascending of what is consumed, which signifies the soul’s ascent in worship (8:21).[9]  In other words, it signifies the lifting up of the human heart and creation to the Lord. 

Noah is presented as one who listens to God’s voice (6:13-21), obeys (v. 22), and finally, Noah acknowledges God’s sovereignty and offers an acceptable sacrifice to the Lord for deliverance (8:20-21).   This then leads to God blessing Noah and his sons and reestablishing his covenant with Noah and all flesh on the earth (9:1-17).[10]  

There are at least three views on the nature of the sacrifice of Noah: 1) John Skinner thought that it is propitiatory;[11] 2) Umberto Cassuto argued that it is a thanksgiving sacrifice, “to express…after the manner of firstfruits and the like,” and that Noah acknowledges that, “everything was from God’s hand…and that He would provide everything in the future;”[12] and 3) Gordon Wenham argues that both ideas are appropriate for understanding the sacrifice of Noah.[13]  However, what is certain from the Hebrew text is that Gen 8:20-22 does not use the term “atonement” in describing Noah’s burnt offering.  This is also true in the later Aramaic translations of the Pentateuch: the Targum of Onqelos, the Targum of Neofiti, and the Targum Pseudo-Jonathan.   As we shall see shortly, the connection between burnt offering and atonement comes later in the books of Exodus and Leviticus.  We shall also discover that it is not until Second Temple Judaism that we find atonement connected with the sacrifice of Noah. 

A gradual development in the Hebrew Scripture will eventually link sacrifice of burnt offering with atonement.[14]  Atoning sacrifices for sin were to be done according to the Law and within the context of the Tent of Meeting (Lev 1:1-9; 4:13-6:30; chap 16; 17:11-14; Ex 29:31-34).  This continued with the First Jewish Temple in Jerusalem.  However, through the prophets, God makes it clear that the covenantal requirements of “justice and mercy” toward one another are essential in order for sacrifices to be pleasing to God (Zech 7:9; Hos 6:6).[15]

During Second Temple Judaism, a few important changes take place.  First, following the desecration of the altar of burnt offering in the Jewish Temple by Antiochus Epiphanes in the 2nd century B.C.E. (1 Macc 1:54; Dan 11:31; 12:11), the ideal of martyrdom is seen as achieving atonement (2 Macc 7:37-38; 4 Macc 17:20-22).  The death of the righteous soul is like a “sacrificial burnt offering” acceptable to God (Wis 3:6).  As we shall see below, Pseudo-Philo interprets the offering of Isaac as a worthy sacrifice.  Secondly, prayer and righteous deed/good works were understood as bringing about reconciliation and atonement outside the religious context of the Jerusalem Temple (Tob 12:9-10; Sir 35:1-5; 1QS 9:1-4; Ps. Sol. 3:8).[16]  Finally, we discover what seems to be the earliest connection made between atonement and the sacrifice made by Noah.  The link is first found in Jubilees from the 2nd century B.C.E. which states that Noah “made atonement for the land” (Jub. 6.1-3),[17] and in the Genesis Apocryphon, dated as early as the late 1st century B.C.E., where Noah is said to have atoned for “all the earth” (1QapGen 10.11-18).[18]  However, the Genesis Apocryphon also associated atonement with praise.  In the next column, there is a parallel account of Noah offering up a kind of sacrifice of praise, thanking God for his mercy upon the earth, for destroying all the workers of violence, wickedness, and deceit.

[Then I,] Noah went out and walked through the land, in its length and its breadth […] … upon it; pleasure in their leaves and fruit. And all the land was filled with grass, herbs and grain. Then I praised the Lord of […] … he is eternal, and he is entitled to praise. And I once more blessed because he had mercy on the earth and because he had removed and destroyed from it all the workers of violence, wickedness and deceit, but has saved … for his sake (1QapGen 11.11-14).[19]

In summary, Noah’s sacrifice is described as an offering of clean animals and clean birds as a whole burnt offering ascending (עֹלָה) to God.  This visible expression signified the inner devotion of Noah to God.  God is pleased with the odor.  In response to Noah’s devotion, God blesses Noah, his family, and enters into an everlasting covenant with Noah, the earth, and all flesh.




[1] Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis 1–15 (vol. 1; Word Biblical Commentary; Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1998), 104. *
[2] TWOT 277.
[3] TWOT 375. *
[4] TWOT 600. *
[5] This is language from Girard, however, he interprets the event with the following perspective: “One of the brothers kills the other, and the murderer is the one who does not have the violence-outlet of animal sacrifice at his disposal.  This difference between sacrificial and nonsacrificial cults determines, in effect, God’s judgement in favor of Abel.  To say that God accedes to Abel’s sacrificial offerings but rejects the offerings of Cain is simply another way of saying—from the viewpoint of the divinity—that Cain is a murderer, whereas his brother is not” (Girard, Violence and the Sacred, 4). 
[6] Daly, Sacrifice Unveiled, 2: Daly has “importance of religious disposition” and “acceptable sacrifice.”
[7] The phrase appears later in Ex 19:18, 25, 41, and Lev 1:9.
[8] There is also play on the word “breath” in the Sumerian myth of the flood (ANET 44). * $
[9] BDB 750.1: “the whole burnt-offering (beast or fowl) is entirely consumed and goes up in the flame of the altar to God expressing the ascent of the soul in worship.” *
[10] God gives to Noah animals, birds, and fish for food, provided he does not eat the flesh with its life, that is, its blood (vv. 3-4).
[11] John Skinner, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Genesis (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1910), 157. *  According to the Book of Jubilees, Noah went out of the ark on the third month, built an altar, and made atonement for the land (Jub. 6.1). *
[12] Umberto Moshe David Cassuto, A Commentary on the Book of Genesis (trans. I. Abraham; pt. 2; from Noah to Abraham; Hebrew University: Magnes Press, 1992 [Heb. 1949]), 117-118. *
[13] Gordon J. Wenham, Genesis 1–15 (vol. 1; Word Biblical Commentary; Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1998), 189.
[14] Here I am following Daly, Sacrifice Unveiled, 2-3, and also George W. E. Nickelsburg, Ancient Judaism and Christian Origins: Diversity, Continuity, and Transformation (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2003), 64-68. *
[15] Daily, Sacrifice Unveiled, 2-3.
[16] However, for an exception see the War Scroll, which speaks of restored worship where holocausts and sacrifices are offered to God to atone for the congregation and to satisfy themselves perpetuity at God’s table of glory (1QM 2.5). *  E. P. Sanders holds the view that this worship refers to a restored temple (Sanders, Jesus and Judaism, 83). *
[17] “And on the first of the third month, he went out of the ark, and he built an altar on that mountain. And he made atonement for the land. And he took the kid of a goat, and he made atonement with its blood for all the sins of the land because everything which was on it had been blotted out except those who were in the ark with Noah. And he offered up the fat upon the altar. And he took a calf, a goat, a lamb, [kids], salt, a turtledove, and a young dove, and he offered up a burnt offering on the altar. And he placed upon them an offering kneaded with oil. And he sprinkled wine, and placed frankincense upon everything. And he offered up a sweet aroma which was pleasing before the LORD” (James H. Charlesworth, The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha and the New Testament: Expansions of the “Old Testament” and Legends, Wisdom, and Philosophical Literature, Prayers, Psalms and Odes, Fragments of Lost Judeo-Hellenistic Works (vol. 2; New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 1985), 66). *
[18] “Then … and he [Noah] took from … […] the ark settled [on] one of the mountains of Hurarat. And eternal fire […] I atoned [כפרת] for all the whole earth …[…] … first … […] … and I burned the fat on the fire, and secondly … their blood to the base of the altar … and I burned all their flesh on the altar, and thirdly the turtledoves… on the altar, an offering … on it I put fine flour mixed in oil together with frankincense, as a meal-offering… on all of them I placed salt, and the scent of my burnt-offering ascended to the [he]aven. Blank Then the Highest … […].”
Florentino Garcı́a Martı́nez and Eibert J. C. Tigchelaar, The Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition (translations) (Leiden; New York: Brill, 19971998), 33.  *
[19] Martinez and Tigchelaar, “The Dead Sea Scrolls,” 35.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Indigenous Leaders in Solidarity with Historical Jewish Connection to the Land of Israel

This news article took me by surprise.   A group of indigenous leaders gathered in Jerusalem from around the world to support the historical...