Was Noah a sinful man?

[Stravinsk]

Most Christians, through Saul/Paul's writings believe the following things, which he summarizes here:

Romans 3:9-18

What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;
As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.
They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips:
Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness:
Their feet are swift to shed blood:
Destruction and misery are in their ways:
And the way of peace have they not known:
There is no fear of God before their eyes.

Noah, a man who lived 950 years(Genesis 9:29), longer than Adam by 20 years(Genesis 5:5). In the introduction to this man is said the following:

Genesis 6:9 (KJV) These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just (צַדִּיק righteous Strongs H6662)man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God.


That being said, it's always worth checking the Hebrew, and that's what I did. You can check yourself here:https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/gen/6/9/t_conc_6009 The better translation going by the Hebrew words and without the additions of "and" and "are" that KJV includes is the following:

These the descendants of Noah: Noah was a righteous man, perfect in his time, Noah walked with God.

If you doubt this translation, you can check the link and show me where I am in error. For example the word translated "generations" twice in this verse is actually 2 different Hebrew words having two different meanings.



If I'm operating under Saul/Paul's text above, Noah simply couldn't be these things. Since Paul says no one seeks God, Noah didn't walk with God. Noah must have been swift to shed blood, making him a perfect choice to save both a small number of humans and the animals. A miserable man who was also destructive, without peace, and without fear of God. Most telling of all, Noah simply couldn't be righteous, and not in all his generations totaling 950 years! For that is the word that is translated "just" in the text, it is the word "righteous" in Hebrew.

So was Moses maybe exaggerating a little? Telling a fib? After all, according to Pauline doctrine the sinful nature and death start from Adam and Eve and as Noah certainly came after them he must have had it also.

What say you?

 

[Imalive]

That is not the Pauline doctrin.
Paul says Lot was righteous.
Romans 3 is from a Psalm. I wonder if its about everyone.

Its not about Gods ppl.

Psalm 14 nkjv

The fool has said in his heart,
“There is no God.”
They are corrupt,
They have done abominable works,
There is none who does good.

2 The Lord looks down from heaven upon the children of men,
To see if there are any who understand, who seek God.
3 They have all turned aside,
They have together become corrupt;
There is none who does good,
No, not one.

4 Have all the workers of iniquity no knowledge,
Who eat up my people as they eat bread,
And do not call on the Lord?
5 There they are in great fear,
For God is with the generation of the righteous.
6 You shame the counsel of the poor,
But the Lord is his refuge.

7 Oh, that the salvation of Israel would come out of Zion!
When the Lord brings back the captivity of His people,
Let Jacob rejoice and Israel be glad.

 

[Imalive]

Romans 3:1

What advantage then has the Jew, or what is the profit of circumcision?

Paul must have known that Psalm. Were all the Jews righteous and better than the rest? No, look at the pharisees.

 

[Imalive]

http://oraclesoffire.blogspot.nl/2013/02/misuse-of-romans-chapter-three-part-one.html?m=1

https://www.blueletterbible.org/faq/don_stewart/don_stewart_734.cfm

 

[Imalive]

Look at this. This is unbelievable. Like God could also have picked the offspring of a woman and a fallen angel cuz they were all equally bad. Aaaargh. And then he says I butcher Scripture. God said he was righteous. Period.
https://www.charismanews.com/opinion/43310-mark-driscoll-noah-was-not-a-righteous-man

 

[MennoSota]

Most Christians, through Saul/Paul's writings believe the following things, which he summarizes here:

Romans 3:9-18

What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;
As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.
They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips:
Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness:
Their feet are swift to shed blood:
Destruction and misery are in their ways:
And the way of peace have they not known:
There is no fear of God before their eyes.

Noah, a man who lived 950 years(Genesis 9:29), longer than Adam by 20 years(Genesis 5:5). In the introduction to this man is said the following:

Genesis 6:9 (KJV) These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just (צַדִּיק righteous Strongs H6662)man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God.


That being said, it's always worth checking the Hebrew, and that's what I did. You can check yourself here:https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/gen/6/9/t_conc_6009 The better translation going by the Hebrew words and without the additions of "and" and "are" that KJV includes is the following:

These the descendants of Noah: Noah was a righteous man, perfect in his time, Noah walked with God.

If you doubt this translation, you can check the link and show me where I am in error. For example the word translated "generations" twice in this verse is actually 2 different Hebrew words having two different meanings.



If I'm operating under Saul/Paul's text above, Noah simply couldn't be these things. Since Paul says no one seeks God, Noah didn't walk with God. Noah must have been swift to shed blood, making him a perfect choice to save both a small number of humans and the animals. A miserable man who was also destructive, without peace, and without fear of God. Most telling of all, Noah simply couldn't be righteous, and not in all his generations totaling 950 years! For that is the word that is translated "just" in the text, it is the word "righteous" in Hebrew.

So was Moses maybe exaggerating a little? Telling a fib? After all, according to Pauline doctrine the sinful nature and death start from Adam and Eve and as Noah certainly came after them he must have had it also.

What say you?

You, dear sir, are a troll of biblical proportions. [emoji48]

 

[Josiah]

There are two ways that "righteous" can be used: From the perspective of man (sometimes called "civil righteousness" in theology) and from the perspective of God. The first only involves what is outward - what is said and done as observed by other people. The other also includes what is inward - it includes our nature, our "heart." I've known people that I've never actually witnessed sinning. Does that mean Scripture lies when it says "for all have sinned?" No..... it just means there are two different perspectives.

 

[Stravinsk]

There are two ways that "righteous" can be used: From the perspective of man (sometimes called "civil righteousness" in theology) and from the perspective of God. The first only involves what is outward - what is said and done as observed by other people. The other also includes what is inward - it includes our nature, our "heart." I've known people that I've never actually witnessed sinning. Does that mean Scripture lies when it says "for all have sinned?" No..... it just means there are two different perspectives.

So are you suggesting Noah was just righteous in the eyes of the people, but not in the eyes of God? There is a reason I broke down the translation, because I know the NIV includes words that it shouldn't - ie: "blameless among the people of his time"

I didn't know it was possible to walk with God and just have a "civil righteousness" that is only an an outward show for others. Sounds sort of like a Pharisee.

 

[Josiah]

Yes, Noah was "blameless among the people" - from that perspective, and yes - God acknowledged that. It's not a bad thing, lol...... It just means that Scripture is not wrong when it says that "no one is righteous, no, not one." In terms of our heart, our soul (which only God sees) we are not perfect, but there can be a "civil righteousness" ("blameless" if often the biblical word used for this).

 

[Stravinsk]

Yes, Noah was "blameless among the people" - from that perspective, and yes - God acknowledged that. It's not a bad thing, lol...... It just means that Scripture is not wrong when it says that "no one is righteous, no, not one." In terms of our heart, our soul (which only God sees) we are not perfect, but there can be a "civil righteousness" ("blameless" if often the biblical word used for this).

Again, there is a reason I looked into the Hebrew of the text used. The KJV does a better job of rendering it, but is not perfect, while the NIV includes that phrase that implies something it shouldn't.

 

[Stravinsk]

That is not the Pauline doctrin.
Paul says Lot was righteous.
Romans 3 is from a Psalm. I wonder if its about everyone.

Internal consistency on this issue within the writings of Saul/Paul would suggest that he meant everyone. If all death and sin originates from one man and woman, is passed on physically so we are all "under sin", which are things that he teaches, then it is consistent with the passage as he uses it here:

"What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;
As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:"

That being said, the internal consistency I refer to starts and ends with Saul/Paul's words on this issue in my view. More broadly, they are not supported by the Scriptures for numerous reasons including but not limited to pointing at various individuals and calling them righteous. Joseph (Mary's husband) included - although the translations like to hide it under other words like "decent" and in the case of Noah - "just" (and like in the NIV, only "among the the people of his generations" - suggesting the sort of thing Josiah referred to)

Romans 3:9-18 is not just taken from one Psalm. Pay close attention and source each line. They come from all over the place and Saul/Paul strings them together as if they can be found in one passage. That is simply not true. Also, the initial psalm quoted is missing a bit of context - for it is referring to fools and workers of iniquity and bases it's comments within this frame work. Your own quote below shows it.

Its not about Gods ppl.

Psalm 14 nkjv

The fool has said in his heart,
“There is no God.”
They are corrupt,
They have done abominable works,
There is none who does good.

2 The Lord looks down from heaven upon the children of men,
To see if there are any who understand, who seek God.
3 They have all turned aside,
They have together become corrupt;
There is none who does good,
No, not one.

4 Have all the workers of iniquity no knowledge,
Who eat up my people as they eat bread,
And do not call on the Lord?
5 There they are in great fear,
For God is with the generation of the righteous.
6 You shame the counsel of the poor,
But the Lord is his refuge.

7 Oh, that the salvation of Israel would come out of Zion!
When the Lord brings back the captivity of His people,
Let Jacob rejoice and Israel be glad.

 

[MennoSota]

Romans 4:20-25
[20]Abraham never wavered in believing God’s promise. In fact, his faith grew stronger, and in this he brought glory to God.
[21]He was fully convinced that God is able to do whatever he promises.
[22]And because of Abraham’s faith, God counted him as righteous.
[23]And when God counted him as righteous, it wasn’t just for Abraham’s benefit. It was recorded
[24]for our benefit, too, assuring us that God will also count us as righteous if we believe in him, the one who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead.
[25]He was handed over to die because of our sins, and he was raised to life to make us right with God.

 

[Stravinsk]

Romans 4:20-25
[20]Abraham never wavered in believing God’s promise. In fact, his faith grew stronger, and in this he brought glory to God.
[21]He was fully convinced that God is able to do whatever he promises.
[22]And because of Abraham’s faith, God counted him as righteous.
[23]And when God counted him as righteous, it wasn’t just for Abraham’s benefit. It was recorded
[24]for our benefit, too, assuring us that God will also count us as righteous if we believe in him, the one who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead.
[25]He was handed over to die because of our sins, and he was raised to life to make us right with God.

Interesting. I thought at first this was a random post but then realized that since my thread hinges on the term "righteous" and the dichotomy between what Saul/Paul teaches in Romans 3:9-18 and Noah's righteousness, I think I get why you brought up this passage. This passage you quoted is one of those by Saul/Paul that seeks to redefine the term righteous to only some sort of mental acknowledgement, absent action.

So I'll address it. Readers may be surprised to know that this argument was pre-addressed by John the Baptist and Yeshua, and post addressed by James.

First, John the Baptist addresses this argument:

Matthew 3:8-10

Second, Yeshua addresses it: John chapter 8, whole chapter.

Third, James addresses it:

James 2:20-24

That's 3 witnesses against your one.

 

[Imalive]

Internal consistency on this issue within the writings of Saul/Paul would suggest that he meant everyone. If all death and sin originates from one man and woman, is passed on physically so we are all "under sin", which are things that he teaches, then it is consistent with the passage as he uses it here:

"What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;
As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:"

That being said, the internal consistency I refer to starts and ends with Saul/Paul's words on this issue in my view. More broadly, they are not supported by the Scriptures for numerous reasons including but not limited to pointing at various individuals and calling them righteous. Joseph (Mary's husband) included - although the translations like to hide it under other words like "decent" and in the case of Noah - "just" (and like in the NIV, only "among the the people of his generations" - suggesting the sort of thing Josiah referred to)

Romans 3:9-18 is not just taken from one Psalm. Pay close attention and source each line. They come from all over the place and Saul/Paul strings them together as if they can be found in one passage. That is simply not true. Also, the initial psalm quoted is missing a bit of context - for it is referring to fools and workers of iniquity and bases it's comments within this frame work. Your own quote below shows it.

But maybe except for Enoch they all sinned. Righteous is not totally sinless as in that they never did anything wrong. Noah got drunk. Moses killed a guy. Abraham lied to that king who wanted to marry Sarah. Lot was called righteous. I have another idea of righteousness. My dad isnt even a christian yet but no way he'd be such a jerk.
So righteous is not completely without doing any sin ever.

 

[Stravinsk]

But maybe except for Enoch they all sinned. Righteous is not totally sinless as in that they never did anything wrong. Noah got drunk. Moses killed a guy. Abraham lied to that king who wanted to marry Sarah. Lot was called righteous. I have another idea of righteousness. My dad isnt even a christian yet but no way he'd be such a jerk.
So righteous is not completely without doing any sin ever.

And David had Bathsheba's husband murdered and was called on it by the prophet Nathan. If David had never repented, he would never have received grace. But he did repent, and he did receive grace. However there were still consequences to his actions.

Have you ever read Ezekiel 3:18-21?

Now in regards to Noah, the Genesis passage is clear to me that over the course of his 950 years, God considered him righteous. Drunkeness is frowned on, is considered foolishness and unwise but one drunk episode does not a drunk make, even so, it's not even mentioned in the 10 commandments.

Paul's description in Romans 3:9-18 simply cannot fit him.

 

[Josiah]

So righteous is not completely without doing any sin ever.

Again, Scripture speaks of "righteousness" in two different ways: 1) One is what you indicate, it's called "civil righteousness" in theology, it is comparative to other people and so is by no means absolute. As indicated, Scripture specifically calls individuals "righteous" and then notes that they did sin. Today, we rarely use the word in this sense (we might simply call them "good"). 2) The other is absolute and from God's perspective, as compared to the Law. Here "no one is righteous, no, not one." "For all have sinned and fall short." Words in Scripture are not always used in identical ways; tradition and theology acknowledge that. Noah was a good man, he had a certain "civil righteousness" and God acknowledges that - but he was not sinless (matching the glory of God, as holy as God is holy, as moral as God is moral, without any less-than-perfect-and-loving thought, word or deed from conception on) and thus does not prove Scripture is wrong when it says "no one is righteous, no, not even one." The opening post simply notes just one of the examples of a word used in Scripture that can mean different things in context.


- Josiah

 

[Stravinsk]

Speaking of context, I do find it amazing that a bunch of different Scriptures taken from lots of different passages can be mixed together and then taken at face value to promote a theology, while the actual passages from which they were taken indicate a completely different context.

Such is the case with Psalm 14. The people spoken of are workers of iniquity and those who, in their heart believe there is no God. They are fools as David calls them.

But if I lift just a few lines from the psalm I could apply it to anyone (or everyone) with a few strokes of a pen (or keyboard). Is that really hard to understand? It's actually more than just "no one is righteous". It's the text that's put together in Romans 3:9-18. Apply ALL of it to someone like Noah and the picture of Noah changes considerably. That is why I worded the text the way I did (in the OP) instead of just focusing on a couple lines from one of the OT scriptures that is quoted. Noah suddenly becomes a bloodthirsty monster if we apply all of Romans 3:9-18 to him.

There are some people (Mark Driscoll? apparently whom I'malive linked) that actually believe that.

 

[MennoSota]

Interesting. I thought at first this was a random post but then realized that since my thread hinges on the term "righteous" and the dichotomy between what Saul/Paul teaches in Romans 3:9-18 and Noah's righteousness, I think I get why you brought up this passage. This passage you quoted is one of those by Saul/Paul that seeks to redefine the term righteous to only some sort of mental acknowledgement, absent action.

So I'll address it. Readers may be surprised to know that this argument was pre-addressed by John the Baptist and Yeshua, and post addressed by James.

First, John the Baptist addresses this argument:

Matthew 3:8-10

Second, Yeshua addresses it: John chapter 8, whole chapter.

Third, James addresses it:

James 2:20-24

That's 3 witnesses against your one.

Why do you hate Paul? Did not Peter call Paul's writing "scripture?"
Did not God inspire Paul as equally as Moses?
How many ways can you avoid God? [emoji41]

 

[Stravinsk]

Why do you hate Paul? Did not Peter call Paul's writing "scripture?"
Did not God inspire Paul as equally as Moses?
How many ways can you avoid God? [emoji41]

Avoiding God means avoiding Saul/Paul? Whopper of a leap there, man!

The reasons I disbelieve Saul/Paul (that is to say, disbelieve many of the things he says, not all) are listed elsewhere on this forum. If you look hard enough, I'm sure you can find them. Alas this is a detraction from the thread.

The questions I posed in my OP are still there if you'd like to read and answer them and participate on the theme of the thread.

 

[Imalive]

Avoiding God means avoiding Saul/Paul? Whopper of a leap there, man!

The reasons I disbelieve Saul/Paul (that is to say, disbelieve many of the things he says, not all) are listed elsewhere on this forum. If you look hard enough, I'm sure you can find them. Alas this is a detraction from the thread.

The questions I posed in my OP are still there if you'd like to read and answer them and participate on the theme of the thread.

It's not Pauls fault that his words get twisted. Go join me and blame Calvin instead LOL. Anything bad is always Calvins fault.