The Noachian Covenant: A Temple Document

But I will establish my covenant with you (6:18).  This is the sign of the covenant which I make between me and you and every living creature that is with you, for all future generations: I will set my bow in the cloud… (Gen. 9:12f.)

The first time the word “covenant” occurs is Genesis 6:18. The usual terminology is to “cut a covenant,” since animals were cut in half to solemnize the event (Hebrew kārat barît). Here, however, we have the Hebrew verb qûm which in this context can well be translated “re- establish” or “perpetuate” an existing covenant (cf. 9:11 with the same verb). Though there is no formal covenantal ceremony in Genesis 2, we see that there is indeed an agreement or at least conditions by which Adam and Eve must live which contain promise or punishment. Every covenant has symbols, and the symbol of the Edenic covenant is the tree of life and the garden in general, which we have identified as the Holy of Holies. With the loss of the garden, and the subsequent crescendo of evil in the antediluvian world, one wonders whether the promise of Eden, the tree of life, is cut off forever to humanity. With Noah we find that God indeed perpetuates His original covenant promise with humanity. The Noachian grows organically out of the Edenic.  We will have much more to say about covenant as we go deeper into Scripture. 

The symbols of the Noachian covenant are two-fold. The rainbow was intended for God to see lest, when beholding evil with pure eyes, He should render justice and destroy the world again. It acts as a divine restraint so that mercy prevails. The ark functions as the other symbol. As we have seen in the former post, the ark is, in fact, a miniature Eden containing another “first man” and animals. As an Eden, it is understood as a temple before which we see Noah building an altar to God where he sacrificed.  The dove is another symbol that links this covenant to creation (See Post on Gen. 1:2) and to Christ (esp. with olive branch, Augustine, Ambrose, Bede, Maximus of Turin). God promises not to curse the earth again, nor destroy it as He just did with the flood, “while the earth remains …” (8:21-22). This last phrase is loaded eschatologically, for the assumption is that this earth will not exist forever in an endless cycle of seasons like the pagan animistic religions understood, but that there is a climax and an end to history as we know it.

Before the ark Noah is blessed to be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth. Therefore, Adam’s original purpose, that of guarding and keeping the temple, as well as expanding it to the whole earth, is perpetuated in this covenant. Moreover, the animals disperse, but now under different conditions. That God would place blood restrictions on the eating of animals assume that with the degradation of humanity before the flood humanity gorged on animal meat as animal devours animal with pulsating blood, or at least with blood not drained. To preserve the imago dei in humanity, God allowed for the eating of animal flesh, but with the restriction of draining the meat properly. Obviously, animals are less inclined to buddy-up to men who desire to eat them. It is contrary to original design for animals to fear humanity, or vice versa. This covenant accepts this reality of the new order, but again, with restrictions so as to keep order in the cosmic temple as man and beast spread forth.

Then there is capital punishment. Before with Cain, murder was dealt with mercifully, and man responded to God’s patience with presumption, killing indiscriminately. Now the killer must be put to death for the specific reason that man was made in the image of God. To kill a man is to strike at God, and God bestows the right and responsibility on the human community to execute the offender (Augustine, Chrysostom, Ephraim the Syrian, Ambrose, Aquinas and many others). This is contradicted with the new addition to the Catechism (2018):

“in the light of the Gospel” the death penalty is “inadmissible because it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person” and that the Catholic Church “works with determination for its abolition worldwide.”

This covenant is universally made with the human race through Noah in anticipation of the 70 nations in Genesis 10.  The next three covenants, Abrahamic Mosaic, and Davidic, grow out of this universal covenant, creating the nation of Israel, which shares the grace and obligations of this covenant with all the other nations.  The new Covenant in Christ in turn grows out of all previous covenants, and the Church has always received the blood demands of the Noachian Covenant as obligatory to national order. The added quote above is not dogma to be received because it has not been promulgated by the extraordinary magisterium, by ecumenical council or ex cathedra. 

Herein is the fundamental problem in this addition:  the very reason for capital punishment is that “it is an attack on the inviolability and dignity of” God.  The “human person” does not factor into this exegetically. It is an act of God through the agency of legitimate governments.  What constitute a “legitimate” government is a whole other issue, but according to St. Paul in Romans 13, Rome falls into this category despite the fact he was anticipating his own execution.  

That these blood restrictions are placed on the human race with regard to beast and fellow men underlines the fact that humanity has become blood thirsty; this new covenant is designed to place boundaries on the shedding of blood. Apart from the confines of the altar, the unmandated shedding of blood defiles the temple in ancient Hebrew thinking. As God mandates Noah to start anew in the original purpose of filling the earth and making it the temple of God, tight blood restrictions were necessary. In this way we see that the Noachian covenant, with its symbols, mandates, and blood restrictions is, in fact, a temple document.

Takeaway: The covenant with Noah underscores the fact that humans are fundamentally bloodthirsty in their fallen state; it sets blood boundaries to maintain order.

Questions:

• Do you believe that fallen humanity is essentially bloodthirsty? If so, can you give examples of this? 
• Do you understand why capital punishment was established in this covenant from the text itself? What do you think about the recent shift in the Church’s teaching on capital punishment? 

Resources Used:

ACCS

Dumbrell, W.J.  Covenant and Creation (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Pub., 1984).  This is a very thoughtful and stimulating work on the biblical covenants, although from a Reformed perspective.  He demonstrates how the concept of creation provides the grounds and warrant for all of covenant theology.