Readtime: 4 min. Impact: Lifetime.
In the Torah, we encounter a tapestry of remarkable figures whose lives illuminate the profound dynamics of obedience, faith, and intercession in their relationship with God. These individuals, often descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, are celebrated for their unwavering commitment to divine commands, shaping the spiritual legacy of Israel. Yet, among these towering personalities, one man stands apart, uniquely distinguished in the sacred text: Noah, the only individual explicitly called a “righteous man” in the entire Torah (Gen. 6:9). This designation is striking, not only for its singularity but also because Noah was not part of the covenantal lineage of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob—the patriarchs chosen to establish God’s holy nation, Israel. While Noah’s righteousness is undeniable, it is Israel, through the descendants of these patriarchs, that God designates as a “holy nation” and a “kingdom of priests” (Ex. 19:6). This raises a profound question: Why, despite Noah’s unparalleled title of righteousness, was he not included among the founders of God’s chosen people? The answer, I propose, lies in the distinct ways Noah and the patriarchs approached God, particularly in moments of divine judgment, revealing deeper dimensions of faith, intercession, and relational engagement with the divine.
To explore this, let us first consider Noah’s response to God’s pronouncement of judgment. In Genesis 6, God reveals to Noah that a catastrophic flood will destroy the earth due to humanity’s pervasive wickedness. God instructs Noah to build an ark to preserve his family and representatives of every animal. Noah’s response is immediate and unequivocal: “Noah did everything just as God commanded him” (Gen. 6:22). His obedience is exemplary, marked by silence and compliance. Noah does not question God’s decree, nor does he intercede for the doomed generation. His righteousness manifests in his faithful execution of God’s command, ensuring the survival of his household and the created order. This obedience is profound, reflecting a deep trust in God’s justice and sovereignty. However, Noah’s approach is notably passive in terms of engaging with God beyond the task assigned. He accepts the divine will without challenge, embodying a form of righteousness that prioritizes submission over dialogue.
In contrast, Abraham’s response to God’s announcement of judgment against Sodom and Gomorrah reveals a strikingly different posture. In Genesis 18:16-33, God informs Abraham of His intent to destroy the cities due to their egregious sin. Rather than acquiescing silently, Abraham engages God in a bold, almost audacious dialogue. He intercedes on behalf of the cities, pleading for mercy if even a small number of righteous inhabitants can be found. Abraham’s language is daring: “Will you sweep away the righteous with the wicked? … Far be it from you to do such a thing … Shall not the Judge of all the earth do what is just?” (Gen. 18:23-25). This is not mere compliance but a priestly act of intercession, where Abraham risks divine displeasure to advocate for others. His persistence—bargaining with God to spare the cities for fifty, then forty-five, down to ten righteous people—demonstrates a relational intimacy with God, one that dares to wrestle with divine intentions. Ultimately, Abraham accepts God’s will, as Noah did, but only after exhausting every possibility to influence the outcome. This intercessory stance aligns with the priestly role Israel is later called to embody, mediating between God and the nations.
The contrast between Noah and Abraham is further illuminated by the etymology of the name “Israel,” derived from Jacob, Abraham’s grandson. The name Israel (Yisrael) stems from the Hebrew root לשרות (lesrot), meaning “to wrestle” or “to exercise influence.” This is rooted in Genesis 32:24-30, where Jacob wrestles with a mysterious figure, later identified as divine, through the night. Refusing to let go until he receives a blessing, Jacob’s tenacity earns him the name Israel, signifying a struggle with God that shapes his identity and that of his descendants. This wrestling is not rebellion but a profound engagement, a willingness to grapple with the divine will while remaining faithful. Jacob’s encounter mirrors Abraham’s intercession, reflecting a pattern among the patriarchs of approaching God with both reverence and boldness. Unlike Noah’s silent obedience, Jacob’s struggle embodies a dynamic relationship with God, one that involves questioning, persistence, and transformation.
This pattern of wrestling and intercession is not unique to Abraham and Jacob but is echoed in other biblical figures who, like the patriarchs, engage God in ways that deepen their covenantal role. Consider Moses, another pivotal figure in Israel’s story, whose interactions with God exemplify this approach. In Exodus 32, after the Israelites sin by worshiping the golden calf, God declares His intent to destroy the people and start anew with Moses. Moses’ response is immediate and courageous: he intercedes, pleading with God to relent. “Why should your anger burn against your people, whom you brought out of Egypt with great power and a mighty hand? … Turn from your fierce anger; relent and do not bring disaster on your people” (Ex. 32:11-12). Moses even invokes God’s reputation among the nations and His covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, urging God to remember His promises. His boldness peaks when he declares, “If you will not forgive their sin … please blot me out of the book you have written” (Ex. 32:32), offering his own life for the people’s sake. Like Abraham, Moses acts as a mediator, standing in the gap between God and Israel, and his intercession secures divine mercy. This priestly role, rooted in relational intimacy and courage, aligns with Israel’s calling as a nation of priests, distinguishing Moses’ approach from Noah’s silent compliance.
Another example is found in the prophet Samuel, whose intercessory role further illustrates this dynamic. In 1 Samuel 7, when the Philistines threaten Israel, Samuel prays and offers sacrifices on behalf of the people, crying out to God for deliverance (1 Sam. 7:9). His intercession leads to God’s intervention, routing the enemy. Later, when Israel demands a king, Samuel perceives this as a rejection of God’s kingship. Yet, rather than withdrawing, he commits to praying for the people: “As for me, far be it from me that I should sin against the Lord by failing to pray for you” (1 Sam. 12:23). Samuel’s persistent intercession, even in the face of Israel’s waywardness, reflects the same priestly mediation seen in Abraham and Moses, contrasting with Noah’s more individualistic obedience.
The distinction between Noah’s righteousness and the patriarchs’ approach lies in their relational posture toward God. Noah’s obedience, while exemplary, is primarily personal and task-oriented, focused on preserving his family and the created order. The patriarchs, however, embody a broader, mediatorial role, engaging God on behalf of others—whether Sodom, Israel, or future generations. This aligns with Israel’s covenantal purpose to be a light to the nations (Isa. 42:6), a role that requires not only obedience but also intercession and influence. Noah’s righteousness, though profound, does not extend to this priestly function, which is central to Israel’s identity.
Moreover, the patriarchs’ willingness to wrestle with God reflects a deeper trust in His character. Abraham’s dialogue assumes God’s justice and mercy, allowing him to plead for the righteous in Sodom. Jacob’s struggle seeks a blessing, trusting God’s transformative power. Moses’ intercession appeals to God’s covenantal faithfulness. These interactions reveal a faith that dares to engage God’s will, not out of defiance but out of confidence in His relational nature. Noah’s silence, while obedient, lacks this dimension of dialogue, positioning him outside the covenantal lineage tasked with mediating God’s presence to the world.
This is not to diminish Noah’s significance. His righteousness preserved humanity and creation, making him a pivotal figure in God’s redemptive plan. The nations, represented by Noah’s descendants, remain integral to God’s purposes, as seen in the promise to Abraham that all nations will be blessed through his seed (Gen. 22:18). However, Israel’s unique calling as a priestly nation requires a faith that combines obedience with intercession, submission with struggle. Abraham, Jacob, Moses, and Samuel exemplify this, their lives woven into the fabric of Israel’s identity as God’s chosen people.
In conclusion, Noah’s righteousness, while unparalleled, reflects a solitary obedience that contrasts with the relational, intercessory faith of the patriarchs. The latter’s willingness to wrestle with God, intercede for others, and engage divine purposes positions them as the founders of Israel, a nation called to mediate God’s presence. Through their examples, we see that true covenantal faith involves not only submitting to God’s will but also daring to dialogue with Him, trusting in His justice and mercy to shape the destiny of nations.
If God has blessed you through this article, please consider support my future cutting-edge research and teaching. I will be very grateful! Please, click here and make an impact.
Impact: Lifetime
Indeed.
תודה רבה!
בבקשה
I truly enjoyed this . Thanks Dr Eli
Let us all grow in our godly hutzpah!
Wow, I really enjoyed reading your blog Dr. Eli.
It’s all written with a great perspective and Hashem placed everything into its proper purpose.
Now I understand what the Holy Hutzpah’s purpose is. Thank you for this.
You are most welcome, Shoshanna!
Beautifully explained. Thank you Dr Eli.
Sylvia, good to see you here! Blessings!
What a wonderful insight into God’s relationship with His covenantal people!
Thank you, Christina!
Is the name Noah (meaning rest) portrait Noah’s character of submissiveness?
Psalm 46:10 NKJV
[10] Be still, and know that I am God; I will be exalted among the nations, I will be exalted in the earth!
Hebrews 4:11 NKJV
[11] Let us therefore be diligent to enter that rest, lest anyone fall according to the same example of disobedience.
Praise the Lord.
Good insight. Perhaps. Eddie.