Christina Koch

Great Conversation-E

Bryn Geffert

October 10, 2005                           

A Morality of One

The two tablets of the Ten Commandments are one of the most common images of law and morality in the world today.  Anyone remotely familiar with the Judeo-Christian tradition has a basic understanding of this moral code.  Yet the very source of this morality belies its widespread acceptance.  In current Western society, morality is based in the Bible, but in Genesis, morality is quite different than the expected “ten commandments” edition.  The author depicts Jacob deceiving his family members, Abraham preparing to sacrifice his legitimate son, and the other side (drunkenness) of Noah, the world’s first savior.  Clearly the practices of everyday life in Genesis are not constrained by the moral obligations of today.  In contrast to the commonly recognized morality of the Ten Commandments, Genesis demonstrates that morality consists of one thing—faith in God and his promises and thus actions of obedience.   

At the beginning of Genesis, Adam and Eve’s morality is one simple rule: obey God’s command not to eat from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.  It would be ridiculous to conclude that God is forbidding people to eat fruit.  The sin in the garden was not the actual eating of the fruit but the disobedience of God’s explicit order.  As a preface to her disobedience, Eve commits the sin of doubt.  Her doubt of God’s command opened the way for her second defiance of eating the fruit.  That single sin of doubt and disobedience has since caused all of the world’s problems.  Clearly, obedience to God is a vital part of maintaining one’s righteousness. 

After Adam and Eve’s disobedience, Abraham gives humanity a second chance at being right with God.  As God attempts to reconnect with a portion of humanity, trust and obedience are essential.  God’s initial exchange with Abraham includes instructions: “Go from your country and your kindred and your father’s house to the land that I will show you” (Genesis 12:1b).  Abraham demonstrates his suitability as God’s chosen by obeying these instructions.  Even when Abraham is not required to act, “… he believed the Lord and the Lord reckoned it to him as righteousness” (Genesis 15:6).   Abraham succeeds in being moral where Adam and Eve failed. 

Abraham even obeys God to the point of sacrificing his son Isaac.  Isaac’s birth is a miracle considering his parent’s age.  Isaac is Abraham’s only link with his posterity.  Commentator Carr says, “The way the command is stated (your only son whom you love) … presupposes that what is being asked of Abraham is extraordinary and extremely difficult” (NOAB3 40).  Today’s morality does not approve of child sacrifice; even the Old Testament later rebukes child sacrifice among the nations of Canaan.  However, Abraham’s belief in God is so sure he starts out for the mountain and gets as far as putting the knife to his son’s neck.  At this point, God quickly steps in and blesses Abraham yet again for demonstrating his utter loyalty to God’s will.  Here good comes when obedience to God trumps personal morals and preferences. 

This pattern of “obedience morality” is well established through Abraham but Jacob seems to take a step in the other direction.  Of all the patriarchs, he does the most double-dealing with no apparent sense of fair play or “morality.”  He cheats Esau out of his birthright for a bowl of stew.  He lies to his father for the firstborn’s blessing.  He deceives his father-in-law and defrauds him of his property.  Is this how the recipient of God’s blessing conducts himself?  Does God condone Jacob’s questionable behavior?  It may be that God values Jacob’s craftiness and initiative.  Because he was not born the first son, Jacob has to “earn” his promised blessing through his actions.  In the end he even strives with God to receive his “new name [that] reflects a new self: no longer was he the ‘supplanter’…but Israel…which probably originally meant ‘El rules’ (with El being the head of the Northwest Semitic pantheon)” (Carr, NOAB3 56).  Jacob has gone from runner up to the highest deity of his time.  His driven pursuit of more makes him part of God’s plan just as Abraham’s faith receives credit as righteousness.  Jacob “obeys” God in his trickery, even if he doesn’t always realize it, and as long as his antics advance God’s purpose for the future nation of Israel, those actions are justified. 

Many other stories in Genesis show that morality consists of faith and obedience to God.  A common theme is that the fear of God brings life.  In Lot’s case, his questionable decision to live in the city of Sodom does not cause his death.  Instead his obedience to God when it counts saves his life.  Lot’s wife, by contrast, disobeys the injunction not to look back at Sodom and suffers death.  Babel also demonstrates the importance of obedience to God.  When humans decide to unite and build a tower to heaven, “The humans’ intention to stay together contradicts the divine imperative to “fill the earth” now found in Priestly traditions” (Carr, NOAB3 25).  Their disregard for God’s command brings about the creation of miscommunication and a scattering about the earth.  Finally, when God decides to destroy the earth by flood, he recognizes Noah as faithful, different than the earth’s other inhabitants.  Noah’s obedience then saves him as, “he did all that God commanded him” (Genesis 6:22), even to the ludicrous extent of building a boat in the middle of the desert. 

In Genesis, God, not social convention or religious tradition, is equated with morality.  Many characters discover that the only real form of “righteousness” comes from being “right” with God—believing and acting upon his will.  Two opposing conclusions can then be drawn about morality in Genesis.  One side would argue that this morality is no morality at all.  It is purely arbitrary, based on the whims of God.  The opposing side would argue that God’s very self is goodness, so this obedience is the only true morality, even truer than the Ten Commandments.  Genesis does not give an answer to this challenge—whether God deserves to be seen as arbitrary or the source of goodness—it merely illustrates.  The reader is faced with the choice of Adam and Eve: to doubt or believe and obey. 


Works Cited

New Oxford Annotated Bible.  Third ed., with the Apocryphal/Deuterocanonical Books.  Edited by Michael D. Coogan et. al.  Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 2001.