Is not the fact that God thinks that the imagination of man's heart is bent to evil from youth onwards proof that the flood was an exaggeration and that therefore he would not bring another flood in Genesis 8:21? Or did he promise this simply on Noah's merit? What was the need for God to bring this understanding to light? Atheists, agnostics, exegetes, secular scholars correlate this passage as God's admission that the flood solved nothing, some go further and argue that God missed his point and changed his approach by not promising to bring another flood, never mind. what circumstances. future generations are just as bad or even worse. In this case, would God have acted on impulse and anger and when it calmed down, did he realize that he had not solved the problem, that this is something ingrained in human beings and that from now on the approach would have to be different? What do you think? How do you understand this text?
-
1I would see as any description of God having emotion, a body etc as poetic.– user24193Commented May 7, 2023 at 3:37
2 Answers
The Alter Rebbe explains this. He asks, why is the reason for bringing the flood, and the reason for never bringing it again the same? I.e. in both cases it is because man is evil from youth? The first time He says it, He says therefore He will destroy mankind, and the second time He says it, He says therefore He will never destroy mankind.
The answer is that intellect is lower in the soul than pleasure. The intellectual argument Hashem made was the same, but before the flood, He had lost the pleasure on His creation and therefore the argument lent towards destruction. Afterwards, Noach brought back the pleasure (as indicated by Hashem smelling the pleasant fragrance of the korban before saying it the second time) so the argument lent towards mercy.
The lesson is on how powerful pleasure is and how it modifies our thinking. Being in a good mood is a moral obligation as someone in a good mood is much more inspired to do good and make the lives of everyone around them better.
-
Can you even understand it that way but all pleasure is momentary, can't a generation so or more perverse happen again to the point of losing pleasure again? At the very least, is it not possible to say that God acted out of emotion and saw that having done that did not improve the state of things by verifying that the inclination of the heart of Man is evil? Of course, supporting this hypothesis would be the same as saying that God is like us who acts on impulse but the Bible anthropomorphizes God in many ways like repenting of something even if it means something different.– ThalesCommented May 7, 2023 at 10:59
-
This would be too big a discussion for this site, so for now I'll just say that a) pleasure is not an emotion and b) you don't have to say He acted on impulse. Best thing to do is study some chassidus on this Commented May 7, 2023 at 11:01
-
I see, despite being a simple question it has complex ramifications. By the way, complementing, he promised not to destroy humanity with a flood right? He didn't generalize the methods, did he? Can he use any other means if he feels so disgusted with the generation that in theory would not violate the covenant he made with Noah?– ThalesCommented May 7, 2023 at 11:07
-
@Thales interesting question. See judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/86288/… for e.g. Commented May 7, 2023 at 11:12
-
This subject of the flood raises many questions that I will ask later. One that I'm thinking about is whether the flood was preventable at that time or was it something decreed with no return? Noah was the only righteous one from what it seems, he alone would not prevent this as in the case of the 10 of Sodom, would there be a margin of righteous people to avoid the flood? This question is among others that I am formulating.– ThalesCommented May 7, 2023 at 11:24
God did not regret bringing the flood at all. Those people were beyond incorrigible and enough was enough. The world was so inundated with sin and pain that, just like dirty bedsheets, it needed a good wash! But God did promise he wouldn't dip the ole blue ball in the sink anymore.
-
1Welcome. OP is asking whether God regretted the flood, not creating man, which is what Genesis 6:6 involves. Regardless, we try to keep a civil tone on the site. While you are certainly welcome to disagree, sarcasm is not constructive.– AvrahamCommented May 8, 2023 at 20:52
-
As it’s currently written, your answer is unclear. Please edit to add additional details that will help others understand how this addresses the question asked. You can find more information on how to write good answers in the help center.– Community BotCommented May 8, 2023 at 20:52