Temple Symbolism and Noah’s Ark

In considering the role of Noah’s Ark in the flood story, note that it was specifically a mobile sanctuary, as were the Tabernacle and the ark made of reeds that saved the baby Moses. Each of these structures can be described as a traveling vehicle of rescue that was designed to parallel in function God’s portable pavilion or chariot.

Scripture makes a clear distinction between the fixed heavenly temple and its portable counterparts. For example, in Psalm 18 and D&C 121:1, the “pavilion” (i.e., booth or canopy; Hebrew sukkah) of “God’s hiding place” should not be equated with the celestial “temple” (i.e., palace; Hebrew hekal) to which the prayers of the oppressed ascend. Rather, it is a representation of a movable “conveyance” in which God could swiftly descend to rescue His people from mortal danger. The sense of the action is succinctly captured by Robert Alter: “The outcry of the beleaguered warrior ascends all the way to the highest heavens, thus launching a downward vertical movement” of God’s own chariot.

Such a “downward vertical movement” had already been urgently undertaken in response to the sorry state of humanity not long before the Flood. In a vision foreshadowing this event, Enoch is said to have seen “many stars descend” from heaven. These were the Watchers or “sons of God”—described variously as angels or mortals. They were given a charge to rescue mankind, having been commissioned to “teach the sons of man, and perform judgment and uprightness upon the earth.” Tragically, however, they “corrupted their way and their ordinances,” the discharge of their missions thus serving to accelerate rather than halt the increase of “injustice… upon the earth.” It was in view of the utter failure of this attempt to save humanity at large that God resolved to rescue Noah and his family.

Noah’s mission was one that few of us would envy. As Nibley writes:

If we fancy Noah riding the sunny seas high, dry, and snug in the Ark, we have not read the record—the long, hopeless struggle against entrenched mass resistance to his preaching, the deepening gloom and desperation of the years leading up to the final debacle, then the unleashed forces of nature with the family absolutely terrified, weeping and praying “because they were at the gates of death,” as the Ark was thrown about with the greatest violence by terrible winds and titanic seas. Albright’s suggestion that the flood story goes back to “the tremendous floods which must have accompanied the successive retreats of the glaciers” is supported by the tradition that the family suffered terribly because of the cold, and that Noah on the waters “coughed blood on account of the cold.” The Jaredites had only to pass through the tail end of the vast storm cycle of Noah’s day, yet for 344 days they had to cope with “mountain waves” and a wind that “did never cease to blow.” Finally, Noah went forth into a world of utter desolation, as Adam did, to build his altar, call upon God, and try to make a go of it all over again, only to see some of his progeny on short order prefer Satan to God and lose all the rewards that his toil and sufferings had put in their reach.

...

Full text

Temple Symbolism in the Form of Noah’s Ark

John Lundquist describes the ancient expectation that temple plans are to be received by revelation. For example:

Gudea of Lagash was visited in a dream in a temple of Lagash and shown the plan of the temple by a goddess, who gave him a lapis lazuli tablet on which the plan of the temple was written. Perhaps the best example of this aspect of temple building is the Sinai episode itself, in which, according to D. N. Freedman, “this heavenly temple or sanctuary with its throne room or Holy of Holies where the deity was seated on his cherubim throne constituted the [pattern (Hebrew tabnît)] or structure seen by Moses during his sojourn on the same mountain.”

Thus the heavenly temple became the pattern for the earthly Tabernacle built by Moses. It is significant that, apart from the Tabernacle of Moses and the Temple of Solomon, Noah’s Ark is the only man-made structure mentioned in the Bible whose design was directly revealed by God. In this detail from a window of the Holy Trinity Church in Stratford-upon-Avon, England, God shows the plans for the Ark to Noah just as He later revealed the plans for the Tabernacle to Moses. The hands of Deity hold the heavenly curtain as Noah, compass in his left hand, regards intently. Like the Tabernacle, Noah’s Ark “was designed as a temple.” The Ark’s three decks suggest both the three divisions of the Tabernacle and the threefold layout of the Garden of Eden. Indeed, each of the three decks of Noah’s Ark was exactly “the same height as the Tabernacle and three times the area of the Tabernacle court.” The same Hebrew word (mikseh) was used for the animal skin covering of the Ark and that of the Tabernacle.

...

Full text

Revisiting the Forgotten Voices of Weeping in Moses 7: A Comparison with Ancient Texts

One of the most moving passages in the “extracts from the Prophecy of Enoch” included in the LDS Book of Moses describes weeping for the suffering of the wicked who were to perish in the Flood in chapter 7, verses 28-49.

According to this text, there are three parties directly involved in the weeping: God (Moses 7:28; cf. v. 29), the heavens (Moses 7:28, 37), and Enoch (Moses 7:41, 49). In addition, a fourth party, the earth, mourns—though does not weep—for her children (Moses 7:48–49).

Daniel Peterson has previously discussed the interplay among the members of this chorus of weeping voices, citing the arguments of non-LDS biblical scholar J.J.M. Roberts  that identify three similar voices within the laments of the book of Jeremiah: the feminine voice of the mother of the people (corresponding in the Book of Moses to the voice of the earth, the “mother of men”), the voice of the people (corresponding to Enoch), and the voice of God Himself.

Because of their eloquent rebuke of the idea of divine impassibility—the notion that God does not suffer pain or distress—the passages in Moses 7 that speak of the voice of the weeping God have received the greatest share of attention in LDS scholarship, eliciting the pioneering notices of Hugh Nibley, followed by lengthy articles by Eugene England and Peterson. Most recently, a book relating to the topic has been written by Terryl and Fiona Givens. In addition, with regard to the complaints of the earth described in Moses 7:48–49, valuable articles by Andrew Skinner  and Peterson, again following Nibley’s lead, discuss interesting parallels in ancient sources.

The purpose of this article is to round out the previous discussion so as to include two voices of weeping that have been largely forgotten by LDS scholarship—that of Enoch and that of the heavens.

...

Full text

Taking the Stories of Adam, Eve, and Noah Seriously

Given their status as targets of humor and caricature, it is sometimes difficult to be taken seriously when discussing the well-worn stories of Adam, Eve, and Noah. However, a thoughtful examination of the scriptural record of these characters will reveal not simply stories of “piety or … inspiring adventures” but rather carefully-crafted narratives from a highly-sophisticated culture that preserve “deep memories” of spiritual understanding. We do an injustice, both to these marvelous records and to ourselves, when we fail to pursue scriptural understanding beyond the initial level of cartoon cut-outs inculcated upon the minds of young children. Hugh Nibley characterized the problem this way:

The stories of the Garden of Eden and the Flood have always furnished unbelievers with their best ammunition against believers, because they are the easiest to visualize, popularize, and satirize of any Bible accounts. Everyone has seen a garden and been caught in a pouring rain. It requires no effort of imagination for a six-year-old to convert concise and straightforward Sunday-school recitals into the vivid images that will stay with him for the rest of his life. These stories retain the form of the nursery tales they assume in the imaginations of small children, to be defended by grown-ups who refuse to distinguish between childlike faith and thinking as a child when it is time to “put away childish things.” It is equally easy and deceptive to fall into adolescent disillusionment and with one’s emancipated teachers to smile tolerantly at the simple gullibility of bygone days, while passing stern moral judgment on the savage old God who damns Adam for eating the fruit He put in his way and, overreacting with impetuous violence, wipes out Noah’s neighbors simply for making fun of his boat-building on a fine summer’s day.

Adding to the circus-like atmosphere surrounding modern discussions of Noah’s flood are the sometimes acrimonious contentions among fundamentalist proponents concerning theories about where the Ark came to rest. Nicolas Wyatt reports:

I once watched a television programme of excruciating banality, in which a camera team accompanied an American “archaeologist” (for so he called himself) on his quest for the remains of Noah’s ark on Mount Ararat. The highlight for me occurred when a rival crew was encountered at several thousand feet… above sea level heading in the opposite direction, on the same quest!

...

Full text

Reminder: Presentation in Provo on 22 September 2012

Jeff will present as part of the The Temple on Mount Zion symposium in Provo, Utah. His presentation is entitled “The Ark and the Tent: Temple Symbolism in the Story of Noah”, and linked are the tentative abstract and notes (note to readers: if the links are broken, let us know by way of comment or through this link, as Jeff is continually polishing and updating the presentation). Come prepared to learn, share, and interact with the attendees and speakers!

Date: Saturday, 22 September 2012
Time: 9:15am to 5:30pm

Provo Public Library
Third floor ballroom
550 N University Avenue
Provo, UT (map)

The abstracts and schedule can be found here at the Mormon Scripture Explorations blog, along with the following summary:

This conference was originally organized by Matthew Brown before his untimely passing. The conference focuses on LDS conceptions of ancient and modern Temple theology as reflected in the Bible and LDS scripture. We are attaching a program listing the participants and the time for their presentations, along with abstracts for each paper.

Admission to the conference is free, but seating is limited to about 300. During the lunch hour you can bring a bag lunch to eat in conference room, or visit some of the restaurants around Center St. and University Ave, a few blocks south of the library. The underground garage at the library is available for parking, but cars must be out at 6 pm.

New review at Interpreter

George L. Mitton, member of the editorial board of the new Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture (link) and former associate editor of FARMS Review, has published a review of Jeff Bradshaw's book Temple Themes in the Book of Moses.

The full text of the review can be seen here.

Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture

We're proud to announce a new outlet for peer-reviewed scholarly Mormon studies! You can see it here. Its mission statement is as follows:

Interpreter: A Journal of Mormon Scripture is a nonprofit educational journal focused on the scriptures of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints: the Book of Mormon, the Pearl of Great Price, the Bible, Doctrine and Covenants, early LDS history, and related subjects. All publications are peer-reviewed and are made available as free internet downloads or through at-cost print-on-demand services.

Our goal is to increase understanding of scripture through careful scholarly investigation and analysis of the insights provided by a wide range of ancillary disciplines, including language, history, archaeology, literature, culture, ethnohistory, art, geography, law, politics, philosophy, etc. Interpreter will also publish articles advocating the authenticity and historicity of LDS scripture and the Restoration, along with scholarly responses to critics of the LDS faith. We hope to illuminate, by study and faith, the eternal spiritual message of the scriptures—that Jesus is the Christ.

Although the editors of the journal fully support the goals and teachings of the Church, the journal is an independent entity with no affiliation with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, nor with Brigham Young University. The Board of Editors alone is responsible for its contents.

Take a look at www.mormoninterpreter.com and feel free to leave feedback and comments at their site. Jeff is on the editorial board and is excited to see this organization grow.