Genesis 6:9: Was Noah Perfect?

Genesis 6:9 is a hard saying because it appears to imply that Noah attained moral and spiritual perfection. How could Noah have achieved such an elevated status of perfection when he came after the Fall? Did he not partake of the sinful nature and the bent toward depravity that all the race had inherited? If he did, as most will affirm, in what sense could it be said that he was "righteous" and "blameless"?

Noah, Daniel and Job are remembered for their righteous lives (Ezek 14:14, 20). But they did not as humans set the standard for others. The standard they shared is still the same today: it is the Lord himself who sets the standard. His nature and will compose the ethical and moral measuring stick for all others to follow.

The Hebrew word sad q (which shares the same root as the Hebrew word sedeq) basically connotes conformity to the standard. The original idea may well have been "to be straight." From this came the idea of a "norm" and of being "in the right." The bureau of standards for what was morally and ethically right was to be found only in God himself. "The Lord is righteous [ sad q ] in all his ways and loving toward all he has made" (Ps 145:17). Therefore, the standards and judgments set out in his Word are righteous (Ps 119:144, 160, 172).

Some of the earlier usages of the word occur in connection with the Israelite judges' carrying out of their functions and decisions. They were warned, "Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly [sedeq]" (Lev 19:15). This same type of "righteousness" applied to scales and weights: "Use honest [ sedeq] scales and honest weights, an honest ephah and an honest hin" (Lev 19:36). Thus, the righteousness of God opposed commercial or judicial fraud and deception.

Righteousness applied to three areas of personal relationships: the ethical, the forensic and the theological. None of these three areas depended on current norms or practices; the righteousness that God wanted could be found only in the standards set forth in his Word. The ethical area dealt with the conduct of persons with one another. The forensic aspect required equality before the law for small and great, rich and poor. The theological aspect demanded that God's covenant people live a life of holiness, following the path laid out by God's righteousness.

In the case of Noah, he conformed to the standard set by God. When all the people around him were immersing themselves in evil and earning the wrath and judgment of God, Noah set his heart to follow the path found in the person and character of God. He stood his ground and remained uninfluenced by all that was happening around him.

The word righteous simply meant that he accepted and used the righteous standard for his living and acting. It does not imply perfection. The term does not in itself establish total approbation of his actions, any more than it does in connection with Tamar in Genesis 38:26. The text expresses an estimate of the comparative rightness of Tamar and Judah. When Judah was exposed as the adulterer by whom Tamar had become pregnant, he said, "She is more righteous than I"--that is, she was more within her rights to act as she did than Judah was in what he did. This can hardly be a complete endorsement of Tamar or her actions. Neither is the use of the same term a total endorsement of Noah.

Noah met the basic requirement set by the norm God had erected, and his conduct proved it. This can also be seen from the parallel clause "and he walked with God"--the same wording that was used of Enoch (Gen 5:24).

But this still leaves the problem of Noah's being called "blameless" or "perfect." Scripture has one preeminent example of the "perfect" man: Job. It is said that he was "blameless" (Job 1:1). He too claimed that he was "blameless" or "perfect" in Job 9:21-22, 12:4 and 31:6. Even under heavy assault to the contrary, he held fast to his "integrity" (same root--Job 27:5). And he was not alone in this opinion, for his wife ascribed "integrity" to him (Job 2:9). Even Yahweh in heaven agreed that Job was indeed "blameless" or "perfect" (Job 1:8; 2:3).

In spite of all these high accolades for Job, he knew that he was a sinner, for he queried, "How can a mortal be righteous before God?" (Job 9:2). He further acknowledged his sin (Job 10:6; 14:16-17). Accordingly, the use of the word blameless or perfect does not imply that one has attained perfection or a state in which one no longer sins. Even the creature in Eden (probably Lucifer) that was created "perfect" was found to be capable of sin (Ezek 28:13-15).

The Hebrew root of the word perfect involves the idea of completeness. Thus we conclude that Noah conformed to the standard set by God and that his life was "complete," with no essential quality missing.

The modifying phrase "among the people of his time" indicates all the more clearly that Noah's righteousness and blamelessness stood out against his contemporaries' sinfulness.

Just as Job had to admit his sin, so the same Scripture that tells us that Noah was righteous and blameless also tells us that he became drunk from the fruit of the vine (Gen 9:21). Clearly then there is no case for perfection and sinlessness in these words righteous and blameless. Instead, this is a case of someone who walked with God and delighted in following what he had said and living by the standards he had established.