BEMA Episode Link: 210: Midrash — The Man in the Fur Coat
Episode Length: 37:32
Published Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2021 01:00:00 -0800
Session 6
About this episode:

Marty Solomon and Brent Billings take a look at even more midrash that surrounds the character of Noah. Some commentary describes Noah as the man in the fur coat. What is this all about?

Discussion Video for BEMA 210

Genesis: A Parsha Companion by Rabbi David Fohrman

Aleph Beta Academy

Subscribe to Aleph Beta Academy

BEMA listeners can use code friendsofbema for one month off of a monthly Premium membership.

Transcript for BEMA 210

Notes

*Note: The following notes are handwritten by me, Adam, and I reserve the right to be wrong.

BEMA Episode 210: Midrash - The Man in the Fur Coat - Study Notes

Title & Source Summary

Episode: 210 - Midrash: The Man in the Fur Coat Hosts: Marty Solomon and Brent Billings Focus: Genesis 6 (Noah), Genesis 13-19 (Lot), Genesis 18 (Abraham)

This episode explores midrashic commentary surrounding Noah, comparing him to Lot and Abraham to reveal three different approaches to engaging with the world and responding to God’s judgment. Through the metaphor of Noah as “the man in the fur coat,” the episode examines what it means to be an insulator, an assimilator, or an engager in relation to the mission of God. The hosts also discuss Rabbi David Fohrman’s approach to reading Torah with fresh eyes, using basic reading comprehension tools to discover deeper layers of meaning in familiar biblical stories.

Key Takeaways

  • Noah is characterized as “the man in the fur coat” or “the Insulator” - someone focused on personal safety and survival rather than interceding for others.
  • Lot represents “the Assimilator” - someone who becomes so integrated into the surrounding culture that they lose their witness and ability to influence even their own family.
  • Abraham models “the Engager” - someone who wrestles with God, stands in the gap, and argues for mercy and justice on behalf of others.
  • The contrast between Noah’s immediate obedience without questioning and Abraham’s bold intercession reveals different postures toward God’s judgment.
  • Reading Torah with “kindergarten basics” - asking simple questions like “what happens next?” and “where have we heard these words before?” - can unlock deeper layers of meaning in familiar stories.
  • The people of God are called to be engagers, not insulators or assimilators, standing in the gap between God and the world.
  • The question “which one am I?” serves as a diagnostic for self-reflection about how we engage (or fail to engage) with the world around us.

Main Concepts & Theories

The Three Postures: Insulator, Assimilator, and Engager

The episode presents three archetypal responses to God’s call and the surrounding world, embodied by three biblical characters:

1. Noah - The Insulator (The Man in the Fur Coat)

Noah’s response to God’s announcement of judgment is immediate, unquestioning obedience. When God says, “I’m going to destroy the whole world,” Noah simply builds the ark as instructed. The text concludes: “Noah did everything just as God commanded him” (Genesis 6:22). While this obedience seems commendable, the Midrash questions why Noah never intercedes for the world around him.

The metaphor of the fur coat captures Noah’s inward focus - he is concerned primarily with his own warmth, his own safety, his own survival. Like someone bundled up in insulation, Noah protects himself and his immediate family but makes no effort to engage the broader world or advocate on its behalf. The problem with the insulator approach is that while you may save yourself, you don’t save the world. You survive, but you fail to fulfill the broader mission of blessing and transformation.

2. Lot - The Assimilator

Lot represents the opposite extreme. Beginning as someone who “pitched his tents near Sodom” (Genesis 13:12), Lot progressively integrates into Sodomite culture until we find him “sitting in the gateway of the city” (Genesis 19:1) - a position of civic authority and full cultural participation. The city gates were where officials and important people gathered, indicating Lot’s complete assimilation into Sodom’s social structure.

The consequence of assimilation is the loss of witness and influence. When judgment comes, Lot cannot even convince his own sons-in-law to flee. According to the Midrash’s counting, there should have been 10 people in Lot’s household (which is why Abraham stops his intercession at 10), but when the angels arrive, many of these family members refuse to leave. Lot has so thoroughly assimilated that he has lost the ability to speak prophetically even to his own family. The assimilator can’t save themselves or anyone else because they have lost their distinctive voice and mission.

3. Abraham - The Engager

Abraham represents the ideal biblical posture - neither insulated from nor assimilated into the surrounding culture, but actively engaged with both God and the world. When God announces judgment on Sodom and Gomorrah, Abraham’s response is radically different from Noah’s. He doesn’t say “Sweet, what do I need to do to be saved?” Instead, he argues with God.

The famous bargaining scene in Genesis 18:22-33 demonstrates Abraham’s chutzpah (boldness) in standing in the gap. He challenges God: “Will you sweep away the righteous with the wicked? … Far be it from you! Will not the judge of all the earth do right?” Abraham negotiates from 50 righteous people down to 10, interceding on behalf of the city. According to Midrash, Abraham stops at 10 because he knows there are 10 people in Lot’s household and assumes they will be righteous.

Abraham models what it means to be priestly - standing between God and humanity, advocating for mercy while maintaining distinctive faithfulness. He has been called to “bless all nations” (Genesis 12:3), and this missional calling shapes his posture toward both God and the surrounding world. The engager wrestles with God, fights for a better way, and maintains both faithfulness to God and love for the world.

Rabbi Fohrman’s Approach to Torah Study

The episode begins with an extended reading from Rabbi David Fohrman’s book “Genesis: A Parsha Companion,” which describes his approach to reading Torah. Fohrman contrasts traditional rabbinical training - which involves memorizing countless commentaries from Rashi, Sforno, Rambam, and other sages - with a more basic approach that starts with simple reading comprehension.

Fohrman advocates “clearing your mind” and reading the biblical text afresh using tools children learn in kindergarten:

  • “Which of these things is not like the other?” - Identifying unusual elements in a set of laws or stories
  • “What happens next?” - Predicting the ending of a story, then noticing how different the actual ending is
  • “Where have we heard these words before?” - Identifying echoes and foreshadowing between different biblical passages

This approach reveals that “just under the surface of the Torah’s most familiar stories, lay whole other layers of meaning just waiting to be discovered.” Rather than being preached at about the Torah’s sacredness, Fohrman invites readers to experience it directly through careful, attentive reading. This methodology aligns with the ancient Rabbis of the Midrash, who pointed to deeper themes thousands of years ago using similar observational techniques.

The result of this approach, according to Fohrman, is not just better understanding but falling in love with the text itself. As he describes teaching at Johns Hopkins University, even secular students began to see “what was special and uncanny about this book” when they read it carefully and attentively.

The Pattern of “Looking Up and Seeing”

The episode notes an important textual parallel between Lot’s choice and Eve’s choice in the Garden of Eden. Both passages use the same Hebrew phrase: “looked up and saw that it was pleasing to the eye.”

Eve “looked up and saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom” (Genesis 3:6). Lot “looked around and saw that the whole plain of the Jordan toward Zoar was well watered, like the garden of the Lord, like the land of Egypt” (Genesis 13:10).

This linguistic connection suggests the author is deliberately echoing the Garden story, implying that Lot’s choice - like Eve’s - is based on what appears good to the eye rather than on faithfulness to God’s calling. The reference to “the garden of the Lord” reinforces this connection, even though it’s unclear how Lot would have known what the Garden of Eden was like. This may be the author’s commentary rather than Lot’s knowledge.

The Question of Why Abraham Stops at Ten

A significant question emerges from Abraham’s intercession: Why does he stop at 10? Why not keep negotiating down to 5, or 3, or even 1 righteous person?

The Midrash provides an answer: Abraham stops at 10 because he knows there are 10 people in Lot’s household, and he assumes Lot and his family will be righteous. This requires careful counting of all the family members mentioned in the text:

  • Lot
  • Lot’s wife
  • Two daughters who escape with Lot
  • Sons-in-law (mentioned in plural)
  • Daughters-in-law (implied by the sons-in-law)

By tracking all the Hebrew references carefully, Rabbi Fohrman demonstrates there should be exactly 10 people. The fact that later in the story the daughters sleep with their father (Genesis 19:30-38) indicates that their husbands didn’t come with them - they refused to flee Sodom despite Lot’s warning. This reveals the extent of Lot’s failed witness: even his own sons-in-law didn’t believe him.

Abraham’s confidence in stopping at 10, therefore, is based on his knowledge of Lot’s household size and his assumption that his nephew would have maintained faithfulness. The tragedy is that Lot’s assimilation had progressed so far that even this small number couldn’t be found.

Examples & Applications

Modern Christian Applications

Marty reflects on how many contemporary Christians would respond if God announced imminent judgment on the world: “I think there are so many Jesus followers that would say, ‘It’s about dang time.’” This raises a challenging question: Would followers of Jesus respond like Noah (focused on personal salvation) or like Abraham (interceding for the world)?

The New Testament presents Jesus as one who intercedes for sinners, prays for his enemies, and comes “not to condemn the world but to save the world” (John 3:17). If Christians are called to follow Jesus, the Abrahamic posture of engagement and intercession seems more aligned with the gospel than either insulation or assimilation.

The Dual Danger: “Assimilators Wearing Fur Coats”

Marty offers a particularly striking diagnosis of contemporary Christian culture: “I feel like Christians have the negatives of the Pharisees. We’re spiritual Pharisees and cultural Herodians. I feel like we’re assimilators wearing fur coats, man. We’re running around Sodom in our fur coats.”

This image captures a double failure: Christians who have assimilated to surrounding cultural values while simultaneously insulating themselves from genuine engagement with those outside their communities. They have adopted worldly patterns while maintaining a self-righteous separation that precludes meaningful witness. This combines the worst aspects of both Lot and Noah - losing distinctive faithfulness while also failing to engage in the mission of blessing.

Diagnostic Questions for Self-Reflection

The episode invites listeners to ask themselves diagnostic questions:

  • Am I an insulator, assimilator, or engager?
  • If not an engager, which direction do I lean?
  • Am I wearing a fur coat right now (focused on my own comfort and safety)?
  • Am I sitting at the city gate (so assimilated I’ve lost my distinctive voice)?
  • Am I engaged in the mission of God (wrestling with God and standing in the gap for others)?

These questions serve as a regular practice of examination for those seeking to follow the Abrahamic model of engagement.

Personality Types and Spiritual Posture

The hosts discuss how personality types (introvert vs. extrovert) might correlate with tendencies toward insulation or assimilation. Marty identifies as an introvert who would happily spend years on the ark with minimal human contact, suggesting a natural tendency toward insulation. Brent identifies as an extrovert who needs social interaction, suggesting a potential tendency toward assimilation.

However, the episode makes clear that spiritual posture is not determined by personality type. Introverts can be engagers who wrestle with God and advocate for others, even if they prefer limited social contact. Extroverts can be insulators who focus on their own salvation despite enjoying people’s company. The call to engagement transcends personality and requires intentional commitment to the mission of God.

The Importance of Wrestling with God

Abraham’s willingness to argue with God models a kind of relationship that may feel uncomfortable to some religious traditions. Yet the Bible presents this wrestling as faithful rather than presumptuous. Abraham challenges God precisely because he has learned God’s character: “Will not the judge of all the earth do right?”

This suggests that true engagement requires deep knowledge of God’s character and a willingness to hold God accountable to His own nature. Like Abraham, believers are invited to stand in the gap, to argue for mercy, to seek justice, and to intercede on behalf of the world. This is not disrespectful but rather reflects the intimate, covenantal relationship God desires with His people.

Potential Areas for Further Exploration

  1. The Role of Hospitality: How does the theme of hospitality connect Abraham, Lot, and Noah? Abraham shows hospitality to the three visitors (Genesis 18:1-8), Lot shows hospitality to the angels (Genesis 19:1-3), but Noah’s story lacks this element. What does this reveal about their respective postures toward strangers?

  2. The Development of Lot’s Character: What happened between Genesis 14 (when Lot is rescued from Sodom) and Genesis 19 (when he’s living at the city gate)? What Midrash exists to fill this gap? How did Lot’s assimilation progress, and were there warning signs along the way?

  3. Noah’s Righteousness: Genesis 6:9 describes Noah as “a righteous man, blameless among the people of his time, and he walked faithfully with God.” How do we reconcile this commendation with the critique that Noah failed to intercede? Is perfect obedience sufficient, or is engagement also required?

  4. The Minyan (Quorum of Ten): Jewish tradition requires a minyan (10 Jewish adults) for certain prayers and communal worship. Does Abraham’s stopping at 10 relate to this later tradition? What is the significance of 10 as the minimum number for a community?

  5. Other Biblical Intercessors: How do other biblical figures model the engager posture? Consider Moses interceding for Israel after the golden calf (Exodus 32:11-14), Samuel interceding for Saul (1 Samuel 15:11), and Jesus interceding for humanity (Hebrews 7:25).

  6. The Flood as a Type: How does the flood narrative function typologically in the New Testament? 1 Peter 3:18-22 connects baptism to the flood. Does this affect how we should read Noah’s role?

  7. Women in These Stories: The episode notes that Midrash has various interpretations of Lot’s wife, “some are very hard, some are very positive.” What are these different midrashic traditions? How do Sarah, Lot’s wife, and Noah’s wife (rarely mentioned) fit into these three postures?

  8. The Covenant with Noah: Genesis 9 describes God’s covenant with Noah after the flood. How does this covenant relate to God’s covenant with Abraham? Does the Noahic covenant suggest limitations to the “insulator” critique?

  9. Jesus as the Ultimate Engager: How does Jesus embody the Abrahamic posture of engagement? Consider His intercession in John 17, His prayer “Father, forgive them” (Luke 23:34), and His role as mediator (1 Timothy 2:5).

  10. The Ethics of Judgment: Abraham asks “Will not the judge of all the earth do right?” How should we think about divine judgment in light of this question? What does it mean that God allows Himself to be challenged and questioned?

Comprehension Questions

  1. According to the Midrash discussed in this episode, what are the three postures represented by Noah, Lot, and Abraham, and what are the strengths and weaknesses of each approach?

  2. What is the significance of the phrase “looked up and saw that it was pleasing to the eye” appearing in both the story of Eve (Genesis 3) and the story of Lot (Genesis 13)? What does this linguistic connection suggest?

  3. Why does Abraham stop his intercession at 10 righteous people according to the Midrashic interpretation? What does the actual outcome in Sodom reveal about Lot’s influence on his own household?

  4. Describe Rabbi David Fohrman’s approach to reading Torah as outlined in his introduction. What “kindergarten basics” does he recommend, and how does this methodology relate to the ancient practice of Midrash?

  5. How does the episode challenge contemporary Christians to examine their own posture toward the world? What does it mean to be “assimilators wearing fur coats,” and how might this description apply to modern church culture?

Brief Personalized Summary

BEMA Episode 210 uses the metaphor of “the man in the fur coat” to examine three different ways of relating to God and the world. Noah, wrapped in his fur coat, focuses on personal safety and survival but never intercedes for the world God is about to judge. Lot assimilates so thoroughly into Sodom’s culture that he loses his ability to witness even to his own family. Abraham, by contrast, models engagement - wrestling with God, standing in the gap, and arguing passionately for mercy.

The episode challenges listeners to identify which posture they most embody. Are we insulators, concerned primarily with our own salvation and comfort? Are we assimilators, so integrated into surrounding culture that we’ve lost our distinctive voice? Or are we engagers, willing to wrestle with God and intercede on behalf of the world?

Through Rabbi Fohrman’s introduction, the episode also models how to read Scripture with fresh eyes, using simple observational tools to discover deeper layers of meaning. By asking basic questions and paying attention to patterns, echoes, and surprises in the text, readers can experience their own romance with the Bible rather than simply consuming others’ interpretations.

The call of Abraham - to bless all nations - requires engagement rather than insulation or assimilation. Like Abraham, followers of God are invited to stand between heaven and earth, maintaining faithfulness to God while advocating passionately for the world. This posture of engagement, uncomfortable as it may sometimes be, reflects the heart of God’s mission and the character of God Himself, who seeks relationship rather than mere obedience.

Edit | Previous | Next