Genesis Per Day

[WebersHome]

.
Genesis 4:2


• Gen 4:2a . . She then bore his brother Abel.

Abel's name is from hebel (heh'bel) which means: emptiness, futility, and/or lacking permanent satisfaction. (cf. Ecc 1:2)

Poor Eve; she's only had two kids and already motherhood has lost its appeal. But you know; in her day, women didn't have access to all the baby supplies, clothing, conveyances, and conveniences that modern women in industrial nations have today. Eve's situation and its conditions, were primitive, viz: pretty much third world.

Cain and Abel are very interesting and share a lot in common. In fact, they share so much in common that their individual personalities must be an enigma to behavioral scientists.

Neither man came from a large gene pool because there were no grandparents. Their genealogy stopped abruptly right in their own home with mom and dad and went back no farther. They both had the same parents, lived in the same home in the same neighborhood, grew up with the same customs, ate the same food, associated with the same people, breathed the same air, survived in the same environment, went to the same church, and worshipped the same God.

Yet those men were noticeably very different from each other. Abel was an inspired man (Luke 11:50-51) but Cain, though religious; was not. And he was violent too. (1John 3:11-12)

Both men were living souls as per Gen 2:7, and both men existed by means of the breath of life as per the same verse. But souls are not the result of cookie-cutter manufacturing processes. Souls are sentient individuals with a mind of their own.

Individuality is one of the unsolved mysteries of life. How does the human brain's three-pound lump of flabby organic tissue produce self awareness and a sense of being unique? I don't know; it's very curious.

• Gen 4:2b . . Abel became a keeper of sheep, and Cain became a tiller of the soil.

The Hebrew word translated "sheep" is either tso'n (tsone) and/or tse'own (tseh one') which mean: a flock; defined by Webster's as a group of birds or mammals assembled or herded together. Abel could just as easily have been a cowboy wrangling bovine and/or tending goats rather than sheep. In point of fact, the Hebrew word for Abraham's "lamb" in the 22nd chapter of Genesis is ambiguous too. It too can mean either sheep or goats. Sometimes translators have to make arbitrary decisions which, at times, can be misleading. But we won't argue the point. Sheep will do.

Both men worked at honorable professions and their skills were essential to the Adams' survival. Man at this time was a vegetarian so Cain farmed and raised the family's food; while Abel kept them clothed and shod by tending flocks for leather; and possibly fleece too.

FYI: The Hebrew language didn't exist in Adam's day; nor would it exist till some time after the Flood and the tower of Babel. Ancient names given in Hebrew aren't the native-tongue names of people prior to Babel; but rather: Hebrew equivalents of those names.
_

 

[WebersHome]

.
Genesis 4:3-5a


• Gen 4:3-4a . . It came about in the course of time that Cain brought an offering to The Lord of the fruit of the ground. And Abel, on his part also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of their fat portions.

It's evident from Heb 11:4 that what's taking place here was a legitimate part of a God-given religion.

It's commonly assumed that Abel's offering was slain; but there isn't enough evidence in this section to support it. Noah's offerings were obviously slain because they're listed as burnt on an altar (Gen 8:20). But Abel's offering is not said to end up the same way.

FAQ: How did Abel get the fat out of his animal without killing it?

A: The Hebrew word for "fat" is somewhat ambiguous. It can mean fleshy material, and it can also refer to prosperity, abundance, and/or the best of the best; for example:

"Take your father and your households and come to me, and I will give you the best of the land of Egypt and you shall eat the fat of the land." (Gen 45:18)

This all tells me that Abel not only offered an animal from among his blue ribbon stock, but he picked out the choicest one of them all.

There's no indication in this scene suggesting their oblations were sacrifices for sin. The Hebrew word for their offerings is from minchah (min-khaw') and means: to apportion, i.e. bestow; a donation; euphemistically, tribute; specifically a sacrificial offering (usually bloodless and voluntary).

Since the offerings were minchah type offerings-- essentially gifts and/or tributes rather than atonements --it would be unwise to insist Abel slew his firstling and/or burned it to ashes. In point of fact, holocaust offerings go by the name of 'olah (o-law') instead of minchah; for example Gen 22:2.

Ancient rabbis understood the brothers' offerings to be a "first fruits" kind of oblation.

T. And it was at the end of days, on the fourteenth of Nisan, that Kain brought of the produce of the earth, the seed of cotton (or line), an oblation of first things before the Lord; and Habel brought of the firstlings of the flock. (Targum Jonathan)

Seeing as how Cain was a farmer, then in his case, an amount of produce was the appropriate first fruits offering, and seeing as how Abel was an animal husbandman, then in his case a head of livestock was the appropriate first fruits offering.

I think it's safe to assume the brothers were no longer boys, but rather, responsible men in this particular scene because God is going to treat them that way.

This incident is not said to be the very first time they brought gifts to God. The brothers (and very likely their parents too), probably had been bringing gifts for many years; ever since they were kids. And up to this point, apparently both men were doing everything right and God was just as much pleased with Cain and his gifts as He was with Abel and his gifts.

• Gen 4:4b-5a . .The Lord looked with favor on Abel and his offering, but on Cain and his offering he did not look with favor.

Regardless of whether their offerings were correct, the first thing The Lord did was look upon the men themselves. He looked with favor upon Abel but not with favor upon Cain. In other words; Abel was the kind of man whom God approves whereas Cain was the kind of man whom God cannot approve.
_

 

[WebersHome]

.
Genesis 4:5b-7a


• Gen 4:5b . . Cain was much distressed and his face fell.

Cain was a whole lot worse than distressed. He was blazing mad. The word for "distressed" is from charah (khaw-raw') and means: to glow or grow warm; figuratively (usually) to blaze up, of anger, zeal, jealousy. Cain is actually in a passionate rage over this and certainly in no mood for a lecture.

• Gen 4:6 . . And The Lord said to Cain: Why are you distressed, and why is your face fallen?

God made a sincere effort to talk things over with Cain and resolve their differences; but Cain didn't respond; he was too busy sulking in a black pout.

• Gen 4:7a . . If you do what is right, will you not be accepted?

Cain believed in the existence of a supreme being; that was good, and his ritual was timely; that was good too. But Cain's piety was flawed, i.e. his personal conduct didn't meet God's standards, viz: Cain wasn't devout, thus his impious ways tainted the offering and made it unacceptable. (cf. 1Pet 1:18-19 where it's implied that Christ's blood is an acceptable offering because his ways were acceptable.)

FAQ: How could Cain possibly know God's standards without a written code to inform him?

A: Luke 11:49-51 says that Cain's kid brother Abel was a prophet; so Cain at least had a verbal source, which is adequate enough when it's coming from an inspired man.

Cain's situation is well illustrated at Isa 1:11-20. Moses' people were offering all the covenanted sacrifices, they were praying up a storm, and observing all the God-given feasts and holy days. He rejected all of it, even though He himself required it, because the people's personal conduct was unbecoming.

"The sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination to Jehovah." (Prv 15:8)

Perhaps the classic example is the one below.

"You do not delight in sacrifice, or I would bring it; you do not take pleasure in burnt offerings." (Ps 51:16)

When David wrote that; he had only just committed the capital crimes of adultery and premeditated murder. There was just no way that God was going to accept his sacrifices and offerings on top of that; and David knew it too.

The principle shows up again in Jesus' teachings.

"Go and learn what this means: I desire mercy and not sacrifice." (Matt 9:13)

Some folk honestly believe that Christ's statement, taken from Hosea 6:6, practically repealed the entire God-given book of Leviticus. But that's not what either Hosea or Jesus were saying. They meant that God much prefers that people be civil with each other rather than religious to their fingertips.

In other words; an ungracious person's lack of things like sympathy, patience, tolerance, lenience, helpfulness, pity, and common courtesy causes God to reject their worship just as thoroughly and bluntly as He rejected Cain's.

It's likely a foregone conclusion that God is deeply insulted when people whose conduct is unbecoming all during the week come to church on Sunday actually thinking He's glad to see them show up for some quality time together.

FAQ: In what way might Cain's piety have been lacking?

A: Well, my first guess would be bad blood between him and his younger sibling. (Matt 5:23-24)

And his attitude was deplorable; Cain was insolent and rude; even to God. (Gen 4:9)
_

 

[WebersHome]

.
REMOVED
_

 

[WebersHome]

.
Genesis 4:7b-8


• Gen 4:7b . . But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door;

This is the very first instance in the Bible of the word "sin". The Hebrew word is chatta'ah (khat-taw-aw') and/or chatta'th (khat-tawth') which are ambiguous words that technically mean an offense; as in repeat offender. In other words; not just an occasional slip-up, but a life style.

• Gen 4:7c . . it desires to have you, but you must master it.

This is the first mention of self control in the Bible. In other words: God created humanity with the capability to choose bad ways for itself; but that's only half the story. God also created humanity with the capability to choose good ways for itself; so He wasn't requiring something impossible from Cain like touching his right elbow with the thumb of his right hand.

Many years ago when I and my siblings were teen-agers attending an evening service at our church, the minister asked us all to stand and promise God that we would live a good life. Well, my brother stood, but he didn't promise. Later at home, I asked him why he didn't make the promise. He said: "There's some things I want to do".

Unbeknownst to us at the time; the minister, in his own words, had called the congregation to heed Gen 4:7 just as God had called Cain all those many years ago. My sister and I, though not the best examples of self control, at least began making an effort. But my brother; none at all. He preferred the land of Nod, so to speak, where he could do as he pleased away from God's interference.

• Gen 4:8a . . Now Cain talked with Abel his brother;

Cain probably complained to his brother that Yhvh was unfair. But the poor man couldn't have picked a worse sounding board because Abel was a prophet (Luke 11:50-51). In Cain's dispute with the Lord, Abel no doubt took Yhvh's side in it. That was too much. There's no way a man like Cain was going to take a lecture from his own kid brother. Abel's popularity with God was bad enough, but preaching only made it worse and added insult to injury.

No doubt Cain was very envious of his kid brother's on-going popularity with God. Poor Abel lost his life just because he was a pious man.

"Do not be like Cain, who belonged to the evil one and murdered his brother. And why did he murder him? Because his own actions were evil and his brother's were righteous. Do not be surprised, my brothers, if the world hates you." (1John 3:12-13)

One of the boys involved in the April 20, 1999 Columbine High School shooting incident shot and killed a girl in the cafeteria just because she believed in God. Isn't that amazing? That boy was nothing in the world but a twentieth century Cain with a gun.

• Gen 4:8b . . and when they were in the field, Cain set upon his brother Abel and killed him.

Whether or not Cain premeditated his brother's death that day is difficult to tell. The word for "killed" is from harag (haw-rag') and means: to smite with deadly intent. So the attack on his kid brother, whether premeditated or not, was definitely meant to end Abel's life rather than to just rough him up and teach him a lesson.

How Cain planned to explain Abel's death to his parents isn't stated. He couldn't very well blame it on a carnivorous predator since man and beast were on friendly terms prior to the Flood. It's my guess he set up the crime scene to make it look like an accident but then too, in light of verse 10, Cain may have buried Able; that way he'd be reported as a missing person instead of possibly murdered.
_

 

[WebersHome]

.
Genesis 4:9-12


• Gen 4:9 . . Jehovah said to Cain: Where is your brother Abel? And he said: I don't know. Am I my brother's keeper?

The Hebrew word for "keeper" indicates, in this case, a guardian; viz: responsibility for someone or something put in one's care; for example: Abel was a keeper of the sheep: a shepherd. (Gen 4:2)

This religious man's reaction to the object of his worship is just as unexpected as the murder he'd just committed. Cain worshipped the true God, and his rituals were correct and timely; yet Cain was insolent and responded to his maker's inquiry with a lie and a sarcastic rejoinder.

It's not too difficult to appreciate God's refusal of this man's recent offering. Over time Cain had become an insensitive jerk. It would be interesting to know what changed him.

• Gen 4:10 . .Then He said: What have you done? Hark, your brother's blood cries out to me from the ground!

The Hebrew word for "cries out" is from tsa'aq (tsaw-ak') and means: to shriek; which can be defined as a wild, involuntary scream.

Whether or not human blood actually has an audible voice isn't nearly important as to what it might be saying. And in this case, it certainly couldn't be good.

In civil law, it's handy to produce the corpus delicti in a homicide case because it's very useful for proving the reality of a death, and for establishing the cause, and the time, of its occurrence. It's interesting that God didn't produce Abel's body for evidence. He could have, but instead relied upon the voice of his body's blood. So a murder victim's blood can be introduced as a witness in the courts of Heaven. That is very interesting.

Abel's blood accuses. In contrast, Christ's blood defends (e.g. Rom 5:6-11, Heb 12:24, and 1Pet 1:18-19). Christ's blood is a whole lot more to people's advantage.

• Gen 4:11 . .Therefore, you shall be more cursed than the ground which opened its mouth to receive your brother's blood from your hand.

The original curse upon the soil reduced its agrarian productivity. But the curse upon Cain brought his agrarian productivity to a complete and irrevocable end.

• Gen 4:12 . . If you till the soil, it shall no longer yield its strength to you. You shall become a ceaseless wanderer on earth.

Ceaseless wandering was an inevitable consequence of the inability to raise an adequate amount of your own food in that day and age. Nobody was eating meat yet, so the soil was pretty much it as far as nourishment went.

Cain went on to become a very hungry, very overworked man. Wherever he tried to farm, the ground would respond in such a way as to act infertile. The curse was leveled right at his diet and the source of his food. Up till now, Cain had been a successful, independent farmer. But no amount of agricultural wisdom would ever restore his independence, nor his once green thumb no matter how hard he tried to overcome it. Cain had crossed over a line and there was no going back.

Since Cain could no longer sustain himself by farming, it would be difficult to settle down and build himself a home; so he was forced to become migratory and forage for seasonal foods.

Though the Bible doesn't say; it would seem to me a reasonable assumption that the curse upon Cain extended to his posterity (cf. Num 14:18). Up ahead we'll see that they became renowned as a commercial/industrial society rather than agrarian. As time went by, and the Adams family multiplied and spread out; Cain's community no doubt traded with them using income from the sale of manufactured goods to barter for the foods that they themselves were unable to grow. Dependence upon imported food may not be ideal; but it's certainly better than going hungry.

NOTE: The punishments inflicted upon Cain weren't according to the letter of a legislated code. They were judgments under the table, so to speak, that took Cain's personality into consideration along with his conduct rather than his conduct alone. God is able to proceed that way in situations where no law has been broken.

Another element in this case pertains to the relationship between God and Cain. In other words; Cain's punishment was personal, slammed on him directly from the hand of God. Compare Gen 3:16 where the physical and emotional unpleasantries associated with bearing children were slammed on Eve in a personal way too.

But though God sometimes gets personal-- and even passionate --when He lowers the boom on people, I think we can be confident that even when angry, God remains fair rather than prejudiced, biased, or partial.
_

 

[WebersHome]

.
Genesis 4:13-16


• Gen 4:13 . . Cain said to the Lord: My punishment is too great to bear!

His punishment was actually very lenient. In point of fact, it wasn't punishment at all, it was discipline. It's true that Cain would struggle to survive; but at least he was allowed to live. His kid brother was dead. How is that fair?

FAQ: How did Cain get off with only a slap on the wrist? Why wasn't he executed for murder since God himself mandates capital punishment for murderers as per Gen 9:5-6, Ex 21:12-14, Lev 24:17, Lev 24:21, and Num 35:31-34? Does God practice a double standard?

A: Murder is intrinsically evil, yes; however; according to Deut 5:2-4, Rom 4:15, Rom 5:13, and Gal 3:17, laws of God enacted ex post facto are too late, i.e. they're not retroactive.

This wasn't an oversight on God's part. The incident with Cain served to introduce very early in the Bible one of Christianity's foundational principles, which is: "Where there is no law, there is no transgression." and "Sin is not imputed when there is no law."

• Gen 4:14a . . Since You have banished me this day from the soil, and I must avoid Your presence and become a restless wanderer on earth--

Who said he must avoid God's presence? Somebody can be a ceaseless wanderer without losing touch with God; I mean, after all: He's everywhere at once. (Ps 139:7-12)

Estrangement was Cain's decision, just as it was Judas' decision to break with Jesus. Both men could've turned it around if they wanted; but didn't. Cain walked out on God of his own volition. Now he would face life very insecure.

• Gen 4:14b . . anyone who meets me may kill me!

I'm curious as to who Cain feared might slay him. The Adams family were the only people on earth at that time. It appears to me that Cain did not believe his father Adam was the only man ever created directly from soil by the hand of God.

• Gen 4:15a . .The Lord said to him: I promise, if anyone kills Cain, sevenfold vengeance shall be taken on him.

Humanistic senses of right and wrong demand that Cain pay for murdering his kid brother. But up to that point in God's association with humanity, He had not yet announced any edicts related to criminal justice. So then, were somebody to go after Cain and execute him for the crime of murder, they would be nothing less than a lynch mob taking the law into their own hands; which is clearly a very serious thing to do.

• Gen 4:15b . . And the Lord put a mark on Cain, lest anyone who met him should kill him.

The nature of Cain's mark is totally unknown. However, the "mark" wasn't so people would hoot at Cain wherever he went. It was a "No Hunting" sign so future generations of the Adams' family would know the real Cain from imposters who might be inclined to give themselves a sort of diplomatic immunity by impersonating Abel's brother.

God allows ignorance as an excuse; to a point. However, information creates responsibility. When a person knows an act is wrong, and goes ahead and does it anyway, they are in much deeper trouble than one who did not know that a particular act was wrong.

No one had been forbidden to kill Abel, nor forbidden to kill any other man for that matter. But soon it would become widespread public knowledge that God strictly forbade killing Cain. Therefore, anyone who ignored God would pay dearly for knowingly, and willfully, ignoring His wishes; just as Adam died for tasting the forbidden fruit because the tasting was willful, and done in full understanding of both the ban and the consequence. (cf. Num 15:30-31, Matt 11:20-24, Luke 12:47-48, Heb 10:26-27)

• Gen 4:16a . . Cain left the presence of The Lord

Cain's departure from the presence of the Lord wasn't a forced eviction as had been the Adams' departure from the garden. And even though the Adams were driven from the garden, they weren't driven from God. The family kept that connection and brought up their boys to keep it too.

Cain's self-imposed exile has the aura of a dreadful finality. He renounced God, and his native religion, and was content to forego its privileges so that he might not be under its control. He forsook not only his kin but also their worship, and cast off all pretenses to the fear of God-- apparently putting out of his mind God's statement: "If you do what is right, will you not be accepted?"

Gen 4:16a is a terrible epitaph upon the tombstone of Cain's life, and you can almost feel the concussion of a dreadful thud as the mighty doors of perdition close solidly behind him; sealing his passage into permanent darkness.

Why didn't God plead with Cain to stay in touch? Well, that would be like throwing good money after bad. God had already tried at Gen 4:7; and like Einstein once remarked: Insanity can be defined as doing the same thing the same way over and over again and expecting a different result. Well; God's not insane; He knows when to say when. Sadly, there are people for whom it can be said: That was the last straw.

Of all the things that Cain had done up to this point, walking out on God was his worst mistake. Yes, he would have to scrounge for food; but that was just a bump in the road; not the end of the road. People need to think that over. No matter how harsh your circumstances are, and no matter what life has thrown in your face, loss of contact with your maker is much worse. It is wise to stay in touch with God even if your life is a train wreck and God seems oblivious to your circumstances.

"The Lord is compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, abounding in steadfast love. He will not contend forever, or nurse His anger for all time . . As a father has compassion for his children, so The Lord has compassion for those who fear Him. For He knows how we are formed; He is mindful that we are dust." (Ps 103:8-14)

That Psalm's encouragement is restricted to "those who fear Him".

• Gen 4:16b . . and settled in the land of Nod, east of Eden.

The Hebrew word for "Nod" is from nowd (node) and means: wandering, vagrancy or exile. Precisely how Nod got its name, or where it was located is unknown; and this is the only place in the entire Old Testament where nowd is found so we can't compare it with other uses.
_

 

[WebersHome]

.
Genesis 4:17-19


• Gen 4:17a . . Cain knew his wife,

According to Gen 3:20 and Acts 17:26, all human beings-- regardless of race, color and/or ethnic identity --are Adam's and Eve's biological progeny. Ergo: Cain married his kin; whether a sister or a niece is difficult to know for sure.

NOTE: Scientists have identified 100,000 pieces of retrovirus DNA in human genes, making up eight percent of the genome. As to whether those retroviruses have contributed to the shortening of the human life span, I don't know; but I'd bet that those bugs were not in the human genome at first. I think it safe to say that the current human genome is a malfunctioning genome, and has been for quite a number of years; possibly several millennia.

Now, as to the "sin" of incest; according to Deut 5:2-4, Rom 4:15, Rom 5:13, and Gal 3:17, divine laws enacted ex post facto are too late; viz: they aren't enforced until after they're codified. Well, incest wasn't prohibited until the covenant that Moses' people agreed upon with God as per Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy.

• Gen 4:17b . . and she conceived and bore Enoch. And he then founded a city, and named the city after his son Enoch.

The "city" probably wasn't the kind of city we're used to thinking. The word for it is from 'iyr (eer) and simply means a community, in the widest sense; even of a mere encampment or post.

Whether Cain actually lived in a permanent settlement is doubtful since he was stuck with vagrancy and wandering. Cain's city was very likely nothing more than a migratory village.

• Gen 4:18-19 . .To Enoch was born Irad, and Irad begot Mehujael, and Mehujael begot Methusael, and Methusael begot Lamech. Lamech took to himself two wives: the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other was Zillah.

Adah is from 'Adah (aw-daw') and means: ornament. It's not unusual for people to name their little girls after precious stones like Jewel, Pearl, Ruby, Jade, Emerald, Sapphire, and Amber.

Zillah is from tsillah (tsil-law') which is derived from tsel (tsale) and means: shade (or shadow), whether literal or figurative. Shade is a good thing in sunny locales so Zillah's name may have been associated with shelter, protection, peace, serenity, and rest-- as in Song 2:3.

Lamech's marriages are the very first incidence of polygamy in the Bible; and I have yet to see a passage in the Old Testament where God forbids it other than the restrictions imposed upon Jewish monarchs. (Deut 17:17 cf. 2Sam 12:8)

Aside from the obvious sensual benefits men derive from harems; polygamy does have its practical side. The gestation period for human beings is nine months. At that rate, it would take a man many years to build up his clan to a respectable size. But with multiple wives, he could speed things up considerably. In primitive cultures, large families are very influential, and their numbers crucial to survival and self preservation.

"Like arrows in the hand of a warrior are sons born to a man in his youth. Happy is the man who fills his quiver with them; they shall not be put to shame when they contend with the enemy in the gate." (Ps 127:4-5)
_

 

[WebersHome]

.
Genesis 4:20-22


• Gen 4:20 . . Adah bore Jabal; he was the ancestor of those who dwell in tents and amidst herds.

This is the Bible's very first mention of man-made portable shelters. Tents, teepees, wigwams, etc; make it possible to roam long distances in relative comfort while searching for foods and pastures.

Abraham and Sarah were housed in portable shelters the whole time they lived in Canaan. With portable shelters, Enochville could be a mobile community, staying in one place only long enough to deplete its natural resources before moving on to better diggings to invade, plunder, exploit, pollute, and depredate.

Jabal wasn't the father of animal husbandry as the passage seems to suggest. Abel was already tending flocks before Jabal was born (Gen 4:2). Dwelling "amidst" herds describes the lifestyle of North America's early plains Indians; whose livelihood depended a great deal upon wild buffalo. Though they followed the herds, the Sioux, Cheyenne, Arapaho, Kiowa, Crow, Blackfoot, Comanche, and Shoshone, et el; didn't actually raise any of their own buffalo like on a ranch.

Dwelling amidst herds is a nomadic way of life rather than one that's domesticated; hence the need for portable shelters; and the herds (e.g. deer, elk, wild goats, antelope, wildebeests, et al) would provide fabric for not only the tents, but also for shoes and clothing; which would need replacement quite often.

One of Lewis' and Clark's complaints, when they were passing through the Oregon territory, was that moccasins rotted off their feet in the Northwest's climate. Even without rot, the soles of moccasins are not all that resistant to wear. Buckskins, manufactured from Elk hide and/or deerskin, fared little better.

• Gen 4:21 . . And the name of his brother was Jubal; he was the ancestor of all who play the lyre and the pipe.

The word for "ancestor" is from 'ab (awb); a primitive word which means father, in a literal and immediate, or figurative and remote application. In this particular case, 'ab wouldn't mean literal kin, but likely analogous to an inventor who is the first to introduce a new concept which then later becomes widely adopted.

The word for "lyre" is from kinnowr (kin-nore') and means: to twang. So the actual instrument itself is difficult to identify. It could have been a harp. But then again, it may have even been something as simple as a string stretched between a washtub and a broom stick.

A stringed instrument is a pretty advanced musical tool and certainly not something you would expect to find among so primitive a people as the antediluvians. The interesting thing about a twanging instrument is its string. How did the Cainites make them? Of what material?

String can be spun from plant fibers. For example the ancient Kumeyaay (Koom'-yi) people of southern California made surprisingly strong, sturdy twine for bows and baskets from agave leaves.

The word for "pipe" is from 'uwgab (oo-gawb') and means: a reed-instrument of music.

A modern reed instrument is typically a woodwind that produces sound by vibrating a thin strip of wood against the mouthpiece; like clarinets and saxophones (hence the classification: woodwinds). But in that culture, it could very well have been something as simple as a tube whistle made from a single hollow section of plant stem; or several of those bundled together like a Pan flute.

• Gen 4:22a . . As for Zillah, she bore Tubal-cain, who forged all implements of copper and iron.

Copper, in its natural form, is too soft and pliable for practical purposes; but it's a classification of metals called work-hardening. In other words, by pounding or rolling cold copper, its mechanical properties can be greatly improved. It probably didn't take Mr. Tubal-cain long to figure that out.

Adding a little tin to copper produces bronze, which is much stronger and tougher than pure copper.

Copper's advantage in cooking is its natural heat conduction, which is very fast as compared to iron and/or steel. It's also an excellent conductor of electricity, but unless they were bottling lightening in those days, copper's electrical properties would have to wait for future exploitation.

Iron, though stronger and harder than copper, is relatively soft and pliable in its natural condition too; but with the addition of small amounts of carbon, it becomes steel, which is quite a bit tougher than natural iron. Whether Tubal-cain figured that out is difficult to know for sure.

• Gen 4:22b . . And the sister of Tubal-cain was Naamah.

Her name is from Na'amah (nah-am-aw') which means pleasant, amiable, or agreeable. A girl named Joy would probably fit that category. Na'amah suggests that the people of Enochville were content with their way of life.

So all in all, Enochville, though unproductive in agriculture, prospered through manufacturing and commerce instead; trading the goods and services of their industrial base for much needed produce; the same way that most urbanites still do even today. People in towns and cities typically don't support themselves directly from nature. They earn a medium of exchange in some sort of skill or profession, then trade it with merchants to buy the things they need to survive.

The technological, and cultural, level of early Man was very high. It's interesting that the identifying marks which evolutionary anthropologists use to denote the emergence of a stone age culture into a civilized society were extant prior to the Flood-- animal husbandry, agriculture, trades, urbanization, music, and metallurgy. All these civilizational technologies emerged very early: within just a few generations of Adam; rather than thousands upon thousands of years of human development.

I'm not saying there were never any "stone-age" peoples. Obviously there were. But though Cain's community may have started out as cave men, by Noah's day they were past primitive conditions and actually pretty advanced.

It's too bad the Flood wiped early Man off the map. Who can tell what he might have accomplished had his progress not been interrupted (cf. Gen 11:6).
_

 

[WebersHome]

.
Genesis 4:23-26


• Gen 4:23-24 . . And Lamech said to his wives: Adah and Zillah, hear my voice! O wives of Lamech, give ear to my speech! I have slain a man for wounding me, and a lad for bruising me. If Cain is avenged sevenfold, then Lamech seventy-sevenfold.

Brag, Brag, Brag-- boy, I tell you some men sure love to show off and glorify themselves in front of women; no doubt about it.

Apparently ol' Lamech figured the homicide he committed wasn't nearly as severe as Cain's because he killed in retribution; whereas Cain killed in a rage. Also, Cain killed his kid brother, whereas Lamech killed his relative a little more distant. So to Lamech's way of thinking, Cain's killing was a much more serious crime; and if a dirty rotten scoundrel like gramps was under divine protections, then, in Lamech's mind, he certainly deserved to be under them even more so.

It almost appears that Lamech killed two people, but really it was only one; and in fact a person younger than himself. Two words describe Lamech's opponent. The first word is from 'enowsh (en-oshe') and simply means a mortal; viz: a human being (of either gender), in general (singly or collectively); viz: someone and/or somebody. The second word reveals the person's age. The word for "lad" is yeled (yeh'-led) and means something born, i.e. a lad or offspring-- boy, child, fruit, son, young one and/or young man.

Apparently Lamech got in a disagreement with somebody and they settled their differences in a fight. The injury Lamech received in the ensuing scuffle could have been something as simple as the man biting his ear or kicking him in the groin. It's my guess Lamech over-reacted and stabbed the man to death with a spiffy hunting knife that his son Tubal-cain made for him over in the blacksmith shop.

Lamech's sense of right and wrong reflects the humanistic conscience of a man void of God's mentoring. In his earthly mind, revenge was an okay thing; which is a common attitude in many primitive cultures.

But his opponent only wounded him. In return, Lamech took his life. The scales of justice don't balance in a situation like that-- they tip. Pure law says eye for eye, tooth for tooth, burning for burning, stripe for stripe, life for life, and no more. If the lad's intent was obviously upon great bodily harm; Lamech would probably be justified to kill in self defense since his opponent was a younger man and had the advantage in age. However, according to Lamech's own testimony, he killed the man in revenge; not self defense.

Cain's side of the Adams family is characterized by technology, invention, boasting, achievement, commerce, and violence. But not one word is recorded concerning its association with, nor its interest in, their maker. Cain's entire community was impious and went on to be completely destroyed right down to the last man, woman, and child in Noah's flood. No one survives him today.

The Bible doesn't record even one single incident of a Cainite blessing God for His goodness; nor for His mercy, nor for His providence. There is no record that any of them ever said even one single prayer-- not even a simple lay-me-down-to-sleep kind of prayer. Every one of the little kids in Enochville went to bed each night without the slightest assurance that humanity's creator cared at all for the well being of their little souls.

How many homes right here today in modern America reflect that very same Cainish culture? The parents and the children are unthankful, unholy, and irreligious; caring little or nothing for things of eternal value: moving towards an inevitable head-on rendezvous with death and the hereafter, and totally unprepared to meet their maker.

• Gen 4:25 . . And Adam had relations with his wife again; and she gave birth to a son, and named him Seth, for, she said, "God has appointed me another offspring in place of Abel; for Cain killed him."

Seth's name in Hebrew basically means a substitute, defined by Webster's as a person or thing that takes the place or function of another; e.g. substitute teachers, generic medications, pinch hitters, and/or after-market car parts.

Apparently Eve was still anticipating that she herself would be the woman to give birth to the man promised by God to defeat the Serpent's wiles. (Gen 3:15)

• Gen 4:26a . . And to Seth, in turn, a son was born, and he named him Enosh.

Sometimes the record shows the mother naming a child, and sometimes the father; which suggests that in all cases there was very likely mutual consultation between husband and wife on this important decision. But it's always important for the father to take a hand in naming the children because the act testifies that he's legally, and officially, accepted them as his own. (e.g. Gen 16:15, Gen 21:3, Luke 1:13, Luke 1:63)

NOTE: God instructed both Joseph and Mary to give her baby the name Jesus (Matt 1:21, Luke 1:31). By doing so, Jesus went on record as both their son rather than only Mary's. (Luke 1:32, (Matt 17:5)

God also selected Ishmael's name (Gen 16:11) Isaac's (Gen 17:19) and Solomon's too (1Chron 22:9) changed Abraham's name (Gen 17:5) changed Sarah's name (Gen 17:15) and changed Jacob's name (Gen 32:28).

Christ changed Peter's name (Mark 3:16). Way out in the future, Christ will be changing quite a few names. (Rev 2:17)

"Enosh" is from 'enowsh (en-oshe') and means: a mortal; hence a man in general, singly or collectively-- thus differing from the more dignified 'adam (aw-dawm') which is the proper name of the human race (Gen 5:2). There's really nothing special about an 'enowsh-- just a feller. Sometimes boys are named Guy, or Buddy, so 'enowsh would be a common enough name.

• Gen 4:26b . .Then men began to call on the name of The Lord.

The Hebrew word for "Lord" in this case is YHVH (a.k.a. Jehovah, a.k.a. Yahweh); which always, and without exception, refers to the one true god.

Apparently up to this point in time, people addressed God in a sort of general way instead of a personal way, and some still do. For example; during the Native American funeral service held for my No.1 nephew, a tribal elder prayed to God as "Grandfather" rather than by a personal moniker like Shiva or some such.
_

 

[WebersHome]

.
Genesis 5:1-8


• Gen 5:1a . .This is the record of Adam's line.

I suspect that Adam's genealogy would be better defined as "a" record rather than "the" record because the Bible's version isn't exhaustive.

Adam's genealogy doesn't include every natural-born human being who ever lived and/or will live; rather, it's primarily concerned with the branch leading to Jesus of Nazareth: the Bible's central figure.

• Gen 5:1b-2 . .When God created man, He made him in the likeness of God; male and female He created them. And when they were created, He blessed them and called them Man.

As a preamble to Seth's line, Genesis reminds the reader that Man's origin was by intelligent design and special creation, and that he was made in the likeness of his creator, and that he's been an h.sapiens right from the get go. Man didn't begin his existence as some sort of pre-human hominid named Ardi who lived in Ethiopia's Afar Rift some 4.4 million years ago.

Some people take issue with Genesis because it seems to them so unscientific and contrary to the (known) fossil record. But they need to be cautious because science doesn't have perfect understanding of everything yet, nor has it discovered everything there is to discover, and it often has to be revised to reflect new discoveries, and to correct outdated theories and opinions.

But to be fair, Bible students don't know everything yet either so I would advise watching the sciences for new discoveries that help fill in some of the Bible's blanks.

• Gen 5:3a . .When Adam had lived 130 years, he begot a son

Bible genealogies often have very large gaps in them, omitting insignificant male siblings; and typically all of the girls. In one instance (1Chron 1:1) the record skips Abel and jumps right to Seth.

Taking advantage of this rather strange Bible practice; critics are quick to point out generational gaps in Christ's genealogy with the intent of invalidating the entire New Testament. But gaps are to be expected or otherwise the list would be cumbersome and require a book all its own. For example; a sizeable quantity of time passed between Noah's ark and the arrival of Abraham on the scene; and probably a couple of ice ages too. We're talking about a lot of generations there, and naming them all to a man would be just as useless as it would be impractical.

• Gen 5:3b . . in his likeness after his image, and he named him Seth.

The best application for "likeness and image" that I've discovered thus far is as a technical term related to kin: physical and/or non physical. For example; in the beginning God made Man in His own image and likeness. However; Man bears no physical resemblance to God at all. Adam exclaimed that Eve was bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh, and she was; but God is neither.

Seth too, like Eve. was bone of Adam's bone and flesh of his flesh; meaning of course that Seth was born as Adam's physical kin; whereas likeness and image refers to Seth as simply kin, i.e. one of the family; physical and/or non physical.

• Gen 5:4-5 . . After the birth of Seth, Adam lived 800 years and begot sons and daughters. All the days that Adam lived came to 930 years; then he died.

Well, there goes grandpa Adam, just as God predicted at Gen 3:19. But hey? Where's the listing of the rest of his kids? Didn't God bless him with the words "be fruitful, increase in number, and fill the earth". Well, I seriously doubt that he and Eve stopped after just three kids. But the rest of his progeny-- for reasons I can only guess --didn't make the cut.

But when did Eve die? Did she outlive Adam? Who died first, Adam or Eve? Nobody really knows. But supposing Eve died quite a while before Adam? Did he remarry? And if he remarried, who did he marry? One of his own grandchildren?

Well . . in Adam's case, what's so bad about that? I mean, after all, his first wife was constructed from the organic tissues of his own body; so that in reality, Eve was his first child which means that by today's social standards; Adam practiced the worst kind of incest. At least his grandkids would have been several times removed.

• Gen 5:6-7 . .When Seth had lived 105 years, he begot Enosh. After the birth of Enosh, Seth lived 807 years and begot sons and daughters.

No doubt some people envy the longevity of the antediluvians; but I don't. Their life was hard, and for the most part, pretty boring too. Would you want to live for 912 years in pre historic conditions without a single modern convenience? Not me.

Was Enosh the first of Seth's children? Maybe, but probably not. However, he is the only child that counts because it's through him that we're moving towards Noah; and ultimately Abraham, David, and Christ.

• Gen 5:8 . . All the days of Seth came to 912 years; then he died.

(sigh) The story of our futile lives. So and So was born, he got married and reproduced; he lived X number of years after that, and then died-- same O, same O. The weary circle of life.

"Meaningless! Futile! complains the Teacher. Utterly meaningless! Everything is meaningless. What does man gain from all his labor at which he toils under the sun? Generations come and generations go, but the earth remains forever." (Ecc 1:2-4)

The earth is dumber than a brick; yet easily outlives its human potentate; whose IQ is infinitely greater.
_

 

[WebersHome]

.
Genesis 5:9-27


• Gen 5:9 . .When Enosh had lived 90 years, he begot Kenan.

Kenan's name in the Hebrew is Qeynan (kay-nawn') which means fixed or permanent; sort of like birds' nests, homes; and drifters finally ending their nomadic life and putting down some roots. Fixed can also mean that someone's life has a noble purpose and that their mind is focused upon that purpose rather than looking two ways at once. Or it can also mean somebody's life is a dead end; for example "this is as good as it's ever going to get". Kind of pessimistic; but had I lived back then, I would have agreed; heartily.

• Gen 5:10 . . After the birth of Kenan, Enosh lived 815 years and begot sons and daughters.

You know, some of these guys really didn't accomplish very much. All they seemed to do was reproduce. But the important thing is: they made a line to Messiah and, as is the duty of patriarchs, preserved whatever sacred teachings were handed down from their fathers.

• Gen 5:11 . . All the days of Enosh came to 905 years; then he died.

(yawn) Over and over again. Just about everybody reproduces in chapter five. And just about everybody dies too.

• Gen 5:12-20 . .When Kenan had lived 70 years, he begot Mahalalel. After the birth of Mahalalel, Kenan lived 840 years and begot sons and daughters. All the days of Kenan came to 910 years; then he died. When Mahalalel had lived 65 years, he begot Jared. After the birth of Jared, Mahalalel lived 830 years and begot sons and daughters. All the days of Mahalalel came to 895 years; then he died.

. . .When Jared had lived 162 years, he begot Enoch. After the birth of Enoch, Jared lived 800 years and begot sons and daughters. All the days of Jared came to 962 years; then he died.

Four of those men-- Enoch, Jared, Mahalalel, and Kenan (Cainan) --are listed in Christ's genealogy at Luke 3:37-38.

• Gen 5:21 . .When Enoch had lived 65 years, he begot Methuselah.

Methuselah's name is Methuwshelach (meth-oo-sheh'-lakh) which is a compound word made up of math (math) which means an adult (as of full length or full size), and shelach (sheh'-lakh) which means a missile of attack, i.e. a spear, sling stone, or perhaps an arrow. Methuselah was a man-size weapon rather than one that might be employed by little children.

Today our preferred missile of attack from a hand held weapon is the bullet. A Methuselah bullet would probably be known today as a magnum. Magnums cost more than normal ammo but hit harder, go further, and cause more damage (they're louder too). A modern name that might correspond to Methuselah is Long Tom-- a nickname often given to very large canons. Maybe they meant to call him Big Guy because he was such a heavy newborn.

• Gen 5:22-23 . . After the birth of Methuselah, Enoch walked with God 300 years; and he begot sons and daughters. All the days of Enoch came to 365 years.

Enoch was a fiery preacher, speaking the words recorded in Jude 1:14-15; warning people prior to the Flood that Almighty God intends to hold people's feet to the fire some day.

• Gen 5:24a . . Enoch walked with God;

Enoch was the exact opposite of Cain: he walked with God rather than away from God.

This is the very first man on record who is actually said to have walked with God; though no doubt Abel did too.

Those who are outwardly religious, but don't actually walk with God, might be wise to give this next little saying some thought.

Ye call me Lord and respect me not.
Ye call me Master and obey me not.
Ye call me Light and see me not.
Ye call me Way and walk me not.
Ye call me Life and choose me not.
Ye call me Wise and heed me not.
Ye call me Kind and love me not.
Ye call me Just and fear me not.
If I condemn thee, blame me not.

On the page of Scripture, Enoch isn't said to walk with God until after his little boy Methuselah was born; suggesting perhaps that parenthood gave him cause to ponder his manner of life thus far.

• Gen 5:24b . . then he was no more, because God took him away.

The Hebrew word for "no more" is 'ayin (ah'-yin) which is primarily a negative indicating that one minute Enoch was on earth, and the next he wasn't.

It's difficult to ascertain from so little information in the book of Genesis whether Enoch died of natural causes or the hand of God; but according to Heb 11:5, he didn't undergo death at all but was instantaneously transferred from this life to the next; apparently leaving behind no remains for his family to bury.

It's assumed by many that Enoch was taken to heaven; but according to Christ; no man had been to heaven prior to himself. (John 3:13)

• Gen 5:25-27 . .When Methuselah had lived 187 years, he begot Lamech. After the birth of Lamech, Methuselah lived 782 years and begot sons and daughters. All the days of Methuselah came to 969 years; then he died.

Ol' Methuselah holds the record for longevity. He outlived his son Lamech, dying five years after him in the very year the Flood came; when Methuselah's grandson Noah was 600.

Whether or not Methuselah died in the Flood or by natural causes is not said. However, he may indeed have perished in it right along with all of the rest of Noah's relatives. Just because men are listed in Messiah's genealogy doesn't necessarily mean they were righteous. In point of fact, some of the Davidic kings in Jesus' line were totally incorrigible men beyond remedy. (e.g. Jer 22:24-30)
_

 

[WebersHome]

-
Genesis 5:28-32


• Gen 5:28-29 . .When Lamech had lived 182 years, he begot a son. And he named him Noah, saying: This one will provide us relief from our work and from the toil of our hands, out of the very soil which the Lord placed under a curse.

The word for "Noah" is from nuwach (noo'-akh) and means: rest or quiet. But not the kind of quiet one might find in a sound-proof room. More like the tranquility a person would experience by getting away from anxiety, fear, conflict, and toil.

Lamech speaks as one fatigued with the business of living, and as one grudging that so much energy, which otherwise might have been much better employed in leisure, entertainment, or self improvement, was unavoidably spent in toil and labor necessary simply to survive back in that day.

Lamech undoubtedly saw that Noah was a very special boy; the next patriarch after himself. Perhaps he hoped Noah was the promised seed of the woman; the one who would crush the Serpent's head, remove the curse, and restore the Earth to its former prosperity and glory; thus making for Man a much more enjoyable experience than the one he is subjected to for now.

"I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us. For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God; for the creation was subjected to futility, not of its own will but by the will of him who subjected it in hope; because the creation itself will be set free from its slavery to decay and obtain the glorious liberty of the children of God." (Rom 8:18-21)

"Repent therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that He may send Jesus Christ, who was preached to you before, whom heaven must receive until the times of restoration of all things, which God has spoken by the mouth of all His holy prophets since the world began." (Acts 3:19-21)

According to Acts 3:19-21, men have been pounding pulpits since the very beginning, and all of the prophets, ever since Abel, have looked ahead in anxious anticipation to Messiah's intervention in world affairs and bringing into existence a much better world than the one that is now.

• Gen 5:30-32 . . After the birth of Noah, Lamech lived 595 years and begot sons and daughters. All the days of Lamech came to 777 years; then he died. When Noah had lived 500 years, Noah begot Shem, Ham, and Japheth.

Lamech escaped the Flood by a mere 5 years. It came when Noah was 600 (Gen 7:6).

Shem was the next patriarch after his dad Noah. But the names of all three boys are given probably because of the role they will play in re-populating the Earth after the Flood. The Bible doesn't say that Shem, Ham, and Japheth were especially good men. They survived the Flood in spite of their character only because they got aboard the ark with their dad when it was time for the rain to begin. If they had mocked, and remained on land with the rest of the world, then they would have certainly drowned right along with everyone else in spite of their ancestry.

So; were Mr and Mrs Noah childless until Noah was 500 years old? Probably not. The other kids, if there were any, didn't count as far as God was concerned, and, if there were any, they perished in the deluge.

NOTE: Being related to holy men like rabbis, pastors, deacons and/or missionaries etc doesn't guarantee a ticket to safety. Everyone has to make their own personal decisions in that regard (e.g. Gen 19:12-14). God commands all people everywhere to repent. The alternative is the sum of all fears no matter how important, nor well connected, your friends, associates and/or relatives might be.
_

 

[WebersHome]

Genesis 6:1-2


• Gen 6:1-2 . . Now it came about, when men began to multiply on the face of the land, and daughters were born to them, that the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were good; and they took wives for themselves, whomever they chose.

The Hebrew word for "good" in that passage is towb (tobe) which is one of those ambiguous Hebrew words that can be utilized in a wide variety of applications. It can indicate morality, a tasty meal, a job well done, a nice man, a pretty dress, a shapely woman and/or a handsome man, and an expert musician and/or a really groovy song. But in this case; I think it's pretty safe to assume towb refers to a woman's looks.

NOTE: Ambiguous Hebrew words like towb serve to illustrate why it's virtually impossible to translate Hebrew into English with 100% verbatim precision. No linguist in his right mind would dare to say that English versions of the Hebrew Old Testament are perfect word-for-word renditions of the original manuscripts-- no; they can't even be certified perfect word-for-word renditions of the available manuscripts let alone the originals.

The characteristics of the "sons of God" has been debated. Some say they were members of the aristocracy of that day who married attractive women from among the commoners. Others say they were renegade spirit creatures who donned fully functioning human avatars-- replete with synthetic male genomes --so they could cohabit with women; thus producing a hybrid strain of hominid freaks. Others say they were God-fearing men who threw caution to the wind and built themselves harems of humanistic women who believed and practiced existential philosophies.

Intermarriage between men of faith and infidel women is a proven tactic for watering down, compromising, and even extinguishing Bible beliefs and practices (e.g. Num 31:7-16). The people of God are strictly, unequivocally, and clearly forbidden to marry outside their faith. (Deut 7:1-4, 2Cor 6:14 18)

Wives can be very effective in influencing an otherwise pious man to compromise his convictions; for example Solomon got off to a good start but down the road accumulated a harem of foreign women who led him into idolatry; which subsequently caused The Lord to engineer rebellion in the kingdom. (1Kgs 11 & 12)

The sons of God in Noah's day-- whose wives were chosen based solely upon sensual appeal sans any spiritual prudence whatsoever --all perished in the Flood right along with their infidel wives and children. Not a one of them had the good sense to go aboard the ark with Noah.

NOTE: Jude urged his readers to contend for the faith-- i.e. struggle (Jude 1:3) --which doesn't imply getting into brawls over it. He means to hang on to it with the same desperate clinging that would be applied to a life ring thrown to a man overboard because there are unfaithful elements in churches all 'round the world pressuring God's people to become flexible.
_

 

[WebersHome]

.
Genesis 6:3-4


• Gen 6:3a . . And the Lord said: My Spirit shall not strive with man forever

Some translations have "abide" instead of strive. But the Hebrew word is diyn (deen) which means: to rule; by implication: to judge (as umpire); also to strive (as at law). It can also mean to plead the cause of; or to contend in argument.

So; how did "My Spirit" accomplish this striving with man? In person Himself? No; just like He always has: via inspired men; e.g. Noah and Enoch. (2Pet 2:5 & Jude 1:14-15)

NOTE: According to 1Pet 3:18-20, the Spirit of Christ and My Spirit are one and the same spirit. In point of fact; according to 1Pet 1:10-11, all the Old Testament preachers (a..k.a. prophets) were motivated by the Spirit of Christ. (cf. Rom 8:9 and 1Cor 6:19 where the Spirit of Christ and The Spirit are seen as one and the same spirit)

• Gen 6:3b . . for they are only mortal flesh.

A problem with flesh is it's brevity. The human body eventually loses its vigor, so God has a limited amount of time to work with people before they pass on. Were humans immortal, He would have plenty of time to turn people around; but alas, without access to the tree of life, such is not the case; which is why I sometimes advise certain folk to use what time they have remaining to begin preparing themselves for the worst when they pass on.

• Gen 6:3c . . yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.

Some feel that God set the limits of human longevity in that verse. But people still continued to live long lives for a great number of years afterwards. Even Abraham, who lived many, many years after the Flood, didn't die till he was 175 years old.

It's far more reasonable to conclude that God was announcing a deadline; viz: they had 120 years left to get ready to meet their maker. But you think that alarmed anybody? Heck no. They went right on; business as usual.

"And as it was in the days of Noah, so it will be also in the days of the Son of Man: They ate, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all." (Luke 17:26-27)

The time of God's patience is sometimes long; but never unlimited; viz: reprieves are not pardons-- though God bear a great while, He never bears forever.

• Gen 6:4 . .There were giants on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men, and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.

The Hebrew word for "giants" in that passage is somewhat ambiguous. It not only refers to people of unusual stature, but also to bullies, i.e. alpha males, achievers, tyrants, movers and shakers, and Machiavellian types.

Historical examples would be men like Genghis Khan of Mongolia, and Alexander the Great of Greece; Napoleon of France, Peter Alekseyevich Romanov of Russia, Chandragupta Maurya of India, shogun Minamoto no Yoritomo of Japan, conquistador Hernando Cortes of Spain, Timur: founder of the Timurid dynasty, and Zahir-ud din Muhammad Babur: founder of the Mughal dynasty that ruled the Indian subcontinent for over three centuries.

In other words: nephiyl doesn't necessarily indicate a special race of people; but can also refer to strong men whose ambition is to dominate others; even if they have to completely destroy their culture and kill them all off to do it.

I would categorize Nimrod as a nephiyl. He was the first statesmen to successfully unite the world; and it was such a solid unity that only divine intervention could bring it down.

The phrase "men of renown" indicates that the nephil types got all the press: they were the Man Of The Year back then while guys like Noah and Enoch were marginalized and went largely unnoticed.

FAQ: If all the nephiyl types drowned in the Flood; then how did their characteristics manage to resurface down the road?

A: Well; from whence did nephiyl types originate in the first place? Same place every other personality type originated: from Adam's genes; viz: since Noah and his wife, and his sons and their wives, were Adam's biological descendants, then nephiyl characteristics survived the Flood by riding it out in the DNA of the people aboard the ark.
_

 

[WebersHome]

.
Genesis 6:5-7


• Gen 6:5 . . And the Lord saw that the evil of man was great in the earth, and every imagination of his heart was only evil all the time.

Man's descent into depravity didn't catch his creator by surprise. After all; not only can God see the future but He can also manipulate it; so He was well aware even before beginning that the people He was about to create were destined for a global deluge.

Also, when God inspected His handiwork at Gen 1:31, He evaluated it not just good, but "very" good. So as far as He was concerned; everything went smoothly and according to plan-- nothing was broken, no parts were missing, and nothing failed to mate with its matching part.

• Gen 6:6 . . And the Lord regretted that He had made man upon the earth, and He became grieved in His heart.

When God created the people of man, it was no doubt with the awareness that the day would come when He would have to put a number of them down like dogs gone mad with rabies.

If it can be safely assumed that God saw man's depravity coming well in advance-- prior to creating even one of the many forces, energies, and particles that would go into the construction of the cosmos --then we have to wonder why it is that He felt remorse for going ahead as planned. Surely it wasn't because He made a terrible mistake. I seriously doubt that a master architect with the creator's intelligence would fail to foresee every possible ramification of their actions.

Well; it's at least comforting to know the destruction of life is not something God enjoys as if He were an outdoor guy who kills fish and wildlife for sport with no more sensitivity than a kid blasting aliens in a video game. Man's creator knew the day was coming when He would have to do what He was about to do next, and clearly wasn't looking forward to it, but nevertheless; leaves us with unavoidable questions about His sanity because from a rational perspective, God's procedures make no sense at all.

Anyway, aside from all that; it appears to me that God had high expectations for the people of man, and was very disappointed that numbers of them went bad; sort of like how parents feel when a kid, whom they've given every privilege, every opportunity, and every advantage imaginable, lets it all go overboard and somehow ends up incorrigible and a total failure instead.

NOTE: The Hebrew word translated "regret" is somewhat ambiguous. Though it includes feeling rue for making a mistake, it also implies taking an unpleasant course of action that you know will cause people harm and/or inconvenience though for sure the course is the wise thing to do.

For example: God was poised to destroy the city of Nineveh lest they changed their ways. Within that city were 120,000 underage children, and numbers of beasts, that would've been collateral damage had not the adults heeded Jonah's preaching.

God impressed upon Jonah that He would not take pleasure in destroying those children, nor those beasts. However, God would have done so because it was the wise thing to do.

I cannot even begin to imagine how it was wise (or right) for God to go ahead and create mankind while knowing well in advance by means of precognition that they would go bad and He would have to kill off just about everything-- birds, beasts, men, women, and underage children too.

From a purely rational perspective, the Judeo/Christian God is fiendish. I mean think about it: why would a sensible designer proceed to bring into existence, without their consent, human lives whom he knew in advance that some day he would be destroying most of them.

For example: the creator knew in advance that if He went ahead as planned, the end result would be the termination of untold numbers of terrified people not only in a Flood, but also in the brimstone depicted by Rev 20:10-15.

It's a mystery that people brighter and better educated than I have thus far been unable to figure it out: they make excuses for God (a.k.a. apologetics) instead of coming to grips with the reality that we're all little more than an insect zoo: just bugs imprisoned in a terrarium constructed for the supreme being's amusement.

"O Lord our God . . you created everything, and it is for your pleasure that they exist and were created." (Rev 4:110)

• Gen 6:7 . . And the Lord said: I will blot out man, whom I created, from upon the face of the earth, from man to cattle to creeping thing, to the fowl of the heavens, for I regret that I made them.

The destruction of earth's birds and beasts was unavoidable; they became collateral damage in God's contention with the evil antediluvians.

The Hebrew word for "blot" is from machah (maw-khaw') which means: to stroke or rub; by implication, to erase; also to smooth (as if with oil), i.e. grease or make fat; also to touch, i.e. reach to.

God intended to not only remove the antediluvians from the face of the earth, but also to scrub off all of their works too so that when He was done, it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to even be able to tell the antediluvians were ever here at all.

It's always been a mystery to me why paleo-anthropologists have managed to find so few fossilized remains of pre-historic human beings.

In 1992, Tim White of the University of California at Berkeley, discovered the fossilized skeletons of human-like creatures in Ethiopia's Afar Rift who lived 4.4 million years ago but those are not the remains of h.sapiens; but rather, of beasts that resemble h.sapiens. To my knowledge; no truly human remains have been found from that era.

While mysterious; that lack of remains isn't exclusive. Take for instance the Passenger Pigeon. That bird at one time numbered an estimated four to five billion individuals; which is a number equal in quantity to the current year-round population of all North American birds combined. Yet an archeological search for the pigeon's bones left behind by people who ate the bird for food, through all pre-Columbian times, has thus far yielded very few remains; at only two sites.

But my point is: where are the remains of the antediluvians? They're gone; lock, stock, and barrel-- no metal implements from Tubal-Cain's blacksmith shop, no musical instruments from Jubal's work shop, no dwellings, no footprints, no bones, no pottery, no pictographs, no petro glyphs, not even any geological evidence of a world-wide deluge: nothing. It's like they were never here.

God moved against the antediluvians like a relentless newspaper editor deleting superfluous words and sentences so skillfully that the reader cannot even tell those superfluous words and sentences ever existed in the original copy.

Why would God do that? I would hazard to guess that His purpose in doing so was to prevent people from believing too easily that the Flood actually happened.

A curious thing about the Bible is that portions of it are just as effective at driving people away from God as they are at attracting them. No doubt it is God's wishes that everybody believe the Bible; but at the same time it seems He's thwarted His own longings by taking steps to ensure that a substantial number of people don't. For example:

"Moses summoned all Israel and said to them: You have seen all that The Lord did before your eyes in the land of Egypt to Pharaoh and all his servants and all his land; the great trials which your eyes have seen, those great signs and wonders. Yet to this day The Lord has not given you a heart to know, nor eyes to see, nor ears to hear." (Deut 29:2-4)
_

 

[WebersHome]

.
Genesis 6:8-10


• Gen 6:8 . . But Noah found favor with The Lord.

The word for "favor" is from chen (khane) and means: graciousness. Translators sometimes render chen as grace. But the important thing is that The Lord didn't find chen with Noah. No, just the opposite-- Noah found chen with The Lord.

Webster's defines graciousness as: kind, courteous, inclined to good will, generous, charitable, merciful, altruistic, compassionate, thoughtful, cordial, affable, genial, sociable, cheerful, warm, sensitive, considerate, and tactful.

Those are all good qualities, and the very things you would expect to see in someone you loved and trusted-- like your spouse or a very close friend.

• Gen 6:9a . .This is the line of Noah.-- Noah was a righteous man;

The Hebrew word for "righteous" is tsaddiyq (tsad-deek') which means: just.

Webster's provides several definitions of "just", but perhaps the ones best suited for our purpose are: conscientious, honest, honorable, right, scrupulous, true, dependable, reliable, tried, trustworthy, dispassionate, equal, equitable, impartial, nondiscriminatory, objective, unbiased, uncolored, and unprejudiced. So then, Noah was not only religious to his fingertips; but he was a pretty decent guy to boot.

The kind of righteousness spoken of in Gen 6:9a is a personal kind of righteousness. There's also a spiritual righteousness, but I don't think that's in view here. The emphasis is upon Noah as a man rather than a believer; though according to Heb 11:7 he was that too.

• Gen 6:9b . . he was blameless in his era; Noah walked with God.

Blameless in the Bible means something altogether different than what you'd expect. In this case, "blameless" means that God had nothing negative to say about Noah; i.e. on the books, Noah's performance was spotless. How is that possible? Well; if God chooses not to record your badness, then the only thing remaining to record is your goodness.

This is a very important aspect of not just Old Testament piety, but New Testament too.

"God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting their trespasses against them" (2Cor 5:19)

The Greek word translated "counting" is logizomai (log-id'-zom-ahee) which means to take an inventory; i.e. an indictment. 2Cor 5:19 is quite an advantage because when there is nothing bad on the books, then there is nothing that can in any way be used to prove that somebody has ever been anything less than 100% innocent; i.e. blameless. This may seem like cooking the books, but God has a way to do it on the up and up.

NOTE: Too often Supreme Court judges-- the State level and the US level --are unjust; viz; they're biased, partial, partisan, and prejudiced; and that's because seldom, if ever, are they nominated on the basis of their objectivity; rather, they're typically nominated primarily on the basis of their politics.

God highly recommended Noah, but it's doubtful Noah would ever be considered for a federal judgeship let alone America's supreme.

The most incredible thing about Noah was his degree of piety in a world gone mad with evil. He was actually a nobody in his day; eclipsed by the nephiyl types. They got all the press, the publicity, and the notoriety while God's man went marginalized and largely ignored. Yet he persisted; and continued pounding a pulpit right up to the end.

• Gen 6:10 . . Noah begot three sons: Shem, Ham, and Japheth.

Were those the only kids Noah had? And no daughters? I seriously doubt it. Noah was six hundred when the flood began. It is unlikely that a healthy, hard working, robust man would live that long without engendering a much larger family than three; especially in those days without birth control. But these three boys are the only ones that count now because they're going on the ark with their dad.
_

 

[WebersHome]

.
Genesis 6:11-14c


• Gen 6:11a . .The earth became corrupt before God;

Technically, this particular verse isn't saying the world became corrupt, rather, it's speaking of the planet whereupon the people lived.

The Hebrew word translated "corrupt" speaks of ruin, decay, pollution, waste, and destruction. In other words; the planet's human inhabitants were rapidly making the Earth uninhabitable, just like they're doing even now. Were the people of that day not stopped, they would've made the Earth unfit not just for human life, but for all life.

• Gen 6:11b . . the earth was filled with lawlessness.

In other words: there no controls in place to regulate how people used the Earth's resources; nor anything in place to regulate the people themselves, i.e. no government.

Crime is pretty much inevitable in a world of sinful beings sans cops and courts. Nobody was accountable for a single thing in those days. The only rules that may have existed were those among clans or in towns. But those rules wouldn't be universal. Rules like that would be different from clan to clan and from town to town. And primitive clans are known to war with each other on a regular basis like the Native Americans did here in America's early years.

I just hope I don't live to see the day when some sort of nationwide disaster, like a nuclear holocaust, occurs in America. Nobody will be safe. Electrical power will be out, the banks won't be open, ATM machines won't work, everyone will be desperate to survive; and hoarders will strip supermarket shelves of food and commodities practically overnight.

Roving gangs of thugs will prowl the rubble looking to scavenge and to steal anything not nailed down or protected by guards. Law enforcement and medical services will be so overwhelmed that dialing 911 will be no more productive than writing a letter to Santa Claus; that is, if telephones even work. If hurricanes Katrina and Sandy taught us anything in New Orleans and Manhattan, it's that large-scale disasters produce large-scale anarchy and chaos.

The criminal element has neither honor nor sympathy for its victims. After the September 29, 2009 tsunami subsided in Samoa, residents returned to neighborhoods only to find that their homes had been looted.

According to the 2016 World Almanac, in the year 2013, there were a total of 1,163,146 violent crimes committed in the USA . The number of property crimes totaled 8,632,512. Those totals exclude crimes like arson, perjury, forgery, insider trading, contempt of court, bail jumping, internet hacking, traffic violations, J-walking, trespassing, animal abuse, feeding parking meters, cheating on taxes; et al.

And to think the USA and its territories are a society of law abiding citizens. Just think what it must have been like in Noah's day with no law enforcement whatsoever to control crime. All I can say is; if something really bad should ever happen here in the USA, you'd better own deadly weapons like swords and guns plus lots of pepper and/or bear spray because neither your life nor your possessions will be safe after dark.

• Gen 6:12-13a . . God saw how corrupt the earth had become, for all the people on earth had corrupted their ways. So God said to Noah: I am going to put an end to all people, for the earth is filled with violence because of them.

That was indeed tragic. Things finally became so bad that the only way to save the planet was to exterminate the people. Quite a few environmentalists are saying the very same thing in our day.

The Hebrew word for "violence" covers a lot of ground-- cruelty, injustice, abuse, damage, brutality, etc.

• Gen 6:13b . . I am about to destroy them with the earth.

Here is set a precedent of God forewarning His own when He is about to execute a calamitous event. The Passover was another such example. God forewarned Moses, and Moses' people, of the imminent annihilation of all the firstborn of Man and Beast in Egypt; which would also impact Moses and his people if they didn't do exactly as God said and paint the blood of a lamb on their door jambs (Ex 11:1-13).

And our man Noah, super-duper righteous man that he was, would have drowned right along with the rest of the antediluvians had he neglected to construct an ark. When God gives a warning, it is best to respond accordingly.

"A prudent man sees danger and takes refuge, but the simple keep going and suffer for it." (Prov 22:3)

FAQ: If God knew in advance by means of precognition that the human life He had in mind to create would go bad, and He would be destroying much of it in a deluge; then why go ahead?

A: People much brighter, and better educated than I, have not been able to come up with a satisfactory explanation. Apparently the master plan of the cosmos had to include the mass destruction of human life in order for it to serve the purpose for which God designed it. That's my best guess; and really it's not a even guess, it's merely stating the obvious.

"O Lord our God . . you created everything, and it is for your pleasure that they exist and were created." (Rev 4:11)

• Gen 6:14a . . Make yourself an ark

The Hebrew word for ark is tebah (tay-baw') and just simply indicates, not a ship, but a nondescript box. The only other object in the Old Testament defined by tebah is the little watertight container Moses' mom constructed to hide her little boy from Pharaoh's assassins. (Ex 2:1-10)

• Gen 6:14b . . of gopher wood;

Nobody really knows for sure exactly what kind of tree Noah used to make the ark. The word for "gopher" has nothing to do with little subterranean rodents. It's a transliteration of the Hebrew word gopher (go'-fer) which only suggests a kind of tree suitable for building structures out of wood. Some think it was cypress because the wood of those trees is so resinous that it resists rotting even after prolonged submersion in water. Others think it may have been cedar or spruce; which are good too.

Noah would've needed some massive structural members so in my estimation; Redwood-- a.k.a. Sequoia --would've been an excellent choice seeing as how the wood is not only resistant to rot, but the trees themselves are typically very large and yield huge quantities of lumber.

Unfortunately, this is the one and only occurrence of gopher in the entire Old Testament so there's no other passages that might help identify a specific kind of tree.

• Gen 6:14c . . make it an ark with compartments,

The word for "compartments" is from qen (kane) which means: a nest (as fixed), sometimes including the nestlings; figuratively, a chamber or dwelling. The construction of nests (and stalls) indicates the animals weren't just herded or jammed together like the crowds attending an outdoor rock concert. They were neatly stowed aboard in their own areas and apparently made to feel quite comfortable.
_

 

[Gabriel Anton]

Read till Post #8. Start at #9.

 

[WebersHome]

.
Genesis 6:14d-15a


• Gen 6:14d . . and cover it inside and out with pitch.

The word for "pitch" is kopher (ko'-fer) which means: a cover. It can also mean a village (as covered in); and also bitumen (as used for coating) and the henna plant (as used for dye).

Kopher is a common word in the Old testament for "atonement" which is like pitch as a coating, or a covering, which not only serves the purpose of a sealing compound like the stuff people apply to weatherproof their patio decks, but also a concealment coating like paint and/or tar and feathers.

NOTE: Old Testament atonements, while gaining offenders a pardon, do nothing to exonerate them; viz: atonements don't expunge their history, i.e. their offenses stay on the books like a rap sheet, and available to God as a means of evaluating peoples' character. This is pretty serious because according to Rev 20:11-15, those books are going to be opened for examination to determine whether people qualify for a pass to heaven. (God has figured out a way to expunge people's records so that they can be legally adjudged innocent, but a discussion of it is not within the scope of a study in Genesis.)

Anyway; coating the ark with bitumen not only served to waterproof it; but also preserved the wood for future uses after the Flood subsided and Noah no longer had need of a titanic water craft.

NOTE: Bitumen is a naturally-occurring kind of asphalt formed from the remains of ancient, microscopic algae (diatoms) and other once-living things. In order for bitumen to be available in Noah's day, the organisms from whence it was formed had to have existed on the earth several thousands of years before him. In point of fact, I read somewhere that the biomass that gave us fossil fuels existed even before the dinosaurs. That's really going back a ways.

• Gen 6:15a . .This is how you shall make it:

What if Noah had some ideas of his own? Would that have been alright? No; when God says "you shall" and/or "you shall not" then that's the law.

Some object that since paper and writing were not yet invented in Noah's day, then God couldn't possible have provided him with plans for the ark. But even a pictograph, or a petro glyph, would've sufficed.

Other skeptics object that a wooden vessel the size of Noah's ark couldn't be built because the timbers required for its structural strength would have been so massive that Noah would never have managed to assemble its pieces and parts.

But ancient craftsmen were far more ingenious than most people living today realize. For example, nobody yet has really figured out how the Egyptians built the pyramids nor how the people of Easter Island cut, carved, and moved all those big stone heads around. And the Egyptians aren't the only ones to mystify us. There are ancient stone structures around the world that seem impossible to be erected by human hands prior to the age of heavy industrial machinery; but nevertheless, there they are.

And not to forget that Noah's God was in the project. Since that's the case, it's not unreasonable to assume God also provided Noah the tools necessary to complete the task He assigned; and very, very possibly chipped in to help out with the construction too. When people fail to factor in God, they invariably end up mystified. To this day scientists are baffled about the origin of the cosmos, with all of its life, matter, and energy, because they refuse to factor intelligent design into their thinking.

How did Noah cut the logs that went into constructing the ark? Well; according to the Bible, Cain's people were proficient with metals. If nothing else; it's probably pretty certain that Noah had at least a metal hammer and an axe; maybe several metal hammers and axes; and quite possibly saws and wedges too.

"And Zillah she too bore Tubal-cain, who sharpened all tools that cut copper and iron" (Gen 4:2, Chabad.org)

How did Noah join the logs and other wooden pieces that went into constructing the ark? Well; you know, a good cabinet maker can assemble a very nice armoire without using nuts and bolts by the strategic use of dowels and clever joinery like grooves, rabbets, dovetails, mortises, and tenons.

Others object that a wooden vessel the size of the ark would never hold up on the open sea without steel reinforcement; especially when the super storm of Gen 8:1 began blowing to mop up the water. But again; those skeptics typically fail to factor God's involvement in the Flood. You really think He left the only surviving humans and the only surviving beasts on the whole planet to the mercy of the elements?

The Flood was a miraculous event, which by its very nature circumvented the laws of physics.

With God's involvement, even a house of cards would've survived the Flood had He wished it to because the strength of natural materials isn't fixed; they can be greatly enhanced, e.g. Samson (Judg 13:2-16:31). He was just an ordinary man of flesh and bone; but God made Samson strong enough to do things that no one man alone could possibly attempt unassisted.
_