Genesis 04

Updated
2001-05-26; 14:31:45utc

From the first verse "Adam lay with his wife Eve, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Cain. She said, 'With the help of the LORD I have brought forth a man,' " we get the impression that Adam and Eve did not have any form of sexual intercourse while still in Paradise; but this would be hard to accept. After all the LORD had already told them in ch. 1:28, "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it." There would have been no reason to suppose that man would not have started doing this. Some commentators believe that Eve did not get pregnant until after the fall; but there is no ground for this supposition either. It is very unlikely that she bore children before they were expelled from the garden of Eden. Those children would have had to trespass individually in order to be expelled also, one would think. The most logical explanation is that Eve had children, probably even several, after the expulsion, but that their names are not mentioned. She could have been pregnant when the temptation took place. This would mean that their period of innocence had been a rather short one. Moses proceeds immediately with the account of the birth of Cain and Abel because it shows in such an dramatic way the impact of the fall and its consequences.

That there were other human beings when these events took place, we understand from vs.17, where Cain's wife is mentioned. There is no other answer to the famous question where Cain found his wife than that she was a daughter of Adam and Eve.

So we believe that the beginning of this chapter shows the same tendency as ch. 5:3 where the birth of Seth is announced and Cain and Abel are not even mentioned.

When Eve gave birth to Cain, we read: "She said, 'With the help of the LORD I have brought forth a man.' " The name Cain means "brought forth" in Hebrew. This would strike us strange, if she had given birth to other children before, unless the previous children had all been girls. That seems to give a likely explanation. Cain was probably the first boy born in the family. Eve recognizes the hand of the LORD in this, probably because of the prophecy in ch. 3:15. She may have thought that the Messiah had arrived, and that the head of the serpent would now be crushed. She lived in the expectation of the return of eternal life, like the tribal people of Irian Jaya, Indonesia, had done for centuries. This expectation would give the account of the murder an even more tragic twist. Instead of being the Messiah, Cain turned out to be the first murderer on earth.

The birth of the first martyr, Abel, takes place without any observation by Eve being recorded. The Westminster Dictionary of the Bible says about Abel: "[Heb. Hebel, breath; applied to Able from the shortness of his life; some derive it from Akkad, ablu, son]. A younger son of Adam, and by calling a shepherd. Abel was a righteous man (Matth.23:35; I John 3:12); one of the Old Testament worthies whose conduct was controlled by faith (Heb.11:4). etc."

Some commentators, like Adam Clarke, believe that Abel was Cain's twin brother. Whether this is true, or even can be construed from the Hebrew grammar, does not make any difference for the point of the story, which is the sacrifice both brothers brought to God and the results. We are told that Cain worked the soil and Abel kept the flock. It is only logical that these occupations would dominate the human race in the beginning. We shall see that industry and "culture" make their appearance at the end of this chapter, with the children of Lamech.

There is no reason to believe that Abel was a better man because he was a shepherd. I see no intrinsic value difference, between Cain's occupation and Abel's. On the surface it seems logical that when the moment to bring a sacrifice came, each brought that which was part of his life: Cain the fruit of the soil; and Abel, parts of an animal. But evidently there is more to it than meets the eye. In Hebrews we read: "By faith Abel offered God a better sacrifice than Cain did. By faith he was commended as a righteous man, when God spoke well of his offerings. And by faith he still speaks, even though he is dead."[ 1 ] Abel's choice of a sacrifice was determined by faith. We may conclude from this that Cain's was not.

The question we have to ask here is, what faith stands for. What kind of faith? What was the object? The problem of the text is that so much is left unsaid. We may supply the biblical truths found elsewhere to fill the gaps, but did Cain and Abel know about sacrifices of atonement and the value of blood in the forgiving of sin? The answer is that if they did not , the whole of this story does not make much sense. There can be no doubt as to whether the boys knew about sin. Paradise was only one generation removed from them, and Adam and Eve would have talked about nothing else. They must have worn animal skins to cover their own nakedness and they knew why. The killing of animals must have been a common practice at this point in human history.

So, when Cain brings "some of the fruits of the soil as an offering to the LORD," he consciously presents the result of his own labor, presuming that this is acceptable. In doing so he bypasses the issue of his sin and the need for atonement. Abel's faith must have consisted in the acknowledgement of his sin and his admission that someone had to die in his place. Unless we take this to be the basis of this story, we will have to accept that God deals with man according to biased favoritism and not on the basis of immutable holiness and righteousness.

The offering Cain brought was a minchah, which is the grain offering, described in Leviticus: "When someone brings a grain offering to the LORD, his offering is to be of fine flour. He is to pour oil on it, put incense on it."[ 2 ] Incidentally, this indicates that the ordinances regarding the sacrifices, as we find them in Leviticus, were mostly a confirmation of the existing practice and not new factors that were introduced with the building of the tabernacle.

In the human experience this grain offering was the third, which could only be brought after there had been a 'Guilt offering' and a 'Sin offering.' So, by bringing this minchah Cain specifically ignored his sin and his need for atonement.

Vs. 4 says: "The LORD looked with favor on Abel and his offering." KJV: "And the LORD had respect unto Abel and to his offering." The Jamieson, Fausset & Brown Commentary says here: " 'had respect to,' signify in Hebrew - 'to look at anything with a keen earnest glance,' which has been translated, 'kindle into a fire,' so that the divine approval of Abel's offering was shown in its being consumed by fire." Evidently, when Cain brought his grain offering nothing happened. He had to light his own fire.

If this interpretation is correct, we have a wealth of spiritual teaching here. God lets His fire descend upon people who come before Him as sinners in humble contrition, people who accept the covering of their sins by the righteousness of Jesus Christ. The Apostle Peter says: "Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved."[ 3 ]People who believe that they are acceptable to God on their own merit, have to light their own fire.

Verse 7 reads: "If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must master it."

Cain must have drawn the conclusion from this that it put him in the second place as son of Adam, that is, that he lost his right as first born son. We turn again to The Jamieson, Faucet and Brown Commentary and quote: " 'If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted?' - A better rendering is, 'Shalt thou not have the excellency?' which is the true sense of the words referring to the high privileges and authority belonging to the first-born in patriarchal times. Sin lieth at the door- sin, i.e. a sin offering - a common meaning of the word in Scripture (as in Hos.4:8; II Cor.5:21; Heb.9:28). The purport of the divine rebuke to Cain was this, 'Why art thou angry, as if unjustly treated? If thou doest well (i.e. wert innocent and sinless) a thank offering would have been accepted as a token of thy dependence as a creature. But as thou doest not well (i.e., art a sinner), a sin offering is necessary, by bringing which thou wouldest have met with acceptance and retained the honors of thy birthright.' This language implies that previous instructions had been given as to the mode of worship; Abel offered through faith (Heb.11:4) unto thee shall be his desire - The high distinction conferred by priority of birth is described (ch.27:29); and it was Cain's conviction, that this honor had been withdrawn from him, by the rejection of his sacrifice, and conferred on his younger brother - hence the secret flame of jealousy, which kindled into a settled hatred and fell revenge."

The above quote gives a meaning to the text which is quite different from what we would understand if we look at the NIV, or even the KJV rendering of vs. 7: "If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must master it." Or the KJV: "If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? And if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him."

Most commentators agree however, that the text is corrupted and difficult to understand. Every translation I have come across translates chattah with "sin" instead of "sin offering." Evidently, both translations are acceptable, since the word stands for both. The Jamieson interpretation seems highly theological; that is it tries to fit the verse in the context of Bible truths found elsewhere. But that does not conflict with principles of Bible interpretation, and the rendering seems more satisfactory than any other. If we follow the suggestion of the translation "sin" instead of "sin offering," it would imply that Cain has to try to overcome sin by his own means. This would amount to divine approval of his attitude, which is contrary to what the whole text implies.

Cain is angry. Obviously, the real object of his anger is self. But, like most people, when a man is angry with himself, he does not admit it; rather he projects his anger upon something or somebody else. So the focus of Cain's anger was put on God, and since anger directed to God has a tendency to bounce back, it hit on Abel. Abel had just received forgiveness for his sin from God, and that becomes the unpardonable sin in the eyes of Cain. Hatred for his brother takes over in his heart. After Adam and Eve sinned, they were ashamed before one another. As we have seen, this meant that they no longer loved each other. Here sin goes one step further; shame turns into hatred and hatred to murder. It seems that Satan has gained a complete victory.

There are four references to this first murder in the New Testament that need our attention. In Matthew: "And so upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar."[ 4 ]In Hebrews: "To Jesus the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel."[ 5 ]John writes in his epistle: "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."[ 6 ]And Jude writes: "Woe to them! They have taken the way of Cain; they have rushed for profit into Balaam's error; they have been destroyed in Korah's rebellion."[ 7 ]

In Matthew, Jesus says that all of humanity bears responsibility for the murder of Abel. Almost in the same way as Adam's sin is imputed on the whole human race, so it seems that all of mankind is guilty of the sin of spilling the first innocent blood. There is a difference in that through Adam's sin we all inherited the tendency to sin, that is our sinful nature; we do not inherit anything in that sense from Cain. John explains that it is a matter in whose camp we belong. Cain belonged to Satan because he had not sought forgiveness from his sins in the way that God had indicated. In the preceding verse John says: "This is the message you heard from the beginning: We should love one another." It is the lack of love for one another that makes us to murderers. There is a direct link between the fig leave that Adam and Eve put on because they no longer loved each other, and the murder of a brother. If we are not filled with the love of Christ, there is no guarantee that we will not murder, even our own brother. It would come as a terrible shock to most people to discover, when their file is opened before the throne of God that they are accused of being guilty of this murder and all the following ones that are committed on earth. It will be of no help to protest that we never even killed a fly.

But the writer of the Hebrew epistle proclaims that the cry of the blood of Abel is drowned out by the cry of the blood of Christ. The NIV says that the blood of Christ speaks "a better word," KJV "speaketh better things." The Greek word is kreitona, which comes from kratos, meaning power. The message of the blood of Christ is not just nobler in that it does not cry for revenge, like Abel's blood did, but it shouts louder, so that the cry of Abel's blood is not heard any longer. Abel also was revenged in the death of Christ.

Jude's pronouncement about the false prophets speaks for itself. There is no confession of sin, only a covering up and a trying to maintain the priority in the face of God's condemnation.

In vs. 8 we read: "Now Cain said to his brother Abel, 'Let's go out to the field.' And while they were in the field, Cain attacked his brother Abel and killed him." It seems from the first part of the sentence that Abel's murder was premeditated. However, in some manuscripts as well as in the Septuagint this part of the verse is missing. It does not really make that much difference. Cain had passed the point of no return when he refused the sin offering. If we cling to our sins like the man in Herman Marsman's poem, who said: "Do not take my last possession from me; my sins will go with me in my grave,"[ 8 ] the devil can make us do whatever he wants. And since he is the murderer from the beginning, he wants his children to be murderers too.

The above does not mean that there is really a point beyond which we cannot turn back to God. The repentance of the murderer, who was crucified with Jesus, proves that there is no point in this life where it is too late.[ 9 ] The devil wants man to believe that there is no way to get up when he has fallen into sin, but this is a lie. There was even hope for Judas. Satan wraps us in despair when he entices us to sin.

There is no need to go into detail as far as this murder is concerned. We do not read how Cain killed Abel. Probably the only way he knew was to kill him like a sacrificial animal was killed by cutting his throat. It must have relieved his feeling of hatred for a moment, but not for long. Blood is not silent. As Don Richardson says in his book Lords of the Earth a dead man is more dangerous than a live one. "The LORD said, 'What have you done? Listen! Your brother's blood cries out to me from the ground.' " Cain must have heard the cry of his brother's blood for the rest of his life, and the picture of his dying face would never be wiped from his memory. We read in Revelation that the blood of people who were martyred cried to God. "When he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain because of the word of God and the testimony they had maintained. They called out in a loud voice, 'How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you judge the inhabitants of the earth and avenge our blood?' "[ 10 ]

We should step back a moment to where Eve looked at the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge, which looked "good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom," and then look at the pool of blood beside Abel's body. How "pleasing to the eye, and also desirable...!" In the next chapter we will be able to step back again and look at the events described from the same vantage point. We can do this through the whole of world history and get the right perspective on the wages of sin and disobedience.

When God confronted Adam with his sin, He called to Adam, "Where are you?" Here God says to Cain: "Where is your brother?" The answer is the first insolence and blasphemy in the Bible. The "I do not know" is partially true. Cain could have no idea what happened to the soul of his brother. But the intent is obviously to deny any knowledge of what happened. Sin and denial go together. Murder and lying are twin brothers. In committing this sin Cain has lost all sense of proportion. At least Adam and Eve realized that God would see through their fig leaf covering. Cain thinks that he can deny responsibility for Abel's death, and get away with it before God. He may have thought that he could kill God like he killed his brother. He certainly would have done so if he could. His hatred for God must have been even greater than for his brother. It was God he had hated in the first place.

Even here God does not curse Cain. The only one cursed in the Bible was the serpent in ch. 3:15. The NIV may be less clear at this point. In vs.11 we read: "Now you are under a curse and driven from the ground, which opened its mouth to receive your brother's blood from your hand." Other translations are probably closer to the truth: "And now art thou cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother's blood from thy hand" (KJV); "And now you are cursed from the ground, which has opened its mouth to receive your brother's blood from your hand." (RSV). It is the earth that curses man now, after having been cursed herself because of man. The earth is spoken of as if it has personality and is able to curse humans. We find a suggestion of this in the book of Numbers: "...for blood pollutes the land, and no expiation can be made for the land, for the blood that is shed in it, except by the blood of him who shed it."[ 11 ]

Verse 12 indicates that because of what Cain did to the land, he will be even less successful as a farmer than his father. "When you work the ground, it will no longer yield its crops for you. You will be a restless wanderer on the earth." So the murder made him the first nomad on earth.

After hearing his sentence, he still shows no sign of remorse. Cain only complains about the severity of his punishment. He does not realize that most of the punishment is in his own conscience. Every time he looks at the ground he will see the blood of his brother which accuses him. He will be under the illusion that if he goes somewhere else and looks at another piece of ground, things will be different; but they are not . I do not know if he ever came to the point where he recognized that the blood-stained ground was in his own soul. The knowledge was as a worm that gnawed at his soul. Jesus describes hell as the place "Where 'their worm does not die, and the fire is not quenched.' "[ 12 ]Cain got a foretaste of hell.

It all started when Cain refused to confess his sin, ask for forgiveness, and bring the sacrifice that would have brought forgiveness. The longer sin lodges in a person's heart, the harder it becomes to confess it. Our heart has the ability to accumulate calluses. And the Bible indicates the danger of hardening one's heart, as Pharaoh did. When Pharaoh hardened his heart, God hardened it so there was no way back. In Exodus, we read several times that Pharaoh hardened his heart until finally God made it irrevocable.[ 13 ]Basically, Cain blames God for the whole affair. His punishment is more than he can bear, he says in vs. 13. This does imply that he accepts responsibility for his act, but there is no sign of remorse. He is afraid that others will do to him what he did himself to Abel. It seems strange that he complains about being banished from the presence of the LORD, as if the LORD's presence would be something desirable for him. Probably the presence of the LORD is a reference to the vicinity of Paradise. It could be that the cherubim with the flaming sword were visible during the centuries that the first generation of mankind was born and grew up. Some commentators suggest that.

Cain sees the consequences of removal from the presence of the LORD. He knows that the LORD's presence gives peace and stability, but that since he could not bear this presence, he will be condemned to wander over the earth restlessly. He has analyzed his condition correctly. He must have known that repentance and confession, accompanied by the required sacrifice, would have restored the presence of the LORD to him sufficiently that he could live with it. But this seems out of the question for him. He never considers confession as a real possibility. Since he has surrendered himself to Satan, he does not see any way back. Yet for him, too, there would have been, what the writer to the Hebrews calls "the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel."[ 14 ]

One wonders of course, who on earth would find Cain and kill him. After all, you could probably count the world population on your hands in those days. If we read Scripture correctly, Adam and Cain were the only males left at that time. It could be that Cain speaks of demons instead of humans and that the mark God put on Cain was a restriction for demonic powers, so that they could not touch the lives of human beings. It is till true that the devil has no power to kill any one. He can entice men to kill men or people to commit suicide, but he cannot do the killing himself. Probably Cain was very much aware of the fact that he was in the power of the devil. The absence of the presence of the LORD may have been a reference to that condition, more than to a locality.

We are not told what the mark was that God put on Cain. If it was meant to keep demons away, it may not have been visible to the human eye. In some way God still kept Cain under his protection.

So Cain moves away. Most likely he could not bear to be in the vicinity of his parents any longer. His residence is East of Eden. John Steinbeck wrote a novel under the title East of Eden, which describes human depravity. The main character is a girl, who gives no indication that she has any trace of conscience. She kills her parents by burning down their house and gives herself to prostitution without restraint. John Steinbeck evidently understood Cain's character quite well. Whatever voice of conscience he may have had was kept suppressed since it was too much mingled with the voice of Abel's blood.

In vs. 17 we read briefly what happened to him after this. "Cain lay with his wife, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Enoch. Cain was then building a city, and he named it after his son Enoch." And then he moves out of the picture completely. When Cain moved he must have taken his wife, who was his sister, with him. Enoch is born, and Cain builds a city. The word 'city' seems a little out of place at this point. When we think of cities, we do not think of a population of three persons. The main characteristic of a city used to be that it was surrounded by a wall. It was a place of protection. Probably what is meant is that Cain built a house and put a large fence around it, to keep the enemy out. What enemy? Like in our modern cities, the enemy lives inside. The mention of the city shows the paranoia to which Cain must have fallen prey at this point. His city was a substitute to the protection of the LORD. People still build protections as substitutes for the protection of the LORD. We want security, but not the security that emanates from fellowship with God. A common form of security, or the substitute of it, is money. Hebrews speak of this. "Keep your lives free from the love of money and be content with what you have, because God has said, 'Never will I leave you; never will I forsake you.' So we say with confidence, 'The Lord is my helper; I will not be afraid. What can man do to me?' "[ 15 ]This is basically what Cain tries to bring about here. Security without the presence of the LORD. In the Parable of the Sower, Jesus calls this the "deceitfulness of wealth." People are lulled into a sense of security that does in no way give protection to the real dangers that threaten us. Only when we realize that the Lord is our helper, will we not be afraid, knowing there is nothing that man or devil can do to us.

Vs. 18 rushes us through four generation to the birth of Lamech, who explored the possibility of polygamy. Degeneration takes one step further with Lamech. Unfortunately, development of human culture stems from this period in history also. I say "unfortunately," because the blessings of human culture are numerous, but the circumstances under which culture was born make it a mixed blessing, or a mixed curse. It is to this period that the beginning of agriculture in the more refined sense - music and industry - can be traced; all of which are factors that influence our modern life.

By his act of polygamy Lamech degraded the dignity of the woman even further. The original fall had demoted Eve from Adam's equal to the one over whom he ruled, and from a relation of intimacy in love they had gone to one of sexual desire only. Lamech pushes this one step further because polygamy removes all dignity from a marriage relationship. It shows how fast the role of the woman in society had deteriorated in the first millennium. The only distinction given to women here is that the names of Lamech's wives are mentioned, whereas we do not read the names of any of the other wives. We do not know what Mrs. Cain was called, for instance.

Adah becomes the mother of Jabal and Jubal and Zillah gives birth the Tubal-Cain. There is a Persian word tupal, which means iron dross. Some commentators believe that the latter name may be related to this. But of course, others do not. It would be suspicious if commentators would agree one hundred percent on any point!

The three boys are highly talented, and distinguish themselves in different areas. The Pulpit Commentary says about Jabal: "And Adah bare Jabal. Either the Traveler or the Producer, from yabhal, to flow; poetically, to go to walk; hiphil, to produce; descriptive, in the one case, of his nomadic life, in the other of his occupation or his wealth. He was the father - av, father; used of the founder of a family or nation, of the author or maker of anything, especially of the Creator, of the master or teacher of any art or science - of such as dwell in tents, and of such as have cattle. Mikneh, literally, possession, from kanah, to acquire, as in vs.1; hence cattle, as that was the primitive form of wealth; by which may be meant that Jabal was the first nomad who introduced the custom of living in tents, and pasturing and breeding not sheep merely, but larger quadrupeds as well, for the sake of wealth." So Jabal may have been the first capitalist on this planet.

Jubal was the first player on an instrument. His name lives on in several languages, like in the English word jubilee. The NIV says about him "he was the father of all who play the harp and flute." The KJV says "the harp and the organ" and the RSV gives the instruments as "the lyre and the pipe." Evidently both strings and wind instruments are meant. This probably implies composition of songs and lyrics. I suppose that abstract music is a phenomenon of later times, that is the last four centuries. Tubal-Cain was the original 'Mr. Smith' on earth. The biblical account proves that the theory that man slowly developed from a primitive creature into a more sophisticated being, as we know him now, is a myth. Both the NIV and the RSV speak about tools made out of bronze and iron. The KJV calls it brass. The ability to extract ore and make fire that is hot enough was exercised early in the history of humanity.

So the three sons of Lamech laid the foundation of our modern society. I have an inkling that this 'primitive' society may have been much more advanced than we give it credit for. We will get back to this suspicion of mine in the following chapters. Lamech's three sons were brilliant men. They may have been sons of a brilliant father. Lamech may have been wicked, but he was not dumb.

We do not learn anything about Naamah, except that she was Tubal-Cain's sister. The very fact that her name is mentioned is interesting. She is the first girl whose name is mentioned in the Bible besides the name of her mother and stepmother. It could be that this throws some light on Lamech's character. He may have been a sinful man, the inventor of polygamy; but he must have been proud of his family. He made sure that the names of his wives and daughter were recorded in history.

He also was a poet. Lamech's words in vs. 23 and 24 are the first poetry in the Bible. The poem is dedicated to his wives. We read:
"Lamech said to his wives, 'Adah and Zillah, listen to me; wives of Lamech, hear my words. I have killed a man for wounding me, a young man for injuring me. If Cain is avenged seven times, then Lamech seventy-seven times.' "

Poetry describes best the spirit of an age. The time of Lamech was a time of self-centeredness. There is no expression of beauty in these words. There is no recognition of God, or even of any authority outside of Lamech. Lamech has set himself up as the center of the universe. If God had promised to revenge Cain, Lamech will defend himself. Centuries later the Apostle Paul will condemn Lamech when he writes: "Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: "It is mine to avenge; I will repay," says the Lord."[ 16 ]The RSV says: "Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord." Although Lamech cannot have known the Apostle Paul, he must have known this truth.

Lamech's words are the first sample of modern poetry. It is sad that things which gives so much beauty to human life, like music and poetry, that obviously have their roots in heaven, were born on earth under such perverse circumstances. One of the first songs that was heard on earth under the accompaniment of Jabal's lyre and flute was a song of revenge, of repaying evil with evil. There is no reference to good or to the standard by which deeds can be measured. The measure of good and evil is Lamech himself. By setting himself up as the ultimate measure he has made himself equal to God.

Fortunately, this is not the only poetry the world has produced. We only have to open the book of Psalms to come upon some of the most exquisite uses of language in human speech written for the glory of God. And above some of the most perfect music the world has ever heard, Johan Sebastian Bach wrote the words "Soli Deo Gloria."[ 17 ]

It seems that the devil had won another major victory here. But Satan, even if he writes poetry, did not create poetry. God is the Creator of speech and beauty. When the enemy writes a verse, he has to borrow God's pen.

But the fourth chapter does not end in this minor note. We read about the birth of Seth in vs. 25. The KJV is probably closer to the original meaning of the Hebrew. Both the NIV and RSV say "God has granted (or appointed) to me another child." The KJV says: "And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth: For God, said she, hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew." The use of the word "seed" is important as a reference to God's promise in ch. 3:15. After the murder of Abel and the departure of Cain, Eve recognized that there was no male to fulfill this promise. The reminder of the promise must have played an important part in the life of Seth, and the calling upon the Name of the LORD must have had a lot to do with that. Eve must have held before Seth's eyes that God had appointed him to fulfill that promise. That was his name; for that reason he was born. Seth means appointed.

We may see a shadow here of the coming of Christ. First of all, Christ was from the line of Seth. But also, there was in the life of Jesus the consciousness, which is expressed in the psalms: "Sacrifice and offering you did not desire, but my ears you have pierced; burnt offerings and sin offerings you did not require. Then I said, 'Here I am, I have come; it is written about me in the scroll. I desire to do your will, O my God; your law is within my heart.' "[ 18 ]

The chapter concludes with the words: "Seth also had a son, and he named him Enosh. At that time men began to call on the name of the LORD." According to The Pulpit Commentary Enosh means "man" in the sense of "mortal, decaying man." If this interpretation is correct, it shows a sense of reality. This would fit with the conclusion of the verse.

There are, however, various interpretations to the words, "At that time men began to call on the name of the LORD." The main one's mentioned in The Pulpit Commentary are: "(1) to invoke by prayer the name of Jehovah....(2) to call themselves by the name of Jehovah." Adam Clarke says about this last version that this distinguishes the line of Seth from others by the appellation of "sons of God" as opposed to the "children of men." This would explain the use of these terms in ch. 6.

It seems to fit more in the context, if my understanding of it is correct, to cling to the thought that this was the time when people started to turn to the LORD to pray for deliverance, and to bring consistently the sacrifices they knew were required. The chapter starts out with the right sacrifice and the wrong one. It shows the development of the neglect; what happens when people do not take sin and forgiveness seriously. Then it ends with Eve's rekindled hope when a new male is born, which could be the 'seed' God promised which would crush the serpent's head. All this works together for a group of people to start taking religion seriously. Let's hope this is what it means!

[ 1 ] Heb.11:4

[ 2 ] Lev. 2:1

[ 3 ] Acts 4:12

[ 4 ] Matt. 23:35

[ 5 ] Heb. 12:24

[ 6 ] I John 3:12

[ 7 ] Jude vs. 11

[ 8 ] "Neem mij mijn laatste bezit niet af, mijn zonden gaan mee in mijn graf."

[ 9 ] See Luke 23:42,43

[ 10 ] Rev. 6:9,10

[ 11 ] Num. 35:33 (RSV)

[ 12 ] Mark 9:48

[ 13 ] Ex. 7-10

[ 14 ] Heb.12:24

[ 15 ] Heb. 13:5,6

[ 16 ] Romans 12:19

[ 17 ] "To God alone the glory."

[ 18 ] Ps. 40:6-8