The Book of Genesis


Internal Links

Beginning of Document/

Chapter Summaries

External Links

Genesis Chapter Links


The following chapters of Genesis have been recently “completed.” A full, word-by-word exegesis from the Hebrew is given, along with all of the information contained in the above lessons. What I have not yet done is gone back, edited out material which is repeated, and added in material from some other sources. However, what you will find in the exegesis of each chapter is the most thorough examination of these chapters available anywhere. The links below are external links:


The Updated and Improved Genesis Chapters; Grouped Links to Updated and Improved Genesis Chapters.


Genesis Introduction (HTML) (PDF) (WPD).


This relatively short document introduces the book of Genesis. Included in the topics are Progressive Revelation, Inspiration, the correct view of the Authorship of Genesis (which includes a short exegetical study of New Testament passages to substantiate this), along with the Themes of Genesis and a few summaries of the book of Genesis.


Genesis 1 (HTML) (PDF) (WPD).


Genesis is a most amazing book. There is no ancient book like this. What other ancient book coincides with the Big Bang Theory? What ancient book suggests there was a great ice age over all the earth? As you will find in this study, there are places where the Book of Genesis disagrees with some scientific theories, but Genesis is definitely not anti-science.


God speaks throughout this chapter-who is He speaking to and for what reason? Is God unable to create everything perfectly just the way He wants it? Then why does God take 6 days to restore the earth?


Doctrines included in this study: Ancient Creation Myths; The Order of Creation; Creation Verbs; God and Light and Darkness; The Angelic Conflict; Genesis Creation Theories; How Light Illustrates the Trinity; Light on Day One, the Sun on Day Four; Evolution, Creationism and Divine Design; Some Arguments Against Evolution; A New Theory of Creation and Restoration; Creation Theories; What is God Teaching the Angels?; We Are the Shadow-Image of God.


As in all chapter studies, every single word of Hebrew is found in Genesis 1, along with 50 or so translations for each and every verse. 239 pages.


Genesis 2 (HTML) (PDF) (WPD).


Genesis 2 goes back and takes a look at day 6 and what happened after day 6, when God built the woman. Although some critics try to present this as an alternate creation narrative, what we have here is simply a closer look at Day 6 and what followed. Hebrew writers often do this; they state an historic event or something, and then they go back and discuss this event in greater detail.


We cover a number of special topics here: the Sabbath, Sanctification, The Tree of Life; The Tree of Knowing Good and Evil, Timelines for the creation of the man and the woman, and the First Four Divine Institutions.


In this chapter is a very important doctrine here for apologists is Ten Amazing Statements from Genesis 1:1-2:7. What we learn from the first chapter and a half of Genesis are amazing things not found in any other creation story. These are significant enough to show that believing in the Bible is not somehow anti-science. Also fascinating is the Chiasmos found in Gen. 2:4–25. 154 pages.


Genesis 3 (HTML) (PDF) (WPD).


Gen. 3 is all about the fall of the man and the woman in the Garden of Eden. Satan plays a prominent role, so we examine Satan, Satan's Fall, Satan's appearance, the role of the cherubim, and this portion of the Angelic Conflict.


This study includes the doctrines of The Basis of Satan's Appeals, Human Good, Morality, Truth and Lies, The Seed of the Woman, Scar Tissue, and Atonement. Also in this study: What the Bible Claims for Itself and The Historicity of Adam, the Woman and the Fall. 214 pages.


Genesis 4 (HTML) (PDF) (WPD).


Gen. 4 is all about Cain and Abel, and the killing of Abel by Cain. There are two verses in this chapter which are invariably mistranslated; and one mistranslation leads to all kinds of sloppy interpretation. One of these verses is Gen. 4:7 (God is speaking to Cain) "Is [it] not [true that], if you do good, [there is] a lifting up [of your countenance]; and if you do not do good, [then] the penalty [for sin] is lying in wait at the door. And to you [is] his desire and you [even] you will have dominion over him." It is impossible for this to be interpreted as Cain having the ability to have dominion over sin. The Hebrew will not allow for that interpretation. In this study, there will be 2 explanations given for what God is saying to Cain. Like Gen. 1-3, this is a word-by-word examination of Gen. 4, with the intent that you understand nearly every word in this chapter. Although this exegesis still requires some polish, at 170 pages, it should be the most in-depth study available.


Included in this study is The Concept of Religion Comes from Cain; How to Distinguish Christianity from Cults; Jesus Christ is the Only Way to God; Cainian Parallels; The Canian population after 100 years (you will be surprised); Why Man Had Tools Early on; What Eve's Words Tell Us; and The Genealogy of Jesus Christ. Because there are some obvious textual difficulties in this chapter, we will take a look at the most prominent ancient translations of the Old Testament (and the concept of families of manuscripts will be discussed). There are several topics discussed throughout. For instance, if a person joins a cult or a movement, and that person stops taking drugs, develops a more legitimate and independent lifestyle, isn't that good enough? Why does he need to be a Christian if he solves many of his problems? Human works and why they are so repulsive to God (with a very good illustration). How exactly Cain murdered Abel. The mark of Cain, which has been discussed for millenarian. Why is Cain banished and not executed? There are modern-day illustrations and applications, such as, science and DDT; Wall Street and greed; my surprise as a young Christian not being able to simply go out and easily find a church that taught the Bible carefully and accurately; and the profound enjoyment one can get from one's profession. 170 pages.


Genesis 5 (HTML) (PDF) (WPD).


Genesis 5 is a genealogy chapter, the first chapter devoted almost entirely to the genealogy of Adam to Noah. For this reason, some would think this chapter could be skipped over, or skim-read in 2 minutes, and be dispensed with. However, this chapter should not be skipped if only to see that gospel message which is found within its pages. It is one of the many chapters which will confirm that the Bible is indeed the Word of God.


Some of the topics discussed are the longevity of those found in Gen. 5 (the lives of those in the antediluvian civilization were typically 900+ years); the various authors of Genesis; the gospel message of Genesis 5; and the timeline set by the Bible.


This study includes; Why Did God the Holy Spirit Record Gen. 5, a Genealogy?; the Gospel of Jesus Christ in the Genealogy of Gen. 5 and the Timeline Set up by the Bible. 122 pages.


Genesis 6 (HTML) (PDF) (WPD).


Gen. 6 is a very unusual chapter. Fallen angels will have the ability to have sexual unions with the daughters of men, and they will produce children who are characters of mythology that many of us have studied over the years (the half-man/half-god characters).


However, this completely pollutes the human race, and God selects seemingly the only people who remain who have not been corrupted, Noah, his wife, his 3 sons and their wives.


There are several things which we find in this chapter: a pronouncement of judgement against the corrupted human race and a promise of their destruction. God will make a covenant with Noah, which is the first mention of a covenant in Scripture. God will also instruct Noah to build an ark.


You may think that this is all just a story, a myth that was passed along for centuries. However, you are going to find out that this historical record is anything other than a myth; it is clearly not devised by someone who thought it would make a great story.


You may be surprised as to how many things in this chapter are interdependent and dependent upon the previous chapters in Genesis. For instance, in order for this to actually have taken place, there had to be an environment much different than we have today. We could not have rain; and we could not have an abundance of bacteria; otherwise, the wood of the ark would have rotted before it took its maiden voyage. And, not surprisingly, this is exactly the sort of environment that previous chapters of Genesis suggests.


This examination of Gen. 6 includes: Biblical States of the Earth; the Accuracy of the Old Testament; the Basic Mechanics of the Christian Life; and the doctrines of Satan’s Counterfeits, Sanctification, Civilizations and Anthropopathisms. 192 pages.


Genesis 7 (HTML) (PDF) (WPD).


Gen. 7 contains God’s instructions to Noah as to what he would need to take on board with his family on the ark, and is followed by the actual entering into the ark and then the flood itself.


Because people are aware that there are other flood records out there, and that some people believe that this flood account in Genesis is allegorical or exaggerated or not what Christians have made it out to be, careful attention is given to some of the other flood stories which exist, and how they line up with the record of the Great Deluge in the Bible. Also, as was done in Gen. 6, some time is spend with looking at this topic scientifically, looking at some extra-Biblical sources, and showing that the Bible record is straightforward and reasonable.


One topic which was not covered here, but will be covered in Gen. 8 is the idea that there are two flood accounts which have been woven together. This does appear to be a possibility, not because of the so-called JPED theory, but because there is a lot of repetition in this particular chapter, even though it is only 24 verses long.


Some of the special topics include: The Flood Timetable; the Different Environments of the Earth as Suggested by the Bible; Robbie Dean’s explanation as to why this was a worldwide flood; Fossil Evidence for Massive Graveyards; and several comparisons of the Genesis record of the flood with other flood accounts from other cultures (with an emphasis upon the Gilgamish account). 137 pages.


Genesis 8 (HTML) (PDF) (WPD).


Gen. 8 is about the second half of the flood, where the waters begin to subside to a point where Noah and his family and the animals are able to exit the ark. The person who recorded this information in the first place continues to keep us abreast of the days and the time of the month that these various events take place.


Included in this study is the Omniscient of God, the Priesthoods of the Bible, several Flood Timetables and a chiasmos organization of Gen. 7–8. One of the fascinating aspects of the flood narrative is how it is organized. Gen. 7–8 can be combined into a chiasmos format, which is quite amazing (and something which often occurs in the Bible). More than likely, you will have to see this and read it in order to fully appreciate it.


Finally, there is some discussion of how the flood may be related to continental drift and to the skewing of the earth’s axis.


Genesis 9 (HTML) (PDF) (WPD).


In Gen. 9, Noah and his family exit the ark to the new world devastated by worldwide flood waters. God makes a covenant (contract with Noah). At the end of this chapter, Noah will get drunk, and the way that his sons react to this will determine the general trends of history among the progeny of Noah’s sons.


Included in this study of Gen. 9 is: The Doctrine of Murder; A Comparison of Dispensationalism and Covenant Theology; the Noahic Covenant; and the Breakdown of Races to come from Noah’s sons (as per R. B. Thieme, Jr.).


Although I do intend to go back and edit this document at a future date, it includes a breakdown of every Hebrew word in this chapter accompanied by samples of over 50 translations, and is the most thorough examination of this chapter of Genesis anywhere. 154 pages.


Genesis 10 (HTML) (PDF) (WPD).


Many people skip all of Gen. 10 and a portion of Gen. 11 because these are genealogy chapters, but there is a lot to be learned in this chapter (you may recall that the gospel of Jesus Christ is hidden in the genealogy of Gen. 5—from Adam to Noah). Every believer ought to learn something about the genealogies found in the Bible.


It is worth noting that, some author did not suddenly say, “Oh, let’s throw in some genealogies here.” Their inclusion at this point is logical and actually fits well with the narrative.


One of the most amazing things is, there are perhaps a half-dozen authors of the Bible who continue the linear (straight-line) genealogy all the way from Adam to Jesus Christ. Somehow, all of these authors knew that, there is one genealogy of promise, and it is included in the Bible (there are no other linear genealogies found). It is worth asking, how did they know? And how did they know not to follow out some of the genealogical lines, like those for Moses, Aaron, Caleb, Samuel or Saul?


Some of the doctrines found in this chapter: What is the Purpose of the Bible, the Doctrine of Toledoth, several maps and alternate ways to show the distribution of the peoples of the earth; the 5 Divine Institutions; Attacks on the Divine Institutions.


This is a great study and highly recommended. 149 pages.


Genesis 11 (HTML) (PDF) (WPD).


Genesis 11 is another amazing, yet often ignored, chapter in the Bible. People are aware of the first half of Gen. 11, which is the Tower of Babel and the Confusion of Languages, but then, the second section follows the line of Shem. This portion is equally important, as are the final few verses, which describe the family of Terah. Those who read the Bible through on some kind of a schedule often speed-read through the final section of this chapter, and they miss how this sets up Gen. 12 and the call of Abram.


According to at least 2 sources, there does appear to be a three-fold breakdown of the languages, which is in agreement with the 3 clans at that time. There will be several sections in this study which deal with archeology and carbon dating and the theories of the age of mankind. The scientific achievements of the people of Ham are listed here, and you will find this to be quite amazing. Ancient man and his primitive ways will not longer seem very primitive to you. There are two kinds of genealogies found in the Bible and these will be explained. We will study the kinds of ancient manuscripts of the Bible which are available to us today. The decline in the ages of the patriarchs will be examined, because they decrease exponentially, which is quite an amazing little detail. Finally, some attention will be paid to the route of Abraham and his family, along with something that I doubt you have heard before—the idea that Abraham was called on two occasions. Also included, and possibly exclusively found here, why Abraham and his descendants are called Hebrews (there are actually several reasons for this).


Included are the following short doctrines: The Assumptions of Archeology and Paleontology, C–14 Dating and Accuracy, Scientific Achievements of Ancient Hamitic Peoples; Types of Genealogies Found in the Bible; Explaining the Age Decline; When did the flood occur?; Ancient Manuscripts of the Bible; Transitional Point in the Book of Genesis; The Two Calls to Abram.


A fascinating study and highly recommended. 175 pages.


Genesis 12 (HTML) (PDF) (WPD).


Gen. 12 is the call of Abram (Abraham), his move to Canaan, his travels through Canaan, and then his misstep of going to Egypt. Gen. 12 marks a transition point in the book of Genesis, as we suddenly focus in on one man and his life. We have studied individuals in the previous 11 chapters, but with Gen. 12, there is a sudden focus and concentration which was not found before. Interestingly enough, Abram (Abraham is not his name yet) is claimed by at least 3 different religions, but, in this study, you will begin to get a feel for the man and his thinking, as well as for his misjudgment.


We will study God’s promise to Abram, “I will bless those who bless you; and curse those who curse you;” and study a great many ancient and modern examples of this. This will lead us to the precarious position that the United States is in today. In Charan, it will be apparent that Abram and his family were successful; but this was outside of God’s geographic will for Abram. He will be blessed even more greatly in Canaan, the Land of Promise.


God appears twice to Abram, and we will study the concept of Theophanies and Christophanies in the Old Testament. We will study the subtlety of the Bible, as many people view the Bible as a book that beats individuals over the head with their own personal sins.


There are many doctrines which are studied in this chapter:


There are many doctrines which are studied in this chapter: How God Would Bless Abram; Should Abram have taken Lot with Him?; The Doctrine of Theophanies; Categories of Passages with a Double Meaning; The Doctrine of the Will of God; Abram and the Geographic Will of God; The Doctrine of Faith-Rest; The Goals of Communism in America; The Abbreviated Doctrine of the Laws of Divine Establishment; and Parallels to the Exodus.


This should be a study of greater depth of this chapter than you have seen anywhere else. 169 pages.



Genesis 13 (HTML) (PDF) (WPD).


In Gen. 13, Abram and his crew return from Egypt, oddly richer than before, despite Abram’s deception. Lot is still with Abram, but because of the abundance of their riches, Abram suggests to Lot that they should separate, Lot being given the first choice of which direction to go in.


After this separation, God comes to Abram and fills him in on more of His promises to Abram. God then tells Abram to continue wandering throughout the land, which Abram begins doing.


There are a great many doctrines covered in this chapter, including the Doctrine of Separation, the Concept of Blessing by Association, the Doctrine of Logistical Grace, the Doctrine of Antisemitism, and several doctrines on Dispensations and intercalation. I, like many Bible exegetes, take the Bible literally. However, there are many figures of speech found throughout Scripture, and several of the more notable ones will be highlighted here with examples.


Also included in this study is an American Heritage Special, because the history of the United States which I was taught in high school and college was inaccurate and intentionally so. Not necessarily by my teachers, but by those who wrote the texts and distorted who our founders really were. In this section, we will read a proclamation by George Washington, the preambles of several state constitutions, and the words of many founding fathers. Our founding fathers are not deists nor did they write the constitution in order to limit the religious speech of government officials. When reading their own words, this will become plain. We will also take a brief look at the Warren Court and how they changed the vocabulary just enough to begin to use the 1st Amendment to limit free speech rather than to preserve it. It is a fascinating study.


All in all, there is a lot of important information for the believer in Jesus Christ in this chapter and a great deal of application. 182 pages.



Genesis 14 (HTML) (PDF) (WPD).


Genesis 14 is a fascinating study, thought by some to be an odd insertion in the Bible. However, once you read this, you will see just how important this chapter is to the narrative of Genesis, and how it plants more seeds for further doctrines.


The Bible is a book which includes the strategy and tactics of various armies, and that is something that we find in this chapter. You may not recognize what is going on by a simple read-through, but exactly what these armies do is clearly laid out. We also study the stages of national discipline here, laid out in the Bible for the first time. The false JEPD theory (documentary hypothesis) is alluded to in this chapter, along with links to where this false theory is explained. Imperialism, which is given a bad name today, will be studied in relationship to Gen. 14. British imperialism was a good thing; it was not evil. Furthermore, what the United States does today is not imperialism. We will note that the Bible is not anti-wealth, and not every wealthy man in the Bible is told to sell everything that he has and give it to the poor. There will be a link to a list of the wealthy men found in Scripture, none of whom had done wrong by being wealthy. We will look at the brilliance of United States policy after WWII and the great failure of George W. Bush in Iraq and Afghanistan (you have not heard this from a Biblical perspective before, I can almost guarantee you).


Included in the doctrines are the Strategy and Tactics of the Kings of the East; the Melchizedek Special; the Priesthoods of God; the Doctrine of Redemption; the Slave Market of Sin; and, very importantly, all the Seeds of Theology found in Genesis 1–14. Progressive Revelation, Tithing, and the Stages of National Discipline are also doctrines which are covered in this chapter.


This is truly one of the great chapters of the Bible. 217 pages.



Genesis 15 (HTML) (PDF) (WPD).


Gen. 15 is a very unusual chapter of the Bible. Twice, Abram is said to be communicating with God when in a trance state; but there seem to be a variety of real activities related to these communications which take place as well. There is a great deal of prophecy in this chapter, where God helps Abram to look forward into time, to see what God will bring to pass.


Also in this chapter is the clear statement of Old Testament salvation: And Abram had believed in the Lord and it is credited to him as righteousness. This verse is quoted 5 times in the New Testament, but each time with a slightly different emphasis (all quotations will be studied in Gen. 15).


The doctrines studied in this chapter will include Four Generation Degeneracy, with a modern example of it; Abram and the large numbers associated with him; and an argument in favor of the less-than-literal Bibles.


There are two doctrines studied at the end of this chapter which I believe are extremely important. The first is the “Lucky Guesses in Genesis 1–15.” These are 20 or so things which are amazing that anyone would have, at anytime in ancient history, recorded these things. The Bible speaks of cloning, of the Big Bang Theory and of the chemical composition of man; as well as about the atmosphere—things which make perfect sense today, and things which were found thousands of years before their discovery in the first 15 chapters of Genesis. There are also a number of very sophisticated theological concepts found in the first 15 chapters of Genesis, which, if this were not the Word of God, we should not expect to find such things.


People have a lot of misconceptions about the Bible itself. They think that the Catholic Church or this or that group snuck in and changed the Bible to conform to all of its theories. Others think that there have been so many translations of translations made of the Bible that there is no way possible to know what it said originally. Others think that, somehow, the prophecies were written after the prophecies had come to pass. All of these ideas are silly; and having some real understanding of the history of the Bible shows these ideas to be false. This is one of the final doctrines found in Gen. 15. 162 pages.



Genesis 16 (HTML) (PDF) (WPD).


Gen. 16 is the story of the birth of Ishmael, the father of many Arab groups who are alive today. Sarai, who obviously knew of the promises that God made to Abram, suggested that her personal maidservant, the Egyptian girl Hagar, function as a surrogate mother, through whom Abram would father a son, and, in this way, help God fulfill His promises to Abram. What happened instead was great discord in the Abram household, where Sarai and Hagar could not be reconciled, and Hagar ran off. God went and found Hagar, and asked her to return to Abram’s compound, telling her that He would multiply her seed greatly.


This is the first appearance of the Angel of the Lord in the Bible (that is, the first time He is given this name). The Angel of the Lord is the Revealed God and this will be shown clearly by the doctrine of the Angel of the Lord.


We also look at the Doctrine of Slavery and applications of that doctrine to today. This is an unemotional, objective examination of the practice of slavery, a practice which is still legitimate today (but not as was practiced in the United States at the time of our founding).


We also will study the Geographical Will of God; Why the Word of God was Not Supernaturally Preserved; and we compare manuscripts which we have of the Bible compared to other ancient manuscripts which have been preserved. People typically have a lot of mistaken notions about the Bible and the manuscript evidence which we have for today’s modern Bibles. This section should help set you straight on that topic.


This is a relatively short chapter (only 16 verses), but packed with a lot of important material. 138 pages.



Genesis 17 (HTML) (PDF) (WPD).


For 24 years, God has been speaking to Abram of promises for the future, which promises did not appear to have an established foundation from a human perspective—Abram had no sons, and all of God’s promises were off in the distant future based upon Abram having a son. In the previous chapter, Abram and Sarai, his wife, tried to help God along by employing a surrogate slave girl, Hagar, by whom Abram would sire a son. The result of this union was Ishmael; but this also introduced a great deal of drama to the Abram compound, due to the considerable friction between Sarai and Hagar (this is covered in Gen. 16).


13 years have passed since Gen. 16—Ishmael is a young teenager—and God again comes to Abram, introducing Himself as ʾEl Shaddai, God Almighty or God Omnipotent. God makes the unequivocal promise that Abram will have a son by his wife Sarai. God changes Abram’s name to Abraham (which means, father of many) and tells him that he will be the father of many nations and that kings would come from him. God also changes Sarai’s name to Sarah (princess).


God first tells Abraham “Walk before Me and be [spiritually] complete;” and then He tells Abraham to be circumcised—along with every other male in his compound. Furthermore, circumcision is to be perpetuated among his people, whether they be slaves or children born as descendants to Abraham.


We examine many doctrines in this chapter, including: Comparing and Contrasting the Church and Israel; Slavery in the United States; Ancient Translation of the Bible; God’s 4 Responses to Prayer; and the Doctrine of Sanctification.


We also study the following topics: Ancient Law Codes and why these codes were developed; we examine the spiritual life of Abram—what it was, and what did Abram know (most believers today do not know the first thing about their own spiritual lives—for instance, most believers today do not know how to get in and out of fellowship with God); Circumcision—just what does it mean and why did God require it; and we look forward to Acts 7 and Rom. 4 to see how our study impacts this New Testament chapters. We will also step back and see the similarities between this chapter and the Suzerain-Vassal treaties of old; and we will look at this chapter as a chiasmos. 231 pages.



Genesis 18 (HTML) (PDF) (WPD).


This study of Genesis 18 is the most doctrinally rich study that you will find on any chapter of the Bible, simply because there is so much going on in this chapter. The application of the information of this chapter to what is going on today will amaze you.


In the first half of this chapter, God and two angels come and speak to Abraham. There is a big picture view here, which I have not seen explained in any other resource.


In the second half of this chapter, Abraham speaks to God about Sodom and Gomorrah, cities which are about to be destroyed, and asks, “What if there are 50 righteous men there; will you destroy city and them with it?” This stimulates a great deal of discussion on the concepts of a national entity, a Christian nation, a client nation, the pivot and the spinoff. Are nations just random things which pop up or is there a corporate relationship between a nation and God? These topics are covered in great detail, along with a great deal of application to today’s world. A believer never has to be afraid of history or of current events; what is true in Genesis and what is taught throughout the Bible about God’s corporate relationship with various groups of people continues to be true today. There are a multitude of principles to be found here, as well as a multitude of applications.


Some of the doctrines covered in this chapter include Angelology, Human Viewpoint Thinking versus Divine Viewpoint Thinking; How Isaac’s Unusual Birth Foreshadows the Birth of our Lord; What Preserves a National Entity; The Client Nation; the Pivot; Heathenism (What about those who have never heard the gospel?); and the Seeds of Doctrines found in this chapter.


There are also discussions in this chapter about the so-called contradictions found in the Bible; the concept of the national entity; how these concepts relate to today and to recent history. Expect a great deal of modern-day application and illustration to be taught in conjunction with this chapter. 304 pages.



Genesis 19 (HTML) (PDF) (WPD).


This is the first complete chapter posted in Genesis. No major revisions or updates will be applied to this Chapter. This is a complete, word-by-word study of this chapter.


Gen. 19 has the two angels of Gen. 18 going to Sodom to both destroy Sodom and 4 other cities; and to rescue Lot and his family from the destruction.


There are a number of minor errors found in other commentaries. For instance, several commentators have Lot and family carrying out containers of wine from Sodom upon their exit. That is simply illogical and wrong. Some try to cover over Lot’s bad choices in offering up his daughters or in later having sex with his daughters. These will all be straightened out in this study.


Because of the subject material of this chapter, there will be an in-depth study of homosexuality and Christianity. The more complete Doctrine of Homosexuality has also been updated. Important information about homosexual men and their number of partners; the continuum of human attraction; the addictive nature of the homosexual lifestyle; AIDS; Will and Grace; sexual attraction is not a matter of genetics alone; the pro-homosexual propaganda which has been going into our schools to our youngest children;


Other topics explored in this chapter: the Christian and Politics; the Physical Nature of Angels; the Stages of National Discipline (there is a 6th Stage of National Discipline which is included here); the Proportionality of the Pivot in a Nation; Why God Destroys Sodom and Gomorrah; the idea that people want to matter; the Dead Sea Scrolls; along with a great deal of artwork that Gen. 19 has inspired.


You may or may not realize that the fire and brimstone destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah actually has a scientific basis directly tied to the area of Sodom and Gomorrah.


The destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah is also an extremely important topic of Scripture, and that will be explored as well.


This is an extensive study of Genesis 19 at over 390 pages of text and graphics.



Genesis 20 (HTML) (PDF) (WPD).


In this chapter, Abraham lies to Abimelech the king of Gerar about Sarah, saying that she is his sister and not his wife. Abraham had done the same thing to the King of Egypt back in Gen. 12, and Isaac will pull this same stunt with Abimelech II in Gen. 26. So, you may think, this is going to be fairly repetitive with very little to offer. Wrong.


This chapter is a case study in God taking Abraham, a believer who has lied to his host king; and Abimelech, a host king with too many wives—and God will take these men and their actions and still work it altogether for good, for His glory, and for His plan.


This is a deceptive little chapter. First of all, it seems very similar to the time that Abraham went to Egypt and lied about Sarah. Later on, in Gen. 26, Isaac will lie to Abimelech about his wife. So, at first we might think this chapter to be repetitive and perhaps even disconcerting to those of us who believe in the inspiration of Scripture (is this merely a tradition handed down from 3 different sources?). And it is a scant 18 verses long. For these reasons, a great many commentators chose not to even comment on this chapter. That is a big mistake.


One of the most important aspects of this chapter is, Abraham is clearly set up as a type of Christ, both as a man who represents God to man, and as a man who represents man to God. He will intercede on behalf of Abimelech, and heal him. In all of this, Abraham illustrates the Messiah to come. Not only is this quite amazing, but I do not believe that many commentators fully appreciated this.


Fundamental to this chapter is the concept of grace. Footnote God is about to bless Abraham and Sarah with a child—a child who will be a type of Christ—who begins the line of promise and is a sign of the good things to come (that is, the fulfillment of God’s many blessings which He has promised to Abraham). And what does Abraham do, literally a month or so before his wife is to conceive—he gets himself into a jackpot in Gerar by lying to the king, and exposes his wife to another man. Abraham puts everything at risk. What Abraham potentially has done here is put his position as father of the Jews into question for all time. He could not have done anything more stupid or dishonorable. All of a sudden, Abraham is doubting God and God’s protection, despite the fact that God has been with Him for all this time. But, despite Abraham’s failure, God does not withdraw His blessing from him. God pours on the blessing. If you understand grace, you are fine with all this. If you do not understand grace, then this chapter becomes confusing. Abraham fails again, and yet, God still blesses him? And Abraham is already a rich man, and God blesses him more. This chapter should rock the world of the legalist. Furthermore, it ought to rock the world of those who believe in covenant theology. They believe that God finally just gave up on the Jews and gave their inheritance away to us, Church Age believers. Then why didn’t God do that right here? Why didn’t God say to Abraham, “Look, you are not the man I thought you were; you have failed me again and again. You just hang out here and do whatever and I will find someone else worthy of My blessings.” But God does not do that. God not only blesses this failure (and right after he failed too), but God later calls Abraham His friend.


This study also includes a number of important doctrines and graphics: several maps are provided so that you have a feel for the territory that Abraham covers; Sin Cannot Derail God’s Plan; The 20 (or so) Dreams of Scripture; The Doctrine of the Sin unto Death; Shem’s life Overlaps Abraham’s life; Examples of God’s Protective, Overruling Will; The Parallels between Abraham and the Coming Savior; The Fear of the Lord; How to avoid repeated sins; Abraham’s life seen from the standpoint of testing; Jesus Christ in Genesis 1–22. Several questions are also dealt with: Speculation: Why did Abraham move? Does God prosper Abraham for lying?


Like all previous chapters of Genesis, it is not apparent at first just how packed this chapter is with spiritual information, a significant portion of which is unique to this commentary. 199 pages.


Genesis 21 (HTML) (PDF) (WPD).




Genesis 22 (HTML) (PDF) (WPD).





Internal Links

Beginning of Document/

Chapter Summaries

External Links

Genesis Chapter Links


I am presently doing a study on Genesis which I send out by email. Contact me here if you want to be added to that list. The overall study is of the Bible, but I have spent a lot of time in Genesis. Every time I complete 10 lessons, I post the new lessons on line. They are here:



External Links to Genesis Broken Down into a Series of Lessons

Introductory Lessons

HTML

Introductory Lessons

PDF

Introductory Lessons

WPD

Genesis Lessons 1–100

HTML

Genesis Lessons 1–100

PDF

Genesis Lessons 1–100

WPD

Genesis Lessons 101–200

HTML

Genesis Lessons 101–200

PDF

Genesis Lessons 101–200

WPD

Genesis Lessons 201–300

HTML

Genesis Lessons 201–300

PDF

Genesis Lessons 201–300

WPD

Kukis Homepage

Exegesis

Doctrines


These lessons are much more detailed than what follows.


What follows is a complete exegesis of the book of Genesis, but it was the first book which I ever attempted to exegete, so that there are a lot of weaknesses. This will give you what I believe to be a very brief overview of Genesis. The lessons above are more detailed, but broken up into 10–20 minute lessons, designed for easy reading. Darkened links are chapters which have been greatly improved upon, and the better exegesis is found here: (HTML) (PDF).


The darkened links have been replaced by a much more thorough exegesis of those chapters.


Genesis Chapter Links

Genesis 1

Genesis 2

Genesis 3

Genesis 4

Genesis 5

Genesis 6

Genesis 7

Genesis 8

Genesis 9

Genesis 10

Genesis 11

Genesis 12

Genesis 13

Genesis 14

Genesis 15

Genesis 16

Genesis 17

Genesis 18

Genesis 19

Genesis 20

Genesis 21

Genesis 22

Genesis 23

Genesis 24

Genesis 25

Genesis 26

Genesis 27

Genesis 28

Genesis 29

Genesis 30

Genesis 31

Genesis 32

Genesis 33

Genesis 34

Genesis 35

Genesis 36

Genesis 37

Genesis 38

Genesis 39

Genesis 40

Genesis 41

Genesis 42

Genesis 43

Genesis 44

Genesis 45

Genesis 46

Genesis 47

Genesis 48

Genesis 49

Genesis 50

Genesis Introduction


To the Reader: this was essentially the first commentary which I have done (1995), and for that reason, it is much shorter and filled with typographical errors. The length of this commentary is approximately equal to 3 or 4 chapters of any book which do now. In any case, I do periodically refer back to the work which I have done here, and some may prefer this to later commentaries which I have done, as I deal with less minutiae in this commentary.


Maps, Charts and Short Doctrines:

 

           Genesis Introduction  Great Themes of the Bible found in Genesis

           Genesis Introduction  Genesis, the Book of Beginnings

           Gen. 1:2                     The Judgement of Satan

           Gen. 1:2                     The Trinity in Genesis

           Gen. 1:13                   What Does the word Day Mean in Genesis?

           Gen. 1:26                   We are the Shadow Image of God

           Gen. 1:27                   The Creation of Man

           Gen. 22:14                 The Offering of Isaac Foreshadows the Offering of Jesus Christ




Genesis Introduction


Maps, Charts and Short Doctrines:

 

       Genesis Introduction      Great Themes of the Bible found in Genesis

       Genesis Introduction      Genesis, the Book of Beginnings


Genesis Introduction:


The Title: Γένεσις (transliterated, Genesis) is a Greek word which means origin, beginning, source, birth, or even of that which follows birth; life, existence. This word is found in Matt. 1:18 and James 1:23 3:6. It is not the first word of the book of Genesis in the Septuagint (the original Greek translation of the Old Testament), but it is found in Gen. 5:1 10:1 6:10 Footnote 40:20. It is an appropriate title for this book. However, this is not the word found in John 1:1 nor is it found in the Septuagint of Gen. 1:1. However, a related word from the Hebrew, sometimes referred to as synonymous to Genesis is berē̕shīth, which is the first word(s) of Gen. 1:1, properly translated In a beginning.


Author: Moses likely wrote the better portion of the next four books of the Bible, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. Genesis is absolutely necessary as a foundation of these books. Moses very likely compiled and edited the records available to him and the final product was Genesis. Although Moses is called the author of the Pentateuch (the first five books of the Bible) and although the Pentateuch is given status as inspired by our Lord, nowhere in the Bible is it said directly that Moses actually wrote Genesis (Josh. 8:31 2Kings 14:6 Ezra 6:18 Luke 16:31 24:44 John 5:45–47). This does not mean that he did not write it, but there are indications that these are records put together by other authors. There is some foolishness about how there are several authors of the Pentateuch itself because in some areas we have the predominant use of Elohim (a name for God in the plural) and Yahweh (the singular name for any member of the Godhead). These theologians also cite differences in vocabulary throughout the Pentateuch. This is superficial nonsense, not worth addressing at length, although several have done so (see Josh McDowell's Second Evidence Which Demands a Verdict). However, let me simply point out that differences in vocabulary are easily explained by (1) differences in subject matter, (2) differences in emphasis, and (3) the text of the source material for Genesis, which at times was probably recorded verbatim (this last point will be covered in more detail below).


These folks who teach that Genesis and other portions of the Bible (chiefly the Pentateuch) were written by 4 principle authors and then woven together are call higher critics. This is not to be confused with textual criticism, which is the true Biblical science of determining the actual content of the autographs (the original manuscripts or a perfect copy of the original manuscripts). This involves the examination of possible scribal errors as well as added text (which may be intentional, as in the end of the gospel of Mark, or unintentional when a verse is copied down twice in the same vicinity).


Another problem that higher critics have with Genesis are the "contradictory" accounts of the creation of man. Parallel accounts in near Eastern language are common. A second account is often added to provide a detailed account. This will be found not just in the second account of the creation of man, but several times just in the first chapter of Genesis.


The real problem that these aforementioned theologians have is with the Bible being God's Word. That is what they do not like. A theory which promotes authors different from the Jewish tradition appeals to them. They do not like the idea that Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, et al., were actually written about the time that these events took place. That makes these documents too historical for them. Furthermore, the idea of calling words written down by men, God’s Word makes them even more hysterical. Or, at least it is an affront to their preformed intellectual theories. So, when Welhausen came along and said, Footnote “Moses didn’t write the Pentateuch; other unknown, unnamed authors did, and they wrote it long after Moses lived.”


Such men would like to make God in their own image so they would like to pick and choose from the Bible. If the Bible is not what it claims to be, the Word of God, then it is much easier for such men to select that things from it they like and reject the things that they do not. In a similar vein, I recall one Sunday school teacher (in Berkeley) emphasizing the commandment "Thou shalt not kill" one morning and pointing out that this commandment does not list any exceptions. Had he read a few other chapters ahead or behind, he would have found several "exceptions." If he knew a smattering of Hebrew, he would have known that there are ten words in the Hebrew all translated by the simple word kill; furthermore, all of these could occur in several different tenses, each tense actually modifying the meaning of the verb. God kills and God mandates man to kill under certain conditions. This Sunday school teacher's problem was that he had a mindset and he chose to make God in his own image. These higher critics are the same way. They do not want to be under God's authority and they do not acknowledge the God in the Bible, who is the only God.


For those who have doubts and are uncertain, there are a great many books and articles which help us to understand that the Bible is really God's Word and that to believe that, one does not have to suspend his intellect. These books come under the heading apologetics. For further information, see Old Testament Textual Criticism (HTML) (PDF) (WPD); the Doctrine of Canonicity (probably R. B. Thieme, Jr.) (Wenstrom) (Grace Notes—brief) (Theopedia) (John Stevenson) (Dr. Bruce Ware—brief) (Sid Litke on Bible.org—brief); the Doctrine of Inspiration (HTML) (PDF) (WPD); a Study of Inspiration (HTML) (PDF) (WPD); Inspiration (Wenstrom); Doctrine of the Bible (probably R. B. Thieme, Jr.); Lucky Guesses Found in Genesis (HTML) (PDF) (WPD); Science and Faith (Arthur C. Custance); the Doctrine of The Authenticity of The Bible (Merritt); and Proof that the Bible is God's Word or similar studies (Can You Prove the Bible is True? From Answers in Genesis) (How Do You Know The Bible Is True? From Clarifying Christianity; Robert Velarde); Is the Bible Really the Word of God? (God and Science); and The Bible and Science (The Bible Today).


In a similar vain, some critics attempt to "demythologize" Genesis. That is, they will claim that portions of Genesis that they do not like are myths and attempt to explain or replace these portions with the "lesson" or the "moral" that these passages were to teach. These critics, who are somewhat different from the ones above, have been intellectually overpowered by years of schooling and brainwashing. Having been personally taught evolution in a child development class, in a math class and in an education course when I was getting a BA in mathematics, I recognize that it is easy to believe that evolution is true because so many educated people believe it. These people, therefore, have problems with the Genesis account of creation. It is easier to believe the Genesis account of creation once one understands that evolution is not a science, it is a false theory to which unsaved man clings in order to avoid being answerable to God. See Evolution and the Bible (HTML) (BibleOne).


Concerning Moses' authorship of Genesis, a reasonable hypothesis by at least two theologians Footnote is that the various authors of the source material for Genesis always began with the phrase and these are the generations Footnote of...(Exodus generation, Gen. 6:9 24:44). I intend to explore that hypothesis as I exegete this book. Writing from source material does not compromise the Divine authenticity of the Bible Footnote . The original records employed do not have to be inspired even though the resultant writing is inspired. God moves through men via the Holy Spirit, so that what results is completely God's Word, although the writer has not compromised his writing style, vocabulary or viewpoint. Just as the Lord Jesus Christ was fully man and fully God as the Living Word, so the Bible is completely inspired and yet still completely the individual work by the individual author.


Because Moses was brought up in the Pharaoh's court and was brought up to be Pharaoh, he would have had the necessary educational background to write what the Pentateuch and he would have access to the source material, both in the library of the Pharaoh and through the Jews that he lead through the desert. There is a reasonable possibility that his father-in-law provided him with some of the source material either through his training (the great oral tradition) or through written documents. However, I think that it is more likely that Moses learned Genesis from another source—perhaps from his mother or sister or even his father-in-law.


Authenticity: Jesus Christ quoted Genesis in Matt. 19:4–6 24:37–39 and the author of Hebrews alludes to it as accurate in Heb. 11:4–22, indicating that it is rightfully part of Scripture. The Old Testament also alludes to the books of Moses as being of vital spiritual importance in I1Chron. 34:14. Genesis is, in fact, quoted over sixty times in seventeen books. Further evidence of the authority of Genesis is that God speaks directly to man several times throughout this book. This is known as an internal claim of inspiration. That is, Genesis from the outset claims to be God's Word. Very few books in man's literature ever make such a claim.


Time of Writing: Moses did not seem to have a grasp of his direction in life until he was eighty and God came to him. Actually, it was probably not until the third or fourth plague when his destiny and calling in life really began to become clear to Moses. Therefore, it is unlikely that he wrote anything until the time of the exodus. Scofield estimates this to be 1450-1410 bc (as does Packer, Tenney and White in the Bible Almanac).


Progressive Revelation: God reveals His attributes and His plan and His relationship to us throughout Scripture. The God of Genesis is the God of Job is the God of Jeremiah is the God of Matthew is the God of Revelation. God is immutable—this means that He does not change; or, more accurately, His attributes do not change. His revealing of His attributes, our perception of His attributes, and the application of His attributes may vary from time to time, but His attributes do not change. What we find in the book of Genesis is what is often called the seed of every major doctrine in Scripture (this isn’t quite true, but it is close to being true). So, when we meet God in subsequent books, what we find is often an affirmation of His character and essence, and, just as often, an additional shade of meaning or an application of His perfect character to a slightly different situation. This is true of essentially every major doctrine of Scripture, apart from those which are specifically Church Age doctrines, which are going to be found in a more concentrated area of the Bible (specifically, the New Testament epistles). Now, it is still the same God, with the same character and attributes, but the application of His attributes change to some degree, as Church Age itself represents a different dispensation from the Age of Israel. However, despite these doctrines specific to the Church Age, the God of Genesis is the God of Paul, the Apostle. God’s essence remains in tact, perfect, and identical throughout every dispensation.


What God reveals of Himself, at any given time, is sufficient to those of that time period. A few generations into the antediluvian period of time, men still knew about the flood, about Noah, and about Adam, as well as about the infiltration of the demons in Gen. 6. They knew about Cain and Abel’s very different offerings, and they knew that God sacrificed an innocent animal in order to clothe Adam and the woman after their fall. Personally, I believe that a lot of this was recorded, and very likely, by Noah. He recognized that the flood, which destroyed all that he could see, was an event unparalleled in human history, and that much would be lost from the era. So, he either kept alive the pre-diluvian era to his sons verbally or he recorded this information himself. Whether written records existed before Noah or not; we do not know. Whether he was the first to write these things down, we do not know. However, much of this history was common knowledge and what we know today was passed down, either in written or oral form. In these first few chapters of Genesis, we know a great deal about God and His character, about the Angelic Conflict, and about our relationship to God. There is enough there, in seed form, for us to read and be saved.


During roughly this same era (give or take a few centuries), Job lived, and we observe in the book of Job a theological discussion between Job and his friends. This gives us an idea as to how far some have drifted from the knowledge of God, and yet, at the same, how much about God was known. At the heart of the book of Job is a discussion of God’s character, His essence, and how He interacts with us, His creation. This gives us an idea what men knew prior to Abraham, who lived during a time of great spiritual adultery. Although there appears to be a general knowledge of God, and His interaction with man, there is no mention of the existence of Scripture at that point in time. Whether portions of Genesis existed at that time or not is one thing; and whether it was recognized as God’s Word is another thing entirely. However, what seems to be key to the theological discussions in Job is, none of them appear to take the Angelic Conflict into consideration, even though the book of Job is premised upon being a part of the Angelic Conflict.


Overview: Genesis gives us the only accurate view that we have of antediluvian civilization (what civilization was like prior to the flood). We do have some extra Biblical information about man's life on earth before the flood in Mythology. However, like most history, mythology is distorted a great deal; however, there is more truth to mythological stories than we realize. Genesis acts as a funnel and concentrates upon a particular family and follows this line through the flood, through Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. There are side trips to be certain, but the focus of Genesis continually narrows (as does much of the Bible).


God's grace, totally unmerited favor, is evident throughout Genesis. It is revealed to Adam and Eve, to Cain, to Noah, to Lot, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and to the twelve sons of Jacob. We often have a very incorrect understanding of these Old Testament saints that they were good and wonderful men with few defects, men who earned God's respect and love. To the contrary, we find that many of the persons in Genesis were men with feet of clay, with many shortcomings; men who were given grace from God far beyond anything that they could ever deserve.


The Book of Genesis introduces us to the great themes of the Bible (this has been improved in my basic study):

Great Themes of the Bible found in Genesis

      God, the creator and provider (Gen. 1:1-2 3).

      The Trinity (Gen. 1:1, 5, 26–27):

             God the Father (Gen. 1:16).

             God the Son (the revealed member of the Trinity, the Creator). Gen. 2:4, 7 3:8

             God the Holy Spirit (the power of God). Gen. 1:2

      Sin and its results (Gen. 3:6,16-17,24 6:5-7 13:13 19:1-29).

      Categories of Sin:

             Original sin (Gen. 3:1–7).

             Sin nature (Gen. 4:4–5 5:4–5).

             Personal sin (Gen. 4:4–5, 23).

             Corporate sin (Gen. 18:20 15:17).

      The Divine institutions:

             Human volition (Gen. 2:16–17).

             Marriage (Gen. 2:18–23.

             Family (Gen. 2:24).

             Human government (Gen. 11).

      God's grace (Gen 1:28 2:18-24 4:15 37:8-28 45:1-15 50:15-21).

      Sanctification (Gen. 2:3).

      Satan (Gen. 3:1-6).

      Angels as a part of man’s existence; however, they play an ever decreasing roll in the life of man (except for the Angel of the Lord). Gen. 3:1–6 6 19:1–29 21:16–21

      The Angel of the Lord (a Theophany; the Revealed Member of the Trinity). This is God interacting with His creation. Gen. 16:7–14 28:12 31:11 48:16

      God's judgement (Gen. 3:14-19 7:17-24 19:15-29).

      Redemption through the blood of an innocent sacrifice (Gen. 3:21 4:3-4 22:1-14).

      The coming Messiah (Gen. 3:15).

      The eventual fall of Satan (Gen. 3:14-15).

      God interacting with man (Gen. 3 17 50:20).

      God’s people, the Jews (Gen. 12–50).

      The other nations of the world. Gen. 11

      God offering up His only Son to be sacrificed for us (Gen. 22).

      God's promises to the Jews (Gen. 15:4-5 17:5-8 28:13-15).

      The concept of a covenant relationship between God and His people (Gen. 6:18 9:8–17 15:18 17:1–22).

      The genealogy which will eventually lead to Jesus Christ. Gen. 5:1–32 11:10–32 46:5–27

      The rule of Judah over Israel until Shiloh comes. Gen. 49:10

In looking at my own list above, I am not sure if there are any significant doctrines which are not found in Genesis. Quite obviously, the mystery doctrines of the Church Age are not to be found, but they are not found in the Old Testament, since they are mystery doctrines.


Return to Genesis Outline

Charts, Graphics and Short Doctrines


The Covenants of God: In Genesis, we are presented with God's covenant to certain men. We will see the Edenic, Adamic, Noahic and Abrahamic covenants. This is where God makes certain promises to man, many of which we have seen fulfilled throughout history. One of the most amazing and most easily verified promise that God has made is the proliferation of the Jewish race. In the later books of Moses, we will see that God will scatter the Jews throughout the world and yet maintain their identity as a race. Today, every major ancient world nation has lost its national identity, whether it be the Assyrians, the Chaldeans or the Hittites. Even the Romans and the Greeks of today bear little or no resemblance to those of the ancient world, and there is certainly no real ancestral tie. Their only tie to their ancestors is one of geography. They now occupy roughly the same territory that the ancient Greeks and Romans occupied. As for being blood descendants; not hardly. However, the Jews, even in nations where physical characteristics are extremely similar, still are a race which stand apart from the rest of the national entity, even when they chose not to.


Additional Background Material: Allow me to quote from The New American Standard Bible in its introduction to Genesis: Another important feature of Genesis should not be overlooked, namely, the eminently satisfactory way in which it answers our questions about origins. Man will always want to know how the world as a whole came into being. He also will want to know how man originated. Moreover, he feels rather painfully that some major disorder has come upon the world and would like to know what its nature is; in short, man must know if a basic and sure hope of redemption exists for this world and its inhabitants, what that hope is, and how it came into the possession of man. Footnote


The scope of Genesis exceeds that of any other book in the Bible. It begins with the creation of the earth and the universe, which may be several billion years ago, and takes us to the Jews in Egypt several hundred years prior to the exodus. Human history begins anywhere from 6,000 b.c. to even as far back as 10,000 b.c. Only Revelation rivals this scope by taking us from the beginning of the church age all the way to the creation of the new heavens and the new earth. It would be hard to imagine having the Bible, God's Word to us, without the inclusion of the book of Genesis.


Genesis is a book of origins or beginnings, giving us:

Genesis, the Book of Beginnings

■ The origin of the universe

■ The origin of man

■ The first sin of man

■ The first animal sacrifice

■ God's first promise to man

■ The first murder

■ The first United Nations

■ The origin of the various languages of man

■ The origin of the Jewish race

■ God's first promise to the Jewish race



Internal Links

Beginning of Document/

Chapter Summaries

External Links

Genesis Chapter Links





Genesis 1


Genesis 1 has been completely reworked and may be found here: (HTML) (PDF) (WP–compressed). It is highly recommended that you go to that study instead of this one. These chapters are being completed one-by-one and will eventually supplant this incomplete study of Genesis.


Genesis 1:1–2:3


Maps, Charts and Short Doctrines:

 

       Gen. 1:2                 The Judgement of Satan

       Gen. 1:2                 The Trinity in Genesis

       Gen. 1:13               What Does the word Day Mean in Genesis?

       Gen. 1:26               We are the Shadow Image of God

       Gen. 1:27               The Creation of Man


A great deal of the Old Testament is narrative and, with few exceptions, requires very little in the way of exegesis. However, Genesis is different; it is narrative and requires a great deal of exegesis; particularly in the beginning. We are dealing with issues which are emotionally charged and history which pre-existed man's appearance on this planet. We are dealing with history for which this is the only document of any sort dealing with that history.

 

In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. [Gen. 1:1]


Two times in the Bible we have the phrase "In the beginning;" here and in John 1:1 in the New Testament. John gives us the first cause, Jesus Christ, the actual beginning. In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God...and the Word became flesh and dwelt among us... (John 1:1, 12a). Gen. 1:1 may or may not have been the very first thing created by God, but both verses reach further back into antiquity than we can imagine. We have various scientific instruments which give us the age of the earth as anywhere from five billion to eighteen billion years old. This is time which goes beyond our comprehension and the disagreement is not very trivial. See the Doctrine of Scientific Dating Methods—not finished yet!!.


In the Hebrew, God is the word Elōhīm (םיה ל א), which has a variety of meanings. It can stand for judges or rulers as divine representatives, for pagan gods or goddesses, for superhuman beings, for angels, and for God. The Hebrew has a singular, dual and plural for nouns. Elohim is plural (this is because of the im ending).There is at least one "Christian" cult which teaches that there are only two members in the Godhead, God the Son and God the Father. In that case, the name for "God" here should be in the dual (two) rather than in the plural (three or more). Other cults, including Judaism, presume that this is plural in all cases but when referring to God and then it is singular. The accompanying verb is in the masculine singular. However, for "Christian" cults, this ignores John 1:1,12a and for all cults with that viewpoint, it ignores the "Let us make man in our own image, after our likeness..." (Gen. 1:26a) (make in that verse is in the plural). The point which I am making here is simple. In the Hebrew, we begin the Bible with God in the plural, not the singular or the dual. In other words, the Bible begins by teaching the trinity. God is three in personality—God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit—but God is one in purpose, hence the verb in this verse is in the singular (as the verbs will be throughout most of Genesis 1). As has been said, the seeds for all the major doctrines of the Bible are found right here in Genesis and right from the beginning we have the Trinity.


Notice that this has begun without naming a human author, without claiming divine inspiration, without the kind of beginning which man would have affixed. We do not know who wrote the original draft of this document, whether it was Adam or Moses. Genesis was possibly finalized by Moses, who possibly wrote all of Genesis by examining previous historical documents in his possession. It is my opinion that several different authors wrote the book of Genesis, each one beginning where the previous one left off. We will examine that in the future.


It is also possible that this portion of the Word of God was dictated at some point in time. After all, no man was alive when these events took place. God allows throughout the Bible the style of the human author to shine through. However, this chapter of the Bible, along with the next dozen or so, go beyond style and contain a beauty and a grace and a flow found nowhere else in the Bible.


The verb precedes "God" in this verse. It is the Hebrew word bārā' (א ר ב) and it means to shape, to fashion, to create to carve, to engrave, to bring into existence and to create out of nothing. The Qal stem is only used with God as the subject. It refers to the creation of anything new: Gen. 1:1 (the heavens and the earth), 1:21 (water animals), 1:27 (man), Ex. 34:10 (miracles Footnote ), Num. 16:30 (a specific miracle), Person singular. 51:10 (a clean heart in a man who has sinned), Isa. 4:5 (a cloud/smoke by day and a flaming fire by night for guidance), 41:20 (a desert wilderness is transformed), 43:1(Jacob), 65:17,18 (a new heavens and a new earth and a new Jerusalem), Jer. 31:22 (right man/right woman), and Ezek. 28:13,15 (Satan, in his innocent state).


Bara is in the Qal perfect, third masculine singular (as mentioned before, it is used with the plural form Elohim. The Qal is the basic form of all Hebrew verbs and the perfect tense is not necessarily completed action (although this context indicates that it is) but if observes the action as a whole without reference to duration or completeness. This creative act is viewed as a whole and if there were any steps or graduations of creation, they are not noted or examined.


Heavens is in the masculine dual and earth is in the feminine singular. There are two heavens; that which is above us and the throne room of God. These are referred to as the second and third heaven, the first heaven, the atmosphere of the earth, has not been created yet. [I need to examine the use of heavens in the Bible, particularly the OT for the dual or plural usage]


The next verse will require some preparation. It says in v. 2 that the earth was without form and void. God, at some point in time, examined the earth and saw it as without form and void. However, Isa. 45:18 tells us that God did not create the earth as a wasted place (the same word as is found here) but He created it to be inhabited.


Verse 2 begins with a conjunction which may be translated but or however; however, this word is most often translation and. God created the earth and the heavens perfect, however, the earth became something. The verb in v.2a is the Qal perfect of hāyāh (ה י ה ) and it can be translated to come to pass, to become, to be, to happen, to be finished. As a Qal perfect, it is translated in most versions as it shall come to pass in Gen. 4:14b. What we have is an earth created by God which very likely was created perfect and able to be inhabited and yet it became without form and void.


The next words to examine are without form and void. In the Hebrew, these are the words tōhū (ו ה ת ) waboh

bôhûw (ו ה  ) (or tohu wabohu, with the Waw conjunctive). Tohu means desolate or a desert. It can indicate confusion, emptiness, empty space, vanity and nothingness. It is a very negative connotation and is found in Deut. 32:10 Job 6:18 12:24 26:7 I Sam. 12:21 Isa. 34:11 41:29 44:9 45:18 49:4 59:4 Jer. 4:23. Bohu is emptiness; it is the earth under judgement according to Brown-Driver-Briggs. and they cite Jer. 4:23, which should be read in context to see that this was part of a judgement. Footnote Isa. 34:11 is the only other place in the Old Testament where this word is found. As an educated determination, I would say that we are dealing with desolate and unable to be populated.


The Hebrew word for darkness here is extreme or extraordinary darkness. The same word is found in Ex. 10:22. This word, like desolate and uninhabitable, all imply judgement. What we must do is to try to reconstruct what has occurred here. We know there is an angelic creation and that they existed prior to our creation. We also know that one third of the angelic creation chose to follow Satan, once an angel, when he fell from grace. It is likely that God provided a place for the angels to dwell as He provided a place for us to live. It is likely that when God created the heavens and the earth that this was not an imperfect creation, but a creation which corresponded with His character. Therefore, it is easy to conjecture that God originally created the earth for the angelic creation. Along with it, there were animals (dinosaurs) and vegetation (prehistoric plant life). When Satan fell and took one third of the angels with him, God judged their place of inhabitation, the earth, and packed it in ice (the ice age). This allows us to make sense out of this passage along with Isa. 45:18 and Jer. 4:23. This also allows for the age of the earth to be what it is estimated as being yet for the age of man to be young, in fact, very young, by comparison.

 

But the earth became desolate and uninhabitable and [extreme] darkness was on the face of the deep. [Ex. 1:2a]


The deep is a reference to raging waters, especially those of the oceans and seas. The word is right next to tohu in Strong's, making this a very poetic sounding passage.


The next verb, the Piel participle of râchaph ( ף ח ר ) describes what the Spirit of God did. God's Spirit hovered over, cherished, brooded over the earth as an animal mother would brood over her offspring (it is used that way in Deut. 32:11). The earth is encased in ice and the Holy Spirit must warm the waters. Furthermore, none of this is a part of the first day. It is possible that v. 2 begins the first day of restoration of the earth but the rest of the restoration process all falls into a formula of "God said....God saw...God made...God called....(not always in just that order); and there was evening and morning, the nth day." However, what is clear from this and other passages is that Gen. 1:1–2 could comprise many billions of years.


What is occurring during this time is the trial of Satan and the other fallen angels. The way Satan's fall is dealt with in Scripture is never: "And the following is a description of Satan's fall...." God the Holy Spirit, instead, takes a prophecy or an historical event as it is covered in Scripture and suddenly begins speaking about Satan and prehistoric occurrences. These passages can be found in Isa. 14:12–16 Jer. 4:23–28 Ezek. 28:12b–17. Satan was tried and convicted (with all the fallen angels) and he has appealed the verdict (eternity in the lake of fire). Every issue that he has brought up is dealt with in human history, including "You made me thus!" However, this is a long study in itself and will be covered at another time. What we need to know is that:

The Judgement of Satan

             God created the heavens and created the earth to be inhabited (Gen. 1:1 Isa. 45:18)

             God created Satan and the angels (Neh. 9:6 Ezek. 28:12b–15a Col. 1:16)

             Satan fell and took one-third of the angels with him (Isa. 14:12–14 Ezek. 28:15b)

             Satan was judged (Isa. 14:15 John 16:11)

             God prepared the lake of fire for the devil and his angels (Matt. 25:41)

             Satan is not there yet; he is still at work in the world (Isa. 14:16 Matt. 4:1–11)

             Satan will be thrown into the lake of fire (Rev. 20:10)


Chapter Outline

Charts, Graphics and Short Doctrines


We can conclude because Satan has been judged and sentenced to the lake of fire, but is not there yet—and because angels observe us (I Pet. 1:12) and Satan accuses us (Job 1:6-12 2:1 Rev. 12:10)—that Satan's sentencing has been appealed and that we are a part of the appeal trial to show that God is righteous in all that He has done.

 

and the Spirit of God gently hovered [or, brooded] over the face of the waters. [Gen. 1:2b]


The Trinity in Genesis 1:1–3

             V. 1 is God the Son, the revealed member of the trinity, Yahweh, Jesus Christ, the creator of the universe (Isa. 42:5 John 1:1–3 Col. 1:16).

             V. 2 is God the Holy Spirit, Who is the source of our power, yet is unseen.

             V. 3 is God the Father, Who has planned everything that we see, yet is not seen by us.


Chapter Outline

Charts, Graphics and Short Doctrines


In my estimation, this begins the first day of restoration (called, incorrectly, the first day of creation). There are many men of God who believe otherwise who, despite that mistake in their theology, are excellent teachers of God's Word. However, paraphrasing what J. Vernon McGee would say, “There are other viewpoints held by brilliant men of God; but if you're interested in the correct viewpoint, then here it is.”

 

Then God said, "Let there be light," and light was [or, came to pass]. [Gen. 1:3]


The first act of the six day restoration, after warming the earth, was to provide light for the earth. This was light from God, not from any celestial star in the heaven, because God is light and in Him is no darkness at all (James 1:17 1John 1:5). This is a completely supernatural act as there was nothing physical, such as the sun or the stars, created to provide this light. All that would come later. The verb "was" is the same verb from Gen. 1:2, except that it is in the Qal imperfect. Vv. 3 and 4 are tied together by a Waw consecutive. This means that we are dealing with a continuous narrative in past time. In a Waw consecutive, the main verb in the previous verse should be in the perfect tense and the main verb in the next verse is in the imperfect tense. This is why we have the slight difference in tenses.

 

And God saw that the light was excellent [or, pleasant or good] and God distinguished [or, separated] the light from the darkness. [Gen. 1:4]


Tōv (ב ד ט ) has a variety of meanings: pleasant to the, good, excellent, joyful, fruitful, lovely, etc. Primarily it stands for moral goodness as against immoral evil. In this case, God declared that the light was as He expected it to be, morally good and perfect in the function for which it was invented since it came directly from His hand.


Bādhal (ד ד ב ) means to separate, disjoin, divide, discern, to make a difference or to divide into parts. So, what exactly does this mean in this context? God has invented darkness and light.. He will distinguish them by name and He will divide them into two parts by having a period of light (daytime) and a period of darkness (nighttime). God did not make darkness at this point in time because the earth was already enshrouded in darkness, having been packed in this ice, since it had been under judgement. He did not invent light here but returned it to the earth. The angelic creation had light before Satan sinned.


When it comes to a time frame, we can certainly allow that v. 2 could have taken a great deal of time. The brooding or hovering over the waters is in the Piel participle, indicating continuous action. However, the light being brought to the earth is instantaneous. Why do we not have the sun first and then the light? This is how many ancient religions saw things; the sun as the great life-giver. However, God, not the sun, it the originator of heat and light, which He provides in vv.2 and 3. This still does not explain why before anything else in restoration, God creates light on the earth. When the angels and the earth was under judgement, it was packed with ice and enshrouded with darkness. This was the last angelic vision of the earth. God has warmed the ice pack and now brings light to the earth so that the angelic creation, both the fallen and the elect angels, can see what God is doing. This is a part of Satan's trial. Under sentencing, Satan certainly objected to several points. (1) How can a loving God cast any of His creatures into a lake of fire? (2) How can I be responsible for my actions; You created me thus? (3) Is God really righteous? (4) Is God really love? (5) Does God really understand what I am subjected to? (6) Isn't this sentence too severe for the crime committed?


Recall the Satan is a genius and certainly had objections which numbered in the thousands. Human history will answer every objection and vindicate God's judgements and righteousness. So why did God provide light first? So that the angelic creation could observe from the very beginning what would transpire on earth.

 

And God called the light day and the darkness He called night. So evening had come to pass and morning had come to pass; one day. [Gen. 1:5]


Restoration began at night, so there Hebrew "day" begins at night. God warmed the earth in darkness and then provided light. We possibly could have translated the second sentence: And there had been evening and morning, one day. This, however, was not the first day of creation. This was one day. I know that the difference has eluded some. Note the end of v. 8: a second day; the end of v. 13: a third day, etc. V. 5 is not an ordinal number. V. 5 does not say the first day. Most translations catch this and the end of v. 5 is translated differently from the end of vv. 8, 13, 19, etc. What is the difference? V. 5 is not the first day; it is one day, invented by God. It is not the actually beginning. In other words, it is not the first day of creation. From that day, we will begin to number the days with ordinal, consecutive numbers. However, there was history prior to this verse. If this was the first day of creation, and if vv. 1-4 were all tied together under day one of creation, then God would have said the first day instead of one day.


I am struggling with a minor detail here; when evening and morning come to pass, is this a reference to the evening and morning just spoken of, or, have these events occurred, then evening and morning? This "one day" certainly refers back to what has already occurred (we can conclude that from examining v. 31). However, there are two ways of looking at a 24 hour day; a day as beginning with the evening and concluding with dusk or a day beginning with dawn and concluding with the end of night. The Hebrews took a full day as the latter and we look at a full day as the former. We do not know the length of time that God the Holy Spirit chose to brood over the earth. However, daybreak began with the creation of light over the earth. Night follows this day, there is daybreak, and that is one day.


The reason it is done like that can be explained by the beginning phrase in v. 1: In the beginning; that may also be translated At first... We find this word occurring elsewhere with similar meanings (e.g., chief or choice part), but we find it quite often in the phase first fruits Footnote (or, more literally, first of fruits Footnote ). Insofar as we are concerned, the beginning or the first thing was the creation of the earth. We have no concept of anything occurring prior to that. We theologians often refer to that as eternity past and, as far as I have studied, I do not see any light being shed upon that beyond what we find in the first chapter of John. So what occurred in v. 1 is "the first." However, because the earth became tohu wabohu, we have a period of restoration which begins in darkness. (when God the Holy Spirit warmed the earth) and the morning when God caused light to appear. The creation portion is instantaneous. That is, God brings light upon the earth, creates, and then lets the angels examine what He has done throughout the day during the daylight.


The next issue to deal with is the concept of "a day." (1) In the Old Testament (as well as in the New), the word day can refer to a period of time less than 24 hours. Gen. 1:5,16 are clear examples where God designates the daytime portion of a 24 hour period of time as a day. (2) Day can be used for a period of time which exceeds 24 hours (Gen. 2:4 Lev. 23:27). (3) And day can be a period of 24 hours (Gen. 2:3 Ex. 20:8–11). Why do some theologians interpret this use of day as being greater than 24 hours? (1) Science has convinced many of them that the earth is quite a bit older than 10,000 years, so this will allow us to add in some extra millenniums. (2) A day is to the Lord as a thousand years, a quotation from II Pet. 3:8. (3) Some have been so brainwashed with evolution that they would like to allow time for plants and animals to evolve, yet still hold to the Genesis account. However, throughout this portion of Genesis, we have no indication that creation was anything other than instantaneous, with the exception of the Holy Spirit brooding upon the face of the waters and the creation of Eve. The very use of the word morning suggests that God, at dawn, created what He intended to create, and then allowed the angels to examine for a period of time what it was that He had done. Our Lord said, "Let there be light," and light was. However, if I were trying to designate that these were twenty-four hour days, I would have used the same construction as we see here and tie six days of restoration with six days of work, and the seventh day of rest for God to the seventh day of rest for man. Throughout the Old Testament, when a day is shorter or longer than 24hours, the context is clear. The examples given for periods of time less than or exceeding 24 hours are clear to any reader. However, if the context does not dictate that we are dealing with a period greater or less than 24 hours, then I see no reason to interpret this set of six days of restoration as being any different than six 24 hour periods of time. In no wise did God require 24 hours of time to create anything which was created and the Bible does not indicate that there was a longer process of creation with the two exceptions noted. That time gave the angels the opportunity to examine what God had done, and then time to discuss it. After all, our world is here for a purpose and the purpose is tied directly to the angelic creation which preceded us.


Furthermore, in this verse, God designates that the darkness will be called night and the light will be called day. He has set up a specific set of times or period of time and has labeled them. If we want to think that the "creative day" is thousands of years long, that means that the creative night would similarly be thousands of years long. And, if we have a "creative period of time" which exceeds a day, then why does God, immediately from the outset of restoration, classify day and night and then tells us that one night and one day have just transpired when thousands of days and nights would have transpired in such a creative period of time? If God's Word tells me or implies through exegesis that we are dealing with creative periods of time, then I have no problem with that viewpoint. But the clear teaching is that God first classifies the concept of night and day, tells us that one night and one day have just passed and that was one day. I don't think that He could be any more clear than that. Now, what we should cover in greater detail is the Doctrine of Days—not finished yet!!

 

The God said, "Let there be an expanse [or, a firmament] in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters." And God made the expanse and separated the waters which were below the expanse from the waters which were above the expanse, and it was so. [Gen. 1:6–7]


All of angelic creation is intently watching the restoration of their previous home, which had been packed in ice. God brought light again to this planet and when the light appeared, the ice pack had been melted. However, the earth is covered entirely in water. God lifts an appreciable amount of water above the earth, giving the earth a belt of water vapor . This is an interesting point. If this were mythology or the product of Moses' imagination, why have one kind of atmosphere here in the beginning of Genesis and a different atmospheric conditions after the flood? This idea is certainly not beyond the realm of human imagination, but why develop this in a fictional account of history and then change it a few chapters later?

 

The expanse or firmament is not land, although, according to Brown-Driver-Briggs, the Hebrews viewed it as solid, but atmosphere or the first heaven (in v. 1, the two heavens are space and the throne room of God. So, we now have an earth covered still in water, an atmosphere, and a band of water vapor, very likely thicker and more distinct than what we have now. The word we are dealing with in the Hebrew is râqîya׳ (-עי.קָר) [pronounced raw-KEE-aģ], which means extended surface, expanse. It is that which has been beat down and spread out above the earth and refers to the earth’s atmosphere. The related verb is used to overlay something with a thin plate. The precision of this term is amazing. The earth itself is 3960 miles in radius. 99% of the atmosphere is within 100 miles of the surface of the earth. Footnote I, with the rudimentary understanding of the earth and its atmosphere, if I had to choose the best noun from the Hebrew for this word, I would have chosen râdîya׳ myself. The writer of Genesis not having the resources and background that I have, chose the same word. Strong’s #7549 BDB #956.


By interpretation, God the Father is speaking here and God the Son is performing the action. The early readers of this would not know this; we have learned the functions of the various members of the Godhead by information which we have distilled from the New Testament; particularly the gospels. We know that God the Father does the planning, God the Son is the visible member of the Godhead who acts in accordance with God's will. The Holy Spirit provides the divine power, although He is the unseen member of the trinity that does not speak of Himself.

 

And God called the expanse heavens. And evening had come to pass and morning had come to pass; a second day. [Gen. 1:8]


Heavens, or shāmayim, is always found in the dual. I can refer to the earth's atmosphere (as it does in this passage), to a location which is far removed from the earth's atmosphere (Gen. 1:14 Isa. 34:4), to the entirety of creation (Gen. 1:1) and to the throne room (or, dwelling place) of God (Deut. 26:15 1Kings 8:30 Psalm 2:4). God has placed over the earth a shield of water vapor to hold in the atmosphere but, unlike every other day, He does not stand back and observe that it is good. This will be the source of judgement in Noah's day and the way that God will water the earth and this thick water vapor barrier will no longer exist after the great flood. So God does not observe that this is good, or fully functional, or will fulfill the purpose for which it was designed until the end of human history.

 

Then God said, "Let the waters below the heavens be gathered into one place and let the dry land appear" and it was so. [Gen. 1:9)


As I was typing this, I thought to myself that it would be dramatic if, rather than this occurring instantaneously, that God allow these waters to recede slowly and the earth to emerge slowly, for dramatic effect. Keep in mind, we have an audience. Although no man was a witness to this, all of angelic creation was able to observe this. It just so happens that the verbs for gathered and appear are in the Niphal imperfect tense. The Niphal is simply the passive stem of the Qal, but it goes beyond that. It can be used to describe action which is in progress; with the imperfect, since we are dealing with a completed action, this indicates that this was perhaps not instantaneous but a process. It did not take a full day, but it may have occurred over the period of a few hours. It had been perhaps several billion years since the earth had been habitable and this dry land appearing indicates that it will be inhabited again.

 

And God called the dry land earth and the gathering of the waters He called seas; and God saw that it was good. [Gen. 1:10]


Notice how God has caused the dry land to occur. The dry land is not brought up but the water is caused to recede. This must mean that tremendous amounts of water were stored under the earth's surface. This is where this water went to.

 

Then God said, let the earth sprout grass, herbs yielding seed, fruit trees bearing fruit after its kind, with seeds in them on the earth"; and it was so. And the earth brought forth grasses, herbs yielding seed after their kind, and trees bearing fruit, with seeds in them, after their kind; and God saw that it was good. [Gen. 1:11–12]


Sprout is the Hebrew word אֶצֶי (yâtsâ), which has more meanings than you can shake a stick at. It is used in so many ways in the Bible, that B-D-B devotes over six columns to it. It generally means to go out, or to march, to go forth, with an emphasis upon origin. The translation given to it is suitable, in context. It is in the Hiphil imperfect. The Hiphil is the causative stem. The way this is used is the subject (in this case, the earth) participates in the action of the verb. That is, God causes the grass to grow but the earth is a participant in this action. Imperfect sometimes refers to incomplete action, sometimes to action which is a part of the whole and to continuous action. Here, all are involved. These plants did not grow and that was the end of plant growth. Trees and grasses continue to grow even to this day. Therefore, this action is incomplete and it is only a part of the while action. Like the dry land emerging, this probably was not instantaneous, but similar to time-lapse photography, although this is only conjecture on my part.


What grew precisely was this: א ש  , which is grass or fresh shoots springing out from the earth. It would not be a classification of thing created with the following two words being examples of it, but a separate category. ב ש צ is herb, herbage or (possibly) plants. It is a particular type, the kind yielding seed. Some plants and grasses are spread by runners, primarily and some are spread primarily by seed. After their kind could be rendered after their species. We also have trees (ץ צ —which is also translated wood); in this case trees which bear fruit and the seed is in the fruit. This, very likely includes pine trees and the like. Fruit does not have to be something that we eat. It is what the tree produces. The reason I mention this things, which otherwise would seem patently uninteresting, is because of Gen. 2:5, one of the many alleged contradictions found in the Bible. You would think that Moses, being the genius that he is, would have caught this a corrected it a long time ago; or perhaps we are talking about slightly different things.


God the Father observes what He has created and declares that it is morally good; it is exactly what He chose to create exactly suited for the purpose for which it was created. Whether there is a relationship between this vegetation and that from prehistoric times, I do not know. Certainly, naturalists would prefer to see this occur over a longer period of time. The dry land appears over a period of several centuries and then, slowly but surely, the seeds buried in the ground begin to bring forth vegetation, which spreads throughout the land. However, that is not the picture we are given here; therefore, that is not how God chose to restore the earth.

 

And evening had come to pass and morning had come to pass; a third day. {Gen. 1:13]


This reference to a day; what is meant here?

What Does the word Day Mean in Genesis?

             God has a period of time during which He creates or restores a portion of the earth.

             After each creative period of time, there is evening and there is morning, each a masculine singular.

             God, in Gen. 1:5 defines this period of time as being one day. It is not a day or the first day but one day.

             If God defines this period of time as one day, an evening and a morning, and repeats this phrasing throughout, why should we look at it differently? God could have certainly restored the earth using multifarious methods. He chose semi-instantaneous to instantaneous restoration.

             God will further define what constitutes one day when we move forward a few verses.


Chapter Outline

Charts, Graphics and Short Doctrines

 

Then God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years; and let them be for lights in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth"; and it was so. [Gen. 1:14–19]


Up until this point during these restoration days, light had been provided directly by God and He removed the light for the evening. Except for vv. 15b and 17b, the word for lights (ר א מ ) refers to a luminous body (and also to a lamp stand). The word is related to that found in Gen. 1:4–5, but it is not the same word. My question here as whether these luminous bodies had already existed and had not shown upon the earth because it was packed in ice and then because it was covered by a thick water vapor or whether they were created instantaneously during the third day. Both viewpoints will have their problems, adherents and detractors.


There are actually three possible viewpoints here, accepting the accuracy of what I have presented so far. (1) These lights could have always existed (and it would have been logical for them to have existed since angelic creation occupied the earth). Our problem is that it sounds as though God just made them on this day. (2) Another viewpoint is that He made them on that day and instantaneously provided the light from these stars to the earth, bypassing the speed of light concept. Why would that have been necessary? We have stars which are millions of light years away from our planet which we can see; therefore, their light would have taken a million years to reached us, from the inception of the star, pushing back this date for restoration beyond the time frame of the Bible. In the latter scenario, God would have had to have supernaturally provided the light from these stars. The problem here is that scientists, when they come to the point of being able to measure the speed of light and the distance of the earth from these stars, then this does not jive with what they understand to be Biblical creationism. The upshot of that is God has, in His creation, given us scientific information which is misleading. It appears as though the stars are billions of years old when, in fact, they are only ten thousand years old. (3) A third possibility is that He had created the stars billions of years ago as a part of Gen. 1:1, yet just created the sun and the moon for the earth during the fourth day. My natural inclination is the accept the last viewpoint.


Since God has created certain forms of plant life in vv. 11–12, when night comes, we can have an absence of light but not an absence of heat. God, the Holy Spirit provided the warmth to melt the ice pack and that warmth is held in place by the highly vaporous atmospheric belt around the earth (along with the temperature of the waters and the earth. Furthermore, there is no indication that the Holy Spirit has stopped brooding over the earth yet.


V. 14 begins with the waw consecutive Qal imperfect of said, the imperfect being part of the waw consecutive construction (meaning, we can add the word then to this translation. The imperfect also indicates that we do not have the complete action (God will continue to issue commands concerning His plan for restoration). The Hebrew word of lights, as pointed out before, means luminous bodies, and it is in the plural of three or more. This means that God commanded for there to be three or more light bearing bodies to come to pass or to come into existence. These light-bearing (or, light-reflecting) bodies were to be in the expanse of the heavens. The purpose of the lights would be to separate the day from the night, previously defined in v. 5. The Hiphil stem means that the subject participants in the action of the verb (but is not the sole causative force). In addition to the lights separating the day from the night, they are to be a means of our ability to distinguish seasons and days and months and years. The verb here is in the conjunctive Qal perfect, meaning that these are additional uses of these luminous bodies. The Qal perfect is a part of the waw conjunctive (i.e., it indicates that we have a conjunctive clause rather than a consecutive clause here). .


V. 15 also begins with a waw conjunctive. That is, the purpose of the sun, moon and stars stated in this verse is not a separate action from v. 14. Nor does it indicate that we are dealing with something different in vv. 14 and 15. From hereon in, light will be provided on the earth by these luminous bodies. The verse finishes with and it was so or and it came to pass.


And God made two great lights, the greater light for the dominion of the day and the lesser light for the dominion of the night; the stars also. And God placed them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth and for the dominion of the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness; and God saw that it was good. And evening had come to pass, and morning had come to pass; a fourth day. [Gen. 1:16–19]


Whereas vv. 14-15 give God's commands and the indication that these commands were carried out, v. 16 actually deals with the carrying out of the plans. The Qal imperfect waw consecutive of ’āsāh (ח ש צ ), which is different from the word in v. 1. In v. 1 we have the possibility of creating out of nothing. Here, we are dealing with a word which means to do, to make, or to fashion. That is, we have some raw materials to work with. This is not a verb exclusive to this context; Israel is told to asah the Law (Ex. 23:22). The waw consecutive means that God the Father issued the order and God the Son then carried out the action. The sun and moon are obviously what are dealt with here, each having dominion over the day or the night. The materials or the sun and moon themselves pre-existed because this verb does not imply creation. Therefore, they could have existed for the angelic creation and God made some modifications upon them. If the earth was packed in ice, then the sun certainly could not be the same intensity and distance from the earth as it is now. Whether there was a change in the orbit or the intensity of the sun, we do not know. Furthermore, they were placed or made in such a way as to provide for us a day and night as has already been defined, further indicating that these days spoken of in the Bible in this portion are 24 hour days. V. 16 ends with the stars also. God also fashioned the stars out of what was already there. This indicates that it is very likely that they preexisted this time of creation. There may have been some rearranging of orbits or other fine tuning which was done, but this was not as important as the work done on the sun and the moon. There is not even a verb here.


The Hebrew often looks upon an act with successive clarity. We are used to time-linear action. That is, we did this first, this second, this third, and now we are finished. That is not the case in this passage. V. 15 ends with and it was so. V. 16 does not pick up from there, but expands upon and it was so, and explains what happened to make this come to pass. V. 17 is a continuation of the explanation was to what was involved in the process implied by and it was so. Once God fashioned the sun, moon and stars, he placed them in their orbits in the heavens. Again, this was all a part of the fine tuning to provide for sustained life on the earth. The stars were for signs and days and years. One theologian has said that the entire Zodiac system, properly understood, is the message of the gospel (this is apart from the concept of Astrology).


On this day, it is important to note that God did not create the sun, moon and stars, but that they were made out of existing material, meaning that they likely pre-existed and God made some modifications upon them (after all, the sun had been burning along with the stars for billions of years). These modifications would have included their placement into possibly slightly different orbits. Although intent in other passages is more clear than in this one, I believe that these few verses indicate that the star light did not have to be supernaturally brought to the earth but that they had existed for billions of years, thus allowing their light to come to the earth.


Vv. 17–18a tell us that they were placed into their orbits, in the heavens in such a way as to (1) provide light for the earth, (2) for one luminous body to have dominance during the day, the other one to have dominance during the night (we do not have a clue as to how it was during the angelic habitation of the earth), and (3) to separate the light from the dark. With these purposes in mind, God observes that this portion of His creation was good; that is, well-suited and well-designed for its stated function. As we have seen thrice before, then there was dusk and then there was dawn, a fourth day.

 

Then God said, "Let the waters swarm with swarms of living creatures and let bird fly above the earth on the face of the expanse of the heavens." [Gen. 1:20]


Unlike the creation of mankind, the creation of the fish, water mammals and birds was done instantaneously for thousands upon thousands of creatures (possibly millions). The verb for swarm could even be construed (in the right context) to mean germinate; however, this is not the same word as is found in Gen. 1:12 (where the earth puts forth vegetation) and it is not in the same tense. In the Hiphil, as found in v. 12, the subject, earth, participates in the action of the verb. However, here, the other verb is in the Qal stem, which means the animals of the sea did not arise out of the sea itself but were created creatures (we will see that in the next verse). We do not have the word for fish here but rather the two words for living creatures or living souls. This is simply because the earth is filled with all kinds of things which are alive and fish only make up a portion of this. We have all types of crustaceans, invertebrates and mammals. The Hebrew words used here cover those categories as well as the category of fish.


Birds were also on the agenda for this day. The Hebrew word here is ‛ôwph (  ו צ ), which can stand for winged, feathered or flying creatures. Therefore, this probably included the creation of flying insects, birds and flying mammals. After God the Father verbalizes the mandate, God the Son executes it:

 

And God created the large whales [and other sea creatures] and every living creature that moves which populate the waters [lit., with which the waters (are) swarmed] after their kind, and every winged bird [and other flying creatures] after their kind; and God observed that it [the creation of Jesus Christ] was good. [Gen. 1:21]


"Great Sea monsters" is the way the first couple of words are usually translated. It is translated (without the adjective great) serpent in Ex. 7:9,10,12 and dragon in Jer. 51:34. Such a wide variety of translations indicates that we are uncertain as to its meaning; and, over the centuries, from the early records of Genesis, to the recording of these records by Moses, to Jeremiah, that the word could have changed in meaning. Every living creature that moves is, literally every living soul glides about. The latter participle can refer both the land animals scurrying across the ground or to water animals gliding through the waters. In context, this is the latter usage. God created a large number of animals which filled the seas and other bodies of water.


There are some who believe that this period of time was long and a creative period of time as opposed to a day. Whereas, I do not believe that the correct interpretation of this supports that, this does not mean that they are not our brothers in Christ. Often the fossil record is cited as supporting evidence that these were creative periods of time rather than days. However, there are a great many presuppositions which are involved in the interpretation of the fossil record and the dating methods involved. There is certainly bias on the part of the evolutionist as there is bias on the part of those who believe that the earth is 6,000–10,000 years old. The former have, for decades, been the exclusive interpreters of the fossil record. The latter, a group of dedicated theologians and scientists, have reinterpreted the fossil record over the past quarter century or more with their own predilections. And, even more recently, there are a group of believers who believe that these days of creation are longer periods of time and interpret the fossil record (and other scientific data) to fit their slant. My expertise in that area is quite limited. Disregarding the fossil record and any other type of scientific data, these days appear to be 24 hour days and the creation seems to be instantaneous of a substantial population to begin with.


After their kind is according to their species or kind. This certainly does not support a belief in evolution. Whereas a Christian can believe that all races of man originated from one set of parents, Adam and Eve (and, later, Noah and his wife), as all dogs could have a common ancestor, the Bible does not support an evolving of one species into another. That is, reptiles did not sprout wings and fly and later become birds. The primate population did not have a series of positive mutations which resulted in a humanoid prototype which later became a man with a soul and spirit. We have a very well-defined set of animals here (as we did with plants in vv. 11–12) which do not change into other species.

 

And God blessed them, saying, "Be fruitful and multiply and fill the waters in the seas and let the birds multiply on the earth." And evening came to pass and morning came to pass, a fifth day. [Gen. 1:22–23]


The word for bless is bārake (בָּרַך׃), and it means to bestow with favor or grace. God did not pronounce a blessing upon the plants. Here He does upon the animals of the seas and of the skies. Also, the Bible speaks of the animals as living souls but does not refer to vegetation in that way. There is an obvious, vast difference between the two kingdoms. The soul means that the animal is capable to limited emotional response and other brain activities similar to man, but certainly not at the same level.


The word bārake is used for the first time (in the Piel—intensive—stem), and God is the One doing the action of the verb, and God blessing the fish and the birds means that God calls for them to multiply; i.e., to have lots of baby birds and fishes. In other words, God blessing animals is associated with them multiplying in abundance. This may help to explain why we call newborn babies a blessing, despite all the evidence to the contrary. Footnote


We cannot draw any sort of conclusion that these animals are breeding like crazy from the beginning, yet Adam and the woman, not yet created, would have no children until after the Fall. We cannot take this interpretation, because the exact same verbiage is used in Gen. 1:28 with the man and the woman. It is possible that animals could breed from the very beginning, but we cannot really come to that conclusion because of the similarity of verbiage in vv. 22 and 28.

 

Then God said,"Let the earth bring forth living souls after their kind; cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth after there kind"; and it was so. [Gen. 1:24]


On a sixth day (which is not the sixth day), God creates the animals on the earth. Why He did not do this the previous day, we do not know. Furthermore, we are not positive as to when God created insects in general. Not everything which God created is necessarily mentioned here in Genesis. It is possible that the insects on land were created on this day and the insects of the seas and air were created on the fifth day.


Creeping things was a word which we encountered in Gen. 1:21 and there it was translated to move or to glide. It is used of animals in and out of water. Here, these are animals which scurry across the ground and run across the ground. And, as has been the pattern, God the Father issues the decree, and God the Son executes the command:

 

And God made the beasts of the earth after their kind; cattle after their kind, and everything that creeps upon the ground after their kind; and God observed that it [this aspect of His creation] was good. [Gen. 1:25]


It is interesting that God did not create all animal life on the same day or on consecutive days apart from the creation of man. I do not know why that is other than to create the land mammals on the same day. However, there will be often things which God does which are inscrutable, and I do not believe that this will be that important.

 

The God said, "Let Us make man in Our [shadow] image, according to our pattern [or, likeness]; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." [Gen. 1:26]


Throughout this chapter, God is speaking. We know that there are three members of the Godhead, which means that God is not talking to Himself. In fact, now would be a good time to examine the Doctrine of the Trinity in the Old Testament. (HTML) (PDF).


However, the reason He is speaking is that He has an audience, all the fallen and all the elect angels. He is not speaking to them but He is speaking on their behalf. What is transpiring will be crucial to their understanding of His judgments and His righteousness. One of the things which the angels will observe is how miserable the fallen angels will make life for man upon this earth. God will put man into perfect environment with everything provided for him, including right man and right woman, and Satan will do what he can to ruin this idyllic situation.


God is doing something with man that He did not do with the animals; God will create man in His own image. What is meant? The word image is from the Hebrew word tselem (ם ל צ ), which can refer to the images of heathen gods, but also it means image, likeness, resemblance, shadow image and definitely not an exact duplicate. Demuth (ת י מ ד ) means likeness, similitude, pattern, or model. The latter word can be used as a son has the likeness of his father. The word make is the common word ʽāsāh (ה ש א ), which has been found in v.. 7, 16 and 25, and it means to make, to do or to construct out of something. In v. 7, God made the atmosphere out of the existing elements from the earth and the water; in v. 16 he constructed the sun and the moon from existing elements (it is possible that they both existed and God worked with them until they were suitable for His purposes); and God made the land animals. The Bible says that God both made and created man, so it is likely that He both made and created all animal life.


The pattern of God is the three members of the Godhead; we were created with three separate components, the body, the soul and the spirit. We were made from the pattern of God and out of the earth (i.e., the elements of the ground). We are the shadow image of God in several ways:

We are the Shadow Image of God

             God is sovereign, we have volition

             God is omniscient, we have intelligence

             God is immaterial and cannot be seen; our greatest part is our unseen person

             God has a physical manifestation; we have a body

             God is love, we have an emotional love capacity (or, better, the ability to love)

             God is eternal life, we had perpetuated life

             God is completely aware of His Own character; we possess self-consciousness

             God is omniscient; we can perceive through our five senses the world around us

       [I possibly have more notes on this in my notes on Acts 20:5-10 with Thieme)


Chapter Outline

Charts, Graphics and Short Doctrines


Notice that the previous stomping grounds of the angels, the earth, once frozen in ice after the fall of Satan and the angels which he took with him, is now given to man and put under man's control and dominion. This would be infuriating to Satan and the other fallen angels because man is so weak and small and inferior in intellect and power and movement as compared to the angels. With this statement, Satan immediately began to plan to take the control of the earth away from man. After all, Satan is more intelligent, more charming and superior to man in almost every way; it seems that taking the dominion of planet earth from him would be easy.


The Hebrew word for man is ʼādhām (ם ד א ), which we recognize as Adam. Here it refers to mankind in the collective sense (see v. 27) as well as to the first man in the singular sense (Gen. 2:20).

 

So God created man in His own [shadow] image; in the [shadow] image of God He created him; male and female, He created them. [Gen. 1:27]


Barah is our creation verb, and it likely means to create out of nothing. It has already been used in vv. 1 and 21. God created Adam only, at first, but the soul of the woman is incubating inside of him (Gen. 2:7,18 5:1,2). This is not significantly different from a woman carrying within her a fetus, a prototype soul and body for her soon-to-be child. People often speculate what would have happened had Adam and Eve not sinned. For instance, the woman assumed all the responsibility when it came to giving birth. This, and the next chapter indicate that it is possible that the man might have carried his right woman within him and, at the right point in time, "given birth" to his right woman. So much for speculation.


Created is used twice in this verse; first in the Qal imperfect and then in the Qal perfect. Often, the imperfect examines the action of the verb from the standpoint of unfinished work or only a portion of the action is alluded to. The entire act is not looked at, just a portion of it. The perfect tense looks at the act as a whole; as a completed total action. When God created man, this was only a portion of the creation of man. The completed action of the creation of man is the creation of man and the woman. Despite the popular women's lib saying of the eighties, man and woman are generally incomplete without each other.


What gives me pause at this point is the actual activity of this sixth day. Did Adam live for several days or weeks prior to the creation of Eve (who is actually called the woman until after the fall; then she is designated Eve)? V. 27 ends with the verb for create with a masculine plural suffix. This is why the verse ends with the word them. Throughout all of vv. 28–29, all of the verbs have masculine, plural suffixes, meaning that God is speaking to two or more people. Chapter two of Genesis, is not a continuation of a narrative, but it is a close-up examination of the sixth day. Chapters 1 through 2:3 give us an outline of what occurred on the first seven days (with a bit of eternity past thrown in).


The remainder of chapter 2 deals with the sixth day.

The Creation of Man

 1.   The creation of man (singular) was an incomplete action or just a portion of the action; this is what the use of the imperfect tense means (Gen. 1:27a).

 2.    The complete action was the creation of both the man and the woman; and so the Qal perfect is employed (Gen. 1:27b).

 3.    Man is both created (v.27) and made (Gen. 6:6). The materials used in the making of man were the elements of the ground or of the earth. That is, our bodies are made of the exact same elements that the earth is made up of. Using these elements as building blocks, God formed our bodies (Gen. 2:7).

 4.    God, using the genetic material from the man, built the woman. This was not a cloning process but God designed a complementary person for the first man in all respects (Gen. 2:20–23).

 5.    Animals were also created, made and formed (Gen. 1:21,25 2:19).

 6.    When God rests on the seventh day, it is not because He is tired, but because He is finished with the creation of everything necessary to that point in time (Gen. 2:1–3). This indicates that the woman was built on the sixth day.

 7.    The careful use of the plural suffixes throughout Gen. 1:27–29 and the lone use of the singular suffix in v. 27 indicates that God was speaking to Adam and the woman in the latter two verses.

 8.    The language of that time often gave a synopsis of the action and then would focus in on some detail. For instance, Gen. 1:15b (as well as vv. 11b and 24b) ends with and it was so. That is, this indicates that the command of that verse was carried out. However, the following verse in each case gives us a more complete view of the action alluded to at the end of the previous verse.

 9.    This is precisely what is occurring in chapters 1 and 2. We get a synopsis of the sixth day in Gen. 1:24–31 and then we are given a closer view of this sixth day in Gen. 2:7–25.

10.  Most people, like myself, have a linear-time bias. That is, we like to see things laid out in chronological order. When I first began to read through the Old Testament, I tried to set up my readings so that they would correspond to the time frame in which they occurred and read them chronologically. This, however, was not the way the Old Testament is set up (or was set up). God invented time and space and is not subject to either. His view of time is different from ours. He sees the end from the beginning and His plan takes into account every free-will choice that every person on this planet would ever make. Therefore, we should not impose a strict linear time-frame to Gen. 1 and 2. Gen. 1:27 tells us that God created man (singular) and then says He created them, plural. We should, barring other evidence from the Scripture, accept this as what occurred on the sixth day of restoration.


Chapter Outline

Charts, Graphics and Short Doctrines

 

And God blessed them and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth." [Gen. 1:28]


In this verse, God gives the man and woman authority over the earth. The angels are watching and the fallen angels are irritated because this was their previous home. They had dominion over the earth and now God has given it to this very weak creature, man. Even though the birth process has not been put into place yet—that is, it is unclear as to who will give birth to children or how—God commands the man and woman to procreate and to fill the earth with their progeny.


There are a great many environmental movements and individuals who behave as though man is an intruder on this earth and that the earth would be a much better place without man. That is, our activities should be as inconspicuous as possible. However, God has ordered us to subdue the earth. Kâbash (ש ב  ) means to conquer, subdue, tread a path, dominate, squeeze and kneed. This includes planting, harvesting, building, etc.

 

The God said, "Behold, I have give you every plant yielding seed that is on the surface of all the earth, and every tree which has fruit yielding seed; it shall be food for you; and to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the sky and to everything that moves on the earth which has life, every green plant for food"; and it was so. [Gen. 1:29–30]


In perfect environment, man and beast were both vegetarians. We were given fruit trees to eat from (and later we would till the ground to produce some foods) and God gave the animals green plants on which to dine. There was no prohibition to meat-eating; it wasn't necessary because no one did. This does not mean that we should or should not be vegetarians. Under perfect environment, such as the millennium, it is likely that man will become a vegetarian again. Animals will likewise lose their ferocity and become vegetarians also. However, we have been given the animal for food since the fall. Whether someone chooses to eat meat or not; or to limit it in one's diet is a matter of free will, dietary consideration and personal inclination and training. It is not a spiritual issue and should never be treated as such. Fish are not mentioned; however, it is likely that they dined on various types of sea weed.

 

And God examined all that He had made and it was, in fact, very good. And evening came to pass and morning came to pass; a sixth day. [Gen. 1:31]


With this verse, we leave Genesis 1 and move into Genesis 2, which is not a new topic by any means. Had chapter divisions been inspired, then this chapter would have ended at Gen. 2:3. God has finished with the restoration of the heavens and the earth. He is not tired but He is finished. God has provided everything that was necessary for mankind. He also provided a stage by which Satan's evil could be fully observed and manifested and righteously condemned.


Internal Links

Beginning of Document/

Chapter Summaries

External Links

Genesis Chapter Links



Genesis 2


Genesis 2 has been completely reworked and may be found here: (HTML) (PDF) (WP–compressed). It is highly recommended that you go to that study instead of this one. These chapters are being completed one-by-one and will eventually supplant this incomplete study of Genesis.


Genesis 2:1–2:3


Maps, Charts and Short Doctrines:

 

       v.      3           The First Three Divine Institutions

 

Thus the heavens and the earth were finished; and all their populations. [Gen. 2:1]


The verb, kâlâh (כָּלָה) [pronounced kaw-LAWH], means to be finished, to be completed or to be accomplished. It is in the Pual imperfect, which is passive voice and incomplete action. God, at this point is temporarily finished. He will be finished until Adam and the woman sin; then He will be involved in work. God will be finished when He says he is finished in the perfect tense. In John 19:30, immediately after our Lord had born our sins in his own body on the cross, then he will say, "It is finished" in the perfect tense. At that point, God will have accomplished for us more than we will ever realize or ever begin to appreciate.

 

And by the seventh day God completed His work which he had done; and He rested on the seventh day from all His work, which He had done. Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it, He rested from all His work which God created for making. [Gen. 2:2–3]


Vv. 2–3 we see a slight break in the pattern. God speaks of the seventh day during the seventh day. The verb completed is the same one found in v. 1 except this is in the Piel imperfect, which speaks of both a completed action which is causative yet the imperfect indicates that it is an action in progress or as of yet, not complete. God did cause the creation and the restoration of the earth, and, to that point in time, it was finished. However, since God is able to see the end from the beginning, He knew that His work was not complete. Hence, the imperfect.


When it reads God rested, this is an anthropopathism. We do not have the ability to understand God's character and essence entirely. The Bible will sometimes use language of accommodation or take an aspect of God's character or being and express it to us in human terms. We understand the human concept and this gives us insight into God's character. God, as was mentioned, was not tired nor does He get tired. He was, however, temporarily finished. Everything which man needed was provided for him. The stage had been set for the appeal trial of Satan, who voiced a great many objections to his sentencing. Now all angels could watch as the activities on earth reveal the righteousness and perfection of God and the viciousness and evil of the fallen angels.


Here we have the word to bless again, and again it is in the Piel (intensive) stem. Previously, blessing was associated with procreation, of birds, of fish and of man (Gen. 1:22, 28). Here, procreation is not the central theme. Therefore, we have to come up with another understanding of the word bârake: Gesenius suggests that in the Piel stem, this can mean to celebrate. It makes sense that, at the completion of a major project, and a person sit back, pop open a cold one, and admire his own work. This seems to be the sense of what we have here. For man, as time would progress, the celebration of the 7th day may include church and then sitting down in front of the game and opening up a beverage of one’s favorite choice. In any case, there is a break in the routine of the work that men do, and we might understand that to be the blessing spoken of here. For God, it is sitting back and recognizing that what He has done is good; and for us, it is sitting back, after a long week’s work, and perhaps recognizing the same thing (if we have done our work as unto the Lord).


Sanctification is the setting apart of something unto God. That is, it is separated from everything else for purposes related to God and His character. So it is with the seventh day. It both commemorates and looks forward to the true rest that we will enter. At this point in time, it commemorates the creation of the heavens and the earth and the restoration thereof. It is a time that man is to cease from his labors and to rest and to use the time to dwell upon our Lord. This is not the only period of time devoted to spiritual things. When our spiritual life and growth and intake of God's Word is limited to one day a week, the results are mediocre at best. We are faced with human viewpoint sixteen hours a day. In these United States, we are bombarded by television programs and advertising, magazine and newspapers and radio station broadcasts which fill us with human thought and human viewpoint. It takes but a generation to throw an entire country out of whack. We have seen that over the past few decades and the incredible increase in immorality. Things which were recognized as wrong in the 50's are seen as possibly okay in the 60's and taken for granted as being what is done in the 90's. Pre-marital sex is presented on almost any television show or movie as what people do when they become interested in one another. It is no longer even expected that the couple be in love; it is viewed as a step to falling in love. What has resulted is a complete erosion of the marriage institution, which has ruined the family, and has resulted in crime and degeneracy in our youth unprecedented in our nation. All of this results from moving away from God's Word and accepting human viewpoint. The only way we can stand up to this human viewpoint (because it is guaranteed that everyone will try to sway your opinion either through argument, ridicule or temptation), is to feed on God's Word—not weekly, but daily. And we are to be responsible to our children; not to haul them to church once a week but to train them daily in God's Word. A child does not have to be separated from the rest of the world in order to grow into a Christian adult. But, he does require doctrine everyday and he requires parents who live according to the Word, as well as teach it. And this goes back to having parents who have character and spiritual growth when they choose and commit to each other. But, I digress.


The last two verbs, created and made, asah and barah, are in the Qal perfect and the Qal infinitive. The former word looks at the action as a whole or as a competed action. God had several acts of actual creation prior to the six days of restoration and during those six days. He created the heavens and the earth and then created the populations to occupy the earth. Working with these raw materials, he made the atmosphere, man and animals from the elements of the ground, etc. The action of the infinitive can be coterminous with or follow immediately the action of the main verb. In this case, made followed created.


Genesis 2:4–2:25


In this portion of Genesis, we will take a closer look at the sixth day of restoration. Once this day has been completed, we have another gap in history, as we found between Gen. 1:1 and 2. We do not know if Adam's age was calculated as beginning at his fall or from the day of his creation. There was a tree of life in the garden which very likely perpetuated human life; a tree that we had to be cut off from when Adam fell. Seth was born to Adam and Eve when Adam was 130 years old (Gen. 5:3), but we have no other time frame for the birth of Cain, Abel or any of Adam and Eve's other children (Gen. 5:4). The short view of this gap would be a few days to perhaps a century (and Adam and Eve produced children from age 100 on). The long view is that God calculates Adam's age from the fall, which gives us an indeterminable amount of time for man's existence in the garden. It would be nice to view this time period as lasting for centuries; however, Satan certainly observed and devised a plan quickly. Whether the next chapter chronicles his first plan or whether it was his first "successful" plan, we do not know.

 

These are the Generations of [or, This is an Account of the Beginnings] the Heavens and the Earth; when they were created, in the day when Yahweh God made earth and heavens): [Gen. 2:4]


This is a break in the narrative. We have covered Gen.1:1–2:3 basically in a chronological manner. However, here, we will take a step back. It is likely that this opens up a new document or a new piece of source material. We can readily assume that Moses compiled the final version of Genesis (see the introduction), but we do not know from how many documents he worked, how much was oral tradition (remember that his father-in-law was a man of God and he certainly received some teaching from him; yet this was centuries removed from that which took place in Gen. 2). It is likely that the first portion of Genesis was given to Moses directly from God or he received it as a part of the oral tradition. However, this beginning phrase seems to indicate that Moses is transcribing a document. My Hebrew is not strong enough to make anything else other than an hypothesis at this point, but my guess is that there will be a change of basic vocabulary at this point to correspond with the new source material.


In the Septuagint, this begins with Aὔτη ἡ ϐίϐλος γενέσεως οὐρανο καὶ γς (transliterated: Aute he Biblos geneseos ouranos kai ges) and it should be translated this [is the] book of the genesis [or, generations or beginnings] of heaven and earth. This is not a word-for-word translation from the Hebrew, but it helps to give us the gist of what is being said here. For the translators millenniums ago who spoke the ancient Hebrew and desired a readable translation into the Greek, they recognized that this was the beginning of a book; or the beginning of a writing. This functions like the title of a book more than it does as a portion of the narrative. We certainly recognize here the two famous transliterated words: Bible and Genesis.


The Hebrew word, translated by the Greek book of beginnings is tôwledôth (תּוֹלְדֹת) [pronounced tohle-DOTH], and it means family, race, descent, history, birth, generations, origin. It refers to what is brought into existence by someone and sometimes the results, but does not include the birth of an individual, so, in this case, this does not refer to the creation of heavens and earth as the focus. We will examine that which was brought into existence; in this case, man on his first day (which is why we can look at this as a beginnings of sorts). The translation I prefer, although it is, like most, more wordy than the original language: "This is an Account of the Beginnings..." This gives us the feeling that this is a document somewhat separate from the rest of the surrounding material, a document composed originally by someone other than the editor or Genesis, and carries with it a sense of beginning or origin. This is the sense in which the second or third century bc Jewish scholars who translated the Septuagint, seemed to take this phrase.


This verse also serves as a beginning of human history; a preface if you will to the rest of the entire Bible. We have reached back in Gen. 1:1 to eternity past to the creation of the heavens and the earth and throughout most of Gen. 1, we have examined the restoration of the earth. This verse introduces human history on earth. In one sense, it is the beginning of the Bible, inasmuch as this begins God's dealings with mankind on earth.

 

Now no shrub of the field was yet in the earth and no plant of the field had yet sprouted for Yahweh God had not yet sent rain upon the earth; and there was no man to cultivate the ground. However, a mist used to rise from the earth and water the whole surface of the ground. [Gen. 2:5–6]


I personally find v. 6 to be absolutely fascinating. How would or why would any author developing a false antediluvian history speak of plants being watered from a mist? The antediluvian world was very different than it is now and this is one of the chief differences; it did not rain but there was a mist which arose from the ground. The earth was surrounded by a much thicker water vapor atmosphere at this time also. If all of this is myth, then this indicates that our ancestors, not too far removed from the cave, had a very imaginative and creative sense of history. Rather than recall the days when man used to roam the earth throwing sticks and rocks at animals and hunkering down around the fire, this author speaks of a much more idyllic period of time and throws in nuances and creativity one would not expect to find in so-called primitive man. However, this is not a myth and man, if anything, was more brilliant and educated then than he is today. When we fantasize about the early days of man, we see cave men throwing rocks and sticks at animals and hunkering down before a fire. Those closer to the true events of history do not record such nonsense in ancient literature. Instead, they record what really happened. Even ancient myths and uninspired literature gives us a more refined view of ancient man than we have. There are certainly those who degenerated over centuries of inbreeding to colonies of less-than-civilized men who drew pictures on cave walls and behaved barbarically. One need look no further back in history than today to examine the affects of inbreeding in the hills of West Virginia or in the primitive portions of Africa to find men who have degenerated to the point of animalism. Throughout all of history, except for the most ancient, we find civilized man living in a world occupied by savages and barbaric peoples; and not infrequently, side-by-side.


What we have here is a different set of plants than we saw in Gen. 1:12. It is difficult, due to the ancient Hebrew, to determine exactly what kind of plants existed prior to man's cultivation of the earth but there were already plants for food for animals and fruit trees and plants which yield their own seed. A reasonable guess might be plants used by man primarily for food or, who knows, possibly flowers? Shrub is a different word than used previously and plant is modified by of the field rather than by yielding its own seed. We view work, particularly farming, somewhat differently than Adam would have. For a person who exercises, there are periods of inactivity when one's muscles crave some exercise. This was Adam's feeling most of the time. Doing a little farming would have been a fine time of reflection and physical enjoyment, not unlike a gardener who enjoys gardening in his yard; nor is it unlike a person who plays a sport for fun. This would become work after the fall, but prior to the fall, this would be enjoyment for Adam.

 

Then God formed man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the spark [lit., breath] of lives and man became a living soul. [Gen. 2:7]


This verse would indicate that we are made up of the same basic chemical elements as the earth is. This certainly, although not expressed in scientific language, is not the idea of some savage. It has been several millenniums later when this fact was confirmed. As many have stated, the Bible is not a scientific textbook; however, when it deals with science, it deals with it accurately.


The verb for formed here is a different one than we have used before. It is the word yâtsar (יָצַר) [pronounced yaw-TSAR], and it means to form, fashion, mold, and several other varied meanings. Here, God is fashioning our bodies out of the elements of the earth. We do not have life until God breaths life into us. The verb breath is the Qal imperfect of nâphach (נָפַח) [pronounced naw-FAHKH], which carries with it the vision of blowing upon a furnace; it means to breathe, inflame, or to blow fire upon something. Breath is the Hebrew word neshâmâh (נְשָמָה) [pronounced neshaw-MAW], and it means panting, breath, puff of air, and even inspiration and wisdom. It is not farfetched to allow this to have an electrical connotation due to the verb and give it the translation the spark of lives. We have learned from science that our brains have an electrical current and the lack of that current indicates death. It is reasonable for God to have taken this lump of clay which was our bodies and breathed into the lungs oxygen and into the brain a spark. The adjective, living, translated often live(s), is the word chayyîym (חַיִּים) [pronounced khay-YEEM], and it has to do with being alive. It is in the plural here. Man's body, soul and spirit were all activated and all became living, or, if you will forgive the cornball expression, energized. The result is that man becomes a living being. These words in the Hebrew are chay again (this time in the singular) and nephesh (נֶפֶש) [pronounced NEH-fesh], usually translated soul; a word applied to animals as well as to people. This is in the feminine singular and seems to refer to the entire being of man in this context.

 

And Yahweh God planted a garden toward the east in Eden and there He placed man whom he had formed. [Gen. 2:8]


Eden, transliterated from the Hebrew, means pleasures or delights. Formed in v. 7 was in the Qal imperfect, because we were looking at a process and a series of steps, whereas formed in v. 8 is in the Qal perfect, which is the completed action or the action is viewed upon from its entirety. Yahweh God is Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is the revealed member of the Godhead to us. His name did not appear in the first chapter because there was no man in the first chapter that He conversed with or had fellowship with. When this chapter begins to unfold, God has a more personal relationship with man than he did the animals or the firmament or the seas, so we now see Jesus Christ, Yahweh Elohim, doing things on our behalf. He begins by planting a garden for man to take care of in Eden. Again, this will be a pleasure for man to tend, not a chore. Then He placed man in Eden, before this garden.

 

And out of the ground Yahweh God caused to grow every tree that is pleasing to the sight and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. [Gen. 2:9]


The Hiphil imperfect for grow means that God had caused the trees to begin to grow and they continued to grow. Whether they began with rings or were solid wood to begin with, I do not know. The latter would seem to be the most likely, not that it makes a great deal of difference. Two types of trees mentioned are those pleasant to look at and those which produce food which is good to eat.


Eden also contained two trees which could open a Pandora's box of interpretations. However, the concept behind these two trees is easy. The tree of life provided perpetual life for the partaker and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil allowed Adam and Eve to understand and, therefore, participate in actions that are good and evil. In innocence, or in sinless perfection, they had no need to know anything about good and evil. Good and evil were not issues in their lives. Prior to their partaking of that tree, Adam and the woman could not sin and seemed to have no fellowship with fallen angels as God allowed Satan to speak with the woman.

 

Now a river flowed out of Eden to water the gardens; and from there is divided and became four rivers. The name of the one [river] is Pishon; it flows around the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold; and the gold of that land is good; the bdellium and the onyx stone are there. And the name of the second river is Gishon; it flows around the whole land of Cush. And the name of the third river is Tigris; it flows east of Assyria. And the fourth river is the Euphrates. [Gen. 2:10–14]


The original author of this portion of God's Word was obviously no savage but a person who had an appreciation for things aesthetic, geographic and agrarian. We have details here that had to come from a person who knew this antediluvian area. We do not know if it was Adam or Adam's description to his sons who passed it on, but this is not the kind of information which one would necessarily fabricate. One's first reaction is a desire to know what these proper nouns mean; however, although man certainly began with a full vocabulary, probably far superior to ours, these are proper names given to these rivers and lands by Adam or his early descendants and likely do not have a meaning. If anything meanings have sprung from these words rather than vice versa. In Havilah we have mentioned that there were a lot of precious stones. Again, the original author is one who appreciates things of beauty. I would not be willing to try and designate where these places would be found today. The world-wide flood occurred when the earth was likely less mountainous than it is today; since the flood and the rage of the flood waters, the terrain has probably undergone some remarkable changes. The flood likely caused a great shifting of the earth's plates, the formation of mountains through volcanic activity and plate shifting and, as a result, I believe that the geography of the antediluvian civilization and the postdiluvian civilization possess more dissimilarities than similarities. I do not know enough about geography to say that this is when the continental drift occurred (if such a thing occurred) but I doubt that the areas identified here and later in the Bible are the same. On the other hand, it is equally likely that persons who possessed a knowledge or a record of the antediluvian civilization used these names again to designate new areas of land, as has been man's habit whenever he conquers a new land.


My educated guess, for what it is worth, is that the rivers mentioned here had names that were retained after the flood. However, because of the massive destruction of a worldwide flood, It is unlikely that we are speaking of the very same Tigris and Euphrates rivers as found today.


On the other hand, there is an argument to be made for some of these rivers and lands to coincide. The reason that I would make this guess is that God has chosen a particular plot of land and has given that to the Jews as a piece of real estate forever. Would it not be logical that this piece of real estate has, in a sense, sentimental value to our Lord as the area of the Garden of Eden and the area first occupied by Adam and the woman. Since the middle East, in many ways, seems to be the center of the earth and likely the original populated area (at least since the flood), I would say that these are the very same rivers of today. The other two rivers have either been renamed (if they are still in existence) and the paths of the rivers have certainly been changed dramatically because of the flood. This would, of course, put the original Garden of Eden somewhere between Israel and the Persian Gulf.


The use of the words one (not first), second, third and fourth are the same as is found in Gen. 1:5,8,13 and 19; the first four days of restoration. The rivers were not necessarily built in a specific order nor was one preeminent; the author just began with one river and then described the others. The lack of detail on the other four lands suggests that the original author of the text from which Moses wrote was not an eyewitness but one who heard this from someone who heard this from someone who heard it from someone who may have been an eyewitness. A much less likely possibility is that Moses simply edited out a lot of text at this point (I am of the opinion that, if Moses did write the book of Genesis, it was from either existing documents or existing information at his time. .

 

Then Yahweh God took the man and placed him into the garden of Eden to cultivate it and to guard it. [Gen. 2:15]


The word for take is the common Hebrew word lâqach (לָקַח) [pronounced law-KAHKH] in the Qal imperfect. This is simple action and only a portion of the action is viewed or the action is incomplete. This word can mean anything from to take one in marriage to take and carry along to take possession of. It has a widespread usage. Here, nothing more than the simple word take is necessary. So from wherever Adam was created; fro there he was taken to the garden of Eden. The Hiphil imperfect of nûwach (נוּחַ) [pronounced NOO-ahkh], and it means to deposit, to lay down, to cast down, to place. The action is causative and a portion of the action is examined.


The last two words in this verse which designate man's responsibilities are both in the Qal infinitive construct; which is simple action and is similar to our infinitive or gerund phrase; it can function as a verbal noun. The first of these words is ʿâbad (עָבַד) [pronounced ģawb-VAHD] and it means to work, or to serve, or to slave or to labor. The final word in Gen. 2:15 is a very common Hebrew word; it is found in Gen. 3:24 and it means to guard, to watch, to preserve or to keep. Dominion and responsibility are inferred here. This is the first recorded responsibility given Adam. God is not going to allow Adam to be idle. This is not in God's plan even in innocence. We, as fallen people, may not have a grasp of what is occurring, but God has just given Adam the equivalent to the keys to the Porsche. Exercising the body is not an unpleasant thing to do, nor is gardening or watching things grow and multiply. To us in our fallen state, since this has become work, it carries a different meaning. However, this was one of the many things which God provided for Adam to do.

 

And Yahweh God commanded Adam, saying, "From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, you shall not eat from it, for in the day that you eat from it, in dying you will die [or, in a state of death, you will begin dying]. [Gen. 2:16–17]


The first word in v. 16 is command and it is in the Piel imperfect. The Piel stem could be intensive and it could be completed action without regard to how it came about. Being first in the verse indicates that this command is important. In fact, this is the first recorded words of God to man following man's creation. This indicates that this is most important. From day one of his life on earth, Adam was given a very simple command. One tree was off limits and God even gave Adam a reason for it being off limits. Adam is warned that he will die and dying is found twice, a doubling of the verb, a Hebraism. It is first found in the Qal infinitive absolute and then in the Qal imperfect. An infinitive absolute stands alone as a noun, verb or an adverb. Usually, it takes the place of a noun. It can be used to intensify the meaning of the word, as it most certainly does here, but it can also state a state of being. We could translate this, in a state of dying, you die; or in a state of death, you will begin dying. . This describes exactly what will happen to Adam when he eats from the tree. He will immediately go into a state of spiritual death; that is, he will not be able to have fellowship with God on his own initiative. God must seek him out and begin the fellowship. So Adam will find himself immediately spiritually dead, cut off from God in several ways. However, this will not be the end of the curse. He will also begin a state of decay and physical degeneration which will eventuate in human death.


This establishes a parallelism between man's state of innocence (or, more properly, perfection) and man's fallen state. As a perfect person, Adam could only do one thing wrong; there was only one act of free will which would cause Adam to lose his fellowship with God and that was choosing to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. In man's fallen state, there is only one decision of merit which will affect man's relationship to God and that is man's decision concerning another tree, the tree that Jesus Christ died on. Rev. 22:2 and 14 both speak of the tree of life; the Greek word used is ξύλον (xulon), and it means tree, cross, wood, or stocks. The exact same word is found in I Pet. 2:24 And He himself bore our sins in His body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for "by His wounds were you healed." Footnote See also Acts 10:39 13:29 Gal. 3:13. All other decisions for man in his fallen state do not affect his relationship with God one way or the other.

 

Then Yahweh God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper in the sight of [and corresponding] to him." [Gen. 2:18]


God is not speaking to Himself nor is He speaking to Adam. We have God speaking throughout the first few chapters of Genesis. It is one member of the Godhead speaking to another member. The reason for speaking is simple: there is an entire angelic creation, both fallen and elect angels who are on hand to witness all of this. At one point in time, the earth was their personal stomping ground. When Satan fell and took a third of the angels with him, God froze the earth in an ice pack. Now it has been thawed and the angels are intently observing the transpiring of these events. God narrates what is occurring.


At this point in time, I do not believe that it is still the sixth day. Footnote We have a lot going on, which includes all of the animals being named, and then the building of the woman. God has made the mammals and other land animals and then He created Adam.


If it is the 6th day, then the animals would have had to been made almost instantaneous (easy for God to do); then God would have been bringing animals to Adam quickly to name, even yet while Adam is learning what to do in the garden. This strikes me as being very rushed for this all to be the 6th day.


It would make more sense that God has taken Adam to the garden which He, God, had prepared several days previous. He outlines Adam's responsibilities, particularly the mandate not to eat of the tree of knowing good and evil. God has designed Adam so that he is brilliant; although, perhaps, not as brilliant as angelic creation. It is likely that God created man inferior to angels in every respect to teach the fallen and the elect angels.


To make is from the Qal imperfect of ʿâsâh (עָשָֹה) [pronounced ģaw-SAWH], which means to do or to make and is found in Gen. 1:7,25 and 2:2. This is a clear-cut example of a Qal stem used as a future tense. What God will design for man is a helper, or a person who will assist, relieve and help man. God is spoken of as a help in Ex. 18:4. Neged (נֶגֶד) [pronounced NEH-ged] is an preposition which refers to something which is conspicuous or something which is always in front of. It is translated before the sight of, or in front of, or corresponding to. Even though God has decided that He will make this helper for Adam, God does not do that immediately. God first brings to Adam members of the animal kingdom for Adam to name. Because Adam is a genius, he will develop names for all of the animals as a result of his intelligence and free will. Adam will recognize that there are a lot of animals but he will certainly realize that there are no animals with which he can fellowship.

 

And out of the ground Yahweh God had formed every beast of the field and every bird of the sky, and He brought them to man to see what he would call them. And whatever the man called a living creature, that was its name. And the man gave names to all the cattle, and to the birds of the sky, and to every beast of the field, for Adam there was not found a helper suitable for him. [Gen. 2:19–20]


Yâtsar (יָצַר) [pronounced yaw-TSAR] is the verb for fashioning and molding and here. The Qal imperfect is used here for the building or the fashioning of the animals from the elements of the ground. We are use to a tense system which incorporates time into most verbs and the Hebrew does not. Context determines the time of the action; as we have just seen two Qal imperfect verbs used as a past tense and as a future tense. Like mankind, most animal groupings proceed from a single set of parents. For instance, the extremely divergent dog family has but one ancestor. These are the animals which Adam was naming. This process took perhaps two to four hours as God paraded the animals and birds before Adam. This is an expansion of Gen. 1:28. Adam is a genius, and although he is but a few hours old, he is able to devise names for these animals from his own intellect and free will. He is enthused about the animals, the garden, his fellowship with Jesus Christ, but he notices that there is no one on earth who is like himself.

 

So Yahweh God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man and he slept. The He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that place and the Yahweh God fashioned [or built] the rib which he had taken from the man into a woman and brought her to the man. [Gen. 2:21–22]


So far, there has only been one designation for Adam (apart from male in Gen. 1:27) in these chapters of Genesis: Adam. Adam is found in Gen. 1:27 2:5,7,8,16,18,19,20,21 and 22. It is translated both man and Adam; nevertheless, it is the same word. The word for woman is ʾîshshâh (אִשָּה) [pronounced eesh-SHAW] and this is the first time that it is used. Its usage will be explained in the next verse. This passage is simultaneously the first operation and the first nap (although it is more of a mid-morning nap rather than an afternoon nap).


What God chose to do here is interesting. God did not create Adam and the woman simultaneously as He did all of the animal creation. He did create them with two different sexes, unlike the angels who are essentially all male (Gen. 6 and Matt. 22:30). The angels have already seen the two different sexes in the animal kingdom, which the fallen angels probably viewed as quaint. Very likely there was not enough time to observe the two sexes to form much of an opinion; however, it would be a matter of semi-interesting speculation if God had originally created the male of the animal kingdom as the male is often today; the most attractive and flashy of the two sexes (e.g.. the lion or the peacock). However, the creation of the woman was an event, as was the creation of the man. It was not a matter a sudden creation in either case. The man was formed or fashioned from the elements of the earth as a potter would form or fashion something out of clay; and then God breathed into him the spark of lives (Gen. 2:7). Enough time was given to this for the angels to observe man's creation. Then, as man is naming the animals and having an aesthetic experience observing the garden, the angels noticed that there is no one else for man to have fellowship with. They were created with other angels. The animals were created with other animals and each specie (I hope that I am using this correctly) had a counterpart in the opposite sex. However, man did not; and both Adam and the angels noticed this.


God spent even more time with the creation of the woman than He did with the creation of Adam. He took the woman out of Adam; not unlike cloning today; and from these cells, built a woman. For hundreds of years, those of an interest in science might have made light of this, thinking it silly to make a woman from the bone of a man; however, as time goes on, we have found that throughout the entire body, the cells carry a blueprint for the entire person, making this act much more rational and understandable. The verb, in the Qal imperfect, is bânâh (בָּנָה) [pronounced baw-NAWH], and it means to build and is most often used with the construction of buildings. At this point in time, God created the most beautiful creature that He had created (this is my opinion). Satan was created dazzling and attractive, but the woman was breathtakingly beautiful. Even the angels found her beautiful; and the fallen angels found her desirable (as we will see in Gen. 6). God set two precedents here: (1) the oft-quoted, God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve; meaning God created man to spent the bulk of his time with a woman, rather than with other men; and that relationship was special, exclusive and permanent. (2) God brought Adam's right woman, his perfect mate, to him. Adam did not have to go and find her. There are a lot of things that we must, as people, go out and seek. Often, once we have completed our education and/or training, we must go out into the world and seek employment. Only a few have employment brought to them. However, we do not have to go out looking for our right woman. We do not have to comb the single's ads, go to bars or single's events in order to find our right woman. God set the precedent by bring them together Himself. There are several commands directly pertaining to marriage and the right man-right woman relationship; none of them involve going out and finding that person.


Why the rib and why do we have all of our ribs today? The latter question is easy: if you cut off a finger and then sire a child, the child will be born with all of his digits intact. The former question is more difficult to answer. There was a famous saying which went with this which had to do with the woman being created as man's equal close to his heart, but this is not the case. The woman was created second in command. Adam was to rule the household. This does not mean that the woman is inferior to the man. I have worked in several places where my boss, the authority above me, was not as intelligent as I was. They still had the authority over me. Inferiority or superiority of any inherent characteristic was never an issue; they were the chiefs and I was the Indian. Immediate context does not reveal Adam's position of authority. This is found later in Gen. 3:17 where blame is placed upon Adam for allowing the woman to call the shots. Satan will attack the human race through the woman, because if Adam orders her to eat from the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, then there will be two non-issues: (1) Adam would have taken the fruit, like the woman, under deception; and (2) the woman would be following the authority of the man—in either case, we do not have a clear-cut, free-will decision to disobey God. Also, Paul goes back to creation, prior to the fall, in order to establish the man's authority over the woman (1Cor. 11:3–11).


I should say something about morality in the state of innocence, or perfection, at this point. There was absolutely nothing that the man and the woman could do which would be considered immoral or wrong, except to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Apart from that, there were no moral issues and there was no old sin nature. What choices they would make and what choices there subsequent progeny would make, has God allowed procreation in the garden, we can only speculate. However, it is clear that there was no act of sin or immorality which they could do together in the garden. A system of morality and right and wrong had to be devised after the fall. This system changed somewhat from dispensation to dispensation. We will find that out in Gen. 4. In fact, one of the issues on trial is the concept of right and wrong and who determines what is right and what is wrong. Clearly, God is the final authority in these matters; but this is certainly one of the objections brought up at Satan's appeal trial. We, as individuals and as communities and nations, are faced every moment with decisions of morality and right and wrong. God has given us a system of morality for both the believer and the unbeliever; systems of authority to be obeyed, laws and regulations to be observed. Satan has also set up his own system of right and wrong. For any dispensation, there is but one system of right and wrong. However, Satan develops several systems of right and wrong for us to chose from; among them, situational ethics, free love, don't trust anyone over thirty, finding the good present in all religions, etc. In my lifetime, I have seen public opinion swayed from monogamous, lifetime marriages wherein sex occurred after the marriage and the commitment (an eye-opener to the incredibly change in mores can be seen in the James Cagney film is it Yankee Doodle Dandy??? (I have to check this out) to a short period of time where sex was seen as an expression of love (at least by the female) in or out of marriage to the eighties and nineties where people meet, are physically attracted, have sex, and then, sometimes, fall in love. Afterward, they may or may not get married. Man is only responsible to God for his moral decisions as God has revealed these to man in, what was in previous dispensations, partial revelation. I need to qualify that statement, but I am not certain as to how to do it. Cain committed many mental attitude sins toward Abel and then killed Abel. These were all wrong; however, God actually protected Cain after committing this murder. When I get to Gen. 4, I will cover the relationship between revelation, morality, right and wrong as it spans the various generations in more detail.

 

And the man said,

"This who now at last, bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh;

                        to this shall be called woman because she was taken out of man." [Gen. 2:23]


Man does what God has been having him do all along. He has been naming all the animals as God brought them to him. However, seeing the woman for the first time causes the man to become poetical and lyrical. He is inspired and we have the first recorded poetry in this verse. God did not have to tell Adam about the operation or the origin of woman; Adam recognizes immediately that the woman was not formed out of the ground, as he was, but directly from himself. Although the Bible does not mention it, this is love at first sight. Adam begins here with physical attraction (this is a precedent; most of us initially date or go out with people to whom we are physically attracted) and he will fall into total soul love in a very short time with the woman. Just seeing her inspires him to wax poetic, however, also somewhat of a precedent.


To cover the Hebrew; man's first word is zôʾth (זֹאת) [pronounced zoth], a word used as a demonstrative pronoun and as an adverb; it is in the feminine singular and can be translated in a variety of ways: here, this, and in poetry it is used as a relative pronoun: wherein, that which, this who. There is no verb in the first verse, denoting excitement and great passion. Paʿam (פַּעַם) [pronounced PAH-ģahm], the second word in Adam's first recorded speech has even a wider range of meanings: beat, foot, anvil, occurrence, once, this once, now at length, now at last. Apparently, this is a Hebrew word whose meaning changed markedly over the centuries. A reading of any passage in the KJV will reveal to the reader that all languages change; the KJV is but four hundred years and the Hebrew found in Genesis predates the Hebrew in Malachi by over a thousand years; perhaps much more since Moses was writing from source material which predated him by many centuries. The latter translation fits the context. Adam has just named hundreds of animals, relating them to a preexisting vocabulary which came with his creation. He has been amused and entertained by what God has brought to him, but nothing was a counterpart to him. The second verse begins with a preposition + zôʾth. There was no "Me Tarzan, you Jane." Adam had a fully functioning vocabulary in a number of different realms. He was created a human genius. Even though this word for man, ʾîysh (אִיש) [pronounced eesh] has not been used yet in the Bible, it was a part of Adam's vocabulary and it, unlike the word Adam, which can be applied to mankind, refers specifically to the male with an emphasis upon sexual and relational differences to the female. Adam therefore names her ʾîshshâh (אִשָּה) [pronounced eesh-SHAW]; or, more simply, ishshah, which came to mean woman as distinguished from a man, but at that time was not a word. It has a more poetic and softer sound than ish. The first verb, called, is in the Niphal, and this is the simple passive sense where the woman receives the action of the verb; she receives the designation isha. Taken from is in the Pual perfect, which is an accomplished, intensive act in the passive sense.


V. 24 seems parenthetical. If you read v. 23 and then v. 25, they appear to work together without v. 24. V. 24 begins with an adverb which refers back to the preceding verse. It can mean so, therefore, in such circumstances, for this reason, that being so. This is an addition or a footnote. It could have been added by Moses, but it was more likely added by the original author or by one who copied the source material. Make no mistake—this is a part of God's Word and fully inspired—this verse sets and emphasizes a precedent.

 

[For this reason, a man shall leave his father and his mother and shall cling to (have sex with) his wife; and they shall become one flesh] [Gen. 2:24]


R.B. Thieme, who was my pastor for over two decades, devised some peculiar vocabulary and designations, which, although they were different from what had been used in the past, essentially taught what diligent pastors have been teaching for centuries. One concept which he develops is the divine institution. This is a structure which has been designed by God and will exist throughout all of time; at least through the millennium. Three of these divine institutions have been presented so far:

The First Four Divine Institutions

Volition: God has decreed that man will be a free, moral sphere in this universe. This is discerned readily from Gen. 2:16–17, wherein God states a prohibition and a penalty (which indicates God's sovereign desire in this matter) and we see that Adam disobeyed that mandate in Gen. 3:6, indicating that man truly has free will. God created man with the ability, but not the desire, to disobey Him. This makes Adam a free moral sphere. I know that this seems like an overemphasis, but there are some Christians who do not believe that we have free will but that we are strictly puppets of God's sovereignty.

Work: Fundamental to Adam’s life was work. God did not make Adam to just be a layabout, sitting under a shady tree, by the river, sipping wine coolers.

Marriage: God designed for Adam, and, by precedence, almost all other men, a woman. There is a perfect time in which God will bring this woman to us and there are ways to ruin this relationship before it even begins, but that is the topic of an entire study. However, the principle is that God has designed a particular man for a particular woman and vice versa and if we wait on God, He will bring that person to us. The result is a lifetime relationship which separates us from the family that we were born into. The husband carries the authority in this relationship.

Family: The fourth divine institution is family; that is, two people marry and have children. God designed for those two people to raise these children and God will give certain restrictions, mandates and directives in raising these children. The parents are the authority and the children are under their authority. The children, when they leave the home; which is often to be done at marriage, at that point leave the authority of their parents.

The fifth divine institution is nation, which will not occur for quite awhile.


Chapter Outline

Charts, Graphics and Short Doctrines


We do not know who originally wrote this, but even if it was Adam, he still wrote this in retrospect, which means that, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, he would be allowed to edit as he saw fit. At this point in time, when examining the woman being brought to the man by God, the author points out that a precedent has been set and that precedent is that the new family unit is separate and distinct from the original family units. There is often still ongoing relationships, love and social activity, but the authority which once existed between the parents of the husband and the parents of the wife over the husband and the wife is no longer in effect. At the time when God brought the woman to the man, there was no family, no mother or father. Even the angels do not marry nor are they given in marriage (Matt. 22:30). In fact, the angels appear to be all males. So, at this time, there is no family and no precedence for a family. However, the writer (or inspired copyist) stopped at this point and inserted the pertinent information that this is why the man leaves his family and cleaves to his wife.


The words for man and woman are the same ones found in the previous verse. Cleave is the Qal perfect of the Hebrew word dâbaq (דָּבַק) [pronounced dawb-VAHK]. This word means to cling, to cleave, to hold fast to, to keep close.. In this case it refers to a union which is both permanent, total and sexual. The perfect tense tells us that this is a completed action That indicates the permanence. And they shall become one flesh modifies the meaning of cleave here and indicates that we are talking, at least in part, about sex. Become is in the Qal perfect; again indicating that this is a permanent action on the part of the man and the woman.

 

And the man and his woman were both naked and were not ashamed [or confused or disappointed]. [Gen. 2:25]


The divine precedence in marriage is set in both subtle and obvious ways. Notice the possessive pronoun found here. It is the man and his woman. There is no word for husband and wife in any of these verses–this is Adam and his ishshah. The v. 24 insert indicates that v. 23 set the precedence for marriage and v. 25 indicates that this is a unit from the beginning. Whether there is a marriage ceremony or not is unimportant. What is important is that this is a permanent, lifetime relationship.


The last word is the Hithpael imperfect of bôwsh (בּוֹש) [pronounced bôsh]. The Hithpael is reflexive action in the Piel (intensive stem); that is, the man and the woman act upon themselves (or, in this case, due to the negative, they do not act upon themselves). The word mens to be ashamed, disappointed, disconcerted, to feel shame, to be confounded. When we sin or fail, we are often disconcerted or we are ashamed of what we have done or confused by what we did. We may feel humiliated or disgraced in public. Adam and his woman felt none of these things. There is no indication that they are aware of the angels watching them, but they are aware of Jesus Christ in the garden and they are aware of each other; but in a state of innocence, there is no guilt or disappointment because they have done nothing wrong. They were created naked and they have no need of privacy. This is not a call to nudism. Contextually, they are innocent and in the Garden of Eden. No nudist colony can remove the old sin nature which is inside of us. We cannot recapture the Garden of Eden by some overt change which we make. We are not one step closer to perfection because we can wander about in public without clothing. This is a state of being which comes with perfection and innocence.


Internal Links

Beginning of Document/

Chapter Summaries

External Links

Genesis Chapter Links



Genesis 3


Genesis 3 has been completely reworked and may be found here: (HTML) (PDF) (WP–compressed). It is highly recommended that you go to that study instead of this one. These chapters are being completed one-by-one and will eventually supplant this incomplete study of Genesis.


Genesis 3:1–24


Maps, Charts and Short Doctrines:

 

       v.      3           Satan’s Appearance

       v.     16           Scar Tissue of the Soul

       v.     24           The Cherubim of God


Introduction: Chapter 3 brings the fall of man. As was mentioned in the previous chapter, we do not know how long this state of innocence lasted. It is possible that man's fall occurred within the week. I like to think of it as a long time; a decade or a century, but that is personal romanticism. Because we cannot put a time on the birth of Cain relative to man's total existence, we cannot get a fix on this time period. The best we can do is speculate: Adam is 130 years old when he sired Seth (Gen. 5:5), who is not necessarily his third child and not necessarily even his third male child (although that is most likely). If Adam had sired Cain and Abel and daughters within the previous decade or two and if his age was calculated upon his beginning in the garden, then man may have spent a century in the Garden of Eden in a state of innocence. Adam and the woman had settled down into some sort of a routine and that routine sometimes included time away from each other, even in perfect environment without two old sin natures. They had both been carefully instructed by Jesus Christ in the garden not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Perfect environment for them included being taught knowledge (or, Bible doctrine if you will) by Jesus Christ in the garden, time together and time alone, sex, eating, enjoying the view and no children.


The angels and Satan had the earth under observation. Satan is intelligent beyond what we can imagine, although he is not omniscient. We can be certain that he carefully planned his attack. We do not know how many other attacks which he made upon the man and the woman. He had one objective, however, and that was to get man and the woman to sin against God. He and his demon troops had all been sentenced to spend eternity in the Lake of Fire and he appealed this decision. He was certainly filled with rage and jealousy against man and this idyllic existence. First of all, the man enjoyed sex with his right woman, something which Satan never had the opportunity to do. Then, although man was weak and stupid by comparison, he enjoyed a life far better than Satan would ever enjoy. See the doctrine of the Fall of Satan. What was Satan's objective here? Very likely, he wanted to show how unfair God would be to Adam and the woman when they sinned just as God had been so unfair to Satan for his sin. Satan judged God's objectives, motives and decisions based upon his own fallen nature and made false conclusions based upon his false assumptions. At this time, Satan had no idea how long human history would last; how long until he would be cast into the Lake of Fire; nor did he know that God would come to earth as a man and pay for Adam's sin and every subsequent sin of mankind. Satan, in his arrogance, just wanted to stir up trouble. It would seem likely that Satan even sat back and observed for a time being, hoping that Adam would, of his own free will, choose against God and take from the forbidden tree.


Satan enters into the body of the serpent (possibly an extinct animal; more than likely it is a snake since the same word continues to occur in the Old Testament). Or Satan takes on the form of a serpent. Possibly God does not allow Satan to manifest himself bodily to the woman at this point because he is a creature of tremendous beauty and he has a marvelous personality and he would have charmed the woman into whatever course of action he chose due to his incredible presence. However, we do have a precedence set here: Satan begins by using demon possession and speaking in tongues. The serpent takes on the characteristics of Satan.

 

Now the serpent was more crafty [subtle or cunning] than any beast in the wild which Yahweh God has made. He then said to the woman, "Indeed, has God said, 'You shall not eat from every tree of the garden'?" [Gen. 3:1]


All animals have some sort of intelligence, but the serpent was crafty because this is a manifestation of Satan (or in the alternative, a serpent indwelt by Satan). There is possibly even a bit of mockery and tongue-in-cheek here. The serpent is even smarter and craftier than the other members of the animal kingdom. This is a status achieved by Satan: craftier than the other animals. The word for crafty is ʿârûwm (עָרוּם) [pronounced ģaw-ROOM], and it means subtle, crafty, shrewd, cunning, sly and sensible. Whether it is used in a good sense or a bad sense is determined by context. It is found in Proverbs in a good sense. Satan's attack was certainly subtle. He attacks the woman. There are no threats, no attempt to cause her fear (which might not have been possible). He just talks to the woman; explores the thoughts of her soul. He wants to know how she feels. "This is your garden, honey, and God has not allowed you to eat from every tree? Now, just how do you feel about that?" This recorded passage is not every conversation that the woman had with Satan nor is it the entirety of this particular conversation. Since there is no indication that any animal ever spoke (nor do they have the vocal cords which have the ability to speak as we do), Satan then must have been allowed by God to either alter the vocal cords or to throw his voice, as it were. The first thing out of his mouth was certainly not about the tree. He had to talk to the woman so that she would not be frightened or confused because an animal was speaking to her and then he needed to get her confidence. This possibly involved several conversations prior to this time; or this could be midway through his first conversation with her. Satan is exceptionally brilliant and his attack on perfect environment had to be clever. He does not go to the man. He spots a vulnerability in the woman and exploits that vulnerability. He also has noticed that Adam is vulnerable through the woman. However, at this point, Satan may not care about Adam's decision. Whether Adam follows her in sin or whether he remains in a state of perfection; either outcome would very likely fit into Satan's incompletely formed plan. He just wants at least one of these creatures who occupy his one-time realm, to fall and sin against God. Satan speaking is in the Qal imperfect, indicating an ongoing conversation; however, God said is in the Qal perfect, implying a finality and a mandate which may not be altogether fair.


Indeed is the Hebrew word ʾaph (אַף) [pronounced ahf] and it is a conjunction which introduces a new, emphatic thought. It can be translated also, indeed, really. Thieme renders this conjunction is it really true that. Satan does not even refer to the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. He will allow the woman to bring it up. He is speaking as though he has heard this rumor and he's just curious whether or not it is true. The woman answers the serpent:

 

And the woman said to the serpent, "From the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat; but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, 'You shall not eat from it or touch it, or else you will die.'" [Gen. 3:2–3]


The woman reveals that either she has not been listening or she has had a doctrinal breakthrough which she has been dying to share with someone. God never said anything about touching the tree. This reminds me of the story Garrison Keilor would tell about the pump handle in back of the grade school in winter. If you put your tongue on it, your spit would freeze and you might have to stay there all winter. Therefore, the younger kids, fully aware of these consequences would not go back there unless they had to, and if they did, they would keep their mouths firmly shut at all times. So the woman thought that she had better not even touch it. The property of death was not inherent in the tree but in her volition with respect to the tree. She does not mention the title of the tree, and she is even a little confused on the doctrine of what will actually happen. She does not say in dying you will die, she merely says that you will be dying. This is in the imperfect voice, so that incomplete action is implied. Satan knows that he has her now. She has misquoted God's Word. She does not even have the gist of it. This indicates that she is not paying close attention in Bible class. Even Satan will correctly quote God's Word (and then negate it).

 

And the serpent said to the woman, "It is not true that in a state of death that you will begin to die!" [Gen. 3:4]


Dying is used twice in this verse. It is used in exactly the way Yahweh Elohim used the verb in Gen. 2:17. It is first found in the Qal infinitive absolute along with a negative, and then in the Qal imperfect second masculine plural. An infinitive absolute acts as a verbal noun and it can be used to intensify a meaning or to complement a meaning. We have come to a full understanding of spiritual and temporal death, and therefore translate these two words in a state of death, you will begin to die. Satan adds a negative to the Qal infinitive absolute, and could be cumbersomely translated, It is not true that in a state of death you will die. This could be shortened to in dying, you will not die. Note also that when God spoke these words originally to Adam, the suffix was the second masculine singular; however, when Satan speaks to the woman, he uses the second masculine plural, telling her that neither she nor Adam would die. Thieme, at one time, gave the rather free translation, "the wages of sin isn't death, honey; eat". Satan continues lying to the woman:

 

"For God knows that in the day you [both] eat from it, your eyes will be opened and you will be like God, knowing good and evil." [Gen. 3:5]


This is the beginning of false religion. God has a clearly revealed will here. There is no mistaking what He has told Adam and the woman. Just as there is no mistaking what we are told over and over again in the New Testament: believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved. I have put together roughly 4–5 pages of verses which say basically that. That is probably the most basic mandate of the Bible yet cults and religion deny it; they deny the Lord who bought them, and substitute in a set of works. Adam and the woman had one negative mandate to test their volition, and it was to not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Satan, as the father of religion, ignores or distorts God's revealed truth and offers in replacement his own works or theology. He has told the woman that she will come to be as smart as God. He does not deny that the tree will provide the knowledge of good and evil; but that the result of knowing good and evil will be different than that which God outlined.


Let me offer an analogy: parents will protect their children as long as they can from the way that the world is. There is no need to expose them to obscene language or to profanity; no need for them to be confused by excessive violence or by the misuse of sex; no need for them to be faced with drugs. Parents will try to keep these things from their children as long as possible, even though these things are found out there in the real world. It is impossible to keep a child from these things for their entire life because we do live in the devil's world and we are faced with his distortions of God's provisions daily; however, most parents, if they could protect their children from association with any of these things up until the child is 14 or 18 or even 21, they would. There is no need for our children to be faced at a young age, in innocence, as it were, to inappropriate language, violence, sex and drugs. We certainly, as the time comes, give outlines of mandates concerning these things. This is analogous to Yahweh God in the garden with Adam and the woman. They had no need to be faced with Satan's fall or Satan's system or Satan's religions. God had provided them a perfect, idyllic existence in the Garden of Eden. They had everything they needed and what Satan did or thought was not an issue to them; just as the immorality or viciousness of humankind is not an issue to a four-year-old child..


Although speaking just to the woman, Satan includes the man in on these conversations. All of the second person references and suffixes are in the plural. He said, "You [plural] will be like God [plural]; knowers of good and evil." As Thieme has said many times; the woman did not become as smart as God; she instead found out how smart God was. So the woman goes up and inspects the tree carefully. In one verse we find a change in life as has never been seen since in human history. In the space of a few minutes, the bodies fo Adam and the woman will change, the world will change, and corruption, degeneration and decay will become a part of life.

 

When the woman saw that the tree was good for food and that it [was] desirable to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to cause one to be wise; she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her man with her and he ate. [Gen. 3:6]


The word for good is the same one as is found in Gen. 1:10,12, 18. In fact, so is the word for saw or observed, which is found in the Qal imperfect in all three verses. What is different is that God observed that it was (Qal perfect tense) and there is no corresponding verb in v. 6. The perfect tense is a completed action and what He created was completely and totally good. The woman does not use this verb. She examines the tree and notes to herself, good for food. The word translated a delight or pleasant to the eyes is taʾăvâh (תַּאֲוָה) [pronounced tah-uh-VAW] and it means more than just pleasant. It means desirable or something which causes lust or longing for. Strong’s #8378 BDB #16. There is a similar (in meaning) verb found in the Niphal (passive voice) of châmad (חָמַד) [pronounced khaw-MAHD]. It means to be desired. Strong's #2530 BDB #326. Both words can be used in a good and a bad sense.


The woman, after careful study of the tree and the fruit, takes the fruit Footnote and eats. She suddenly realizes that she has done something wrong. She suddenly has a conscience and recognizes that there is good and evil in this world. This acted upon her as sin acts upon us. Our fellowship with God is immediately broken when we sin. Her fellowship with God was broken immediately at the eating of this fruit. She has several options before her, but her option of choice is to find the man and put him into the same boat as she is. She has been deceived, although God made it clear as to what was acceptable and what was not. She broke the only negative commandment of God and is in a state of confusion.


Satan, upon seeing man in the Garden of Eden, with the woman, in perfect environment and in a state of bliss, chose to do whatever he could to cause man to fall; to be in the same position that he is in. The woman will react to her own fall the same way. Rather than go to Adam and discuss this, she brings the fruit to him. This may have been the first ultimatum given by a woman to a man and it may have been an unspoken ultimatum. God does not reveal this to us. However, there is no confusion with Adam. He has not been deceived. He knows exactly what the issue is. Any man who has ever been head over heels in love understands what Adam does in this verse. There is a clear-cut choice for him. He has seen animal after animal when he named them and recognized that there was no one in the animal kingdom for him. It was when God brought the woman to him that he realized and recognized his lifetime counterpart. There are no singles bars; there are no other options that he is aware of; there is one woman for Adam; woman that he is in love with and desires beyond anything else in the world, and she stands before him holding the fruit that Yahweh God has specifically told him not to eat. He knows that the woman has partaken of the fruit. Even if the woman did not say a thing to Adam, the very fact of her holding the fruit before him has told him that she has eaten from the tree. Now he has to decide between his creator and what God created for him. He has to decide between the love of his life and Jesus Christ in the garden. He does not fully understand the outcome of what he is about to do, but he does recognize that he has a choice that is clear-cut: Jesus Christ or the woman. Adam chose; as federal head of the human race, he chose for all of us at that time. Just as when a president declares war on a country and congress approves, we are at war with that country because they act as our federal heads. Adam was so much in love with the woman and was so worried that he might lose her, that he chose her above everything else.


We all have free will and we all make choices; some which have devastating effect on our lives for decades. Those who at a young age became involved with drugs or illicit sex have caused themselves problems with far-reaching results. With drugs, there are portions of our brains which might not ever function up to par ever again. With pre-marital sex, we might lose out on the right person designed by God for us. We might be out fornicating with some inconsequential person while our right person persistently is knocking on our door. After awhile, that person gives up and we are left with emptiness and swinging at the wind. Adam had no concept as to the long-term effect of his sin. He did know his Creator, however, and God told Adam emphatically not to eat of the tree. There are certain mistakes that we make with our lives; even fundamental mistakes that we make after salvation; after our teen years. There have been wonderful marriages and families destroyed by adultery. One of the purposes of filling our souls with doctrine is that not only do we know what the prohibitions are but we know why and the rationale behind these prohibitions. We have a better grasp on the longevity of our mistakes and might chose for once not to make stupid mistakes because we have a well-rounded view of what the sin is and the results of that sin. Certainly, the more we know about God's Word, the more prohibitions that we learn; but we also learn why these are prohibitions. It is much easier to listen when someone tells you that something is hot and that you will burn yourself than it is to find that out first-hand.


With a human conscience and being out of fellowship with God, Adam and the woman begin acting in accordance with their new found conscience. I hate to make this analogy because it is not an exact analogy, but dogs do not realize that they are naked and this never bothers them whether they are in a crowd or alone. Adam and the woman were naked and it did not bother them to be that way before the animal kingdom, before Jesus Christ, before each other; and, if they were aware of the angelic kingdom, before the angels. Clothes were not an issue to them. This is not an argument for nudism. That is not the point. Nudists recognize that they are naked. Even a nudist would be embarrassed to be au natural in certain places and under certain circumstances. However, this had never been an issue to Adam and the woman until now.

 

Then the eyes of both of them were opened and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made for themselves loin coverings. [Gen. 3:7]


We find here the first act of human good. Whether they covered themselves up or continued to go without clothes; that is a non-issue. The issue here was that they ate of the fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. They do not think about Jesus Christ; they have forgotten about Him almost entirely. Their fellowship with God is broken and it will require God to restore this fellowship. God will have to seek them out. God will have to clothe them. He will need to cover their naked sinfulness. However, their sinfulness cannot be covered with a loin cloth made out of any material other than animal skins; and the animal must be an animal without spot and without blemish, an animal guilty of no wrongdoing; an animal which speaks of Jesus Christ who would go to the cross and die on behalf of this sin.

 

And they heard the sound of Yahweh God walking in the garden in the spiritual portion of the day, and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of Yahweh God in the forest of the garden. [Gen. 3:8]


Tree is in the singular, but then it is in the singular back in Gen. 1:11. It behaves like our word forest—it can in the singular refer to trees in the collective sense. Walking and hid are both in the Hithpael stem, which is reflexive. The time of day in the NASB is translated as the cool of the day (or, the wind breeze of the day). The New Revised Standard Version calls this at the time of the evening breeze. Even the Emphasized Bible gives several similar renderings. The Amplified Bible doesn't amplify anything here. It is just cool of the day. I mentions this to show how having several translations does not always give you a better idea of what is being presented. Certainly, you're thinking, big deal, it's moderately chilly, there's a breeze in the air and maybe it's daytime or early evening; I've got the gist of it. There are two nouns here, the second one being the common noun for day and found in Gen. 1:5,8,14,19, etc. The first word found here is rûwach (רוּחַ) [pronounced ROO-ahkh]. Rûwach has several meanings and this word has already occurred in Genesis 1:2 and it can be translated wind, breath or breeze, but it is usually translated spirit. This is the spiritual part of the day; this is when God came to talk with Adam and the woman in the garden; to have fellowship with them and to teach them.


God's Word, good food, right man/right woman and sex were all a part of perfect environment. What is indicated by this phrase is that there was a particular portion of the day devoted to fellowship with God. You cannot grow spiritually on Sunday worship service; nor can you grow spiritually by attending Sunday worship, Sunday school and Sunday evenings. We are continually inundated with human viewpoint; every person that we talk to, everything that we read and everything that we see on television is filled with human viewpoint. We are constantly bathed in the devil's world with human viewpoint. We are brainwashed and socially conditioned to think in certain ways; to believe certain things. Take any page of the newspaper, any ten minutes on television, any five-minute conversation with another person. You are receiving a way of thinking, a standard that you are to adhere to in the devil's world and it is wrong. Often there is just enough truth mixed in there to make it palatable. We only have one line of defense and that is God's Word. There is only one way to live in this devil's world and it begins with our thinking. If Adam and the woman required fellowship with God and spiritual truth on a daily basis to where there was a specific time period set aside for this; then how much more do we as Christians need this fellowship and feeding on the Word?


The man and the woman have been receiving Bible teaching from Jesus Christ in the garden for perhaps a century and they do not remember that God is omnipresent. They do not flee the garden because that is their home. This is not unlike hiding in a closet or the attic of one's home. They do not call out to God; they do not present themselves to God. They are in a fallen state. They do not know how to have fellowship with God nor do they desire fellowship with God. God will have to make all of the first moves in order restore fellowship in this new world. Therefore, God will call to them.

 

Then the Lord God called to the man, and said to him, "Where are you?" [Gen. 3:9]


God must speak first and He calls to the man, as the federal head of the earth. God is omniscient and He knows where they both are, but He must open the lines of communication. God must always reach out to us to provide us a grace means or a non-meritorious way to have fellowship or to restore fellowship with Him. God's question is a simple interrogative adverb with a second person, masculine singular suffix.

 

And he said, "I heard the sound of You in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid myself." [Gen. 3:10]


Even though the sound of you sounds stilted in the English, this is perhaps the best way to translate this phrase. Your voice sounds better, but Adam and the woman hide themselves when they here Jesus Christ walking in the garden. Note what occurs; Adam is fearful, an emotion that he has never had before; and he immediately justifies himself (which he will continue to do throughout this chapter). He possessed no shame or regret prior to his fall. Being naked before God and before his right woman was not an issue. He has always been naked and at this point in time, he is covered with a loin cloth, so he is not even naked now. And note, more importantly, he does not tell God that he is hiding because he ate of the fruit. God knows all of what has happened. His speaking to the man is to restore fellowship and to pass judgement on the man and the woman. However, the facts must be clearly stated for the man, and the woman and for all angelic creation. This is the purpose of the subsequent interrogation.

 

And He said, "Who revealed to you [or caused you to know] that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree from which I commanded you not to eat?" [Gen. 3:11]


The verb often translated told is the Hiphil perfect of the Hebrew word nâgad (נָגַד) [pronounced naw-GAHD]; and it means to be conspicuous. The Hiphil stem is the causative stem. Adam has been caused to know something, his nakedness has been made conspicuous to him or declared and revealed to him. As far as Adam is concerned, there is no one to tell him that he is naked other than Jesus Christ in the garden. We have no indication that Adam spoke to Satan in any form (although that would have been possible). Adam knows that he is naked because he has eaten from the tree and Adam knows that God knows this because he covered himself. God was never confused as to what happened; He knew what would happen in eternity past. He is not interrogating the man for the purpose of information; He is by-passing any lying and as many side-issues as possible. Adam will certainly pass the buck and blame everyone else in his vicinity, but God has at least headed him off at the pass when it comes to lying. Eaten and commanded are both in the perfect tense, meaning completed action; God left a standing command concerning the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and when Adam ate of the tree, it was a completed action, not to be repeated and with permanent results.

 

And the man said, "The woman, whom You gave [to be] with me, she gave me from the tree and I ate." [Gen. 3:12]


Adam has been immediately transformed from being a man to a child with several excuses. He blames the woman because she gave the fruit to him. He is not even going to give the woman's side of the story or cover up what she did; he blames the affair on her, the one he loves, and then blames God because God gave the woman to him. The word for gave is the same word in this verse and both times it is in the Qal perfect to match the two Qal perfects in the previous verse. According to Adam, he just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. He was just standing there, minding his own business when God drops a woman in his lap and then the woman drops the forbidden fruit into his hand. There is no inherent nobility in Adam; he does not immediately take responsibility for his actions.


At this point in time, Satan is quite pleased with himself. He did not attack the man directly. Had he deceived the man, the man's responsibility would have been lessened (but not eliminated). Furthermore, since the man was the head of the earth, he could have commanded the woman to eat of the fruit and her volition would not have been involved. The woman is to obey the man and her disobedience to God would have been a non-issue. However, the woman still chose to eat of the tree of her own free will, although she was deceived by Satan (at that point in time, it was unknown that anyone would lie). Adam took of the fruit knowing exactly the responsibility of his action. Satan did to. Satan wanted them to be in as deep a water as he was in. I don't think that he had a clearly-formed plan other than to make certain that the man and the woman fell. Very likely one of his arguments was So what if I fell; I can fix everything. Just give me a portion of the universe to hang in and I'll be fine. Perhaps he said, I'll never do it again. However, this incident, along with the rest of human history reveals to us that Satan cannot be allowed to roam the universe freely. He will be in chains through the millennium (which is one of the reasons there is perfect environment), but when he is released, he will immediately lead a rebellion against perfect environment. Once a creature has fallen, he is a danger to the entire universe. Satan, in his arrogance and vindictiveness, will not allow any of God's creation to live unspoiled. Apparently, when innocence rebels against God, there is a fundamental change in its nature. This cannot be strictly a natural law, because God sets up the laws of the universe. However, this has to be a logical result which is fully compatible with God's essence. In fact, this fundamental change in a fallen creature's nature and God's judgement and punishment of same has to be. Any other result would be totally incompatible with God's character. The only modification possible to these results would be for a person, undeserving of punishment, to receive our punishment and the judgement for our sins; to endure the hell which we certainly deserve. That is the only basis for our pardon.

 

Then the Lord God said to the woman, "What is this you have done?" And the woman said, "The serpent deceived me, and I ate." [Gen. 3:13]


Jesus Christ continues His inquiry. This is not because He doesn't know what has occurred; God is omniscient and He knows all of the facts. This is for the court record and for the benefit of all angelic and human creation. Some angels were not there; and none of us were there. So, the facts must be stated for the record. The facts will be presented and then God will render His decision. He began with Adam because Adam was the ruler of the earth. God put him in charge (Gen. 1:28). He will allow the buck to be passed and then God will handle to judgement in the reverse order. Even though these creatures will blame someone else and think that they are off the hook; God's judgement will leave no one off the hook.


Satan has already been tried and convicted. He is in the midst of his appeal trial. God will stop with the woman and pronounce judgement. God has heard all of Satan's appeals already. Even the serpent will receive a judgment of sorts; which is more symbolic perhaps than a real judgement. Don't misunderstand me; God certainly did judge the serpent and there were real results; however, the purpose of the judgement was more symbolic than judicial.

 

And the Lord God said to the serpent, "Because you have done this, you are more cursed than all of cattle [and more cursed] than every beast of the field. On your belly you shall walk and the dust you shall eat." [Gen. 3:14]


Satan’s Appearance

 1.   There is no indication in the Bible that man has ever seen Satan.

 2.    All of our manifestations or representations of Satan are poor caricatures. The fellow in the red suit with the forked tail and pitch fork is not even close. If anything, Dracula is a semi-reasonable concept of Satan, yet still not accurate.

 3.    Satan's actually appearance is one of incredible beauty and attractiveness (Ezek. 28:12–13).

 4.    What we see in human history are the creatures which Satan has occupied. Satan occupies very few creatures because he is not omnipresent; therefore, when he indwells a creature, he is confined to that place, which Satan would find to be very stifling. However, we can reasonably guess that he indwelt this serpent (Rev. 12:9 20:2), Judas (Luke 22:3 John 13:27), and possibly some world leaders such as Hitler or Stalin.

 5.    Therefore, God judges the serpent, an animal, as a symbolic judgement of Satan; a judgement which we will observe throughout human history.

 6.    The test implies that the serpent either stood up on hind legs or had legs and feet that he walked upon like a lizard. There was an actually, physiological change in the serpent which has remained with this animal until this day. However, the judgement, although it is a real, physical judgement, its purpose was more of a symbolic judgement of Satan.


Chapter Outline

Charts, Graphics and Short Doctrines


God continues His judgement of Satan:

 

"And I will put hostility between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head and you shall bruise Him on the heel." [Gen. 3:15]


This is the first foreshadowing of the cross. Jesus Christ is the seed of the woman. In His incarnation, He will not have a biological father. He will be born of a virgin. This is more than just a sign. When we are born, we have a human father and this father passes onto us the old sin nature. The father determines our sex without any input whatsoever from the mother; similarly, because Adam sinned deliberately, making a clear, free-will choice, a choice which was not subject to fraud or misrepresentation; he therefore passes on the old sin nature, as do all of his sons. It is found in the father's sperm and this contaminates every egg. Because of this the old sin nature is found in each and every cell of the human body. There is one exception and that is the egg of the mother. Because the woman sinned under deception, she will carry within her body a perfect, undefiled egg, each and every month. Jesus Christ, because He was born of a virgin, was born without inheriting the old sin nature from the male. He was still tempted as we are, but He resisted all temptation. Our Savior must be without sin; otherwise He could not die for our sins because He would have to die for His own sin. Because of all this, Jesus Christ is called the seed of the woman. The serpent's seed refers to all unbelievers. The Bible does not teach the universal fatherhood of God. Those who are unbelievers take after their father, Satan (Matt. 13:38 John 8:31–44 Acts 13:10 1John 3:10).


Unfortunately, The New English Bible reads: I will put enmity between you and the woman, between your brood and hers. They shall strike at your head and you shall strike at their heel. This translation completely confuses those who read this version. There is no they in this verse. The verb, shûwph (ףש) [pronounced shoof] means to greatly injure or wound, to bruise, to grind, to snap at. Almost every lexicon gives a different meaning for this verb. It is used twice in this verse and the meaning in both cases should be to wound or to inflict serious injury to. The New English Bible ignores the parsing of the verb. The first use of shûwph is the third person masculine singular with a second person masculine suffix, and it means he shall wound you(r head). The second use of this word is in the second masculine singular with a third masculine singular suffix, meaning (and) you shall wound Him (His heel). The point here is that there is no plural. In fact, every verb and noun is in the singular in this verse. The seed of the woman is not Christians, Jews or good people; it is Jesus Christ in His incarnation. The serpent is Satan. When a one crushes (or greatly injures) the head of a snake, he kills the snake. Jesus Christ will greatly wound Satan when Satan is locked away in prison for a thousand years (Rev. 20:2–3) and then after he is released, Jesus Christ will throw him into the Lake of Fire (Rev. 20:10) However, when Satan wounds Christ on the heel, Jesus Christ will die, enduring on the cross an eternity of hells on our behalf. However, when He is finished, He will be raised from the dead to sit on the right hand of God for eternity (Matt. 19:28 Rev. 3:21).

 

To the woman, He said, "I will greatly multiply your pain and your conception. In pain, you will bring forth sons; yet your craving shall be toward your man and he will rule over you." [Gen. 3:16]


The KJV, the NRSV and the NASB and most other translations translate a portion of this as "I will greatly multiply your pain in childbirth" (or words to that effect). Since there is an incredible amount of pain associated with childbirth, many translators have allowed this translation to stand. However, it is literally your pain and your conception. The next phrase tells us that there would be pain in childbirth. The literal translation is, in pain, you will bring forth sons rather than bring forth children. In perfect environment, there was no pain or suffering and there was no childbirth. Both of these came as a result of the woman's eating the fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.


The Hebrew word translated desire or craving is teshûwqâh (תֶּשוּקָה) [pronounced tesh-oo-KAW]. This is a very rare word in the Old Testament, found only three times (also in Gen. 4:7 and SOS 7:10). It refers to an intense desire. Although there is a Hebrew word for husband, it is not found in this verse. This is the word for man as separate from woman. It does refer to Adam as her husband; but better as her right-man. A normal woman will crave her right man to the point of obsession. In a degenerate society where the males do not behave with honor and the females make a great many poor choices, this becomes distorted. Two simple explanations are the sin nature and scar tissue. The sin nature distorts the soul and the scar tissue on the soul reduces natural function.


At this point, I ought to explain what scar tissue is:

Scar Tissue of the Soul

1.    This is another term developed by R. B. Thieme, Jr. in order to explain a Biblical concept. There are a myriad of terms used in traditional theology which are not found in the Bible, including the accurate word trinity.

       a.    Vocabulary is necessary in this life. It is necessary in school—in every subject at school, at your job, and in theology. You are only able to think with a vocabulary. When I was a teacher, I taught my honors students how to build a mathematical system from scratch, and one of the most important aspects of this assignment was the development of a consistent and reasonably descriptive vocabulary. That is, you would not use the word quad to describe the Trinity. It makes more sense to use a word with which people are familiar; or a word that is made up of words with which people are familiar, and use the word to stand for a concept.

       b.    I simply mention these things because R. B. Thieme, Jr.’s vocabulary sometimes throws people for a loop; and some think that his teachings are cultic because of the vocabulary. A cult is not defined by having a specialized vocabulary, no more than the first person who came up with the term Trinity was a cultist.

2.    Definition: scar tissue is what develops on the essence of the soul as a result of negative volition toward God and/or Bible Doctrine. For the unbeliever, scar tissue also can build up on their souls when they reject divine establishment principles and hold to utopian philosophies or to messiah-like political or religious figures. To understand how this works: let’s say that your vacuum cleaner becomes filled with soot, hair, carpet fuzz or whatever. At some point, it loses its ability to create suction. There is no more a flow of air through a designated path. We “breathe” in information and we exhale this information in terms of what we do, think and say. If we breathe in Bible doctrine, divine viewpoint and divine establishment thinking, then we breathe out the correct application of these things. If we breathe in false doctrine, anti-establishment thinking and./or religion, we exhale this in our daily lives. If you can imagine your lungs covered over with scar tissue so that you cannot breathe properly, that is a physical parallel to scar tissue of the soul.

3.    In case you did not know, there are Greek words from the Bible which describe this soul condition.

       a.    Verb: pôroô (πωρόω) [pronounced pon-ROH-oh], which means, 1) to cover with a thick skin, to harden by covering with a callus; 2) metaphorically; 2a) to make the heart dull; 2b) to grow hard, callous, become dull, lose the power of understanding. Thayer definition only. Strong’s #4456. Mark6:52 8:17 Jn.12:40 Rom.11:7 2Cor.3:14.

       b.    Feminine noun: pôrôsis (πώρωσις) [pronounced POH-roh-sis], which means, 1) the covering with a callus; 2) obtrusiveness of mental discernment, dulled perception; 3) the mind of one has been blunted; 3a) of stubbornness, obduracy. Thayer definition only. Strong’s #4457. Mk.3:5 Rom.11:25 Eph.4:18

       c.     Feminine noun: sklêrotês (σκληρότης) [pronounced sklay-ROHT-ace], which means, 1) hardness; 2) obstinacy, stubbornness. Thayer definition only. Maranatha church adds: petrified, hard like petrified wood. Strong’s #4643. Rom. 2:4–5

       d.    Feminine. noun: sklêrokardia (σκληροκαρδία) [pronounced sklay–rok–ar–DEE–ah], which means, hardness of heart. Thayer definition only. Strong’s #4641. Matt. 19:8, Mark 10:5, Mark 16:14

       e.    Adjective sklêrotrachêlos (σκληροτρֱχηλος) [pronounced sklay-rot-RAKH-ah-los], which means, 1) stiffnecked; 2) stubborn, headstrong, obstinate. Thayer definition only. Strong’s #4644. Acts 7:51

       f.     Verb sklêrunô (σκληρύνω) [pronounced sklay-ROO-no], which means, 1) to make hard, harden; 2) metaphorically; 2a) to render obstinate, stubborn; 2b) to be hardened; 2c) to become obstinate or stubborn. Thayer definition only. Maranatha church adds to petrify. Strong’s #4645.

4.    Eph.4:17-19 gives us the mechanics of scar tissue: This, therefore, I am saying and solemnly declaring in the Lord, that no longer are you to be ordering your behavior as the Gentiles order their behavior in the futility of their mind, being those who have their understanding darkened, who have been alienated from the life of God through the ignorance which is in them, through the hardening of their hearts, who, being of such a nature as to have become callous, abandoned themselves to wantonness, resulting in a performing of every uncleanness in the sphere of greediness. (Weust) Or the ESV: Now this I say and testify in the Lord, that you must no longer walk as the Gentiles do, in the futility of their minds. They are darkened in their understanding, alienated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them, due to their hardness of heart. They have become callous and have given themselves up to sensuality, greedy to practice every kind of impurity.

5.    R. B. Thieme Jr. takes this passage apart: This, therefore, I {Paul} explain/communicate and make 'an emphatic honest demand'/'testify under oath' by means of the Lord, for the purpose that you all no longer continue walking just as also the Gentiles {acting as reversionistic unbelievers} who keep walking, by means of the 'mataiotes'/vacuum/nothingness/emptiness of their mind/'left lobe of the soul'. {Note: Mataiotes means emptiness or devoid-ness. It therefore refers to a lack of doctrine in the soul resulting in a vacuum of the soul. The empty space is therefore filled with human viewpoint and/or 'doctrines of demons'. The next stage in reversionism is scar tissue of the soul; which leads to the sin unto death if they continue in reversionism.} Having become darkened in their {way of} thinking . . . {scar tissue of the soul - blackout of the soul - no objective type thinking} {1} having been estranged {warning stage}/ {2} alienated {intensified stage}/ {3} excluded {final stage - sin unto death} {apallotrioo} from the {concept of} life of their God . . . because of the ignorance which keeps on being in them {blackout - negative to doctrine} . . . because of the hardness of their 'right lobe'/heart. {Note: Apallotrioo has three meaning - estranged, alienated, and excluded. They are all applicable here depending on which stage of black out of the soul the believer is in.} {Reversionism Leads to a Frantic Search for Happiness} Who/'which category' {of reversionists} while having become callused {by scar tissue of the soul} . . . have 'betrayed themselves'/'given themselves over' to promiscuous debauchery {means illicit sexual activity, adultery, lasciviousness, licentiousness, being unrestrained}, resulting in the practice of every kind of immorality . . . in the sphere of insatiable lusts {desires/greediness in three categories - sexual, arrogance, power}.

6.    The idea is, if you reject Bible doctrine, then your mind becomes a vacuum which sucks in human viewpoint and cosmic thinking, which covers your soul in scar tissue, which thinking eventually blinds you [this is known as blackout of the soul]. The great unhappiness which results can lead you on a frantic search for happiness, wherein you give in to your lusts, becoming a slave to your lusts.

7.    Scar tissue can form on the heart (thinking) of the believer, which is illustrated by the Exodus generation. They had one of the greatest leaders of all time—Moses—leading while being guided by God. They saw tremendous miracles, and yet, their faith in Yehowah yielded nearly no positive spiritual results. Although they walked out of Egypt, God eventually had to take the first generation of believers (Gen X) out under the sin unto death before they could move into the land of promise.

8.    The solution to scar tissue is given in the verses which follow its description in Eph. 4: But that is not the way you learned Christ!-- assuming that you have heard about him and were taught in him, as the truth is in Jesus, to put off your old self, which belongs to your former manner of life and is corrupt through deceitful desires, and to be renewed in the spirit of your minds, and to put on the new self, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness. Therefore, having put away falsehood, let each one of you speak the truth with his neighbor, for we are members one of another. Be angry and do not sin; do not let the sun go down on your anger, and give no opportunity to the devil. Let the thief no longer steal, but rather let him labor, doing honest work with his own hands, so that he may have something to share with anyone in need. Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear. And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in Christ forgave you (Eph. 4:20–32, ESV).

9.    Exegeting this passage was one of the great breakthroughs for R. B. Thieme, Jr.: But {in contrast} you {Royal Family} have absolutely not {to be reversionist and negative to the word} been taught {academic learning under strong discipline} in this manner . . . the Christ. {Note: All doctrine revolves around the person of Jesus Christ. In fact bible doctrine is the mind of Christ. Reversionism is the function of your own soul and we are not taught in the bible to go backwards. We are told to advance and hold the high ground as long as we live.} If, in as much as, you had begun to hear Him {Christ - by listening to doctrinal teaching} - and you have - and have been taught by Him, since the doctrine/truth is and keeps on being . . . in the Jesus. {Importance of Rebound in Reversion Recovery} {That} with reference to your former 'manner of life'/lifestyle, you 'rid yourselves'/lay aside' {rebound technique} the 'old man' {Old Sin Nature (OSN)} . . . which {OLD SIN NATURE} is becoming depraved/corrupted/degenerate according to the lusts from the source of deceit {reversionism is the source of the lust}. {Note: The 'old man' refers to a person out of fellowship and 'living by the flesh'. All unbelievers do this, and so do believers who revert to their old thinking and have gone into reversionism.} {Resumption of GAP in Reversion Recovery} And for the purpose that you be restored again and again by means of the {Holy} Spirit by the means and source of your mind/'left lobe'. {Follow-through to SuperGrace - Logical Progression of Three Infinitives in Verses 22-24} 24~~And for the purpose that you clothe yourself {on the inside} with the 'new in species man' {member of the Royal Family - having an Edification Complex of the Soul - a new species of man}, which according to the standard of God {the perfect standard} has been created in the sphere of {absolute} righteousness and in the sphere of 'devotion to doctrine'/'true holiness'. {Verses 25-32: Seven Results} {Verse 25: Recovering the Divine Viewpoint} Therefore having stripped off 'the lie' {cosmic involvement} {from Zechariah 8:16} each one of you keep communicating the truth/doctrine {doctrine as the absolute truth} with the 'near to him' {someone close to you in your soul} because we are 'members one of another' {part of the body of Christ}. {Note: This verse is discussing the habitual act of lying. Lying is a sin and sinning takes you into the Cosmic System and out of fellowship. Also, the Plan of Satan - the Cosmic System - is also referred to as 'living in the lie'. Both concepts are in view here.} {Verse 26: Objective Indignation} 'Be angry with righteous indignation and yet do not sin in your anger'/ 'tremble with anger and do not sin' {a quote from Psalms 4:4} . . . do not permit the sun to go down on your intensified/sinful anger. {Note: There is a time for justifiable anger when your thinking clearly lines up with 'the Truth' (from the previous verse). The second part of the verse is a mental attitude sin and we are instructed to keep short accounts - rebound.} {Verse 27: Victory in the angelic conflict} And, do not be giving opportunity/space/room {running room} to the devil. {Verse 28: Production of Divine Good in the Business World} The one stealing {reversionist} . . . from now on . . . stop stealing; but rather work hard {to the point of exhaustion}, earning a living {the good} with his very own hands in order that he might have and hold {money} to share with the one having a need. {Note: When individuals share their excess blessings with others, that is charity and appropriate. When the Government takes your money and gives it to those who refuse to work is welfare. It helps neither the party having the money taken from them or the recipient who does not learn the value of working hard . . . self-esteem, etc. Charity is for the helpless poor, welfare is for the poor helpless.} Do not permit any rotten communications/sermons {unsound doctrine} to go out from your mouth, but, in contrast, whatever {sound and true doctrine} keeps on being good of intrinsic value for the purpose of edification {edification complex of the soul}, in order that it {doctrine} may give grace {understanding of grace resulting in SuperGrace} to the ones customarily/consistently hearing. {Verses 30-32: Discontinuance of the Practice of Grieving the Holy Spirit} And, stop grieving the Spirit . . . the Holy One . . . the God {co-equal with the other members of the Godhead}, by Whom you have been sealed {eternal security} for the day of redemption {rapture/ultimate sanctification}. {Discontinue Bitterness} All categories of bitterness {types follows}: both wrath {emotional type anger - violent outburst}, and anger {mental attitude anger - tantrums, sulking}; both vociferation {shouting in anger, verbal brawling, offensive loudness} and slander {murder with your mouth, character assassination} . . . be removed from you all . . . together with all 'other forms of wickedness'/malice/'revenge motivation'. {Note: Bitterness involves antagonism, animosity, hardness and cruelty toward others. Hence, the totality of resentment toward others. Bitterness is related to the mental attitude sinning of reversionism in this passage. It is also closely related to 'Chain sinning'. It is similar to the chain smoker who lights one cigarette on another - 'clusters of sin' - one on another on another.} {Verse 32: Nobility of the Soul under the Function of Grace} But {in contrast to verse 31} become 'gracious in the soul'/kind toward one another {impersonal love}, compassionate {eusplagchnos - virtue from thinking doctrine}, graciously forgiving each other, even as the God in/'by means of the agency of' Christ has graciously forgiven all of you.

10.  Living with scar tissue is, unfortunately, the lifestyle of many believers. The most fundamental doctrine of the Christian life—the periodic naming of your sins to God—is something which is done rarely, if at all; resulting in the lift of a believer who is nearly always out of fellowship. It is possible to mask this scar tissue with self-righteousness and overtly moral behavior. Therefore, it is possible for people to be under the blackout of the soul, and yet seem to be okay. I have no idea if former Vice President Al Gore is a believer or not, but if he was, he would be a believer suffering from blackout of the soul due to the rejection of Bible doctrine and the vacuum which has sucked in human viewpoint into his soul.

Sources and references:

http://gracebiblechurchwichita.org/?page_id=1501

http://www.versebyverse.org/doctrine/scar-tissue.html

http://www.gbible.org/index.php?proc=d4d&sf=rea&did=3

http://www.gracedoctrine.org/word/012311.htm

http://makarios-online.org/notes/pdf/scar%20tissue%208-10.pdf

http://www.gbible.org/_files/pdf/blackout.pdf

http://syndein.com/Ephesians_4a.html


Chapter Outline

Charts, Graphics and Short Doctrines


The result scar tissue in women can be lesbianism, women's liberation and other indicators of confusion. These things are as much the fault of the man as they are of the woman. Nevertheless, the principle stands. And even in a degenerate society, the majority of the women will still crave their right man. Sometimes, all they have is an image, distorted by their old sin nature; but the woman still craves and chases that image.


Even though the woman was deceived, she still is responsible for her decisions. This is an important principle in marriage, because when many women are married, they have been deceived by the man that they marry. They are still responsible for this decision. Because of the way that God designed the soul of the woman, she has a safety device to keep her from being deceived. That is the man as her ruler. When a woman begins to think about marriage, the first thing that she should contemplate is can I subjugate my will to this man for the rest of my life? Do I have enough respect and trust in this man to allow him to rule over me as though he is my God, my Lord and master? If she has any reservations in this regard, then she should not get married. The woman is under the rulership of the man in marriage because (1) the first woman allowed Satan to deceive her in the garden and she choose directly in opposition to God's stated will and, (2) because Adam was created first and the woman was created for him. There is no inferiority or superiority implied here. Nor is this to be a dominance of a cruel and unjust or tyrannical nature. Nor is every man the ruler of every woman. It is the right man is the ruler over his right woman and that only with her consent. I have no personal ax to grind in this respect nor is it my intense desire to have the power to rule over another person. It is what the Bible says: and he shall rule over you. It is a matter of God's plan. This does not mean that a woman has no authority. I have worked under a half a dozen women and, like men, some exercised their authority properly and intelligently and some did not. Most I had a great personal respect for and never felt inferior or out of God's plan because they had authority over me.


What we have here is a careful balance designed by God to protect the woman and to protect the woman's soul. She has a craving toward her right man and he is to rule over her. If she can balance that craving with a conscious choice to subjugate her will to this man, then she has likely chosen the correct person to marry. If she only feels an intense desire, but cannot submit to his authority, then she needs to reevaluate her choice. Then she is operating under libido, a desire for security and under the image but not the reality of her right man. Even under tremendous desire, the right man will honor the right woman and treat her with respect. The woman must recognize this and be able to determine when it is genuine and when it is an act. Again, this goes back to the delicate balance of craving and authority.

 

Then to Adam He said, "Because you have listened to [and obeyed] the voice of your woman and have eaten from the tree about which I commanded you, saying, 'You shall not eat from it'; the ground is cursed because of you; in difficult toil [and pain] you will eat of it all the days of your life." [Gen. 3:17]


As in the previous verse, there is no word for wife here, but these are the words for man and woman as are found in Gen. 2:23. In our degenerate times, some have rebelled against the concept of ownership in marriage, but this verse as well as v. 16 speaks of your man and your woman. There is a possessiveness which works both ways for a man and a woman.


Adam sinned deliberately under his own free will. God did not create Adam to sin; He created Adam perfect and placed him into perfect environment. But God did give him the ability to chose for or against His mandates. God has the ability to create beings with free will. Just as Adam had free will in the garden, we have free will today. There has developed a lot of theological controversy over the centuries about God's sovereignty and man's free will. The Armenians believe that man's free will is so powerful that it can undo perfect salvation; that is, by the proper number of wrong choices, man can undermine the work of Christ on the cross in his behalf and lose his salvation. The Calvinists (although, not necessarily Calvin, from what I understand) believe that God's sovereignty is too powerful for man's free will to exist and that every move that we make is under God's direction, in accordance with His perfect plan. If we choose to believe in Jesus Christ and then to lead a reasonable Christian life, it is because God granted us the free will choice to do so; and those who do not are just operating under their own natural volition, for which they will spend eternity in the Lake of Fire. It is for our choices that we are responsible. God has the ability to create man with an actual free will, whether in a fallen or a perfect state. Because we have free will, we are completely responsible for our free will.


Listened is the Qal perfect of shâmaʿ (שָמַע) [pronounced shaw-MAHĢ] and it can be the simple word for listen, but in this context, it means to listen and to obey. The old English has a terrific word for this: hearken. Unfortunately, hearken is old English. God makes it very clear as to the act of disobedience here and in v. 11.

The Hebrew word for man is ʾâdâm and the Hebrew word for land is ʾâdâmâh. Adam was born knowing the words for man and land. Man is naturally in the masculine singular and land is in the feminine singular. The poetical nature of his statement in Gen. 2:23 is even more striking because man was called ʾâdâm because he was taken out of ʾâdâmâh (the earth or the ground) and Adam called the woman ishah because she was taken out of ish (man). Man was taken out of the ground (singular feminine) and the woman was taken out of man (singular masculine). Adam added a feminine ending to Ish to set up a grammatical parallel and a parallelism of origin.


When man was created, tending the garden was a pleasure and exercise. He enjoyed doing it. Although he could eat from the trees and find nourishment and food in the way of fruit, God gave him the opportunity to do some gardening. This form of relaxation and exercise will become necessary and a burden. The word ʿitstsâbôwn (עִצָּבוֹן) [pronounced ģihts-tsaw-BOHN] is found here, in relationship to farming, in Gen. 5:29, where it is used in the same sense, and in Gen. 3:16 as the first word for pain. It means pain, painful, difficult and toil. The very ground from which Adam was taken; the ground that he has enjoyed for perhaps a century as a gardener, gardening for leisure and for exercise, will turn on him. Whereas it wa a joy and it was easy, this will all change. The earth had become cursed. This is the point at which God put into motion the first or the second law of thermodynamics: that all matter proceeds from order to disorder. What God has warned Adam and the woman that "in a state of death you will die." This pronouncement of judgement is an explanation in detail as to what that statement meant. Adam's state of death is primarily spiritual. He will have a separation from God as we have, and a bondage to the earth which is also in a state of decay. In this state of death, he will degenerate physically and eventually die.

 

"Both thorns and thistles it shall grow for you; and you will eat the plants of the field. By the sweat of your face, you will eat food until you return to the ground, because from it you were taken—for you are dust; and to dust you will return." [Gen. 3:18–19]


Gardening for Adam will change from a pleasure to a toilsome necessity. To bring forth is in the Hiphil imperfect, meaning that God will cause the ground to continually bring forth thorns and thistles. Since our word you can be plural or singular, I should point out that all of the Hebrew suffixes are second masculine singular in this verse. God is speaking directly to Adam and placing these judgements upon him. God spends the longest time with Adam because he laid down the law to Adam and the man sinned knowingly. These same curses will apply to the entire human race.


Under perfect environment, there were no thorns or thistles; there was no pain; there was no childbirth; there was no spiritual separation from God; there was no physical death. It is even possible that Adam and the woman did not even know what some of these things were. They may have had only a vague concept as to what thorns and thistles were, or pain. In the Hebrew, plants is actually in the singular. To get a feel for the singular use, you may substitute in herbage or production.


By the sweat of your face is different in the Hebrew than I would have expected. Sweat is a feminine singular noun (sweat can also be masculine) with an attached preposition. Your is the second masculine singular suffix (referring to Adam) of face, which is masculine dual or plural. I do not know of any translation which takes all of this into account. Furthermore, face is more often rendered nostrils (Gen. 2:7), nose and even anger (as in, nostrils flaring as a sign of anger). I would have expected the sweat of your brow instead. The dual is easily explained if one translates this by the sweat of your nostrils. Why the feminine fro sweat rather than the masculine eludes me except as a reference to the woman who gave Adam the fruit. In any case, whereas gardening was a pleasure for Adam, it will become a chore. In order to eat, he must work and work will often be difficult. Many translations read you will eat bread. They are not invalid because the Hebrew word can mean food or bread. It is specifically used for bread in the Levitical offerings. We do not know if Adam and the woman had learned how to make bread from wheat. To examine wheat and then to see the finished product as bread, one can't help but wonder what were they thinking? How did anyone come up with this? Personally, I could have grown wheat for a thousand years and not figured out how to make bread from it. I am even wondering at this point whether God taught Adam and the woman how to make bread. There was no leaven and there were no ovens so this would not have tasted like Mrs. Baird's bread. However, considering the difference of environment, it is likely that their bread tasted incredible. It gives me a thought about leaven also. I have often wondered why leavening was considered to be a symbol of evil, and therefore not allowed during Passover. However, leaven is a sign of the new world, the world after the fall; the world after the flood. It is associated with Noah's and, later, Lot's drunkenness.


Dust is dry earth and God took from this dry earth, added water, created a soul and spirit, and thereby created man. Man will now decay and eventually end up back as the elements of the earth. Dust here is a symbol of judgement, of degradation, as we saw in Gen. 3:14 (see also Gen. 18:27, Job 16:15 and Isa. 47:1).

 

Now the man called the woman Eve, because she was the mother of all living. [Gen. 3:20]


You can tell that Adam has gone through a transformation. His original designation for the woman was the beautiful word ishshah. This word is Chavvâh (חַוָּה) [pronounced khahv-VAW] which is not nearly as beautiful or poetic. Still, even in their fallen state, Adam and the woman had similar feelings about births as do we, with the added hope that this would be the one to deliver them from their fallen states.


The verb for the word to live is châyâh (חָיָה) [pronounced khaw-YAW]. In their excitement of the anticipation of a child (it is likely that they had observed this in the animal kingdom), Adam names the woman Chavah (Eve). While it does not match the poetical beauty and irony of her first name, it is still a reasonable name. From whence do we derive the name Eve? The Greek word for Chavvah is Eὕα, which is pronounced Hway'-aw making it a transliteration there is no v or w in the Greek as there is in the Hebrew). However, it looks like Eve, so perhaps it was a semi-arbitrary choice of an early translator which has been followed through the ages (here, I am only guessing).


More importantly, is this story allegorical? It is a made up story to explain some truth? There are enough real life experiences recorded in Genesis to make one more which is merely a story unnecessary. Furthermore, Jesus alluded to the historicity of Adam and Eve in Mark 10:6–8b, when He said, "But from the very beginning of creation, God made them male and female; for this cause shall a man leave his father and mother and the two shall become one flesh." Whereas our Lord took time to explain His own parables and expound on truths found in the Old Testament (see Matt. 5:17–30), nowhere does He ever allude to the first few chapters of Genesis as some sort of an allegory or story. Paul, under the ministry of God the Holy Spirit, wrote, But I am concerned that, just as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, that your minds might be led astray from the integrity and purity of Christ (2Cor. 11:3). Also, under the ministry of the Spirit, Adam gives Timothy two reasons why the man is in authority over the woman: But I do not allow a woman to teach or to exert authority over a man, but to remain quiet, for [you see], it was Adam who was first created, then Eve. And [it was] not Adam who was deceived but the woman, being quite deceived, who fell into transgression. (1Tim. 12–14). The authority of the man is an issue which will survive throughout the ages along with the controversy over this authority. Paul settles the question here, quoting the historicity of creation and the fall as the reasons for this authority. This also precludes women from teaching in the church in positions of authority over men (male children are not men).


The designation of Eve as the mother of all living indicates that the creation of mankind is over and that all of humanity will proceed from Eve. Her is another area where people may have problems. This means that Jews, Blacks, Indians, Hispanics, Orientals and Caucasians (including Pollacks) have as their common ancestors Adam and Eve. This should not trouble the earnest Bible student, nor should it be a cause for dispute from the unbeliever. All the breeds of dogs have proceeded from a common ancestor—Christians and non-Christians will attest to that historical fact, and yet these dogs are different in coloration, size, figure, etc. They are all dogs and no one has bred a mouse or a cat from an original set of canine parents. The key is the isolation of certain genes in breeding. It is likely that man chose similar looking women with whom to raise a family and it is very likely at the confusion of the languages at the tower of Babel that God did not arbitrarily assign everyone a language, but kept that language within certain family groups. Instead of having everyone counting off and then assigning all one's this language, all two's that language, etc.; God likely isolated certain genetic types and families and gave these similar groupings the same language.

 

And the Lord God made garments of skin for Adam and his woman, and clothed them. [Gen. 3:21]


Salvation has been the same from the first ones who sinned to the last. Adam and Eve's sins were paid for by Jesus Christ on the cross. They were given a temporary covering to shield them from God's judgement. God saw the skins of the sacrificial animals (the same word is used for the hides of sacrificial animals in Ex. 29:14 and Lev. 4:11) and passed over them for judgement. The skins were a covering, not for their nakedness, but for their sin. God looked to them and saw Jesus Christ on the cross, dying for their sins. Since this had not occurred historically, these skins were a temporary covering. An animal had to die; the first animal that Adam and Eve ever saw die, in order to make these skins. God could have made clothing out of cotton but this does not illustrate to them the salvation; the efficacy of the innocent dying on behalf of the guilty. Notice also that God is doing all of the work. He makes the garments for them and he clothes them. This sacrifice is seen again in Gen. 4:1–7 where Cain's sin is that he is presenting God with offerings from his own production rather than the sacrifice of an innocent animal. Cain, in fact, was the first animal rights activist, but more of that in the next chapter.


There is something about these four verses, vv. 20–23, which strikes me as inharmonious or stilted. I cannot put my finger on it. It seems as though the chronological order is lost. That, or that they are occurring simultaneously. God has passed judgement on the man and the woman and Adam goes back to his naming thing which he did the first day of his life. The Lord God, meanwhile, even as Adam is doing this, brings to them an animal and kills it before them and prepares the hide. Then, God the Father determines that they must be driven out of the garden. Right now, Jesus Christ is with them in the garden, but He cannot leave until he has removed them from the garden. Man has continually attempted to bypass the cross. How many billions of people refuse to take God's free gift of salvation, yet think that they should be allowed in God's presence after their death? They want to bypass the cross and still gain eternal life. So many people have tried to perpetuate their lives, no matter how miserable, by any means possible.

 

Then the Lord God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of Us Footnote , knowing good from evil, and now, so that he does not stretch out his hand and take also from the tree of life, and eat and live forever"—therefore, the Lord God sent him out from the garden of Eden, to serve the ground from which he was taken. [Gen. 3:22–23]


This quotation is exactly as it seems; it is fragmented, as if said in haste. God had to take immediate action. Adam could not be allowed to remain in the garden. Has become is the exact same word as found in Gen. 1:2, except that it is in the masculine gender here rather than the feminine. The Qal perfect means that this is an action which is complete. There is no process of action here; it has occurred once and for all. The tree of life would have perpetuated life, possibly forever, as this indicates. The man and the woman must shed their fallen natures and this cannot occur apart from physical death, otherwise they will perpetuate their spiritual death. They still have Jesus Christ, but the relationship has changed. The words take, eat and live are all in the Qal perfect. This means that these actions would be complete and irrevocable.


Adam was created with the express purpose to rule over the earth from which he was taken (Gen. 1:26) but now he will serve the earth. Serve is the same word as is found in Gen. 2:15, but it is no longer a joy but a necessity to his life; therefore serve is the proper rendering, in context.

 

So He drove the man out; and at the eat of the garden of Eden, He stationed the Cherubim and the flaming sword which turned every direction to guard the way to the tree of life. [Gen. 3:24]


Both the words sent in v. 23 and drove in v. 24 are in the Piel imperfect or intensive stem, imperfect action; that is, only a portion of the action is viewed or the action has not been completed. Although God keeps us from this tree of life, He provides us with another tree of life in the New Testament: Jesus Christ dying on the cross for our sins. The cross of Jesus Christ becomes our tree of life. The reason Adam was prevented from eating from the tree of life in the garden was that tree would perpetuate his life in a fallen state. The cross of Christ provides for us eternal life in a state of restored perfection.


At this point, we ought to examine the Doctrine of the Cherubim of God.

The Cherubim of God

1.    Cherubim guarded the entrance to the Garden of Eden after the expulsion of Adam and Eve: When He drove out the man, He placed Cherubim out from the front to the Garden of Eden along with [lit., and] a fiery sword, turning [and transforming], in order to guard the path to the Tree of Lives [or, immortality] (Gen. 3:24).

2.    There were two golden cherubim upon the Ark Of The Covenant, who represent the Angelic Conflict. “And make two cherubim out of hammered gold at the ends of the cover. Make one cherub on one end and the second cherub on the other; make the cherubim of one piece with the cover, at the two ends. The cherubim are to have their wings spread upward, overshadowing the cover with them. The cherubim are to face each other, looking toward the cover." (Exodus 25:18-20).

3.    God dwelt between the two cherubim (Ex. 25:22 2Sam. 6:2). This essentially indicates that God is in the midst of angels in general (2Kings 19:15).

4.    The idea that God would meet with man in between the two cherubim describes the concept of salvation; because between them was the mercy seat which sat upon the Ark of God (which represented Jesus Christ). Our salvation is the result of a gracious act of Jesus Christ, dying for our sins, so that we might meet God on the mercy seat of the Ark of God. This is central to the Angelic Conflict.

5.    Ezekiel had a curious encounter with cherubim, and described their appearance: Their entire bodies, including their backs, their hands and their wings, were completely full of eyes, as were their four wheels. I heard the wheels being called "the whirling wheels." Each of the cherubim had four faces: One face was that of a cherub, the second the face of a man, the third the face of a lion, and the fourth the face of an eagle. (Ezekiel 10:12-14). Ezekiel probably speaks more on Cherubim (Cherubs) than anyone else in the Bible. Ezek. 1 10

6.    The appearance of the Cherubim in The Tabernacle In The Wilderness is also described in the New Testament: A tabernacle was set up. In its first room were the lampstand, the table and the consecrated bread; this was called the Holy Place. Behind the second curtain was a room called the Most Holy Place, which had the golden altar of incense and the gold-covered ark of the covenant. This ark contained the gold jar of manna, Aaron's staff that had budded, and the stone tablets of the covenant. Above the ark were the cherubim of the Glory, overshadowing the atonement cover (Hebrews 9:2-5).

References:

http://www.keyway.ca/htm2002/cherubim.htm

http://www.bible-topics.com/Cherubim.html

I do not know anything about these websites, so I cannot confirm their accuracy throughout.


Chapter Outline

Charts, Graphics and Short Doctrines


One of the things which I have noticed is that there are details in the Bible of things which we have never seen and would have no reason to even know about if it were not in the Bible. For instance: the earth was originally watered by a mist arising from the ground and not by rain (Gen. 2:6). If man had written the Bible from man's viewpoint (particularly so-called primitive man), he would not have thought to include something which was not at all like our present state. This verse also includes information that we would not have known about. God set up angels to guard the Garden of Eden and to keep man from the tree of life. The angels use a flaming sword which turns in every direction to bar us from the garden. Exactly what this was; that is, whether Adam and Eve were prevented from seeing the entrance to the garden or seeing the garden at al because of this sword turning every way or whether this was similar to a road block to keep them out, we do not know. However, the Garden of Eden is not mentioned again in the Bible in the pre-deluvian civilization. We do not have man trying to steal into the garden to eat from the tree of life.


Internal Links

Beginning of Document/

Chapter Summaries

External Links

Genesis Chapter Links



Genesis 4


Genesis 4 has been completely reworked and may be found here: (HTML) (PDF) (WP–compressed). It is highly recommended that you go to that study instead of this one. These chapters are being completed one-by-one and will eventually supplant this incomplete study of Genesis.


Genesis 4:1–24


Maps, Charts and Short Doctrines:

 

       v.      4           How to Distinguish Between Christianity and Christian Cults


Introduction: Genesis chapter 4 tells us the familiar story of Cain and Abel. We learn some things about sin that we did not realize in this chapter and about God's judgement of sin. We also see the first animal rights activist and the first religion of man.

 

Now the man had sexual relations with his woman, Eve, and she conceived and gave birth to Cain, and she said, "I have gotten a man, the Lord Footnote ." [Gen. 4:1]


The first verb in the Qal perfect in v. 1 is yâdaʿ (יָדַע) [pronounced yaw-DAHĢ], and it, like many of the words found in Genesis, is very common Hebrew. It means to know, to be known, to observe, to take note of, etc. It also means, in the proper context, to know in the sense of having sexual relations with. The Qal perfect means a completed action which yields results. I remember a letter in the Straight Dope of someone asking Cecil Adams at what point in time did man realize that copulation would result in having a child. Here is the answer to that question. The first parents understood that there was a relationship between sex and having children.


The name Cain was likely a play on words, for which Adam and Eve were both known. Cain is Qayin (קַיִן) [pronounced KAH-yin] and she says that I have gotten; qânâh (קָנָה) [pronounced kaw-NAWH] and means to purchase, to redeem, to buy, to get, to acquire. In Gen. 1:19, when God is called a possessor of heaven and earth (the Qal participle of qânâh), He possesses these because He bought them. This adds new meaning to the verse “I have gotten a man [from] the Lord.” (Gen. 4:1b), which is totally incorrect. It should read: “I have purchased a man—the Lord.” There was blood, there was pain—she endured the first labor and no one knew exactly what was occurring. She felt as though she had brought forth the Redeemer in all her pain and blood. Although the woman was wrong in what had occurred, she did understand that there was a purchasing which took place with blood and pain which was related to the Redeemer, Who would come through her. Strong’s #7069 BDB #888.


She very possibly took his name from its noun cognate, acquisition, which is the word qineyân (קִנְיָן) [pronounced kine-YAWN]. There is disagreement concerning the preposition here. The preposition is generally conceded to be with the help of (like all prepositions, it has several meanings). However, it appears as though the way I have translated it above is the most accurate (see The Emphasized Bible, p. 36 footnote). It is very likely that Eve expected her firstborn to be her savior, YHWH. How much she knew about her Savior to come, we do not know, but she does know that it will be her seed. This indicates that she knows it will be Jesus Christ in the garden who will be born of her and that He will be her Savior. She just happens to be wrong about who this son is and when Jesus Christ will come in the flesh.


Because many of the most ancient proper names have reasonable, corresponding meanings in the Hebrew language, it has been asserted that Hebrew may have been the original language. This is at best, speculation, and not necessarily important unless the Word of God chooses to speak to this issue. Proper nouns are sometimes carried from one language to another and adjusted to reflect their original meanings. It is also possible that the words from which they are derived also are transferred from language to language. However, that is enough speculation; if it was important that we knew the original language of man, God would have revealed it to us.

 

And again she gave birth to his brother, Abel. And Abel was a keeper of flocks, but Cain was a tiller of the ground. [Gen. 4:2]


Again is not an adverb but a verb. It is the Hiphil imperfect of yâçaph (יָסַף) [pronounced yaw-SAHPH] and it means to add to, to increase by, to have more. The Hiphil is the causative stem and this verb carries with it the singular feminine suffix. Eve was cause to increase or to add to her number of sons by one: Abel. The meaning of Abel's name is less certain, with possible suggestions of breath, fragility, vapor or son. It is quite likely that there was meaning to his name, but that has been lost over the millenniums which have passed.


We do not know how much guidance that Adam and Eve got from Jesus Christ when it came to raising their sons (and daughters, who are not mentioned). We do not have a set pattern of morality, examples of things which are wrong to help guide a child to do that which is right. The size of the society was small, but it appears to have grown rapidly. The things that Cain or Abel might think of doing may not even occur to Adam and Eve. Christian parents think that their job of raising their children is difficult because of all the outer influences. God has provided us with clear guidelines when it comes to raising children and clear guidelines for what is right and wrong. We need only start with a child while he or she is young and correctly love and discipline them. And they must both go together; if there is no discipline, then there is no love; just like if there is no knowledge of Who and What God is, then there is no love, no matter how emotional the person gets.


It has been suggested by those who object to the historicity of Genesis that this is an allegory, revealing the enmity which exists between the farmer and the sheepherder. This is pure conjecture as most allegories have in mind to teach some principle. There is nothing being taught here. The villain, clearly Cain, is a farmer; but then so was his father, Adam. So it is not implied or stated that farming is wrong in any way or inferior to shepherding. Cain is called upon to account for his offering, which was not efficacious, and for his actions in killing Abel. His vocation is never an issue.

 

So it came to pass in the course of time that Cain brought an gift Footnote to the Lord of the fruit of the ground. Also, Abel, as well, on his part, brought of the firstborn of his flock and of their fat portions. And the Lord had regard for Abel and for his gift but for Cain and for his gift, He had no regard [lit., He did not look at it]. So Cain became very angry and his countenance fell. [Gen. 4:3–5]


Most people do not even have a clue as to what has occurred here. When I read this story as an unbeliever, it seemed particularly arbitrary. Cain has worked hard in his garden and he brings to God the best of his production as a sacrifice. It is possible that Cain does not want to harm an animal and would rather offer God a kinder and gentler offering. To me, in my unbelieving youth, it seemed as though what Cain was offering was reasonable and, if anything, commendable. The problem is that our human good and our human works mean nothing whatsoever to God. In fact, all of our righteousnesses are as filthy rags in His sight (Isa. 64:6). This confuses the unbeliever and sometimes puts him off when it comes to Christianity. How can someone spend most of their life trying to do good for others, living sacrificially, thinking nice thoughts as often as possible; and then be condemned to eternity in hell? What kind of an arbitrary God is that and what kind of a religion would teach that? At this point in time, we have had one pronouncement of morality of which we are cognizant: do not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. This is the second; and the first recorded one for a fallen world. Fruits and vegetables, the works of man's hands, are not offerings that God will regard as efficacious. There must be a blood sacrifice. An innocent life must be given in order for God to accept the sacrifice. From the very beginning, God would have to send His Son, Jesus Christ to the cross to pay for our sins with His blood sacrifice, the innocent on behalf of the guilty. Every animal sacrifice was a shadow and spoke of this sacrifice which was real and still to come.


The difference between Cain and Abel and their sacrifices is the difference between true Christianity and any other religion, sect or cult:

How to Distinguish Between Christianity and Christian Cults

True Christianity

Religion, "Christian" cults, Catholicism, etc.

God seeks us (Gen. 3:9 4:6)

We seek God* (Acts 17:27)

God provides the means of salvation (Gen. 3:15,21 2Cor. 5:21)

We provide the means for our salvation

We come to God on the basis of a blood sacrifice of that which is innocent (Gen. 3:21 4:3–5 1Peter 3:18)

We come to God on the basis of our good life, our works, our human goodness (Luke 19:18–25 Rom. 4:2)

God reaches down to us (John 1:1,14 3:27)

We reach up to God (Gen. 3:3–5)

Our salvation and relationship with God is based upon what God has done for us in the form of Jesus Christ on the cross (Gal. 2:16,21 3:13 Tit. 3:5)

Our salvation and relationship to God is based upon our being a good person, following the law or the ten commandments, etc. (Rom. 3:20–21)

Salvation is free (Rom. 4:5 Eph. 2:8)

We earn our salvation (Rom. 9:31)

Salvation is unmerited (1Cor. 4:7 Eph. 2:9)

If we are bad, we are not saved (Luke 23:39–43)

Righteousness is imputed (Rom. 4:22 9:30)

Righteousness is earned (Acts 17:25)

Salvation is permanent (Psalm 37:24 John 10:27–30 Rom. 8:1 11:1,2,29

It is possible to lose our salvation if we commit enough sins or rebel against God (1Cor. 5:17)

Our righteousness is Christ's righteousness (Jer. 33:16 Rom. 5:17)

Our righteousness is a personal righteousness or a self-righteousness (Isa. 64:6 Phil. 3:9)

Salvation requires not just faith in God but comes through faith in Christ (John 14:1 Rom. 3:22 4:3,4)

Salvation is through faith in ourselves (Luke 18:9–14)

Salvation is only through Jesus Christ (Isa. 43:11 Hos. 13:4 John 14:6 Acts 4:12)

God is revealed to man in many ways: as Jesus Christ, Buddha, Mohammed, Joseph Smith, etc.

Salvation is a matter of God's righteousness (Rom. 5:21)

Salvation is related to our righteousness (Matt. 19:16–22 Luke 18:9)

Our righteousness comes by faith (Rom. 4:4,5 10:10)

Our righteousness comes by works (Luke 10:25–37 Tit. 3:5)

*      I don't want this to be confused with positive volition. There is a sense in which we seek God. We have a desire to have a relationship with Him; to know Him. However, God must come to us as a response to our positive volition; if He did not, we would have no way of knowing Him.


Chapter Outline

Charts, Graphics and Short Doctrines


The offering brought by the two sons is an indication of the condition of their heart; that is, Abel recognizes that God expects blood sacrifice of the innocent for his covering and Cain does not. Cain thinks that he must work and do something difficult, and then give that to God. This is because, at least at this point in time, Cain is an unbeliever and Abel is a believer in Jesus Christ. Heb. 11:4 confirms this: By faith, Abel offered to God a superior sacrifice than Cain, through which he obtained the testimony that he was righteous, God Himself giving approval to his gifts [i.e., his offering] and through it [his faith] even though he is dead, he still speaks." (Heb. 11:4). Abel's gift or offering showed that he was righteous. He believed in Jesus Christ and his gift was a witness to that faith. Even though he was killed, the quality of his offering due to his faith still stand as a testimony even until today. Without the shedding of blood, there is no forgiveness (Heb. 9:22b).


God has respect or regard for the offering of Abel but not for Cain. The word respect is the Hebrew word shâʿâh (שָעָה) [pronounced shaw-ĢAW] and it means to simply gaze upon. By implication, it means to consider, to inspect, to look upon steadily with interest. When Abel brought his offering, God continued to look upon it with interest and regard (Qal imperfect) and when Cain brought his offering, the offering of his own works, God did not even look at it (Qal perfect). When Jesus Christ stopped appearing physically to man, we do not know. My personal picture here is that these two brothers see our Lord face to face (our Lord would be in human form or in the form of an angel). He continues to look at what Abel has brought Him but He does not even glance at what Cain has brought. It is not unlike attending a party and two guests arrive at the same time and both present a gift to the host; the host takes one and admires it and thanks the guest for it. The other one is not taken from the second guest; nor is it even acknowledged. This is God the Son that is doing this and Cain should realize that there is a reason for it. Instead of examining his own gift or his own life (which is lacking in faith in Jesus Christ), his anger burns against his brother.


As is pointed out by Zodhiates, notice that God first mentions the person then the offering. The offering was an indication of the state of their heart; Abel was a believer and trusted in Jesus Christ and Cain was not necessarily an unbeliever, but he was a believer who trusted in the works of his own hands. That is, his human efforts were his works before God. Still, even though Cain was wrong, God came to him:

 

Then the Lord said to Cain, "Why are you angry? And why has your countenance fallen?" [Gen. 4:6]


God knows why Cain is angry; He is omniscient. However, with unbelievers, God must reach out and initiate the conversation, as it were. The same is true for believers out of fellowship. God speaks first. Cain's anger and the fallen face—an expression of disappointment after all of that work—are both in the Qal perfect. The perfect is a completed action. The imperfect is used with God speaking to Cain, meaning that He had begun to speak to Cain or (later on in this passage) that this was another portion of what He said to Cain. There were no widely accepted rules of behavior in the first days. Cain does not hide his anger nor does he play poker.

 

"If you do well [or, if what you do is pleasing], surely you will be accepted [or, lifted up]. And if you do not do well, sin is stretch out [and resting] at the opening; and its desire is for you, but you are master [over] it [the opening]." [Gen. 4:7]


"If you do well [or, if what you do is pleasing], surely you will be accepted [or, lifted up]. And if you do not do well, sin is stretch out [and resting] at the opening; and its desire is for you, but you are master [over] it [the opening]." This is the first extremely difficult verse in this narrative in Genesis. Translating the first phrase is difficult because the Hebrew word means to please as well as to do well. Cain's offering was not pleasing to God. It was not a part of God's salvation plan for Cain (or anyone else) to bring our own works to Him. Unfortunately, there is no first person masculine suffix on this verb, so it would be improper to translate this if you please me. The NASB throws in the word countenance after this phrase, as if God is concerned about "lifting Cain's countenance." There is no word for countenance in this verse. God is concerned with Cain's salvation. Cain's countenance has fallen and God is going to lift Cain up if Cain does what is pleasing to God. The verb translated accepted means to be lifted up and it is in the Qal infinitive construct. It is an action which occurs simultaneously with the main verb (with only two notable exceptions in the OT) and does not have person, number, gender or suffix. We must, at best, infer this from the verse. It is tied to the main verb so that we would take the person number and gender of the main verb rather than change any of those. Therefore, this is a reference to Cain, not to his countenance. The infinitive construct can operate like an infinitive or a gerund in our language. Often it is translated like a verbal noun. The first phrases are probably more literally translated, shall there not, if you do what is pleasing, be an uplifting?


The second sentence gives the alternate option and it is a negation of the verb found in the first sentence. If you do not do well [or, if you do not what is pleasing]. Chaţţâʾth (חַטָּאת) [pronounced khat-TAWTH] can mean sin or sin-offering. However, because it is being used here for the first time in the Bible; and since sacrifices have not been standardized as of yet, this would mean sin, offense or a sinful thing. This sinful thing is said to be stretched out or laying down at Cain's opening (sometimes translated door). Râbats (רָבַץ) [pronounced rawb-VAHTS] is a word used primarily of animals in a resting or relaxed position. The word for desire is an intense longing Footnote , found in only two other places: Gen. 3:16 (an intense longing of a woman for a man) and SOS 7:11 (as an intense longing of a man for a woman). I cannot buy that we are speaking of Abel's intense desire here and there is not a first person masculine suffix, so it is not our Lord's intense desire. However, Satan desires to have Cain, just as he desired to have Peter, to sift him as wheat (Luke 22:31).


The verse as translated sounds as though we must master sin or master our desire, but both of them are in the feminine singular and the suffix to the verb for to master or to have dominion over is third masculine singular. The only thing found in the third masculine singular is door. However, it does not necessarily mean door; it can mean gate, entryway, entrance, opening, etc. I don't know that we have houses just yet in this time period, or even tents where there is some kind of a door. This is not revealed to us. Just as Satan was lying in wait for Eve, he is also lying in wait for Cain, waiting for an opening. Jesus calls him a murderer from the very beginning in John 8:44, referring to this very incident and to the fall of man, which resulted in the death of the human race (both physical and spiritual). Cain has free will and Cain is the master of this opening, this entrance. He can allow Satan to inspire the first murder (which will spring forth out of hatred and jealousy) or he can close this opening to sin. I don't like the word crouch, because it sounds too much as though sin is lying in wait to pounce and that is not what the word means. It refers to a position of rest. It is always there. Sin could very likely be Satan as well as an act of sin, since the verb resting is generally used of an animal. It is up to Cain to open up to it or not. Cain is not a master of sin, nor can he be a master of Satan or Satan's desire. However, he is the master of the opening which he can chose to give to Satan or not.


However, Cain has been formulating an idea. He has watch Abel kill these little sheep or sin offerings; how he uses the blade to cut the carotid and how the blood flows out. Cain ii exception brilliant and has quickly put two and two together to devise a plan. He lures Abel out to a field, away from the rest of the family:

 

And Cain said to his brother Abel. It came to pass when they were in the field that Cain rose up against Abel, his brother and killed him. [Gen. 4:8]


The first sentence of this verse appears to be incomplete, as we would expect the content of what Cain said listed next. Footnote They have guessed that the content of the statement has been removed from the Bible (this may have dropped off the original manuscript from which Moses worked—we don't know for certain). However, it is a Greek idiom where Cain would speak to Abel, saying. We could translate it And Cain spoke to Abel; but that does not appear to be accurate. The Massorah indicates that there is a space here. The Samaritan Pentateuch, Septuagint, Syriac Version, Vulgate and Targum of Jonathan all supply the quote, "Let us go into the field." If this quote belongs here, we have not lost much with its loss. It is also a logical phrase to add, which could have occurred.


I mentioned the targums and a number of ancient translation. Here is a brief background of each.

Ancient Translations of the Bible

Translation

Background

The Targums

The Jews were removed from the Land of Promise in 586 b.c. under the fifth stage of national discipline and taken to Babylon. When the Jews returned to the land 70 years later, they spoke Chaldean (western Aramaic) rather than Hebrew. So that the Scriptures could be understood when read in the synagogue, there was a loose translation given of them in Aramaic. This was eventually written down as the Onkelos Targum and as the Targum of Jonathan ben Uzziel. These targums date back to the century before the birth of Christ, although the earliest copies of them which we have only date back to a.d. 500. Furthermore, these are paraphrases rather than translations, so there is some interpretation thrown in, and a lot of extra explanatory text. The two named are the most well-known of the ancient targums.


It is only recently that this translation is becoming available on the internet.

The Greek Septuagint

This is generally a careful translation from the Hebrew into the Greek done around 200–100 b.c., supposedly done by 70 scholars (for this reason, it is also called the LXX, which means the Seventy). This translation would have been based upon Hebrew manuscripts dating as far back as 400 b.c. and even before. This is particularly helpful in 3 ways: (1) some difficult Hebrew words are translated into the Greek, so that we have a better idea as to what these words mean; (2) some portions of the LXX contain portions of verses which appear to have been dropped out of later Hebrew text; and (3) this mostly confirms to us the great accuracy of the Hebrew text, from which many modern translations are made. Let me add one more important function of the LXX: the Greek translation reveals that the Bible has stood essentially unchanged for centuries. No theological group ever got a hold of the Bible and made it conform to their doctrines. There is a clear bias in some modern translations; but the text upon which they are based has stood firm going back to around 400 b.c. at least (which is when the Old Testament had been completed).


The Septuagint became the “Christian Bible” in the ancient world. Many early Christians spoke Greek, so it is only natural that they would gravitate towards this version of the Old Testament.


The oldest Greek translations that we have today are the Chester Beatty Papyri, which contains 9 Old Testament Books in the Greek Septuagint and which dates back to between a.d. 100-400; and the Codex Vaticanus and Codex Sinaiticus each contain almost the entire Old Testament of the Greek Septuagint and they both dated around a.d. 350.

It should be noted that the Septuagint was not the only Greek translation of the Old Testament. In fact, Origen, in a.d. 240–250, developed Origen’s Hexapla, which was a 6 parallel column text of the Old Testament. In the first column was the original Hebrew text; in the second was the Hebrew text transliterated into Greek letters; in the third was the literal translation of Aquila (a Greek translation of the Old Testament, circa a.d. 130); in the fourth was the idiomatic revision of Symmachus (a Greek paraphrase of the Old Testament, where the overall meaning was key); in the fifth was Origin’s own revision of the LXX; and in the sixth was the Greek revision by Theodotion. So, the idea of a parallel Bible goes back to around a.d. 250. Unfortunately, we have no copies of Origen’s Hexapla today. This would have been a huge manuscript and not easy to produce or sell.

The Latin Vulgate

Even as Rome conquered much of the known world, they held onto the Greek culture and the Greek language. However, after awhile, more and more people in the Roman empire began to speak Latin. Therefore, a translation was needed into the Latin, and that was done by St. Jerome. There already were a variety of texts and translations at that time, such as the Old Latin version of the Old Testament. Between a.d. 390–405, Jerome did a new Latin translation of the Old Testament, which appears to have been based on Hebrew manuscripts, but he apparently used the Greek LXX and other ancient translations as well. The history is more complex than this, but this is a reasonable summary.


The Latin Vulgate is often used as the basic text for many Catholic versions of the Bible although it is more common for modern English translations approved by the Catholic church use the extent Hebrew manuscripts as well.


Jerome apparently translated portions of the apocrypha (the books written in between the Old and New Testaments), but it is not clear that he translated all of them and it appears as if he treated them as separate works from the Old Testament (that is, he did not consider them inspired.


Jerome’s Latin translation is excellent and very dependable. I have yet to come across any passage in Jerome’s Latin translation which is decidedly Catholic. I am not saying there is no bias in the Latin Vulgate; I am simply stating that I have never come across any (most of my work is in the Old Testament).

The Peshitta (the Syriac text)

Syriac is a dialect or collection of dialects from the eastern Aramaic language. We do not know for certain who made this translation into Syriac and there are even some who claim it is the original language for the New Testament. It appears possible that the Syriac version of the Old Testament was done in the first or second centuries a.d. Geisler and Nix place this time period as late as the 3rd century (or even later) and that it is the work of many unnamed people. It appears as though our earliest manuscript of the Old Testament in Syriac dates back to the 9th century a.d.

Of these ancient translations, the Greek and the Latin are the closest to the Masoretic text (the Hebrew). The Peshitta varies slightly more than the Greek and the Latin, but I have come across many instances where the Syriac and Latin agree and are at variance with the Greek. The targums are not very reliable with entire new sentences and phrases thrown in.

However, when it comes to the Greek, Syriac and Latin, the ways in which they differ from the Hebrew text are quite trivial and often represent the constraints of the language. For instance, in the Hebrew, the word face is always in the plural. However, it sounds goofy to us in the English to translate this literally to his faces; so it is translated his face. Because this is just the way it is, no English translation has a footnote telling you, literally, from the Hebrew, this reads “his faces.” Therefore, many of the differences which we find are simply grammatical nuances in one language which are not found in the other language.

What I personally do not find is, some sort of theological bias slipping in. I don’t see a difference in Latin and Hebrew, and then think to myself, “There is that old Catholic bias slipping in again.” Several modern English translations show much more of an intentional bias than can be found in the differences between the Hebrew, Greek, Latin and Syriac manuscripts.

We have nearly complete Hebrew manuscripts, but they are dated later than you might think: the Aleppo Codex: contains the complete Old Testament and is dated around a.d. 950. However, more than a quarter of this Codex was destroyed in anti-Jewish riots in 1947. Footnote There is also the Codex Leningradensis, which is the complete Old Testament in Hebrew copied by the last member of the Ben Asher family in a.d. 1008. There are slightly earlier fragments of manuscripts which are still in existence, as well as the Dead Sea Scrolls, which are dated back to 200 b.c. to a.d. 70 and contain the entire book of Isaiah and portions of every other Old Testament book except Esther. It is the Dead Sea Scrolls which have confirmed to us the accuracy of the Hebrew texts which we depend upon today.

This doctrine will also be found in Genesis 17 (HTML) (PDF).

These ancient translations can be found online:

The Targum         http://targum.info/targumic-texts/pentateuchal-targumim/

The Hebrew         http://qbible.com/hebrew-old-testament/

The Greek           http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/gopher/text/religion/biblical/lxxmorph/

The Latin             http://www.latinvulgate.com/verse.aspx?t=0&b=1

The Syriac           http://www.studylight.org/desk/?l=en&query=Genesis+1&section=0&translation=pes&oq=Genesis&new=1

Sources:

http://www.bible-history.com/isbe/T/TARGUM/ accessed February 20, 2012.

http://mb-soft.com/believe/txx/targum.htm accessed February 20, 2012.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulgate accessed February 20, 2012.

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/bibleorigin.html accessed February 20, 2012 and appears to be a good resource for this type of information.

http://www.bible-researcher.com/vulgate1.html accessed February 20, 2012.

Norman Geisler and William Nix; A General Introduction to the Bible; Chicago; Moody Press, ©1980, p. 507–508, 512–513, 539.


Chapter Outline

Charts, Graphics and Short Doctrines


Up until this time, no person has ever died and it is very possible that Cain doubts the promise of death delivered by Jesus Christ and repeated to him by his mother and father. However, he has observed the death of sacrifices and decides to do the same to Abel. There are quite a number of words for kill in the Hebrew; and each stem of the verb alters the meaning. Hârag (הָרַג) [pronounced haw-RAHG] means to kill and ruthless violence is implied. It is also used of God killing in stern judgement. It is occasionally used for the judicial killing by man or for the killing of beasts.


Satan was very much involved with the first people on this earth. There were few enough of them to where he could keep a handle on everything. He would lie in wait and influence in whatever way that he could. It angered Satan to see Abel make sacrifices to God and it angered Cain. Exactly how Cain was influenced and in what way, I do not know. Today we can point toward television, newspapers, magazines and other people. However, Cain did not have near as many distractions and influences. He was religious, but he wanted to show God what he could do for Him. He worked hard in his garden and was proud of this work and expected that God would be pleased to see all that he had produced. There was not a problem with the amount of his gift, its condition or anything else. It was just that his gift did not involve a blood sacrifice of an innocent animal and therefore, it was meaningless to God. This caused Cain to become very indignant and self-righteous and angry with Abel. Out of all these mental attitude sins preceded the first murder. There was no alcohol involved, no drugs, no fighting. It was the first holy war, you might say. This murder was cold-blooded and premeditated and brought on by religion against one of God's own.

 

Then the Lord said to Cain, "Where [is] Abel, your brother?" And he said, "I do not know. Am I my brother's keeper?" [Gen.4:9]


This is grace that God comes to Cain and questions him directly. This is the third human being; the firstborn of Adam and Eve. God always searches us out. This is grace. To remain unbelievers, we must fight grace and turn away from Jesus Christ at every opportunity for our entire lives. When Cain said that he did not know where Abel was, he used the Qal perfect tense—he is claiming that he has absolutely no idea. It is not just this moment but a completed action.

 

And He said, "What have you done? The voice of your brother's bloods is screaming to me from the ground." [Gen. 4:10]


Done is the same word used in Gen. 2:4 and 3:1; the same word is used for God making the universe and the animals is used here. Out of his mental attitude sins and jealousy, Cain has manufactured the first murder. Blood is in the plural, which is not the way it is usually found (see Gen. 9:4,6 or 37:22). Early on, it is possible that not much had been taught to the first family about the separation of the soul, spirit and body. The blood is normally associated with the body. However, here, it is associated with the physical death of the body and the separation of the soul from the body; the soulish death. The plural might be used to express great emotion and great violence. Crying is no longer used for screaming loudly or in distress; so I translated this screaming instead.

 

"And now you are cursed from [or, by reason of] the ground, which has opened its mouth to receive your brother's bloods from your hand. When you cultivate the ground, it shall no longer yield its strength to you; you shall be a vagrant and a wanderer on the earth." [Gen. 4:11–12]


This is the first murder and this is the firstborn of the earth. God is quite gracious to Cain in this case. In later dispensations, God would prescribe execution for murder. Here, God will banish Cain from this area. Actually, this will be mutually agreed upon, because Cain could face retribution from his father or from any of his sisters. A later brother might come after Cain. So Cain does not have any choice in this matter.


Cain was previously quite successful in his farming efforts and God has told him that this will become more and more difficult. This could be specific to Cain and it may have to do with where he is banished to. In any case, the land has become more and more difficult to grow vegetables from. We are in a world which is steadily decaying. Complex, in general, proceeds to less complex. The fertile and the beautiful become unyielding and ugly.

 

And Cain said to the Lord, "My iniquity too great to take away!?!" [Gen. 4:13]


There are two different takes on this quotation of Cain's. It is usually translated "My punishment is too great to bear!" The first word is the adjective (in the masculine singular) for great in magnitude or degree. ʿâvôwn (עָווֹן) [pronounced ģaw-VOHN] primarily means iniquity. There are some who do not recognize this word as meaning punishment for iniquity and some who recognize that meaning in only a scattering of places. Guilt from iniquity is also a second meaning. However, I think it would be best, unless there is some particular reason to translate the word differently than it is most often used, to retain the meaning iniquity. Iniquity has the first person singular suffix. The verb is the Qal infinitive construct of nâsâ’ nâsâʾ (נָשָֹא) [pronounced naw-SAW] and the affixed preposition min (מִן) [pronounced min]. The preposition is used primarily with verbs expressing removal or separation. The verb is a verbal noun. It means to bear or carry and with this preposition to take away or to remove. It is occasionally translated to forgive, but I do not believe that would be correct here (and that is not a primary meaning). There is no verb per se in this sentence. There is great emphasis and emotion expressed here. Cain has no idea as to the severity of the sin which he has committed. He sees Abel kill little, innocent woollies all the time. He was angry, a natural human reaction, and he was smart enough to figure out how to deal with that anger. He doesn't even ask for forgiveness; he expects for this iniquity be removed. He has seen God remove other iniquities yet forgiveness does not come to mind. This is because the firstborn of mankind is an unbeliever. He is saying, "What? Is there a problem here? You can't just take away this iniquity? You have to mete out punishment?" Cain, in some respects, is very moral; he is hard-working; he brings to God the fruits of his labors, as does any sincere, religious person. He cannot see any reason for killing an animal and bringing that to God. Yet, he is very amoral when it comes to the killing of Abel. He used the same method as Abel did to kill his sacrifices; why should there be any punishment or consequences tied to that? Cain just happened to be smart enough to realize that could be done to man also.

 

"Behold, you have driven me this day from the face of the ground; and from Your face I shall be hidden, and I will be a vagrant and a wanderer on the earth, and it will come about that whoever finds me will kill me." [Gen. 4:14]


Driven out or cast out is in the Piel perfect; it is an intensive, completed action with permanent results. The preposition of removal or separation from the last verse is used again. Cain loves farming and it is apparent that will no longer be a rewarding venture for him. He associates Yehowah with that area, not realizing God's omnipresence, and is religious, so he finds the removal of God from his life to be a punishment. He recognizes that others, notably his father or a brother (it is likely that there were several other brothers; the Bible, although it only mentions Cain and Abel, does not preclude the possibility of Adam and Eve having many sons by this time). Certainly, Cain and Abel are in their teens or older by this point in time (probably late teens or older) and logic would dictate that there are other brothers and sisters. God only records the first birth, the first murder and the line of Jesus Christ.


Cain''s concern for his own life, much greater than his concern for Abel's life, seems to indicate that there are more people on the earth than just Adam, Eve, Abel and himself. He does have a wife (v. 17) which would be a sister (still, she could be his right woman as their gene pool was far superior to ours). It is unlikely that Adam and Eve did not have a sexual relationship for 15–25 years which produced children. Very likely at this time there were at least a dozen siblings to Cain. When Cain is concerned that he will be killed, he uses the same word as is found in v. 8, also in the Qal imperfect. He actually thought that he could hide this from God. Realizing that God knew meant that anyone could know.

 

So the Lord said to him, "Not so! Whoever kills Cain, vengeance will be taken on him sevenfold." And the Lord placed on Cain a mark, lest anyone finding him should slay him [or, the Lord shall ordain on behalf of Cain a pledge of assurance that anyone who finds him will not kill him]. [Gen. 4:15]


The first two words in a quote from our Lord are: likely lôʾ (לֹא or לוֹא) [pronounced low] (which is a negative prefix, similar to the alpha primitive in Greek, meaning not and kên (כֵּן) [pronounced kane], which means so. This is a disputed reading; however, this is what The Emphasized Bible and Owen both seem to think; and, contextually, it makes sense (the other reading is therefore). Sevenfold literally means seven times as much, but is a figure of speech which gives emphasis to what is to be done. Vengeance will be taken is in the Hophal imperfect, which is causative action. God will cause vengeance to be taken upon this person.


For Cain's benefit, God placed or put a mark upon him. The verb has a wide variety of applications, including to set, ordain, or appoint but more often to put, place or set. Cain has a lamed (ל) prefix, which has close to ten pages of applications in Brown-Driver-Briggs. This word denotes direction, but not necessarily motion. It can express locality or denote the object of the verb. It can even mean with reference to or regarding. The Hebrew word for mark is ʾôwth (אוֹת) [pronounced oath] and it can mean sign, token, pledge, symbol or omen. The reason that this is translated mark is that the verb associated with this noun can mean mark. This could just as easily mean the Lord shall ordain on behalf of Cain a pledge of assurance that anyone who finds him will not kill him. Because of the KJV translation, many have speculated just what is the mark of Cain. In Josh. 2:12 there is no physical mark involve yet the same word is used. The mark of Rahab as not a mark, but a verbal pledge or vow to deal kindly and faithfully with her (Josh. 2:14). In other words the sign to Rahab was a vow or a pledge from the two spies. One of the more humorous signs is when God comes to Moses and tells Moses that he is to lead Israel out of bondage. Moses asks for a sign and God tells him that he, Moses, will lead the people to this mountain (which is outside of Egypt and on the way to Israel) and they will worship there. So, the sign to Moses and the people that he will lead them out of Egypt and into Israel is the fact that he will lead them out of Egypt and into Israel.


Sign is also used for a very recognizable physical phenomena. Moses was to show the Pharaoh a staff, throw it upon the ground and it would turn into a snake. He was also to put his hand inside his cloak, pull it out and it would be leprous like snow. Both of these things were called signs by God. Neither was permanent and they both represented to the Pharaoh that Moses was from God. That is, the signs themselves were meaningless; it was what they signified that was important. A sign to Eli in 1Sam. 2:24 was that his two sons would both die on the same day.


Cain is concerned that he is not killed in revenge and God either gives him a sign or a mark or an assurance. Since this term doesn't seem to be used for an actual physical mark which is put upon someone; furthermore, I am not certain what that physical mark would be which would keep anyone from killing Cain. Certainly, there has been a population explosion or sorts, but still everyone would know everyone else. God wouldn't come to them as a whole and tell them not kill the guy with the red dot on his head because that's Cain; everyone knew who Cain was. God just has to say the word that no one is to touch Cain and that sets up the limits. More important than any physical mark to Cain would be God's assurance He would see to it that no one kills Cain or that person would be avenged sevenfold.


A question that you should be asking yourself: this is the Old Testament and the God of the Old Testament is a severe, harsh God. What happened to an eye for an eye; a tooth for a tooth? God is not just pardoning Cain, he is providing Cain with protection. God did not give man the law yet. There is no organized society as such yet. There is a society, but it is just a group of people with nothing more than social mores. There is no law, no governing body, no court system, no police force, etc. This may be hard to understand, but what that means is that anyone who killed Cain would be guilty of revenge, hatred, murder, and vigilantism. A system of law must be in place in order for someone to be guilty of breaking the law. A court system must be in effect to impartially judge those who have gone against the law. Law is not effective or meaningful unless it is impartial. There could be no impartiality in the killing of Cain and God despises anarchy.

 

Then Cain went out from the presence of the Lord and settled in the land of Nod, east of Eden. [Gen. 4:16]


In the dispensation of innocence and the dispensation of fallen man, God had a visible presence. In innocence, it was in the garden and in man's fallen sate, it was just outside the garden. When Cain left this area, he left the visible presence of Jesus Christ.


Back in v. 12, when God tells Cain that he will be a wanderer on the earth (and Cain confirms this in v. 14), wanderer is the word nûwd (נוּד) [pronounced nood] and it means to move to and fro or to wander. It has a related meaning which I would guess came centuries afterward and that is show grief, lament, shake the head to and fro, to console or to deplore (and taunt). The latter usage of this word occur about the time of Jeremiah and the former usage in Genesis. Language develops by associations made. Cain was associated with this word and Cain was banished from God's presence as the first murderer. Because of this, Cain was grieved and he lamented; therefore, it is likely that this word came to have that connotation. Furthermore, as a person can wander to and fro, the head can be shaken to and fro; that being true and given the connotation of nûwd, shaking the head to and fro came to be association with grief or deploring but then also with sympathy, as some would feel sorry for Cain (at least he did). In this verse, the word Nod is from the Hebrew word Nôwd (נוֹד) [pronounced nohd]. The only difference between the words is a dagesh (the little dot next to the w) which becomes a cholem (a tiny dot above the w). Prior to the vowel points (which did not exist in the original manuscripts) these words would be identical. Land and earth are the same word in the Hebrew: ʾerets (אֶרֶץ) [pronounced EH-rets]. Context would determine the usage. It is generally agreed that this verse refers to a proper noun, taken from the curse placed upon Cain. Cherubim had been placed at the east entrance of the Garden of Eden to prevent man from entering into the garden the taking from the tree of life. Cain settled in this area fearing for his life.

 

And Cain had sexual relations with his woman and she conceived and bore Enoch; and he [Cain] built a city and called the name of the city Enoch, after the name of his son. [Gen. 4:17]


Philologists and theologians give several possible meanings for Enoch: consecration, teaching, initiation. It is not too far in structure from the word for trained, dedicated or experienced. It might have had a meaning and it might have just sounded good to his mother. Speaking of Enoch's mother, Cain married one of his sisters. Certainly Adam and Eve were multiplying and filling the earth. It is likely that they had a child every year and this would make the world population at least 18. Given the very long lives that they had, this incident of Cain and Abel, although portrayed in literature as young (in their teens); this incident could have occurred at age 100 for all we know. Cain was married, which indicates that he was probably at least 16 and likely closer to 20 or above. Marriage in antediluvian society would have been among very close relatives, many of whom were originally brother and sister. There were no sins associated with this and no prohibitions. The gene pool at that point in time was strong enough to withstand intermarriage. However, man has degenerated since that time and marriage among siblings or even cousins often results in genetic problems for the offspring. God prohibits marriages among close relatives in Lev. 18:6–17.


Given the longevity and the prolific nature of the early human race, populations must have grown quicky so that Cain built a city for his progeny and named it Enoch, who was likely his firstborn after his relocation. A city at that point in time likely consisted of a dozen or so dwelling places, but since Cain did not have as much success with farming, he became a builder. This building likely took place once there had been a population in that area to warrant such building. Again, just guessing, but by the time Cain's progeny reached 10–20 in number is when he likely began to build. Furthermore, there is a desire on the part of some men to leave some part of themselves behind. Artists of all sorts are famous for this; and builders. This is how man makes his mark in the world. It is not necessarily inherently sinful, although the motivation at times can be directly attributed to sin. Many of us want to leave our mark in the world in some way. For some, it is their offspring; for others their legacy; and still others their writings, their art or their building. This could be related to Cain's building this city and the desire to get most of his family out of his house may have been another portion of his motivation. There was a standing mandate, if you will, that, due to the precedent set by Adam and Eve, a man will leave parents and cleave to his woman. However, as was also covered during that time, this verse was very possibly an addition, divinely inspired, however, from a later writer (perhaps added as late as Moses' compilation).

 

Now to Enoch was born Irad and Irad sired [or, better: caused to be born] Mehujael; and Mehujael sired Methushael; and Methshael sired Lamech. And Lamech took to himself two wives: the name of the one Adah and the name of the other Zillah. [Gen. 4:18–19]


Sired, in this context, is a good one-word translation for yâlad (יָלַד) [pronounced yaw-LAHD] as long as you keep in mind that it may skip a generation or two. Caused to be born is even more accurate (the use for the word begot is good; it is just Old English). Not every person is memorable; furthermore, Cain likely had many more children than just Enoch (just as their progeny are not all represented here). The meanings of their names show us that Cain was not godless but very religious. This religion was passed on to his progeny. Irad means townsman, Mahuiael means smitten of God, Methushael means man of God and Lamech means powerful. This means that Cain had done some serious religious thinking and had passed his thinking on down to his sons and sons' sons. Lamech is mentioned for two reasons; he is the first recorded male to take to himself two wives. The divine precedent was one man and one woman. Since Cain had built a city and was a man of great importance. any direct descendent of Cain would probably do well during his first 20 or 30 years. Therefore, for that period of time, Lamech was probably a successful person and he was successful enough to command two wives. There is no judgement passed against him for this, however. There is still no law on the earth. Lamech's wives names mean ornament (or, beauty) and flighty (or, shade). What likely occurred with these names is that the names came to mean these various things according to the person and personality of the one named.

 

And Adah gave birth to Jabal; he was the father of those who dwell in tents and [possess] livestock. And his brother's name was Jubal; he was the father of all those who play the lyre and pipe. [Gen. 4:20–21]


The line of Cain continued and prospered. Certain of those in his line became famous for shepherding and for the arts. There is disagreement as to the meaning of the latter instrument; some think that it is several reeds together and others view it as a bagpipe prototype (Thieme would be proud). Jabal means shadow production and Jubal means sounds.

 

As for Zillah, she also gave birth to Tubal-cain, the forger of all implements of bronze and iron; and the sister of Tubal-cain was Naamah. [Gen. 4:22]


Archeology has a lot of theories concerning the bronze age and the iron age. It didn’t take but a few generations of man before he developed musical instruments, buildings, bronze and iron. Keep in mind that man at this time was in the antediluvial age. He developed many things which were lost in the flood. Civilizations come and go, as do nations; and some advance to incredible heights of technology; and then fall behind. We had periods of time three hundred years prior to the birth of our Lord when the Greeks not only knew that the world was round but they knew the earth's circumference. By the time of the dark ages, almost two millennium later, this information was lost and there were some who thought that you could sail off the earth. All this means is that technological advances do not always and continually move forward. It moves forward, it moves backward, it stays in the same place. We are not evolving as a people, and even though we live in an age of great technological advance, the technology could be lost overnight. My point is that fire, music, bronze and iron go back almost to the dawn of human history. Man was exceptionally brilliant during his beginnings on earth. Furthermore, our bodies were exceptionally strong, durable and man lived for centuries; allowing him the ability to build upon his own knowledge. Bronze and iron may have been developed separately at a later date after the flood; but here is where it was first invented.


It's interesting, and I don't know the reason why, but Lamech's wives and the one daughter are the first women named following Eve. Furthermore, Cain, the first religious man and the first murderer, is the man whose line is first followed. The Bible does not focus on the reaction of Adam and Eve nor does it go immediately to the line of Seth, but it stops here at Cain's line and examines it. From Cain developed architecture, metal working and the arts in the antediluvian era. So that we see the natural progression of sin, we have the next few verses:

 

And Lamech said [sang] to his wives, "Adah and Zillah, listen to my voice; you wives of Lamech, give heed to my tale. For I have killed a man for wounding me; and a young man for striking me; If Cain is avenged sevenfold, then Lamech seventy-sevenfold." [Gen. 4:23–24]


Lamech became the first folk singer and sang this type of tripe to his wives. He was apparently in a barroom brawl with a family and killed a father and son (or a young man and an older man). Everyone knew that Cain got away with murder; and further, that God would see that his death would be avenged. So Lamech sang that since he killed two men, he would receive even more protection. There is no remorse; Lamech is so proud that he write a song about it and sings this song to his wives. We have seen why God protected Cain following his murder of Abel. Lamech totally misapplied that mandate of God. Our first recorded misapplication of doctrine.


I have placed the last two verses of chapter 4 with chapter 5 because they sound as though they are a preface to this book. Whether they are in fact a preface is not a point of doctrine nor does any doctrine rise or fall with this choice on my part. There are things in the Bible which are never covered in any detail because that information is unimportant to us spiritually. For instance, the exact type of government that a church should have, who the actual authors of Genesis were, from whence did Moses obtain his source material, etc. These things are a matter of intellectual curiosity and too often of theological debate, but spiritually, they are unimportant.

 

And Adam had sexual relations with his woman again; and she gave birth to a son, and named him Seth, for [she said] "God has decreed for me another seed instead of Abel, because Cain murdered him." [Gen. 4:25]


In the Hebrew, Seth is Shêth (שֵת) [pronounced shayth] and it means tumult. In Eve's quote, the verb used is shîyth (שִית) [pronounced sheeth] and found throughout the Bible in many varied applications. We last looked at this word when God gave a sign to Cain for his protection. When God placed enmity between the serpent's seed and the woman's seed, that word was shiyth. Brown-Driver-Briggs point out that this almost is equivalent to give in some instances Footnote , but finding a good one word (or several word) translation for all instances has been difficult. May I suggest that when God is the subject and shiyth is in the Qal perfect that it means to decree or to set, place or give by decree. With this quote, it is clear that Eve has grown spiritually over the past few decades. She and Adam were lovers of language and they used their words with a certain amount of intelligent playfulness. This choice of name for Seth mixes the divine decrees with tumult. Why? This use possibly means that it was a difficult labor or a difficult birth. Possibly the name Seth was chosen because this was the man that God appointed and it would be through this man that the earth is shaken.


Soon after the murder, Cain fled with his wife. This means that Adam and Eve had other children as previously noted. It is possible—in fact, likely—that their children had all been female, except for Cain and Abel up until that time and it is possible that they did not have the same hope for the other male children as they did originally for Cain. God had decreed that the woman would bear a son who would crush Satan, the serpent and Eve originally that it was to be Cain. When Cain and Abel grew, she changed her opinion and thought that it would be Abel (as this verse suggests). Now she believes that it is Seth and she is correct insofar as this will be the line of our Lord.

 

And to Seth—to him also—was born a son and he called his name Enosh. At that time, he began to call on the name of Yahweh. [Gen. 4:26]


The Hebrew word for Enosh is ʾĚnôwsh (אֱנוֹש) [pronounced ehn-OHSH] and it appears as though meaning was derived from it rather than vice versa. This word in later Scripture came to be used for man or mankind. It was almost a poetical use. It is found scattered throughout the Bible, but primarily enowsh is found in Job. The last phrase of this verse is significant. Thieme said that this is the beginning of evangelism or a wave of evangelism. I see this as a sadder note in some ways. My take on this (and I may change my mind later as I go further into Genesis) is that Jesus Christ, who would come bodily to visit Adam and the woman both in the garden and outside the garden; who was physically before Cain and Abel and their sacrifices, no longer came to the earth in bodily form on a daily basis. There will still be theophanies but these will be rare occurrences and not everyday fellowship. As the earth becomes more and more filled with sin and rebellion, so short a time following the garden, the visible presence of God withdraws more and more. At the beginning of Gen. 4, we have God speaking directly to Cain (Gen. 4:9–15). However, we do not find such a conversation taking place after that. In fact, direct conversations after Gen. 4 are rare, often involve theophanies, and tend not to be usual occurrences. This leaves man with only one alternative: to call upon the name of the Lord.


Began is in the Hophal perfect masculine singular, and the Hophal stem carries with it both a passive and active sense. What it conveys is the subject is compelled to do something and the agent causing this is not always named. It is the least used of all the stems. Here, because our Lord no longer walks among man; no longer comes to them on a daily basis, Enosh is compelled or caused to begin to call upon the name of the Lord. The Hebrew word here as several diverse meanings. The verb is in the masculine singular, indicating that the subject of the verb is likely one of the males named in this verse; that male probably being Enosh. It took but a little over two hundred years from the fall before God's visible presence began to be withdrawn from the presence of man. Following the verb to become is qârâʾ (קָרָא) [pronounced kaw-RAW], which means to call, to proclaim, to read, to call to, to call out to, to assemble, to summon; to call, to name [when followed by a lâmed]. Strong's #7121 BDB #894. This is followed by the bêyth preposition, which means in, into, at, by, near, on, with, before, against, by means of, among, within (this is not an exhaustive list). Sometimes, the bêyth preposition merely points to the object of the verb. No Strong’s # BDB #88.


Some would include Gen. 4:25 and following as a part of Gen. 5.


Internal Links

Beginning of Document/

Chapter Summaries

External Links

Genesis Chapter Links







Genesis 5


Genesis 5 has been completely reworked and expanded, including the entire word-by-word Hebrew exegesis. It may be found here: (HTML) (PDF) (WP–compressed). It is highly recommended that you go to that study instead of this one. These chapters are being completed one-by-one and will eventually supplant this incomplete study of Genesis.


Genesis 5:1–5:32


Maps, Charts and Short Doctrines:

 

       v.     24           The Assumptions of Archaeology and Paleontology

       v.     24           Scientific Achievements of Ancient Man

       v.     29           The Possible Authors of Sections of Genesis


Introduction: Gen. 5:1–2 sounds like the beginning of a new section, perhaps by a new author. We do not know when the oral tradition stopped and when these things began to be written down. There is no reason to think that man was not capable of writing until centuries later. Man has been a genius from the first man and has always been able to write likely from the time that this was needed, although we are not told specifically when.


There is no reason why we ought to assume that there was a need for writing at the very beginning—man was very verbal, but he was also probably very smart. It is likely that nearly every man remember everything that was said to him over the period of his life, and that he could recall whatever it was that he needed to recall. So, if Enosh and Kenan entered into some kind of an agreement, this contract did not need to be written down and notarized, because both men were there, and they both understood the terms of the contract, and each man heard and recalled what the terms of the contract were.




Sometime after Noah, man’s lifespan and, logically, his mental capabilities also degenerated. There was probably a time when man knew, at the very least, the Scriptures of God. However, somewhere between Abraham (circa 2100 b.c.) and Moses (circa 1440 b.c.), I suspect, God’s Word began to be written down (God tells Moses to write down the laws which He gives him in Ex. 34:27).


V. 25 carries with it an explanation as to why Seth was so important to Adam and Eve (Adam again knew his wife and she gave birth to a son. She called his name Seth, for [she said] “Elohim has appointed to me another offspring in place of Abel, for Cain killed him.”).


Many believe that Moses collected this source material and edited it and recorded all of it under the ministry of God the Holy Spirit, meaning what Moses wrote down was definitely inspired. We do not have to imagine Moses as sitting down as a secretary under God the Holy Spirit and writing down word for word as the Holy Spirit dictated. There is no indication of that. In Exodus, when God delivers the law, that is a matter of strict dictation. The fact that Moses used source material or recorded and edited from source material does not make the writings less inspired. What Moses does in Deuteronomy is a dramatic change from the previous 3 books. He gives a sermon (actually several) tying everything together for the Jews under his command, preparing them to go into the Land of Promise without him, and, at some point, both he and his people recognize that he is actually speaking the Word of God, even though it is not being dictated to him.


Dr. Luke, in his introduction to his gospel, indicates that this account was a result of compiling information from several sources. His source material may or may not have been inspired, but the resultant gospel is inspired. That is, as we have studied, God the Holy Spirit recorded through Dr. Luke and through Moses exactly what He wanted to communicate to man, i.e., God's complete and connected thought to mankind in such a way that Dr. Luke's and Moses' personalities, vocabularies, experiences, trains of thought and literary styles remained intact, so that the very words of their writings were simultaneously the words of God and the words of man. On the other hand, this does not mean that the Law may be separated into four basic authors who wrote centuries after the exodus, each identified by the frequency of the use of the different names of God. That is liberal tripe which has been overlaid on the Scripture, taking into account several pre-existing prejudices of the creators of this theory. However, just because their concept is not Biblical, this does not mean that we must retreat to the other end of the spectrum and claim that Moses was the original author of all the portions of Genesis. He was a brilliant man whose authorship is , in Scripture, continually attributed to the latter four books of the law, but never to Genesis; although tradition places him as the author of Genesis. Therefore, he is likely the editor but not necessarily the original author of Genesis. In this chapter and in subsequent chapters, we will follow the line of Adam for at least one millennium and perhaps even two.


We have left Cain's generations with Lamech at this point and have picked up with Adam's progeny. . The human and legal line of Christ will proceed from Adam through Seth and through Noah into the post deluvian civilization. Why did we stop with Lamech's family? This could have been all of the information which was available to the author of that portion of the source material to Genesis and it may have been the last of the completely human posterity of Cain. But more of that in chapter 6.


It is possible to see the final couple verses of Gen. 4 as somewhat of a prologue to Gen. 5. They do seem to hang together as a whole. Sometimes, when examining verses word-by-word, we often lose the full impact of the overall passage sometimes. It is hard to see the forest through the trees. However, examine this as a prologue, a title and text:


[Prologue ] And Adam had sexual relations with his wife again and she gave birth to a son, and he [Adam] named him Seth, for [she said] "God has decreed for me another son [seed] in place of Abel; for Cain murdered him." And to Seth —to him also—was born a son; and he called his name Enosh. Then he began [or, was compelled to begin] to call upon the name of the Lord.

This is the Book [or the Record] or the Generations of Adam:

In the day when God created man, He made him in the likeness of God. He created them male and female, and He blessed them and named them Man in the day when they were created. When Adam had lived 130 years, he became the father of one in his own likeness, according to his image, and he named him Seth. Then the days of Adam after he became the father of Seth were 800 years, and he had sons and daughters. So all the days that Adam lived were 930 years, and he died. And Seth lived 807 years after he became the father of Enosh, and he had sons and daughters. [Gen. 4:25–5:4]


It is often said that the Hebrew manner of writing back then was to take an incident and later embellish upon that incident by quoting a line or so from it. This is definitely a possibility. However, the other explanation is that when additional material was added on to God's word, the manner in which it was done was to often quote a previous verse or two to tie the writings together and then to title this section or to indicate that this is the beginning of a new section.


A problem one would think of at this point is writing material. We have been taught from early on that man began with crude pictographs scrawled on a cave wall and a written language evolved form that. It is certainly possible that some languages developed that way; however, recall that man in the antediluvian civilization was much more intelligent than we are and had likely developed a written language and writing materials and some sort of medium to write upon. Furthermore, this writing medium was not necessarily chunks of clay with indentations but something perhaps more sophisticated, but more perishable. This was likely carried upon the ark and added to as time went one. At some point in time, someone must have realized the significance of the writings and the fragility of the medium and copied it onto something which might lst longer. All of this, needless to say, is pure conjecture, just as Mosaic authorship of the book of Genesis is pure conjecture. However, it is a reasonable theory


This passage begins what sounds like a different author. This merely means that Moses had several manuscripts to work from and chose to copy that which God the Holy Spirit led him to copy. Book is the Hebrew word çêpher (סֵפֶר) [pronounced SAY-fur], which means, letter, missive, book, document, writing, scroll, tablet, register. Strong’s #5612 BDB #706. Generations, if you will recall, is the word later translated genesis in the Greek Septuagint. Man was quite interested in genealogy and sought to preserve it as best as he could. There are many people who today do the same thing with their own family line. The primary difference here is, Noah or Seth knew personally nearly every person named in Noah’s genealogy (as we will see when we look at the ages of these men and when who sired when).


It is in this way that God the Holy Spirit preserves for us the line of the humanity of Jesus Christ. Here, man, in the singular, is said to be in the shadow-image or in the likeness of God, as it is written in Gen. 1:27. Paul quotes this in 1Cor. 11:7 when dealing with the headware of the man and the woman and the authority of the man. The woman is never said to be created in God's image although the Bible uses the words created and built when it comes to the creation of the woman. Adam and man are the same word in vv. 1–5. Certainly, Moses, or whoever wrote the last copy of these verses became concerned over the time period named. Even the Bible says that man's life span, under normal circumstances, is approximately 70 years (Psalm 90:10). Here is where an author, concerned that no one would believe this, would have downplayed the ages, or eliminated them. However, the ages of man as he began were all close to the millennial mark. We do not know at what age man matured, married and had children. The youngest age named for siring a child was that of Enoch, at age 65 (v. 23). The oldest named is 500 years (v. 30). The child is not the first or the last born necessarily. Adam had other sons and daughters; otherwise, Cain would have been hard pressed to find a wife, as would Seth. Prior to Seth, there were certainly born to Adam and Eve at least two sons and a daughter (and likely far more). God the Holy Spirit records here only the line of Noah, through which will come the line of our Lord.

 

So all the days that Adam lived were 930 years, and he died. And Seth lived 105 years and sired Enosh. Then Seth lived 807 years after he sired Enosh, and he had sons and daughters. So all the days of Seth were 912 years and he died. And Enosh lived 90 years and sired Kenan. Then Enosh lived 815 years after he sired Kenan and he had sons and daughters. So all the days of Enosh were 905 years, and he died. And Kenan lived 70 years, and became the father of Mahalel. Then Kenan lived 840 years after he sired Mahalel, and he had sons and daughters. So all the days of Kenan were 910 years, and he died. [Gen. 5:5–14]


Although the genealogies throughout the Bible will sometimes skip a generation or more, it is likely that every male in Noah’s ancestral line was preserve. The reason for this conclusion is the age given. So and so was a particular age when he sired his son. So we may know exactly how long the antediluvian age lasted: 1676 years (we do not know whether Adam's age was calculated from the fall or from his creation).


The meaning of Kenan is unclear; it is close to the words for elegy or dirge and also the word for chant or wailing. Thieme says that it means deplorable. Mahalalel means, according to Thieme, praise of God. This meaning seems to be well-agreed upon.

 

And Mahalalel lived 65 years and sired Jared. Then Mahalalel lived 830 years after he sired Jared, and he had sons and daughters. So all the days of Mahalalel were 895 years, and he died. And Jared lived 162 years and sired of Enoch. Then Jared lived 800 years after he sired Enoch, and he had sons and daughters. And Enoch lived 65 years and sired Methuselah. [Gen. 5:15–21]


Jared means to descend or to go down. We notice a similarity in the lines of Cain and Seth at this point. Both had descendants named Enoch, who in turn had descendants named Methushael (Methuselah for Seth, a different Hebrew word); and almost the last named person in the lines: Lamech. Satan has always been an imitator of God; a very poor imitator. He counterfeits the line of Seth as best as he could. Enoch might means trained or experienced or it might mean dedicated. Methuselah means it will be sent when he dies (according to Thieme). Methuselah died the year the flood began.

 

Then Enoch walked with God 300 years after he sired Methuselah, and he had sons and daughters. So all the days of Enoch were 365 years. And Enoch walked with God; and he vanished, for God took him. [Gen. 5:22–24]


Walked is in the Hithpael imperfect, which is the reflexive of the Piel. This means that Enoch caused himself to walk, or to go with God. It means to walk to and fro. It is a constant, daily walk with God. This is intensive, meaning that in the state that the earth was in, this walk was a difficult, intense experience. We will see more about the corruption of the earth in chapter 6. He vanished (or, he was not), is a substantive with a third masculine singular suffix, which means naught, vanished, nothing.


Took is the Hebrew word lâqach (לָקַח) [pronounced law-KAHKH], which means, to take, to take away, to take in marriage; to seize. Strong’s #3947 BDB #542. Enoch here is a type; that is a shadow image of the pre-tribulational rapture. God is about to bring great and intensive judgment upon the earth. Enoch, as God's faithful, is taken up prior to the judgement. We have a world, during Enoch's time of the corruption of flesh and evil beyond imagination. Even though we are but seven generations from Adam and Adam is still alive at this time, there has been an incredible population explosion, and by this point in time there are a number of half-angelic, half-human beings. The angels had never seen anything like a woman before and the fallen angels burned in lust for the daughters of men. At that point in time, they were able to manifest themselves physically as more than an apparition and they did (that, or they took over the bodies of men as in demon-possession) and they earth was becoming vastly corrupt. It is difficult to live in the midst of a vastly corrupt society and not to become quite corrupt yourself. Enoch managed to remain uncorrupted, unaffected by the evil about him, even though he possessed an old sin nature and was born with the imputation of Adam's original sin. Enoch was not a monk nor was he a person who went off to some hill to meditate. He had a family and sons and daughters. However, he knew God because he knew God's Word as revealed at that time. Although it is not stated, he could go directly to his great5 grandfather, Adam, and find out everything that God had told Adam in the garden. Our walk with God include fellowship and God's Word, as it has always been. At that time, he could get God's Word through Adam, who walked with our Lord in the garden. As he got this information from Adam, he also walked with God.


Lest anyone examine this verse carefully and say that there is nothing about Enoch being raptured Footnote here, we need only look to Heb. 11:5 for corroboration: By faith-doctrine, Enoch was taken up [or transported or transferred] so that he should not see death; and he was not found because God took him up; for he obtained the witness that before his being taken up, he was pleasing to God.


We now need to digress somewhat I realize that you read this chapter to yourself and either gave no thought to it or fell asleep during it. Genesis 5 has caused a lot of controversy with regards to (1) the ages of those listed; (2) the overall time period involved and (3) the dating of the antediluvian civilization. I will list some of the prominent theories and cover the basic problem which has caused theologians trouble, particularly over the past century. Theologians from centuries ago were not troubled by modern science and modern assumptions, but present-day theologians do not want to appear as though they are alfalfa-chewing barbarians Footnote when faced with the assumptions and conclusions of modern science. There is also the problem of theologians latching onto the Sumerian king list. This list gives us a list of kings which reigned before and after the flood. There are parallels between this list and the Biblical account of the flood which could indicate the same source material. The problem here is that theologians have been so anxious to grasp at some extra-Biblical corroboration for the Genesis flood that they have assumed that this list is it.


The main cause of concern is archaeology and paleontology. Archaeology is the study of ancient man through his relics, monuments, pottery and artifacts. Paleontology is the study of past geological ages based upon the study of fossils. These sciences make several assumptions:

The Assumptions of Archaeology and Paleontology

             The age of man on this earth is very ancient;

             Man evolved from a primate-type being which was not human;

             Man either is, was or has always been in a state of evolution; that is, a progression from more primitive to less primitive to civilized to modern.

The data which these scientist collect are dropped conveniently into these slots of general agreement.

Not all Archaeologists and Paleontologists make these assumptions. These assumptions are essentially moot with regards to archaeology covering the time of around 2300 b.c. and forward.


Chapter Outline

Charts, Graphics and Short Doctrines


The dating of man is accomplished by radioactive dating methods and by the strata in which the fossils have been found. There are two types of commonly used radioactive dating, carbon-14 and potassium argon dating. C-14 dating is done as follows. All living and previously living things have a certain amount of carbon in them. We constantly ingest and egest carbon and carbon carries within it a certain amount of radioactive carbon, known as C-14. When that which is living dies, it no longer ingests carbon; however, it has a certain amount of carbon within it which has a certain amount of C-14 within it. The C-14 begins to disintegrate, thus changing the ratio of C-14 to carbon within this once living organism. The half-life of C-14 is approximately 5700 years so that once a living organism dies, the C-14 within it is reduced by weight by half every 5700 years. To get an idea as to the kind of ratio that we are dealing with, there is approximately one atom of radiocarbon for every trillion molecules of carbon dioxide in the air. Footnote It is important to realize that we are dealing with a very minute amount of carbon and an even smaller amount of C-14 (less than one trillionth of the carbon examined) and that this method of dating assumes that the ratio of C-14 to carbon in the atmosphere has always been constant throughout human history. Since the antediluvian world was probably surrounded by an atmosphere with more water vapor in it than the present world, this may have had an affect upon this ratio. What happened in the floor was cataclysmic, and what set the flood off is unknown. Is it possible that a higher concentration of radioactive carbon was introduced into the earth’s atmosphere during these cataclysmic events? I have previously suggested that the earth was struck by meteors or asteroids, which both set off the 40 days of rain and tilted the earth. Although I came up with these thoughts independently, others have hypothesized similar events which set off the great flood of Noah. Such a series of events could have changed the C-14 concentration in the earth’s atmosphere, throwing off all calculations which extend beyond 7000 years ago.


Furthermore, due to the very small amount of carbon that we examine, the time limits of this method, although touted as being accurate for 50,000 years, might not be accurate for even 10,000 years, assuming atmospheric constancy. Also, the interpretation of the results can be distorted. As Charlie Clough points out, when a piece of wood found in a tomb is tested using carbon dating methods, the age given is not the age of the tomb nor is it the age of the tree when it was put into the tomb but, rather, it is the age of the tree when it was cut down originally.


Potassium-argon dating depends upon the decay of potassium 40 into argon 40. This decay rate is much slower than that of C-14, and is used to date items which might be a million or more years old. Certain rock formations are dated this way. The assumption here is that when some rock formations of Africa show to be 1.5 million years old, then the tools and the bones of primitive man found in that vicinity are also 1.5 million years old. I hope that it is obvious that this does not indicate the true age of the artifacts or the bones found with the rock but, at best, dates only the rock itself.


I have mentioned these methods of dating for several reasons:

             To indicate that the methods of dating are not infallible

             To show you that they are the product of a certain number of assumptions which may or may not be erroneous


On the other hand, I do not wish to disparage the work of archaeologists or paleontologists. The Bible has been continually vindicated in several areas of archaeology and historical accuracy due to their discoveries. They have also been force-fed certain assumptions throughout their entire school life; and when you are told something long enough at an early enough age by people that you trust and admire, it is only natural to accept those premises.


Stratigraphy is the study of various strata of sites where man has lived. Due to man's predisposition toward evolution, it is thought that the stone age came first (which can be separated into different eras), then the Chalcolithic (copper/stone) period, the bronze age, etc. A period of man's history is assigned to these strata which are postulated to be in one of these categories and everything found in that strata are then dated by the strata in which they are found. When man is dated based upon the strata within which he is found, then we are at the mercy of the precepts upon which stratigraphy is founded. That is, a particular human fossil may be determined to be a million years old because the strata in which he is found is assumed to be a million years old. You see, carbon dating destroys portions of the items which are found in archaeological digs, so using this method conserves the organic matter which is found (which is very little in the Palestinian area).


The problem here is that anyone can go out today and find people who are living in one of these ages. There are people who are living in the stone age; people who function as hunters and gatherers who join in tribes. It has been a fact throughout human history that these various kinds of people have lived almost side-by-side since the dawn of man. It is true that many societies go through a period of growth and prosperity in which their culture becomes richer and more diversified during which we see a technological boom. In fact, in many countries today we see a tremendous boom in technology. However, it takes but a superficial examination of human history to see that the world has moved through ages of advance and decline, advance and decline. Man in Rome in the first four centuries ad was light years ahead of man in the dark ages, which occurred later.


Charles Clough, in his book Dawn of the Kingdom, section III, he gives a list of the technological advances made by early post-diluvian man (he took these from Arthur Custance, Doorway Papers). I will note a few of these under the same headings:

Scientific Achievements of Ancient Man

Mechanical Principles and Applications: Gears, pulleys, lathes, fire pistons, gimbal suspension, suspension bridges, domes and arches, lock gates and lifts, steam engine principle, clockwork mechanism, etc.

Materials: Copper, bronze, iron, cast iron, steel, cement, dyes and inks, rubber, lenses of several types, glass (including possibly a malleable glass), china and porcelain, glues, preservatives, shellacs, varnishes, enamels, gold and silver work (including sheet, wire, and plating of metals), etc.

Building Techniques, Tools and Materials: Nails, saws, hammers, brace and bit, sandpaper, Carborundum, plans and maps, surveying instruments, central heating systems, window materials, including glass, protective coatings, street drainage systems, sewage drainage on a wide scale, running water in piped systems, piped gas for heating, drills (including diamond drills), buildings of all types (including genuine skyscrapers and earthquake-proof construction), etc.

Fabrics and Weaving: Cotton, silk, wool, linen, felt, lace, needles, gauze, mechanical looms, mending, tapestry, batik, thimbles, parchment, tailored clothing, feather and fur garments, knitted and crocheted materials, all types of thread, ropes up to 12 inches in diameter, paper of all kinds (including coated stocks), etc.

Food gathering Methods: The use of fish poisons and animal intoxicants, the use of tamed animals (dogs, cats and birds) to catch game, elephants for labor and land clearance, traps and nets of all kinds, and, in agriculture, the use of multi-culture, fertilizes and mechanical seeders and other equipment.

Writing, Painting, etc: Inks, chalks, pencils, crayons, block printing, literary forms, movable type, textbooks, encyclopedias, envelopes and postal stamps, libraries and catalogues, etc.

Medical and Sugical Practices and Instruments: Gargles, snuffs, inhalators, enemas, fumigators, suppositories, insecticides, truth serums, cocaine, anesthetics, soaps, splints, quinine, pills, lotions, ointments, plasters, bandages, tourniquet, adhesive tapes, surgical stitching, caesarian operations (although they were probably not called that at that time), animal stupifying drugs, vaccine for small pox, surgical instruments (knives, tweezers, forceps), identification of hundreds of common diseases and injuries including brain and eye operations and surgery in general), etc.

Certainly, ancient man lacked Gameboy and WordPerfect, but this partial list should indicate that these are not the grunting, semi-civilized, "let's go throw a rock at the head of an animal and see what happens" man which is too-often portrayed. One of the main reasons that the authorship of Moses is questioned by higher critics is that they do not like the idea of such civilized literary content coming from bronze age man. I reproduced this list to indicate that man has, even in ancient history, been extremely intelligent, very inventive, and that identifying the age of man by stratification, under the assumption that man has progressed over a long period of time from very primitive to highly civilized (I guess we are the ones who view ourselves as being highly civilized), is fraught with inaccurate presuppositions.

The entire list is found here:

http://www.custance.org/Library/Volume1/Part_I/Chapter3.html


Chapter Outline

Charts, Graphics and Short Doctrines




An important note is that the years given in Gen. 5 are different in the Hebrew text (upon which our Bible is based), the Septuagint and in the Samaritan text. We do not know which text is more accurate in this area, although most scholars tend to go with the Hebrew text, as that is the original text. The numbers in the LXX indicate that Methuselah would have survived the flood and the numbers found in the Samaritan text would have Jared, Methuselah and Lamech outliving the flood. Obviously, this does not jive with the Genesis account of the flood where these men are not mentioned as survivors of the flood. It is possible that all the ages were changed systematically in order to make certain that no one outlived the flood. This, of course, causes us problems with the common interpretation of this passage. Therefore, I will list some other interpretations. However, I should point out that only one scribal error could throw off the chronology of Genesis 5 and if that occurred, then the ages of the others named in Genesis may have been changed to correlate with the error.


The two problems which current theologians have with the antediluvian period is the longevity of those named in this record and the overall dating of this record. Important archaeological evidence which has been cited is that human fossils which have been examined have been determined to be between 20 and 60 years old. Further, it is generally agreed upon between archaeologists that man is approximately a million years old. To the former, recall that we are dealing with bones and fossils which are 5-10,000 years old and that certain assumptions are made as to the aging process; my point being is that these bones may (1) only appear to be 20-60 years old or (2) these are not bones from the antediluvian period. When it comes to dating the antediluvian period (for which Biblical scholars will be hard-pressed to do with any great accuracy), we cannot rely upon what archaeology has done in the dating of mankind in general. They are forced into these positions by the assumptions under which they operate. We have superficially dealt with the methods of dating used by archaeologists and paleontologists and have shown that they are not necessarily infallible.


Whereas in other genealogies throughout Scripture, it is clear that some generations are skipped, in Gen. 5 it appears as though this is the one time where each and every father and son are named due to the unique construction of this chapter. The parent is listed; the age when his son is born is listed, the number of years afterward that he lived is listed, and then the total years that he lived is listed. Now, there are other sons and daughters born to these men and it is possible that the son listed is not their son but their grandson—the amount of time given allows for that as does the precedence of other genealogies. However, the meticulous manner in which this chapter is written seems to indicate that the author was particular about getting the ages correct. Furthermore, the verb found here is associated with fathering a child, not with simply being an antecedent.


Could the text have been corrupted? That is certainly a possibility. How about the longevity factor? It is my personal opinion (and this is not shared by many) that the remains of the antediluvian civilization have never been found because (1) they were completely (or nearly completely) destroyed and/or (2) we have never looked in the right place. I believe if any of it has been preserved (and I doubt that much has) it would be found at the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean. Whereas we have seen many destructive floods in our lifetimes, I do not think that we have seen any flood even one-tenth the magnitude and strength of the Genesis flood. I do not believe that civilization began in Mesopotamia but even possibly on another continent which was destroyed in the Atlantic. Throughout the Old Testament, God would occasionally order the destruction of a particular group of people and would command the obliteration of every man, woman, child, and their cattle and possessions. If God would command Israel to execute such judgement, then it only stands to reason that a generation so corrupt as the antediluvian age should be similarly summarily obliterated when God is Himself exacting the judgment. When that continent was deluged, it sunk and caused havoc throughout the rest of the earth, including tidal waves hundreds of feet high, almost unimaginable. There were likely dramatic geological changes which occurred at this time.


The new civilization did begin in the Mesopotamian area. Archaeology has not found any ancient man who died being hundreds of years old because archaeology has never discovered any antediluvian men. Whether they could be found or whether they even exist, we have no idea.


However, it is probably important to note what other theologians are thinking with respect to the genealogy given in Gen. 5:


The (false) theories start out innocuous enough. It has been noticed that there are 10 generations from Adam to Noah and ten from Noah to Abraham. It is postulated that this is done for symmetry, brevity and easy memory. The Hebrew words for sired (or, begat) and for son or daughter are used with great latitude and immediate descendent is not always the meaning (I am not aware of this being true for the verb sired, begat, became the father of). Skipping a generation or two is common (and we are always referred to Matt. 1as proof). All this is true; however, we do not show the skipping of four or five generations at every benchmark in Matthew. So even if a generation is skipped here or there, there is no implication that between each set of names we have several generations.


However, based upon those facts, we have a theory that Enosh lived 90 years and sires Kenan and then Enosh lives another 815 years, having other sons and daughters, and then dies at the age of 905, that Enosh, at age 90 had a son, Bob, and Bob had a son Bubba, and Bubba had a son Junior and Junior (quite a number of years later) had a son Kenan. If this is the case, then figures and statements made in Gen. 5 would be false, which would suggest that this is not the Word of God. The conclusion that not all generations are included in Gen. 5 and the time frame given is not what it seems, does not really solve any problems (the age of mankind; and the individual ages noted herein), and introduces the new problem that: the Bible is not the Word of God.


Because there are some instances where an individual's name is used for both himself and for his seed (Gen. 46:1–4), it is theorized that the list of antediluvian names represents tribes or families or dynasties and the number of years given stands for the length of time that dynasty survived (this does not account for the fact that the ages given are all very similar). Again, this really does not solve any problems, but only suggests that the Bible is not the Word of God.




Possibly include this with Gen. 6–8

The remains of at least four major floods have been found in the Mesopotamian area and they have all been thought to be evidence of the Genesis deluge. At Ur, for instance, there were some excavations made in the 1920's under the direction of a man named Woolley, who discovered some incredible tombs which were a veritable treasure chest of golden drinking cups and goblets, a vases and jugs, bronze tableware, mother of pearl mosaics, and all other manner of artifacts. The lowest and last tombs were judged to be from 2800 b.c. Below that were charred wood ash and clay tablets with writing guessed to date back to 3000 b.c.; and below, there was more pottery and vases, all from the period of time of the tombs. Then right below that was a 10 foot band of clay, the kind deposited by water, yet several yards above the river level. The clay abruptly stopped and below that they found more vases and pottery, which they judged to be possibly antediluvian. Woolley concluded that this was a flood which covered approximately 400 miles x 100 miles, just Northwest of the Persian Gulf. Although it would have been a local occurrence insofar as we would be concerned to day, it was thought to we world wide for the inhabitants of that area. We have also found traces of flooding in Mesopotamia, in Kish, Nenveh and Uruk. The problem is they all occurred at different times with possibly centuries separating them. A result of this is that very few Biblical scholars will point to any one of these and call it the Genesis flood. In fact, most authors that I have read, although they believe in the Genesis flood, they do not believe that there is any irrefutable evidence of such a flood. Believers should not be troubled by this. For centuries, the Bible was ridiculed because it gave great prominence to some insignificant group of peoples known as the Hittites. We have since found out, through the efforts of archaeology that the Hittites were ever bit the world power during their time as the Bible makes them out to be. With respect to the Genesis flood, it should be pointed out is that the Genesis flood possibly did not even occur in this area, although it certainly affected this area in terms of earthquakes, tidal waves and the dramatic shifting of the continents. Furthermore, although historical accuracy is an absolute must for God's Word, as we believe in the inerrancy of Scripture; even historical verification of every point in the Bible would not prove to anyone that Jesus Christ died on their behalf on the cross and that by believing in Him they would have eternal life. Even God the Father would not allow those at Gethsemene to view Jesus bearing our sins. He covered the land with a thick, supernatural darkness.


The Weld-Blundell Prism is a list of eight kings who ruled Sumer prior to the flood and fourteen dynasties which came after the flood. It has been assumed by many, hoping for corroborating evidence of the flood in extra-Biblical literature, that the flood here is the Genesis flood. Since there have been four major floods at least early in the history of man in the Mesopotamian area, that means that these kings do not have to be antediluvians and post-diluvians. If God wiped out the inhabitants of the earth, which the Bible clearly indicates, then it would be illogical for a tablet to list a group of kings which reigned before and after a flood. This indicates some sort of coherency in rulership and in population. We have faced incredible floods and have lost large groups of people; it is not inconceivable that mankind could have lost much larger groups of people in an ancient flood, yet the nation survived and some sort of rulership survived, consistent enough to manage to find both sets of kings, those before and after to end up on the same historical record.


One of the intriguing things about this Prism is that some of the names of the kings seem to mean the same thing in translation as some of the names in Genesis 5. The third patrairch named in Genesis is Enosh (which means man) and the third king on the Sumerian (or, Babylonian) list is Amelu, and it means man. Kenan is our #4 man on the Genesis list and his name comes from a word which means to fabricate and the forth king is Ummanu, and his name means artificer. #7 man on the Genesis list, Enoch, is said to have walked with God and then he was not; the seventh king on the Babylonian list (Enmeduranel) was said to have been summoned by the gods Shamash and Ramman. The tenth king, just like Noah, is said to have survived a great flood. There are differences between the two lists to be sure. Further, the period of time during which the antediluvian kings on the Sumerian list reigned was a total of 240,000 years. That's a long time. Individuals reigned for anywhere from 18,000+ years to 36,000 years. None of this should be troubling. Just in case you have forgotten, Satan is the great counterfeiter. No matter what God has done, Satan has attempted to copy it.




Let’s summarize this:

Summing up the Longevity Digression

To sum up, what I have hoped to accomplish by this lengthy digression is to show:

             It is possibly that most or all of the direct ancestors of Noah are given in Gen. 5

             It is very likely that the time frame given for the antediluvian period is reasonable and true; other than the error of a copyist, we have no reason to doubt the overall time frame of Gen. 1–5

             It is very likely that those men named in Gen. 5 really did live for almost an entire millennium.

             Most theories end up questioning the accuracy of the Word of God, not questioning any of the scientific theories they hope agree with; and yet, never actually come to a point where they agree with existing scientific thought.

             Finally, there is no reason to hold to some date a million years ago for the actual beginnings of man on this earth. 5000 to 10,000 b.c. is a reasonable time frame for a Christian to believe

Science, over and over again, comes up with theories that people believe for many decades (or longer), and then these theories turn out to be wrong.


Chapter Outline

Charts, Graphics and Short Doctrines

 

And Methuselah lived 187 years and sired Lamech, and he had sons and daughters. So all the days of Methuselah's were 969 years, and he died. And Lamech loved 182 years and become the father of a son. Now he called his name Noah, saying, "This one shall give us rest [or, comfort us] from our work and from the toil of our hands from the ground which the Lord has cursed." [Gen. 5:25–29]


This line of Seth, the seed of the woman, hoped for someone to deliver them from this earth of sin. Most of those who were alive had spoken with Adam and had learned from Adam what the earth was like 1500 years previous. Life, for them, as it is now, was a struggle and hard work. They further faced a world of half-angelic, half-human creatures. Each generation hoped for Messiah, the seed of the woman, the one to give them rest from all their labors. Noah is Nôach (נֹחַ) [pronounced NOH-ahkh] and the word for rest is nachath (נַחַת) [pronounced NAH-khahth], which means tranquility, quietness, rest. Strong’s #5183 BDB #629. The verb that Lamech uses here is nâcham (נָחַם) [pronounced naw-KHAHM], which means, to comfort, to console, to have compassion, to show compassion. Strong’s #5162 BDB #636. Jesus said, "Come to me all of you who are weary and heavy-burdened, and I will rest you. Take My yoke upon you; and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart; and you will find rest for your souls." [Matt. 11:28–29] Rotherham also points out that Noah could mean consolation.


V. 32 will mark the end of the generations until we come to Gen. 10:1, which deals with the descendants of Shem, Ham and Japheth. This indicates that the author of the narrative from Gen. 4:25-9:32 was probably the same person, very likely Noah or one of his sons. The generations of Adam are dispensed with quickly with very little history or information other than the fact that Enoch was raptured (which had to be mentioned as the amount of years each person lived was mentioned). However, this would have been written by someone who possibly knew some of these men in the past and had kept some sort of a record and wrote from that record. Since the author will record Noah's life in more detail, along with the general state of the earth, I would further assert that Noah was the author of this portion of God's Word. Again, believing that this is a record written down by someone closer to the facts than Moses in no way detracts from the inspiration of God's Word. As I have mentioned, even Luke pooled different resources from which to write his gospel. He did not sit down after forty days and forty nights of eating nuts and berries, praying in the desert, and then start writing from a semi-conscious, subliminal state. We are never told to go into some kind of a trance state and start taking dictation nor is any writer of Scripture. This is foolish and very un-Christian. Those who wrote Scripture give the impression of being very lucid and very conscious while recording Scripture (although some of it came from dreams and visions).


Furthermore, there is no indication that some author like Moses later took these several different sources and tried to weave them together. Each individual narrative seems to be quite cohesive and self contained. There does not seem to be various writing styles found within each narrative. The narratives have a beginning and a logical end. They do not repeat word for word what previous or later naratives say, yet some of the material overlaps. In other words, this is not too different from the gospels, where there are portions which are found in almost all the gospels and information which only one gospel holds. The chart below is the result of educated guesswork; it is by no mans to be taken as truth etched in stone:


 

The Possible Authors of Sections of Genesis

Text

History Covered

Possible Author(s)

Rationale

Gen. 1:1–2:3

Creation of the earth and the universe; the six days of restoration; the seventh day of rest

God dictated this to Adam, Noah, Abraham or Moses


No person was alive to witness this, therefore it had to be dictated. It is reasonable to assume that another writer of Scripture was the instrument of God's dictation.

Gen. 2:4-3:24

The creation of the man and the woman, the fall of man, the pronouncement of judgement upon them and the serpent;

Adam.

This is too difficult to call with any accuracy. The history which has been covered is vast and covers information known primarily to Adam, Eve, Cain and to Lamech.

Gen. 4:1–4:15

The birth of Cain and Abel; the murder of Abel.

Adam, Cain or Seth.

Adam would have found out about this, possibly from God. Cain would have known about all of it. Particular striking is the conversation between God and Cain.

Gen. 4:16–24

The generations of Cain to the sons of Lamech.

Cain; one of La-mech's wives or children, Enoch, Shem or Noah.

The earth at this time would have been a "small town", and information would be gathered through the grapevine. Furthermore, Lamech's song was possibly known far and wide. Furthermore, man lived for centuries, so that his life spanned 10 generations.

Gen. 5:1–32

The genealogy of Adam to Noah.

Noah or Shem.

Every individual at this time could probably know his genealogical line in greater specificity than is recorded here. Just as we learn our names as very young children, they would be taught their genealogies in the same way.

Gen. 6:1–9:29

The corruption of mankind, the flood, and the beginning of the post-diluvian civilization.

Noah or Shem

The author was aware of the previous generations but does not record much information about them. The author spends the greatest amount of time dealing with the life of Noah. This indicates to me that this is the work of Noah.

Bear in mind that I have suggested that man’s memory was much greater around the time of the flood, so that hundreds or thousands of men could have been aware of all of these incidents up to the flood. Even after the flood, large numbers of men could have known this information, many of them knowing the narrative of the flood exactly as we read it in the Bible.

Gen. 10:1-32

 

 

 

Gen. 11:1-0

 

 

 

Gen. 11:10-24:67

 

 

 

At this point, we are far ahead of where we need to be.


Chapter Outline

Charts, Graphics and Short Doctrines

 

Then Lamech lived 595 years after he became the father of Noah, and he had sons and daughters. So all the days of Lamech were 777 years and he died. And Noah was 500 years old, and Noah sired Shem, Ham and Japheth. [Gen. 5:30–32]


Shem means celebrity, Ham means swarthy or hot, and Japheth means extension. These are not necessarily Noah's only children, but these are the only ones which are mentioned in Scripture. If Noah had other children, then they perished in the flood, having been contaminated by the demons of Gen.  (to be covered in more detail in that chapter. Writing about other sons and daughters would have been no doubt very painful for Noah.


Some people are confused about the genealogical records and their purpose. The primary purpose of these records is to record the line of the humanity and the legal line of our Lord, which do not diverge until after King David. They trace, throughout several centuries, the seed of the woman. At this time, it was obvious that at least Adam and Lamech had sons which they thought were the promised seed. Furthermore, we are in a time of great corruption on the earth, which will be covered in chapter 6.


The New Testament makes several allusions to Noah and the flood and these references would be a good way to preface chapter 6. In Matt. 24, Jesus is telling of the signs of His return. When He returns, man will be preoccupied with his life on earth and little thought will be given to spiritual things. Noah, after having his three sons, will evangelize the earth for 120 years and the sum total of his converts will be his wife, three of his children and their wives. He would not be written up in Evangelism Monthly. Man and partial man will be too caught up in their own affairs to pay any attention to Noah. Our Lord said, "For the coming of the Son of Man will be just like the days of Noah: for as in those days which were before the flood, they were eating and drinking, they were marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark. Further, they did not understand until the flood came and took them all away, so shall the coming of the Son of Man be. We have two pictures of the time prior to the flood and the time prior to the coming of the Son of Man. One picture is that of great violence and destruction (Gen. 6:11–13 and Matt. 24:6–7,21–22) and the other is a picture of a total lack of interest in things spiritual, or daily life being carried on without a thought to God or to the eternal consequences of one's actions (see also Luke 17:26–30). There is no contradiction in these pictures; merely a difference in emphasis. Today, you can go to any place on earth and find great violence and you can find people totally preoccupied with their own lives. Prior to the flood and prior to our Lord's second advent, this will also be true, except that the violence will become intensified.


Our Lord spoke of Noah as an historical person and the flood as an historical event. There seems to be no indication that this was some kind of a folk tale carried down through the ages. Further, Noah finds himself in several genealogies (see 1Chron. 1:4 and Luke 3:36).


Hebrews take a wide view of spiritual history, covering the faith of Abel, Enoch and Noah, as well as baker's dozen of historical Jewish figures. Concerning Noah, it reads: By faith-doctrine, Noah, having been warned about things not yet seen, in reverence, prepared an ark for the salvation of is household, by which he condemned the world, and became an heir of the righteousness which is according to fait.


Peter, who became quite a Biblical scholar is his later years, mentions Noah once in each epistle. However, Peter, in each case, is not focusing upon Noah as much as he is focusing upon the angels who sinned. So I will save his quotes for the beginning of chapter 6 when we examine the actual makeup of the earth in the days of Noah.


Just recently, I have read that the continuous history of Israel certainly could not have been written by just one person (or two or three), so those who were the human authors of God's Word would always tie together their portion of the Bible with the previous section with a couple of verses. They might perhaps add a verse or two or a chapter to the previous book (for instance, Joshua likely wrote about the death of Moses at the end of Deuteronomy) and then in their portion of Scripture, they might repeat in the first few verses of their portion one or two verses from the previous book of Scripture. In this way they establish an end, a beginning and continuity. Chapter 1 of Joshua contains primarily a direct quote from God spoken to Joshua and in this quote, their are several quotations of what was in the writings of Moses. The Mosaic (and Abrahamic and Palestinian) covenant is repeated briefly in Josh. 1:2–4. God's promise repeated to Israel several times under Israel: "I will never fail you or forsake you" is found n Josh. 1:5. The Law of Moses, a reference to the five books of Moses, is recognized immediately as Scripture in Josh. 1:8. Then we begin with a history of Joshua, written n the third person as did most , but not all, writers of Scripture did.


We find a very similar pattern in the book of Genesis. In the chart which is found previously in this chapter, I have noted certain portions of Scripture and have given reasonable, educated guesses as to the authors of these sections. What we ar studying here is very likely the work of Noah. A short addendum is added to chapter 4 of Genesis (vv. 25–26); the portion which is begun is given a title of sorts in Gen. 5:1 (this is not always the case); a portion of the previous book is repeated almost word for word (Gen. 5:1b–2a quotes Gen. 1:27–28a); this author notes the genealogical link in Gen. 5:1-32 (not always the case); and then the author launches into the text of his portion of God's Word. As for myself, I would bet money that—since the genealogy covers the seed of the woman throughout the entire antediluvian period, from Adam and the woman to Noah and his sons, and since the bulk of the following text deals exclusively with the events of Noah's life, which spanned the end of the antediluvian period and the beginning of the post-diluvian civilization— that Noah is the author of this portion of Scripture. I would be even more inclined to say that Moses did not necessarily even examine the documents and write the history of man, but copied it line for line in the book which became Genesis or merely added to it.


Internal Links

Beginning of Document/

Chapter Summaries

External Links

Genesis Chapter Links



Genesis 6


Genesis 6 has been completely reworked and expanded, including the entire word-by-word Hebrew exegesis. It may be found here: (HTML) (PDF) (WPD). It is highly recommended that you go to that study instead of this one. These chapters are being completed one-by-one and will eventually supplant this incomplete study of Genesis.


Genesis 6:1–22


Maps, Charts and Short Doctrines:

 

v. 13               Robert Dean on Why the Noahic Flood was Worldwide


Introduction: There are those who are good, Christian men and women, who believe that the flood came just because man got way too sinful. This is not altogether logical, however. Man, in various portions of the world, has become extremely degenerate and Godless, yet God does not wipe out the earth. Certainly, in Gen. 9, God promises Noah that He will never again destroy the population of the earth as a whole by a flood; but how could tings get so bad so soon after the fall, making such drastic action necessary? We are not speaking of a man who miscalculated or perhaps overreacted and destroyed mankind from the face of the earth; we are speaking of God the Father who has all of the facts, has a perfect knowledge of the past, present and future; and Who does not miscalculate or overreact. Logically, this would indicate that something occurred during this period of time which was evil enough or unusual enough to warrant more than just strong discipline but absolute destruction.


Our lives are but a drop in human history. Man is arrogant to believe that as it has been in his life, it always has been and forever will be. Eccles. 1:9 What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done, and there is nothing new under the sun (ESV). Eccles. 3:15 That which is has been long ago, and that which is to be has been long ago: and God seeks again that which is passed away (WEB). The first few chapters of Genesis introduce us to an world which is much different from our own and people who are much different from us today and circumstances which are far stranger than we can imagine.


God has sentenced Satan and the angels that fell to the Lake of Fire. Certainly, Satan objected to this sentence and brought forth many reasons why this sentence was unjust or too harsh. Human history reveals the absolute catastrophe of God allowing the coexistence of sin. However, so that there is no later objection that God stacked the deck, human history occurs in a number of environments, in a number of scenarios. We have man in innocence in perfect environment in the garden; but we also have fallen man in perfect environment in the millennium. We have man faced with signs and miracles and prophecy and we have a period of time where there are a dearth of signs and miracles and no prophecy. Throughout these various epochs of history, we also have a change in the relationship of the angels and demons to man. Whereas, angels have often been involved in our history as servants of God for our benefit and protection, the demonic role in history has changed. In the garden, Satan was allowed to indwell a serpent (or possibly even cohabit with a serpent, producing the serpent that lied to the woman). In the period of time when our Lord came to this earth, demon-possession was fairly common and almost universally acknowledged. That is, it appeared that in almost every town there were cases of demon-possession. Furthermore, this demon-possession resulted in very radical behavior. Today, there are likely many cases of demon-possession, but, for the most part, the behavior is less radical and more civilized. The multiple personality syndrom could be partially attributable to demon activity. This does not mean that all multiple personality types are demon-possessed; but it is likely that some are. In a similar vein, it is likely that some mass-murderers, with their sexual deviance and aberrant behavior beyond the murder of strangers, are demon-possessed. It is not beyond the field of logic to imagine that some world leaders, notably Stalin and Hitler, were demon-possessed, given the huge number of people whom they callously had killed. Demon-possession does not have to result in behavior which is clearly bizarre. Demons are far more intelligent than we are and their social skills would be close to perfect, if they so chose to act. This is why some mass-murderers can find so many victims and seem so normal to their victims to the point of actually seducing them to a point.


The purpose of all this introduction is to make you understand that after the fall, things could have been different than they are now in more respects than we realize. Demon activity could have been different than it is now. It is my opinion that (1) demons actually were allowed to have their own bodies and were able to copulate with mankind and produce offspring; (2) these offspring were half-demon and half-human, a counterfeit of the hypostatic union of Jesus Christ; and (3) that mythology is based upon this period of time. When Satan seduced Adam and the woman to fall, mankind and the earth underwent some dramatic changes. Had Satan not the ability to intervene in human history, he could have objected that even though he caused man to fall, he could have straightened out the earth, given the opportunity. Therefore, Satan and his demon army have always played a part in human history in one way or another. We always think of Satan as a force for sin, but he also operates in the field of good and evil. Man's many attempts for a human utopia are not continually thwarted by Satan, but a result of Satan's attempts to show that he can run the world and the world system. He is the ruler of the earth and he is in charge. The fact that there are wars, poverty, sickness, and all types of evils on this earth are not necessarily the result of Satan's direct action but a result of his ineptitude to provide a suitable environment for the inhabitants of the earth. There is a marvelous quote from Chafer which Thieme was wont to use at this point which I cannot find in my abridged Systematic Theology.


Communism and socialism are great political systems which are related to Satanic philosophy. There is an attempt to make everyone equal, and to remove those who are so foolish as to believe in God (they are removed from society, reeducated, or simply killed). You cannot suddenly impose a socialistic system without killing millions of people. However, you can slowly inundate society with socialistic trends and socialistic philosophy, which has happened in most of Europe, Canada and currently in the United States.


Back to Genesis 6: there are a great many good Christians who do not believe that angels ever were allowed to copulate with mankind, and, as J. Vernon McGee used to say, on this one point we can allow them to be wrong. We can still fellowship with them and spend eternity with them. However, since Satan took over the rulership of the earth, it is only logical to allow him a certain amount of autonomy in ruling it. Furthermore, the angels came from a lifestyle of celibacy. They did not procreate; there were not male and female angels; they do not marry or give in marriage. What occurred on the earth with the woman was a new thing. Satan’s plan was to corrupt all mankind by having angels fornicate with women. This viewpoint must be substantiated and it will be shown that every reference to angelic activity during Noah's time will indicate that more than demon-possession took place.


There is a second reason that angels cohabited with mankind (I should say womankind); fallen angels are destined for the Lake of Fire. They will spend eternity there in suffering and in separation from God. The harshness of God’s sentencing is explained in human history. God has allowed the redeeming of fallen man, but not of fallen angels. So, why can’t God just allow Satan some little corner of the universe to hang, separated from all else? First of all, God will give Satan that little corner of the universe; we call it hell, but it is properly the Lake of Fire. Secondly, Satan and his angels are doing everything possible to see that we do not choose Jesus Christ, but that we spend our eternity with him instead. However, I am deviating from the point I would like to make. Mankind can be redeemed and angels cannot. So what is God going to do when He is faced with some half-man, half-angelic beings? Won’t God have to save them if they choose to believe in Jesus Christ? And God had Moses preach the gospel for 120 years, with the only converts coming from his own family, who were uncontaminated flesh. Therefore, that remains a moot question.


The first term which we must examine is sons of God found here and in Job 1:6 2:1 and 38:7. Both Hebrew words are the common words for sons and for God. However, they are only used in conjunction in these four portions of OT Scripture. In Job, it is fairly clear that we are dealing with a convocation of angels, both fallen and elect, and Satan in the courtroom of God. This is why it is that sons of God in Genesis refers to angels. The use of Son of God in the New Testament is used only of Jesus Christ in His incarnation and sons of God in the New Testament refer to us as believers in union with Jesus Christ.


The New Testament has more to say on the subject of the times of Noah, however. In the little book of Jude, the writer is making a point by quoting several parallel judgements found in the Old Testament. In fact, the time period covered is the same as that in Genesis and Exodus (Jude mentions Cain, Enoch, Moses, Sodom and Gomorrah and the Exodus generation). In the midst of these things, Jude writes: And angels who did not keep their own domain, but abandoned their proper abode, [those] He has kept in eternal bonds under darkness for the judgment of the great day. (Jude 6) These are the angels who left their celibate state and cohabited with the daughters of men; the same were buried under the raging waters of the flood and held in bonds under darkness until the day of judgment. Even Jesus Christ, in his Spirit, immediately following his death by crucifixion, carried a victorious proclamation to these angels. In which [Spirit] He also went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison who once were disobedient (or unyielding) when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water. (1Peter 3:19–20) This was not Peter's last word on this subject: For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them in pits of darkness, reserved for judgment, and did not spare the ancient [antediluvian] world, but preserved Noah, a proclaimer of righteousness, with seven others, when He brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly. (2Peter 2:4–5)


So it is clear that something occurred with some angels during the time of Noah, causing them to be put under chains of darkness, reserving them for later judgement and this transgression involved leaving their own principality or position. Our most logical conclusion is that they cohabited with the daughters of men. Remember, that women were a brand new thing on the earth. No such creature had ever existed before like this. And it is logical to have one period of time where angels could directly intervene upon human history, to reveal that they do not have the ability to correct the fallen state of man, which was caused by Satan.


The last, and weakest witness to this viewpoint is the history of man. If something like this occurred, even though the post-diluvian civilization began with believers only, the sons of Noah would certainly remember the incredible half-human half-angelic creatures that lived upon the earth and they would, tell about these beings. Stories about half man, half-god beings would certainly find its way to almost every major ancient culture. This is precisely what we find. Mythology exists for the Celts, Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, Scandinavians and Hindus (among others). There are a great many parallels between these various myths. They had the same source material; each culture just embellished these myths. See the Mythology Table (PDF version). It is not unlike a rumor which has gotten out of control. In the myths which I have examined, there is parallel after parallel between God's Word and these myths, from the creation of the earth and the creation of man to the tribulation and the millennium. Recall that Satan is the great counterfeiter and he will counterfeit the truth and, whenever possible, glorify himself in the process. Most of these mythologies have a trinity of sorts; they all have Satanic figures (and usually many Satanic figures); there is a lot of marriage between brothers and sisters and nephews, and other close relatives, similar to the antediluvian civilization. There is cohabitation between gods and men and there are races of half-mortal/half-gods in these myths. The parallels between the truth and myth are amazing. As I read through various myths and synopses of various mythologies, I am amazed by the clear bastardization of the truth which is found in everything from the creation myths, to the underworld, to the chains of darkness, to even the end times.


Now with this several page introduction to chapter 6 of Genesis, we are finally able to begin and have some idea as to what is really occurring:

 

Now it came to pass when men began to multiply on the face of the earth that daughters were born to them, and the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful; and they took wives to themselves, whomever they chose. [Gen. 6:1–2]


The angels are called sons of God because God created them; they do not procreate or give birth. They do not have a male or female sex. As Jesus said, "The angels do not marry nor are they given in marriage." However, man does procreate and they began to have daughters as well as sons. Women are often impressed by foolish things, such as power, exterior beauty, fame and riches, and these fallen angels had all of these attributes, making them far more desirable than puny man. Therefore, the angels were able to chose as they so desired. God allowed this for a time to illustrate that angelic infiltration of the human race was not the answer and that Satan could not solve the problems of the fallen world in this way. This also indicates that God created the woman as a creature of great beauty, which we still see today. Only a man with real character can see beyond this tremendous exterior beauty.


We have seen the Hebrew word for take before; it can mean to take in marriage and this is what it means in this context. It is in the Qal imperfect, which means they continued to take these women as wives, that it did not all occur at once but a few of them tried it and made it work so other fallen angels decided to join in. Chose is in the Qal perfect; they made the initial choice, stuck with it, and then took these women as wives. Their choice is in the perfect tense, because it was a completed action with results that continued.

 

The Yahweh said, "My Spirit shall not plead [the cause] [or, strive] with man forever; because he also [is] flesh, therefore his days shall be 120 years." [Gen. 6:3]


This verse has a couple of slightly different renderings, mostly because the translators do not know what is going on in this passage, therefore the actually translation does not make sense to them. The first verb in the quote is dîyn (דּין) [pronounced deen]; and it can mean to judge, to exercise judgement, to punish and it can mean plead (the cause) or to strive. The latter translation is found in Gen. 30:6 Jer. 5:28 30:13. Then there is the elusive Footnote preposition shel (שֶל) [pronounced shehl], and it means on account of, because, whatsoever, whichsoever. Man is in the singular masculine meaning that it stands for mankind; and is followed by the relative pronoun in the singular masculine. Gam (םַ) [pronounced gam] is an adverb denoting addition and it can be translated also, moreover, yea or even.


God will continue to witness to mankind below, even though most of man is half-angel, half-man at this point; but God will still plead the gospel with them, because man is also flesh. God has also given man a cutoff time. For 120 years, Noah will proclaim the gospel to the masses for 120 years, regardless of their origins, and he will have but seven converts, his wife, his three sons and his three daughters-in-law, (who wisely chose to marry into Noah's family). An additional purpose fo the line of Noah is now more obvious: this line shows that Noah was descended from 100% homo sapiens. There were no angels in the woodpile for Noah. Noah's father and grandfather both died prior to the flood and the means of their death is not told to us.


There are certainly other theories on what this means. The most common theory is that the two lines represent the line of Seth and the line of Cain intermarrying; another is that the sons of God refer to kings who could choose whatever women they wanted because they were kings. It is true that Israel often became corrupt due to intermarriage with people of other religions but this is not Israel that we are speaking of here. God has said nothing about who can marry who. Furthermore, whether we have the line of Cain mixed with the line of Seth (who have the same father), does that require God to wipe them off the face of the earth with a flood? Can Cain's line really be that bad? Further, it is possible that there were kings at that time, but we must remember that we are less than a dozen generations from Adam and Eve. They have certainly populated the earth quickly, as lifetimes tended toward the millennial mark and cities began to be built, but this does not mean that man has banded into separate nations as of yet (or city-states). God seems to encourage this type of separation later in Gen. 9. The point is, these theories come very short of dealing with the passage in context, with the quotations from Jude and Peter, and when it comes to dealing with Noah being perfect and all flesh being corrupt, these theories will also prove to be inadequate.

 

The Nephilim were in the earth in those days and also after that [or, as a result of this], when the sons of God came into the daughters of men and bore [sons] to them; the same were the heroes of old, the men of renown. [Gen. 6:4]


Again, examine the other two, incorrect theories of the mixture of the two lines (whether kings and women or Cain's line and Seth's line); if these are men of renown, heroes of the past, why do we not know anything about them today? However, if they are a mixture of angels and man, then almost every ancient culture knows about these men and this information has been brought down to us even to today. A mixture of Seth's line and Cain's line is not going to account for men who are looked back upon as heroes or as men of renown. Properly interpreted, God's Word makes perfect sense at this point. Being that we are in an age where miracles and signs and wonders are rare, people tend to want to remove any hint of supernatural from the Bible. Critics for centuries have tried to discount the miracles of Moses, Elijah and Jesus Christ, claiming that these are but myths. Some fundamentalists get caught in the same trap and more subtly persuaded that since there is no cohabitation between women and angels today, that it therefore never took place before. There are a lot of things in the antediluvian state which is different from our present age. This allowance by God is but one of many drastic dissimilarities between our age and that age.


Most translators, at this point, puppy out and transliterate instead of translate the first noun. The KJV uses the word giants, but that is not necessarily correct. The word is Nephîlîym (נְפִלִים) [pronounced nef-eel-EEM] (the –im suffix is the plural suffix in the Hebrew). It's meaning is disputed, which is why it is often transliterated. It is found only elsewhere in Num. 13:33 where a patrol sent out by Moses to the land of Canaan comes back, one of them, Caleb, desiring to overtake the peoples in the land, the majority report was afraid to attack because the people were nephilim and the Jews, by comparison, were grasshoppers in their sight. It is for this reason, the word is sometimes translated giants. Another possible meaning is fallen ones. The root word for this is nâphal (נָפַל) [pronounced naw-FAHL] which means to fall; or nêphel (נֵפֶל) [pronounced NEH-fel] which means untimely birth or abortion (it is the same root word). This can be a technical term for these half-angel/half-human beings. They are related to an untimely birth; they are probably larger in stature and much stronger than the Jews; the are fallen creatures. The use in Num. 13:33 could have been an exaggeration based upon this passage. The spies in those circumstances were so nervous and afraid, that they saw these people as not the mythological people of old but similar to these gods. That is, the word was used to incite fear among the Jews (which it did).


The sentence structure is such that we cannot determine whether these are beings in addition to those mentioned in the verse or whether these are the product of this unholy union of the sons of God and the daughters of men. However, it would be logical that these refer to the fallen angels who copulated with the homo sapiens females.

 

Then Yahweh saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only [or, altogether] evil continually. [Gen. 6:5]


Wickedness includes bad, unkind, vicious, disagreeable and displeasing. Furthermore, wickedness and evil are the same words in the Hebrew in this verse. Again, how is it likely that man, left to his own devices, could reach a state of evil this great? Man, throughout history, has always had pockets of evil. But the only difference here, by many expositors, is that man was able to pick and chose the women that he wanted and he lived a lot longer than man today. This is not going to account for this concentration of evil. Again, the only logical explanation for what is going on is that God has allowed the angels to cohabit with women.

 

And Yahweh was sorry that He had made man on the earth and He was grieved in His heart. [Gen. 6:6]


Translators and expositors have had a lot of trouble with this verse. Sometimes it is even translated improperly as it repented the Lord that... This way God would not be the subject of the sentence. It is not a problem to have a verse like this. It is simply an anthropopathism. This expresses God's motivation and response to a situation in human terms; ascribing to God emotions and feelings which He does not have, yet better explaining God to man through the use of these emotions. God knew in eternity past exactly what was going to happen. The events of the past three chapters did not catch God by surprise and now He wishes He would have thought this out a bit better. At this point in time, one-third of the angels had fallen and man had fallen. However, it was through this, and through the rest of human history that God would preserve the rest of the angels forever and preserve man forever, those who so choose.

 

And the Lord said, "I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the earth, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the sky; for I am sorry that I have made them." [Gen. 6:7]


It is worthwhile to note that God is a trinity and is speaking amongst Himself and speaking aloud so that (1) the angels may hear Him and learn and (2) that man might have a recording of what God thought in our historical past prior to the flood. What God plans to do to the man who is on the earth is mâchâh (מָחָה) [pronounced maw-KHAWH] and its proper meaning is to stroke or rub, its derived meanings is to blot out, to erase, to rub out, to obliterate. It is always used in the latter sense and not in the former.

 

But Noah discovered grace in the eyes of Yahweh. [Gen. 6:8]


Because it would be nice to see the Hebrew word for grace, it is chên (חֵן) [pronounced khayn]. It means graciousness, kindness, favor, elegance. This particular phrase, discovering grace in the eyes of Yahweh, is found throughout the Old Testament. Genesis, being the book where all great doctrines have their origin, introduces grace for the first time. The definition of grace by R. B. Thieme, Jr., all that God is free to do for us on the basis of the cross is much preferable to the more common unmerited favor. Footnote Grace is a true doctrine for every dispensation, as we all receive far more than we could ever deserve, it is not found in the Old Testament as often as it is in the New. We are given the Holy Spirit in the age of grace, the church age, as believers in Jesus Christ, whereas, in the Old Testament, only a very small percentage of believers, one-tenth of one percent, received the Holy Spirit (which could then be withdrawn). In fact, many believers in the Old Testament did not even realize that such a thing as the Holy Spirit existed. Those who had It and those who knew some doctrine realized that God did give to some a Helper; but because the cross was presented in shadow form, the full revelation of God's plan had not been given. The life of the believer in the Old Testament was on more of a legal basis. There was grace because Israel was given certain covenants that would stand forever and would be fulfilled no matter what. On the other hand, of the Law, God told Israel, "Do this and live." Man by his effort, was to attempt to keep the law and if he did not, he was to avail himself of the grace of God through animal sacrifices to cover his sin. Why are we the privileged dispensation? As I have mentioned, man is teaching the angels in human history, as well as resolving the angelic conflict. Every stated objection and unstated objection of Satan is being answered. We have seen man under perfect environment, under long life and intermingling with the demon army of Satan, and we will see man in several dispensations without the fully guidance of the Holy Spirit (which will show that we cannot live a spiritual life—a life pleasing to God—apart from the Holy Spirit). Although it is not stated, I would think that God had given Noah, and very likely his entire family, the Holy Spirit. This is implied by v. 3; God's Sprit would not always strive with man. Is the Spirit some ethereal essence for good? Certainly not; the Holy Spirit usually, but not always, functions through someone. That someone is at least Noah, and possibly some or all of the members of his family.


What occurs next is difficult to explain in terms of authorship. It seems very likely that Noah wrote Gen. 5–10, but the next few verses seem to indicate that a new author has logged on. We have the famous phrase, these are the beginnings (or the generations) of Noah, v. 10 ties us to the previous increment of Scripture, but that generally indicates a new author. At first, I would guess that Lamech, Noah's father, wrote Gen. 4:25–6:8 (or, Gen. 5:1–6:8), because he lived long enough to see the sons of Abraham being born and lived to see the corruption of the earth. Furthermore, a great spiritual man needs to have been taught from someone. The only logical place for Noah to have matured spiritually is under the tutelage of his father, who learned from his father. This would indicate that Lamech, although little is said about him, was also spiritually mature. However, he is not likely the author as his death is recorded. Because of the personal conversations recorded in Gen. 6, it is more likely that Noah wrote the latter portion than the former, so my educated guess would be that chapter 4 and the first part of 5 were written by Noah before the flood and that he carried the manuscripts with him on the ark (or carried onto the ark in his mind, as I think antediluvian people were much smarter than man today). This portion of Scripture was probably written by Noah after the flood.

 

These are the Generations [or, the Progeny] of Noah: Noah was a righteous [or, justified] man; he was blameless [innocent, unimpaired, uncorrupted] in his time period [or, generation]; with God, Noah walked. [Gen 6:9]


Many Bibles use the word generation twice in this verse, but there are two different Hebrew words (the ESV reads: These are the generations of Noah. Noah was a righteous man, blameless in his generation. Noah walked with God.). The first one is the one used several times previous, transliterated from the Greek genesis. It might be more literally translated begettings. It is similar to the words for born, kindred, offspring. The second word often translated generation is dôwr (דּוֹר) [pronounced dohr] and it has a variety of meanings. It is quite similar to our understanding of the word dispensation or age. It is properly a revolution of time, which is why it can be translated as age or dispensation. It can also mean dwelling place. It also means circle or ball.


In this verse we have the first use of the word righteous in the Bible (or, just, justified, vindicated). It is the word tsaddîyq (צַדִּיק) [pronounced tsahd-DEEK]. It is used of both man and God and is quite similar to our use of it in the New Testament. However, we have righteousness because we share Christ's righteousness. We are in Christ. We do not know how much that man knew about what was right adn what was not during thisperiod of time. The revelation which has come down to us says very little about the moral codes, other than that when Cain murdered his brother, God protected him because it had not been revealed yet that murder was a sin against God. However, for as much as was revealed at that time as being righteous, Noah was this.


Then we find the word that the KJV translated perfect, which caused problems theologically speaking for many. We all know that all of sinned and come short of the glory of God so people have trouble with this word perfect. The word is tâmîym (תָּמִים) [pronounced taw-MEEM] and it means to be without blemish, to have integrity, being complete, wholesome, innocent, unimpaired. His character has already been alluded to in this verse. In another context, with another verb, this would refer to spiritual maturity. However, the verb used here is in the perfect tense; it is a completed actions viewed as a whole. What this is, is an unchangeable fact. Therefore, this refers to the fact that Noah is 100% homo sapiens without any mixture of demonic blood. This is the word used for sacrificial animals who have no external blemishes or imperfections. When used of Noah, it meant that his parents were Homo sapiens, as were theirs. This is important enough to record the generations prior to this portion of God's Word.


Walking refers to a lifestyle or to a way of life. We can be justified in the past with results which continue on forever. However, our lives can be an ungodly mess. That is, the vindication that we possess is not seen by anyone else, often not even ourselves. However, this walk is the day-in, day-out experience of the mature believer who recognizes his salvation and exploits his relationship with God to the maximum. Therefore, in this verse, we have three words which describe Noah and they are not synonymous. He was saved, justified or vindicated; he had not been corrupted; and his walk with God indicated an ongoing maturity.

 

And Noah sired three sons: Shem, Ham and Japheth. [Gen. 6:10]


Sired is in the Hiphil imperfect; Noah caused these sons to come into being. They were not all sired at once; hence, the imperfect tense. This verse is almost a direct quote from Gen. 5:32b, which ties this portion of Scripture to what has gone before. It is as though there was a scroll which was written upon; and the author would stop and then he (or another person) would pick up from there in the future. He might write a preface, introduce the subject matter with a title, and then tie it to what has gone before with a verse or two. Here, because it is likely Noah doing the writing (and my guess is that he is writing this after the flood), that he does not quote much from his previous manuscript.

 

Now the earth became corrupt in the sight of God; therefore the earth was filled with violence [or, noisy, wild ruthlessness]. [Gen. 6:11]


Shâchath (שָחַת) [pronounced shaw-KHAHTH] means to decay, to ruin, to become corrupt, marred or spoiled. In the Niphal imperfect, it means that the earth was caused to become corrupt (it is in the passive voice) and it was a process. In the sight of God means that the earth may have seemed fine to those fallen angels who corrupted it and they were enjoying their party on earth; but from a divine perspective, the earth had entered into ruin and corruption.


Filled is also in the Niphal imperfect. Violence is the word châmâç (חָמָס) [pronounced khaw-MAWS] and it refers to physical violence, but also to wrong in the sense of injurious and vicious language, harsh treatment, and noisy, wild ruthlessness. This is a surprisingly contemporary word, brought into the English language as Hamas.


The angels took the daughters of man without any thought to the men on earth; without a single thought to their needs, to their right man/right woman relationship that they have destroyed. These angels were nothing more than powerful bullies who had their way no matter what the consequences.

 

And God looked on the earth and behold it had (been caused to) become corrupt; for all flesh corrupted their way upon the earth. [Gen. 6:12]


The first use of corrupt (the same word as in the previous verse) is in the Niphal perfect. God views the action as a whole and the earth (or the land) does not cause its own corruption; it is passive. It became (or was caused to come) corrupt. The second use of corrupt is in the Hiphil perfect where the object of the verb takes a part in the action of the verb. Flesh both was acted upon and acted out of volition to bring upon this corruption. This again describes exactly what occurred. The daughters of men in most cases allowed themselves to be swept away by the romanticism and the power of the fallen angels. However, also ,the volition of the fallen angels caused the corruption of the earth; so we have a joint subject, although the fallen angels are not named specifically. However, this is brought out by the use of the Hiphil stem. Notice that all flesh had become corrupted. This means that virtually the entire population of the earth, with the exception of a few of those in Seth's line, had become part man and part fallen angel.

 

Then God said to Noah, "A coming of an end of all flesh before Me [or, in My presence]; for the earth is filled with violence because of their presence; and take a sobering look to Me [literally, behold Me]; the ruination of them with the earth." [Gen. 6:13]

 

Qêts (ץ̤ק) [pronounced kayts] refers to an end or cessation. There is no definite article. All flesh is the same two words in the same construction as in the previous verse; all is a substantive and this might be more correctly translated the totality of flesh. Then we have the Qal active participle of bôwʾ (בּוֹא) [pronounced boh], which means to go, to come, to come in, to come upon or to fall upon (as an enemy), to come to pass. This is followed by a preposition and the masculine plural noun (with a first person singular suffix) of pânîym (פָּנִים) [pronounced paw-NEEM] and it has a variety of uses. It is found in the plural, but used as the singular, and it means face. Literally, what we have is: the coming of the cessation of all flesh in my face. However, before me, in my presence, in front of me would all be reasonable ways to translate this. For the earth is filled with violence is correct. The preposition is from, out of, because of and it is followed paniym again, but with a third masculine plural suffix this time. This should be translated because of their presence.


Hinnêh (הִנֵּה) [pronounced hin-NAY] with the first person singular suffix means behold Me. This, unfortunately, does not sound as we would like in modern English. The New English Bible, because of the awkward and out of date phrasing, does not even translate this word. The New Revised Standard Version follows suit. Take note of this, or watch me might be more up to date renderings, but they lose some of the force and vigor of behold Me. We then have a play on words, although it is not done in a playful way. The verb is the Hiphil participle of shâchath (שָחַת) [pronounced shaw-KHAHTH], which has been used several times in the previous verses to describe the corruption of the earth which has occurred. Man and man corrupted by angels has caused the corruption of the earth so God will now cause the further ruin of the earth. The Hiphil means the object of the verb, mankind or flesh, participates in the action of the verb. Through their corruption of flesh and of the earth, they have caused the further destruction of the earth. It is the law of volitional responsibility. God has shown that direct demonic involvement with the affairs of man causes the absolute corruption and destruction of mankind. Satan cannot help to facilitate the fall of man and then claim had he further involvement with man, he could have set things right. God allowed Satan and his demonic corps a chance to repair the earth but all they did was further destroy it. In fact, their involvement was so destructive, that God had to destroy the earth with a flood.


We would expect, just as there are mythological records of the Nephilim from before the flood, that history would also bear some record of the flood and an ark. The Bible, being God's Word, has the accurate account; however, one would expect to find evidence of this in other historical records. One author, F.A. Filby notes that "there is no other story of an ancient event in all the world so widely accepted [as the flood]." From Nippur, in Southern Babylonia, we have a cuneiform tablet which tells of a king, Ziusuddu, having been warned that the gods were about to bring upon the earth a deluge, who built a boat to escape this flood. This Sumerian record has been dated as approximately 2000 b.c., although the oral version probably predates this considerably. There are several Akkadian accounts from both Assyrian and Babylonia. One of the more famous of these is one written in Akkadian and is a portion of the Epic of Gilgamish. Ea, a god, warns Uta-napishtim concerning the flood that is to come. Uta then builds a boat to save his family, various craftsmen, animals and gold and silver. The flood in this version lasted but seven days and the boat comes to rest on a mountain in NW Persia. Uta sends out a dove, then a swallow and finally a raven. The raven does not return, so Uta and company exit the boat and make sacrifices to the gods.


Insofar as geological evidence is concerned, there is a difference of opinion concerning that. Several authors contend that there has been nothing discovered, as of yet, that would irrefutably indicate a flood of the disastrous proportions recorded in Genesis. Others, with less reliable archeological backgrounds, believe that there have been several discoveries that point to the flood of Genesis. There have been a dozen "ark sightings", but none have produced pictures or any other corroborating evidence. And, at this point in time, it is highly unlikely that an archeological team will be given the financial backing to search the mountains of Urarţu for a ship. Furthermore, there is great prejudice on both sides. Most geologists have a view of things which treat C-14 dating methods as infallible and they had a set of assumptions and beliefs under which they operate. On the other hand, the Christian community itself has a great deal of prejudice in this area.


Finally, there is the question as to how large an area was affected by the great flood. There are two basic viewpoints, one is that it was a world wide flood covering the entire earth to the highest mountain. This would require approximately eight times the amount of water than presently exists on the earth. Whether this water existed prior to the flood and was unleashed and then removed from the earth, we do not know. God is capable of effecting such an incredible miracle. It could have been a local flood, covering the entire populated earth. The word for land and earth are the same in the Hebrew and the word for heaven could mean the entire atmosphere of the earth, the heavens above or the general sky from horizon to horizon. One can even speculate as to whether God used a heavenly body, such as a comet, to have a tremendous gravitational pull upon the water to that portion of the world. We simply do not know and the Bible is not specific in this regard. What is clear in the recording of the flood is that it did destroy all flesh from the earth at that time.


For years, I will admit that I was somewhat skeptical of a worldwide flood. I thought that perhaps it was a very dramatic, albeit, local flood. However, Robert Dean convinced me that it had to be a worldwide flood, with the following points:

Robert Dean on Why the Noahic Flood was Worldwide

1)    The text itself tells us that the floor was universal. If the flood was local, why did Noah have to build an ark in the first place? Modern man did not build a ship equivalent to the size of the ark until 1856. It was a huge ship and it had more than enough room for the animals and the humans on board. So if the flood was local he had 120 years to walk to the other side of the mountains and miss the flood altogether.

2)    If the flood was local, why did God send the animals to the ark so they would escape death. There would have been other animals to reproduce that particular kind of those who were the ones that died. They could have migrated another 100 miles and they would have been out of danger.

3)    If the flood was local, why was the ark big enough to hold all the kinds of land vertebrate animals that have ever existed. If only the local Mesopotamian animals were threatened the ark could have been much smaller.

4)    If the flood was local, why would birds have been sent on board. They could have flown across to a nearby mountain range.

5)    If the flood was local, how could the waters rise to a height of fifteen cubits (21-22 feet) about the mountains-Genesis 7:20. We have to remember that water seeks its own level and couldn't rise to cover the local mountains and leave the rest of the world untouched.

6)    If the flood was local, it would not have solved the problem of the corruption of the human race, which was itself a world-wide phenomenon.

7)    If the flood was local, people who did not happen to be living in the vicinity would not be affected by it. "As it was in the days of Noah." If the flood was local then by analogy that would mean the Tribulation would also be partial. If the flood is reduced to a local situation it has implications for how we understand the Tribulation.

8)    If the flood was local, then God has repeatedly broken His promise to never flood the earth again. Large local floods occur all of the time. To be consistent with that it must be a universal flood.

Let me add a point:

9)    If this was a local flood, then corrupted mankind could have found some place to escape to. Recall, there were perhaps billions living on the earth at this time. If any place existed to which they could flee and have temporary safety, we may reasonably assume some would have done that.

This comes from Dean’s notes on his own lectures:

http://phrasearch.com/Trans/DBM/setup/Genesis/Gen041.htm (I slightly edited the text)

The audio lecture is lesson #41 which can be downloaded from here:

http://deanbible.org/andromeda.php?q=f&f=%2FAudio+Files%2F2003+-+Genesis

Based upon these points, I would be hard-pressed to come up with reasonable counter-arguments.

 

"Make for yourself an ark of cypress wood; you will make the ark with rooms, and shall coat it inside and out with pitch. And this is how you will make it: the length of the ark 300 cubits, its breadth 50 cubits, and its height 30 cubits." [Gen. 6:14–15]


In the Epic of Gilgamish, previously mentioned, the ark in it was a 200 foot cube. This would have made a very unseaworthy vessel unless it was completely enclosed without any openings, and then it would have spun around and turned upside down, etc. the ark in a Greek legend was 3000' x 1200', which is way too large. Similar ratios to those given by God to Noah are used today. We do not know exactly the length of a cubit, but 18" is close, making this ark 450' x 75'. This is not unlike the dimensions of a modern ocean liner. So, God has given us very accurate and reasonable measurements for the ark, yet left us without absolute geological proof of the flood and the existence of the ark. This does not means that the geological proof does not exist; it just means that we have not discovered it yet.


Kâphar (כָּפַר) [pronounced kaw-FAHR] is the word usually translated atonement; it means covering. It usually means that God does not see us for our real selves because our nature has been covered up from his sight. It is a reference to seeing Jesus Christ instead of seeing us when it comes to the judgment that we deserve. Actual forgiveness is not based upon this covering; it is a shadow of things to come. The death of our Lord on the cross provides us with the real forgiveness. The ark is a type of Christ. The family of Noah is inside the ark, covered and protected from God's judgement. Note that Noah is delivered through the storm; God still allows the earth to flood where Noah and his family are; God just provides for them a way of escape. This way of escape is a covering.


The time that Noah spent working on this ark with the help only of his three sons was his testimony to the world. When he was questioned, he explained to them clearly that God was going to judge the world with a flood and that only those in the ark would survive.

 

"You will make a roof for the ark and finish it to within a cubit from the top; and set the door of the ark on the side of it; you will make it with lower, second and third decks." [Gen. 6:16]


The cubit opening around the roof was to allow for air circulation; rather important when traveling with several thousand animals for a year in an ocean liner. There was only one door; again, analogous to salvation. Jesus said, "I am the door; if any man enters in through Me, he will be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture."

"[Now] observe that I, [even] I, will bring a flood of waters upon the earth to destroy all flesh in which is the breath of life. Everything from under the heaven that is on the earth shall die." [Gen. 6:17]


It is verse like this in the English that make people adamantly hold for a universal flood. Personally, if the Bible teaches a universal flood and there is no evidence of any sort discovered, then I will believe the Bible.

 

But I will establish My covenant with you; and you will enter the ark—you and your sons and your wife, and your sons' wives with you. [Gen. 6:18]


Altogether, that was eight people. We do not know if Noah had other sons and daughters. This is never mentioned. If Noah wrote this, it is possible that he did not even want to think about his other children since it would be a very painful memory. After 500 years, you would expect that he would have had more children. We all proceed 100% from the genetic pool of Adam and Eve; however, only partially from Noah and his wife. Each of his sons was married to a woman, likely from outside the family (although we do not know this for certain; these women could have been their sisters). In any case, the wives are progeny of Adam and Eve, and we are descended from one of them.

 

"And of every living thing of all flesh, you will bring two of every kind into the ark, to keep them alive with you; they shall be male and female. Of the birds after their kind, and of the animals after their kind, of every creeping thing of the ground after its kind; two of every kind shall come to you to keep alive. And, as for you, take for yourself some of all food which is edible and store it for yourselves; and it will serve as food for you and for them." [Gen. 6:19–21]


Modern ocean liners are known to take hundreds of animals and their provisions along with hundreds of people and provisions for them. How many animals exactly were involved is not said. At this point in time, it appears as though man and animals are all vegetarians. There will be restricted movement and restricted activity for the next year, so it would not be unexpected that the animal's system would go into a kind of hibernation. Reduced activity and reduced in take of food. The animals coming to the ark was not necessarily a miracle. Noah had 120 years to prepare for this. He did not necessarily need to go out and capture these animals himself. Just as animals are bought and sold today, it is not out of the question for man to buy and sell animals then. Furthermore, since man did not eat animals then, they were not necessarily as fearful of man as they are now. Also, Noah needed to carry only one pair of dogs, for example; the breeds came later. The same with horses, cows, etc. Therefore, the number of animals required would be much less.


I have never made the calculations for the size of the ark as contrasted to the number of animals; but something which might help to explain how little space is needed. If we decided to take every man, woman and child from our entire planet and stand them next to one another, you would be amazed as to how little room is necessary. To take round numbers, take 6 billion, multiply by, say, 3 square feet (1.7' x 1.7') to represent the amount of space each would occupy, and then divide that by 5280 and divide again by 5280 (because there are 5280 x 5280 square feet in a square mile), that would tell you how large an area the entire present population of the earth would occupy. It is surprisingly small, isn't it? With God's grace, the control and survival for these animals was carried out.


So Noah did, according to all that God had commanded him, so he did. [Gen. 6:22]


Internal Links

Beginning of Document/

Chapter Summaries

External Links

Genesis Chapter Links



Genesis 7


Genesis 7 has been completely reworked and expanded, including the entire word-by-word Hebrew exegesis. It may be found here: (HTML) (PDF) (WPD). It is highly recommended that you go to that study instead of this one. These chapters are being completed one-by-one and will eventually supplant this incomplete study of Genesis.


Genesis 7:1–8:22


Maps, Charts and Short Doctrines:

 

       v.     12           The Flood Time Table


Introduction: Chapter 6 covered the corruption of mankind on the earth and the reasons for the flood. God also promises the flood in chapter 6 and explains exactly what will happen to Noah. In Gen. 7, we have Noah's obedience to God's instructions and the actual flood itself.

 

And Yahweh said to Noah, "Enter into the ark, you and your household; for you have I seen righteous before me in this generation" [Gen. 7:1]


Fallen angelic creation has had an opportunity to think about what it has done for centuries—perhaps millenniums—and when given the opportunity to come back to the earth, they have not learned a lesson, they have not reformed, they do not recognize God's power and righteousness. The sum total of their influence over the newly fallen world is one of corruption and violence. Only Noah—weak, humble Noah (this is in comparison to the angelic host on the earth) is righteous before God. His righteousness is observed by fallen and elect angels alike.

 

"You will take with you from every kind of clean animal by sevens, a male and his female; and of the animals that are not clean, two, a male and his female; also of the birds of the heavens, by sevens, a male and female; to keep their offspring alive on the face of all the earth." {Gen. 7:2–3]


In the antediluvian state, it appears almost as though there were a kind of right man/right woman with animals with the possessive his female. By sevens is literally seven seven, meaning there were seven males and seven females taken into the ark of the clean animals. There was apparently some sort of a theological development in the antediluvian state that we are not partial to whatsoever. We do not hear about clean and unclean animals until we get to Leviticus 7 and 10. What was the proper protocol in the antediluvian system and the method of spirituality is at best alluded to. We know that animal sacrifices were required as plainly stated in the record of Cain and Abel (and implied by Gen. 3:21). Distinguishing between clean and unclean animals tells us that this was a more elaborate system than just going out and killing any animal (clean and unclean in the antediluvian life was not a matter of what animals could be eaten because animals were not eaten prior to the flood). These additional animals were for sacrifices and not necessarily for food. It is possible, however, that the half breeds of Gen. 6 began eating meat. This is only hypothetical. Man was not specifically allowed to eat meat until after the flood.


I sat down with the calculator and, looking at the normal value given for a cubit (18") and taking one set of numbers for animals and birds, determined the square footage allotted to each pair of animals. According to taxonomists, there are approximately 4500 different species of animals and 8650 species of birds (there have been comparatively few extinctions of animals during the past 10,000 years). In allowing 500 of the animals and all of the birds to occupy one floor of the ark, that leaves 2000 pairs of animals for each of the other two floors. If my math can be depended upon, that leaves an average of 16 square feet per pair of animals on the ark. Certainly, for a pair of elephants, this is too small, but for a pair of mice, this is more than adequate. Furthermore, not being a biologist, I do not know what species of animals would have common ancestors. It surprises me that greyhounds, St. Bernard’s and beagles all have a common ancestor. In examining other people, I am surprised that we have a common ancestor in Adam and Noah. My point here is that I do not know if 4500 species would be necessary. How many common ancestors some groups of animals would have is beyond my realm of expertise, however the figures which I have put together make this a reasonable size for an ark. Insofar as feeding and waste removal, we are given no information; but my thoughts are there was a supernatural force at work preserving the animals just as there was one which brought the animals to the ark in the first place. It would not surprise me that most of the animals went into a state of divine-induced hibernation during the year that they were in the ark.


There is no reason to suppose that this is a myth or a fable. I have heard one person call this a fable which teaches conservation. This, as a fable, teaches absolutely nothing to us. We cannot look upon our antediluvian ancestors and look upon this as a story of warning to us. We do not have to be concerned about a flood because God has promised us in Gen. 8:21–22 that He will never destroy the entire population of the earth with a flood. What God is doing is He has finished with one dispensation entirely; He has allowed the fallen angels to cohabit with man and thereby have direct input upon the state of the world; and has shown that demonic involvement in our day-to-day affairs is not an improvement but results in violence and licentiousness (Gen. 6:1, 2, 11) and in a world without a concern or an interest in its creator (Matt. 24:38).

 

For, after seven more days, I will send rain on the earth forty days and forty nights; and I will blot out from the face of the land every living thing that I have made." [Gen. 7:4]


Although it is not alluded to in the Bible, it is not unimaginable that some fallen angels cohabited with animals. Degenerate man has been known to do such a thing. Furthermore, half man/half animals continually show up in mythology. And God destroyed the animals along with the human race.


Zodhiates points out that the forty days and forty nights are not arbitrary, but a number often used by God when testing or judging. When Moses spoke to God on Mount Sinai, he was on the mountain for forty days (Ex. 24:18 Deut. 9:9). Israel, due to the apostasy of the first free generation, wandered the desert for forty years (Num. 14:32–35 Deut. 29:5). When a civil case was tried in court, the loser was not awarded forty million dollars in judgement but was struck up to forty times. Elijah went without food and fled Jezebel for forty days and nights (1Sam. 19:1–8). God judged Egypt by scattering its inhabitants and leaving the land fallow for forty years (Ezek. 29:1–13). Our Lord fasted and was tested by the devil for forty days and nights (Matt. 4:1–11).

 

And Noah did according to all that the Lord had commanded him. Now Noah was 600 years old when the flood of water came upon the earth. The Noah and his sons and his wife and his sons' wives with him entered the ark because of the water of the flood. [Gen. 7:5–6]


Nothing is said about the Holy Spirt and Noah here. There had to be some involvement with Noah and the Spirit as God said, "My Spirit shall not strive with man forever." This indicates that Noah's building of the ark and an explanation was to what he was doing as evangelism. It is likely that no one prior to Noah even had built a boat or a ship. Whereas man was fully capable of such a project, there is no indication that he ever did prior to Noah. Since then, people have tried to imitate Noah; in many towns there is some person building an ark for the oncoming flood. It is one of the town's kooks. Noah also attracted a lot of attention. First of all, he was one of the only persons who was still alive who was 100% human (along with his immediate family). Secondly, he was building an ark because of an oncoming flood (it is possible that it had never even rained before). And thirdly, he spoke of Yahweh, the God of Adam, who walked with Adam and the woman in the garden. For all intents and purposes, Noah was the first evangelist, and one of the least successful by human standards. He evangelized a world for 120 years and during that time three of his sons and his wife and three women came to know Yahweh and to believe in Yahweh Footnote .


Notice also that this is a fulfillment of what was said in Acts 11:14; And he will speak words to you by which you will be saved, you and all your household. It is easier to evangelize strangers because they do not know what you are like in real life. Those of your immediate family are the toughest to reach because they see you day in and day out and they know every bit of hypocrisy that is in your soul.

 

Of clean animals and animals that are not clean, and birds and everything that creeps on the ground, they went into the ark to Noah by twos, male and female, as God had commanded Noah. And it came about after the seven days that the water of the flood come [literally, the waters of the flood were] upon the earth. [Gen. 7:8–10]


Notice that Noah was commanded to bring the animals into the ark, but God was the one who made it possible for this to occur. Whether or not any of this was miraculous, we are not told; in any case, it is never alluded to as such. Furthermore, How these animals were chosen was probably based upon very practical reasons. I believe that Noah and his sons had assembled an animal preserve over the past 120 years, and that they took the best of the lot into the ark. Had there been any commingling of demons and animals, then God would have certainly excluded those animals from the ark.

 

In the 600th year of Noah's life, in the second month on the seventeenth day of the month, on the same day all the fountains of the great deep burst open and the floodgates [or, windows] of the sky were opened and the rain fell upon the earth for forty days and forty nights. [Gen. 7:11–12]


This is not a fable to teach us anything; the flood and Noah and his ark all really occurred. The Bible is very specific as to names and dates.


This also gives us a time table:

The Flood Time Table

             At Flood minus 120, God came to Noah and began to tell him what would occur 120 years in the future and what Noah had to do to prepare for it. Noah began to build the ark. He also probably began to establish an animal preserve on his property.

             Around F minus 100, Noah (who is already about 500 years old) began to have the children who would travel with him on the ark. We do not know whether he had other children, sons or daughters or not. However, it is due to this restricted gene pool that the age of man began to decline rapidly. Whereas man at one time lived to be nearly a millennium; he would almost immediately drop to 500 years old, and, in a few generations, to what our age is today. If you took any group of people and began to inbreed, there would be a lowering of the life expectancy of their children and children's children.

             At F minus 90, Noah's children begin to grow up and notice that Noah is the odd man out. Their father is building an ark and warning those around him of an impending flood. They apparently trusted Noah so much, even through their teens, that they believed him and remained with him.

             F minus 80: Very likely, after Noah had been working on this ark for 40 years or so, his sons began to help him finish the ark. Sometime around this time, these young men would marry, and it would not be out of the question for them to marry their sisters.

             We are now at F minus zero; Noah's children are fully grown, capable of making their own decisions, and are married. They are probably the only uncorrupted male flesh upon the earth. They are all around a hundred years old and about to enter the ark.

 


Chapter Outline

Charts, Graphics and Short Doctrines


Now would be the time to deal with the extent and the location of the flood. The Hebrew word for flood is used only in connection with the Genesis flood and the Greek translation of the word is found only in connection with this flood (with the exception of Psalm 29:10). That means that this word does not tell us the extent or the location of the flood. Very likely it covers the entirety of the inhabited world, but we do not know how large that area is. We cannot assume that the flood took place in or around Mesopotamia. Such a thing is assumed because the rivers the Tigris and the Euphrates are mentioned. If this record is made by someone from the antediluvian era, then they would have no knowledge of the present day Euphrates and Tigris rivers. It has been the habit of man throughout all of human history to name a new area to which he has come after an old area from whence he came. Where Noah and the ark landed could have been thousands of miles away from where he began. The land where Noah was could have been in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean, totally submerged at this point in time. The flood carried over to other nearby portions of the earth, to the point where the ark did rest upon Mount Ararat and civilization began anew in the Mesopotamian area. The word translated earth can also mean land. Heavens also can mean the entire universe above us and it can refer to only that which goes from horizon to horizon. When all the earth and mountains under the heavens are covered by flood waters, this could refer to a continent off the coast of Europe or Africa, long since submerged. This land could have been low to the water to begin with, the mountains were not necessarily 14,000 feet high (or even 2000 feet high). It could have been laying upon a great body of water (throughout the world, there are bodies of water beneath the surface of the earth). The fountains of the deep refer to water coming from below. The windows of the heavens refer to water coming from above. The water came down with such force that the people and animals were engulfed between the waters and drown. Wherever this area was, it was large enough to support a fairly large population (some have estimated that the earth’s population at this time could have numbered in the billions).


I need to make clear that this is only a thought, a theory and there is nothing in the Bible which would substantiate this nor preclude it from the list of possible flood scenarios. Psalm 74:13 reads: You divided the sea by Your strength and you broke the heads of the great sea creatures in the waters. Such a passage to me suggests that there was a division of the waters took place after the floor (in fact, there are several verses in Psalm 74 which make this an ideal psalm to teach after Genesis 8. It would help to explain why we have not found irrefutable evidence of a Genesis flood in the mid-East and it may be the source of stories of the famous submerged continent Atlantis. There is no reason that this flood has to be the product of a natural series of events either. God can work within the confines of nature and outside those confines. God invented all the physical laws to which we are subject yet He is not. I do not mean in anyway to denigrate the great flood of Genesis or doubt God's ability to cover the entire earth with water. However, that is not necessarily the scenario presented here and we must go by the scenario presented to us in the Word. What we can be certain of is that this flood covered the mountains of the populated area of the earth, destroyed all the human and partially human beings and all of the animal upon the earth, and that there was an incredible amount of water brought from below as well as from above when the flood came. Whereas the days of restoration are likely 24 hours and whereas we can be fairly certain that there are no gaps in the Adamic line presented in Gen. 5; concerning this flood, the Bible does not allow us to be as dogmatic about its extent or its location. If such a theory is correct, then I should deal with man and his tendency to explore. Those who explore are primarily men. If there are any famous female sea captains, then I do not know their names. The population of the earth was composed primarily of human women and fallen angels and their progeny. Man, who would normally explore, was probably destroyed or killed. The fallen angels were far superior in every way to the human male and the violence upon the earth certain referred to murder and fighting. It is likely that the human males mostly perished during this time period. The fallen angels were content to cohabit with the beautiful human females and the half angelic creation was also similarly disposed. My point being is that these angelic beings, although they had been throughout the entire world in the past, had no need to build ships and travel from their general area. They were interested in the women and the women were right there.


Robert Dean provides the most extensive proof of a worldwide flood that I have seen: http://phrasearch.com/Trans/DBM/setup/Genesis/Gen041.htm


The audio lecture is lesson #41 which can be downloaded from here:

http://deanbible.org/andromeda.php?q=f&f=%2FAudio+Files%2F2003+-+Genesis

 

On the very same day, Noah and Shem and Ham and Japheth and the sons of Noah, and Noah's wife and the three wives of his sons with them, entered the ark; they and every beast after its kind, and all the cattle after their kind, and every creeping thing that creeps on the earth after its kind, and every bird after its kind, all sorts of birds. So they went into the ark to Noah, by twos of all flesh in which was the breath [or, spirit] of life. And those that entered, male and female of all flesh, entered as God had commanded him; and the Lord closed [the door] behind him. [Gen. 7:12–16]


Now it sounds as though Noah and his family entered the ark on the day that it began to rain and flood. I have also noticed that this author has become rather repetitive. Vv. 6–10 give us an overview. Then this story is basically repeated in vv. 11–24 but with more details. The door could be opened from the inside and only closed from the outside. God—Jesus Christ—closed the door behind Noah.


In my thinking concerning this flood, I have thought that earthquakes and falling and rising lands would be possible. I have thought that some mountain ranges could have been formed due to this flood. Others before have had the same thoughts, but there is not agreement here with the geologists. However, it would be helpful at this time to note a reading from the Psalms: He [Yahweh] appointed [to] the earth its fixed, established place [i.e., its orbit] so that it would not totter [or, be shaken] forever and ever. The sea as with a garment, You covered with it. The waters were standing above the mountains. At Your rebuke, they fled; at the sound of Your thunder, they hurried away. The mountains rose, the valleys sank down to the place which You had established for them. You set a boundary that they may not pass over; that they may not return to cover the earth. (Psalm 104:5–9). This portion of Psalm 104 belongs to the restoration of the earth or to the flood. Under restoration, the angelic host had inhabited the earth but they destroyed it with their partying. God froze the earth in an ice pack (this is the ice age) and later restored it. At the time of restoration, there were major changes in the earth's surface; the valleys sunk lower and the mountains rose higher. However, we have a parallel situation with the flood. Due to the angelic host living upon the earth again, God covered the earth (or at least the inhabited portion of the earth) with water. At the proper time, the waters receded and it is possible (but I would not stake my theological life upon it) that the valleys sunk again and the mountains rose even further. However, v. 9 seems to indicate that we are speaking of the Genesis flood here because the writer says that they might not return to cover the earth. After the ice age, the waters did return and covered at least a portion of the earth.


Cover in Psalm 104:6 is in the Piel perfect, meaning that this was an intensive, completed action. The process of covering was not a gentle occurrence, but could refer to the destruction of a flood or to the desolation of an ice age. However, it has a third person, masculine singular suffix where we would expect a feminine suffix to correspond with the earth. The only masculine singular anywhere around is garment.

 

Then the flood was upon the earth for forty days; and the water increased and lifted up the ark so that it kept rising higher above the earth. And the water prevailed and increased greatly upon the earth, and the ark floated on the surface of the water. And the water prevailed more and more upon the earth, so that all the high mountains which were under the heavens were covered. [Gen. 7:17–19]


Noah is in the ark but there is that opening between the top and the ark. Since he possibly has never even seen rain before, he and his family are probably amazed watching the water come down around them. As far as he could see, there was no more land.

 

And the water prevailed fifteen cubits deep above the mountains. [Gen. 7:20]


Actually, above the mountains is really and the mountains were covered. However, I believe that the point of the author was that not only were the mountains under water (v. 19), but they were 15 cubits (approximately 22 feet) below the surface of the water (v. 20). Even for smaller mountains in a local area, this is nothing short of incredible. As I had mentioned before, it would not surprise me if the gravitational force of a comet were involved at this point. This does not mean that God requires something of that nature; however, He often uses natural phenomena to accomplish His plan.

 

And all flesh that moved upon the earth perished, birds and cattle and beasts and every swarming thing that swarms upon the earth, and all mankind. Of all that was on the dry land all in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit of life, died. Thus He blotted out every living thing that was upon the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping tings and to birds of the sky and they were blotted out from the earth; and only Noah was left, together with those that were with him in the ark. [Gen. 7:21–23]


God had given the world 120 years to watch Noah build this ark and they had been told what He was going to do and the world chose to ignore Noah and his message of impending destruction. God fulfills His promises to us.

 

And the water prevailed upon the earth 150 days. [Gen. 7:24]


Comparing Gen. 7:11, 24 and 8:3–4, we see that we have five thirty day months. The heavens rained for forty days, but the waters continued to flood the land around Noah for an additional 110 days. He could have traveled a great distance during that time. in a storm which was that powerful. There is no need to think that Noah just put down anchor and basically was in the same spot where he left five months previous to this 150th day. He very likely did a great deal of moving. Whereas, it would be possible to determine how far a ship could travel in 5 months and to draw that sort of a radius about where Noah landed, I think that it is a reasonable bet that he came from somewhere in the Atlantic Ocean.


There is a certain amount of agreement between historical geology and the Bible; and between some legends and the Bible. The greatest area of contention is the time frame. Geologists agree that something akin to an ice age has occurred—several, in fact—and that great parts of the earth have been packed in ice. The first couple verse of Genesis, as we have seen, seems to indicate the same thing. Geologists do not view mountains as having always existed, but that several major mountain ranges have risen dramatically. in the past. Psalm 104 is in agreement with that. During the time that the mountain ranges rose, shallow oceans and marshy areas dried up. Footnote This is in total agreement with the Biblical record of the flood (Psalm 104; Gen. 8:3,7). Historical geology postulates that there have been some dramatic climatic changes during the earth's history Footnote ; Genesis 1 supports this, as well as the changes which occurred before and after the flood. The mountains, at one point in time in the history of the earth, began to wear down. Footnote This is in total agreement with a large-sale flood similar to the revealed Genesis. Plato tells us about a major continent called Atlantis, once out in the Atlantic Ocean, which was submerged totally in a flood. This is possibly the area where the antediluvian civilization began and the area which was completely deluged by Noah's flood.


One Christian author, W. U. Ault, lists a number of difficulties encountered by those who have tried to prove the existence of a universal flood. In fact, he sounds more like a devil's advocate at times, accepting a great many of the presuppositions of geology. However, one of the figures which he gives us, which I have not yet found his corroborating source, is that during the Wisconsin Ice Age or 40,000 years ago, the sea level was approximately 330 feet lower than what it is today. Footnote


One theory given for the source of the water for the flood is the canopy theory. It is assumed here that the earth was enveloped by a atmosphere or outer atmosphere of water or water vapor which provided a very different environment for the antediluvian civilization. If such an atmosphere existed, it was used in the flood, as now the atmosphere contains only a small portion of water vapor.

earth_topography.jpgFrom http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:AYool_topography_15min.png

Another theory is, the mountains during this period of time were not as high, nor the valleys as low; Wikipedia, a source which I do not care to rely on for much, says that if the earth’s surface was flat, then the oceans would cover us up for a distance of 2.7 km (we’d be more than a mile underwater). Footnote The violence of the water over everything would have caused great destruction, resulting in earthquakes, volcanos, and greater valley depths in places. Most of the earth is 0–1000 ft. in elevation. There are very few places on this earth which are above 4000 ft. And there are many more places in the ocean which are 6000 ft. deep as compared to places on the earth which are that high.


This theory, by the way, is not one which I simply pulled out of thin air. Psalm 104:5–8: Who laid the foundations of the earth, That it should not be moved forever. You covered it with the deep as with a vesture; The waters stood above the mountains. At your rebuke they fled; At the voice of your thunder they hurried away (The mountains rose, the valleys sank down) To the place which you had founded for them. Since the idea that mountains rose and valleys sank down further, creating a greater contrast between the high and low points of this earth, it appears as though the Bible does support the notion of a violent geographical change after the flood.


There is another theory that the water covered the inhabited earth, and, although this seems to differ from the Biblical account, one could make a rational argument that the language of Scripture allows for this.


Internal Links

Beginning of Document/

Chapter Summaries

External Links

Genesis Chapter Links





Genesis 8 has been completely reworked and expanded, including the entire word-by-word Hebrew exegesis. It may be found here: (HTML) (PDF) (WPD). It is highly recommended that you go to that study instead of this one. These chapters are being completed one-by-one and will eventually supplant this incomplete study of Genesis.


Genesis 8


Genesis 8:1–22


Maps, Charts and Short Doctrines:


Introduction:

 

But God remembered Noah and all the beasts and all the cattle that were with him in the ark; and God caused a wind to pass over the earth and the waters subsided. [Gen. 8:1]


Although I have probably read this verse several times, this is the first time that I have actually read it. I don't understand exactly what it means. I do not know the mechanics as to how the waters were gathered up where Noah and his ark were, but God apparently caused these waters to dissipate with a tremendous wind and scattered the water about the world. It is during this time, if I am reading Psalm 104 correctly, that the mountains and valleys became more pronounced (although this does not correspond with geology which holds that these things were done billions of years ago). This verse also indicates that during this storm; during this 150 days, there was no direct contact between God and Noah. Using the anthropopathism God remembered Noah indicates the lack of contact during that time.

 

Also the fountains of the deep and the floodgates of the sky were closed and the rain from the sky was restrained. Then the water receded steadily from the land, and at the end of 150 days, the waters [began to] decrease [evaporate or disappear]. [Gen. 8:2–3]


Shûwb (שוּב) [pronounced shoobv] is in the Qal imperfect and it means to retreat, to return, to turn back. It is a very common word in the Hebrew, given several pages in Brown Driver Briggs. The waters from under the ground returned to beneath the surface of the earth. kâlâʾ (כָּלָא) [pronounced kaw-LAW] means to shut up, to restrain, to withhold. It is in the Niphal imperfect, which is the simple passive stem in the Hebrew. God caused the rain to stop and caused the waters from below to stop. châçêr (חָסֵר) [pronounced khaw-SEHR] means to lack, lacking, to need as well as to decrease. With respect to water, it means to disappear. This refers to the evaporation of the water as well as to the water flowing back into underground streams and river. Since the water does not decrease or dissipate all in one day, began to has been inserted into the translation.

 

And in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month the ark rested upon the mountains of Ararat. [Gen. 8:4]


The ark, like an ship, will be primarily under the water. Only a portion of the ship is above the water. This is why it could come to rest on a mountain, yet surrounding mountains could not be seen. We are not necessarily on the highest mountains in the world, or even in that area. As far as the eye could see, there were no other mountains. This could have been prevented by the heavy evaporation and the tremendous fog and water vapor which would have been in the air at this time. It is likely that this referred to an area later known as Urarţu, which flourished during the Assyrian empire near Lake Van in Armenia. It is rendered both Armenia and Ararat in various translations and occurs but four times in the Old Testament.

 

And the waters decreased steadily until the tenth month. In the tenth month, on the first day of the month, the tops of the mountains became visible. [Gen. 8:5]


Became visible is the Hebrew word for to see, but it is in the Niphal perfect, which is the passive voice, completed action. They looked out of the ark and suddenly, there they were; some other mountains. Where they were, there was still no area of land to walk upon, since it was only the tops of these mountains which had become visible to them. Due to the receding water and to the decrease of some of the fog, these mountains had become visible to the inhabitants of the ark. In reading this, this makes me think that this was a diary kept by Noah (I should say a record or a ships's log) in which Noah recorded the events. It reads as though he would write one or two lines, tend to the animals on board, and then, a few days later (or even months later) add a few lines. This might account for many of the things being said twice. Noah was very impressed by the behavior of the animals and how they wandered up the ark ramp in twos, so he mentions this twice and alludes to it a third time. The tremendous rain is also mentioned twice and alluded to a couple of times.

 

Then it came about that Noah opened the widow of the ark which he had made and he sent out a raven, and it flew here and there until the water was dried up from the earth. Then he sent out a dove from him to see if the water was abated from the face of the land, but the dove found no resting place for the sole of her foot; so she returned to him into the ark; for the water was on the surface of all the earth. Then he put out his hand and took her and brought her into the ark to himself. [Gen. 8:6–9]


There is an opening around the ark so that Noah and his family can see out. However, the animals are kept in their various rooms. In the bird room, or in a room adjacent to them, Noah had built a window, which he did under God's direction or due to foresight. When Noah opened the window and sent out the bird, these verbs were both in the imperfect tense, indicating that these are successive actions. However, when he built the window, this is in the perfect tense, meaning it was a completed action, like from the past.

 

So he waited yet another seven days, and again, sent out the dove from the ark. And the dove came to him toward evening and behold, in her beak was a freshly picked olive leaf. So Noah knew that the water was abated from the earth. Then he waited yet another seven days, and sent out the dove but she did not return to him again. [Gen. 8:10–12]


On the side of a mountain, apparently some seeds had begun to germinate, and a few inches of an olive tree had begun to grow, along with a leaf, which the dove picked during her first trip to the outside world. However, there was still not enough out there in terms of food and land for the dove to want to remain out of the ark. However, the second time, the dove found food and a place to lighten feet, so she remained in the world.

 

Now it came about in the six hundred and first year, in the first month, on the first of the month, the water was dried up from the earth. Then Noah removed the covering of the ark and looked, and, behold, the surface of the ground was dried up. And in the second month, on the twenty-seventh day of the month, the earth was dry. [Gen. 8:13–14]


At this point, Noah and crew are becoming more excited about exiting the ark and Noah is writing fewer things down twice. Twice, it is stated in the Qal perfect that the waters were dried up and the same Hebrew word is used. This is simple; Noah is not repeating himself. The first use of dry means that the water was no longer on the surface of the ground; the second use of dry means that the ground was no longer muddy, but a consistency upon which Noah and crew could walk.

 

Then God spoke to Noah, saying, "Go out of the ark, you and your wife and your sons and your sons wives with you. Bring out with you every living thing of all flesh that is with you, birds and animals and every creeping thing that creeps on the earth that they may breed abundantly on the earth and be fruitful and multiply upon the earth." [Gen. 8:15–17]


The last three verbs are all in the Qal perfect. God knows the end from the beginning and is stating a fact which He views as a consummated whole. From Noah's viewpoint, the animals would continue to breed and multiply; from God's viewpoint, He has decreed that it will occur and it has occurred insofar as God is concerned. In terms of meanings, it is likely that breed has to do with the animals mating; fruitful is their fertility and multiply is the animals will grow to adulthood and have continued generations.


Concerning the amount of time that Noah and crew were in the ark is reported variously as 365 days and as 371 days. The fact that it was about one year is significant, and all the information that we need in terms of the time frame.

 

So Noah went out and his sons and his wife and his sons' wives with him. Every beast, every creeping thing and every bird—everything that moves upon the earth—went out by their families from the ark. [Gen. 8:18–19]


It is interesting that these animals went in by twos, but they come out by their families. This indicates that some of these animals bred while in captivity. Then Noah does something which he could not do aboard the ark; something that he was been waiting a full year to do:

 

Then Noah built an altar to the Lord and took of every clean animal and of every clean bird and offered burnt offerings on the altar. [Gen. 8:20]


Throughout this ordeal, Noah has been a man with the correct priorities. He does not begin building a home; he does not send his family foraging for food; he builds and altar and offers sacrifices to God. Noah was justified by faith in Jesus Christ as the Revealed Member of the Godhead. Man at this time, and for many years, was quite demonstrative; therefore, what he did on the exterior was a mirror of what had occurred on the interior. We cannot see into the heart of other men; however, Noah, as a testimony to grace and deliverance, offers sacrifices to God. These sacrifices speak of Jesus Christ dying for our sins upon the cross. This is a testimony to his family, on behalf of himself and his family; and a testimony to the angels and a testimony to us throughout all the ages. His building an ark for 120 years was a testimony to fallen man and unregenerate mankind. On the earth at this time are people who are all believers in Jesus Christ.


We have three historical civilizations and two future civilizations on the earth throughout history; all three have begun with believers only. When God created the heavens and the earth, He made it a place for the angels; this is prehistory insofar as we are concerned. Then He restored the earth for Adam and the woman; also both believers. This time, the people beginning the civilization on the earth was Noah and his family. In the future, following the tribulation, the world will begin again with believers only. At the end of the millennium, the earth will again be cleansed and a new heavens and a new earth shall be created for the believers who will begin.


Also notice that there is no command from God to do this. This is the mature response of a believer. The first thing that Noah thought of was to sacrifice to God.

 

And the Lord smelled the soothing aroma; and the Lord said to His heart, "I will never again curse the ground on account of man, for the inclination of man is evil from his youth; and I will never again destroy every living thing, as I have done." [Gen. 8:21]


We have to be careful about ascribing to God the kind of thoughts that we would have. God did not destroy every living creature from the face of the earth and then decide, "Maybe I shouldn't have been so harsh; next time I'll give them a little more slack." God is making a divine decree here. What He did had to be done. Just as cancer growing inside a person should be cut out; just as a society needs its degenerate members culled out; God had to take out the corrupted flesh. Man in the next civilization is not going to be more moral or better in any way; man will, however, be 100% Homo sapiens and fallen angels will not be allowed to interfere with man's life as they did prior to the flood.


From the standpoint of man, it would appear as though God has inflicted His wrath upon the earth almost without mercy. Therefore, the word nîychôach (נִיחֹחַ) [pronounced nee-KHOH-ahkh] is used to describe the odor of the sacrifice: soothing, tranquilizing. God does not require soothing; He does not have ruffled feathers; however, this is an anthropopathism, ascribing to God an emotion or thought that He does not actually have so that we can have a better understanding. God smells the sacrifice, which speaks of His Son dying on our behalf, and is satiated. Noah, by making this sacrifice, is testifying to his own salvation through faith in Yahweh Elohim.


V. 22 appears to be still a quote from God speaking to His heart; however, it is in a poetic form.

 

While the earth remains, seedtime and harvest; and cold and heat; and summer and winter; and day and night shall not cease. [Gen. 8:22]


During the tenure of the earth, all these things mentioned in v. 22 will remain in existence by the decree of God.





Internal Links

Beginning of Document/

Chapter Summaries

External Links

Genesis Chapter Links



Genesis 9 has been completely reworked and expanded, including the entire word-by-word Hebrew exegesis. It may be found here: (HTML) (PDF) (WPD). It is highly recommended that you go to that study instead of this one. These chapters are being completed one-by-one and will eventually supplant this incomplete study of Genesis.


Genesis 9


Genesis 9:1–29


Maps, Charts and Short Doctrines:


Introduction: Chapter 9 is the new civilization and the slightly changed earth. We will see the life expectancy to drop abruptly and we will see the existence of bacteria, which did not seem to exist or was not a factor in the antediluvian system. We will also see behavior which is certainly unbecoming a Christian in this chapter. It is all recorded for our benefit. There is not a man in Scripture who does not have feet of clay. This further indicates the unusual material which is found in the Scripture; most people spend a great deal of time justifying themselves—however, those who wrote Scripture record even there most embarrassing moments or the most serious mistakes that they made; and these are recorded unabashedly, without apology and without justification.

 

And God blessed Noah and his sons and said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth." [Gen. 9:1]


It is of the utmost importance when studying God's Word and the various commands within it to note who is giving a command and who is receiving the command. It is important to examine whether this command is designed to be carried out by a specific person, generation, epoch or whether it holds for all time. God gave this specific command to Adam and Eve, to Noah and his sons and to the animals. This command is not repeated nor is it repealed in the New Testament. At that point in time there were but eight people alive on the earth and God had intended for them to repopulate the earth. This in no way invalidates birth control nor does it mean that population control is the order of the day. Today, those are non issues to be determined by individuals. Some families should be large and other married people should not have any children whatsoever. When it comes to that sort of thing, it is up to the individuals involved to act according to how God guides them. Further; if you do not know God's Word then just how exactly do you expect to be guided? It is possible that there is no real divine guidance apart from God's Word in our souls. Any other guidance is the result of repeated discipline.

 

"Furthermore, the fear of you and the terror of you shall be on every beast of the earth and on every bird of the sky; with everything that creeps on the ground, and all the fish of the sea; into your hand they are given." [Gen. 9:2]


This is another one of those verse which I have read before, but never really read. This represents certainly a change from the garden, where there was no animosity or fear between man and the animal kingdom. After the garden, we are not told about the relationship between man and animal other than it is implied by this chapter and by the early chapters of Genesis, that man originally was a vegetarian and this changed after the flood. We are not told when animals began to eat other animals for food, but my educated guess would be at this point in time. We have developed over time the ability to kill any animal that lives and we do this for sport as well as for food. These are animals which are clearly faster, more agile and stronger than we are. The deciding difference is our intelligence. This represents a change from the ark certainly where Noah preserved the animals on the ark and they came to him by twos (although that was a miracle). V. 2 is best understood in conjunction with v. 3:

 

"Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you; I give all to you as [I gave] the green plants. Only you shall not eat the flesh with its soul; its blood." [Gen. 9:3–4]


This is a mini Mount Sinai. God is giving Noah instructions on what law will be in the new post-diluvian era. God will cover some dietary laws and one prohibition. Here is where man began to be a meat eater. Prior to this, sacrifices were not eaten. I don't know if sacrifices to the true God were ever eaten, but meat sacrificed to idols was. I wouldn't be surprised if meat-eating in general did not occur, particularly in the first millennium of the antediluvian era; but I would venture to guess that the part man/part angelic beings did engage in meat-eating. This is certainly conjecture on my part; but this does not appear to be something which is unthinkable to Noah; he was probably aware of meat-eating and he just probably did not engage in it. This is why God tells him how to be a meat-eater—you do not eat the animal's blood.

 

"In fact I will require your blood [i.e., the life] of your souls; from (the hand of) every beast, I will require it. And from (the hand of) man and from (the hand of) every man's brother I will require the soul of man." [Gen. 9:5]


This verse begins with a conjunction and an adverb ʾake (אַ) [pronounced ahke]. ʾAk emphasizes what follows, often in contrast to what precedes it. God is speaking about the blood of animals and then says what He does in v. 5 as a continuation but a contrast to v. 4. The word usually translated require is the Hebrew word dârash dârash (דָּרַש) [pronounced daw-RASH] and it means to search out, to study, to inquire, to investigate. However, it does also mean to require and that is the correct translation in this verse due to what follows in v. 6. Because of Cain and Abel, God requires of one's brother their soul.

 

"Whoever sheds man's blood, by man his blood shall be shed, for in the image of God He made man. And, as for you, be fruitful and multiply; populate the earth abundantly and multiply in it." [Gen. 9:6–7]


Made is in the Qal perfect third masculine singular; so God is speaking of the Creator of man in the third person. This could be poetic license but it is more likely that God the Father speaking of God the Son. God has given explicit permission to do what might have been considered to be taboo; God has set one law in force and retribution for those who broke that law; and He gave one positive commandment:

 

"Then God spoke to Noah and to his sons with him, saying, "Now take note, I Myself do establish My covenant with you and with your descendants after you; and with every soul that is with you, the birds, the cattle and every beast of the earth with you; of all that comes out of the ark and even every beast of the earth. And I will establish My covenant with you; and all flesh shall never again be cut off by the water of the flood, neither shall there again be a flood to destroy the earth." [Gen. 9:8–11]


God's covenant with Noah was that He would never again destroy virtually all the lives of those upon the earth with a flood. It was not that God had made a mistake the first time or that He regretted what He did. God's plan is perfect and the earth has entered into a new epoch or a new phase. During this time, until the end of time, there will be floods and other natural disasters, but none of them will destroy, for all intents and purposes, the population of the earth. Part of what we can learn from this is that this flood was world-wide in terms of population (not necessarily in terms of land mass). One point of contention with fundamentalists and scientists is not just the occurrence of this flood, but how widespread that it was. In these past few chapters of Genesis, we have seen no reason to assume that the flood covered the entire earth, both hemispheres, so that every mountain on earth was below water. This is a view taken by those who read that the entire earth was covered in the King James Version and they take that literally (and the Bible should be taken literally). However, as we have noted, the word for earth also means land and that is its most common meaning and the meaning used here. In the Genesis flood, or deluge, the entire populated land was under water, including the mountains.. We can only speculate as to where this took place and my guess was on a continent in the midst of the Atlantic Ocean, but there is no reason to assume that guess is equivalent to God's Word. This certainly had an effect upon the other portions of there world.

 

And God said "This is the sign of the covenant which I am placing between Me and you and every living soul that is with you, for all successive generations. I have placed My rainbow [lit., bow] in a cloud and it shall be for a sign of a covenant between Me and the earth. And it will come about when I bring a cloud over the earth, that the rainbow will be seen in the cloud. and I will remember My covenant which is between Me and you and every living soul of all flesh and never again shall the waters become a flood to destroy all flesh. When the rainbow in the cloud, then I will look upon it, to remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living soul of all flesh that is on the earth." And God said to Noah, "This is the sign of the covenant which I have established between Me and all flesh that is on the earth." [Gen. 9:12–17]


The first Hebrew word to be examined is naturally qesheth (קֶשֶת) [pronounced KEH-sheth] and it comes from a word which means bending. It is usually translated bow or in a way related to the bow (as in Gen. 27:3 48:22 and over a dozen other passages). It is logical, though not conclusive, to assume that we are speaking of a rainbow, which, from the ground, appears to be an arc. The Greek word used in the Septuagint also means bow. It is used in conjunction with the word for arrows, which speaks of lightning in Habak. 3:9–11. The use of qesheth in Ezek. 1:28a seems to further indicate that we are speaking of a rainbow (As the appearance of the rainbow in the clouds on a rainy day; so was the appearance of Your surrounding radiance). Furthermore, we have a parallel passage to this in Rev. 4:3 and 10:1 in which the Greek word used means rainbow exclusively.


The Torah points, out, as do several authors, that this rainbow here is not the first rainbow seen by man. However, it now takes on new meaning as a sign between God and man that God will not destroy the earth again with a flood. Since the rainbow is the prism effect which occurs when light is shined through raindrops (or through a mist), this would be likely. However, prior to the flood, the earth was surrounded by an atmosphere or a band of water vapor, which may have curtailed the rainbow effect until after the flood. There is no serious theological problem here, no matter which position is taken.


V. 18 is the proper beginning for another chapter. What follows is the only recorded incident concerning Noah after the flood (other than God speaking to him concerning the rainbow). We do not have the same pattern as we have seen before. It is possible that we have someone other than Noah recording the latter half of chapter 9 and there is certainly someone other than Noah who wrote Gen. 10 and following. We do not have a verse which ties the sections together. The only possibility, if we are to remain with the established pattern, is that Noah wrote Gen. 4:25–9:27 and someone else began writing with 9:28, using 10:1 to tie into 9:18. Whereas the latter half of chapter 9 could be easily attributed to Noah or to one of his sons (likely, Shem), chapter 10–11:26 could be attributed to Shem as he could have lived to see his descendant, Abram. Since Shem's line in particular is followed in the latter half of chapter 11, it is my opinion that Shem wrote Gen. 9:18–11:26. Shem writes very little about himself, yet records some incredible events.

 

Now the sons of Noah who came out of the ark were Shem and Ham and Japheth; and Ham was the father of Canaan. [Gen. 9:18]


I suspect that this was written hundreds of years after the flood, all in retrospect by Shem, while he was old. Shem lived for 502 years after the flood (Gen. 11:10–11). With a new generation beginning every 30 years or so (which is more often than we saw in Gen. 5), the earth experienced a population explosion and Canaan and his descendants had become quite famous worldwide during the time that this was committed to writing. From Gen. 10 forward, the Canaanites play a dramatic role in history.


To me, a most fascinating study would be that of racial origin. Whereas, it is quite likely that many Caucasian races proceeded from Japheth, we can only guess as to some of the ancestors of Ham. I would think that the Blacks are descended primarily through Canaan and that the oriental races might have been descended through another son of Ham. Since Noah had the genetic material from which all races came, it is possible that some of that was displayed in his sons. That along with intermarriage would make such designation difficult to ascertain, but a marvelous study nonetheless.

 

These three [were] the sons of Noah and from them the whole earth was populated [lit., scattered]. [Gen. 9:19]


The Bible clearly indicates a common ancestor for us all in Adam and then in Noah. There is no indication that Noah sired any children after the flood. Whether his wife survived much beyond the flood or whether she and Noah ever had relations again, we do not know, as she is never mentioned again. However, the following event seems to indicate that one of those two things occurred.

 

And Noah began to be a farmer and therefore planted a vineyard. [Gen. 9:20]


The consecutive Qal imperfect meaning it is a logical continuation of the narrative.


Prior to the flood, we have no indication of bacteria, leaven or anything of that sort. After the flood, such things exist and will have a profound effect upon Noah's modus operandi. He will become a bit less inhibited than we would like to witness.

 

And he drank of the wine and became drunk and masturbated himself inside the tent. [Gen. 9:21]


The word usually translated uncovered [himself] is the Hithpael imperfect third masculine singular of gâlâh (גָּלָה) [pronounced gaw-LAWH] and it means to bare, to denude, to unveil, to go into exile, to emigrate, to evacuate a country. The Hithpael means that Noah was acting upon himself; he uncovered himself, he unveiled himself. Obviously the word is not always used in a sexual sense, but in nearby Lev. 18:6–19, it is. The context and the Piel stem often will infer sexual activity (the Hithpael is the reflexive form of the Piel). This verse tels us that Noah got drunk, got naked and was a total embarrassment to himself and his family. Then he passed out in his tent. Ham was childish about it.

 

And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father and told his two brothers outside. [Gen. 9:22]


The proper thing to do in such a situation is the cover up his father, who is obviously passed out, or semi-coherent because of the wine An honorable son would not mention this incident to anyone else. Instead. Ham makes fun of what has occurred and points this out to his brothers. His brothers react honorably to protect and hide their father's shame:

 

But Shem and Japheth took a garment and laid it upon both their shoulders and walked backward and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were turned away, so that they did not see their father's nakedness. When Noah awoke from his wine, he realized what his youngest son had done to him, so he said, "Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants he shall be to his brothers." [Gen. 9:23–25]


Since Noah's youngest son was a shame to him, treating his father without respect, Noah puts a curse upon Ham's youngest son, Canaan. A curse cannot be fulfilled when the person under the curse is honorable and has character. However, by that time, Noah could see that Canaan was most like his father and just as Ham was a shame to Noah, Canaan would be a shame to Ham. This indicates that the ancestors of Canaan, although they had a great deal of potential to begin with, later fell into slavery many times as a race and in many forms of slavery and servitude. It is fascinating that we read about this in the oldest book in existence (although the book of Job was probably written during this time, this chapter of Genesis I am certain precedes the book of Job).

 

He also said "Blessed be the Lord, the God of Shem; and let Canaan be their servant. May God cause Japheth to be persuaded, and let him dwell in the tents of Shem, and let Canaan be their servant." [Gen. 9:26–27]


When Noah said let Canaan be their servant, he was actually being very precise; Canaan would not personally be the servant of Japheth or of Shem, but he progeny would spend many years in various forms of slavery to the progeny of his uncles. Persuaded is the Hebrew word pâthâh (הָתָ ) [pronounced paw-thaw' ] and it is in the Hiphil imperfect, which is causative action. God causes Japheth to be persuaded. In the NASB and the KJV, this word is translated to be enlarged, but that meaning does not appear to be in Brown-Driver-Briggs. The word can mean to be used to mean deceived or persuaded. The latter definition appears to be the most apt here. The tents of Shem refers to blessing and prosperity in the spiritual and physical realm. For the next two millenniums, the Jews would be blessed through their association with Yahweh Elohim, the God of the Universe. The Gentiles that would be blessed were those Gentiles who followed the spiritual lead of the born-again Jews. When a Gentile recognized the power and efficacy of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, then he often chose to become a Jew. In this way, he dwelt in the tents of Shem and was blessed because of that. It was the convincing or persuading ministry of God the Holy Spirit which made him realize his need and his lack.

 

And Noah lived 350 years after the flood so that all the days of Noah were 950 years and he died. [Gen. 9:28–29]


If we follow Noah's post deluvian life, we see that he lived through to see 10 generations and he saw many of his grand children and great grandchildren die before he did. Noah lived to see his most important descendant up until that time: Abram. And just as inbreeding today causes some serious physical problems and limits life expectancy, we will see that the inbreeding with in Noah's own line caused a rapid decrease in the ages of all of his descendants.


Internal Links

Beginning of Document/

Chapter Summaries

External Links

Genesis Chapter Links



Genesis 10 has been completely reworked and expanded, including the entire word-by-word Hebrew exegesis. It may be found here: (HTML) (PDF) (WPD). It is highly recommended that you go to that study instead of this one. These chapters are being completed one-by-one and will eventually supplant this incomplete study of Genesis.


Genesis 10



Genesis 10:1–32


Maps, Charts and Short Doctrines:


Introduction: In my younger years, during the many times which I began to read the Bible, I would often skim over chapters like chapter 10. Occasionally I would wonder why these chapters were found in the Bible.

 

Let me quote from Scofield: This chapter contains the earliest ethnological table in the literature of the ancient world, compiled centuries before the Homeric writings. In this table of nations there is a remarkable perception of the ethnic and linguistic situation of the age of Noah and his descendants. Virtually all the names here have been found in archaeological discoveries of the past century. Footnote


There are two possibilities for authors here: Noah, recording the generations which follow him (as he lived to see Abram) or Shem (who also lived to see Abram). Gen. 10:1a (And these are the generations of the sons of Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth. LTHB) and Gen. 11:10a (These are the generations of Shem. LTHB) both begin with a genealogy, which could signify the change of authors (Noah followed by Shem; or Shem followed by Abraham). Many believe that the book of Genesis has had several authors [see Authorship in the Introduction to the Book of Genesis (HTML) (PDF) (WPD)]. It is possible the Noah wrote most of Genesis 10 and that Shem wrote much of Gen. 11; or, it is even more likely that Shem recorded Gen. 10 and Abraham recorded Gen. 11. As has been mentioned previously, I do not mean that they necessarily wrote anything down, but that they committed this genealogical lines to memory and passed them along. I do not say this dogmatically, as authorship here is simply speculation, but it is more reasonable for Shem and Abraham to be the authors rather than Moses. In any case, as R. B. Thieme, Jr. would always say, It is not the man but the message which is important. Authorship of a portion of God's Word is a matter of interest and sometimes is helpful in terms of isagogics; however, what is recorded in God's Word is what is important.

 

And These the Generations [or, the Beginnings] of the Sons of Noah: Shem, Ham and Japheth. And Sons Were Born to Them After the Flood: [Gen. 10:1]


This first verse is a title for what is to come, The first phrase is a series of nouns, conjunctions and an adjective; there are no verbs. We do not have a verb until the verb for born which occurs at the end of the verse. It is in the Niphal imperfect—that is a passive stem—and it can function as an adjective in that respect. The action can be in progress at the time of writing, and, in this case, it is still in progress. The generations of these three continue until today.


There has been a lot of speculation concerning these lines—that there has been some skipping of several generations. There would be two reasons for this. If a line is mentioned in retrospect, perhaps the more well-known of the ancestral line are mentioned. However, when the lines are recorded by a contemporary, recall that in early history, men lived for a long time and they might live with their grandsons, and great grandsons in a way which would be not unlike living with one's son. This also would be a very likely reason for ancestral worship or ancestral veneration (which has found its way into several cultures) because the oldest living ancestor would date back several generations and have a very good perspective of life. That being said, there is no reason to suppose that this occurred continually in each line of descendants recorded. There are some definite instances of it in the NT genealogies and in the 1Chronicles take on these genealogies; but that does not mean that we should read several generations between each father and son. That has come about because it is wrongly presumed that man dates back a million years in time and this would be a way to slip in a few additional years. However, that is not necessarily so (in fact it is very doubtful) and, as I have pointed out before, mathematically (HTML) (PDF), the population of the earth today does not put the flood and the repopulating of the earth too far back. Estimates of 5-6000 years ago are reasonable and, 15,000 years ago is probably too far back.

 

The Sons of Japheth: Gomer and Magog and Madai and Javan and Tubal and Meshech and Tiras. [Gen. 10:2]


Chris is a pleasant name for a male or a female. Gomer is also a male or a female name, although it would not be my first choice for anyone that I liked. Historians have determined that his progeny are the Cimmerians (the Akkadian name is gimmirrai and the Greek is Kimmerioi) and the Cimbri, from who come the Celts. For awhile, they occupied Southern Russia and were forced out by the Scythians and they moved into Asia Minor at the end of the 8th century b.c. In the 7th century b.c., they conquered Urartus, Phrygia and Lydia and battled Greek cities on the West Coast. The Scythians that they did battle with are probably descended from Magog, his brother (according to Josephus). They occupied the territory North of the Black Sea, which would put them in Western Russia and Poland. Magog figures into prophecy quite heavily in Ezek. 38:2 39:6 and Rev. 20:8.


From Madai comes one of the most famous of the ancient peoples: the Medes. They are Indo-European peoples who populated northwestern Iran and were later absorbed by the Persians. Except for words of theirs taken by other nations, their language has disappeared in antiquity and the records of their distribution are found in the documents of Assyrian rulers who fought against them. It appears that they might have been allied with the Cimmerians and protected from the Scythians in that alliance.


Javan is the Jewish word for Greeks. Javan's famous descendants include the Ionians, who lived in the West Coast of Asia Minor, Greece, Macedonia and Syria. Isaiah (in Isa. 66:19) associates Javan with the far-off nations to whom Yahweh's messengers will be dispatched. This associates him with the far-western nations with respect to the Jews at that time. Ezekiel tells us that Javan contributed to the wealth of Tyre (Ezek. 27:13). Daniel associates Javan with Alexander's Greco-Macedonian empire.


Tubal is mentioned several times throughout the Bible and his descendants are thought to have populated the area south of the Black Sea, in what is today Turkey, but then it was called southern Anatolia. The Assyrian empire began to expand to the North and East and began to be in conflict with the tribes of Anatolia from the rise of Ashurnasirpal (circa 870 b.c.) to onslaught of the Scythians in 679 b.c. Their strength and tenacity in battle is shown by resisting these forces for several centuries, remaining in continual, bitter conflict with the Assyrians. The Bible ascribes to Tubal the trading of slaves and metals.


Meshech is often mentioned in conjunction with Tubal and Magog in Biblical and secular literature alike. Some believe that they were Indo-European peoples who populated central Asia Minor, but were later pushed by their enemies southeast of the Black Sea. Many think that these three are the source of the modern Russians. Ezekiel refers to them as traders of slaves and bronze (Ezek. 27:13); when castigating Egypt, Ezekiel tells them that they will inhabit Sheol with uncircumcised barbarians like Meshech and Tubal (Ezek. 32:26); they are grouped again with Tubal in Ezek. 38 and 39 as the anti-God forces from the land of Magog.


Tiras is thought to be the progenitor of the Thracians, and later the Tyrsenoi, a people which occupied the coastal area of the Aegean Sea. There is some disagreement here and others see them as being related to Tarsus and Tarshish and possibly as the ancestor of the Etruscans.

 

The sons of Gomer: Ashkenaz and Riphath and Togarmah. [Gen. 10:3]


Ashkenaz apparently did not stray too far. According to Jer. 51:27, they lived in Ararat and Armenia during Jeremiah's time. Extra-Biblical Jewish literature indicates that Ashkenaz later became a synonym for Germany. Just as Jews in Spain and Portugal were called Sephartic Jews, Jews in Germany were called Ashkenazim. According to the Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia they likely became the Scythians who were allied with the Manneans in battle against the Assyrians. Their name became a synonym for Barbarian as they were a crude and warlike people Footnote who caused unrest in the Assyrian empire. Herodotus recorded their conquest of the Cimmerians (Gomer).


The parallel passage in 1Chronicles calls Riphath, Diphath. In Hebrew, this is an R: ר and this is a D: ד. There is obviously very little difference. Why wasn't this error caught? The Scribe who copied Genesis is not necessarily the same Scribe who copied 1Chronicles; even if it was, they would likely not have caught the error that they made. Any Scribe who caught the error later was not permitted to change it. However, we do have several manuscripts plus the Septuagint and the Latin Vulgate which read Riphath in both passages. Scofield notes that Riphath and Togarmah were both inhabitants of Asia Minor. The ZPEB gives several possibilities, identifying them with the Ripheaean mountains and the river Rhebas in Bithynia and with the Rhibii, a people who lived eastward of the Caspian Sea which would be in Southern Russia. All of these could be true as it is not necessary for a family to all remain in the same geographical area for the rest of their lives. Certainly there are groups who break off and others who intermarry. What we are examining is general trends.


Togarmah is described by Ezekiel as a nation which traded with Tyre, providing them with Mules, horses and horsemen (Ezek. 27:14). They are called allies of Magog and associated with Gomer, Persia, Cush and Put in Ezek. 38:6. Josephus believed them to be the Phrygians but Assyrian inscriptions refer to a Til-garimmu (Tegarama in Hittite) which could refer to Togarmah. That city was in East Cappadocia, so this would place them possibly North of Palestine and southeast of the Black Sea. This city was destroyed by the Assyrians in 695 b.c.

 

And the sons of Javan: Elishah and Tarshish, Kittim and Dodanim. [Gen. 10:4]


Josephus identified Elishah with the Æolians, a Greek peoples and others have associated them with Carthage, a nation in Northern Africa because the name of the Tyrian princess who, according to tradition, founded Carthage had a similar name: Elissa. The ZPEB concludes that due to their supplying purple dyes to the Tyrians and their association with Greece and Kittam, they were likely the inhabitants of islands out in the Aegean Sea or of Sicily and Southern Italy.


Tarshish was the name of a city in the West Mediterranean region near Gibralter in Spain and it is likely equivalent to Tartessus, where Jonah fled when he was told to evangelize Nineveh. They could have also been associated with sea ports around southwestern Italy as Tarshish is closely associated with sea vessels and sea ports. This reputation would have allowed them to occupy a spread-out area like this. When Tarshish is used in connection with ships, it likely does not refer to a geographical origin or destination but to the ships themselves; their large size and sea worthiness.


Kittim is associated with the Island of Cyprus, which Herodotus claims was colonized by the Phœnicians (Shem), the Ethiopians (Ham) and the Greeks (Japheth), which is not unlike what happened on the Isle of Crete. Josephus ties Kittam to a city on the southeast coast of Cyprus, Cition. Jeremiah uses Kittam to refer to generally the seafaring West which would exert dominance over the East. Daniel's reference to the ships of Kittam could refer to the Romans who defeated Antiochus Epiphanes in Egypt in 169 b.c. In fact, the Septuagint, instead of reading ships of Kittam reads Romans. The Apocryphal and Pseudopigraphal literature associate Kittam with the Grecian empire.


Dodanim could very likely be Rodanim (as it is rendered in 1Chron. 1:7), in which case they are associated with the inhabitants of the island of Rhodes in the Aegean Sea, right off the coast of Turkey, a stepping stone to Crete and the Mediterranean Sea. If Dodanim is the correct rendering, then we have no idea as to who these people are.

 

From these were dispersed the inhabitants of the borders [or, the coastlines] of the nations in their lands each with his own language by their families in their nations. [Gen. 10:5]


This indicates that the writer of this is recording this information after the Tower of Babel and the confusion of the languages in Gen. 11. This also shows that the distribution of languages was not arbitrary, but God gave each family their own language, so that it would be natural to move off in a group of those they had been raised with, were kin to and who spoke the same language.


The word translated twice as nations is the Hebrew word gôy (יֹ) [pronounced GOH-ee] which most of us recognize as Gentiles. It can refer to a community, a nation or a group of peoples. This is generally, but not always, Footnote a word for those who are not Jewish in the Bible and this is its first occurrence.


Borders [or, coastlines] is the Hebrew word ’îy (אִי) [pronounced ee] and it refers to islands, to coast lands and to regions bordered by coast lands (the are seen from the perspective of the person in the water). As you have no doubt noticed, all of these peoples seemed to be associated with islands or with the various seas.

 

And the sons of Ham: Cush and Mizraim and Put and Canaan. [Gen. 10:6]


Cush is translated variously as Ethiopia, Cush, Cushi and Cushite (it is all the same word). Ethiopia is south of Egypt, off the Red Sea. They appear to be associated with Egypt circa the twentieth century because, but later became independent from the Egyptians around 1000 b.c. A few centuries later, they ruled over Egypt and had prepared to do battle with Hezekiah, but they were driven off by the Assyrians in the late 7th century b.c.


Mizraim is Hebrew for Egypt and is translated that way in the RSV.


Josephus claims that Put was the founder of Libya and that the first inhabitants are called the Putites. Put has quite the varied future. Isaiah said that Put (and Tarshish and Lud) would one day here the glory of God in Isa. 64:19. Jeremiah groups Put with Ethiopia and Lud as nations whose warriors would be used in the conquest of Egypt by Nebuchadnezzar (Jer. 46:9) Ezekiel, on the other hand, both mentions that Put contributed to the wealth of Tyre (Ezek. 27:10) and as a nation which will fall by the sword (Ezek. 30:5). She is grouped with other nations as an object of God's wrath (Ezek. 38:5) and with nations which supported Nineveh (Nahum 3:6–9).


Canaan occupied the promised land before the Jews did and is the source of many peoples who were antagonistic toward the Jews. Now would be a good time to examine the doctrine of the Canaanites (not finished yet !!).

 

And the sons of Cush: Seba and Havilah and Sabtah and Raamah and Sabteca. And the sons of Raamah: Sheba and Dedan. [Gen. 10:7]


Seba is a land and a people in Southern Arabia. Some have thought them to be equivalent to Sheba, since the difference between the names is a small dot; but this would not make any sense to list the same person twice. They may have stayed together as brothers and founded, for all intents and purposes, one nation or people. Psalm 72:10 mentions them together. God spoke through Isaiah, saying, "For I the Lord your God, the Holy One of Israel, your Savior; I have Egypt as your ransom; Ethiopia and Seba for you." (Isa. 43:3) Isaiah also indicates that the Sabeans would come to Israel, recognizing the God of Israel is the only God (Isa. 45:14).


Havilah is likely located in the Western portion of Arabia, just North of Yemen. This son of Cush likely received his name after the land mentioned in or near the garden of Eden. Let me quote from ZPEB: Many regard this Havilah of Arabia and that of the Garden of Eden story as two different places. Duh.


Sabta is thought to be a place in Arabia on or near the East coast. Sabteca is thought to be by some a scribal error for Sabtah, but this would not make any sense to name the same group twice. They are associated with Southern Arabia.


Raamah was probably located in Arabia, but exactly where is disputed. They traded with Tyre as did Sheba (Ezek. 27:22).


Since there are other Sheba's in the Bible (Abraham's grandson and a decedent of Joktan), it is hard to identify which is which. Some have even suggested that there had been a blending of the Semitic and Hamitic tribes, which is possible. Whereas some authorities are not sure whether this could refer to one, two or three people, I do not find it difficult to imagine that some kids just got the same name and some families have two children with the same names (Sheba and Dedan were both sons of Raamah and Sheba and Dedan were both sons of Jokshan, a descendant of Abraham). Sheba was a country in Southwest Arabia, where Yemen is today. Camel caravans from Sheba are mentioned twice: once in Job 6:19 and also in 1Kings 10:1–13 (the latter is in connection to the visit of the Queen of Sheba to Solomon). Which Sheba populated this area is not known, but I would think the grandson of Cush.

 

And Cush sired Nimrod and he began to be a mighty [possibly, audacious and bold] [man] on the earth. He was a mighty hunter before (the face of) the Lord; therefore it is said, Even as Nimrod the mighty hunter before (the face of) the Lord. [Gen. 10:8–9]


Suddenly we have a break in the mood. Throughout this genealogy, there have been a dearth of verbs, with the exception of v. 5. What was written was as little as possible. This particular author did not care for genealogies either yet had to record them, so he recorded as little as possible. The second verb in this verse is the Hiphil perfect of the most unusual verb châlal (חָלַל) [pronounced chaw-LAWL]. It is unusual, not because it is rarely found but because it has such a variety of meanings. In Ezekiel, it is used several times in conjunction with God's name—it means to profane His name. It can mean to defile or to pollute (see Gen. 49:4 Lev. 19:29 1Chron. 5:1). However, in Gen. 4:26 6:1 9:20 11:6 41:54 and in many other places, it means to begin. This use of châlal is always in the Hiphil or the Hophal (although its use in conjunction with profanity is also found in the Hiphil). My first thought is could there a way to integrate these meanings? This would change a great many translations severely; such as Gen. 4:26 could mean, It was then that man began to profane the name of God. However, this would be misplaced as the line being examined in context is Seth's, the line of our Lord; the verb for to call is used consistently in a good sense. I do not find it used in conjunction with taking God's name in vain. The Hiphil is the causative stem, yet it can assume a reflexive meaning. The object of the verb can participate in the action as a second subject. The emphasis is upon the causing of the action rather than on the result of the action. The perfect tense means a completed action at the time of the writing; or an action looked upon as complete by the writer and reader. Then we have the infinitive of the verb to be and Nimrod was the first to be known as mighty, strong, valiant. The perfect action of this verb means that Nimrod was recognized as having accomplished a certain reputation or sphere of might at the time of writing.


Prior to the flood, man did not eat meat; man farmed or man was a shepherd (although professions were more diverse than those two). After the flood, animals began to fear man on the earth; therefore, their ferocity increased as they were associated less and less with man; and, whereas Noah began to be a farmer upon the earth, Nimrod began to be a hunter. This is a brand new profession and Nimrod was renown for this profession. Before Yahweh is probably a neutral expression. God figured into the thinking of some of the inhabitants of the earth; Nimrod had achieved this fame as a great hunter and the fame is emphasized by using God's name. He is not just a great hunter, but a great hunter before God. He was the measuring rod by which all other hunters were measured. If someone was mentioned as being a great hunter, it would be said he was a mighty hunter before the Lord just as Nimrod was.

 

So the beginning of his kingdom was Babylon and Erech and Accad and Calneh in the land of Shinar. [Gen. 10:10]


Nimrod, in order to be a hunter, had to do a great deal of traveling and apparently what he would do is hunt throughout a certain area, found a city, and then move on to another city. He seems to be the first person infected with wanderlust. I'll wait until chapter 11 to cover Babylon. Erech is a city just down the Euphrates a ways from Babylon. This city is also found on the Sumerian king list. One of the kings was Gilgamish, who was a hero of Sumerian legends.


We do not know where the city Accad was located, but we have extra-Biblical documentation that as early as 2350 b.c. there was a dynasty there founded by Sargon (which means true king). During this time period, Accad controlled all of Sumer (Southern Babylon) and it had armies stationed as far away as Elam, Syria and southern Anatolia. This dynasty lasted two centuries and became known to the Babylonians as the ideal kingdom, a golden age if you will; or the good old days. Accad later became the designation for northern Babylonia and the word Accadian today is applied to the language of Babylonia and not to its speakers.


We are unsure about Calneh; the original Hebrew was consonants only with no spaces between the words; the vowel points were added sometime later. A different set of vowel points changes Calneh to all of them. So the sense of this verse could be that all of these cities were in the land of Shinar. We do find a city of Calneh is Amos 6:2 and a similarly named city in Isaiah 10:9 (Calno).


Scholarship seems to support that Shinar is equivalent to Babylonia in designation or area. Shinar was probably the first designation of the area of these three or four cities and later, due to the prominence of Babylon, the area took on the name of Babylonia. There is not an undisputed corresponding word for Shinar found in extra-Biblical literature, however. The Bible continues to use the term Shinar in several instances (Gen. 14:1 Joshua 7:21 Isa. 11:11 Dan. 1:2 Zech. 5:11).

 

From that land he went into Assyria and built Nineveh and Rehoboth-Ir and Calah; and Resen between Ninevah and Calah, this is the great city. [Gen. 10:11–12]


There is a difference of opinion as to the translation at this point. It is unclear as to whether it should read from this land went Asshur and he built Nineveh or from this land he went into Assyrian and built Nineveh... Asshur, we later find out, is the son of Shem. If this written by Noah or Shem, then it is reasonable to, out of the blue, name Asshur, someone who has not come into this context yet. This does occur in Scripture. Contextually, it seems to make more sense that we are speaking of Nimrod rather than of the area near Babylon. On the other hand, it would by likely that Asshur (Assyrian) would found Assyrian cities. Age and stated modus operandi would favor Nimrod as the founder and builder of those cities.


It is reasonable to assume that Nimrod then moves northwest into Assyria and, as before, hunts over a great area and founds cities near this area. He originally traveled down the Euphrates and then he moved up the Tigris river. He apparently would found a city and then hunt throughout the adjoining area. For that reason, the area adjacent to Assyria is called the land of Nimrod in Mic. 5:6. His name is used to designate at least two cities: Birs Nimrud, which is south-west of Babylon, and Nimrod in Assyria. He is found in Sumerian, Assyrian and other extra-Biblical documents and has been identified by some scholars as perhaps Gilgamish or Sargon of Agade. There is no reason for that, however. It is likely that he would found these cities, remain for a century or so, and move on. By examining Shem's line in chapter 11, we see that immediately after the flood, people lived for five hundred years on the average; including those of Nimrod's generation. Since Noah lived 950 years, it would not be out of the question for Nimrod to have lived that long. Being a man struck with wanderlust, it would not be surprising that he would move from place to place, possibly with a different wife (or, wives) and found a city with his progeny.


Nimrod stopped and founded two of the most famous cities of the ancient world: Babylon and Ninevah. Ninevah, now in ruins, will figure prominently (as will Babylon) into Israel's future history. See R. B. Thieme, Jr.’s The Worm and the Gourd (now out of print) or Henry Hastings study of the book of Jonah.


Rehoboth-Ir and Resen are cities both lost to history, even though Resen was obviously a very famous city at one time and the most prominent of the cities named at the time of writing. It is supposed that Calah is 24 miles south of Nineveh on the Tigris river and it has been rebuilt several times since then.

 

And Mizraim sired Ludim and Anamim and Lehabim and Naphtuhim and Pathrusim and Casluhim and (from which came the Philistines) Caphtorim. [Gen. 10:13–14]


All the names are have the im plural ending. Since we know sired or became the father of is not a literal father, my guess is that from this person came several famous tribes of peoples (famous in those days) although the ancestor of each tribe was not necessarily Mizraim's son. In fact, Mizraim's name is plural, so he could have named all of his children in the plural. However, it is clear that from Ham came Mizraim and through Mizraim, we either have several peoples or several individuals.


Ludim is not Lud, the son of Shem, and his place in history, along with Anamim and Naphtuhim, are unknown. Some scholars believe that Lubim should be Libya, others claim that we do not know at this time who they are or who they became. The Pathrusim belong to upper Egypt (they are the people of Pathros). At the end of the verse, I changed the word order from the Hebrew to give the proper sense to the end of the verse. The Philistines are related to Caphtorim, so I placed the and, which goes with Caphtorim, before the Philistine phrase (see Deut. 2:23 Amos 9:7). It is generally agreed that this phrase became misplaced.

 

And Canaan sired Sidon, his firstborn, and Heth and the Jebusite and the Amorite and the Girgashite and the Hivite and the Arkite and the Sinite and the Arvadite and the Zemarite and the Hamathite; and afterward, the families of the Canaanite were spread abroad. [Gen. 10:15–18]


Sidon and Heth are the sons of Canaan and the others which follow are the various tribes which eventually populated Canaan. Sidon is not spoken of as an individual or as the head of a tribe again (except in the 1Chronicles list), but the city he gave his name to is mentioned throughout the Bible. It was once the capitol of ancient Phœnicia. From Heth came the Hittites. The Hittites lived in the land of Canaan. Esau's wives are said to have been the daughters of Heth and Jacob was warned by Rebekah against marrying the daughters of Heth (Gen. 27:46). My maps place them in southern Turkey as well.


The last two verses indicate that this was written by someone who lived to see these tribes gain some prominence, or, when this was copied in the future, the copyist, possibly Shem, Moses or Abraham, added vv. 16–19. My educated guess is that Noah wrote these basic records down and Shem later added to them. Gen. 10:32 and the contents of this chapter make me think that Noah, as a doting mega-grandfather, wrote this information down, following his progeny as far as he could. Shem, who lived another 150 years past his father Noah, during his last years on earth, became the doting Patriarch, and copied what his father had written, adding a phrase here and there; deciding that it was necessary to understand Gen. 10:5, so he explained what occurred at the tower of Babel in Gen. 11. One of his progeny likely picked up either at the beginning of chapter 11 or mid-chapter 11 with the genealogy and narrative.


See http://christiananswers.net/q-aig/race-skincolor.html about how the races came about from Babel.


The Jebusites lived in the hills surrounding Jerusalem. Jebus, later called Jerusalem, was their main city and Jebusite is first used of the present occupants of that area (Gen. 15:21 Ex. 3:8) and then of the former occupants of that area (Ezek. 16:3, 45 Zech. 9:7). No one could drive them out of this area for centuries, so they lived side-by-side the Israelites (Joshua 15:63 Judges 1:21). David finally conquered this city, making it his own. He either restored the name of Jerusalem or the author of Judges (or an editor of Judges), inserted its name in Judges 19:10.


The Amorites lived scattered about the hills surrounding the Jordan. They occupied a large enough territory and exerted enough influence to have their named used as a general term for those who lived in Canaan (Gen. 15:16 48:22 Joshua 24:15). Ezekiel described Jerusalem as the offspring of the Amorite and the Hittite (Ezek. 16:3, 45). The difference between the two might be a northern and a southern area of occupation. Their leaders (Gen. 14:13 Num. 21:21 Deut. 31:4), their stature (Amos 2:9) and their gods (Joshua 24:15 Judges 6:10) are all mentioned in Scripture. They have a rich, extra-Biblical history (see the Doctrine of the Amorite--not finished).


The Girgashites have been associated by some with the city Karkisha, found in the cuneiform Hittite texts, but this is not an historical certainty. Israel did defeat them in Deut. 7:1 Joshua 3:10 24:11.


The Hivites lived in the hills of Lebanon (Gen. 10:17 Judges. 3:3) and the Hermon range to the valley which leads to Hamath (Joshua 6:3). They occupied this territory even until the time of David (2Sam. 24:7). They are more closely associated with the Arkites than the other tribes mentioned. It is quite likely that these are also known as the Horites, the mixup being due to a scribal error. Gen. 36:2,20–30 are cited to prove this (Zibeon is called both a Hivite and a Horite). The original difference between the words is vav (waw), ו, and resh, ר, so it is easy to see how a scribal error could have been made. Gen. 34:2 and Joshua 9:7 have various readings of Hittite, Hivite and Horite.


The Arkite inhabited, of all places, the town of Arka (presently, it is Tell ‘Arqa, four miles from the sea and 12 miles northeast of Tripolis, Syria. The city is found in the Assyrian inscriptions under the name Irkatah, described by both Shalmaneser II and Tiglath-pileser II as rebellious.


Arvad (called Ruâd today) was the northern most Phœnician city, is an island two miles off the coast of Syria (which was ancient Phœnicia) opposite Cypress approximately 50 miles north of Byblos. Despite its diminutive size (less than a mile in circumference), Footnote it was heavily fortified and they ruled over some a great deal of the neighboring coast. This city maintained its independence up until the 9th century because when it was under Tyre's control during the time of Ezekiel (who mentions it in Ezek. 27:8, 11).


Except for the parallel passage in 1Chronicles, the Sinites and the Hamathites are never mentioned again. The Sinites have been variously associated with Sinna on Mount Lebanon (Strabo notes this). We find that their name may have survived in the names Nahr as-Sinn and Sinn addarb and might be related to other peoples in secular history.


The Zemarites likely lived in northern Phœnicia, between Arvad and Tripolis in what is now called Sumra (called Sumur in the Tell el-Amarna letters and Simirra in the Assyrian texts).

 

And the territory of the Canaanite was from Sidon as you go toward Gerar, as far as Gaza; as you go toward Sodom and Gomorrah and Admah and Zeboiim, as far as Lasha. [Gen. 10:19]


This description allows us to know when this was written; or at least to set some time boundaries. Sodom and Gomorrah were still cities and the Hittites had not moved nor had the been pushed too far north. We find Sodom and Gomorrah mentioned in Abram's time, and they were obviously well-established by that time. The first and third cities are on the coast of the Mediterranean, and the latter five are the cities of the plain, some possibly beneath the Dead Sea today. This area is basically the promised land, but smaller. Had Moses been the original author, then he would not have referred to the latter five cities because they would not have existed during his time. Some time would have to pass after Canaan to allow for the movement of the families. However, our concept of a city and their concept of a city would be quite different. Their city could consist of one main family and 3-6 generations of descendants.

 

These are the sons of Ham according to their families, according to their languages, by their lands, by their nations. [Gen. 10:20]


As in v. 5, this passage tells us that this chapter was written after the chapter 11 occurred (not necessarily after chapter 11 was written, however). The author knew very little about Japheth, therefore the passage concerning his progeny is short and without verbs. Those descended from Ham had made quite a mark in the world and the author spent a lot of time with them. The different construction beginning v. 21 might indicate that Shem is the author, or a descendant of Shem's.

 

And also to Shem, the father of all the children of Eber, the older brother of Japheth, children were born. [Gen. 10:21]


This verse clearly tells us that father does not mean father as we understand it, but ancestor. This does not alter the ages or the succession of generations given in Ge. 5:3–32 or 11:10–26. It does not indicate the relative age of Ham either; so it has been supposed that Ham is the second oldest brother.

 

The sons of Shem: Elam and Asshur and Arpachshad and Lud and Aram. [Gen. 10:22]


The land of Elam is in between the Persian Gulf and the Caspian Sea. They are non-Semitic Caucasians and their earliest appearance in secular history is approximately 2450 b.c. Their succession of rulers happened to be very peculiar to man: the throne was hereditary through women so that the new ruler was a son of a sister of a member of the previous ruler's family. Like most nations, they enjoyed periods of independence and periods of being dominated. Ezekiel has prophesied that they will drink from the cup of the wrath of God. The book of Esther takes place in Susa, a capitol of Elam during the rulership of Ahasuerus the Persian.


Asshur, son of Shem, is the progenitor of the Assyrians. It is possible that the translation of Gen. 10:11 is Asshur going forth and establishing cities. The segue is that Nimrod is founding cities and so is Asshur. However, nowhere else do we show, in this chapter, of people from one line, cropping up in the middle of another genealogy. The city of Asshur and the name Assyria may have come from Asshur and it may have been taken from their god Ashur. This name occurs in several personal names, so the relationship is unclear. There could even be some ancestor worship involved. Asshur, or Assyria, is north-northwest of Babylon. There is no reason to assume that there is some kind of a mistake here, as this all occurs within the same chapter within about 10 verses of one another. The problem is this: it appears as if Nimrod (in the line of Ham) establishes the city Asshur (and possibly even names one of his children Asshur). But Asshur, the son of Shem, is closely associated with this city as well; and the Assyrians are certainly believed to be a Semitic people. It is not impossible to come up with a possible explanation for this. Asshur heard of a city with his name and simply went there and conquered it. We do not know when such things began to happen (although Gen. 14 will suggest that this has been occurring over a long period of time, as it presumes previous military engagements).


Arpachshad was the son born to Shem two years following the flood. There are only guesses as to his descendants and geography. Even the Chaldeans have been suggested as his progeny.


Lud is quite similar to Ludim but they are different people. Lud is most likely associated with Lydia. Josephus and philology back this up.


There is much more covered in the more updated Genesis study.


Internal Links

Beginning of Document/

Chapter Summaries

External Links

Genesis Chapter Links



Genesis 11 has been completely reworked and expanded, including the entire word-by-word Hebrew exegesis. It may be found here: (HTML) (PDF) (WPD). It is highly recommended that you go to that study instead of this one. These chapters are being completed one-by-one and will eventually supplant this incomplete study of Genesis.


Genesis 11


Genesis 11:1–9


Maps, Charts and Short Doctrines:

 

       v.      4           What is the problem with this tower?

       v.     10           Traditional View of the Ages

       v.     16           Explaining the Age Decline

       v.     26           The Meaning of the Names in Abram’s Line

       v.     27           Why Historical Dates are Difficult to Calculate


Introduction: Chapter 11 is set in two parts; the first explains the separation of nations and peoples, which occurred before most of chapter 10. The second half of chapter 11 deals with the descendants of Shem. It is my opinion that Abram wrote this and the following several chapters of Genesis.


Gen. 10:32 behaves as pretty much a period at the end of chapter 10, and likely to that author's work (Noah or Shem), but chapter 11 picks up with the tower of Babel, a popular term, not found in the Bible.

 

Now the whole earth was one language [lit., one lip] and one vocabulary, and it came about as they journeyed from east and they found a plain in the land of Shinar an settled there. [Gen. 11:1–2]


The early population was not going to settle in the mountains, and not knowing which way to go, headed west, following the sun. They had no reason to separate from one another. They journeyed from the east could also be rendered as they brake away onwards and the word means to pull up as one would pluck up tent pins.


Given thousands of years, two groups of people with a common language will develop an entirely different dialect. However, we are speaking of only a few generations from Noah. Therefore, what occurs in this chapter would have to be miraculous (assuming that it is true, which I do).


Only three generations of Japheth are mentioned, but it is likely that several generations could have been skipped, since there was no specific information on these groups in this portion of Scripture. Only three generations of Ham's line are traced, but there is a bit more detail. However, Shem's line is followed linearly, as if the author is going somewhere with it.


By comparing Gen. 10:25a (To Eber were born two sons: the name of the one was Peleg, for in his days the earth was divided) with the years given in Gen. 11:10–17, we find that this incident occurred 101 years Footnote after the flood, three generations into each line (it appears as though a generation during that time was every thirty years). In either case, Noah would have died by this time.


Being a number's person, I find that it would be interesting to calculate the number of people alive at that time. We begin with eight people and it does not appear that Noah had any other children (Gen. 9:19) and, whereas 7 males born to a family does not seem unusual (Gen. 10:2), 13 males born to a family does (Gen. 10:26–29). Assuming an equal number of daughters and sons, the average family probably produced about 14 offspring. while the parents were between ages 25–50 (reasonable child bearing years). This gives us approximately 42 children in the first generation, all of whom are child-bearing age prior to the confusion of languages, which is 21 families all capable of producing another generation of a adults prior to this incident. Which is close to 600 adults from that generation. By the 3rd generation, there would have been 12,600 children, and in the 4th generation, Footnote a quarter of a million people. So there could have easily been a quarter of a million people alive during the confusion of languages (this is assuming that the chronology given in the latter portion of this chapter is correct as per the copyists).


Since the Exodus generation was at least two million and they traveled together, then it is likely that this group traveled together out of the mountains to find a river for water and then they all likely settled down together. The original three patriarchs (and wives) had all seen the flood and would have been alive during the confusion of the languages. We know that God had spoken to Noah and his sons (Gen. 9:1), and given that there is no description given as to the manner in which God spoke to them, it is reasonable to suppose that God took on the form of a man and spoke to them.


The next few generations would have been told stories about the antediluvian world and the interaction between the fallen angels and mankind; such stories would have made wonderful bedtime stories, from a secular point of view. However, as a logical result of this, there are a great many adults on the earth who do not believe in the Revealed Lord, but who have an interest in the gods of the antediluvian era (the fallen angels and their children the daughters of men bare to them) and that this group of people became possibly very religious, but not believers. Furthermore, they were highly intelligent, as was early man (archeological discoveries aside; place a quarter million geniuses on an island with only natural materials and what they will develop will require great thought, but it might appear primitive.

 

And they said to one another, "Come let us make bricks and fire [them] thoroughly." And they used brick for stone and, for them, bitumen was for mortar. [Gen. 11:3]


They obviously found that firing bricks made the bricks stronger. We do not know exactly what was used for mortar, but it was some kind of asphalt, also used in the sealing of the ark that Moses traveled in (Ex. 2:3) but not used to seal Noah's ark.

 

And they said, "Come let us build for ourselves a city, and a tower whose top in the heavens and let us make for ourselves a name; so that we are not scattered abroad over the face of the whole earth." [Gen. 11:4]


The narrative tells us that man is building this city and this tower, and that God doesn’t like it, so why exactly is that true?

What is the problem with this tower?

      The average reader has no concept of what is occurring here. God has mandated that man fill to the earth (Gen. 1:28 9:1). They are choosing to remain in one place.

      Instead of building an altar to God, as did Noah (Gen. 8:20–21), they built a monument to themselves (Gen. 11:4). Therefore, they were glorifying themselves, not God.

      The tower references heaven rather than God. Controlling the vocabulary means that you can control the thinking of a people.

      Often towers were built for pagan deity worship; archeology has discovered in Mesopotamia terraced towers, ziggurats, designed for that purpose. It is very likely that they had this in mind to worship the deities of the antediluvian era.

      Why does this tower have to reach into the heavens? This is so they have a place to flee in case there is another flood, which God has promised them that there would not be. They are building this because they do not believe God's Word.

      It would be God Who would direct man's movements, if they so chose; so it would be God Who would direct some of them to His geographical will, which may not be in that city. However, regardless of what God's plan is, they chose to remain there.

Despite the sparseness of this narrative, we can get a good idea as to the thinking of mankind.


Chapter Outline

Charts, Graphics and Short Doctrines

 

And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower which the sons of men had built. And the Lord said, "Behold, they are one people and they all have one lip. And this is what they have begun to do, and now nothing which they purpose to do will be withheld from them." [Gen. 11:5–6]


We have seen that, separating into nations, it has taken us several millenniums to create some of the incredible technology that we have created. For a great deal of time, we spread ourselves throughout the earth and battled for our territory and worked for our sustenance, so that there was not as much time for technological advance or for self-exaltation. In the past several decades, we have seen incredible advances in scientific development and much of that has been dependant upon the cooperative interaction of various nations. This has not been God's plan for us until now.

 

"Come, let Us go down and there confuse their language [lit., lip], that they may not understand one another's speech [lit., lip]" So the Lord scattered them abroad from there over the face of the whole earth; and they stopped building the city. [Gen. 11:7–8]


God could have chosen to do whatever He wanted to do. He chose, rather than to scatter men through natural disasters, to do it by language. In the midst of building this tower (quite a feat for 1–5 centuries past the flood with practically no developed technology), those building the tower could no longer communicate to one another. If you have ever been in a foreign land and no one around you speaks your language, and you suddenly meet someone who speaks English, there is an immediate bond which is formed. God confined these languages to the various families, as we see in Gen. 10:5 & 20. It is very likely that almost every person named in Gen. 10 had a different language. They found that they could communicate with one another in their family, but not with any of a dozen or two dozen families which lived around them. Certainly there were misunderstandings, misscommunications, and everyone thought that they were speaking in a language that they were born with. Adam was created with a fully functioning vocabulary. God did the same with these and created different patterns of language.

 

Therefore its name was called Babel [or, Babylon] because there the Lord confused the language of the whole earth; and from there the Lord scattered them abroad over the face of the whole earth. [Gen. 11:9]


Bâbel (לֶבָ ) [pronounced baw-BEHL] is one of the very few words which has come down to us even in the English. This is one of the oldest words (if not the oldest) which is the same in English as it is in t It means to confuse or to confound. Scatter is in the Hiphil perfect, which is the causative stem; God did not physically pick anyone up and move them; that would be the simple Qal stem. God, by confusing their language caused them to be scattered. The perfect tense means that this is written from the standpoint of completed action.


Genesis 11:10–32


Preface: Archeology and the Bible: It is important that we have some kind of an idea as to what life was like during these times insofar as ancient history and archeology reveal to us. Due to preconceived ideas, most modern scholars see this period of time as being exceptionally primitive, which contradicts the Bible. We have a change in the languages for a majority of the population of the earth, which would require a new written language for them.


We do not know when a written language was developed. My guess is, there was no written language until after the confusion of the languages, and here is why: the mind of Adam (and his early descendants) was so powerful that, they had no reason to write anything down. They heard something once and they remembered it.


At this point in science, we do not fully understand why we remember some things and forget others; why our brain prints and retains some information, and yet, other information seems to be printed and becomes almost immediately inaccessible (lack of short-term memory). Ideally speaking, our own minds seem as though they ought to keep all of our memories somewhere, which is why hypnotism is used to dredge up old memories. And for all of us, who meet a person and then, 2 seconds later, have forgotten that person’s name, we know that sometimes information just does not seem to print at all.


Coming from the hand of God—and let me stress that this is a personal theory—early man’s comprehension and memory was phenomenal, so that everything, or very nearly everything, that early man heard, he retained. For that reason, there was no need to write anything down.


As man degenerated physically, he also degenerated mentally, and a written language became a necessity. Since man needed a written language, he developed one. My guess is, this occurred after the flood and after the confusion of languages.


Some assumptions of archeology have remained unchanged since the early 19th century. It was at that time that archeologists separated the earth into several layers representing various time periods and we have held to that model until this day even though it was made prior to carbon dating methods at a time when very little fossil evidence had been uncovered. It was at that time that ancient history was separated into three ages: the Stone Age (10,000–3200 b.c.), the Bronze Age (3200-1200 b.c.) and the Iron Age (1200–330 b.c.). For this reason, a lot of archeological finds are grouped into these preordained time periods. Only organic matter may be dated using C-14 dating methods and there is a dearth of organic matter to be found in Palestinian excavations. Therefore, a lot of dating is done by strata (that is, if it is found in a certain layer, then it is dated according to that layer). This is primarily true of dating layers of earth which is determined to be pre-man.


It is also possible that there have been some corruption of Biblical texts in regards to the years given. The years given in the Masoretic text are slightly different from those in the Greek text. Also, there is one name left out of Shem’s line in the Massoretic text, which is found in the Greek text. It is, in part, for these reasons that it is difficult to correlate Biblical and archeological dates. Somewhere in the Middle Bronze Age (after 2300 b.c.) do we begin to see greater correlation between archeological dating and Biblical dates. The dates given for the Old Stone Age (also known as the Paleolithic Age) is based as more upon evolution and geological theories as it is upon sound archeological evidence. It is clear that there is no existing archeological evidence which requires us to go back further than 10,000 b.c. Footnote


It is assumed by archeology, but not taught by the Bible, that earliest man primarily hunted and gathered food from nature. Their earliest implements were made of flint and chipped stone. This is what as known as the Paleolithic period. It is very likely that some groups from Gen. 11 functioned that way, but farming predates the flood and Noah was a farmer immediately after the flood, so there did exist some agrarian societies before and after the flood.


The second period of the Stone Age, the Mesolithic period, was, according to archeological assumptions when we first saw food-producing societies and real settlements. There certainly existed advances in the arts of civilization during this time. The Bible would group these two periods of time together.


As Charles Clough points out, the original inhabitants of the ark emerged to a cruel world. Even though the antediluvian people were forbidden to enter into the garden of God, they still seemed to have a very moist, and comfortable climate with a great deal of vegetation. However, those in the ark emerged to a flood-ruined land with some, but very little vegetation. In fact, it was possibly due to the lack of vegetation that they were given permission to eat animals, as they had additional clean beasts on the ark.


The third part of the stone age is called the Neolithic period, which began about 5000 b.c., and it is at this point where the interpretations of archeological finds and the Bible fall into greater agreement. With all the clay available to the post-diluvian societies, and the lack of large trees, they made mud-brick shelters, which, after a few heavy rains, disintegrated to nothing. Charles Clough points out where archeology assumes that each stage of building these mud huts represents a century, the first few more than likely represent a decade or less for each layer of mud huts. Man certainly experimented and his first mud huts were worthless. Afterward, he learned to fire his clay bricks and to affix them with a mortar for a more permanent dwelling.


When Noah and his family came down from the mountains from the east and moved into the Euphrates valley, there would have been far more water on the ground and far more rain, and much more temperate weather as a result. In Gen. 11:1–4, man built a city with a great tower. There is no reason to think that, immediately upon leaving the mountains that they built successful buildings, but, given their age and intellect, within 100–200 years, they were probably building a city which could withstand heavy rains.


In archeological sites in Jericho (Jericho is in Israel; not in the Euphrates valley), we have four Neolithic periods; two which were pre-pottery and two which had pottery. This would correlate with eventually discovering how to fire bricks to make shelters which would withstand rain. With the first group in Jericho, we have found massive defensive walls which have been built. After this wall was destroyed (perhaps by invaders and likely by heavy rains), the second period of time still lacks the ability to make pottery, but they did make realistic portraits of human heads or skulls using clay for molding and shell inset for eyes. The next group in Jericho could make pottery. We do not know if these were new groups which supplanted to original peoples, or whether these ages represented technological advances.


It may occur to you, how can man successfully figure out how to build a city in Shinar (the Euphrates Valley), and then, hundreds of years later, experiment once again with building? Technology is built upon technology. There is not a person in the world today who could build, from raw materials, an airplane, a car or a computer. When man dispersed, some families had some knowledge of this; and others had some knowledge of that. When man began to spread out, he faced different environments with different building materials. Whatever shelters were built to begin with, may have reflected expediency, a loss of some technology and a new set of raw building materials. Expediency may have been the biggest factor. This occurs today. On a plot of ground, a person may first set up a trailer; then he may build a frame home, and then he may build a brick home. It is not that this person has never heard of bricks before and discovers them right before building his brick home; he started out simply lacking in resources, and did what he could. This could explain mud huts which were later replaced by better mud huts, which were later replaced with brick huts, all occurring not over a century or two, but over a few decades (as Clough suggests).


Prior to the Neolithic Age (the "New Stone Age"), people appeared to live in small migrating groups which had no permanent settlements but they did seem to return to the same areas sometimes for generations. They were concerned with hunting and agriculture and some had hunting camps which were separate from these settlements.


Neolithic peoples domesticated wild animals and were familiar with irrigation and storage insofar as agriculture was concerned. Certainly, most communities would do both, and some would specialize, depending upon the personal preferences of the group. Neolithic villages have been discovered in the mountains of northern Iraq, indicating that these small, roving bands had begun to settle down in one place, but away from Shinar.


Recall that these groups of peoples had heard about the antediluvian civilization as well as about the true God and it is quite possible, if not likely, that to the unbelievers, they became mixed up. After all, most people who are unsaved and liberal in their religious background today see Buddha and Confucius and Jesus Christ as very similar, if not essentially the same; and a part of man's search for God. Christians with any amount of doctrine understand that Buddha and Confucius represent not a search for the truth but a rejection of the truth. Because of the oral history which they had received, we would expect early, post-deluvian man to be polytheistic, which he is. Each had their own gods and goddesses (which would be slightly different because (1) information was passed down orally for several centuries and (2) each group had its own language). We find evidence that there would be a power shifting to the local cult and the officiators of that cult. The result as often what we call a temple-town, when many of the citizens worked for the local temple in one way or another. Some built religious towers (ziggurats). We would expect this because even though the fallen angels who cohabited with man in the antediluvian era have been put into chains of darkness, there still remains perhaps millions of fallen angels who desire to interact with man. They are able to do this through pagan religions. We would further expect to see a power struggle and to see power shift into the hands of these cults, and that is what history seems to bear out.


These groups also began to record their language in writing and kept economic records. Most developed arithmetic and most recorded their myths, legends, ethics, history, laws, songs and literature. So, by Abram's time, many of these villages and temple-towns had put their language into writing. There were certainly struggles between groups for land and buildings and some groups conquered other groups, causing an amalgamation of language, religion and customs. Although it seems that Neolithic man was pretty consistent in their polytheism, or worship of many gods, we also have evidence of ancient monotheism as well. In fact, what we would expect is monotheism predating polytheism, and for polytheism to be based, in part, upon Gen. 6 (the intermingling of man and angelic beings).


At the end of the Stone Age and the beginning of the Bronze age, we have since inserted the Chalcolithic period, which is the copper-stone period. This is around 4000 b.c. or so when copper was used extensively.


Interestingly enough, I came across at least 2 different secular sources which, prior to 10,000 b.c. there was an Ice Age which was later followed by higher ocean levels (which would be inline with the Biblical narrative).

Traditional View of the Ages

10,000 b.c.

8000 b.c.

6000 b.c.

4000 b.c.

2000 b.c.

Stone Age

Bronze Age

Mesolithic Period

Neolithic Era

 

 

The Iron Age begins circa 700 b.c.


Chapter Outline

Charts, Graphics and Short Doctrines


During the early part of the 3rd millennium b.c., we have these groups becoming city-states. In fact, for all intents and purposes, these were the first empires. As their groups became larger, they became more efficient at providing the daily necessities and it became more important to provide some sort of defense against those from without. We see in history a simultaneous population explosion, better organized religions, and better defined boundaries. We find these early empires scattered throughout the Near East, in Egypt, Elam and the cities of the Mesopotamian area, Syria and Israel. We have found huge palace complexes and temples and evidence of large-scale commerce, including trade-agreements, cooperation and competition. Much of civilization seemed to be centered about what is known as the fertile crescent; the area in and about the Tigris and Euphrates rivers (which, according to Gen. 11:2, was where civilization began). With the almost impenetrable Arabian desert in the south (which likely became more and more inhospitable with time), trade between empires often involved routes going through Palestine.


It is during this time which we have also discovered sea-faring nations out on the Mediterranean and the Aegean Sea. It is not inconceivable that their were even a few imitation arks where groups of people built their own ark and launched themselves out into the seas. Satan has always been a great counterfeiter of the truth.


Throughout the 3rd millennium b.c., Egypt had developed into an empire, having gone through dynasties 1-6 prior to Abraham's visit to Egypt. One of the first, great historical records is a plaque of slate, called the Palatte of Narmer which dates back to 3000 b.c., depicting the conquest of Lower Egypt by King Narmer of Upper Egypt (however, he was unable to subjugate it but his successor, Menes was). There is still much confusion surrounding this and some believe that these two are one and the same person. When Mennes united the two sections of Egypt, he proclaimed Horus, the sky god, the national god, and then claimed that he was the incarnation of Horus. Most of the pharaohs of the next several dynasties did likewise.


Introduction: The second half of Genesis Chapter 11 is the genealogy of Abram. Very likely that this portion of the Word is written by Abram. It would be likely that the previous chapter and a half was written by Shem. This is because Shem's line is covered in more detail than the other lines, which occurs not just because this is the line of Abram but because it would be natural for Shem to know his line better than anyone else. I've put together a genealogy chart which shows, if the figures are correct in this chapter, that most of those in Abram's line were alive at his birth. Noah was. It was from these direct sources that Abram wa able to gather information on his line. Note that this line is similar to, but not an exact copy in vocabulary, to the line recorded in Gen. 5.

 

These the Generations [or, Descendants] of Shem: When Shem was 100 years old, he sired Arpashchad two years after the flood; and Shem lived 500 years after he sired Arpashchad and he had other sons and daughters. [Gen. 11:10–11]


Arpashchad means boundary; its stem means to define or limit. This means that Shem lived for 502 years after the flood up until Abram. In fact, he outlived all of his ancestors, with the exception of Eber, including Abram, down until Isaac. This is according to the numbers in the Masoretic text (the Hebrew); the Greek text adds nearly 900 years to the extent of this line. .

 

When Arpashchad had lived 35 years, he sired Shelah. And Arpashchad lived 403 years after he sired Shelah and he had other sons and daughters. [Gen. 11:12–13]


Shelah means missile, weapon, or sprout. Certainly it was used in the latter sense when it came to naming Shelah. Certainly a playful use of the language, considering that many in this line were farmers.

 

When Shelah had lived 30 years, he sired Eber. And Shelah lived 403 years after he sired Eber and he had other sons and daughters. [Gen. 11:14–15]


Notice that we have a gradual decrease of age of the line of Abram; Noah lived for almost a century, Shem for over half a century, and now these two for less than half a century. Also, circumstances like this would give rise to ancestral worship, because the oldest living ancestor would have been alive prior to the floor (eight of them would be) and Noah would have talked to God. Therefore, the older the person, the closer he would be to the truth as taught directly by God. Now this is not necessarily true; but it gives a good reason for this kind of thinking.


Eber is almost the exact same Hebrew word as Hebrew. It means region across or beyond. He may have been born when the inhabitants of the earth first moved to Shinar and settled there in Gen. 11:2.

 

When Eber had lived 34 years, he sired Peleg. Then Eber lived 430 years after the birth of Peleg and he had other sons and daughters. [Gen. 11:16–17]


Eber was the last person to live almost a half century. He was alive even up until the births of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. He outlived Abraham and all of his progeny up until Isaac.


The age decline is actually quite simple to explain.

Explaining the Age Decline

1.   Adam through Noah lived approximately a millennium. There was intermarriage, as everyone had to be descended from Adam, but the human line was exceptionally strong.

2.   After the flood, the line had been narrowed to just Noah's line, with some outside genes provided by the wives of his sons (and they could have been sisters). Nevertheless, the limiting of the genetic pool and the post flood environment cut their life expectancy in half.

3.   Right before Peleg was born, the languages were separated, which limited the gene pool even further for each family. Each family had a limited group from which to sire children. This reduced the gene pool into the hundreds immediately.

4.   From one group of ancestors, we have the dog family and we have dogs which had been so interbred, that the difference between breeds is phenomenal. However, this breeding has isolated certain characteristics and qualities and most mutts will be healthier, stronger and more intelligent than the stocks from which they came. From these several families of Gen. 10, we have groups of people who look completely different; they all have common ancestors, bu the language division caused a sharp division of physical and intellectual traits.

5.   The combination of further inbreeding and continued degeneration of the earth, with the proliferation of bacteria and disease, the age of man decreased into the hundreds and finally to approximately 70.

The age decline is an exponential decline, which is what we would expect.


Chapter Outline

Charts, Graphics and Short Doctrines


As we have seen, Peleg is almost the same as the word for to divide, and the two words are used together in Gen. 10:25. Logically, this means that immediately before the birth of Peleg, God separated the languages of man.

 

When Peleg had lived 30 years, he sired Reu. Then Peleg lived 209 years after the birth of Reu and he sired others sons and daughters. [Gen. 11:18–19]


Reu might mean friendly; they are similar words, but not quite the same.

 

When Reu had lived 32 years, he sired Serug. Then Reu lived 207 years after the birth of Serug and he sired other sons and daughters. [Gen. 11:20–21]


Serug is very similar to the word from tendril or twig. It means descendant or younger branch. This indicates that Serug was probably not Reu's first-born.

 

When Serug had lived 30 years, he sired Nahor. Then Serug lived 200 years after the birth of Nahor and he sired other sons and daughters. [Gen. 11:22–23]


Nahor means snoring. Abraham's brother will be named after him.

 

When Nahor had lived 29 years, he sired Terah. Then Nahor lived 119 years after the birth of Terah and he sired other sons and daughters. [Gen. 11:24–25]


It is a very tough call as to who wrote this portion of God's Word. The reason is that it stops with Terah, possibly indicating that Terah is still alive at the writing, but it has the age of death of several people who died after Terah (Shem through Eber). It is even possible that Noah or Shem wrote this; or that these were public records and the ages were inserted after these people died. Because this line leads directly to Abram, my guess would be Eber, Terah or Abraham who recorded this portion of God's Word, working from the public records and leaving some ages blank.


Terah possibly means tree, but that is very uncertain. Terah could also mean traveler Footnote .

 

When Terah had lived 70 years, he sired Abram, Nahor and Haran [Gen. 11:26]


This is where the line stops temporarily. For this reason, it would sem that Terah or Noah recorded most of chapter 11:10–26. Terah had to have some spiritual maturity because he named Abram exalted father. Nahor means snoring and Haran means possibly to throw down or break. The next verse seems to indicate a new author or a break in the time of writing.


Over the past few weeks, as I have concentrated on a group of about 10 lessons, I have been pondering two questions: what does the line of Shem mean, if anything; and what happened during this time period? Somewhere between 300–1200 yeas go by, and we know that (1) man settled in the Euphrates Valley and built the tower of Babel and (2) God confused the languages and scattered mankind.

Given that Peleg’s name is given as being significant in Scripture, let me postulate that, the names of some of these men may have reflected the eras in which they lived.

The Meaning of the Names in Abram’s Line

Name

BDB Meaning

Smith’s Meaning

Discussion

Shem

name

name

I don’t know that Shem may be better defined by his sons and where they ended up: Syria (Aram), Chaldea (Arphaxad), parts of Assyria (Asshur), of Persia (Elam), and of the Arabian peninsula (Joktan). Semitic languages find their origin with Shem.

Arpachshad

I shall fail as the breast: he cursed the breast-bottle

stronghold of the Chaldees

Also spelled Arphaxad. His name is less defined than the others. Most place him in the Chaldees.

Cainan

decree, statute

 

This is the missing man from the Hebrew text. During his time, man began to set up a governmental system with laws.

Shelah

sprout

a petition

It was determined that, if there are laws, there must be a system of judicial prudence, where men could go and petition on their own behalf.

Eber

the region beyond

the region beyond

Eber’s name suggest that his family had begun to think about the land further out. This suggests the generation which left the mountains and moved into the Euphrates valley.

Peleg

division

division

Peleg was alive around the time that the languages were confounded. For him to receive this name at birth, he would have been brought up in a family which, for the first time, spoke a different language than the rest of civilization.

Rue

friend

friend

People had to choose what they would do, when languages were confused. They banded together by language and by clans, calling one another friends (implying a cultural similarity based upon familiar similarities).

Serug

branch

branch

Now that these families began to spread apart, Serug was viewed as a branch of the family.

Nahor

snorting

snorting

His name also means hoarse, dry, hot; and may describe the climatic conditions for several decades of the Euphrates valley.

Terah

delay

station

Terah was said to be an idolater in the Bible, and is the reason that Abram had to separate himself from Terah.

Abram

exalted father

a high father

Abram is known as the father of the Jewish race.

Quite obviously, this is only a theory, but one which I believe to be solid. For the Hebrew line, the meaning of a man’s name reflected the thinking of his father, which reasonably mirrors the world in which he finds himself. Therefore, the names of some of these men tell us something about the world in which they grew up.


 

The Generations [or, Descendants] of Terah: Terah was the father of Abram, Nahor and Haran (Haran was the father of Lot). Then Haran died before his father Terah in the land of his birth, Ur of the Chaldeans. [Gen. 11:27–28]


 

Why Historical Dates are Difficult to Calculate

      The calender has been changed several times since the beginning of time. If I recall right, it was not until the 1700's when we got an accurate solar calender (?)

      In the Bible, we have several places which indicate that there is a 360 day year (obviously, not a solar year)

      The numbers and ages given in the Bible go back to manuscripts written thousands of years ago and copied and recopied dozens of times. There is clear indication that the numbers found in our Bibles may not be accurate, as the Massoretic text does not agree with the Septuagint or with the Alexandrine Text, both of which differ from the Massoretic Text by nearly a thousand years. See the doctrine of O.T. Manuscripts (not finished yet !!)

      Archeology has certain presuppositions which are based upon evolutionary and geological theories, which affects the time table which they adhere to.

For these reasons, it is difficult to affix a date to Abraham's birth. Thieme places it at 2161 b.c.; the Scofield Bible uses the date 1950 b.c., and most scholars find dates between 2050–1650 b.c. ZPEB places it between 2000 and 1900 b.c.


Chapter Outline

Charts, Graphics and Short Doctrines


Became the father of is not exactly accurate and a change in the translation which I have been using. Begot is closer to became the ancestor (or, the antecedent) of. Son is not precisely son but it refers to progeny, as in Christ was the Son of David. I returned to the more familiar translation because it is probably accurate at this point in characterizing the relationships.


Lot means envelope, covering, concealment. Because of his father's death, Lot, Abram's nephew, was likely raised as Abram's younger brother, almost as the baby of the family. As such, like the baby of most families, he was possibly spoiled and the incidents which follow in Genesis seem to indicate that Lot was used to getting his way and that Abram was used to allowing his youngest "brother" to choose.


We do not know with any certainty exactly where Ur of the Chaldeans was. Up until 1850, it was assumed that this was Urfa, which was near Haran in Southern Turkey. Others place it at Ura' near Haran. What seems to be the most accepted interpretation is Ur is Uri, in modern Tell el-Muqaayyar. Excavations in this area have produced a layer of water-laid clay, indicating a great flood; cemeteries dating back to 2500 bc; and the ruins of a ziggurat (which is a temple tower built to heathen gods). Later, this city was ruled by neo-Babylonian (Chaldean) kings. Abram moved from here to Haran with his family (Gen. 11:28, 31).


Archeology has uncovered a great deal of information concerning the society in which Abram's family possibly lived prior to this move (this may have been the society which developed after Abram and company left). They have found the remains of five temples which appeared to have surrounded the Ziggurat of king Ur-Nammu in a semi-circle. The largest was 300' x 180' with thick, fortress like walls, and it was dedicated to the moon-god. To give you the concept of the strength of the materials, there were water fountains there which are still standing; the water troughs were coated with bitumen. There were temple kitchens with still-functioning ovens.


What has also been discovered at this site are spacious, comfortable homes. Whereas, excavations which found homes dating to 600 b.c. were fairly simple, one-story, three or four room houses, built around a courtyard, these in Ur, dating back to the earth 4th millennium b.c. were two-storied villas with 13+ rooms, the bottom floor built of sturdy fired brick and the top with mud brick, the walls coated with plaster and whitewashed. The front door led to a small entry hallway into an inner court, which had paving (not unlike, in concept, to our tiled entryways of the present), and then there was a reception room, kitchen, living rooms private rooms and a domestic chapel. A lavatory was hidden under the stone staircase, which led to private and guest rooms.


This was a very prosperous society, revealing great comforts and advances, including hymnals and mathematical tables which reveals formulas for the extraction of square and cube roots. This indicates, if this is from whence Abram proceeded, that he was not a simple Nomad, but a man emerging from a highly organized, advanced city, leaving to move toward the promised land and away from the idolatry which abounded.


Again, this is disputed, partially due to the fact that the Septuagint does not read Ur of the Chaldees but rather land of the Chaldees. Further it is cited that Abram lived like a nomad with his family and herds, but this would be expected because he left this area.


Acts 7:2, 4 tell us that Abraham lived in Mesopotamia prior to living in Haran, so this indicates that either Ur was in Mesopotamia, Abram and company traveled through Mesopotamia on the way to Haran. Mesopotamia indicates the region between and around the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. Abram, to move from where we believe Ur to be up to Haran, would have traveled along the Euphrates River, through Mesopotamia (which can indicate a very large area; or it can indicate the northwestern portion along the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, whereas Babylon can refer to the more southeastern area. In either case, he traveled through and lived in the Mesopotamian area.

 

And Abram and Nahor took wives for themselves. The name of Abram's wife was Sarai; and the name of Nahor's wife was Milcah, the daughter of Haran, the father of Milcah and the father of Iscah. [Gen. 11:29]


This is the first time for awhile that wives are named (we do not even know the names or the origins of the wives of Noah and his sons). Because Haran is specifically said to be the father of Milcah and Iscah here, and in v. 29, he is the father of Lot; it is possible that these are two different Haran's. On the other hand, it is more likely that Nahor is marrying his niece, as there were no prohibitions concerning that during that time. Milcah could possibly mean royalty (what father hasn't called his daughter princess?). Thieme suggests that Sarai means contentious or bitchy. Rotherham supports this. Terah had at least two wives and Sarai was Abram's half sister by the other wife (Gen. 20:12).

 

And Sarai was barren; she had no child. [Gen. 11:30]


Sarai's barrenness was a problem in the ancient world. At that time, it was a sign of prosperity to have a lot of children. God had commanded man to fill the earth and, as we have seen in our study of genealogies, most families did just that, often having 10–20 children. Sarai's barrenness is also mentioned in Gen. 16:1–2.

 

And Terah took Abram his son, and Lot, the son of Haran, his grandson, and Sarai, his daughter-in-law, his son Abram's wife; and they went out together from Ur of the Chaldees in order to enter the land of Canaan; and they went as far as Charan and settled there. [Gen. 11:31]


Haran, Lot's late father, spells his name with an h (ה ; called he) and Haran, the place (called Charran in the KJV), is spelled with a ch (ח ; called het). Many translations do not differentiate between the two and called them both Haran. Charan was an important city on the trade route between the Mediterranean and the Mesopotamian area and it is unclear in this context as to how established it was. It was a flourishing city during the 3rd millennium b.c., which would place it in this time-frame, either immediately before or after. If Terah and family came from a burgeoning, advanced city, it would be likely that they would be most comfortable staying in such a city. We are not given a reason for their move and we do not know if God had told them or just caused them to move. God moved me to Houston from California; however, He did not directly contact me and tell me to move. Living in two large cities would indicate that in order to do any trading and carry on any kind of commerce, Terah and family would have to learn the languages of those in that area. Being major cities, there may be have up to two or more languages spoken in each area and some variations of each.

 

And the days of Terah were 205 years and Terah died in Charan. {Gen. 11:32]


One chronology places this time period as being circa 2086 b.c. Abram leaves his father, apparently after he had died Charan, and moves to the land of Canaan. He obviously keeps in touch through whatever methods were available.


One expositor, Dr. C.D. Ginsburg, believes that this verse has been transposed. Abraham did not write this as a diary, recording each day as it came. In fact, it is possible that Eber died after Abram passed away. The previous section was a family tree, likely put together by Abraham from previous records, possibly with Eber’s date left open to be filled in as his predecessors passed away.


If the dates given are accurate (which has been discussed), then the flood occurred roughly 300 years previous to this. This obviously plays havoc with archeological data, since it is likely that we can push civilization back at least to 4000-3000 b.c. If the chronology of the Septuagint (or the Alexandrine Text) is accurate, then we are roughly a millennium after the flood. This seems more reasonable to me.


Internal Links

Beginning of Document/

Chapter Summaries

External Links

Genesis Chapter Links



Genesis 12 has been completely reworked and expanded, including the entire word-by-word Hebrew exegesis. It may be found here: (HTML) (PDF) (WPD). It is highly recommended that you go to that study instead of this one. All of the material found here is included in that study. These chapters are being completed one-by-one and will eventually supplant this incomplete study of Genesis.


Genesis 12


Genesis 12:1–20


Maps, Charts and Short Doctrines:

 

       v.      6           The Doctrine of Theophanies

       v.      6           Links to the Doctrine of Theophanies


Introduction: Genesis 12 is the first time it is noted that God spoke to anyone since Noah emerged from the ark, roughly 400 years previous. Abram has just about traveled as far as he could go and still be near fresh water. The next movement is going to take Abram away from the Euphrates and Tigris Rivers toward the coast of the Mediterranean Sea into the land of the Canaanites.

 

Now the Lord said to Abram, "Come forth from your country, and from your relatives and from your father's house, to the land which I will show you. Furthermore, I will make you a great nation and I will bless you, and make your name great; therefore, and you must be a blessing. [Gen. 12:1–2]


The first verse indicates that his father is still alive when these words are first spoken. Abram had to separate from his father in order to grow spiritually. He had to get out from under his father’s shadow and his father’s influence. We know that there is a problem in this regard, as God told Abram these things in Ur, yet Abram came as far as Charan (Haran), with his father and, apparently, with several members of his family, and he stopped right there. In one ear, God is telling Abram one thing, and in the other, his father Terah is modifying God’s commands.


The emphasis here is not on Abram, but upon God’s mandates, God’s promises, and God’s grace. The idea is, God is telling Abram, “Here is your pathway, here is your destination; and I will greatly bless you if you get onto that pathway.”


What begins here is the Abrahamic covenant. Abram has done nothing of note to that time, because this information is not recorded. He is certainly a believer in Jesus Christ and has some semblance of maturity since God is speaking to him, but God is giving him an unconditional covenant. That means, that what God promised him, God would perform, regardless of his behavior. The last phrase is in the Qal imperative; God has ordered Abram to be a blessing.


Prior to this, God spoke to individuals and worked through individuals. God spoke with Adam and Eve, with Cain to place judgement upon him, with Enoch (we assume), with Noah and with Abram. Approximately 2000 years of human history have passed and God's Word has revealed a very small number of individuals who God spoke to. The Bible does not give us an organization for the worship of God, beyond sacrifices (which are barely mentioned) and the prohibition of murder (along with its punishment) at the exit of Noah and company from the ark. We have followed the line of Seth through the line of Shem, but this is the first time we have the promise of blessing upon an ancestral line.


God's first promise to Abraham is that He would bless him. One way that he would be blessed is with a child. Children were considered a great blessing in the ancient world and Abram will wait for a quarter century past this calling before he is blessed with a child. Before he dies, Abraham will have been blessed with several children, all born past the time that he was able to sire children. Abraham will also be blessed materially; Gen. 13:2 indicates that his material wealth had become great. He had another wife after Sarai had passed away (Gen. 25:1); he had servants (Gen. 24:2, 35); and vast possessions (Gen. 24:35). Abraham was blessed spiritually. He left a spiritual legacy equaled by very few, which will be the study of the next few chapters. In fact, God blessed Abraham in every way (Gen. 24:1).


Just as many religions and individuals claim Jesus Christ as exemplary of what they teach and/or believe in, Abraham is claimed by many religions. Judaism rightly claims them as their racial father, but many of them have not followed him into regeneration. Abraham is second only to Mohammed in Islam, insofar as prophetic importance is concerned. The Koran, their religious book, contains 188 references to Abraham. We as Christians look to him as our father in faith; and Paul several times referred back to the fact that Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him as righteousness. In fact, Abram’s name (Abraham) will be found over 100 times in the New Testament. God has clearly made Abraham's name great.


Two great cities are mentioned in connection with Abram: Ur of the Chaldees and Charan. We know far more about Abram than we know about either of those cities. There were many nations around the world during the time of Abram—can you name a single king over any of these nations from that time? Probably not. But you know about Abram. From that era, there is no man whose name is more famous. And what did he do? He believed God. He trusted God. He did what God asked of him.


As a nation, there is no nation like Israel upon the earth. The Jews, dispersed prior to the birth of Christ; dispersed again in the first century a.d., their nation destroyed and occupied for the next 1900 years, still exist as a people and as a nation. No other group of people can make a claim like that. Even though Jews look very much like the people whose nations they inhabit, they are a separate people and will remain a separate people, a people peculiar to our God. God has made Abraham into a great nation.

 

And I will bless those who bless you and the one who curses you I will curse; and by means of you, the races of the earth will be blessed." [Gen. 12:3]


One of the most fascinating studies is the history of the Jew in relationship to other nations. Spain, early on, in the 1400's (?) was a dominant world power and it had a fair and honorable attitude toward the Jews as a whole. Following Torquemada and the Spanish inquisition and their whole scale persecution of the Jews, it sunk to a third rate power, never to revive its greatness. Britain and the United States, with their fair and tolerant attitudes toward the Jewish people, have prospered greatly, the United States beyond any other country in history. God promised this to Abram 4 millenniums ago, and God has kept His Word throughout the ages, throughout the variance and change in dispensations.


Through Abram, through his progeny, the Jewish race, we as Gentiles have been blessed, as they recorded and preserved God's Word with accuracy unknown in the rest of the literary world. The Jews destroyed cancerous nations which threatened to severely pollute the world. Through the Jews, we have our Savior (and their Savior) our Lord Jesus Christ. The contributions of all other races put together are minuscule compared to the preservation of God's Word and the incarnation of Jesus Christ.

 

So Abram went forth as the Lord had spoken to him, and Lot went with him. Now Abram was 75 years old when he departed from Charan. So Abram took Sarai, his wife, and Lot, his brother's son, and all their substance that they had gathered, and the souls that they had gotten in Haran; and they went forth to go into the land of Canaan; and into the land of Canaan they came. [Gen. 12:4–5]


Obviously, Abram had enjoyed some prosperity in Charan, as he no doubt did in Ur. He was not a simple nomad with a tent and a couple relatives, but a businessman who did business in great ancient cities. He was a man with great possessions, and an owner of slaves. Speaking of which, note that God did not tell Abram to release his slaves prior to his trip to the Holy Land, a some means of purification. Abram purchased or traded for slaves in Charan, as a result of his prosperity, and nowhere in the Bible is he castigated for having slaves. See the Doctrine of Slavery (HTML) (PDF) (WPD). Something else that God did not tell Abram to do: “Sell all your goods and give them to the poor.” See the Doctrine of Wealthy Men in the Bible (HTML) (PDF) (WPD).


Scofield lists the end of chapter 11 as wasted years in Charan. God has perfect timing and Abram has some spiritual growth to go through. The incredible high points of his spiritual life all occur when he is 100 years old and older. He still has another 25 years to go until that time. Those will be years of testing and preparation; and they will be years of spiritual growth. God has given Abram a promise that he will be the father of a great nation. God has to give Abram some time to believe this. He is in a half hopeless situation—his wife is barren—God will wait until Abram is in a totally helpless situation before He begins to fulfill His promises. For Abram's part in God's plan, there needs to be a quarter of century of faith in God's Word.

 

And Abram passed through the land as far as the site of Shechem, to the oak of Moreh. Now the Canaanite was in the land. [Gen. 12:6]


At least 11 generations of Canaanites have been brought into the world. It would be possible, with uninhibited growth, with the size families which are given, to have millions of Canaanites extent at that time. In fact, at the average number of children in each family being 5, this allows us enough generations to have 10,000,000 Canaanites in existence at that time (these are not all the Hamites, as we have another three sets of families at least which have come from Ham, allowing approximately another 30 million.


Theologians, so that they can agree with the presuppositions of archeology, have thought that several generations are missing in the enumeration of the line of Shem. However, each missing generation essentially multiplies the population by 5 (using that as a median value for the number of persons in a family, a very conservative figure). There would be some attrition due to famine, pestilence, disease and likely warfare and crime (although none of these things have been mentioned). From the standpoint of reasonable population amounts and mathematics, there is unlikely many gaps, if any, in Shem's lineage in Gen 11.


In one verse, Abram has moved to the southern portion of Judah, 3/4ths of the way to Egypt from Haran. They have traveled perhaps 500 miles, on the simple command of God to come out to the land of Canaan.

 

And the Lord appeared to Abram and said, "To your descendants I will give this land." So he built an altar there to the Lord who had appeared to him. [Gen. 12:7]


Prior to the incarnation, Jesus Christ appeared to man in a number of different forms; primarily as a man or as an angel, but also he was the burning bush and the cloud and the pillar of fire in Exodus. These appearances prior to the incarnation are called theophanies.


This is basically thrown together from the internet.

The Doctrine of Theophanies

"What is a theophany? What is a Christophany?"


Answer: A theophany is a manifestation of God in the Bible that is tangible to the human senses. In its most restrictive sense, it is a visible appearance of God in the Old Testament period, often, but not always, in human form. Some of the theophanies are found in these passages:

 

1.    Genesis 12:7-9-The Lord appeared to Abraham on his arrival in the land God had promised to him and his descendants.

2.    Genesis 18:1-33-One day, Abraham had some visitors: two angels and God Himself. He invited them to come to his home, and he and Sarah entertained them. Many commentators believe this could also be a Christophany, a pre-incarnate appearance of Christ.

3.    Genesis 32:22-30-Jacob wrestled with what appeared to be a man, but was actually God (vv. 28-30). This may also have been a Christophany.

4.    Exodus 3:2 - 4:17-God appeared to Moses in the form of a burning bush, telling him exactly what He wanted him to do.

5.    Exodus 24:9-11-God appeared to Moses with Aaron and his sons and the seventy elders.

6.    Deuteronomy 31:14-15-God appeared to Moses and Joshuah in the transfer of leadership to Joshua.

7.    Job 38-42-God answered Job out of the tempest and spoke at great length in answer to Job's questions.


Frequently, the term "glory of the Lord" reflects a theophany, as in Exodus 24:16-18; the "pillar of cloud" has a similar function in Exodus 33:9. A frequent introduction for theophanies may be seen in the words "the Lord came down," as in Genesis 11:5; Exodus 34:5; Numbers 11:5; and 12:5.


Some Bible commentators believe that whenever someone received a visit from "the angel of the Lord," this was in fact the pre-incarnate Christ. These appearances can be seen in Genesis 16:7-14; Genesis 22:11-18; Judges 5:23; 2 Kings 19:35; and other passages. Other commentators believe these were in fact angelophanies, or appearances of angels. While there are no indisputable Christophanies in the Old Testament, every theophany wherein God takes on human form foreshadows the incarnation, where God took the form of a man to live among us as Emmanuel, "God with us" (Matthew 1:23).

Links to the Doctrine of Theophanies

What is a theophany (from Answers . Com)?

http://www.answers.com/topic/theophany


From the Quartz Hill School of Theology:

http://www.theology.edu/journal/volume3/theoph.htm


H.P. Liddon on Anticipations of Christ in the Old Testament

http://www.gospelpedlar.com/articles/Christ/liddon4.html


The Trinity in the Old Testament (HTML) (PDF) (WPD).

The first treatise is from Got Answers . Org http://www.gotquestions.org/theophany-Christophany.html


Chapter Outline

Charts, Graphics and Short Doctrines


A theophany might be a vision, a dream or real life. We do not have the occasional appearance of our Lord throughout modern history because we have the written Word of God, in its entirety. This is a blessing beyond comprehension which most Christians take for granted. We often think that if we were alive in our Lord's time, we would drop everything and follow Him because we could see, touch and listen to Him. Realize that very few people, comparatively speaking, spoke to our Lord and were guided specifically by Him during His incarnation. Those that had that opportunity often rejected Him and those who didn't often failed. With God's Word, it is just as though we have our Lord Jesus Christ right with us every step of the way to guide us in our lives and in our every decision. No previous dispensation had such blessing and guidance. Furthermore, we all participate in God's plan. In past dispensations, there were heroes of the faith, many enumerated in Heb. 11. However, in this dispensation, everyone of us has purpose, meaning and definition. Our lives can count as every bit as much as Abram's. We are given more specific guidance than Abram and we are given the Holy Spirit, our Helper, to guide us through this life. We do not have to go to the Bible and try to ascertain its contents for ourselves; God has provided men with the gift of pastor-teacher who will guide us through His Word. It takes just one thing; our choice, our free will, our volition.


Abram has revealed a certain amount of spiritual maturity. When God told him to move, he moved. This was not likely Sarai's choice, which would make this a difficult trip to make. They had been living in a rather cosmopolitan city and they were very well off. Why fix was ain't broken? Sarai was obedient to her husband, but it is likely that she gave her opinion once and awhile as to what a fool idea this was. In order for Abram to be made into a great nation, he will need to have a piece of geography. So God takes him to the land of Canaan and points out the land that he will possess through his progeny.


Abram does not have to be told what to do; just like Noah, he builds an altar to God; not something which is worshipped, just as we would not worship a church building or a pew, but an instrument of worship where from Abram would offer animal sacrifices. We do not know how specific God was in what He expected in the way of animal sacrifices. This was certainly revealed to the many generations previous to Noah on down to Abram, but not recorded in Scripture. It was certainly not near as defined as we will find in Exodus. The primary purpose was to teach the gospel. This is how God the Holy Spirit explained salvation to unbelievers. An innocent animal was slain on the altar to God. When a person at God consciousness, then as today, desired a relationship or knowledge of God, then God the Holy Spirit took the spiritual information available to this person, often revealing it through the animal sacrifices, and made it real and understandable to them. At that point they either followed Abram into salvation by believing God or they did not.

 

Then he proceeded from there to the mountain of the east of Bethel, and pitched his tent with Bethel on the west and Ai on the east; and there he built an altar and called upon the name of the Lord. [Gen. 12:8]


Abram has led his family across the land of Canaan and he has almost gone through it without recorded incident. His family might have an interest in stopping and settling somewhere and Abram needs some guidance. What does he do from here? He followed God into the land of Canaan and he's walked through the land of Canaan.

 

And Abram journeyed on, continuing toward the Negev. [Gen. 12:9]


God obviously gave Abraham some direction, as he continues to head south (the Negev is the southern portion of the land of Canaan). God leads us in various ways. Sometimes there are circumstances which seem to allow us only one direction. Abram will be led in this manner next.

 

Now there was a famine in the land; so Abram went down to Egypt to sojourn there, for the famine was severe in the land. [Gen. 12:10]


Abram and family were not starving because they had great wealth and herds. However, for anyone who has lived off their savings, you can live off the interest, in which case you have money which will theoretically last you into perpetuity and you can delve into the principal, which means that you have a limited time that you can survive until the savings are depleted. Abram realized that with his slaves and family that he was beginning to dig into the principal, and, although he might be able to survive for several years on his present possessions, Abram is not that kind of a person. He looks to experience growth in his wealth and possessions and, when that does not occur, he takes steps to correct the situation. Sometimes you might find yourself spinning your wheel in a town where there is a depression; some people will pick up stakes and move to a more prosperous city in order to survive. This is what Abram was doing.


Now this is fine. It is not outside of God’s will to think, to reason or to depend upon past experience. However, as we will see, going to Egypt is outside of God’s will for Abram. What should Abram have done? He should have depended upon God. God wanted him in the land of Canaan, so he should not have left the land of Canaan apart from God’s direction.

 

And it came about when he approached Egypt, that he said to Sarai his wife, "Listen, if you would: you are a woman beautiful to behold and it will come about when the Egyptians see you, that they will say, 'This is his wife'; and they will kill me, but they will let you live. Please say that you are my sister so that it may go well with me because of you, and that I may live on account of you." [Gen. 12:11–13]


Abram does not appear to be as concerned about losing Sarai as he is concerned about his own life period. This deception which he has planned, would, in an area where men are honorable or dishonorable, would, if anything, encourage their courting and/or taking of Sarai as a wife or as a mistress. Since she is exceptionally attractive, the ruse planned by Abram does nothing but preserve his own skin. If he is revealed to be her husband and faces residents of Egypt who desire her, there are two possibilities: (1) if they are honorable, they will do nothing; and, (2) if they are dishonorable, they will kill Abram and take her from him. If, as Abram plans, they purport him to be her brother, then if they are honorable or dishonorable, they may still try to take her, probably by ingratiating themselves to Abram first. So no matter what the scenario, which Abram has certainly thought out, his concern is not for Sarai or for his losing Sarai; it is for the saving of his own neck that he wants to enact this duplicity.


Thieme translates the latter portion of v. 11 "Thou art a knockout!" Often God tests us two or more times concerning the same thing. We have Abram and his half-lie here, Moses and the no-water test, Peter when Christ was crucified. God often places us in identical circumstances several times and allows us to choose our path. Those who have read or heard this story know Footnote that Sarai is Abram's half-sister, so what is the big deal with Sarai telling anyone who wants to know that she is Abram's sister, which is possibly true, rather than saying that she is his wife? In other words, what is wrong with this picture?

Abram’s Half-Lie about Sarai

1.    God has caused Abram to come down to the land of Canaan (Gen. 12:1—7)

2.    Due to a famine, a circumstance beyond his control, Abram is going to Egypt (Gen. 12:10)

3.    However, there is no indication that God is pushing Abram to go to Egypt.

4.    Sarai is Abram's half-sister, both having the same father (Gen. 20:12)

5.    In saying that she is Abram's sister, she (and Abram) are both telling a half-truth, which is the same as a lie. The relationship which is important and foremost is their marriage. Being half-siblings is not a matter of importance.

6.    Furthermore, in all actuality, we do not even know if Gen. 20:12 is the truth; Abram is trying to talk himself out of a situation and there is no reason to think that he is not lying in this portion of God's word.

7.    God has already promised that He will make him a great nation and He will give to Abram's seed the land of Canaan which they just went through (Gen. 12:2,7).

8.    Abram is not concerned about Sarai's welfare, he is concerned about saving his own skin (Gen. 12:13).

9.    How is it possible for Abram to die if he has no children and God has unequivocally promised to make him a great nation and to give the land of Canaan to his children? Abram, even if he was out of God's geographical will, which is a possibility, but not necessarily the case, has the best life insurance policy possible. God has promised things to him and his children, and since he has no children, then God will have to keep him alive until he does. It is that simple.

10.  Our problem here is a half-lie or a full-blown lie; and, more importantly, lack of trust in Jesus Christ.

 


Chapter Outline

Charts, Graphics and Short Doctrines


Why does Abram do this? If he is identified as her brother, any man who has an interest in Sarai, who is very attractive, will want to make the best impression possible. Killing a woman's brother is not the way to her heart, generally speaking. If anything, a man with an interest in Sarai will ingratiate himself to Abram and Abram will be in no danger. However, if Sarai identifies herself as Abram's wife, then there would be only one person who would stand between a stranger and Sarai and that person would be Abram. Under those circumstances, Abram's life is automatically in danger if they happen to run into any heathen who is attracted to Sarai.

 

And it came about when Abram came into Egypt, the Egyptians saw the woman, that she was very beautiful. In fact, Pharaoh's officials saw her and praised her to Pharaoh; and the woman was [seized and] taken to the house of Pharaoh. [Gen. 12:14–15]


Abram was correct about Sarai's beauty; she was so attractive that Pharaoh's officials thought her to be good enough for the Pharaoh. This would be a rare woman indeed who would be appropriated for the Pharaoh. There is also another phenomenon of female beauty: in a roomful of brunettes, a blonde will get all the attention of the males therein; and vice versa, a lone brunette in a roomful of blondes will receive the most accolades. It is very likely that most of the women in Egypt were darker skinned than Sarai, so that she would stand out and be easily noticed.

 

Therefore, he [Pharaoh] treated Abram well for her sake; and gave him sheep and oxen and donkeys and male and female servants and female donkeys and camels. [Gen. 12:16]


Abram hit the jackpot; not only was his life spared due to his duplicity, but Pharaoh was trying so hard to make a good impression, that he showered Abram with wealth. Abram had to have a great deal of wealth to begin with or else the Pharaoh would not have given him so much. The Pharaoh has to give Abram enough to impress him and to ingratiate himself to Abram. If Abram was a simple nomad with a tent and a couple relatives and a couple animals, then Pharaoh could have cut back on these gifts by 80% and that would have been impressive enough for Abram.

 

But the Lord struck Pharaoh and his house with great plagues because of Sarai, Abram's wife. [Gen. 12:17]


This tells us that God is not going to fulfill His promises to Abram through just any woman; these promises are going to be fulfilled through Sarai. Otherwise, it would not be important for Abram to keep Sarai. Her gene pool is just as important as Abram's. There will be other races which proceed from Abram's gene pool; but only Jews will come through Sarai. The Pharaoh was obviously very successful in his position; he had men on patrol who procured beautiful women for him. He had a great deal of wealth which he could graciously give away. However, in the midst of all this human prosperity, suddenly trouble enters into the Pharaoh's home. We are not told what occurred exactly; we only have the word for plague. That is the Hebrew word nega‛ (עַגֶנ) [pronounced NEH-gah] and it means to strike a blow, to inflict a wound. Metaphorically, it is used of God in sending divine punishment or divine wrath, often in the form to disease, to some entity. This is not the same word used repeatedly in Exodus in relation to Pharaoh (it is used one time in Ex. 11:1). Struck is the cognate verb; making this verse onomatopoetic.


When disaster struck the Pharaoh's household (we are not told exactly what occurred; we could reasonably guess that, since his house was struck, but not the country in general, that this would very likely be a contagious disease), Pharaoh examines his life, perhaps prays to his deities, to find what he has done wrong in his life. Insofar far as he can determine, the only thing which he has done which is different is to bring Sarai into his household. What Abram has done is wrong; however, God will use that as a witness to Abram's God. We are not told any specifics (including the time frame here, whether Sarai was there for a week or a month), but no doubt Abram recognized this as God's work. Since Pharaoh's gods could do nothing about this, he certainly recognized the power of Yahweh himself. This is one of the many times one of Egypt's pharaohs were given a chance to believe in Yahweh.

 

Then Pharaoh called Abram and said, "What is this you have done to me? Why did you not tell me that she was your wife?" [Gen. 12:18]


It is even possible that God came to Pharaoh in a dream and explained what the problem was. Pharaoh was certainly upset over the plague which affected his household; and being the most powerful man in the land, with access to all the Egyptian gods, he was powerless against this plague-judgment from God. The narrative is brief at this point, which indicates that Pharaoh was possibly visited by God (a fact outside of the realm of the author's—Abram's—experience), and therefore not recorded. Notice that in v. 17, God strikes Pharaoh and his house; v. 18, Pharaoh calls Abram and asks why he didn't tell Pharaoh that Sarai was his wife. With no intervening information, Abram was probably not the person who told Pharaoh that Sarai was his wife. Throughout this chapter, the only information that we know is what has happened to Abram personally (which is why he is probably the author). Therefore, someone else must have told Pharaoh that Sarai was Abram's wife. One distinct possibility is Sarai herself. These judgments happen in such a way as to indicate to Pharaoh that his impending nuptials to Sarai is problematic, so it is very possible that he interrogated her directly.


God has taken Abram's lie, Abram's lack of faith, and has turned it into a witness for the truth. Unfortunately, we will not know until we arrive in heaven the eternal result of this witness to Pharaoh, whether he believed in Yahweh or not. Because he sends Abram away, it is likely that he did not.

 

"Why did you say, 'She is my sister' so that I took [or, began to take] her to me as my wife? Now then, here is [lit., behold] your wife; take her and go." [Gen. 12:19]


Took is in the Qal imperfect, which can mean that this is not a completed action, allowing for the translation began to take. In other words, this marriage was probably not consummated. The KJV reads so I might have taken her to me to wife. Following the first verb for take, we have two prenominal suffixes: the third person feminine singular (translated her) and the first person common singular (translated to me). Take is the same Hebrew word as took, except that it is in the Qal imperative, second person singular; it is an order for Abram to take his wife. Go is also in the Qal imperative, second masculine singular; meaning Abram in particular is ordered to leave.


We have a parallel situation in Jonah. Jonah, when told to give the gospel to the Assyrians, whom he hated, he hopped in a ship and went in the other direction. When this ship suffered attack by God, it was the crew which acted honorably and the believer who did not. Here, the Egyptian Pharaoh is acting honorably whereas Abram, a believer, did not. His pretext for lying is given in v. 13; however, God cannot make of him a great nation unless he has a wife and that wife is apparently going to be Sarai. So even if Abram's fear is certainly a real possibility, God is not going to allow Abram or Sarai to be killed, because He has promised Abram, and that which God has promised, He will perform.

 

And Pharaoh commanded [his] men concerning him [Abram]; and they sent [or, escorted] him away, with his wife and all that belonged to him. [Gen. 12:20]


There is nothing said about Pharaoh taking back the gifts that he gave to Abram. These gifts were certainly given with strings; that is, he gave those things to Abram in order to make a good impression with Sarai; however, what has occurred caused the Pharaoh enough fear and respect to allow Abram to leave without any retribution. Pharaoh recognizes God's power (which even Abram, in this situation, does not) and acts accordingly. Abram, who should recognize God's power, does not and behaves accordingly. This is again one of the many times in Scripture when an unbeliever shows more character than the believer. We as the believers, have the truth and are related to the God of the universe. Our behavior should exemplify this. Unbelievers in our periphery should be able to see that we have character and honor; when they show more character and honor than we show, we are a disgrace to our Lord Jesus Christ. And this is not snooty, self-righteousness, but a behavior which reveals recognition that we are related to the God of the universe.


Internal Links

Beginning of Document/

Chapter Summaries

External Links

Genesis Chapter Links



Genesis 13 has been completely reworked and expanded, including the entire word-by-word Hebrew exegesis. It may be found here: (HTML) (PDF) (WPD). It is highly recommended that you go to that study instead of this one. All of the material found here is included in that study. These chapters are being completed one-by-one and will eventually supplant this incomplete study of Genesis.


Genesis 13


Genesis 13:1–18


Maps, Charts and Short Doctrines:


Introduction: Chapter 13 concentrates upon the relationship between Abram and Lot. There relationship is more like siblings than it is like an uncle and a nephew. Lot is the somewhat spoiled youngest child and Abram is the indulgent, overprotective older brother. However, in this chapter, we come to a point where they can no longer function together, even though they have tremendous wealth between them.

 

So Abram went up from Egypt to the Negev [or, the South country Footnote ], he and his wife all that belonged to him; and Lot with him. [Gen. 13:1]


Abram is out of God's geographical will because he had gone down to Egypt, as he was in the Negev less than a year previous. God has in the past given Jews to Egypt as witnesses innumerable times. All the surrounding countries had some benefit of their close proximity with the Jews; but Egypt seemingly more than the rest. There will be millenniums of contact between the two countries, sometimes antagonistic, but always as a witness as to the true God of the Universe, Yehowah of the Jews, Jesus Christ. God always allowed the witness of the Jews to stand, even when they were not as honorable as the Egyptians to whom they were witnessing to (as in this case). God also blessed Egypt greatly when Egypt honored their relationships with the Jews (as we will see with Abram's great grandson, Joseph, who helped rule over Egypt). However, when Egypt did wrong by the Jews, God witnessed to Egypt with the application of His justice, as He did in the exodus.

 

Now Abram was very rich in livestock, in silver and in gold. [Gen. 13:2]


Even though Abram has made some serious mistakes in judgement, God still prospered him and God did not withdraw his promises from Abram. We, as believers today, understand some moral issues and the obedience required, and we recognize the severe mistakes Footnote that King David made, but what Abram did was a serious mistake as well. This was covered back in chapter 12; but bear in mind, to know God's will and not to do it; to know God's Word and not to believe it, these are very serious sins. And yet, note how prosperous Abram is. This verse indicates that in the mist of a famine (Gen. 12:10), Abram is a very rich man. In fact, he and Lot are so wealthy that it is too difficult to keep track of their own individual wealth. This is Abram's third test (he was tested once when he was told to leave his father's house; he did, thereby passing the test. He was tested again when he arrived in Egypt and could have either trusted God for protection or he could have lied about his relationship to Sarai; that test he failed). Abram's third test will involve Lot and their individual possessions.

 

And he went by stages from the Negev as far as Bethel, to the place where his tent had been at the beginning, between Bethel and Ai, to the place of the altar, which he had made there formerly; and there Abram called on the name of the Lord. [Gen. 13:3—4]


When it is possible, most translations give a word-for-word translation of the Hebrew into English (which would include cognizance of the suffixes and verb forms). This has its good and bad points. On the good side, a reader does not presume there are 3 Hebrew words translated by one English word, or vice versa. On the negative side, sometimes some meaning is lost. The KJV says that Abram went on his journeys from the south and The Emphasized Bible has Abram going on his way, by removals, from the south. The Hebrew word is maçça‛ (מַסַּע) [pronounced mahs-SAH] and it refers to the picking up and removal, or the plucking up of tent pins, or the breaking of camp. Obviously, what this means is that Abram and company travel, camp, remain perhaps for a night, a few days, a few months, and then pick up stakes and move on. By stages I believe, would be the best way to translate this word and its preposition. Abram was supposed to be traveling thorughout the promised land, but God has not contacted Abram since those last instructions, so Abram is wandering about, to some degree.


Therefore, Abram returns to where he had previously built an altar to God and sacrificed to Him. It is possible that this was the last time that Abram was in God's geographical will, but it is possible that God needed for Abram to be a witness of sorts to the Pharaoh in Egypt. Even if he had been out of God's geographical will, God still used this to His Own advantage.


Puzzled by what God's will was for his life, Abram decided to sacrifice to Yahweh and then to proclaim the character of God. Even though Abram’s wealth has increased dramatically, Abram probably feels as though he was wasted a great deal of time going down to Egypt for no purpose. The increase in wealth was a fluke, not the result of a series of business decisions which resulted in prosperity.

 

Now Lot, who went with Abram, also had flocks and herds and tents. Also, the land could not sustain them while dwelling together; for their possessions were so great that they were not able to remain together. [Gen. 13:5—6]


Their wealth had grown to such a substantial size that in the unpopulated wilderness land, there was not enough grass and grazing land for them to both use in the same area; and their livestock, apparently, kept getting mixed together. The tents which Lot possessed means that he had a great many servants, and/or hired help, and these many tents were their quarters.

 

Furthermore, there arose a strife between the herdsmen of Abram, and the herdsmen of Lot. Also the Canaanite and the Perizzite were then dwelling in the land. [Gen. 13:7]


The conjunctions throughout are the same, but for literary purposes, I have used words such as furthermore and then rather than just the word and. Because Lot and Abram grew so prosperous, there was not enough land for their respective flocks to graze upon. Certainly, in traveling together, their flocks became mixed. All this would cause some difficulties between them and their slaves and/or hired help were involved in altercations over these problems.


This verse also tells us where one of the groups from Gen. 12 moved to; the Canaanite moved into the promised land and were close to where Moses and Lot were sojourning. The Perizzite is not mentioned in the table of nations, however. This is their first mention in the Bible. They are mentioned several times throughout the early Old Testament as those peoples who populated Palestine prior to the conquests of Joshua. They are among the list of ten nations who occupied the promised land given to Abram in Gen. 15:18—21. There are two possible mentions of the Perizzites in secular literature, but that is only a guess. They might be the Pirati from an Egyptian vocabulary list and they might be named in a fragment from Amarna.


All of this is a quiet premonition of what is to come. The Canaanites and the Perizzites are a full-blown people. They are two peoples who populate the land of Palestine. Abram is a Jew—the first Jew, a rich man, but a man with a nephew with whom he did not get along, and a barren wife. Here they were guests of the Canaanite and the Perizzite in a land of Palestine. Over a half a millennium later, the children of Abraham will defeat and destroy these tribes of Canaanites and Perizzites, as ordered by God because of their consummate degeneracy.

 

So, then, Abram said to Lot, "Please let there be no strife between us [lit., between me and between you] and between our herdsmen, for we are men [and] brothers. Is not the entire land before you? I ask you to separate yourself from me; if to the left hand, then I will go to the right, and if to the right hand, then I will go to the left." [Gen. 13:8–9]


Now Abram is behaving as though he has some doctrine in his soul. He knows that God has given him the land so no matter what Lot does and no matter what direction Lot goes, God has given Abram the land. Therefore, it is not important for Abram to choose. It has been customary in most families to allow more leniency when it comes to the youngest in the family and I have known several people who have been jealous of this (my self and my other brothers excluded); they feel that the youngest has been given too much or is allowed too much slack. Here, Lot, who is more like Abram's younger brother than a nephew, is certainly indulged by Abram and given the first choice.


Application: Abram also recognizes something that most Christians do not: even though we are commanded to love one another, it is not necessary for us to spend any time together. There are some people who are Christians and they rub you the wrong way and you rub other Christians the wrong way. You will be spending eternity in heaven together and will have more than enough time to enjoy each other's company there; so you do not need any additional time here on earth. At that point in time, the fault for your dislike of one another will not be important because that will not exist. What is important is that we bear no mental attitude sins against another believer and that we do not engage in any sort of personal conflict with another Christian. We have been washed by the same blood, forgiven and loved by the same God, and are positionally equal. We have the same exact opportunity to glorify God, which we do by not harboring mental attitude sins toward one another. If it is necessary for us to spend time apart, then that should be on the agenda for our lives. Abram passes this test entirely.

 

So Lot lifted up his eyes and beheld all the circuit [or, the round] of the Jordan [or, according to the Septuagint, all the country around Jordan] that everywhere was well-watered ([this was] before Yahweh destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, [it was] like garden of Yahweh, like the land of Egypt, as you enter Zoar). [Gen. 13:10]


Lot does not have the benefit of the promises of God. He can only operate on human viewpoint. He cannot determine which way it is that he should go, not does he even seem to realize that God has a plan for his life also. He is used to taking the best and that is what he will do.


It is obvious that this area is much nicer than it was several centuries later. During Joshua's time (after which some scholars allege that Genesis was written), this portion of the Jordan valley was absolutely desolate, the antithesis of the description given in this verse. It would make no sense for an author to make up a story like this, when everyone during and after Joshua's day could see that this land was barren. Since that time, however, in the 19th and 20th centuries, archeologists have shown that there were several populous cities in this area previous to Joshua's time for centuries. Since it is highly unlikely that cities would be founded in a barren desert, this would fit with Abram's description which he gives here (in his writing). As Scofield put it, the Spade of the archaeologist has served again and again to confirm the Scriptures, not to deny them. Footnote This also tells us that when God told Abram that He would give the land to him, that He was not speaking of some forlorn desert or some barren waste. The land was beautiful and fruitful.

 

Then Lot chose him all the land around Jordan, so Lot took up stakes [and went] forward [possibly, eastward], and they separated themselves, each man from his brother. [Gen. 13:11]


There is the problem here that the Hebrew text reads from the east. Furthermore, this is also true of the Greek and Latin texts as well. If Abram and Lot are still up by Hebron, then the traditional locations for Sodom and Gomorrah would have been decidedly southward (moving a little to the east). However, they would not be moving from the east. Due east from where they were in Ai would be where the Jordan river empties into the Dead Sea. This is what it is like today; but that is not necessarily the way things were during the time of Abram. So, we have several problems and possibilities.

Problems and Possibilities of Lot’s Movement

1.    The text reads that Lot moves from the east, from the front, or from what occurs before.

2.    We do not know where Abram and Lot are right at this moment. In recent verses, they were near Bethel and Ai and possibly they have gone as far as Shechem. This puts them in central Israel, putting traditional locations of Sodom and Gomorrah south from them (and quite a distance south, by most determinations).

3.    Straight in front of Abram and Lot, if they are near Bethel, would be an oval of land about the Salt Sea (which is 1285 feet below sea level), south and south-east, of them. Some scholars place the valley of Jordan that Lot traveled to below the Dead Sea, which is due south and slightly east from Ai. Actually, we do not know with certainty where Ai was. It is always mentioned in the context of Jerusalem, Bethel and the Jordan, so we would likely place it northwest of the Dead Sea, in the eastern foothills of the hill country. Whereas Lot moved toward the Dead Sea, the other direction for Abram would put him in the hill country not far from where Jerusalem would be located.

4.    Therefore, we also have the problem of the topology, where they look down into the Jordan valley. They could have traveled to some land quite nearby Bethel and Shechem to do this, but that would place Sodom and Gomorrah at the northern portion of the Dead Sea.

5.    We do not even know if there is a Dead Sea at this time; this may all be a river leading into the Red Sea.

6.    If this is where Abram and Lot are, then Lot would be moving to the east or to the south to get to Sodom and Gomorrah (assuming that they were located anywhere along the west side of the Dead Sea (or the Jordan River, if the topology is different).

7.    An alternative view is—and this is making many assumptions—that Abram and Lot have moved quite a distance from Bethel and Ai and Shechem, already traveling southward along Dead Sea (or Jordan River).

8.    They essentially have to go all the way to the southern part of the Dead Sea (or the southwestern part of the Dead Sea) in order for Lot to move from the east to the Jordan River valley.

9.    What suggests that these theories may be reasonable is:

       a.    There are ways to indicate that a person goes in the direction of any compass point; so, the text could have simply read that Lot moves westward. However, if Abram and Lot are, at this time, in far eastern territory (south or southeast of the bottom of the Dead Sea), then speaking of Lot going from the east would make perfect sense.

       b.    In studying a topography map of this area, it does not seem out of the question that, at one time, the Jordan River flowed all the way into the sea, and that there is no Dead Sea.

       c.     This would suggest that the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah was so great that, it ended the flow of the Jordan River into the sea, and what formed from this was the Dead Sea.

10.  All of these are just assumptions. Only the first one can be tied directly and reasonably to the text.

 


Chapter Outline

Charts, Graphics and Short Doctrines


It is sad that Lot and Abram have traveled all this distance together and have been prospered beyond the point where they can even keep track of their wealth without altercation because they have been prospered by God. Abram has been prospered because he is a mature believer (or moving in that direction) and Lot has been prospered due to his association with Abram. God has His reasons for them to separate; likely it is so Abram can grow more spiritually; plus God has a plan for Lot.


Since the land that Lot chose was so beautiful, it is likely that others would have seen this land and claimed it for themselves. This would be the land occupied by the great degenerates of that time. They were degenerate to a point that they were a cancer which had to be totally eradicated. God has allowed a lot of degeneracy to last, as we have seen in the United States, intervening only occasionally to wipe out segments of our population (not all of whom are degenerate, of course).

 

Abram fixed his dwelling in the land of Canaan, but Lot fixed his dwelling among the cities of the land around Jordan, and moved his tent as far as Sodom. Now the men of Sodom were evil and sinful, against [or, before] the Lord to a great degree. [Gen. 13:12—13]


The valley or the land around Jordan is, in the past few verses, the circle of Jordan. Owen gives this as the valley of Jordan (which is where it could refer to). Apparently from where they stood, the valley of Jordan, or the area around Jordan appeared to be a large circle or an oval. This would be visible as a circle (or oval) of green from where they stood, indicating that where they were was elevated somewhat with a reasonable vantage point over the entire valley (however, we do not have the verb to look down or the verb to go down, found in any of this context).


Lot has, for all of his life, been raised among people who were generally moral and likely believers in Yehowah. It is this sort of life that he has taken for granted. He obviously lacks the spiritual growth of Abram and looks out for number one. He moved in the direction of the green valley where there appears to be an over abundance of grazing land and water. He gave no thought to the people among whom he would be sojourning because he has taken honorable behavior on the part of others as normal. He will become vexed by the peoples of this area, as the NT KJV puts it.


The men of Sodom are described as evil, which is the Hebrew word raʿ (רַע) [pronounced rahģ]. The adjective and the noun and the verb in the perfect third masculine singular are not always distinguishable; however, here as an adjective, it means evil, malignant, unkind, vicious. This is modified by the phrase, against God exceedingly or against God to a great degree (the adverb follows God, therefore rightfully goes with that phrase rather than with evil or sinful. Abram and Noah could be classified as sinful, but they were not against God. Evil places man in direct opposition to God. This displays a mind set and a lifestyle, different from those who do wrong and recognize their mistakes.


Sinful is the Hebrew word chaţţâʾ (חַטָּא) [pronounced khat-TAW] and without the vowel points, it is indistinguishable from the noun and the verb, just like evil (however, in the case of evil, even the vowel points are the same). This word means to miss the mark, to do wrong, to behave sinfully. Every man of God in the Bible was sinful and we are all sinful, before salvation and after salvation. Even our attitude does not always separate us. It is pointed out that we should behave in a manner befitting our relationship to Jesus Christ; but that belies the fact that some of us do not; even the intention is not there. In the case of the men of Sodom, their entire mental attitude and lifestyle is portrayed as being against the Lord. The lamed (ל) preposition takes up 17 columns in BDB, so this is very much a matter of interpretation. Before, against, in front of, towards, with reference to, etc. are some of the many varied uses in our language to represent the lamed preposition. The adverb (actually, it is a masculine noun used as an adverb) is the word meʾôd (מְאֹד) [pronounced me-ODE] and it functions as a superlative, classified as a masculine noun, but it modifies adjectives and objects. It can be translated force, might, exceedingly, to a great degree, greatly, very. This alludes to the excessive lifestyle of the Sodomites.


A brand new world will open up to Lot. Lot bears witness to the fact that raise up a child in the way that he should walk, and when he is old, he will not depart from it. Lot may have been spoiled and used to having his way and used to looking out for number one, but when faced with the baseness and evil of the Sodomites, even he will become disgusted. Those without the proper training would become a Sodomite just like them. Lot, however, will reveal his training, despite his own personal lack of character, in his inability to assimilate with those of Sodom.

 

And Yahweh said to Abram, after Lot had separated himself from him, "Lift up, if you would, your eyes and look from the place where you are—northward, southward, eastward and westward—for all the land which you have before you, I will give it to you and your progeny forever. [Gen. 13:14–15]


Abram has possibly climbed up the foothills of what will later to be Jerusalem area, northwest of the dead sea, and he has climbed to a point where he could see quite a bit of the land of Israel. It is very possible that this is the same place where he and Lot stood back in v. 11. From this vantage point, God shows Abram as far as he can see in all directions, including in Lot's direction, all this land was to be his. In fact, this land covenant goes beyond Abram's ability to see. Today, this area suffers from years of warfare and lack of rain. During Abram's time, every direction that he can see is beautiful and green. Abram had to separate from Lot to get to this point. Lot, although far superior to the morally bankrupt peoples of the Jordan valley, would only hold Abram back. This is given to Abram’s descendants unconditionally. Abram does not have to do anything in order to receive this land from God.

 

"And I will make your descendants as the dust of the earth; so that if anyone can number the dust of the earth, then your descendants could also be numbered." [Gen. 13:16]


God’s unconditional promise to Abram continues. Abram's seed (the literal translation) will be practically innumerable. We have two sets of seed for Abram: the spiritual and racial Jew and hidden in this promise, but revealed in the church age, Abram's spiritual seed, those who follow him into regeneration. That would be us believers of the church age; we are Abram's spiritual seed. All the believers of the church age and all the believing Jews throughout time will be a huge number. It is countable because God knows exactly how many particles of dust cover the earth at any given instant and this does not mean that the number of particles of dust equals the number of believers in time; there is an analogy being drawn here and the number of believers throughout time will be as uncountable by man just as the particles of dust on the earth are uncountable by man. Even Abram's racial seed will be uncountable. His line will not die out. Every generation has a large number of clearly identifiable Jews.

 

"Rise! Go up and down in the land, to the length thereof, and to the breadth thereof, for to you I will give it." [Gen. 13:17]


Abram has already transversed a great deal of this land. He began in Haran, almost as far north as you can go on the Euphrates and the Tigris rivers, and he was transversed the land from North down to Egypt; throughout the entirety of this land, and far more; all of it was given by God to Abram.

 

Then Abram moved his tent and came in and dwelt among the oaks of Mamre, which were in Hebron; and there he built an altar to Yahweh. [Gen. 13:18]


Abram is directly between the Dead Sea (or where the Dead Sea will be) and the Mediterranean. He understands his relationship of Jesus Christ as well as any man on the earth and he is constantly building altars to God.


Internal Links

Beginning of Document/

Chapter Summaries

External Links

Genesis Chapter Links



Genesis 14 has been completely reworked and expanded, including the entire word-by-word Hebrew exegesis. It may be found here: (HTML) (PDF) (WPD). It is highly recommended that you go to that study instead of this one. All of the material found here is included in that study. These chapters are being completed one-by-one and will eventually supplant this incomplete study of Genesis.


Genesis 14


Genesis 14:1–24


Maps, Charts and Short Doctrines:

 

       Introduction            What We Learn from Genesis 14


Introduction: Chapter 14 as of this point in time is a total mystery to me. There are several questions: who wrote it? Chronologically it fits here, perhaps, but why is it here? This seems so different and so removed from the rest of Genesis. As J. Vernon McGee said, the continuity of Genesis would be just as intact if this chapter were not there. From reading some commentaries, a rarity for me during the first draft, let me offer you the following reasons for this chapter:


Gen. 14 is one of the most unusual chapters in Genesis, if not in the entire Bible.

What We Learn from Genesis 14

      This will give us a much fuller understanding of the person of Abraham with respect to his wealth, his character, his bravery, his assets. Also, the number of his servants and staff is revealed. Furthermore, the loyalty which his people have for him is apparent in this chapter.

      This chapter gives us a better clue as to the recording and the transmission of Scripture. There are a few places in here where a copyist, or, most likely, Moses, added a word of explanation or clarification. Very likely, vv. 3, 7, 8 and 17 have these points of clarification. Moses, being a genius of history, having been raised in the palace of the Pharaoh and receiving a royal education, a recognizing the need of the readers to properly interpret Scripture, would have been the most likely person to add those words of clarification, by the guidance of God the Holy Spirit. My point is that it appears as though someone recorded this information and then someone added those few words to it. Logically, this would be Abram as the original writer and Moses as the one who copied these things down.

      This chapter gives us a better idea as to the state that the world was in. This is the first war mentioned in the Bible. This is a major war, but the organization with which this is done and the existence of arms, indicates that this was a normal occurrence in life. At some point in time when the groups of peoples from Gen. 11 dispersed, there were going to be some territorial disputes. Certainly, one group would find a picturesque spot along a river with fresh water and an abundance of wild game and good land for farming and settle there, and another group would come along and either camp nearby or decide that they would like that particular place, and there would be a skirmish. Remember, that they could not communicate as a whole (although, with man's genius, it was apparent that some learned to translate from language to language at a very early time). Just like today, if you took one hundred people at random and dropped them into the middle of Germany, one or two could get by with their German skills and another 2 or 3 might be able to say a few German phrases to begin with, but the vast majority would be without linguistic resource. It was the same here.

      We understand how various nations interacted. Alliances were formed, nations were conquered, protectorates were formed, nations paid tribute; and, from time to time, a protectorate would rebel.

      We will actually learn some important principles of military function: the importance of training, surprise, and the proper use of mass.

      We have a better idea as to the state of the world and corruption of man, the violence that he was capable of soon after the flood.

      Most importantly, we learn that Jesus Christ controls history.

These few points of introduction only apply to the first portion of Gen. 14. There is a second portion which will require as much explanation as the first portion.


Chapter Outline

Charts, Graphics and Short Doctrines