Genesis by Gary DeLashmutt (2019)

The Two Humanities Continued

Photo of Gary DeLashmutt
Gary DeLashmutt

Genesis 4:16-5:32; Genesis 11:10-32

Summary

A continuing study of the two humanities delving into the genealogies of Seth and Cain. As human society develops, we see both man's greatness in being made in God's image and man's corruption through godless egotism with a moral trajectory downward. We are all born into the line of Cain spiritually, but we can choose the line of Seth by entrusting ourselves to the God of the Bible. We all leave a legacy ? what step of faith can we take with the Lord TODAY toward a godly life legacy?

Listen Now
1x
0.5
0.75
1.0
1.25
1.5
1.75
2.0
2.25
2.5

Keywords

Download Materials

Outline

Introduction

Reiterate "beginnings" theme of conflict, including between the two humanities (3:15).  Last week, we saw this prediction begin to be fulfilled by Cain and Abel.  In 4:16-5:32, we see these two humanities continuing through the genealogies of Cain and the line of Seth (Abel's "replacement").

This passage was as far as I got as a new Christian when I decided to read the Bible.  It's too bad, because there's some very rich and very problematic material here.  Let's study at the spiritually rich material first, and then we'll look briefly at the problematic material.

Cain's Line

Read 4:16.  This is where we left off last week.  Cain's line begins with him departing from the presence of the Lord, choosing to wall himself off from God (even though he falsely accused God of doing this to him in 4:14), and building a life for himself apart from God.  This sets the tone for the rest of his line.

Read 4:17a.  "Who was Cain's wife?"  The answer is really quite simple – his wife was one of his sisters (5:4 tells us that Adam and Eve had other sons and daughters).  Isn't this incest, which the Bible forbids?  Yes and no.  "Yes" in the technical sense that Cain married his sister.  "No" in the sense that given that God's design was for the human race to all descend from the first couple, there is no other possibility (other than for Cain to have sex with Eve!).  Is this why God didn't forbid incest until much later?

Read 4:17b-22.  How should we assess Cain's line? 

On one level, there is much here that is morally neutral or even good.  Animal husbandry, music, and metallurgy – these are technological and cultural contributions that are essentially good.But when we look more closely, we see some things that are troublesome, even sinister.

God commanded Cain to be a nomad for the rest of his life (4:12b), but Cain rejected this command by building a city, and naming it for his son.  This seems to be a deliberate attempt to forge an identity and create a legacy based on human achievement rather than on God.No reference to God in their accomplishments.  People are busy doing things, creating things, building things, having children, etc. – creating a way of life and pursuing a set of values in which God is absent or largely irrelevant.  They may have given lip-service to God,This suspicion is confirmed when we get to the "hero" of this line, Lamech.

Notice that he took two wives (re-read 4:19), the first recorded polygamist – perverting God's monogamous design for marriage (2:24).

The names of his wives and daughter suggest that he was a sensualist.  "Adah" means "ornament."  "Zillah" means "shade," possibly referring to her thick head of hair.  "Naamah" means "loveliness."  Lamech evidently viewed women primarily as objects, in terms of their physical attractiveness.

Then there is the song that Lamech sings to his wives (read 4:23,24).  Remember the song that Adam sang to Eve (2:23) which honored her as his companion and partner in life (see also 1 Pet. 3:7 ". . . grant her honor as a fellow heir of the grace of life . . .")?  How different this song is!  Lamech wants his wives to know what will happen to them if they don't do whatever he says.  If he has killed a younger man for wounding him, what can they expect if they cross him in any way?What an accurate picture of fallen humanity!  This is what we see when we study human history – this contradictory combination of greatness and wickedness.  Humans still retain God's image, but are now deeply fallen.  We are capable of great things, but there is a tragic flaw which spoils our greatness.  Cain's descendants could manage their environment, but they couldn't manage themselves.  They use their power and intelligence to accomplish some great things – but they also use it to exploit others.  Left to themselves, the moral trajectory is downhill (leading to 6:5).  But there is a hopeful note when we turn to Seth's line . . . 

Seth's Line

Moses has arranged his material as a deliberate contrast between the legacies of these two lines – especially between the second, third, and seventh names (after Adam) mentioned.

Cain's legacy was his revolt from God's purpose for his life to pursue his own purpose (4:16).  Read 4:25 – Eve rejoices that God has given her another godly son, Seth ("appointed").  Seth's legacy was that he embraced God's appointment for his life.

The legacy of Cain's son is that he had a city named after him (4:17).  Read 4:26 – the legacy of Seth's son is that he influenced people to "call upon the name of the Lord."

The seventh (after Adam) in Cain's line was Lamech, who was a murderer who intimidated people through death-threats (4:23,24).  But when we come to the seventh name in Seth's line, we read something very different (5:21-24).  Enoch's legacy was that he walked with God and that God took him so that he never died (read Heb. 11:5).  To walk with God means to commune with God (3:8), to live according to His ways, to follow His guidance by faith.  By delivering Enoch from death, God indicated that walking with Him is the way to eternal life.

Application

To which humanity do you belong?  Remember that God says there are only two humanities (3:15).  Which humanity you belong to is not determined for you by your family or your culture; it is something you choose.  Moses is tracing these two family lines, but the Bible never teaches that your family determines your spiritual legacy.Which legacy do you want to leave?  It is tragically possible for you to belong to God's family/humanity, and yet pursue the legacy of the other humanity!  Otherwise, why would the Bible regularly warn Christians not to love the world-system (e.g., 1 Jn. 2:15,16)?  Those of us who know Christ must therefore consider which value-system we are actually pursuing, and which legacy we want to leave.  Consider the following legacy-comparisons:

"He didn't let anyone tell me what to do – he went his own way."  OR "He sought God's will for his life and followed God's ways."

"She experienced the best this world has to offer." OR "She walked with God and experienced the joy that comes from trusting God."

"She was known for her beauty, business success, political power, artistic talent, etc." OR "God changed her and worked through her life and words to draw many people to Himself."

"He learned how to gain power and use it to advance his own agenda." OR "He learned how to let God empower him to serve others and advance His agenda."

"He ignored his inevitable death and focused totally on this life." OR "He lived for eternal values, overcame the fear of death, and glorified God by the way he died."

What step of faith does God want you to take TODAY toward a God-pleasing life-legacy?  Life-legacies are built, not by dramatic one-time feats, but through day-by-day decisions (read Heb. 11:5).  Is it to give your life to Him (Rom. 12:1)?  Is it to reject and turn away specific values of Cain's line?  Is it to prioritize walking with God?  Ask God what step He wants you to take.  Ask godly friends who know you.

Problematic material

The lifespans of the people named in Gen. 5 (averaging about 900 years) seems too long, and therefore must be either distorted, symbolic, textually altered, mythical, etc.

The Hebrew (Masoretic) text is well attested.  The same author speaks of later characters (see Gen. 11) with shorter life-spans, so we should understand Gen. 5 as literal.  Like all of Genesis, this is historical narrative rather than myth.

The life-spans decrease rapidly after the Flood.  Was this because environmental factors affecting life-spans changed radically?  Was this the curse of Gen. 3:19 gradually taking effect?  Is this what God predicted in Gen. 6:3?

Other ancient writings have similar traditions of primeval longevity (although even longer than this).  Perhaps they are the corruption of something real which Gen. 5 accurately records (as with the Flood, as we'll see next week).

These genealogies seem too short – seemingly indicating that the human race has existed for less than 6500 years.  But anthropological evidence indicates that humans are many times this old.

By comparing other biblical genealogies we learn that they are selective, not complete.  "Begat" means "became the ancestor of."  They are like genealogical "highlights" that record certain lineages that are important to the biblical plot.  There is no compelling reason to believe that Gen. 5,11 are different in this regard.

Moses' records certain ancestors' ages before begetting, the lifespan after begetting, and their total lifespan.  But the fact that he does not give a total number of years for the line (as in Ex. 12:40 – from Egypt to Exodus, and 1 Kings 6:1 – from Exodus to building of the Temple) strongly implies that he is not describing all of the ancestors.  He probably records the above numbers to exhibit in these examples the lifespans of early human life – both before the flood (similar, static lifespans) and after the flood (decreasing lifespans).

The symmetrical structure of the genealogies in Gen. 4,5,10,11 implies that Moses is purposefully editing.  As we've seen, in Gen. 4,5, both genealogies have key 7th descendants – for contrasting reasons (Lamech vs. Enoch).  Also, each genealogy ends with a father having three sons (Lamech vs. Noah).  This regular scheme (similar to Matt. 1) suggests that the symmetry is editorially crafted rather than coincidental.

Therefore, as William Green said in 1890, ". . . the genealogies in Gen. 5 and 11 were not intended to be used, and cannot properly be used, for the construction of a chronology."