Genesis 4:25,26

PART NINETEEN:
THE BEGINNINGS OF THE MESSIANIC LINE

(Genesis 4:25 to Genesis 5:32)

1. The Birth of Seth

25 And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth: For, said she, God hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel; for Cain slew him. 26 And to Seth, to him also there was born a son, and he called his name Enosh. Then began men to call upon the name of Jehovah.

2. The Two Genealogies

(1) The inspired author first traces the Line of Cain through seven generations, and at that point he terminates the genealogy of the Cainites. Why did he trace the Line no further? Apparently because this was far enough to accomplish his purpose, namely, the explanation of the universal wickedness which spread over the whole earth as a result of the intermingling of the pious Sethites with the irreligious Cainites. By the time we conclude reading his few terse statements about the Line of Cain, especially those descriptive of Lamech and his offspring, we are bound to see that Cain's descendants were restless, proud, lustful, inclined to violence, and generally profane. Hence, in Genesis 4:25 the writer turns our attention to his basic purpose in giving us these early genealogical tables, that of recording the beginnings of the Messianic Line.

We must not lose sight of the fact that the fundamental design of the Holy Spirit in giving us the sacred Scriptures is that of providing the evidence to authenticate the Messiahship of Jesus (cf. John 20:30-31; John 16:13-14; Acts 3:13-18; Acts 10:39-43; Acts 26:22-23; 1 Peter 1:10-12). We sometimes wonder why all the genealogical tables scattered throughout the Bible, especially those in Genesis, in Chronicles, and in Matthew and Luke. They are there for a specific purpose: to give us the history of the Messianic Line, the Line of Promise, the Line destined to culminate, and to be fulfilled, in the Seed of the Woman (Genesis 3:15). The method of the author of Genesis is followed by practically all Bible writers, namely, that of taking up first the relevant collateral matter and then returning to the main theme. He first disposes of the Line of Cain, for the purposes as stated above, and then traces the line of Seth (substitute for Abel) through whom the Messianic Line is carried forward, concluding with Noah, a preacher of righteousness (2 Peter 2:5. Murphy [MG, 161]): This passage completes the account of Adam's family. Henceforth we generally meet with two parallel lines of narrative, as the human family is divided into two great branches, with opposing interests and tendencies. The main line refers to the remnant of the race that are on terms of open reconciliation with God; while a collateral line notes as far as necessary those who have departed from the knowledge and love of the true God. Green (UBG, 49): The whole arrangement bears evidence of adaptation and careful thought, and is suggestive of one author, not the combination of separate compositions prepared with no reference to each other. A further indication of the same sort, implying the original unity of these Chapter s, is their correspondence with the general plan of Genesis in respect to genealogies. Uniformly the divergent lines are first traced before proceeding with the principal line of descent leading to the chosen people. In ch. 10 the various nations of mankind sprung from the three sons of Noah; then (Genesis 11:10 sqq.) the line from Shem to Abram. Nahor's descendants (Genesis 22:20 sqq.), those of Keturah (Genesis 25:1 sqq.), and of Ishmael (Genesis 4:13 sqq.), before those of Isaac (Genesis 4:19 sqq.). Those of Esau (Genesis 36:1 sqq.) before those of Jacob (Genesis 37:2 sqq.). In like manner the degenerate and God-forsaken race of Cain is traced (Genesis 4:17 sqq.) before proceeding with that of Seth (ch. 5).

(2) On account of the similarities of certain names in both genealogical tables, some of the critics have supposed a mingling of both genealogies, or one common primitive legend in two forms. Lange (CDHCG, 261): Keil contends against this by laying emphasis on the difference of the names that appear to be similar, and the different position of those that are alike. For the sake of comparison we let the line of Seth immediately follow: 1. Adam (earth-man). 2. Seth (compensation or the established). 3. Enoch (weak man). 4. Cainan (profit, a mere like-sounding of Cain). 5. Mahalalel (praise of God [only an echo of Mahujael]). 6. Jared, descending, the descender (only a resemblance in sound to Irad). 7. Enoch, or Henoch, the consecrated. Here the devoted, or consecrated, follows the descending; in the Cainitish line he follows Cain. The one was the occupier of a city in the world, the other was translated to God; both consecrations, or devotions, stand, therefore, in full contrast. 8. Methuselah. According to the usual interpretation: man of the arrow, of the weapons of war. As he forms a chronological parallel with the Cainitic Lamech, so may we regard this name as indicating that he introduced these newly invented weapons of the Cainites into the line of Seth, in order to be a defence against the hostile insolence of the Cainites. It consists with this interpretation, that with him there came into the line of Seth a tendency toward the worldly, after which it goes down with it, and with the age. Even the imposing upon his son the name Lamech, the strong youth, may be regarded as a warlike demonstration against the Cainitic Lamech. Therefore, 9. Lemech or Lamech. 10. Noah, the rest, the quieter, or peacemaker. With Lamech who greeted in his son the future pacificator, there appears to be indicated in the line of Seth, a direction, peaceful, yet troubled with toil and strife. It was just such an age, however, as might have for its consequence the alliances and minglings with the Cainites that are now introduced, and which have so often followed the exigencies of war. This Sethian Lamech, however, forms a significant contrast with the Cainitic. The one consoled himself with the newly invented weapons of his son Tubal Cain, as his security against the fearful blood-vengeance. The other comforts himself with the hope that with his son there shall come a season of holy rest from the labor and pains that are burdened with the curse of God. In regard to both lines in common, the following is to be remarked: 1. The names in the Cainitic line are, for the most part, expressive of pride, those of the Sethic, of humility. 2. The Cainitic line is carried no farther than to the point of its open corruption in polygamy, quarrelsomeness, and the consecration of art to the service of sin. The Sethic line forms in its tenth period the full running out of a temporal world-development, in which Enoch, the seventh, properly appears at the highest point. 3. Against the mention of the Cainitic wives, their charms and their arts, appears in the Sethic line only the mention of sons and daughters. It serves for an introduction to the sixth chapter.

(3) Genesis 4:25-26. (a) Adam is now bequeathing his own image to his offspring, not the image of God that he had been originally by creation, but that image which has now become marred by sin. Of course, we have no means of knowing how greatly the descendants of Adam may have multiplied by the time he attained the age of 130 years (Genesis 5:3). In view of the penalty pronounced on Eve, however, his progeny must have been numerous (note Genesis 3:16unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy pain and thy conception). The Bible is not concerned with any of these numerous sons and daughters (Genesis 5:4), but only with the three who figure in the Messianic Development, namely, Cain, Abel and Seth. (b) Said Eve, God hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, hence the name Seth (the appointed, substitute, compensation). Murphy (MG, 162): For God hath given me another seed instead of Habel, He is to be instead of Habel, and God-fearing like Habel. Far above this consideration, God hath given him. This son is from God. She regards him as God's son. She receives this gift from God, and in faith expects him to be the seed of God, the parent of a godly race. Her faith was not disappointed. His descendants earn the name of the sons of God. As the ungodly are called the seed of the serpent, because they are of his spirit, so the godly are designated the seed of God, because they are of God's Spirit. The Spirit of God strives and rules in them, and so they are, in the graphic language of Scripture, the sons of God (Genesis 6:1). Note that God here, in the words attributed to Eve, is Elohim. (Was Mother Eve in any sense aware of the implications of the Divine oracle of Genesis 3:15, concerning the seed of the woman?) (c) To Seth was born a son, and he called his name Enosh (A.V., Enos), i.e., weakness, frailty,probably a sorrowful remembrance of Abel (Psalms 8:5; Psalms 90:3).

(4) Note especially Genesis 4:26 b. This closing sentence points up a remarkable event which took place in connection with the birth of Enosh: Then began men to call upon the name of Jehovah. The LXX gives it: He was the man who began to call upon the name of the Lord. This is a difficult passage. Lange (262) holds that what is narrated here must be the beginning of a formal divine worship. Murphy writes (162-164): The gist of the sentence does not lie in the name Jehovah. For this term was not then new in itself, as it was used by Eve at the birth of Cain; nor was it new in this connection, as the phrase now appears for the first time, and Jehovah is the ordinary term employed in it ever afterwards to denote the true God. As a proper name, Jehovah is the fit and customary word to enter into a solemn invocation, It is, as we have seen, highly significant. It speaks of the Self-existent, the Author of all existing things, and in particular of man; the Self-manifest, who has shown himself merciful and gracious to the returning penitent, and with him keeps promise and covenant. Hence it is the custom of calling on the name of Jehovah, of addressing God by his proper name, which is here said to have been commenced. Murphy goes on to point up the fact that whereas we read of God speaking to man in Paradise, we do not read of man speaking to God. He writes: In the examination that preceded the sentence passed upon the transgressors, we hear Adam and Eve replying to the questions of God, but not venturing to open a conversation with the Most High. He proceeds to call attention to Adam's belief of the indications of mercy, whether in word or deed which God gave him. The bringing of an offering to God was a step in advance, he says, of the humble, submissive, self-accusing faith of our first parents, yet the institution of sacrifice was essentially a symbolic act, a mute sign of the obedient faith being manifested by the worshiper, unaccompanied by invocation or address of any kind. At length, however, Sheth was given to Eve, and accepted by her as a substitute for Habel. Enosh, the child of sorrow, was born to him. Collateral with this line of descent, and all the anxieties and wants which it involved, was the growth of a class of men who were of the spirit of Cain, and receded further and further from God. In these circumstances of growing iniquity on the one hand, and growing faith on the other, believing reason comes to conceive the full import of the mercy of God, freely and fully accepts of pardon, and realizes the peace and privilege which it bestows. Growing man now comprehends all that is implied in the proper name of God, Jehovah, the author of being, of promise, and of performance. He finds a tongue, and ventures to express the desires and feelings that have long been pent up in his breast, and are now bursting for utterance. These petitions and confessions are now made in an audible voice, and with a holy urgency and courage rising above the sense of self-abasement to the confidence of peace and gratitude. These adorations are also presented in a social capacity, and thereby acquire a public notaries. The father, the elder of the house, is the master of words, and he becomes the spokesman of the brotherhood in this new relationship into which they have spontaneously entered with their Father in heaven. The spirit of adoption has prompted the confiding and endearing terms, Abba, Father, and now the winged words ascend to heaven, carrying the adorations and aspirations of the assembled saints. The new form of worship attracts the attention of the early world, and the record is made, -Then began they to call upon the name of the Lord,-' that keepeth covenant and mercy.

Of course, the analytical critics speculate that this was an insertion from the J document or code, the author of which, they say, was interested especially in origins, and hence is the source of our information about the beginnings of nomadism, music, and metalworking (Genesis 4:20-22), the origin of the Nephilim (giants, Genesis 6:2), the origin of viticulture (Genesis 9:20), the first of the Gibborim (despots, or in terms of early Greek thought, tyrants, Genesis 10:8), and the origin of diversity of languages (Genesis 11:1-9). (See, for example, IBG, 526). Hence it is J who, according to this theory, reports in Genesis 4:26 the origin of what is called the cult of Yahweh. Skinner writes in similar vein (ICCG, 127): What historic reminiscence (if any) lies behind this remarkable statement we cannot conjecture; but its significance is not correctly expressed when it is limited to the institution of formal public worship on the part of a religious community (Delitzsch); and the idea that it is connected with a growing sense of the distinction between the human and the divine (Ewald et al) is a baseless fancy. It means that Enos was the first to invoke the Deity under this name; and it is interesting chiefly as a reflection, emanating from the school of J, on the origin of the specifically Israelite name of God. The conception is more ingenuous than that of E (Exodus 3:13-15) or P (Exodus 6:3), who base the name on express revelation, and connect it with the foundation of Hebrew nationality. Skinner goes on to say, however, that the expression (literally, call by [means of] the name of Y), denotes the essential act in worship, the invocation (or rather evocation) of the Deity by the solemn utterance of His name. It rests on the widespread primitive idea that a real bond exists between the person and his name, such that the pronunciation of the latter exerts a mystic influence on the former. (For the significance of names, see Plato's Cratylus). It should be remarked here that these critics tear even separate Scripture verses into shreds in their useless speculation about which belongs to what (J, E, D, P), without benefit of external evidence of any kind whatsoever, a form of seminary nit-picking that is paralleled in no other branch of human study. They ignore the obvious fact of the repeated interlacing of the Divine Names, not only in various sections, but even in particular verses, throughout the Pentateuch. Perhaps the most significant fact of all is, that the critics are hopelessly at variance even among themselves as to the credibility of their conflicting suppositions. Even the few arguments that could be acceptable as legitimately supporting the Documentary Hypothesis are vitiated by this Babel of academic tongues. (For a critical examinationand refutationof these theories, the student is advised to study, along with the present textbook, the great work by William Henry Green, published in 1895, entitled The Unity of the Book of Genesis. The author was, at that time, Professor of Oriental and Old Testament Literature in Princeton Theological Seminary. Unfortunately for the spread of the truth, students in present-day standardized theological seminaries are never given any opportunity to become acquainted with this book or with any other of like content. The would-be pundits of our time seem to assume that no learning ever existed prior to the beginning of the present century.)

Concerning Genesis 5:26 b, M. Henry writes (CWB, 15): The worshipers of God began to distinguish themselves. The margin reads it, Then began men to be called by the name of the Lord, or to call themselves by it. Whitelaw summarizes (PCG, 90): Either (1) to invoke by prayer the name of Jehovah, i.e., Jehovah himself as he had been pleased to discover his attributes and character to men, referring to the formal institution of public worship. -The expression is elsewhere used to denote all the appropriate acts and exercises of the stated worship of Godch. Genesis 12:8, Genesis 13:4, Genesis 21:33; 1 Chronicles 16:8; Psalms 105:1 (Bush).-' Or (2) to call themselves by the name of Jehovahcf. Numbers 32:42, Judges 18:29, Psalms 49:12, Isaiah 44:5. Rotherham (EB, 37 n.): Or, -to invoke with the name Y.-' We suggest here Lange's terse simple statement (CDHCG, 262): The language undoubtedly refers to a general honoring of the name Jehovah among the pious Sethites. (For a further treatment of this problem, see my Genesis, Vol. III, with respect to the correlation of Exodus 3:14-15; Exodus 6:2-3 with Genesis 22:14).