Genesis 1-5: Creation to Lamech
Genesis
Genesis gets right to it. Nothing to indicate who it is doing the writing. No indication how this is to be taken....as allegory or as fact. Nothing to indicate whether this was the author's opinion of the events he was recording, or if it was handed down as folklore. The only thing we can use to answer these ponderings is the actual words recorded.
Genesis 1
Genesis 1 is the telling of the creation. We do not know how this happened as there was, according to the story, no one around to witness these events. The fact that the author believed this to be a historical account, or more a recording of lore is unknown to us. The author was not there to see how God created the earth and the heavens, so if it is meant as fact, we must assume that God told this person directly what transpired.
God created a light and darkness and called light Day, and darkness Night. God didn't create the sun or moon for another few days, so what the author meant by this is obviously very different than what we understand as being day and night. Also, day and night are capitalized. Why this is, is again, unknown.
God also created plants and trees which were able to produce fruit before there was a sun, so we can understand that the author of this version of creation was unaware of how biology works.
God then created the animals that live in the waters, and in the skys. He told them to be fruitful and multiply.
The next "day" God created animals of the land. God then says, "Let
The very next verse, though, the author recants and says God created man in his image, and says that man means man and woman, and that both are in God's image.
Verse 28 of Genesis 1 may deserve some looking into. God blesses man and woman and tells them to be fruitful and multiply, and to replenish the earth. Replenish, according to The Merriam-Webster Dictionary, is a verb and means to fill or build up AGAIN!; stock or supply ANEW!
Did the author of this story know something that has been overlooked for millenia? Was the earth populated before God created man and woman in the Bible? All we can do is speculate, but if the Bible is to be looked at as a historical chronology of the earth science may have a "bone" to pick on the dating of the earth.
And that is pretty much the end of the creation. God says to man and woman that he has provided food for them, and power to dominate the animals of the earth. The chapter ends, "God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
Conclusion
We can see right from the start that any kind of thorough examination of this text will be a huge piece of work. Just from this first chapter, 31 verses, I have brought up:
- the source of this information....."whispered" from God?
- What is this sunless Day that is referred to in verse 5?
- How did the plants and trees grow without a sun?
- Who is this WE God referred to when creating humans?
- How did the plural "us" in verse 26 become the singular "his" in verse 27?
- What is meant when God commands man to replenish the earth?
- Who or what occupied the earth prior to man? Prior to creation?!?
So from this first chapter my skimming through it produced 7 questions! I am positive that a more thorough examination of this chapter will bring up many more. What can we conclude about this chapter?
I put forth that an event as huge as the creation of everything should either be made much more clear or just vaguely referred to, if at all. If we can not know for certain, that is, without question, how it happened, surely a "theory" or allegory that is not quite as laughable as this should be produced. The ideas and concepts presented here do more to confuse when looked at in detail then they do clarify.
It is hard for me to imagine that God would present a cloudy story if God were to put one forth at all.
Genesis 2
Genesis 2 is an interesting chapter. The end of one telling and the beginning of another. If examined with a open mind, it can easily be seen that we either - a) have reached our first contradiction, or b) see two seperate authors relating their version of the creation. I believe both to be true. My opinion stated, let's look.
Genesis 2:1-3 is the telling of the completion of the creation. It also tells us that God ended his work on the seventh day which he had made, and rested. He blessed this day and sanctified it because he rested this day. OK.
Genesis 2:4 then becomes mysterious. This is either a retelling of the first chapter, or a new telling by someone else, as mentioned above. We have the creation of the earth and the heavens.
Then the plants and herbs, though there was no rain or man to till the earth. So verse 6 made a mist to water the whole face of the earth.
Verse 7 is the creation of man. Unlike chapter 1 we have a clue as to just how God did it. He used dust of the ground to form us. Well, this is an amazing insight since we know that the body is made up of elements that exist in the earth. Then God breathed into this man's nose and this physical man gained a soul.
Verse 8 tells about God "planting a garden eastward in Eden;" Eastward of where? Wherever it was, God put man there. God then made every tree that is pleasant to the eye grow out of the ground. Trees for food, but also a tree of life and a tree of knowledge of good and evil, whatever those may be. Apparently knowledge grew on trees way back when.
We then have a telling of some rivers flowing out of Eden. One main one it appears which splits into four. Pison is the main one, and it encompasses the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold. Not just gold, but good gold. There is also bdellium and onyx stone.
I know what onyx is, but have been unable to find any info on bdellium. I was not aware that gold which has been unmolested by man could be good or bad. Isn't it the adding of other metals that causes Gold to become less pure? Maybe something else was meant here.
In verse 15, God takes the man and put him in the garden....again, I guess(verse 8).
Verses 16 and 17 has God telling man what is acceptable as far as the trees in the garden. The trees may be eaten of freely, except the tree of knowledge of good and evil. If man were to eat of this tree, man would certainly die. A test? A threat? We shall find out.
In verse 18 God decides that man should not be alone, so creates a "help mate" for him.
Verse 19 God decides to create animals and he does so out of the same physical stuff with which he created man....the ground. God proceeded to march them all to Adam to find out how Adam would name them.. In verse 20, Adam named all of the animals but did not find an animal suitable to be his help mate.
So, God caused Adam to go into a deep sleep, and God removed one of Adam's ribs and closed Adam back up. With this rib God created a woman and brought her to the man. Adam seemed to have total knowledge of who this was and then proclaimed, "This is now bone of my bones(quite literally according to the story), flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of man."
Well, it appears that according to this story women are not only man's help mate, but alive only because man had some spare parts to provide life for her. Man knew that this had happened, and knew that she was 'woman'.
Verse 24 goes on to say that because of this whole process, that should a man leave his father and mother he shall cleave unto his wife, and they shall be one flesh. - So because woman came into existance because of man, man should cling to woman. And they shall become one flesh. Is this a sexual reference?
That it was sexual may be aided by the next verse that closes chapter 2 saying, "And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed."
This concludes Chapter 2.
Conclusion
This chapter may be more confusing than the first. To start off with we have a new telling of the creation story. That it is a retelling of the same story has been put forth by some looking to find no inconsistencies. Some say that chapter one just puts the facts out there, and chapter two gives more detail.
If this is so, why is it that from 1:1 through 2:3, the end of day 7, the divinity is referred to only as God, or in the original hebrew, Elohim, while from 2:4 through the end of chapter 2, he is referred to consistently as Lord God, translated from the hebrew YHWH? (see above)
These two sources remain consistent in how they refer to God throughout the entire first four books of the Bible, and were believed to be the "two" authors, as previously mentioned.
Beyond this difference is also the difference in the order of the creation. Chapter 1 has it going: 1. Plants, 2.Animals, 3. Man, & Woman. Chapter 2 has the order: 1. Plants, 2. Man, 3. Animals, 4. Woman. Again the theory has been put forth that this is just a more detailed retelling. I strongly disagree. It would have been a simple matter to retell the same story in more detail without changing the order of events.
We have the two trees, one of life, and the other of knowledge of good and evil introduced to us in this chapter. The tree of knowledge will be thoroughly discussed in the following chapter. But, what is a tree of life? Can we conceive of what such a tree might look like? Apparently because of what was to happen in the following chapter prevents us from ever knowing.
Then there is the matter of the creation of woman from the rib of man. Anyone who knows anything about biology knows that it is the man that comes out of the woman at birth, and certainly not the other way around. Was this the author's way to make sure that the male sex would be the dominant of the two? I think it was. It seems to have worked massively for millenia.
This chapter puts forth the notion that woman was created to prevent Adam from being lonely and as a helper. Beyond that it was only after he did not find any other suitable animal in creation. That women believe this to be an accurate description of themselves, and believe this to be a true account of how they came into the creation is nothing short of amazing!
Genesis 3
This may be the most controversial chapter in the entire book. It describes the fall of man through a double deception. The acquisition of man's knowledge of good and evil caused God to not only curse man and woman, but also snakes and the ground. Let's take a look.
Verse 1 introduces us to the talking serpent. It says that this animal is more subtle than all of the rest which God had created. The most clever. I guess this must be correct because this particular animal has the gift of speech. The serpent starts by asking the woman if God permits them to eat of every tree within the garden.
The woman's simple reply was that they may eat of every tree in the garden except the tree which is in the midst of the garden, for God has told them that if they eat from that one or even touch it that they would die.
The snake said that this surely couldn't be. They wouldn't die. The snake tells Eve that they were commanded by God to not eat of this tree because as soon as they did their eyes would be opened and they would be as Gods knowing good and evil.
Apparently this was enough for the woman for she looked upon the tree and saw that it looked good and was to be desired to make one wise, so she took of the fruit and ate, and gave to her husband and he ate, too.
Lo and behold, the snake had been right! Their eyes were opened and they knew that they were naked. Deciding that this was an unacceptable state, they sewed some leaves together and made skirts for themselves.
Now when the man and the woman "heard the voice of the Lord God walking in the garden in the cool of the day", they hid themselves from the Lord God amongst the trees. So Lord God called out to them and asked where they were. Isn't God represented as omniscient - knowing everything, and omnipresent - being everywhere?
Adam responded that he had heard the voice and had gotten afraid, because he had been naked. So he hid himself.
God replied, "Who told you that were naked? Did you eat of the tree that I had told you not to eat of?" Adam told God that it had been the woman that had tricked him.
So God asked the woman, "What have you done?" And the woman told God about the serpent tricking her. Thus two deceptions.
But we can clearly see that the serpent hadn't tricked her. He had told her that she would not die, which she didn't, and that she would know good and evil, which she did. The serpent had been honest with the woman.
God apparently believed the woman over the serpent for God cursed the serpent over the cattle, and above every other beast, and made the serpent crawl on it's belly. God said that the serpent would eat only dust for the rest of the serpent's life.
The first part of this curse must indicate that snakes had not always slithered on the ground, and from that day forward they would. The second part must have been intended specifically for this snake, for we know that snakes do not eat dust for sustenance. God also added that there would be enmity between snakes and people. We can see that this apparently did not hold true for everyone, as their are many people quite fond of snakes.
To the woman God said that he would multiply her sorrow and her conception. Does this mean that because of her "sin" that she would have children? Is that a punishment? Maybe the end of verse 16 clears this up, though, as God says that she woman will bring forth children in sorrow. I guess God made this curse stick.
The very end of verse 16 must be the author adding a little ammunition to the male dominance issue, for he wrote, "and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee."
Unto Adam God said that because he had listened to his wife, and ate of the tree which God had commanded him not to, God would curse the ground , and in sorrow shall he eat of it all of the days of his life. That the ground would bring forth thorns and the like, and Adam would eat herbs of the field. God said that only while sweating would Adam eat bread until he died. For it was from dust Adam came and to it Adam would return. Make sense since our physical bodies do eventually return to a dust state after death.
Verse 20 is curious and seems almost like it is out of place. It reads, "And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living." Did Adam mean every living creature or just humans?
Verse 21 has God making coats of skin for Adam and Eve and clothing them.
Verse 22 merits a looking into. We will remember that in Genesis 1:26 that God said, "Let us make man in our image....." Gen 3:22 continues this theme, saying, "Behold, the man is become as one of US, to know good and evil." Again, we see God referring to a group, and not just to an individual. Is there more than one God? Is this what the author believed?
Beyond this may lie larger questions still. What is meant by the words, "become as one of us"? Is man God-like because he knows the duality of good and evil? Is that all it takes? Is this the author's opinion, or did he receive this information through a divine inspiration?
Further still in this verse is the line, "and now, lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:" Definition of the word lest is for fear that. This line, in clearer words is: Now, for fear that man may eat of the tree of life, and live forever.... This puts forth two huge concepts. The first that God can know fear. The second that immortality, at least at one time, grew on a tree.
So, to prevent man from becoming immortal, God sent man out of the garden of Eden to till the ground from where he had come. God put Cherubims at the entrance to the garden, and a flaming sword to "keep the way of the tree of life". So, man was cast out of the garden, and would never be allowed back in.
This concludes chapter 3.
Conlusion
There certainly is a lot to discuss in this chapter. We go from a talking snake to a flaming sword, and we have the fall of man, woman and snake in the middle.
That God could create a snake that talks is not in question here. I firmly believe that if God wanted to do such a thing, God certainly could. Why would God do such a thing? Beyond this, why would God create a talking snake that would encourage man and woman to purposefully go against God's wishes? Wouldn't an omniscient God know what the result of this would be?
The eating of the fruit is referred to by some as the "original sin". Because woman disobeyed God's orders, mankind not only gained knowledge of good and evil, but would experience both extremes.
In this chapter we see that God may not be all-knowing, and all-present. We see that God walked the earth. We see the first example of a spiteful, vengeful God. We see a God who punishes those not yet born for the actions of their ancestors.
We also run into some unanswerable questions in this chapter as we did in the previous two:
- What did God mean in verse 22, by saying "as one of us"? Is there more than one God?
- Can man be God-like through the knowledge of good and evil? Does this mean that we are Gods?
- Does God know fear, as shown in the same verse?
- Was there ever a tree of life that had fruits on it that could provide immortality?
- What became of this garden known as Eden?
Now, these questions can only be guessed at. Theologians have been speculating about these questions and others since these words were first shared in this tale. Can we answer them? I do not think so.
The Bible is represented by some as the "divinel;y inspired word of God". Would a book that this is claimed about leave such monumental questions? Would there be any contradictions from a source that is represented as perfect as God is? I think a clear answer of no is the only possible answer.
Genesis 4 & 5
And so the procreating begins. Genesis 4 is the "new life" outside ot the garden of Eden. We have the first murder of man occuring. Then we have the "punishment", and then the beginning of what is known as the Book of Generations. Kind of a fast forward through time. Instead of hearing what these individuals did, and how they lived, we only hear that they lived an incredibly long time, and bore children at incredibly old ages. How people of this age measured years is unknown to us, and a subject of some debate. This said, let's take a look.
Right off of the bat, we see the first example of sex in the Bible. It is obviously between Adam and Eve as there was nobody else around. Or was there? Regardless, the Bible tells us that Adam knew his wife and she bore a child, Cain. Adam "knew" her again and she bore to him Abel.
In verse 2 it says that Abel was a shepherd, and Cain a grower of crops. The story jumps ahead some time where both Cain and Abel brought forth their product to God, and God had respect for Abel's offering of the firstling of his flock of sheep, but God had no respect for Cain or his offering which was the fruit of the ground.
Apparently God was not pleased with Cain's offering and clearly Cain was upset at this for it says that he was wroth and his countenance fell. Apparently the Lord God did not know why Cain would be upset for he asked Cain why he was wroth. He also asked Cain if it was true that if Cain had done well, that he would be accepted, and if he does not do well sin will be at his door. Was God saying that it is a sin to not do well at something? Is there a line that seperates someone who is unable to do well, and someone who chooses not to? No distinctinction is made here.
And the end of Verse 4 - "And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him." In other words, if you do well, not only will you not have sin at your door, you will accepted, and you will cause your brother to be jealous of you. Apparently this did not encourage Cain. No, it must have been done quite the opposite as we shall see.
Verse 8 is the murder I mentioned earlier. Cain went to talk with Abel, and then they got to the field, and Cain slew his brother. Now Cain was told of what he needed to do to shine in God's eyes, but also gain the desire of his brother. Instead of doing this, he decided that he would be the only one to have a chance at God's respect.
Verses 9-12 are God's accusation, Cain's denial, and the beginning of the meting out of punishment.
God asks Cain where Abel is and Cain answers the now infamous words, "Am I my brother's keeper?" Obviously he knew, and God figured this out for God says that the ground cries to God from the ground.
God proclaims that when Cain works the ground that the ground will not give Cain it's strength. That Cain would be a fugitive and a vagabond IN the earth. That is an odd thing to say. Cain was in the earth? What can this mean?
This may become more confused when after Cain saying that he can not handle this punishment, that God has driven out from the face of the earth. Was Cain planted into the ground, and because he murdered his brother was cast out of the face of the earth to be a vagabond?
Cain goes on to say that he will be hidden from God's face, and be a vagabond and fugitive in the earth, and that every one that finds him will slay him. Apparently God had a face that could be looked on. Beyond this, Cain could be slain more than once. But slain by whom? According to the story, there was originally two people in the earth who gave birth to two and one was murdered leaving 3. Cain, and his parents.
Well, God seemed to relent a little here after being talked into it by Cain, for God said that God would bring vengeance on anyone who slays Cain - not once, but seven times! To assure this, God marked Cain so all would know it. We don't know who this "all" is, for we have only been told of three people, and surely Adam and Eve would have noticed that 25% of the population had disappeared.
This problem of other people is dismissed without addressing a couple verses later. Cain moved to the land of Nod, which was away from the presence of the lord. There he knew his wife, and bore a son named Enoch, after whom Cain named a city which he built. Where this wife came from is beyond the author's knowledge apparently.
Verse 18 really begins the book of generations, though it is not opened until the beginning of Chapter 5. Enoch had unto him born Irad, and unto Irad Mehujael, and he begat Methusael, who begat Lamech. Now either a different order is given or there are many more generations between Adam and Abraham as Matthew recorded in his Gospel in the New Testament. More on this in a bit.
In verse 25 of chapter 4 Adam knew his wife again and she had another son: Seth. Seth has a son in verse 26 and his son's name was Enos. This wraps up chapter 4.
Chapter 5 begins where 4 leaves off. Verse 2 is a bit curious, though. It says that God created male and female and called THEIR name Adam. So Eve's name apparently was also Adam since Adam translated directly from hebrew is Man, or human.
Verse 3 is also curious. We learned from Genesis 1:27 that God created man in God's own image. Here in Genesis 5:3, we have Adam begetting Seth, a son in Adam's own image. Does this mean that such as the son looks like the father, so man looks like it's spiritual "father", God?
The rest of chapter 5 is pretty much a fast forward through time, with the beginning of the begetting. These men lived sometimes as long as 900 years, before they all died. That is, they all died except one.
In verse 22 Enoch, the father of Methusaleh, walked with God. In the next two verses it describes Enoch's life in the same way that it does the other men in this chapter, but when it says that they died for the others, it say for Enoch: "And Enoch walked with God: and he was not: for God took him. This is open to interpretation of course, but it seems as if God took Enoch to be with him without Enoch dying.
Other than this, we have the matter of the order of birth, and why the names are different. The answer is really quite easy. We have two different sources. The J source ends with the Chapter 4, for as you will notice, throughout 4, divinity is Lord or Lord God. Throughout 5, it is God until verse 29 where the J source was put back in the lead.
Let's look at the two orders:
|
"J" source:
1. Cain 2. Enoch 3. Irad 4. Methujael 5. Methusael 6. Lamech 7. Noah |
|
"R" source:
1.Seth 2. Enos 3. Cainan 4. Mehalaleel 5. Jared 6. Enoch 7. Methusaleh 8. Lamech 9. Noah |
Why this happened, and was allowed to go unmolested since it was written is unknown to us. It has been speculated that the J source predates the R source by some two hundred and fifty years and that between the two writings a priesthood had arisen and thus corrupted the stories telling.
Chapter 5 concludes with the listing of Noah's children, Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
Conclusion
God is represented by monotheists, of which Christianity claims to fall, as omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent. This is all-knowing, all-present, and all-powerful. How can a God of such unlimited knowledge not know why Cain was upset? Or that Cain had killed his brother? How does one move away from the presence, as Cain did in 4:16, of a God that is all-present or everywhere?
Cain demonstrated that he could bargain with God, when he said to God that all would kill him if he were a vagabond, and a fugitive, and God put a mark on him representing Cain as one that God protects. Why would God protect a murderer, when clearly murder is frowned down upon in other parts of the Bible?
How is it that everyone that finds Cain can slay him? Surely slaying means murdering, and this can only be done once.
Who were these other people that Cain referred to? There is no mention of a creation of any other people, as likewise there is no mention of other people being born to Adam and Eve, yet. This matter is left as unreconciled.
What did the author mean by "in God's image"? Surely if man was created in God's image, then all following Adam were as well, for the same words are used to describe Adam's son. Does this mean that we look like God? Does this mean that we act like God? This question has been pondered since the words were written.
And here I thought this would be an easy couple of chapters. Again, we reach a list of questions that can only be guessed at. No conclusions are made. We are only finding more confusions that have no resolutions.
NEXT - Gen. 6-8: Noah and the Flood