Ch. 5. The Descendants of Seth. (P.)

On the Cainites and Sethites, see note at the close of the chapter. In Genesis 4:25-26 a commencement was made of the Sethite genealogy taken from J. In ch. 5 a fresh start is made, and the line of Seth is traced from Adam to Noah. The genealogy is taken from a different source, which is clearly P. (a) The contents of Genesis 5:1-3 refer back to Genesis 1:26-28; (b) the “generations” (tôl’dôth) of Genesis 5:1 is the expression employed by P as the superscription of successive sections in his narrative (see note on Genesis 2:4); (c) the name Seth in Genesis 5:3 is given by Adam; according to J (Genesis 4:25) it was given by Eve; (d) the formal and systematic description of the patriarchs, consisting of (1) their names, (2) their age at the birth of their firstborn, (3) the length of their life, corresponds with the characteristics of P’s literary style and his fondness for statistics. With the exception of Genesis 5:29, the whole of the chapter may be regarded as the writing of P and the continuation of Genesis 1:1 to Genesis 2:4 a.

NOTE ON THE ANTEDILUVIAN PATRIARCHS

According to chap. 5 (P), the interval of time between the work of Creation (Genesis 1:1 to Genesis 2:4 a) and the visitation of the Flood (Genesis 6:9 ff.) is occupied by a list of ten Patriarchs.

The chronological scheme of P, according to the Hebrew text, makes this period to consist of 1656 years (in the Samaritan text, it is 1307 years; in the LXX, 2242). The description given of the ten Patriarchs is precise and formal. It is limited in each case to the bare formulae narrating facts respecting (i) the age of the Patriarch at the birth of his firstborn, (ii) the number of his remaining years, and the fact that he was the father of other children, (iii) his age at the time of his death.

The account which is thus given furnishes an explanation of the great population of the earth which is overthrown in the Flood. The chapter, however, contains no mention of the growing wickedness of the race. And it does not appear that P takes any account of the Narrative of the Fall (chap. 3 J). Budde, indeed (Urgesch. 93–103), contends that the names of the Patriarchs are intended to symbolize the condition of their age, the names Jared (= descent), Methuselah (= the man of the weapon, or the man of violence) denoting its deterioration.

The ten names represented the history of the human race before the Flood. The distribution of these ten names over the period of 1656 years implies a minute and elaborate calculation by the chronologists and chroniclers, whose work has been employed in P.

I. Ten Babylonian Kings

It is impossible to resist the conclusion that there is some sort of connexion between the ten Antediluvian Patriarchs of Genesis 5 and the ten kings before the Flood in the Babylonian Legends. The names of the ten kings are as follows:

(A. According to Berossus.)  (B. According to cuneiform inscriptions.)

1. Alôrus.  1.   Arûru.

2.   Alaparos.  2.   Adapa.

3.   Amêlôn.  3.   Amêlu (= Man, ? = Enosh).

4.   Ammenôn.  4.   Ummanu (= Master-crafts-man, ? = Kenan).

5.   Megalâros.

6.   Daônos.

7.   Euedôrachos.

8. Amempsinos.  7.   Enmeduranki (?=Enoch).

8.   Amel-Sin (= Man of the god Sin, ? = Methuselah).

9. Ôtiartes.  9.   Ubara-Jutu.

10 .  Xisûthros.  10.   Ḥasisatra (?=Noah).

In this list there may possibly be discerned some points of correspondence with the Hebrew. (a) In No. 3 Amelu (= Man) may be translated in Enosh=Man. (b) In (4) Ummanu (= Workman), in Kenan; and in (8) Amel-Sin (Man of Sin), in Methuselah (= Man of Shelah). (c) No. 7, Enmeduranki (king of Sippar, the city of the Sun-god, Shamash), who was the friend of the gods Ramman and Shamash, looks as if he must stand in some close relation to Enoch, whose life was 365 years and who walked with God. (d) The 10th in the list, Xisuthros or Ḥasisatra, the Ut-napishtim of the Epic, is the hero of the Babylonian Flood, and corresponds to Noah in the Hebrew list.

In the Babylonian list, the ten kings are assigned a period of 432,000 years.

II. Sethite and Cainite Genealogies

It is important to compare the two lists of the Sethite (P) and Cainite (J) Genealogies.

Sethite (chap. 5).  Cainite (chap. Genesis 4:17-24).

1.   Adam  1.   Adam

2.   Seth  

3.   Enosh  

4.   Kenan  2.   Cain

5.   Mahalalel  3.   Mehujael

6.   Jared  4.   Irad

7.  Enoch  5.   Enoch

8.   Methuselah  6.   Methushael

9.   Lamech  7.   Lamech

10.   Noah  " Jabal, Jubal, Tubal-Cain.

" Shem, Ham, Japheth.  

  

(a) The general resemblance in the names is very striking. (b) One list contains the perfect number ten, the other the perfect number seven. (c) Each list concludes in a family of three sons. We have to deal either with two variants of the same tradition; or with two distinct traditions, in which the same stock of primitive legendary names is found very closely repeated.

III. Different Chronologies

The Chronology of the Antediluvian Patriarchs varies in the three principal sources for the text, (1) the Massoretic (Hebrew), (2) the Samaritan, (3) the Septuagint. They are presented in the following Table.

  Massoretic Text  Samaritan  LXX  Year (Anno Mundi) of Death

  Firstborn  Remainder  Total  Firstborn  Remainder  Total  Firstborn  Remainder  Total  Mass. Text  Samaritan  LXX  

1.  Adam  130  800  930  130  800  930  230  700  930  930  930  930  

2.  Seth  105  807  912  105  807  912  205  707  912  1042  1042  1141  

3.  Enosh  90  815  905  90  815  905  190  715  905  1140  1140  1342  

4.  Kenan  70  840  910  70  840  910  170  740  910  1235  1235  1534  

5.  Mahalalel  65  830  895  65  830  895  165  730  895  1290  1290  1696  

6.  Jered  162  800  962  62  785  847  62  785  847  1422  1307  1923  

7.  Enoch  65  300  365  65  300  365  165  200  365  987  887  1484  

8. Methuselah  187  782  969  67  653  720  167*  802*  969  1656  1307  2256  

9.  Lamech  182  595  777  53  600  653  188  565  753  1651  1307  2204  

10.  Noah  500      500      500            

Till the Flood  100      100      100            

Year of the Flood  1656      1307      2242            

These different figures are not due to errors in the text. They seem to arise from the adoption of differing systems for the calculation of the chronology.

It has commonly been supposed that the Hebrew figures (1656) are part of a scheme which calculated 2666 years to have been the interval between the Creation and the Exodus, and that 2666 years represented two-thirds of a cycle of 4000 years.

The 2666 years are computed as follows:

1656  Creation to Flood

290  Flood to birth of Abraham

100  To birth of Isaac (Genesis 21:5)

60  To birth of Jacob (Genesis 25:26)

130  To Jacob’s descent into Egypt (Genesis 47:9-28)

430  Sojourn in Egypt (Exodus 12:40)

2666  

The Samaritan figure of 1307 is part of a system which calculated 3007 years to intervene between the Creation and the entrance into Canaan. The calculation was as follows:

Creation to Flood  =  1307  years

Flood to birth of Abraham  =  940  years

Birth of Abraham to descent into Egypt  =  290  years

Sojourn in Egypt  =  430  years

Wandering in Wilderness  =  40  years

    3007  years

Skinner (in loc.) points out, that, if the calculation be made in round numbers=3000, the entire period may then be divided into three decreasing periods of 1300, 940, 760 years, of which the second exceeds the third by 180 years, and the first exceeds the second by twice 180 years (2x180) = 360 years.

The LXX figure of 2240 is the equivalent of the Samaritan calculation from the Creation to the Flood (1300 years) + the Samaritan calculation from the Flood to the birth of Abraham (940 years). But whether this be the result of accident or design, it is impossible to say.

IV. Longevity of Patriarchs

The Hebrew tradition evidently assumed that human vitality, in the era immediately following upon the Creation, was at its highest point, and that, in consequence, immense longevity was to be expected in the lives of the Antediluvian Patriarchs.

The immense duration of life assigned to these ten Patriarchs has always been the occasion of difficulty. Attempts have been made to explain away the figures. (a) It has been suggested that the names of the Patriarchs represent dynasties. But the mention of the first-born and of other children obviously refers to personal history. Nor does the transference of these enormous figures to the duration of dynasties greatly diminish the improbability of their literal historicity. (b) It has been suggested that the Hebrew word for “year” (shânah) is used in this chapter to denote a shorter period of time. But this arbitrary solution is devoid of any evidence in its favour. Familiar Hebrew words, like “years” in this chapter, or like “day” in chapter 1, must not be supposed, because of our difficulties in interpretation, to require new meanings.

There is no reason not to interpret the statements respecting the longevity of the ten Antediluvian Patriarchs quite literally. The account of them belongs to the domain of primitive tradition. It would be strange, if the primitive unverifiable tradition were not accompanied by the exaggerations which popular legend weaves around prehistoric names.

It is instructive to compare the ages of the Antediluvian and Postdiluvian Patriarchs with those of the famous Israelites of more historic times.

Adam, the first of the Antediluvians, lived  930 years

Seth, the second of the Antediluvians, lived  912 years

Noah, the tenth of the Antediluvians, lived  950 years

Shem, the first of the Post-diluvians, lived  600 years

Arpachshad, the second of the Post-diluvians, lived  408 years

Terah, the tenth of the Post-diluvians, lived  205 years

Abraham  lived  175 years

Isaac  lived  180 years

Jacob  lived  147 years

Joseph  lived  110 years

Moses  lived  120 years

Joshua  lived  110 years

David reigned  40 years  

Solomon reigned  40 years  

Rehoboam lived  58 years  (2 Chronicles 12:13)

Hezekiah lived  54 years  (2 Chronicles 29:1)

Manasseh lived  67 years  (2 Chronicles 33:1)

It is clear that this descending scale, in the duration of life, corresponds to the stages of transition from legend to history.

There is no evidence to shew that the earlier phases of civilization were more favourable to longevity than the later.

1. This is the book, &c.] The word rendered “book” (Heb. sêpher) is used of any written document. Our word “book” gives rather too much the meaning of a piece of literature. The word is often used in a much more general sense, e.g. Isaiah 50:1, “where is the bill (Heb. sêpher) of your mother’s divorcement?” Jeremiah 32:10, “and I subscribed the deed (Heb. sêpher), and sealed it”; 2 Samuel 11:14, “David wrote a letter (Heb. sêpher) to Joab.” Here it is equivalent to “a written list.”

the generations] See note on Genesis 2:4, “The generations of Adam,” i.e. the genealogy from Adam to Noah. LXX γενέσεως, Vulg. “generationis,” regarded the Hebrew word as singular.

Adam] The proper name, Adam, not ha-adam = “the man” or “mankind.”

God created man] The words “God” (Elohim), “created” (bara), “in the likeness,” reproduce the distinctive language of Genesis 1:26-28.

2. male and female, &c.] This clause is repeated from Genesis 1:27.

blessed them] From Genesis 1:27. The words of the command, “be fruitful and multiply,” &c., which accompanied the blessing, are not repeated; they are implied in the genealogy that follows.

called their name Adam] Better than marg. “called their name Man.” That God gave the name “man” (Heb. adam) is not recorded in ch. 1. The proper name is probably here intended; but, if so, we should read “his name,” as the LXX, τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ.

3. in his own likeness, after his image] Cf. Genesis 1:26. Man was made in God’s image, after His likeness; he begets a son, in his own likeness, after his image. Many Heb. MSS., however, only read “in his image.” On the words “image” and “likeness,” see note on Genesis 1:26. The phrase here is evidently intended to shew that the elements of resemblance to the Divine image, which at the first were implanted in man’s nature, were communicated from father to son.

That the priestly document contained any tradition respecting the Fall, or the murder of Abel, seems improbable.

Seth] See note on Genesis 4:25. The father here gives the name; the mother’s name is not mentioned in this genealogy.

6. Enosh] See note on Genesis 4:26.

9. Kenan] The first syllable of this name is the same in Hebrew as the name “Cain,” and it is presumably akin in meaning as well as in form (see note on Genesis 4:1).

12. Mahalalel] As a Hebrew name this would mean “the praise of God”; but see note on the etymology of proper names in prehistoric times, Genesis 4:17. For Mahalalel the versions give a different form. LXX Μαλελεήλ; Vulg. “Malaleel.”

15. Jared] Heb. Yared = “a going down.” Cf. Jordan (Heb. Yardên) = “the going down, or descending, river” (?). The Book of jubilees, written in the latter part of the second century b.c., made use of this Hebrew etymology of the name, and connected it with the descending of angels upon the earth, when “the sons of God saw the daughters of men,” &c., Genesis 6:2. To suppose that it denotes “descent,” in the sense of “deterioration,” is very far fetched.

18. Enoch] Heb. Ḥanôkh; cf. Genesis 4:17. Enoch and Mahalalel are here transposed.

21. Methuselah] Possibly = “the man of Shelah”; and, if so, Shelah may indicate the name of a deity; cf. Methushael (Genesis 4:18) = “the man of God.”

22. walked with God] The phrase here, as in Genesis 5:24, used of Enoch, has passed into common use to express intimacy of communion with God. It denotes more than either standing in His presence, or walking before Him (Genesis 6:9, Genesis 17:1), or following after Him. It combines the ideas of fellowship and progress. It is the picture of one who has God with him in all the various scenes of life.

The audacity of the metaphor caused the LXX to render it by a paraphrase; εὐηρέστησε δὲ Ἐνὼχ τῷ θεῷ = “and Enoch was well pleasing unto God,” which is quoted in Hebrews 11:5. For other paraphrases, see Targ. Onkelos, “walked in the fear of God”; Targ. Palestine, “served in the truth before the Lord.”

23. and all the days, &c.] Concerning Enoch the following points deserve attention: (1) He is the seventh in the genealogy, cf. Jdg 1:14; (2) by comparison with the lives of his fathers and descendants, the length of his life is immensely curtailed; (3) the number of his years agrees with the number of days in the solar year; (4) owing to the closeness of his walk with God he was believed to have been “translated” into Heaven. With this summary must be compared the account of the seventh king in the antediluvian Babylonian Dynasty, Enmeduranki by name, who received revelations from the Sun-god Samas, and was the builder of the town of Sippar, which was dedicated to the Sun-god.

24. and he was not] For this expression used to denote an unaccountable disappearance, cf. Genesis 42:13; Genesis 42:36; 1 Kings 20:40. In order to make it quite clear that the words did not imply death, LXX renders οὐχ εὑρίσκετο; Vulg. “non apparuit.”

The shortness of his life as compared with the other patriarchs might have been regarded as a proof of Divine displeasure, if the next sentence had not been added to explain the circumstance.

for God took him] “Took,” or “received,” him, i.e. into His own abode, without death: cf. “he shall receive me” (Psalm 49:15). Sam. “the Angel took him”; LXX μετέθηκε = “translated”; Lat. tulit; Targ. Onkelos, “for the Lord had made him to die.” Our word “translated” has passed into general use from this passage and from the allusion to it in Hebrews 11:5, “By faith Enoch was translated (Lat. translatus est) that he should not see death, and he was not found, because God translated him.” For the only other instance in the O.T. of a Saint’s “translation,” see the story of Elijah (2 Kings 2). In the early Babylonian traditions, Xisuthros, the hero of the Babylonian Deluge story, is “translated” after the Deluge, that he may dwell among the gods.

Late Jewish tradition was very busy with the story of Enoch. Enoch was supposed to have received Divine revelation concerning “all mysteries,” and to have recorded them in writing in apocalyptic books. This current belief concerning Enoch, as the repository and the recorder of the mysteries of the universe, gave rise to the writing of the extant apocalyptic work, “The Book of Enoch,” composed in the second century b.c.

The devout Israelite was able to believe that they who walked with God would somehow be taken by God; cf. Psalm 73:24, “Thou shalt guide me with thy counsel, and afterward take me to glory.” In an age which had no conception of a general resurrection there was faith in God’s power and a trust in fellowship with Him.

25. Methuselah] According to the Hebrew text and the Samaritan version, Methuselah lived the longest of all the patriarchs, and, according to their figures, his death at the age of 969 years occurred in the year of the Flood.

29. saying, This same shall comfort us, &c.] It is generally supposed that this verse, containing a poetical couplet which is intended to explain the name of Noah, has been inserted from the same source of tradition (J) as Genesis 4:25-26. Certainly, (a) the saying interrupts the bare list of names and years; (b) it contains a reference to the curse pronounced upon the soil, Genesis 3:17; (c) it recurs to the use of the sacred name “Jehovah” (“Jahveh”), whereas “God” (“Elohim”) has been used in Genesis 5:1; Genesis 5:22; Genesis 5:24.

comfort] Heb. naḥem, “to comfort,” “relieve.” The name “Noah,” however, is not derived from naḥem, but there is a play on the general similarity of sound. The LXX renders “gives us rest.”

for our work] The word “for” is in the Heb. “from,” and the meaning is that Noah will comfort his fellow-creatures and give them relief and refreshment “from” their toil.

because of the ground] Better, as R.V. marg., “which cometh from the ground.” This clause is in prose, following two metrical clauses.

In what way did the tradition connect the name of Noah with “comfort” as regards work upon the ground? According to the Hebrew figures in this chapter, Lamech, Noah’s father, must have died either before or in the Flood. It is conceivable that the saying recorded in this verse is taken from a group of Israelite traditions which contained no account of the Flood, and only associated the name of Noah with the work of an husbandman and with the first planting of a vineyard (Genesis 9:20).

31. and all the days of Lamech] Lamech’s life of 770 years was shorter than Methuselah’s by 192 years. His death occurred five years before the Flood. In the Samaritan text the date of his death coincided with the year of the Flood.

32. And Noah was, &c.] Noah is thus represented as much older, when he begets his children, than were the other patriarchs, when children were born to them. A hundred years is the interval of time between the birth of Noah’s sons and the Deluge (Genesis 7:6).

Compare the mention of three sons born to Lamech, the last name in the Cainite genealogy (Genesis 4:20-24).