Why is Cainan included in Luke 3:36 but absent in Genesis 11? The Question Framed Luke 3:36 lists “the son of Cainan, the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem…,” yet Genesis 11:12-13 states, “When Arphaxad was 35 years old, he became the father of Shelah,” omitting Cainan. Why the difference? The Two Key Texts • Luke 3:35-36 : “the son of Serug, the son of Reu, the son of Peleg, the son of Eber, the son of Shelah, the son of Cainan, the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem…” • Genesis 11:12-13 : “When Arphaxad was 35 years old, he became the father of Shelah…Arphaxad lived 430 years and had other sons and daughters.” The Septuagint Factor The Greek Septuagint (LXX), produced c. 250-150 BC, was the common Old Testament Bible of the Mediterranean world and the primary source Luke used. Virtually every extant LXX manuscript—Codex Vaticanus (B), Sinaiticus (א), Alexandrinus (A), and thousands of later minuscules—reads: Genesis 11:12-13 (LXX): “Arphaxad lived 135 years and begot Cainan; and Cainan lived 130 years and begot Shelah.” Thus Luke’s genealogy matches the text circulating in first-century synagogues. The Masoretic Text and Its Omission The standard Hebrew text (the Masoretic) formed between the 6th-10th centuries AD. It omits Cainan. No Dead Sea Scroll fragment of Genesis 11 currently preserves this verse, so the Hebrew evidence is later than the Greek. Conservative textual scholars observe that: 1. The LXX and Luke agree independently of one another. 2. The Masoretic line shows a shorter chronology from Shem to Abraham. The simplest explanation is that an early Hebrew exemplar contained Cainan and a later Jewish copyist accidentally or deliberately dropped the name, creating a “haplography” (eye-skip) between two identical words (“Arphaxad” or the phrase “begot Shelah”). Once the shorter form became standard, it passed into the Masoretic tradition. Patristic and Jewish Witnesses • Josephus (Antiquities 1.6.4) omits Cainan, indicating he consulted a Hebrew text now represented by the Masoretic. • Irenaeus (Against Heresies 3.21.3), Africanus, and the early church readily include Cainan, quoting Luke and the LXX without apology. • The Samaritan Pentateuch also omits Cainan, showing a divergent Hebrew tradition existed before Christ. Genealogical “Telescoping” Hebrew lineages often compress generations. “Son of” (Hebrew ben, Greek huios) means “descendant of.” Cainan could be Arphaxad’s grandson, yet Genesis lawfully skips him to maintain symmetry (ten names from Adam to Noah; ten from Shem to Abram). Thus Genesis is not falsified; it is abbreviated. Chronological Implications Archbishop Ussher’s chronology follows the Masoretic numbers. The LXX adds 130 (Arphaxad) + 130 (Cainan) = 260 years between the Flood and Abraham. Whether the true interval is c. 352 or c. 612 years, both figures still place creation well within a young-earth framework (<10,000 years). Luke’s Reliability as Historian Luke states he researched “everything carefully from the beginning” (Luke 1:3). He accessed public genealogical archives preserved in the Temple (destroyed AD 70) and quoted the Bible of his Gentile readership—the Septuagint. Manuscript studies show Luke’s genealogy is stable across thousands of Greek witnesses. Harmonization Scenarios 1. Original Hebrew contained Cainan; Masoretic lost him. Luke/LXX preserve him. 2. Cainan is an alternate name for Shelah, listed in Luke to avoid confusion with Kenan (Enosh’s line). 3. Copyist inserted Cainan into early LXX; Luke, writing under inspiration, validated the name, making the LXX correct where the Hebrew became corrupt. Because inspired Scripture cannot contradict itself (John 10:35), option 1 or 3 maintains inerrancy. Most conservative scholars favor option 1. Archaeological Parallels Ancient Near-Eastern king lists (e.g., Sumerian King List) omit or expand names for symmetry. Genesis’ literary structure reflects a similar practice, consistent with authentic antiquity rather than later mythmaking. Theological Significance The genealogies anchor Jesus in real space-time history, a line stretching from Adam to the risen Christ. Paul ties salvation to a literal first Adam and a literal last Adam (Romans 5:12-21; 1 Corinthians 15:22). Cainan’s inclusion testifies to meticulous providence guarding the Messianic line. Answer Summarized Cainan appears in Luke 3:36 because Luke—guided by the Holy Spirit and using the widely-accepted Septuagint—preserves a name that an early Hebrew scribe inadvertently (or purposely) dropped in the Masoretic tradition. Genealogical telescoping renders the omission non-contradictory, and the combined manuscript evidence confirms Scripture’s harmony. |
    |