Dublin, OH
Commentaries and Other Bible Study Helps - Prayer Tents - Prayer Tents
2:4-4:26 Earth's First People. Centered initially on the garden of Eden, the episodes that make up this part of Genesis recount how God's ordered creation is thrown into chaos by the human couple's disobedience. The subsequent story of Cain and Abel and then Lamech (ch. 4) shows the world spiraling downward into violence, which precipitated the flood (6:11, 13). These events are very significant for understanding not only the whole of Genesis but all of the Bible.
2:4-25 The Man and Woman in the Sanctuary of Eden. The panoramic view of creation in ch. 1 is immediately followed by a complementary account of the sixth day that zooms in on the creation of the human couple, who are placed in the garden of Eden. In style and content this section differs significantly from the previous one; it does not contradict anything in ch. 1, but as a literary flashback it supplies more detail about what was recorded in 1:27. The picture of a sovereign, transcendent deity is complemented by that of a God who is both immanent and personal. The two portrayals of God balance each other, together providing a truer and richer description of his nature than either does on its own. In a similar way, whereas ch. 1 emphasizes the regal character of human beings, ch. 2 highlights their priestly status.
2:4 These are the generations of. This is the first of
2:5-7 These verses concentrate on God's creation of a human male, amplifying 1:26-31 in particular. The main action here is God's "forming" of the man (2:7); vv. 5-6 describe the conditions as the action took place. The term land (Hb. ’erets) can refer to the whole earth (cf. ESV footnote), to dry land (cf. 1:10), or to a specific region (cf. 2:11-13). To show the continuity with ch. 1 (see note on 2:4), and in view of the mention of rain, the ESV rendering ("land") is best. The location of this land is some unnamed place, just as the rainy season was about to begin, and thus when the ground was still dry, and without any bush of the field. These conditions prevailed before the creation of man, suggesting that the lack of growth was related to the absence of a man to irrigate the land (which would be the normal way in dry conditions to bring about growth). then the Lord God formed the man of dust from the ground (v. 7). The verb "formed" (Hb. yatsar) conveys the picture of a potter's fashioning clay into a particular shape. The close relationship between the man and the ground is reflected in the Hebrew words used to denote them, ’adam and ’adamah, respectively. breathed into his nostrils the breath of life (v. 7). Here God breathes life--physical, mental, and spiritual--into the one created to bear his image. living creature. The same term in Hebrew is used in 1:20, 24 to denote sea and land creatures. While human beings have much in common with other living beings, God gives them alone a royal and priestly status and makes them alone "in his own image" (1:27). (See Paul's quotation of this passage in 1 Cor. 15:45.)
2:8-9 God provides a suitable environment for the man by planting a garden in Eden, in the east. The name "Eden," which would have conveyed the sense of "luxury, pleasure," probably denotes a region much greater than the garden itself. God formed the man in the "land" (see vv. 5-7), and then put him in the garden (cf. v. 15). The earliest translation into Greek (the Septuagint) used the word paradeisos (from which comes the English term "paradise"; cf. note on Luke 23:39-43) to translate the Hebrew term for "garden," on the understanding that it resembled a royal park. The abundance of the garden is conveyed by the observation that it contained every tree that is pleasant to the sight and good for food (Gen. 2:9), which is an ironic foreshadowing of 3:6 (see note there). Two trees, however, are picked out for special mention: the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (2:9). Since relatively little is said about these trees, any understanding of them must be derived from the role that they play within the account of Genesis 2-3, especially ch. 3. On "tree of life," see note on 3:22-24; on "tree of knowledge," see note on 2:17.
2:10-14 The general description of the river that flowed out of Eden dividing into four rivers (v. 10) implies that Eden had a central location. In spite of the very specific details provided, however, Eden's location remains a mystery. While the names Tigris and Euphrates (v. 14) are associated with the two rivers that surround Mesopotamia, the rivers Pishon and Gihon, as well as the regions of Havilah and Cush (vv. 11, 13), have not been satisfactorily identified (see map). The reference to gold and onyx (vv. 11, 12) suggests that the land is rich in resources; these materials are later associated with the making of the tabernacle and temple.
2:15-16 The overall picture of Eden presented in the preceding verses suggests that the park-like garden is part of a divine sanctuary. The man is put in the garden to work it and keep it. The term "work" (Hb. ‘abad; cf. v. 5; 3:23; 4:2, 12; Prov. 12:11; 28:19) denotes preparing and tending, and "keep" (Hb. shamar) adds to that idea. Since this command comes before Adam sinned, work did not come as a result of sin, nor is it something to be avoided. Productive work is part of God's good purpose for man in creation. Later, the same two verbs are used together of the work undertaken by the priests and Levites in the tabernacle ("minister" or "serve" [Hb. ‘abad] and "guard" [Hb. shamar]; e.g., Num. 3:7-8; 18:7). The man's role is to be not only a gardener but also a guardian. As a priest, he is to maintain the sanctity of the garden as part of a temple complex. And the Lord God commanded the man. The fact that the command was given to Adam implies that God gave "the man" a leadership role, including the responsibility to guard and care for ("keep") all of creation (Gen. 2:15)--a role that is also related to the leadership responsibility of Adam for Eve as his wife (cf. v. 18, "a helper fit for him"). (On the NT understanding of the relationship between husband and wife, see Eph. 5:22-33.)
2:17 While God generously permitted the man to eat from every tree of the garden, God prohibited him from eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (v. 17). The fruit of this tree has been variously understood as giving
Theologians have discussed whether the instructions in 2:16-17, together with the instructions in 1:28-30, should be called God's "covenant" with Adam. Some have denied it, observing that the Hebrew word for "covenant" (berit) is not used until 6:18; others have added to this the insistence that covenants have to do with redemption. In reply, it can be pointed out that the thing itself can be present, even if the ordinary word identifying it is not: 2 Sam. 7:4-17 says nothing about a covenant, but Ps. 89:3, 28, 34, 39 all use the term to describe God's promise to David. The same happens with Hos. 6:7, which refers to a covenant with Adam (see note there). Also, Gen. 9:1-17 describes Noah in terms that clearly echo 1:28-30, explicitly using the word "covenant": Noah is a kind of new Adam, i.e., a covenant representative. Finally, there is no evidence that biblical covenants are limited to the sphere of redemption: the term simply describes the formal binding together of two parties in a relationship, on the basis of mutual personal commitment, with consequences for keeping or breaking the commitment. The man (Adam) receives this covenant on behalf of the rest of mankind: you is singular in 2:16-17, which provides the basis for Paul's use of Adam as a representative head of the human race, parallel to Christ, in 1 Cor. 15:22; cf. Rom. 5:12-19. The word "you" is plural in Gen. 3:1-5, where the woman's statement shows that she has appropriated the command for herself. Also, by virtue of Adam's disobedience, his offspring receive the penalty: they cannot return to the garden any more than he can, and they descend into sin and misery (ch. 4).
2:18-25 These verses describe how God provides a suitable companion for the man.
2:18 Not good is a jarring contrast to 1:31; clearly, the situation here has not yet arrived to "very good." I will make him can also be translated "I will make for him," which explains Paul's statement in 1 Cor. 11:9. In order to find the man a helper fit for him, God brings to him all the livestock, birds, and beasts of the field. None of these, however, proves to be "fit for" the man. "Helper" (Hb. ‘ezer) is one who supplies strength in the area that is lacking in "the helped." The term does not imply that the helper is either stronger or weaker than the one helped. "Fit for him" or "matching him" (cf. ESV footnote) is not the same as "like him": a wife is not her husband's clone but complements him.
2:20 The man gave names. By naming the animals, the man demonstrates his authority over all the other creatures. Adam. See note on 5:1-2.
2:23-24 When no suitable companion is found among all the living beings, God fashions a woman from the man's own flesh. The text highlights the sense of oneness that exists between the man and the woman. Adam joyfully proclaims, "This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh." This terminology is used elsewhere of blood relatives (29:14). This sentence and the story of Eve's creation both make the point that marriage creates the closest of all human relationships. It is also important to observe that God creates only one Eve for Adam, not several Eves or another Adam. This points to heterosexual monogamy as the divine pattern for marriage that God established at creation. Moreover, the kinship between husband and wife creates obligations that override even duty to one's parents (therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, 2:24). In ancient Israel, sons did not move away when they married, but lived near their parents and inherited their father's land. They "left" their parents in the sense of putting their wife's welfare before that of their parents. The term "hold fast" is used elsewhere for practicing covenant faithfulness (e.g., Deut. 10:20; see how Paul brings these texts together in 1 Cor. 6:16-17); thus, other Bible texts can call marriage a "covenant" (e.g., Prov. 2:17; Mal. 2:14). Paul's teaching on marriage in Eph. 5:25-32 is founded on this text. The sense of being made for each other is further reflected in a wordplay involving the terms "man" and "woman"; in Hebrew these are, respectively, ’ish and ’ishshah. As a result of this special affiliation, Gen. 2:24 observes that when a man leaves his parents and takes a wife, they shall become one flesh, i.e., one unit (a union of man and woman, consummated in sexual intercourse). Jesus appeals to this verse and 1:27 in setting out his view of marriage (Matt. 19:4-5).
2:25 naked and . . . not ashamed. This final description in vv. 18-25 offers a picture of innocent delight and anticipates further developments in the story. The subject of the couple's nakedness is picked up in 3:7-11, and a play on the similar sounds of the words "naked" (Hb. ‘arummim) and "crafty" (3:1, Hb. ‘arum) links the end of this episode with the start of the next.
3:1-24 The Couple Rebels against God. The sudden and unexplained arrival of a cunning serpent presents a challenge of immense importance to the human couple. Their choice is to disregard God's instructions, an act of willful rebellion that has terrible consequences for the whole of creation. As a result, God's creation is thrown into disorder, with chaotic effects that result from the disruption of all the harmonious relationships that God had previously established.
3:1 The speaking serpent is suddenly introduced into the story with minimum detail. Nothing is mentioned about its origin, other than that it is one of the beasts of the field. Although the serpent is eventually portrayed as God's enemy, the initial introduction is full of ambiguity regarding its true nature. While the brief comment that it is the craftiest of the beasts possibly indicates potential danger, the Hebrew term ‘arum does not carry the negative moral connotations of the English words "crafty" and "cunning." Similarly, the serpent's initial question may have sounded quite innocent, although it deliberately misquotes God as saying that the couple must not eat of any tree in the garden. Did the serpent merely misunderstand what God had said? In these ways the subtlety of the serpent's approach to the woman is captured by the narrator. It is noteworthy that the serpent also deliberately avoids using God's personal name "Yahweh" ("Lord") when he addresses the woman. Here is another hint that his presence in the garden presents a threat. Although his initial words appear deceptively innocent, his subsequent contradiction of God leaves no doubt about the serpent's motive and purpose. The text does not indicate when or how the serpent became evil. As the narrative proceeds, it becomes clear that more than a simple snake is at work here; an evil power is using the snake (see note on v. 15). As indicated by God's declaration that "everything he had made . . . was very good" (1:31), clearly evil entered the created world at some unknown point after God's work of creation was completed. Likewise, nothing in the Bible suggests the eternal existence of evil (see notes on Isa. 14:12-15; Ezek. 28:11-19).
3:2-3 The woman's response largely echoes the divine instruction given in 2:16-17 regarding the tree of knowledge (for more on the meaning of the covenant, see note on 2:17), although she fails to identify the tree clearly as the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and adds the comment neither shall you touch it. These minor variations are possibly meant to convey, even at this stage, that the woman views God's instructions as open to human modification.
3:4-5 The serpent not only directly contradicts what God has said but goes on to present the fruit of the tree as something worth obtaining: by eating it, the couple will be like God, knowing good and evil. The irony of the serpent's remarks should not be overlooked. The couple, unlike the serpent, has been made in the image of God (1:26-27). In this way they are already like God. Moreover, being in the image of God, they are expected to exercise authority over all the beasts of the field, which includes the serpent. By obeying the serpent, however, they betray the trust placed in them by God. This is not merely an act of disobedience; it is an act of treachery. Those who were meant to govern the earth on God's behalf instead rebel against their divine King and obey one of his creatures. You will not surely die. It is sometimes claimed that the serpent is correct when he says these things to the couple, for they do not "die"; Adam lives to be
3:6 when the woman saw. Like all the other trees in the garden, the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was "pleasant to the sight and good for food" (2:9). The irony is that somehow the serpent has made the woman discontent with the permitted trees, focusing her desire on this one. Its deadly appeal to her, apparently, is its ability to make one wise (see note on 2:17)--wise, however, not according to the "fear of the Lord" (Prov. 1:7; 9:10). she also gave some to her husband who was with her. The fact that Adam was "with her" and that he knowingly ate what God had forbidden indicates that Adam's sin was both an act of conscious rebellion against God and a failure to carry out his divinely ordained responsibility to guard or "keep" (Gen. 2:15) both the garden and the woman that God had created as "a helper fit for him" (2:18, 20). The disastrous consequences of Adam's sin cannot be overemphasized, resulting in the fall of mankind, the beginning of every kind of sin, suffering, and pain, as well as physical and spiritual death for the human race.
3:7-13 Eating the fruit transforms the couple, but not for the better. Now ashamed of their nakedness (cf. 2:25), they attempt to clothe themselves. Conscious of the Lord God's presence, they hide. When confronted by God regarding the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, the man blames the woman, who in turn blames the serpent.
3:9 the Lord God called to the man . . . , "Where are you?" Both "man" and "you" are singular in Hebrew. God thus confronts Adam first, holding him primarily responsible for what happened, as the one who is the representative (or "head") of the husband-and-wife relationship, established before the fall (see note on 2:15-16).
3:14-15 God addresses the serpent first. Verse 1 declared the serpent "more crafty" (Hb. ‘arum); now God declares it more cursed (Hb. ’arur). Indicted for its part in tempting the woman, the serpent will be viewed with contempt from now on. This is conveyed both literally and figuratively by the serpent's going on its belly and eating dust. Having deceived the woman, the serpent will have ongoing hostility with the woman, which will be perpetuated by their respective offspring.
3:15 While many modern commentators interpret this part of the curse as merely describing the natural hostility that exists between men and snakes, it has traditionally been understood as pointing forward to the defeat of the serpent by a future descendant of the woman, and this interpretation fits well with the words and the context. This defeat is implied by the serpent's being bruised in the head, which is more serious than the offspring of Eve being bruised in the heel. For this reason, v. 15 has been labeled the "Protoevangelium," the first announcement of the gospel. This interpretation requires that the serpent be viewed as more than a mere snake, something which the narrative itself implies, given the serpent's ability to speak and the vile things he says. While the present chapter does not explicitly identify the serpent with Satan, such an identification is a legitimate inference and is clearly what the apostle John has in view in Rev. 12:9 and 20:2. The motif of the offspring of the woman is picked up in Gen. 4:25 with the birth of Seth; subsequently, the rest of Genesis traces a single line of Seth's descendants, observing that it will eventually produce a king through whom all the nations of the earth will be blessed (see Introduction: History of Salvation Summary). he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel. Some interpreters have suggested that by saying "he" and "his," the intended meaning is that one particular offspring is in view. Within the larger biblical framework, this hope comes to fulfillment in Jesus Christ, who is clearly presented in the NT as overcoming Satan (Heb. 2:14; 1 John 3:8; cf. Matt. 12:29; Mark 1:24; Luke 10:18; John 12:31; 16:11; 1 Cor. 15:24; Col. 2:15), while at the same time being bruised.
3:16 By way of punishing the woman for her sin of disobedience, God pronounces that she will suffer pain (Hb. ‘itstsabon) in the bearing of children. This strikes at the very heart of the woman's distinctiveness, for she is the "mother of all living" (v. 20). Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you. These words from the Lord indicate that there will be an ongoing struggle between the woman and the man for leadership in the marriage relationship. The leadership role of the husband and the complementary relationship between husband and wife that were ordained by God before the fall have now been deeply damaged and distorted by sin. This especially takes the form of inordinate desire (on the part of the wife) and domineering rule (on the part of the husband). The Hebrew term here translated "desire" (teshuqah) is rarely found in the OT. But it appears again in 4:7, in a statement that closely parallels 3:16--that is, where the Lord says to Cain, just before Cain's murder of his brother, that sin's "desire is for you" (i.e., to master Cain), and that Cain must "rule over it" (which he immediately fails to do, by murdering his brother, as seen in 4:8). Similarly, the ongoing result of Adam and Eve's original sin of rebellion against God will have disastrous consequences for their relationship:
3:17-19 God's punishment of the man involves his relationship with the very ground from which he was formed (see note on 2:5-7). Because he has eaten that which was prohibited to him, he will have to struggle to eat in the future. Given the abundance of food that God provided in the garden, this judgment reflects God's disfavor. Adam will no longer enjoy the garden's abundance but will have to work the ground from which he was taken (3:23; see note on 2:8-9). The punishment is not work itself (cf. 2:15), but rather the hardship and frustration (i.e., "pain," itstsabon; cf. 3:16) that will accompany the man's labor. To say that the ground is cursed (Hb. ’arar, v. 17) and will bring forth thorns and thistles (v. 18) indicates that the abundant productivity that was seen in Eden will no longer be the case. Underlying this judgment is a disruption of the harmonious relationship that originally existed between humans and nature.
3:19 Further, the man's body will return to the ground (v. 19), i.e., it will die (which was not true of the original created order; cf. Rom. 5:12). For this reason, the Bible looks forward to a time when nature will be set free from the consequences of human sin; i.e., nature will no longer be the arena of punishment, and it will finally have glorified human beings to manage it and bring out its full potential (Rom. 8:19-22).
3:20-21 God's words of judgment on the serpent, woman, and man are immediately followed by two observations that possibly convey a sense of hope. First, the man names his wife Eve (v. 20), which means "life-giver" (see ESV footnote). Second, God clothes the couple (v. 21). While this final action recognizes that the human couple is now ashamed of their nakedness in God's presence, as a gesture it suggests that God still cares for these, his creatures. Because God provides garments to clothe Adam and Eve, thus requiring the death of an animal to cover their nakedness, many see a parallel here related to
3:22-24 The couple is expelled from the garden. God begins a sentence in v. 22 and breaks off without finishing it--for the man to live forever (in his sinful condition) is an unbearable thought, and God must waste no time in preventing it ("therefore the Lord God sent him out from the garden"). The tree of life, then, probably served in some way to confirm a person in his or her moral condition (cf. Prov. 3:18; 11:30; 13:12; Rev. 2:7; 22:2, 14, 19). According to Gen. 2:15, the man was put in the garden to work it and keep or guard it. Outside the garden the man will have to work the ground, but the task of keeping or guarding the garden is given to the cherubim (3:24). By allowing themselves to be manipulated by the serpent, the couple failed to fulfill their priestly duty of guarding the garden. Consequently, their priestly status is removed from them as they are put out of the sanctuary. The placing of cherubim to the east of the garden is reflected in the tabernacle and temple, where cherubim were an important component in the structure and furnishings (see The Ark of the Covenant).
4:1-26 Adam and Eve's Sons. This chapter shows mankind plunging further into sin, with Cain murdering his brother and his descendant Lamech taking indiscriminate revenge. Although they have been expelled from the garden of Eden, Adam and Eve are enabled by God to have two sons. With them rests the hope of an offspring who will overcome the serpent. When Cain callously murders his righteous brother Abel, however, evil seems to triumph. Any hope that Cain's descendants will reverse this trend appears remote when Lamech boasts of killing a man simply for striking him. Against this background the brief announcement of Seth's birth to replace Abel offers fresh hope.
4:1 Eve's reference to the Lord's help when Cain is born conveys a sense of optimism. The serpent may yet be overthrown by the offspring of the woman.
4:2-5 Although Cain and Abel have contrasting occupations and present different types of offerings to God, the present episode is not designed to elevate herdsmen over farmers, or animal offerings over plant offerings. One way to explain why God had regard for Abel and his offering, but not for Cain, is to posit that Abel's offering, being of the firstborn of his flock, is a more costly offering, expressing greater devotion. Another way to explain the difference is first to observe that both offerings are recognizable parts of the later Levitical system: for Cain's offering of the fruit of the ground (v. 3), cf. Deut. 26:2 (an offering expressing consecration), and for Abel's offering of the firstborn of his flock, cf. Deut. 15:19-23 (a kind of peace offering, a meal in God's presence). But at no point does the Bible suggest that offerings work automatically, as if the worshiper's faith and contrition did not matter; and Cain's fundamentally bad heart can be seen in his resentment toward his brother and in his uncooperative answers to God in the rest of the passage. Several NT texts derive legitimate inferences from this narrative, namely, that Cain demonstrated an evil heart by his evil deeds, while Abel demonstrated a pious heart by his righteous deeds (1 John 3:12); and that Abel offered his sacrifice by faith and was commended as righteous for that reason (Heb. 11:4).
4:6-7 The Lord's words challenge Cain to do better. He still has the possibility of turning, evidently with God's help, to please God. To succeed in doing this, however, he must overcome the domination of sin, presented here as a wild beast seeking to devour Cain (cf. note on 3:16).
4:8 The brevity of the report of Abel's murder underlines the coldness of Cain's action. Jealousy, probably coupled with anger at God, causes him to slay his own brother without pity. The heinousness of this spiteful murder reveals that sin has mastered Cain.
4:9 am I my brother's keeper? When the Lord confronts Cain with his crime, his coldhearted nature causes him to deny any knowledge about his brother. Cain shows no sign of remorse.
4:10-12 Cain's punishment is linked to his crime. He will no longer be able to cultivate the soil (vv. 11-12) because his brother's blood cries out to God from the ground (v. 10). Cain's sentence adds to the alienation between man and the ground that has already been introduced in 3:17-18. Underlying these punishments is a principle that recurs throughout Scripture: human sin has a bearing on the fertility of the earth. Whereas God intended humanity to enjoy the earth's bounty, sin distances people not only from God himself but also from nature (see note on 3:17-19). Genesis 4:10 is the likely background for the NT's use of the phrase "the blood of Abel" as the paradigm for an innocent victim crying for justice (Matt. 23:35; Luke 11:51; Heb. 12:24).
4:13-16 Cain is immediately conscious of the severity of his punishment. He is to be alienated from both the ground and God. While this may seem like a very lenient sentence, it meant that Cain would become a fugitive and a wanderer on the earth (v. 14). Alienated from the rest of human society, Cain fears that others will have such a dread of him that anyone finding him will kill him (v. 14). The reader is not told who those others might be. By way of reassuring Cain, the Lord states that sevenfold vengeance will come on anyone who kills him (v. 15). the Lord put a mark on Cain. In spite of much scholarly speculation, the precise nature of the mark is uncertain. It must have been something visible, but that is all that can be said. Like his parents, who were sent out of the garden, Cain is forced to move away from the presence of the Lord (and Moses seems to be implying that this is true of Cain's offspring as well, since vv. 17-24 lack any mention of God). Presumably Cain moves farther to the east of Eden (v. 16). Cain settles in a region that is appropriately known as Nod (location unknown), which in Hebrew means "wandering."
4:17-24 These verses provide selective information about Cain's descendants, concluding with a description of Lamech (v. 19), who boasts of having taken revenge "seventy-sevenfold" by killing a man who wounded him. Seven generations on from Cain, Lamech resembles his ancestor, but seems to be worse.
4:17 Cain knew his wife. No explanation is given as to the origin of Cain's wife. As is often the case in Genesis, the limited and selective nature of the account leaves the reader with unanswered questions (see Introduction: Reading Genesis in the Twenty-first Century). Presumably, Cain married his sister--a reasonable assumption, since the whole human race descends from Adam and Eve (and the laws later forbidding this practice, such as in Lev. 18:9, would not have been relevant at this stage; cf. Gen. 5:4). he built a city. The precise identity of the city-builder is open to debate. While Cain would appear to be the builder (on the basis that it is named after his son, Enoch), the Hebrew text could also be taken as indicating that Enoch was the builder. Although the opening two chapters make no specific mention of a "city," the early readers of Genesis would have automatically assumed that the instruction to fill the earth implies that humanity would establish a city or cities around, and then spreading out from, Eden. While this was part of God's design for the earth, Genesis observes that some people engage in city building without any reference to God (see esp. 11:1-9).
4:18-22 Seven generations after Cain, Lamech is born (v. 18). His immediate descendants are associated with animal breeding, music, and metalwork, all of which are noteworthy cultural and technological developments (vv. 20-22). Whereas Abel is linked to sheep (v. 2), the herds of Jabal also include cattle, donkeys, and possibly camels (v. 20). (Pre-flood genealogies are well attested in the ancient Near East, in particular, in Mesopotamian texts. The Sumerian King List records lists of monarchs who ruled the land before the "Great Deluge." The founding of cities was one of the primary industries of these pre-flood rulers. Such parallels confirm the historicity of the biblical pre-flood account.)
4:23-24 The new developments of vv. 20-22 are overshadowed by Lamech's boast of having killed a man for wounding or striking him (v. 23). Lamech's response is out of proportion to the injury, showing his inordinate vengefulness. This, like his bigamy (v. 19), reveals his depravity. His behavior reveals that the line of Cain is dominated by those who have no regard for the lives of others or respect for the principle of monogamy that 2:23-24 endorses (see note there). Later laws in the Pentateuch insist on proportional punishment: in the case of murder, a maximum of life for life (Ex. 21:23). sevenfold . . . seventy-sevenfold. Lamech is boasting that his vengeful passion makes him safer than Cain (Gen. 4:15), who had protection only from God. "Seventy-sevenfold" is a picturesque statement for extravagant excess; cf. Matt. 18:22 (see ESV footnote).
4:25-26 The final verses of this section suddenly jump back to Adam and Eve in order to report the birth of their third son, Seth. Eve's remark, God has appointed for me another offspring instead of Abel, is clearly an allusion back to the offspring of the woman in 3:15. The potential of Seth's birth is immediately underlined by the observation, At that time people began to call upon the name of the Lord, i.e., to seek him in (public) worship. Details are not given, but the implication may be that this calling on the Lord's name began in Adam's own family circle.
