Author: biblical.jungle

Genesis: Cain’s Curse

Posted on by
Genesis Chapter 4

I always viewed the Mark of Cain as a negative. Cain was marked because he had killed his brother. The mark of Cain has been interpreted to mean “the curse of Cain,” which could be passed down from generation to generation. Throughout history, people have used the “mark of Cain” as a basis for discrimination and racism.

For example, many Americans during the Civil War believed the mark of Cain was dark skin, which they used as justification for slavery; i.e., descendants of Cain were cursed. Slavery was the result of Cain’s curse passed from generation to generation. See PBS’ series “This Far by Faith” for information on how the issue of slavery divided Protestants.

I wasn’t aware of how the issue of slavery led to the formation of the Northern and Southern Baptists or created the division within the Methodist Episcopal Church. The PBS series gives a fascinating look into the impact of church doctrine on society as a whole.

Protection

As I read these verses in Genesis, I see the mark of Cain as a way for God to protect Cain as he wandered the earth. It wasn’t a mark to separate him from the rest of the world. It was a way to give Cain another chance.

One reason I think God was giving Cain a second chance is based on verse 4:13. The NIV, as do most versions, translates the verse as “punishment is too great.” However, the word for punishment can also mean iniquity or guilt. If guilt is substituted for punishment, Cain is saying that his guilt is overwhelming. Because he is sorry for what he has done, God is willing to protect him.

A second reason also rests on how a verse is translated. As discussed, verse 4:8 is translated differently in the Christian verses Masoretic texts. If Cain lured Abel into the field as the Christian translations suggest, the murder would have been premeditated and the punishment should have been death, according to the Old Testament laws. Since God didn’t kill Cain, I think the Hebrew and Aramaic texts are correct. Cain came upon Abel in the field; they may have argued and Cain killed him in anger. It was a crime of passion.

Genesis: Who me?

Posted on by
Genesis Chapters 3

From the beginning, humans were trying to pass the buck. Adam blames Eve; Eve blames the serpent. We never want to take responsibility for our poor choices. Let’s face it. If things had turned out differently and God was pleased with the disobedience, do you think Adam would have said “Eve made me do it”? Yeah, right.

Then, look at Cain and Abel. What’s the most quoted verse out of the Cain and Abel chapters? Yep. Cain’s response of: “Am I my brother’s keeper?” Just a different way of deflecting blame.

What I find curious about Cain and Abel are all the assumptions that have been made and how those assumptions have been passed down from generation to generation.

  • Cain and Abel were firstborn. The Bible doesn’t indicate the birth order of Cain or Abel. In fact, the Bible doesn’t mention the birth order of any of Adam and Eve’s children, nor does it indicate the number of children they had. Just because they are the first ones mentioned doesn’t mean they were the firstborn. Individuals may be able to deduce the order, but those deductions are based on assumptions.
  • Rejection of Cain’s offering. For some reason, I thought sacrifices should be blood sacrifices so Cain’s offering was not acceptable. But, it was Cain’s attitude that was at fault. Verse 7 says that “If you do what is right, will you not be accepted?” Clearly, something wasn’t right with Cain.
  • Cain as a murderer. Was Abel’s murder a crime of passion or of premeditation? Most Christian translations have Cain luring Abel to his death while the Hebrew and Aramaic texts have Cain coming upon Abel by accident. Since Christian translations have Cain luring Abel, most theologians believe it was premeditated murder. I think there is a case for a crime of passion.
  • Cain’s punishment. The infamous mark of Cain. Cain’s punishment was not death. He was to become a wanderer, marked by God. Precisely what the mark of Cain was is not stated although speculation abounds.

I’m only four chapters in and already I’ve found so many misconceptions about what the Bible really says. Am I the only one who had these misconceptions?

Genesis: Noah

Posted on by

Genesis 5

What value can a list of names I can’t even pronounce possible have?

Well . . . various scholars have used the genealogy in chapter 5 to determine a date for the flood and creation. Their calculations are based on the assumption that the genealogy in Chapter 5 is a complete and accurate listing of all generations between Adam and Noah.

Is that assumption correct enough to have become “fact”?

Some Bibles call Chapter 5 Adam’s Descendants to Noah, Adam’s Descendants, or something similar. Those titles imply that the listing is complete. However, the original writings didn’t include those headings; the writings didn’t even have chapters.

So, who decided that the genealogical listing in Chapter 5 could be used as an accurate estimate of the time between Adam and Noah?

James Ussher, 1581-1656, created what is known as the Ussher Chronology, which continues to be the basis for the literalists position on the date of creation. Is there a reason why we still rely on data from the 17th century? Shouldn’t we revisit those century-old assumptions?

Aren’t there still questions to be answered regarding the timeline? Questions like:

  • Do Adam’s 930 years include the time spent in the Garden?
  • How does Enoch’s life factor into the equation, if he never died?
  • Did any of the “other sons and daughters” live longer than those mentioned in Chapter 5?
  • Is the listing complete?

My biggest question is why are Christians fighting over the accuracy of the Biblical timeline?

Any timeline is based on assumptions. Assumptions that Chapter 5 is a complete and accurate genealogy from Adam to Noah. Yet, the author of Genesis doesn’t claim that the genealogy is complete and makes no statements as to who was or was not included in the listing. The author only claims to provide the genealogy for one branch of Adam’s family tree. How do other branches of Adam’s family tree impact the timeline of Chapter 5?

Is one person’s assumption better than another’s?

I get how people could read Chapter 5 as THE timeline between Adam and Noah. I also see how that timeline is based on a few assumptions. What I don’t see is the need for believers to condemn other believers who do not share the same assumptions. Haven’t we lost sight of the message in our drive to be right?

Genesis: What’s in God’s day?

Posted on by
Genesis 1 and 2

Was the world as we know it created in six days? Yes? No? Maybe?

YES, Creation happened

For those who believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible, the answer is Yes. The thought that the world was not is heresy. Creation happened in six days exactly as the Bible says. The problem with this view is the variations in the account of Creation between Chapters 1 and 2.

Chapter 2 seems to duplicate a great deal of information from Chapter 1, which has led some scholars to believe that Chapter 2 was added after the fact and by a second writer or editor. Others believe that Chapter 2 is an amplication of Chapter 1 and focuses on man’s creation. Chapter 2 may or may not have been written by a second writer. Try reading Chapters 1 and 2 in the following order:

  • Chapter 1: 1-27
  • Chapter 2: 4-15
  • Chapter 1:28
  • Chapter 2: 1-3

The restructuring does make the events flow more coherently, but questions still remain, such as

  • When were the sun, moon and stars created day 2 or day 4?
  • When did vegetation start to grow?
  • Who does the we refer to on Day 6?

For scholars who believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible, these are questions that need answers since the two chapters appear to contradict each other.

NO, Creation’s a metaphor

Some theologians believe that creation is a metaphor for what happened and do not believe that Chapters 1 and 2 of Genesis should be taken literally. (Sally McFague is a leading proponent of the metaphorical approach to the Bible. She does not have a website, but a brief biography and list of writings can be found on Wikipedia.)

MAYBE

I created the maybe school of thought for me. I don’t think that Genesis is a metaphor and didn’t take place. The world is just too intricate to have been the result of an accident of nature. But precisely how long and in what order, I’m not sure. For a brief summary of possible “maybe theories,” see “Nine Views of Creation.”

Gap Theory

The idea that God’s day is not the same as our day is part of the “gap” theory of creation. Most adherents to the gap theory point to 2 Peter, “But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day [is] with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day (3:8).” Critics of the theory point to the use of “morning” and “night” as a basis for arguing for a “day” meaning a 24 hour period. The basic concept is that the time between “days” could allow for evolutionary theories.

Translation

Another theory is based on the translation of the Hebrew words for create and make. Depending on how you interpret these words, God created the world from nothing, or God made the world from something. If God made the world from something, then the world could have existed in some form before Genesis. This theory would support an evolutionary period prior to Genesis. (See Aplogetics Press for a discussion of the various theories of creation.)

Genesis: In the beginning

Posted on by
Genesis 1 and 2

I’m hesitant to write what I think about creation because of what others might think. That’s sad. I shouldn’t be afraid of being unfriended or ridiculed because of what I think especially by other believers. But I am. I’ve never really understood why it is so hard for believers to have a reasoned discussion over a difference in interpretation.

Most, if not all, civilizations have a creation story. (See Leeming, David Adams; Leeming, Margaret Adams (2009), A Dictionary of Creation Myths Oxford Reference online ed. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0195102754). A list of creation myths can be found on Wikipedia Under List of Creation Myths, although the article lacks references.

The Chaldean Genesis

Critics of Genesis point to the Epic of Enuma Elish as the basis for the Creation story in Chapters 1 and 2. Because the Epic was written during the Sumerian period, which was before Genesis was written, critics believe Genesis was adapted from the earlier epic.

Image of tablets with missing areas

The epic was written on six tablets (6 days) with a seventh tablet (Sabbath) praising the work recorded in the first six tablets. Copies of the Epic may also be found under The Chaldean Genesis, which was the title given to the Epic when it was first published in the 19th century. A copy of the 19th century text is available online.

When something was written doesn’t mean it did not exist as oral history. Genesis could have existed before the Epic as an oral tradition. It is interesting that Genesis is the only creation account that has only a single God without form ( no idols) and specifically mentions woman as part of creation. Despite all the science, I have a hard time believing that we are an accident of nature.

What do you think? An accident of nature or an act of God?