Lonang Commentary on Genesis 5

Gen. 5:1-2 This is the book of the generations of Adam. When God created man, he made him in the likeness of God. Male and female he created them, and he blessed them and named them Man when they were created.

Who Wrote Genesis?

First, the easy question – as to grammar. Note that God refers to both male and female as Man. The modern trend which views this as sexist’ is out of step with our creation. God – the inventor of language – sets the pattern for proper word usage, not modern (mostly anti-God) sensibilities. This is consistent with the New Testament’s treatment of women as included in the adopted sons of God and being heirs of God as much as men.

Second, this phrase, “the book of the generations,” appears only this one time in the entire Bible. The more common phrase is, “these are the generations,” which appears ten times in Genesis, nine of which are at the beginning of a new branch of human genealogy. The first use of the phrase is in Gen. 2:4, referring to the generations of the heavens and the earth in connection with Day 6 of the creation week. But the appearance of this phrase here provides us with the opportunity to consider who really wrote Genesis.

There are two principal camps: the traditional (i.e., conservative) view that Genesis, as with the other books of the Torah, was written by Moses around 1450 B.C.; and the JEDP Theory (i.e., liberal) view that Genesis was written by several (or many) people around 500 years after Moses. Whereas for myself, I consider it beyond any doubt that Moses wrote Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. As for Genesis, I view Moses as most likely being the compiler of Genesis -which is to say, Genesis was largely written – not after Moses – but before Moses.

My reasoning is simple. The vast majority of the rest of the Bible was written, in the case of each book, by an actual eyewitness to the events described. The one notable exception is Luke, which was actually written by Luke, but he himself was not an eyewitness so much as a compiler of accounts from others. And he states so much in the opening verses of his Gospel. In other words, he didn’t hide the fact of how he came about his information. Other portions of scripture, notably the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation, were imparted by visions from God to the authors. But again both authors came right out and said they were recounting visions from God, not as eyewitnesses to the future, but as eyewitnesses of the visions.

The question is whether Genesis was dictated to Moses in a dream, vision, or other supernatural revelation – for Moses was most certainly not an actual eyewitness to anything whatsoever recounted in Genesis. Or whether Moses was a compiler, and perhaps an editor, of eyewitness accounts handed down by the patriarchs, inevitably funneling through Noah and his sons as the only possible means of surviving the flood.

I generally discount the idea that Genesis, in its entirety, was dictated to Moses by God. For Genesis most certainly never claims Moses as its author. Nor is it anywhere claimed that the entire contents of Genesis were revealed in a dream or vision. Genesis includes dreams and visions revealed to Joseph, certainly – but again this is not merely presumed or implied, the scriptures come right out and admit that Joseph had dreams. Nowhere does Genesis say that the rest of the book was revealed in a dream or vision – which we might expect, if that is what happened.

Certainly, Genesis chapter 1 had no human eyewitness, as such, unless perhaps God told Adam what happened during the creation week before Adam was formed. Which would have required Adam to write down what God told him – a feat most scholars would consider impossible. However, Adam was able to speak and have a command of language – what exact language, we don’t know – on the very first day of his life. He was able to name all the animals, and as noted previously, he was no dummy. So what secular scholars believe early man was capable of does not decide the matter for me.

As a practical matter, if the years given for the lives of the patriarchs are accurate, any information Adam had could have been given by him to Methuselah, which he could have handed down to Shem, who could have transferred the same to either Abraham, Isaac or Jacob (all of whom were born during Shem’s lifetime). So it is not difficult to believe there could have been a scenario where this information was preserved for many years with very few transfers, eventually landing the hands of Moses. Of course, I do not know this.

All I am saying is that it might be possible that Genesis was written in several parts – for the entire book covers a span of 2,300 years or so (i.e., from creation to the time of Joseph) – each part being written by a patriarch who lived at the time and was an eyewitness to the events described. These various parts then could have landed in the care of Moses, who compiled and edited the source material under the Lord’s inspiration. Or you can believe the entire book of Genesis was dictated by the Lord to Moses long after the fact – but this would be seriously inconsistent with all the rest of scripture, so it is not my first choice.

Gen. 5:3-5 When Adam had lived 130 years, he fathered a son in his own likeness, after his image, and named him Seth. The days of Adam after he fathered Seth were 800 years; and he had other sons and daughters. Thus all the days that Adam lived were 930 years, and he died.

A Good Long Life

There is no way to verify this, but according to tradition as accepted by Bishop Ussher and reported in Adams’ Synchronological Chart or Map of History (1871), Adam and Eve had a total of 33 sons and 23 daughters. James Ussher (4 January 1581 – 21 March 1656) was the Church of Ireland Archbishop of Armagh and Primate of All Ireland between 1625 and 1656. He is famous for developing a chronology and timeline of history based on biblical genealogies which established the initial Creation as occurring on 22 October 4004 BC, according to the Julian calendar worked backwards. Of course, America adopted the Gregorian calendar in 1752 in place of the Julian calendar, which is no longer in use anywhere, but you get the point – Ussher dated the Creation (based on biblical textual evidence) at 4,000 years before the birth of Jesus in 4 BC.

If we assume Seth was only the third child of Adam, then he had 53 more children over the course of the rest of his life – 800 years – or an average of one child every 15 years. Of course, there is no reason to assume Adam’s children were all equally spaced over that time period, which also would have been limited both by Eve’s lifespan and whether she ever went through menopause – questions we cannot answer. But they, like most couples, probably went through a period of frequent childbirth, followed by a period of enjoying their grandchildren, and great-grandchildren, etc. Can you imagine the whole world calling Adam and Eve, Pop’ and Gram’ or the equivalent?

I do not take the lifespans as recorded in Gen. 5 as mythic, symbolic, or allegorical – I take them as literal. There are many reasons why people before the flood could have lived much longer than people today. Since rain had not yet fallen on the earth (Gen. 2:5), ostensibly there would not have been any storms either – no hurricanes, tornadoes or thunderstorms, meaning no lightning, no floods, no hail, etc. With all of the topographical changes wrought by the flood – continental drift, the formation of mountains and deserts, changes in sea levels, etc. the earth as a whole could well have been more temperate without any uninhabitable zones or polar ice caps. Although most of these things are debated by scientists, if we take the scriptures at face value it is entirely possible that the environment of the earth could have been much more conducive to a longer lifespan.

Another major factor affecting human lifespans is what happened to our DNA after the flood. And here I make reference to two things: first, the absolutely huge reduction in the human gene pool resulting from only eight persons surviving the flood. Who knows how many gene variations were lost as a result? Second, human DNA began a process by which mutations – mainly through copying errors from one generation to the next – have caused our DNA to degrade over the generations. And mutations almost always impact people negatively in some way. Meaning that over time, the human genome continues to degrade each generation, the undoubted effect of which has been to shorten lifespans.

Regardless of your view of the relative health benefits of eating meat, as it was not authorized by God prior to the flood, we must presume that all of our antediluvian ancestors had a diet that was exclusively plant based – no meat of any kind. When one factors in the dangers of eating uncooked meat, it is quite possible that a meatless diet would have extended lifespans.

And don’t get me talking about the corruption of the food supply, by which much of our food has been genetically modified and/or tainted with artificial ingredients. All of which may fight off insects and keep food fresh longer, but essentially degrades the nutritional value of the food and has harmful long-term side effects. Whereas pre-flood, people only ever ate all-natural organic food, uncorrupted, unmodified, and untampered with. No wonder they lived longer. So yes, I take all the lifespans in Genesis literally.

Gen 5:6-32 [Abridged]When Seth was 105, he fathered Enosh, lived another 807 years, and died at age 912.
When Enosh was 90, he fathered Kenan, lived another 815 years, and died at age 905.
When Kenan was 70, he fathered Mahalalel, lived another 840 years, and died at age 910.
When Mahalalel was 65, he fathered Jared, lived another 830 years, and died at age 895.
When Jared was 162, he fathered Enoch, lived another 800 years, and died at age 962.
When Enoch was 65, he fathered Methuselah, lived another 300 years, and at age 365 God took him, and he was not.
When Methuselah was 187, he fathered Lamech, lived another 782 years, and died at age 969.
When Lamech was 182, he fathered Noah, lived another 595 years, and died at age 777.
After Noah was 500 years old, Noah fathered Shem, Ham, and Japheth.

Real History, Not Myth or Allegory

One of the most unappreciated aspects of the biblical genealogies is that they help establish the biblical record as fact, not myth. The genealogies are not just a sequence of names – rather, they are interspersed with historical data that link them with real historical events and cement them as a credible witness of the past. And since the various genealogical records of the scriptures (in Genesis and elsewhere in the Bible) span the entire time from creation until Christ, they help cement the factual nature of the entire Bible, not merely the genealogies themselves.

The genealogy of chapter 5 provides useful timeline information from Adam down to Noah and the flood. For each person in the list, we are given his age when his heir was born, how long he lived after that, and then what his total lifespan was. The fact such data exists helps to establish the genealogies as factual and not merely mythical or allegorical. In other words, the numbers are meant to be added together, cross-checked and verified – not just for each individual, but as between different generations. If these records were meant to be taken as mere myth or allegory, there would be no purpose in doing this.

Especially given that the first eleven chapters of Genesis are viewed by many people as non-historical, the type of data we find here provides an additional basis (that is, in addition to the other historical facts presented in Genesis) for considering the genealogies as historical fact. This, in turn, further supports the understanding that all the events described in the first eleven chapters of Genesis (and not merely the genealogies) are historical fact and not mere myth or allegory.

Which is crucial, given that so many of our most fundamental legal principles, including equality, religious freedom, private property, economic liberty, family relationships and mankind’s dominion over the creation (to name but a few) all spring from a literal/historical reading of Genesis 1 thru 11. Not to mention that our whole understanding of the fall, man’s sinful nature and the absolute necessity of redemption all rest on a shaky foundation if the events of Genesis are not factually and literally true.

By this I mean either we are all of us – every single person – a physical descendant of Adam and the inheritor of a pre-disposition to sin as a matter of absolute fact, or the whole story only has as much weight as we choose to give it. If fact, then it doesn’t matter what any of us believe, we are all objectively sinful. If not fact, then the whole thing becomes subjective and a lot less like a universal truth. Establishing the Genesis account as a fact is crucial if it is to be understood as truth. And this is by no means limited to mankind’s sinful nature and the need for spiritual redemption.

Our conceptions of legal equality – based on the sentiments of the Declaration of Independence that all men are created equal – are directly derived from Gen. 1:27 and the idea that all people are equally made in God’s image. If this verse is not objectively true as a fact, then legal equality disappears, and all we are left with is factual inequality, for people are obviously born with different traits and abilities into different social and economic situations. Without the image of God as a constant in human nature, what else is there that makes everyone equal? If all people are not equally subject to the laws of God, equally accountable to Him, and equally to be judged by Him, any so-called law of equality is merely wishful thinking.

Without a literal reading of Gen. 1:26-28 (the Dominion Mandate), there is no firm foundation for private property as the gift of God (property then becomes a mere creation of the state). If the Dominion Mandate is not fact – and an actual legally binding covenant between God and factual descendants of Adam – then marriage, family and children are no longer inalienable human rights (i.e., rights granted by God, not men). A merely mythical or allegorical Dominion Mandate does not convey any actual legal rights which are absolutely binding, and which actually legally constrain civil governments. Only if Genesis 1-11 is real history, based in fact, are our rights secured.

This is what the genealogy in chapter 5 helps to do. It helps establish the factual credibility for the most fundamental and sacred legal principles we hold dear as the underlying basis for human society. And for this we should be most thankful.

Ancient Chronology

It is solely because of the data contained in the Genesis genealogies that we are able to construct any kind of useful time line for ancient human history. Granted, the dates of birth and death are not as precise as we would like – there are no months and days, only years. Actually, scripture does indicate the month and day of the great flood, namely, “in the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month.” Gen. 7:11. But that doesn’t tell us when Noah was born, or how long that was after creation. So we need the genealogical data to fill in the gaps.

I assume the lifespans given are accurate plus or minus one year, so that the law of averages will make the overall numbers fairly accurate. Even if we assume, as a worst case scenario, each lifespan could be off by as much as a full year (more or less), when you realize there are only 77 generations from Adam to Christ (as indicated in Luke’s genealogy), it means that the time line between them (based on genealogical data) is about 4,000 years plus or minus only 77 years. Not 100,000 years, or even 10,000 years. Thus, the range for error is very small, and for purposes of mapping out history, almost negligible. As the data in chapter 5 covers only 10 generations, that means the numerical data is good to within 10 years.

This makes dating certain events (within a few dozen years) fairly easy. Thus, using Bishop Ussher’s timeline as an example, Noah was born around 1056 A.M. (Anno Mundi – “year of the world,” i.e., years after creation), or circa 2948 B.C. The flood itself occurred around 1656 A.M., or 2348 B.C. The dispersion following the Tower of Babel came a mere 150 or so years later. Abraham was born around 1950 A.M., or 2054 B.C. Moses was born around 2460 A.M./1544 B.C., and the Exodus occurred 80 years later, about 1464 B.C. David was born around 1,060 B.C. All these dates are approximate, but in the ball park.

We can tell, within a few dozen years, when all of the O.T. divine covenants were inaugurated (Adamic, Noahic, Abrahamic, Mosaic and Davidic). We can chart, with some certainty, the progress of various nations and key interactions between them, such as the Exodus, when Solomon’s temple was built, the deportation to Babylon, the rebuilding of the temple, etc. In short, the biblical genealogies make it possible for us to see the overall plan of history, and to understand some of its patterns.

One of the highlights of biblical chronology is to see which of the patriarchs were alive at the same time. For example, Adam was still alive when Noah’s father (Lamech) was born eight generations later. Methuselah – the world’s oldest man at 969 years and Noah’s grandfather – died in the year of the flood. Methuselah and Adam were both alive for an overlap of about 243 years. Shem was still alive when both Isaac and Jacob were alive, though we can’t know if they knew each other. Unusually long lifespans of 450+ years continued for four generations after Noah (from Shem to Eber, namesake of the Hebrews). But beginning with Peleg (during whose lifetime the dispersion from Babel occurred – Gen. 10:25), lifespans began to top out around 200 years or less.

When you realize that Noah was alive for the first 56 years of Abraham’s life, and that they could quite possibly have talked directly with each other (even though the nations had scattered by that point), it is conceivable that information going all the way back to creation could have landed in Abraham’s hands in only three transfers – Adam to Methusaleh, Methusaleh to Noah, and Noah to Abraham. Just like that, information about the first 2,000 years of human history as recorded by the people who were there, could have landed in the care of Abraham to pass down to his descendants. Of course, you have to assume the earliest men were not merely glorified apes who grunted and pointed as their best means of communication. Ugh! Mwanawana goo goo!

While I find the dating of biblical events to be a fascinating study, I offer a strong caution against believing that every significant event in the scriptures can be dated with accuracy to not only the number of approximate years, but exact years, even down to the exact number of months, weeks and days. Or believing that all biblical events fall on dates according to set patterns that can be discerned, mathematically calculated and predicted. I feel sorry for all the well intended people making calculations in the 1980’s showing the Second Coming of Christ and the start of the Millennium occurring in 2001. That is not why the genealogical data is given to us.

Is the data useful for history, chronology and dating? Yes. But it is not full of wondrous secrets waiting to be unlocked by careful mastery and manipulation using number theory. The genealogical data is historical fact, not a mathematical code. The Bible tells us that God keeps some things hidden until He decides to reveal them. Deut. 29:29; 1 Cor. 2:7; Col. 1:26, 2:3. What that means is that if God has hidden secret truths in the numbers of the Bible, nothing you do can ever unlock or discover those secrets until God is ready to reveal them. I mean reveal them by His word. So don’t waste your time playing with the numbers. You are not ever going to crack God’s code (if there is one) or hack His system. The things God hides cannot be found.

But the general timing, sequence and flow of history is not one of those secret things. These are things which can be known – not based on science, but on eye-witness testimony – and put to good use to enhance our understanding of the world if we are open to it. After all, the origin of humanity is not primarily a scientific question, nor is it answered primarily by scientific evidence. The scientific method can only measure things now, not 6,000 years ago. And tests developed for dating all have serious limitations and assumptions. The best evidence for understanding the origin of humanity, in particular, is eye-witness testimony and documentary records – which is what Genesis provides.

Law of Inheritance

The genealogy here in chapter 5, as with biblical genealogies in general, only traces the male lineage, never a person’s female ancestors or his or her female descendants. Even Mary’s genealogy in Luke, though it terminates with her, is strictly concerned with her male ancestors. Why is this? It is not because the biblical genealogies are part of any ideological system that men are inherently dominant or superior to women. Neither are the genealogies indicative of an unjust social system that oppresses women. Frankly, none of what we are about to discuss was the idea of any man or group of men because – I suggest – it was, and is, God’s idea.

I start with the assumption that the genealogies, as much as any other part of the Bible, are God-breathed, Holy Spirit inspired, and ultimately authored by God. Thus, not man invented or man perverted. And if that is the case, it may profit us to ask why God would do things this way, whether there is any way to make sense of it, and what we can learn about our world if this be so.

Let me suggest that there is such a thing as the Law of the Nature of Inheritance, which is to say, there is a law of inheritance which is part of the law of nature. In biology, the law of genetics is such that each human child takes equally from both parents, one of which must be male, and the other which must be female. However, according to the law of the nature of inheritance (hereafter, the law of inheritance), each child takes solely from the father and the mother is disregarded. So while genetics says a child takes from his parents 50-50, for purposes of inheritance under the law of nature and also in the scriptures, a child takes 100% from the father and 0% from the mother. Thus the difference between science (genetics) and law (inheritance).

It is most important that these two laws of genetics and inheritance not be confused. The law of genetics applies in the physical realm which mainly pertains to biology. The law of inheritance applies in the legal realm which mainly pertains to authority over property, the right to rule, and also goes to the matters of nationality and ethnicity. Before you get up in arms over gender-equality, let us see what evidence there is in the scriptures for this law of inheritance. What I will do here is give several examples from later scriptures evidencing the law of inheritance, and assume that God is logically consistent with Himself (“for God is not a God of confusion” – 1 Cor. 14:33), so that the same principles hold true here in Gen. 5 as with the rest of scripture.

First, consider the Matthew genealogy (Mat. 1:1-17), which establishes the right of Jesus to rule the nation of Israel as the heir of David. The genealogy makes reference to four non-Jewish women in the lineage from Abraham to Jesus, namely, Tamar, Rahab, Ruth, and Bathsheba. If the right to rule is to be inherited pursuant to the law of genetics, i.e., 50-50 from the father and the mother, then it would taint the genealogy because then Jesus would be less than 100% Jewish, the Son of David.

But none of that matters. As long as each male in the lineage was a descendant of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, then the lineage of Jesus as a descendant of Abraham and David is intact due to the operation of the law of inheritance. The ethnicity of the women is disregarded as irrelevant. And it strongly suggests that for all purposes with which the Matthew genealogy is concerned, only the fathers are important in determining the character and quality of that inheritance which is passed to the next generation.

Second, consider the case of In re The Daughters of Zelophehad found in Num 27:1-11 and Josh 17:3-4. In legal cases, the term in re (or, in the matter of) refers to a judicial proceeding having some item of property at the center of the dispute rather than adverse parties. In this case, the property at issue is the estate of Zelophehad, an Israelite of the tribe of Manasseh who died and was survived by five daughters and no sons. And the law controlling the distribution of the estate was this: “According to the names of the tribes of their fathers they shall inherit.” Num. 26:55.

In other words, property was to be inherited solely from one’s father, not the mother. What is unstated, but necessarily implied, is that only the sons would inherit from their fathers. If a daughter were to inherit (or a wife), upon her death no one would be able to inherit from her, since she will never have been a father, and the whole system of inheriting only from one’s father would unravel quickly. Thus, as an initial rule, no provision was made for either wives or daughters to inherit. But now comes the wrinkle, which had to happen eventually, where a man dies leaving no sons to inherit from him. But his property has to go somewhere, right? So the daughters of Zelophehad came to Moses with a question: where does the property go?

Long story short: the estate was divided among the daughters temporarily, until they could each get married from a man from the tribe of Manasseh, at which time the property would pass to the husband, who could then pass on the property to his sons. In fact, the solution God gives Moses solves two problems: 1) maintaining the integrity of father-to-son inheritance; and 2) maintaining the tribal integrity of Israel (which is why the daughters couldn’t marry men from other tribes). Obviously the tribal aspect of the case was peculiar to Israel and not part of the laws of nature, but I suggest, the father-to-son inheritance rule is more generally applicable to all nations.

Third, we also see the law of inheritance applied to the Church, the Body of Christ. Scripture indicates Christians are adopted as sons of God, not sons and daughters. Gal. 3:26. In a spiritual sense, God has children, but no daughters. Why? Because daughters do not inherit from their father, i.e., God.

“For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God. For you did not receive the spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received the Spirit of adoption as sons, by whom we cry, Abba! Father!’ The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ….” Rom. 8:14-17.

I am not making the argument that women are not or cannot be heirs with Christ. Rather, that women must be placed in the position of a son, legally, in order to be a spiritual heir of God the Father. Gal. 4:7. Thus, the N.T. repeatedly refers to all Christians as the sons of God. Luk. 20:36; Jn. 1:12; Rom. 8:14, 19; Gal. 3:26; Phlp. 2:15; 1 Jn. 3:1-2. It may not be politically correct in our culture, but this is the way God operates. If your translation of the Bible doesn’t carry this concept forward because it serves the false god of gender neutrality, throw it out.

A fourth example is one we have already seen – the Fall of mankind being inherited by the descendants of Adam, for which purpose Eve’s transgression was and is disregarded.

A fifth example is something we alluded to in considering Gen. 3:15, namely, the prophecy of the seed of the woman (not Adam’s seed) overcoming the Devil. This prophecy relating to the birth of Christ – considered in light of the law of inheritance – fully explains why and how Jesus was born sinless and without a sin nature. For Jesus had no human father, and therefore inherited no sin nature as a descendant of Adam. His mother Mary, of course, being a descendant of Adam, had a sin nature. But it had no bearing on Jesus, because He inherited nothing from her – mothers being disregarded for inheritance purposes, after all.

Thus, I suggest the law of inheritance is a universal rule throughout scripture, and is part of the eternal law of nature.