Please Help Us Keep These Thousands of Blog Posts Growing and Free for All

$5.00

THE LINE OF SHETH.—Gen. 5:1-32

Some Hebrew Vocabulary First

5:1. סֵפֶר writing, a writing, a book.

5:9. קֵינֽן Qenan, possessor, or spearsman.

5:12. מַֽהֲלַלְאֵל Mahalalel, praise of El.

5:15. יֶרֱד Jered, going down.

5:21. מְתוּשֶׁלַח Methushelach, man of the missile.

5:29. נֹהַ Noach, rest, נחַם sigh; repent; pity; comfort oneself; be revenged.

5:32. שֵם Shem, name, fame; r. be high. חָם Cham, hot. יֶפֶת Japheth, spreading; r. spread out.

We now enter upon the third of the larger documents contained in Genesis. The first is a diary, the second is a history, the third a genealogy. The first employs the name Elohim exclusively; the second uses Jehovah Elohim in the second and third chapters, and Jehovah usually in the fourth; the third has Elohim in the first part, and Jehovah in the second part. The name Elohim is employed in the beginning of the chapter with a manifest reference to the first document, which is here quoted and abridged.

This chapter contains the line from Adam to Noah, which states some common particulars concerning all and specific unique details concerning three of them. The genealogy is traced to the tenth in descent from Adam and terminates with the flood. The scope of the chapter is to mark out the line of faith, hope, and holiness from Adam, the first head of the human race, to Noah, who eventually became the second natural head of it.

Genesis 5:1-2 Updated American Standard Version (UASV)
5 This is the book of the history of Adam. In the day when God created man, he made him in the likeness of God. ²Male and female he created them, and he blessed them and named them Man^[39] when they were created.

^[39] Lit Adam

Genesis 5:1-2. These verses are a recapitulation of the creation of man. The first sentence is the superscription of the new piece of composition now before us. The heading of the second document was more comprehensive. It embraced the generations, evolutions, or outworkings of the skies and the land as soon as they were called into existence and was accordingly dated from the third day. The present document confines itself to the generations of man and commences with the sixth day. The generations here are literal for the most part, though a few particulars of the individuals mentioned are recorded. But taken in a large sense this superscription will cover the whole of the history in the Old and New Testaments. It is only in the prophetic parts of these books that we reach again in the end of things to the wider compass of the heavens and the earth (Isa. 65:17; 2 Pet. 3:13; Rev. 21:1). Then only does the sphere of history enlarge itself to the pristine dimensions in the proper and blessed sense, when the second Adam appears on earth, and re-connects heaven and earth in a new, holy, and everlasting covenant.

GENESIS 5:1: From Where Did Moses Get the Information He Included in Genesis?

The present superscription differs from the former one in the introduction of the word סֵפֶר book. There is some ground in the text for supposing the insertion by Moses of an authentic document, handed down from the olden time, in the great work he was directed to compose. The chapter before us could not have been completed until after the birth of Shem, Ham, and Japheth. But if we accept the last verse, there is no impossibility or improbability in its being composed before the deluge.

The invention of writing at that early period is favored by some other circumstances connected with these records. We cannot say that it is impossible for oral tradition to preserve the memory of minute transactions—sayings, songs, names, and numbers of years up to a thousand—especially when men’s lives exceeded nine hundred years. But we can easily see that these details could be much more easily handed down if there was any method of notation for the help of the memory. The minute records of this kind, which we find in these early chapters, though not very numerous, afford a certain presumption in favor of a very early knowledge of the art of writing.

Genesis 5:2 And called their name man. This name seems to connect man (אָדָם) with the soil from which he was taken (אֲדָמָה Gen. 2:7). It is evidently a generic or collective term, denoting the species. God, as the maker, names the race, and thereby marks its character and purpose. With the creation of the woman, man was complete as a “kind.”

Genesis 5:3-5 Updated American Standard Version (UASV)
³When Adam had lived one hundred and thirty years, he became^[40] the father of a son in his own likeness, according to his image, and named him Seth. ⁴Then the days of Adam after he became the father of Seth were eight hundred years, and he had other sons and daughters. ⁵So all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years, and he died.

^[40] Lit begot

Genesis 3–5. In the compass of these three verses, the course of Adam’s life is completed. And after the same model the lines of all his lineal descendants in this chapter are drawn up. The certain particulars stated are the years he lived before the birth of a certain son, the number of years he afterward lived during which sons and daughters were born to him, and his death. Two sons, and most probably several daughters were born to Adam before the birth of Sheth. But these sons have been already noticed, and the line of Noah is here given. It is evident, therefore, that the following individuals in the genealogy may, or may not, have been first-born sons. The stated formula, and he died, at the close of each life except that of Enoch, is a standing demonstration of the effect of disobedience.

The writer, according to custom, completes the life of one patriarch before he commences that of the next; and so the first event of the following biography is long antecedent to the last event of the preceding one. This simply and clearly illustrates the law of Hebrew narrative.

The only peculiarity in the life of Adam is the statement that his son was in his likeness, after his image. This is undoubtedly intended to include that depravity that had become the characteristic of fallen man. It is contrasted with the preceding notice that Adam was originally created in the image of God. If it had been intended merely to indicate that the offspring was of the same species with the parent, the phrase, after his kind (לְמִינֵהוּ), would have been employed, as in the first chapter. This is one of the mysteries of the race, when the head of it is a moral being, and has fallen. His moral depravity, affecting the essential difference of his nature, descends to his offspring.

As this document alludes to the first in the words, in the day of God’s creating man, in the likeness of God made he him, quotes its very words in the sentence, male and female created he them, refers to the second in the words, and called their name man (Gen. 2:7), and also needs this second for the explication of the statement that the offspring of man bore his likeness, it presupposes the existence and knowledge of these documents at the time when it was written. If it had been intended for an independent work, it would have been fuller and explanatory on these important topics.

Genesis 5:21-24 Updated American Standard Version (UASV)
²¹Enoch lived sixty-five years and became the father of Methuselah. ²²Then Enoch walked with God^[41] three hundred years after he became the father of Methuselah, and he had other sons and daughters. ²³So all the days of Enoch were three hundred and sixty-five years. ²⁴Enoch walked with God;^[42] and he was not,^[43] for God took him.^[44]

^[41] The BHS/MT has the reading “walked with God” in both verse 22 and 24 of chapter 5. On the other hand, we have a variant in the Greek Septuagint (LXX) that reads “Enoch was pleasing to God” in both verse 22 and 24 of chapter 5. The metaphor “walked with God” would have been deemed offensive to the devoted worshippers, irreverence, or disrespect for God, audacious in that a human could walk with God or worse still that God was being lowered to a human level, an imperfect one at that. Clearly, the Septuagint rendered the metaphor “walked with God” as a paraphrase “Enoch was pleasing to God.”

^[42] See note on 5:22

^[43] Septuagint was not found

^[44] God took Enoch so as to not see death; See Hebrews 11:5

Genesis 5:21–24. The history of the Sethite Enoch is distinguished in two respects: First, after the birth of Methuselah, he walked with the God. Here for the first time we have God (אֱלֹהִים) with the definite article, with which it occurs more than four hundred times. By this he is emphatically distinguished as the God, now made known by his acts and manifestations, in opposition to atheism, the sole God in opposition to polytheism, and the true God in opposition to all false gods or notions of God. It is possible that in the time of Enoch some had forsaken the true God and fallen into various misconceptions concerning the Supreme Being. His walking with the God is a hint that others were walking without this God.

The phrase “walked with God” is rendered in the Septuagint εὐηρέστησε τῷ θεῷ, pleased God, and is adduced in the Epistle to the Hebrews (2:5, 6) as evidence of Enoch’s faith. Walking with God implies community with him in thought, word, and deed, and is opposed in Scripture to walking contrary to him. We are not at liberty to infer that Enoch was the only one in this line who feared God. But we are sure that he presented an eminent example of that faith which purifies the heart and pleases God.

IMITATE ENOCH: Walk With God Even in Times of Difficulty

He made a striking advance upon the attainment of the times of his ancestor Sheth. In those days they began to call upon the name of the Lord. Now the fellowship of the saints with God reaches its highest form,—that of walking with him, doing his will and enjoying his presence in all the business of life. Hence, this remarkable servant of God is accounted a prophet and foretells the coming of the Lord to judgment (Jude 14, 15). It is further to be observed that this most eminent saint of God did not withdraw from the domestic circle, or the ordinary duties of social life. It is related of him as of the others, that during the three hundred years of his walking with God he begat sons and daughters.

Jude 1:14 BDC: Why is Jude here quoting from the uninspired Book of Enoch as though it were Inspired?

Secondly, The second peculiarity of Enoch was his translation. This is related in the simple language of the times. And he was not, for God took him; or, in the version, of the Septuagint, “and he was not found, for God translated him.” Hence in the New Testament, it is said, Heb. 11:5, “By faith Enoch was translated, that he should not see death.” This passage is important for the interpretation of the phrase וְאֵינֶנּוּ καὶ ουχ εὑρίσκετο, and he was not (found). It means, we perceive, not absolutely, he was not, but relatively, he was not extant in the sphere of sense. If this phrase does not denote annihilation, much less does the phrase “and he died.” The one denotes absence from the world of sense, and the other indicates the ordinary way in which the soul departs from this world. Here, then, we have another hint that points plainly to the immortality of the soul (see Gen. 3:22).

This glimpse into life in ancient times furnishes a new lesson to the men of early times and of all succeeding generations. An atonement was shadowed forth in the offering of Abel. A voice was given to the devout feelings of the heart in the times of Sheth. And now a walk becoming one reconciled to God, calling upon his name, and animated by the spirit of adoption, is exhibited. Faith has now returned to God, confessed his name, and learned to walk with him. At this point God appears and gives to the antediluvian race a new and conclusive token of the riches and power of mercy in counteracting the effects of sin in the case of the returning penitent. Enoch does not die, but lives; and not only lives, but is advanced to a new stage of life, in which all the power and pain of sin are at an end forever. This crowns and signalizes the power of grace and represents in brief the grand finale of a life of faith. This renewed man is received up into glory without going through the intermediate steps of death and resurrection. If we omit the violent end of Abel, the only death on record that precedes the translation of Enoch is that of Adam. It would have been incongruous that he who brought sin and death into the world should not have died. But a little more than half a century after his death, Enoch is wafted to heaven without leaving the body. This translation took place in the presence of a sufficient number of witnesses and furnished a manifest proof of the presence and reality of the invisible powers. Thus were life and immortality as fully brought to light as was necessary or possible at that early stage of the world’s history. Thus was it demonstrated that the grace of God was triumphant in accomplishing the final and full salvation of all who returned to God. The process might be slow and gradual, but the end was now shown to be sure and satisfactory.

Genesis 5:24 OTBDC; Hebrews 11:5 NTBDC: Did Enoch Go to Heaven?

Genesis 5:25-27 Updated American Standard Version (UASV)

²⁵Methuselah lived one hundred and eighty-seven years and became the father of Lamech. ²⁶Then Methuselah lived seven hundred and eighty-two years after he became the father of Lamech, and he had other sons and daughters. ²⁷So all the days of Methuselah were nine hundred and sixty-nine years, and he died.

Genesis 25–27. Methuselah is the oldest man on record. He lived to be within thirty-one years of a thousand and died in the year of the flood.

Genesis 5:28-31 Updated American Standard Version (UASV)
²⁸Lamech lived one hundred and eighty-two years and became the father of a son. ²⁹Now he called his name Noah,^[45] saying, “This one will give us comfort^[46] from our work and from the toil of our hands arising from the ground which Jehovah has cursed.”^[47] ³⁰Then Lamech lived five hundred and ninety-five years after he became the father of Noah, and he had other sons and daughters. ³¹So all the days of Lamech were seven hundred and seventy-seven years, and he died.

^[45] Meaning Rest

^[46] Or rest or relief

^[47] Curse: (Heb. אָרַר arar; Gr ἐπικατάρατος epikataratos; from ἐπικαταράομαι epikataraomai) This should not be confused an offensive word or phrase used to express anger or annoyance. It means to threaten or pronounce to invoke supernatural divine power to inflict harm, punishment, or evil upon someone or something. A curse is frequently a formal statement of a pronouncement or prediction of evil, and it is prophetic if it is made by God or one of his representatives. – Gen. 5:29; 12:3; Nu 5:18, 19, 22, 24^(2x), 27; 22:12; Ga 3:10.

Genesis 5:28–31. In the biography of Lamech the name of his son is not only given, but the reason of it is assigned. The parents were cumbered with the toil of cultivating the ground. They looked forward with hope to the aid or relief which their son would give them in bearing the burden of life, and they express this hope in his name. In stating the reason of the name, they employ a word which is connected with it only by a second remove. נוּהַ and נָחַם are stems not immediately connected; but they both point back to a common root נח signifying to sigh, breathe, rest, lie down.

This is only another recorded instance of the habit of giving names indicative of the thoughts of the parents at the time of the child’s birth. All names were originally significant and have still to this day an import. Some were given at birth, others at later periods, from some remarkable circumstances in the individual’s life. Hence many characters of ancient times were distinguished by several names conferred at different times and for different reasons. The reason of the present name is put on record simply on account of the extraordinary destiny which awaited the bearer of it.

Which Jehovah has cursed. Here is another incidental allusion to the second document, without which it would not be intelligible. If the present document had been intended to stand alone, this remark would have had its explanation in some previous part of the narrative.

Genesis 5:32 Updated American Standard Version (UASV)
³²Noah was five hundred years old, and Noah became the father of Shem, Ham, and Japheth.

Genesis 5:32. And Noah was the son of five hundred years. A man is the son of a certain year, in and up to the close of that year, but not beyond it. Thus Noah was in his six hundredth year when he was the son of six hundred years (Gen. 7:11, 6), and a child was circumcised on the eighth day, being then the son of eight days (Lev. 12:3; Gen. 17:12).

When the phrase indicates a point of time, as in Lev. 27, it is the terminating point of the period in question. The first part only of the biography of Noah is given in this verse, and the remainder will be furnished in due time and place. Meanwhile, Noah is connected with the general history of the race, which is now to be taken up. His three sons are mentioned because they are the ancestors of the postdiluvian race. Therefore, this verse prepares for a continuation of the narrative and implies a continuator or compiler who lived after the flood.

From the numbers in this chapter, the length of human life in the period before the deluge was ten times its present average. This has seemed incredible to some, and hence they have imagined that the years must have consisted of one month, or at least of a smaller number than twelve. But the text will not admit of such amendment or interpretation. In the account of the deluge the tenth month is mentioned, and sixty-one days are afterwards indicated before the beginning of the next year, whence we infer that the year in ancient times consisted of twelve lunar months at least. But the seemingly incredible in this statement concerning the longevity of the men before the flood, will be turned into the credible if we reflect that man was made to be immortal. His constitution was fitted for a perpetuity of life, if only supplied with the proper nutriment. This nutriment was provided in the tree of life. But man abused his liberty and forfeited the source of perpetual life. Nevertheless, the Pre-flood post-Eden vigor of an unimpaired constitution held out for a comparatively long period. After the deluge, however, through the deterioration of the climate and the soil, and perhaps much more the degeneracy of man’s moral and physical being, arising from the abuse of his natural propensities, the average length of human life gradually dwindled down to its present limits. Human physiology, founded upon the present data of man’s constitution, may pronounce upon the duration of his life so long as the data are the same; but it cannot fairly affirm that the data were never different from what they are at present. Meanwhile, the Bible narrative is in perfect keeping with its own data and is therefore not to be disturbed by those who still accept these without challenge.

The following table presents the age of each member of this genealogy when his son and successor were born, and when he himself died, as they stand in the Hebrew text, the Samaritan Pentateuch, the Septuagint, and Josephus:

	Hebrew.		Samaritan Pentateuch		Septuagint		Josephus		Date
	Son’s Birth.	Own Death.	Son’s Birth.	Own Death.	Son’s Birth.	Own Death.	Son’s Birth.	Own Death.	Of Birth.	Of Death.
1. Adam	130	930	130	930	230	930	230	930	0	930
2. Seth	105	912	105	912	205	912	205	912	130	1042
3. Enosh	90	905	90	905	190	905	190	905	235	1140
4. Kenan	70	910	70	910	170	910	170	910	325	1235
5. Mahalalel	65	895	65	895	165	895	165	895	395	1290
6. Jared	162	962	62	847	162	962	162	962	460	1422
7. Enoch	65	365	65	365	165	365	165	365	622	987
8. Methuselah	187	969	67	720	187	969	187	969	687	1656
9. Lamech	182	777	53	653	188	753	182	777	874	1651
10. Noah	500	950	500	950	500	950	500	950	1056	2006
	100		100		100		100
Deluge	1656		1307		2262		2256

On comparing the series of numbers in the Hebrew with those in the Samaritan, the Septuagint, and Josephus, it is remarkable that we have the main body of the original figures in all. In the total ages of the first five and the seventh, and in that of Noah at the flood, they all agree. The Hebrew, Septuagint, and Josephus agree in those of the sixth and eighth. In that of the ninth, the Hebrew and Josephus agree, while the Samaritan and Septuagint differ from them and from each other. On examining the figures of the Samaritan, it appears that the sixth, eighth, and ninth total ages would have reached beyond the flood, if the numbers found in the other authorities had been retained. And they are so shortened as to terminate all in the year of the flood. This alteration betrays design. The totals in the Hebrew, then, have by far the preponderating authority.

Of the numbers before the birth of a successor, which are chiefly important for the chronology, the units agree in all but Lamech, in regard to whom the Hebrew and Josephus agree, while the Samaritan and the Septuagint differ from them and from each other. The tens agree in all but two, Methuselah and Lamech, where the Hebrew, the Septuagint, at least in the Codex Alex., and Josephus agree, while the Samaritan differs from them all. In the hundreds a systematic and designed variation occurs. Still they agree in Noah. In Jared, Methuselah, and Lamech, the Hebrew, Septuagint, and Josephus agree in a number greater by a hundred than the Samaritan. In the remaining six the Hebrew and Samaritan agree, while the Septuagint and Josephus agree in having a number greater by a hundred. On the whole, it is evident that the balance of probability is decidedly in favor of the Hebrew. To this advantage of concurring testimonies are to be added those of being the original and having been guarded with great care. These grounds of textual superiority may be supported by several considerations of less weight. The Samaritan and the Septuagint follow a uniform plan; the Hebrew does not, and therefore has the mark of originality. Josephus gives the sum total to the deluge as two thousand six hundred and fifty-six years, agreeing with the total of the Hebrew in three figures, with that of the Septuagint only in two, and with that of the Samaritan in none. Some MSS. even give one thousand six hundred and fifty-six, which is the exact sum of the Hebrew numbers. Moreover, these readings differ from the sum of his own numbers, which itself agrees with the Hebrew in two figures and with the Septuagint in the other two. This looks like a studied conformation of the figures to those of the Septuagint, in which the operator forgot to alter the sum total. We do not at present enter into the external arguments for or against the Hebrew text. Suffice it to observe that the internal evidence is at present clearly in its favor, so far as the antediluvian figures go.

The primary weight of external evidence generally goes to the original language manuscripts, and the Codex Leningrad B 19A and the Aleppo Codex are almost always preferred. In Old Testament Textual Criticism, the Masoretic text is our starting point and should only be abandoned as a last resort. While it is true that the Masoretic Text is not perfect, there needs to be a heavy burden of proof in we are to go with an alternative reading. All of the evidence needs to be examined before concluding that a reading in the Masoretic Text is corrupt. The Septuagint continues to be very much important today and is used by textual scholars to help uncover copyists’ errors that might have crept into the Hebrew manuscripts either intentionally or unintentionally. However, it cannot do it alone without the support of other sources. There are a number of times when you might have the Syriac, Septuagint, Dead Sea Scrolls, Aramaic Targums, and the Vulgate that are at odds with the Masoretic Text the preferred choice should not be the MT.

Initially, the Septuagint (LXX) was viewed by the Jews as inspired by God, equal to the Hebrew Scriptures. However, in the first century C.E. the Christians adopted the Septuagint in their churches. It was used by the Christians in their evangelism to make disciples and to debate the Jews on Jesus being the long-awaited Messiah. Soon, the Jews began to look at the Septuagint with suspicion. This resulted in the Jews of the second century C.E. abandoning the Septuagint and returning to the Hebrew Scriptures. This has proved to be beneficial for the textual scholar and translator. In the second century C.E., other Greek translations of the Septuagint were produced. We have, for example, LXX^Aq Aquila, LXX^Sym Symmachus, and LXX^Th Theodotion. The consonantal text of the Hebrew Scriptures became the standard text between the first and second centuries C.E. However, textual variants still continued until the Masoretes and the Masoretic text. However, scribes taking liberties by altering the text was no longer the case, as was true of the previous period of the Sopherim. The scribes who copied the Hebrew Scriptures from the time of Ezra down to the time of Jesus were called Sopherim, i.e., scribes.

From the 6th century C.E. to the 10th century C.E. we have the Masoretes, groups of extraordinary Jewish scribe-scholars. The Masoretes were very much concerned with the accurate transmission of each word, even each letter, of the text they were copying. Accuracy was of supreme importance; therefore, the Masoretes use the side margins of each page to inform others of past copyists’ deliberate or inadvertent changes in the text. The Masoretes also use these marginal notes for other reasons as well, such as unusual word forms and combinations. They even marked how frequent they occurred within a book or even the whole Hebrew Old Testament. Of course, marginal spaces were very limited, so they used abbreviated code. They also formed a cross-checking tool where they would mark the middle word and letter of certain books. Their push for accuracy moved them to go so far as to count every letter of the Hebrew Old Testament.

In the Masoretic text, we find notes in the side margins, which are known as the Small Masora. There are also notes in the top margin, which are referred to as the Large Masora. Any other notes placed elsewhere within the text are called the Final Masora. The Masoretes used the notes in the top and bottom margins to record more extensive notes, comments concerning the abbreviated notes in the side margins. This enabled them to be able to cross-check their work. We must remember that there were no numbered verses at this time, and they had no Bible concordances. Well, one might wonder how the Masoretes could refer to different parts of the Hebrew text to have an effective cross-checking system. They would list part of a parallel verse in the top and bottom margins to remind them of where the word(s) indicated were found. Because they were dealing with limited space, they often could only list one word to remind them where each parallel verse could be found. To have an effective cross-reference system by way of these marginal notes, the Masoretes would literally have to have memorized the entire Hebrew Bible.

By James G. Murphy and Edward D. Andrews

Bibliography

Edward D Andrews, BIBLE DIFFICULTIES: How to Approach Difficulties In the Bible, Christian Publishing House. 2020.
Edward D. Andrews, INTERPRETING THE BIBLE: Introduction to Biblical Hermeneutics, Christian Publishing House, 2016.
Gleason L. Archer, New International Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties, Zondervan’s Understand the Bible Reference Series (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1982).
Geoffrey W. Bromiley, ed., “Appearance,” The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Revised (Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1979–1988).
Hermann J. Austel, R. Laird Harris, Gleason L. Archer Jr., and Bruce K. Waltke, Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament (Chicago: Moody Press, 1999).
Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary (Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers, 2003).
James Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains: Hebrew (Old Testament) (Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997).
John Joseph Owens, Analytical Key to the Old Testament, vol. 1-4 (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1989).
John F. MacArthur, The MacArthur Bible Commentary. Thomas Nelson. Kindle Edition.
Robert L. Thomas, New American Standard Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek Dictionaries: Updated Edition (Anaheim: Foundation Publications, Inc., 1998).
Thomas Howe; Norman L. Geisler. Big Book of Bible Difficulties, The: Clear and Concise Answers from Genesis to Revelation. Kindle Edition.
Walter A. Elwell and Barry J. Beitzel, “Chronology, Old Testament,” Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1988).
W. E. Vine, Merrill F. Unger, and William White Jr., Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words (Nashville, TN: T. Nelson, 1996).