Four Rivers

One read of Genesis 9 is that Ham did *something* to prevent Noah from having more children.

Here are the clues:

Noah had three sons, and could not have four.
Ham had four sons (Cush, Egypt, Put and Canaan); Noah curses Canaan, who is the fourth one.

And there is one more clue.

A river watering the garden flowed from Eden; from there it was separated into four headwaters.
The name of the first is the Pishon; it winds through the entire land of Havilah, where there is gold. (The gold of that land is good; aromatic resin and onyx are also there.)
The name of the second river is the Gihon; it winds through the entire land of Cush.
The name of the third river is the Tigris; it runs along the east side of Ashur.
And the fourth river is the Euphrates.
Genesis 2:10-14 (NIV)

A quick glance at Genesis 2 lists four rivers. I broke down the verses by river, and you see a clearly descending order of detail, with the Pishon given a lot of page-space, and the Euphrates barely being described at all.

Ironically, we have no clue where the Pishon or the Gihon are. They don’t exist anymore. They’re never even mentioned outside these verses listed, or outside the Bible. But we know the Tigris and the Euphrates.

You might think the Genesis writers were like, “Oh, everybody knows the Tigris and Euphrates, so we don’t need to describe them much,” but that would mean you haven’t been paying attention. That’s not how how the writers organized the words.

There are allegories here.

Rabbi Fohrman wrote that the Genesis 2 account of rivers is a prophetic cutting-off of what should have been. God told Noah to be fruitful and multiply: to have a fourth river, but Ham’s action (whatever it may have been) made it impossible.

The river is named, but it goes nowhere, like a child you’ve named in the womb, or a child you dreams of having.

Noah’s action of cursing Ham, in this view, is retaliation: you cut me off, so I’m cutting you off in the same way; your fourth for my fourth. Your river for my river.

Maybe Noah even named this fourth planned son, but the plan goes nowhere.

So maybe Noah stopped trusting God at this point.

When Adam and Eve were told to be fruitful and multiply, the consequence of eating the fruit was death, which created the first “oh no! How will God fulfill his blessing of *be fruitful and multiply* if humanity dies?”

God’s solution: Adam names his wife Eve, which means LIFE. The antidote to death.

When Eve thought that Cain was God’s promise, only to have Cain kill Abel, this was the second “on no! How will God fulfill his blessing? There are no more sons!”

God’s solution: Seth is born. God appointed Seth as the conduit to bring His promises into humanity.

When God sees the whole world is corrupt and will wipe it all out in a flood, the reader experiences the third “oh no!”

God’s solution: He preserved Noah and his family, even though the sons were not “good” according to the story. They were corrupt like the world.

So Noah is accustomed to this. When God tells him directly to be fruitful and multiply (to replace his corrupt sons?), whatever Ham does creates the next “oh no!”

Rather than wait for God to provide a solution, Noah unleashes a curse into his own family line.

So what will God do now?

God’s solution: I will use Shem, broken or not, and I will bring the fulfillment of my promise through him. I will maintain the goodness of my Name through him.

And “Shem” means “name.”

The story of Scripture is about God fulfilling His promise, no matter what happens, whether it’s our own disobedience, or the disobedience of our children, or of the whole corrupt world.

God will not be stopped from fulfilling His promises.

Comments on Commentary

Some rabbis have suggested that the Genesis 5:3 statement that Seth was in “Adam’s likeness: hints at Genesis 6’s world of weird angel/hybrid creatures.

Adam himself is TECHNICALLY not “just a human,” being born of dirt and spirit.

ויולד בדמותו כצלמו, “he begot a son in his likeness in his image;” the emphasis on this is to show us that anything he begot during the previous 129 years were only creatures that did not reflect his likeness or image, i.e. disembodied spirits, mostly מזיקים, injurious, destructive spirits. (Compare 3,20)
Chizkuni on Genesis 5:3

BUT.

Other rabbis in the Midrash have said that being “in Adam’s likeness” meant that he was… born circumcised.

He was righteous (Gen. 6:9). This suggests that he was one of the seven men born circumcised. Adam and his son Seth were born circumcised, as it is written: He begot a son in his own likeness after his image, and he called him Seth (Gen. 5:3).
Midrash Tanchuma on Genesis 5:3

Which is, by the way, NOT ANY WEIRDER THAN ANGEL/HUMAN MONSTER BABIES.

So, always take commentary with a grain of salt. Even mine.

Angels, Giants, and Men

When human beings began to increase in number on the earth and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of humans were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose.
Genesis 6:1-2 (NIV)

There are 2 schools of thought on the “sons of God” in Genesis 6. This phrase “benei ha-elohim” can either be:

1. Angels who impregnated women
2. Men of Seth’s “godly” lineage who mixed w/ Cain’s line.

In interpretation 1, the Nephilim are monsters and giants. In interpretation 2, they are evil humans.

Either way, whether you believe the “sons of God” refers to angels or men in Seth’s line, neither position requires you to believe that the events actually happened.

The goal is to try to understand what the text intends to teach us, and the lesson may be the same either way.

That said, I strongly believe that Genesis 6 is meant to tell us a story about angels who took human form and impregnated women. Not that I think it literally happened, but I think that’s what the story is saying. And this is primarily because “daughters of Adam” cannot just mean “daughters of Cain.”

Besides, Jude and Peter aren’t going to quote from the Book of Enoch if they don’t think their audience is familiar with the book of Enoch and understand what says. And what it says is that angels impregnated women and those women gave birth to monsters. Later, war. And then the flood.

A Hint of the Nephilim

When Adam had lived 130 years, he fathered a son in his own likeness, according to his image, and named him Seth.
Genesis 5:3 (NASB)

Genesis 5 says his image about Seth, and nobody else.

The Rabbis wondered about this and suggest that Adam and Eve may have had other offspring after Cain and Abel, before Seth. These offspring were… different. Not like Adam. Something monstrous.

This points to the Nephilim in Genesis 6.

10s and 100s

Something important is happening with the ages listed in Genesis 5.

With Adam, the Hebrew language descdribes his age as 900, and 30 years.

But for everyone else in the list of ages, the 10s and 100s are reversed: Seth lived 12, and 900 years. Enosh lived 5 and 900.

The next time we see the person’s age listed with the 100s first, it’s with Abraham.

One rabbinical teaching is that when an age is written 100s and then 10s, it means the last years of their lives were good and productive. So we seem to be told that God has redeemed Adam.

That doesn’t mean the rest are not redeemed, but specifically that God has compassion on Adam, the first of the lineage to die from the curse (from dust, to dust).

In His Image

When Adam had lived 130 years, he had a son in his own likeness, in his own image; and he named him Seth.
Genesis 5:3 (NIV)

We are told something specific about Adam and Seth that we aren’t told about the rest of the genealogy.

Before you say that the text “wouldn’t include any unnecessary repetition,” keep in mind that the whole chapter is repetition. The differences are meant to stand out.

Trust after a Broken Heart

I’m not a mother, but I try to imagine the depth of hurt, ache, and the mixing of hope & hopelessness bound up in the birth of Seth.

Eve knows God will redeem the world through her children, but one is lost by murdering the other. All of her hope is destroyed.

She holds Seth.

How she must have trembled at his first cry. How she must have clung to him and pressed him close to her body, but also feared losing him, just like she lost the others.

Could she trust God with this child? She trusted him with the first two, and we know what happened.

I weep for Eve. For us.

How do we trust after we’ve been let down? How do we hope when everything we hoped for has been dashed?

The story of Eve and Seth is a story of God healing the broken hearted. It will require time. It will require God.

Neither Cain nor Abel

We always call it the story of “Cain & Abel,” but this ignores a critical part of the story.

Eve assumes God will use Cain – she says as much when she first speaks. And we, seeing Abel’s sacrifice, assume God will use the younger son to fulfill the blessing of “be fruitful and multiply.” But our assumptions are dashed by murder. Cain leaves the scene, and Abel dies. What will God do to solve this problem?

Perhaps the right name of the story should be “Not Cain, not Abel, but through Seth.”

Seth’s name means “appointed.” As in, selected by God to be used for a specific purpose. God’s purpose.

This is the nature of things.

What’s in a Name?

Perhaps there is a story in the name and lives of the sons of Adam and Eve:

Cain means acquired
Abel means a breath; vanity
Seth means appointed

“By the work of my hands, I attempt to acquire a name for myself. But this, too, is vanity, a grasping for the wind.
But God appoints another way. God’s way.