Genesis 4

     That Cain and Abel story is very interesting to me. I find that the murder of Abel by his brother had a far reaching effect on mankind of the early days. I also think that the effect stretches through to the destruction of virtually all men at the time of the great flood. Here's how I see it:
     At the time of the fall, in the garden of Eden, God made a promise when He cursed the serpent. He said, "And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel." (Gen 3:15). This was an apparent prophesy about her decendant, Jesus, and his crushing of sin, Satan, evil, etc. We know that Satan did strike Him with a fatal wound, just like when bitten by a poisonous snake, but He emerges the victor.
     Eve gave birth to a Cain, (Gen 4:1), which must have been astonishing to her, for as of yet no such thing had ever happened. Might not she have thought that Cain was the answer to God's promise. (Same verse) Eve said, "with the help of the Lord I have brought forth a man." Abel was born later. In my way of thinking, it's not unlikely that she would have considered Cain the fulfillment of the promise, and looked to Abel as just a son. Her reaction to Abel's murder by Cain must have been heartbreaking, for sure, but also confusing as she watched Cain be exiled by God to Nod, east of Eden. In Cain was the hope for restoration to communion with God. Now he was gone. Her other son was dead. Perhaps her hope died as well.
     Hope reborn. Eve gave birth to another son and named him Seth, saying "God has granted me another child in place of Abel, since Cain killed him." (Gen. 4:25). The Bible then gives two seperate geneologies, Cain's and Seth's. The geneology of Cain goes several generations before it is dropped, but we then follow Seth's, Starting with his father Adam, through Seth, all the way to Noah. Of course this is the same family tree we are reminded of in Luke Chapter 4. This is the line of decendancy through which God's promise of restoration was fulfilled in Jesus Christ.
     I wish I could claim this one for my own, but I found this in a Bible commentary once, I appreciated it very much, however I've never heard this taught, nor read about this idea elsewhere. The suggestion was that when we read about the flood, the story starts off with, (Gen. 6:1,2), "When men began to increase in number on the Earth and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose." I've heard a few explanations for who we're talking about here, but none ever satisfied me until this particular commentary. The commentator concluded that the sons of men might possibly be the decendants of Cain, the foresaken brother killer, and the son's of God were the decendants of Seth. In hind sight we see that it was through Seth and his lineage that we arrive at Christ. Hence the Godly line, or sons of God. It was not good that the Godly line was intermarrying with the earthly line. I think we can assume that the Godly line was diminishing and we find that by the time of Noah no Godly men remained. (Gen 6:7-9) So the Lord said, "'I will wipe mankind, whom I have created from the face of the Earth . . . . . for I am grieved that I have made them.' But Noah found favor in the eyes of the LORD. This is the account of Noah. Noah was a righteous man, blameless among the people of his time, and he walked with God." I think Noah was the last righteous man on Earth. The only hope for the restoration of the decendants of Adam and Eve to communion with God, was in his loins. God could have easily wiped out everyone and started all over again. God, however, does not break His promises, so this was the solution.
     My thoughts, apart from the afore mentioned commentary are that if Noah was the last righteous man, then his sons were not necessarily righteous, but would procreate only through the preserved decendants of  Noah. Cain's crime against his brother was finally dealt with. This was not retribution for the crime of murder, but the necessary consequence for a society completely intermarried with sin.
     In Job we find the "sons of God", KJV, petitioning Him at His throne. In the NIV they are refered to as angels. I don't know which is the correct interpretation, but I suspect that the sons of Seth found favor in the sight of God, if for nothing else other than their direct genetic connection to Christ. However I give them more credit than that. Enoch, it is said, walked with God; then he was no more, because God took him away, (Gen. 5:24).
     If anyone would care to comment, I think there is a lot to be explored here. Or maybe I've got it all wrong. Tell me what you think,

Joe