The Story, chapter 1. Genesis chapter four. Adam through Noah.

 

Genesis 4

The offering of Cain and Abel

The bottom line, Cain, in a jealous rage, kills his brother Abel.

God has not turned his back on the man in a rage as we all expect, and so once again, God shows up. We do not know what that looked like. I understand as we make assumptions, and one we do not make very often is that even here, it is Jesus talking with Cain. If God’s character remains the same, then his actions should be consistent as well.

As I understand it, the Jewish basis of prophecy lies in repeated patterns. For something to dominate their mind as prophetic, it must have been repeated in scripture.

So do we find Jesus throughout the Old Testament?

At virtually every turn, He (Jesus) is there and is referred to on many occasions as the angel of the Lord, but why is that important? God made it very plain to Moses that man (in his broken state, could not look upon God), so if God could be looked upon in the future, why is it He can be seen by these fallen men?

We are looking for consistency.

Before the fall, humanity was the direct image of God, practically His shadow. A shadow can demonstrate the form but not the precise detail of the person, and I see no reason why Adam and Eve could not have continued to walk in a personal relationship with God.

At this point, some will tell you that they are hopelessly embroiled in sin, but you are ignoring that God himself slaughtered enough animals to make an instructed sacrifice, including the reasons why. The logic behind this is about to be covered, so keep reading. There is no reason to believe that this was not Jesus with them at this point, either. In other words, since Jesus was God, He may well have been here in the garden as well.

There are always repercussions for taking liberties

If I jump several thousand years ahead, to the point where Jesus has given his life for us, we come to the realization that the payment of death, demanded for the sin that we all inherited, is done away with.

My belief in Jesus Christ’s full payment on my behalf and acceptance of his sacrifice makes me free from the bondage of that death.

However, there are always repercussions for taking liberties, and that is what we see with Cain.

How does God handle this murder?

He shows Cain an amazing amount of mercy. Even before Cain murders his brother, God seeing his internal struggle with jealousy, has a talk with him.

Genesis 4:3-7 TLV  “So it happened after some time that Cain brought an offering of the fruit of the ground to Adonai,  (4)  while Abel—he also brought of the firstborn of his flock and their fat portions. Now Adonai looked favorably upon Abel and his offering,  (5)  but upon Cain and his offering He did not look favorably. Cain became very angry, and his countenance fell.  (6)  Then Adonai said to Cain, “Why are you angry? And why has your countenance fallen?  (7)  If you do well, it will lift. But if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the doorway. Its desire is for you, but you must master it.”

There is much that happens in the background of these first four chapters, and they are not spelled out in scripture. Contrast this with God’s background activity in the life of Esther and Mordechai, and you will see what I mean. You could not ask these questions of your own sons if you had not made it clear what was expected of them. Since Adam had been deemed to have dominance over the earth, he was still the relaying body of information to his sons. Come on now, use some logic. God showed Adam how to make a sacrifice for sins, and Adam showed his sons.

Cain murders his brother Abel

^{Genesis 4:8-10 TLV  “Cain spoke to Abel, his brother. While they were in the field, Cain rose up against Abel, his brother, and killed him.  (9)  Then Adonai said to Cain, “Where is Abel, your brother?” “I don’t know,” he said. “Am I my brother’s keeper?”  (10)  Then He said, “What have you done? The voice of your brother’s blood is crying out to Me from the ground.”}

Still, we anticipate God striking the man dead, but he does not. Abel is dead, and God approaches Cain once again, and like Adam, God asks, “Where is your brother Abel?” It is not a question of God not knowing. He knows exactly where Abel is. Perhaps he wants us to come clean, and that is more than likely what we are seeing come from the Apostle John when he writes:

If we say openly that we have done wrong, he is upright and true to his word, giving us forgiveness of sins and making us clean from all evil. (1 John 1:9 BBE)

However, Cain would not do that.

As I said before, there are repercussions for your actions.

The curse of Cain

^{Genesis 4:11-13 TLV  “So now, cursed are you from the ground which opened its mouth to receive your brother’s blood from your hand.  (12)  As often as you work the ground, it will not yield its crops to you again. You will be a restless wanderer on the earth.”  (13)  Cain said to Adonai, “My iniquity is too great to bear!”}

This is where it gets a little weird, but again, there are no straightforward answers as to why Cain has an understanding that people would kill him unless he is aware that this level of activity is all ready going on out there. A filter that almost all of us apply is that we are looking at a tight chronological timeline that starts after sin in the garden. The problem with that thinking is that time began outside the garden and sin.

Once again, God shows mercy and love for those made in his image, and so He marks Cain in an effort to divert (these unexplainable, according to tradition) people from killing him.

While you might think that Cain’s lineage is over, however, through a couple of them, like Jubal, we have metal work, instruments of music, and Jabal, the father of those who live in tents and raise livestock. While that may seem innocent enough, it is also the foundation for an evil, violent world that has no relationship with God.

The closest thing God has to his original creation is Adam and Eve, not that it matters now, for everything is broken, but there is a distinct difference, for it seems they are the only ones left that understand what it means to commune with God.

The birth of Seth

^{“Adam was intimate with his wife again, and she gave birth to a son and she named him Seth, “For God has appointed me another seed in place of Abel—since Cain killed him.” To Seth, also was born a son. He named him Enosh. Then people began to call on Adonai’s Name.” (Genesis 4:25-26 TLV)}

Two things that jump out here, Adam and Eve have had another son, he becomes the lineage that brings about Jesus, and after Seth has his own son Enosh, men begin to call upon the LORD. You would think that at least three people might have been doing that already. This has huge implications because we have so much activity going on in the background, and apparently, none of these people have been acknowledging God.

If you look the name Enosh up, you might not think it unusual:

'ĕnôsh The same as H582; Enosh, a son of Seth: - Enos. However, pursue it further and it defines Enosh with a little more detail: properly a mortal (and thus differing from the more dignified 'âdâm ruddy, that is, a human being)

So Enosh marks a transition from God’s original creation, ADAM, to what is now defined as a mere mortal. This is another huge clue as to what is going on in the background.

And be joined to his wife? Genesis 2:24

This is another subject that came up among my friends one recent morning.

In the world of sin, I have done more than my fair share. What do I mean? Considering that “sinning” is merely missing the mark, then yes, I do that daily; and if you were honest, then you would admit that so do you.

So then, we need to establish something here, who is setting the mark for these goals we try to meet and how many goals are there, because it can be exhausting some days? Well, since we, as followers of Christ have submitted ourselves to God as the moral authority in our lives, then He is the primary one setting the goals.

(This moral standard, of course, is all on a theoretical basis, as many of those who call themselves “Christians” use the law they created in their head as the moral standard. Having watched that so-called moral standard in progress, I can tell you that you have little to no consistency in your standards, and you are not showing me anything I want to copy. I happen to think most of these inconsistent standards are picked from the bits and pieces the world offers us – just as long as it suited our lusts [desires] and needs.)

Why bring any of this up?

Because I too have felt the sting of judgment, as I lived with a woman before I was able to marry her. (Let me point out that the friend/brother in Christ that wanted to “turn in me” to church management, later on, had a fling with a woman he was not married to and had to turn himself into that same church management. That church put him on the shame list and limited his interactions there, for six months, along with a total separation from that woman - just as he was going to do to me. Now, before you get all religious and high minded thinking you have the right to judge me, hear me out.

The State of California does not recognize a common law marriage and has not since 1895. The law in California:

“requires both parties to consent to be married, but mere consent does not a marriage make. Generally, there must be a marriage license issued, a solemnization and authentication following the issuing of the license and a recordation in the county where the solemnization/authentication took place.”

https://statelaws.findlaw.com/california-law/california-marriage-law.html

So then, if consent without love, is the sole approving factor, then why are we getting married?

Because your marriage, under state laws, makes you a corporate, tax identity, and a statistic. 

Is a legal marriage mandatory for love? I'm being somewhat sarcastic here, and you know that is not true. It sure seems like a good way of tracking you, as a marriage license is just another method of tracking and controlling you. 

If blacks in the South could deem themselves married by jumping over a broom, in front of witnesses, then what are we doing? 

Although I had to pay the fees and get a marriage license, my wife and I were married in our attorney's office by a man I hired through the internet. I did this because we were trying to take out a mortgage on the home that had once been paid off so that we could buy out my wife's brother (my wife's mom had died, and the brother wanted his half of the estate.) Some might look at our actions as merely fulfilling an immediate need; but the fact is that we were two weeks away from being married about 15 years earlier. That marriage would have happened if it were not for religious legalism deciding to get involved. What that overzealous legalistic pastor did was to ask if we had had relations with each other. Now I could either hit him in the face, answer him with the sarcasm he deserved, or tell him the truth; I answered his question without lying. Instead of marrying us, (and mind you, all the announcements were printed,) we were restricted from marrying in that church and told to stay apart for six months. Needless to say, I did not comply and we did not get married.

Do you have to be in love to consent to a marriage?

Clearly, this idea of love, as an aspect of your consent, is counterfeit because here again, my first marriage had little to do with love.

Again, let me explain. A young man does not fall in love; he falls in lust. Love is something profound that grows over time and is based in commitment; which is in part: choice, desire, and the longing to be with someone – theoretically, forever. So though my first marriage might have had those components as part of the plan, my wife, at the time, had no intention of carrying through with the words she pronounced before everyone that day. Within six months she had sex with a friends boyfriend and then did it again seven years later with someone she met at a bar in Las Vegas. After she committed adultery twice, we separated, and two years later we divorced. My ex-wife had no longing to stay married, and her counselor helped me to understand that by telling me so. What made this more difficult was the religious legalism imposed on me by the church in which I was raised. You see, there was a tremendous amount of guilt interlaced in those marriage vows; not to mention the fact that the pastoral counseling you had to sit through helped to emphasize that point.

I suspect that much of this legalism comes from the Old Testament, but inevitably a little bit comes from some pastoral training, where they are apparently taught to control the flock God has given them, and this is how you do it. Some of those potential verses come from Genesis 31; Genesis 22, and Genesis 24. Jesus, in response to the Pharisees who were looking for ridiculous ways out of their marriages, spoke of divorce and the hardness of their hearts in Matthew 19. Paul, almost as if he is assuming that a woman would never cheat, spoke in 1 Corinthians 7 about a wife's reactions to a cheating husband, and how you are to stay single, but who does that?

Ah, but you say, we are not under the law but grace.

If you believed that you would be reading this with an open mind and heart, and you are not. You are judging the heck out of me – so shame on you. So, when it comes to God's law, I am sorry to disappoint, but God's word stands forever, and those same laws are now written in our hearts by God's Holy Spirit. Yes, those laws are there to keep us out of trouble, and when you hear them spoken to your heart it would be wise to obey them.

If there was a woman that caused a man trouble, it would be Eve; and yet, Did you see Adam divorcing his wife? I did not think so.

One of the most excellent answers Jesus gave when asked, “What is the greatest commandment?” Was this:

Matthew 22:36-40 NET. "Teacher, which commandment in the law is the greatest?" 37) Jesus said to him, " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.' 38) This is the first and greatest commandment. 39) The second is like it: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' 40) All the law and the prophets depend on these two commandments."

Instead of advocating laws perhaps we should be promoting God's love (Just saying.)

Several years back there was a movie called The Three Amigos. The main characters were fictional movie heroes that somehow got caught up in a Mexican town's power struggle with some bad guys. At one point a bad guy says to the gang leader, “there are a plethora of men coming.” The leader pauses and responds to the man, “do you know what plethora means?” The man admitted that he did not, but liked the sound of the word. The leader comes back with, “do not use words to which you do not know their meaning.”

So, I say to you, I do not think that word wife means what you think it means.

The first occurrence of the term wife shows up in Genesis 2:24, but the story does not start there. So let's look at the beginnings of this man and woman relationship.

Genesis 2:18 MKJV And Jehovah God said, It is not good that the man should be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.

Now you might think, this is where God makes Eve, but it isn't.

What does this idea of “help meet," mean?

God made animals and birds. Did he expect for the man to find a helpmate out of this collection? When I started looking at this intently, I was in a place without any high tech tools and had to rely on the commentary and limited concordance of my Dake Bible. 

Dake's tells me that this idea of a helpmate was,

“someone suitable intellectually, morally, and physically – as the man's counterpart.”

Aside from the animals how many choices did Adam have that would fit this description given by Finis Jennings Dake? Zero, and yet the next move God makes is to form, out of the ground, every beast of the field and every fowl of the air.

God sees a need for the man to have a helpmate, but watch what God does.

Genesis 2:19-20 NET. The LORD God formed out of the ground every living animal of the field and every bird of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them, and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. 20) So the man named all the animals, the birds of the air, and the living creatures of the field, but for Adam, no companion who corresponded to him was found.

As you can see in verse 20, that “for Adam, no companion who corresponded to him was found.” Does this surprise anyone? 

When I was a child, watching television in the early 1960's, I saw many black and white television westerns in which there was that one guy who lived back in the hills, and was content not interacting with anyone but his dog. I think that type is a rarity.

God's solution was to make an exacting duplicate of the man, with a few body style modifications of course.

Genesis 2:21-25 24) (Therefore a man will leave his father and his mother and cling to his wife, and they will become one flesh.) 25) Even though both the man and his wife were naked, they were not ashamed about it.

• God caused a deep sleep to overshadow the man.
  If you will, the first instance of anesthesia.
• He removed one of the man's ribs and closed up the flesh where it had been.
  The first case of surgery.
• The LORD God formed the rib that he had taken from the man into a woman and brought her to the man.
  Why did God bring her to the man in this manner? Was it out of respect, or was He allowing for the man to name her, or both?
• And then, there is this odd exclamation we see in Genesis 2:24 CJB This is why a man is to leave his father and mother and stick with his wife, and they are to be one flesh.
  Why say its odd? Adam may well understand that God is ab or Father, but where would he get the concept of mother ’ēm? The KJ concordance shows that this word is used 220 times in the Old Testament. All but six of those examples indicate some form of mother.
  The Hebrew words El Shaddai – implies a complete sufficiency to nurture, but can also mean the Breasted One. In the Jewish culture, this is understood as the God who sustains us and loves us like a mother loves her newborn child.

Do I then perceive Adam as pulling away from the all-sufficiency of God, to pursue what, life on the prairie? Or, is Adam speaking of a future time, when others will and should learn to live life outside of the parent's immediate intervention? 

Perhaps a Jewish viewpoint might help to bring forth an answer.

When I look at a website, http://learn-biblical-hebrew.com/hebrew-scripture/garden-of-eden-story/genesis-224/ (The short address is: http://tinyurl.com/lmtopj2) I get this:

What we understand as the word, Therefore “is the Hebrew phrase, עַל־כֵּן (`al-ken) and is not part of the story. Rather, its use introduces an editorial comment on the part of the author.”

Because we understand the author to be Moses, then we can perceive that this is conveying that the man understands his need to “stick with his wife through thick and thin.” “The text seems to say that the quality of loyalty and fidelity is constitutive of “one flesh.” After all, one need not be loyal (or even loving) to have sex and live together. The idea in view here is a commitment, especially of the man for his wife.”

Verse 24 is kind of where this journey begins and our first instance of the word wife.

Genesis 2:24 MKJV Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave to his wife and they shall be one flesh.

The second occurrence of wife presents itself here.

Genesis 3:8 NASB They heard the sound of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God among the trees of the garden.

The Hebrew word for wife is 'ishshâh and means a woman, a female, or a wife.

Since the concept of a wife, as defined by modern law, could not possibly have existed in the early days of man, what did? 

While the answer comes off like a cave dweller, it would most likely be “my woman.” I seriously doubt that term would have conveyed disrespect as we expect some people to express in this “modern” age. Today, the usage of the term woman is more closely associated with someone sitting in the corner of the couch, wearing a dirty tee-shirt, demanding this female living with him, to bring him a beer.

Question; throughout the Old Testament, were there any public recording offices available to verify your marriage documents back then, thereby making you legal according to the laws of that particular county?

No, I didn't think so, and yet God seemed to recognize their relationships and often bless the relationship by having them produce some offspring like Samson, or better yet, Jephthah. You can find the story surrounding his life in Judges chapter 11.

Why then, do pastors impose such legalistic ideals on people, as though they are the gatekeepers, capable of allowing you entrance, or preventing you from entering the kingdom and away from God's love and grace?

An intensive look at Enoch. Part one.

I have been looking at Enoch and attempting to write about him, and his surroundings, for weeks now. It has been nothing less than a struggle as the things I talk about here, are controversial (I know this because I have been around religion for a long time and I have had first-hand experience with this.) And, as I will mention in the post, there seems to be so little known about the man; at least that is the impression we were given growing up in church.
May I interject something here? Growing up in church rarely brings you to an understanding of who God is. Oh sure, you can walk away with a boatload of traditions and opinions, but few of them are correct, accurate, or appropriate. For example: In today's morning study, the leader said, "you will not find a Pharisee in heaven." I do not believe that is a valid statement, nor was it appropriate. For weren't Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimethia Pharisees?

Mark 15:43 CJB  Yosef of Ramatayim, a prominent member of the Sanhedrin who himself was also looking forward to the Kingdom of God, went boldly to Pilate and asked for Yeshua's body.

John 3:1 NASB Now there was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews;

So for someone to make such a brash statement like NO Pharisees will be found in heaven, is blatantly untrue. There is a point to this tirade and that is, that there is a multitude of things being preached and taught that are at worst decrepit lies, and at best, false teachings;  none-the-less, both can send you into a pit of deception. If we have bought into the lies, choosing to not challenge what we hear by reading the Word of God for ourselves. Then how will we know what is true? Jesus, by the way, is the one who said, "no one comes to the Father but through me." Is it possible that: the tearing of the veil in the temple; giving himself as the final sacrifice; pouring out his own blood on the heavenly altar, and giving his life as the payment for the redemption of the world is the thing that restored our way back to the Father?  Seriously, the price has been paid; and all that is required is that WE acknowledge and accept Jesus as that final lamb that slaughtered for us.
But what does religion do? It clouds the issue, creates more rules, and condemns every stupid thing we do as we stumble through this thing called life.

Having said all that, I give you an intensive look at Enoch.

Enoch is a man that few talk about, and yet, Enoch's legacy is found in Genesis, the book of Jude, Hebrews 11 and 2 Peter 2. We also see Enoch's name entwined in the history of Middle East. There is no doubt that Enoch interacted with the Nephilim, and, that he walked with God in such a way that he was able to walk off the earth.

By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God. (Heb 11:5, UKJV)

A man like this is worthy of a concentrated look and study.

The first reference we have to the name Enoch is in Genesis 4:17 where the wife of Cain, (the man who killed his brother Abel,) is having a baby. They named that baby Enoch. This child is not the Enoch we are looking for but is the son of Cain and the father of another called Enoch. This son of Cain built a city and named that city after his son, Enoch. However, neither of these play a role in getting us to the Enoch we desire to understand. If I look carefully at the genealogy provided in Genesis chapter five, I find that Cain played NO role in the bloodline that leads us to Noah. We will probe a possible reason why Cain is excluded further on in the thesis.

Do we have other methods of determining which Enoch we want, as there are two so far?
Yes, and one of the answers comes from the book of Jude.

And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of his saints, (Jude 1:14, UKJV)

Genesis provides an excellent genealogy through Seth, not Cain.

And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he brings forth sons and daughters: And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died. And Seth lived a hundred and five years, and brings forth Enos: And Seth lived after he brings forth Enos eight hundred and seven years, and brings forth sons and daughters: And all the days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve years: and he died. And Enos lived ninety years, and brings forth Cainan: And Enos lived after he brings forth Cainan eight hundred and fifteen years, and brings forth sons and daughters: And all the days of Enos were nine hundred and five years: and he died. And Cainan lived seventy years and brought forth Mahalaleel: And Cainan lived after he brings forth Mahalaleel eight hundred and forty years, and brings forth sons and daughters: And all the days of Cainan were nine hundred and ten years: and he died. And Mahalaleel lived sixty and five years, and brings forth Jared: And Mahalaleel lived after he brings forth Jared eight hundred and thirty years, and brings forth sons and daughters: And all the days of Mahalaleel were eight hundred ninety and five years: and he died. And Jared lived an hundred sixty and two years, and he brings forth Enoch: And Jared lived after he brings forth Enoch eight hundred years, and brings forth sons and daughters: And all the days of Jared were nine hundred sixty and two years: and he died. And Enoch lived sixty and five years and brings forth Methuselah: (Gen 5:4-21, UKJV)

Since Jude says that Enoch was the seventh generation from Adam, let's test the claim. Adam; Seth; Enos; Cainan; Mahalaleel; Jared; Enoch. There it is, seven generations.

The name Enoch alone tells us much about the man, as his name means dedicated or disciplined. This dedication must have been a predominant aspect of his life because we have this,

And Enoch walked with God after he brings forth Methuselah three hundred years, and brings forth sons and daughters: And all the days of Enoch were three hundred sixty and five years: And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him. (Gen 5:22-24, UKJV)

What do we have that could explain Enoch's understanding of God and how to communicate with God as if that is a big mystery?

If we do the math, we find that Adam was 622 years old when Enoch is born, and Adam lived to be 930 years old. Therefore Adam may have had a substantial impact on Enoch, and Adam is the only logical choice to influence Enoch.

If Adam was able to inform Enoch and demonstrate what this idea of walking with God looked like, Why then didn't Adam merely walk off the earth as Enoch did?
Maybe the answer, as with Cain, has more to do with their cataclysmic errors in judgment.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges explains this walk that Enoch lived as a combination of fellowship and progress.

[walked with God] The phrase here, as in Genesis 5:24, used of Enoch, has passed into common use to express intimacy of communion with God. It denotes more than either standing in His presence, or walking before Him (Genesis 6:9, Genesis 17:1), or following after Him. It combines the ideas of fellowship and progress. It is the picture of one who has God with him in all the various scenes of life.

The word took, is explained in the Cambridge Bible commentary as well.

This expression is used to denote an unaccountable disappearance, cf. Genesis 42:13; Genesis 42:36; 1Kings 20:40. In order to make it quite clear that the words did not imply death, LXX renders οὐχ εὑρίσκετο; Vulg. “ non-apparuit.” The shortness of his life as compared with the other patriarchs might have been regarded as a proof of Divine displeasure if the next sentence had not been added to explain the circumstance. [for God took him] “Took,” or “received,” him, i.e., into His own abode, without death.

The Hebrew word for took is lāqaḥ: A verb meaning to take, to get. Its exact meaning must be discerned from its context. It is used of grasping or seizing a person or an animal. Word Study Dictionary.

You will also find the word lāqaḥ used in Ezekiel 8:3 where Ezekiel describes the spirit, lifting him up by the hair and taking him, by visions, to God.

This word lāqaḥ is very similar to the Greek word Harpazo, which also means to snatch away. Harpazo is the Greek word that we substitute for the word rapture. In either case, it conveys the rapid removal of the church from the earth prior to God's wrath being poured out on the planet – just like Noah and the flood; and, just like Lot before the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah.

In the book of Jude, we have a prophecy attributed to Enoch which cannot be verified in the Old Testament by direct comparison, because it is only found in The Book of Enoch (Enoch 1:9.)

Jude 1:14-15 MKJV And Enoch, the seventh from Adam, also prophesied to these, saying, Behold, the Lord came with myriads of His saints, 15) to do judgment against all, and to rebuke all the ungodly of them concerning all their ungodly works which they ungodly did, and concerning all the hard things ungodly sinners spoke against Him.

Assuming you don't have a copy of the Book of Enoch, is a statement like this so odd?
Hardly, and here are some examples that convey that theme, although they came long after Enoch.

Daniel 7:18 But the saints of the Most High shall take the kingdom and possess the kingdom forever, even forever and ever.

Zechariah 14:5 MKJV And you shall flee to the valley of My mountains; for the valley of the mountains shall reach to Azal. And you shall flee as you fled from before the earthquake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah. And Jehovah my God shall come, and all the saints with you.

There is no doubt in my mind that Jesus will come as described in Revelation 19:14 with all the armies of heaven, just as Enoch described.

If this was all the Biblical information I had on Enoch, what then do I make of this man.

I think it would be safe to say that:

• Enoch was a good man.
  While the majority of the world was going crazy, Enoch remained sane.
  Genesis 6:5 NASB Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
  The passage implies that the whole world had gone mad. Even if one man had not, then I should not be allowed to say all. It is safe to assume that something close to all is being suggested, however, Enoch cannot be counted among that number.
  While it is safe to assume that Enoch was a good man, all we have is Hebrews 11:5 to validate that claim. There is something certain about Hebrews 11:5, as the writer of Hebrews had no more information about Enoch than we have, unless they had access to a copy of The Book of Enoch, as J.R. Church claims they did. Suddenly it seems the Bible itself is validating this Book of Enoch.
• He was a worshiper of God.
  Enoch seems to have taken worship to the next level; something I wish I could attain. But again, there is nothing in the Old Testament to validate this claim outside of this,
  Genesis 5:24 NASB Enoch walked with God; and he was not, for God took him.
  There is, however, this line we find in Hebrews 11:5,
  “ for he obtained the witness that before his being taken up he was pleasing to God.”
  The words obtained and witness are the same word marturéō which means (according to the Word Study Dictionary) To bear witness, to testify to the truth of what one has seen, heard, or knows. Now, did God bear witness to Enoch, or did Enoch bear witness to God? Since The Book of Enoch was known and read throughout the early church for the first 700 years of its existence; then it is safe to say that Enoch bore witness to: not only the current and future acts of the living God (prophetically,) but also the activities of the fallen angels - as they attempted to prevent God from bringing in the seed (through man) that would crush Satan's head.
• It is safe to say that Enoch walked the earth at the same time as the Titans.
  Dissecting this requires that we use our brains and think outside the religious boxes in which we entrench ourselves. Our principal source of information comes from Genesis 6. What is the problem with that? The problem is that we make immediate and critical assumptions based upon the placement of the information in the, so called, Bible “chronology.”
  Allow me to explain. We know that God created man (male and female,) put a body on them, and placed them in the garden. We assume that garden was a small selective spot and that they never left it, but neither of those ideas is valid. All you have to do is travel a bit, stop at the local museum, and you find that the barren location you are now standing on was once a vibrant, tropical garden.
  What we do know is this,
  Genesis 3:1-3 NASB Now the serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said to the woman, "Indeed, has God said, 'You shall not eat from any tree of the garden'?" 2) The woman said to the serpent, "From the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat; 3) but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, 'You shall not eat from it or touch it, or you will die.'"
  In this expansive place called a garden was a plot of ground considered to be the center. Here is where the fall of man took place.
  Another assumption we make is that there were no children born to Adam and Eve until the fall. If that was the case, then why would God have to make this declaration to Eve?
  Genesis 3:16 NASB To the woman He said, "I will greatly multiply Your pain in childbirth, In pain, you will bring forth children;
  This comment by God would make no sense to Eve unless she was producing children without all the pain and discomfort normally associated with childbirth. Add to this piece of logic a question recently thrown at me, once again; “where did Cain get his wife?” The answer lies in setting aside tradition, assumption, and faulty teaching. Since we legitimately do not know how long Adam and Eve walked this earth prior to the fall. It is only natural to think that two naked humans would have had intercourse, only without the self-serving motives sin brings. And, this, is the only reasonable explanation for Cain to obtain a wife. The alternative, of Cain, waiting for his parents to produce a female child is ridiculous. Besides that, we relish the idea of clinging to twisted chronological logic, which cannot explain why Cain would say, people, will kill me, especially when we want to believe that there were no other people. And do we have any reason that logically explains why Cain was able to go to a city? Mind you, at this time in civilizations history; a city could have been several thatch huts and a fire pit. It still implies others living there and the probability of families of their own.
  If this idea of children before the fall is valid, then what kind of mentality would they have had? They were just like their parents, godlike. 

God was sorry he made man on the earth. Is that even possible? Edited.

I was asked by a friend about the Book of Enoch that I was recently reading. I acquired it several months ago but have never taken the time to read the book. Having recently decided to pursue its contents, I find it requires my full concentration. Waiting for this friend to get out of his medical appointment, I had a few minutes to spare, and so I began rereading pages of the book I had already read. This time I had determined to make notes as I went because I wanted to build some word pictures in my head (it's how I learn best.) Waiting for some paperwork from the front desk, there were a few brief minutes before we left and so I started talking about what I had learned so far.

I mentioned that the Book of Enoch had been an integral part of the early Church, and had been read aloud among the body for 700 years. Early Church fathers, such as Clement, Barnabas, and Irenaeus referenced and quoted from the Book of Enoch. Th D. JR Church published the book, “Enoch, The First Book Ever Written,” and he does the commentary on it as it progresses.

I have come to realize that verifiable evidence is not enough to convince some people of the necessity nor the authenticity of information that gives us more insight into Biblical events that are otherwise eternally obscured. I am a firm believer that the answers are in scripture, and, if not they might be obtained through some other source, like the Book of Enoch.

Keep this in mind as you read. Jude, the author of his own book, quotes a prophecy from Enoch that is not in our Bibles and can only be found in the Book of Enoch. The writer of Hebrews places Enoch in the hall of fame for his great faith, by which he walked off this earth and into God's arms, never to see death (Hebrews 11:5). And we find the name of Enoch in Luke 3:37, where he is listed in the lineage of Jesus Christ.

I can't remember how we got there, but my friend said, then what do you do with Genesis 6:7 where God said, I am sorry that I made man?

Perhaps I had attempted to point out how the fallen angels had, as Jude tells us, cohabited with the daughters of men, with the express purpose of circumventing God's plan of redemption. How can I make that statement? You have to go back to the garden where God is addressing Eve about her actions. She is cursed, but there is some good news, as one from her seed will bring about the redemption of the world. (Okay, I did not use the exact wording, but you should get a general idea.)

Genesis 3:13-15 NASB Then the LORD God said to the woman, "What is this you have done?" And the woman said, "The serpent deceived me, and I ate." 14) The LORD God said to the serpent, "Because you have done this, Cursed are you more than all cattle, And more than every beast of the field; On your belly you will go, And dust you will eat All the days of your life; 15) And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, And you shall bruise him on the heel."

Satan's evil plan almost worked prior to the flood.

Consider what was happening at this time. God, seeing that the earth was FILLED with violence and that the thoughts of “men” were only evil. The fallen angels, by taking whomever they wanted among women, had filled the earth with hybrids. The International Standard Bible says it best.

Genesis 6:4 ISV The Nephilim were on the earth at that time (and also immediately afterward), when those divine beings were having sexual relations with those human women, who gave birth to children for them. These children became the heroes and legendary figures of ancient times.

These titans became the foundation of mythology.

Question, does all indeed mean all? No, because there was at that time a handful; specifically the close lineage that produced Noah. This family line was, as yet, untouched by the genetic corruption that these fallen angels were introducing.

So far I haven't focused on any passages that touch on the word all, but the question was asked, “didn't God say that he was sorry he created man on the earth?” Doesn't that phrase imply that God was offended by all, including Noah? There is nothing about this question or the verse, that paints a correct picture of God or His character. If He was disgusted with all, then why waste any time communing with Enoch. The disjointed logic we use when we focus on one verse out of context makes no sense and is incorrect. So let's rethink the generalized question, wasn't God sorry He created man.

Genesis 6:6-7 NASB The LORD was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7) The LORD said, "I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the sky; for I am sorry that I have made them."

While it is true that the Bible translations range from sorry to regret, and grieved; but remember, God, put the man on earth so that He could share His life with and talk to the man.

[Right here is where the understanding that God was not caught off guard by Satan's/Lucifer's actions, and the plan of salvation – that is the securing of the creation, including God's finest creation, man, was initiated. All of our confusion and misunderstandings stem from how we perceive these first few moments of time. God knew full well what would happen and adapted to the perverted twists. The day will come when our relationship with the Father will once again be restored to the condition it was prior to Adam's fall in the garden.]

When you understand God's nature and character, the emotion of being sorry doesn't seem to accurately convey His heart toward men like Enoch, Methuselah or Noah, and they should be excluded from such a generalized statement. Therefore, it must mean something more specific.

To merely quote this verse is to ignore the context in which it is said.

The context begins in verse two, where fallen angels are taking human women, having intercourse with them, and filling the earth with their own version of hybrids. Not only that, but these hybrids are not just tall, they are massive, and they are violent hunters of humankind.

Genesis 6:2-5 CJB the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were attractive; and they took wives for themselves, whomever they chose. 3) Adonai said, "My Spirit will not live in human beings forever, for they too are flesh; therefore their lifespan is to be 120 years." 4) The N'filim were on the earth in those days, and also afterwards, when the sons of God came into the daughters of men, and they bore children to them; these were the ancient heroes, men of renown. 5) Adonai saw that the people on earth were very wicked, that all the imaginings of their hearts were always of evil only.

The attention grabber in this paragraph above is verse 5, where it says, “Adonai saw that the people on earth were very wicked, that all the imaginings of their hearts were always of evil only.” Evidently, the Satanic scheme to hijack the redemption of the earth was so efficient that it had reduced the unpolluted lineage from Adam to the close relatives of Noah.

Now, if the earth had been infiltrated to the point there were only a handful of undamaged humans left, wouldn't God be justifiably disgusted to the point where he was not only willing but needed to remove this malignancy from the earth.

Genesis 6:6-7 NASB The LORD was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7) The LORD said, "I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the sky; for I am sorry that I have made them."

Sorry, the word used in the NASB is the Hebrew word nâcham and means to sigh that is, breathe strongly; by implication to be sorry.

For me, an implication is not a translation, nor is it definitive. It is, however, something that may explain or add clarity. The words sigh and breathe strongly are words that I can understand, as I do it frequently. I sigh when I am angry, frustrated, and have enough. In this case, God had enough.

The phrase “he had made,” is the Hebrew word ‛āśāh: A verb meaning to do, to make, to accomplish, to complete. This frequently used Hebrew verb conveys the central notion of performing an activity with a distinct purpose, a moral obligation, or a goal in view (cf. Gen_11:6).

I could just as comfortably read Genesis 6:6 as The Lord was extremely frustrated that His good intentions had come to this.

Isaiah tells that the earth was habitable in the day that it was formed, and yet, something transpired because there was most certainly some imperfection taking place.

Isaiah 45:18 NASB For thus says the LORD, who created the heavens (He is the God who formed the earth and made it, He established it and did not create it a waste place, but formed it to be inhabited), "I am the LORD, and there is none else.

Likewise, man was perfect in the day he was made as well.

Genesis 1:27-31 NASB God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. 28) God blessed them; and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth." 29) Then God said, "Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the surface of all the earth, and every tree which has fruit yielding seed; it shall be food for you; 30) and to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the sky and to everything that moves on the earth which has life, I have given every green plant for food"; and it was so. 31) God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.

What is there about this paragraph above for God to be disgusted with? Nothing.

How about here in Genesis 2:7-9?

Genesis 2:7-9 NASB Then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being. 8) The LORD God planted a garden toward the east, in Eden; and there He placed the man whom He had formed. 9) Out of the ground the LORD God caused to grow every tree that is pleasing to the sight and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

Still good. But things are about to change. I am cutting it short for space sake.

Genesis 3:7-10 NASB Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loin coverings. 8) They heard the sound of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God among the trees of the garden. 9) Then the LORD God called to the man, and said to him, "Where are you?" 10) He said, "I heard the sound of You in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid myself."

Eve was deceived, but Adam was wide awake and chose to trash his relationship with God. The passage also demonstrates an event that may have happened on a daily basis, God communing with the man and his wife. The tragedy here is that the connectedness and ease of communication with God were now broken.

I pointed out earlier, how in talking with the serpent, God said, “I will put enmity Between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, And you shall bruise him on the heel.”

Not too long after this, is when Satan's plan to stop this seed, gets put into action.

Ask yourself a question. Through intercourse and a maintained level of violence, how long would it take you to redirect the global order of things? Now, consider the added benefit these hybrids had in their completion of Satan's ugly plan. Can you now see why the history of man on earth, has been riddled with holocausts?

“The Story” chapter 1 - From creation to Noah. Genesis 1-3. Prep for bible study.

Many years ago, I shared the teaching responsibility of a men’s Bible study. The entire church was interrupted by the Pastor, who felt we needed to walk everyone through Rick Warren’s The Story, a pathetic overview of the Bible. You would be right if you got the sense that I was disgusted. Since we each had a copy of this book, I made some notes that might assist me in teaching and put them on my website. This was posted in 2014 when I did not use the Grammarly program to check my grammar. After a recent check of my statistics, I saw that someone had pulled up this excessive rant, prompting me to fix it. If you invested the time to read all 18 pages, I am chopping this up and extending it by one chapter. 

Because “The Story” covers many subjects quickly, it is difficult to do a focused bible study when dealing with many topics over 11 chapters. That being said, I will attempt to focus on one aspect at a time.

Genesis 1

God creates heaven and earth

“In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth,” (Genesis 1:1 LSV)

• (The Literal Standard version italicized the word “the” as it was added for continuity. Removal of such a simple word tends to show that the creation was a process, and we are still involved in that process until the end of the 1000-year reign.)

Why is it important to know how things began?

Perhaps because it shows original intent, or, once everything goes bad, it demonstrates that the creator has a plan.

God creates man in his own image, blesses him

“Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, after Our likeness! Let them rule over the fish of the sea, over the flying creatures of the sky, over the livestock, over the whole earth, and over every crawling creature that crawls on the land.”
(Genesis 1:26 TLV)

Several things dominate this passage.

• “Then God said,”

Ah, but to whom?

If we work off the assumption that God, like Allah, is a standalone entity, then this makes no sense. The writer has to be referring to God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. Knowing that I am writing these notes to followers of Christ, then it seems safe to believe that you understand that God is a triune entity and that Jesus Christ – the Word of God – has made himself known to us in the body of a man.

• “Let us make man in our image, in our likeness”

In unity, from the beginning of time, there have been three.

How does that affect how I understand creation?

It does not, unless, as I consider what the image of God was, I began to understand that this has little to do with a physical body, and is focused more on the character and attributes of the creator.

The Apostle John makes it very clear that Jesus was right there in the beginning.

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” John 1:1

Jesus indicates that the Holy Spirit was there.

“And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.” Genesis 1:2 KJV

And,

“But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceeds from the Father, he shall testify of me:”
(John 15:26 KJV)

As for making “man in our image, and likeness.”

Paul wrote, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, about man when he said,

“…You were created to be like God, and so you must please him and be truly holy.” (Ephesians 4:24 CEV)

The Hebrew word for image tselem - conveys multiple possibilities. Tseh’-lem – From an unused root meaning to shade; a phantom, that is, (figuratively) illusion, resemblance; hence a representative figure, especially an idol:

If man was only a shadow, then he is not an exacting duplicate of God but a mere representation, something that vaguely resembles the creator. Seeing as man is made in all three aspects (shade, resemblance, and representative figure), how could you pin down one specific thing to define what the man looked like without a body. 

The point to this, the overarching theme I see here, is that God created someone that was so much like him that it would be ridiculous to think that this man did not walk in constant communication with the Father. 

I am stunned by God as he opens my eyes, and I begin to see things I have never seen before. Examples of this would be: Jesus, the last Adam, created in the image of God, and untainted by the sin prevalent in the world, walked this earth, in full view of the disciples, in perfect communion with the Father. The other is Enoch. Enoch learned how to walk in perfect harmony with the Father and walked off the earth. This freedom of communication is the atmosphere that Adam was placed in.

 Genesis 2

The book, The Story asks the question:

Why did God put the tree of knowledge of good and evil in the garden?

One of the things that run through my mind as I look at the events of man's creation is: if the human is so closely and intimately made in God’s image and apparently placed here so that God would have someone to talk with, what separates us, and makes us something other than mere slaves?

The answer to that question has freedom written all over it.

We are free to choose whom we will love and how we will respond when love is shown to us. The other side of this coin is how God will continue to respond to us, even when we break off communication.

Man had complete knowledge of good, for that is part of the character of God, as is love, but he had no knowledge of bad; there was nothing inhibiting or tainting man’s relationship with the creator.

So man was free to exhibit love toward God or ignore Him. Certainly, the fruit of that tree was a test, but what you don't see or know is how many years were they able to ignore it? 

Man is placed in the garden, and the fruit of the tree of knowledge is the only forbidden thing.

“Then Adonai Elohim took the man and gave him rest in the Garden of Eden in order to cultivate and watch over it.  (16)  Then Adonai Elohim commanded the man saying, “From all the trees of the garden, you are most welcome to eat.  (17)  But of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil you must not eat. For when you eat from it, you most assuredly will die!” Genesis 2:15-17 TLV 

Man only has one demand placed upon him; do not eat the fruit of that tree!

Does it get any better than this?

Well, yes. Having an intimate union with God is, even in God’s mind, not enough, and so God made a woman for him. 

 Genesis 3

The serpent deceives Eve

“Now the serpent was more cunning than any creature of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said to the woman, "Is it true that God has said, 'You shall not eat of any tree of the garden?' " Genesis 3:1 AFV 

My pastor recently said, “we don't know where Adam was during this time.” Oh really!

Adam was standing right there, watching the entire process, hearing everything the dragon said, and never said a word in defiance.

“Now the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a thing of lust for the eyes, and that the tree was desirable for imparting wisdom. So she took of its fruit and she ate. She also gave to her husband who was with her and he ate. Then the eyes of both of them were opened and they knew that they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made for themselves loin-coverings.” (Genesis 3:6-7 TLV)

Adam was very clear about what God had told him, and there were NO issues with his memory, and he is alone with the animals. Adam, in time, of course, after she was cloned from his rib, told Eve about the only rule they had, and there is no doubt in my mind she understood what he said and where that information came from. But keep in mind that deception is a twisting of the truth, and those who are not established in their relationship with the Father seem to be the quickest to fall.

How does that explain Adam being sucked into this?

It does not, but what it does demonstrate is that God has to be consistent with His actions. (We will see God demonstrating His intent and character throughout the Old Testament. He says to both Noah, and then Abram. God typically said “as for me”, indicating that no matter what happens I will uphold my end of this contract.)

I have heard pathetic explanations about the fall of man in the garden, told in so many perverted ways, and none of them make any sense to me.

Adam has, at this point, demonstrated selfishness and defiance for the first time and he did what he wanted. In contrast, Jesus told us that He only did what the Father told him. Think about the alternatives. Adam heard those words from God and knows full well that Eve will die, and he watched her bite wholeheartedly into that fruit without wincing.

Could God make another Eve, as He had made the first one?

Well certainly, but there is a huge issue with the man trusting what the Father had said, and he had just demonstrated that he didn't trust God anymore.

Here is a tainted human piece of logic. God, on the other hand, can use any or all methods of death to fulfill His promise; and lacking specific information, we do not know if Adam fully understood what those words concerning death meant.

Also think about how it appears that nothing had ever been killed before God did it, and it might be an entirely new concept to them. For all Adam knows she could merely drop dead in the next few seconds. Oh, they died, as both, immediately in their spirits, as the lights of this open communication with the Father went out, and they began to deteriorate immediately in ways they slowly began to perceive.

“The LORD God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife, and clothed them.” (Genesis 3:21 NASB)

Some, you would think, prefer an angry, vengeful God, and this would have been a good time for it, if that was his character, but he does not pour out His hot anger on them. What we do see is that God is entirely consistent with His nature and character, and this is something that we need to perceive as we read about the events of creation and the beginnings of man.

At this point, (I may have seen this in “The Story” but I indicated that it was a caption from the NIV. I have four versions of the NIV and none of them say this.) the next segment shows God arraigning them as though they had been convicted in a criminal court.

Watch what happens, and I will show you differently.

“Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the LORD God as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and they hid from the LORD God among the trees of the garden. But the LORD God called to the man, "Where are you?" He answered, "I heard you in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked, so I hid.”
(Genesis 3:8-10 TNIV)

God is not arraigning anyone. In fact, He is acting completely within his unchangeable character; He is acting in love toward that, which is a replica of him, and showing them respect; but there is one huge change, and the only ones demonstrating the effects of the change that sin brought, is His creation as suddenly the man, who had been naked and not ashamed, is now hiding, not only from God but from each other as well.

“And he said, "Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree that I commanded you not to eat from?" (Genesis 3:11 TNIV)

I fully expect Adam to understand what is being said because God spoke directly to the man. But it is a peculiar statement, at best, if God did not expect Eve to know the rules. You see, the problem is that He did expect her to know, not like an angry father, who expected you to somehow absorb his thought processes. God told Adam, who had dominion over the earth and was, therefore, God's representative here on earth, and Adam conveyed this information to Eve. As far as God was concerned, she had been told and there could be no excuses. Well, that sounds harsh, and if it was like that then a full and brutal punishment would be in order; but that IS NOT what God did. He showed mercy, grace, and punishment by upholding His word.

I suppose many generations of misunderstanding and tradition have taught us that God is always ready to strike us down, but what if what we see here is God merely asking questions and reasonable questions at that. (Try to maintain one clear thing here, you are not getting anything past God, and He already knows the answer before He asks, so lying is not an appropriate response.)

Did Eve just stand there dumbfounded as she listened to God's word to them?

We do not know, but the hesitation allowed for the newly found damage to manifest in Adam when He said:

“The man answered, “That woman, the one you gave me, gave me some fruit from the tree, and I ate it.” (Genesis 3:12 GW)

Well, that was pathetic. Now we see something close to what I deem anger.

One of the things you cannot deny is that God can and does get angry, but at whom?

The serpent is cursed

“So the LORD God said to the snake, “Because you have done this, You are cursed more than all the wild or domestic animals. You will crawl on your belly. You will be the lowest of animals as long as you live.” (Genesis 3:14 GW)

There is good news and bad news.

The promised seed

^{“And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her Offspring; He will bruise and tread your head underfoot, and you will lie in wait and bruise His heel.” [Gal. 4:4.]}
(Genesis 3:15 AMP)

^{Enmity? Webster's dictionary tells us that it is “The quality of being an enemy; the opposite of friendship; ill will; hatred; unfriendly dispositions; malevolence.”}

In short, Satan hates us.

“But when the time arrived that was set by God the Father, God sent his Son, born among us of a woman, born under the conditions of the law so that he might redeem those of us who have been kidnapped by the law.”
(Galatians 4:4 MSG)

None of this caught God by surprise.

How would you have played a game of chess, over a period of years, with such vast dimensions, all the way out to the last winning move, without putting tremendous thought into it?

(It is possible that God had this all mapped out in his head in seconds.)

Giving His “representative figure” the freedom to make choices almost makes you think that there had to have been an alternate plan, or was this the plan from the very beginning. Apparently, God did not intend to let such a destructive force run havoc, not against Him and His creation for all eternity; that would have been contrary to the original design and out of character.

While there may be a good chewing out going on here, there is also the God I have come to understand, giving Eve the hope that her seed will be the one that brings the enemy his defeat.

The new way of life Adam and Eve brought upon themselves will soon be filled with pain, murder, jealousy, and the promise of hope, much like the covenant God made with Abraham.

Expelled from paradise, the repercussions of man’s selfishness permeated everything, and the death clock immediately began counting down; under the limitations of that clock and now recorded time, two sons are born.

There are many horrid aspects to consider.

The outcome of their sin, that God continues to discuss: such as pain in childbirth, and Adam now having to toil to get the land to produce. But I refuse to believe that they did not have an understanding of what God was talking about when he speaks of crushing and bruising, or as He kills the animals necessary to make the clothing they needed. God made clothing for them. He did it in such a manner that they, too, would know-how and understand the implications behind what He did. This is not made explicit in scripture, but enough clues are given that allow us to ascertain what God did, for in a short time, we will see both Cain and Abel making sacrifices. One son does it right and is accepted, and the other turns his jealousy inward, with a devastating result.