Genesis 4--The Line of Cain

So Cain went out from the LORD's presence and lived in the land of Nod, east of Eden.

Yes.

And I realize that much Christian editorializing has gone into this verse, to the effect that Cain's descendants founded the civilization that later became known as Babylon--but this ignores one fundamental point, of great significance to our comprehension of the story as it was recited and understood by the ancient Israelis 3000 years ago: The descendants--or line--of Cain ended with the destruction of the human race by flood.

(For further information on this event, see Genesis 6-8, which we will discuss at greater length in a few posts.)

Noah, who we will cover later, was descended from another ancestor--Seth--and therefore did not pass on either the line of Cain or the so-called "mark" of Cain . . . which begs the question: Why even mention this family line at all, since it is not the one traced throughout the book of Genesis?

Simple: Cain's family line exemplifies everything that the Israelis were taught not to be.

Cain lay with his wife, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Enoch. Cain was then building a city, and he named it after his son Enoch. To Enoch was born Irad, and Irad was the father of Mehujael, and Mehujael was the father of Methushael, and Methushael was the father of Lamech.

Two things to note here, and then an aside:

1. Cain built a city--a rather strange thing to do for someone who had spent his entire life tilling and cultivating the soil. However, remember that the previous verses of chapter 4, Cain had been banished from the soil; in essence, his livelihood was destroyed because of his cold-blooded murder of Abel, his brother. In order to eat, and in order to make a life for himself, Cain was reduced to other crafts and trades.

Throughout human history, the endeavor to build cities, and more fundamentally, ways of living outside of farming, has brought about a great many advances, but it has also, I fear, done a great deal of damage to the human soul. It seems we are at our best when we are tied in some way to the soil, a fact recognized (and celebrated) in many of our greatest works of art, music, and literature. When we walk away from the soil, when we "say goodbye" to close-knit communities in which men and women have tilled the ground for generations, we lose a sense of respect for the wonders of the creation that we were always designed to steward (see previous blog entries on Genesis 1 and 2).

The argument that human beings should be able to abandon the feeding and care of livestock and the growing and harvesting of plants for "higher pursuits" is, at its heart, fatuous. What higher pursuit could there be than to dedicate one's physical, mental, and spiritual energy toward making things grow? And what greater metaphor could we have for the necessity of cultivating holistic spiritual, mental, and physical vitality in our families, our communities, and ourselves than in the simple miracle of a seed germinating into beautiful, productive life?

An inability to comprehend the importance of agriculture will, inevitably, lead to a civilization's decline, and a culture that abandons all pretense of agriculture will, in the process, I fear, abandon all pretense of real warmth and understanding in its households and communities.

2. Cain's family line was short. We do not hear of anyone after Lamech, and probably for good reason. In Genesis 6-8, the Israelites preserved an account, recited from memory over dozens of generations, of a great flood which destroyed every member of the human race--except for one family. This family, the family of Noah, was not descended from the line of Cain but from the line of Seth, another one of Adam and Eve's sons.

Which brings up another important question, and one I want to address here:

Where did Cain find a wife?

The answer, I think, should be obvious--if only we could, for a moment, look past our own rather benighted concepts of marriage to a culture in which the union of husband and wife was the union of two families. The ancient Israelis, like almost every other human civilization on Earth before 1900, had a keen understanding of marriage's implications, that it was the union of two souls as well as two bodies and minds. Therefore, to them, it was deadly serious business, with potentially devastating consequences for both bride and groom if lightly undertaken.

Ancient Israeli families, like the families of many other pre-Industrial cultures, were very careful about making sure their children had spouses who loved them and who brought out their best qualities . . . and this is the reason why marriages were, for the most part, arranged in ancient Israeli society. What better way to assure that your son or daughter will find a mate you can trust with their welfare than to look for suitable spouses in your local community, neighborhood, or family?

Yes, family--fathers and mothers often arranged marriages between 2nd or 3rd cousins, and sometimes even between people who were related more closely, with an interest in maintaining family traditions or simply in protecting the physical, mental, and spiritual welfare of their children, and so it would not have been as difficult for them to imagine where Cain's wife might have come from during the recitation of this chapter than it seems to be for us.

I doubt that Cain married his sister, as some Christian writers have argued, but almost certainly, he married a niece--and while this offends every sensibility of the postindustrial, postmodern mind, I would like to remind you that while we may find the marital practices of the ancients repugnant, we cannot escape the conclusion, given the state of our own culture today, that their marital practices were, on the whole, better than our own.

Consider, if you will, the standard scenario that our culture considers "normal" today: Young men and women, upon entering puberty, are expected, without guidance from their parents or elders, to be wise in the application of their sexual desires. Predictably, they do what anyone in their situation would do--they make decisions based on their own fantasies rather than on a clear estimation of their personalities and needs.

Therefore, the story we often recognize as "acceptable" in our culture goes something like this: These young men and women begin to date absolute strangers, often without bothering to tell their parents what is happening and how they feel about it. Dating leads to a "relationship"--which can involve sex, but more often involves the loss of emotional virginity--and these "relationships," which have not been grounded on the basis of mutual needs, beliefs, and interests, end in what we euphemistically term a "breakup."

Unfortunately, in too many cases, the cycle simply repeats itself, until the son or daughter in question finds someone he or she "might marry," who is then subjected to the obligatory family "interview" (which is often simply a rubber stamp for whatever the child actually wanted). If the "interview" (usually no more than 2 hours) is successful, then engagement and marriage ensue shortly thereafter.

This scenario is extremely dangerous for the people involved in these relationships because often, they are not afforded an adequate review of their romance by those who know and care for them the most. The reason we have a 60% divorce rate within the United States is that we do not invest enough time and energy in training our children to approach every potential relationship with the opposite sex as if it were a decision of grave importance. Instead, we allow our children, in the absence of our own accumulated wisdom, to soak up fantasies about love and marriage that ultimately lead them, if they (and we) are not careful, to a union with someone that neither we nor they can trust.

Think about it: If you have a son or daughter, who you spent 20 years of your life training, feeding, and fixing band-aids for, wouldn't you want to make sure that son or daughter marries someone you know will give them the same love, care, and dedication that you did?