Part F. The rise of nations (10:1-32)
F1. The Japhethites (10:1-5)
F2. The Hamites (10:6-20)
F3. The Shemites (10:21-32)
† Gen 10 is a chapter completely dedicated to a record of genealogies. There are a total of 70 clans and nations (Shem 26, Ham 30, Japheth 14). The total number is the product of two symbolically perfect numbers, 7 and 10. This implies that the list is not comprehensive and contains only selected names.
†
As this chapter mentions the different languages
(v.5,20,31) which did not exist until
A NOTE on ancient
documents referred:
[1] Talmud is the collection of ancient Rabbinic writings consisting of two components: [a] the Mishnah (around AD 200), the first written compendium of Judaism’s Oral Law containing rabbinical elucidations, elaborations, and commentaries; and [b] the Gemara (around AD 500), a discussion of the Mishnah and related writings.
[2] Targum is the Aramaic translations or paraphrase of the Hebrew Bible, with explanations, in the 1st century.
[3] Josephus Flavius (AD 37-100) was a Jewish historian famous for his history books, especially Antiquities of the Jews (about AD 93).
[4] Herodotus (484-425 BC) was a Greek
historian. He is often called “The Father of History” because of his famous
book Histories about ancient
10:1 generations: a new “toledot” section (the 4th of 10 in Genesis).
10:2 The Japhethites recorded here include 7 sons (marked “(1)” in following
table) and 7 grandsons (marked 2), a total of 14 clans and nations. These 14
groups were described to be residents of
These are the Europeans and the ancestors of the white races.
These nations belong to the Indo-European language group. After migration, they
resided in Europe, North and South America, and
|
Gen |
Japhethites |
Possible Race |
Possible Location |
|
10:2 |
Gomer (1) |
Celts, Franks, Gauls, Phrygians |
|
|
|
Magog (1) |
Goths, Scythians, Persians |
E Turkey, |
|
|
Madai (1) |
Medians |
|
|
|
Javan (1) |
Ionians |
|
|
|
Tubal (1) |
Bithynians, Spaniards |
S Russia, |
|
|
Meshech (1) |
Mycenaens, Slavs |
NW |
|
|
Tiras (1) |
Thracians, Albanians |
European Turkey, islands |
|
10:3 |
Ashkenaz (2) |
Reginians, Germans |
W Turkey, |
|
|
Riphath (2) |
Paphlagonians, Etruscans |
|
|
|
Togarmah (2) |
Armenians, Turks |
|
|
10:4 |
Elishah (2) |
Aeolians, Greeks |
Greek islands |
|
|
Tarshish (2) |
Spaniards, Lombardians |
|
|
|
Kittim (2) |
Cypriots, Italians, Romans |
|
|
|
Dodanim (2) |
Dodonians, Bohemians |
|
Gomer: Cimmerians as
recorded in Assyrian documents; located near Cappadocia in northern
o
Jewish commentary: [a] Most probably the Celts (cf. Herodotus 2:33), the Franks, or
the Gauls, all of whom were closely related. [b] Early sources translate this as Afrikey. This Afrikey, however,
is not Africa, but Frikia or
Magog: located in
northern
o
Jewish commentary: [a] Most probably a Teutonic people, living to the north of the
Madai: Medians, a great nation, defeated the Babylonians with the Persians in 6th century BC; located in northern Iran; mentioned in 2Ki 17:6; Ezr 6:2; Es 1:3; Isa 21:2; Jer 25:25; Dan 8:20.
o Jewish commentary: [a] Ancestor of Medes (Josephus; Talmud). [b] An ancient source states that Madai is to the west of Gomer and Magog, on the shores and the islands.
Javan: Ionians, a
Greek tribe; located in western
o
Jewish commentary: [a] Yawan in ancient Hebrew, also spelt Yavan; denoting
Tubal: also spelt
Tuval; located north of
o
Jewish commentary: [a] A northern country (Eze 27:13; 38:2). This is usually
identified with
Meshech: also spelt
Meshekh; located southwest of
o
Jewish commentary: [a] A northern kingdom (Eze 27:13; 38:2; Ps 120:5). Most Talmudic
sources identify Meshekh with
Tiras: only appears in this chapter in OT; sea people.
o
Jewish commentary: [a] The Targum identifies this as Tarkey, which is identified as
10:3 Ashkenaz: Scythians in the Assyrian
documents; located among the Medianites in the 7th century BC; mentioned in Jer
51:27 (In modern times, Ashkenazi is the group name for Jews living in
o
Jewish commentary: [a] This is a nation associated with the Ararat area (Jer 51:27).
In Talmudic sources, it is rendered as
Riphath: located
near the
o
Jewish commentary: [a] Josephus identifies these people with the Paphlagonians, an
ancient people who lived on the
Togarmah: located in
the upper Euphrates, in eastern
o
Jewish commentary: [a] A northern people (Eze 27:14; 38:6). Josephus identifies these
people with the Phrygians. [b] Other
sources have Barberia, which some identify as
10:4 Elishah: Alasiyans, located on the
o
Jewish commentary: [a] This is seen as an island (Eze 27:7). Josephus identifies it
with the Aeolians (Antiquities 1:6:1), who were known to have inhabited the
Tarshish:
Carthagians in northern Africa; mentioned in 1Ki 10:22; Isa 2:16; some believe
it refers to
o
Jewish commentary: [a] Tarshishah (1Ch 1:7). It was famed for its ships (1Ki 10:22;
22:49; Isa 23;10; 66:19; Eze 38:13; Jonah 1:3). [b] Josephus ant Talmud identifies it with Cilicia, whose capital
was
Kittim: (plural form
representing people group) located in southern coast of
o
Jewish commentary: [a] An island people (Jer 2:10; Eze 27:6; Nu 24:24; Isa 23:1,12;
Dan 11:30). Josephus identifies it with
Dodanim: (plural
form representing people group) possibly located in
o
Jewish commentary: [a] Rodanim (1Ch 1:7). The Dodonians were known to be an ancient
people (cf. Iliad 2:748; Herodotus 2:52-57). [b] The Targum renders it as Dardania, a city on the
10:5 the coastland peoples: a suitable description of the long coastlines of Mediterranean lands, absent from the descriptions for the descendants of Ham and Shem.
o Jewish translation: isolated nations, islands.
spread: a main theme in this chapter, the result of God’s action in Gen 11:9.
lands…languages…clans…nations: These are the 4 dividing factors: divisions according to physical location (literal: territories), communication, culture, and government.
o The Israelites were organized into tribes, clans, families, individuals (Jos 7:14).
The record for the Japhethites is the shortest among the three, possibly because they lived further from the Israelites and had little contact with them.
10:6 The Hamites recorded here include 4 sons (marked “(1)” in following
table), 8 grandsons (2), 2 great-grandsons (3), 7 races (8), and 9 nations (9),
a total of 30 clans and nations. These 30 groups were described to be residents
of northern Africa and the Middle East, including
These are the Africans and the ancestors of the black races.
These nations belong to the African language group. After migration, they
occupy most of the continent of
|
Gen |
Hamites |
Possible Race |
Possible Location |
|
10:6 |
|
Cassites, Ethiopians |
S Egypt, |
|
|
|
Egyptians |
|
|
|
Put (1) |
Libyans |
|
|
|
|
Canaanites |
|
|
10:7 |
Seba (2) |
Sabeans |
|
|
|
Havilah (2) |
Arabians, Indians |
|
|
|
Sabtah (2) |
Astaborns |
Arabia, |
|
|
Raamah (2) |
Libyans, Mauretanians |
Arabia, NW |
|
|
Sabteca (2) |
Yemenites, Zeugis |
SE Arabia, |
|
|
|
Sabeans |
|
|
|
Dedan (3) |
Judeadeans, Mazices |
|
|
10:8 |
Nimrod (2) |
Babylonians |
|
|
10:13 |
Ludim (8) |
Egyptians |
|
|
|
Anamim (8) |
Mareotis |
|
|
|
Lehabim (8) |
|
|
|
|
Naphtuhim (8) |
|
C |
|
10:14 |
Pathrusim (8) |
|
|
|
|
Casluhim (8) |
Philistines |
|
|
|
Caphtorim (8) |
Philistines |
|
|
10:15 |
|
Phoenicians |
|
|
|
Heth (2) |
Hittites |
|
|
10:16 |
Jebusites (9) |
Jebusites (1Sa; 2Ki) |
|
|
|
Amorites (9) |
Amorites (Gen 48:22; Jdg) |
|
|
|
Girgashites (9) |
Girgashites (Dt; Jos) |
|
|
10:17 |
Hivites (9) |
Hivites (Jos; Jdg) |
|
|
|
Arkites (9) |
|
|
|
|
Sinites (9) |
Kafruseans |
|
|
10:18 |
Arvadites (9) |
|
|
|
|
Zemarites (9) |
|
|
|
|
Hamathites (9) |
Hamathites (Nu; Jos) |
N Palestine, |
o
Jewish commentary: [a] Usually translated as
o
Jewish translation: Mitzraim is the Hebrew name for
Put: same as
o
Jewish commentary: [a] Josephus identifies it with Lybyos or Lybia in
Canaan: located in
o
Jewish commentary: Aborigine tribe of the
10:7 Seba: located in the
o
Jewish commentary: [a] Josephus identifies this with the Sabeans, a people living in
southern
Havilah: located in
the
o
Jewish commentary: [a] The Targum has
Sabtah: located in
the Arabian Peninsula; another possibility is
o Jewish commentary: [a] Josephus identifies this nation with the Astaborans. [b] The Talmud identifies it with outer Takistan. [c] The Targum identified a Cushite tribe, possibly the Sabrata of North Africa.
Raamah: located in southwest Saudi Arablia; major ancient commercial centre; mentioned in Eze 27:22.
o
Jewish commentary: [a] They were traders in spices, precious stones and gold (Eze
27:22). The Targum has Lubai, the Lybians. [b]
It can also be Mauretania, a district in northwest
Sabteca: located
north of
o Jewish commentary: The Targum renders it Zingain, possibly the African Zeugis.
o Jewish commentary: [a] Josephus identifies these with the Sabeans (1 Ki 10:1; Gen 10:28; 25:3). [b] The Targum renders it Zamdugad or Dmargad.
Dedan: located in
oases of the Arabian Peninsula; major ancient commercial centre (Eze 27:20;
38:13); mentioned in Isa 21:13; Jer 49:8; 25:23; note that
o
Jewish commentary: [a] Josephus identifies this nation with the Judadeans of western
10:8
o Jewish commentary: See Micah 5:5. Nimrod is credited as being the first Babylonian king and the builder of the Tower (Gen 11:1-9).
In this chapter, there are 2 different terms to record the names of the sons: “sons of…” or “fathered…”, the former used when the emphasis is on the father, the latter used when the emphasis is on the son (such as the case of Nimrod in v.8).
mighty man: a warrior excelling at battles.
10:9 before the Lord: an idiom meaning excelling in his work of hunting. However, some interpret this positively to mean God’s favour while others interpret this negatively to mean sinful rebellion as in the thought of Ps 66:7 where God watches the nations to stop the rebellious rise up against Him.
10:10 beginning of his kingdom: Nimrod’s
conquest began from central
Babel: ancient Babylon; near the narrowest part between Tigris and Euphrates rivers; 80 km south of Baghdad; the name Babylon may be traced to the Akkadian babilu, meaning “gate of God”.
o
Jewish commentary: Hebrew for Babylonia or
Erech: later called Uruk, today called Warka; southwest of Baghdad, 40 km from Ur, the ancient hometown of Abraham; mentioned in Ezr 4:9-10; may be the origin for the name Iraq.
o
Jewish commentary: This was a city near
Accad: locate in
northern
o
Jewish commentary: This was the capital of
northern
Calneh: possibly in
southern
o
Jewish commentary: The Talmud identifies this
the modern Niffer, midway between Erekh and
o
Jewish commentary: Usually identified with
10:11 built: Nimrod’s origin from
Assyria: different
from the
o
Jewish commentary: (Hebrew Asshur) See Genesis 10:22. It also denotes a city on the
Nineveh: capital of the Assyrian Kingdom in 8th century BC; mentioned as a large city with great wickedness (Jonah 1:2; 3:3; 4:11); located in northern Iraq, east of upper Tigris River, opposite the town of Mosul.
o
Jewish commentary: The ancient capital of
Assyria, on the
Rehoboth-Ir: the 2
words mean “open land” and “city”, possibly referring to the land adjacent to
o
Jewish commentary: Literally ‘broad places of
the city,’ or ‘avenues of the city.’ The Talmud says that it is Euphrates of
Mishan. Meshan or Mesene is the island formed by Euphrates, the Tigris and the
o
Jewish commentary: This is a city a few miles
south of
10:12 Resen: city 13 km northwest of
o Jewish commentary: The Talmud identifies Resen with Aktispon or Ctesphon. The Targum renders it Talsar or Talasar (Isa 37:12; 2Ki 19:12).
The people in Nimrod’s empire, Assyrians and Babylonians, eventually became main enemies of the Israelites and conquered the two Israeli kingdoms.
While some people believe that Nimrod was a cruel dictator,
there is no indication in the Bible on his character. However, his origin from
Historians variously linked Nimrod’s identity with the names of
Tukulti-Ninurta (Assyrian king in 1246-1206 BC), Sargon (king of
the great city:
10:13 The next 7 names refer to the races, not individuals (suffix “–im” means sons of, implying the tribe or nation; similar to endings of “–ite”).
Ludim: located in
the western part of the
o
Jewish commentary: [a] The Targum renders this Givatai, related to the name Gipt or
Anamim: may mean the
Libyan desert, or west of
o
Jewish commentary: The Targum renders this
Martiorti or Mariotai. These are the people of Mareotis, a district in lower
Egypt containing the town of
Lehabim: Libyans,
west of
o Jewish commentary: Literally ‘fire people,’ since their faces are like fire. The Targum translates this name as Livvakai or Livkai, possibly a Lybian tribe. Josephus states that they are Lybians.
Naphtuhim: located in
central
o
Jewish commentary: The Targum translates this as
Pontsikhnai, a district in
10:14 Pathrusim: located in southern
o
Jewish commentary: See Isa 11:11; Jer 44:1,15;
Eze 29:14; 30:14. The Targum translates it as Nasyotai or Gasyotai, the
district surrounding east of Pelusium in
Casluhim: originally
located in northern
o
Jewish commentary: The Targum renders this as
Pentpoletai, an Egyptian district. In the Midrash it is identified with Sa’id
on the upper
Philistines: (Heb. Pelishtim) These people lived on the
Mediterranean shore between
Caphtorim:
originally located in the
o
Jewish commentary: in Hebrew, referring to
Philistines. [a] See Dt 2:23; Am
9:7. It is identified as an island (Jer 47:4). From the context, it appears to
be an island on the Nile Delta. [b]
However, the Septuagint, and the Targum translate it as Cappadocia, an area
south of the
10:15 Canaan had at least 2 sons:
o
Jewish commentary: [a] located to the north of the
Heth: ancestor of
the great Hittite Empire between 16th and 8th century BC; located in the hilly
region of
o
Jewish commentary: father of the Hittites, one
of the tribes living in the
10:16 Jebusites: located near
o
Jewish commentary: Jebus is identified with
Amorites: located in
o
Jewish commentary: A people who originally lived
on the west of the
Girgashites: located
in
o
Jewish commentary: Inhabitants of the
10:17 Hivites: located in the northern hilly
region of
o
Jewish commentary: They lived in the central
part of the
Arkites: located
north of
o
Jewish commentary: They are identified as the
residents of Arce, a city at the northwest foot of
Sinites: possibly
north of
o
Jewish commentary: This is most probably
associated with the city of
10:18 Arvadites: located in northern
o
Jewish commentary: [a] These are identified as the inhabitants of the
Zemarites: located
on the Mediterranean coast of
o
Jewish commentary: Literally ‘wool people,’
possibly because they sold or worked with wool. Talmud renders their area as
Chametz, a city of
Hamathites: located
in northernmost
o
Jewish commentary: This is to the north near
10:19 in the direction of Gerar: Canaanites
extended from
o
Jewish commentary: Capital of the Philistine
nation, toward the south of the
o
Jewish commentary: These first four cities were
in what is now the southern end of the
10:20 The record for the Hamites is the longest in this chapter, mainly because they were the main adversaries to the Israelites.
10:21 The Shemites
recorded here include 5 sons (marked “(1)” in following table), 5 grandsons
(2), 16 later descendants (3,4,5), a total of 26 clans and nations. These 26
groups were described to be residents of the Middle East and lived in the same
regions as the some of the Hamites, including
These are the Asians and the ancestors of the yellow races.
Many of these nations belong to the Semitic language group. After migration,
they resided in the continent of Asia and northern
|
Gen |
Shemites |
Possible Race |
Possible Location |
|
10:22 |
|
Persians |
|
|
|
Asshur (1) |
Assyrians |
E of |
|
|
Arpachshad (1) |
Chaldeans |
lower |
|
|
Lud (1) |
Lydians |
upper |
|
|
|
Aramaeans, Syrians |
|
|
10:23 |
Uz (2) |
|
|
|
|
Hul (2) |
Armenians |
|
|
|
Gether (2) |
Bactrians |
? |
|
|
Mash (2) |
|
|
|
10:24 |
Shelah (2) |
|
|
|
|
Eber (3) |
|
|
|
10:25 |
Peleg (4) |
Jews |
|
|
|
Joktan (4) |
Arabians |
|
|
10:26 |
Almodad (5) |
|
|
|
|
Sheleph (5) |
|
|
|
|
Hazarmaveth (5) |
|
|
|
|
Jerah (5) |
|
|
|
10:27 |
Hadoram (5) |
|
|
|
|
Uzal (5) |
|
|
|
|
Diklah (5) |
|
|
|
10:28 |
Obal (5) |
|
|
|
|
Abimael (5) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10:29 |
Ophir (5) |
|
SW Arabia |
|
|
Havilah (5) |
|
|
|
|
Jobab (5) |
|
|
children of Eber: Jewish translation: Hebrews (see Gen 10:24; 11:14).
o Jewish commentary: In the Hebrew language, ‘Hebrews’ are Ivri’im, literally, ‘Eberites,’ or ‘Sons of Eber.’ Others, however, translate this verse, ‘sons of all who live on the other side of the river.’
o
Eber gave his name to the later Israelites (Gen
14:13; 39:14; 41:12; Ex 2:11). However, the etymology of “Hebrew” remains
disputed. The term “Israelites” is used much more often and the term “Hebrew”
occurs usually to distinguish the Hebrew people from foreigners (Gen 43:32; Ex
2:6; 1Sa 4:6-9). Josephus described
elder brother of Japheth: Shem is clearly identified as Noah’s eldest son. This is found in most English versions of the Bible and is supported by most Biblical scholars. However, Jewish tradition and some versions (NIV, KJV) identify Japheth as the eldest son of Noah (NIV: “Shem, whose older brother was Japheth”).
10:22
o
Jewish commentary: [a] See Gen 14:19. It is associated with Media (Isa 21:2; Jer
25:25). Josephus writes that
Asshur: located east
of Tigris (Gen 25:3; 2Sa 2:9); another possibility is the race in
o
Jewish commentary: Identified with
Arpachshad: (2nd
generation after Shem, ancestor of Abraham) located in
o
Jewish commentary: He was the ancestor of
Abraham (Gen 11:10). Josephus states that he was the ancestor of the Chaldeans,
who lived on the lower
Lud: located in
upper
o
Jewish commentary: Josephus identifies this with
o
Jewish commentary: Ancestor of Aramaea (from
where the language Aramaic comes), to the northeast of the Holy Land,
approximately where
10:23 Uz: may not be the Uz in Job 1:1; possibly
located near
o
Jewish commentary: Josephus writes that Utz
founded the cities of Trachnitis and
Hul:
o
Jewish commentary: Josephus states that Hul
founded
Gether:
o Jewish commentary: According to Josephus, the founder of the Bactrian nation.
Mash: possibly in
the mountains of
o
Jewish commentary: Meshekh in 1Ch 1:17. Josephus
identifies it with Charax Spanisi. Other sources state that it is the land in
the area of
10:24 Shelah: (3rd after Shem, ancestor of
Abraham); descendants ruled
Eber: (4th after Shem, ancestor of Abraham); great-grandson of Shem, but was mentioned first amongst Shem’s descendants in v.21; the name Eber has been associated with the word Hebrew (possibly because he was a religious and pious person in the time of general apostasy; although Hebrew is later used only for Abraham’s descendant, Gen 14:13); the meaning of the name is “region across”, related to the crossing of the Euphrates by Abraham on his way to Canaan (Gen 15:18; Num 24:24).
o Jewish commentary: Ancestor of the Hebrews.
10:25 Peleg: (5th after Shem, ancestor of Abraham); the name means “division”.
in his days the earth
was divided: probably pointing to the
o
Jewish commentary: This refers to the split
occurring after the destruction of the
Joktan: the name
means “small” or “young”. Nomads in
o
Jewish commentary: Josephus states that he and
his children lived near the
10:26 Almodad: in southern
o
Jewish commentary: Some identify him with the
founder of Morad in
Sheleph: in
o Jewish commentary: Possibly Shalepynoi mentioned by Ptolemy’s Geography.
Hazarmaveth: in
southern
o
Jewish commentary: Literally, ‘courtyard of
death.’ Some identify this with Hadarmaveth in southern
Jerah: possibly in
southern
o
Jewish commentary: To the west of Hadarmaveth,
there is a
10:27 Hadoram: possibly modern Dauramn in
o
Jewish commentary: Some interpret this as
denoting ‘the south.’ This was a fortress to the south of
Uzal: in
o
Jewish commentary: This was the ancient Arabic
name for
Diklah: likely an
oasis in southern
o Jewish commentary: Literally a palm tree. Some say that it is an area in Mina, abundant in palm trees.
10:28 Obal: in
o
Jewish commentary: Some identify this with
Avalitae on the
Abimael: possibly in
o
Jewish commentary: Literally ‘Father of Mael.’
Some identify this with the
10:29 Ophir: in southwestern Arabia; producing
gold (1Ki 9:26-28; 1Ch 29:4); much of the gold overlay of the
o
Jewish commentary: The place from which King
Solomon brought gold (1Ki 9:28; 10:11; Ps 45:9; Isa 13:12). [a] From the context, it is a place on
the
Havilah: in western
o
Jewish commentary: Some identify this with
Chavlotai, an area on the
Jobab:
o
Jewish commentary: This is identified as
Yovevitai or Yoveritai mentioned by Ptolemy, along the
10:30 Mesha: at the westernmost boundary of
Joktan’s descendants, possibly in northern
o
Jewish commentary: This is identified with
Sephar: possibly in
southern
o
Jewish commentary: Some sources identify this
with
hill country of the east:
Some identify this with Alakdar in eastern Arabia, on the
10:31 The record for the Shemites should by necessity be the longest because they included God’s chosen people. While it is not as long as the Hamites in this chapter, the Shemite genealogy continues in Gen 11:10-26.
10:32 sons of Noah: recapitulation, corresponding to v.1.
genealogies…nations: Notice that there is no mention about “languages”. This last verse refers to the clans of the sons of Noah when there was not yet any differentiation by language.
o Jewish commentary: There are 70 nations mentioned in this chapter. These are the 70 nations or 70 languages often mentioned in Talmudic literature. The number “70” is a multiple of “7” and “10”, both numbers symbolizing completeness. The 70 nations therefore are representative of the totality of all peoples.
Question: Can we classify human beings into different races?
Answer:
[1] Race as a Question of Political Correctness:
In the last 20 years, talking about race becomes a taboo in the present social atmosphere of political correctness. Many people object even the simple division of people into races, let alone talking about comparative differences between races.
Yet, objectively, race is a fact. For the majority of people we meet, the race can be easily determined by visible physical appearance. Trying to avoid the subject of race in the name of political correctness is unnecessary. Objective truth must be recognized.
o What is political correctness? The origin of political correctness is to avoid insulting or embarassing people. It is a noble objective that all human interaction should adopt. However, modern political correctness has become a radical tyranny by suppressing truth in the name of political correctness. For example, in the name of tolerance, sin is no longer called sin. In the name of pluralism or diversity, all religions are treated as equal. Christians must avoid this irrational tendencies and insist that truth is a higher priority than political correctness. We are not required to be politically correct in the presentation of truth.
[2] Objective Criteria for Races:
Human groups do vary strikingly in a few highly visible characteristics, such as skin color, eye shape, hair type, body and facial form—in short, the traits that often allow us to determine a person’s origin at a single glance.
But there are more differences between races than appearance
alone. Races are recognized by a combination of geographic, ecological, and
morphological factors and gene frequencies of biochemical components.
o In biology, race is a sub-species. It is defined as: [a] a local geographic group distinguished by genetically transmitted physical characteristics, or [b] a group of people classified together on the basis of common history, nationality, or geographic distribution.
o Ethnicity is a related but different concept. It usually refers to the membership in a group defined by a shared geographical origin or cultural history, including common language, religion, art, and other cultural factors.
[3] Physical Characteristics of the 3 main races:
Traditionally, anthropologists classify people in the world into 3 broad races: Mongoloids (yellow people), Negroids (black people), and Caucasoids (white people).
o
Some split Mongoloids into Mongoloids and
Australoids; some split Negroids into Congoids (equatorial Africa) and Capoids
(southern
o Some classify into 5 races: Yellows (East Asians), Reds (Native Americans), Whites (Europeans), Browns (Australoids, Southeast Asians), and Blacks (Africans).
|
|
Mongoloids / Orientals (Yellow) |
Negroids /
Africans (Black) |
Caucasoids
(White) |
|
skin colour |
yellowish to brown |
brown to black |
very light to brown |
|
eye colour and shape |
dark brown pupils, almond-shaped eyes (epicanthal folds) |
dark brown pupils |
light blue to dark brown pupils |
|
hair type and colour |
straight black to brown hair |
tightly curled, woolly, kinky black hair |
varied, straight to wavy/ curly black to blonde hair |
|
body |
body hair scarce, fewest sweat glands, dry crumbly ear wax |
most sweat glands, moist adhesive ear wax |
moderate sweat glands, moist adhesive ear wax |
|
facial form |
relatively broad and flat, small noses, medium to low nose bridges,
narrow nasal opening; rounded orbital opening |
prominent nasal spine, steepled nose bridge, broad nostrils, wide
nasal opening, low nose; rectangular orbital opening, thick everted lips |
narrow nasal opening, high nose bridge, angular to rounded orbital
opening |
|
skull |
brachycephalic head shape (round-headed), projecting prominent
cheekbones |
mesocephalic head shape (medium breadth), with receded cheekbones |
dolichocephalic head shape (long-headed), with receded cheekbones |
[4] Genetic Differences between Races:
A wellknown anthropologist Luca Cavalli-Sforza documented the genetic distances among 15 sample populations, 3 per continent, calculated from 5 blood group systems: Africans, Oceanians (aborigines in Pacific islands and Australia), East Asians (Orientals), Europeans, Americans (Indians in North and South America).
Africans are most different from all others. Oceanians are furthest from Africans and are also different from the other three. The other 3 groups (East Asians, Europeans, Americans) are closest to each other, with Americans being in the middle.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
20.6 |
10.0
|
|
|
|
|
16.6 |
13.5 |
9.7
|
|
|
|
22.6 |
14.6 |
8.9 |
9.5 |
While the differences are statistically significant, Cavalli-Sforza argued that different racial groups were originally from the same origin and the differences occurred only after groups of people migrated. Counter argument: Different races may come originally from one group but the present differences are sufficient to justify the description of races. For example, the English language is originated from German and French, but we cannot use this reason to conclude that English, German, and French are all ONE language.
[5] Recent Arguments:
Since the 1970s, some anthropologists have proposed that races, as distinct biologically or genetically homogeneous groups of humans, are an artificial concept not justified by reality. Biologists have attempted to show that only a small proportion (6% or less) of human genetic variability occurs between races. [It should be noted that human DNA is only 13% different from the chimpanzee and only 25% different from the nematode worm.] This is part of the campaign for political correctness which truth-believing Christians should not support.
The case against using the concept of race is based on: [a] There is much genetic variation within each race, but less variation between races. Counter argument: This is a statistical trick, comparing the differences between individuals within the group to the average values of different groups. [b] There are no “pure” races because of increasing intermarriages among races. [c] Different races are still potentially interfertile (intermmariages can produce children).
o Illustration of the statistical trick: Body weights of adults range from 40 kg to 100 kg, and with an average of 80 kg. Body weights of teenagers range from 30 kg to 90 kg, and with an average of 60 kg. For both groups, the difference between individuals within each group is 60 kg. The difference of average body weight between the two groups is smaller, only 20 kg (44 pounds). It is of course accurate to conclude that adults are heavier than teenagers. [Numbers are for illustration only.]
On the other hand, a wellknown psychologist Philippe Rushton (1994) used empirical research to show significant differences among races. He classified human populations along traditional lines—people of east Asian ancestry (Mongoloids, Orientals), people of African ancestry (Negroids, blacks) and people of European ancestry (Caucasoids, whites). He found that these classifications have much predictive and explanatory power. On more than 60 variables—such as brain size, intelligence, reproductive behaviour, aggressiveness, life span, etc.—Mongoloids and Negroids define opposite ends of a spectrum, with Caucasoids falling intermediately. He also admitted that there is much variability within each group.
Rushton, a professor at the
Population censuses in the
† There were many great heroes in history, perhaps wellknown in the whole world at their times. Their great deeds have all been buried in history. Few of them are even mentioned today. Yet, service for God will be recorded in God’s records and will be forever remembered.
† A nice poem Ozymandias (1818) by P.B. Shelley reminds us the transient nature of man. Nimrod (v.8) may be the greatest man in his time. Now, none of his works remains.
I
met a traveller from an antique land
Who
said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand
in the desert...Near them, on the sand,
Half
sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And
wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell
that its sculptor well those passions read
Which
yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The
hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed.
And
on the pedestal these words appear:
‘My
name is Ozymandias, king of kings;
Look
on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!’
Nothing
beside remains. Round the decay
Of
that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
The
lone and level sands stretch far away.
[see Picture: Listening to the Sphinx (1863) by Vedder]
Part G.
G1.
G2. Genealogy of Shemites (11:10-32)
†
The first 11 chapters of Genesis appear as a
complete cycle. At creation, chaos (Gen 1:2) became order (Gen 2:1-3). At
†
Gen 11 mirrors the incident in
TIMING: The time of
11:1 the whole earth: the known world, not the globe, referring to all the known races. Just like the description of the whole Earth in the Flood, here it may not be all races.
one language and the same words: one same language that everyone could understand each other.
o
If ch.11 is chronologically after ch.10, then
there would have been many languages on Earth at that time. The “one language”
could then be a common language (lingua
franca) that everyone could understand while each nation also had their own
language, just like Mandarin in
11:2 people: Which group of people is represented here is unknown. It may not be the same as “the whole earth” in v.1.
migrated from the east
(ESV, KJV): “From the east” are translated in some versions (NIV, NASB) as “to
the east.” “To the east” is probably more in line with the negative image of
going eastward. Going eastward in Genesis is a metaphor for departing from
God’s blessing, as evident in both the cases of Adam and Cain moving east after
expulsion. Also, most of the clans and nations in Gen 10 were located west of
plain: can be
translated “valley” (Dt 8:7; 11:11), probably between Tigris and
settled there: permanent settlement, contrary to God’s command of “filling the earth” (Gen 1:28; 9:1). The word “there” (Heb. sam) occurs 5 times in this passage and is a phonetic play with “name” (Heb. sem in v.4) and “heavens” (Heb. samayim in v.4).
11:3 come, let us: The phrase occurs 3 times in this passage and is a phonetic play. The making of bricks (“come, let us make bricks”) led to the building of the city (“come, let us build a city”) and then led to the action by God (“come, let us go down and confuse”).
make bricks, and burn them thoroughly: The Mesopotamian plain did not have sufficient rocks and stones for construction. The Hebrew literal translation is “brick bricks and burn for a burning” (Heb. nilbena lebenim…nisrepa lisrepa), perhaps a deliberate play on words that led to the eventual babbling.
bitumen for mortar: a mineral pitch, which, when hardened, forms a strong cement for attaching the bricks. In Hebrew, bitumen is “heimar” and mortar is “homer”, another play on words.
11:4 a city: for security and protection, especially in the middle of an indefensible plain.
a tower with its top in
the heavens: similar to today’s skyscraper; with great height appearing to
reach the heavens (Dt 1:28; 9:1). The tower represented a symbol to reach God’s
abode and be equal with God. It is an expression of their arrogance like the
king of
o
The tower was likely similar to a ziggurat, a
common structure in
make a name for ourselves: They expressed their objectives: [a] to pursue fame and independence from God, and [b] to avoid being scattered. Only God is worthy of everlasting fame (Isa 63:12) and only God can dispense everlasting fame to His chosen people (Gen 12:2; 2Sa 7:9; 8:13).
o Sin has 2 dimensions: [a] excess or exceeding: doing beyond what God allows man to do, and [b] deficiency or lacking: failing to follow God’s commands. These are exactly what the people did.
lest we be dispersed: With protection of the city, they could stay in the same place. Again, to prevent emigration was contrary to God’s command of “filling the earth” (Gen 1:28; 9:1).
11:5 the Lord came down: God was still higher despite their plan to reach heavens. The descent of God implies judgment, not seeking information.
children of man: The word man (Heb. adam) has the same root as dust (Heb. adama), a reminder of man’s corruptible state, yet they were arrogant enough to wish to be like God.
had built: in the process of being built.
11:6 one people, one language: a people unified by the same language. It may also imply that there was only one race because the word “people” in OT often points to kinship ties (while the word “nations” indicate geographic and political relations).
the beginning of what they will do: They wanted to be like God and they disobeyed God’s command. If they succeeded, they would have continued to commit other unimaginable sins.
will now be impossible: It does not mean that they would be successful in achieving their plan, but simply means that it would be difficult to restrain them from more conspiracy to sin. The verse is a hyperbole that explained why God needed to act.
11:7 let us: gathering the angels to complete God’s plan; or possibly expressing the 3 persons of trinity.
confuse their language: The word “confuse” (Heb. balal) can also be translated baffle or babble. It was originally used to describe the mixing of the food in cooking, meaning the components could not be distinguished after mixing.
11:8 dispersed them: The word “disperse” appears 3 times in this chapter (v.4,8,9) and is a main theme. Not dispersed was the main problem and dispersal was the result of God’s action.
Before the Flood, man killed each other and were not at peace and they received God’s judgment. Here, man were in unity and at peace yet they still received God’s judgment. It can be seen that unity of the whole world may not be God’s plan.
left off building the city: The city was the greater problem than the tower so that the tower is not mentioned here. Their intention to stay together was likely more problematic than their arrogance to reach God. However, it is likely that the tower was implied here as part of the city.
Because of the different languages, they could not cooperate so they stopped their construction. It is also possible that their spirit was dampened by the clear signal that God was against their work.
Question: Would God approve of world peace and unity?
Answer: From human perspective, world peace may be an
ideal. But, as can be seen from the example of
What kind of danger is it? The analogy of marketing can be used to illustrate the risks of world peace and unity. If one corporation acquires full control over a product everyone needs, we can anticipate that the price will go up and quality will go down. That is why western free-market economies enact antitrust laws to keep monopolies from practising this kind of exploitation. Free competition has been found to be the best kind of economic system. Total world unity will eliminate competition among citizens and corporations.
Monopoly of power is dangerous because “absolute power corrupts absolutely.” We have seen good examples from the widespread corruption at the United Nations. A one world government will unavoidably oppress its citizens and institutions. That is exactly what will happen in the future Great Babylon described in Rev 17—18.
We can see evidence of how large scale institutions today are being dominated by anti-God secularism. For example, the present European Union is constituted entirely of supposedly Christian nations (though nowadays most of them in name only), but the governing parliament of EU has many times rejected the recognition of God in their draft constitution. If there is ever a mega-scale government, it will certainly be a secular one. We have witnessed in the last few decades how secularists attack Christianity and persecute Christians. The future Great Babylon (representing a world system, that will comprise of the political, social, economic, religious, and cultural structures of the entire world) will do its worst in persecuting and murdering Christians.
World unity may be theoretically an ideal state. However, it is most likely against God’s will. The best possible state of world affairs may be a relatively peaceful world where national states can negotiate to settle their differences under the arbitrators from neutral states. It is also important that the most powerful nations be the ones that subscribe to the divine ideal of justice and peace.
o In the last two centuries, the world has been dominated by western culture which is mainly influenced by Christianity.
o
After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1990,
the
o
It is only under God’s providence that the
11:9
11:10 generations: a new “toledot” section (the 5th of 10 in Genesis).
Shem (11th generation from Adam): Shem was 100 years old 2 years after the Flood. As Noah got his 3 sons after he was 500 years old (Gen 5:32), Shem was born when Noah was 502. However, the number 100 may be a rounded number so Shem might be 102 at that time.
11:11 Shem lived 600 years, compared to Noah’s 950 years. The life span of Shem was already shorter.
o Note that there is no mentioning of death in this genealogy (different from the genealogy in ch.5). The suggested reasons are: [a] new optimism leading to the new era starting with Abraham; [b] producing a faster pace for the chronology; [c] the emphasis here is life and expansion as opposed to death resulted from Adam’s sin in ch.5.
11:12 Arpachshad (12th generation): apparently the third son of Shem (Gen 10:22). Since he was born only 2 years after the Flood, he could be the eldest son. However, Biblical genealogies typically record only the individuals who were chosen by God or who were important in salvation history. Because of this, the line from Arpachshad to Abram may not always be the eldest son.
11:13
11:14 Shelah (13th generation): According to Lk 3:36, there is one skipped generation between Arpachshad and Shelah: Cainan.
11:15
11:16 Eber (14th generation): Eber is famous possibly because his name was associated with the word Hebrew. Eber was the one with the longest life span (464) among all those born after the Flood. This is possibly a reward for his adherence to the ways of God.
11:17
11:18 Peleg (15th generation): The Tower of Babel
was probably built during his lifetime. Jewish tradition puts the year of
11:19
11:20 Reu (16th generation): His name could be
related to “Ruel” meaning “friend of God” or “God is friend.”
11:21
11:22 Serug (17th generation):
11:23
11:24 Nahor (18th generation): meaning “blow away”; same name for Abram’s brother.
11:25
11:26 Terah (19th generation): The name could
mean “mountain goat” or could be close to the word for “moon” (Heb. yareh). It is likely that Terah’s family
was involved in the worship of moon god (called Sin) which was common in
ancient
o
There will be a logical difficulty if Abram was
the eldest son. Consider: [a] Terah
was 70 years older than Abram (Gen 11:26). [b]
Terah moved from
o
The proper reading should be: If Abram (age 75) left
While Abram was named before the other 2 sons of Terah, it does not mean that Abram was the eldest son (see the example of Shem, Ham, and Japheth). It only means that Abram was in the chosen line. The verse simply points out that Terah had a son when he was 70 years old and two more afterwards.
As
Similar to the chronology in ch.5, the numbers in this chronology are also different in the Masoretic Text (MT, the Hebrew Bible), the Greek Septuagint (LXX), and the Samaritan Pentateuch (SP). [Masoretes were Jewish scribes who standardized the OT Bible during 5th to 10th century AD.]
o
According to MT, presuming that there are no
gaps in the genealogy, the first son of Terah (probably
o In addition, the Septuagint recorded a generation (Kainan) between Arpachshad and Shelah.
|
|
MT |
|
LXX |
|
SP |
|
|
|
son |
life |
son |
life |
son |
life |
|
Shem |
100 |
600 |
100 |
600 |
100 |
600 |
|
Arpachshad |
35 |
438 |
135 |
565 |
135 |
438 |
|
Kainan |
-- |
-- |
130 |
460 |
-- |
-- |
|
Shelah |
30 |
433 |
130 |
460 |
130 |
433 |
|
Eber |
34 |
464 |
134 |
504 |
134 |
404 |
|
Peleg |
30 |
239 |
130 |
339 |
130 |
239 |
|
Reu |
32 |
239 |
132 |
339 |
132 |
239 |
|
Serug |
30 |
230 |
130 |
330 |
130 |
230 |
|
Nahor |
29 |
148 |
79 |
208 |
79 |
149 |
|
Terah |
70 |
205 |
70 |
205 |
70 |
145 |
|
Years after Shem |
390 |
|
1,170 |
|
1,040 |
|
NOTE: The numbers show the
age of each patriarch at the birth of the recorded son and at death.
The italics are the numbers
that differ from the Hebrew Bible.
11:27 generations: a new “toledot” section (the 6th of 10 in Genesis).
Abram (20th generation): His name means “exalted father”; later God changed his name to Abraham at the age of 99 (name meaning “father of a multitude” or “father of many nations”, Gen 17:5). According to the genealogy in this chapter, Abram was the 10th generation after Shem, and Noah was the 10th generation after Adam. And 10 is a symbolically perfect number. However, because of skipped generations, it is unsure how many generations passed from Adam to Abram.
o According to the genealogy in Lk 3, there were no gaps between Adam and Noah and Noah was indeed the 10th generation after Adam. Jude 1:14 clearly says that Enoch was the 7th generation from Adam. Further, the descent from Enoch to Methusaleh to Lamech to Noah was clearly without gaps.
o What about between Shem and Abram? According to Lk 3, there was at least one skipped generation between Shem and Abram. Further, only the father-son relationship of Terah and Abram was clear. There may be more unrecorded gaps.
Nahor: Both Isaac and Jacob had their wives from Nahor’s family. Nahor had 12 sons (Gen 22:20-24).
11:28
o Some point out that Chaldeans appear only after Abraham’s time. However, there are 2 explanations: [a] The original Hebrew is “Ur Casdim” where the name Casdim might have derived from Arpachshad, which is Arp-casad. [b] Even if it actually refers to the Chaldeans, the name was probably used by Moses (the author of Genesis) to show its location.
11:29 Sarai: Some (such as the Jewish historian
Josephus) believe that she was the same as Iscah (the name is rendered Jessica
in English), the daughter of Abram’s elder brother
Marriages to close relatives might have taken place because
these men did not want to marry pagan women around them. Abraham, Isaac, and
Jacob all married to someone one generation below them (if counted from Terah).
[Isaac married Rebekah (Gen 24:15; granddaughter of Abraham’s brother Nahor);
Jacob married Leah and Rachel (Gen 29:12; great granddaughters of Abraham’s
brother Nahor).] Since both Isaac and Jacob married from one generation below
them from Nahor’s family, Abram was most likely younger than Nahor. So, in
terms of age, Terah’s 3 sons in order were:
11:30
11:31 to go into the
11:32 Terah died in Haran: The life span decreased gradually from Shem to Abram [600—438—433—464—239—239—230—148—205—175]. The average is 317 years compared with the average of 912 years from Adam to Noah (excluding Enoch).
o
The city
†
The
† Arrogance (the extreme form of pride) is a common sin of man. Wanting to be like God is another common (and serious) sin. We need to be cautious to guard ourselves against these temptations.
†
Terah left
[1] Name of the one God: The
belief of one true God was unique and different from the cultures in the
[2] Attributes of God: God is characterized as a powerful God who completed the creation of the universe and continued with His providence over the universe. He has infinite wisdom and He created a universe that is “good”. He is a God of peace and harmony.
God is also a God of love and of perfection.
He loves man and created man as a perfect being after His image. God created
the paradise (
[3] Themes in Genesis: One
constant theme throughout the whole book is a process with 3 phases: [a] intimacy, [b] rupture by strife, and [c]
reconciliation (though this last phase missing in some cases).
The first 2 chapters of Genesis introduce the paradisiacal world where there was only blessing. The last 2 chapters of Revelation introduce the new paradisiacal world, again only with blessing. The world of Gen 3 to Rev 20 is a combat zone between God and the devil.
In Gen 1—2, man is living in complete harmony with God, with other human, and with the created order. Gen 3 introduces the theme of God’s judgment, which is the withdrawal of His blessing as a result of man’s disobedience. This disobedience came from discontent with what God gave man. God gave man the power over nature. Being discontent, man wants to extend his power over things, including the power to be morally autonomous (from God), power over somebody else’s life, power over the determination of one’s own future.
This desire for power alienated man from God. The results were expulsion from paradise, shortening of life span, death from the Flood, confusion of language and dispersion. Yet, throughout the judgments, the voice of grace and promise is never muted. Adam and Eve were clothed. Cain was divinely protected. God announced a covenant never to destroy the whole human race again. Yet the ultimate grace is the election of Abraham and his family by which everyone on Earth may be reconciled to God.
[4] Genesis as Myth: Some people have doubts whether Genesis can stand up to the challenge of archaeology or science. To avoid this problem, they try to regard stories recorded in the book as non-historical. They attach only theological and kerygmatic value to the book but not historical value. They regard the book as myth.
The word “myth”, used in the later books of NT, always has a negative connotation. [a] Paul urges Timothy not to pay attention to myths (1Ti 1:4). [b] Paul predicts that the time is coming when people will find myths more attractive than the truth (2Ti 4:4). [c] Paul instructs Titus to reprove those who are absorbed with Jewish myths, an aberration which detracts from sound faith (Titus 1:14). [d] Peter declares that the basis of certainty behind his message is that he was “an eyewitness of His majesty,” and not cleverly devised myths (2Pe 1:16).
Based on these verses, what is myth is not true. What is true is not mythical. Myths are fictitious narratives, invented stories. Myth is not only a figurative expression of truth, but a false expression of truth as well. As Genesis provides the foundation of all that we believe in about God, the attitude of regarding the book as a myth will undercut all our beliefs. More importantly, the author recorded what he perceived as facts and there is never a hint that anything in Genesis is mythical. Christians should never regard Genesis as mythical.
This
section documents some deficiencies in many (more than a few) Bible
commentaries on Genesis, including some written (unfortunately) by evangelical
Bible scholars.
[1] Apparent
subscription to the documentary hypothesis: Some fall back on documentary
hypothesis when they had even slight difficulties explaining the Biblical text.
The problem is: they assume that the author of Genesis had copied from those
documents (which are, in the first place, of unproven and doubtful existence)
and the author he had made a mistake in accepting some incorrect information.
As evangelical Christians, we hold to the position that the Bible is the Word
of God and God would not allow the original manuscripts to contain incorrect
information. Such assumption about the Biblical text is therefore unacceptable.
(Rare errors made by the copyists are of course an entirely different issue.)
[2] Apparent
subscription to ancient legends: A similar problem to the previous point is
the common reference to ancient legends and myths in the
[3] Conjecture
on the author’s intention: Occasionally, some commentaries assume that the
author of Genesis used his writing to promote a certain viewpoint. For example,
in explaining why Canaan was cursed because of Ham’s sin in Gen 9:25, one
author writes: “Perhaps the author wished to imply that Israelites could invade
(the land of)
These
problems are common in commentaries on Genesis. These are misguided
explanations. These should not be included in their commentaries. If there is
an academic necessity for the inclusion
of those information (such as to demonstrate that the author of the commentaries
are knowledgeable and therefore academically well qualified), the most they
could do is to include it in the footnotes, and to add a disclaimer that they
do not accept those explanations.
† Genesis provides the foundation for our understanding of the origin of everything. It is the foundation for a comprehensive worldview for Christians (and for Jews too).
· purpose of creation and the establishment of institutions, including family and marriage.
· relationship between God and man, and between man with the rest of the created order
· our exalted position as the image of God
[1] The origin of all things
Genesis begins with the creation. There is no explanation where God comes from, but He is simply there, as declared in 1:1. He is all-powerful, wise and in control, but He cares about the human whom He created. Genesis clearly defines the relationships among God, man, and the world. Life has meaning only in God’s plan.
Man’s dignity comes from the fact that we are created in God’s image. There are clear differences between animals and man as man are given power to rule over the animals. Also apparently, only man are given the ethical choice of following God’s command, and their decisions on which choices to make actually affects the whole earth.
[2] Man’s sin
God originally created a perfect world. Apparently, man had meaningful work to do but did not need the work for survival nor suffered and toiled at work. God provided everything that man needed. Yet man still decided to disobey God. Today, many people blame the environment and the society for people’s wrong doing. We try not to create excuses for all the wrongs man commit but downplay the responsibility of the individual. However, as Genesis demonstrates, even in a perfect environment, man still sins.
In Genesis, man’s sin led to destruction. Sin got progressively worse: from Adam and Eve’s disobedience to Cain’s murder, then to Lamech’s boasting of his murders, then to heinous sins committed by all mankind. If it wasn’t for the faithful and obedient Noah, man would be extinct in the Flood. Freedom without God leads only to death. While man are hopelessly running down a slippery slope, God intervenes. Genesis lays out the ground for God’s wonderful plan of salvation, which is one of the most important theme throughout the Bible. And we all know that everything will eventually end up with God’s total victory.
[3] God of Love and of Justice
God is a God of love. He designed an eternal plan of sharing His glory with man. In Genesis, there were times when God’s plan appeared to fail. In fact, the plan was only deferred but still on track. Despite the many episodes of darkness, there was always hope shining like a beam of light breaking the dark night.
o After the Fall of Adam and the murder committed by Cain, there was the birth of Seth.
o After the Flood killed almost the whole human race, there was the family of Noah.
o
After the
But God is also a God of justice. He deals with sin with punishment; yet He also rewards righteousness and obedience with blessings. (Ex 20:5; 34:6-7; Nu 14:18; Dt 5:9-10; 7:9)
[4] The Toledots and the Genealogies
Genealogies appear throughout the Bible. They show us that what was recorded was real history, not arbitrary man-made stories. However, because of the peculiar usage of the Hebrew language, genealogies may contain gaps. The Bible authors often use a perfect number of generations between two main characters (10 generations between Adam and Noah, 10 generations between Noah and Abraham, 14+14+14 generations from Abraham to Jesus etc.). The numbers do not necessarily reflect the real genealogies.
The Bible usually only focuses on particular persons, and God has been blessing all the world through these people whom He chose.
Some Bible passages in the OT are constructed in
the form of chiasmus. It is a literary device commonly used in rhetoric to give
balance and strength to the argument. In a chiasmus, many passages with a
common theme are intentionally arranged or constructed in an inverted parallel
structure. For example, 6 passages may be arranged in a structure of
A—B—C—C’—B’—A’, where A and A’ have similar contents, etc.
Biblical scholars have detected this kind of
parallelism throughout the book of Genesis. Sometimes, one chiasmus includes
many chapters of the Bible. Sometimes, it includes only a short passage of a
few verses. Since these structures are of interest mainly to scholars, only 3
chiasmuses (on the lives of Abraham, Jacob, and Joseph) will be presented in
this course.
† God’s promises are intended for everyone in the world but only those who accept the free gift of God (salvation and eternal life) can receive all those promises.
† Deception is a main motif of the book. The lesson is that despite these self-indulgent deceptions, God’s goal of blessing proceeded. The deceivers received the same treatment, often more severely. The pattern of “the deceiver being deceived” and the resulted pain warned against the sin of self-interest.
† In past centuries, many academics and critics have tried to discredit the Bible. Many have even predicted the loss of credibility of the Bible. But as of today, there is still no definitive proof that any part of the Bible is erroneous. Millions today still have full trust of the Bible as the Word of God.