Clouseau

One does not need to source sin to a particular historic named individual; the pervading presence of sin in the world is reckoned as evidence enough. Adam represents all men, Eve, all women- each of us may be said to have our own Fall, loss of innocence and the compromised conscience that results. As Jesus said, his message is not for those who think they have not sinned.

Apikorus

Modern scholars generally believe that the story of Cain and Abel is an etiological tale describing the origins of the Kenites, the eponymous ancestor of whom was Cain. The intent of the story was likely to explain why the Kenites were so fierce -- they were, after all, descended from a murderer. Note also the sevenfold vengeance in Gen 4:15, which is exceptional to the usual talionic (a life for a life) system of retributive justice.

The story was very likely inserted into the Genesis narrative. This and other antediluvian etiologies are clearly out of place because they purport to explain contemporary reality by identifying ancestral figures known for certain behaviors or responsible for certain innovations. Yaval, in Gen 4:20, "was the father of all who dwell in tents and [have] cattle." Yuval (Gen 4:21) was the first musician. Tubal-cain (Gen 4:22) was the founder of metalworking. It makes little sense to explain that musicians can trace their art back to Yuval if at some point after Yuval all humans, aside from Noah and his family, were wiped out in a flood.

Incidentally, the "mark" of Cain is probably not a mark at all. In context, the Hebrew word 'ot in Gen 4:15 is better translated as "promise" and refers to YHWH's approval of Cain's sevenfold vengeance. A similar usage can be found in Exod 3:12, where the 'ot apparently refers to a promise that Moses would bring the Israelites to serve YHWH at Sinai.

As the OP points out, the context of the Cain pericope clearly presumes that there were other men around, who might kill Cain, and other women, from whom Cain took his wife (Gen 4:17).

The contrast between ancient and modern understandings of this and other stories from the Hebrew Bible is described in an outstanding recent book by James Kugel, How to Read the Bible (or via: amazon.co.uk) (see ch. 3 on Cain and Abel). Kugel there goes on to discuss other literary and historical aspects to the interpretation of the Cain pericope. If I were constrained to recommend just one book on the Hebrew Bible, this would be it.

-Jay-

I'm starting to think I need to move that book to the top of my queue. It's sitting beneath some Ehrman and reruns of Friedman at the moment...

regards,

NinJay

John Kesler

The gods were indeed "regional entities," but this does not mean that each was conceived as creator of his own people. To the contrary, the god El--whose attributes were later absorbed by Yahweh--alloted humans to each of his 70 sons, the patron gods of the respective nations.

I have already mentioned one piece of evidence: verse 14 presumes the presence of other people who might kill Cain. Another consideration is that verses 13-15 intrude on the narrative by breaking the connection between verse 12, in which Yahweh condemns Cain to a life of wandering, and verse 16, which says that Cain left Yahweh's presence and settled in the "land of Nod," i.e. "the land of wandering."


Also note that the very next verse states that Cain "built a city," hardly what one would expect from one sentenced to a life of wandering, which may indicate a fusion of traditions about Cain.

Clouseau

What evidence is there that the Kenites were fierce- or even that they were Cain's descendants?

The use of 'seven' in the Bible generally denotes completeness and/or promise, and this remark is likely to indicate confidence in Cain's safety rather than a measure of retribution. Note Lamech's comment to his wives (witnesses), justifying his killing of just one man, on account of an attack (Ge 4:23-4).

Clouseau

Intrusion, or indication of abstract meaning of wandering? Cain settled, physically speaking, but, like Adam and Eve, he was excluded from God's presence through his unforgiven sin. The default human spiritual condition is to be both excluded from Eden and wandering in the land of Nod.

Apikorus

In Hebrew, Cain = qayin = QYN. The gentilic adds a yod: Kenite = qeyini = QYNY (see e.g. Gen 15:19). For example, in the Table of Nations (Gen 10) we read of the Canaanites = kenaani = KN(NY, who are ancestors of the eponymous Canaan = kenaan = KN(N, the son of Ham and grandson of Noah. Similarly, the people associated with Canaan's son Heth = chet = XT are the Hittites = chiti = XTY (Gen 15:20). Note that there are other ways to express the gentilic, such as "sons of X". For example, Ammonites = amoni are also called "children of Ammon" = bnei amon.

That the etiology in Gen 4 is explaining the fierceness of the Kenites is largely conjectural. Clearly it is etiological, establishing the characteristics of their eponymous ancestor. Geographically the Kenites are associated with the Amalekites, who were portrayed as ruthless killers and eternal enemies of Israel.

The promise or pledge = )T here seems to refer to the utterance of Yahweh in Gen 4:15a:

And YHWH said unto him: 'Therefore whoever kills Cain will receive sevenfold revenge.'

This apparently furnishes a divine explanation for the Kenites' vengefulness -- a retributive system which exceeds that of the talionic "life for a life," which is also divinely ordained (Exod 21:23).

Amaleq13

There is also archaeological evidence that suggests Kenites were smiths and one of Cain's descendants is described in the Bible as spawning a family of smiths.

And, eventually, it is my understanding Amalek came to be the name of the demon in charge of atheism.

John Kesler

There is also Balaam's oracle in Numbers 24, quoted from the JPS Tanakh:

Clouseau

Even if the Kenites were descended from a man named Cain, it does not mean that the man was Cain the son of Adam. There is no certainty about the origin of the Kenites, and several views have been proposed. Most scholars identify the Kenites with the Midianites or a sept thereof.

'Saul went to the city of Amalek and set an ambush in the ravine. Then he said to the Kenites, "Go away, leave the Amalekites so that I do not destroy you along with them; for you showed kindness to all the Israelites when they came up out of Egypt." So the Kenites moved away from the Amalekites.' 1 Sa 15:5-6 NIV

A motive to justify Kenite fierceness does not seem to have been necessary. In any case, Cain was not vengeful in the account; it was the deity who might have been thought to have been vengeful, but, as already explained, even that does not seem to be true.