{"id":122,"date":"2022-09-23T22:34:23","date_gmt":"2022-09-24T03:34:23","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/exegetical-and-hermeneutical-commentary-of-genesis-58\/"},"modified":"2022-09-23T22:34:23","modified_gmt":"2022-09-24T03:34:23","slug":"exegetical-and-hermeneutical-commentary-of-genesis-58","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/exegetical-and-hermeneutical-commentary-of-genesis-58\/","title":{"rendered":"Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Genesis 5:8"},"content":{"rendered":"

And all the days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve years: and he died. <\/i><\/b><\/h3>\n

And all the days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve years, and he died.<\/strong> As his father Adam before him. Seth, according to Josephus l, was a very good man, and brought up his children well, who trod in his steps, and who studied the nature of the heavenly bodies; and that the knowledge of these things they had acquired might not be lost, remembering a prophecy of Adam, that the world should be destroyed both by fire and by water, they erected two pillars, called Seth’s pillars; the one was made of brick, and the other of stone, on which they inscribed their observations, that so if that of brick was destroyed by a flood, that of stone might remain; and which the above writer says continued in his time in the land of Siriad. The Arabic writers m make Seth to be the inventor of the Hebrew letters, and say, that when he was about to die he called to him Enos, Cainan, Mahalaleel, Jared, Enoch, their wives and children, and adjured them by the blood of Abel not to descend from the mountain where they dwelt, after the death of Adam, nor suffer any of their children to go to, or mix with any of the seed of Cain, which were in the valley; whom he blessed, and ordered by his will to serve the Lord, and then died in the year of his age nine hundred and twelve, on the third day of the week of the month Ab (which answers to part of July and part of August), A. M. 1142, and his sons buried him in the hidden cave in the holy mountain, and mourned for him forty days.<\/p>\n

l Antiqu. l. 1. c. 2. sect. 3. m Elmacinus, Patricides, apud Hottinger, p. 228, 229.<\/p>\n

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

8. Jabal, (wanderer;) Jubal, (player;) Tubal-cain, (lance-forger.) 9. Lamech, (the strong.) 10. Noah, (rest.) The names which are identical probably have different meanings in the two lists. Henoch the son of Cain is so named (Gen 4:17<\/span>) from the initiation <\/em> of city life, his birth co-existing with the foundation of the first city; Henoch the Sethite is “initiated” in the ways of God . Lamech the Cainite is a “strong” warrior, Lamech the Sethite is “strong” in faith, as we see from his prophecy (Gen 5:29<\/span>) at the birth of Noah . Methusael may mean “man of might,” as “cedars of El<\/em> ” is equivalent to lofty cedars . A glance down these lists of names will show the strong contrast in character. The Sethitic names breathe godly faith, fears, and aspirations; they tell of a primitive religion; while the Cainitic names tell of primitive art and industry, of warlike prowess, of luxury, and the lust of the eye. Yet two of the Cainitic names show that God was not yet forgotten in that family, and “Methuselah” shows that the Sethites had their heroes of war as well as of faith. But see on Gen 5:27<\/span> for another etymology of this name; it may be prophetic of the deluge. The antediluvian piety comes to its “bright consummate flower” in Henoch, the seventh of the Sethites, the man “initiated” into secret sacred communion with God; while the fierce passions, the warlike violence a lust of that long age culminate in Lamech, the seventh of the Cainites. No ages and dates are given in the Cainitic line; the general features of the family are described for a few generations and there the record closes.<\/p>\n

Two objections have been urged against the contents of this chapter: 1) That the age of the antediluvian patriarchs is too great, and 2) that the time from the creation to the deluge is too short. These ten antediluvian patriarchs reach an age which stretches over ten times the present period of human life, a longevity declared by many objectors to be incredible. But man was not created subject to death. The vigour of the paradisaical state, wherein man had free access to the tree of life, although impaired by sin, was yet in some degree transmitted to the first generations. While the primeval men were simple in their tastes and habits, the increase of luxury and the transmission and multiplication of the weaknesses which are the results of sin, through successive generations, gradually shortened human life. God’s wise purposes can be seen in this longevity. While literature did not yet exist the individual observation and experience of centuries supplied the place of historic learning, and oral communication transmitted and preserved great historic facts as well as it can be done now by books or monuments. The great longevity of the primeval man is the almost universal tradition of antiquity. See note on Gen 5:5<\/span>. While the science of physiology can authoritatively pronounce upon the probabilities of life with regard to a constitution enervated and impaired by many successive ages of sin, it can know nothing of the vigour of man fresh from the creative hand, or drawing his life directly from those who were endowed with eternal youth.<\/p>\n

The second objection is drawn from the supposed proofs of human antiquity in heathen history and in geological science. But in regard to both classes of objections it is for the present enough to say, that it will be ample time to reply to them when eminent antiquaries on the one hand, and eminent scientists on the other, agree among themselves as to the real state of the facts. Scripture exegesis is not to be changed or modified by any questionable hypothesis. The immense antiquity which has been claimed for the early Egyptian dynasties rests upon a single author, Manetho, whose work exists only in fragments, the genuineness of many of which is yet under discussion, and which, if genuine and authentic, can thus far be only hypothetically interpreted. Moreover, eminent Egyptologists claim that Manetho’s statements are contradicted by the monuments. Bunsen and Lepsius differ by many thousand years while reasoning from the same data, and Rouge states that Manetho’s text has been so tampered with, and the monumental series is so incomplete, as to render all chronological deductions from them uncertain. Concerning the geological evidences of man’s antiquity see the Excursus at the end of chap. 2.<\/p>\n

The numbers, and consequently the chronology, of this chapter, as given in the Samaritan and Septuagint, differ much from those of the Hebrew.<\/p>\n

The Septuagint makes six of the patriarchs older at the birth of the first son mentioned the first five, a hundred years older and the ninth, Lamech, six years older. This, it will be seen, adds six hundred and six years to the chronology given in the Hebrew text. It also makes Lamech’s age twenty-four years less. On the other hand, the Samaritan makes three of the patriarchs much younger at the birth of the first-mentioned son, (thus diminishing the chronology by two hundred and forty-nine years,) and, besides, diminishes the age of Jared, Methuselah, and Lamech. Thus the Hebrew text gives one thousand six hundred and fifty-six years from the Creation to the Deluge, while the Samaritan gives one thousand three hundred and seven, and the Septuagint two thousand two hundred and forty-two. Careful examination and comparison will show that the balance of probability is decidedly in favour of the Hebrew text. The Septuagint shows the marks of a systematic and designed variation.<\/p>\n

The following table gives the figures of the Hebrew, Samaritan, and Septuagint in parallel columns. The numbers in parentheses are the readings of the Codex Alexandrinus of the Septuagint.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

8<\/strong>. <\/strong> In his own likeness, after his image <\/strong> Not God’s image and likeness, in which man had been created . The contrast is designed and striking . God’s image and likeness could not be transmitted in their purity through the fallen Adam . <\/p>\n

Seth <\/strong> See Gen 4:25<\/span>. Seth only is here named of Adam’s sons, because he was the one divinely appointed <\/em> to take Abel’s place as the heir of the great primeval promise . This is not a history of the antediluvian world, but of the gradually unfolding plan of salvation . They only are chronicled who transmitted God’s torch from age to age .<\/p>\n

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Gen 5:8 And all the days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve years: and he died.<\/p>\n

Ver. 8. And he died.<\/strong> ] See Trapp on “<\/em> Gen 5:5 “<\/em> Omnes una manet nox: Et calcanda semel via lethi<\/em> a<\/em> Death is the way of all flesh, saith David: of all the world, says Joshua. Jos 23:14 On this condition came I into the world, said Socrates, b<\/em> that I might go out again, when called for. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

a<\/em> Horat. <\/p>\n

b<\/em> Sen., Ep. xxv.<\/p>\n

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

am 1042, bc 2962, Gen 5:8 <\/p>\n

Reciprocal: Gen 5:5 – nine 1Ch 1:1 – Sheth<\/p>\n

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

5:8 And all the days of Seth were {e} nine hundred and twelve years: and he died.<\/p>\n

(e) The main reason for long life in the first age, was the multiplication of mankind, that according to God’s commandment at the beginning the world might be filled with people, who would universally praise him.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

And all the days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve years: and he died. And all the days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve years, and he died. As his father Adam before him. Seth, according to Josephus l, was a very good man, and brought up his children well, who trod in … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Genesis 5:8”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-122","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/122","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=122"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/122\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=122"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=122"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=122"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}