I need the straight dope on these guys, but fast. Sons of Adam, one killed t’other… this is all I have so far. How, why, when? What outcome?
Read chapter 4 of Genesis.
Well, if you don’t have a Bible handy to look up Genesis 4:1 through 4:16, you can look here.
Hmmm…is Cain still alive?
Some interesting meanings of names:
Adam - comes from hebrew ha-adam meaning “the human.” Closely resembles hebrew ha-adama, meaning “the soil.” (“ha-aha” you say)
Eve would have come from Havvah, which could be related to hay or hayyah (“life” or “living” as in the mother of all living), however, there’s another pun possible, in the Arameic hewya, meaning serpent.
Cain comes from Qayin, the hebrew word for metal worker, but also a pun on qanah, (begotten or created; a pun on Eve saying she also created a man.) He is probibly the namesake for the Kenites (but not the Canaanites).
Abel may be related to Jabal for ram (he was a sheppard) or hebhel, meaning breath (as in his life was as short as).
Cain certainly ain’t alive, but the clan named for him (Kenites) were wandering metal workers, who were usually marked as a sign of protection.
I got the above from The Secret Origins of the Bible, by Tim Callahan. Even if you don’t agree with the man’s interpretation of the Bible as myth (this ain’t GD, I don’t wanna get into it), he is an incredibly thurough biblical scholar.
Named after him because they were his descendents? Since everybody but Noah’s family was wiped out in the flood (according to Genesis), and Noah was a descendant of Cain’s brother Seth, how could this be. Why else would they be named after him?
Sorry, I was trying to stay away from the areas that would lead to a GD…
One hypothesis is that Cain is the eponymous namesake for the Kenites. As I understand the term, it references a literary or legendary pesron from whom you get a (e.g. clan) name. Basically Tim Callahan was saying Cain, along with a long list of other biblical figures, were legendary, not real. I don’t have the time to devote to a GD right now (and I know that there are some verbose and much more learned scholars here than I), so I’m not going into detail on Tim’s theories. The point of my post was simply that the names of the first four people mentioned in Genesis were all puns.
Upon further rereading, I probably should have left that bit out (to make sure I avoided the debate). Generally, the Kenites are atrributed to one of Seth’s descendands. (But not one of Moses’s).
and please disregard my numerous spelling errors (all from English, I see)
:smack:
“(But not one of Moses’s).” <delete><delete><delete>
(But not one of Noah’s).
And who did they marry exactly? Their own sisters? No wonder the world’s in a state.
I the explination I came up many years ago, was that of course the flood was only a local thing, :rolleyes: , and of course Adam and Eve wasn’t really the first people, what-so-ever. Cain simply married a woman from a neighbouring tribe.
Then I reallized the whole thing was silly, and chucked out any interest in being an apoligist.
Eponymous just means that they were named for him. You don’t need to be legendary to be eponymous. And you don’t need to convince me that Cain was merely legendary.
My point is that given what Genesis says, whether or not it is true, how could somebody who accepts it say that there is an ethnic group consisting of descendants of Cain? A maternal descent argument doesn’t really work, because a large fraction of humanity would have to be equally descended from Cain.
Scott: You may seriously want to try Callahan’s book (if you haven’t already). Although he (and presumably) his editors came up with a controversial sounding name, it’s an incredibly well put together book that developes a strong case for the Bible as a mythology based on previous mythos. Put that way, it really makes an interesting and thought provoking case. The one downside is that Callahan is a biblical scholar; it’s not an “easy read.”
This is not the least of the problems I see in taking Genesis literaly; I just didn’t want to go there. You’re preaching to the choir.
I still like the puns, though. It’s kinda like when I first started to understand Shakespeare
I wonder if I can make a joke involving this, and people named Smith.
Nah, probably not. 
Oh, and I wasn’t about to read the book you recommended, till I read this in the reviews:
I think I’ll look it up, even though I am not unfamiliar with the fact that the Bible is a mythology based on previous myths.
Actually, Scott, Israelite humorists anticipated you by about 3,000 years. The Kenites (and the Kenazites) were fairly common quasi-tribal groups among the Israelites (Caleb and his family were descended from them, as was one of Moses’s wives), and the Smith=common surname/smith=metalworker play is the basis of some extremely subtle humor in the O.T. stories.
Not the Bible itself as a whole, but much of the supposed-historical material (and particularly the eponymic and didactic stories). I don’t know the Callahan book, myself, but reports about scholarly research into the underpinnings of this sort of thing is fascinating reading.
Cain killed his brother Abel, in effect murdering one quarter of the world’s population and thereby becoming the world’s worst mass murderer. Percentage-wise, at least.
I didn’t realize there were only 4 people on Earth at the time. Cain leaves and has Enoch with his wife, who already existed. I’m assuming that there were more people than Cain and Abel at the time.
I think Yahweh wiping out all but Noah and his family was a higher %.
Not necessarily so.
The bible often relates occurences out of chronological order. Genesis 5 relates that Adam had other sons and daughters. In addition, since at the end of the episode Cain and his wife go and build a city, it should be obvious that this story takes place sometime after other children are born. This is further confirmed by the fact that there is no date on the story, only that it happened before Seth was born.
Zev Steinhardt
Why the rush?