A. M. 12. A. C. 3876; OR, ACCORDING TO HALES, A. M. 200. A. C. 5211. GEN. CH. 4. TO VER. 25. Thus to represent the horrid nature of sin, and to seal the eternal covenant of mercy; to be types of the great expiatory sacrifice of Christ's death, and a standing means of obtaining pardon and reconciliation with God, seem to be some of the principal ends of God's instituting sacrifices at first: and what was of use to gain them a favourable acceptance in his sight, we may, in some measure, learn from the reasons, that are usually alleged, for his rejection of Cain's, and approbation of Abel's sacrifice. more strongly, than the groans and struggles of innocent creatures, bleeding to death for his guilt, before his eyes, and by his own hands? Sights of this kind are shocking to human nature even yet, though custom hath long made them familiar: with what horror then, may we imagine that they pierced the hearts of our first parents, and how was that horror aggravated, when they considered themselves as the guilty authors of so much cruelty to the creatures which were about them? Nay, when the groans of these dying animals were over, what a sad, a ghastly spectacle must their cold carcasses yield? and even after their oblation, how dismal a meditation must it be, to consider the beauty and excel-tity or quality of them. They tell us, that ‘Cain brought lency of these animate beings reduced to an handful of dust; especially, when they could not see them in that condition, but under sad conviction, that they themselves must follow the same odious steps to destruction? We can hardly conceive, how God could strike the human soul with a deeper sense of misery from guilt, or with more abhorrence of the sad cause of that misery, than by this method of appointing sacrifices: nor can we imagine how our first parents could have ever sustained themselves under such afflicting thoughts, had not God, in his infinite goodness, caused some ray of hope to shine through this scene of mortality and misery, and made sacrifices (at the same time that they were such lively emblems of the horror of guilt) the means of its expiation, and the seals of his covenant of grace. That God entered into a covenant of mercy with man, immediately after the fall, is evident from the sentence passed upon the serpent, wherein that covenant is comprised and therefore, as we find that, in after ages, his usual way of ratifying covenants of this kind was by sacrifices; so we cannot imagine that he failed to do so at this time, when such mercy was more wanted than ever it was since the foundation of the world. Sacrifices indeed have no natural aptitude to expiate guilt, in which sense, the apostle affirms it to be impossible for the blood of bulls, and of goats, to take away sins.' The death of a beast is far from being equivalent to the death of a man, but infinitely short of that eternal death to which the man's sinfulness does consign him: but still, as sacrifices are federal rites, and one of those external means which God had instituted, under the antediluvian dispensation, for man's recovery from sin, we cannot but suppose, but that, when piously and devoutly offered, they were accepted by him, for the expiation of transgressions; though it must be owned, that they did not, of themselves, or by their own worthiness, atone for any thing, but only in virtue of the expiatory sacrifice of the Messias to come, whereof they were no more than types and shadows. To speak strictly and properly, therefore, these sacrifices did not really and formally, but typically and mystically expiate, that is, they did not pacify God's anger, and satisfy his justice, and take away sin, by their own force and efficacy, but as they were figures and representations of that universal sacrifice, which (in the divine intention) 'was slain from the foundation of the world,' and, in the fulness of time,' was to come down from heaven, in order to fulfil the great undertaking of 'making atonement for the sins of all mankind.' Most of the Jewish interpreters have placed the different events of these two sacrifices in the external quan 36 of the fruits of the ground' indeed, but not of the first- The author to the Hebrews has given us, I think, a key to this difficulty, when he tells us, that 'by faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain.' The faith (of which the apostle gives us several instances in this chapter) is the belief of something declared, and, in consequence of such belief, the performance of some action enjoined by God: By faith Noah, being warned by God, prepared an ark,' that is, he believed the warning which God gave him and obediently made the ark which he had appointed him, to make: By faith Abraham, when called' to go into a strange land, which God promised to give him for an inheritance, obeyed,' that is, he believed that God would give him what he had promised, and, in consequence of such belief, did what God commanded him: and thus it was, that Abel, by faith, offered a better sacrifice than Cain,' because he believed what God had promised, that the seed of the woman should bruise the serpent's head,' and, in consequence of such belief, offered such a sacri Chap. xi. ver. 4. A. M. 128. A. C. 3876; OR, ACCORDING TO HALES, A. M. 200. A. C. 5211. GEN. CH. 4. TO VER. 25. until the seed should come. CHAP. IV. fice for his sins, as God had appointed to be offered, bers as Patriarchal Dispensation. (SUPPLEMENTAL BY THE EDITOR.) SCRIPTURE assures us that Christ was the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.' But what meaning are we to attach to these expressions, unless we understand them as referring to the significant and emblematical rite of sacrifice, instituted to prefigure the death incurred by sin, and the atonement by which its guilt was to be expiated? It is admitted that this atonement had a retrospective efficacy; that through it God declared his righteousness for the remission of sins that were past; and have we not, therefore, the best grounds for regarding the institution of sacrifice as having been intended from the beginning impressively to show forth the death of the Redeemer? He is described as 'the Lamb of God who taketh away the sin of the world,' because he really fulfilled that which the sacrifice of lambs and of other animals prefigured. 1 In order to offer a sacrifice by faith then, there are three things requisite. 1st, That the person who offers On the Design of Sacrifice :—On the Sacrifices of the should do it upon the previous appointment and direction of God. 2dly, That he should consider it as a sign and token of the promise of God made in Christ, and of remission of sins through his blood; and 3dly, That, while he is offering, he should be mindful withal (in the phrase of St Paul) to present himself a living sacrifice, holy, and acceptable unto God.' In the first of these qualifications Cain was right enough, because he had learned from his father, that, as God had appointed sacrifices, it was his duty to offer them: but herein was his great defect, that while he was offering, he gave no attention to what he was about; nor once reflected on the promise of God, made in paradise, nor placed any confidence in the merits of a Saviour, to recommend his services; but, vainly imagining that his bare oblation was all that was required to his justification, he took no care to preserve his soul pure and unpolluted, or to constitute his meminstruments of righteousness unto God.' In short, his oblation was the service of an hypocrite, lying unto God, and using the external symbols of grace for a cloak of maliciousness; whereas Abel's sacrifice was In the first promise there is allusion to the sufferings attended with awful meditations on that seed of the of the Mighty Deliverer. In order that the great truths woman' which was to become the world's Redeemer, comprehended in this promise might be more clearly unwith warm applications to him for mercy and forgiveness, derstood and deeply felt, we have every reason to beand with holy resolutions of better obedience, of aban-lieve that sacrifice was immediately and divinely instidoning all sin, and always abounding in the work of tuted as an explanatory ordinance. Though the words the Lord;' and therefore there is no wonder, that their of the institution are not recorded, the fact cannot be services met with so different a reception. For, how-questioned; because sacrifice constituted a part of the ever sacrificing was an external rite, yet the rite itself worship of God from the fall of man; and we must feel would by no means do, unless the attention of the mind, assured that it could not be acceptably used in his worand the integrity of the heart went along with it, he ship but in consequence of divine appointment. We that killed an ox was as if he slew a man; and he that know that the inferior animals were not used as food, at sacrificed a lamb as if he cut off a dog's neck;' so de- least with the divine permission, till after the flood; and, testable in the sight of God was a the richest oblation, consequently, there could be no occasion for slaying when the sacrificer was not a good man; nay, so ready them, unless it were for sacrifice, till after that period. was he to pass by all observances of this kind, if the Our first parents having been clothed at the expense of worshipper came but, in other respects, qualified: 3 For life, and by the special interposition of God, had a he that keepeth the law bringeth offerings enough; he striking representation given them of the mode in which that taketh heed to the law offereth a peace-offering; he forfeited happiness should be restored, and of that perthat requiteth a good turn offereth fine flour; and he that fect righteousness by which they were justified before giveth alms sacrificeth praise. To depart from wicked- God. It was an intimation to them that the Deliverer, ness is a thing pleasing to the Lord; and to forsake un-denominated the Seed of the woman, should redeem righteousness is a propitiation.' * Isa. Ixvi. 3. 26 'Heidegger's History of the Patriarchs, Essay V. Ecclus. xxxv. 1, &c. a That it is not the quality of the sacrifice, but the mind and disposition of the sacrificer, which God regards, was the general sentiment of the wisest heathens, as appears by that excellent passage in Persius: 'Justice upright, and sanctity of heart, A polished mind, pure at its inmost core And that other in Seneca: Sat. 2. It is not by victims, though they be most valuable and glitter with gold, that honour is paid to the gods, but by worshipping them with a pious and upright heart.'-On Old Age, 1. 6. them by his sufferings. Thus have we presented to our view immediately after the fall, and before the first transgressors were expelled from paradise, the two principal methods in which God unfolded to mankind the way of salvation, namely, prophecy and typical sacrifice. Both these methods of divine revelation were continued in the church with increasing clearness and precision till the coming of Christ; and both were intended to direct the faith of the people to the Substitute and Surety of sinners, who by the one offering up of himself was to obtain eternal redemption. In the first promise we have the foundation of that series of prophecies which was delivered from age to age, which announced the divine nature, the incarnation, the sufferings, death, and subsequent glories of the Redeemer. In the first sacrifice we have the basis of that series of typical observances, which prefigured the mediation and atonement of the Son of God. A. M. 128. A. C. 3876; OR, ACCORDING TO HALES, A. M. 200. A. C. 5211. GEN. CH. 4. TO VER. 25. Prophecy was the annunciation of what was future, ex- | But, as it had also an immediate, and most apposite, pressed not by words but by signs. These signs were application to that important event in the condition of indefinitely varied; and, accordingly, the rites appointed man, which, as being the occasion of, was essentially to be observed in the worship of God, and the vicissitudes connected with, the work of redemption; that likewise, of the church in its trials and triumphs, recorded in the we have reason to think, was included in its significaOld Testament, were emblematical. They served unto tion. And thus, upon the whole, sacrifice appears to the example and shadow of good things to come. But have been ordained, as a standing memorial of the death the most prominent of these emblems was sacrifice, which introduced by sin, and of that death which was to be by its direct reference to the atonement of Christ, aided suffered by the Redeemer." the faith and hope of believers, and which by its univer- First, then, it is evident, that the offering of Abel was sal use, even when its original design was forgotten, different in its nature from that which was presented by may have prepared mankind for that message of salva-Cain; and that this difference constituted the principal tion which, in the fulness of time, was sent to them ground for the acceptance of the one, and the rejection through a crucified Redeemer. of the other. It was a more full, a more ample sacrifice, that is, it partook more essentially of the nature of sacrifice, than the offering of Cain. It was of the firstlings of his flock,' an animal slain in solemn sacrifice unto God, in obedience to a known divine command, whereas Cain offered merely of the fruit of the ground, as an expression of thankfulness to the bounty of God. Hence, These views are confirmed by the circumstances recorded in Scripture regarding the sacrifice of Abel. By faith we are told that Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts. Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the Lord: and Abel, he brought of the firstlings of his flock. Secondly, Abel is said to have offered his more exIf we bear in mind the observations already made, we cellent sacrifice by faith. On this circumstance there is shall readily perceive the ground on which the sacrifice | much stress laid by the apostle, as he adduces it in the of Abel was accepted, while that of Cain was rejected. eleventh chapter of the Hebrews, as an example illustraAbel offered his sacrifice in faith, in strict accordance tive of the power and efficacy of faith. But what was with the command of God, and in firm reliance on his the object of this faith? Unquestionably a divine revepromise: he acknowledged by the death inflicted on an lation, the promise of the Messiah, to which such frequent innocent animal his own desert as a sinner, and his trust allusion is made in Scripture, and in firm reliance on in the way of redemption and recovery which God had which the patriarchs lived and died. 'These all,' Abel mercifully provided: he thus as a true penitent ap- and all the others whom the apostle had named, 'not proached God in worship, looking for pardon and re- having received the fulfilment of the promises, but havconciliation, renewing and sanctifying grace, through ing seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and an atonement. But Cain, viewing God merely as his embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers Creator and Preserver, offered the fruits of the earth as and pilgrims on the earth.' This could not be the proan acknowledgment of his goodness, entirely overlook-mise of entering the land of Canaan, because to Abel, ing his own character as a sinner, and disregarding the Enoch, and Noah, no such promise was given, and bedivinely instituted sacrificial rite, the appointed emblem cause that even in regard to Abraham, the evangelist of the new and living way of access to God. "In | (John viii. 56.) explains the expression of his seeing the short, Cain, the first-born of the fall, exhibits the first-promises afar off, and embracing them, as signifying his fruits of his parents' disobedience, in the arrogance and seeing the day of Christ and rejoicing. To the compleself-sufficiency of reason, rejecting the aids of revelation of the great promise of the coming of the Seed of tion, because they fell not within its apprehension of the woman, to accomplish the redemption of mankind, right. He takes the first place in the annals of deism, Abel looked with firm reliance on the truth of God. In and displays, in his proud rejection of the ordinance of the faith of this promise he offered unto God the kind of sacrifice, the same spirit, which, in later days, has ac-sacrifice which had been enjoined as the evidence of detuated his enlightened followers, in rejecting the sacri-pendence on divine mercy, and as the typical expression fice of Christ." of that atonement which was to be made in the fulness of time. And, therefore, The terms in which God expostulates with Cain convey a rebuke for his not offering an animal sacrifice like In the third place, he obtained the testimony of God his brother Abel: If thou doest well, shalt thou not be to the acceptableness of his sacrifice, and to his own peraccepted? and if thou doest not well, a sin-offering sonal justification before God. By which he obtained lieth even at the door.' There is here a reference to witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: sin-offering as a known institution, the neglect of which and by it, he being dead, yet speaketh.' He thus bein Cain incurred the divine displeasure, and the obser- came heir of the righteousness of God which is by faith, vance of animal sacrifice is anew enforced. The sacri-even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus fice which Abel presented unto God was of this description. The reason of its acceptance, according to the apostle Paul, was the faith in which it was offered; faith in the Redeemer promised under the appellation of the seed of the woman. "Of this faith, the offering of an animal in sacrifice, appears to have been the legitimate, and consequently the instituted, expression. The institution of animal sacrifice, then, was coeval with the fall, and had a reference to the sacrifice of our redemption. Christ unto all, and upon all them that believe.' It was declared by God himself, that he was righteous before him, by his visibly attesting the excellency and acceptableness of his oblation. We thus discover the reason for the difference in the divine reception of the sacrifices of Cain and Abel. This cannot be accounted for by those who deny the divine origin of sacrifice. Abel's sacrifice, as our author remarks, was more excellent than his brother's, because A. M. 130. A. C. 3874; OR, ACCORDING TO HALES, A. M. 230. A. C. 5181. GEN. CH. 5. AND 6. TO VER. 13. or 1122. it was offered with faith in the great atonement, which he | A. M. 622, SECT. V. CHAP. I.-Of the General Corruption of Mankind. : THE HISTORY. GREAT was the grief, no doubt, which our first parents felt upon the loss of the righteous Abel, and the expulsion of their wicked son Cain; but, to alleviate, in some measure, this heavy load of sorrow, God was pleased to promise them another son, whose fate should be different, and himself a lasting comfort and consolation to them and therefore, as soon as Eve was delivered of the child, she called his name Seth, which signifies substitute, because God had been so good as to send him in the room of his brother Abel, whom Cain slew. Adam, when he had Seth, was 130 years old: he lived after that 800 years, and begat several other children (though Moses makes no mention of them.) So that the b whole of his life was 930 years. A. M. 235, or 435. A. M. 325, or 625. A. M. 395, or 795. A. M. 460, or 960. Seth, when he was 105 years old, had a son named Enos: after which time he lived 807 years; so that the whole of his life was 912. Enos, when 90, had a son named Cainan : after which he lived 815 years; in the whole 905. Cainan, when 70, had a son named Mahalaleel after which he lived 840 years; in all 910. Mahalaleel, when 65, had a son named Jared: after which he lived 830 years; in all 895. a The Jewish, and some Christian doctors, say, that Adam and Eve mourned for Abel one hundred years, during which time they lived separate, Adam particularly, in a valley near Hebron thence named the valley of tears. And the inhabitants of Ceylon pretend, that the salt lake on the mountain of Columbo, was formed by the tears which Eve shed on this occasion. All fiction.-Calmet's ictionary. b If it be asked, how it came to pass, that Adam, who was immediately created by God, and, consequently, more perfect than any of his kind, did not outlive Methuselah, who was the eighth from him? the answer which some have given, namely, that his grief and affliction of mind for the loss of paradise, and the misery which, by his transgression, he had entailed upon his offspring, might affect his constitution, and by degrees, impair his strength, is not much amiss: but there is another reason which seems to me better founded, namely, that, whereas Adam was created in the full perfection of his nature, and all his descendants, being born infants, did gradually proceed to maturity; subducting the time from their infancy to their manhood, we shall find, that Adam outlived them all. For we must not compute, as we do now, (when the extent of man's life is usually no more that seventy) that his complete manhood was at thirty, or thereabouts. In the very catalogue now before us, we read of none (except Enoch, and two others, who begat children before they were ninety or upwards;) and therefore, subtracting those years (which we may suppose interfered between his birth and his manhood) from the age of Methuselah, we may perceive, that Adam surpassed him to the number of almost sixty.-On the more Difficult Pussages. or 1287. A. M. 874, or 1474. A. M. 1056, or 1656. A. M. 1556, or 2256. Jared, when 162, had a son named Enoch : after which he lived 800 years; in all 962. Enoch, when 65, had a son named Methuselah: after which he lived 300: in all 365. Methuselah, when 187, had a son named Lamech after which he lived 782; in all 969. Lamech, when 182, had a son named Noah : after which he lived 595; in all 777 : and Noah, when he was 500 years old, had three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japhet, c from whom the world, after the deluge, was replenished. d This is the genealogy which Moses gives us of the posterity of Adam, in the line of Seth, until the time of the deluge; but we must observe, that these are far from being all his progeny. In the case of our great progenitor Adam, he informs us, that after the birth of Seth, 'he had several sons and daughters,' though he does not so much as record their names; and the like we may suppose of the rest of the antediluvian patriarchs. For 1 Gen. v. 4. 16 c Of these three sons, the eldest was Japhet, as appears from Gen. x. 21., the second was Shem, from Gen. x. 21., and the youngest Ham, from Gen. ix. 24. Nevertheless, both here, and a little lower, Shem is named first; whether it was, that the rights of primogeniture were transferred to him (though the sacred historian says nothing of it,) or God was minded, thus early, to show that he would not be confined to the order of nature, in the disposal of his favours, which he frequently bestowed upon the younger children; or (what I think the most likely) because the nation of the Jews were to descend from him, and he, and his posterity, were to be the principal subject of this whole history.-Patrick and Le Clerc's Commentary, and Pool's Annota. d From this catalogue we may farther observe, that the custom in those times was, to give children their names according to the occurrences in life, or expectations of their parents. Thus Seth, being a good man, was grieved to see the great degeneracy in other parts, though he endeavoured to preserve his own family from the contagion; and therefore called his son Enos, which signifies sorrowful. Enos, perceiving the posterity of Cain to grow every day worse and worse, was concerned for their iniquity, and began to dread the consequences of it; and therefore called his son Cainan, which denotes lamentation. Though Cainan had his name from the wickedness of Cain's family, yet he himself was resolved to maintain the true worship of God in his own; and therefore called his son Mahalaleel, that is, a praiser and worshipper of God. In the days of Mahalaleel (as the tradition tells us) a defection happened among the sons of Seth, who went down from the mountains where they inhabited, and adjoined themselves to the daughters of Cain: and therefore he called his son's name Jared, which signifies descending. Jared, to guard against the general corruption, devoted himself and his descendants, more zealously to the service of God, and, accordingly, called his son Enoch, which means a dedication. Enoch, by the spirit of prophecy, foreseeing the destruction which would come upon the earth, immediately after the death of his son, called his name Methuselah, which imports as much; for the first part of the word, Methu, signifies he dies, and Selah, the sending forth of water. Methuselah, perceiving the wickedness of the world, in the family of Seth, as well as that of Cain, to grow every day worse and worse, called his son Lamech, which intimates a poor man, humbled, and afflicted with grief, for the present corruption and fear of future punishment. And Lamech conceiving better hopes of his son (as some imagine) that he should be the promised seed, the restorer of mankind after the deluge, or a notable improver of the art of agriculture, called his name Noah, which denotes a comforter.-Bedford's Scripture Chronology. We may observe, from this catalogue, however, that the patriarchs, in those days, were not so superstitious, as to think any thing ominous in names; and therefore we find, that Jared feared not to call his son Enoch, by the very name of Cain's eldest son, Gen. iv. 17., even a Methuselah called his son Lamech, by the name of one of Cain's grandchildren, ch. iv ver. 18.-Patrick's Commentary. A. M. 130. A. C. 3874; OR, ACCORDING TO HALES, A. M. 230. A. C. 5181. GEN. CH. 5. AND 6. TO VER. 13. it is incongruous to think, that Lamech was 181, and son of singular piety and sanctity of life, not only took Methuselah, 187, before they ever had a child, when it care of his own conduct, as considering himself always so plainly appears that his father Enoch had one at 65. under the eye and observation of a righteous God, but, The true reason then of this omission is,—that the his- by his good advices and admonitions, endeavoured liketorian never intended to give us a catalogue of the col-wise to put a stop to the torrent of impiety, and reform fateral branches (which doubtless were many) but only of the principal persons by whom, in a right line, the succession was continued down to Noah, and thence to Abraham, the founder of the Jewish nation. Not long after the departure of Cain, the whole world was divided into two families, or opposite nations: the family of Seth, which adhered to the service of God, became more frequent in religious offices; and, as their number increased, met in larger assemblies, and in communion, to perform the divine worship by way of public liturgy; and, for this their piety and zeal, were styled the sons or servants of God, in distinction to the family of Cain, which now became profligate and profane, renouncing the service of God, and addicting themselves to all manner of impiety and lasciviousness; from whence they had the name of the 'sons and daughters of men.' In this period of time, Enoch, one of the family of Seth, and the seventh in a direct line from Adam, a per 1 Heidegger's History of the Patriarchs. the vices of the age; for which reason God was pleased to show a signal token of his kindness to him; for he exempted him from the common fate of mankind, and, without suffering death to pass upon him, translated him into the regions of bliss. In this period of time, Adam, who (according to the sentence denounced against him at the fall) was to return to his native dust, departed this life, and (as the tradition is) having called his son Seth, and the other branches of his numerous family about him, he gave them strict charge, that they should always live separate, This seems to be the natural sense of the expression of walking with God; and excellent to this purpose is this passage of Seneca, if we take what he tells us of the presence of God in a Christian sense:— Verily we must so conduct ourselves as if we lived in into the recesses of our hearts, and there is one who can, for God's presence, we must so think as if some one could look what availeth it that any thing be kept hid from man? nothing is concealed from God; he is present in our minds, and knoweth our thoughts."-B. 1. Epist. 83; Le Clerc's Commentary. But, considering how usual a thing it was, in these early ages of the world, for angels to be conversant with good men, it may not improperly be said of Enoch, and of Noah both, that they walked with God in this sense, namely, that they had oftentimes familiar converse with these messengers, who might be sent with instructions from him how they were to behave upon several occasions: for this answers the traditions of the heathens, namely, that in the golden age, their gods had fre An endless life shall be his gift, and he, Virg. Ec. 4. More oft of old th' inhabitants of heaven, a The words in our translation are,-Then,' that is, in the days of Enos, began men to call upon the name of the Lord,' eh iv. 26.; but, it being very probable, that public assemblies for religious offices, were held long before this time, and that even when Cain and Abel offered their sacrifices, their families joined with them in the worship of God; some men of great note, such , Bertram, Hackspan, and Heidegger, take them in the same sense with our marginal translation; then began men,' that is,quent intercourse with men: the children of Seth, to call themselves by the name of the Lord,' that is, the servants and worshippers of the Lord, in contradistinction to the Cainites, and such profane persons as had forsaken him. It must not be dissembled, however, that the word Hochal, which we translate began, in several places of Scrip- | And to the same purpose:ture signifies to profane; and upon this presumption many of the Jewish writers, and some of no obscure fame among us, have taken the words so, as if Moses intended to intimate to us, that men began now to apostatize from the worship of God, to fall into idolatry, and to apply the most holy name, which alone belongs to the great Creator of heaven and earth, to created beings, and especially to the sun. But, considering that Moses is here speaking of the pious family of Seth, and not of that of Cain; that when the Hebrew word signifies to profane, it has always a noun following it; but when an affirmative mood follows, (as in the passage before us,) it always signifies to begin; and withal, that the eastern writers represent this Enos as an excellent governor, who, while he lived, preserved his family in good order, and, when he died, called them all together, and gave them a charge to keep all God's commandments, and not to associate themselves with the children of Cain: considering all this, I say, we can hardly suppose that Moses is here pointing out the origin of idolatry, but rather the invention of some religious rites and ceremodes in the external worship of God at this time, or the distmetion which good men began to put between themselves and such as were openly wicked and profane. For that the true meaning of the expression Karabeshem, according to our marginal translation, is to call or nominate by, or after the name of any one, is manifest from several instances in Scripture. Thus, Gen. iv. 17, Jikra, he called the name of the city Beshem, by, or ofter the name of his son, Numb. xxxii. 42. Jikra, he called it Nobahbeshem, by, or after his own name; and in Psal. xlix. 11. Kureau, they call their lands Bishmotham, by, or after their Own names; and the name here intimated is afterwards expressly given them by Moses himself, Gen. vi. when he tells us, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men.'-Patrick's Commentary; and Calmet's Dictionary on the word Enos; and Shuckford's Connection, vol. 1. b. 1. Catul. in Nup. Thet. et Pelei. e Where Adam was buried cannot be collected from Scripture. St Jerome, in Matt. xxvii, seems to approve of the opinion of those who imagine that he was buried at Hebron, in the cave of Machpelah, or the double cave, which Abraham, many ages after, bought for a burying place for himself and family, Gen. xxiii. 3. &c. The oriental Christians say, that when Adam saw death approaching, he called his son Seth, and the rest of his family to him, and ordered them to embalm his body with myrrh, frankincense, and cassia, and deposit it in a certain cave, on the top of a mountain, which he had chosen for the repository of his remains, and which was thence called the cave of All-Konuz, a word derived from the Arabian Kanaza, which signifies to lay up privately. And this precaution (as the Jews will have it) was ordered by Adam to be taken, lest his posterity should make his relics the object of idolatry. Several of the primitive fathers believe, that he died in the place where Jerusalem was afterwards built, and that he was interred on Mount Calvary, in the very spot where Christ was crucified; but others are of opinion, that (though he did not die at Jerusalem,) yet Noah, at the time of the deluge, put his body into the ark, and took care to have it buried there by Melchisedec, the son of Shem, his grandson. The Mahometans will have his sepulchre to have been on a mountain near Mecca; and the ancient Persians, in Serendil, or Ceylon: so ambitious is every nation to have the father of all mankind reposited with them. When Eve, the mother of all living, died is nowhere expressed in Scripture; but there are some who venture to tell us, that she outlived her husband ten years.-See the Universal History; and Calmet's Dictionary on the word Adam. |