Bible Options Bible Study Software
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Genesis 5 Genealogy shows Jesus
#1
I read a study of the original roots of the names in the Genealogy of Genesis 5, showing that the Gospel is hidden in this genealogy. I found it very interesting and was wondering if anyone can comment on it:
Hebrew English
Adam Man
Seth Appointed
Enosh Mortal
Kenan Sorrow
Mahalalel The Blessed God
Jared Shall come down
Enoch Teaching
Methuselah His death shall bring
Lamech The despairing
Noah Rest, or comfort

Adam: comes from adomah, and means "man." As the first man, that seems straightforward.
Seth: means "appointed." When he was born Eve said, "For God hathappointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew."
Enosh: means "mortal," "frail," or "miserable." It is from the root anash: to be incurable; used of a wound, grief, woe, sickness, or wickedness. (It was in the days of Enosh that men began to defile the name of the Living God.)
Kenan: can mean "sorrow," dirge," or "elegy." (The precise denotation is somewhat elusive; some study aids unfortunately presume an Aramaic root synonymous with "Cainan.") Balaam, looking down from the heights of Moab, employed a pun upon the name of the Kenites when he prophesied their destruction.
Mahalalel: from mahalal, which means "blessed" or "praise"; and El, the name for God. Thus, Mahalalel means "the Blessed God." Often Hebrew names included El, the name of God, as Dani-el, "God is my Judge," Nathani-el, "Gift of God," etc.
Jared: from the verb yaradh, meaning "shall come down." Some authorities suggest that this might have been an allusion to the "Sons of God" who "came down" to corrupt the daughters of men, resulting in the Nephilim ("Fallen Ones") of Genesis 6.
Enoch: means "teaching," or "commencement." He was the first of four generations of preachers. In fact, the earliest recorded prophecy was by Enoch, which amazingly enough deals with the Second Coming of Christ.
Methuselah: The Flood of Noah did not come as a surprise. It had been preached on for four generations. But something strange happened when Enoch was 65, from which time "he walked with God." Enoch was given a prophecy that as long as his son was alive, the judgment of the flood would be withheld; but as soon as he died, the flood would be sent forth.
Enoch named his son to reflect this prophecy. The name Methuselah comes from two roots: muth, a root that means "death" ; and from shalach, which means "to bring," or "to send forth." Thus, the name Methuselah signifies, "his death shall bring."
And, indeed, in the year that Methuselah died, the flood came. Methuselah was 187 when he had Lamech, and lived 782 years more. Lamech had Noah when he was 182. The Flood came in Noah's 600th year. 187 + 182 + 600 = 969, Methuselah's age when he died.
Lamech: a root still evident today in our own English word, "lament" or "lamentation." Lamech suggests "despairing."
Noah: derived from nacham , "to bring relief" or "comfort"
#2
Absolute Bovine manure! Here are the actual meaning of the names:

Adam - man; mankind
Shet - to give; buttocks (e.g., Isaiah 20:4)
Enosh - man; person; human
Keinan - to lament (e.g., 2Samuel 1:17); to build a nest (e.g., Jeremiah 48:28)
Mahalal'el - praise of God (e.g., Proverbs 27:21, "mahalal" - a praise [noun])
Yered - to decend (e.g., Genesis 42:38; to fall down (e.g., Ezekiel 26:11)
Hanoch - to teach (e.g., Proverbs 22:6); to inaugurate (e.g., Numbers 7:84)
M'tushelah - no good match exists; closest verb is 'to be abandoned' (e.g., Isaiah 27:10)
Lemech - no good match exists; in Modern Hebrew it means 'a fool'
No'ah - to rest (e.g., Isaiah 14:7); rest (noun, e.g., Esther 9:16)

So, the names Keinan & Hanoch are related to the meanings you listed. The others are not.
#3
...deleted - draft accidentally posted
#4
Your reply is obviously inaccurate on its face. You say only two of the ones listed are correct – Keinan and Hanoch. However, in your own list there are obviously others that we agree on plus many that a very similar:


Adam--> man; yours - man = Same

Shet (Seth)--> appointed; yours - to give = Similar - given and appointed are similar in meaning

Enosh --> mortal, frail; yours - man, human = Similar – mortality is key part of humanity
Keinan --> sorrow; yours - to lament = Same - you admitted
Mahalal’el --> Blessed God; yours - Praise of God = Similar – I also said praise so you could say the Praised God for mine (and El is used for God, do you deny that?)
Yered (Jared)--> shall come down; yours - to descend = Same – obviously;
Hanoch/Enoch --> teach; yours - teach = Same – you admitted
M’thushelah --> his death shall bring; yours - abandoned/You say no good match
Lemech --> lament/despairing ; yours - a fool/You say no good match
Noah --> comfort, rest; yours - rest = Same – I agree with rest

To summarize, you are agreeing on several and there are only minor discrepancies in the ones you claim to disagree with. I will add that Noah meaning rest fits perfectly with Jesus because the New Testatment talks all about Jesus bringing rest and being our rest, etc.

So, even using your own interpretations, we are not that far off-->

Mine: Man appointed mortal sorrow (but) the Blessed God shall come down teaching (that) his death shall bring the despairing rest
Yours: Man given to human(ity) sorrow (but) the Praise of God descend(ed) teaching (that) [no good match] [no good match] rest

The two "no good matches" that you have – I clearly gave good explanations which make sense whereas you didn’t have any.

End result:
My post 100% right
Your post 100% Bovine manure

PS please clarify how we only agreed on 2 when there were obviously way more. In addition to Keinan & Hanoch, we agree exactly on Adam, Yered, and Noah making that 5 out of 10, with several of the remaining being very similar...the only ones that aren't are the two that you conveniently have "no good matches" for.
#5
....having problems with computer when posting...please ignore this post
#6
If I were moderator, I would not tolerate this pointless nastiness. First, Noahide, you are not a seeker if you respond like that. When someone overresponds by exaggerating problems with a point made, it shows a fear of a certain position. A seeker should have no fear of what he will find. An appropriate response would have been to state that the names Methuselah and Lamech do not have clear meanings, and that you disagree slightly with a few of the others. And Tricia, I am disappointed that you responded in the same nastiness of Noahide. Are you afraid of losing the argument also?
#7
(01-08-2014, 12:07 PM)ThomasDGW Wrote: If I were moderator, I would not tolerate this pointless nastiness. First, Noahide, you are not a seeker if you respond like that. When someone overresponds by exaggerating problems with a point made, it shows a fear of a certain position. A seeker should have no fear of what he will find. An appropriate response would have been to state that the names Methuselah and Lamech do not have clear meanings, and that you disagree slightly with a few of the others. And Tricia, I am disappointed that you responded in the same nastiness of Noahide. Are you afraid of losing the argument also?

Sorry if you took it that way. I'm not at all afraid of losing the argument. It's not about arguing; it's about truth.
When I read Noahide's comment, I took it as more of light-hearted banter/joking, than nastiness. So, I responded as a joke back. On the internet, it's sometimes hard to tell someone's intentions when they write stuff. I didn't think there was any ill intent.
Anyway, thanks for pointing out that someone could interpret my post as nastiness, so I can clarify that I did not intend it that way at all.


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)