Beth-El Baptist Church

06/19/2011

Greg Tomlinson

Do the genealogies of Genesis 5 & 11 identify only father-to-son relationships?

Many people question the genealogies of Genesis chapters 5 and 11 and indicate that they do not provide father-to-son relationships but provide the name of a father whose eventual lineage gave rise to a distant male whose lineage eventually gave rise to another, etc., etc..

1. Are there any anomalies in the language that we need to be aware of?

Genesis 5:6-8 Genesis 11:12-13

Both Genesis 5 and 11 provide the genealogies in a incredibly consistent pattern for all of the people mentioned. Although there are a few deviations from the basic pattern, these deviations do not actually break the pattern. In Genesis 5, the formula is “Name1 lived Y1 years and begat Name2 and Name1 lived after he begat Name2 Y2 years and begat sons and daughters and all the days of Name1 were Y3 years and he died”. In Genesis 11, the formula is nearly identical but is slightly shorter. “Name1 lived Y1 years and begat Name2 and Name1 lived after he began Name2 Y2 years and begat sons and daughters”. This regular formula makes it simpler to understand what is happening.

2. Could the word translated “begat” provide for any relationship besides father-to-son?

Genesis 5:9-11 Genesis 11:14-15

The word translated “begat” is a Hiphil Imperfect 3rd Person Masculine Singular verb of the Hebrew word “yalad”. The Hiphil stem is a causitive verb steam meaning that the subject (Name1) directly causes the action on the object (Name2). The Imperfect aspect means that the verbal action is viewed as being in process and not viewed as a completed action from the stand point of the subject. It is as though the subject himself is speaking. The Hebrew word “yalad” means to bear, bring forth, or the gender. As a noun, the word “yalad” means a young child. With this information, an expanded form would state “Name1 lived Y1 years then he caused to bring forth Name2”. This is a very strong way to describe a father-to-son relationship. All references in Genesis 5 and 11 that are translated “begat” or “begotten” is the hiphil form of the Yalad. Some are in the imperfect aspect, others are in the infinitive. Either way, it is a direct causal verb.

3. How else can we be sure that these are father-to-son relationships?

Genesis 5:3 Genesis 4:25-26

Genesis 4:26 Genesis 5:28-29

Jude 1:14 cmp Genesis 5:3-23

We are specifically told that Adam is the one who named Seth and that Seth was understood to have been born as a direct replacement for “Abel, whom Cain slew”. We are told that it was Seth who named Enos, his son. We are told that it was Lamech who named Noah, his son. The New Testament book of Jude indicates the Enoch was the seventh from Adam and according to Genesis 5:3-23 we are told of the father-to-son relationships of : Adam – Seth – Enos – Cainan – Mahalaleel – Jared – Enoch who is listed as the 7th from Adam. There are no gaps nor strange usages in the genealogies of Genesis 5 and 11.

4. Could Yalad offer any other meaning?

Genesis 3:16; 4:1-2, 17-24; 6:1, 4, 10; 10:1, 8, 13, 15, 21-26; 16:2

Exodus 1:15-21 Numbers 1:18

1 Kings 3:16-27

There are almost 500 uses of various forms of Yalad, in verbal or noun form. It is generally translated as begat, born, bear, delivered. Sometimes as midwife (piel participle – causative with an intensive nuance). Sometimes at pedigree or ancestry (hithpael imperfect – causative, reflexive). Sometimes as child (Qal imperfect – simple verb which may mean suckling). Although I have not looked at all 500 uses. None of the ones I spot checked carried any meaning other than carrying the idea of a parent/child type relationship being in view.

5. Do some of those deviations in the genealogies provide any possible holes?

Genesis 5:3-5 Genesis 5:21-24

Genesis 5:28-32 Genesis 11:10-11

The deviations only provide some specific commentary information about a few select individuals and are expansions of the standard formula with life commentary. They do not modify the formula in any way.