And Lamech said unto his wives, Adah and Zillah, Hear my voice; ye wives of Lamech, hearken unto my speech: for I have slain a man to my wounding, and a young man to my hurt.
23. a man for wounding me ] Lamech boasts that he has slain a man who had wounded him and a young man who had bruised him. Whether “a man” and “a young man” are the same person, or whether they mean a man and his son, cannot be decided. Lamech has exacted the vengeance of death for the insult of a blow 2 [11] .
[11] See for an explanation by Jewish tradition Appendix B.
It is, however, possible that the poem only describes an imaginary instance in which Lamech had retaliated in self-defence, and boasts that with the assistance of metal weapons Lamech’s capacity for revenge is increased elevenfold.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
23, 24. The Song of the Sword. These verses are written in a poetical style, with the parallelism of clauses characteristic of Hebrew poetry. It is the first instance of Hebrew poetical composition in the Bible 1 [10] . It contains (1) the address of Lamech to his wives; (2) the announcement of a recent exploit; (3) the boast of confidence and security against injury or insult. It is generally supposed that Lamech’s Song is intended to represent his exultation after the invention of metal weapons by his son Tubal-Cain. The new possession inspired primitive man with confidence and eagerness for savage retaliation.
[10] See G. Adam Smith’s Early Poetry of Israel, p. 21 (Schweich Lectures, 1910).
The substance of line (or stichos) 1 is repeated in line (or stichos) 2: “Adah and Zillah” correspond to “Ye wives of Lamech,” and “Hear my voice” to “Hearken unto my speech.”
In line (or stichos) 3, the word “I have slain” gives the note to the whole distich; but “a man for wounding me” is repeated in greater detail in line (or stichos) 4, “a young man for bruising me.” Line (or stichos) 5 mentions the traditional vengeance promised for Cain; line (or stichos) 6 boasts of a vengeance tenfold greater than this for Lamech.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Verse 23. And Lamech said unto his wives] The speech of Lamech to his wives is in hemistichs in the original, and consequently, as nothing of this kind occurs before this time, it is very probably the oldest piece of poetry in the world. The following is, as nearly as possible, a literal translation:
“And Lamech said unto his wives,
Adah and Tsillah, hear ye my voice;
Wives of Lamech, hearken to my speech;
For I have slain a man for wounding me,
And a young man for having bruised me.
If Cain shall be avenged seven-fold,
Also Lamech seventy and seven.”
It is supposed that Lamech had slain a man in his own defence, and that his wives being alarmed lest the kindred of the deceased should seek his life in return, to quiet their fears he makes this speech, in which he endeavours to prove that there was no room for fear on this account; for if the slayer of the wilful murderer, Cain, should suffer a seven-fold punishment, surely he, who should kill Lamech for having slain a man in self-defence, might expect a seventy-seven-fold punishment.
This speech is very dark, and has given rise to a great variety of very strange conjectures. Dr. Shuckford supposes there is an ellipsis of some preceding speech or circumstance which, if known, would cast a light on the subject. In the antediluvian times, the nearest of kin to a murdered person had a right to revenge his death by taking away the life of the murderer. This, as we have already seen, appears to have contributed not a little to Cain’s horror, Ge 4:14. Now we may suppose that the descendants of Cain were in continual alarms, lest some of the other family should attempt to avenge the death of Abel on them, as they were not permitted to do it on Cain; and that in order to dismiss those fears, Lamech, the seventh descendant from Adam, spoke to this effect to his wives: “Why should you render yourselves miserable by such ill-founded fears? We have slain no person; we have not done the least wrong to our brethren of the other family; surely then reason should dictate to you that they have no right to injure us. It is true that Cain, one of our ancestors, killed his brother Abel; but God, willing to pardon his sin, and give him space to repent, threatened to punish those with a seven-fold punishment who should dare to kill him. If this be so, then those who should have the boldness to kill any of us who are innocent, may expect a punishment still more rigorous. For if Cain should be avenged seven-fold on the person who should slay him, surely Lamech or any of his innocent family should be avenged seventy-seven-fold on those who should injure them.” The Targums give nearly the same meaning, and it makes a good sense; but who can say it is the true sense? If the words be read interrogatively, as they certainly may, the sense will be much clearer, and some of the difficulties will be removed:
“Have I slain a man, that I should be wounded?
Or a young man, that I should be bruised?”
But even this still supposes some previous reason or conversation. I shall not trouble my readers with a ridiculous Jewish fable, followed by St. Jerome, of Lamech having killed Cain by accident, c. and after what I have already said, I must leave the passage, I fear, among those which are inscrutable.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Adah and Zillah, observing his fierceness and cruelty, feared that the vengeance of God or men would fall upon him, and upon them for his sake.
Be it so that I have slain a man, and that a young man, why do you concern yourselves in it? It is
to my own
wounding and hurt, not to yours; I must suffer for it, not you. Some take this to be a sorrowful confession of his bloody crime: q.d. I have murdered a man, to my wounding, &c. i.e. to my utter ruin, or to the wounding and grief of my heart and conscience. But this seems not to agree either with the quality of Cains family, or with the temper of Lamechs person, or with the scope of the Holy Ghost in this place; which is to describe, not the virtues, but the crimes of that wicked race. According to the marginal translation, the sense may be this, Fear not for me; for if any man, though in his youth and strength, should assault me, and give me the first wound, he should pay dearly for it; and though I were wounded and weakened, the remainders of my strength would be sufficient to give him his deaths wound. The words also may be otherwise rendered; the particle chi being taken interrogatively, as it is Isa 29:6; 36:19, and elsewhere: Have I slain a man to my wounding, and or, or a young man to my hurt? i.e. that thereby I should deserve such a mortal wound or hurt to be inflicted upon me by way of retaliation? You have therefore no cause of fear, either for my sake or for your own.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
23, 24. Lamech said unto hiswivesThis speech is in a poetical form, probably the fragmentof an old poem, transmitted to the time of Moses. It seems toindicate that Lamech had slain a man in self-defense, and its driftis to assure his wives, by the preservation of Cain, that anunintentional homicide, as he was, could be in no danger.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And Lamech said unto his wives, Adah and Zillah,…. Confessing what he had done, or boasting what he would do should he be attacked; or in order to make his wives easy, who might fear from his fierceness and cruelty; and the murders he had committed, or on account of Abel’s murder, Ge 4:15 that either the judgments of God would fall upon him and them, or some man or other would dispatch him and his; wherefore calling them together, he thus bespeaks them,
hear my voice, ye wives of Lamech, hearken unto my speech; this he said in an imperious manner to them, demanding their attention and regard, and as glorying in, instead of being ashamed of his polygamy, and in a blustering way, as neither fearing God nor man; or rather speaking comfortably to them, to remove their fears:
for I have slain a man to my wounding, and a young man to my hurt; which, as some say, were his great-grandfather Cain, and his son Tubalcain: according to a tradition of the Jews i, it was after this manner; Cain being old, and blind, and weary, sat in a thicket among the trees to rest himself; when Lamech, who was blind also, and led by Tubalcain hunting, who seeing Cain, and taking him for a wild beast, bid Lamech draw his bow, which he did, and killed him; but coming nearer, and finding it was Cain, was wroth and angry, and slew the young man: the Arabic writers k tell the story with a little variation, and
“Lamech being in a wood with one of his sons, and hearing a noise in it, supposing it to be a wild beast, cast a stone, which fell upon Cain, and killed him ignorantly; and the lad that led him said, what hast thou done? thou hast killed Cain; at which being very sorrowful after the manner of penitents, he smote his hands together, and the lad standing before him, he struck his head with both his hands, and killed him unawares; and coming to his wives, Adah and Zillah, said to them, hear my word, he that slew Abel shall be avenged sevenfold, but Lamech seventy times seven, who killed a man with a cast of a stone, and a young man by clapping of his hands.”
And our version, and others, imply, that he killed both a man, and a young man, or some one person or more, and that he was sorry for it, made confession of it; it was to the wounding and grief of his soul, which does not so well agree with one of the wicked race of Cain: wherefore the words may be rendered, “though I have slain a man” l, that is nothing to you, you are not accountable for it, nor have any thing to fear coming upon you by reason of that; it is to my own wounding, damage, and hurt, if to any, and not to you. Some versions render it, “I would slay a man”, c. m any man, young or old, that should attack me I fear no man: if any man wounds me, or offers to do me any hurt, I would slay him at once; I doubt not but I should be more than a match for him, be he who he will that shall set upon me, and kill him; though I might receive some slight wound, or some little hurt in the engagement, and therefore you need not be afraid of any man’s hurting me. The Arabic version reads interrogatively, “have I killed a man c.?” and so some others n, I have not with which agree the Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan,
“I have not killed a man;”
for which he or his posterity should be punished, as they interpreted it; and therefore his wives had no need to fear any ill should befall him or them, or that the murder of Abel should be avenged on them, this being the seventh generation in which it was to be avenged, Ge 4:15 wherefore it follows,
i R. Gedaliah, Shalshaleth Hakabala, fol. 74. 2. Jarchi in loc. k Elmacinus, p. 7. apud Hottinger. Smegma Oriental. l. 1. c. 8. p. 224, 225. l So the particle is sometimes used; see Nold. Part. Ebr. Concord. p. 399. m “interficerem”, Vatablus; “certe ausim interficere”, Piscator; “sane occiderem, ant occiderim”, Muis, Rivet. n “An virum inferfeci?” De Dieu.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
23 And Lamech said unto his wives, Adah and Zillah, Hear my voice; ye wives of Lamech, hearken unto my speech: for I have slain a man to my wounding, and a young man to my hurt. 24 If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold, truly Lamech seventy and sevenfold.
By this speech of Lamech, which is here recorded, and probably was much talked of in those times, he further appears to have been a wicked man, as Cain’s accursed race generally were. Observe, 1. How haughtily and imperiously he speaks to his wives, as one that expected a mighty regard and observance: Hear my voice, you wives of Lamech. No marvel that he who had broken one law of marriage, by taking two wives, broke another, which obliged him to be kind and tender to those he had taken, and to give honour to the wife as to the weaker vessel. Those are not always the most careful to do their own duty that are highest in their demands of respect from others, and most frequent in calling upon their relations to know their place and do their duty. 2. How bloody and barbarous he was to all about him: I have slain, or (as it is in the margin) I would slay a man in my wound, and a young man in my hurt. He owns himself a man of a fierce and cruel disposition, that would lay about him without mercy, and kill all that stood in his way; be it a man, or a young man, nay, though he himself were in danger to be wounded and hurt in the conflict. Some think, because (v. 24) he compares himself with Cain, that he had murdered some of the holy seed, the true worshippers of God, and that he acknowledged this to be the wounding of his conscience and the hurt of his soul; and yet that, like Cain, he continued impenitent, trembling and yet unhumbled. Or his wives, knowing what manner of spirit he was of, how apt both to give and to resent provocation, were afraid lest somebody or other would be the death of him. “Never fear,” says he, “I defy any man to set upon me; whosoever does, let me alone to make my part good with him; I will slay him, be he a man or a young man.” Note, It is a common thing for fierce and bloody men to glory in their shame (Phil. iii. 19), as if it were both their safety and their honour that they care not how many lives are sacrificed to their angry resentments, nor how much they are hated, provided they may be feared. Oderint, dum metuant–Let them hate, provided they fear. 3. How impiously he presumes even upon God’s protection in his wicked way, v. 24. He had heard that Cain should be avenged seven-fold (v. 15), that is, that if any man should dare to kill Cain he should be severely reckoned with and punished for so doing, though Cain deserved to die a thousand deaths for the murder of his brother, and hence he infers that if any one should kill him for the murders he had committed God would much more avenge his death. As if the special care God took to prolong and secure the life of Cain, for special reasons peculiar to his case (and indeed for his sorer punishment, as the beings of the damned are continued) were designed as a protection to all murderers. Thus Lamech perversely argues, “If God provided for the safety of Cain, much more for mine, who, though I have slain many, yet never slew my own brother, and upon no provocation, as he did.” Note, The reprieve of some sinners, and the patience God exercises towards them, are often abused to the hardening of others in the like sinful ways, Eccl. viii. 11. But, though justice strike some slowly, others cannot therefore be sure but that they may be taken away with a swift destruction. Or, if God should bear long with those who thus presume upon his forbearance, they do but hereby treasure up unto themselves wrath against the day of wrath.
Now this is all we have upon record in scripture concerning the family and posterity of cursed Cain, till we find them all cut off and perishing in the universal deluge.
Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary
23. Hear my voice, ye wives of Lamech. The intention of Moses is to describe the ferocity of this man, who was, however, the fifth in descent from the fratricide Cain, in order to teach us, that, so far from being terrified by the example of divine judgment which he had seen in his ancestor, he was only the more hardened. Such is the obduracy of the impious, that they rage against those chastisements of God, which ought at least to render them gentle. The obscurity of this passage, which has procured for us a variety of interpretations, mainly arises hence; that whereas Moses speaks abruptly, interpreters have not considered what is the tendency of his speech. The Jews have, according to their manner, invented a foolish fable; namely, that Lamech was a hunter and blind, and had a boy to direct his hand; that Cain, while he was concealed in the woods, was shot through by his arrow, because the boy, talking him for a wild beast, had directed his master’s hand towards him; that Lamech then took revenge on the boy, who, by his imprudence, had been the cause of the murder. And ignorance of the true state of the case has caused everyone to allow himself to conjecture what he pleased. But to me the opinion of those seems to be true and simple, who resolve the past tense into the future, and understand its application to be indefinite; as if he had boasted that he had strength and violence enough to slay any, even the strongest enemy. I therefore lead thus, ‘I will slay a man for my wound, and a young man for my bruise,’ or ‘in my bruise and wound.’ But, as I have said, the occasion of his holding this conversation with his wives is to be noticed. We know that sanguinary men, as they are a terror to others, so are they everywhere hated by all. The wives, therefore, of Lamech were justly alarmed on account of their husband, whose violence was intolerable to the whole human race, lest, a conspiracy being formed, all should unite to crush him, as one deserving of public odium and execration. Now Moses, to exhibit his desperate barbarity, seeing that the soothing arts of wives are often wont to mitigate cruel and ferocious men, declares that Lamech cast forth the venom of his cruelty into the bosom of his wives. The sum of the whole is this: He boasts that he has sufficient courage and strength to strike down any who should dare to attack him. The repetition occurring in the use of the words ‘man’ and ‘young man’ is according to Hebrew phraseology, so that none should think different persons to be denoted by them; he only amplifies, in the second member of the sentence, his furious audacity, when he glories that young men in the flower of their age would not be equal to contend with him: as if he would say, Let each mightiest man come forward, there is none whom I will not dispatch.’ So far was he from calming his wives with the hope of his leading a more humane life, that he breaks forth in threats of sheer indiscriminate slaughter against every one, like a furious wild beast. Whence it easily appears, that he was so imbued with ferocity as to have retained nothing human. The nouns wound and bruise may be variously read. If they be rendered ‘for my wound and bruise,’ then the sense will be, ‘I confidently take upon my own head whatever danger there may be, let what will happen it shall be at my expense; for I have a means of escape at hand.’ Then what follows must be read in connection with it, If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold, truly Lamech seventy and seven fold. If the ablative case be preferred, ‘In my wound and bruise,’ there will still be a double exposition. The first is, ‘Although I should be wounded, I would still kill the man; what then will I not do when I am whole?’ The other, and, in my judgment, the sounder and more consistent exposition, is, ‘If any one provoke me by injury, or attempt any act of violence, he shall feel that he has to deal with a strong and valiant man; nor shall he who injures me escape with impunity.’ (252) This example shows that men ever glide from bad to worse. The wickedness of Cain was indeed awful; but the cruelty of Lamech advanced so far that he was unsparing of human blood. Besides, when he saw his wives struck with terror, instead of becoming mild, he only sharpened and confirmed himself the more in cruelty. Thus the brutality of cruel men increases in proportion as they find themselves hated; so that instead of being, touched with penitence, they are ready to bury one murder under ten others. Whence it follows that they having once become imbued with blood, shed it, and drink its without restraint.
(252) It is clear that Calvin had no perception of the poetical character of this speech, or he would more correctly have interpreted its meaning. There is, however, and will be, much difference of opinion respecting the real nature of the act spoken of in this obscure poem. Some have thought Lamech guilty of savage cruelty in murdering an innocent person; others have deemed the act to be one of justifiable homicide, done in self-defense. Others, again, have supposed the expression of Lamech to be a mere question, which admitted only of a negative answer, ‘Have I slain a man for my wound?’ And, lastly, there are those who, with Calvin, take it as the language of bravado, ‘I would slay a man for wounding me, if he should attempt to do it.’ In Bishop Lowth’s fourth Prelection the whole is given in three distiches of Hebrew poetry, of which the following is a translation: —
“
Ada and Zillah, hear my voice: Ye wives of Lamech, hearken to my speech; Because I have slain a man for my wound, And a boy for my bruise: If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold, Lamech even seventy times seven.”
De Sacra Poesi Hebraeorum. See also Dr. A. Clarke’s Commentary in loco.
The following translation from Herder is also worthy of notice: —
“
Ye wives of Lamech, hear my voice, And hearken to my speech; I slew a man who wounded me, A youth who smote me with a blow, If Cain shall be seven times avenged, Then Lamech seventy times seven.” Caunter’s Poetry of the Pentateuch, vol. 1, p. 81.
Caunter commends the translation of Bishop Lowth for having got rid of the copulative conjunction in the fourth line. This, however, is a mistake into which he has been led by reading Lowth not in the original, but in Dr. Gregory’s translation. A remark of Michaelis appears worthy of attention. Speaking of Lamech and his wives, he says, ‘It is not to be supposed that he addressed them in verse; the substance of what he said has been reduced to numbers, for the sake of preserving it easily in the memory.’ — Ed.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(23, 24) Lamech said . . . Following quickly upon music, we have poetry, but it is in praise of ferocity, and gives utterance to the pride of one who, by means of the weapons forged by his son, had taken violent revenge for an attack made upon him. Many commentators, however, regard the poem as hypothetical. Were any one to wound me, I would with these weapons slay him. It would thus be a song of exultation over the armour which Tubal-cain had invented. It more probably records a fact, and is intended to show that, side by side with progress in the material arts, moral degradation was going on. Cains own act is spoken of, not as a sin to be ashamed of, but as a deed of ancient heroism: not comparable, however, with the glory of Lamech, whose wrath shall be ten-fold. The poetry is vigorous, and marked by that parallelism which subsequently became the distinguishing quality of Hebrew verse. It should be translated:
Adah and Zillah, hear my voice,
Ye wives of Lemech. give ear unto my rede.
For I have slain a man for wounding me:
Even a young man for bruising me.
Truly Cain shall be avenged sevenfold,
And Lemech seventy and sevenfold.
It is remarkable that both of the words used for the attack upon Lamech refer to such wounds as might be given by a blow with the fist, while his word means to pierce, or run through with a sharp weapon. Young man is literally child, but see on Gen. 21:14.
With this boastful poem in praise of armed violence and bloodshed, joined with indications of luxury and a life of pleasure, the narrator closes the history of the race of Cain.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
23. Lamech said This father of skilful inventors was himself a genius, and the author of this oldest fragment of poetical composition, of which the following is a literal translation:
Adah and Zillah, hear my voice,
O wives of Lamech, listen to my saying;
For a man have I slain for my wound,
And a child for my bruise
For sevenfold avenged should Cain be,
And Lamech seventy and seven
It is not strange that this mere fragment of antediluvian song is obscure and difficult of explanation. The common version conveys the idea that Lamech was smitten with remorse over the murder of a young man, and this is the explanation of some of the older expositors. But the language of Gen 4:24 illy accords with such a view, and the entire passage breathes the spirit of violence and confident boasting rather than of remorse.
A better interpretation is, that which supposes Lamech to have slain a man in self-defence. The words “for my wound” and “for my bruise” would then be equivalent to “for wounding me,” “for bruising me,” and the song is Lamech’s attempt to comfort his wives in view of the manslaughter, and assure them that no one would dare avenge the deed.
Others make the poem a sort of triumphant exultation over Tubal-cain’s invention of brass and iron weapons, and translate the past tense of the verb slay as future, or else as present, expressing confident assurance: “I will slay the man who wounds me, and the youth who presumes to harm me.” Gen 4:24 is understood to express the boast that he could now avenge his own wrongs ten times more completely than God would avenge the slaying of Cain. This interpretation accords with the context, and brings out the spirit of the passage, but has against it the perfect tense of the verb I have slain, .
May we not blend the two last mentioned views, and, retaining the strict sense of the words, as translated above, explain that Lamech, by the use of weapons of his son’s invention, had in some duel or personal conflict slain a young man, possibly one of his own children, ; and yet, so far from feeling remorse or penitence over the deed, exultingly sang to his wives this song of his prowess, and boastingly declared that any one who should attempt to take vengeance on him for the deed would suffer more than ten times the vengeance pronounced against the murderer of Cain. “By the citation of the case of his ancestor Cain he shows,” says Lange, “that the dark history of the bad man had become transformed into a proud remembrance for his race.” According to this view, we discern in this old Cainite song that spirit of violence and lust which waxed worse and worse until it brought upon the wicked world the judgment of the flood. For a full synopsis of the various expositions of this passage, see M’CLINTOCK and STRONG, Cyclopedia, art. Lamech.
‘And Lamech said to his wives, “Adah and Zillah, hear my voice, you wives of Lamech listen to what I say, I have slain a man for wounding me, a young man for striking me, if Cain is avenged sevenfold, truly Lamech seventy and seven fold”.’
Lamech has killed a young man and claims that it was in self-defence. But he fears vengeance from the young man’s family. Now he is claiming the protection of God. God had promised to avenge Cain, who did not act in self-defence, sevenfold. In fairness He must, if necessary, avenge Lamech seventy and seven fold. Thus does he lay claim to a covenant relationship with God, and to God’s protection.
Yet it is noteworthy that he does not mention the name of Elohim or of Yahweh, nor does either appear in this section. This may suggest a deliberate avoiding of either name by those who are of the family of Cain, possibly because it was considered too sacred to name and as such taboo. Desert dwellers have often been the most religiously conservative. Interestingly such an indirect way of referring to God by using the passive tense is paralleled in the teaching of Jesus (e.g. ‘blessed are the poor in spirit’).
Some see this rather as a boasting song. They consider that he is exulting in having obtained vengeance over and above that which God would have allowed in respect of Cain. They thus see this as a further increase in the level of man’s sinfulness. But while the idea is attractive and would agree with increasing viciousness and violence on the earth (Gen 6:11), where however it is not limited to Cain’s descendants), it does not tie in strictly with his words. Cain had not been avenged sevenfold, the vengeance was potential only, therefore Lamech is speaking of potential vengeance. Nor would it give his words the value of a covenant. And all these early records are in respect of covenants. It is always possible, of course, that it may have been preserved as a tribal assertion of superiority.
It is interesting to note that the intensification of sevenfold is ‘seventy and seven’ fold. In later times it would be ‘seventy times seven’. This is an indication of the antiquity of his words.
And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the LORD.
Enos signifying wretchedness; in allusion, perhaps. to the fallen state ()f nature, which even the children of gracious parents are born to, as well as others. Psa 51:5 ; Eph 2:2-3 . By men calling upon the name of the Lord, is, perhaps, meant, calling themselves by his name. And if so, hence begun that distinction of character, which hath, ever since, marked the precious from the vile, in the character of the Lord’s people; they, who, in the first ages, lived in the faithful expectation of the Lord’s coming, and such as now are counted to the Lord for a generation. Psa 22:30-31 .
REFLECTIONS.
THE honest employment of our fathers, in the patriarchal age, gives the highest sanction, both of antiquity, and right order, to the different labours of life. It was the saying of a good old saint, now with God. “Give your children a Bible, and an honest calling, and then leave them with God, for his blessing.” From the offerings of the Sons of Adam, of their first-fruits to God, we learn how early the practice hath been, and how becoming it is to acknowledge the Lord, as the original Giver of all we have or enjoy. And is it not right that, as we are but tenants at will, we should be always ready to pay our rents, by way of acknowledging our holding. But what a sweet thought it is, that amidst all God’s gifts, of which we are only stewards, he hath given us the Lord Jesus, to have and to hold forever! – Contemplate, my soul, with due self-abasement, the awful effects of our fallen nature, in the horrible view of the murder of Abel. Alas! what crime is there, that man is not capable of committing unless restrained by Almighty grace. Lord, keep me in the hour, and from the power, of temptation! Reader! remark, with me, that the first who tasted death, in consequence of the fall, died in the faith of Jesus. Blessed Redeemer! as thou art, thyself, the first-fruits in resurrection, so the first-fruits of the dust of the earth are thine! But, do I not see in Abel, a type of the blessed Jesus? Was not Jesus hated, and, at length, murdered by his brethren, when, as the great Shepherd of his fathers sheep, he came to seek and save that which was lost? But, Oh! how infinitely short, Abel falls, in comparison of Jesus. The blood of Abel cries for vengeance. The blood of Jesus pleads for mercy. Dearest Lord! in all things it behoves thee to have the pre-eminence. May it be my happiness, like Abel, to offer all my poor offerings, in faith, with an eye to thy blood and righteousness; then will God my Father have respect unto them, and I myself shall be accepted in the beloved.
Gen 4:23 And Lamech said unto his wives, Adah and Zillah, Hear my voice; ye wives of Lamech, hearken unto my speech: for I have slain a man to my wounding, and a young man to my hurt.
Ver. 23. And Lamech said unto his wives. ] Who, it seems, were troublesome to him with their domestic discords, and led him a discontented life. He therefore gives them to understand in this set speech, what a man he is, if molested by them or any other, and what slaughters he can make, if provoked by an adversary. I would slay a man, if but wounded, &c. This revenge he counts manhood , which indeed is doghood rather. So Alexander Phereus consecrated his javelin, wherewith he slew his uncle Polyphron, as a monument of his manhood, and called it his god Tychon. a So Sulla caused it to be registered in the public records, b that he had proscribed, and put to death, four thousand and seven hundred Romans. So Stokesly, Bishop of London, comforted himself upon his deathbed with this, that in his time he had burned fifty heretics, as he called them. c Is not this to “glory in their shame, and to have damnation for their end?” Php 3:19 Is it not the devil which sets men working to do thus, as he did Saul to seek David’s life, and Lamech to domineer in this sort over his wives, seeking so to repress their strife? A certain Indian coming into a house of the New English where a man and his wife were brawling, and they bidding him sit down, he was welcome: he answered, he would not stay there; “Hobomack,” that is, the devil, was there; and so departed. d
a Plutar in Pelopida .
b Ne memoria tam praeclarae rei dilueretur .
c Act. and Mon .
d New Engl. First Fruits , p. 4.
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Gen 4:23-24
23Lamech said to his wives,
Adah and Zillah,
Listen to my voice,
You wives of Lamech,
Give heed to my speech,
For I have killed a man for wounding me;
And a boy for striking me;
24If Cain is avenged sevenfold,
Then Lamech seventy-sevenfold.
Gen 4:23 Lamech said to his wives This is one of the first uses of poetry recorded in the Bible (about 40% of the OT is in poetic form). It is grammatically connected with Gen 4:22. Rabbinical legend says that his two wives had left him because he had killed Cain by accident and also his son, Tubal-cain, while hunting. This seems extremely fanciful. What it does emphasize is the development of sin to such an extent that Lamech was bragging on the stringency of his revenge. Some have asserted that he held up Tubal-cain’s first weapon of war and made this rhythmical brag. There has been much discussion among commentators about the time element (past, future). Most assume that they refer to something that will happen, not to something that had happened.
Gen 4:24 seventy-sevenfold This shows the severity of Lamech’s revenge (cf. Gen 4:15). Some commentators see a contrast between this and Jesus’ words about forgiveness in Mat 18:21-22.
Hear . . . hearken. Refers to Gen 3:17. Lamech was in greater danger than Adam. Adam had only one wife, Lamech had two. Hear my voice, emph. on “my”.
I have = continuous present. May be rendered thus: “I can kill a man for wounding me, And a young man for hurting me. “
to my wounding
Or, who wounded me. Cain had slain an unoffending man and yet was protected by Jehovah; how much more Lamech, who had slain in self-defence.
hear: Num 23:18, Jdg 9:7
I have slain a man to my wounding: or, I would slay a man in my wound, etc. Gen 49:6
to my hurt: or, in my hurt
Reciprocal: 1Sa 1:2 – two
4:23 And Lamech said unto his wives, Adah and Zillah, Hear my voice; ye wives of Lamech, hearken unto my speech: {r} for I have slain a man to my wounding, and a young man to my hurt.
(r) His wives seeing that all men hated him for his cruelty, were afraid, therefore he brags that there is none strong enough to resist, even though he was already wounded.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes