Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series I/Volume II/City of God/Book XV/Chapter 20

Chapter 20.—How It is that Cain&#8217;s Line Terminates in the Eighth Generation, While Noah, Though Descended from the Same Father, Adam, is Found to Be the Tenth from Him.

Some one will say, If the writer of this history intended, in enumerating the generations from Adam through his son Seth, to descend through them to Noah, in whose time the deluge occurred, and from him again to trace the connected generations down to Abraham, with whom Matthew begins the pedigree of Christ the eternal King of the city of God, what did he intend by enumerating the generations from Cain, and to what terminus did he mean to trace them?&#160; We reply, To the deluge, by which the whole stock of the earthly city was destroyed, but repaired by the sons of Noah.&#160; For the earthly city and community of men who live after the flesh will never fail until the end of this world, of which our Lord says, “The children of this world generate, and are generated.” &#160; But the city of God, which sojourns in this world, is conducted by regeneration to the world to come, of which the children neither generate nor are generated.&#160; In this world generation is common to both cities; though even now the city of God has many thousand citizens who abstain from the act of generation; yet the other city also has some citizens who imitate these, though erroneously.&#160; For to that city belong also those who have erred from the faith, and introduced divers heresies; for they live according to man, not according to God.&#160; And the Indian gymnosophists, who are said to philosophize in the solitudes of India in a state of nudity, are its citizens; and they abstain from marriage.&#160; For continence is not a good thing, except when it is practised in the faith of the highest good, that is, God.&#160; Yet no one is found to have practised it before the deluge; for indeed even Enoch himself, the seventh from Adam, who is said to have been translated without dying, begat sons and daughters before he was translated, and among these was Methuselah, by whom the succession of the recorded generations is maintained.

Why, then, is so small a number of Cain&#8217;s generations registered, if it was proper to trace them to the deluge, and if there was no such delay of the date of puberty as to preclude the hope of offspring for a hundred or more years?&#160; For if the author of this book had not in view some one to whom he might rigidly trace the series of generations, as he designed in those which sprang from Seth&#8217;s seed to descend to Noah, and thence to start again by a rigid order, what need was there of omitting the first-born sons for the sake of descending to Lamech, in whose sons that line terminates,—that is to say, in the eighth generation from Adam, or the seventh from Cain,—as if from this point he had wished to pass on to another series, by which he might reach either the Israelitish people, among whom the earthly Jerusalem presented a prophetic figure of the heavenly city, or to Jesus Christ, “according to the flesh, who is over all, God blessed for ever,” the Maker and Ruler of the heavenly city?&#160; What, I say, was the need of this, seeing that the whole of Cain&#8217;s posterity were destroyed in the deluge?&#160; From this it is manifest that they are the first-born sons who are registered in this genealogy.&#160; Why, then, are there so few of them?&#160; Their numbers in the period before the deluge must have been greater, if the date of puberty bore no proportion to their longevity, and they had children before they were a hundred years old.&#160; For supposing they were on an average thirty years old when they began to beget children, then, as there are eight generations, including Adam and Lamech&#8217;s children, 8 times 30 gives 240 years; did they then produce no more children in all the rest of the time before the deluge?&#160; With what intention, then, did he who wrote this record make no mention of subsequent generations?&#160; For from Adam to the deluge there are reckoned, according to our copies of Scripture, 2262 years, and according to the He

brew text, 1656 years.&#160; Supposing, then, the smaller number to be the true one, and subtracting from 1656 years 240, is it credible that during the remaining 1400 and odd years until the deluge the posterity of Cain begat no children?

But let any one who is moved by this call to mind that when I discussed the question, how it is credible that those primitive men could abstain for so many years from begetting children, two modes of solution were found,—either a puberty late in proportion to their longevity, or that the sons registered in the genealogies were not the first-born, but those through whom the author of the book intended to reach the point aimed at, as he intended to reach Noah by the generations of Seth.&#160; So that, if in the generations of Cain there occurs no one whom the writer could make it his object to reach by omitting the first-born and inserting those who would serve such a purpose, then we must have recourse to the supposition of late puberty, and say that only at some age beyond a hundred years they became capable of begetting children, so that the order of the generations ran through the first-born, and filled up even the whole period before the deluge, long though it was.&#160; It is, however, possible that, for some more secret reason which escapes me, this city, which we say is earthly, is exhibited in all its generations down to Lamech and his sons, and that then the writer withholds from recording the rest which may have existed before the deluge.&#160; And without supposing so late a puberty in these men, there might be another reason for tracing the generations by sons who were not first-born, viz., that the same city which Cain built, and named after his son Enoch, may have had a widely extended dominion and many kings, not reigning simultaneously, but successively, the reigning king begetting always his successor.&#160; Cain himself would be the first of these kings; his son Enoch, in whose name the city in which he reigned was built, would be the second; the third Irad, whom Enoch begat; the fourth Mehujael, whom Irad begat; the fifth Methusael, whom Mehujael begat; the sixth Lamech, whom Methusael begat, and who is the seventh from Adam through Cain.&#160; But it was not necessary that the first-born should succeed their fathers in the kingdom, but those would succeed who were recommended by the possession of some virtue useful to the earthly city, or who were chosen by lot, or the son who was best liked by his father would succeed by a kind of hereditary right to the throne.&#160; And the deluge may have happened during the lifetime and reign of Lamech, and may have destroyed him along with all other men, save those who were in the ark.&#160; For we cannot be surprised that, during so long a period from Adam to the deluge, and with the ages of individuals varying as they did, there should not be an equal number of generations in both lines, but seven in Cain&#8217;s, and ten in Seth&#8217;s; for as I have already said, Lamech is the seventh from Adam, Noah the tenth; and in Lamech&#8217;s case not one son only is registered, as in the former instances, but more, because it was uncertain which of them would have succeeded when he died, if there had intervened any time to reign between his death and the deluge.

But in whatever manner the generations of Cain&#8217;s line are traced downwards, whether it be by first-born sons or by the heirs to the throne, it seems to me that I must by no means omit to notice that, when Lamech had been set down as the seventh from Adam, there were named, in addition, as many of his children as made up this number to eleven, which is the number signifying sin; for three sons and one daughter are added.&#160; The wives of Lamech have another signification, different from that which I am now pressing.&#160; For at present I am speaking of the children, and not of those by whom the children were begotten.&#160; Since, then, the law is symbolized by the number ten,—whence that memorable Decalogue,—there is no doubt that the number eleven, which goes beyond ten, symbolizes the transgression of the law, and consequently sin.&#160; For this reason, eleven veils of goat&#8217;s skin were ordered to be hung in the tabernacle of the testimony, which served in the wanderings of God&#8217;s people as an ambulatory temple.&#160; And in that haircloth there was a reminder of sins, because the goats were to be set on the left hand of the Judge; and therefore, when we confess our sins, we prostrate ourselves in haircloth, as if we were saying what is written in the psalm, “My sin is ever before me.” &#160; The progeny of Adam, then, by Cain the murderer, is completed in the number eleven, which symbolizes sin; and this number itself is made up by a woman, as it was by the same sex that beginning was made of sin by which we all die.&#160; And it was committed that the pleasure of the flesh, which resists the spirit, might follow; and so Naamah, the daughter of Lamech, means “pleasure.”&#160; But from Adam to Noah, in the line of Seth, there are ten generations.&#160; And to Noah three sons are added, of whom,

while one fell into sin, two were blessed by their father; so that, if you deduct the reprobate and add the gracious sons to the number, you get twelve,—a number signalized in the case of the patriarchs and of the apostles, and made up of the parts of the number seven multiplied into one another,—for three times four, or four times three, give twelve.&#160; These things being so, I see that I must consider and mention how these two lines, which by their separate genealogies depict the two cities, one of earth-born, the other of regenerated persons, became afterwards so mixed and confused, that the whole human race, with the exception of eight persons, deserved to perish in the deluge.