Kissling And Enoch Comparison

665 Words2 Pages

Paul Kissling and Kenneth Mathews have identifies similarities between Gen. 3:7 and 5:22, and claim they represent a comparison between pre-fallen Adam and Enoch. Contra Kissling and Mathews, Philip Alexander reads “angels” in place of “God” in the Enochian texts, diluting if not destroying any such comparison. However, a thorough search of antediluvian Genesis indicates not only are Kissling and Matthews correct, but they have touched on only two points of a much larger comparison that has gone largely unnoticed. This paper investigates the comparison between the three men presented as righteous: pre-fallen Adam, Enoch, and Noah; and their opposites, who show the depths of sinful humanity: Cain, Lamech, and Ham. The following is a synopsis of the work and conclusions.
The author of Genesis identifies pre-fallen Adam, Enoch, and Noah as exemplars of righteousness. This identification is indicated with the phrase “and he walked with God” as it is unique to the relationships between God and Enoch and God and Noah. Yet, this …show more content…

Yet, these bookmarks also serve to highlight a greater negative exemplar: Lamech, who sits in comparison to Enoch. As such, the author presents in Enoch a man so righteous that God simply took him, and his doppelganger Lamech, a man who trebles the sins of his forefathers. The three ways in which Lamech sinned begins with him further breaking creation through the second recorded murder (equaling him to Enoch). Then, Lamech asserts he would be avenged exponentially more than that asserted by God for Cain, thus acquiring a role of God for himself (just as Adam and Eve acquired the role of deciding between good and evil in the Garden of Eden). Finally, the author records Lamech participating in the first polygamous marriage, which breaks the intended order of man and

Open Document