Why was the mark of Cain necessary?

Upvote:7

First, it doesn't necessarily say that Cain was the first born, only the first who did anything significant enough to be included in the record.

Second, even if Cain was the first son, that doesn't preclude Adam being the one to hypothetically take vengeance. For example, The Law of Moses included a passage requiring parents of incorrigible adult children to be the ones to bring the accusation before the elders of the city. (Deuteronomy 21: 18-21. And as shocking as this may sound, consider the psychological effect: it makes an amazing motivator for parents to make sure their kids turn out well!)

Also, when you consider that Genesis tells of people living for centuries, there's no reason why someone born after Cain wouldn't have grown to adulthood, then run across him, recognized or found out who he was, and tried to take vengeance into their own hands.

More post

Search Posts

Related post