6:5-8: The St. Joseph edition has this to say about the flood: “The story of the great flood here recorded is a composite narrative based on two separate sources interwoven into an intricate patchwork…Both Biblical sources go back ultimately to an ancient Mesopotamian story of a great flood, preserved in the eleventh tablet of the Gilgamesh Epic.” (The first sentence referring to sources is going off of the Documentary Hypothesis, a widespread theory that is losing favor slowly among some scholars.)


Cultures from around the world have flood narratives in their ancient histories, with multiple similarities. Pursuing a study of the various narratives is an interesting task but beyond the scope of this website. For those interested, I would start with the Mesopotamian, Akkadian, Sumerian, and Egyptian versions, and then work from there.

_Did people actually live for centuries?

The New American Bible has this to say on the subject: This chapter…together with Gn 11, 10-26, its primary purpose is to bridge the genealogical gap between Adam and Abraham.  Adam’s line is traced through Seth, but several names in the series are the same as, or similar to, certain names in Cain’s line.  The long lifespans attributed to these ten antediluvian (of the time before the Biblical flood or ancient) patriarchs have a symbolic rather than a historical value.  Babylonian tradition also recorded ten kings with fantastically high ages who reigned successively before the flood. 

The Archaeological Study Bible states: It is uncertain whether the large numbers describing human longevity in the early chapters of Gn are literal, serve a literary function, or both.  The fact that there are exactly ten names in the list (as in the genealogy of Gn 11:10-26) indicates that it almost certainly contains gaps, the lengths of which are summarized in the large numbers.  Other ancient genealogies outside the Bible exhibit similarly unrealistic figures and also contain exactly ten names. 

St. Jerome’s Commentary, an extremely detailed and complex study of the Bible, notes the fact that the Mesopotamian tradition has seven ‘apkallu’s,’ the seven sages prior to the flood, who were believed to have founded the elements of culture (writing, artistic skill, etc.) The pre-flood list of Sumerian kings later became standardized to 10, a number that the Biblical writer adopts.  Some Mesopotamian lists attempt to correlate the seven sages and the 10 kings.  Segmented genealogies (both Biblical and non-Biblical) were generally not for conveying historical information but for determining domestic, politico-jural, and religious matters. In the case of early Bible genealogies- showing a line of sin, a line of “blessing of progeny and land,” a line of God’s undiminished commitment to the blessed, etc.

On the other hand, some….uh…scholars with a more literal view (such as those writing “Commonly Misunderstood Bible Verses”) believe that prior to the flood, a water canopy surrounded the earth and protected the inhabitants from harmful radiation in outer space.  (They don’t mention exactly how LIGHT got through).  And, people might have been vegetarians, contributing to their longer lifespans. 

Other scholars do have various explanations, of which you may study in your own time.  If I don’t cut off this post, I’ll still be writing it into the next year.  

Sources:
Brown, Raymond E. (S.S.), Fitzmyer, Joseph A. (S.J.), & Murphy, Roland E. (O. Carm). (1990) Genesis. “The New Jerome Biblical Commentary.” Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Catholic Book Publishing. (various) Genesis: Chapter 5 Notes. “St. Joseph Edition, New American Bible.” New York, NY: Catholic Book Publishing.

Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary. (2005). Genesis: Chapter 5 Notes. “New International Version: Archaeological Study Bible”. Zondervan Corporation, Grand Rapids, MI.

Rhodes, Ron. (2008). Genesis 4:17. “Commonly Misunderstood Bible Verses.” Eugene, Oregon: Harvest House Publishers.”

5:24 Enoch is one of two people in the Bible who does not die; they are instead "taken up" directly to God.  Walking with God is a relic of the first Paradise when people walked and talked with God in holy familiarity. 
5:29 There is a similarity in sound between the Hebrew word "noah" and the verbal phrase "yenahamenu" (he will bring us relief).  This latter refers to both the curse put on the soil because of the fall of man and to Noah's success in agriculture, especially in raising grapes for wine. 

1 This is the record of the descendants of Adam.  When God created man, he made him in the likeness of God;
2 he created them male and female.  When they were created, he blessed them and named them "man."
3 Adam was one hundred and thirty years old when he begot a son in his likeness, after his image; and he named him Seth.
4 Adam lived eight hundred years after the birth of Seth, and he had other sons and daughters.
5 The whole lifetime of Adam was nine hundred and thirty years; then he died.
6 When Seth was one hundred and five years old, he became the father of Enosh.
7 Seth lived eight hundred and seven years after the birth of Enosh, and he had other sons and daughters.
8 The whole lifetime of Seth was nine hundred and twelve years; then he died.
9 When Enosh was ninety years old, he became the father of Kenan. 
10 Enosh lived eight hundred and fifteen years after the birth of Kenan, and he had other sons and daughters.
11 The whole lifetime of Enosh was nine hundred and five years; then he died.
12 When Kenan was seventy years old, he became the father of Mahalalel,
13 Kenan lived eight hundred and forty years after the birth of Mahalalel, and he had other sons and daughters. 
14 The whole lifetime of Kenan was nine hundred and ten years; then he died.
15 When Mahalalel was sixty-five years old, he became the father of Jared. 
16 Mahalalel lived eight hundred and thirty years after the birth of Jared, and he had other sons and daughters.
17 The whole lifetime of Mahalalel was eight hundred and ninety-five years; then he died.
18 When Jared was one hundred and sixty-two years old, he became the father of Enoch.
19 Jared lived eight hundred years after the birth of Enoch, and he had other sons and daughters.
20 The whole lifetime of Jared was nine hundred and sixty-two years; then he died.
21 When Enoch was sixty-five years old, he became the father of Methuselah.
22 Enoch lived three hundred years after the birth of Methuselah, and he had other sons and daughters.
23 The whole lifetime of Enoch was three hundred and sixty-five years.
24 Then Enoch walked with God, and he was no longer here, for God took him.
25 When Methuselah was one hundred and eighty-seven years old, he became the father of Lamech.
26 Methuselah lived seven hundred and eighty-two years after the birth of Lamech, and he had other sons and daughters.
27 The whole lifetime of Methuselah was nine hundred and sixty-nine years; then he died.
28 When Lamech was one hundred and eighty-two years old, he begot a son
29 and named him Noah, saying, "Out of the very ground that the Lord has put under a curse, this one shall bring us relief from our work and the toil of our hands."
30 Lamech lived five hundred and ninety-five years after the birth of Noah, and he had other sons and daughters.
31 The whole lifetime of Lamech was seven hundred and seventy-seven years; then he died.
32 When Noah was five hundred years old, he became the father of Shem, Ham and Japtheth.

In Chapter 4, we meet Cain and Abel, and witness the first murder committed by man.  In our prior discussion, we studied the word origins of various names used in Chapter 4.  We also looked at the practice of sacrifice and why Abel’s sacrifice was preferred.   

 For additional discussion, we are going to look at Cain and at the perplexing question of Cain’s wife.  This will be divided into two parts: 1) Biography of Cain  -and-  2) Where did Cain find his wife?

Part 1:
Cain (biography):
Origin of the name: Genesis 4:1- “The man had relations with his wife Eve, and she conceived and bore Cain, saying ‘I have produced a man with the help of the Lord.’”  The Hebrew name "qayin" (Cain) and the term "qaniti" (I have produced) is another play on words that would be recognized in the original Hebrew, but is lost in translation.  An extremely rough equivalent would be “I have gained Cain”, with gain meaning “to begat” or “to create”

The first son of Adam and Eve.  The first murderer in human history- killed his brother Abel because God preferred Abel’s sacrifice over his own.  In punishment, Cain was “banned from the soil” and condemned to wander the Earth.  He settled in the land of Nod and built a city.  His descendants include: Jabal (forefather of tent-dwelling cattle-keepers), Jubal (forefather of musicians), Tubal-Cain (forefather of smiths).  It is also hypothesized that Cain is the father of the Kenites, which included both shepherds and metal-workers.  In this theory, though, some of the descendants of Cain must have survived the flood.  This is entirely possible as it is becoming more common to accept that the flood was not world-wide. 

The Oxford Illustrated Companion to the Bible lists multiple later interpretations, including identifying Cain as the son of either Satan, the wicked angel Sammael, or the serpent in the Garden of Eden.  It also states that the “Zohar” and various medieval legends speculate on the fate of Cain’s offspring (with his wife Awan, meaning “Wickedness”) as demons.

Part 2:
4:17 Where did Cain find his wife?  Reading the Bible, one naturally comes to a perplexing question: if Cain’s parents were literally the first two people on Earth, where did Cain find his wife?  There are two possible solutions to this dilemma. 

1) If one takes a literal view of the story of Genesis (see Genesis: Chapter 3: Additional Notes & Discussion for more information), then one accepts not only that Adam and Eve were literal figures, but that they really lived for 800 years.   The Bible also states that Adam and Eve had many sons and daughters.  Genesis states that Cain “settled in the land of Nod.”  One reads specifically that Cain spent many years wandering before he settled down and started a family.  Quite logically, then, Cain may have married one of his sisters, or the daughter of one of his many brother or sisters. 

2) One can also accept that between the literary traditions of the time and the oral tradition by which we have received these stories, that Genesis is figurative, not explicitly literal.  In that case, early humans may have fallen from grace and Adam and Eve could have been literal people, but they may have been part of a tribe of humans, not the only two humans ever in existence.  Cain, in this theory, has multiple options when choosing a wife. 

Brown, Raymond E. (S.S.), Fitzmyer, Joseph A. (S.J.), & Murphy, Roland E. (O. Carm). (1990) Genesis. “The New Jerome Biblical Commentary.” Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Catholic Book Publishing. (various) Genesis: Chapter 4 Notes. “St. Joseph Edition, New American Bible.” New York, NY: Catholic Book Publishing.

Geisler, Norman & Howe, Thomas. (1992). Genesis 4:17. “The Big Book of Bible Difficulties.” Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books.

Green, Kevin (compiler). (2008). Cain. “All-In-One Bible Reference Guide”.  Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan.

Metzger, Bruce M. & Coogan, Michael D. (2003). Eden. “The Oxford Illustrated Companion to the Bible”. New York, NY: Tess Press.

Rhodes, Ron. (2008). Genesis 4:17. “Commonly Misunderstood Bible Verses.” Eugene, Oregon: Harvest House Publishers.”

Adam & Eve:  Past the Hype

This article is divided into three parts:
1) Notes and Discussion on Language
2) “The Fall of Eve?” or “The Fall of Adam and Eve?”
3) The Bible Uses Figurative Language: Follow Your Heart

1) Notes and Discussion on Language:
Many people underestimate both the challenge of understanding the translation process and the rich amount of learning that can be gained by thoroughly understanding that same process.  I shall set forth the many proposals put forth, and allow the reader to absorb what they will. 

Adam:
-It could be ultimately derived from Hebrew meaning “to be red”, referring to the ruddy colour of human, or from Akkadian “adamu” meaning “to make.” 
-With Adam, God is portrayed as a potter molding man's body out of the clay.  This is a play on the how the words sound in Hebrew.  The Hebrew "Adam" is "man" and "adama" is "ground".  Adam is literally simply named “man”.
-“Adham” is Hebrew for “of the ground” or “taken out of the red earth.”  

Eve:
-From the Hebrew name “Chawwah”, which was derived from the Hebrew word “chawah”, “to breath” or the related word “chayah,” “to live.” 
-With Eve, the name is also descriptive.  The Hebrew name “hawwa” (Eve) is related to the Hebrew word “Hay” (living).  This implies that she is not only the mother of all the living, but also the mother of promised Seed who would give life to the human race now subjected to death. 
-The name given to the first woman by the first man (Gen. 3:20).  The Bible interprets this name to mean “the mother of all living,” both because Eve is, through her sons, the female ancestor of the entire human race and because the name sounds similar to the Hebrew word for “living being.”  The wordplay is probably etymologically incorrect, and later rabbinic tradition proposed a connection with the Aramaic word “serpent.”  The actual linguistic derivation of the name remains uncertain. (Oxford)

2) “The Fall of Eve?”  or “The Fall of Adam and Eve?”
Katharine Doob Sakenfeld, professor at Princeton Theological Seminary, has dedicated her life to understand the Bible and sharing that knowledge with others.  I am going to quote her directly out of my great respect for her learning…..my paraphrasing would be insult to her concise and well-reasoned arguments.  I went back and double-checked the Bible verses myself.  She’s right…the Bible specifically states that they WERE together when the serpent spoke to them; God DID create them as equal; and they were BOTH cursed/punished, not just Eve.  Anyway, in her own words:

“According to the the account in Genesis 2-3, the woman is created to be a companion corresponding to (not originally subordinate to) the man.  Because the two of them eat the forbidden fruit, the man is destined to toil as a farmer in fields of thorns and thistles, and the woman is destined to suffer pain in childbearing.  It is in the aftermath of these divine pronouncements that the man names the woman as he had earlier named the animals, thus indicating dominion over her. 
   
Both Jewish tradition and the New Testament offer a very negative view of Eve, presenting her as representative of the alleged weaknesses of women.  Paul feared that the Corinthian Christians would be led astray from Christ as Eve was deceived by the serpent (2 Cor 11.2).  In 1 Timonthy 2.13-15, Eve’s deception by the serpent and also her creation subsequent to the man are cited as reasons that women must keep silent in church (cf 1 Cor 14.34-35) and hold no authority over men.  Early Christian theologians contrasted Eve’s sinfulness with the perfection of the “new Eve,” Mary,  the mother of Jesus.

This traditional emphasis on the gullibility of Eve and her tendency toward sin is one possible interpretation of the Genesis narrative itself.  Genesis 3 gives no indication why the serpent addressed the woman and even indicates that the man and woman were together when the serpent spoke.  It has been suggested that the serpent might have addressed the woman as provider of food or as theological thinker, not as the more gullible of the couple, and that the woman’s addition to the divine prohibition about the fruit (“we may not touch it”) represents not a lie, but a desirable exaggeration meant to make sure that the basic command would not be broken.  The man and woman together discover their nakedness, together make fig leaf garments, and together hide from the deity.  Both are destined to a life of pain (neither is cursed) because of their actions, and together they are expelled from the garden.  Thus, once the reader sets aside the portrait of Eve based on later tradition, the great skill of the Genesis narrator in presenting a character open to diverse interpretation becomes apparent.”


3) The Bible Uses Figurative Language: Follow Your Heart
This current insistence on refusing to accept that the Bible uses various literary techniques and that every single word is a literal fact, not to be interpreted in any way, is simply foolish.  I’m sorry, but it’s true.  The Catholic Church, the most conservative of believers, maintains the position that we as human being must INTERPRET the Bible, that God can have placed more than one meaning in each story, and that our understanding can be wrong. 
It also specifically, and in multiple places states, that the various events in Genesis are used to illustrate an eternal truth, that God is behind the existence of all, NOT that every event in Genesis took place during a literal 24-hour day, that the world began only 10,000 years ago, or that evolution is completely false.   The following article explain these concepts at further length: http://www.catholic.com/tracts/adam-eve-and-evolution 
As with all, use your mind.  Pray to God for guidance.  And follow your heart.

When we first contemplate Eden, the best place to start is with the exact Biblical verses that talk of Eden.  After reading the Bible verses, we will look at possible word origins and translation notes as well as the various locations scholars have suggested for Eden.  And finally, we will look at the various meanings and interpretations that can be drawn from the verses about the Garden of Eden.

In this case, I have taken these verses from the St. Joseph Edition, New American Bible. 
Genesis, Chapter 2, Verses 8-15:
8 Then the Lord God planted a garden in Eden, in the east, and he placed there the man whom he had formed.
9 Out of the ground the Lord God made various trees grow that were delightful to look at and good for food, with the tree of life in the middle of the garden and the tree of knowledge of good and bad.
10 A river rises in Eden to water the garden; beyond there it divides and becomes four branches.
11 The name of the first is the Pishon; it is the one that winds through the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold. 
12 The gold of that land is excellent; bdellium and lapis lazuli are also there.
13 The name of the second river is the Gihon; it is the one that winds all through the land of Cush.
14 The name of the third river is the Tigris; it is the one that flows east of Asshur.  The fourth river is the Euphrates.
15 The Lord God then took the man and settled him in the garden of Eden, to cultivate and care for it.

Word Translation & Origins:
In the Saint Joseph Bible, the notes for this section note that in Sumerian the word Eden is derived from ‘eden’, meaning ‘fertile plain.  In Hebrew, a similar-sounding word means ‘delight.’  Together:  the garden in Eden could therefore be understood as the ‘garden of delight,’ so that, through the Greek version, it comes to us as ‘paradise,’ literally, a ‘pleasure park.’
The Archeological Study Bible has a slightly different meaning for the words.  They state that the Sumerian word ‘eden’ means ‘steppe’ or ‘open field,’ and the identical Semitic word, denotes ‘luxury’ or ‘delight.’   The Garden of Eden is not only the name of the garden in which the first humans resided but also a metaphor for the Garden of God, or Yahweh’s dwelling place. 
The Oxford Illustrated Companion to the Bible agrees with the general meanings stated above: that some scholars connect the word ‘eden’ with a Sumerian meaning  of “wilderness” or “plain,” while others have proposed a derivation from the Hebrew word for “delight” or “pleasure.”  Therefore, we identify Eden as an ideal garden of delight, or paradise. 


Location:

*****St. Jerome’s commentary takes perhaps the most logical stand about the location: it states simply that the Garden of Eden is the locale of God.  They take the following reasons as evidence:
    “The river going forth from Eden to water the garden and thence dividing into four rivers of the world, may be the ‘flow’ referenced in verse 6.
    In some Ugaritic and Akk texts the high god dwells at the ‘source of the double deep,’ i.e., the source of all life-giving waters of the earth. 
    The totality of the world is symbolized by ‘four,’ as in the Akk phrase ‘the four quarters of the earth.’ 
St. Jerome’s commentary goes on to state flatly that the location of Pishon and Havilah in this text is unknown.  Later in the Bible, Havilah is a descendant of Shem and Gihon is the name of a spring in Jerusalem.  However, here the river Gihon flows through Cush in southern Mesopotamia (as deduced by the known positions of the Tigris and Euphrates).  
The Zondervan All-in-One Bible Reference Guide also admits the truth: we simply do not have sufficient evidence to determine where the Garden of Eden was actually located. 
The Archeological Study Bible puts forth possible meanings for the Gihon River and Pishon River, with the Gihon possibly being Hebrew for ‘to gush’ and the Pishon being understood as a form of the Semitic verb ‘to spring up.’ Even with these meanings, the ASB admits that the two rivers are difficult to identify.

*****Some scholars believe that the Gihon refers to the Nile, as Cush is sometimes associated with Nubia, south of Egypt.  This is a belief with many complications as by naming the Gihon as the Nile, it makes the rest of the geography impossible, as the other rivers are in a completely different region.

*****Other scholars identify Cush as the land of Kassites, east of the Tigris, which was also known as Kush during ancient times.  This theory has the benefit of placing three of the rivers noted (Gihon, Tigris, & Euphrates) in the same region.  Supported by the verse that God placed the Garden “in the east,” presumably, to the east of Canaan/Israel, where most of the later events of the Bible took place. 

*****A final theory is that Gihon and Pishon were simply parts of the Tigris or Euphrates Rivers, in the form of canals or tributaries.  This is also supported by the verse that God placed the Garden “in the east,” presumably, to the east of Canaan/Israel, where most of the later events of the Bible took place

These theories, while separate from each other, can be incorporated into another set of theories, these based around the words in Verse 10: “A river rises in Eden to water the garden; beyond there it divides and becomes four branches.”  These theories debate whether Eden was upriver of the four branches, encompassed the four rivers, or was downstream of the location of the four branches.

*****The first theory is that the four rivers shared a common source in Eden, placing Eden in northern Mesopotamia or Armenia.  However, the fact that the Tigris and Euphrates lack a common source makes this theory suspect.

*****The second theory is that Eden is upriver of the four branches.  This makes some sense with the current geography as the Tigris and Euphrates do indeed converge in southern Mesopotamia before they empty into the Persian Gulf.  In this scenario Eden may still, as above, have been located in northern Mesopotamia or in the mountains in Armenia, from which the Tigris and Euphrates spring. 

*****A third is theory is that Eden was in southern Mesopotamia, where the Tigris and Euphrates converge.  This would place Eden downriver of the four branches. 

*****A fourth theory is that Eden refers to an extremely large area of land, and that the four rivers referred to did not actually “meet” at any point, and instead, that they simply flowed within the boundaries of Eden.  In this theory, some believe that the Pishon and Gihon respresent the Indus and Nile, indicating that Eden includes the entire Fertile Crescent from India to Egypt.

Further Notes:

Once we have dispensed with the many, many theories about where Eden was located, we must look beyond the literal words to the various meanings and interpretations included in these verses.  Eden has at its center the tree of life and the tree of knowledge.  Thus, the garden is not simply an earthly garden, but a place created especially by God for humans.  It is a model of the perfect relationship that existed between God and humans before the disobedience. 

According to the Oxford Illustrated Companion to the Bible, later prophets had an altered meaning of the term.  I’ll quote directly from that source: “The image of the garden of Eden reappears in somewhat altered form in the later prophets.  The expulsion from Eden functions as a metaphor for the coming judgment against the nations (Tyre: Ezek. 28:11-19; Egypt: Ezek 31:8,9,16,18), and for the coming judgment of the day of the Lord (Joel 2:3).  The garden of Eden is also an image of promise; in parallel with ‘the garden of the Lord,’ Eden appears in Isaiah 51:3 as a metaphor for the renewal of the land of Israel after the Babylonian exile (see also Ezek. 26:25, Rev. 22:2-3).”


Further reading:
I found a wonderful site that goes much more deeply into the matter of the location that I do.  If you want more- or more complete- information, please visit: http://www.israel-a-history-of.com/biblical-garden-of-eden.html.
 

Sources:

Brown, Raymond E. (S.S.), Fitzmyer, Joseph A. (S.J.), & Murphy, Roland E. (O. Carm). (1990) Genesis. “The New Jerome Biblical Commentary.” Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Catholic Book Publishing. (various) Genesis: Chapter 2 Notes. “St. Joseph Edition, New American Bible.” New York, NY: Catholic Book Publishing.

Geisler, Norman & Howe, Thomas. (1992). Genesis 2:8. “The Big Book of Bible Difficulties.” Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books.

Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary. (2005). The Location of Eden. “New International Version: Archaeological Study Bible”. Zondervan Corporation, Grand Rapids, MI.

Green, Kevin (compiler). (2008). Eden. “All-In-One Bible Reference Guide”.  Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan.

Lockyear Sr., H. (Ed.) (1986) Eden. “Illustrated Dictionary of the Bible”. Nashville, Tennessee: Thomas Nelson Publishers.

Metzger, Bruce M. & Coogan, Michael D. (2003). Eden. “The Oxford Illustrated Companion to the Bible”. New York, NY: Tess Press.

There are "difficulties" and misunderstandings about a lot of Bible verses, and some of the most complex and interesting of these are in Genesis. 

2:2- Were the "days" and "nights" referred to during creation literal 24-hour periods?  There is evidence both for and against the idea that these days were meant to be interpreted as 24-hour periods of time.  First of all, there is no contradiction between the Bible and fact; it is a contradiction about the scientific evidence and/or the interpretation of scripture.  The evidence of the Earth being billions of years old agrees completely if one interprets the "days" referenced to be longer periods of time than a simple 24 hours.  So, either most scientists are wrong about the age of the Earth or SOME Biblical commentators are incorrect in their interpretation when they insist the days of creation were 24-hour periods with no gaps before, during, or after.  (Evidence for the different interpretations of the meaning of the word "day" are available in multiple commentaries, study books, internet pages, and Bibles.  I won't belabor the issue by re-hashing all of the quotes on both sides of the issue.)

2:8- Was Eden a real location on Earth?  See "Eden" entry under Dictionary & Facts section of the website (Eden is located on the "Places" page).

2:17- God states "the moment you eat from it you are surely doomed to die."   Why, then, didn't Adam immediately die?  Various explanations include: From the moment he took the first bite, the endless, happy existence he was going to have in Eden vanished and the fact that he would eventually die became a reality.  Hence, he began to physically die.  Adam "died" spiritually, that is, he was separated from God from the moment he ate of the fruit. 

2:19- The order of creation: animals, man, then man naming the animals, seems to be different in chapters 1 and 2.  Chapter 1 gives a strict chronological explanation of creation.  Chapter 2 covers the story in general, with the focus being on God bringing the animals (which he had previously created) to Adam to be named. 

There are "difficulties" and misunderstanding about a lot of Bible verses, and some of the most complex and interesting are in Genesis. 

Genesis 1:1- the actual point of creation.  In science, it is called "THE singularity" (a singularity is a zone that cannot be explained with our current understanding of physics).  The theory of the Big Bang works perfectly mathematically until it goes back it time towards the actual point of creation.  Thus far, science cannot explain the actual moment of creation.  The same problem arises with the scientific law "energy is neither created nor destroyed."  The math falls apart at the actual moment of creation.  So, the Biblical explanation does NOT contradict with the scientific explanation.  However, many scientists are starting to disbelieve the Big Bang theory due to the fact there are many contradictions.  Research and theories are constantly being developed and are beyond the scope of this book.

Genesis 1:1-5- were the "days" and "nights" literally 24-hour periods?  (See Genesis: Chapter 2 for more complete discussion). 

Genesis 1: 13-18- the sun wasn't created until the third day, but God separated the light and darkness on the first day.  There are two explanations often put forth: 1) God Himself was the source of light prior to the creation of the sun  -and/or-  2) God had already made the sun prior to this point and it was providing light, but it wasn't until the third day he put it in it's current position (1:17 "set them in the dome of sky"). 

Genesis 1:26- God refers to Himself in the plural when he says "let us make man in our image."  This is simply how the Hebrew language uses the word.  "Us" is simply a more majestic form of "I"....not an indication of multiple Gods, references to the angels, or any other crazy theories (aliens, for example).  Many Middle Eastern languages work this same way.  Some claim that the "us" is a way of proving the existence of the trinity, but that is a misunderstanding of the translation.  Other Old Testament verses more clearly foreshadow the trinity. 

4:1 The Hebrew name "qayin" (Cain) and the term "qaniti" (I have produced) is another play on words that would be recognized in the original Hebrew, but is lost in translation.
4:4-5 Origin of sacrifice & various meanings: see below
4:15 The mark put on Cain was probably a tattoo.  Tattooing of tribal marks has always been common among inhabitants of the Near Eastern deserts.
4:16 The land of Nod does NOT refer to a specific geographical location, instead it means "land of nomads" or "land of wanderers."  Nod is play on the Hebrew word "nad" (line over a), which is the participle of "to wander." 

The original beginnings of the practice of sacrificing to God are much debated, though in the rest of the Bible much of the practice relies on Genesis 4:4-5 as the foundation for sacrifice being an appropriate behavior.  One of the major questions is: was sacrifice a direct command of God -or- did man come up with the concept out of religious instinct? 

It is important to note that the offerings themselves weren’t the source of God’s rejection or acceptance. God doesn’t have a preference for meat over grain. It was the “spirit” in which it was given, aka- was the sacrifice given out of the spirit of faith or was it a mere "superstition"?  Other scholars put forth the premise that Abel offered the first-born of his flock, the best part, and that Cain's offering was not of the best part of his crop. 

In today’s day and age, we don’t offer meat and grain to the Lord. However, we can offer a “proper” spirit and behavior.
Can you name some examples of “proper” spiritual feelings or behavior that the Lord would “accept as an offering”?

Due to the sin of killing his brother, Cain receives punishment from God.  However, Cain complains that it is too great to bear. We receive trials and tribulations (as part of life and for God’s own reasons; not because we murdered someone).  It is important to note that God will help us through those trials as long as we display faith in his all-knowing wisdom. 

Name one trial or tribulation that you have gone through. Did God help give you strength? In retrospect, did you gain any spiritual benefit from the trial/tribulation?