The writers of this section propose, if the Lord permit, to discuss some of the individuals who find a place in the readings for the month under review. There have been many persons who, whilst not prominent in the record, nevertheless have had a great influence on the events which affected the affairs of Israel. These are the people we hope to consider.
During the current month we are somewhat overwhelmed by the large number of people involved, for our readings cover a period of some 2,500 years.
Firstly, what of Cain? It is necessary to separate facts that are on record, from traditions that have grown up around this man, the world’ first murderer.” Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground.” If one tills the ground, one must wait at the same place for the harvest, whilst shepherds (if they did not cultivate special pastures) would of necessity be nomadic. So it is evident that Cain led a more settled life than Abel, even if Cain moved from area to area in successive seasons.
The Lord had respect to the offering by Abel of certain of his flock, but not to the offering of Cain. We have some traditional ideas as to why the Lord differentiated in this way, but the Divine record does not give any reason, and our assumptions could be wrong. We are told that when the Lord showed no respect for Cain’s offering that Cain became angry. Anger, as is usually the case, led to jealousy, and jealousy led to spite. Cain could not attack the Lord, so he attacked Abel and killed him.
One cannot but meditate on these developments, because they so accord with the ways of mankind. Abel was successful in pleasing the Lord whilst Cain was not. Down through the ages the ways of Cain have dominated history, as one prophet after the other was killed; then the supreme crime against the Son of God, followed by the killing of the Apostles. Jealousy always finds an excuse for persecuting the good, the kind, the gentle, the holy servants of God. Meanwhile the persecutors think that they are doing God’s service (see the words of Jesus, John 16, 2). Cain certainly set the example for a historical development that has bedevilled all future ages of man.
Another person who finds but brief reference in Genesis is Nimrod, but the few comments are very illuminating. Nimrod began to be a “mighty one” in the earth. He was a “mighty hunter” and the “beginning of his kingdom was Babel (or Babylon). The original word here rendered “kingdom” is “mamlakah” which, according to Young means”reign”. Evidently Nimrod reigned over a community of people and is the first recorded king in the world’s history. This represents a substantial change in the recognised order as it existed before that time. The land had been shared out to family groups (see Gen. 10. 5) and over the family, Whether acknowledged or not, was the Creator. Now a man had interposed himself as an object of veneration.
The idea of having a human being as head of the community spread rapidly and by the time of Joshua, Israel were unique in having a Theocracy. Then, in the days of Samuel, Israel desired a king “to judge us like all the nations”. (1 Sam. 8. 5) Nimrod and his people set an example that has been followed even down to our days. In the middle ages, so ingrained had become the organisation of nations into ruler and ruled, that one even reads about the “divine right of kings”, as though they had some deputed power from God, confusing permission with right. It may be that some of Jesus’ actions should be read in the context of the ways of the world in this regard.
For example, it is recorded in John 6. 15 “When Jesus perceived that they would come and take Him by force, to make Him a king, He departed again into a mountain himself alone”. His appointment is to be truly by divine right, but because He pleased God and not because He pleased man, neither will this Man rule by man-made laws, but in absolute justice of the laws of God.
The third person we would like briefly to discuss is Melchisedek, king of Salem, a man so important that even Abraham paid taxes to him. Who was this Melchisedek? His name means “king of righteousness, and he was priest of the most high God. It is interesting to recall that he lived in the days prior to the Mosaic era, when the priesthood was vested in the elder male member of a family group. (It was this order that had been broken across by Nimrod.) Now it is a matter of simple calculation that the eldest surviving member of Abraham’s line of descent was Shem who lived 600 years (this would take him until Jacob was about 50 years of age), so it is probable that Melchisedek was in fact Shem. This idea gets further support from the Babylonian records of the flood, in which the eldest of the three sons of the builder of the escape ship is named “Sedec”, the latter part of the name of the person to whom Abraham paid taxes. The people of Salem (Jerusalem) then, had been careful to choose as king the man who was indeed their head by divine right.
This right of Melchisedec to be accepted head of his community did not depend on human appointment, but because he was, in fact the elder amongst his people. (In passing, it is interesting to recall that Jesus will indeed be by far the oldest living person, having now lived continuously for nearly 2,000 years, which relates Him to the reign of Melchisedec as antitype to type in a very unique way.) The writer of the Hebrews has much to say concerning Melchisedec, because Psalm 110, which so clearly relates to Christ, also declared, “Thou art a priest for ever, after the order of Melchisedec”. The current month is not the time to consider in detail the rather obscure references to Melchisedec made in Hebrews. But perhaps the record deliberately hides the origin of this man (as we have said, most probably Shem) under a title related only to his office as righteous king and priest, so that we may not seek to find his right to his throne as is usually done — by descent from other men.
Melchisedec enters the record (like Elijah) quite suddenly, and without explanation. But the brief reference tells us that he was great and good-living and that even the “friend of God” gave honour to him, receiving in return bread and wine and blessing. Truly, the Son of God is of the “manner—or order—of Melchisedec”.
Daniel The Prophet – (Part 3)