Welcome to EBible Fellowship’s Bible study in the Book of Genesis. This is study #18 of Genesis, chapter 4 and we will read Genesis 4:17-23-24:

And Lamech said unto his wives, Adah and Zillah, Hear my voice; ye wives of Lamech, hearken unto my speech: for I have slain a man to my wounding, and a young man to my hurt. If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold, truly Lamech seventy and sevenfold.

I will stop reading there. We are continuing to look at God’s recording of events in the family of Cain as Cain dwelt in the land of Nod on the east of Eden. The word “Nod” means “wandering,” so it is the land of wanderers or those that have gone from the presence of the Lord.

We saw that the mindset of the descendants of Cain was on building a city and developing tools and musical instruments and things of the world. One of Cain’s descendants was Lamech and he married two women, Adah and Zillah. The two women had children and those children were Jabal, Jubal and Tubalcain and they were involved in various activities that we mentioned in our last study, but as far as the deeper spiritual meaning, I am not completely sure what it is, except that we know that men build cities and call lands after their own names, according to Psalm 49, because they are trying to make a lasting impression in this earth. This is their inheritance and their portion, so their focus is wrapped up in the things of the world, so the focus on Cain and his family is on activities the world is involved in, but when we get to verses 23 and 24 there is a strange account. Lamech is speaking to his two wives, Adah and Zillah, and he said, “Hear my voice; ye wives of Lamech, hearken unto my speech.”

I think I mentioned last time that when we look up the word “Lamech,” we are not really helped. The concordance does not help us with the origin of the word and related words that are next to it in the concordance do not seem to match, so we do not know what the name “Lamech” means, so that makes it more difficult.

Again, Lamech said to his two wives, “Hear my voice; ye wives of Lamech, hearken unto my speech: for I have slain a man to my wounding, and a young man to my hurt.” As we read this, we might wonder if he is talking about having killed two people or just one person. Is the “young man” a second person he killed or are both statements referring to the killing of one person? I think it is the latter – both statements refer to the killing of one person. He is telling his wives that he has slain a man to his wounding and a young man to his hurt. The word “and” is a word that can be translated as “even,” so it could say, “I have slain a man to my wounding, even a young man to my hurt,” as if he is further identifying the man he slew as a young man. Lamech, like his ancestor Cain, is a murderer. The Bible does not give us any indication how long Cain lived. We do not know if he lived 100 years after he slayed Abel or if he lived 500 years after he slayed Abel. The Bible does not give us Cain’s age or his death age, but we do know that Cain was a forefather of Lamech and it had said in regard to Cain slaying Abel in Genesis 4:15:

And JEHOVAH said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And JEHOVAH set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.

So several generations later his descendant killed a man. We do not know the timeline because God did not give us ages or dates with any of these individuals that we are reading about in the last part of Genesis, chapter 4, but we know it is several generations later. Now Lamech has, likewise, killed a man and he is making reference to Cain: “If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold, truly Lamech seventy and sevenfold.” We will look at that a little bit later.

But, first, let us look at some of the words in Genesis 4, verse 23. Why does Lamech say, “for I have slain a man to my wounding, and a young man to my hurt”? Why is Lamech referring to his “wounding” and to his “hurt”_ When we look at the word “wounding,” it is Strong’s #6482 and it is also translated as “wounds” where Job speaks as a type of Christ under the wrath of God in Job 9:17:

For he breaketh me with a tempest, and multiplieth my wounds without cause.

Remember Jesus said, “They hated me without a cause.” Job is experiencing “wounds” as he is suffering in this picture of the suffering of the Lord Jesus Christ under the wrath of God, so to experience “wounds without cause” is language that identifies with being under the wrath of God.

We find this same word in Isaiah. It says in Isaiah 1:5-7:

Why should ye be stricken any more? ye will revolt more and more: the whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint. From the sole of the foot even unto the head there is no soundness in it; but wounds, and bruises, and putrifying sores: they have not been closed, neither bound up, neither mollified with ointment. Your country is desolate, your cities are burned with fire: your land, strangers devour it in your presence, and it is desolate, as overthrown by strangers.

God is speaking of rebellious Israel, as well as a picture of the rebellious New Testament corporate church. It says, “From the sole of the foot even unto the head,” there are “wounds.” It is language indicating that Israel of old and the New Testament corporate church have come under the wrath of God due to their disobedience to the Word of God. Like Job, it is picturing being under the wrath of God.

Let us look at another place where this same Hebrew word, Strong’s #6482, is found in Exodus 21:22-25:

If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life, Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.

The word “wound” is used twice and it is our word. We can see from the manner in which it is used here in Exodus 21 it has to do with repayment. When someone has done wrong they will pay an equal payment for the wrong they have done. Of course, when we sin, the payment that the Law of God demands is death: “The wages of sin is death.” As God says, it is “life for life.”

Lamech said, “I have slain a man to my wounding.” He has sinned. He has done wrong. He has broken the law of God. He had killed someone, like Cain did, and it was to “his wounding” because the Law of God stipulates “wound for wound.” If you have wounded someone you must be wounded, so Lamech is basically saying that his sinful act will result in his own wounding. It was a sinful act and whatever reason there was does not matter. Everyone tries to justify the act with reason and the person says, “I killed him because…” There are trials that are held and people try to lay out their justification for killing a man and, yet, they have killed and it is “life for life” and “wound for wound.” With his statement Lamech is indicating that his act of killing someone was done to his own wounding. There is a recognition that the thing he did will be something that will injure him. It goes on to say in Genesis 4:23:

… and a young man to my hurt.

He has slain a young man to his hurt. The verse we just looked at in Exodus 21 said in Exodus 21:25:

… Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.

The word “hurt” is Strong’s #2250 and it is the same word as the word translated as “stripe” in Exodus 21, verse 25. God is directing us to this verse in Exodus because those two words are found in Genesis 4:23: “for I have slain a man to my wounding, and a young man to my hurt.” Again, it is “stripe for stripe.” In other words, Lamech has slain this young man and he is saying that the Law of God will do the same to him, because God’s Law says that if you wound someone, you must be wounded. If you afflict someone with a stripe, you must be afflicted with a stripe. So this is really a very powerful acknowledgement by Lamech that he is under the wrath of God for the thing he has done. There is no information in this verse concerning a Saviour that would take Lamech’s wounds or stripes; it is as if Lamech knows nothing about that, but he is simply stating that since he has killed someone he will be killed by God. That is a correct understanding of the Law. The only exception is if you find an Intercessor to receive the “wound” that you should receive or receive the “stripe” that you should receive.

Again, the word translated as “hurt” does lead us to Isaiah 53, a Messianic chapter where God is opening the veil to reveal the Messiah and He says in Isaiah 53:4-5:

Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

The word “stripes” is the same word we saw in Exodus and it is the same word translated as “hurt” in our verse. It is by His stripes we are healed. It is really not that complicated to understand and I think that people, in general, understand what God has done in His salvation program. According to the Law, God should mete out stripes and afflict wounds to those that have broken the Law and transgressed His commandments and He does so with every sinner that has no Saviour.

But for those God chose and predestinated before the foundation of the world, God had a different plan. He took their sins upon Him. I am sure there are many murderers, like Barabbas, that have been let go while Christ was crucified and that is a good illustration of what Christ has done for a great number of sinners, including adulterers, thieves, murderers, liars, and so forth. God took their sins and iniquities and He was wounded and given stripes for the sins they committed. Since Christ was bearing their sins, He stood in their place and the wrath of God came down upon Him instead of the elect sinners. As a result, it is as though the sinner is healed from his wound and healed from his hurt and there is no damage done to him because of what Christ has done.

That is the wonderful thing for the children of God, but, sadly, for the rest of the people of the world, they do not have a Saviour. We saw that with Cain who said, “My iniquity is greater than I can bear.” Now his descendant is going in the way of Cain and living in the land of Nod or the “land of wanderers” and Lamech must bear his iniquity, whatever it is, “wound for wound” and “stripe for stripe.”

I just wanted to mention this because it is an unusual verse that we really do not understand, but since we were looking up these two words, let us look at something in the first part of the verse in Proverbs 20:30:

The blueness of a wound cleanseth away evil…

I have read that as I have gone through the Book of Proverbs. I have read this Book many times because there was a period of years when I would read the chapter for the day of the month. If it was the first day of the month, our family would read Proverbs, chapter 1 and if it was the 10th of the month we would read Proverbs, chapter 10. We did that for years. I often wondered what “blueness of a wound” was talking about, but the word “blueness” is the same word translated as “hurt” in our verse and as “stripes” in Isaiah 53 and in Exodus 21. So, it is “the stripes of a wound.” As Lamech said, “for I have slain a man to my wounding, and a young man to my hurt,” The same two words are found in Proverbs 20 and now I think we can understand it because the stripes of a wound cleanses away evil, just as “With his stripes we are healed.” The stripes that were laid upon the Lord Jesus Christ for the “wound” we had done (or the sin we had done) cleansed us from our evil. I just thought that was an interesting thing. You know, there is never a better time to go to a verse than when you are following a “word” through the Bible and following two words like this was helpful to understanding another Scripture in Proverbs 20, verse 30.

Let us go back to Genesis 4:24:

If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold, truly Lamech seventy and sevenfold.

Again, back in Genesis 4:15, God had made an unusual statement when Cain was concerned that whoever found him would kill him, so God set a mark upon Cain. It said in Genesis 4:15:

And JEHOVAH said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold…

We talked about that and we saw how Cain was a picture of the corporate church. The corporate church at the time of the end killed its more faithful brethren, as typified by righteous Abel. The corporate church drove out the people of God out of the congregations of the world and spiritually slayed them. Even though they did something horribly wrong, yet God set a protection upon the churches. Yes, God had raised up Satan and loosed him to come against the churches, but after the Great Tribulation concluded God judged Satan and his emissaries for daring to stretch forth their hand against his anointed, the churches called by His name. That is why God said that vengeance would be taken on him that would slay Cain seven times.

Now Lamech is referring back to Cain and Lamech said, “If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold, truly Lamech seventy and sevenfold.” This is a difficult verse to understand. First of all, we have to understand that God’s pronouncement of vengeance had to do with someone finding Cain and killing him in response to Cain’s act of murder. Likewise, Lamech is drawing on that and he is saying that if someone had found Cain and killed him, it would be avenged seven times but if someone were to kill him for the murder he committed then the person that killed him (Lamech) should experience vengeance “seventy and sevenfold.” Again, this is very difficult language. It is Cain’s family and it is not something we encounter that often, so it is sort of a struggle to understand. I will try to come up with an explanation and present it and you can check it out and see if it is Scriptural as to an explanation for Lamech saying that vengeance against someone killing him should be greater than for someone killing Cain.