Cain is Literally Satan's Offspring

...I can not get past the line of Cain which is under the generations of heaven... and all of the other children of Adam are under Adam. There's no way he is Adam's son. And it makes perfect sense that Satan would copy God. Abel never reproduce his seed line and died before the appointed time...

There are several reasons why this is believed as far as I can tell.

  1. Firstly, it is believed Eve had sex with Satan.
  2. Secondly, where Cain's birth is mentioned in Genesis 4:1, the King James Companion notes feel the literal rendering of "I have gotten a man from the LORD" is "A man, even Jehovah."
  3. Thirdly, (this was the most compelling for me, personally), Cain does not appear under Adam's geneology in Genesis 5.
  4. Forthly, Cain & his offspring are mentioned only under "the generations of heaven..."
  5. Lastly I will relate some commentary from a friend online regarding this and more spiritual breakdown in 1 John.

Eve had Sex with Satan?

Now, firstly, the idea that Eve had sex with Satan goes hand in hand with the idea that Cain is the offspring of that union. If the first is shown to be untrue, it follows that the second is also untrue. I addressed this more fully in the first section of the timeline. I covered several different points, reaching the conclusion that this could not have happened.

Genesis 4:1 - Cain is god-like?

Secondly, when we approach Genesis 4:1 in simplicity, without bringing any other doctrine to the table and/or reading another doctrine or presuppositions into the text, the clear meaning is that Adam and Eve had sexual relations and Cain was the offspring - and with God's help - in as much as all babies are miracles from God. Nobody reads Genesis 4:1 and concludes otherwise unless they have another reason outside of the plain scripture to believe this - namely the serpent-seed/Kenite presupposition.

I wonder if the "literal rendering" in the Companion Bible notes could go beyond the mere miracle of life. What if Eve expected to give birth to the Messiah - expected the promised heir that defeats Satan to come to fruition immediately as God promised it would come through her seed? In a sense this would be something Mary could say - that she had given birth to a man - even God himself.

Note that she uses the proper name for God - His personal name. The fact that the proper name is used (old English transliterated it as 'Jehovah') also indicates Eve is not calling her son a god or god-like (i.e. a Nephilim in the tradition of the old Greek/Roman mythologies), simply a miracle from the same God that created them. How do you explain away the plain words of Genesis 4:1 without superimposing another doctrine?

Cain is Missing in Adam's Genealogy!

Thirdly, and this is the most compelling reason of all to believe Cain is Satan's son: Cain does not appear in Adam's genealogy in Genesis 5 - yet if Adam is his father, surely he should be listed? Rather he appears under the heading the generations of the heavens and of the earth (Genesis 2:4). Indeed Cain's entire genealogy - his sons and his son's sons and so on are listed the chapter before, even before Seth's mention. Yet Seth is mentioned as Adam's son right away. The passage talks about Seth being a man in the image and likeness of Adam (versus in the image and likeness of God for now Adam is in a fallen state). Likewise Eve never identifies Cain as the promised seed - only Abel, Cain's younger son is mentioned in Genesis 4:11 and Seth is Abel's replacement because Cain murdered Abel.

If we look back at Cain's brief dark spell, we learn that God wanted Cain to do the right thing from day one, lovingly instructing him (Genesis 4:7). Cain goes out from the presence of the Lord for murder (Genesis 4:16) but God still cares enough to be merciful to him in Cain's fear of being killed, despite punishing Cain first (Genesis 4:15). Cain is cursed from the earth (Genesis 4:11). The finality of this curse is the flood for only Noah and his sons, direct descendants of Seth, survive. Furthermore, Cain departs from the presence of the Lord leaving Adam and Eve to produce a new descendant for the seedline: Seth.

In Genesis 5, we learn that Seth is born when Adam is 130 years old. Adam's genealogy begins at this point and who is clearly missing? Cain! Now when I first asked about this, someone pointed to these kind of verses in the Epistles:

1 Timothy 1:3-4

"As I urged you when I went into Macedonia, stay there in Ephesus so that you may command certain men not to teach false doctrines any longer nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies. These promote controversies rather than God's work--which is by faith. "

Titus 3:9

But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless.

It is interesting how the verse in Timothy links false doctrines to myths and genealogies. Lest it be retorted back that all scripture is "God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness," (2 Timothy 3:16 - emphasis mine), and that there must be a reason for the Biblical genealogies to be included, then here's a juicy point...

The King James Bible Companion side notes are quick to point out that Cain is missing and yet it does not note that Abel is also missing!!!

Abel's birth and death are not recorded anywhere here among Adam's descendants despite the fact that Abel is seen as the righteous good son in his pleasing sacrifice versus Cain's murderous jealousy.

When it was first pointed out to me that Cain was absent from the genealogy as proof that Cain was not Adam's son, I never noticed that Abel is missing too! What do we say about Abel then for his absence in Adam's list of children and children's children - that it means he was also a son of Satan? Of course not! I've never heard anyone even suggest as much.

I would be curious to know why both of these sons are missing and can only conclude their histories are already fully covered before we reach this point in the text (Genesis 5), and the author simply felt no need for repetition for the purpose of this genealogy may be ultimately to chronicle the descent towards the promised Messiah.

Adam had other sons and daughters - his genealogy says so - but none are listed by name - but that doesn't mean they're all children of Satan. As Abel is not also mentioned by name, how do we not know that these "other sons and daughters" aren't explicitely mentioned because they are simply not linked anymore to the Messianic seedline? Cain got the boot due to murder, Abel dropped dead. So we move on to Seth and his descendants.

Cain is of the Generations of Heaven, Right?

The quote at the top of the page says this: ...I can not get past the line of Cain which is under the generations of heaven..

The reference is to Genesis 2:4 (King James):

"These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens..." (emphasis mine)

Cain and his offspring are mentioned after this but before Adam's genealogy. Because of the word "heavens," the connection is made to angels and angelic offspring (as well as Adam, created directly by God). Thus it is concluded that Cain is not truely all of the earth but of "the generations of heaven" through the angel Satan (so Cain is a Nephilim).

Now aside from the Abel argument, let me show you what you may have missed in your haste to believe this doctrine - let's see the whole verse again:

"These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens..." (emphasis mine)

Did you forget to notice the earth part? This is the history of the heavens and the earth when they were created, this is the story of how it started. Don't stumble over the word "heavens" when the word "earth" is also there - don't ignore the word "earth."

Other comments from a friend...

"Adam and Even sinned against God and were driven out from the Garden but they lived peacfully until Cain killed his brother. It is the first sin of man against man. It shows that sin carried on to the next generation after the fall, and thus to all of us. Man is corrupt and sinful. Period.

And as Cain was banished and Abel dead, the decendents of Adam had to come through the third son, Seth but the crux of the matter is Genesis 4:1. Adam had relations with his wife and she conceived. Man is Man. Adam means man in Hebrew. I think that if Satan had fathered a child on Eve, the scripture would say so, not that she slept with her husband. Some people just need to read what's written and not take verses out of context. It says she had sex with the man and conceived that was Cain. Now, Abel is the one that just mentions him being conceived (no sex mentioned) so therefore Abel is Satan's son?

In Genesis 4:1: The man had intercourse with his wife Eve and she conceived and gave birth to Cain. "I have acquired a man w/ the help of Yahweh," she said. 2. She gave birth to a second child, Abel the brother of Cain.

OK so - first off, she says with the help of Yahweh, not Satan. Secondly, Cain's birth directly follows intercourse, Abels' is the one that doesn't, so on that theory, Abel would be the child of Satan, not Cain. Which would also make Cain pretty justified in killing him, if you follow that line of reasoning. In verses 15, Cain receives God's mercy and protection, which God wouldn't give to the devil.

"John, who also mentioned Cain, says that anyone who sins habitually is child of the devil but he means spiritually not that Satan slept with their mothers.

1 John 3:8-12
He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil. Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother. For this is the message that ye heard from the beginning, that we should love one another. Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother's righteous."

"Now, if John is talking about physical birth, and Cain is Satan's literal son, then there are those who are God's literal sons, and as we are neither, having been birthed by human parents, the whole battle of good and evil has nothing to do with us but if it is all spiritual, then we being born again are God's sons, and those who are not, are Satan's sons as that's who they will end up with. And if you take it to mean that Satan slept with Eve so Cain's seed is from the physical serpent seed, then so are all other sinners - there's been lots of women sleeping with Satan. Then he slept with Hitler's mom too!

"Now look at verses 2-4,15:

"Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is. And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure. Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law." 15: Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.

"It can't be physical one place and spiritual elsewhere. One has to be consistant: either every sinner's mother slept with the devil, or no one's did.

"Cain is used first by Moses, then by John, as an example for us to learn from. In Genesis, Cain is an example how not to treat your brother which makes me think he must be like us. The Nephilim are mentioned in the Old Testament, but neither Jesus or any of the church fathers mention them, much less use them as a lesson and they are *not* like us. Basically it comes down to if Cain was not human than there is nothing for us to learn from him, and no point in him being so specifically named and learning what happens to him.

Q. Why do people want to believe this?

"Well, it gives an excuse for sin, and contradicts that Adam's sin was passed down to us as Cain is the first example of that, but if Cain wasn't human, then all Adam's children were good hence, no original sin - just Eve messing around. People want to blame Eve for everything anyway, when it was just as much Adam's fault, if not more, as he was supposed to lead and teach her. Maybe they don't really want to believe that they were that bad to begin with, but John takes it so much further and Jesus too: that hate and murder are the same thing even if you don't do the physical act and Paul says as in Adam, all die, not as in Adam and then Satan."