Book of Moses Evidence: The Seed of Cain

After Cain killed Abel, the Lord declared, “thou shalt be cursed from the earth which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother’s blood from thy hand. When thou tillest the ground it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength. A fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth” (Moses 5:36–37). We thus see that Cain was both cursed and, to some extent, ostracized after he committed murder.

A similar curse was placed on the seed of Cain (and any others) who perpetuated Satan’s works of darkness. For instance, “the Lord cursed Lamech [a descendant of Cain], and his house, and all them that had covenanted with Satan; … Wherefore Lamech was despised, and cast out, and came not among the sons of men” (Moses 5:52–54). Moreover, just as the Lord had cursed Cain so that the earth would not yield its strength for him, it is reported that “God cursed the earth with a sore curse, and was angry with the wicked” (Moses 5:56). Later on, the text emphasizes the separateness of Cain’s seed, this time in conjunction with a description of them being black: “And Enoch also beheld the residue of the people which were the sons of Adam; and they were a mixture of all the seed of Adam save it was the seed of Cain, for the seed of Cain were black, and had not place among them” (Moses 7:22).

Interestingly, a similar set of descriptions is given of the people of Canaan (a mysterious group living in antediluvian times who should not be conflated with the Canaanites of later biblical periods):1

… and the people of Canaan shall divide themselves in the land, and the land shall be barren and unfruitful, and none other people shall dwell there but the people of Canaan; For behold, the Lord shall curse the land with much heat, and the barrenness thereof shall go forth forever; and there was a blackness came upon all the children of Canaan, that they were despised among all people. … And it came to pass that Enoch continued to call upon all the people, save it were the people of Canaan, to repent. (Moses 7:7–12)

It seems significant that the seed of Cain and the people of Canaan were each (1) negatively affected by a curse upon the earth, (2) ostracized, and (3) associated with blackness. Although any association between Cain himself and the concept of blackness is never mentioned in the text and thus would be speculative, it should be recalled that he was also cursed and ostracized. These congruities are outlined in the following chart:

Because of limited data, it would be premature to assume a direct equivalence between the “seed of Cain” and the “people of Canaan.”4 Nevertheless, depending on how one interprets the text, it is possible that they could be the same group or that they may be related or overlap to some extent.5 At the very least, the seed of Cain and the people of Canaan occupy a similar conceptual space in the narrative. By way of clarification, the point of this comparison is not to settle the precise relationship between these groups but to highlight relevant patterns and possible interpretations of the text. The overall thesis of this article does not depend on or require any association between the seed of Cain and the people of Canaan.

Sources Available to Joseph Smith

With this textual data established, it is worth exploring what Joseph Smith may possibly have understood about these groups—especially regarding Cain and his posterity—based on sources available in his day. The most relevant source would, of course, be the passages in Genesis 6:1–3:

And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.

Although these verses imply that the intermixing between the “sons of God” and the “daughters of men” was in some way prohibited, the text never specifies who these groups were.6 On the other hand, a number of sources in Joseph Smith’s day asserted that these specific groups correspond to the seed of Seth and Cain, respectively, and further that they should not have intermixed. For instance, in his commentary on Genesis, John Calvin wrote that “it was fitting that the small portion which God had adopted, by special privilege, to himself, should remain separate from others. It was, therefore, base ingratitude in the posterity of Seth, to mingle themselves with the children of Cain, and with other profane races.”7 Likewise, in his popular Bible commentary, the Presbyterian minister Matthew Henry claimed that the “posterity of Seth did not keep by themselves, as they ought to have done …. They intermingled themselves with the excommunicated race of Cain.”8

There were also contemporary sources that associated Cain and his posterity with blackness. According to David Goldenberg, “Several authors in antebellum America refer to a then-current idea that Cain was smitten with dark skin as punishment for killing his brother, Abel. To some, this was the unspecified ‘mark’ that God put on Cain ‘so that no one who found him would kill him’ (Gen4:15).”9 However, “the Curse of Cain did not originate on American soil. A curse of blackness on Cain, from whom the Blacks are descended, is often noted in European literature of the seventeenth to nineteenth century.”10

Based on the availability of these ideas in Joseph Smith’s 19th-century environment, some may assume the Book of Moses simply reflects their presence in modern sources. However, as will be shown in the following sections, similar notions can be traced back throughout the medieval period and even into antiquity.  

Cain and His Seed Being Cursed and Ostracized in Ancient and Medieval Sources

The book of 1 Enoch never directly states that the seed of Cain were ostracized by the rest of Adam’s posterity, at least not in a mortal context. However, the distinction between these groups is mentioned in the context of judgment after death. Concerning the different locations where departed spirits (associated either with the righteousness of Abel or the wickedness of Cain) were assigned to dwell, Enoch asked his angelic guide, “‘For what reason is one separated from the other?’ And he replied and said to me, ‘These three [locations] have been made in order that the spirits of the dead might be separated’” (1 Enoch 22:8–10).11

Much clearer parallels can be seen in the writings of early Christian writers. In the time of Julius Africanus, it appears there were already differing views about the meaning of Genesis 6:2. While some believed that the “sons of God” in this passage refer to fallen angels, commonly known as the Watchers, Africanus entertained the possibility that this was referencing a group of righteous mortals among Adam’s posterity, specifically those who came through the line of Seth. This position is much more in line with the explanation of the “sons of God” in the Book of Moses.12 Africanus wrote:

Therefore, what is said is—as I suppose—that the descendants of Seth are called ‘sons of God’ by the Spirit, on account of the righteous ones and the patriarchs who have sprung from him until the time of the Saviour. But he designates the descendants of Cain as the seed of men, as they had nothing of the divine in them any longer, because of the wickedness of their race, and also because of the dissimilarity of their nature, so that, when they were mingled together, the indignation of God was evoked.13

This notion is echoed by the Syrian writer Aphrahat, who declared that when Noah “had seen that the generation of Seth had commingled itself with the accursed sons of the house of Cain, he decided to take neither a wife nor to beget sons, lest he would be commingled and doomed together with this accursed offspring, the family of Cain.”14 Concerning the posterities of Cain and Seth, John Cassian wrote that as “long as therefore this separation between these two lines of them remained, this offspring of Seth, because it came forth from an excellent root, was named for the merits of its sanctity, ‘angels of God,’ or, as some copies have it, ‘sons of God.’”15

Regarding Genesis 6:2, Eusebius of Emesa wrote that “there was no mixing of the sons of Seth with those of Cain.”16 As described by Athanasius, “The race of Seth was segregated and not mixed with the race of Cain because of the curse which was laid on him by the God of the universe.”17 The curse being described as the reason for the separation is also mentioned by Theodoret of Cyrus: “For the generation of Seth was segregated and was not mixed with the people from Cain, because of the curse that was put upon him by the God of the universe.”18 Eutychius of Alexandria also made the connection with the curse: “after the death of Adam, the family of Seth separated itself from the accursed family of Cain.”19

Ephrem the Syrian commented on these circumstances at length. He claimed that the descendants of Seth “cut themselves off from Cain and did not intermarry with him because of his reproach” and conversely that “Cain, therefore, separated himself from his parents and his kin because he saw that they would not intermarry with him. The land of Nod is so called because it was the land in which Cain wandered about in fear and trembling. But [the land] also received a second curse, when God said, ‘When you till the earth it shall no longer yield to you its strength.’”20 Ephrem went on to explain that the “house of Cain, because the earth had been cursed so as not to give them its strength, produced small harvests, deprived of its strength, just as it is today that some seeds, fruits, and grasses give strength and some do not. Because, at that time, they were cursed and sons of the cursed and were dwelling in the land of curses.”21 This parallels the cursed earth and barren ground in Moses 5:56 and Moses 7:8, not just for Cain but for his descendants and the people of Canaan.

This view of history is also found in early Christian texts that reimagined or rewrote the story of Adam and Eve and their posterity. According to the Conflict of Adam and Eve with Satan, Adam gave Seth the following charge just before his death: “sever thy children and thy children’s children from Cain’s children; do not let them ever mix with those, nor come near them either in their words or in their deeds.”22 Likewise, in an Armenian telling of the story, an angel gave Adam the following instructions, “But let not the seed of Seth, or the seed of others of thy children, be mixed with that of Cain’s generation; for if they mix themselves with that generation, thy good children shall become wicked, and then all shall be punished together.”23

This theme is especially pronounced in the Cave of Treasures. It states that after “Adam’s burial the families and generations of Seth’s children separated themselves from the children of Cain the murderer. At that time Seth took his first-born Enosh, Kenan, Mahalalel, their wives and children, led them and made them ascend the glorious mountain where Adam lay buried. But Cain and all his offspring remained in the plain below where Cain had slain Abel.”24 This accords well with the description in the Book of Moses of the residue of Seth’s righteous posterity separating themselves from the rest of the people (Moses 6:17). It also aligns with Enoch coming from a “land of righteousness” (Moses 6:41) and of him and his people occupying the “high places” (Moses 6:37–38; 7:17).25 Throughout the Cave of Treasures, Adam’s counsel about not mixing with the Cainites is repeated and emphatic, as each successive righteous patriarch attempted to uphold it. As summarized by Albertus Klijn, “Every generation living on the Mountain had to swear by the blood of Abel not to mix with the Cainites.”26

In addition to affirming that the Sethites and Cainites did not mix, Cyril of Alexandria claimed that the Sethites were stronger than the Cainites in battle:

They called the descendants of Seth and of Enosh sons of the gods, or better, sons of the rulers, because of the piety and godliness which was in them, and because they could defeat all adversaries: while God, I suppose, in all likelihood came to their aid, and made known all around this pious and holy generation, which was not mixed with that other one, that is to say, with the descendants from Cain and, what is more, from Lamech.27

This parallels the description of Enoch and his people overpowering all of their enemies through God’s power in Moses 7:13, especially because it is just a few verses away from the description of the segregation of Cain’s posterity in Moses 7:22.28

The segregation of the Sethite and Cainite lines can also be found in Islamic texts. One such account states: “Enoch sent for his people and warned them, and commanded them to obey God, may He be praised and glorified, and to resist Satan, and not to associate with the descendants of Qābīl [i.e., Cain]. However, they did not submit to him. Group after group of the descendants of Seth began descending (the mountain) to the descendants of Qābīl.”29 Another Islamic source declares, “Of the descendants of [Seth], none remained on the sacred <mountain> except for those three; namely, Methuselah, Lamech, and Noah, together with their families. They were ordered to never go down to the land which was inhabited by the abominable descendants of Cain.30

Finally, the tradition about the separation between the Sethite and Cainite lines can be seen in a late medieval Jewish work known as the Chronicles of Jerahmeel:

It came to pass when man began to multiply upon the face of the earth, that the children of Elohim—that is, the seed of Seth—looked upon the daughters of man—that is, the seed of Cain—and they took them wives of all which they chose, and begat those giants that peopled the earth in the days of Noah. During the whole lifetime of Adam the sons of Seth had not intermarried with the seed of Cain, but when Adam died they intermarried. The sons of Seth dwelt in the mountains by the Garden of Eden, while Cain dwelt in the fields of Damascus, where Abel was killed.31 

Because this is a late work that draws upon a variety of unspecified sources, it is impossible to trace the origin of this idea. It is interesting, though, that the very next story (known as “The Midrash of Shemḥazai and ‘Azael”) preserves a variant of an early Jewish account about the fall of the Watchers, which intersects with material from both 1 Enoch and the Book of Giants.32 In other words, it is possible that the Chronicles of Jerahmeel preserves a very early Jewish account of the Sethite and Cainite lines that dovetails nicely with the Christian understandings. It also must be acknowledged that it is ultimately unknown where the earliest Christian writers first picked up this tradition.33

Cain and His Seed Being Associated with Blackness in Ancient and Medieval Sources

As demonstrated previously, the Book of Moses associates the seed of Cain and also the people of Canaan (who may or may not be related) with blackness. On several occasions throughout the text, the imagery of blackness or darkness is elsewhere associated with evil. This includes the darkness of Satan himself, the nature of his dark works, the dark prison prepared for the wicked, and the prophesied darkness of the last days.34 Thus, the mention of blackness in association with the seed of Cain can be seen as contributing to a book-wide theme rather than just an isolated historical detail. It should also be mentioned that blackness tends to hold a negative connotation in a variety of extrabiblical texts and traditions.35

In addition to its apparent symbolic associations, whether or not the blackness was also believed by the ancient authors/editors of the Book of Moses to correlate to race, skin color, or some other literal feature of these societies is not clearly established by the text.36 What can be said with confidence is that the symbolic associations are, to various degrees, corroborated in extrabiblical sources.

One fragment of this tradition, which specifically emphasizes the blackness or darkness of Cain as symbolic in nature, may be present in the Greek Life of Adam and Eve. The text states, “This is the account of Adam and Eve. After they had come out of Paradise, Adam took his wife, and they went down into the East. … Eve conceived and bore two sons, Adiaphōtos called Cain, and Amilabes called Abel.”37 Regarding the transliterated term Adiaphōtos , which is the dominant variant spelling of this term in the underlying Greek manuscripts, Johannes Tromp writes:

Insofar as I could ascertain, the word ἀδιάφωτος [adiaphōtos] does not occur outside GLAE [Greek Life of Adam and Eve]. Διάφωτος [Diaphōtos] is not a common Greek word either, but it may be connected with a current word such as διαφωτίζειν [diaphōtizein], “to enlighten” (e.g., the meaning of Scripture, or someone’s soul). In the seventh century, διάφωτος [diaphōtos] is used by John Malalas to describe a large, “illuminated” palace. Applied to Cain, ἀδιάφωτος [adiaphōtos] may therefore mean “the unenlightened one,” or “the obscure,” or even “the one with a dark soul.”38

An Adamic book from the Armenian corpus provides another interesting statement: “And the Lord was wroth with Cain, and as a handful of dust is carried away of the wind, so he scattered all his harvest of corn, and destroyed all his riches, so that not even an ear of corn could be found. He beat Cain’s face with hail, which blackened like coal, and thus he remained with a black face.” This is then contrasted with Abel, whose “face became shining” when he offered unto God an acceptable offering.39

It is also interesting that Cain is viewed in the Book of Moses as the inheritor of Satan’s teachings, whereby Cain took on a paternal status over Satan’s lies: “For from this time forth thou shalt be the father of his lies; thou shalt be called Perdition; for thou wast also before the world” (Moses 5:24). At the same time, Satan himself was viewed as a father figure to the wicked: “But behold, their sins shall be upon the heads of their fathers; Satan shall be their father, and misery shall be their doom” (Moses 7:37).40 These associations find parallels in various extrabiblical sources. As explained by Klijn, in some Jewish traditions, “Cain was often regarded as the son of the devil.”41

With this in mind, a statement made concerning a Satan figure in the Apocalypse of Elijah seems quite relevant: “You have fallen from heaven like the morning stars. You were changed, and your tribe became dark for you. But you are not ashamed, when you stand firmly against God. You are a devil.”42 This notion is echoed in the Conflict of Adam and Eve with Satan. Concerning Satan and the angels that fell with him, it reports that “they have been black ever since they transgressed.”43 The author then notes that because the righteous posterity of Seth were seen as angel-like beings, it gave rise to the myth that literal angels had consorted with humans. In other words, there was believed to be a conflation between these fallen angels who had become “black” and the spiritually degenerate Sethites who joined the seed of Cain.

Other sources point more specifically to the blackness of Cain’s people or posterity, as can be seen in a Samaritan text. Klijn explains, “Cain’s children were ‘children of darkness.’ Unlike Cain’s children, the children of Seth were children of light.”44 A similar dichotomy is found in the portion of 1 Enoch known as the Animal Apocalypse. It provides an allegorical account of Jewish history in which various groups are symbolically represented by different animals. Within this framework, Cain and his posterity are repeatedly associated with the color black. In his treatment of these colors and their allegorical symbolism, Daniel Olson writes:

The allegory uses a simple color symbolism to indicate standing before God. White indicates righteousness or divine favor. The chosen line of Seth is made up of white cattle (85:8–10), Shem is white (89:9), the sheep are occasionally said to be white (89:12, 90:6, 32), and the good angels are described as “white men” (88:2, 90:21–22, 31). Black indicates wickedness or divine disfavor. The line of Cain is made up of black cattle (85:3–5) …. Newsom assumes without argument that the symbol of whiteness includes being part of that chosen lineage, but the assumption is reasonable: the genealogies of Seth (white cattle) and Cain (black cattle) are both indicated in the allegory, and the fact that each line produced colored cattle after their kind is emphasized (85:5, 9–10).45

Throughout the years, there has been ongoing debate regarding the interpretation of this text. Some scholars conclude that the use of these colors is entirely symbolic while others believe that they reflect ancient beliefs about race and skin color.46 In any case, a related light/dark dichotomy surfaces in the Book of Moses. In contrast to the “seed of Cain” and “people of Canaan” (who are described as being “black” or having a “blackness” come upon them in Moses 7:8, 22), we read that Enoch was “clothed upon with glory” and that “the glory of the Lord … was upon his people” (Moses 7:3, 17).47

According to Goldenberg,

Cain’s blackness may possibly be found in Arabic sources. In the Qur’an the name for Cain is Qābīl. … Perhaps in addition to assonance [connected to the Arabic name for Abel (Hābīl)] another factor was behind the creation of the name: the root qbl in Aramaic means “black.” Note, in this regard, that the name or title of the king of Nubia in some Arabic sources was qabil. If Islamic tradition, as Armenian/Syriac tradition, believed that Cain was black, it would account for the name Qābīl.48

Conclusion

To be clear, this article is not asserting that Cain or his posterity had black skin, that black skin is a curse, or that mixed-race marriages are sinful.49 Instead, this article does not take any position on the specific nature of the blackness associated with the seed of Cain and the people of Canaan, as reported in Moses 7:8, 22.50 Whatever the historical reality was, and whatever the ancient authors and editors of the text believed, the current position of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is clear on this topic: “Church leaders today unequivocally condemn all racism, past and present, in any form.”51 This article is therefore strictly analyzing the contents of the Book of Moses and the degree to which they may be supported by extrabiblical sources.

Based on the available data, it might be argued that the Book of Moses simply reflects common racial attitudes and interpretations of Genesis 6 that were present in Joseph Smith’s 19th-century environment. Such an interpretation, however, is unnecessary. The notion that the sons of God represent the righteous posterity of Adam and that they weren’t supposed to mix with the wicked seed of Cain can be traced back at least to the time of Julius Africanus (AD 100–200), and it is ultimately uncertain where this idea first originated. The association between Cain and the concept of blackness can be traced back even further into the Second Temple period, as manifested in the Animal Apocalypse portion of 1 Enoch (200–100 BC). Both ideas are also expressed in a variety of other extrabiblical sources, sometimes with nuances that align particularly well with the Book of Moses.

These ancient sources, of course, do not remove the possibility that Joseph Smith could have accessed these same ideas from his environment. Yet they do neutralize arguments that these ideas must be modern in origin. They also help demonstrate that the Book of Moses resonates with ancient and medieval traditions in ways that are not reducible to the surface text of Genesis. When these types of consistencies are added to many others—especially those which could not have been easily guessed by Joseph Smith or derived from his environment—their aggregated strength becomes quite impressive.