Does God conceal or hide knowleedge from his people?

“It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter.”—Proverbs 25:2.

The translation of our text, if it had been more literal, would have run thus, “It is the glory of God to cover a matter, but the honor of kings is to search out a matter.” For the sake of variety in language our translators sometimes gave two different interpretations to the same word; and though that makes the verbiage more smooth, it is generally a great mistake and apt to mislead us. The word “conceal” is just the same word that we get in the passage, “Blessed is he .... whose sin is covered.” So the text runs thus—I will give it to you again that I may further impress it upon you—“It is the glory of God to cover a matter, but the honor of kings is to search out a matter.”

First of all I will give you the common interpretation which is given to these words, and the topic which is suggested to most minds thereby, namely that it is God’s glory to conceal much of the great truth which concerns himself and his dealings with the sons of men. “Clouds and darkness are round about him.” It is his glory that he is not seen, his glory that he is concealed; while as for kings, it is their honor “to search out a matter.” This is the general interpretation which almost every expositor gives of this passage, but I am not able wholly to agree with it. However, I will speak upon it for little while.

It is certain that such an explanation as this would have to be taken in a limited sense, for it cannot absolutely and without qualification be the glory of God to conceal a thing; for if so, he might have concealed everything from us. It is evidently for his glory that some things should be revealed, or else why has he revealed them? He might have dwelt for ever in that wondrous solitude in which we suppose he did dwell before he commenced the work of creation. We know not what he was doing in that eternity—of which it is difficult if not impossible for us to conceive—when there was no creation, when not a single star had begun to shine, nor an angel had fled through space on rapid wing. If it were God’s glory to be absolutely concealed, it seems to me that he would have remained alone in the thick darkness that surrounded him, for he would not have wanted to have a single creature to know his love, to realize his power, or to contemplate his wisdom. It is at once obvious that if this is the true and correct interpretation, “It is the glory of God to conceal a thing,” it must be taken in a very limited sense. If it had been his glory to conceal everything, he would have continued to conceal it; but as far as I can see his manifested glory is his glory. The glory of God is not so much to conceal as to reveal himself to those whom he prepares to receive the revelation.

There are many things which it would not be for God’s glory to conceal. You could not say of everything, “It is the glory of God to conceal this.” Take, for instance his righteous law, would it have been for his glory to have left our race utterly ignorant of it? I cannot conceive of such a thing. And then his matchless redemption he has revealed to us in many wonderful ways. Would he have taken all the pains that he has done to reveal himself in Christ Jesus if it had been for his glory to conceal himself in that respect? Would he bid us go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature if it could be for his glory to conceal that? No, it is high treason against the majesty of heaven for any man to obscure the blessed revelation of God in Christ Jesus. I am afraid that all of us preachers of the Word do that in some measure by reason of our infirmity; but God forbid that we should ever wilfully keep back a single ray of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ!

There are many great and glorious truths which do not need that God should conceal them. If we do not perceive them probably it is because it is not necessary that they should be concealed, for their own inherent glory is their concealment. If I were to take for instance the mysterious doctrine of the eternal filiation of the Lord Jesus Christ, or the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Son— these wondrous truths need not be concealed from us, because they are in themselves such deep mysteries that however clearly there may be revealed to us it is not possible for us to understand them. Even the grand doctrine of the Trinity, which is so plainly set forth in the Scriptures—the Trinity in the Unity of the Godhead—need not be concealed; as indeed it has not been, yet we cannot comprehend it. God need not seek out any method of concealment, for if he were to unveil his face among us the glory would be too bright to be beheld. Go and stand, O mortal man, and gaze upon the sun at mid-day! Canst thou do it? Would not thine eyes be thereby blinded? Yet the sun is only one of the myriads of servants in the courts of God; then what must the face of the King himself be? It needs not that he should veil it; his own glory is surely veil enough unto itself. Our minds are finite, contracted, limited. There were certain men who called themselves “Encyclopaedists”, because they fancied that they knew everything; yet they knew nothing perfectly, and many of them broke down together in their attempt to learn even all that might be known by men. But as for God himself, who can possibly comprehend him? The archangel who stood nearest to his august presence must veil his face with his wings, for even he is not able to gaze upon the glory of that excessive light. It does not seem to me to be so great a truth that it is the glory of God to conceal as that his very glory doth conceal itself, not by being concealed, but by being so exceedingly unveiled. The glory itself blindeth, for the finite mind of man is not able to gaze thereon.

Yet the truth which our English Version seeks to convey to us may be accepted without hesitation if we regard it thus: if God has concealed anything, it is God’s glory to conceal it, and it is right that it should be hidden. If God has not told us any truth, it is for his glory not to tell it to us. Perhaps we have as much reason to bless the Lord for what is not in the Bible as for what is there; and what he has not revealed may be as much for our benefit, and certainly is as much for his glory, as what he has revealed. For instance, if he does not tell us all about himself and the mystery of his person, do we want to know it? Can we not believe in him and love him all the better because we do not understand him? Surely a God whom we could understand would be no God. We delight in being out of our depth—in finding waters to swim in where understanding with its little plumline finds no bottom, but where love with a restful spirit finds perfect peace. Doubtless there is a glory in the Lord not revealing himself so far as the past or present is concerned.

As to the future, it is no doubt for the glory of God that he has not revealed to us all concerning the history of this world. It may be all in the Book of Daniel and the Book of Revelation. Some friends think it is, and it may be; but this I venture to say, there is no man who understands it, and I do not think any men will understand it until the Word shall explain itself; and then possibly, when history becomes the commentary upon the prophecy, we shall wonder that we did not see it. Yet we cannot do so at present. It is to the glory of God and to thine own profiting that thou dost not know what will happen to thee on the morrow. Thou knowest not what afflictions may await thee, nor when thou shalt die; it is well for thee that thou dost not know. If it had been for God’s glory that thou shouldst read thy history from its first page to its last and be able to foretell every event in thine own life story, or in the history of the nations of the earth, God would have revealed it to thee; but be thou content not to know what God doth not tell thee, and say in thy spirit, “Let it be so; for in some things it is the glory of God to conceal a thing.”

Still, I think that this is not the teaching of the text. I conceive that it has quite another meaning which I will try to give you. You know that in a proverb like this with a “but” in the middle there is what we call a antithesis, or an expression of opposites. The text does not run thus, “It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honor of kings is to publish a thing.” That is not what is said here; it is quite a different sentence which is not an antithesis at all. Then again, the antithesis is not complete, “It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honor of kings is to search out a matter,” for it is not so much the business of kings to search out matters that refer to wisdom, as it is the business of wise men to do so. If there are doctrines that are not known to us because God conceals them, it is the business of wise men to search them out, and not so much the business of kings to do so. Neither can we read the passage thus, “It is the glory of God to conceal a thing, but the honor of kings to make things plain,” because the third verse of the chapter does not agree with this rendering. Solomon did not think that it was to the honor of kings to make things plain. He was a believer in diplomacy, for he says “The heaven for height and the earth for depth, and the heart of kings is unsearchable.” He could not therefore have intended to convey that meaning.

Now let me give you what I think is the true meaning of the passage. What is the business of kings? Why are they set up above their fellow-men? What is their honor? Why, it is the honor of kings to search out matters that concern the administration of justice, to bring prisoners before their bar, laying bare their crimes and convicting them of they are guilty. It is the glory of God to cover a matter, that matter being sin; but it is the honor of kings to search that matter out and bring the guilty one to justice. You know that we think less and less of our police if they are not able to discover criminals. It has sometimes happened that justice misses its mark. Perhaps there is an attempt made to get a certain important witness out of the way, or to suborn another, or to suppress some testimony that might be brought against the accused persons. It is never to the honor of kings when that is done. When for instance a murder has been committed and the criminal cannot be traced, it is not to the credit of the governing powers that it should be so; and though it must be so sometimes— for no human government can be perfect in its detective forces— yet it is not to the honor of “the powers that be.” It is to the honor of kings that they search matters out till they bring home the guilt to the proper individual. Nor is it to the honor of kings if they give their verdict and sentence at first sight according to prejudice. It is their honor to search out a matter—to hear both sides of the case. The magistrate who sits in the king’s name is bound to enquire thoroughly into the matter brought before him, and at last to adjudicate as justice demands. This is sometimes very difficult, but it is to the honor of kings and their representatives when they attempt it. Now to God such a thing as this is impossible. Nothing is concealed from him; the whole universe is but one great prison for those who offend against him and he can find them at any time that he pleases, and he can execute his just sentence upon them without a moment’s delay. He needs no witnesses, he need not summon this person or that who has seen a certain deed done, for the transgression has been committed in his own sight. His glory is that he covers the matter; and as it is the glory of God to cover the matter, it is also the honor of kings to search the matter out; that matter in each case being the breach of law. I am persuaded that this is the meaning of the text. Even if it were not, it is a grand truth of Scripture well worthy of our meditation.

So we shall dwell upon it thus. First, it is the glory of God to cover sin. Secondly, this is a great encouragement to penitent sinners; and thirdly, it ought to be a great stimulus to saints.

Who was Cain afraid would kill Him?

 Cain was afraid of the punishment God meted out on him and claimed it was too harsh because anyone who found him wandering around the wilderness would want to kill him since he murdered his brother. This excuse seems illogical since if the sole reason people would want to kill Cain was that he murdered his brother, how would it be any different if he had a farm and grew crops and stayed in one place?

 Wouldn’t people still want to kill him, and to find him easier in order to kill him since he is not wandering around? Wandering around would keep him out of people’s way and make it harder for people to find him if he is evasive enough. But Cain mentions that he would be banished from God’s presence. So Cain understood that in God’s presence there is protection.  Cain was banished away from a relationship with God. Even so, Cain was just making an excuse about his punishment and was the world’s first murderer.

        

With Cain’s grievance, he made the claim people would want to kill him. He understood that people would want vengeance, and since he had the ability to kill someone, other people had the ability to kill as well. Since Abel had the ability to die by violence, Cain understood he had the ability to die by violence from someone else since he was human just as his brother. Cain had fear that there were other people who would kill him. Who were these people that Cain was afraid would kill him? This section of Scripture can be found in Genesis 4:13-14 where Cain mentions his fear of being killed. After reading this passage one would wonder who Cain could possibly be talking about since all that the Bible mentions are Adam, Eve, Cain, and Abel existing and does not mention other people. So who was he afraid would kill him? There are a few options of who they could be.

        The only people that this part of the Bible mentions being alive were Adam, Eve, Cain and Abel (until he was murdered). No other children are mentioned until the next chapter when it talks about the line of Cain, and also Adam through Seth. It is possible that Adam had some daughters during this time that were alive during Abel’s death. Genesis 4:3 says “In the course of time” when referring to the grievance that Cain had which enraged him to murder. This was the time when Cain and Abel both offered sacrifices and God rejected Cain’s offering of crops. 

So after Cain and Abel were born there was a passing of some time. Genesis is not clear on how long this time was, but it had to be enough for Cain and Abel to be grown up and mature. During the course of time it is possible Adam and Eve had daughters and Cain may have taken one to be his wife and had children by this time, and it is plausible, by the time he murdered Cain, these children were old enough to be able to understand what Cain did and also had the ability to kill him. It is also possible that Cain’s sisters (Adam and Eve’s daughters) would try to kill him as well. Women do have the ability to kill men, it is not impossible.

       

 When reading Scripture it shows that it was unlikely Abel had a wife and children, since there is no mention of his line. It is also apparent that Adam and Eve did not have any other sons until after Abel was murdered. So Abel could not have had any descendants who would want to kill Cain. Only after Abel’s death does it mention Adam knowing his wife intimately again and bearing a son who was named Seth. One would assume a husband and wife would have had plenty of time to have sex various times; so it seems odd it took so long for Adam to have sex with Eve again to birth Seth. No witnesses exist today who were there, so we cannot say Adam and Eve had sex or did not have sex until that length of time. But it is possible they did not. But what is more likely is that Adam and Eve did have abundant sex and most likely bore daughters or figured out some primitive method of birth control. If Adam and Eve did bear daughters, Cain could have had one as his wife, before he murdered Abel, and had children that would be upset he murdered their uncle.

        It is obviously though that Seth was born after the death of Abel and not before since it mentions in Genesis 4:25 that Seth replaced Abel. The passage of Seth’s birth was not isolated outside of chronological order. In some instances throughout the Bible passages are not in chronological order; but in the case of this story in Genesis it is obviously in chronological order that Seth was born after Abel died since it explicitly states that Seth replaced Abel who died previously.

        Another possibility is that Cain was thinking about the future that there will be more people born eventually who might grow up to kill him. He could have assumed Adam and Eve his, own parents, would kill him; or that they would have another son who would try and kill him eventually. Humans lived several hundred years during this time, and no one had died of natural causes or old age yet, so Cain probably did not think about dying himself except by a violent act, since the only death he knew about was the one he committed on his brother. So it is plausible Cain was preparing for the future that someone at some point would kill him.

       An even more plausible explanation of who would kill Cain is that Cain had had children before he murdered Abel, and for some reason Abel did not take a wife. Abel was younger than Cain. Some scholars claim Cain and Abel were twins, but there is no factual evidence to prove this. The only evidence would be that they are mentioned one after another without a mention of time passing. If Cain and Abel were twins they would be sexually mature at the same time and most likely both have wives around the same time. Why would Abel wait? But if Abel was much younger than Cain it makes more sense. It would be understandable how easy it would be for Cain to murder him without much of a fight if he was younger and smaller. Also it would explain why Abel did not take a wife yet. Cain was older and was sexually mature before Abel. Abel could have been too busy worshiping God instead of thinking about romance. Cain on the other hand had a very different personality and could have been preoccupied with romance and took a wife. To populate the earth Cain had to have one of his sisters as a wife. Incest did not exist and was not called sin yet since the genetic lines were so pure, and this was the only possible way to populate the earth. Only later was incest mentioned as a sin in the Old Testament by God, and for good reason, since it is a fact that incestual relationships cause many deformities and mental illnesses. Within a few generations the ability to marry more distant relatives was available until family ties were so far apart that it was easy to find someone not related in the sense of our idea of relatives today. This ability could have happened within a very few generations.

      

  The best explanation of why Cain feared people would kill him is that he had taken a wife, had children (since Genesis 4:17-22 does not state when exactly Cain had sexual relations with his wife, it could have been before he murdered Abel) who were old enough to understand he murdered his brother, and word would spread to everyone including future generations who would hunt Cain down and kill him eventually. He could have had sisters currently alive who would want to kill him, as well as fearing his own parents might want to kill him. Who knows what Cain’s irrational and selfish mind would assume. Also, no one was immune to sin especially his own parents who were the first sinners. He could have also been thinking that Adam and Eve would have more sons and daughters who would grow up and also possibly kill Cain. God prevented this from happening by declaring that if anyone would kill him, they would be punished seven times over. God then put a mark on Cain to signify that by God’s command Himself, no one is to harm Cain at all, or suffer that fate. This mark on Cain was some visible marking on his physical body. It could have been a special design somewhere people could see easily. Probably his face. Whatever that sign looked like the people of the time knew exactly what it meant. So Cain was not murdered and died eventually most likely by a natural cause. This was an act of God’s common mercy on all people, both wicked and righteous.

Did the continents divide before or after the flood from scriptures?

The Bible seems to indicate that for a period of time after the flood of Noah the earth's continents were all connected. They became disconnected, however, during the days of Peleg. 

In Genesis 10 we find a fascinating but often overlooked statement regarding this event.

. And Eber begat two sons. The name of the one was Peleg, FOR IN HIS DAYS THE EARTH WAS DIVIDED; and his brother's name was Joktan. (Genesis 10:25, HBFV)

Peleg was born 101 years after the flood ended. Some believe that the division caused during the days of Peleg refers to the division of earth via plate tectonics or that put simply that the continents separated. This supposition is incorrect. If massive plate movements during the time of Babel or Peleg had divided the earth it would have caused catastrophic rearrangements of the earth. This would have been recorded in various historical accounts. The fact that this division is of a less catastrophic nature weighs against plate tectonics being the cause of this division.

The connection of the continents allowed animals to move into areas that were later separated by water. For example, animals and people moved into Australia, Micronesia, Polynesia and also other places such as North and South America via the land bridge that once connected present day Russia and Alaska.

Genesis 10:25 reveals that the earth and its land masses were divided by rising sea levels. The name of Peleg is derived from the word pelagic. This word means 'watercourse' in the Hebrew (Strong's Concordance #H6388) and 'division' in the Aramaic. It also means relating to, or living or occurring in the open sea, oceanic. This word is often used as a descriptive term. We often speak of pelagic birds, which means marine or ocean birds. The word "Peleg," in its basic use, means division by water, as in Job 38:25 where it states "Who has divided (peleg) a channel for the overflowing water . . ."

The Genesis flood caused the ice age. This would lock up massive amounts of water in polar ice. As the earth warmed up and the polar ice melted it would have caused a corresponding rise in the level of the earth's oceans. As the ocean levels rose the rising waters would have separated various landmasses. This would have included the separation of Western Asia (Russia) from Alaska via the Bering land bridge. Other areas separated would have included Australia, New Zealand, and Southern Asia. If the waters had raised slightly more the Isthmus of Panama would be underwater today, which would have separated North and South America.

Shortly after the flood, the earth began to thermally stabilize and the polar ice began to melt. This was one of the reasons that God was adamant that human migrations take place quickly.

1. And God blessed Noah and his sons, and He said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and replenish the earth . . ."

6. And the LORD said, "Behold, the people are one and they all have one language. And this is only the beginning of what they will do - now nothing which they have imagined to do will be restrained from them. 7. Come, let Us go down and there confuse their language, so that they cannot understand one another's speech." 8. So the LORD scattered them abroad from that place upon the face of all the earth . . . (Genesis 9:1,11:6 - 8, HBFV)

As the ice began to melt, routes that were easy to traverse (for animals and humans) would have been inundated by rising water. This is one of the reasons that God confounded the languages at the tower of Babel. The new languages caused the people to migrate immediately before many of the migration routes, especially between continents, would be sealed off by rising water. The change in the earth's climate, however, meant lifespans significantly decreased after Noah's flood.

Wher is the Tree of Life on Earth after Eden?

What happened to the tree of life after Adam and Eve were thrown out of Eden's garden for disobeying God?    

  Adam and Eve, very soon after their creation, had an important decision to make that involved a special tree. What was at stake was profound. They had to decide whether they would trust God or trust in their own determination of what they thought was right and wrong. What forced them to decide (a test which the Eternal planned) was a tree, in the middle of the Garden of Eden, labeled the knowledge of good and evil (Genesis 2:17). As most people know, our first parents choose unwisely, and thereby bequeathed to humanity an existence of toil and trouble that still exists today.
Eating of the tree of life (Genesis 2:9; 3:22 - 23) symbolized committing to going God's way in faith and obedience, then ultimately be given the gift of living forever. Adam and Eve's eating of the forbidden fruit (Genesis 2:16 - 17; 3:3, 11), however, symbolized man deciding for himself, apart from God, what was right and wrong, good and evil, the best way to live, and so on.
As a side note, some wonder what type or kind of fruit was on the tree that symbolized eternal existence. The Bible is unfortunately silent in this regard.Our first parents choose to live life based on their own human reason and emotions, which would ultimately be led by God's adversary Satan the devil (Revelation 12:7 - 9; Isaiah 14:12 - 14; Ezekiel 28:12 - 19). Ironically, they rejected believing in the true God to "worshipping" their own views and opinions. The Eternal allowed Man to set himself up as 'god' of the universe created in his own mind in order to learn valuable eternal lessons!
After their sin, God exiled the first two humans from the garden and placed a special angel at its entrance to keep the first couple and their descendants from re-entering it. The reason why God did this was to keep them, and all humans, from living forever in misery brought by man's choice to reject him and his ways.

24 Then at the east side of the garden (of Eden) he (God) put living creatures (the NKJV and other translations have 'cherubim,' which are a powerful class of angels like Archangels) and a flaming sword . . . This was to keep anyone (Adam and his descendants) from coming near the tree . . . (Genesis 3:24).

What happened to the tree of life after the sin and banishment of our first parents? It was highly likely destroyed, with the rest of Eden's garden, during the great flood that covered the whole world (Genesis 7:17 - 23). Will we see it sometime in the future? Yes! It is mentioned three times in the Book of Revelation.
The tree's first mention is when God makes a special promise to those in the church at Ephesus, the very first church to receive a spiritual evaluation by him. Those who overcome will be able to eat from it in God's kingdom!

7. The one who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To the one who overcomes I will give the right to eat of the tree of life that is in the midst of the paradise of God (Revelation 2:7, HBFV)

The second time it is mentioned is in the New Jerusalem God will create and bring down from heaven to the earth. John writes that it will produce, each month, twelve different fruits!

1. Then he showed me a pure river of the water of life, clear as crystal, flowing out from the throne of God and of the Lamb. 2. And in the middle of the street, and on this side and that side of the river, was the tree of life, producing twelve manner of fruits, each month yielding its fruit; and the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations (Revelation 22:1 - 2, HBFV)

The third and last mention is a statement by God that those who OBEY his commandments (yes, they still are in affect and were never done away with!) will be given the right to eat from it!

14. Blessed are those who keep His commandments, that they may have the right to eat of the tree of life, and may enter by the gates into the city (Revelation 22:14, HBFV).

Blessed be God who hath saved us by the death of His Son who chose to die for us on the cross and having   ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.

 What does "he ascended" mean except that he also descended to the lower, earthly regions?
He who descended is the very one who ascended higher than all the heavens, in order to fill the whole universe.(Ephesians 4 verse 8-9)

Who did Cain and Abel marry from Scriptures?

The truth is that the bible is the only valid book that has the only reasonable evidence to creation philosophy logically and no other book has been able to give a better explanation.As it is the bible is the only true book and only gives its knowledge to those that are willing to receive it and without the pride of knowledge that puffs up.
The first question is, how many sisters were potentially available for Cain and Abel to marry? 

The Bible does not reveal exactly how many children Adam and Eve produced. It is safe to assume, however, that since Adam lived 930 years, he had PLENTY of time to take full advantage of God's command to procreate and fill the earth!

A footnote in the writings of the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus (Antiquities of the Jews, Book 1, Chapter 2) states that there existed an old tradition which said Adam had THIRTY-THREE sons (which included Cain and his brother) and TWENTY-ONE daughters! Adam and Eve's creation was perfect in every way. Their children would also be born physically and genetically perfect. 

For a time after humans were created men could (and had to) marry one of their sisters - without the genetic problems that would later arise.
 God, temporarily allowed intra-family marriages to increase his earthly family.
 Sometime after the flood,  He began commanding that near-relative marriages should not occur (Leviticus 18:6). If Adam and Eve received the same command God gave to Israel, and they and their children all obeyed it, man would have quickly died out.

By the time of the flood, severe genetic weaknesses had likely set in, making close-kin marriages impractical, and greatly reducing the average life span of man after the flood. This would prevent another population explosion of the pre-flood magnitude. (Mathematicians have calculated a billion people may have died in the flood.).