Cain's wife...thoughts?

[JonMarc]

Originally Posted by Bandit

that's cool JonMarc. but then the people before Adam would be under the curse of death because of Adams trangression & several other complications in the scripture. I am seeing it as a reiteration of the 6th day & that God has not yet rested, because perfected man is His rest. From what I can see the sixth day is mans day.

interesting point...agree to disagree? haha. regardless, i think the important point the creation story is trying to show is God's part in it! believing that, the rest are details which we can pick apart to help examine our other personal beliefs and keep our grey matter going!

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by JonMarc

interesting point...agree to disagree? haha. regardless, i think the important point the creation story is trying to show is God's part in it! believing that, the rest are details which we can pick apart to help examine our other personal beliefs and keep our grey matter going!

right . so take it away & i will just kind of hang out & listen to what you are seeing there.

[mynameisstephen]

Many skeptics have claimed that, for Cain to find a wife, there must have been other ‘races’ of people on the Earth who were not descendants of Adam and Eve.

To many people, this question is a stumbling block to accepting the creation account in Genesis and its record of only one man and woman at the beginning of history

The first man

‘Therefore, even as through one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so death passed on all men inasmuch as all sinned (Romans 5:12).’

We read in 1 Corinthians 15:45 that Adam was ‘the first man.’ God did not start by making a whole group of men.

The Bible makes it clear that only the descendants of Adam can be saved. Romans 5 teaches that we sin because Adam sinned. The death penalty, which Adam received as judgment for his sin of rebellion, also passed on to all his descendants.

Since Adam was the head of the human race when he ‘fell,’ we who were in the loins of Adam ‘fell’ also. Thus, we are all separated from God. The final consequence of sin would be separation from God in our sinful state forever. However, the good news is that there is a way for us to return to God!

Because a man brought sin and death into the world, all the descendants of Adam need a sinless Man to pay the penalty for sin and the resulting judgment of death. However, the Bible teaches that ‘all have sinned’ (Romans 3:23). What is the solution?

The last Adam

God provided the solution—a way to deliver man from his wretched state. Paul explains in 1 Corinthians 15 that God provided another Adam! The Son of God took on a human nature in addition to His full divinity, becoming a perfect God-man—Jesus Christ. In His humanity He was a descendant of Adam (through Noah, Abraham and David)—He thus became our relation! He is called ‘the last Adam’ (1 Corinthians 15:45), because he took the place of the first Adam. He became the new head and, because he was sinless, He was able to pay the penalty for sin:

‘For since by a man came death, by a man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive (1 Corinthians 15:21–22).’8

Christ suffered death (the penalty for sin) on the cross, shedding his blood (‘without shedding of blood is no forgiveness’ Hebrews 9:22) so that those who repent of their sin of rebellion and put their trust in His work on the cross can be reconciled to God.

Since the Bible describes all human beings as sinners, except the God-Man Jesus, and we are all related (‘And He has made all nations of men of one blood to dwell on all the face of the Earth’ Acts 17:26), the gospel makes sense only on the basis that all humans alive and all who have ever lived are descendants of the first man Adam.9 If this were not so, then the gospel could not be explained or defended.

The Book of Hebrews amplifies how Jesus took upon himself the nature of a man to save mankind (Hebrews 2:11–18). Seven centuries before this happened, the Prophet Isaiah spoke of Him as literally the ‘Kinsman-Redeemer,’ i.e. one who is related by blood to those he redeems (Isaiah 59:20, uses the same Hebrew word goel as used to describe Boaz in relation to Ruth).

Thus, only descendants of the first man Adam can be saved.

All related

Thus, there was only one man at the beginning—made from the dust of the Earth (Genesis 2:7).

This also means that Cain’s wife was a descendant of Adam. She could not have come from another ‘race’ of people and must be one of Adam’s descendants.

The first woman

In Genesis 3:20 we read, ‘And Adam called his wife’s name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.’10 In other words, all people are descendants of Adam and Eve—she was the first woman.

Eve was made from Adam’s rib (or side, Hebrew tsela, Genesis 2:21–24)—this was a unique event. Jesus (Matthew 19:4–6) and Paul (Ephesians 5:31) use this historical and one-time event as the doctrinal foundation for the marriage of one man to one woman.

Also, in Genesis 2:20, we are told that when Adam looked at the animals, he could not find a mate—there was no one of his kind.

All this makes it obvious that there was only one woman, Adam’s wife, at the beginning. There were never any other women around who were not Eve’s descendants.

If Christians cannot defend that all humans (including Cain’s wife) can trace their ancestry ultimately to Adam and Eve, then how can they understand and explain the gospel? How can they justify sending missionaries to every tribe and nation? Therefore, one needs to be able to answer the question about Cain’s wife, to illustrate that Christians can defend the gospel and all that it teaches.

Cain’s brothers and sisters

Cain was the first child of Adam and Eve recorded in Scripture (Genesis 4:1). His brothers, Abel (Genesis 4:2) and Seth (Genesis 4:25), were part of the first generation of children ever born on this Earth.

Even though only these three males are mentioned by name, Adam and Eve had other children. In Genesis 5:4 a statement sums up the life of Adam and Eve—‘And the days of Adam after he had fathered Seth were eight hundred years. And he fathered sons and daughters.’ This does not say when they were born. Many could have been born in the 130 years (Genesis 5:3) before Seth was born.

During their lives, Adam and Eve had a number of male and female children. The Jewish historian Josephus wrote that, ‘The number of Adam’s children, as says the old tradition, was thirty-three sons and twenty-three daughters.’11

The Bible does not tell us how many children were born to Adam and Eve. However, considering their long life spans (Adam lived for 930 years—Genesis 5:5), it would seem reasonable to suggest there were many! Remember, they were commanded to ‘Be fruitful, and multiply’ (Genesis 1:28).

The wife

If we now work totally from Scripture, without any personal prejudices or other extra-Biblical ideas, then back at the beginning, when there was only the first generation, brothers would have had to have married sisters or there would be no more generations!

We are not told when Cain married or any of the details of other marriages and children, but we can say for certain that some brothers had to marry their sisters at the beginning of human history.

[Bandit]

Many skeptics have claimed that, for Cain to find a wife, there must have been other ‘races’ of people on the Earth who were not descendants of Adam and Eve.

To many people, this question is a stumbling block to accepting the creation account in Genesis and its record of only one man and woman at the beginning of history

right mynameisstephen & the rest of what you have pulled together is pretty much how i see that too.

another interesting point there with what you already have is Cain built a city & named it Enoch (after his son). there is nothing there that indicates there was already a city in the 'land' of Nod.
some feel they need to pull the 'prehistoric' into this (which is Gods creation too).
some feel that even the serpant/Satan procreated with Eve (but we cross the line there with THAT WHICH IS BORN OF FLESH IS FLESH...)

So far, i believe the prehistoric is a seperate issue from modern man as we know him & even if there was another at the same time, according to the bible it all, every living THING was destroyed, because that is why God collapsed the canopy of waters, to destroy the evil.

People multiply faster than we give credit for. Like in 40 years we went from 3.5 billion to over 6 billion

i do not see any difference in me & a jew or an african or japanese, except for a little different color in skin or a bigger nose or smaller ears & of course there customs. I have irish, indian, german & swedish in me.
now i do see a big difference in me & monkeys & ummm, tadpoles.

for me, i think all the other creation stories out there on this are pretty much being derived from the creation story that we are speaking of here in the bible. like the telephone wire game, we play as kids.

but to each there own.
& Welcome to CR Steven

[JonMarc]

very good information stephen! as with most of your other posts i've seen, you are very throrough in your explanations and scriptural support for such. i am not saying i see a contradiction in the bible because of this point, i simply see things slightly differently than you do.

i said juan's post hit on my own beliefs, but did not go into depths on my own beliefs, which do differ from juan's some.
so....bandit....here i go!!

incidentally... somehow i missed the post by path of one and wanted to comment on it quickly....
in addition to what you said in your first passage...which is in agreeance with my own beliefs, here are some more thoughts of mine...

cain said he could not bear God's punishment, that he would be hidden from His presence, a restless wanderer.... though i do not infer that cain literally left the scope of God's sight, i interpret this banishment 'from God's view' symbolically as cain's leaving God's people, becoming that wanderer, and thus ending up wed to a woman from another culture.

Now...God sees all and knows all, is present in all places.... IS all. except for hell... which in my eyes is, forgetting for the time being anything about fire and brimstone, the state of being completely separated and, for all intensive purpose, ignored by God.

consider this... god created adam and eve... god also created others... the story of the Bible follows the geneological line of adam because it was adam and his wife eve who sinned. and it was a descendant of adam who was spared from the flood. the line of adam are the only ones who can be saved... they are the only ones who need saving, as they are the only ones cursed by adam's sin. perhaps others were dwelling in the garden of eden, perhaps they stayed there. perhaps these were the sons of God the bible speaks of before the flood.... who later took the daughters of men from adam's line as their wives. this displeased God, for although they did not directly obey anything He had told them to do or not to do (sin) as adam did, they were not perfect, they were, in fact, inherently evil at heart. God then decides to bring the flood, but spares one man and his people, for that man (Noah) found favor in God's eyes by being a '...righteous man, blameless among the people of his time, and he walked with God.' - Genesis 6:9

i am still working many things out regarding the specifics of my faith, the creation story being only one of them. but these are some ideas that i've struggled with and thought and prayed about much. i am not 100% firm in my belief in this interpretation of the events layed out in the beginning of genesis, but all of this is stuff that i've come up with so far. thanks for reading!

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by JonMarc

so....bandit....here i go!!

LOL go for it that is one reason why they have this place for us, to share our beliefs without feeling discarded. i am a pretty good listener & head nodder & I really do try to understand what others are seeing.

hanging out here is a lot of fun.
just so long as they dont try to take away our prayer life, our bibles & our Jesus.

[Faithfulservant]

Ok.. I agree with Stephan.. First off.. God commanded Adam and Eve to populate the earth and before they were ousted from Eden you have to remember that they were in perfect bodies able to survive for eternity they were to never know death. So... following Gods command they began populating the earth.. how many children do you think someone could have in 1000 years... and how many children could those children have in 1000 years.. and those children and those children and those children etc.. Just because Cain and Abel are the first listed descendents of Adam does NOT mean they were the first children. They were just the first ones that had any relevancy to history at that time.

If you can grasp that sin is what corrupted their bodies you can grasp that they had perfect genes and perfect DNA till sin began corrupting these things in subsequent generations when God finally said no more incest. You would have to believe that God can do anything.

I believe the bible is literal except when words are used like "like unto"

[Quahom1]

First born, and second born...over and over first born gets his butt kicked, however the second born gets God's favor. First born hurts and the second born gets hurt...ouch.


v/r

Q

[JonMarc]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

...
Don't get me wrong...I bend knee at my wife's waist. But I know I run the roost as well...
...

so long as your wife does not read this line it should be smooth seas and steady winds! haha
i once thought i ran the roost... until i realized she was running out of the roost from time to time... alas, some things cannot be.

Originally Posted by Faithfulservant

...
Just because Cain and Abel are the first listed descendents of Adam does NOT mean they were the first children. They were just the first ones that had any relevancy to history at that time.
...

interesting we make exactly the same point. i simply make it about God's creating of lives while you make it about adam and eve's *assisted* creating of lives.

perfect bodies, perfect dna, and then sin? or sin therefore imperfect bodies, imperfect dna? after all, they did sin inside the garden, when they were still supposed to be 'perfect' yes?
i dunno...

*nods head*..... just not the same effect as in real life eh bandit?
amen brother

[Faithfulservant]

When they sinned in Eden.. it wasnt just BAM! your corrupt and going to die before your 60 from cancer diabetes heart disease or whatever.. I believe it was a generational thing.. if you look at the following generations in the bible you see how their life spans were shortened.


gen 5:5 So all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years; and he died.

gen 5:8 So all the days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve years; and he died.

gen 5:11 So all the days of Enosh were nine hundred and five years; and he died.

gen 5:14 So all the days of Cainan were nine hundred and ten years; and he died.

gen 5:17 So all the days of Mahalalel were eight hundred and ninety-five years; and he died.

gen 5:27 So all the days of Methuselah were nine hundred and sixty-nine years; and he died.

gen 5:31 So all the days of Lamech were seven hundred and seventy-seven years; and he died.

gen 9:29 So all the days of Noah were nine hundred and fifty years; and he died.

After the Flood


gen 11:32 So the days of Terah were two hundred and five years, and Terah died in Haran.

gen 25:17 These were the years of the life of Ishmael: one hundred and thirty-seven years; and he breathed his last and died, and was gathered to his people.

Num 33:39 Aaron was one hundred and twenty-three years old when he died on Mount Hor.

Jos 24:29 Now it came to pass after these things that Joshua the son of Nun, the servant of the Lord, died, being one hundred and ten years old.


2Ch 24:15 But Jehoiada grew old and was full of days, and he died; he was one hundred and thirty years old when he died.

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, all!

Very interesting conversation so far. I think a lot hinges on “truth” versus “fact.” Since there is no direct evidence of the existence of Eden, it is really difficult to say with any certainty. Since I try to bring my understanding of truth into line with fact, I go with what can be shown using extra-Biblical supports to align my beliefs with fact so that my belief is not merely blind acceptance. I also realize this course is not for everybody, I don’t expect to sway anyone here. I am merely presenting my understanding, using some supposition, especially in my regarding Adam and Eve as historical people who actually did exist. I want to believe they were real people, not an allegorical myth to explain some episode in human development. That said…

Originally Posted by Bandit

And Adam 'knew' Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD.

Ah, but did you notice Adam is not mentioned? Eve bare a son, yes, but not by Adam. Notice especially that Cain is not included in the genealogy of Adam. Because the Bible is the (hi)story of the descendents of Adam.

Originally Posted by Bandit

Genesis 7:21 And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man:

Genesis 7:22 All in whose nostrils [was] the breath of life, of all that [was] in the dry [land], died.

Genesis 7:23 And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained [alive], and they that [were] with him in the ark.

This requires a bit of a stretch of imagination. The “whole” earth was all of the earth, and then some, that these people, the descendents of Adam, knew. Indeed, a lot of the earth was covered no doubt, and there are evidences around that demonstrate massive flooding. But not everywhere. I mentioned Australia. How does one explain how such diverse animals as kangaroos, koalas, tasmanian devils and other creatures unique only to Australia got there? On the Ark? Then to get off and cross an ocean? And leave no trace anywhere else? I have a hard time reconciling that.

Originally Posted by queenofsheba

"Adam" means "man"

“Adam” means “man of red earth” or “red clay,” possibly owing to the ruddy complexion as much as the constitution. “Ashes to ashes and dust to dust…”

Originally Posted by Bandit

…the people before Adam would be under the curse of death because of Adams trangression & several other complications in the scripture.

Why?

Look at the days of creation. The first five days end “and it was good.” The sixth day creation, the “hunter-gatherers,” the “Adam” without the article, ended with “and it was very good.” My emphasis, the word is in the manuscripts. By contrast, the eighth day creation, “ha-Adam,” the man Adam, was created to tend the garden. This marked the dawn of agriculture. I have shown over and again how important this is to human development. Before ha-Adam, there was no man to till the soil. The sixth day creation were outside of the promise and obligation made to and of the man we know as Adam. The sixth day creation, like all of wild nature, were created innocent and perfect, just the way God intended, even if we do not understand His ways. The fall of Adam and Eve may have affected all of creation, including the sixth day humans, but they were not born that way.

Look at the curses: Adam would earn his bread by the sweat of his brow; weeds, thorns and thistles would plague his efforts. Eve would travail in labor. (Morton wrote an interesting piece dealing with this that I referenced quite some time ago on another thread, having to do with the size of the infant skull and the fact human infants are so slow to mature in comparison with other creatures of comparable size and weight) And the serpent, who until that time walked about on legs like humans, was cursed to crawl on his belly. I don’t think this was all snakes, but snake anatomy is interesting, they have residual hips and limbs.

Originally Posted by mynameisstephen

Many skeptics have claimed that, for Cain to find a wife, there must have been other ‘races’ of people on the Earth who were not descendants of Adam and Eve.

To many people, this question is a stumbling block to accepting the creation account in Genesis and its record of only one man and woman at the beginning of history

Perhaps for some, I will not disagree. There are those who will find any excuse they can to disagree with the teachings of the Bible. However, I will state emphatically and for the record, this is not my motivation. I no longer find this a “stumbling block” in my walk.

Originally Posted by Bandit

some feel that even the serpant/Satan procreated with Eve (but we cross the line there with THAT WHICH IS BORN OF FLESH IS FLESH...)

That is fine, you know I value your opinion. I have heard such teaching before. In my walk I find it difficult to justify rationally after some of the other things I have pointed out. If the serpent were indeed Satan, which may or may not be, it only further justifies what I have been saying, that prior to the curse he was not only able to, but did procreate with Eve. It is for that transgression that he was cursed as much or more than the opening of the eyes to “good and evil.” As has been pointed out by you and others, God had a purpose in mind for Adam and his descendents from the beginning. And at the beginning, the serpent (Satan) tried to derail the process. In some small way he succeeded, at least until Jesus.

Originally Posted by JonMark

the line of adam are the only ones who can be saved... they are the only ones who need saving, as they are the only ones cursed by adam's sin.

I want to say first that you are very astute, and have managed to capture a great deal of nuance in your understanding. I agree with a great deal of what you have to say in this regard. However, here I will take a minor issue. Why would God not save the creation prior to Adam? Especially if it was very good? If all flesh was preserved alive in the Ark, it could be argued some of the sixth day creation also went along for the ride. Personally, I think many were spared the ravages of the flood by reason of where they were at.

The descendents of Adam concern the monotheistic races. The rest are as God intended. I can see here some of the things bananabrain has been saying all along about how the Jewish Laws are not contingent upon those who are not Jews, who are only required to observe the Noahide Laws, which roughly correspond with what I call “common human decency.”

There is something path of one said, I guess it was in another thread, dealing with pigmentation of the skin in peoples from the Northern and Southern hemispheres, and how peoples were darker coming from the South because of harsher sunshine, or something to that extent. This is something I struggle with as well. If the implications are correct, and I haven’t looked closely at the data, then Neandertal would have been the fair skinned races, and Cro-Magnon would have been the darker skinned races. In the stuff I have posted elsewhere, time and again Neandertal is shown to have been in the North in the depths of the Ice Age, while the relative new-comers, the Cro-Magnon, were invaders from the South. Something to think about…modern humans then would all be descended from the African races, yet the depictions in the biology books show otherwise…

So yes, Bandit, sometimes even Darwin must be looked at with questioning eyes, perhaps our biology books still contain a great deal of myth…

But the point of Adam and Eve still is not lost on me. Whether literal or symbolic, they represent the beginning of the promise to which I find myself aligned. And historically they represent the landmark moment of the “opening of the eyes,” the dawn of the agricultural revolution, without which modern humanity would still be living in caves.

[juantoo3]

That is fine, you know I value your opinion. I have heard such teaching before. In my walk I find it difficult to justify rationally after some of the other things I have pointed out. If the serpent were indeed Satan, which may or may not be, it only further justifies what I have been saying, that prior to the curse he was not only able to, but did procreate with Eve. It is for that transgression that he was cursed as much or more than the opening of the eyes to “good and evil.” As has been pointed out by you and others, God had a purpose in mind for Adam and his descendents from the beginning. And at the beginning, the serpent (Satan) tried to derail the process. In some small way he succeeded, at least until Jesus.

A thought occurred to me after I posted: Why would the serpent be so concerned with the new-comers in the Garden? And not the 6th day creation? Why seduce Eve "shortly" after her creation, when there must have been plenty of other women available? It gives me pause to consider...

[Bandit]

Thank You for explaining Juan, but yes i do believe it says Adam knew her, just prior to her having Cain & of course he would not be in the geneology because Jesus came through the righteous seed via Seth & not Cain.

I suppose what you call blind acceptance & stretch of imagination, I would call faith & that nothing is impossible with God.
I think it only takes a tablespoon of water for someone to drown on & one little boat to move the rest...

Thank You again for explaining where you are getting your thoughts from. I do appreciate that.

[juantoo3]

Anytime Bandit, with kind regards!

[JonMarc]

Originally Posted by juantoo3

A thought occurred to me after I posted: Why would the serpent be so concerned with the new-comers in the Garden? And not the 6th day creation? Why seduce Eve "shortly" after her creation, when there must have been plenty of other women available? It gives me pause to consider...

hehehe....

regarding cain's birth and cain's fatherhood...
as (i believe) bandit pointed out elsewhere in this thread or another, the words used to describe cain's conception and enoch's are identical save the name's of course. and seth's birth, minus the words 'and she concieved,' is also the same. which is why i do not see cain's birth as being of any other than adam.

every other man in the geneology to noah lived x number of years, and had many children, other than the ones specific to the line down to noah. in noah's life this line about having many more children is omitted. because he did not have other children aside from the three sons? or though he did, omitted on purpose? because they were not brought onto the ark? just a few thoughts. and if he did other children, no mention of noah taking any daughters onto the ark, he took his sons and his son's wives. kind of find these things interesting myself.

juan made a good point which i think applies to many who have posted on this topic. many of us combine what we know or can learn from history, geology, etc. to construct our personal beliefs on many of the 'gray areas' so to speak. it is my belief that we do not get the whole story in genesis. i feel 100% confident things transpired that were not written there. it is my feeling that they were omitted because, as others have said, they did not apply. the bible relates to adam, his relation to God (Jesus), his and His, respectively, relation to us. Therefore, while i may have 'blind-faith' that the events which transpired in genesis so happened according to The Scripture, i also use non-biblical knowledge (like things people have said in this thread ) to supplement it, thus formulating these ideas i have. i feel like i'm being awfully repetetive here in i'm just repeating what others are saying, but feel the need to clarify my stance.

a word of advice for those of you who live in hot places...
do not leave your bible open and lay your arm across it while typing out these posts, lest you tear pages from it unintentionally as i have.