cain's wife...

Ann is correct. You also seem to forget that they were sinners and that alone would bring them into such relations.

 

How much time lapsed between Cain and his wife? I'm quite sure it could have been a couple of generations.

 

Wow

Would your imagined post-Flood-newly-created-human-spouses-for-each-of-Noah's grandchildren-so-the-grandchildren-wouldn't-mate-with-each-other-since-that's-icky — would these new people have had a sin nature, since they were not descended from Adam?

 

Here's an idea. If you can't believe Cain married his sister, stop calling yourself a "Fundy". The Fundies got it right. You got it wrong.

 

There's one other option, his mother.


But I agree with you. Good post. :wavey:

 

I gotta say, what you posted, and apparently believe, is the weirdest thing I've ever heard!

 

If it cannot be found in Scripture, you are adding to it; those who do so are addressed in Proverbs 30:5-6.

 

When in Egypt, Abraham said that Sarah was his sister. He was not lying.

 

There are no other options. You cannot create a new doctrine (extra people created) from silence. The bible is clear that Eve is the mother of ALL the living. There were no other Eves.

 

Then you are not open to the truth and you are adding to the bible, and no there is no possibility that God created other people if you understand your bible. You seem to have an overly concern for this issue as well as a very confused one. While I am not suggesting that incest should be practiced the scriptures never deals with it as strong or in the way as you seem to want to make it. In fact in the creation of only two people there was absolutely no possible alternative for their children. Also if someone wanted to press the point to extremes Adam married part of himself. Not only that any marriage is marrying some relative even today as there was only two people in the creation and we all came from them.

God did not forbid incest in the beginning perhaps because the early years after creation the genic pool remained somewhat pure. The first understanding that incest was wrong was not until the law of Moses so anyone who did that prior was not in sin. Where there is no law there is no sin attributed to the person.
Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth [it] not, to him it is sin.
Cane had to marry either a sister, niece or the child of a niece and nephew or some combination like that as there was no one else to marry.
As to specualtion yes we can, but it has to be within the parameters of what we have in the bible and it is not possible that God created someone after Adam.

 

you'll have to look elsewhere, then, roby, cause you mightn't find it here.

 

Genesis 4:1-3 :

1 And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived , and bare Cain, and said , I have gotten a man from the LORD.
2 And she again bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground.
3 And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the LORD.

"in process of time" (v3) might be the key to your issue, robycop. In process of time could be "and time passed". that is, the people grew, matured, propagated. sexual maturity, childbearing, etc., etc.

This "process of time" also involves the health and quickness upon which the early humans reached sexual maturity. How old (or young) before it was considered proper to marry ? So, Cain's wife might be a few notches removed down.
Like, my daughter bears a daughter, and that granddaughter of mine, does not bear my family name, it's just a middle initial to her, and if her daughter marries, well, then, my family name, disappears, and that daughter is now what, twice removed from me ? and if she has a daughter, then that great-great granddaughter of mine is thrice removed from me, and somewhere along the branches and limbs in-between somebody from the same family tree could marry somebody from the same family tree and so on, you understand what I'm getting at ?
But, in the case of Adam and Eve, well, there's gotta be incest at some point, maybe in the early years.

 

One way to look at it is that God had a reason to make only one male and one female “that all nations might know themselves to made of one blood, descendants, from one common stock, and might thereby be induced to love one another.” After all, in my opinion God’s greatest attribute is love and purpose for creation is about love.


Another way to look at it is that “man” and/or “Adam” could/might could be taken in some cases as plural (some linguistics scholars say as much) and/or seen similar to as a type of gap theory.


:laugh:

 

I'm not sure what exactly you are suggesting with this line of thought, and I'm not sure that I want to know

 

I believe that there was almost no genetic mutation up until that time and people lived much longer as a result.
During those times, marrying "within the extended family" was acceptable and provided additional stability.