Featured Who Did Cain Marry?

Do you still do Animal Sacrifices?

 

If you use the example of God being Unchanging as your explanation as to why full sibling incest is wrong, always has been, and always will be, then why would you accept that half sibling incest was acceptable at one point, but God then condemns it in Lev 18:9 The nakedness of thy sister, the daughter of thy father, or daughter of thy mother, [whether she be] born at home, or born abroad, [even] their nakedness thou shalt not uncover.

I know you are trying to say that the difference is between whether or not they were full blood or half blood. God says both are wrong when he has Moses lay down the law. So was it wrong for Abram to marry his half sister? or not? because - correct me if I'm wrong - if we apply your logic to that then we have the answer on full blooded incest.

 

Eve was Adam's sister. She was his flesh and bone.

 

If this is the criteria what precludes Cain from marrying his niece?

 

I thought of that too, and then I realized... If Cain didn't marry his sister, but rather his niece... which of his brothers married a sister to produce that niece. "full blooded incest" as it's beginning to be called, would have occurred one way or another. Doesn't bother me, but I guess it does Roby

 

Might as well ask--who was Abel's wife? If Abel was not married and didn't have children who was Cain a fugitive from, who did he fear would kill him? (Gen. 4:14)

 

Brother, that wasn't my intent, and apparently I offended you, so I am offering you the "olive branch" as my way of apologizing to you. TBS, nothing either of us said will affect his status before God. These threads tend to get rather heated and I was wanting to parlay what Brother Salty said as a little levity to diffuse this a little.

Now, I see it that Cain had to have married someone close in his family. Either that, or he married an alien. There are no other people spoken of at this time other than what came from Adam and Eve, so it had to be a niece, 1st cousin, half-sisiter, whole-sister.....either way, it was one of his kinsmen(kinswomen).

 

Don't waste your time...

Don...don't waste your time on that biologos link. That outfit rejects the Genesis account of creation as literal history involving 6 literal 24 hour days. They advocate that God used evolution and billions of years to accomplish creation. They reject the literal history of the first 11 chapters of Genesis. Ken Ham and the excellent staff and scientists at Answers In Genesis and the good folks at the Institute for Creation Research have proven them Biblically wrong many times. You can't just pick and choose what parts of the Bible you accept or reject.

Bro.Greg:saint:

 

Video: “The Anti-biblical Teachings of BioLogos”


September 27, 2011Tags: Christian Unity
Today's entry was written by Darrel Falk. You can read more about what BioLogos believes here.

Answers in Genesis has posted a 21 minute video of a live talk given by Ken Ham called “Anti-biblical Teachings of BioLogos.” The approach Mr. Ham has taken is quite interesting. He shows clips from about 10 videos featuring BioLogos leaders and supporters, most about 15 to 20 seconds long. After each one, Mr. Ham makes a particular point about how he thinks the BioLogos view leads to the erosion of biblical authority or some related topic.
We have been tempted not to respond to this video. The people in his huge audience— those who are laughing at his remarks and applauding his words—are not going to be swayed into changing their opinion by anything we would say. There are millions in that audience and for them the choice is simple: what is most trustworthy—God’s written Word or as Mr. Ham terms it, “man’s historical science?” Mr. Ham is adept at speaking to the heart of their concerns. He also knows exactly which 15-second clips to use from the vast collection of BioLogos videos to make a strong rhetorical point.
As most of Ken Ham’s followers have already made up their minds—and are not following our blog anyway—we do not write to defend ourselves or even point out how he may have misled them. He has likely made errors in judgment, but we are aware that we have made errors too. There are many people, however, who may see Mr. Ham’s video and suspect that they are not hearing the whole story. They may be sympathetic to Mr. Ham’s message, but they may genuinely want to learn more. Just what are these BioLogos people really saying, they may ask? With that group of people in mind, here is one thing we can do. We can provide the links (we also offer a PDF version to view alongside the video) to those videos that have been commissioned by us or which represent the BioLogos view, so that people can see for themselves the full context of the message we are trying to convey.
I watched Mr. Ham’s video the day after I wrote my blog about the discovery and sequencing of the genome of a second non-human hominid species (Neanderthals are the first) that co-inhabited the planet with modern humans 30,000 years ago. That blog and the reading I had done in preparation for it were fresh on my mind as I watched Mr. Ham stir up fear in the hearts of people. As I’ve written before, I love the people in Mr. Ham’s audiences, and I love being with them. In so many ways, they have their fingers on the pulse of God. They are careful thinkers and they are dedicated followers of Jesus. Above all, they want to protect their children and grandchildren, the persons they love most in life; they want to be sure there is a safety net in place as those children grow up and venture out on their own.
Just think of it, however. We have the instruction books on how to build two different non-human beings, Neanderthals and Denisovans, whose lineage separated from our own 800,000 years ago! Geneticists are already examining them gene-by-gene. It’s not just transitional fossils anymore. We have the genomes! Once civilization has those (the genome sequences), it is not beyond the realm of possibility (heaven forbid) that in coming decades someone somewhere would put these instructions into a human egg, then after implanting into a surrogate mother, bring these beings to life again.
So many of my Christian brothers and sisters keep saying that they know God didn’t create through a gradual process because there are no transitional species. This is not true. Hardly a month goes by when there is not some fossil specimen discovered which fills in one more gap (see here for a recent example discussed on our site). The gaps get smaller and smaller. But now, not only do we have the bones of ancient species, we have the DNA too—in this case, of our closest cousins1 who also arose through this evolutionary process by which God has chosen to create us.
Scientific knowledge is accumulating at lightning speed and we are in need of Christians who understand it and put it into the light of Christian ethics, morality, and a clearly articulated view of the God who loves us and cares for us more than we can imagine. This is the community we are trying to build here at BioLogos. Unfortunately, instead of being the much-needed salt and light in the scientific world and broader culture, too many Christians have removed themselves from the discussion. Too many have hunkered down, hiding their wonderful light under a bushel, when our culture needs them to help put the rapidly accumulating information into a Christ-centered context.
If you choose to watch the linked videos, you’ll probably do so in an individual context—by yourself. However, we also encourage you to view them with friends in discussion groups in your homes and churches. Be careful though. Discussion is healthy, but argument seldom is. Romans 14 reminds us of the importance of respecting those who think differently, and our highest priority is to patiently let each person work through the issues in a manner that is best for them. We mustn’t be the cause of others stumbling. (The Joel Hunter video in the associated set of links does a great job of emphasizing this.) Still, we are a community of loving believers and discussion, well-grounded in a deep sense of care for each other and for the Church, is wholesome and thoroughly biblical.
And, given all that is being discovered in science today, it is also much needed.

 

Kibbitzing again

What if Jesus returns today? Or: our next heartbeat is our last?

Would this money be better spent on widows and orphans?

Have we discovered the gnome for sin?

For further discussion: are some homo sapien subgroups more depraved than others? Also: Where is Cain's progeny after the Flood?

Who did Cain marry? May have been a Mary, certainly not a Larry.

Even so, come Lord Jesus.

Bro. James

 

Don't waste your time with quantum in this discussion. He, too, rejects Genesis, and though will assert he believes Adam and Eve were the first humans, believes they had parents who had evolved.

I'll just let the absolute absurdity of that scenario sink in a little

 

Regardless of how you try to avoid directly saying that God created other humans along side Adam and Eve, that is exactly what you are saying. Someone other than Adam or Eve had to produce, at a minimum, a half-sister for Cain in order to avoid your premise about incest.

Have you ever studied genetics? (I am NOT talking about the theory of evolution!) It seems that you have mixed hybrids and mutations in trying to make your points. Have you ever studied mitochondrial DNA? Dominate & recessive genes? Heredity diseases predominate in ethnic groups?

From the Biblical standpoint, have you taken into consideration, that after the dispersion of people due to language barriers, genetic changes, whether inherited tendency for certain diseases or skin color, came about in more isolated (separated) populations? The gene for red hair is recessive. Yet, there is one population group that has a higher incidence of red hair.

Next, God doesn't change. Yet, His directions (instructions) for human behaviour have changed.

1st example: After the flood, He gave permission for people to eat meat.
2nd example: He lifted dietary restrictions previously in place. ie It isn't what a man puts into his mouth, it's what comes from his mouth that defiles him.
3rd example: When the temple veil was torn, individuals no longer had someone standing between themselves and Him.

In closing, either God created only one man and woman (Adam & Eve) or He created enough men and/or women to ensure that incest wouldn't happen. There is no middle ground.

I believe the Scriptures. God created Adam and Eve. He told them to multiply. When appropriate the time came, in His viewpoint, He changed His instructions for human behaviour. Just as He did when He, Himself, made the final blood sacrifice.

Skin color is a result of mutations in DNA, after the fall, when human bodies became subject to physical death. Whether it's skin color, hair color, sickle cell anemia, hemophilia, dwarfism, and/or other heredity traits. The premise is the same as the cultural distinctions that came about after the separation of mankind. For example, those in Asia, separated from those in western Europe, developed both physical and cultural differences.

 

OF COURSE I do. If Seth had wed someone from another family, Eve would still be his mom, and the grandma of his children, great-grandma of their children, etc. etc.

 

There are some things that have ALWAYS been wrong, such as murder and bestiality. And I believe union between full siblings, or parent-child are among them. God didn't make NEW laws concerning marrying relatives to Moses...he extended those already in existence, for example, extending the prohibition of full siblings marrying to then include half-siblings.

 

The law is still "in the book". However, it was fulfilled completely by JESUS' sacrifice of Himself, eliminating the need for any more animal sacrifices. in fact, making an animal sacrifice now would be denigrating JESUS' sacrifice.

So, no, I DON'T make animal sacrifices, as JESUS fulfilled all of that law.

 

No, she wasn't. She was CREATED, not born.

 

Where did the nieces come from? Who did Cain's bros and sisters marry?

Backta Square One.

 

I don't believe it did, as this idea is so alien to most people around the world.

The Japanese existed for many generations having never heard of God, but incest has always been a strong taboo among them. Same for several other isolated peoples. And we know what the results of incest are in most children produced by it. ( It is practiced in some Moslem lands where sharia is the law of the land, such as in some parts of Pakistan, and we've seen the results!)

Now, any thing we say about the origin of Cain's wife is guesswork since Scripture and secular history are both silent about it, but I simply DO NOT believe it was a full sister! Same for A&E's other children.

 

We really don't know, do we?