Cain's Wife - [On Trial]

Scarlett O. · Aug 29, 2016

In 1925 during the Scopes "Monkey" Trials, the ACLU defense attorney, Clarence Darrow pulled an odd stunt and actually put the lead prosecuting attorney, William Jennings Bryan, on the witness stand.

What happened next (and I've read the entire transcript last year getting ready for a Genesis 1-3 Bible study), was nothing short of an attack on Byran's Christian beliefs. Here's the whole transcript: http://www.beliefnet.com/news/scienc...pes-trial.aspx

Darrow went through the Old Testament and asked a lot of questions about Jonah, Adam/Eve, Cain's wife, and more asking him if he believed these things to be true and could be explain ANY of it.

Bryan said he believed it, but could not rationally explain any of it. Here is the small portion of the transcripted question and answer between Darrow and Bryan concerning Cain's wife:

"Q—Did you ever discover where Cain got his wife?A—No, sir; I leave the agnostics to hunt for her.

Q—You have never found out?A—I have never tried to find.

Q—You have never tried to find? A—No.

Q—The Bible says he got one doesn’t it? Were there other people on the earth at that time?A—I cannot say.

Q—You cannot say. Did that ever enter your consideration?A—Never bothered me.

Q—There were no others recorded, but Cain got a wife.A—That is what the Bible says.

Q—Where she came from you do not know."

Here's my whole sad take on this.

Why COULDN'T and WOULDN'T William Jennings Bryan answer the questions? Yes, he was mad that a pagan was mocking God and Biblical beliefs, but all the more reason he SHOULD HAVE answered them.

Just saying "I don't know" and "I let you agnostics figure that out" is no testimony. The Bible says clearly in Proverbs (two separate passages) that there is a time TO answer a fool and and time NOT to answer a fool.

If ANY time there was to answer a fool trying to make a fool out of Christians and their belief in God's Word (as Darrow confesses at the end of the transcript), THIS WAS THE TIME!! Bryan, the Christian, came off looking condescending, ignorant, angry, and belligerent.

Questions like these have been used by non-believers forever in trying to discredit the Bible, God, and Christians. And some Christians today - not a lot, but enough to bring this up - are just like William Jennings Bryan. They don't want to explore, reason, or tackle tough questions.

Sometimes, "I don't know" is a good answer.

And sometimes, "I don't know" coupled with "I don't care - you figure it out" is a terrible answer.

Van · Aug 29, 2016

Great issue, thanks.

As many are aware, the scoffers have websites that supply questions calculated to undercut the authority and veracity of the Bible. The Skeptics Annotated Bible (http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/ ) is one such website.

Usually the questions are based on an invalid assumption, designed to create the illusion of conflict via inconsistency.

Another deflection answer might be "the Bible does not say who gave birth to Cain's wife, and since my beliefs are based on what the Bible does say, I avoid speculation because speculation is the mother of false doctrine. She could have been Cain's sister or niece, but again, that is speculation.

One of the telltale signs is when you answer a question, rather than acknowledging it, they plunge right into another question also calculated to undercut the Bible. Thus the question is agenda driven, rather than a sincere quest for truth.

Scarlett O. · Aug 29, 2016

You are exactly right about those scoffers.

And you have been on the internet long enough to know trolls when you see them and those who don't care about truth should be ignored. That's what I meant when I said that the Bible says that there is a time NOT to answer a fool.

Getting in a discussion with someone like that who is only pushing you to speak so that they can further discredit you is pointless.

But I just have to wonder, what if there were people in the courtroom that day and people since who have studied that infamous case in history classes who were legitimately curious about the answers?

Bryan, with his dismissal of the line of questioning, missed an opportunity to send countless people TO the Bible.

Revmitchell · Aug 29, 2016

Scarlett O. said:
In 1925 during the Scopes "Monkey" Trials, the ACLU defense attorney, Clarence Darrow pulled an odd stunt and actually put the lead prosecuting attorney, William Jennings Bryan, on the witness stand.

What happened next (and I've read the entire transcript last year getting ready for a Genesis 1-3 Bible study), was nothing short of an attack on Byran's Christian beliefs. Here's the whole transcript: http://www.beliefnet.com/news/scienc...pes-trial.aspx

Darrow went through the Old Testament and asked a lot of questions about Jonah, Adam/Eve, Cain's wife, and more asking him if he believed these things to be true and could be explain ANY of it.

Bryan said he believed it, but could not rationally explain any of it. Here is the small portion of the transcripted question and answer between Darrow and Bryan concerning Cain's wife:

"Q—Did you ever discover where Cain got his wife?A—No, sir; I leave the agnostics to hunt for her.

Q—You have never found out?A—I have never tried to find.

Q—You have never tried to find? A—No.

Q—The Bible says he got one doesn’t it? Were there other people on the earth at that time?A—I cannot say.

Q—You cannot say. Did that ever enter your consideration?A—Never bothered me.

Q—There were no others recorded, but Cain got a wife.A—That is what the Bible says.

Q—Where she came from you do not know."

Here's my whole sad take on this.

Why COULDN'T and WOULDN'T William Jennings Bryan answer the questions? Yes, he was mad that a pagan was mocking God and Biblical beliefs, but all the more reason he SHOULD HAVE answered them.

Just saying "I don't know" and "I let you agnostics figure that out" is no testimony. The Bible says clearly in Proverbs (two separate passages) that there is a time TO answer a fool and and time NOT to answer a fool.

If ANY time there was to answer a fool trying to make a fool out of Christians and their belief in God's Word (as Darrow confesses at the end of the transcript), THIS WAS THE TIME!! Bryan, the Christian, came off looking condescending, ignorant, angry, and belligerent.

Questions like these have been used by non-believers forever in trying to discredit the Bible, God, and Christians. And some Christians today - not a lot, but enough to bring this up - are just like William Jennings Bryan. They don't want to explore, reason, or tackle tough questions.

Sometimes, "I don't know" is a good answer.

And sometimes, "I don't know" coupled with "I don't care - you figure it out" is a terrible answer.

More than likely there is some aspect of the legal wrangling in that line of questioning that Bryan understood that maybe we do not.

robycop3 · Aug 30, 2016

I once got into a HUGE argument on another site over Cain's wife, as I don't believe God ever condoned full incest. But, as Scripture and secular history are both silent on that subject, anything anyone says about where she came from is is merely a guess, so I'll let it go at that.

Best example of the consequences of incest in Scripture are Lot's daughters, and the peoples that came from them. While Scripture doesn't mention Nimrod's taking up with his own mom Semiramis, several historical accounts say such, and that they had a son, Tammuz, the object of worship by some Jews in Jeremiah's time. they were also the founders of the "mystery, Babylon" religion.

HankD · Sep 7, 2016

The very same question could be asked of Seth.

Where did Seth get his wife?

Or, where did any male in Genesis Chapter 5 get his wife?

HankD

TCassidy · Sep 7, 2016

Where did Adam get his wife? Eve was made from Adams flesh/bone, and therefore was genetically identical to him. (Genesis 2:21-24)

Cain obviously married his sister. And Seth either married his sister or his niece.

Abraham married his sister.

In Genesis 3:20 we read, “And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.” In other words, all people are descendants of Adam and Eve—she was the first 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 who were not Eve's descendants.

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.

Some people immediately reject the conclusion that Adam and Eve's sons and daughters married each other by appealing to the law against brother-sister intermarriage. Some say that you cannot marry your relation. Actually, if you don't marry your relation, you don't marry a human! A wife is related to her husband even before they marry because all people are descendants of Adam and Eve—all are of “one blood.” The law forbidding marriage between close relatives was not given until the time of Moses (Leviticus 18-20). Provided marriage was one man to one woman for life (based on Genesis 1 and 2), there was no disobedience to God's law originally when close relatives (even brothers and sisters) married each other. Remember that Abraham married his half-sister (Genesis 20:12). God blessed this union to produce the Hebrew people through Isaac and Jacob. It was not until some 400 years later that God gave Moses laws that forbade such marriages.

Some people immediately reject the conclusion that Adam and Eve's sons and daughters married each other by appealing to the law against brother-sister intermarriage. Some say that you cannot marry your relation. Actually, if you don't marry your relation, you don't marry a human! A wife is related to her husband even before they marry because all people are descendants of Adam and Eve—all are of “one blood.” The law forbidding marriage between close relatives was not given until the time of Moses (Leviticus 18-20). Provided marriage was one man to one woman for life (based on Genesis 1 and 2), there was no disobedience to God's law originally when close relatives (even brothers and sisters) married each other. Remember that Abraham married his half-sister (Genesis 20:12). God blessed this union to produce the Hebrew people through Isaac and Jacob. It was not until some 400 years later that God gave Moses laws that forbade such marriages.

For an excellent article (the source of much of the above) and how a denial of the bible fact that Cain married his sister, and how that rejection of the Truth destroys the Gospel see: http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c004.html

HankD · Sep 7, 2016

TCassidy said:
Where did Adam get his wife? Eve was made from Adams flesh/bone, and therefore was genetically identical to him. (Genesis 2:21-24)

Cain obviously married his sister. And Seth either married his sister or his niece.

Abraham married his sister.

In Genesis 3:20 we read, “And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.” In other words, all people are descendants of Adam and Eve—she was the first 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 who were not Eve's descendants.

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.

Some people immediately reject the conclusion that Adam and Eve's sons and daughters married each other by appealing to the law against brother-sister intermarriage. Some say that you cannot marry your relation. Actually, if you don't marry your relation, you don't marry a human! A wife is related to her husband even before they marry because all people are descendants of Adam and Eve—all are of “one blood.” The law forbidding marriage between close relatives was not given until the time of Moses (Leviticus 18-20). Provided marriage was one man to one woman for life (based on Genesis 1 and 2), there was no disobedience to God's law originally when close relatives (even brothers and sisters) married each other. Remember that Abraham married his half-sister (Genesis 20:12). God blessed this union to produce the Hebrew people through Isaac and Jacob. It was not until some 400 years later that God gave Moses laws that forbade such marriages.

Some people immediately reject the conclusion that Adam and Eve's sons and daughters married each other by appealing to the law against brother-sister intermarriage. Some say that you cannot marry your relation. Actually, if you don't marry your relation, you don't marry a human! A wife is related to her husband even before they marry because all people are descendants of Adam and Eve—all are of “one blood.” The law forbidding marriage between close relatives was not given until the time of Moses (Leviticus 18-20). Provided marriage was one man to one woman for life (based on Genesis 1 and 2), there was no disobedience to God's law originally when close relatives (even brothers and sisters) married each other. Remember that Abraham married his half-sister (Genesis 20:12). God blessed this union to produce the Hebrew people through Isaac and Jacob. It was not until some 400 years later that God gave Moses laws that forbade such marriages.

For an excellent article (the source of much of the above) and how a denial of the bible fact that Cain married his sister, and how that rejection of the Truth destroys the Gospel see: http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c004.html

I totally agree and my intuition told me that you would give a winning response.
Cain and Seth took their sisters to wife.

The core scripture (IMO) - "one blood".

Acts 17:26 And He has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined their preappointed times and the boundaries of their dwellings,

Jesus entered that "one blood" line through Mary.

In the biblical sense we are all brethren.

Today in the US individual states determine what is legal and what is not.

Some states even allow first cousin marriage.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin_marriage_law_in_the_United_States_by_state

HankD

percho · Sep 7, 2016

TCassidy said:
Where did Adam get his wife? Eve was made from Adams flesh/bone, and therefore was genetically identical to him. (Genesis 2:21-24)

Cain obviously married his sister. And Seth either married his sister or his niece.

Abraham married his sister.

In Genesis 3:20 we read, “And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.” In other words, all people are descendants of Adam and Eve—she was the first 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 who were not Eve's descendants.

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.

Some people immediately reject the conclusion that Adam and Eve's sons and daughters married each other by appealing to the law against brother-sister intermarriage. Some say that you cannot marry your relation. Actually, if you don't marry your relation, you don't marry a human! A wife is related to her husband even before they marry because all people are descendants of Adam and Eve—all are of “one blood.” The law forbidding marriage between close relatives was not given until the time of Moses (Leviticus 18-20). Provided marriage was one man to one woman for life (based on Genesis 1 and 2), there was no disobedience to God's law originally when close relatives (even brothers and sisters) married each other. Remember that Abraham married his half-sister (Genesis 20:12). God blessed this union to produce the Hebrew people through Isaac and Jacob. It was not until some 400 years later that God gave Moses laws that forbade such marriages.

Some people immediately reject the conclusion that Adam and Eve's sons and daughters married each other by appealing to the law against brother-sister intermarriage. Some say that you cannot marry your relation. Actually, if you don't marry your relation, you don't marry a human! A wife is related to her husband even before they marry because all people are descendants of Adam and Eve—all are of “one blood.” The law forbidding marriage between close relatives was not given until the time of Moses (Leviticus 18-20). Provided marriage was one man to one woman for life (based on Genesis 1 and 2), there was no disobedience to God's law originally when close relatives (even brothers and sisters) married each other. Remember that Abraham married his half-sister (Genesis 20:12). God blessed this union to produce the Hebrew people through Isaac and Jacob. It was not until some 400 years later that God gave Moses laws that forbade such marriages.

For an excellent article (the source of much of the above) and how a denial of the bible fact that Cain married his sister, and how that rejection of the Truth destroys the Gospel see: http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c004.html

I find it interesting that at the moment that the following was stated - 3:20 And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living. - they were in a state of, dead in trespass and sin. Dying thou dost die, and were at that moment, to our knowledge, the only two alive.

Of course we do have the statement of God in verse 15 - And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

In reality isn't Eve the mother of all living because of the promised seed through which there will actually be life? I am the resurrection and the life.

Through Abel, yet to be born? Through Cain, yet to be born? Or because of - And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth: For God, said she, hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew.?

Was she the mother of all who will live through Seth and him, only?

Would also like your thoughts on why eight souls were saved instead of say Mama and Daddy and Mr and Mrs Shem or say just Mr and Mrs Shem?

Might as well throw in; What did poor old Canaan do to be cursed?

Just some rambling thoughts. BTW I have always assumed Cain married a sister but am not sure it is relevant to the gospel in the context of how we consider say, the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction of Romans 9 or election in general.

JonC · Sep 8, 2016

Scarlett O. said:
In 1925 during the Scopes "Monkey" Trials, the ACLU defense attorney, Clarence Darrow pulled an odd stunt and actually put the lead prosecuting attorney, William Jennings Bryan, on the witness stand.

What happened next (and I've read the entire transcript last year getting ready for a Genesis 1-3 Bible study), was nothing short of an attack on Byran's Christian beliefs. Here's the whole transcript: http://www.beliefnet.com/news/scienc...pes-trial.aspx

Darrow went through the Old Testament and asked a lot of questions about Jonah, Adam/Eve, Cain's wife, and more asking him if he believed these things to be true and could be explain ANY of it.

Bryan said he believed it, but could not rationally explain any of it. Here is the small portion of the transcripted question and answer between Darrow and Bryan concerning Cain's wife:

"Q—Did you ever discover where Cain got his wife?A—No, sir; I leave the agnostics to hunt for her.

Q—You have never found out?A—I have never tried to find.

Q—You have never tried to find? A—No.

Q—The Bible says he got one doesn’t it? Were there other people on the earth at that time?A—I cannot say.

Q—You cannot say. Did that ever enter your consideration?A—Never bothered me.

Q—There were no others recorded, but Cain got a wife.A—That is what the Bible says.

Q—Where she came from you do not know."

Here's my whole sad take on this.

Why COULDN'T and WOULDN'T William Jennings Bryan answer the questions? Yes, he was mad that a pagan was mocking God and Biblical beliefs, but all the more reason he SHOULD HAVE answered them.

Just saying "I don't know" and "I let you agnostics figure that out" is no testimony. The Bible says clearly in Proverbs (two separate passages) that there is a time TO answer a fool and and time NOT to answer a fool.

If ANY time there was to answer a fool trying to make a fool out of Christians and their belief in God's Word (as Darrow confesses at the end of the transcript), THIS WAS THE TIME!! Bryan, the Christian, came off looking condescending, ignorant, angry, and belligerent.

Questions like these have been used by non-believers forever in trying to discredit the Bible, God, and Christians. And some Christians today - not a lot, but enough to bring this up - are just like William Jennings Bryan. They don't want to explore, reason, or tackle tough questions.

Sometimes, "I don't know" is a good answer.

And sometimes, "I don't know" coupled with "I don't care - you figure it out" is a terrible answer.

I understand what you are saying, but something in me admires Bryan's answers - not only for their simplicity but also because they strike at the heart of the matter. There is much revealed in Scripture about what God did, but not as much about how He did it. If we are in need of understanding the "how" before we can accept God's Word then we are in a precarious situation.

Internet Theologian · Sep 8, 2016

Scarlett O. said:
In 1925 during the Scopes "Monkey" Trials, the ACLU defense attorney, Clarence Darrow pulled an odd stunt and actually put the lead prosecuting attorney, William Jennings Bryan, on the witness stand.

What happened next (and I've read the entire transcript last year getting ready for a Genesis 1-3 Bible study), was nothing short of an attack on Byran's Christian beliefs. Here's the whole transcript: http://www.beliefnet.com/news/scienc...pes-trial.aspx

Darrow went through the Old Testament and asked a lot of questions about Jonah, Adam/Eve, Cain's wife, and more asking him if he believed these things to be true and could be explain ANY of it.

Bryan said he believed it, but could not rationally explain any of it. Here is the small portion of the transcripted question and answer between Darrow and Bryan concerning Cain's wife:

"Q—Did you ever discover where Cain got his wife?A—No, sir; I leave the agnostics to hunt for her.

Q—You have never found out?A—I have never tried to find.

Q—You have never tried to find? A—No.

Q—The Bible says he got one doesn’t it? Were there other people on the earth at that time?A—I cannot say.

Q—You cannot say. Did that ever enter your consideration?A—Never bothered me.

Q—There were no others recorded, but Cain got a wife.A—That is what the Bible says.

Q—Where she came from you do not know."

Here's my whole sad take on this.

Why COULDN'T and WOULDN'T William Jennings Bryan answer the questions? Yes, he was mad that a pagan was mocking God and Biblical beliefs, but all the more reason he SHOULD HAVE answered them.

Just saying "I don't know" and "I let you agnostics figure that out" is no testimony. The Bible says clearly in Proverbs (two separate passages) that there is a time TO answer a fool and and time NOT to answer a fool.

If ANY time there was to answer a fool trying to make a fool out of Christians and their belief in God's Word (as Darrow confesses at the end of the transcript), THIS WAS THE TIME!! Bryan, the Christian, came off looking condescending, ignorant, angry, and belligerent.

Questions like these have been used by non-believers forever in trying to discredit the Bible, God, and Christians. And some Christians today - not a lot, but enough to bring this up - are just like William Jennings Bryan. They don't want to explore, reason, or tackle tough questions.

Sometimes, "I don't know" is a good answer.

And sometimes, "I don't know" coupled with "I don't care - you figure it out" is a terrible answer.

I disagree with the statements that say he was arrogant, angry, belligerent. He answered exactly how someone should answer when under oath and being interrogated. Short, concise answers, no elaboration. Perfect.

HankD · Sep 8, 2016

I also agree with Bryan's answer but that does not negate the fact that if we know the "how" of God's works we should elaborate.

Hmm, society lets our up and coming queen (hope not) give these kind of answers.

IMO Both responses are appropriate "I don't know" and "I'll explain".

Ya, I know - Situational Ethics.

HankD

TCassidy · Sep 8, 2016

The word which seems to have been eliminated from the average Christians vocabulary is "believe."

"Where did Adam get his wife?"

I don't know as the bible doesn't say, but I BELIEVE the vast preponderance of the evidence suggests he married his sister.

"When did God create the heavens and the earth?"

I don't know, the bible doesn't say, but I BELIEVE the vast preponderance of the evidence suggests the heavens preceded the earth and the earth was subsequently formed in 6 24 hour days.

rsr · Sep 8, 2016

percho said:
Might as well throw in; What did poor old Canaan do to be cursed?

Maybe you should start a thread on that.

rsr · Sep 8, 2016

Having read the transcript, I can't find too much fault with Bryan's answers. He pretty much stuck to affirming the Bible. What I do fault him for is agreeing to testify: really, what defense attorney agrees to testify? The judge should have forbidden it, as well. No one looking at the case from a modern perspective can fail to wonder what in the world Bryan's religions beliefs have to do with the facts of the case.

I think it was hubris: He considered himself Darrow's superior and thought he would vanquish him. In one sense, he was correct; he won the case (decided by a sympathetic jury), but the trial really became a trial of the historicity of Genesis. On that count, his testimony was inadequate given the national news coverage.

Some leeway probably should be allowed: Bryan died just days after the verdict, so he may not have been himself during the trial and his testimony. Again, hubris may have played a part: He was intent on smashing Darrow, not on trying the case on the narrow grounds upon which he would have won a conviction anyway. And why in the world did a three-time presidential candidate and former secretary of state step in to prosecute a case that the local prosecutor could have won?

SovereignGrace · Sep 9, 2016

Internet Theologian said:
I disagree with the statements that say he was arrogant, angry, belligerent. He answered exactly how someone should answer when under oath and being interrogated. Short, concise answers, no elaboration. Perfect.

Sometimes less IS more...

Cain's Wife - [On Trial]

Scarlett O.

Moderator

Van

Well-Known Member

Scarlett O.

Moderator

Revmitchell

Well-Known Member

robycop3

Well-Known Member

HankD

Well-Known Member

TCassidy

Late-Administator Emeritus

HankD

Well-Known Member

percho

Well-Known Member

JonC

Moderator

Internet Theologian

Well-Known Member

HankD

Well-Known Member

TCassidy

Late-Administator Emeritus

rsr

<b> 7,000 posts club</b>

rsr

<b> 7,000 posts club</b>

SovereignGrace

Well-Known Member