Who Did Cain Marry?

[TCassidy]

You are wasting your time trying to teach Robycop the bible. He is intellectually immune to learning.

God did not outlaw brother-sister relations until Leviticus, the giving of the law to Levi. That took place around 1445 BC.

Prior to that time there was no law against brother-sister marriage as evidenced by Abraham and Sarah in about 2100 BC.

Look again at Leviticus. God also prohibited the eating of shell fish. Prior to the Law eating shell fish was not prohibited. After the Law, shell fish is no longer prohibited.

Robycop continually makes the same error, that of extrapolating a bible statement back to a time when it did not apply.

The question came up about murder. Was murder against God's law from the very beginning? Think about it. Why is murder a sin? Because it blots out the image of God in man. And the VERY FIRST TIME it happened, God unequivocally condemns it. But God NEVER CONDEMNED any brother-sister relationship until 1445 BC when he included it in the law.

So, it seems obvious that God outlawed incest in Leviticus due to the deterioration of the genetic structure due to sin. This is supported by the decline in average life expectancy at the time of Adam at 930 years declining to 120 at the time of Moses, and finally to around 70 at the time of David.

At the time of Adam, Eve, Cain, and Abel, the gene pool was still perfect or near perfect so brother-sister marriage would not produce genetically damaged offspring simply because there was not, as yet, sufficient genetic damage.

By the time of Moses that was no longer true so God prohibited marriage outside the limits of consanguinity.

And he continually tries to deflect the discussion away from his error to KJVOism, lacking the wit to realize his condemnation of KJVOism, "there is no biblical evidence for it" also applies to his idiotic theory of some other woman/human line not mentioned anywhere in the bible.

Don't bother trying to have an intelligent discussion with him. Just pity him.

 

[Gregory Perry Sr.]

Keep It Simple...God did...!

Simply put...IF one believes the Word of God...Cain had to have married one of his future sisters...or at the very least, one of his future cousins. It is entirely possible that she was a (very young) child bride. That is not culturally acceptable in our day but back then there likely weren't many prohibitions to such things once puberty was reached. Once SIN entered the picture it is certain that men (and women) steadily corrupted and perverted that which God had intended to be pure and good. We know this is true as man's early multiplication and ultimate history culiminated in the flood of Noah's day ( not to mentioned the wickedness of our own time). If Adam and Eve were the father and mother of the entire humanKIND from which ALL the various races have their descendants (and they are)... then there are no other options. While it doesn't say one way or the other, there are no other reasonable explanations which would not be contradictory to the Biblical record. In light of scripture, TCassidy's previous summation makes the most sense. There is plenty of valid genetic research by reputable Creationist-friendly Christian scientists that would validate that theory as reasonable and most likely. You can do much beneficial reading on topics related to that from the Institute for Creation Research or Answers in Genesis or other good YEC based ministries. I highly recommend AiG's current "The Answers Book" series. In any case...to make a very long story short...Cain got his wife from his own Mom and Dad. To make it even simpler...It had to be his sister because Adam HAD NO BROTHER...and no "mom" and "dad" (in the human sense) or any "aunts" and "uncles" in the traditional 1st generational sense. It would be interesting to know just HOW MANY children Eve actually had. I bet she had more than Michelle Duggar:laugh:. One thing I look forward to about heaven is getting to find out about some of this stuff. I like history.

Bro.Greg:saint:

 

[Luke2427]

No, he DIDN'T.



Then, what IS?



Yes, He DID. While "You shall not murder" wasn't written that we know of before God gave Moses the Decalogue, but we see Moses condemned by the Egyptians for killing an Egyptian, as well as the case oc Cain.

Cain did not care much about the law of God at some point in his life since he WAS A MURDERER.

But GOD did.



But Adam, Eve, and the his sister he mighta eyeballed highta cared...as well as GOD.



No, it DOESN'T. God CREATED Eve-she was no human's child or sister.



I think there's PLENTY of support. Remember,GOD DOES NOT CHANGE. Remember, the clear cases of incest before Moses resulted in CURSES. The descendants of Moab and Ammon, the products of Lot's daughters' incestuous flings with daddy did NOT survive as peoples.



And could be wrong.

Scripture does NOT tell us where Cain got a wife, but it DOES tell us GOD HATES INCEST.

Where does God condemn incest BEFORE the law of Moses.

And even if God always hated it, as you purport, where does Scripture indicated that Cain and his wife would have KNOWN that God hated it?

Furthermore, even if Cain DID know that God hated it, where is your Scripture to support the nation that Cain would certainly have OBEYED God and NOT slept with his sister?

Do you not see that your dogmatic position is chocked FULL of holes?

There is nothing more telling about a persons intelligence than his dogmatism on something that he cannot fully support.

 

[Baptist4life]

Amen! :thumbsup:

 

[glazer1972]

Sister....

 

[Oldtimer]

I'm right here!

And I've plainly stated my views, and I'm not gonna state'em again. Rant-n-rave all ya wish, maybe some of your fellow KJVOs will hearken to your silliness and repetition, but I won't.

Yes, you have stated your views, quite plainly. You've picked 1 sin as the basis for your assumption that God created 3 people in the beginning. You need a miminum of 3 people in order to make your "kind produces kind" stance on race. BTW, did you bother to look up the relationship between Vitamin D & skin color?

When those opposed to your viewpoint countered your position, you chose to drag in a totally related issue. One that has no bearing. I don't know of any Bible version that does not say God created a NAMED man and woman. Then, told that single pair of individuals to populate the earth.

Rant-n-rave all ya wish about any red herring that suits your fancy. It doesn't change the fact that you cannot support your premise that God created separate races in the beginning. All human life on this earth today came from one DNA source. That was Adam. Created by God, in the image of God.

In closing, there's one more factor to consider, if you decide to continue with your premise. We are ALL brothers and sisters in Christ.

 

[saturneptune]

Yes, you have stated your views, quite plainly. You've picked 1 sin as the basis for your assumption that God created 3 people in the beginning. You need a miminum of 3 people in order to make your "kind produces kind" stance on race. BTW, did you bother to look up the relationship between Vitamin D & skin color?

When those opposed to your viewpoint countered your position, you chose to drag in a totally related issue. One that has no bearing. I don't know of any Bible version that does not say God created a NAMED man and woman. Then, told that single pair of individuals to populate the earth.

Rant-n-rave all ya wish about any red herring that suits your fancy. It doesn't change the fact that you cannot support your premise that God created separate races in the beginning. All human life on this earth today came from one DNA source. That was Adam. Created by God, in the image of God.

In closing, there's one more factor to consider, if you decide to continue with your premise. We are ALL brothers and sisters in Christ.

OT,
You are wrong again, LOL. Here is proof of the third person. This is from the archives of FOX NEWS coverage of the Creation.

 

[quantumfaith]

Excellent article

http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2003/PSCF9-03Collins.pdf

 

[saturneptune]

Excellent article

http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2003/PSCF9-03Collins.pdf

As usual, you have a great way of presenting a way to close the gap between science and faith. A lot of the article is above my understanding, but one thing that I found interesting and thought about was the question, "what is the interface between faith and science?"

Although we do not know for sure, God is the ultimate interface between the two, as He created everything. The gap or the mystery of the two is our limited minds and lack of understanding. I am convinced even if God revealed to us all His secrets in black and whilte, well would still not understand them in our present state.

 

[quantumfaith]

As usual, you have a great way of presenting a way to close the gap between science and faith. A lot of the article is above my understanding, but one thing that I found interesting and thought about was the question, "what is the interface between faith and science?"

Although we do not know for sure, God is the ultimate interface between the two, as He created everything. The gap or the mystery of the two is our limited minds and lack of understanding. I am convinced even if God revealed to us all His secrets in black and whilte, well would still not understand them in our present state.

I am one of those dreaded "seekers". I like everyone else have my own opinions, convictions and positions on such issues. I think God's creation is marvelously grand, intricate and creative. I don't KNOW as much as many here in BB land do, but I am convinced that no one has it all correct, no matter how loudly they speak and toss out heresy claims and labels. I have immense respect for Dr. Crick, but I would find myself much more aligned with ID positions.

Thanks for your honorable respect.

 

[Oldtimer]

Excellent article

http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/2003/PSCF9-03Collins.pdf

Thank you for the link. While there are some areas of comment that raise red flags*, IMO, it is refreshing to read differing opinions that are not using demeaning words against those who disagree.

As one who used to believe in theistic evolution, too, he doesn't draw two distinctions that are important IMO.

(1) Even though what is known about the past is increasing, there's still enough unknown that may, indeed, turn many of the 'ologies on their heads. The "theories" they contain, that is.

If the tenets of young earth creationism were true, basically all of the sciences of geology, cosmology, and biology would utterly collapse.

No, not collapse, but would be viewed in a different light. ie sedimentary rock layers came about quickly rather than slowly. Wouldn't change the fact that there are sedimentry rock layers.

(2) There are some elements of "evolution" that are true based on observation. AFTER Genesis and the fall, a type of evolution is in process. Changes that come about in the flu virus for example. Arrival of the HIV/AID's virus is another. Mutations are changes in DNA, thus giving rise to changes.

th HIV-1 and HIV-2 are believed to have originated in non-human primates in West-central Africa and were transferred to humans in the early 20th century.[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIDS

IMO. As long as Satan holds dominion over the earth, he will continue to evolve woes for the flesh. In the beginning, mankind lived almost a century. God, for His purposes brought that down to about 70-80 years. Satan further reduced it to about 35 years or so. Medical science advances, in particular, have brought it back to around 75-80 or so. (Variables for ethic & economic factors.)

Again, thanks for the link. Plan to read again, when I have more time.



(*Some of this is in light of ObamaCare that came into being well after this article was published.)

 

[quantumfaith]

Thank you for the link. While there are some areas of comment that raise red flags*, IMO, it is refreshing to read differing opinions that are not using demeaning words against those who disagree.

As one who used to believe in theistic evolution, too, he doesn't draw two distinctions that are important IMO.

(1) Even though what is known about the past is increasing, there's still enough unknown that may, indeed, turn many of the 'ologies on their heads. The "theories" they contain, that is.



No, not collapse, but would be viewed in a different light. ie sedimentary rock layers came about quickly rather than slowly. Wouldn't change the fact that there are sedimentry rock layers.

(2) There are some elements of "evolution" that are true based on observation. AFTER Genesis and the fall, a type of evolution is in process. Changes that come about in the flu virus for example. Arrival of the HIV/AID's virus is another. Mutations are changes in DNA, thus giving rise to changes.



IMO. As long as Satan holds dominion over the earth, he will continue to evolve woes for the flesh. In the beginning, mankind lived almost a century. God, for His purposes brought that down to about 70-80 years. Satan further reduced it to about 35 years or so. Medical science advances, in particular, have brought it back to around 75-80 or so. (Variables for ethic & economic factors.)

Again, thanks for the link. Plan to read again, when I have more time.



(*Some of this is in light of ObamaCare that came into being well after this article was published.)

You make salient points, and I do appreciate so much your "tone" . As I have stated prior, I personally am much more comfortable (with current knowledge) with an ID position. Dr. Crick is an excellent spokesman for the faith and science debate.

 

[Baptist4life]

This has been a very enlightening thread.Thank you for your comments.

 

[Baptist4life]

So Who Did Cain Marry?
Many Christians are baffled by the fact that the Bible tells us that Adam and Eve had only three sons, Cain, Abel and Seth. It then goes on to say that Cain murdered Abel and “…went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden.” (Gen 4:16) In Nod he not only found a wife but built a city, which presumably he did not do alone. “…and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch”. (Gen 4:17). Furthermore Adam and Eve did not give birth to Seth until after Cain murdered Abel and was banished to Nod. (Gen 4:25).

One of the main reasons this question perplexes most people is because they do not actually read the words of the text and assume that Cain found his wife in the land of Nod. But read the text again!

"And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden. And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch." (Genesis 4:16-17).

The Bible doesn't say that Cain found his wife in Nod. It says that he went to Nod and then “knew” his wife. . The word ‘knew’, means that Cain had sexual relations with his wife, who he could have been already married to when he left for Nod. (The word ‘knew’ is only used in some translations. The New American Standard Bible says “And Cain had relations with his wife…”) So… Where did Cain get his wife?

The Bible does tell us "after Seth was born, Adam lived 800 years," and it also tells us that "he had other sons and daughters." (Genesis 5:4 ).

In fact, the genealogy in Genesis 5 records that every descendant of Adam down to Lamech had "other sons and daughters," some born to men who were on the wrong side of 180 years. People up to this point in Biblical history had very long life spans thereby substantially increasing their childbearing years, which means there could have been a out-and-out population explosion in a relatively short period of time.

If Eve’s childbearing years were about 500 and they had their first child at about the age of 50 and another child every five years, it is not outside the realm of possibility that he had sisters from whom he picked a wife even before he left. However had he waited to marry until he was about 200 years old, he probably had more than a few women to choose from, some of whom could have left for Nod before he did. In fact the world's population could have approached a few billion by the time of Adam's death at the age of approximately 900, and at least 120,000 people could have been alive on earth within only a few hundred years. The math is simple….

http://www.inplainsite.org/html/finding_a_wife_for_cain.html

 

[robycop3]

You are wasting your time trying to teach Robycop the bible. He is intellectually immune to learning.

Actually, unlike certain paragons of erudition here, I don't throw COMMON SENSE under the bus.

God did not outlaw brother-sister relations until Leviticus, the giving of the law to Levi. That took place around 1445 BC.

Yes, he prohibited incest between FULL siblings from the gitgo. Please show us an example of a union between FULL siblings, approved by God, from Scripture.

Prior to that time there was no law against brother-sister marriage as evidenced by Abraham and Sarah in about 2100 BC.

they were HALF-siblings.

Look again at Leviticus. God also prohibited the eating of shell fish. Prior to the Law eating shell fish was not prohibited. After the Law, shell fish is no longer prohibited.

God gave His dietary laws only to Israel.

Robycop continually makes the same error, that of extrapolating a bible statement back to a time when it did not apply.

MMRRPP! WRONG!

There was NO written law against HOMOSEXUALITY before the Exodus, but God incinerated Sodom and Gomorrah for practicing it.

God told Noah the whole world was corrupt. Now, what did this corruption consist of? remember, NO WRITTEN LAW!

And Jacob demoted Reuben for having an affair with jacob's concubine Bilhah, with no intervention by God. Again, NO WRITTEN LAW.

The question came up about murder. Was murder against God's law from the very beginning? Think about it. Why is murder a sin? Because it blots out the image of God in man. And the VERY FIRST TIME it happened, God unequivocally condemns it.

But Cain KNEW he'd done wrong, as is apparent from his evasive answer to God's question about Abel's whereabouts.

But God NEVER CONDEMNED any brother-sister relationship until 1445 BC when he included it in the law.

That is, between HALF-siblings. I believe He prohibited unions between FULL siblingsw from the gitgo.

So, it seems obvious that God outlawed incest in Leviticus due to the deterioration of the genetic structure due to sin. This is supported by the decline in average life expectancy at the time of Adam at 930 years declining to 120 at the time of Moses, and finally to around 70 at the time of David.

Actually, MANY factors shortened the lifespan, such as the prevalence of disease, increase in sin, including substance abuse, etc. etc.

At the time of Adam, Eve, Cain, and Abel, the gene pool was still perfect or near perfect so brother-sister marriage would not produce genetically damaged offspring simply because there was not, as yet, sufficient genetic damage.

I believe God fractured certain genes and chromosomes soon as Eve, then Adam, sinned.

By the time of Moses that was no longer true so God prohibited marriage outside the limits of consanguinity.

God merely extended a rule He'd already had in place.

And he continually tries to deflect the discussion away from his error to KJVOism, lacking the wit to realize his condemnation of KJVOism, "there is no biblical evidence for it" also applies to his idiotic theory of some other woman/human line not mentioned anywhere in the bible.

As I said, I'm open to any plausible explanation that DOES NOT INCLUDE INCEST.

There's even the possibility, given the long lifespans in the beginning that the events of Genesis 6:4 produced spousal material for some of A&E's children. But whatever we say is at best a guess, as both Scripture and secular history are silent about the origin of Cain's wife.

Don't bother trying to have an intelligent discussion with him. Just pity him.

"Paul, thou art beside thyself; much learning doth make thee mad."

Sometimes I sub Doc Cas for Paul in this respect. Doc, I lost a lotta respect for you when you fell into the habit of calling anyone who accidentally makes an incorrect statement a LIAR.

Now, you HAVE NOT proven me incorrect in the possibilities I've brought up. All these things remain possible without any evidence to the contrary. Absence of Scripture doesn't disprove them!

OTOH, the man-made origin of KJVO is plain as day.

 

[Baptist4life]

^^^^^^^ More roby nonsense.

 

[SaggyWoman]

Cain was not married. He was just fruitful and multiplied.

 

[quantumfaith]

Cain was not married. He was just fruitful and multiplied.

I guess it is reasonable to assume that he had a partner in his fruitfulness.

 

[jbh28]

Genesis 3:20 "The man called his wife’s name Eve, because she was the mother of all living."

Anyone that says that Eve was not the mother of ALL living is basically calling the Bible a lie. There were no other separate people created. That would make Eve not the mother and Genesis 3:20 wrong. Cain had a child with his sister. It's easy. Incest was not outlawed until Leviticus.

to sum this all up.

1. Eve is the mother of ALL living (case closed at this point)
2. No mention of any other people being created outside of the line of Adam
3. Incest not outlawed till Leviticus (not from the "gitgo") So saying that marrying his sister would be wrong is total nonsence since it was outlawed and would also mean that Eve wasn't the mother of all living.

This is pretty easy. Only those that don't believe the Bible(Genesis 3:20) and want to make there own stuff up would say otherwise.

 

[Amy.G]

Cain married Mrs. Cain.

Cased closed. :smilewinkgrin: