Cain Married His Sister

[NeoPatriarch]

If you don't like that, if you don't believe that, you are at odd with scripture.

Other Possibilities? Sure anything is possible BUT is it reasonable in light of the evidence we have?

To suggest otherwise is to consider facts not in evidence and deny the sufficiency of scripture.

 

[Isabella]

If you don't like that, if you don't believe that, you are at odd with scripture.

Other Possibilities? Sure anything is possible BUT is it reasonable in light of the evidence we have?

To suggest otherwise is to consider facts not in evidence and deny the sufficiency of scripture.

This is a bit of a contradictory statement, you write anything is possible i.e. the text is open for more than one interpretation and then you say that it is sufficient. Well no it isn't or there would not a case for other possibilities.

B

 

[NeoPatriarch]

Not all Isabella.

For instance, it's possible that the planet was seeded by aliens, BUT it's not reasonable considering the evidence. It's possible we are all in the Matrix, but it's not reasonable... You get the idea.

We are not beholden to every possibility. Your position is at odds with the evidence, again.

 

[Isabella]

Not all Isabella.

For instance, it's possible that the planet was seeded by aliens, BUT it's not reasonable considering the evidence. It's possible we are all in the Matrix, but it's not reasonable... You get the idea.

We are not beholden to every possibility. Your position is at odds with the evidence, again.

I think your definition of "Evidence" and mine may be completely different.

Think on that....

 

[FollowingHim]

Sorry, I intended to delete this thread when I shifted the discussion on Cain's wife to a new thread, as this was made to accomplish. but I forgot. And now that you've started discussing it here too, I'd feel bad deleting your posts!

For the benefit of readers, a more detailed discussion on Cain's wife may be found here:
http://www.biblicalfamilies.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=3804

 

[Isabella]

I am not sure if this was meant for me or Neo? I don't mind my posts on his thread being deleted though as I think the real discussion is going on in the other thread,

B

 

[NeoPatriarch]

Evidence is what the Bible says.

Speculation on possibility is not evidence.

You can disagree if you like.

 

[Walt]

With the other thread locked, I would like to propose what I believe to be the correct answer to who did Cain marry...

Mrs. Cain

 

[Hugh McBryde]

His mother's daughter or grand daughter?

 

[cnystrom]

Evidence is what the Bible says.

But the point of fact is that Bible does not say who Cain married.

In light of that clear evidence would not then the very best answer be, "I don't know"?

 

[Oreslag]

Evidence is what the Bible says.

But the point of fact is that Bible does not say who Cain married.

In light of that clear evidence would not then the very best answer be, "I don't know"?

Yes, it would.

 

[Isabella]

Evidence is what the Bible says.

But the point of fact is that Bible does not say who Cain married.

In light of that clear evidence would not then the very best answer be, "I don't know"?

Yes, it would.

Yes, definitely

B - Who hopes this puts to bed the 'We all agree' statement made at the end of the closed thread. No, we don't.

 

[Hugh McBryde]

In light of that clear evidence would not then the very best answer be, 'I don't know'?"

"I don't know" is overbroad in the context of this question. Essentially, it's equivocating between "I don't know her name" and "I don't know where she came from."

The assertion that Cain married his sister is only flawed because of the vague and distant possibility that Cain may have married his niece or other much lesser possibilities.

He married someone who was a product of his mother's womb, either first generation or a succeeding one.

Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living."

Cain did not marry a rock, nor did he marry a monkey. We keep coming back to this ground.

The answer we are seeking is; "What CATEGORY of being did Cain marry and what FAMILY TREE did that being fall out of?"

The only Biblical answers (and as I repeat ad nauseam, that this is BIBLICAL families), is the one I gave above. She was a descendant of Eve because there were no other humans on the Earth other than her children and we have yet to mate a human with an ape and produce offspring, though I'm sure someone has tried.

Other answers require that we either be so broad minded our brains fall out, or that we don't accept that we have an authoritative rule for living in the Bible itself.

In the latter case, if we are to permit, as a group, speculations that assign Mrs. Cain different parentage than Eve, we would need to be honest with ourselves and call this group "Semi Open Marriage Families with a Preference for what Men Want, Not Women."

So, respectfully, I ask that we QUIT acting like we're "nice people" and "respectful of others opinions" and call a lie a lie. Cain married from inside his immediate family tree and so did his brothers or none of us would be here (on this Earth) or in this forum (we aren't Biblical).

 

[Isabella]

So, respectfully, I ask that we QUIT acting like we're "nice people" and "respectful of others opinions" and call a lie a lie. Cain married from inside his immediate family tree and so did his brothers or none of us would be here (on this Earth) or in this forum (we aren't Biblical).

Why are you trying to force this website into the box you have assigned it? There are (clearly) a lot of Biblical people who don't agree with you, not to mention a great deal of the rest of humanity. How unstable is your faith that you cannot tolerate another opinion?

B

 

[Hugh McBryde]

I can't force anything Isabella, but I am demanding we be truthful. I recognize for instance, that you don't share a view of the Bible as Scripture that I do. You don't seem to realize that I'm "cool" with that, but I am.

There are two ways to discuss this issue:

• The Bible is Truth in it's original language/manuscript (my position).
  
  The Bible is a Book. The name as I recall does mean "Book."

Your position seems closer to the latter.

If we start with your position, or any variation of it closer to but not including my view, Cain may or may not have existed and we certainly don't have to abide by such quaint notions as "Adam and Eve were the only people."

There is no "Biblical" view other than the one I express. Scripture flatly asserts that all who live are the issue of Eve's womb. We also know that Eve (the first woman), came from man (a one time event) and that all others came from woman (the Apostle Paul). You see, the more you abide by Scripture (the 66 books of the Bible) as true, the less latitude you have.

I do get to demand Isabella. I AM a teacher and an elder in my faith. I am not assured of the outcome of that demand, nor am I responsible for it. Ezekiel 3:

Son of man, I have made thee a watchman unto the house of Israel: therefore hear the word at my mouth, and give them warning from me. When I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life; the same wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand. Yet if thou warn the wicked, and he turn not from his wickedness, nor from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity; but thou hast delivered thy soul."

I am responsible to say something. I have no "word of prophecy" to impart, but I do have this rather heavy coffee table book that I have actually read and believe. What's in that book does not permit such views as are being expressed about Cain and his wife, other than the view that I have expressed.

I haven't expressed (notice how heavily I am emphasizing "I") something new, but only a representation that is accurate to the letter of what scripture says. All that flows from what scripture says leaves only one outcome and the discussion is over.

We continue to claim that we are "Biblical Families." I'll put everyone on notice. As long as we are doing that, and I'm one of the "we" that is here involved in the conversation. I'm slam out going to veto claptrap and nonsense and call it claptrap and nonsense.

Now, if we start with your position Isabella, I have no objections to anything you might believe about Cain, up to and including that he didn't even exist. We do have to be clear and honest though. If we start with the position that the Bible is truth as it was presented in the original language, you're wrong but you're entirely entitled to your opinion and with your view of scripture, the only real discussion you and I have about truth, is where we should find it.

Oreslag on the other hand, has a view in between yours and mine but closer to mine. I would note that close only counts in hand grenades, horse shoes and atom bombs. Oreslag holds out for the view that the LXX Septuagint is more reliable than Hebrew manuscripts and seeks a shading of a meaning of a word or two so as to imply there might be someone else other than Adam and Eve out there from which Cain got his bride. To be frank, I am far more dismissive of his opinion than yours.

 

[Oreslag]

In the latter case, if we are to permit, as a group, speculations that assign Mrs. Cain different parentage than Eve, we would need to be honest with ourselves and call this group "Semi Open Marriage Families with a Preference for what Men Want, Not Women."

On the contrary, if we were to accept the speculation that he married a descendant of Eve, we'd merely be accepting the opinion of a man. To call such an opinion the truth of God would be criminal.

 

[Isabella]

I think you have gone off on a tangent, I am concerned about the fact that you are trying to remake this thread into the same themes as your other thread. It isn't and I have not commented on your other thread as it does not pertain to me, however, you do not get to make assumptions about what I believe or what I am, or not, entitled to have an opinion on. Nor do I believe you have that right with anyone else on this thread.
We are all free to duke it out as we wish and that is the only thing I would ask your respect for.

B

 

[Hugh McBryde]

f we were to accept the speculation that he married a descendant of Eve, we'd merely be accepting the opinion of a man. To call such an opinion the truth of God would be criminal."

My point exactly about you Steve, you don't accept scripture as truth, thus more properly this discussion should be held as the title of another thread. Having it leak out as a legitimate view about scriptural characters and where they came from is off topic. I suggest (really I do in all sincerity) that you start a thread about the Bible as Truth. This is where your "point of tension" is. Not Cain and Mrs. Cain.

I think you have gone off on a tangent, I am concerned about the fact that you are trying to remake this thread into the same themes as your other thread."

No B, I'm not on a tangent, you are. The tangent is entirely concerned about whether scripture is true.

Frankly there's no discussion about Cain at all if you don't accept the Bible as true. It goes like this:

• "Who was Cain's wife?"
  
  "meh"

 

[NeoPatriarch]

Evidence is what the Bible says.

But the point of fact is that Bible does not say who Cain married.

In light of that clear evidence would not then the very best answer be, "I don't know"?

By this reasoning, very little can be actually known. Who was Cain's wife? Forget that question. Who was Jesus? I would suggest that if the first question is too hard, the latter is unknown.

But Christians do know that Jesus is God. How would you know that if you cannot even determine the simpler question?

 

[Isabella]

The tangent is entirely concerned about whether scripture is true.

Frankly there's no discussion about Cain at all if you don't accept the Bible as true. It goes like this:

• "Who was Cain's wife?"
  
  "meh"

And that is the point in which you have made an assumption about me. I have said plenty of times that I am not a Christian, you know nothing more than that so stop attempting to claim you have some great insight into my mindset. You don't.

B