Hugh McBryde said:
I did. Eve is the mother of all living. This is clearly and absolutely declared in scripture. This alone is enough. I have put my money where my mouth is and you're just mouthing off saying I haven't.
Eve is not the mother of sheep, or of goats, or of elephants. Thus, Eve is not the mother of "all living" in this sense and it is ridiculous to make such a claim. Who then does scripture declare Eve to be mother to? Obviously, she is the mother of her descendants. This does not preclude the possibility of other beings that did not descend from her (refer to the sheep, goats, elephants argument above). However, she would still be the mother of any of Cain's descendants (regardless of who he married) because she was Cain's mother. Thus, this particular truth is irrelevant when it comes to answering the question of who Cain married; she would also be the mother of Cain's descendants through Cain alone, and there are clearly other living creatures of whom she is not the mother.
Perhaps also noteworthy, there is another possibility that this only refers to certain individual descendants of Eve; which would exclude this truth even further from relevance regarding who Cain married. In particular, this may refer to those who are spiritually alive vs. those who are spiritually dead (ref. Matthew 8:22; 22:31-32, Luke 9:60 etc.). In this latter possibility, Eve is the mother of all those alive in Christ. Indeed, I think this fits rather well in context too: "I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel.” (Gen 3:15). Note that Adam names her following God's pronouncement of the curse on the serpent. Notice also that her offspring is referred to as "he" (i.e. Christ, who clearly is Eve's descendant). Notice also that God had said "but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die” (Gen 2:17), but that neither Adam nor Eve died (in the physical sense of death) "in the day that you eat of it." Thus, Adam might very well have named her Eve knowing full well that God meant spiritual death and that His declaration to defeat the serpent through the "he" of her offspring was the restoration of life that he (i.e. Adam) had as his only hope.
Hugh McBryde said:
There are other scriptures that bolster this view and in fact DEPEND on it for correct doctrine. The fall is a specific event through which all sin in the world flows. This too is clearly declared in scripture. Through ONE MAN sin entered the world. All men are sinful. DO YOU DISPUTE this? What follows is that the sin of another cannot have come from any but Adam, so since all men are sinful (women are included in this sort of universal declaration) and sin entered the world through Adam and was passed on to successive generations through Adam, this too proves the point that ALL are his offspring. Cain's bride, if not of Cain's mother and father, is by definition SINLESS, and not in need of a savior. All have sinned. All have gone astray. All have gone their own way. All of this is traceable only to ADAM.
Regarding "through ONE MAN sin entered the world", it seems you are taking this very literally and leaving no room for hyperbole. If I had nothing else but this scripture I'd have to conclude the same as you. However, scripture interprets scripture. In the garden the serpent tempted Eve, and she ate. Indeed, the serpent went so far as to declare God a liar! Are you claiming that there was no sin in the cosmos before the fall of Adam? If so, aren't you leaving out a lot of scripture that refers to the evil one and his minions? It seems pretty clear that sin and evil were in the creation before Adam fell.
No, I absolutely do not dispute that all men are sinful. Neither do I dispute that all Adam's descendants are sinners (i.e. doctrine of original sin). However, once again this is irrelevant because Adam was Cain's father. Thus, sin passed to Cain and to all his descendants through Adam regardless of who Cain married (once again).
Regarding Cain's bride, why is she be definition SINLESS if she didn't come from both Cain and Eve? You just argued the opposite a moment ago; you said all sin came through Adam, now you're saying all sin comes through Adam and Eve? You can't have it both ways. Regardless, I think we've already established that sin and evil was present in the creation before Adam fell (unless you think the evil one and his minions are and remain sinless).
Hugh McBryde said:
I could go on and on, and I have. You're engaging in an internet tactic involving repeatedly asking to be shown something that hasn't been shown to you and getting that in on the LAST PAGE so that the impression stands to the casual reader that you haven't been told. You've been told. YOU ARE WRONG.
If however, you wish to preach another Gospel, you are not bound to these things, but you ARE discovered.
Yes, you do continue to go on an on with irrelevant facts that have nothing to do with showing the scriptural basis for declaring you know that Cain married one of Eve's daughters. Although you suggest that many other truths depend upon the parentage of Cain's bride, you've failed to establish this to be the case. You've told me nothing relevant. You're engaging in the worldly tactic of baffle and confuse; using facts that have nothing to do with the case you're trying to make and hoping that folks get lost in the mist so that they won't realize you don't know what you're talking about.
