Featured Who Did Cain Marry?

Ever hear of "vigilantes"? They often wanna play God and kill someone who they perceive as a sinner, even when they've done nothing against their killer(s).

 

They had the same Father.

 

How fair is thy love, my sister, my spouse! how much better is thy love than wine! and the smell of thine ointments than all spices!
​

Cant. 4:10

 

Scripture has already been quoted in this thread that removes the "guessing" aspect that you accuse me of doing. Do you have any evidence that God told a group of people (before Noah & his family) to populate the earth? If not, then anything other than telling this to Adam & Eve is pure speculation on your part. Your opinion. An opinion, that IMO, is contrary to the Bible.

Seems that your knowledge of biology and genetics is limited or you have been misinformed about where God placed limitations on what can be naturally fertilized by what to produce offspring. Or, maybe a better approach is for you to define EXACTLY what you mean by the term "like". Yes, dogs produce dogs. Cats produce cats. Humans produce humans. Dogs of every size, shape, and color roam this earth. Other than a physical size problem (tiny breed female & large breed male) all dogs can successfully reproduce more puppies.

Counter point: The further north from the equator, the less daylight is available in a year to produce vitamin D in the body. Lighter skin can absorb more sunlight during time that light is available. People with dark skin, in the far north, would be more prone to problems resulting from lack of vitamin D. Thus, enhancing the livability, in that area, of those with genetically lighter skin.

In each area, each generation would have tended to weed out those, from a common origin (Noah/family) who did not have the genetic variation of skin color best suited for the region. To say that most black people "originally" came from lands near the equator denies that all existing people originally came from Noah & family.

Can you provide a listing of His basic laws of human behavior, as provided by Him, when Adam & Eve were cast from the garden? It seems that you have forgotten that God can and does change His mind in given sets of circumstances. Again, I'll use Noah, as the example. Noah & family were not destroyed because God decided to spare them to repopulate the earth.

IMO, you are trying to put God in a cage, when you presume to know EXACTLY what is/isn't His "basic law". Yet, you cannot give evidence that God considered incest to be against His "basic law" until such a point, in time, that He deemed it to be so.

According to scriptures, this is when God told mankind they could eat animals.
Genesis 9: KJB
1 And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.
2 And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of the air, upon all that moveth upon the earth, and upon all the fishes of the sea; into your hand are they delivered.
3 Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.

Prior to that were these instructions:
Genesis: 1 KJB
28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.
30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.

Mankind & animals were vegetarian. Here the word meat means food.

Where are the scriptures that specifiy dietary restrictions were specifically for health reasons? If that were the only reason, why were those restrictions lifted?

Yes, because God caused a change to happen in their lives. He, Himself, changed what was expected for their behaviour. There was a rule in place that they could not go behind the veil. He changed the rule.

Prove it! So far you have not proved that God considered incest to be a sin, before the time He made that restriction on behaviour. How is that any different than putting rules in place regarding sacrifice. When He, Himself, decided that xyz activity was a sin, it was recorded as such. It seems that you are mixing "sin" with knowledge of good and evil. Today, we have many ways to "sin" that did not exist 5,000 years ago. IMO, God knew when Satan corrupted the act of reproduction. At that time, He placed additional restrictions on who could be partners.

Again, where is this list of basic laws?

In closing, this last section further confirms previous comments on biology, genetics/heredity. When some genetic mutations happen, they are passed along to offspring. If the mutation is beneficial and/or is recessive, it will be replicated in future generations in widening circles of influence.

 

Sure...vigilantes. Who are the parents of the vigilantes?

 

Their moms & dads.

 

Other than expulsion from Eden and other punishments (sweat of the brow, pain in childbirth), where can these other directives be shown in Scripture to have been in effect immediately after the fall?

Or it could have as easily been the norm in some...

It seems like you are making facts up in order to fit the case you are making.

Stating that a God-given decree existed at a time when none can be shown in Scripture to be in effect seems like adding to the Bible.

 

Well, IMO, it's NOT contrary to Scripture. Nowhere in Scripture do we see God doing a 180 on His commands. Yes, I know He told Moses He was gonna destroy Israel, but I believe He was testing Moses, since He had already prophesied what would become of each tribe, and that Shiloh was to come from JUDAH. (Moses was a Levite.) That incident was different from His basic laws of behavior. And I firmly believe that His basic law was in place from the gitgo, given orally to the first generations.

But Chihuahuas cannot produce Yorkies; Great Danes can't produce St. Bernards. Yes, a Chihuahua can mate with a Yorkie and produce a Chikie. But, long as they mate with a like breed, they'll produce pups of that breed.

Actually, the opposite is true. it's common sense that black absorbs much more light, infrared, or UV than white. Just place your hands on a white car and a black car that have both been sitting the sun for awhile.

Not really. We know where Mt. Ararat is, in Turkey. And we have "red" people living everywhere from Mongolia to Alaska or the Yukon, to Guatemala & other tropical lands, since ancient times.

Now, a case can be made for Noah's grandchildren marrying nieces and nephews, but NOT for Adam and Eve's kids marrying each other.

Yes...the Decalogue, among others, the sole exception being that there were no Israelis, nor nation of Egypt; God hadn't yet brought His peculiar people outta Egypt.

Cain was guilty of covetousness jealousy, and disrespect of God as well as murder. Had he been fully wanting to obey God, he woulda inquired of God what sacrifice he could make that woulda been acceptable to Him. Maybe God rejected Cain's sacrifice due to his ATTITUDE.

I believe it's self-evident. We know exactly what His basic laws for behavior were when He gave them to Moses, so why should we assume they weren't in effect until then? We see SIN first mentioned by GOD in Gen. 4:7, before Cain whacked Abel. And the forbidden fruit allowed man to know good from evil, so Satan had already fallen, as evil then existed. There HAD to have been rules that could be broken for sin to exist, and plainly sin already existed. And what is sin? BREAKING A RULE OF GOD'S.

That was before A&E sinned. Afterward, GOD made clothes for them from ANIMAL SKINS. And don't forget Abel's animal sacrifices. I betcha man ate meat right after "the fall", as God made it harder for man to simply farm.

That's why I recommend that no one be limited to just the KJV.

Practical reasoning. Food prep had advanced somewhat in paul's day.

And GOD didn't always explain everything He did. For example, He listed BATS among the non-kosher BIRDS.

Actually, NOT. The priests repaired or replaced that veil; the rule was still in place for the Jews. However Hebrews 9 shows us that JESUS fulfilled all the laws of animal sacrifice and blood with Himself. The rule wasn't changed; it was FULFILLED. However, the Orthodox Jews went right on following it.

The prohibition against incest is a basic law of God's, same as no worship of anyone/anything else, or against murder, theft, covetousness, adultery, etc. that were in place from the gitgo. God made SMALL adjustments as time passed, as he'd already planned, but He did NOT make any profound changes in the laws of behavior/conduct.

The whole Old Testament points to JESUS. Everyone who wprshipped God looked for the Messiah. When He came, few recognized Him, but He left His Gospel to spread the fact of His coming, death, and resurrection to the whole world. And Jesus Himself said He was NOT come to CHANGE any of God's laws, but to FULFILL certain ones of them.

Again, you can start with the Decalogue and add the laws against incest and other sexual perversions, lying, and any dishonesty toward one's fellow men.

Maybe, maybe NOT. Woolly mammoths are better-suited for survival in today's world than elephants. They could live in a variety of climates, and had much-harder teeth than elephants, enabling them to habe a more-varied diet. But they're not here any more.

 

God's punishing Cain for murder.

Possible. We just don't know.

Not really, when GOD HIMSELF says He doesn't change. And again, we go back to Cain's murder. God even mentioned sin to Cain BEFORE he whacked Abel.

And then there's Genesis 6, when God said the whole earth was corrupt. There HAD to have been something to have been corrupted-common sense.

 

Are you saying Satan could have pro created with a woman?

 

How many children did Adam and Eve have? We know about Cain, Abel and Seth. But Adam lived about 800 years after Seth was born. If you consider half that lifespan he and Eve were fertile and a baby takes about a year, then Adam and Eve could have had perhaps 400 kids, half girls. Then lets say after another 100 years, these 400 start producing kids perhaps 200 or so a year. Thus when Cain was alive, he would have had several sisters, and nieces to take as his wife.

All this is speculation, but there is no problem with where Cain got his wife. She was family.

 

So, you still believe GOD condoned incest between full siblings, B4L?

And A&E were of the same race. Like produces like. So, YOU tell me where the various races came from.

"Oops-Bleached another one" won't do.

You're in a tizzy cuz you've been exposed as a closet KJVO in various dialogues, and you have no Scriptural support for it. And again, anything WE say about where Cain got a wife is speculation, as both Scripture and secular history are silent about it. So, you might as well get over it. You cannot prove me wrong, and I can't prove myself right on this'n. It's just one of those mysteries that GOD will reveal to us some day, if He chooses to. Nothing we can change about it; whatever effects it had are still the same-it changes nothing.

 

According to the extra Biblical book of Enoch, the name of the person Cain married was Candy. Since she did not have a last name, she took Cain's name for her last name. Her name was Candy Cain, and here is a picture of her from the CNN archives.



And here is their family

 

Eve was made from Adam and they procreated.

 

There is so much wrong within this post that I cannot begin to address all the issues within the time I have to spend here and the physical limitations of this conversation medium. Much is pure speculation without any scriptural support. Or, speculation (opinion) contrary to what's stated in the scriptures.

Further, it is clear that you don't have a good grasp of how both man and God used/uses genetics. Either that or you have a specific motive for ignoring important points because they don't meet the criterior that you've set. That is using "incest", as you define it, to justify your apparent belief that God created multiple peoples -- races -- classes -- different physical attributes -- in the beginning.

Scriptures tell us that God created Adam in His own image, which would have included perfection in DNA. He then took a rib from Adam (identical DNA) and "modified" it to create a woman named Eve. Modification included X & Y chromosomes, establishing the gender/genetic difference between a man and a woman. Establishing mitochondrial DNA, whereby the linage of Christ could/would be carried by women back to Eve, born of Adam's flesh.

To suggest that Cain married a woman, created by some means other than resulting from a union of Adam and Eve, implies several things. One of which is that either Adam or Eve committed adultry. ie Cain married a half sister, at the minimum. In order to trace the linage of Christ back to Adam, through Eve, it would have been Adam who sinned in this manner.

To my knowlege, there is nothing in scripture that indicates Adam committed this sin. In fact, lack of this sin is indicated in that Adam was so faithful to Eve that he followed her, instead of God's instruction.

Again, to my knowledge there is nothing in scripture about incest being a sin until God declared it to be so. In order for your premise about incest to stand, you have to claim that Adam committed a particular sin without scriptural proof that he did so. The sin of adultry. Especially in view of when Adam became aware of "good & evil" and the birth of their children. In essence you are saying that Adam willfully sinned with another woman in defiance of God, yet again. Can you show me where the scriptures record that he committed this sin?

If this sin happened, then, the linage of Christ back to Adam is broken. See mitochondrial DNA. Christ's linage would be traced back to the other woman that God would have had to create. One not born of Adam. Or, are you saying that God took more than one rib from Adam?

 

It is not often we get to LOL on hear. Thanks!

 

If there is an, "Age of Accountability;" What did this little innocent baby boy do? And he said, Cursed Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren. Gen. 9:25

Why does this verse end as it does? And the sons of Noah, that went forth of the ark, were Shem, and Ham, and Japheth: and Ham [is] the father of Canaan. Gen. 9:18

What is so significant concerning this innocent baby boy, one of the sons of Ham, born after the flood?

Could his birth have been relative to incest?