From where did the "wives" of Cain and Abel come?

[Milton Platt]

The simple answer is that since Eve was to be "the mother of everyone living", that her sons married either sisters or nieces. If you read Genesis ch 4 you will see no time frames mentioned as to how old Cain and Abel were at the time of their presenting their sacrifices to God. And since there is no family line from Abel he apparently died childless, so maybe.

Genesis ch 5 simply says....
"Adam lived for 130 years and then became father to a son in his likeness, in his image, and he named him Seth. 4 After becoming father to Seth, Adam lived for 800 years. And he became father to sons and daughters. 5 So all the days of Adam’s life amounted to 930 years, and then he died."

So Adam was 130 when Seth was born. Again, there is no timeframe between the death of Abel and the birth of Seth. And since Adam was 130 years old when Seth was born, it doesn't mention any sisters, but they may have been born without naming them prior to Seth's birth. How many children can be produced in 130 years?

Since the law on incest had not been written, and genetically there was no problem with what we call "inbreeding", it was always God's intention to have humans marry their close relatives until there were sufficient numbers to broaden the gene pool.

That would be my understanding.....

Why was there no problem genetically with inbreeding, when in fact, that is exactly what was what would have had to happen? Support the claim with evidence that genetics behaved differently then.

 

[Deeje]

Why was there no problem genetically with inbreeding, when in fact, that is exactly what was what would have had to happen?

God did not create humans with defects. They were genetically perfect and let’s face it, if you begin with two people and tell them to “fill the earth”, it stands to reason that inbreeding was not going to be a problem. It only became a problem when sin was involved and the genetic imperfections were spread to the whole human race. The further away from perfection the human race went, the more of a problem it became. Hence, time to put a stop to inbreeding. Today the gene pool is more like a cess pool.

Support the claim with evidence that genetics behaved differently then.

Paul said that where there is no law, there is no sin. (Romans 5:13) So until the laws on incest were written, it was not committing a sin to marry a close relative. Abraham’s wife, Sarah was his half sister....Jacob’s wives were his cousins (daughters of his uncle). Lot’s daughters had sons to their own father. All of this recorded in scripture.

Moses received the law only after Israel’s release from slavery in Egypt. So apparently before then, no genetic problems existed.

 

[calm]

You also have no scriptural answer. Just another idea?
I'm looking for a scriptural answer, not stated ideas. Thanks.

For what do you need a scriptural answer? A biblical passage that proves that an immortal does not need food?

I'm calm, calm.
What's the point you are making calm?

What I'm trying to tell you is that the Torah was written by several persons who wrote all their knowledge down. That becomes clear for several reasons, these reasons are that the writing style, the God terms and the "speech" are different in each of these 5 books.
So this also refutes the assumption that Moses wrote the Torah.
Other reasons that Moses is certainly not the author is that the Torah was written in the view of a third person; and that the death of Moses was written down.
So why should Moses write as a third person and how could Moses write about his death after his death and futher?
Science itself also says that the Torah was written by different persons and was later adapted by an "editor". And for once I agree with the science.

So the reason why there are two different orders of creation in Genesis is that several authors have each written down their own view.
The conclusion for it is that neither the first creation story in Genesis 1 nor the second creation story in Genesis 2 contains the exact order.
And not only in Genesis the order of the creation story is told in different orders but also in other old Christian/Jewish scriptures.

 

[sooda]

not saying that you're right or wrong, but consider this, Genesis 4:20 "And Adah bare Jabal: he was the father of such as dwell in tents, and of such as have cattle." according to Noah Webster's 1828 Dictionary of American English, CATTLE: 1. Beasts or quadrupeds in general, serving for tillage, or other labor, and for food to man. In its primary sense, the word includes camels, horses, asses, all the varieties of domesticated horned beasts or the bovine genus, sheep of all kinds and goats, and perhaps swine. In this general sense, it is constantly used in the scriptures. See Job 1:3. Hence it would appear that the word properly signifies possessions, goods. But whether from a word originally signifying a beast, for in early ages beasts constituted the chief part of a mans property, or from a root signifying to get or possess. This word is restricted to domestic beasts; but in England it includes horses, which it ordinarily does not, in the United States, at least not in New-England.

PICJAG.

Job was written later and camels had not been yet domesticated.. Its an anachronism.

 

[sooda]

God did not create humans with defects. They were genetically perfect and let’s face it, if you begin with two people and tell them to “fill the earth”, it stands to reason that inbreeding was not going to be a problem. It only became a problem when sin was involved and the genetic imperfections were spread to the whole human race. The further away from perfection the human race went, the more of a problem it became. Hence, time to put a stop to inbreeding. Today the gene pool is more like a cess pool.



Paul said that where there is no law, there is no sin. (Romans 5:13) So until the laws on incest were written, it was not committing a sin to marry a close relative. Abraham’s wife, Sarah was his half sister....Jacob’s wives were his cousins (daughters of his uncle). Lot’s daughters had sons to their own father. All

Moses received the law only after Israel’s release from slavery in Egypt. So apparently before then, no genetic problems existed.

You are trying to make sense of mythology. Incest is common in mythology. The OT stories are not history.. The message is important, but the stories are fiction.

 

[calm]

Sorry to interrupt one.
What is this Religion: "Natsari"?
Is it the same as "Natsarim" or "Nazarenes (or Nazoreans)", please?
Is it a Christian or a Judaism denomination, please? Just for information, please.

Regards

Natsari (plural: Natsarim) means "Watchman of Yahusha/Yahuah".
The first followers of Yahuah (Paul, Peter...) called themselves "Natsarim".
And the name of their faith group was "Natsarith" which means "Wachtower of Yahuah/Yahusha".

The first followers of Yahuah did not know the terms "Christianity", "Christendom", "Jesus", "Jehovah", "Chirst" or "Lord". All these terms and names were invented much later by the Catholic Church.


"Hear, Yisharal: YAHUAH, our Aluah, is one."

 

[sooda]

Natsari (plural: Natsarim) means "Watchman of Yahusha/Yahuah".
The first followers of Yahuah (Paul, Peter...) called themselves "Natsarim".
And the name of their faith group was "Natsarith" which means "Wachtower of Yahuah/Yahusha".

The first followers of Yahuah did not know the terms "Christianity", "Christendom", "Jesus", "Jehovah", "Chirst" or "Lord". All these terms and names were invented much later by the Catholic Church.


"Hear, Yisharal: YAHUAH, our Aluah, is one."

The Christian New Testament asserts that the name "Christian" first emerged in Antioch. It was one of the four cities of the Syrian tetrapolis.

Roman Catholicism itself maintains that the Roman Catholic Church was established by Christ when he gave direction to the Apostle Peter as the head of the church. This belief is based on Matthew 16:18, when Jesus Christ said to Peter:

"And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it." (NIV).

 

[nPeace]

For what do you need a scriptural answer? A biblical passage that proves that an immortal does not need food?

No. A scripture that says, or shows that Adam was created immortal, without any need for food. You don't have any scriptural support for that, do you?
The idea was presented that Adam, or Gender, was created immortal. That's an idea that comes - not from the Bible - but God knows where.

What I'm trying to tell you is that the Torah was written by several persons who wrote all their knowledge down. That becomes clear for several reasons, these reasons are that the writing style, the God terms and the "speech" are different in each of these 5 books.
So this also refutes the assumption that Moses wrote the Torah.
Other reasons that Moses is certainly not the author is that the Torah was written in the view of a third person; and that the death of Moses was written down.
So why should Moses write as a third person and how could Moses write about his death after his death and futher?
Science itself also says that the Torah was written by different persons and was later adapted by an "editor". And for once I agree with the science.

So the reason why there are two different orders of creation in Genesis is that several authors have each written down their own view.
The conclusion for it is that neither the first creation story in Genesis 1 nor the second creation story in Genesis 2 contains the exact order.
And not only in Genesis the order of the creation story is told in different orders but also in other old Christian/Jewish scriptures.

You believe the Document hypothesis, apparently.
Other scholars disagree, and so do I.

Many persons were used to write portions of the Bible, true.
Does it matter whom God used to record the death of Moses?
That plays no significant role to me, and does not make Moses an obsolete writer.

The opinion that there were different writers of Genesis one and two, is just another opinion. If you like that opinion, it is fine with me. However, speaking of it, as though it is fact, won't make it become a fact. It's not.

Calm believes ideas which nPeace doesn't, and that's okay. We don't have to agree, do we?

I'm interested in what you think though. You don't seem to be saying that the writers were liars, and cons - deceivers - or am I wrong? -, but you seem to hold the view that multiple writers took up where one left off. Why?

For example, Genesis chapter 2 begins by ending Chapter 1, before stating that what was to follow was the generations of, or account of what had just occurred in Chapter 1.
Can you explain what logic leads you to conclude that this must be a different writer?

This is the style that is seen throughout Genesis. Events -> History. Events -> History.
(Genesis 5:1, 2)
1 This is the book of Adam’s history. In the day that God created Adam, he made him in the likeness of God. 2 Male and female he created them. On the day they were created, he blessed them and named them Man.
(Genesis 10:1)
This is the history of Noah’s sons, Shem, Ham, and Jaʹpheth.. . .

Do you conclude that each of these must be a different writer?
Why do you have the opinion that these must be different writers?

 

[sooda]

No. A scripture that says, or shows that Adam was created immortal, without any need for food. You don't have any scriptural support that, do you?
The idea was presented that Adam, or Gender, was created immortal. That's an idea that comes - not from the Bible - but God knows where.


You believe the Document hypothesis, apparently.
Other scholars disagree, and so do I.

Many persons were used to write portions of the Bible, true.
Does it matter whom God used to record the death of Moses?
That plays no significant role to me, and does not make Moses an obsolete writer.

The opinion that there were different writers of Genesis one and two, is just another opinion. If you like that opinion, it is fine with me. However, speaking of it, as though it is fact, won't make it become a fact. It's not.

Calm believes ideas which nPeace doesn't, and that's okay. We don't have to agree, do we?

I'm interested in what you think though. You don't seem to be saying that the writers were liars, and cons - deceivers - or am I wrong? -, but you seem to hold the view that multiple writers took up where one left off. Why?

For example, Genesis chapter 2 begins by ending Chapter 1, before stating that what was to follow was the generations of, or account of what had just occurred in Chapter 1.
Can you explain what logic leads you to conclude that this must be a different writer?

This is the style that is seen throughout Genesis. Events -> History. Events -> History.
(Genesis 5:1, 2)
1 This is the book of Adam’s history. In the day that God created Adam, he made him in the likeness of God. 2 Male and female he created them. On the day they were created, he blessed them and named them Man.
(Genesis 10:1)
This is the history of Noah’s sons, Shem, Ham, and Jaʹpheth.. . .

Do you conclude that each of these must be a different writer?
Why do you have the opinion that these must be different writers?

Aesop's Fables were written around the same time.. about 620 BC.

 

[nPeace]

Aesop's Fables were written around the same time.. about 620 BC.

So says sooda, the guy with the "facts" list. Why aren't all scholars in agreement with your "facts" list? Might it be that there are no little birdies around to tell us whose opinions are correct?

 

[Deeje]

You are trying to make sense of mythology. Incest is common in mythology. The OT stories are not history.. The message is important, but the stories are fiction.

Says who? You make these statements as if they are indisputable....but I believe what the Bible teaches because it is from the one who created us. People can offer their opinions about a lot of things, but at the end of the day, I trust God, not humans to determine what is truth and what is myth.

He has preserved his word down through history despite many attempts to destroy it. If you can’t trust God to tell the truth, then who can you trust? I believe that you put your trust in the wrong people.

Your constantly disparaging the Bible is rather tiresome. You have an opinion based on what others tell you....don’t we all? Who is right and who is wrong will all come out in the wash.....in the cleansing that God accomplishes before he brings in the rule of his kingdom. (Daniel 2:44) I for one am looking forward to that.

 

[sooda]

So says sooda, the guy with the "facts" list. Why aren't all scholars in agreement with your "facts" list? Might it be that there are no little birdies around to tell us whose opinions are correct?

Leviticus and Deuteronomy were written during and after the Babylonian exile.. Genesis and Exodus were written after than.

 

[sooda]

Says who? You make these statements as if they are indisputable....but I believe what the Bible teaches because it is from the one who created us. People can offer their opinions about a lot of things, but at the end of the day, I trust God, not humans to determine what is truth and what is myth.

He has preserved his word down through history despite many attempts to destroy it. If you can’t trust God to tell the truth, then who can you trust? I believe that you put your trust in the wrong people.

Your constantly disparaging the Bible is rather tiresome. You have an opinion based on what others tell you....don’t we all? Who is right and who is wrong will all come out in the wash.....in the cleansing that God accomplishes before he brings in the rule of his kingdom. (Daniel 2:44) I for one am looking forward to that.

Norse mythology and Greek mythology is just full of incest and gods mating with humans and people coming back from the dead.

 

[sooda]

Says who? You make these statements as if they are indisputable....but I believe what the Bible teaches because it is from the one who created us. People can offer their opinions about a lot of things, but at the end of the day, I trust God, not humans to determine what is truth and what is myth.

He has preserved his word down through history despite many attempts to destroy it. If you can’t trust God to tell the truth, then who can you trust? I believe that you put your trust in the wrong people.

Your constantly disparaging the Bible is rather tiresome. You have an opinion based on what others tell you....don’t we all? Who is right and who is wrong will all come out in the wash.....in the cleansing that God accomplishes before he brings in the rule of his kingdom. (Daniel 2:44) I for one am looking forward to that.

The Book of Daniel was written quite late.. about 167 BC by a committee.

Storytelling is a way of teaching.. and it a powerful way of teaching. Like Aesop's Fables are still around 2500 years later.

 

[101G]

Job was written later and camels had not been yet domesticated.. Its an anachronism.

did you see my post #194?
PICJAG.

 

[sooda]

did you see my post #194?
PICJAG.

Yes.. There were no domesticated camels. Its an anachronism.

 

[101G]

Yes.. There were no domesticated camels. Its an anachronism.

thanks for the reply, but we still disagree, Genesis 1:26 "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth."
so again cattle is tamed. read your Gill commentary on this verse.
again thanks.

PICJAG.

 

[sooda]

thanks for the reply, but we still disagree, Genesis 1:26 "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth."
so again cattle is tamed. read your Gill commentary on this verse.
again thanks.

PICJAG.

Camels aren't cattle.. you're confusing poetic language.


Even the army traveled on foot. There is very little evidence for horses in the OT and certainly Palestine didn't have the water or pasture for horses.

 

[101G]

Camels aren't cattle.. you're confusing poetic language.


Even the army traveled on foot. There is very little evidence for horses in the OT and certainly Palestine didn't have the water or pasture for horses.

In that day and time, yes, and they was considered "Property".
Genesis 4:20 "And Adah bare Jabal: he was the father of such as dwell in tents, and of such as have cattle."
again read your commentaries

hope that helped.

PICJAG.

 

[sooda]

So says sooda, the guy with the "facts" list. Why aren't all scholars in agreement with your "facts" list? Might it be that there are no little birdies around to tell us whose opinions are correct?

I am a grandmother. The ancient Jews knew that men didn't walk on water or live inside a fish.. They knew that 3 million people and their herds didn't live in the Sinai for 40 years. They were NOT stupid people...

The stories are didactic literature.. They are important because of the lessons they teach NOT because they are history.