Thanks George.
I certainly have no problem with your conviction, but I was hoping for some scriptural evidence. You seem so certain that Cains wife was not directly related. Are you able to give a reason?
Matt
Although I would argue with the importance of the creation history, I could not agree with you more with its requirement to our salvation. As it says in Ephesians, “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith.” It says nothing about believing in a specific origins model.
Thanks
Matt
1 Like
I agree with you completely concerning the cause of salvation. God bless you, Matt.
Perhaps this is not DIRECTLY related to my earlier assertions… but once you adopt the view described below, my earlier conclusion becomes fairly easy to adopt:
"Critical Theories:
"Without going outside the Scripture text we may find strong evidence that the narrative under consideration is founded in part upon ancient sources. Let the line of Cain (Ge 4:17-24) be compared with that of Seth (Ge 5:1-29):
“The Hebrew forms of the names show even more clearly that Cain = Kenan, Irad = Jared, Methushael = Methuselah; a single transposition, that of the first and third names after Cain, brings the two Enochs together, and likewise the similar names Mehujael and Mahalalel.”
" Thus we have six names nearly or quite identical; seven ancestors in one list and ten in the other, ending in both cases with a branching into three important characters. Resemblances equally certain, though not by any means so obvious, exist between the names in this double list and the names of the ten kings of Babylonia who reigned before the Flood, as the latter are given by Berosus, the Babylonian historian of the 3rd century BC (see Skinner, Driver, Sayce as below)."
" Thus one source of which the author in Ge 4 made use appears to have been an ancient list in genealogical form, by which the first of mankind was linked with the beginnings of civilized institutions and articles Another part of his material was the story of a brother’s murder of a brother (Gen 4:1-16). Many maintain at this point that the narrative must be based upon the doings of tribes, rather than of individuals."
" It is true that not seldom in the Old Testament tribal history is related under individual names (compare Ge 49;,Jud 1, and the tables of tribes in Ge 25:1-4); yet the tribe referred to can hardly be the Kenites of the Old Testament, who appear as the close allies of Israel, not especially bloodthirsty or revengeful, and haunted by no shadow of early crime against a brother tribe (see KENITES)."
" The indications in Ge 4:1-16 of a developed state of society and a considerable population may go to show that the narrative of the murder was not originally associated with the sons of the first man. Thus there is room to suppose that in the process of condensation and arrangement Cain, son of Adam; Cain, the murderer; and Cain, city-builder and head of a line of patriarchs, have been made one. The critical conclusions here epitomized are indeed reached by a delicate and difficult process; but it is asserted in their favor that they make possible the removal of difficulties which could be explained in no other manner. "
Thanks George for your reply. The text excert is interesting.
However, I may be missing something here, and you have obviously taken this from a wider context, but if I can make a few personal observations from the text you have submitted.
This seems to show that the names used by the two lines are similar or even the same, not necessarily the same persons. (If that’s what is being implied.) My father was a genealogist and found many similar runs of names and certainly many of the same name in our own family tree.
Again, resemblances of name and even same names don’t seem to certify that Cain’s wife was not a close relative.
If this is refering to the statement that Cain made: “I will be a restless wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me,” could simply be referring to others in the family (now possibly growing - or, at lease, Cain know would grow).
If it’s refering to the passage “Cain was then building a city…” the word ‘city’ (so I’ve been informed) doesn’t necessarily mean a very large town, but could also mean a small village. Easily populated by one man and his wife.
If I’m reading this part correctly, the author is suggesting that the two Cains are two different persons. I find nothing in the scriptural text that suggests this. The implications of the scriptural narrative appear to suggest that they are one and the same.
Matt
This topic was automatically closed 4 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.