Full Version: Adam And Eve Had Two Sons
Adam and Eve had two sons, Cain and Abel, Cain killed Abel then if later says that Cain married, who did he marry if Adam and Eve only had Cain and Abel for children?
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/.../cains_wife.asp
The above article may be of interest to you.
To answer your question specifically, however, Adam and Eve had MANY children (Genesis 5:4). Note that this verse doesn't say WHEN these other children were born.
Marriage of brother and sister was not forbidden until the times of Moses (remember that Abraham married his half sister).
The above article may be of interest to you.
To answer your question specifically, however, Adam and Eve had MANY children (Genesis 5:4). Note that this verse doesn't say WHEN these other children were born.
Marriage of brother and sister was not forbidden until the times of Moses (remember that Abraham married his half sister).
Genesis is not in a timed order. Because it says that Cain knew his wife, that could have been two or three or even six hundred years later.
Genesis 4
25 And Adam knew his wife again, and she bore a son and named him Seth, "For God has appointed another seed for me instead of Abel, whom Cain killed."
Genesis 5
3 And Adam lived one hundred and thirty years, and begot a son in his own likeness, after his image, and named him Seth.
4 After he begot Seth, the days of Adam were eight hundred years; and he had sons and daughters.
5 So all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years; and he died.
Genesis 3
20 And Adam called his wife's name Eve, because she was the mother of all living.
*
Genesis 4
25 And Adam knew his wife again, and she bore a son and named him Seth, "For God has appointed another seed for me instead of Abel, whom Cain killed."
Genesis 5
3 And Adam lived one hundred and thirty years, and begot a son in his own likeness, after his image, and named him Seth.
4 After he begot Seth, the days of Adam were eight hundred years; and he had sons and daughters.
5 So all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years; and he died.
Genesis 3
20 And Adam called his wife's name Eve, because she was the mother of all living.
*
Yes, I realize that Adam and Eve had many children, but what I am asking is when Caine was married, there is no mention of any other children by Adam and Eve. The bible states the line of man by Adam but does not explain this fact, at least what I can see.
QUOTE(labman24 @ Apr 24 2007, 07:47 AM) [snapback]110254[/snapback]
Yes, I realize that Adam and Eve had many children, but what I am asking is when Caine was married, there is no mention of any other children by Adam and Eve. The bible states the line of man by Adam but does not explain this fact, at least what I can see.
Yes... there is mention of OTHER children. (see my post above)
Genesis 5:4 says:
After Seth was born, Adam lived 800 years and had other sons and daughters. (emphesis added)
As charlie pointed out- the timing of the "other sons and daughters" is not mentioned. It can be reasonably assumed that at least one of the daughters was born in the time of the first generation of Cain and Abel. This is who Cain married.
In the above post, I gave a link to an article. In it the author states:
"According to Jewish tradition, the Jewish historian Josephus wrote that, ‘The number of Adam’s children, as says the old tradition, was thirty-three sons and twenty-three daughters.’"
It is a VERY good article on the subject should you feel the need to really search this out fully.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/.../cains_wife.asp
The Bible is not silent on the subject!!!
All glory and honor to GOD!
QUOTE(charlie @ Apr 24 2007, 01:48 AM) [snapback]110248[/snapback]
Genesis is not in a timed order. Because it says that Cain knew his wife, that could have been two or three or even six hundred years later.
Genesis 4
25 And Adam knew his wife again, and she bore a son and named him Seth, "For God has appointed another seed for me instead of Abel, whom Cain killed."
Genesis 5
3 And Adam lived one hundred and thirty years, and begot a son in his own likeness, after his image, and named him Seth.
4 After he begot Seth, the days of Adam were eight hundred years; and he had sons and daughters.
5 So all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years; and he died.
Genesis 3
20 And Adam called his wife's name Eve, because she was the mother of all living.
*
I agree since the scripture states that eve was the mother of all living. Then Cains wife had to have come after the earth was well occupied with people descendant from eve. Which also indicates that Cains wife was a niece or great niece or great great niece which ever the case may be.
QUOTE(jhamner @ Apr 23 2007, 08:21 AM) [snapback]110159[/snapback]
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/.../cains_wife.asp
The above article may be of interest to you.
To answer your question specifically, however, Adam and Eve had MANY children (Genesis 5:4). Note that this verse doesn't say WHEN these other children were born.
Marriage of brother and sister was not forbidden until the times of Moses (remember that Abraham married his half sister).
That is an excellent article, Jhammer.
sojourner
Something to consider,
In vv. 2 Gen 4 we find the word 'again'. Look it up in the concordance, as it means "continue to do a thing", in other words, she had twins. Where did Cain get a wife, see Genesis 2:1, "Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them."
Many believe that Gen. 2 is somewhat of a side-view or augmentation of Gen. 1, but upon consideration to the figure of speech the Holy Spirit has seen fit to employee, we must acknowledge that this is not the case.
The figure of speech is called a "polysyndeton", by which in the 34 verses of the introduction of ch. 1, each one of the 102 seperate acts are emphasized. This carries over to ch.2 as well.
Po'ly-syn'de-ton; or, Many Ands
(Genesis 22:9,11. Joshua 7:24. Luke 14:21). The repetition of the word "and" at the beginning of successive clauses, each independent, important, and emphatic, with no climax at the end (Compare Aysndeton and Luke 14:13).
Therefore it may be concluded that Cain took a wife from the 'host' of them who make up the mankind created in Genesis 1 and who were told to replenish the earth of Genesis 1:2, and this without regard to the man adam who was then formed in a series of further and separate acts being emphasized by the figure of speech polysyndeton.
In vv. 2 Gen 4 we find the word 'again'. Look it up in the concordance, as it means "continue to do a thing", in other words, she had twins. Where did Cain get a wife, see Genesis 2:1, "Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them."
Many believe that Gen. 2 is somewhat of a side-view or augmentation of Gen. 1, but upon consideration to the figure of speech the Holy Spirit has seen fit to employee, we must acknowledge that this is not the case.
The figure of speech is called a "polysyndeton", by which in the 34 verses of the introduction of ch. 1, each one of the 102 seperate acts are emphasized. This carries over to ch.2 as well.
Po'ly-syn'de-ton; or, Many Ands
(Genesis 22:9,11. Joshua 7:24. Luke 14:21). The repetition of the word "and" at the beginning of successive clauses, each independent, important, and emphatic, with no climax at the end (Compare Aysndeton and Luke 14:13).
Therefore it may be concluded that Cain took a wife from the 'host' of them who make up the mankind created in Genesis 1 and who were told to replenish the earth of Genesis 1:2, and this without regard to the man adam who was then formed in a series of further and separate acts being emphasized by the figure of speech polysyndeton.
hadmadderest ... you are right.
Rabbinic thought is that she "continued to bear" ... no mention of "knowing" Adam between the birth of the two.
They were twins, and I (personally) believe this is the "mark of identification" that God placed upon Cain ... Cain and Abel appeared the same.
There is an interesting study about twins in the Bible, and how it applies to prophecy for the last days, but that is a subject for another time.
Good find hadmadderest! You are the first Christian I have met to come to that conclusion.
I am not the only "nut case" out there!
Rabbinic thought is that she "continued to bear" ... no mention of "knowing" Adam between the birth of the two.
They were twins, and I (personally) believe this is the "mark of identification" that God placed upon Cain ... Cain and Abel appeared the same.
There is an interesting study about twins in the Bible, and how it applies to prophecy for the last days, but that is a subject for another time.
Good find hadmadderest! You are the first Christian I have met to come to that conclusion.
I am not the only "nut case" out there!
calvin,
I too agree w/laurel about being interested in reviewing a study on the subject you just brought to bear, if you have the time to work one up for us.
I too agree w/laurel about being interested in reviewing a study on the subject you just brought to bear, if you have the time to work one up for us.
Laurel and hadmadderest ... I needed that prod. It will take some time, but I will try to put something together. In that this "sign" relates to Mystery Babylon, it may not be quite what one would expect.
QUOTE(Godsloft.com @ Apr 25 2007, 05:33 PM) [snapback]110351[/snapback]
QUOTE(charlie @ Apr 24 2007, 01:48 AM) [snapback]110248[/snapback]
Genesis is not in a timed order. Because it says that Cain knew his wife, that could have been two or three or even six hundred years later.
Genesis 4
25 And Adam knew his wife again, and she bore a son and named him Seth, "For God has appointed another seed for me instead of Abel, whom Cain killed."
Genesis 5
3 And Adam lived one hundred and thirty years, and begot a son in his own likeness, after his image, and named him Seth.
4 After he begot Seth, the days of Adam were eight hundred years; and he had sons and daughters.
5 So all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years; and he died.
Genesis 3
20 And Adam called his wife's name Eve, because she was the mother of all living.
*
I agree since the scripture states that eve was the mother of all living. Then Cains wife had to have come after the earth was well occupied with people descendant from eve. Which also indicates that Cains wife was a niece or great niece or great great niece which ever the case may be.
I don't get the point. Why can't Cain have married a sister. There is nothing in the text which indicates whether he married a sister or a niece. Surely you are not suggesting that Eve did not 'know" Adam for the entire time of Cains life. What could possibly cause you to conclude that no daughters were born during Abel's lifetime. If he did marry a niece then who was the nieces father. It must have been Abel. And who did Abel marry? A niece? Then who was that nieces father? Cain? Then who did Cain marry?
Errrr.. Something does not compute. Logic chip hemorraging. Clearly by force of logic either Cain or Abel must have married a sister. And as there is no mention of Abel having a wife and there is mention of Cain marrying a wife it is almost certain that Cain married a sister and that Abel was unmarried when Cain slew Abel and was banished to Nod.
QUOTE(hadmadderest @ May 25 2007, 04:33 AM) [snapback]113429[/snapback]
Something to consider,
In vv. 2 Gen 4 we find the word 'again'. Look it up in the concordance, as it means "continue to do a thing", in other words, she had twins. Where did Cain get a wife, see Genesis 2:1, "Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them."
Many believe that Gen. 2 is somewhat of a side-view or augmentation of Gen. 1, but upon consideration to the figure of speech the Holy Spirit has seen fit to employee, we must acknowledge that this is not the case.
The figure of speech is called a "polysyndeton", by which in the 34 verses of the introduction of ch. 1, each one of the 102 seperate acts are emphasized. This carries over to ch.2 as well.
Po'ly-syn'de-ton; or, Many Ands
(Genesis 22:9,11. Joshua 7:24. Luke 14:21). The repetition of the word "and" at the beginning of successive clauses, each independent, important, and emphatic, with no climax at the end (Compare Aysndeton and Luke 14:13).
Therefore it may be concluded that Cain took a wife from the 'host' of them who make up the mankind created in Genesis 1 and who were told to replenish the earth of Genesis 1:2, and this without regard to the man adam who was then formed in a series of further and separate acts being emphasized by the figure of speech polysyndeton.
There is nothing in the text to indicate that Cain and Abel were twins. Where do you get these ideas? Am I getting this correct that you believe that God created a huge host of men and that they were not all descendants of Eve? Again I repeat, where do you get these ideas? I am honestly astonished at the stuff I read here. As if there are not enough plainly understood things with which we may occupy our minds we have to go and complicate things with obscure and fanciful fables.
excubitor,
NOTHING in the text? Are you certain? Did you look up the words in the concordance? How familiar are you with Hebrew, Greek, English, and even rules of grammar? Is there nothing left for God to reveal to you in His Word concerning this great subject?
Indeed this is an admittedly difficult subject, but to automatically presuppose that one who is trying to help shed some light here, whether rightly or wrongly, is involved with "obscure and fanciful fables" before prayerful study or even looking up the words employed seems a be a bit much, so let me ask you,
Do you believe that God created all the races, or that all races came from one man and one woman? The reason I ask is because 1, nature dictates that when, for example, white and black have offspring, the white overshadows the color black (the children become lighter not darker) in the generations that follow which would most surely nullify the color of the black race eventually and 2, ch. 1 reads that mankind was created on day six (more on this later). Was one of them (adam and Eve) white and the other black? Is that how we got all the different races? Do you see the point? And what about the other races, did God not create them, or were they an evolution somehow? If we follow this to it's logical end, we can only determine that the races came to us contrary to nature, making God's work against nature. And that doesn't seem right. What does Scripture affirm? To take just one example, Scripture affirms that the races were to remain separate, does it not? I have seen some very very black and beautiful people God created, which indicates they are not the offspring of white people mixed.
If I skirt the accusations, I am left with your well deserved question which I will gladly attempt a response using Scripture.
I got the idea from the wording given us by the Holy Spirit, which is two fold, one, the wording given in Genesis 4:2, where the Hebrew word means to continue to bear, as I recommended that this word be looked up in the concordance in the above post, and still do,
Gen 4:2 And she AGAIN bore his brother Abel.
"AGAIN":--
H3254
יסף
yâsaph
BDB Definition:
1) to add, increase, do again
1a) (Qal) to add, increase, do again
1b) (Niphal)
1b1) to join, join oneself to
1b2) to be joined, be added to
1c) (Hiphil)
1c1) to cause to add, increase
1c2) to do more, do again
and from Strong's:--
H3254
יסף
yâsaph
yaw-saf'
A primitive root; to add or augment (often adverbially to continue to do a thing): - add, X again, X any more, X cease, X come more, + conceive again, continue, exceed, X further, X gather together, get more, give moreover, X henceforth, increase (more and more), join, X longer (bring, do, make, much, put), X (the, much, yet) more (and more), proceed (further), prolong, put, be [strong-] er, X yet, yield.
(It will be further noted that in ch 3, the words to both Satan and the woman have to do with offspring. How many seeds are there, for example, mentioned in vv. 15? The word 'touch' in vv. 3 also has specific intent and connotation. Please do look those two references up. Have you considered why, if Cain was of the man adam, why Cain is not listed in the generations of adam? There must be some reason, surely the reason cannot be that the Holy Spirit is wrong. What is the Biblical reason? Why is the apostle inspired to write that "Cain was was of that wicked one" in 1Jn 3:12? Why does the Lord explain in the house plainly that there are two seeds, one counterfeit and one true, in Matt. 13? Why was Israel to utterly destroy the Canaanite and why was the Canaanite already occupying the land of promise, not to mention all the Holy Feast days?)
and this coupled with the fact the Holy Spirit has seen fit to use the figure of speech polysyndeton. Dr. Bullinger has a book called Figures of Speech which studies them. You may see the appendix 6 of the Companion Bible by going to the following link:--
http://www.levendwater.org/companion/append6.html
being that we will miss much if we do not understand the import of figures of speech employed in Scripture, as the opening paragraphs in the above link help make dear. And two,, when there is no article (no word "the") in front of the word man in ch. 1, it means mankind because of it's non-specificity and generality.
Gen 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.
Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
Gen 1:28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth...
Note the lack of the definite article in the above verses. Let us make mankind in our image...So God created mankind... male and female...them...blessed them.
So in ch. 1 we read that God created mankind both male and female, and told them to replenish the earth. It is the same word used of Noah when he was told to replenish the earth. (We do not know how long God's day of rest was, as in ch 1 where His work was an evening and a morning, but there could have well been many generations by the time we get to the garden scene and the forming, not the creating, of the man adam there). A careful comparison of ch. one and two will show that the order of occurrences are not the same. Moreover, THE man adam was not told to replenish the earth, but the instruction given him was in regard to a great spiritual foe, moreover, in the Garden of God, Eve was also not created as in ch. 1, but 'taken from adam' (the rib-Gen 2:22). Later we read that in this garden all the trees were envious (Eze 31:9), which leads one to realize that in this garden the beings were not earthly, but angelic in composition - there is no mention of any other humans in this garden, but it was full of envious trees, one tree is called that old serpent the devil and Satan in Revelation twelve.
(Just as Christ has many titles, so too with Satan, and he is called the serpent when in his beguiling mode or office)
Notice too, that 'the man adam' has the definite article, but not only so, in the Hebrew it has both the article and the particle (eth ha adam), meaning that this is a very specific man and not mankind. The man adam was not told to go out and replenish the earth. This one man was given a very different instruction touched upon above.
Being that the words the Holy Spirit teacheth are purified as silver is purified, and this seven times over, His words become Holy Words of earth (Psa 12:6), wherein we read in Gen. 1 that when mankind was created, that it was not only good, like the work done on the first five days, but it was 'very good'. So when we keep close to Scripture here, we find that 'all the host of them' was 'finished' on day 6, and God rested on the seventh day. And the 'many ands' do not stop there, they continue wherein we find God 'forms' the man adam...etc etc
Now the Bible does not say or even imply that Cain got his wife from one of the man adam's and Eve's offspring, in fact Cain was driven off and away from them. But the Bible does state plainly that 'all the host of them' had been 'finished' from the 6 days of God's work, and this information is written immediately after we have just read that 'it was very good' regarding the creation of mankind.
So, to me, if I am to keep close to Scripture, there was an entire host of mankind from Genesis 1 on the earth (not in the garden), as well as a host of other beings in the heavens. God rests the seventh day, and then God continued in His work - and God did continue His work,
both in the forming of the man adam, the working with mankind, the flood of Noah and the revealing of His name and the calling out a nation, the making Himself known for the preaching of the good news all the way through to the coming in the flesh & resurrecting to the reoffering of the kingdom to Israel throughout the Acts with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit to finally the revealing of the mystery to Paul.
In fact, God is still revealing (doing work) with us today when we study IN His Word, to the intent we get to know Him and the might power of His resurrection when He raised Him from the dead, but not only so, as the Lord Christ Jesus said He was going to prepare a place...
It is not the intention of my posts to be upsetting to anyone in any way, and yet, we should be able to agree that the Bible is the great corrective without name calling and accusations against one another. While I do not recommend that you take my word for anything (as I am not infallible like the inspired writers of Scripture were) I do recommend that you always search and see.
QUOTE
There is nothing in the text to indicate that Cain and Abel were twins. Where do you get these ideas? Am I getting this correct that you believe that God created a huge host of men and that they were not all descendants of Eve? Again I repeat, where do you get these ideas? I am honestly astonished at the stuff I read here. As if there are not enough plainly understood things with which we may occupy our minds we have to go and complicate things with obscure and fanciful fables.
NOTHING in the text? Are you certain? Did you look up the words in the concordance? How familiar are you with Hebrew, Greek, English, and even rules of grammar? Is there nothing left for God to reveal to you in His Word concerning this great subject?
Indeed this is an admittedly difficult subject, but to automatically presuppose that one who is trying to help shed some light here, whether rightly or wrongly, is involved with "obscure and fanciful fables" before prayerful study or even looking up the words employed seems a be a bit much, so let me ask you,
Do you believe that God created all the races, or that all races came from one man and one woman? The reason I ask is because 1, nature dictates that when, for example, white and black have offspring, the white overshadows the color black (the children become lighter not darker) in the generations that follow which would most surely nullify the color of the black race eventually and 2, ch. 1 reads that mankind was created on day six (more on this later). Was one of them (adam and Eve) white and the other black? Is that how we got all the different races? Do you see the point? And what about the other races, did God not create them, or were they an evolution somehow? If we follow this to it's logical end, we can only determine that the races came to us contrary to nature, making God's work against nature. And that doesn't seem right. What does Scripture affirm? To take just one example, Scripture affirms that the races were to remain separate, does it not? I have seen some very very black and beautiful people God created, which indicates they are not the offspring of white people mixed.
If I skirt the accusations, I am left with your well deserved question which I will gladly attempt a response using Scripture.
I got the idea from the wording given us by the Holy Spirit, which is two fold, one, the wording given in Genesis 4:2, where the Hebrew word means to continue to bear, as I recommended that this word be looked up in the concordance in the above post, and still do,
Gen 4:2 And she AGAIN bore his brother Abel.
"AGAIN":--
H3254
יסף
yâsaph
BDB Definition:
1) to add, increase, do again
1a) (Qal) to add, increase, do again
1b) (Niphal)
1b1) to join, join oneself to
1b2) to be joined, be added to
1c) (Hiphil)
1c1) to cause to add, increase
1c2) to do more, do again
and from Strong's:--
H3254
יסף
yâsaph
yaw-saf'
A primitive root; to add or augment (often adverbially to continue to do a thing): - add, X again, X any more, X cease, X come more, + conceive again, continue, exceed, X further, X gather together, get more, give moreover, X henceforth, increase (more and more), join, X longer (bring, do, make, much, put), X (the, much, yet) more (and more), proceed (further), prolong, put, be [strong-] er, X yet, yield.
(It will be further noted that in ch 3, the words to both Satan and the woman have to do with offspring. How many seeds are there, for example, mentioned in vv. 15? The word 'touch' in vv. 3 also has specific intent and connotation. Please do look those two references up. Have you considered why, if Cain was of the man adam, why Cain is not listed in the generations of adam? There must be some reason, surely the reason cannot be that the Holy Spirit is wrong. What is the Biblical reason? Why is the apostle inspired to write that "Cain was was of that wicked one" in 1Jn 3:12? Why does the Lord explain in the house plainly that there are two seeds, one counterfeit and one true, in Matt. 13? Why was Israel to utterly destroy the Canaanite and why was the Canaanite already occupying the land of promise, not to mention all the Holy Feast days?)
and this coupled with the fact the Holy Spirit has seen fit to use the figure of speech polysyndeton. Dr. Bullinger has a book called Figures of Speech which studies them. You may see the appendix 6 of the Companion Bible by going to the following link:--
http://www.levendwater.org/companion/append6.html
being that we will miss much if we do not understand the import of figures of speech employed in Scripture, as the opening paragraphs in the above link help make dear. And two,, when there is no article (no word "the") in front of the word man in ch. 1, it means mankind because of it's non-specificity and generality.
Gen 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.
Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
Gen 1:28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth...
Note the lack of the definite article in the above verses. Let us make mankind in our image...So God created mankind... male and female...them...blessed them.
So in ch. 1 we read that God created mankind both male and female, and told them to replenish the earth. It is the same word used of Noah when he was told to replenish the earth. (We do not know how long God's day of rest was, as in ch 1 where His work was an evening and a morning, but there could have well been many generations by the time we get to the garden scene and the forming, not the creating, of the man adam there). A careful comparison of ch. one and two will show that the order of occurrences are not the same. Moreover, THE man adam was not told to replenish the earth, but the instruction given him was in regard to a great spiritual foe, moreover, in the Garden of God, Eve was also not created as in ch. 1, but 'taken from adam' (the rib-Gen 2:22). Later we read that in this garden all the trees were envious (Eze 31:9), which leads one to realize that in this garden the beings were not earthly, but angelic in composition - there is no mention of any other humans in this garden, but it was full of envious trees, one tree is called that old serpent the devil and Satan in Revelation twelve.
(Just as Christ has many titles, so too with Satan, and he is called the serpent when in his beguiling mode or office)
Notice too, that 'the man adam' has the definite article, but not only so, in the Hebrew it has both the article and the particle (eth ha adam), meaning that this is a very specific man and not mankind. The man adam was not told to go out and replenish the earth. This one man was given a very different instruction touched upon above.
Being that the words the Holy Spirit teacheth are purified as silver is purified, and this seven times over, His words become Holy Words of earth (Psa 12:6), wherein we read in Gen. 1 that when mankind was created, that it was not only good, like the work done on the first five days, but it was 'very good'. So when we keep close to Scripture here, we find that 'all the host of them' was 'finished' on day 6, and God rested on the seventh day. And the 'many ands' do not stop there, they continue wherein we find God 'forms' the man adam...etc etc
Now the Bible does not say or even imply that Cain got his wife from one of the man adam's and Eve's offspring, in fact Cain was driven off and away from them. But the Bible does state plainly that 'all the host of them' had been 'finished' from the 6 days of God's work, and this information is written immediately after we have just read that 'it was very good' regarding the creation of mankind.
So, to me, if I am to keep close to Scripture, there was an entire host of mankind from Genesis 1 on the earth (not in the garden), as well as a host of other beings in the heavens. God rests the seventh day, and then God continued in His work - and God did continue His work,
both in the forming of the man adam, the working with mankind, the flood of Noah and the revealing of His name and the calling out a nation, the making Himself known for the preaching of the good news all the way through to the coming in the flesh & resurrecting to the reoffering of the kingdom to Israel throughout the Acts with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit to finally the revealing of the mystery to Paul.
In fact, God is still revealing (doing work) with us today when we study IN His Word, to the intent we get to know Him and the might power of His resurrection when He raised Him from the dead, but not only so, as the Lord Christ Jesus said He was going to prepare a place...
It is not the intention of my posts to be upsetting to anyone in any way, and yet, we should be able to agree that the Bible is the great corrective without name calling and accusations against one another. While I do not recommend that you take my word for anything (as I am not infallible like the inspired writers of Scripture were) I do recommend that you always search and see.
laurel,
I believe, at least from my limited experience, that you are correct about the time spent in the word; additionally, there is something about the quality and intent of that time - prayerfully and in circumspection (as upon trembling knees round about the cliff ledge whereupon we might easily fall off) are words that come immediately to mind. Christ said that He is the beginning and the goal, and indeed this must be the case. If we are to place ourselves in that position to receive truth, then we may do well to guard against what we feel and think, after all, if we are ever to receive of His truth, His interpretation and His Holy Word, we may discover that our interjection into it may be a stumbling block towards the acknowledgment of what is written therein, and to the personal knowledge of Him.
Further I would say that we should enjoy this short time we may have together in fellowship, for we know not what tomorrow might bring. I believe too, that as well studied as any of us may become, and while our sharing of our workmanship may point to the wonderful truth He has set forth for our learning, the best we might ever do for one another is to point out where 'it is written', wherein it then rests upon the feet of Him who is worthy, and who alone can accomplish that work in the revealing to us something of His plan and purpose of the ages, The Lord, for it is only through His Word that we might Get To Know Him.
On another note, I wish to incourage all who desire Him, His Great Names Sake and the power of His resurrection to receive the word with all readiness of mind, but to search and see if a thing is so. And look forward to reading calvin's upcoming thread for sure, but you know, take your time and hurry up calvin (just a little levity - hope you don't mind).
Let every man abide in the same calling wherein he was called (1Co 7:20).
I believe, at least from my limited experience, that you are correct about the time spent in the word; additionally, there is something about the quality and intent of that time - prayerfully and in circumspection (as upon trembling knees round about the cliff ledge whereupon we might easily fall off) are words that come immediately to mind. Christ said that He is the beginning and the goal, and indeed this must be the case. If we are to place ourselves in that position to receive truth, then we may do well to guard against what we feel and think, after all, if we are ever to receive of His truth, His interpretation and His Holy Word, we may discover that our interjection into it may be a stumbling block towards the acknowledgment of what is written therein, and to the personal knowledge of Him.
Further I would say that we should enjoy this short time we may have together in fellowship, for we know not what tomorrow might bring. I believe too, that as well studied as any of us may become, and while our sharing of our workmanship may point to the wonderful truth He has set forth for our learning, the best we might ever do for one another is to point out where 'it is written', wherein it then rests upon the feet of Him who is worthy, and who alone can accomplish that work in the revealing to us something of His plan and purpose of the ages, The Lord, for it is only through His Word that we might Get To Know Him.
On another note, I wish to incourage all who desire Him, His Great Names Sake and the power of His resurrection to receive the word with all readiness of mind, but to search and see if a thing is so. And look forward to reading calvin's upcoming thread for sure, but you know, take your time and hurry up calvin (just a little levity - hope you don't mind).
Let every man abide in the same calling wherein he was called (1Co 7:20).
QUOTE(hadmadderest @ May 25 2007, 07:44 PM) [snapback]113510[/snapback]
excubitor,
QUOTE
There is nothing in the text to indicate that Cain and Abel were twins. Where do you get these ideas? Am I getting this correct that you believe that God created a huge host of men and that they were not all descendants of Eve? Again I repeat, where do you get these ideas? I am honestly astonished at the stuff I read here. As if there are not enough plainly understood things with which we may occupy our minds we have to go and complicate things with obscure and fanciful fables.
NOTHING in the text? Are you certain? Did you look up the words in the concordance? How familiar are you with Hebrew, Greek, English, and even rules of grammar? Is there nothing left for God to reveal to you in His Word concerning this great subject?
Indeed this is an admittedly difficult subject, but to automatically presuppose that one who is trying to help shed some light here, whether rightly or wrongly, is involved with "obscure and fanciful fables" before prayerful study or even looking up the words employed seems a be a bit much, so let me ask you,
Do you believe that God created all the races, or that all races came from one man and one woman? The reason I ask is because 1, nature dictates that when, for example, white and black have offspring, the white overshadows the color black (the children become lighter not darker) in the generations that follow which would most surely nullify the color of the black race eventually and 2, ch. 1 reads that mankind was created on day six (more on this later). Was one of them (adam and Eve) white and the other black? Is that how we got all the different races? Do you see the point? And what about the other races, did God not create them, or were they an evolution somehow? If we follow this to it's logical end, we can only determine that the races came to us contrary to nature, making God's work against nature. And that doesn't seem right. What does Scripture affirm? To take just one example, Scripture affirms that the races were to remain separate, does it not? I have seen some very very black and beautiful people God created, which indicates they are not the offspring of white people mixed.
If I skirt the accusations, I am left with your well deserved question which I will gladly attempt a response using Scripture.
I got the idea from the wording given us by the Holy Spirit, which is two fold, one, the wording given in Genesis 4:2, where the Hebrew word means to continue to bear, as I recommended that this word be looked up in the concordance in the above post, and still do,
Gen 4:2 And she AGAIN bore his brother Abel.
"AGAIN":--
H3254
יסף
yâsaph
BDB Definition:
1) to add, increase, do again
1a) (Qal) to add, increase, do again
1b) (Niphal)
1b1) to join, join oneself to
1b2) to be joined, be added to
1c) (Hiphil)
1c1) to cause to add, increase
1c2) to do more, do again
and from Strong's:--
H3254
יסף
yâsaph
yaw-saf'
A primitive root; to add or augment (often adverbially to continue to do a thing): - add, X again, X any more, X cease, X come more, + conceive again, continue, exceed, X further, X gather together, get more, give moreover, X henceforth, increase (more and more), join, X longer (bring, do, make, much, put), X (the, much, yet) more (and more), proceed (further), prolong, put, be [strong-] er, X yet, yield.
(It will be further noted that in ch 3, the words to both Satan and the woman have to do with offspring. How many seeds are there, for example, mentioned in vv. 15? The word 'touch' in vv. 3 also has specific intent and connotation. Please do look those two references up. Have you considered why, if Cain was of the man adam, why Cain is not listed in the generations of adam? There must be some reason, surely the reason cannot be that the Holy Spirit is wrong. What is the Biblical reason? Why is the apostle inspired to write that "Cain was was of that wicked one" in 1Jn 3:12? Why does the Lord explain in the house plainly that there are two seeds, one counterfeit and one true, in Matt. 13? Why was Israel to utterly destroy the Canaanite and why was the Canaanite already occupying the land of promise, not to mention all the Holy Feast days?)
and this coupled with the fact the Holy Spirit has seen fit to use the figure of speech polysyndeton. Dr. Bullinger has a book called Figures of Speech which studies them. You may see the appendix 6 of the Companion Bible by going to the following link:--
http://www.levendwater.org/companion/append6.html
being that we will miss much if we do not understand the import of figures of speech employed in Scripture, as the opening paragraphs in the above link help make dear. And two,, when there is no article (no word "the") in front of the word man in ch. 1, it means mankind because of it's non-specificity and generality.
Gen 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.
Gen 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
Gen 1:28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth...
Note the lack of the definite article in the above verses. Let us make mankind in our image...So God created mankind... male and female...them...blessed them.
So in ch. 1 we read that God created mankind both male and female, and told them to replenish the earth. It is the same word used of Noah when he was told to replenish the earth. (We do not know how long God's day of rest was, as in ch 1 where His work was an evening and a morning, but there could have well been many generations by the time we get to the garden scene and the forming, not the creating, of the man adam there). A careful comparison of ch. one and two will show that the order of occurrences are not the same. Moreover, THE man adam was not told to replenish the earth, but the instruction given him was in regard to a great spiritual foe, moreover, in the Garden of God, Eve was also not created as in ch. 1, but 'taken from adam' (the rib-Gen 2:22). Later we read that in this garden all the trees were envious (Eze 31:9), which leads one to realize that in this garden the beings were not earthly, but angelic in composition - there is no mention of any other humans in this garden, but it was full of envious trees, one tree is called that old serpent the devil and Satan in Revelation twelve.
(Just as Christ has many titles, so too with Satan, and he is called the serpent when in his beguiling mode or office)
Notice too, that 'the man adam' has the definite article, but not only so, in the Hebrew it has both the article and the particle (eth ha adam), meaning that this is a very specific man and not mankind. The man adam was not told to go out and replenish the earth. This one man was given a very different instruction touched upon above.
Being that the words the Holy Spirit teacheth are purified as silver is purified, and this seven times over, His words become Holy Words of earth (Psa 12:6), wherein we read in Gen. 1 that when mankind was created, that it was not only good, like the work done on the first five days, but it was 'very good'. So when we keep close to Scripture here, we find that 'all the host of them' was 'finished' on day 6, and God rested on the seventh day. And the 'many ands' do not stop there, they continue wherein we find God 'forms' the man adam...etc etc
Now the Bible does not say or even imply that Cain got his wife from one of the man adam's and Eve's offspring, in fact Cain was driven off and away from them. But the Bible does state plainly that 'all the host of them' had been 'finished' from the 6 days of God's work, and this information is written immediately after we have just read that 'it was very good' regarding the creation of mankind.
So, to me, if I am to keep close to Scripture, there was an entire host of mankind from Genesis 1 on the earth (not in the garden), as well as a host of other beings in the heavens. God rests the seventh day, and then God continued in His work - and God did continue His work,
both in the forming of the man adam, the working with mankind, the flood of Noah and the revealing of His name and the calling out a nation, the making Himself known for the preaching of the good news all the way through to the coming in the flesh & resurrecting to the reoffering of the kingdom to Israel throughout the Acts with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit to finally the revealing of the mystery to Paul.
In fact, God is still revealing (doing work) with us today when we study IN His Word, to the intent we get to know Him and the might power of His resurrection when He raised Him from the dead, but not only so, as the Lord Christ Jesus said He was going to prepare a place...
It is not the intention of my posts to be upsetting to anyone in any way, and yet, we should be able to agree that the Bible is the great corrective without name calling and accusations against one another. While I do not recommend that you take my word for anything (as I am not infallible like the inspired writers of Scripture were) I do recommend that you always search and see.
The Bible had no trouble communicating that Jacob and Esau were twins. Why would it obscure and shade the notion that Cain and Abel were twins if that were the case. Of course the Bible would have told us that they were twins. The fact that it did not tells us they were twins means that we can easily conclude that they were not twins.
Look I've heard it all. Fanciful tales like the theory of superfetation that Eve knew both Adam and also the devil when she ate of the forbidden fruit and that Cain is the offspring of the devil and Abel is the offspring of Adam. Therefore it is said to explain why Eve is called the Mother of all living and Adam is not called the Father of all living. They then throw in the root of the Hebrew word and the square root of the figurative idiom to justify their theorys. So are these people commended for having studied the Bible? No they are monstrous perverters of the Bible; using the Bible to introduce false and foolish fables and notions to confound the simple.
Let us receive the Bible's plain words which clearly state that Cain had a brother who was not his twin because if he was a twin the Bible would have told us so.
The Bible teaches us to avoid fables and the raising of contentious questions.
1 Timothy 1:4 Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do.
1 Timothy 4:7 But refuse profane and old wives' fables, and exercise thyself rather unto godliness.
2 Timothy 4:4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
2 Peter 1:16 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.
This notion of Cain and Abel being twins is nothing more than a fable, and not particularly cunningly devised either.
I know how this all works. You try and capture your audience into believing that Cain and Abel are twins and then when the simple and unwary have swallowed your hook and departed the path of common sense you then whack them with the next fable like; God made another race of men not borne of Eve, or something like that superfetation nonsense. I'll have none of it.
I also entirely reject your claim that Eve conceiving all the races of man being against nature. The Bible specifically states that
Genesis 3:20 And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.
To claim otherwise is entirely profane and I don't mind being accused of name-calling because if you were here on my doorstep I would say it to your face. Clearly Adam and Eve had the genetics for all the races contained within their DNA. Why is this so hard to accept when we know that only 2 of each kind of creature entered the ark and from that single couple the entire variety of the species sprang. As an example, there was only one kind of dog on the ark, but look at the variety of dogs we have on the earth today. These different types of dogs differ far more from one another than the races of men do. Would you like to say that dogs are against nature too.
To say that not only did God create Adam and Eve but that he also created an entire host of men besides Adam and Eve is also profane and entirely against the scripture. We know that Adam is the Father of all living also because we know that death entered into the world by his hand and passed by inheritance and birthright to all men. Romans 5: 12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that [3] all have sinned:
So there you go. We both spent time in the scriptures studying the word. However you came up with a whole heap of fables and profane ideas whereas I came up with common sense teachings that have been believed from time immemorial by our fathers and their fathers.
Why is that?
excubitor,
You are welcome to your views, no argument here. You can be sarcastic and condemning with all judgmentalness and it will not cause me one troubling thought, as I myself am in much need of faith, patience, lowliness, meekness, longsuffering, forgiveness and forbearing, with truthing in love.
But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another (Gal 5:15).
If you feel that I have troubled you in any way, then perhaps the Christian in you may learn to forgive. As I have made known, I realize this is an exceedingly difficult subject, and I believe that most of them are. I provided the definitions, I gave the figures of speech the Holy Spirit sees fit to employee. All I can do is point to the Scriptures and try to share something of what the words the Holy Spirit teacheth bring forth.
Why doesn't the Holy Spirit be more clear, you ask? Perhaps there is a purpose, perhaps He wishes our trust and effort in these difficult matters, and perhaps He wishes our acknowledgment more than our interpretations. Perhaps the depths of Scripture cannot be fully plumbed, maybe they are all so very deep that not even one verse can be fully plumbed (I certainly have never fully plumbed even one verse). For example, I confess that even with the shortest verse in the Bible, 'Jesus wept', I have much learning and acknowledgment left in my work, and have not got the full understanding of even this short verse to this very day. How much more difficult it must be when the subject is even more veiled.
I think we all realize that everyone is not learning the same things at the same time, and I imagine the Lord knows why. I am certain you yourself have learned something new that at one time you might have read and not yet understood. This may or may not be one of those future events. All I had asked was that you search and see, but if you are unwilling to dig into the deeper things of God I am sure the Lord will exercise His patience until such a time you might decide a readiness to allow Him to reveal the depths of His Word.
As I have already stated, it is not by other peoples studies that one might learn, but by prayerfully asking God to reveal when reading and studying in the Word of Truth, and He will show forth the Truth to such an one I am sure. Although you may not agree with what I have written, what I have written did come straight from Scripture. I realize you are earnest towards God, and would suggest that the words the Holy Spirit uses are purposed and for our learning. There is always the good news, but it is good because of what had happened was so very very bad. The Bible makes clear that 'an enemy hath done this'. Even in Matt. 13, the Lord purposely uses the word sperma, translated to 'seed' in the English, when speaking of the two seed lines (the true and the tares).
Genesis 3:20 "And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living."
I can venture to remark that the man adam had not yet been out of the garden of God but that becomes supposition (even though it is true) and I am personally uncomfortable with any of that, but it was the man adam who called her that, not the Lord Himself.
We may note that the word 'all' is often translated 'many' in the Bible, nevertheless, Satan knew it was through the womb of this woman Eve that the Messiah would drive his [the devil's] head to the pit, and then to ashes; and destroy him. It was the seed that Satan wanted to destroy, and nearly did several times. Therefore through Eve down to Mary Satan and the great enmity would follow, yet Christ did come.
The word "living" here is looking forward to the Redeemer, Jesus Christ, as we had just read the first prophecy of Scripture, namely that (vv. 15) the seed of the serpent would have enmity with the seed of the woman.. Only in Jesus Christ, and in His name can you have eternal life.
The gentile nations would be blessed through Israel as recorded throughout Scripture. I could do more work on this if only I saw some willingness to acknowledge that which is written. Nevertheless, the Scripture shows steadily that, for example, when (Ezr 8:15) Ezra counted the priests, he found none of the house of Levi, the only priest line; instead they were of the Canaanites and Nephilim. Just some things to search out and see.
You may be confusing genus with species. When we use the word ‘dog’ we use a word that means a genus, but in that genus will be many species. There is no doubt that there are different races of men. My conclusion was that if one adam and eve was white and one was black then to get all the different races from them would be contrary to nature, the first child would not have been the bright and beautiful black of the people of Africa etc, and that being God has chosen to use this natural world, the one where man walks under the sun, to destroy that great spiritual foe, it would be contrary to God for Him to mutate or evolve the various races from merely two people, for example He had said in Genesis 1, and beast of the earth after its kind: and it was so...and every winged fowl after its kind...and every thing that creepeth upon the ground after its kind... And God created man in his own image, in the image of God.
Gen 2:1 And the heaven and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.
We have no warrant to declare that God did not make the races of mankind after their kind, whether that be white, black, red, yellow, brown, etc., and certainly no warrant to suggest that evolution equals creation.
Sorry if I was not clear on that point.
You are welcome to your views, no argument here. You can be sarcastic and condemning with all judgmentalness and it will not cause me one troubling thought, as I myself am in much need of faith, patience, lowliness, meekness, longsuffering, forgiveness and forbearing, with truthing in love.
But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another (Gal 5:15).
If you feel that I have troubled you in any way, then perhaps the Christian in you may learn to forgive. As I have made known, I realize this is an exceedingly difficult subject, and I believe that most of them are. I provided the definitions, I gave the figures of speech the Holy Spirit sees fit to employee. All I can do is point to the Scriptures and try to share something of what the words the Holy Spirit teacheth bring forth.
Why doesn't the Holy Spirit be more clear, you ask? Perhaps there is a purpose, perhaps He wishes our trust and effort in these difficult matters, and perhaps He wishes our acknowledgment more than our interpretations. Perhaps the depths of Scripture cannot be fully plumbed, maybe they are all so very deep that not even one verse can be fully plumbed (I certainly have never fully plumbed even one verse). For example, I confess that even with the shortest verse in the Bible, 'Jesus wept', I have much learning and acknowledgment left in my work, and have not got the full understanding of even this short verse to this very day. How much more difficult it must be when the subject is even more veiled.
I think we all realize that everyone is not learning the same things at the same time, and I imagine the Lord knows why. I am certain you yourself have learned something new that at one time you might have read and not yet understood. This may or may not be one of those future events. All I had asked was that you search and see, but if you are unwilling to dig into the deeper things of God I am sure the Lord will exercise His patience until such a time you might decide a readiness to allow Him to reveal the depths of His Word.
As I have already stated, it is not by other peoples studies that one might learn, but by prayerfully asking God to reveal when reading and studying in the Word of Truth, and He will show forth the Truth to such an one I am sure. Although you may not agree with what I have written, what I have written did come straight from Scripture. I realize you are earnest towards God, and would suggest that the words the Holy Spirit uses are purposed and for our learning. There is always the good news, but it is good because of what had happened was so very very bad. The Bible makes clear that 'an enemy hath done this'. Even in Matt. 13, the Lord purposely uses the word sperma, translated to 'seed' in the English, when speaking of the two seed lines (the true and the tares).
Genesis 3:20 "And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living."
I can venture to remark that the man adam had not yet been out of the garden of God but that becomes supposition (even though it is true) and I am personally uncomfortable with any of that, but it was the man adam who called her that, not the Lord Himself.
We may note that the word 'all' is often translated 'many' in the Bible, nevertheless, Satan knew it was through the womb of this woman Eve that the Messiah would drive his [the devil's] head to the pit, and then to ashes; and destroy him. It was the seed that Satan wanted to destroy, and nearly did several times. Therefore through Eve down to Mary Satan and the great enmity would follow, yet Christ did come.
The word "living" here is looking forward to the Redeemer, Jesus Christ, as we had just read the first prophecy of Scripture, namely that (vv. 15) the seed of the serpent would have enmity with the seed of the woman.. Only in Jesus Christ, and in His name can you have eternal life.
The gentile nations would be blessed through Israel as recorded throughout Scripture. I could do more work on this if only I saw some willingness to acknowledge that which is written. Nevertheless, the Scripture shows steadily that, for example, when (Ezr 8:15) Ezra counted the priests, he found none of the house of Levi, the only priest line; instead they were of the Canaanites and Nephilim. Just some things to search out and see.
QUOTE
These different types of dogs differ far more from one another than the races of men do. Would you like to say that dogs are against nature too.
You may be confusing genus with species. When we use the word ‘dog’ we use a word that means a genus, but in that genus will be many species. There is no doubt that there are different races of men. My conclusion was that if one adam and eve was white and one was black then to get all the different races from them would be contrary to nature, the first child would not have been the bright and beautiful black of the people of Africa etc, and that being God has chosen to use this natural world, the one where man walks under the sun, to destroy that great spiritual foe, it would be contrary to God for Him to mutate or evolve the various races from merely two people, for example He had said in Genesis 1, and beast of the earth after its kind: and it was so...and every winged fowl after its kind...and every thing that creepeth upon the ground after its kind... And God created man in his own image, in the image of God.
Gen 2:1 And the heaven and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.
We have no warrant to declare that God did not make the races of mankind after their kind, whether that be white, black, red, yellow, brown, etc., and certainly no warrant to suggest that evolution equals creation.
Sorry if I was not clear on that point.
Good posts hadmadderest ... and I do enjoy levity ... very much so.
Why didn't God tell us that Cain and Able were twins?
Some things are sealed to the last days for a purpose.
Why didn't God tell us the language and numeric system to be used to "count the beast"?
Some things are sealed to the last days for a purpose. Rev 13:18.
Why didn't God tell us that Cain and Able were twins?
Some things are sealed to the last days for a purpose.
Why didn't God tell us the language and numeric system to be used to "count the beast"?
Some things are sealed to the last days for a purpose. Rev 13:18.
QUOTE(hadmadderest @ May 26 2007, 02:22 PM) [snapback]113593[/snapback]
excubitor,
You are welcome to your views, no argument here. You can be sarcastic and condemning with all judgmentalness and it will not cause me one troubling thought, as I myself am in much need of faith, patience, lowliness, meekness, longsuffering, forgiveness and forbearing, with truthing in love.
But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another (Gal 5:15).
If you feel that I have troubled you in any way, then perhaps the Christian in you may learn to forgive. As I have made known, I realize this is an exceedingly difficult subject, and I believe that most of them are. I provided the definitions, I gave the figures of speech the Holy Spirit sees fit to employee. All I can do is point to the Scriptures and try to share something of what the words the Holy Spirit teacheth bring forth.
Its not a difficult subject. I have never had any trouble with it. My children never have any trouble with it. It never occurred to any of them that Cain and Abel might be twins. Neither did it ever occur to me until not so long ago when I chanced upon one of those wacko secret knowledge type websites. In fact I have NEVER heard ANY CHRISTIAN EVER say that all of the peoples of the world did not descend from Adam and Eve. Did any Jewish sage think such a thing? Did any Christian father say such a thing. I never even heard of it on a wacko secret knowledge web site. You have invented this out of your imagination. You have complicated the issue by raising all these bizarre and contentious notions.
QUOTE(hadmadderest @ May 26 2007, 02:22 PM) [snapback]113593[/snapback]
Why doesn't the Holy Spirit be more clear, you ask?
I never asked this? I think he is being perfectly clear on this matter. This is your own rhetorical question borne of an addled and confused view of the creation of man.
QUOTE(hadmadderest @ May 26 2007, 02:22 PM) [snapback]113593[/snapback]
Perhaps there is a purpose, perhaps He wishes our trust and effort in these difficult matters, and perhaps He wishes our acknowledgment more than our interpretations. Perhaps the depths of Scripture cannot be fully plumbed, maybe they are all so very deep that not even one verse can be fully plumbed (I certainly have never fully plumbed even one verse). For example, I confess that even with the shortest verse in the Bible, 'Jesus wept', I have much learning and acknowledgment left in my work, and have not got the full understanding of even this short verse to this very day. How much more difficult it must be when the subject is even more veiled.
If you can't accept a single simple concept like Eve is the mother of all living without examining the square root of the hebrew hypotenusus to the point that you don't know what to believe then you might as well throw out the Bible. The Bible is perfectly accessible to even the youngest child. My eight year old understands Genesis 1 - 3 better than you do. Of course there are difficult matters in the Bible that God will reveal to his servants in the last days but this is not one of them. This is one of the simplest matters understood with ease by countless generations through history.
QUOTE(hadmadderest @ May 26 2007, 02:22 PM) [snapback]113593[/snapback]
I think we all realize that everyone is not learning the same things at the same time, and I imagine the Lord knows why.
Yes and I think we also know that some people never learn.
Surely it is a manifestation of the last days to see the scriptures fulfilled before our eyes.
2 Tim 3:7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.
QUOTE(hadmadderest @ May 26 2007, 02:22 PM) [snapback]113593[/snapback]
As I have already stated, it is not by other peoples studies that one might learn, but by prayerfully asking God to reveal when reading and studying in the Word of Truth, and He will show forth the Truth to such an one I am sure.
I have no doubt that nobody taught you this fancy. It is clear that this is a product of your own dreamtime. So you would have me believe that God worked with hundreds of generations of his people throughout history and allowed them to all incorrectly believe that Eve is the mother of all living so that right at the end of history he could correct the accumulated errors of their teaching by revealing them to you. Please... What do you take me for?
QUOTE(hadmadderest @ May 26 2007, 02:22 PM) [snapback]113593[/snapback]
Although you may not agree with what I have written, what I have written did come straight from Scripture. I realize you are earnest towards God, and would suggest that the words the Holy Spirit uses are purposed and for our learning. There is always the good news, but it is good because of what had happened was so very very bad. The Bible makes clear that 'an enemy hath done this'. Even in Matt. 13, the Lord purposely uses the word sperma, translated to 'seed' in the English, when speaking of the two seed lines (the true and the tares).
Your words are not straight from the scripture and you know it. In fact you are denying the plain words which are straight from the scripture which says "Genesis 3:20 "And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living." You are denying the plain teachings of the church and generations of wise christian men. And it is not a matter of blandly not liking your teachings. I detest them and will oppose them with every fibre of my being and will constantly defend the teachings of our fathers and the teachings of the Bible.
QUOTE(hadmadderest @ May 26 2007, 02:22 PM) [snapback]113593[/snapback]
Genesis 3:20 "And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living."
I can venture to remark that the man adam had not yet been out of the garden of God but that becomes supposition (even though it is true) and I am personally uncomfortable with any of that, but it was the man adam who called her that, not the Lord Himself.
What's Adam going out of the garden got to do anything? So you don't like supposition. You must be joking. Your whole idea that Cain and Abel were twins is supposition. Your idea that God created a host of human beings outside the garden at the same time he created Adam and Eve is not just supposition it is imagination.
Gen 3:20 PLAINLY SAYS that EVE was the mother of ALL living. That is why Adam named her Eve. There is nothing in that statement which suggests that Adam incorrectly supposed that Eve was the only woman in the world. Obviously God told him that she would be the mother of all living else how would he have come to that belief? Besides which this is a clear and unequivocle statement which you are trying to explain away
QUOTE(hadmadderest @ May 26 2007, 02:22 PM) [snapback]113593[/snapback]
We may note that the word 'all' is often translated 'many' in the Bible, nevertheless, Satan knew it was through the womb of this woman Eve that the Messiah would drive his [the devil's] head to the pit, and then to ashes; and destroy him. It was the seed that Satan wanted to destroy, and nearly did several times. Therefore through Eve down to Mary Satan and the great enmity would follow, yet Christ did come.
This time you didnt even bother to drag out the Hebrew word and explain the disambigutation of the pythagorean inflex of the accented hyfoluten. You just changed a word in the Bible from "ALL" to "MANY". If this is what you have to resort to to make your theory fly then you might just as well pack your bag of tricks and take up knitting.
QUOTE(hadmadderest @ May 26 2007, 02:22 PM) [snapback]113593[/snapback]
QUOTE
These different types of dogs differ far more from one another than the races of men do. Would you like to say that dogs are against nature too.
You may be confusing genus with species. When we use the word ‘dog’ we use a word that means a genus, but in that genus will be many species. There is no doubt that there are different races of men. My conclusion was that if one adam and eve was white and one was black then to get all the different races from them would be contrary to nature, the first child would not have been the bright and beautiful black of the people of Africa etc, and that being God has chosen to use this natural world, the one where man walks under the sun, to destroy that great spiritual foe, it would be contrary to God for Him to mutate or evolve the various races from merely two people, for example He had said in Genesis 1, and beast of the earth after its kind: and it was so...and every winged fowl after its kind...and every thing that creepeth upon the ground after its kind... And God created man in his own image, in the image of God.
Gen 2:1 And the heaven and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.
Now you want to give me a science lesson. Even if it is unnatural (which it is not) I would still believe the testimony of the Bible that Eve is the mother of all living, and that God is quite able to supernaturally cause Eve to bear children with various ethnic traits from genes which he created in her.
QUOTE(hadmadderest @ May 26 2007, 02:22 PM) [snapback]113593[/snapback]
We have no warrant to declare that God did not make the races of mankind after their kind, whether that be white, black, red, yellow, brown, etc., and certainly no warrant to suggest that evolution equals creation.
Sorry if I was not clear on that point.
We most certainly have warrant because the Bible says Eve was the mother of all living. So now you are adding disgraceful teachings to your kit bag of disgraceful teachings. Fancy saying that there are different kinds of men. So which noble race did God create to live in the garden of Eden and which were the kinds of people which were outside the gate. Maybe God put them in a garden as well. Maybe there was a garden for every kind of man. And maybe every garden had its own tree of knowledge of good and evil and its own version of Adam. Maybe the serpent did a round robin of all the gardens to seduce all the different kinds of Adam and Eve to sin and eat of the tree. Look it just gets too silly for words. So laughable.
So you tell me. Did these other hosts of men of different kinds created outside the garden sin also? If so how do you explain the scripture I quoted in my previous post that sin entered the world through Adam?
I'm sorry I have to go off somewhere and cool down. And by the way Calvin. Where is your integrity. Surely you don't believe all this stuff. Can't you at least say to madhatter that you don't agree with some of the things he says. You wouldn't have to tell him in such a grating way as I have but at least you could lend the truth some support.
QUOTE
If you can't accept a single simple concept like Eve is the mother of all living without examining...
Who's concept...?
My main comment would be to say that God isn't using Webster's dictionary, didn't even write His word in English, and many many many words are not only archaic, but do not and cannot translate or transliterate into the English at all. If the words aren't used according to God's definition then, well, we can make the words mean anything, and that causes divisions, where we get the word denomination from don't you know.
Having acknowledged these things, I have developed this (apparently very bad) habit of not only looking up every word in every verse, but even go so far as to look up and catalog all the other occurrences of every word, how it is used, the subject and objects of each clause following them to there logical conclusion as given in Scripture, where the contexts vary, make the lists, the charts and diagrams, the outlines, testing the things that differ, precept upon precept line upon line, the whole nine yards.
But please don't let that trouble YOU.
QUOTE
Did these other hosts of men of different kinds created outside the garden sin also? If so how do you explain the scripture I quoted in my previous post that sin entered the world through Adam?
That's an easy one, not even an enigma like some of them, however, I'll let someone else take the question and the angry bashing and name calling which would surely follow if I had answered it using the Bible.
QUOTE
Fancy saying that there are different kinds of men.
So you are telling me that the Bible knows nothing of different kinds of men, none to honor and none to dishonor, there are no slaves, masters, sent ones (apostles), prophets, kings, priests, angels are not called men, nothing like that in the Bible? No difference between the Canaanite the Jew or the Greek? Hmm.
And no differences in say, Koreans, Caucasians, Africans, Indians, Chinese and Hawaiians, etc etc? But if there were dfferences in any of these races, God didn't make them, adam and eve did. Well. OK. No need for me to comment on much else in that post, but,
As for your final paragraph, in Ephesians the question is asked, can one be angry and not sin, and the answer seems obvious. In case you never read it, our battles are not with one another (Eph 6:12). It is a good meditation to contemplate. As to the rest of your, ahh hmm, comments, no thanks. Have a great day.
There is just soooo much more that could be studied on this subject, but as to the title of the thread, "Adam And Eve Had Two Sons", the Bible does not make any such declaration that Eve had two sons named Cain and Abel, but that Eve had two sons by those names, and in the lineage of Adam, Cain is not mentioned as being his son.
Instead, we have two separate lineages under consideration. We have that of the man adam, and that of Cain. It is the Holy Spirit who has made the distinction. It is us who will either join the two lineages, or acknowledge that it is the Lord who has not joined them together. The question should then become, why did the Lord separate these two lineages as if they were, well, not to be joined one with another.
All one need do is read of Adam's lineage, Cain is absent. Read Cain's lineage, and his children have nearly identical names as that of Adam's. Why is that? The word counterfeit or spurious may have some bearing on this great subject.
Instead, we have two separate lineages under consideration. We have that of the man adam, and that of Cain. It is the Holy Spirit who has made the distinction. It is us who will either join the two lineages, or acknowledge that it is the Lord who has not joined them together. The question should then become, why did the Lord separate these two lineages as if they were, well, not to be joined one with another.
All one need do is read of Adam's lineage, Cain is absent. Read Cain's lineage, and his children have nearly identical names as that of Adam's. Why is that? The word counterfeit or spurious may have some bearing on this great subject.
QUOTE(hadmadderest @ May 28 2007, 01:01 AM) [snapback]113660[/snapback]
There is just soooo much more that could be studied on this subject, but as to the title of the thread, "Adam And Eve Had Two Sons", the Bible does not make any such declaration that Eve had two sons named Cain and Abel, but that Eve had two sons by those names, and in the lineage of Adam, Cain is not mentioned as being his son.
Instead, we have two separate lineages under consideration. We have that of the man adam, and that of Cain. It is the Holy Spirit who has made the distinction. It is us who will either join the two lineages, or acknowledge that it is the Lord who has not joined them together. The question should then become, why did the Lord separate these two lineages as if they were, well, not to be joined one with another.
All one need do is read of Adam's lineage, Cain is absent. Read Cain's lineage, and his children have nearly identical names as that of Adam's. Why is that? The word counterfeit or spurious may have some bearing on this great subject.
Clearly I was spot on with my previous post. It is clear that if you believe that Cain and Abel are twins and that Cain had a different father to Abel that you believe the ridiculous notion of superfetation where a woman having multiple partners at the same time may conceive different eggs with sperm from different men. Whilst this can happen in extremely rare cases it is almost absurd to suggest it in the case of Eve. First of all there were no other men on the earth. Adam alone was made of the dust of the ground. So you probably believe that the serpent knew Eve and conceived unnatural offspring. Whilst it is true that certain of the angelic host left their spiritual habitation to couple with women, there is absolutely no evidence that this happened in the case of Eve. As I persistantly said in previous posts that sin entered into the world by birthright and inheritance on account of the sin of Adam. There is no evidence that sin entered into the world as the result of the sin of the serpent. There is no evidence that God created a host of men outside the garden who broke into the garden for a midnight tryst with Eve.
I can see now that my previous post does not just apply to a general subset of whacko secret knowledge kooks, it also applys completely to you.
QUOTE
Look I've heard it all. Fanciful tales like the theory of superfetation that Eve knew both Adam and also the devil when she ate of the forbidden fruit and that Cain is the offspring of the devil and Abel is the offspring of Adam. Therefore it is said to explain why Eve is called the Mother of all living and Adam is not called the Father of all living. They then throw in the root of the Hebrew word and the square root of the figurative idiom to justify their theorys. So are these people commended for having studied the Bible? No they are monstrous perverters of the Bible; using the Bible to introduce false and foolish fables and notions to confound the simple.
AS IF TO PREEMPT this absurd theory the Bible even SPECIFICALLY states that Adam was Cains physical and natural father. In Genesis 4:1 AND ADAM KNEW EVE HIS WIFE AND SHE CONCEIVED AND BARE CAIN
but know we can't just simply believe this statement. Madhatter has to cook it, twist it, carve it up, read between its lines and believe something completely different, that Adam did not conceive Cain. And then having done so PROUDLY boast "Yes I believe every word of the Bible, I just have a different interpretation of it". Stop this nonsense and start believing the plain words of the scripture.
About twins with multiple fathers, is it possible:--
http://multiples.about.com/od/glossary/g/s...fferent+fathers
This isn't about you silly, how 'bout them verses though?
1Jn 3:11 For this is the message that ye heard from the beginning, that we should love one another.
1Jn 3:12 Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother's righteous.
Of the evil one (ek tou ponērou) lit. out from, having come out of, evil, is literal not figurative !!! ek is a primary preposition denoting origin:--
ek governs only one case (the Genitive), and denotes motion from the interior. See under apo . It is used of time, place, and origin. It means out from as distinguished from apo , which means off, or away from. Ek marks the more immediate origin, while apo marks the more remote origin; of expressing the intermediate meanings.
ponērou is the Gr. masculine singular case and in this grammatical case always means "the devil", brought forward from vv. 10.
NOW
Agreed 100% (Genesis iv. 1) Adam did know his wife, and I agree that she had Cain, and again bear abel. No problem there, as the Holy Spirit had this Book given to us with ALL truth.
Now here comes the comma but part, but,
Cain is not listed as one of the man adam's sons. Instead Cain is given his own lineage. Do you think the Holy Spirit forgot?, which is rhetorical - THINK ABOUT IT. why would the HS give Cain his due lineage, but go out of the way to exclude Cain from Adam's lineage? What is the reason for such a Dreadful exclusion?
However, I would truly ask you ANSWER how many seeds are mentioned in the following vv.:
speaking to the serpent from vv. 14, God says:--
Gen 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
How many seeds is that? Why does God want to "utterly destroy" the Cainnanites throughout the OT?, ALSO not rhetorical.
Example:--
Deu 7:1
When the LORD thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it, and hath cast out many nations before thee, the Hittites, and the Girgashites, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and mightier than thou;
Deu 7:2
And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor show mercy unto them
It is further interesting that the meaning of the name of Cain is gotten or acquired.
http://multiples.about.com/od/glossary/g/s...fferent+fathers
QUOTE
Clearly I was
This isn't about you silly, how 'bout them verses though?
1Jn 3:11 For this is the message that ye heard from the beginning, that we should love one another.
1Jn 3:12 Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother's righteous.
Of the evil one (ek tou ponērou) lit. out from, having come out of, evil, is literal not figurative !!! ek is a primary preposition denoting origin:--
ek governs only one case (the Genitive), and denotes motion from the interior. See under apo . It is used of time, place, and origin. It means out from as distinguished from apo , which means off, or away from. Ek marks the more immediate origin, while apo marks the more remote origin; of expressing the intermediate meanings.
ponērou is the Gr. masculine singular case and in this grammatical case always means "the devil", brought forward from vv. 10.
NOW
Agreed 100% (Genesis iv. 1) Adam did know his wife, and I agree that she had Cain, and again bear abel. No problem there, as the Holy Spirit had this Book given to us with ALL truth.
Now here comes the comma but part, but,
Cain is not listed as one of the man adam's sons. Instead Cain is given his own lineage. Do you think the Holy Spirit forgot?, which is rhetorical - THINK ABOUT IT. why would the HS give Cain his due lineage, but go out of the way to exclude Cain from Adam's lineage? What is the reason for such a Dreadful exclusion?
However, I would truly ask you ANSWER how many seeds are mentioned in the following vv.:
speaking to the serpent from vv. 14, God says:--
Gen 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
How many seeds is that? Why does God want to "utterly destroy" the Cainnanites throughout the OT?, ALSO not rhetorical.
Example:--
Deu 7:1
When the LORD thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it, and hath cast out many nations before thee, the Hittites, and the Girgashites, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and mightier than thou;
Deu 7:2
And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor show mercy unto them
It is further interesting that the meaning of the name of Cain is gotten or acquired.
QUOTE(hadmadderest @ May 28 2007, 12:40 PM) [snapback]113698[/snapback]
About twins with multiple fathers today:--
http://multiples.about.com/od/glossary/g/s...fferent+fathers
QUOTE
Clearly I was
This isn't about you silly, how 'bout them verses though?
1Jn 3:11 For this is the message that ye heard from the beginning, that we should love one another.
1Jn 3:12 Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother's righteous.
Of the evil one (ek tou pone¯rou) lit. out from, having come out of, evil, is literal not figurative !!! ek is a primary preposition denoting origin:--
ek governs only one case (the Genitive), and denotes motion from the interior. See under apo . It is used of time, place, and origin. It means out from as distinguished from apo , which means off, or away from. Ek marks the more immediate origin, while apo marks the more remote origin; of expressing the intermediate meanings.
pone¯rou is the Gr. masculine singular case and in this grammatical case always means "the devil", brought forward from vv. 10.
NOW
I agree 100% that adam did know his wife, and I agree that she had Cain, and again bear abel. No problem there, as the Holy Spirit had this Book given to us with ALL truth.
Now here comes the comma but part, but,
Cain is not listed as one of the man adam's sons. Instead Cain is given his own lineage. Do you think the Holy Spirit forgot?, which is rhetorical - THINK ABOUT IT. why would the HS give Cain his due lineage, but go out of the way to exclude Cain from Adam's lineage? What is the reason for such a Dreadful exclusion?
However, I would truly ask you ANSWER how many seeds are mentioned in the following vv.:
speaking to the serpent from vv. 14, God says:--
Gen 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
How many seeds is that? Why does God want to "utterly destroy" the Cainnanites throughout the OT?, ALSO not rhetorical.
Example:--
Deu 7:1
When the LORD thy God shall bring thee into the land whither thou goest to possess it, and hath cast out many nations before thee, the Hittites, and the Girgashites, and the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, and the Hivites, and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and mightier than thou;
Deu 7:2
And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor show mercy unto them
It is further interesting that the meaning of the name of Cain is gotten or acquired.
Clearly the devil had seed. This is described later when the sons of God went into the daughters of men.
Gen 6:1And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, 2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. 3 And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years. 4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.
So the mingling of the seed occurred AFTER WHAT? AFTER men multiplied on the earth. So it occurred hundreds of years after the creation. Notice also that the offspring were unnatural and were giants. There was nothing unnatural about Cain, he was 100% human. Noah also was unique in that he was "perfect in his generations" verse 8, indicating that his genes were not intermingled with the seed of Satan and that he was just and righteous. The flood purged the world of all wickedness and the human race began again afresh. Except in your scenario which insists that the seed of the devil through Cain had to continue through one of those who were on the ark. Who was it hattermad? Noah's wife, one of his son's or daughters in law. Surely the Bible would have told us if an imposter was preserved on the ark.
No the flood was definitely a fresh start for humanity with a slate wiped clean. It was not until hundreds of years after the flood that it seems Satan got up to his old tricks and when he saw that the land of Canaan was promised to Abraham to be his inheritance he corrupted the people of those lands with his seed so that they became giants. There was no record of giants being in the land 400 years earlier when Abraham and his tribe lived there. The corruption occurred in the time since. This is why the land had to be entirely purged and the Canaanite cursed from that day until now.
We also know that in the last days this tampering of the gene pool will occur again as we see the ten toes of Daniel being part clay and part iron picturing a mingling of another seed with the seed of man.
Dan 2:42 And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken. [11] 43 And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one [12] to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay.
From this we can safely consume that the beast/antichrist will have perverted heritage and will be a seed of the devil. It will be he who will be struck down and destroyed at the return of Christ who comes and destroy the ten toed world empire led by the antichrist/beast.
Dan 2:34 Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out without [10] hands, which smote the image upon his feet that were of iron and clay, and brake them to pieces.
Now these things are difficult matters of the scripture. However at least I can say that these beliefs of mine are entirely in line with the Biblical statement that as a consequence of Adam knowing Eve, Cain was conceived. They completely explain the meaning of the "your seed and her seed" expression in Gen 3:15.
Bible students also know that the crucifixion of Jesus was a fulfillment of the "and thou shalt bruise his heel" expression. So are you saying that Jesus was directly conceived by Eve and was her son? No of course not. So why do you insist that the seed of Satan must also be conceived directly by her. Notice also that you are in a twist. On the one hand you say that Cain was Eve's son, but on the other hand you argue that he is of the "your seed" in Gen 3:15 as opposed to the "her seed". You can't have it both ways.
The very first prophecy of Scripture provides the first instance of the revealing of the unfolding mystery of Christ, it is not disconnected from the touch Eve was afraid of earlier in the same chapter. The subject and object of the grammar did not change, it continues right on up to this first prophetic utterance, they were afraid, they covered themselves, then we learn of the two seeds, both literal.
The seed to be utterly destroyed is the seed of Cain. Cain is 'of the evil one'.
The words used in Genesis 4 reveal that Eve did have twins, just look up the word, or go back to where I quoted it for everyone to search out and see.
In vv. 1 we read "I have gotten a man from the LORD." but omit the word 'from', it isn't in the manuscripts; she thought her curse was over, that she had borne The Lord. But it would be the seed which God would have Israel destroy utterly.
What we learn from Gen 1:15 forward is God is working out His plan of redemption here for all His creation. This due to a great spiritual foe, is at the heart of God’s redemptive plan, in the mind of God before there was a need for it. It elevates Christ to His highest position in Scripture.
Everything at the beginning of the Book speaks of generations, it is chronological. The prophecy begins with two seeds.
Cain is omitted from Adam's lineage. He was not Adam's son or he would be of Adam's lineage. The HS does not make mistakes. Something happened to begin the prophecy of two seeds. It happened in the garden. It was the cause of the first prophecy. They get kicked out the garden for it. Adam knew Eve. Eve had two son's. One was 'of that evil one', the devil. At least that is what is written in Scripture anyways.
Genesis 6, yes, there is an angelic breech told there.
I would like to bring to attention the fact that earlier you said this is not difficult at all, but now you are admitting that it is so. I would only suggest that we let the air breath and study more and look it afresh at a later date. There is simply no way we can take everything in which each Bible subject has to offer. God is the revealer, not me, not you, but the Lord reveals through our prayerful study in the Word. There is no telling what He may reveal, but one thing we know, is that the carnal mind cannot understand that which is spiritually discerned, so it is more than just a matter of searching out a thing, it is believing everything we read as well asking the Lord that the eyes of our understanding be enlightened.
"Zealous of good works". A mark of a peculiar people. "Rebuke with all authority". I hate to rebuke anybody. I haven't done very much of that. I don't like to be rebuked, do you? But when Titus is over bishops, deacons and so on, there's going to have to be a little of that to put folks in line. We're not exercising authority today, really. I'm not in the business of rebuking folks. I seldom do and if I do, I try to be positive rather than finding fault and maybe suggest there's a better way. I want to be helpful. I have nothing whereof to boast. I don't want to put anyone down. I want everyone who names the name of Christ to have a witness of some kind. And we can't be in the business of putting folks down and spoil their witness.
I will come back to read if anyone posts, but doubt I will continue in this vein.
There’s an awful lack of love among men today, and many of them profess the name of Christ. We should pray, and we should so live that His love might be revealed to them. Let us walk in love ourselves. Now Christ loved us. He came and was obedient unto death. He was obedient unto the Father. He performed that for which He was preordained to perform.
The seed to be utterly destroyed is the seed of Cain. Cain is 'of the evil one'.
The words used in Genesis 4 reveal that Eve did have twins, just look up the word, or go back to where I quoted it for everyone to search out and see.
In vv. 1 we read "I have gotten a man from the LORD." but omit the word 'from', it isn't in the manuscripts; she thought her curse was over, that she had borne The Lord. But it would be the seed which God would have Israel destroy utterly.
What we learn from Gen 1:15 forward is God is working out His plan of redemption here for all His creation. This due to a great spiritual foe, is at the heart of God’s redemptive plan, in the mind of God before there was a need for it. It elevates Christ to His highest position in Scripture.
Everything at the beginning of the Book speaks of generations, it is chronological. The prophecy begins with two seeds.
Cain is omitted from Adam's lineage. He was not Adam's son or he would be of Adam's lineage. The HS does not make mistakes. Something happened to begin the prophecy of two seeds. It happened in the garden. It was the cause of the first prophecy. They get kicked out the garden for it. Adam knew Eve. Eve had two son's. One was 'of that evil one', the devil. At least that is what is written in Scripture anyways.
Genesis 6, yes, there is an angelic breech told there.
I would like to bring to attention the fact that earlier you said this is not difficult at all, but now you are admitting that it is so. I would only suggest that we let the air breath and study more and look it afresh at a later date. There is simply no way we can take everything in which each Bible subject has to offer. God is the revealer, not me, not you, but the Lord reveals through our prayerful study in the Word. There is no telling what He may reveal, but one thing we know, is that the carnal mind cannot understand that which is spiritually discerned, so it is more than just a matter of searching out a thing, it is believing everything we read as well asking the Lord that the eyes of our understanding be enlightened.
"Zealous of good works". A mark of a peculiar people. "Rebuke with all authority". I hate to rebuke anybody. I haven't done very much of that. I don't like to be rebuked, do you? But when Titus is over bishops, deacons and so on, there's going to have to be a little of that to put folks in line. We're not exercising authority today, really. I'm not in the business of rebuking folks. I seldom do and if I do, I try to be positive rather than finding fault and maybe suggest there's a better way. I want to be helpful. I have nothing whereof to boast. I don't want to put anyone down. I want everyone who names the name of Christ to have a witness of some kind. And we can't be in the business of putting folks down and spoil their witness.
I will come back to read if anyone posts, but doubt I will continue in this vein.
There’s an awful lack of love among men today, and many of them profess the name of Christ. We should pray, and we should so live that His love might be revealed to them. Let us walk in love ourselves. Now Christ loved us. He came and was obedient unto death. He was obedient unto the Father. He performed that for which He was preordained to perform.
QUOTE(hadmadderest @ May 28 2007, 01:48 AM) [snapback]113713[/snapback]
Cain is omitted from Adam's lineage. He was not Adam's son or he would be of Adam's lineage. The HS does not make mistakes.
your logic is faulty. You make jumps where there are none. THer eis NO ommittance. SHOW me and I will show you you are messing up. What are you using to prove that point?
genesis 4:
--------------
1 Adam [a] lay with his wife Eve, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Cain. [b] She said, "With the help of the LORD I have brought forth [c] a man." 2 Later she gave birth to his brother Abel.
25 Adam lay with his wife again, and she gave birth to a son and named him Seth, [i] saying, "God has granted me another child in place of Abel, since Cain killed him."
Adam lay with his wife, she what? GAVE birth to CAin. In both situations, Seth and CAin, it was God's favor according to Eve's words, taht she brought for a man or another son....
Additionally, it isn't til chapter 4 , AFTER the expulsion from the garden that Cain is conceived... The expulsion happened before either Cai or Abel were alive AND it happened before Genesis 4: 1 where it says Adam lay with his wife and she bore a son...
Now, why did you quote genesis 4:1a, (THE SECOND HALF AND LEAVE OUT THE PROBLEMATIC PHRASE, ADAM LAY WITH HIS WIFE EVE) and just "deceivingly" left out it out? Why leave out that passage and try to convice that since one workd is not in the hebrew regarding the birth of Cain, that Eve thought she gave birth to God Himself? One heresy after another, the slippery slope is full of dangers.
The mistake is not the HS's which you then try to conver up with your picking and choosing how you find passages, it is specifically your mistake.
Adam lays with his wife Eve, on both occassions, we see a son born, CAin or Seth specifically, in both cases, Eve thanks God.
In fact, you can exclude Abel as Adam's son also if you read the following:
Genesis 5:
------------
1 This is the written account of Adam's line.
When God created man, he made him in the likeness of God. 2 He created them male and female and blessed them. And when they were created, he called them "man. [a] "
3 When Adam had lived 130 years, he had a son in his own likeness, in his own image; and he named him Seth. 4 After Seth was born, Adam lived 800 years and had other sons and daughters. 5 Altogether, Adam lived 930 years, and then he died.
The HS makes no mistakes, maybe the HS did and forgot to mention Abel who had been killed since the HS didn't mention Cain either in this account! Christ's geneology mentions specifically, only hte line that is important to Chrsit. WE get to Noah, the same thing. The geneologyu is traced to Noah becasue he is the culmination from Adam. Christ is the culmination thru Judah.
So many people try to interprete the bible, 33000 independent denominations all think they got the end all of the bible. yet, The bible is not interpreted, it is more explained. Christ opened the eyes of the apostles and explained the meaning of what they meant. The early church did not need intepretation, they needed explaination. Interpretation comes from a lack of apostolic roots.. the road to Emaus story teaches us taht unless a QUALIFIED person who has received the truth in WORD, explained to him the gospel and the bible, the words do not come alive, it is going to and fro in the waves of Confusion and babylon. 33000 protexstant denominations is just another word for babylon. (at the tower of BAbel, there was only 70 nations, in denominationalism, there are 33000)
GET ROOTED in the church and what they taught , not Hislop and not serpent seed doctrines modern day false prophets teach. LEarn from what the early church fathers had to say and understood, learn of what the various types of prayers were.
QUOTE(apostolic-church @ May 28 2007, 01:14 PM) [snapback]113739[/snapback]
QUOTE(hadmadderest @ May 28 2007, 01:48 AM) [snapback]113713[/snapback]
Cain is omitted from Adam's lineage. He was not Adam's son or he would be of Adam's lineage. The HS does not make mistakes.
your logic is faulty. You make jumps where there are none. THer eis NO ommittance. SHOW me and I will show you you are messing up. What are you using to prove that point?
This is a valid question and I don't mind responding (this final time) where the omission is. Simply read the geological record of Adam, Cain is omitted.
I agree, the HS makes no err, God cannot lie.
The record begins in Gen. v.
Gen 5:1 This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;
Gen 5:2 Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.
Gen 5:3 And Adam lived a hundred and thirty years, and begot a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth
WHOOPS, WHAT HAPPENED TO CAIN, HE SEEMS TO NOT BE IN THE RECORD OF ADAM'S LINEAGE
It will be noted that only survivors are listed, for example, Abel is absent, but Cain had survivors, and Cain's lineage is listed apart from 'the book of the generations of Adam'. It is the record by the Holy Spirit. The HS did not make a mistake here, there is a reason for it. We read of it throughout the Bible, which is one of the great reasons for the tedious record of all that begetting going on, so we can trace the true seed from the counterfeit.
ponder:--
Judas IscariotHe is sometimes called "the son of Simon," Joh_6:71; Joh_13:2; Joh_13:26, 'the Canaanite'.
Mat 10:4 Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot (Hitchcock's Bible names=a man of murder), who also betrayed him.
NOW
I didn't deceive by getting to the point straightaway. People often expect the Lord to rewrite everything in every verse so they can connect things more easily, but God expects us to be able to remember, or at least work by precept upon precept, else the Book would not be so small as it is. And for me, don't feel the need to repeat everything I 'd previously discussed either, as the posts are long enough, and I had already made the strong point that I believe firmly that Adam did indeed know eve and bare a son.
back to the garden
sin
violation of the first law, 'thou shalt not...' (Gen. ii. 17)
adam was under law
the response to the serpent, enmity between two seed lines
and to the woman, 'greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception'
both problems have to do with their children
now we aren't to conclude that bringing a child from her womb would have otherwise been painless are we?
so what is the great sorrow
it is NOT about her seeds sorrow in some future posterity, as this concerns HER sorrow in HER conception, multiplied
Cain has his own lineage apart from the man adam
but I hear many saying we cannot connect these Holy Inspired Records even though they are concurrent events of the generations, that somehow we must disassociate these events and place them elsewhere, or ignore them altogether while selecting one verse and building around that one, rejecting all the verses surrounding them when they press the reader to acknowledge what goes against what they believe or have heard. does anyone else hear many saying such things about the inspired record?
there are many plain statements in Scripture that state these things, I have given but a few, they should be enough to begin with. perhaps it is not yet time for everyone to begin a study such as this. it's right there in Scripture though, awaiting that good time when it is yet.
for ex. Christ told them plainly, ye are of your father, lower case f, the devil, 'I' am from my Father, upper case. Is Christ lying? Can Christ lie? If any believe a figure of speech is being used, please tell the name of that figure, but let us not tell others to set things aside that are so plainly stated so many times in the inspired record, as if there is something wrong with them for acknowledging that which IS written for our learning.
really though,
I am not going to respond to this argumentative posturing, it now given back to the threadholder and other members. I have given enough information for anyone to search it out and see if these things are truly in the record or not. I have other work to do and share.
Thank you all for you graciousness in allowing me to post these verses and further for having read them.
Search and see, prayerfully asking for the Lord's understanding and grace, which abounds exceedingly.
QUOTE(hadmadderest @ May 28 2007, 03:48 PM) [snapback]113713[/snapback]
The very first prophecy of Scripture provides the first instance of the revealing of the unfolding mystery of Christ, it is not disconnected from the touch Eve was afraid of earlier in the same chapter. The subject and object of the grammar did not change, it continues right on up to this first prophetic utterance, they were afraid, they covered themselves, then we learn of the two seeds, both literal.
The seed to be utterly destroyed is the seed of Cain. Cain is 'of the evil one'.
The words used in Genesis 4 reveal that Eve did have twins, just look up the word, or go back to where I quoted it for everyone to search out and see.
The words absolutely do not. It is only examing the square root of the hebrew hyptonenuse hypofluten mixed in with some magic mushrooms that you can get it to say that Cain and Abel were twins.
QUOTE(hadmadderest @ May 28 2007, 03:48 PM) [snapback]113713[/snapback]
In vv. 1 we read "I have gotten a man from the LORD." but omit the word 'from', it isn't in the manuscripts; she thought her curse was over, that she had borne The Lord. But it would be the seed which God would have Israel destroy utterly.
More magic mushrooms here. Don't you think all the generations of bible translaters would have translated it
"I have given birth to the Lord" if that what it said in the Hebrew. Do you really think that the translators are that stupid? What do you think of this gem Calvin and Laurel?
QUOTE(hadmadderest @ May 28 2007, 03:48 PM) [snapback]113713[/snapback]
I would like to bring to attention the fact that earlier you said this is not difficult at all, but now you are admitting that it is so. I would only suggest that we let the air breath and study more and look it afresh at a later date. There is simply no way we can take everything in which each Bible subject has to offer. God is the revealer, not me, not you, but the Lord reveals through our prayerful study in the Word. There is no telling what He may reveal, but one thing we know, is that the carnal mind cannot understand that which is spiritually discerned, so it is more than just a matter of searching out a thing, it is believing everything we read as well asking the Lord that the eyes of our understanding be enlightened.
Again, the words of a fox and a trickster. You know well that I am saying that the matter of the birth and lineage of Cain and Abel is a simple matter whereas the matter of the seed of the devil and prophecies associated with it are a more difficult.
QUOTE(hadmadderest @ May 28 2007, 03:48 PM) [snapback]113713[/snapback]
"Zealous of good works". A mark of a peculiar people. "Rebuke with all authority". I hate to rebuke anybody. I haven't done very much of that. I don't like to be rebuked, do you? But when Titus is over bishops, deacons and so on, there's going to have to be a little of that to put folks in line. We're not exercising authority today, really. I'm not in the business of rebuking folks. I seldom do and if I do, I try to be positive rather than finding fault and maybe suggest there's a better way. I want to be helpful. I have nothing whereof to boast. I don't want to put anyone down. I want everyone who names the name of Christ to have a witness of some kind. And we can't be in the business of putting folks down and spoil their witness.
I am not shy to rebuke you for your false teaching. I absolutely find the gravest fault in you and don't mind telling you. I would tell you to your face if you came to my door.
QUOTE(hadmadderest @ May 28 2007, 03:48 PM) [snapback]113713[/snapback]
I will come back to read if anyone posts, but doubt I will continue in this vein.
It is my cherished hope that you will not continue in this vein and is the entire intent of all of these posts of mine.
QUOTE(hadmadderest @ May 28 2007, 03:48 PM) [snapback]113713[/snapback]
There’s an awful lack of love among men today, and many of them profess the name of Christ. We should pray, and we should so live that His love might be revealed to them. Let us walk in love ourselves. Now Christ loved us. He came and was obedient unto death. He was obedient unto the Father. He performed that for which He was preordained to perform.
I love the truth. I love the simple, new Christian who loves the plain words of the scriptures who does not need to be tricked, deceived and led astray by falsehoods such as you have been spreading. I do not love those who bring another false gospel. If sin did not enter into the world through one man then how can life and salvation enter the world through one man?
As shown by this scripture which you have constantly evaded and continually ignored
Rom 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that [3] all have sinned: 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many. 17 For if by one man's [4] offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)
So how can you say that sin entered the world through Adam if you believe that God created hosts of other kinds men outside the garden. And how do you say that the curse of Adam passes to all men if he is not the father of all men? And if death did not come to the world through this one man Adam. Then how can it be also said that life and salvation came to the world through just one man Jesus Christ. So I say to you that you are introducing a false gospel which must be considered anathema by all Christians. To all those foolish folk who continue to read these posts, I urge, do not entertain this pattern of thinking in your minds for such fables are the things which draw people away from the truth to the peril of their souls.
QUOTE(hadmadderest @ May 28 2007, 01:48 AM) [snapback]113713[/snapback]
Cain is omitted from Adam's lineage. He was not Adam's son or he would be of Adam's lineage. The HS does not make mistakes.
This is a valid question and I don't mind responding (this final time) where the omission is. Simply read the geological record of Adam, Cain is omitted.
I agree, the HS makes no err, God cannot lie.
The record begins in Gen. v.
Gen 5:1 This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him;
Gen 5:2 Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.
Gen 5:3 And Adam lived a hundred and thirty years, and begot a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth
WHOOPS, WHAT HAPPENED TO CAIN, HE SEEMS TO NOT BE IN THE RECORD OF ADAM'S LINEAGE
What rubbish. Just because God does not record the lineage of Cain in as much detail as the lineage of Seth does not logically follow that Cain was not Adam's biological son. When Cain was banished to Nod he effectively was disowned by Adam. God continued to deal with Adams line whereas Cains line was cursed and banished from his presence entirely. He became a vagabond in the earth. The passage in Gen 5 simply goes to show that Noah was a direct descendant of Adam through Seth.
QUOTE(hadmadderest @ May 28 2007, 01:48 AM) [snapback]113713[/snapback]
It will be noted that only survivors are listed, for example, Abel is absent, but Cain had survivors, and Cain's lineage is listed apart from 'the book of the generations of Adam'. It is the record by the Holy Spirit. The HS did not make a mistake here, there is a reason for it. We read of it throughout the Bible, which is one of the great reasons for the tedious record of all that begetting going on, so we can trace the true seed from the counterfeit.
Yes the reason was given plainly that he was banished and made vagabond because he murdered Abel. I doubt that the HS is required to understand something so absurdly obvious in the story. Of course Cain and all of his seed were cursed, but that is not the same thing as saying that Cain was conceived by Satan.
QUOTE(hadmadderest @ May 28 2007, 01:48 AM) [snapback]113713[/snapback]
I didn't deceive by getting to the point straightaway. People often expect the Lord to rewrite everything in every verse so they can connect things more easily, but God expects us to be able to remember, or at least work by precept upon precept, else the Book would not be so small as it is. And for me, don't feel the need to repeat everything I 'd previously discussed either, as the posts are long enough, and I had already made the strong point that I believe firmly that Adam did indeed know eve and bare a son.
No sir, you most definitely did deceive, working trickery like a snake. First you tried to cajole people to believe your dastardly notion that Cain and Abel were twins, and then as per my prediction you then found fertile ground to launch into your even more dastardly doctrine of superfetation of Cain and Abel. Hence you got Calvin and Laurel on your side and now that the full outrage of your beliefs has come out into the open suddenly they are nowhere to be seen. Not even to lend support for me as I tackle your false teachings. If I had more assistance from them now I would not need to be so strident in my criticism.
Of course we need to be as wise as serpents and harmless as doves, but you have been as crafty as a serpent and as deadly as a snake.
QUOTE(hadmadderest @ May 28 2007, 01:48 AM) [snapback]113713[/snapback]
for ex. Christ told them plainly, ye are of your father, lower case f, the devil, 'I' am from my Father, upper case. Is Christ lying? Can Christ lie? If any believe a figure of speech is being used, please tell the name of that figure, but let us not tell others to set things aside that are so plainly stated so many times in the inspired record, as if there is something wrong with them for acknowledging that which IS written for our learning.
So who is a Christian’s father? Is it not God himself making us children of God. Does this mean that God physically cohabited with our mothers to produce us. No of course not. We are reborn, begotten of the Holy Spirit at Baptism. Whereas we were children of the devil from our birth (unless we were Holy Children of a Saint) on account of the sin of Adam. So you use this “father of the devil” to argue that Cain was conceived by Satan, therefore you must also argue that the holy line of Seth must have been conceived of God himself to be consistent. You have not argued that (surprisingly).
QUOTE(hadmadderest @ May 28 2007, 01:48 AM) [snapback]113713[/snapback]
really though,
I am not going to respond to this argumentative posturing, it now given back to the threadholder and other members. I have given enough information for anyone to search it out and see if these things are truly in the record or not. I have other work to do and share.
Thank you all for you graciousness in allowing me to post these verses and further for having read them.
Search and see, prayerfully asking for the Lord's understanding and grace, which abounds exceedingly.
You get no thanks from me but a stiff retort as you errors deserve. It is my most cherished wish that you do no longer respond on this subject and it is of course my continual effort to resoundly correct false teaching
QUOTE(laurel @ May 29 2007, 01:19 PM) [snapback]113756[/snapback]
so again, im so sorry that you think that i left you to do the job yourself, but life was happening, as even at my best i wasnt able to keep up with it all. not perfact!
I wonder if Calvin was running too!
Fair enough, good answer. I was a bit upset about you inferring that I was simply namecalling. It seemed to me that you were taking sides initially and that you were in support of the Hadmad and his twin idea and against me when all I was doing was defending the Scriptures and the teachings of the church. I certainly agree that both you and Calvin were running. It would have been nice to had some support from at least one person. Fortunately apostolic came in on the scene recently to add additional sanity to the thread. Apostolic was absolutely spot on. How I wish that more Christians had his approach to the Bible and would avoid all this New-Agey false prophets of doom hocus pocus serpent seed stuff that hadermad has been pushing.
I only read this today. I support what excubitor is saying.
Personally I think the Lord is clever enough to have said something else, if it was something else that He meant.
I do not have time for this thread, but I will add my support..well if that means anything
Personally I think the Lord is clever enough to have said something else, if it was something else that He meant.
I do not have time for this thread, but I will add my support..well if that means anything
Laurel,
I entered this thread because of one reason ... hadmadderest claimed that Cain and Abel were twins.
I had noted that because of the Hebrew word used, Rabbinic thought is that she "continued to bear" ... there is no mention of "knowing" Adam between the birth of the two. I think this is an important point.
Regardless of what Excubitor says, I continue to believe they were twins, and that it is not a silly fable
My only reason for being on a discussion board like this is because of my sincere desire to understand prophecy more clearly. I have absolutely no interest (or knowledge) in what the two combatants are discussing. I encouraged hadmadderest because I thought the discussion would get back to the subject of twins in the Bible.
The expositors of old spoke about a "red thread" that weaves its way through the Bible interconnecting certain words or passages relative to the understanding of prophecy.
I am far from completing the article I spoke about but I will soon PM you, Excubitor and hadmadderest a sample of why I believe the mark placed upon Cain is connected to the image, mark and number of the beast ... and why the biblical "two twin or double" sign may help us to identify that great city Mystery Babylon.
I entered this thread because of one reason ... hadmadderest claimed that Cain and Abel were twins.
I had noted that because of the Hebrew word used, Rabbinic thought is that she "continued to bear" ... there is no mention of "knowing" Adam between the birth of the two. I think this is an important point.
Regardless of what Excubitor says, I continue to believe they were twins, and that it is not a silly fable
My only reason for being on a discussion board like this is because of my sincere desire to understand prophecy more clearly. I have absolutely no interest (or knowledge) in what the two combatants are discussing. I encouraged hadmadderest because I thought the discussion would get back to the subject of twins in the Bible.
The expositors of old spoke about a "red thread" that weaves its way through the Bible interconnecting certain words or passages relative to the understanding of prophecy.
I am far from completing the article I spoke about but I will soon PM you, Excubitor and hadmadderest a sample of why I believe the mark placed upon Cain is connected to the image, mark and number of the beast ... and why the biblical "two twin or double" sign may help us to identify that great city Mystery Babylon.
QUOTE(calvin @ Jun 1 2007, 05:31 AM) [snapback]114068[/snapback]
Laurel,
I entered this thread because of one reason ... hadmadderest claimed that Cain and Abel were twins.
I had noted that because of the Hebrew word used, Rabbinic thought is that she "continued to bear" ... there is no mention of "knowing" Adam between the birth of the two. I think this is an important point.
Regardless of what Excubitor says, I continue to believe they were twins, and that it is not a silly fable
My only reason for being on a discussion board like this is because of my sincere desire to understand prophecy more clearly. I have absolutely no interest (or knowledge) in what the two combatants are discussing. I encouraged hadmadderest because I thought the discussion would get back to the subject of twins in the Bible.
The expositors of old spoke about a "red thread" that weaves its way through the Bible interconnecting certain words or passages relative to the understanding of prophecy.
I am far from completing the article I spoke about but I will soon PM you, Excubitor and hadmadderest a sample of why I believe the mark placed upon Cain is connected to the image, mark and number of the beast ... and why the biblical "two twin or double" sign may help us to identify that great city Mystery Babylon.
Well Calvin I certainly believe that twins feature heavily in the scriptures. I will also be interested in how you link Cains mark with the antichrist. However I doubt very much that your article hinges upon Cain and Abel being twins. If it does I will probably reject it. If I gave you that text in Genesis to read without any preconceived ideas, there is no way that you would conclude that Cain and Abel were twins. It is only because someone with a clever fandangled "red thread" idea suggested it that it would ever occur to you to imagine that they might be twins. Why would God obscure the matter of Cain and Abel as twins and yet show so clearly that Jacob and Esau were twins?
My complaint towards you is that you spoke out in support of hadmad and then when he went bizarro on us you were nowhere to be seen. I suspect that with a couple of well placed sentences you could have set hadmadder onto a more productive path.
QUOTE(C @ May 30 2007, 09:02 PM) [snapback]113858[/snapback]
I only read this today. I support what excubitor is saying.
Personally I think the Lord is clever enough to have said something else, if it was something else that He meant.
I do not have time for this thread, but I will add my support..well if that means anything
Thanks C, It means a lot to me.
QUOTE (labman24 @ Apr 23 2007, 06:46 AM) 
Adam and Eve had two sons, Cain and Abel, Cain killed Abel then if later says that Cain married, who did he marry if Adam and Eve only had Cain and Abel for children?
Look at the scriptures closely,,and you will see on the sixth day God created man and woman,,at the same time,(races) and gave them dominion over animals,,,,then God rested after His rest behold he had no gardener and no man and woman for Christ to come threw.... So God created Adam and made Eve from Adam,,,these would be the 2 Christ came from.....
To answer your question Cain found a wife from the people that were created on day 6....
QUOTE (calvin @ May 31 2007, 02:31 PM)
Laurel,
I entered this thread because of one reason ... hadmadderest claimed that Cain and Abel were twins.
I had noted that because of the Hebrew word used, Rabbinic thought is that she "continued to bear" ... there is no mention of "knowing" Adam between the birth of the two. I think this is an important point.
Regardless of what Excubitor says, I continue to believe they were twins, and that it is not a silly fable
My only reason for being on a discussion board like this is because of my sincere desire to understand prophecy more clearly. I have absolutely no interest (or knowledge) in what the two combatants are discussing. I encouraged hadmadderest because I thought the discussion would get back to the subject of twins in the Bible.
The expositors of old spoke about a "red thread" that weaves its way through the Bible interconnecting certain words or passages relative to the understanding of prophecy.
I am far from completing the article I spoke about but I will soon PM you, Excubitor and hadmadderest a sample of why I believe the mark placed upon Cain is connected to the image, mark and number of the beast ... and why the biblical "two twin or double" sign may help us to identify that great city Mystery Babylon.
I entered this thread because of one reason ... hadmadderest claimed that Cain and Abel were twins.
I had noted that because of the Hebrew word used, Rabbinic thought is that she "continued to bear" ... there is no mention of "knowing" Adam between the birth of the two. I think this is an important point.
Regardless of what Excubitor says, I continue to believe they were twins, and that it is not a silly fable
My only reason for being on a discussion board like this is because of my sincere desire to understand prophecy more clearly. I have absolutely no interest (or knowledge) in what the two combatants are discussing. I encouraged hadmadderest because I thought the discussion would get back to the subject of twins in the Bible.
The expositors of old spoke about a "red thread" that weaves its way through the Bible interconnecting certain words or passages relative to the understanding of prophecy.
I am far from completing the article I spoke about but I will soon PM you, Excubitor and hadmadderest a sample of why I believe the mark placed upon Cain is connected to the image, mark and number of the beast ... and why the biblical "two twin or double" sign may help us to identify that great city Mystery Babylon.
#3254 in the Strong's Hebrew dictionary; "to continue, conceive again, to continue to do the same thing." What happens when a woman gives birth to one child, and "Continues to do the same thing"??????????????? that she is doing? Of course, she has twins. These are not identical twins that Eve bare, for they had two different fathers; as we saw in the study of chapter three..........
these were twins with different fathers.....
Cain married either one of his sisters... or one of his nieces, or grand nieces... anyways, a relative 
QUOTE (Anne @ Jul 15 2008, 08:00 PM)
Cain married either one of his sisters... or one of his nieces, or grand nieces... anyways, a relative
Can prove this with scripture?????because I can prove what im saying with it.....
QUOTE (Anne @ Jul 15 2008, 08:00 PM)
Cain married either one of his sisters... or one of his nieces, or grand nieces... anyways, a relative
Thats stupid,,,he got kicked out,,,he wasnt even around them,,,,,,,and if you took the time to study instead pulling answers out of nowhere you know Cain wasnt adams son,,,,and the wife he found was oriental....
I have to agree with you on scripture. Many times I have had many, upset with me on this biblical issue. The Garden was a very special place for God's creation "man". God walked in this Garden with his creation. We cannot put God in a box!
Point to ponder is the Nephilium, Gen 6:4 they were on the earth in those days-and afterward-......also Gen 1:1&2.....In the beginningGod created the heavens and the earth. (The end of the first sentence) 2-Now the earth was (footnoote, "became") formless and empty---
A period after a sentence is the end of a statement and when God speaks He does exactly this. Short Sweet and to the point!
Another question? Where exactly did the Gentiles come from if we all are decendents of Adam and Eve?
excubitor,
NOTHING in the text? Are you certain? Did you look up the words in the concordance? How familiar are you with Hebrew, Greek, English, and even rules of grammar? Is there nothing left for God to reveal to you in His Word concerning this great subject?
Indeed this is an admittedly difficult subject, but to automatically presuppose that one who is trying to help shed some light here, whether rightly or wrongly, is involved with "obscure and fanciful fables" before prayerful study or even looking up the words employed seems a be a bit much, so let me ask you,
Do you believe that God created all the races, or that all races came from one man and one woman? The reason I ask is because 1, nature dictates that when, for example, white and black have offspring, the white overshadows the color black (the children become lighter not darker) in the generations that follow which would most surely nullify the color of the black race eventually and 2, ch. 1 reads that mankind was created on day six (more on this later). Was one of them (adam and Eve) white and the other black? Is that how we got all the different races? Do you see the point? And what about the other races, did God not create them, or were they an evolution somehow? If we follow this to it's logical end, we can only determine that the races came to us contrary to nature, making God's work against nature. And that doesn't seem right. What does Scripture affirm? To take just one example, Scripture affirms that the races were to remain separate, does it not? I have seen some very very black and beautiful people God crea
Point to ponder is the Nephilium, Gen 6:4 they were on the earth in those days-and afterward-......also Gen 1:1&2.....In the beginningGod created the heavens and the earth. (The end of the first sentence) 2-Now the earth was (footnoote, "became") formless and empty---
A period after a sentence is the end of a statement and when God speaks He does exactly this. Short Sweet and to the point!
Another question? Where exactly did the Gentiles come from if we all are decendents of Adam and Eve?
QUOTE (excubitor @ May 25 2007, 11:31 PM)
QUOTE (hadmadderest @ May 25 2007, 07:44 PM)
excubitor,
QUOTE
There is nothing in the text to indicate that Cain and Abel were twins. Where do you get these ideas? Am I getting this correct that you believe that God created a huge host of men and that they were not all descendants of Eve? Again I repeat, where do you get these ideas? I am honestly astonished at the stuff I read here. As if there are not enough plainly understood things with which we may occupy our minds we have to go and complicate things with obscure and fanciful fables.
NOTHING in the text? Are you certain? Did you look up the words in the concordance? How familiar are you with Hebrew, Greek, English, and even rules of grammar? Is there nothing left for God to reveal to you in His Word concerning this great subject?
Indeed this is an admittedly difficult subject, but to automatically presuppose that one who is trying to help shed some light here, whether rightly or wrongly, is involved with "obscure and fanciful fables" before prayerful study or even looking up the words employed seems a be a bit much, so let me ask you,
Do you believe that God created all the races, or that all races came from one man and one woman? The reason I ask is because 1, nature dictates that when, for example, white and black have offspring, the white overshadows the color black (the children become lighter not darker) in the generations that follow which would most surely nullify the color of the black race eventually and 2, ch. 1 reads that mankind was created on day six (more on this later). Was one of them (adam and Eve) white and the other black? Is that how we got all the different races? Do you see the point? And what about the other races, did God not create them, or were they an evolution somehow? If we follow this to it's logical end, we can only determine that the races came to us contrary to nature, making God's work against nature. And that doesn't seem right. What does Scripture affirm? To take just one example, Scripture affirms that the races were to remain separate, does it not? I have seen some very very black and beautiful people God crea