• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

A good mystery...who did the sons of Adam marry?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Anonymous
  • Start date Start date
The law regarding those prohibitions didn't happen until long after both Adam & Eve and after Noah repopulated the earth. Based on today's customs the idea of Adam producing children with his daughters and his sons with their sisters seems disgusting, but remember that these were pure blood lines and the problems of "inbreeding" like you get when you breed animals too closely probably didn't exist because of them being pure blood lines. I believe that when God made the law concerning who was allowed to procreate with whom it was because at that point our blood lines were no longer pure and any further "inbreeding" would have been harmful to the human race.

I am no scholar. I have not studied it. I just know that God had a reason for making every law and he had perfect timing. I think that what this line of questioning does is try get an explanation from God about something that may have no explanation.


I found this online regarding the questions of where Cain's wife came from.

"When sin entered the world at the Fall, bringing with it death, disease, and destruction, the gene pool would gradually become corrupted. At first, no harm would result from marriage of brothers and sisters, and had sin not entered the world, presumably no harm would have ever entered.

As the generations passed, however, disease, environment, and sin took their toll on the genetic pool, which resulted in mutant and defective genes. Incest was prohibited in Moses' time, from a biological standpoint, because it now was dangerous and resulted in deformed, moronic, or otherwise defective offspring.

Moreover, in addition to the biological problem which arises from incest, there is also an ethical one. God forbids incest on moral grounds, and this is more crucial than the biological aspect (Leviticus 20:11).

Incest disrupts the family social and moral structure. The family is the only God-ordained institution in the world other than the church. At the initial formation of the family structure in Cain's day, it is difficult to presume what happened with inter-marriage. Thus we cannot be sure to what extent incest occurred. One things is certain: after God's ordained family structure stabilized, incest was sin."
From the book "Answers to Tough Questions," by Josh McDowell and Don Stewart


I need to go now but want to look further. Right now the needs of my 3 yr old gson outweigh the need to write on this subject.
 
Yes it is possible that it was some other kind of offering, but so far, the only offering we see in scripture to this point is a sin offering; that's all we have to go on so far. That doesn't mean there weren't other kinds yet, but it's the only one written about so far in the story of beginnings thus far. Offerings for other purposes aren't established until later as far as we can read. Tithing, in fact, wasn't mentioned until much later in Gen 28:22 concerning Jacob.

It does not say that Cain's issue was a heart issue. After his offering was not acceptable, then his countenance fell. It only says, "And the Lord had regard for Abel and for his offering; but for Cain and for his offering He had no regard. So Cain became very angry and his countenance fell." (Gen 4:4b-5, NASV). The Hebrew word here for both "offerings" is minha or minchah which could be grain, animal, a blood sacrifice, a gift, or some kind of tribute. Fruits here in Gen 4 is the Hebrew word pri or peri (sorry, can't find all the extra symbols to put over the letters), but the word basically includes grains, produce, and even the off-spring of any creature, according to Strong's. Now, on to Abel's firstlings/fat portions- they could have been tithes, but tithes were generally a tenth of the whole, not usually the firstlings. If all you had were firstlings, how could you know what a tenth was going to be? Virtually everywhere in scripture, firstlings and fat portions are offered as sacrifices for sin, not as tithes. I'm not saying they couldn't be, but in your studies, look at other passages and contrast tithing versus sacrificing. There's a big difference, and the firstlings are generally sacrifices. Then, when a flock is completely done calving for the season, a tithe is given as a gift, not a sacrifice. These may seem like word picking, but they're important details to interpret what happened with Cain and Abel. To be fair to my new friend ^_^, there are plenty of scholars who disagree with me and agree with you. In seminary, about half say it was Cain's heart, and the other half say it was the blood.

Concerning genetics issues, my new friend sweetlissa's got the right point, but it's not "pure vs impure" genes or bloodlines that pose genetic defects. Once sin occurred on the Earth, the curse spread, genetic mutations would have begun to occur spontaneously just as they do every second in our bodies. Thousands of cells every day receive mutations due to several genetic errors that I won't bore you all with. Of course, many of these are repaired, but not all of them. Not even in healthy people. Now, that doesn't mean they automatically lead to a tumor or something. The key is this: it is when two people with extremely similar genetic makeup (such as a brother and sister) inherit similar genetic "mix-ups", that they are more likely to express a genetic defect. We see this in animal breeding in studying genetics. Purebreds from the same family line often suffer quirks and other more serious defects due to the close relationship of their parents, not really from the impurity of their gene pool. The quote from "Answers for Tough Questions" by Josh McDowell is good here. It only makes sense that Adam, Eve, and their immediate decendants would have fewer defects at first because their original genes were "perfect" sets. Their off-spring would suffer more defects, and their off-spring even more, and so on.

Also, I liked your point about God's timing. His ways are not always for us to understand; you're right, they're His perfect plan.

My whole point is that sin was in the world, and that with or without any law or ordinance, sinners make sinful choices, often with no regard to the outcome. All sinners need forgiveness, and blood must be shed (at some point) to repay sin. Jesus came, didn't sin, but died instead of us. If we accept His forgiveness and have faith in His substitionary death and His ressurection, we get to claim His victory with Him and receive salvation. Just wanted to clear up any confusion where I was headed with all this!

Humbly greatful,
Tom
 
Tom,

Thank you. And thanks for the new friendship. In this lifestyle, one cannot have too many friends. Anyway given that you are studying medicine, It is nice to have a little authoritative comentary to help out.

Hope you are doing well and that your wife gets a job quickly.

Lissa
 
Hi I'm a little bit insomniac now so I post a thought, ready? Where does it say that the payment for Adam and Even for their first sin was physical death? It says that "In that day that you eat thereof you shall surely die" well Eve certainly didn't die THAT day. My point is spiritual life is what God meant when he said sin leads to death. Of course the physical mirrors the spiritual. Therefore, would Adam and Eve and others had died physically anyway even had they not sinned? Then they may have gone on to eternal life without need for Jesus sacrifice? Their sin brought death into the world--but who says both physical and spiritual? Who says that "eternal life" means physical eternal life. Should I have started a new topic?? :oops:
 
sin and death might be conquered at this point, but not eradicated. important difference there.
I've a theory that some very important parts of the new covenant are not for this world, but for the next. Again, that's a whole other topic.
Needless to say, things aren't back to like in the garden of Eden at this point in time. We don't go 'round nakie, nor does Elohim physically walk the earth with us. This too I believe will be restored.
 
What I am about to say here has been debated, and most biblical scholars tend to see this as two accounts of the same creation of man. However, I do not see it this way, to answer the question on who the sons of adam married I put forth the following,

Genesis 1: 27-31

27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.

30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so.

31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

Then consider this;

Genesis 2: 6-8

6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.

7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.

8 And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.

as well as;

21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof;

22 And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.

23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.

I submit that this is to be taken litterally, that there was actually two creations of man, one where he created man in the 6th day, and the second was after he had rested on the 7th, which was Adam and Eve. Why God would have created man twice, is beyond my knowledge, I only hypothesis is this, the first was a general creation of man and woman, and the second was his chosen people to where Noah and Abraham would spring forth and eventually Jesus as well. To prove the existence of this with another verse is the following;

Genesis 4

13 And Cain said unto the LORD, My punishment is greater than I can bear.

14 Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me.

15 And the LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.

16 And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden.

17 And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch.

First question to ask, who is Cain afraid of? There was Adam, Eve, Cain, and Abel, who was Cain afraid of? How did he find a wife? These would make sence if the almighty had indeed made mankind twice. Just some food for thought. Good Evening
 
yet you cannot deny that God created man and woman on the 6th day...and it was only after he rested on the seventh day did he create adam and eve. :) the point is that it is entirely possible and probbale that God created man twice, the purpose to this is unknown, but it is possible.
 
Wow i like this post. very Intriguing. I will bible study on this!!!!
 
Hello,

Is it possible that everyone is complicating this too much? Is it possible that this is nothing more than the ancient practice of the "Law of Recurrence"? Just a thought!
 
Brother Randy,
You got my vote. I think ( and with just 3 hrs total sleep in 4 days it did hurt :lol: thats what happens when you work out here in the Gulf ) we have just about run this topic in the ground and are starting to grasp at straws, so to speak. Lets face it, we will never truely know nor figure it out until we all get to heaven, and then, I doubt we will even think about it then.

Just my 2 cents worth


Happy Fathers Day to all you dads!!!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top