Cain and Able

[Guest shiloh357]

Soooo...since the Law only applies of extra-marital sex (from your perspective)...then it was perfectly legit for two cousins to have extra-marital sexual unions, or for Uncles to have sex with their nieces outside of marriage. That really makes no sense to me at all. Why would God pass down a law of who can't have extra-marital sex when He had already

The way Leviticus 18 is worded, it is not talking about who to marry or not to marry. The KJV uses the phrase "uncover (so and so's) nakedness" which is actually helpful becuase it refers to the act of dishonoring the other person. Lev. 18 refers to immoral acts. Between close relatives.

The text does not say, "A man shall not take your sister as your wife." Incest was rampant among the pagans.

So the question arises. If God has already stated that sexual intercourse out of wedlock is forbidden, then why go to the trouble of making the list we find in Lev. 18?? Would not the commandment against extra-marital sex already covered out of wedlock sex between relatives?

The same question could be asked about why, after God said that they were not to imitate the pagans, did God creaete a list of things pagans do that they were not to do. I mean, if God already told them not to go after the way of the pagans would God have to say, "Don't make your children pass through fire, the priests are not to wear tatoos, you are not to make a graven image, you are not to communicate with the dead, or practice witchcraft, etc. Would not the commandment to avoid paganism already covered those acts?

Again, we don't know where all these descendants came from and thats what we are conjecturing about. People aged slower?

The problem is that you are assuming that "incest" includes marrying a sister or brother. The reason my view is not conjecture is that there is no biblical prohibition over a brother and sister marrying, so it does not create a problem if some of Adam and Eve's children married.

Before the flood, people aged slower. There is no way people could age like the do today and live to 900 years old. So in nine hundred years, it is possible that there was more time for more people to appear on the earth. Cain would have had a much larger population to choose from.

The conundrum about Cain stems from the assumption that there were only few people on the earth. It assumes a modern time frame, but Cain and Abel were hundreds of years old when Cain killed Abel.

[Axxman]

So the question arises. If God has already stated that sexual intercourse out of wedlock is forbidden, then why go to the trouble of making the list we find in Lev. 18?? Would not the commandment against extra-marital sex already covered out of wedlock sex between relatives?

The same question could be asked about why, after God said that they were not to imitate the pagans, did God creaete a list of things pagans do that they were not to do. I mean, if God already told them not to go after the way of the pagans would God have to say, "Don't make your children pass through fire, the priests are not to wear tatoos, you are not to make a graven image, you are not to communicate with the dead, or practice witchcraft, etc. Would not the commandment to avoid paganism already covered those acts?

The command to not have pre-marital sex is concrete. It means no sex before you are married...there is no need for a list of people you can't have sex with before marriage because there was no confusion about what "before marriage" means. On the other hand, "who" you can marry might require a list since there are multiple options and multiple laws concerning marriage. Likewise, what is the "way of the pagans?" That is not so concrete because not everything the pagans did was evil. Thus we wind up with hundreds of different laws.

I should point out that I don't necessarily disagree with your explanation and use of the KJV's ""uncover (so and so's) nakedness". I think that fits just fine because you wouldn't approach someone to uncover their nakedness, under God's law, unless you were married. In other words, God is specifically telling them not to approach certain members of close relation with the intent to "uncover their nakedness". So clearly, God would not approve of Cain approaching his sister to uncover her nakedness.

I can find no biblical study guide or commentary that denies the intent of these passages is marriage.

Before the flood, people aged slower. There is no way people could age like the do today and live to 900 years old. So in nine hundred years, it is possible that there was more time for more people to appear on the earth. Cain would have had a much larger population to choose from.

The conundrum about Cain stems from the assumption that there were only few people on the earth. It assumes a modern time frame, but Cain and Abel were hundreds of years old when Cain killed Abel.

This is a bit off topic (lol) but I love the topic. I don't believe people aged more slowly...or lived hundreds of years. I totally agree that many people erroneously use modern timeframes in their understanding of those things. Maybe someday we'll meet on a topic that discusses this...

The conundrum about Cain stems from many assumptions from many angles.

[~candice~]

Soooo...since the Law only applies of extra-marital sex (from your perspective)...then it was perfectly legit for two cousins to have extra-marital sexual unions, or for Uncles to have sex with their nieces outside of marriage. That really makes no sense to me at all. Why would God pass down a law of who can't have extra-marital sex when He had already

The way Leviticus 18 is worded, it is not talking about who to marry or not to marry. The KJV uses the phrase "uncover (so and so's) nakedness" which is actually helpful becuase it refers to the act of dishonoring the other person. Lev. 18 refers to immoral acts. Between close relatives.

The text does not say, "A man shall not take your sister as your wife." Incest was rampant among the pagans.

So the question arises. If God has already stated that sexual intercourse out of wedlock is forbidden, then why go to the trouble of making the list we find in Lev. 18?? Would not the commandment against extra-marital sex already covered out of wedlock sex between relatives?

The same question could be asked about why, after God said that they were not to imitate the pagans, did God creaete a list of things pagans do that they were not to do. I mean, if God already told them not to go after the way of the pagans would God have to say, "Don't make your children pass through fire, the priests are not to wear tatoos, you are not to make a graven image, you are not to communicate with the dead, or practice witchcraft, etc. Would not the commandment to avoid paganism already covered those acts?

Shiloh, perhaps I've missed something here... but there is nothing wrong with God repeating His commands. I agree that Lev 18 isn't about marriage, in fact many commentators agree that it is an expansion and elaboration on the 7th commandment, thou shall not commit adultery. The expansion and elaboration shows just how much God honours sex within marriage and forbids it in all other circumstances. The first few verses, and last few verses, frame the chapter as an expansion / list of ways in which one could commit adultery, so the context is perfectly clear.

Blessings

Andy

[Guest shiloh357]

The command to not have pre-marital sex is concrete. It means no sex before you are married...there is no need for a list of people you can't have sex with before marriage because there was no confusion about what "before marriage" means.

Then there would have been no need for a prohibition against homosexuality, Lesbianism, beastiality, adultery, and so forth.

On the other hand, "who" you can marry might require a list since there are multiple options and multiple laws concerning marriage.

If the issue were marriage, it would have been worded to that effect.

Likewise, what is the "way of the pagans?" That is not so concrete because not everything the pagans did was evil.

"Way of the pagans" is my wording. The sepecific comandment was not to worship God after the manner of the pagans. It is not as concrete to US as to what that means, but that would not have been true given Israel's situation. Pagans borrowed from each other and trade relations would have exposed Israel to all manner of pagan religious customs, not to mention that they were slaves for centuries in a pagan land and would have been very familiar with those things.

I should point out that I don't necessarily disagree with your explanation and use of the KJV's ""uncover (so and so's) nakedness".

And yet, modern translations translate that phrase to refer to out-of-wedlock sexual intercourse in Lev. 18.

From the NIV:

Lev 18:6

[Axxman]

If the issue was who you could marry, then the list would not have included types of relationships where marriage would have been impossible, such as sex with a daughter-in-law, or the father's wife.

So you support (and apparently so does the bible) the extra-marital sexual union of cousins and Uncles with their neice? Why does God need to give a list of people to have pre-marital sex with..when that is so obvious...and then, why would He leave certain couplings out of the list? Especially in light of the fact that you are trying to present the case that the reason he is making the list is because he doesn't want any misunderstandings to His law.

The Bible says the lived hundredes of years, and God is able to communicate his meaning just fine. If me meant something else, He would have said it.

And yet we continue to labor over every little printed word, and its meaning.

[e lansing]

i think there is a lot of conjecture on both side of this topic. All i tried to do is get answers based upon what has been written, if there were no kids mention from adam and eve before seth was born we can not assume there was. When in chapter one when it referrs to them why do we assume that Adam and Eve were included in that, eve was not even created until some time aftere Adam was created. in verse 5 and 7 based upon the stage of creation and when God made a man why is this consider conjecture? Why are these such retarded questions that they should be lock up for discussing? They just show up and POW! Shut up and shut down!

[Guest LadyC]

e. lansing, i gotta dissect a couple of things you said.

if there were no kids mention from adam and eve before seth was born we can not assume there was.

since there is no mention that God created any other man from dust, or any other woman from ribs, then we can NOT assume there was. since there is no mention that God created any other humans, we can NOT assume there was.

however, since God did say that they were to be fruitful and fill the earth, and since God did say that adam and even had other sons and daughters, and since God did say that cain took a wife at some point in time, then we MUST assume that adam and eve didn't wait 130 years after the death of half their offspring to start obeying the command to fill the earth, and that siblings were marrying and also obeying the command.

eve was not even created until some time aftere Adam was created.

both adam and eve were created during the same day. the sixth day. so when you say she wasn't created for some time after adam, you can only be right in the sense that (and i'm illustrating a point here, not being literal as to mealtimes) adam was created before breakfast and eve was created sometime after lunch.

of course, we do know that God's concept of time is not the same as ours, and what is one day to us may be a thousand years to Him, but no matter who's timeline you're looking at, adam and eve were still created on the same day.

[Axxman]

I would add...its complete conjecture to assume that Cain and Abel were the first children born to Adam and Eve.

Also the bible says that Adam was created...then a garden, then trees, then animals...then God allowed Adam to name all the animals...then God created Eve. So if God did all of that, then allowed Adam to name "all the livestock, the birds of the air and all the beasts of the field" ...then I can only imagine that we are not talking about a 24hr day.

[e lansing]

e. lansing, i gotta dissect a couple of things you said.

if there were no kids mention from adam and eve before seth was born we can not assume there was.

since there is no mention that God created any other man from dust, or any other woman from ribs, then we can NOT assume there was. since there is no mention that God created any other humans, we can NOT assume there was.

I'm just going by what has been written.

however, since God did say that they were to be fruitful and fill the earth, and since God did say that adam and even had other sons and daughters,

Yes it says this. But why no mention of other kids before seth and only after seth? assumeing nothing, just going by what is written.

and since God did say that cain took a wife at some point in time, then we MUST assume that adam and eve didn't wait 130 years after the death of half their offspring to start obeying the command to fill the earth, and that siblings were marrying and also obeying the command.

not adding anything to scripture just going by what was written. After all Adam did live hundereds of years after seth was born.

on the genetic thing, how do we know that our genes are so different from Adams or even Noah? Is because they lived so much longer then we did? How do we draw such a conclusion?

eve was not even created until some time aftere Adam was created.

both adam and eve were created during the same day. the sixth day. so when you say she wasn't created for some time after adam, you can only be right in the sense that (and i'm illustrating a point here, not being literal as to mealtimes) adam was created before breakfast and eve was created sometime after lunch.

of course, we do know that God's concept of time is not the same as ours, and what is one day to us may be a thousand years to Him, but no matter who's timeline you're looking at, adam and eve were still created on the same day.

[wyguy]

I would add...its complete conjecture to assume that Cain and Abel were the first children born to Adam and Eve.

Also the bible says that Adam was created...then a garden, then trees, then animals...then God allowed Adam to name all the animals...then God created Eve. So if God did all of that, then allowed Adam to name "all the livestock, the birds of the air and all the beasts of the field" ...then I can only imagine that we are not talking about a 24hr day.

The Bible does not say Adam named all the animals.

It says:

" So, the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds of the air and all the beasts of the field."

A smaller group of animals were involved: livestock, flying birds, and the beasts of the field. (Genesis 2:20) Note that Adam was told to name the beasts of the field, not the beasts of the earth. Other animals were excluded from this naming event. These include fish, water-dwelling animals, and "creatures that move along the ground" (Genesis 1:24), including most reptiles, insects and many more small animals. Thus, a very large number of animals are eliminated from naming on day six.