Cain's Wife (Genesis 4)

[n david]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Mankind was created on the sixth day, but Adam was created after the first Sabbath. The creation accounts in ch 1 and ch2 of Genesis are different, presenting a clearly different and contrary account in each chapter, and therefore cannot be reconciled as two descriptions of the same event, nor is either account clearly symbolic or mythological. Therefore, they each describe a different series of events.

Chapter One is the synopsis of creation. Each day, poetic in structure.
Chapter Two are the details of man and the garden.

Both are about the same event.

There wasn't a first creation of man, and then came Adam in chapter two. There was only one creation of man with two different stories of origin.

Consider the first two chapters like this: you could journal a week-long vacation, detailing each day's events; and then after doing so, write again in detail about one of the events. It doesn't mean there were two separate events, just that the first entry was a synopsis of the whole week and the second entry detailed one event which happened during that week.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by n david

Chapter One is the synopsis of creation. Each day, poetic in structure.
Chapter Two are the details of man and the garden.

Both are about the same event.

There wasn't a first creation of man, and then came Adam in chapter two. There was only one creation of man with two different stories of origin.

Consider the first two chapters like this: you could journal a week-long vacation, detailing each day's events; and then after doing so, write again in detail about one of the events. It doesn't mean there were two separate events, just that the first entry was a synopsis of the whole week and the second entry detailed one event which happened during that week.

Chapter 1:

Animals created first, then mankind (male and female). Mankind is told to fill the earth and subdue it.

Chapter 2:

Man (male only) is created first, then animals, then woman. Man (male only) is put in a Garden to tend it, woman created as a helper for him in the garden.

There is no way these are two descriptions of the same sequence of events. If they are, then one of them is false. Since they are both correct and accurate, they must necessarily be describing two distinct events. Both accounts differ materially as to the sequence of activities.

Were the animals made before man and woman? Or after man and before woman? Was mankind told to spread out and populate the earth? Or put in a garden to tend it?

That these are two different events explains who Cain was worried about being found by and for whom he built his city. It explans who his wife was most likely to be as well as possibly who Seth's wife was, and so forth, without resorting to "sanctified incest" which creates other difficulties.

The idea that these are two accounts of the same event not only creates all those difficulties, but also the difficulty of the integrity of the text itself, since the two accounts are clearly fundamentally different. Not to mention it creates a discrepency with known history and archaeology (humans have been around longer than a mere 6,000 years).

[n david]

I just don't see any evidence of this in the Bible. If what you claim is true, it's incredible that God and the Bible are silent about the first creation after the first chapter. It's also odd that God would base the entire narrative and story of redemption around the second creation and not the first. The woman is named Eve because she is the mother of all living. But you say she's not.

Sin came by Adam and Eve's disobedience through eating the fruit, yet you're claiming there was a prior creation. This first creation was not in the garden, which causes more questions and puts more doubt in scripture.

I just cannot agree with a two creation account and believe it is the same account written in two different ways. The first a synopsis of each day; the second a detailed account of the creation of Adam and Eve.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Chapter 1:

Animals created first, then mankind (male and female). Mankind is told to fill the earth and subdue it.

Chapter 2:

Man (male only) is created first, then animals, then woman. Man (male only) is put in a Garden to tend it, woman created as a helper for him in the garden.

There is no way these are two descriptions of the same sequence of events. If they are, then one of them is false. Since they are both correct and accurate, they must necessarily be describing two distinct events. Both accounts differ materially as to the sequence of activities.

Were the animals made before man and woman? Or after man and before woman? Was mankind told to spread out and populate the earth? Or put in a garden to tend it?

That these are two different events explains who Cain was worried about being found by and for whom he built his city. It explans who his wife was most likely to be as well as possibly who Seth's wife was, and so forth, without resorting to "sanctified incest" which creates other difficulties.

The idea that these are two accounts of the same event not only creates all those difficulties, but also the difficulty of the integrity of the text itself, since the two accounts are clearly fundamentally different. Not to mention it creates a discrepency with known history and archaeology (humans have been around longer than a mere 6,000 years).

Man being around longer than 6,000 years is another debate.
I know this is going to sound like a dumb question, but were males and females (of the other people) created before Adam? Then why was Eve, taken from Adam’s side? Since males were created separately from females amongst the other people?

[n david]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

MI know this is going to sound like a dumb question, but were males and females (of the other people) created before Adam? Then why was Eve, taken from Adam’s side? Since males were created separately from females amongst the other people?

Hard to believe something that 1) isn't supported anywhere else in scripture; 2) causes more questions and sows doubt in the scriptures; and 3) isn't supported by any other historical or religious accounts.

To me, this is about as realistic as the plot of the hollyweird movie "Noah."

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by n david

I just don't see any evidence of this in the Bible. If what you claim is true, it's incredible that God and the Bible are silent about the first creation after the first chapter. It's also odd that God would base the entire narrative and story of redemption around the second creation and not the first. The woman is named Eve because she is the mother of all living. But you say she's not.

Sin came by Adam and Eve's disobedience through eating the fruit, yet you're claiming there was a prior creation. This first creation was not in the garden, which causes more questions and puts more doubt in scripture.

I just cannot agree with a two creation account and believe it is the same account written in two different ways. The first a synopsis of each day; the second a detailed account of the creation of Adam and Eve.

Hmm. I find it incredible the Bible would describe the same event twice in such a way that the two accounts cannot be reconciled due to the very different order of events. I dont however think it is incredible that Bible doesn't detail histories that aren't really germane to the story of the Bible, which is about God and His Messiah. I mean, why isn't the history of China or Polynesia detailed in the Bible? Well, probably because the Bible isn't a story about everything that happened to everyone everywhere at all times? But is about God creating everything and then it narrows the story to Adam, down to Noah, down to Shem, down to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the nation of Israel (notice the ten tribes pretty much drop out of the narrative once they are deported, the story narrows down to Judah), and then the Messiah, who was the end goal and focal point of the whole thing.

Eve is the mother of all living. But you don't take that literally, you restrict it to "all living descendants of Adam". She is not the mother of cats, dogs, or cattle, after all. In other words, we both understand it the same way, the difference is I can clearly see there are people mentioned in Scripture NOT descended from Adam.

As for whether any of those other people are still around, or whether they all eventually intermarried into Adam's posterity, or were wiped out at some point, is a different subject.

Sin came by Adam's disobedience, but what does that have to do with other people not descended from him? I don't see any kind of logical connection between the two ideas.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Man being around longer than 6,000 years is another debate.
I know this is going to sound like a dumb question, but were males and females (of the other people) created before Adam? Then why was Eve, taken from Adam’s side? Since males were created separately from females amongst the other people?

It doesn't say specifically how males and females were created on the 6th day. As for Eve, she was bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh, created out of him. This establishes a typological paradigm for God and His Bride.

If the two accounts are describing the same event, why does one say mankind (both male and female) created on the 6th day AFTER the animals were made and told to spread abroad and rule the earth, but the second says a male was made first, THEN animals, THEN the woman, and their purpose was to live in and take care of a garden?

Who was going to find Cain and kill him for being a wanderer?

For whom did he build a city?

Both views raise questions. One raises questions and problems for contemporary theology, the other raises questions and problems for the integrity of Scripture. Seems it would make more sense that the one that follows the actual text while creating problems for common theology is more likely to be correct.

[Esaias]

And I admit, I am not claiming my understanding is guaranteed correct. I am however saying that it sure looks to me like the Bible shows there were people before Adam and likely contemporaneous with Adam's progeny, at least until the Flood. By then they may have intermarried (I am starting to think that is what Gen 6 is all about).

[n david]

Originally Posted by Esaias

And I admit, I am not claiming my understanding is guaranteed correct. I am however saying that it sure looks to me like the Bible shows there were people before Adam and likely contemporaneous with Adam's progeny, at least until the Flood. By then they may have intermarried (I am starting to think that is what Gen 6 is all about).

I appreciate your responses and thoughts on this. Thank you.

[n david]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Hmm. I find it incredible the Bible would describe the same event twice in such a way that the two accounts cannot be reconciled due to the very different order of events. I dont however think it is incredible that Bible doesn't detail histories that aren't really germane to the story of the Bible, which is about God and His Messiah. I mean, why isn't the history of China or Polynesia detailed in the Bible? Well, probably because the Bible isn't a story about everything that happened to everyone everywhere at all times? But is about God creating everything and then it narrows the story to Adam, down to Noah, down to Shem, down to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the nation of Israel (notice the ten tribes pretty much drop out of the narrative once they are deported, the story narrows down to Judah), and then the Messiah, who was the end goal and focal point of the whole thing.

I understand what you're saying with the Bible not containing everything not germane to the story of the Bible. That makes sense and I agree.

What are you thoughts on the so-called Gap Theory?

Originally Posted by Esaias

Eve is the mother of all living. But you don't take that literally, you restrict it to "all living descendants of Adam". She is not the mother of cats, dogs, or cattle, after all. In other words, we both understand it the same way, the difference is I can clearly see there are people mentioned in Scripture NOT descended from Adam.

I take it as mother of all living persons.

Originally Posted by Esaias

As for whether any of those other people are still around, or whether they all eventually intermarried into Adam's posterity, or were wiped out at some point, is a different subject.

Sin came by Adam's disobedience, but what does that have to do with other people not descended from him? I don't see any kind of logical connection between the two ideas.

My question or thought is that these initial created beings were sinless before Adam. Why the need to create another couple? Did God walk with them as He did with Adam?