• CFN has a new look and a new theme

    "I bore you on eagle's wings, and brought you to Myself" (Exodus 19:4)

    More new themes will be coming in the future!

  • Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?

    Join For His Glory for a discussion on how

    https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/

  • CFN welcomes new contributing members!

    Please welcome Roberto and Julia to our family

    Blessings in Christ, and hope you stay awhile!

  • Have questions about the Christian faith?

    Come ask us what's on your mind in Questions and Answers

    https://christianforums.net/forums/questions-and-answers/

  • Read the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ?

    Read through this brief blog, and receive eternal salvation as the free gift of God

    /blog/the-gospel

  • Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need

    https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

[_ Old Earth _] A possible explanation about Cain's wife that makes sense

  • Thread starter Thread starter Eve777
  • Start date Start date
E

Eve777

Guest
I think this is as good an explanation as I have ever heard about Cain's wife....


By Ken Ham, Jonathan Sarfati and Carl Wieland,

Today, brothers and sisters (and half-brothers and half-sisters, etc.) are not permitted by law to marry because their children have an unacceptably high risk of being deformed. The more closely the parents are related, the more likely it is that any offspring will be deformed.

There is a very sound genetic reason for such laws that is easy to understand. Every person has two sets of genes, there being some 130,000 pairs that specify how a person is put together and functions [Ed. note: This was an estimate from the number of different proteins. But after the Answers Book was published, the Human Genome Project discovered that there are only about 35,000 genes. This is an additional layer of complexity, since these genes must still somehow produce all the proteins. See Genome Maniaâ€â€deciphering the human genome: what does it mean?] Each person inherits one gene of each pair from each parent. Unfortunately, genes today contain many mistakes (because of sin and the Curse), and these mistakes show up in a variety of ways. For instance, some people let their hair grow over their ears to hide the fact that one ear is lower than the otherâ€â€or perhaps someone’s nose is not quite in the middle of his or her face, or someone’s jaw is a little out of shapeâ€â€and so on. Let’s face it, the main reason we call each other normal is because of our common agreement to do so!

The more distantly related parents are, the more likely it is that they will have different mistakes in their genes. Children, inheriting one set of genes from each parent, are likely to end up with pairs of genes containing a maximum of one bad gene in each pair. The good gene tends to override the bad so that a deformity (a serious one, anyway) does not occur. Instead of having totally deformed ears, for instance, a person may only have crooked ones! (Overall, though, the human race is slowly degenerating as mistakes accumulate, generation after generation.)

However, the more closely related two people are, the more likely it is that they will have similar mistakes in their genes, since these have been inherited from the same parents. Therefore, a brother and a sister are more likely to have similar mistakes in their genes. A child of a union between such siblings could inherit the same bad gene on the same gene pair from both, resulting in two bad copies of the gene and serious defects.

However, Adam and Eve did not have accumulated genetic mistakes. When the first two people were created, they were physically perfect. Everything God made was ‘very good’ (Genesis 1:31), so their genes were perfectâ€â€no mistakes! But, when sin entered the world (because of Adamâ€â€Genesis 3:6ff, Romans 5:12), God cursed the world so that the perfect creation then began to degenerate, that is, suffer death and decay (Romans 8:22). Over thousands of years, this degeneration has produced all sorts of genetic mistakes in living things.

Cain was in the first generation of children ever born. He (as well as his brothers and sisters) would have received virtually no imperfect genes from Adam or Eve, since the effects of sin and the Curse would have been minimal to start with (it takes time for these copying errors to accumulate). In that situation, brother and sister could have married with God’s approval, without any potential to produce deformed offspring.

By the time of Moses (a few thousand years later), degenerative mistakes would have built up in the human race to such an extent that it was necessary for God to forbid brother-sister (and close relative) marriage (Leviticus 18–20).12 (Also, there were plenty of people on the Earth by now, and there was no reason for close relations to marry.)
 
Yep thats generally the accepted view of it, if you search their site they have several other articles related to this. :smt023
 
I'll leave a shadow here, but I'm moving this thread to Christianity and Science.
 
Re: A possible explanation about Cain's wife that makes sens

Eve777 said:
I think this is as good an explanation as I have ever heard about Cain's wife....


By Ken Ham, Jonathan Sarfati and Carl Wieland,

Today, brothers and sisters (and half-brothers and half-sisters, etc.) are not permitted by law to marry because their children have an unacceptably high risk of being deformed. The more closely the parents are related, the more likely it is that any offspring will be deformed.

There is a very sound genetic reason for such laws that is easy to understand. Every person has two sets of genes, there being some 130,000 pairs that specify how a person is put together and functions [Ed. note: This was an estimate from the number of different proteins. But after the Answers Book was published, the Human Genome Project discovered that there are only about 35,000 genes. This is an additional layer of complexity, since these genes must still somehow produce all the proteins. See Genome Maniaâ€â€deciphering the human genome: what does it mean?] Each person inherits one gene of each pair from each parent. Unfortunately, genes today contain many mistakes (because of sin and the Curse), and these mistakes show up in a variety of ways. For instance, some people let their hair grow over their ears to hide the fact that one ear is lower than the otherâ€â€or perhaps someone’s nose is not quite in the middle of his or her face, or someone’s jaw is a little out of shapeâ€â€and so on. Let’s face it, the main reason we call each other normal is because of our common agreement to do so!

The more distantly related parents are, the more likely it is that they will have different mistakes in their genes. Children, inheriting one set of genes from each parent, are likely to end up with pairs of genes containing a maximum of one bad gene in each pair. The good gene tends to override the bad so that a deformity (a serious one, anyway) does not occur. Instead of having totally deformed ears, for instance, a person may only have crooked ones! (Overall, though, the human race is slowly degenerating as mistakes accumulate, generation after generation.)

However, the more closely related two people are, the more likely it is that they will have similar mistakes in their genes, since these have been inherited from the same parents. Therefore, a brother and a sister are more likely to have similar mistakes in their genes. A child of a union between such siblings could inherit the same bad gene on the same gene pair from both, resulting in two bad copies of the gene and serious defects.

However, Adam and Eve did not have accumulated genetic mistakes. When the first two people were created, they were physically perfect. Everything God made was ‘very good’ (Genesis 1:31), so their genes were perfectâ€â€no mistakes! But, when sin entered the world (because of Adamâ€â€Genesis 3:6ff, Romans 5:12), God cursed the world so that the perfect creation then began to degenerate, that is, suffer death and decay (Romans 8:22). Over thousands of years, this degeneration has produced all sorts of genetic mistakes in living things.

Cain was in the first generation of children ever born. He (as well as his brothers and sisters) would have received virtually no imperfect genes from Adam or Eve, since the effects of sin and the Curse would have been minimal to start with (it takes time for these copying errors to accumulate). In that situation, brother and sister could have married with God’s approval, without any potential to produce deformed offspring.

By the time of Moses (a few thousand years later), degenerative mistakes would have built up in the human race to such an extent that it was necessary for God to forbid brother-sister (and close relative) marriage (Leviticus 18–20).12 (Also, there were plenty of people on the Earth by now, and there was no reason for close relations to marry.)

Right on... :D

Man is a fallen being not a rising evolving one as demonstrated by the many ape like beings that inhabit this forum... ;-)
 
According to this website, discussing the same general thing, there are at least 4,500 known genetic diseases. http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-308.htm

Now, an argument I have heard from YEC against evolutionists is that the rate of mutations is not enough to have produced the variety of life we see today in the Earth's alleged timespan. However, not knowing any technical details, I have to think that 4500 mutations in 6000 years is an astonomically high mutation rate compared to the mutation rate we have observed. I really don't know enough to say for sure though---would someone with more background weigh in on my thoughts?
 
icr

cubedbee said:
According to this website, discussing the same general thing, there are at least 4,500 known genetic diseases. http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-308.htm
You referenced the ICR. Here is what you should know about he ICR before you use it for reference.First of all this is not an independent scientific organization. Their members must pledge an allegience to the bible and their beliefs. So rule number one is the bible is true and rule number two is if anything is found to contradict the bible go back to rule number one.
 
Re: icr

reznwerks said:
cubedbee said:
According to this website, discussing the same general thing, there are at least 4,500 known genetic diseases. http://www.icr.org/pubs/imp/imp-308.htm
You referenced the ICR. Here is what you should know about he ICR before you use it for reference.First of all this is not an independent scientific organization. Their members must pledge an allegience to the bible and their beliefs. So rule number one is the bible is true and rule number two is if anything is found to contradict the bible go back to rule number one.
Yes, I Know. As a biased creationist source, the 4,500 number should be taken as a minimum. So, if my hypothesis that 4500 mutations in one species over 6000 years is too high of a rate, then my source won't be accused of inflating the number of diseases.
 
Re: A possible explanation about Cain's wife that makes sens

Eve777 said:
I think this is as good an explanation as I have ever heard about Cain's wife....


By Ken Ham, Jonathan Sarfati and Carl Wieland,

Today, brothers and sisters (and half-brothers and half-sisters, etc.) are not permitted by law to marry because their children have an unacceptably high risk of being deformed. The more closely the parents are related, the more likely it is that any offspring will be deformed.

There is a very sound genetic reason for such laws that is easy to understand. Every person has two sets of genes, there being some 130,000 pairs that specify how a person is put together and functions [Ed. note: This was an estimate from the number of different proteins. But after the Answers Book was published, the Human Genome Project discovered that there are only about 35,000 genes. This is an additional layer of complexity, since these genes must still somehow produce all the proteins. See Genome Maniaâ€â€deciphering the human genome: what does it mean?] Each person inherits one gene of each pair from each parent. Unfortunately, genes today contain many mistakes (because of sin and the Curse), and these mistakes show up in a variety of ways. For instance, some people let their hair grow over their ears to hide the fact that one ear is lower than the otherâ€â€or perhaps someone’s nose is not quite in the middle of his or her face, or someone’s jaw is a little out of shapeâ€â€and so on. Let’s face it, the main reason we call each other normal is because of our common agreement to do so!

The more distantly related parents are, the more likely it is that they will have different mistakes in their genes. Children, inheriting one set of genes from each parent, are likely to end up with pairs of genes containing a maximum of one bad gene in each pair. The good gene tends to override the bad so that a deformity (a serious one, anyway) does not occur. Instead of having totally deformed ears, for instance, a person may only have crooked ones! (Overall, though, the human race is slowly degenerating as mistakes accumulate, generation after generation.)

However, the more closely related two people are, the more likely it is that they will have similar mistakes in their genes, since these have been inherited from the same parents. Therefore, a brother and a sister are more likely to have similar mistakes in their genes. A child of a union between such siblings could inherit the same bad gene on the same gene pair from both, resulting in two bad copies of the gene and serious defects.

However, Adam and Eve did not have accumulated genetic mistakes. When the first two people were created, they were physically perfect. Everything God made was ‘very good’ (Genesis 1:31), so their genes were perfectâ€â€no mistakes! But, when sin entered the world (because of Adamâ€â€Genesis 3:6ff, Romans 5:12), God cursed the world so that the perfect creation then began to degenerate, that is, suffer death and decay (Romans 8:22). Over thousands of years, this degeneration has produced all sorts of genetic mistakes in living things.

Cain was in the first generation of children ever born. He (as well as his brothers and sisters) would have received virtually no imperfect genes from Adam or Eve, since the effects of sin and the Curse would have been minimal to start with (it takes time for these copying errors to accumulate). In that situation, brother and sister could have married with God’s approval, without any potential to produce deformed offspring.

By the time of Moses (a few thousand years later), degenerative mistakes would have built up in the human race to such an extent that it was necessary for God to forbid brother-sister (and close relative) marriage (Leviticus 18–20).12 (Also, there were plenty of people on the Earth by now, and there was no reason for close relations to marry.)

The scientific merit of the website you got this from is well documented.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/home.aspx

Attention posters.

This is primarily a Christian forum and the topic here is Christianity and Science.

No one is forcing non Christian guests to stay here.

If you don't like Chrisitians giving a Christian perspective and Christian source then please feel free to hit the road.

You are welcome here but this is a Christian forum.

Keep that in mind...
 
Re: A possible explanation about Cain's wife that makes sens

Disappear! Oh please disappear!
 
Re: A possible explanation about Cain's wife that makes sens

thespunk said:
bibleberean said:
If you don't like Chrisitians giving a Christian perspective and Christian source then please feel free to hit the road.

There is a difference between a Christian perspective and a Christian bias in research. The Christian perspective can be formulated to account for the evidence obtained from research. The Christian bias leads to the presentation of false evidence, and is therefore intellectually dishonest.

The anthropologist in Germany is a good example of bias tainting research. For whatever reason he chose, he presented false evidence of the remains being older than they actually were.

I won't argue with that.

However, that was not my point. Christian sites and the bible are valid sources to use in a primarily Christian forum.

My point is this. If that doesn't suit non-Chrisitan posters then they can "hit the road".

That is the way it is and that is the way it will stand...
 
Re: A possible explanation about Cain's wife that makes sens

Disappear! Oh please disappear!
 
Re: A possible explanation about Cain's wife that makes sens

thespunk said:
bibleberean said:
However, that was not my point. Christian sites and the bible are valid sources to use in a primarily Christian forum.

I agree Christian sources are valid. However, I do not believe the poster intended to invalidate Christian sources. I believe he was suggesting one not suspend a healthy degree of skepticism simply because it is a Christian website. It is good to have a degree of skepticism when reading any source regarding scientific issues.

I have agood degree of skeptism when reading any science book. My point and this is the last time I am going to make it is that quoting scientific evidence from a Christian source is valid.

This is a Christian forum.
 
Re: A possible explanation about Cain's wife that makes sens

Eve777 said:
I think this is as good an explanation as I have ever heard about Cain's wife....


By Ken Ham, Jonathan Sarfati and Carl Wieland,

Today, brothers and sisters (and half-brothers and half-sisters, etc.) are not permitted by law to marry because their children have an unacceptably high risk of being deformed. The more closely the parents are related, the more likely it is that any offspring will be deformed.

There is a very sound genetic reason for such laws that is easy to understand. Every person has two sets of genes, there being some 130,000 pairs that specify how a person is put together and functions [Ed. note: This was an estimate from the number of different proteins. But after the Answers Book was published, the Human Genome Project discovered that there are only about 35,000 genes. This is an additional layer of complexity, since these genes must still somehow produce all the proteins. See Genome Maniaâ€â€deciphering the human genome: what does it mean?] Each person inherits one gene of each pair from each parent. Unfortunately, genes today contain many mistakes (because of sin and the Curse), and these mistakes show up in a variety of ways. For instance, some people let their hair grow over their ears to hide the fact that one ear is lower than the otherâ€â€or perhaps someone’s nose is not quite in the middle of his or her face, or someone’s jaw is a little out of shapeâ€â€and so on. Let’s face it, the main reason we call each other normal is because of our common agreement to do so!

The more distantly related parents are, the more likely it is that they will have different mistakes in their genes. Children, inheriting one set of genes from each parent, are likely to end up with pairs of genes containing a maximum of one bad gene in each pair. The good gene tends to override the bad so that a deformity (a serious one, anyway) does not occur. Instead of having totally deformed ears, for instance, a person may only have crooked ones! (Overall, though, the human race is slowly degenerating as mistakes accumulate, generation after generation.)

However, the more closely related two people are, the more likely it is that they will have similar mistakes in their genes, since these have been inherited from the same parents. Therefore, a brother and a sister are more likely to have similar mistakes in their genes. A child of a union between such siblings could inherit the same bad gene on the same gene pair from both, resulting in two bad copies of the gene and serious defects.

However, Adam and Eve did not have accumulated genetic mistakes. When the first two people were created, they were physically perfect. Everything God made was ‘very good’ (Genesis 1:31), so their genes were perfectâ€â€no mistakes! But, when sin entered the world (because of Adamâ€â€Genesis 3:6ff, Romans 5:12), God cursed the world so that the perfect creation then began to degenerate, that is, suffer death and decay (Romans 8:22). Over thousands of years, this degeneration has produced all sorts of genetic mistakes in living things.

Cain was in the first generation of children ever born. He (as well as his brothers and sisters) would have received virtually no imperfect genes from Adam or Eve, since the effects of sin and the Curse would have been minimal to start with (it takes time for these copying errors to accumulate). In that situation, brother and sister could have married with God’s approval, without any potential to produce deformed offspring.

By the time of Moses (a few thousand years later), degenerative mistakes would have built up in the human race to such an extent that it was necessary for God to forbid brother-sister (and close relative) marriage (Leviticus 18–20).12 (Also, there were plenty of people on the Earth by now, and there was no reason for close relations to marry.)

Now, back to the topic...
 
The more distantly related parents are, the more likely it is that they will have different mistakes in their genes. Children, inheriting one set of genes from each parent, are likely to end up with pairs of genes containing a maximum of one bad gene in each pair. The good gene tends to override the bad so that a deformity (a serious one, anyway) does not occur. Instead of having totally deformed ears, for instance, a person may only have crooked ones! (Overall, though, the human race is slowly degenerating as mistakes accumulate, generation after generation.)

This part struck me as particularly funny. I don't believer there is a single factual statement in this.

The reason why genetically close parents shouldn't mate is because the closer their genes are to each other, the greater likelihood for mutation occurs. I has nothing to do with so-called mistakes.

A child is a copy of the two parents combined, with variance, or a mutation.

If two copies make their own copy...then the "quality" of the child wont be as good, because you're making a copy of a copy.

Now, this concept of perfect genes is ridiculous. First off, perfect is about the most arbitrary word you can imagine. It's an ideal, not something that can actually exist. Flaws (such as crooked ears) are merely the result of human imagination.

Anyway, my biggest problem is the idea that the "good" gene overrides the "bad gene". If someone could possibly refute me on this, but there is no such thing as good or bad genes.

There are aggressive traits, and recessive traits. Traits such as right-handedness are aggressive, and are dominant over left-handedness. It has nothing to do with good or bad....

my conclusion:

AiG is comprised of members of the EAC and seek to discredit Christianity.
 
Hello et. al.


I'm partial to answers that "fly" on any forum.... I personally would not use the argument in the opening statement.

The used of dominant and recessive traits leans towards evolution as the form of man's progression.


The Word of God would tell us in Genesis 3:19, God condemned Adam to death. That was the curse given to Adam for allowing sin to enter the world.

"By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return."

Man was created in God's image (Gen 1:27) which would have made man physically perfect, and in 3:19, God changed that condition, and I would leave it at that. There was 2500+ years from the time of Adam and Eve until the giving of the law at Sinai where close marriages ceased to be acceptable standards. BTW... I believe even after Sinai, one could marry their niece. Is my memory right there?

~serapha~
 
Re: A possible explanation about Cain's wife that makes sens

bibleberean said:
[

I have agood degree of skeptism when reading any science book. My point and this is the last time I am going to make it is that quoting scientific evidence from a Christian source is valid.

This is a Christian forum.
I don't want to get on your bad side but WHY would you look skeptically at a source that provides hard evidence as opposed to a source that demands you believe without evidence. I think Christian scientific evidence is an oxymoron. They approach science bass ackward. Scientists first come up with a hypothesis, test that hypothesis, analyze the results and come to a conclusion. "Christian scientists" are often NOT trained in the disiplines they are commenting on and they start out with the answer and then look for the evidence.Now if you want to treat the bible and Christianity and science as one would treat a forum on a book such as "WAR and Peace" that is one thing but if you really want to get to the truth and evidenc you have to let ALL the evidence stand or fall on its merits.
 
I've got a good question for all you folks that choose to believe that Cain's wife was his sister:

Would you allow your daughter to marry your son that had just killed his brother? Come on now. Cain had just murdered his brother and been banished from the sight of God and his parents would allow him to take his sister with him? Or she would choose to follow a murdering vagabond? There is absolutely NO mention of any other children of Adam and Eve until after Cain and Abel. Yes you can assume that there were daughters before Cain was cast out, but that would be it; just an assumption.

Here's an explaination that makes even more sense:

Cain went to the land of Nod where he found a wife.

This makes perfect sense if you READ the Bible without being influenced with outside sources, (traditions of ignorant men).

Let me explain:

In the first chapter of Genesis it says that God created men and women and told them to be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth. (We won't get into the replenish part right now). He gave them every plant and every tree on the face of ALL THE EARTH to be used for food. Read the first chapter yourself.

In the second chapter of Genesis in the VERY BEGINNING it says that all of God's work was finished. Then it says that there was not a man to till the earth. It DOES NOT say that there wasn't a man. It specifically states that there was not a MAN TO TILL THE EARTH. I may be mistaken, but I believe that this means that there was not yet a farmer. Since we know that man in the beginning was a nomadic gatherer then my hypothosis could answer many questions other than the heritage of Cain's wife. Read on. God then created Adam from the dust of the earth and breathed into his nostrils THE BREATH OF LIFE and man, (Adam), became a LIVING SOUL. He placed Adam in a garden east of Eden and commanded of the man that he not eat of a certain tree.

Even with the little that is outlined above, watch this:

The first creation was given EVERY tree on the FACE OF ALL THE EARTH to be used for food. Wow, if this is true then the first creation can't be the creation mentioned in the second chapter for in this chapter the creation was commanded that there was a tree in which the fruit was forbidden. Contradiction? I don't think so. It get's better though bare with me,

Cain murdered his brother and God set a mark upon Cain and sent him away. Cain says to God that everyone that sees this mark will want to kill him. Who? His parents would obviously know what he had done. His sisters and brothers also. So who whould Cain be worried about killing him. Furthermore, why would God place a mark on Cain so that those that saw him would know what he had done. Who? We already know that his family would be aware of his deed.

Not only that but when God came into the garden after Adam and Eve's disobedient act of eating the fruit, God asks them, Who told you that you were naked? What kind of question would this be to ask of two people that were the ONLY two people on the planet? If you believed that you were the only person on the planet, and I asked you who told you something, wouldn't this be confusing? God did not ask them HOW they knew of their nakedness, but, WHO told them of it? Not through yet, it gets really deep now.

After given the lineage of Adam's decendants we are told that at one point, man's heart became evil continually. At this point He chose one man, Noah, (and his sons), to replenish the earth. Right? Ok, now listen close: The Bible states that Noah was a 'just' man and 'perfect in his generations'. Let's allow that to sink in for a second and let us go back to Cain. Cain went to the land of Nod and his wife had a child which he named Enoch. True? Then he built a city there. Come on guys. He built a CITY for his wife and Child? Three people/a city? That just don't make NO sense.

Now back to Noah. The Bible states that at a time previous to Noah that the 'sons of God' saw the 'daughters of men' and took them wives of those which they chose. What could this possibly mean? Angels? I think not. The 'son's of God' were most likely the decendants of Adam who could very well be considered a 'son of God'. Then who could these 'daughters of men' have been? Wow this is a tricky one huh? Not really. The daughters of men were the first creation. Cain's wife was a 'daughter of man'. The 'first' creation met and joined with the second.

Here's your PROOF:

Back to Noah again. The Bible STATES without any misunderstanding and it is simple to understand if you choose to read and accept what it says:

Noah was a just man and PERFECT in his generations. Now I ask you, what is a generation? A generation is the the description that we use to show the difference in time between father and son, right? My father is one generation, I am the next generation and my child is the next generation right? Here's what the Bible says plainly and without confusion: Noah's blood-line had not been interupted from Adam to His father Lamech. Noah's lineage had not been diverted through an intermingling with the 'daughters of man' (the first creation). Just like the beginning of a personal relationship with man through Adam, God chose Noah to start over with the same 'pure' seed, or blood-line, a direct decendant of Adam. The generations from Adam up to Noah were perfect. All others had chosen to spread out and take wives and husbands of the first creation and through this intermingling God became lost to them. Thus the reason that God decided to destroy these people. They had commited spritual adultry and turned to other Gods instead of the God of their ancient ancestor, Adam.

Now I know what you're saying, "This guy is nuts". Ok. But, I am teaching from the Bible and not the limited understanding of man. I believe that most people are aware that most of the Bible's prophecy was ONLY intended as a reference and not prediction. In other words Daniel and John probably had little understanding of their visions nor the first people to read them. The visions were not meant to benefit them but the future generation that would read the words that they had written and THEN understand that they were Divinely inspired at a time when the prophecy had been fulfilled.

Moses had absolutely no understanding of the world in which we live today. He knew nothing of modern science or medicine. This was knowledge that would take much time to discover and simply wasn't available to his time period. Things have certainly changed since then.

We now have the ability to split atoms and take pictures of the inside of the human body. We have mapped DNA and placed a man on the moon. We know the speed of light and can literally see the creation of life as sperm and egg join and become an embryo. We have learned to harness the sun's energy to produce electricity which we use to cook our food with microwaves and speak to others thousands of miles away on a thin wire made of clear glass. We have learned how the elements are formed and their exact composition. This said, we have also learned that the earth is much, much older that the 9,000 year time-line that the traditional Church has taught for centurys if not millinia.

I have heard much debate about carbon dating and the study of sedimentary deposits. I find it utterly childish that there are those that argue against this science for no other reason than to try and hold onto a tradition and teaching of men that goes back to a time of complete ignorance concerning the natural world in which we live. Not a one of you would deny that the Sun is the center of our solar system, or that our solar system is not the center of the universe. These too were once the teachings of ignorant men that had no understanding of our physical universe.

We have NO positive PROOF that dinosaurs and men EVER lived together. No paintings of dinosaurs by ancient man or the use of their bones by ancient man or any bones of ancient man that show evidence of being eaten by dinosaurs. This alone should offer enough evidence that they never coexisted. But if not, consider the evidence of carbon dating and the study of sedimentary deposits. Evolution certainly exists in the animal kingdom. It continues this very moment. No, we didn't come from monkeys, we were created just as the Bible offers. The Bible however does NOT discredit or in any way deny the existence of these prehistoric creatures that existed BEFORE man. So the only way that one could argue against their existence or the time-line of their existence is through their own fantasies or a following of teaching that was incomplete because of the lack of knowledge needed to understand.

Science itself does NOT contradict the Bible. Some scientist, maybe, but not science itself. If anything, science PROVES the methods and ways in which God created the universe. Mathamatics is most certainly the means in which God chose to impliment most of creation. Numbers my friends, it's all about numbers. EVERYTHING that exists, exists because of numbers. Numbers of time, Numbers of cells, Numbers of molecules, Numbers of peoples, Numbers of days etc,,,,,,,etc,,,,,,,,,,etc,,,,,,,,,We only discovered the use of numbers, we didn't create their uses, God did.

Now, most anthropologist accept the time in which man has occupied OUR continent to be between 13,000 and 30,000 years. They accept it because of the use of carbon dating of the bones of ancient men and their tools. I know that there are those that will insist that because they have been taught that the earth is only 9,000 years old that this belief of an older earth is wrong. The six days of creation is in NO way proof that God created everything in six of OUR days. To think that the creator of the earth was limited to the 24 hour rotational period of His creation is absurd. He created the earth people, He is not bound by it's physical limitations. A day to God is as a thousand years. I seem to remember reading this somewhere. So if this is true, then there would certainly be no Biblical way to discern an exact age of the earth. Taking this into account leaves us with a serious question. How old is the earth? This doesn't really matter. As long as we come to the conclusion that the traditional teachings of a 9,000 year old earth are based on a lack of knowledge of those that taught us this mis-information then we can move on from there to the real question of the dinosaurs and ancient man.

I believe that there was a 'first' creation as described in the Bible. I also believe that there was a very long time period between the first creation and the second, (Adam). Exactly how much time is irrelevant for I am not an anthropologist, but many, many thousands of years, if not hundreds of thousands, (in my opinion). I believe that man had evolved much, and there were many at the time of the second creation. Cain's wife was but one of the first creation and the city Cain built was for these people and could quite possibly have been the beginning of Babylon. Read the physical description of the location of Eden and you will plainly see that it was in the area of what later became Babylon. I doubt that Cain traveled thousands of miles from Eden, more likely a hundred or so.

I ask all you traditionalist this question: If we are all decendants of Adam and Eve, why are there so many different races? Blue eyes, brown eyes, green eyes. Black hair, brown hair, red hair, blond hair. People with slanted eyes, people with round eyes. People with dark skin, people with light skin. People that eat other people, people that don't eat cows. People that worship the Sun, water, moon, trees, and people that know the 'true' God. These are all changes that would have taken time. Much, much time. No doubt that God is capable of doing what He wills, yet most of His miracles have been accomplished by the phsical world in which He created. How could a race of people that at one time KNEW God personally, not pass this knowledge down through each sucsessive generation. Yes, there could be other ways in which to worship God but the God would be the same.

The answer is that God had no personal relationship with the first creation. I don't know if they had forgotten God or had never known Him but obviously there had been a seperation long enough for other Gods to be created by them. After a time, He decided that He would create this personal relationship and so created Adam. It plainly states in the second chapter that God breathed into Adam the 'breath of life' and at this point man became a 'living SOUL'.

I know that this seems absolutely preposterous to most people for their teachings of Adam and Eve being the 'first' go back to early childhood. Before you attack what I have offered go back and read the first few chapters of Genesis and see if the Bible doesn't take on a whole new character and offer a much broader understanding of the beginning. As I've stated in other posts, I am not limited to man's teaching of the Bible but to the teaching of the Bible itself. Read the words and see what they really say instead of the meaning that has been placed upon them erringly.
 
I've got a good question for all you folks that choose to believe that Cain's wife was his sister:


And I have a good answer: Adam was the “first man†(1 Corinthians 15:45, etc.) and Eve was “the mother of all living†(Genesis 3:20).


The Mother of all living....it either had to be his sister or if he married many years down the road....we really don't know how old he was when he killed Abel......he could have married one of his cousins,,,Adam and Eve did have other sons and daughters......
 
Excerpt from "Where did Cain Get His Wife"

http://christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c004.html

Cain's Brothers and Sisters

"Cain was the first child of Adam and Eve recorded in Scripture (Genesis 4:1). His brothers, Abel (Genesis 4:2) and Seth (Genesis 4:25), were part of the first generation of children ever born on this earth.

Even though only these three males are mentioned by name, Adam and Eve had other children. In Genesis 5:4 a statement sums up the life of Adam and Eve -- "And the days of Adam after he had fathered Seth were eight hundred years. And he fathered sons and daughters." This does not say when they were born. Many could have been born in the 130 years (Genesis 5:3) before Seth was born.

During their lives, Adam and Eve had a number of male and female children. 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."[11]

The Bible does not tell us how many children were born to Adam and Eve. However, considering their long life spans (Adam lived for 930 years -- Genesis 5:5), it would seem reasonable to suggest there were many! Remember, They were commanded to "Be fruitful, and multiply" (Genesis 1:28)."

Read the whole article here...

http://christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c004.html

Another short quote from article

"Sagan cleverly used common questions -- such as "Who was Cain's wife?" -- questions that are often directed at Christians in an attempt to prove the Bible cannot be defended.

Sadly, most Christians probably could not answer these questions! And yet, there are answers. But, since most churches are lacking in the teaching of apologetics,[7] particularly in regard to the Book of Genesis, most believers in the church are not "ready always to give an answer to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope in you" (1 Peter 3:15)."
 
Back
Top