What is the name of Enoch's mother?

[amg0364730]

GENESIS 4:17
Cain knew his WIFE, and she conceived and bore Enoch; and he built a city, and named it Enoch after his son Enoch."

1. Where can I read the name of Enoch's mother? What verse and where?

 

[inhopeofglory]

The Bible doesn't give her name.

 

[amg0364730]

I just want to add, if SOLA SCRIPTURA is the sole TRUTH in Christianity, then why this verse is incomplete? Should I just BELIEVE / SOLA FIDE / faith alone to rule over my conviction as why I am a Christian? If my sole pillar of truth is incomplete then the next verses is questionable?

Or is it there any ORAL TRADITION behind this? Is there? Is it also the reason why the Scribes at that time adopt the Talmud or the Mitzvah to fill up the meaning over distorted script?

 

[Tina]

.
I don't think you have a right understanding of Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide.

Sola Scriptura means everything one needs to know on faith and Christian practice is found in Scripture alone. Sola Fide means salvation by faith alone. They are two different things.

What have these got to do with knowing the name of Enoch's mother or oral tradition ? ...


.

 

[Ed the Ned]

Does it matter what her name is?

 

[whirlwind]

GENESIS 4:17
Cain knew his WIFE, and she conceived and bore Enoch; and he built a city, and named it Enoch after his son Enoch."

1. Where can I read the name of Enoch's mother? What verse and where?

First realize that this Enoch isn't the same Enoch that "walked with God" and "was taken." Cain's children should NOT be confused with the Adamic line even though there are purposeful similarities in the names.

I see the wife of Cain as the great whore and the city they "builded" as....Babylon!

 

[inhopeofglory]

We don't need to know her name, and so God chose not to give it to us. What's the issue? The Bible is not an exhaustive book of everything there is to know about anything and everything.

 

[whirlwind]

We don't need to know her name, and so God chose not to give it to us. What's the issue? The Bible is not an exhaustive book of everything there is to know about anything and everything.

Proverbs 25:2 It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter.

 

[amg0364730]

POINT OF ORDER: Why I put up Sola Fide or faith alone; first one must know the scriptures with faith, no ones sees righteousness in God's deeds without faith. Now look at the verse I give you, if the Bible is indeed infallible, then where is the consistency?

Second, Sola Scriptura or Scripture Alone is our only truth, then if the Bible could stand on its own then where is the answer to the problem I point out?

Is it important to know who is the mother of Enoch? Or answer such kind of queries? Yes! How can you win over a non-christian, if in the beginning you SWEAR that the Bible is true, when this problem arise and you answer differently, like: OH, THAT IS NOT IMPORTANT TO KNOW, ADAM'S LINEAGE IS VAGUE and we must continue on...

Be consistent! Like when a Muslim brother asked this same question to a Evangelical Pastor, do you know what the Pastor said? "My brother, Enoch is not the Enoch that went to heaven..." Hey!!!!!! Wake up!!!! this dude is just asking simple question. If a Christian could not used the BIBLE, as using it accordingly then Christians would loosed credibility.

Now, look at your answer to my question, is it right? Some just throw the question away. If someone asked you the same question, would you NOT answer straight?

 

[Menno]

are you a Roman Catholic apologist?

 

[follower of Christ]

I just want to add, if SOLA SCRIPTURA is the sole TRUTH in Christianity, then why this verse is incomplete? Should I just BELIEVE / SOLA FIDE / faith alone to rule over my conviction as why I am a Christian? If my sole pillar of truth is incomplete then the next verses is questionable?

Or is it there any ORAL TRADITION behind this? Is there? Is it also the reason why the Scribes at that time adopt the Talmud or the Mitzvah to fill up the meaning over distorted script?

If your faith revolves around Enochs mothers name then you have much bigger problems than sola scriptura, friend.

 

[follower of Christ]

Is it important to know who is the mother of Enoch? Or answer such kind of queries? Yes! How can you win over a non-christian, if in the beginning you SWEAR that the Bible is true, when this problem arise and you answer differently, like: OH, THAT IS NOT IMPORTANT TO KNOW, ADAM'S LINEAGE IS VAGUE and we must continue on...

You have to be joking, right ?
We dont 'WIN' over non-christians, friend. If you believe that nonsense then your foundation is off to begin with.
ONLY Gods drawing brings men to the Son. NOTHING we can say will convince them.
WE are to take the gospel to mankind and where the Father is laying the groundwork men WILL respond to the gospel provided for them.

Can you honestly say here that YOU CAME TO CHRIST BECAUSE someone showed you what Enochs mothers name is ?!?!?
I seriously DOUBT that was the case.

Scripture doesnt cover every detail because we dont NEED all those details for salvation or to understand the big picture.
Frankly, and I mean no offense, but Im having a little trouble believing that the material used here to show your point isnt just a joke on us all...was it ?

Be consistent!

Be LOGICAL !

Like when a Muslim brother asked this same question to a Evangelical Pastor, do you know what the Pastor said? "My brother, Enoch is not the Enoch that went to heaven..." Hey!!!!!! Wake up!!!! this dude is just asking simple question. If a Christian could not used the BIBLE, as using it accordingly then Christians would loosed credibility.

If ANYONE needs to know Enochs mothers name to have faith in God then they are simply looking for a reason to NOT believe.
The evidence used to support your argument is so far beyond ridiculous that its hard to believe you even presented it, friend.
Enochs mothers name is IRRELEVANT !
As are the names of anyone NOT mentioned BY name in scripture

 

[amg0364730]

Now concerning my question; who is the mother of Enoch? Yes, indeed who cares about it, I will not be dammed into the burning sulfur, if I did not know it. It was a allegory for those who regard the LAW as LAW, it needs a partner to hear and understand the scripture.

To close my question; here are the probable verse that should be posted: Genesis 5: 3-5
I said probable, because Adam had other sons and daughter. I call it indirect to redirect answer. For the Torah, it needs the Talmud to express the hidden meaning.

Besides I asked the question just to see different Christian reaction.

 

[amg0364730]

Is my question irrelevant? NO! it is not. If such question would give you to share your faith why not! There is a lot of thing to add, not just trying to answer a question who in truth had a indirect answer!

IF we firmly believe that the Bible hold the truth then why should we be ashamed? If they rejected you then they rejected the one you bear witness!

I faced harder and more ridiculous question coming from a Jew or Muslim. Such as Why does the angel needed a ladder to clime up o the throne of God? Genesis 28:12. Such question for me is an invitation to teach and share my faith, without hate but with enduring patience.

Now if such question in Gen 28:12 would be thrown in your lap, and you hold your pillar and bulwark of your faith which is your Bible, what would you do? Run away?

 

[westtexas]

I just want to add, if SOLA SCRIPTURA is the sole TRUTH in Christianity, then why this verse is incomplete? Should I just BELIEVE / SOLA FIDE / faith alone to rule over my conviction as why I am a Christian? If my sole pillar of truth is incomplete then the next verses is questionable?

Or is it there any ORAL TRADITION behind this? Is there? Is it also the reason why the Scribes at that time adopt the Talmud or the Mitzvah to fill up the meaning over distorted script?

This verse is not incomplete nor is scripture distorted, as FOC has said, God has given us all we need for our salvation in the 66 books of the Bible."And Cain knew his wife" tells us all we need to know. However, Jewish tradition and literature says Cain married his sister Awan. But our faith is no stronger or weaker if we choose to believe this or not. "And Cain knew his wife" is complete enough.
Westtexas

 

[handy]

In all honesty, if a person were acting that the Bible couldn't be taken seriously because it doesn't tell us who Cain's wife was, or why an angel needed a ladder to reach the throne of God, I wouldn't be taking their queries all that seriously. Generally questions like those are the type of questions that, even if a sound and clear answer is given, the questioner just jumps to the next inconsequential subject.

A few years back I went round and round with someone about why the Scriptures say that the hare chews the cud until I finally figured out that the person wasn't the least bit interested in learning that an apparent inaccuracy was in fact, not an inaccuracy, just interesting in nit-picking the Bible so he wouldn't have to come to terms with the clear truth about his sin and God's redemption.

I'll still answer the question about the hare, because it crops up fairly often. But, I don't lose any sleep if the questioner then jumps to another irrelevant thing.

 

[amg0364730]

Yes I agree it is just enough that Cain knew his wife. But have you understand the exegesis of the verse? I look the scripture not only a Holy Book, but also it must contain messages beyond what you see and read.

Seeing is not believing nor reading it. The scripture foretold the future of humanity. The splendor of God's wisdom. Now, about my question who is the mother of Enoch? It is a apologetic way to consort people to look the scripture on different way.

I believe that Christianity is not build by books or because of the Bible Christianity was born. NO. Christians live and die because of the promise of God.

Is the Bible important? Yes, it holds the history and the promise of God to us. Should we as Christians get our sole Christian authority in the Bible? No. Since the time in Pentecost, the Apostles got their authority to Christ alone, but since the mission of the Church includes the gentiles, Christ sends them to preach and baptize in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. Plus, Jesus Christ never mention to write and send them copies of your writing.

If we, Christians only accept what is written and ONLY WRITTEN, does we limit God's knowledge only to written scriptures? Or should we accept that the scripture plus the church and our tradition would make more way God's knowledge to spread through out the world.

Are we like Pharisee? or Sadducee? Who hold the Law and still guilty of it.

 

[handy]

But even the Apostle Paul praised the Bereans for not accepting his words, but examining the Scriptures to if what he was saying was truth.

Yes, the Church and even a certain amount of tradition is fine, if the Scripture validates it. But, only if the Scriptures validate it. And that is what is at the heart of sola scriptura.

 

[amg0364730]

Well, my topic question is a hard one, especially if you would be Bible literalistic minded. About the traditions that should be accepted only if written or found in the scripture. Ah, how about Asian Christians, they practiced bowing to temples, as a national respect, plus bowing to dead great teacher who's picture hangs on every classroom or dojos. Are they guilty because the Bible said in: Dt. 5:9 that "You shall not bow down or worship them...." Those are great traditions! In south east Asia, typically in the Philippines, they kiss the hand of the person who is more elder to them like Aunts, Grand father or mothers, would these tradition which is NOT WRITTEN in the Bible should be long forgotten?

Or greeting your friend Happy Birthday? It is not written, should Christians celebrate it?

IF AND ONLY IF Christians were told what to do by a written text, then we are like the Jews, who tend to study read all day long for the Law, and WE ARE NOT FREE. We rather set another law. IF IT IS NOT WRITTEN DON'T BELIEVE IT.

In my topic question; since literally there is no quite direct answer, should we just jump and read the next verse?

 

[handy]

I guess, with the exception of the Jehovah's Witnesses, which I believe is a non-Christian anyway, I don't know of any Christians who are so literal minded that bowing to one's Aunt or saying Happy Birthday is a problem. Bowing out of respect and bowing in worship are very different things.