Cain's wife

[Extol]

I was reading some of Ray's old e-mail responses and came across this one about Cain's wife. Does anyone know if Ray still believes this? Since the Nashville conference I've been very intrigued about the possibility of other peoples apart from [and maybe before] Adam's line.

Cain obviously married one of His sisters. This practice was allowed in the early stages of man replenishing of the earth. Tradition tells us that Adam and Eve had SEVENTY children. They lived 900 years you know. "And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years, and he begat sons AND DAUGHTERS"  (Gen. 5:4).

[Marky Mark]

Extol,Hello.

  Very interesting subject matter.I would have to believe that since Scripture does not state that there were people before Adam and Eve, that all belief other wise would be of pure conjecture. Now,I believe that the Spirit can lead one to think and meditate on the subject,but without definite scriptural proof, it would be pure speculation.





Peace...Mark

[aqrinc]

Hi Extol, Mark,

These are some excerpts from The Postscript To Nashville 08 Conference. There are several places in the Nashville 08 Conference papers where Ray discusses more about Humanity and Man being introduced on the scene. I would suggest you read All The Nashville 08 Transcripts to get your complete answer.

http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,9130.0.html

Excerpt # 1.                                    FIRST HUMANS

Now I talked a little, not during the conference so much, but in some of the bull sessions in the evening we had.  Where it was said, 'were Adam and Eve the first humans?'  Well, I said, not necessarily and I gave numerous reasons for that.  I thought of another one here just yesterday, so I'll throw this out just for fun and just to think about.  I'm not making some big stand on this.

I used to think where it says God formed man from the dust of the ground (Gen. 2:7), He's just going back to explain in more detail what He did in chapter 1.  But I'm thinking that's not tenable either. 

So let's ask ourselves, when God created herbs and things, did He just create one?  One piece of moss, one blade of grass?  Or did He make grass, a lot of grass and a lot of things.  Well let me explain this, because I don't know if I did this at the conference.  Notice where it says in verse 11.

Now what do science finds are the progression of plants?  You start with the primitive, they can be somewhat advanced, until you finally have whole trees producing fruit.  What is one of the last things in plant life that comes on the scene according to the geological table?  It's a very recent addition... flowers.  Flowers are relatively new to plant life in the geological time scale.

So obviously He didn't make one blade of grass or one piece of algae, there was a multitude.  Now notice when we come over to verse 20.

Gen 1:20  And God said, let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creatures, that hath life.

Did He just make one male and one female fish or was there an abundance of them?  Then we go on verse 21, "He made the great tanniyn."  Which I believe you know are the dinosaurs, the reptiles.

Then we have the cattle, verse 24.  Did He just make one cow and one bull, is that it? Well, it says He made cattle.

Well then when we come down to verse 26, it says  "God said, Let Us make man..."  But the Hebrew is 'humanity.'  "Let us make humanity."  Did He really just make one man and one woman?  That's not what He did with all the other things, did He?  Look at it.

Gen. 1:27  Let Us make humanity in Our image after Our likeness, and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle...

Remember, I pointed out it doesn't say let them have dominion over the great tanniyn, the dinosaurs.  Why?  Because they were extinct for 50 million years.

"In the image of God created He him."  That's what it says, but that's not in the Hebrew.  It just says, "In the image of God created."  That's all, it doesn't say "He him."  Concordant puts "created it."  God created it, humanity, it.  So it just says "in the image of God created."  He created, but to make the English more understandable, they put in "...created He him."  God created  him, but the "him" is not in there. 

Excerpt #2.

"Male and female created."  Now in our translation, it says "male and female He created them."  So it's pretty difficult to say, 'well there was one man and one woman.'  He created humanity, He created humanity male and He created humanity female.  Humanity, okay. 

Now when we come to Adam and Eve, He gives them a name and we know it's just one. Are they the first ones though?  Maybe not.  Because we later have Cain, that says his sentence is too great, wherever I go, they will kill me (Gen. 4:13-14).  Who will kill him? Who?  There was only Abel and he killed Abel.  So if there's only Adam and Eve and their two sons, Cain and Abel... well Cain killed Abel, so now there's only one man left, and his mother and father.  He says to God, wherever I go, "anyone who finds me will kill me."  Who?  He killed the only other man alive on earth.  Well if we interpret it that way, there are problems.  Then Cain took a wife... so there'd be all these other things to contend with and so on.  Alright.

george.

[EKnight]

Ray also says this:

http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,9130.0.html

Now when we come to Adam and Eve, He gives them a name and we know it's just one. Are they the first ones though?  Maybe not.  Because we later have Cain, that says his sentence is too great, wherever I go, they will kill me (Gen. 4:13-14).  Who will kill him? Who?  There was only Abel and he killed Abel.  So if there's only Adam and Eve and their two sons, Cain and Abel... well Cain killed Abel, so now there's only one man left, and his mother and father.  He says to God, wherever I go, "anyone who finds me will kill me."  Who?  He killed the only other man alive on earth.  Well if we interpret it that way, there are problems.  Then Cain took a wife... so there'd be all these other things to contend with and so on.  Alright.

Eileen

[Dennis Vogel]

Does anyone know if Ray still believes this?

No, he has changed his thinking on this.

[aqrinc]

hi Eileen,

Good study habits; you are correct. As I wrote, Ray did say more on the subject it is hard listening and reading daily.

george.

[EKnight]

Sorry George, I didn't see you had that part in your post. 

Eileen

[Extol]

Thanks Dennis, and George. I had forgotten about the Nashville postscript--I need to go over that a few more times. 

[jerreye]

Does Ray also believe that there were men BEFORE the creation of Adam? If so, then every human (who was supposed to be made in God's Image - or BEING made in God's Image) can not and will not be saved/made righteous etc, etc, since it is only those "IN ADAM" that shall eventually "be made righteous" according to Romans 5. Seems to me that Adam was the first man, unless God will NOT make ALL "humanity" in His Image?

[daywalker]

Does Ray also believe that there were men BEFORE the creation of Adam? If so, then every human (who was supposed to be made in God's Image - or BEING made in God's Image) can not and will not be saved/made righteous etc, etc, since it is only those "IN ADAM" that shall eventually "be made righteous" according to Romans 5. Seems to me that Adam was the first man, unless God will NOT make ALL "humanity" in His Image?

Not true.

Even if there where humans before Adam [which, as previous posters have so stated, is pure speculation until Scriptural Proof...], they can and will be saved. It was through Adam's Sin, that humanity became subject to death and Judgment; whether or not, one is a descendant of Adam doesn't change that:

Romans 5:17 "For if, by the offense of the one, death reigns through the one, much rather, those obtaining the superabundance of grace and the gratuity of righteousness shall be reigning in life through the One, Jesus Christ."
18 Consequently, then, as it was through one offense for all mankind for condemnation, thus also it is through one just award for all mankind for life's justifying."
19 For even as, through the disobedience of the one man, the many were constituted sinners, thus also, through the obedience of the One, the many shall be constituted just."

Besides, we have plenty of other Scriptures that plainly say that God wills ALL HUMANITY to be saved:

I Timothy 4:9 Faithful is the saying and worthy of all welcome
10 (for for this are we toiling and being reproached), that we rely on the living God, Who is the Saviour of all mankind,; etc, etc, etc...

If you try to limit the "all mankind", then you're making the same mistake that Babylon has done to justify their evil doctrine of Eternal Damnation.


Hope this helps,

Daywalker.

[jerreye]

Good point, Daywalker. (BTW: I believe in the Salvation of ALL humanity, just so you are aware.)

Now, if there were human beings present before Adam, then wouldn't this mean that they were all sinless? After all, sin entered because of ADAM, correct?

[Dave in Tenn]

Good point, Daywalker. (BTW: I believe in the Salvation of ALL humanity, just so you are aware.)

Now, if there were human beings present before Adam, then wouldn't this mean that they were all sinless? After all, sin entered because of ADAM, correct?

Here I think a review of the first few chapters of Romans would be helpful.  Where there is no law, there is no transgression. 

None of us were 'there', so to speak, so I am currently willing and able to entertain any number of 'imaginatory' possibilities as long as they don't contradict scripture or clear teaching.  My own is 'speculation' to a degree, but not competely uninformed, even though it is quite possibly 'wrong' and most definately incomplete. I wasn't there either.   

I don't see our current sinful state as being a result of heredity via the "fall of man", but of the way mankind was formed in the first place--Adam and Eve and/or any who may have lived before them (assuming they themselves are literal historical figures).  So any who may have preceded Adam and Eve would be my ancestors in meat-carnality (which falls short of the Glory of God simply by being flesh), and Adam my ancestor in transgression.  In both cases, God IS forming man in His Image.

Take that for what it is worth--just my present understanding.

This is a good subject to meditate on, I think.  As Ray shared in Nashville, a fuller understanding of the beginning of the Great Parable opens the path to a fuller understanding of the rest of it.   

[mharrell08]

Good point, Daywalker. (BTW: I believe in the Salvation of ALL humanity, just so you are aware.)

Now, if there were human beings present before Adam, then wouldn't this mean that they were all sinless? After all, sin entered because of ADAM, correct?

No, death was passed onto all men...not sin.

Rom 5:12  Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

Rom 5:17  For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.

Rom 8:6  For to be carnally minded [the natural mind] is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.


Marques

[daywalker]

Jerreye:
Good point, Daywalker. (BTW: I believe in the Salvation of ALL humanity, just so you are aware.)

Seeing that you are here studying at BT, I had already made that assumption. 


Dave in Tenn:
Here I think a review of the first few chapters of Romans would be helpful.  Where there is no law, there is no transgression. 

Good idea! 

Revised Standard Version:

Rom 7:7  What then shall we say? That the law is sin? By no means! Yet, if it had not been for the law, I should not have known sin. I should not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, "You shall not covet."
Rom 7:8  But sin, finding opportunity in the commandment, wrought in me all kinds of covetousness. Apart from the law sin lies dead.
Rom 7:9  I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died;
Rom 7:10  the very commandment which promised life proved to be death to me.
Rom 7:11  For sin, finding opportunity in the commandment, deceived me and by it killed me.
Rom 7:12  So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and just and good.
Rom 7:13  Did that which is good, then, bring death to me? By no means! It was sin, working death in me through what is good, in order that sin might be shown to be sin, and through the commandment might become sinful beyond measure.
Rom 7:14  We know that the law is spiritual; but I am carnal, sold under sin.
Rom 7:15  I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate.
Rom 7:16  Now if I do what I do not want, I agree that the law is good.
Rom 7:17  So then it is no longer I that do it, but sin which dwells within me.
Rom 7:18  For I know that nothing good dwells within me, that is, in my flesh. I can will what is right, but I cannot do it.
Rom 7:19  For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I do.
Rom 7:20  Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I that do it, but sin which dwells within me.
Rom 7:21  So I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand.
Rom 7:22  For I delight in the law of God, in my inmost self,
Rom 7:23  but I see in my members another law at war with the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin which dwells in my members.
Rom 7:24  Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death?
Rom 7:25  Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I of myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin.


My current thoughts regarding pre-Adamic humans is, as Ray pointed out, that Genesis does seem to at least point to the possibility [that is, until further Scriptural review/support...]. But far as I know, it is nowhere stated that God ever gave any Commandments to any human race preceding Adam.

"sin, finding opportunity in the commandment"

This is exactly what happened in the Garden. God gave Adam a Commandment--don't eat the fruit--Sin found its opportunity to introduce itself. Of course, leave it to that Old Serpent to be the mediator.

I should not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, "You shall not covet."

Seeing that the Scriptural definition of a "sin" is to miss the mark, and to fall short of the glory of God, I don't think it'd be wrong to suggest that Adam and Eve [who were created as Carnal Beings] had sinned several times in the Garden, but until they broke the Commandment of God, they were unaware of their transgressions.

if it had not been for the law, I should not have known sin.

Seems to me, it's very possible, that Adam and Eve were "sinning machines" just like us, but without God's Law, they could not know it. Just like they didn't realize they were naked, until they broke God's Commandment:

Gen 3:7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves.

But, to be naked is not a good thing:

Rev 3:17 You say, 'I am rich; I have acquired wealth and do not need a thing.' But you do not realize that you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind and naked.



This Seventh Chapter of Romans is actually my personal Favorite. I can relate to Apostle Paul here so much, and I can see there is a ton of Wisdom and Sacred Secrets hidden within this Chapter...


But Until Further Review,

- Daywalker.

[Deborah-Leigh]

From the teachings we have here we  know that there is not one Antichrist. We understand that we are the beast. We accept that Adam and Eve were carnal and we know that God did not make one blade of grass and one fish and one bird and etc...

I think Adam is the name for humanity not for one human being.  The one Humanity of which we are all together made is carnal - as in first the natural then the spiritual. The One vivifying Spirit  is the LAST Adam that is Christ. 

Excerpt from http://bible-truths.com/lake4.html
Christ the FIRST of the firstfruit. Then believers, the FIRSTFRUITS.  


Arc

[musicman]

Perhaps the mixing of Adam with the other humans is what ultimately lead to the decline in life spans.  Science hasn't found any human fossils that they feel lived to very old ages.  The earliest humans problably didn't live all that long.  Just specticalating.

[Kat]

If we consider that there were people already living around the world, as Ray has suggested, as we know there are many indigenous tribes of people that live around the world. Then maybe God created His own race of people in which to bring His son into the world.  And the Bible gives us record of how Jesus Christ came out of this line of Adam.  Maybe this particular line is what is referred to as sons of God in early chapters of the Bible.

Gen 6:1  And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them,
v. 2  That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.

It seems that this Scripture might fit with Adam's line intermarrying with indigenous people of the land.  It's not that indigenous people are less human or are excluded from the plan of salvation, but God was working through a certain line of people that He created especially for a purpose.  But this is just something that I was thinking about.

mercy, peace and love
Kat

[daywalker]

Kat,

Also,in the scripture below it states plainly that we should not do as the verses state.

  Would not these laws also have applied to Cain also?And if they do you think Adam and Eve would have given permission to Cain(a murderer and vagabond) to have sex with one of their daughters many years latter? I don't think God would have let Cain marry his own sister,knowing that if He did It would be a violation of His own law,which in turn would be going against Gods own will. Lots of questions for sure.

Just my thoughts not trying to teach


Leviticus 18
9 'The nakedness of thy sister, daughter of thy father, or daughter of thy mother, born at home or born without; thou dost not uncover their nakedness.  11 The nakedness of a daughter of thy father's wife, begotten of thy father, she is thy sister; thou dost not uncover her nakedness.

Leviticus 20
17 'And a man who taketh his sister, a daughter of his father or daughter of his mother, and he hath seen her nakedness, and she seeth his nakedness: it is a shame; and they have been cut off before the eyes of the sons of their people; the nakedness of his sister he hath uncovered; his iniquity he beareth.


Peace...Mark

Hey Mark,

Remember, also, that intermarrying wasn't condemned in the early stages of mankind. In fact, Abraham's wife was also his sister. [Gen 20:12]

It seems as though, God gave out His Commandments in increments. Like, how Jesus added to the Law that was already in existence, by giving us a New Covenant, and a Higher Law. I imagine God worked the same way in the Old Testament times. He gave out a set of laws; then when it was necessary, He added more to them.

None that would contradict any laws in existence; just it was His Time to reveal more of His Commandments. [Ex: Giving the commandment to 'not marry one's sister' wouldn't contradict any previous laws, as there was never a law that stated 'a man could marry his sister'. There just wasn't a law forbidding it, yet.]

At least, that's the way I understand it, but I'm not rubber-stamping it or anything... 


Have a good one,
Daywalker.

[Deborah-Leigh]

All humanity is carnal regardless of either being grafted in or of the cultivated olive branch. God did not spare the NATURAL branches.

First the natural, whether wild and grafted in, or pruned and broken off the cultivated olive tree.

Notice what Ray points out that the carnal of the carnal is TALKING ABOUT HUMANITY.

Excerpt #1

Rom 2:1  "Therefore you have no excuse, O man..."  Do you know what Paul had in mind when he said "O man?"  He's talking about the carnal of the carnal, he's talking about humanity in the world, about total uncovering, total carnality.  O man, you know he uses that phrase again in Rom. 9:20,  "But who are you, O man, that answers against God," see.  God can form man anyway He wants to, who are you O man.

Rom 2:1 " Therefore you have no excuse, O man, every one of you who judges. For in passing judgment on another you condemn yourself..."

Is this beam and speck start clearing up a little bit now? 


Excerpt #2

Whatever O man is.  That's what we are, because O man is Adam.  O man came out of Adam.  Where did you come from, some place else?  We're all out of Adam.  And what does Adam do?  Being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness, full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness, backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters and on and on.  Wow, this is O man out of Adam.  This is what he does.  And only by the grace of God, some of us didn't have to go that route. 

excerpt # 3

"Mat 7:3  And why do you (My disciples) look at the mote in your brother's eye, but do not consider the beam in your own eye?

Why would His disciples have more sin, and I think we can see that this beam has to do with sin and character flaws and all of that.  Why would they have a bigger problem than their brothers.  Why would the people that were following Christ, loyally following Christ, learning to do good and to be good and to love God.  Why would they have more sins than their brothers, who's not up on the mountain?  He's saying your looking to get a molt out of your brother's eye and He didn't say it appears that you have it, you really do have a beam.  And it isn't what appears to be a mote, He says to you, and this is all from the prospective of YOU, "Why do YOU" try to get what YOU think is a beam out of  your brothers eye, when you have this beam in your own eye.  You follow me?   Why doesn't He reverse it, why doesn't He give the guy credit for at least making some improvement, to where the log is down to the size of a beam?

For very keen answers to the questions Ray expounds go to http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,3709.0.html

Arc

[mharrell08]

Hey Mark,

Remember, also, that intermarrying wasn't condemned in the early stages of mankind. In fact, Abraham's wife was also his sister. [Gen 20:12]

It seems as though, God gave out His Commandments in increments. Like, how Jesus added to the Law that was already in existence, by giving us a New Covenant, and a Higher Law. I imagine God worked the same way in the Old Testament times. He gave out a set of laws; then when it was necessary, He added more to them.

None that would contradict any laws in existence; just it was His Time to reveal more of His Commandments. [Ex: Giving the commandment to 'not marry one's sister' wouldn't contradict any previous laws, as there was never a law that stated 'a man could marry his sister'. There just wasn't a law forbidding it, yet.]

At least, that's the way I understand it, but I'm not rubber-stamping it or anything... 


Have a good one,
Daywalker.

Heb 13:8  Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.

Mal 3:6  For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.

Chris,

Seeing that God does not change and condemned incest (as Mark points out in scripture), incest has always been a sin. For example, 'Lust of the eyes, lust of the flesh, & the pride of life' [1 John 2:16] were always sin whether Eve knew & understood them or not. And seeing as she committed such in the Garden, she was in the transgression [1 Tim 2:14; 1 John 3:4].

Remember, when Abraham took Sarah as his wife, he was known as Abram and was just as pagan as anyone else. It was not until the Lord 'dragged' him to seek after Him, did he learn the ways of the Lord. And of course, he was already married.

And one more note: the scriptures, when speaking of Terah [Abraham's natural father] lineage, refer to Sarah as his daughter in law even though Abraham says in Gen 20:12 they have the same father.

Gen 11:26  And Terah lived seventy years, and begat Abram [who is later called Abraham], Nahor, and Haran.

Gen 11:31  And Terah took Abram his son, and Lot the son of Haran his son's son, and Sarai his daughter in law, his son Abram's wife...


Hope this helps,

Marques