Who did Cain and Abel Marry?

rainbowsmiles · Post by **rainbowsmiles** » Thu Oct 05, 2006 6:36 pm

I know this is probably an old question for some but it recently came up in a group where we were discussing religions of the world. The topic of Cain and Abel and who they married came up and whether or not we are all descended from Adam and Eve. My personal view is that we are not. One of the people involved in our group is a Christian and regularly attends Bible study and she asked me to point out in the bible why I believe we are not all descended from Adam and Eve. This is the scripture I used:

Genesis 4:13-15

Cain said to the Lord, "My punishment is more than I can bear. Today you are driving me from the land, and I will be hidden from your presence; I will be a restless wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me. But the Lord said to him, "Not so, if anyone kills Cain, he will suffer vengeance seven times over." Then the Lord put a mark on Cain so that no one who found him would kill him.

Her question was "then who did Cain and Abel marry" if Adam and Eve were the only people on earth? My point was that Cain and Abel were the FIRST man and woman created but not the only ones. Just because God created Adam and Eve did not mean he didn't create more people after. The scripture, I believe, backs up my beliefs.

I'm curious as to what others think of that scripture.

I forgot to say, it also, I believe, backs up my belief that some of us could be descended from other groups and not just Adam and Eve.

weinbeck · Post by **weinbeck** » Sat Oct 07, 2006 3:45 pm

rainbowsmiles wrote: I know this is probably an old question for some but it recently came up in a group where we were discussing religions of the world. The topic of Cain and Abel and who they married came up and whether or not we are all descended from Adam and Eve. My personal view is that we are not. One of the people involved in our group is a Christian and regularly attends Bible study and she asked me to point out in the bible why I believe we are not all descended from Adam and Eve. This is the scripture I used:

Genesis 4:13-15

Cain said to the Lord, "My punishment is more than I can bear. Today you are driving me from the land, and I will be hidden from your presence; I will be a restless wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me. But the Lord said to him, "Not so, if anyone kills Cain, he will suffer vengeance seven times over." Then the Lord put a mark on Cain so that no one who found him would kill him.

Her question was "then who did Cain and Abel marry" if Adam and Eve were the only people on earth? My point was that Cain and Abel were the FIRST man and woman created but not the only ones. Just because God created Adam and Eve did not mean he didn't create more people after. The scripture, I believe, backs up my beliefs.

I'm curious as to what others think of that scripture.

I forgot to say, it also, I believe, backs up my belief that some of us could be descended from other groups and not just Adam and Eve.

You are right - it is an old question. VERY old! It's almost as old as the chicken or the egg argument. I don't worry about something that might or might not have happened at the beginning of time. I'm just worried about the problems of today. I mean, of you take the creation story literally, it begs further questions like How much older was Adam than Eve? Let's face it - Adam was already an adult when God swiped one of his ribs to make a woman. Would she already have had a full head of hair to start off with? Your question, because there is no acceptable answer is superficial, bordering on the superfluous.

rainbowsmiles · Post by **rainbowsmiles** » Sun Oct 08, 2006 1:39 pm

Thanks for answering Weinbeck. I wondered how many people have pondered this question. I started to think I was the only one after my group meeting and those participating in the discussion had never thought of it before. Its interesting to get peoples view points on it. I love reading or hearing peoples interpretations of the scriptures.

Bill Sikes · Post by **Bill Sikes** » Sun Oct 08, 2006 2:02 pm

weinbeck wrote: I mean, of you take the creation story literally, it begs further questions like How much older was Adam than Eve? Let's face it - Adam was already an adult when God swiped one of his ribs to make a woman. Would she already have had a full head of hair to start off with? Your question, because there is no acceptable answer is superficial, bordering on the superfluous.

I think that if you take the bible as the absolute and literal truth, then you are

bound to be disappointed. I'm sure much is lost or distorted, considering the

time, the translations, and other uncertainties. The same goes for other religious

texts - none are *entirely* new, are they?

weber · Post by **weber** » Sun Oct 08, 2006 2:09 pm

I used to think that Cain and Abel had to have children by their mother until I was opened up to the fact that there were other people on the earth at the time. Anyway, I don't know cuz I wasn't there and I will never know for absolute sure.

Erinna1112 · Post by **Erinna1112** » Sun Oct 08, 2006 2:47 pm

Bill Sikes wrote: I think that if you take the bible as the absolute and literal truth, then you are

bound to be disappointed. I'm sure much is lost or distorted, considering the

time, the translations, and other uncertainties. The same goes for other religious

texts - none are *entirely* new, are they?

There are those who do indeed believe the bible is the absolute unvarnished literal truth. I wonder if one of them would answer this? (I do not belong to this category, just for the sake of clarity here

)

rainbowsmiles · Post by **rainbowsmiles** » Sun Oct 08, 2006 4:49 pm

There are those who do indeed believe the bible is the absolute unvarnished literal truth.

Thank you bill, weber and erinna for your posts!

Yes Erinna, the girl I discussed this with in my group believes the words of the bible are the absolute truth and come directly from God. She was raised to believe and finds truth in the scriptures that we are all descended from Adam and Eve, thats how it became a topic for discussion for us.

I use to think that Cain and Abel married their own siblings until I started picking through the scriptures and trying to decifer their meaning for myself. Of course, with all things, I reserve the right to grow an change my mind :wah:

I guess I got to wondering too if people believe we all came from Adam and Eve because that is the general thought that is taught to us by our christian leaders or because the bible has us believe this? A great deal of what I believed early on is because of what I was taught but the more I study and explore on my own the more I find I have a different take on things.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Sun Oct 08, 2006 4:51 pm

rainbowsmiles wrote: I know this is probably an old question for some but it recently came up in a group where we were discussing religions of the world. The topic of Cain and Abel and who they married came up and whether or not we are all descended from Adam and Eve. My personal view is that we are not. One of the people involved in our group is a Christian and regularly attends Bible study and she asked me to point out in the bible why I believe we are not all descended from Adam and Eve. This is the scripture I used:

Genesis 4:13-15

Cain said to the Lord, "My punishment is more than I can bear. Today you are driving me from the land, and I will be hidden from your presence; I will be a restless wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me. But the Lord said to him, "Not so, if anyone kills Cain, he will suffer vengeance seven times over." Then the Lord put a mark on Cain so that no one who found him would kill him.

Her question was "then who did Cain and Abel marry" if Adam and Eve were the only people on earth? My point was that Cain and Abel were the FIRST man and woman created but not the only ones. Just because God created Adam and Eve did not mean he didn't create more people after. The scripture, I believe, backs up my beliefs.

I'm curious as to what others think of that scripture.

I forgot to say, it also, I believe, backs up my belief that some of us could be descended from other groups and not just Adam and Eve.

Does the Bible not suggest that Cain and Able married the "Children of God" or Angels?

rainbowsmiles · Post by **rainbowsmiles** » Sun Oct 08, 2006 4:57 pm

Does it Byrn? I'm not sure. I don't remember reading it. I'd like to read it if it does, cause that certainly would change my point of view.

The pastor who lead my O.T. studies last year said the scipture just implied a rapid growth of the human race in the future. :-3 That one was too far fetched for me.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Sun Oct 08, 2006 5:08 pm

rainbowsmiles wrote: Does it Byrn? I'm not sure. I don't remember reading it. I'd like to read it if it does, cause that certainly would change my point of view.

The pastor who lead my O.T. studies last year said the scipture just implied a rapid growth of the human race in the future. :-3 That one was too far fetched for me.

I'm certain the Bible has a way round the inbreeding problem and I recall it involved these 9 foot high beings refered to as the Children of God.

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Mon Oct 09, 2006 2:03 pm

rainbowsmiles:-6

Many scholars today recognize that the creation stories found in the Bible are borrowed from other tribes of the day and are in fact myths or if you like parable. In fact a good part of the Bible is parable. Parables do teach profound truths. Just because they are parables does not mean they are of no value.

Ted:-6

Erinna1112 · Post by **Erinna1112** » Mon Oct 09, 2006 6:13 pm

Bryn Mawr wrote: I'm certain the Bible has a way round the inbreeding problem and I recall it involved these 9 foot high beings refered to as the Children of God.

Got a reference for that? I went to a very fundamentalist church, growing up, very strict on "is it in the bible?", and I don't recall any nine-foot high beings other than Goliath.

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Mon Oct 09, 2006 6:42 pm

Pinky:-6

LOL

I'm saying that Able couldn't have been mistaken as Abbie or the other way around. Since they form part of a myth they were not, in fact, real people.

Shalom

Ted:-6

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Mon Oct 09, 2006 11:15 pm

Erinna1112 wrote: Got a reference for that? I went to a very fundamentalist church, growing up, very strict on "is it in the bible?", and I don't recall any nine-foot high beings other than Goliath.

No - that's the thing about it, just a vague memory. I'll do some searching this evening.

rainbowsmiles · Post by **rainbowsmiles** » Sat Oct 14, 2006 5:01 pm

Pinky wrote: Are you sure they didn't mishear Able as Abbie? Then they could have married each other:D

:wah:

Well Cain killed her then, so that is no good :-3

Many scholars today recognize that the creation stories found in the Bible are borrowed from other tribes of the day and are in fact myths or if you like parable. In fact a good part of the Bible is parable. Parables do teach profound truths. Just because they are parables does not mean they are of no value.

Thank you Ted for the information

weber · Post by **weber** » Sat Oct 14, 2006 5:07 pm

Hey, I just had a thought.

Maybe a dumb thought but.... Genealogy in the bible consists of men, not women. Anything to do with naming people, for the most part men are listed, not women. So maybe Adam and Eve had many children and maybe girls in there with Abel and Cain. Just a thought but I am beginning to believe that any thought is a good thought.:-6

rainbowsmiles · Post by **rainbowsmiles** » Sat Oct 14, 2006 5:09 pm

But does that mean Cain and Abel married their sisters?

weber · Post by **weber** » Sat Oct 14, 2006 6:34 pm

The gene pool at time would be quite pristine being as these are the first genes and the first people. It would be possible for them to marry their sisters. There are other attempts at explanation like the Sons of God but they are men so it doesn't fit.

I have no idea Rainbow

If you believe in God anything is possible because God is Omni everything and can do anything. If you don't believe in God, why do you even care to talk about it.

I repeat

If you believe in God, anything is possible. I believe in God. I believe God can do anything that He chooses to do, anything that He knows is good. I believe that God will not do bad things. That is why I find it difficult, actually don't read the Old Testament.

If a person doesn't believe in God, I don't know why they would even want to talk about it.

rainbowsmiles · Post by **rainbowsmiles** » Sat Oct 14, 2006 7:01 pm

If a person doesn't believe in God, I don't know why they would even want to talk about it.

Well - I disagree. People who don't believe in God have a right to talk about anything they choose. I have friends who are Atheists who discuss the Bible with me all the time (yes, they've read it). I have friends of all walks of life and beliefs that discuss religion or their opinion of the Christian Bible as well as other books of faith, including the Koran and the Torah. I think everyone has a right to discuss whatever they choose. It isn't limited to those who believe in only one thing.

But since I do believe in God I'd guess you give me your "approval" on this discussion then. :rolleyes:

But I must clarify - you and I don't believe in the same God so of course we wouldn't see this topic in the same light. But to each their own

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sat Oct 14, 2006 7:15 pm

I believe in God. I also believe that God could do anything He wants but He does not work that way.

Shalom

Ted:-6

weber · Post by **weber** » Sat Oct 14, 2006 7:15 pm

rainbowsmiles wrote: Well - I disagree. People who don't believe in God have a right to talk about anything they choose. I have friends who are Atheists who discuss the Bible with me all the time (yes, they've read it). I have friends of all walks of life and beliefs that discuss religion or their opinion of the Christian Bible as well as other books of faith, including the Koran and the Torah. I think everyone has a right to discuss whatever they choose. It isn't limited to those who believe in only one thing.

But since I do believe in God I'd guess you give me your "approval" on this discussion then. :rolleyes:

But I must clarify - you and I don't believe in the same God so of course we wouldn't see this topic in the same light. But to each their own

Okay so I don't know any atheists and I don't why an atheist would want to read the bible. I don't even want to read the bible all the time and I believe in God. I know what's in it. Strange but it is true that if atheists want to read the bible and discuss God, that is their perrogative. However I will say that the one thing I have noticed(within forums)is that when atheists, and people who don't believe in God or the bible, when they do so the purpose seems to be to prove that God doesn't exist, which also I guess is their right.

Rainbow, God is God. I believe in God. How can you say we do not believe in the same God. There is only one God. You may believe in God in your own manner, but it is still God, the same God I believe in. I would be interested in your description of two different Gods who are God.

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sat Oct 14, 2006 7:30 pm

Actually many different people have somewhat or greatly differing concepts of God. Personally I think all folks are aiming at the same end--ultimate reality.

Shalom

Ted:-6

rainbowsmiles · Post by **rainbowsmiles** » Sat Oct 14, 2006 7:44 pm

I find it interesting that you would like to know my definition of God

I think it has been well established that you and I don't agree on much. We have our opinions and they are what they are. I don't feel I have to explain my beliefs to you, since explaining them certainly doesn't validate anything for me nor will it validate anything for you. Quite the contrary actually... I think all a response from me on your question of God will do is bring about more confrontation. You'll either think I'm criticizing your beliefs or you'll criticize mine, and that isn't why I posted here. You've already moved on from the original topic by stating people who don't believe in God shouldn't be discussing the sciptures (which I'm sure was aimed at me and your genius that told you I was a disbeliever - BTW/you were wrong) and I certainly hope that doesn't dissuade people who don't believe from posting an opinion here. I was hoping for any and all opinions.

BTW/I've never had an Atheist try and convince me that God doesn't exist (though I have no doubt they do it). I've had Atheists tell me why they don't believe God exists but never have they tried to lead me away from my belief. I don't care if someone follows the Bible or not, I'm still always fascinated to hear how different people from different walks of life interpret the sciptures, I'm also very interested in learning why people follow a particular spiritual path or why they choose to follow none at all.

I appreciate everyone who took my post seriously and are (were) willing to discuss this scipture with me.

Ted, you gave me more to think about. And thank you for the following post - and you are right

Actually many different people have somewhat or greatly differing concepts of God. Personally I think all folks are aiming at the same end--ultimate reality.

Erinna, I haven't read of any other giants either. Please Bryn if you find anything about this can you post it for me, I'd be interested in reading it.

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sat Oct 14, 2006 7:51 pm

rainbowsmiles:-6

Thanks. I do hope it helped. I do not necessarily want others to believe as I do but I like to raise ideas to get people thinking. We must each walk our own path and we meet many interesting people and companions along the way. Some walk with Jesus and others walk with Buddha and so on.

My personal choice is the Christian way but I do meet a lot of Buddhists etc. along the way. It makes the walk interesting. When we get to the end we will find a lot of folks from a lot of different faiths there.

Shalom

Ted:-6

weber · Post by **weber** » Sat Oct 14, 2006 7:52 pm

rainbowsmiles wrote: I find it interesting that you would like to know my definition of God

.
I still would like to know your definition of God. As Ted said, and I said much the same thing, different people have different concepts of God. I like that thought much better than your God is not my God. To me God is God and is seen in a different way by different people but is still God. I have asked a question which is quite different than being questioned on what I say which you have provided me ample material to work on.

rainbowsmiles · Post by **rainbowsmiles** » Sat Oct 14, 2006 8:03 pm

It is as Ted said - a different concept of God.

My concept of God, I can assure you, is different than your concept of God - and for me that means we believe in different Gods. Just as I don't see myself believing in the same God that a terrorist believes in when they commit atrocities in the name of God - nor do I believe in the same God that religious leaders who commit crimes claim to believe in to rationalize their behavior. But, if for you a belief in God encompasses every belief in the world, that is fine. Thats your belief - it just isn't mine. There are people who don't believe in one God - they have multiple - how would you clarify that? Would you say that their multiple Gods are actually your singular God but just lumped into one?

I see it differently than you do - that is all - nothing more, nothing less. Why do I see it the way I do? That could take a lifetime to explain since it took me a my present lifetime to get here.

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sat Oct 14, 2006 8:08 pm

I made an addition to my post #25 so that it would make more sense. The problem of being a falible human.

Shalom

Ted:-6

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sat Oct 14, 2006 8:15 pm

rainbowsmiles:-6

Extremists and others such a peadophiles will twist the name of God in order to justify many things. This does not change God but is a blatant misuse of God's name.

Yes some religions seem to have more than one God but for some who view Christianity from the outside also say the same thing about us; Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

All of our words used to describe or define God are not up to the task. We cannot do it in any language so we must resort to metaphor in order to make it humanly comprehesible. Ultimately we are all looking for the same end by whatever name, the Creator.

Shalom

Ted:-6

weber · Post by **weber** » Sat Oct 14, 2006 8:27 pm

rainbowsmiles wrote: It is as Ted said - a different concept of God.

My concept of God, I can assure you, is different than your concept of God - and for me that means we believe in different Gods. Just as I don't see myself believing in the same God that a terrorist believes in when they commit atrocities in the name of God - nor do I believe in the same God that religious leaders who commit crimes claim to believe in to rationalize their behavior. But, if for you a belief in God encompasses every belief in the world, that is fine. Thats your belief - it just isn't mine. There are people who don't believe in one God - they have multiple - how would you clarify that? Would you say that their multiple Gods are actually your singular God but just lumped into one?

I see it differently than you do - that is all - nothing more, nothing less. Why do I see it the way I do? That could take a lifetime to explain since it took me a my present lifetime to get here.

Rainbow

I only know that I believe in God and how and what I believe. And I am happy with who I am and what I believe and I would defend anybody else to believe as they choose. For saying things not nearly as clear and concise as that, I have been visciously attacked on other forums for not being a Christian. I have been attacked as not being Chritian because I am Roman Catholic. I am not accustomed to being accepted the way I am and if I get feisty, it is because I tend now to see everything as an attack.

I am not going to apologize for something I did not intentionally do. You said it in a nutshell. It is of no use for us to try to communicate.

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sat Oct 14, 2006 8:29 pm

The bell has gone. Go to your corners please. LOL

Perhaps the ref will call it a draw. LOL

Shalom

Ted:-6

weber · Post by **weber** » Sat Oct 14, 2006 8:33 pm

Ted wrote: The bell has gone. Go to your corners please. LOL

Perhaps the ref will call it a draw. LOL

Shalom

Ted:-6

Nah, Rainbow won. I don't like corners. I'm going to bed. Fight is over. Strange though, I didn't even know there was a fight til now.

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sat Oct 14, 2006 8:38 pm

weber:-6

See the other thread.

Shalom

Ted:-6

rainbowsmiles · Post by **rainbowsmiles** » Sat Oct 14, 2006 8:59 pm

Its ok Ted. Some people just don't mesh well - in real life or on the net. Its certainly doesn't matter to me and doubt it matters to Weber.

As for apologies Weber - I never expected any. I wasn't trying to seek one out. I've learned already from other conversations that there aren't any mutual respected conclusions with you.

I'm sorry that you were viciously attacked on other forums over your beliefs and that people called you a non-christian for being Catholic. But the last time I checked I wasn't one of those people who wronged you in that fashion but I was being treated as such. BTW/I had accepted you as you were and actually enjoyed being involved in the same topics as you up until now. I just wish you hadn't seen my comments as attacks or maybe asked me to clarify a few things before you assumed the worse. I certainly agree - we can't communicate and I won't make any further attempts to do so. I promise not to post in any topics that you start and I will steer clear of posting a reply to any of your posts in the future.

As for this thread, I hope it can go back to the my original post. I'm still very interested in everyones opinion on the scripture.

weber · Post by **weber** » Sat Oct 14, 2006 9:40 pm

I don't think Cain and Abel actually married anyone. As far as I know, marriage as we know it didn't take place until much later on in history. They took wives as far as I know. It is said that there were people on the earth before creation took place in which case they could have married anybody.

No problem Rainbow. Last post period. period

double helix · Post by **double helix** » Sun Oct 15, 2006 1:51 am

I thought they married the daughters of the Giants of the Earth. You know, the ones that were already there before Adam and Eve reproduced. You know, after Adam devorced Lilith, his first wife and pulled a rib off for God to make him his Eve.

weber · Post by **weber** » Sun Oct 15, 2006 8:03 am

Hey Helix

Tell me about Adam's first wife Lilith. This is a new story to me. I have heard about the Giants of the Earth but I don't know much about them. Do you know more about them? Where they came from? I am interested.

weber · Post by **weber** » Sun Oct 15, 2006 8:24 am

I found something. In the bible there are two stories of creation. I am not so sure that they are two different stories. In the first, God created man in His image and told them to go forth and multiply. That was the sixth day and on the seventh day God rested. That was 1 Genesis. In Genesis 2 Adam and Eve were created in the Garden of Eden. So there were people created before Adam and Eve.

I will give you the URL. Perhaps the theory is not valid but it makes sense to me.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/pers01.htm

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sun Oct 15, 2006 2:11 pm

If read closely you will find that they are indeed two different stories. Each one borrowed from a different tribe.

Shalom

Ted:-6

weber · Post by **weber** » Sun Oct 15, 2006 2:22 pm

Ted wrote: If read closely you will find that they are indeed two different stories. Each one borrowed from a different tribe.

Shalom

Ted:-6

Okay. So they are two separate stories of creation by two different tribes. So which are we supposed to believe. I find reading the bible that a lot of the time there are two separate and different stories attached to the same event. I choose the one I wish to believe. If there was only one, there would be no choice. I have come to know that the bible may have been God inspired but was written by men and then somewhere down the line more men came along and decided what writings to put in and what not to put in. I believe the bible is a very good guide for living but I in no way think it is inerrant.

So who do you think Cain had children with. I have no idea about Abel, maybe he had children before he was killed, but who with?

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sun Oct 15, 2006 2:32 pm

weber:-6

The Bible was never intended to be read as a history book. It is primarily a religious book. The appropriate question about any story from the Bible is "What does it mean?" and not "Did it really happen this way?"

The Bible is written in a midrashic style or in parables if you will.

Since Adam and Eve are myths it is rather futile to ask who did what to whom or how did this happen. Apparently, according to the latest scientific discoveries conscious human behaviour began in Africa.

So what does this story mean? One of the beauties of language and written text is that things can often be interpreted in many different ways and all are valid.

If some want to take it literally then so be it. Many of us do not see it that way.

There are some kernels of history scattered throughout the book.

Once you come to understand "midrash" or "parable" most of the problems that people raise concerning the sacred scriptures just seem to melt away.

Shalom

Ted:-6

weber · Post by **weber** » Sun Oct 15, 2006 3:04 pm

That makes sense to me Ted.

I have always read the bible as it was written and many parts of the bible I interpret according to my experiences and what I have learned. So I have no problem with midrash, parables, euphamisms, allegories, whatever. The only thing I have a problem with is when people tell me that I can't do what I just said and that I have to read and believe word for word, and I don't do that.

I accept creation and I don't have a problem with exactly how. Exactly or exact is not a part of my language because exact anything doesn't exist on this earth.

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sun Oct 15, 2006 3:14 pm

weber:-6

In my opinion you are on the right track.

A brief explanation of "midrash". The modern definition is different from the ancient definition. Today it is a style of interpretation. In ancient times it was both a style of interpretation and writing.

It is a method whereby a new or newer event is interpreted in light of an older event. This is to show the importance given to the story or event.

For example the story of crossing the Reed or (Red) Sea during the exodus is an important story in the religious history of the Hebrews; their escape from exile. Thus in the story of Joshua crossing the Jordan on dry land is written to show the importance of that event; entrance to the promised land.

Did the exodus happen as written. Scholars don't believe so. It may in fact be written based on the expulsion of the Hyksos from the Nile delta, by the Egyptians.

Did Joshua cross the Jordan on dry land. It is highly unlikely. But it is probably the second most important story in the religious history of the Hebrews.

Neither are lies or an attempt to deceive. They are written to show the importance of the story of the religious history of the Hebrews.

They are important stories for what they mean not for the historical value.

Shalom

Ted:-6

weber · Post by **weber** » Sun Oct 15, 2006 3:27 pm

I used to believe that the waters parted for Moses, Ted

I watch the movie and enjoy in spite of the fact that I know that many of the things happening may not be exact. It was so easy when I just believed everything in the bible as it is. Figuring things out is complicated but I prefer thinking things out to blindly believing everything put before me.

And there are parts of the bible that are not a problem to me and I don't bother trying to make them difficult. When I got into grade 9 in school and learned about evolution, both creation and evolution had to be right(school and church)so I put them together. Doesn't pose a problem for me.

double helix · Post by **double helix** » Sun Oct 15, 2006 3:41 pm

weber wrote: Hey Helix

Tell me about Adam's first wife Lilith. This is a new story to me. I have heard about the Giants of the Earth but I don't know much about them. Do you know more about them? Where they came from? I am interested.
Lilith

http://www.lilithgallery.com/library/li ... -Sira.html

The story of Lillith comes from the Jewish story of creation. Which of course is where our Christian faith originates. It has been changed by mankind thtough the ages to the point of 300,000 different beliefs or doctrins ( I may be off a tad in the numbers).

http://www.stevequayle.com/Giants/artic ... Earth.html

There is a passage in the King James bible in genisis that says something about "and the children of "someone" married the daughters of the giants of the earth.

Ted · Post by **Ted** » Sun Oct 15, 2006 3:46 pm

weber:-6

There was an excellent program on TV called "The Exodus Decoded". They explored the possible history behind the story and there is some evidence to suggest that the Hyksos did cross on dry land as the result of nearby volcanic eruption. This also gave some credibility to the story of the plagues which were probably very natural events and then interpreted from a religious point of view.

True? I don't know but it was interesting and thought provoking. I was sent the tape by another discussion group friend trying to convince me of the veracity of the Exodus as written. It actually did just the opposite. It lent support to the Hyksos theory. This theory has some valid historical evidence to support it.

Shalom

Ted:-6

Galbally · Post by **Galbally** » Sun Oct 15, 2006 6:20 pm

This is where all the problems start when you start talking things literally in any of the great monotheistic religions. I think that arguing about these sorts of inconsistencies or more mystical ideas contained in the Bible or the Torah or the Koran quite quickly turns into the sort of "how many angels can fit on the head of a pin" sorts of debates that theologicals love, a lot like the way Lawyers love getting into the minutae of legal codes. Its obvious that a lot of the bible doesn't really stand up scrutiny based on a scientifc approach to the world, particularly the old testament. Obviously its not very plasuible that Noah put every species of plant and animal on earth in a big boat during a flood that covered the earth a few millenia ago, or that the earth is 6,000 years old, or that 2 human beings were put in situ in the middle east and from these 2 people everyone else is descended, or that Lot's wide got turned into a literal pillar of salt cause she looked at a city.

These stories are oviously meant to be taken as parables that outline a moral truth, but that didn't actually happen as described but may be based on ancient folk memories, and got passed down from generation to generation like our more modern fables like the tortoirse and the hare etc. It doesn't mean that they are not powerful or pertinent to people, or even that they are not part of gods wider purpose. Just that its the meaning of the story that matters, not the setting or the details. Obviously there are people that want these things to be literally true as it possibly makes them feel that is actual physical evidence of there beliefs being justified, while there are others that like to debunk them because of an anti-religious agenda. I find I quickly get bored of these debates as I just don't have a religous mindset although I do believe in god. I think that basically the way people actually act during their lives is a much more useful debate to have then trying to analytically dissect the bible in a literal manner, its all just a bit sterile if you ask me.

weber · Post by **weber** » Sun Oct 15, 2006 6:38 pm

double helix wrote: Lilith

http://www.lilithgallery.com/library/li ... -Sira.html

The story of Lillith comes from the Jewish story of creation. Which of course is where our Christian faith originates. It has been changed by mankind thtough the ages to the point of 300,000 different beliefs or doctrins ( I may be off a tad in the numbers).

http://www.stevequayle.com/Giants/artic ... Earth.html

There is a passage in the King James bible in genisis that says something about "and the children of "someone" married the daughters of the giants of the earth.

Interesting story of Lillith Helix

I didn't finish all of it as it is getting late but I can see how the story evolves from the two stories of creation.

Also interesting about the Giants and I will read more. I have heard of some of them but there are a lot that I hadn't heard about. I also heard the stories of how the Giants, Sons of God, had children with the beautiful human women, producing the Giants. There is a lot of information to remember.

weber · Post by **weber** » Sun Oct 15, 2006 6:44 pm

Ted wrote: weber:-6

There was an excellent program on TV called "The Exodus Decoded". They explored the possible history behind the story and there is some evidence to suggest that the Hyksos did cross on dry land as the result of nearby volcanic eruption. This also gave some credibility to the story of the plagues which were probably very natural events and then interpreted from a religious point of view.

True? I don't know but it was interesting and thought provoking. I was sent the tape by another discussion group friend trying to convince me of the veracity of the Exodus as written. It actually did just the opposite. It lent support to the Hyksos theory. This theory has some valid historical evidence to support it.

Shalom

Ted:-6

I think we can guess at a lot of things Ted

but truth to me is what I arrive at after hearing all the different beliefs. They tell me I can't do that because there is only one truth. I beg to differ because we are each unique and each fine our own truth.

Galbally

It doesn't hurt to hear all the different beliefs. It's just important to be able to have clear in our own minds what we need.