A Command of Incest?

[Guest]

Hi - I'm interested in some responses on a question posed to me by my eighteen year old son.

Basically, here is my son's question:

If God commanded humankind to be plenish the earth, and if Cain took a sister for his wife, as many suspect, then it seems the only way to fulfill that particular will of God would be to commit incest - which was later condemned.

I applauded my son for asking a question more deeply than simply, "Where did Cain get his wife." But, I really didn't have a good response.

Was incest a sin before the commandment in Leviticus 18? If so, when did it become a sin?

Any thoughts?

peace,

dane

[Guest]

it would certainly seem that God allowed incest early on, although this word sounds rather harsh because of its understandable prohibition today.

my understanding is since Adam and Eve were created perfect, they had perfect genes, etc and would have had perfect children had they not sinned. once they sinned, the laws of thermodynamics in regard to their bodies began.. i.e they began breaking down. they also became subject to environmental factors. however, the closer in time you get to the creation, the less "impurity" would be found in the genetic lines. incest is forbidden today for practical (as well as moral) concerns-- there is a much greater chance today, because of genetic mutations, etc, that a child of incest will be born with defects. however, closer in time to the creation, the genetic lines were still pure so the risk of this was nil. as time progressed, however, this changed (along with the fact that you wouldnt have to marry a sister or close relative any longer).

the bigger question in regards to Cain in my mind (which may be answered elsewhere on one of these forums) is who were the people "out there" that he was afraid of? the bible doesnt mention anyone else at the time of Cain and Abel other than Cain, Abel, Adam and Eve (at least i believe they are the only ones mentioned). i always assumed that cain and able were the first two children, but perhaps not. it seems there must have been a substantial number of other offspring elsewhere, because Cain expressed fear that anyone who finds him will kill him. i'm sure there is a logical explanation. i simply havent heard a good one.

TK

[Guest]

TK,

Thanks for the reply. Your answer was basically what I told my son. However, what you said about the harshness of the word "incest" today made me think of something ... perhaps incest was condemned for logical reasons rather than for its crossing any great moral line?

Regarding your question of Cain here's my response: We know that Adam and Eve had other sons and daughters (Gen 5:4). The first chapter of Genesis gives us a time-line of seven days. After that I find it hard to accurately track time. Therefore, it seems easy to believe that there are gaps of time unaccounted for. During that unaccounted time frame the population is likely growing rapidly.

Personally I don't see a real problem with Cain's response. Everyone that he would meet would be a relative, and could have some motive to repay the evil he had done. Since we know that he had more siblings, and they probably had families, he could be facing a real threat.

... that's my two cents.

peace,

dane

[Guest]

I applauded my son for asking a question more deeply than simply, "Where did Cain get his wife." But, I really didn't have a good response.

Was incest a sin before the commandment in Leviticus 18? If so, when did it become a sin?

The assumption of the question of incest though is that Cain married a close relative. This assumes an argument from silence. The setting of the first three chapters of Genesis is the Garden. We are told virtually nothing about what was going on outside the garden during this time. We tend to think that everything God did was limited to just what we are told about in the garden. God created animals and plants. We are told that Adam named the animals in the garden. We are told that God planted the trees in the garden. Does this mean that the only animals that God created and the only plants were there in the garden? Did God create animals and plants outside of the garden? I believe that the text suggests this as Adam was able to live outside of the garden. He didn't step from the Garden into "formless and void". There was food already available there. Using the same logic, that God's creative acts were not limited to just what Adam could see that was recorded for us, there is no reason to believe that God could not have created other people either. I think it is too easy to think that if the first chapters of Genesis don't tell us about it, then it didn't exist.

The common argument against other created people is usually that "by one man sin entered into the world". This assumes that sin is genetically transferred though through some natural or physical means. Eve died as well, a consequence of the sin that entered through Adam, and she was not a post-sin descendant of Adam. I'm not sure the text supports this genetic link as the only possibility. Adam, as the first man, was representing mankind. We are often told that Chist was without a sin nature because he had no earthyly father. But this too assumes a causal relationship between two different things that the text itself does not say. Christ had a maternal grandfather, didn't he? If we go too far in this genetic sin nature path, we end up with a conclusion that cloned females would be sinless because they had no father.
D.

[Guest]

Djeaton,

Thanks for the reply.

Agreed: the assumption of incest is "an argument from silence" - just as is the possibility of "unrelated" life being created outside of the garden - the Bible is silent in both respects.

The "sister" theory opens the door to the idea of incest, while the "unrelated life" theory does not. What I'm trying to do is determine if there are any good responses to the incest charge suggested by my son. I understand, however, that a plausible response does not mean that incest occured, or that a lack of reason suggests that it did not.

dane

[Guest]

I thought I'd share this little story with you.

When I was 23, and worked for a chocolate company in Winnipeg, a fellow-worker told me how he had "made his stand" (others might use different phraseology such as "became a disciple" or "got saved"). He had joined a particular sect. Previous to "making his stand", he had been a memer of a street gang. We'll call him "Bill Angleton".

One day Bill told me about having met some members of his old gang.

"Well, Bill Angleton!" one of them exclaimed. "So you got religion. Well, tell me one thing. Where did Cain get his wife?"

"Now Paidion, how am I supposed to answer a question like that?" Bill remarked.

"How would I know where Cain got his wife," Bill told them. "Maybe she fell out of the clear blue sky for all I know!"

"Anyway," Bill went on. "I'm not concerned about where Cain got his wife. My concern is about where I'm going to get my wife!"

[Guest]

I thought I'd share this little story with you.

When I was 23, and worked for a chocolate company in Winnipeg, a fellow-worker told me how he had "made his stand" (others might use different phraseology such as "became a disciple" or "got saved"). He had joined a particular sect. Previous to "making his stand", he had been a memer of a street gang. We'll call him "Bill Angleton".

One day Bill told me about having met some members of his old gang.

"Well, Bill Angleton!" one of them exclaimed. "So you got religion. Well, tell me one thing. Where did Cain get his wife?"

"Now Paidion, how am I supposed to answer a question like that?" Bill remarked.

"How would I know where Cain got his wife," Bill told them. "Maybe she fell out of the clear blue sky for all I know!"

"Anyway," Bill went on. "I'm not concerned about where Cain got his wife. My concern is about where I'm going to get my wife!"

Good point.

It seems to me that folks who raise up supposedly contradictory statements found in the Bible, they are actually just finding excuses. They know what they should do. They simply don't do it. And it clears their guilty conscience to find such paradoxical declarations in Scripture. It focuses the attention off of their own lives and onto something else.

When corresponding with such people, always remember that minor issues can always be resolved later on. The goal is to reconcile them with their Maker. And in then end, that is only thing that really matters.

[Guest]

It seems to me that folks who raise up supposedly contradictory statements found in the Bible, they are actually just finding excuses. They know what they should do. They simply don't do it.

Amen Loaves. When one discovers that there is a Maker one must come to terms with the idea that the Maker may have some desires on how we are to live and function. That can be a harsh blow to Self. Harder than some are willing to accept.

peace,

dane

[Guest]

I find that astounding that you all did not know this, then I remembered you don't see Dispensationalism. It was not against the law till the law came, what? in Leviticus I think.

[Guest]

obviously, things didnt have to "against the Law" to be wrong prior to the Law. killing siblings, for instance, and bringing sacrifices that were substandard in some way or another. marrying close relatives in those early times was not wrong in God's eyes, apparently.

DJ-- i understand what you are saying about there being more to the creation than what was in Eden, and i think you are correct in regard to plants and animals-- but do you believe there were other "creations" of other people, apart from Adam and Eve, or are you just stating such for the sake of argument? if you really believe this, then i am interested in hearing some more of your reasoning. i've heard various views of Genesis and creation but i do not believe that I have heard that one before. Hugh Ross(reasonstobelieve.org), e.g. believes there were non-human primates that pre-existed or co-existed with Adam(thus explaining the fossils of non-human primates), but that Adam was a special creation. i have not yet listened to Steve's teaching through Genesis- perhaps he talks about neanderthal man, etc, but that's another big question i have-- i.e. where they fit in the biblical framework.