Hypocritical Leviticus

A parent takes her child to the doctor for a sore throat. The doctor turns the lights on, sets the child on the bed and examines the child's throat.Then the doctor takes little wooden stick and puts it in the child's mouth reaching back to the rear of the tongue. "Say Ahhh." The doctor uses his skill to explore the inside of the child's thoat and arrives at some analysis or treatment.The child comes home. In a few days that child is "playing doctor" with a younger sibling. The child puts a stick in the mouth of the younger sibling. The mother is alarmed - "Don't do that! Don't EVER put anything in your brother's/ sister's mouth like that."What hypocrisy!! How come she let the doctor do it? How come the toddler can't do the same thing and shove a stick in the younger sibling's mouth?Hopefully a useful analogy. God permited the first created humans to marry close of kin. There were no other people to marry to get the human race off to multiplying. He oversaw and supervized this.Much latter He forbade the Jews to do so. Different circumstances. Different situation. What was permissible before was now not permissible.It shouldn't be too hard to comprehend that.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

It is perculiar to me how some people seem prone to make errors in their comprehension of the Scripture.The story of Cain and Abel highlights a particular event of importance (the first murder) that happened to two of the children of Adam and Eve.It does not mean that they are the only two children that they had. If they were the parents of us all, any people in the land of Nod had to have come about from Adam and Eve.You should not read the account and think that this was the only thing that happened. You should not assume that other children were not born and had their own migrations here and there.Cain, a child of Adam and Eve, married in another female child descendent of Adam and Eve. What is the big deal? He begat more sons and daughters. And they in turn were marrying and begetting sons and daughters.Cain's wife in the land of Nod is no cause to scratch our heads in bewilderment.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

I don't see it that way. There is no prohibition stated in Genesis against them marrying close family kin. There is the mentioning of one man having two wives which seems to suggest this was not too good. And there are instances where murder is highlighted as if we are to take note of this negative.The writer could have therefore pointed out the sin of Cain or Seth or the other early humans marrying cousins or sisters and it did not. So it must have been Okay with God at that point.Beside this, these early humans had very healthy lives. A life span of 900 years was normal. The point here is that the defects which incest latter manifested probably were not a problem for this pre-flood group of extremly fit early humans.No doubt, latter generations after the longevity of people began to be shortened, the mental and physical problems associated with close to kin marriage became much more of a cause for God to forbid it.The Bible states that Adam called his wife Eve because she was the mother of all living."And the man called his wife's name Eve, because she was the mother of all living." (Genesis 3:20)So the first woman - Adam's wife, was the first human mother of all human beings. Beside Adam the husband of Eve, there are no human beings who do not trace back to Eve the mother of all living.It might be interesting to try to figure out:1.) How many years it was before Cain killed Abel,2.) If and how many other children she had after the incident.3.) How long Cain was in Nod before he married.4.) Whether he married before he entered Nod or after.5.) How many children not specifically mentioned in the geneology ALSO had children and how many.6.) How many people moved east of Eden to Nod while Cain was there.7.) How old was Cain's wife when he married her compared to his age.We are just not given too many details. We know that after the murder of Abel, Cain migrated to Nod. At sometime he married a wife.At any rate -"Cain went forth from the presence of the Jehovah and dwelt in the lnd of Nod, east of Eden. And Cain knew his wife, and she conceived and gave birth to Enoch; and he built a city and called the name of the city after the name of his son Enoch." (Gen. 4:17)I think the writer is saying that this was the genesis or the origin of the culture (a city) raised by the man who departed from the presence of God. This is the origin of the godless world culture - the city of Enoch. Cain's wife had to have had Eve as an ancestor because Eve "was the mother of all living" (Genesis 3:20). You've failed to demonstrate that I think. I don't mind being corrected on my facts. To read the Bible well you have to master all of the facts of what you read.What you apparently have overlooked is the fact that Eve was the mother of all living. So Cain and his wife had to have been at last somewhat closely related.And Adam is called "the first man, Adam" (1 Cor. 15:45). So Adam, the first man, and Eve, the mother of all living, were the first human parents of all humans. That would include those specifically mentioned and those not mentioned.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : Typos and typos!Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

As I read Genesis I see no place where I sense that the clock stops and we suddenly ascend into an existential level of abstraction. The flow of history is quite seamless.My trust in a book like Genesis came late. What happened was the I had had an experience with Jesus Christ. And as I read the New Testament I gradually noticed that Jesus took Genesis seriously. Though I was strongly influenced by most of the typical modernist thought of my generation, I decided that if Jesus took Genesis as history then it must be Okay for me to do so.What I am honestly telling you is that I developed a belief that the integrity of Jesus is beyond question. So if Jesus took the Hebrew Scripture seriously, I decided that I have to also. That is because the veracity and intigrity of the wisdom of Jesus is beyond reproach.I started my reading of the Bible with the New Testament first. Then I went back and read the whole Bible from the beginning - a number of times. Yes. I believe so. Doesn't it stand to reason though? If you have a man created by God and God says that His creation is "very good" if something did go wrong it might take a long time for that defect to cause this man to extinguish.It may also be significant that the condition of the earth changed drastically after the flood in Noah's time. At least the life spans drop off dramatically to more of what we're accustomed to today. As I said above, I first was persuaded that the wisdom of Jesus Christ was beyond disputing. Based upon this, what I noticed that He took seriously, I believed that I also should take seriously.I think there is a strong case to be made that Jesus of Nazareth regarded Genesis as including also historical facts.Recognizing that there is divine and even mystical wisdom embodied in many stories does not for me to form a dichotomy. That dichotomy being since there is spiritual wisdom in the stories therefore they most not be taken as history.You may notice that millennia latter the Gospel writer Luke traces the geneology of Jesus right back to Adam. There is no point where the clock stops, the chain is broken, and we ascend into an abstract and mythical prose. The chain is seamless and historical. One of the books of Chronicles also treats the ancestors of Adam in the same way. I think by now you shuold get the idea how I think about Genesis.Incidently, the longest living person recorded is Methusaleh. It is interesting that his name means something life "When he dies it will come." The it to come refers to the flood of judgement which wiped out the wicked society.God prolonged His mercy a long time because when Methusaleh was to die He apparently promised to judge the people. So in His mercy this man lived the longest time 969 years. Then God could forebear no longer. And when he died the flood came.Another interesting thing is the Enoch walked with God after he bore "When he dies it will come" - Methuselah.I think that Enoch walked with God because he saw the divine judgment was coming. Little indications like this encourage me that I am on the right track to take Genesis seriously. I think there is no reason to grill me on this point. I gave you my opinion. What God permitted previously he now forbade.Before the flood He also intended that man only eat vegatables. After the flood He allowed man to eat meat. So we see God making adjustments as He deemed right by His authority.Before the flood man was not to kill man. After the flood God made an adjustment and capital punishment was instituted. So the fact the God adjusted some of His intructions to mankind is evident.In the matter of marriage, why then is it difficult to understand that He could have made an adjustment as He did in other things? You mean perhaps that they are skeptical about some theories. For instance I might be skeptical about ape-men. I am.The actual age of man on the earth, I am not that dogmatic about. I'm not sure we can deduce the age of the existence of humans by counting geneologies. Sometimes there were skips of people, to highlight people signifcant to God's plan.I know that there are theories of ape-men. I hope the scientists continue to study. I like science just as much as the next guy.However, I believe that science is man's invention while the Bible is God's revelation. If there is a real discrepency between the two, I feel that the error must be on the part of man's invention - science. That is because God knows all the facts.Today they have some theories. Let's see what they sat tomorrow. These theories of science often change, as well they should.I believe that there was a first MAN and a first WOMAN. I don't think there is any fact that you know which contradicts this. There may be some theories which contradict it - blurring the line between "pri-mates" and humans.And imaginative artists keep these ideas alive by drawing what some scientists want to imagine. And also special effects people in the motion picture industry keep such popularized thoughts alive with programs like NOVA.So I think you are talking about the contrary ideas of some theories. What you could be looking at is the remains of degenerated humans rather than pre-humans.You could be looking over humans infected with bone deseases as some sort of degeneration set it after the creation of Adam. People migrated far and wide and died. Perhaps rather than ape-men which Darwin predicts, you are seeing humans under some form of de-evolution of sorts rather than evolution. Most of the people I talk to who argue for the hopelessness of ever knowing what the Bible says, have no idea about the meaning of life. Not one who argues that the message the Bible is lost in translation can tell me anything about why they are here or what is the meaning of thier human life.They usually retort something like "Why does there have to be a meaning anyway?"For me, I am reluctant to throw up my hands in dispair saying that it is no use to try to know what the Bible says. The simplier matters are so deeply meaningful that they give me a sense of knowing why I am here.We all eventually have to put our trust in someone or someones. You may choose to put your ultimate trust in Charles Darwin or RIchard Dawkins. These fellows are very interesting and have some interesting things to say. But for the real important matters of life I have decided to trust Christ.So His attitude towards the rest of the Bible has become a governing vision to me. This sounds a little like a refutation in search of a debate.However, I think unbridled greedy lust is the sin which God is restricting in the matter of incest after a certain point in early human history.In securing a partner in marriage and the intimacy of romantic love, people are to have a measure of self control. Unrestricted and unbridled lust was to be controlled. You cannot just off and marry anyone or anything.I don't mean to imply that mental and physical defects were the only reasons for the restriction.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

I don't think any more needs to be said about other people on the earth besides those mentioned - Adam, Eve, Cain, and Abel. If you can't comprehend that you just can't.As far as murder being acceptable with God, I assume that you read the story. But I have my doubts.Did Cain think that his punishment was bearable or unbearable?By being sent forth from the presence of God he simultaneously became a stranger to the face of the earth. Read it. It is true that God had not yet allowed human government to excerccise capital punishmnet.Man was still under the rule of human conscience. This was like a God ordained libertarian anarchy. I mean anarchy in the positive sense. Human government had not yet been ordained by God and each man was to be ruled by his conscience.So the fact that God did not allow Cain to be killed in revenge was something like the modern murderer being given a life sentence rather than the death penalty. At any rate the distress of Cain indicates that he had no sense of getting scott free for anything. Look at the recorded ages from before the flood and compare them to people after the flood. It is a deduction. Many have thought that some paradise like conditions existed until the time of the flood.I can't think of a single passage that tells this. It is a deduction. And I could be wrong. But the length of human ages dropped off around the time of the flood. One thing is sure to me. The writer of the five books of Moses could be detail oriented when he needed to, as the minute discriptions of the measurements of the tabernacle prove.So I assume if the numbers didn't make sense he would know it, however it tallies up. The history or age of the planet earth does not depend on the tally of years in the genealogies. The earth was found waste and void in verses 2 of chapter 1. We are told that God created the heavens and the earth in the beginning.It is not possible for us to know when the beginning was. I think it is logical to read that in sex days God performed some restoration work and further creation work to prepare the world for human beings. These would be the tradition six creation days plus the seventh day.However, a gap of unspecified time - an interval exists between the in the beginning and the commencing of restoring the earth from a condition of being without form and void.We are given some hints of some events in the Pre-Adamic time on the planet, but not much. It is not of much interest to God now that man is created on the planet. His main interest is human beings.My chief reasons for believing in an ancient pre-Adamic earth are theological and not based on dating methods of geology, primarily. My primary reasons for believing in an ancient earth are to account for a pre-Adamic rebellion of Satan that took place sometime before the earth became waste and void in Genesis 1:22. I come to the Bible to touch God Himself firstly.I think coming to the Bible and failing to contact God Himself is an abuse of the Bible. I don't come to the Bible merely to tickly my curiosity about this or that. I try to make touching God my focus.It is a book of life. If you calculate all these numbers and come away with lots of data and lots of information but you had no encounter with God, that is a tragedy.I teach people how to believe the Bible. Many on this forum concentrate on teaching people how to disbelieve the Bible. I like to teach people how to believe it.Nothing you've said is overwhelmingly demonstrative of the innacuracy of the record of Genesis. Though we are not told all the details we are told what is most vital to the record.The people mentioned are mentioned because they are central to what the prophetic Spirit working in the writer wants us to know. If hundreds or thousands of other people were not mentioned by name in the geneology, it is because they are not central to what we are suppose to know.Cain's wife came out of number of other people not specifically singled out by name for inclusion the account. That's all.Did you ever here the saying of Christ about straining out a gnat and swollowing a camel? I think possibly you're straining out a gnat and swollowing a camel. It doesn't read like Cain founded a metaphorical city."And Cain went forth from the presence of Jehovah and dwelt in the land of Nod, east of Eden" "East" of a purely abstract place is not likely. Dimensions in the abstract realm are hard to imagine."And Cain knew his wife" - that doesn't sound abstract." ... and she conceived and gave birth to Enoch" - neither does this sound existencial or abstract." ... and he built a city and called the name of the city after the name of his son Enoch" - this sounds practical to me not metaphorical.Now it has significance, even spiritually. Cain is developing a culture to essentially replace God the presence of whom he has lost.
The verses following highlight how the human culture is developing.One thing I immediately notice is Lamech. He abuses the word of God and twists it to protect himself from vengence after his own crime of murder:" ... I have slain a man for wounding me, even a young man for striking me. If Cain is avenged sevenfold, Then Lamech seventy-sevenfold." (Gen. 4:23,24)You have the first instance of man twisting God's words to get some kind of social advantage. OF course the multiple wives of Lamech highlight the unbridled and greedy lust of man developing more and more.Then we have the origins of nomadic agriculture, and musical intertainment, and probably weopontry or metal industry - in Jabal (v.20), Jubal (v.21), and Tubalcain (v.22).Man apart from the presence of God is developing a godless culture. The invention of his amusement, protection, and provision all seem like noble things to us. But the contrast is being established between the line of those who live by faith in God and those who plunge ahead to replace the loss of God with their culture.I have to continue latter.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

How old was Cain when he knew his wife?How old was his wife?The timeline does not make it impossible that Cain married some female, knew her, and had a child. Maybe it was his sister. Maybe it was not. You're free to develop your opinion. The interpetation that it is impossible that Cain married another descendent that had Adam and Eve as ancestors is to me not reliable.I don't know if it was a sister or not. But I do know that both Cain and his wife had Adam and Eve as their ancestors one way or another.I don't think that Genesis is tracing the creation of the first man and his wife AND implying that besides them there were other first progenitors at the time.I don't know what your problem is. Lots of skeptics want me to believe that all living organisms have one organism as their ultimate parent via Natural Selection. So why so much problem with Adam and Eve being the first parents of all humans? The fact recorded is that Eve was the mother of all living. You can say "Well, I don't believe that." You can say "No, Cain's wife could not have had any relationship to Eve."The fact recorded is that Eve was the mother of all living. Upon that recorded fact then I form my interpretation that Cain married some relative of his.Let me ask you this. Is it possible that Cain's wife could have been many years younger than he?Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Testing

Teen4christ,In those 1600 or so posts I have been paying more attention to other things to which I apparently gave a higher priority.Sorry. Research into those other matters took up my time I guess. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.