Prior Book | Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | Ephesians 5:25 ¶ Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her, |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | Ephesians 5:25 ¶ Husbands, love your wives [seek the highest good for her and surround her with a caring, unselfish love], just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her, |
Subject: Did Cain marry one of his sisters? |
Bible Note: Except that the wording of this verse in the Hebrew included the word "hayah", which refers to a future event, not a past or current event. That would cause the text to read that Eve "_would become_ the mother of all the living", which happened in Genesis 7:21-23 when all mankind perished except Noah, his wife, their 3 sons, and their three wives. Noah was descended from Adam and Eve. God does not lie. Please continue taking God’s Word over mine. But make sure it is actually God’s Word and not simply Traditional Interpretation to which you are clinging. "That another "people" existed before Adam is not supported biblically. The fact that there were none IS." I have yet to see you or anyone else here provide anything that suggests this statement is true, though eklektos has come close. I have just shown how your misinterpretation of Genesis 3:20 is based on the English usage of the word "was" rather than the Hebrew word "hayah" that can be transliterated into the English "was". So please try again? I really would love to find something in the Word that disproves my theory, as that would make things much easier for me. So far, however, I have yet to find anything, nor has anyone else with whom I have spoken or written to about this. You suggest that I "take the logical explanation and fantasize it into something that isn't real", yet I have been able to back up every single point I've made with Biblical evidence and support. I have cross-referenced both Old Testament and New Testament. I have gone to the original Hebrew, demonstrating how the original words were used. So I ask you the same as I asked Mark...how is this fantasizing? How is this not real? How is this not supported Biblically? How is this compromising the Word of God? Rather than simply stating that I am doing these things, please show me how your assertions are true! Show me what in the Word am I compromising? Show how what I’m saying and presenting is rationalizing? Don't just say the words! What I’m doing is looking at all implications of this. I’m looking at how this piece fits in, not just with what is written in the Bible, but also the sciences, history, and sociology. It is supported by physical evidence, and has the virtue of not being antagonistic with scientists. It is the only theory I have ever heard that meshes with everything, and in fact provides Christians with ammunition against Evolution beyond "God said so," which is not convincing when dealing with someone who doesn't believe in God as most Evolutionists don't. Your “Cain’s sister” theory falls short on all counts except that it is not contradicted directly (though certainly not supported) in the Word. Which brings us to one thing I have only briefly touched on so far – the scientific implications of this. Do you know that every physical science can be reconciled with the Bible except two? Those two are anthropology and paleontology. Do you know why? Because once upon a time, someone in the church said that the Hebrew word “adam” used in Genesis 1:26-27 meaning man in a plural sense really meant the Adam in Genesis 2, thus suggesting that Adam in Genesis 2 was the first man. When this was accepted, it limited the age of the world to approximately 12,000 years. This had, quite literally, no impact until the theory of evolution was fully developed and took precedence as the standard view of the origins of man. Unfortunately, anthropology and paleontology have too much physical evidence that supports the earth being older than 12,000 years old, and thus are contradictory to the misinterpretation of Genesis 1:26-27. This led to an impossible battle, with the church saying one thing, and science contradicting. Because science is observable, it becomes easier to understand, and easier to accept. And now we have problems in our schools because of it. The truth of Creationism is becoming illegal to teach in favor of the falsehood brought about (Evolution) by observable evidence. The physical sciences are, simply put, the study of the observation of God’s creation. If so, there *must* be a reconciliation between the two. Science cannot observe something that isn’t part of God’s creation. The *interpretation* of the observation certainly can be mistaken (note: evolution – BIG mistake!), but the actual observations *must* be part of what God created! He created everything! Because of the far-reaching impacts to the scientific community, and the waterfall effect into our schools, I submit that this really is far more important than I initially said. As a Christian, it becomes a moot point. However, to those who are not saved and put more trust in the observable, this becomes a much greater issue. |