Here are the gymnastics you have to engage in order to reach that conclusion that Cain married his sister. Now, I am not saying this could *not* be the case, but simply to point out that such a conclusion is NOT based on a plain and simple reading of the text (which is so popular among literalists). If you want to believe Cain married his sister and that all the population around at the time was that one family, you have to do a LOT of "adding in" to the text.
1. the evidence from the text is very strong that Seth was the third born child. Look at 4:25. Just after it tells of Cains banishment and fate (then takes the time to set out Cains line while on that subject), it goes on to say that Adam lay with his wife again, and they had Seth. Eve named him Seth ("granted") because God had granted him to Adam and Eve "in place of Abel". In 5:3, it says that when Adam as 130 years old, he had Seth. In 5:4, it says that "After Seth was born", Adam had other sons and daughters. So, it is absolute that Seth was born *after* Abels death and the evidence is very strong from the text itself that the order of birth was Cain, Abel and then Seth, and *then* the "other sons and daughters".
2. Cain was worried about being killed by others immediately after he kills Abel. In 4:14, Cain is distressed at his banishment, saying that if wanders the earth, whoever finds him will kill him. The only plain reading of this is that, at the time of the murder, there *were* other humans around besides Adam and Eve. If Seth was not born yet, and all the other children were born *after* Seth, according to the plainest reading of 5:4, then the others that Cain was worried about could *not* have been Adam and Eves children.
3. These others were not in the immediate area, as in a family grouping, but were distant enough that Cain would be fearful of them when he was wandering in his banishment from the land, off in Nod, east of Eden.
4. There were enough other people during Cains lifetime to fill his created "city", which he named Enoch after his first born son. Even though this was more likely a small settlement of some kind, it still implies something more than a small family grouping.
So, in order to get a "Cain married his sister" scenario, you have to find come to some very "non-plain" conclusions.
1. You would have to say that, despite the plain reading of 5:4, there were actually children born to Adam and Eve before Seth.
2. You would have to say that the murder of Abel by Cain occurred *after* all these other children were born and spread out far enough for Cain to be afraid of them killing him while he was banished from the land, out of the Lords Presence. In short, people living also in these more distant areas. This multiplying and spreading out, moreover, would have to take place before Seth was born, which we know was when Adam was 130.
3. If you believed that other *sons* were born before Seth, this would make for a VERY strained reading of Eves statement that Seth was a replacement for Abel. If you believed that only daughters were born, it would be difficult to understand how the family could have multiplied with Adam being the only non-banished male left to impregnate all these girls (which would again raise the incest issue).
So, you can see that whatever scenario you create results in VERY strained readings of the Scripture, much less following the plain reading. If you are willing to read *this* text in anything other than the plainest, simplest meaning, and willing to add in so many details to support that theory, but refuse to consider such a method elsewhere, then who is "picking and choosing"? I see all of this as not "picking and choosing" but consideration and analysis.
1. the evidence from the text is very strong that Seth was the third born child. Look at 4:25. Just after it tells of Cains banishment and fate (then takes the time to set out Cains line while on that subject), it goes on to say that Adam lay with his wife again, and they had Seth. Eve named him Seth ("granted") because God had granted him to Adam and Eve "in place of Abel". In 5:3, it says that when Adam as 130 years old, he had Seth. In 5:4, it says that "After Seth was born", Adam had other sons and daughters. So, it is absolute that Seth was born *after* Abels death and the evidence is very strong from the text itself that the order of birth was Cain, Abel and then Seth, and *then* the "other sons and daughters".
2. Cain was worried about being killed by others immediately after he kills Abel. In 4:14, Cain is distressed at his banishment, saying that if wanders the earth, whoever finds him will kill him. The only plain reading of this is that, at the time of the murder, there *were* other humans around besides Adam and Eve. If Seth was not born yet, and all the other children were born *after* Seth, according to the plainest reading of 5:4, then the others that Cain was worried about could *not* have been Adam and Eves children.
3. These others were not in the immediate area, as in a family grouping, but were distant enough that Cain would be fearful of them when he was wandering in his banishment from the land, off in Nod, east of Eden.
4. There were enough other people during Cains lifetime to fill his created "city", which he named Enoch after his first born son. Even though this was more likely a small settlement of some kind, it still implies something more than a small family grouping.
So, in order to get a "Cain married his sister" scenario, you have to find come to some very "non-plain" conclusions.
1. You would have to say that, despite the plain reading of 5:4, there were actually children born to Adam and Eve before Seth.
2. You would have to say that the murder of Abel by Cain occurred *after* all these other children were born and spread out far enough for Cain to be afraid of them killing him while he was banished from the land, out of the Lords Presence. In short, people living also in these more distant areas. This multiplying and spreading out, moreover, would have to take place before Seth was born, which we know was when Adam was 130.
3. If you believed that other *sons* were born before Seth, this would make for a VERY strained reading of Eves statement that Seth was a replacement for Abel. If you believed that only daughters were born, it would be difficult to understand how the family could have multiplied with Adam being the only non-banished male left to impregnate all these girls (which would again raise the incest issue).
So, you can see that whatever scenario you create results in VERY strained readings of the Scripture, much less following the plain reading. If you are willing to read *this* text in anything other than the plainest, simplest meaning, and willing to add in so many details to support that theory, but refuse to consider such a method elsewhere, then who is "picking and choosing"? I see all of this as not "picking and choosing" but consideration and analysis.
