• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Did Cain find a wife in Nod?

Calminian

Senior Veteran
Feb 14, 2005
6,789
1,044
Low Dessert
✟49,695.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
...I have studied ancient history for over 40 years now. ...

hence our dilemma. You've been studying ancient history 40 years, I've been studying the Bible 20 years. While they often complement one another, they also at certain points are in disagreement. I side with the Bible at those points.

I absolutely love ancient history. That's one reason I love the Bible so much, especially Genesis. It is a collection, compiled by Moses, of the most ancient toledoth in the world.

Therefore I would use the Bible to understand better all other theories of ancient history. In so doing, those theories myths and legends will actually come to life, and become better understood through a biblical framework.

I realize there are scientific dating methods that challenge the Biblical text, especially its timelines. Obviously I believe those methods are flawed and therefore not giving us an accurate picture of history. But when all things are viewed through the lenses of scripture, they seem to make perfect sense.

That's not to say I can technically refute these systems you're putting your faith in. There are others that are much better at that aspect of the debate. But what I've found is that the Bible is an impeccable witness and therefore the better I understand it, the better my knowledge of ancient history will be.

P.S. That's not to say I can't learn a great deal from someone like you. In fact I hope you're open to me picking your brain. I'll just aways factor the Bible into every bit of data I come across.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

yeshuasavedme

Senior Veteran
May 31, 2004
12,811
779
✟105,205.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You've gone to the dangerous extent of believing it is inerrant.
Many times you have assumed a superior position over the knowledge written in the history book called "Book of the Upright" or "Upright Record", and then set yourself up as my judge in condeming my own understanding gained from reading the Upright Record, and its contents as authentic which corroborate the Torah and Tenach and NT accounts and give much understanding of things left unsaid in them because they were already written in the "Upright Record";
which record gives a serious student of the Bible much understanding by its shedding light on obscure passages of the Bible that are wrongly translated or left in the dark by translators who -as you said and as I have always said- are not themselves inspired; and many times, they are in ignorance, which reading such a history book as the "Upright Record" would enlighten them about, and which would bring much less confusion to the translations.


For instance: Amraphael in Genesis 14 is none other than Nimrod, and his name Amraphael is what the people coined from the Hebrew "Am Rapha El", "for in him, the people fell at the tower" -of Bab-el event.
Strong's concordance leaves us in the dark, saying they do not know the origin of the Word, when in fact, it is composed of three Hebrew words: "people/them", "rapha/to cast down/to fall" and "el- mighty one".

Book of Jasher 11:6
And Nimrod dwelt in Babel, and he there renewed his reign over the rest of his subjects, and he reigned securely, and the subjects and princes of Nimrod called his name Amraphel, saying that at the tower his princes and men fell through his means.

The book of the Upright makes this clear, and proves Abraham contemporary with Nimrod, for Abraham was born when Terah was 70 years old, and Nimrod was at that time only 40.

In Jasher 7:42 we read: And he placed Terah the son of Nahor the prince of his host, and he dignified him and elevated him above all his princes.
For that reason, Terah named Abram "exalted father" -denoting his own position:
Jasher 7: 50, 52
And Terah the son of Nahor, prince of Nimrod's host, was in those days very great in the sight of the king and his subjects, and the king and princes loved him, and they elevated him very high. ...
Terah was seventy years old when he begat him, and Terah called the name of his son that was born to him Abram, because the king had raised him in those days, and dignified him above all his princes that were with him.


Names mean things, but in the Strong's concordance, because Strong was without the history as written in the "Upright Record", and did not understand the meaning of Am-raph-ael, he also did not understand the meaning of the name "Miriam", which is contracted from bitter מרר marar and am/people: Strong claimed in his ignorance of the upright record that it was from "rebellion".

Jasher 67:3 And the woman conceived and bare a daughter, and she called her name מרים /Miriam, because in those days the Egyptians had embittered the lives of the children of Israel.



 
Upvote 0

Calminian

Senior Veteran
Feb 14, 2005
6,789
1,044
Low Dessert
✟49,695.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Many times you have assumed a superior position over the knowledge written in the history book called "Book of the Upright" or "Upright Record", and then set yourself up as my judge in condeming my own understanding gained from reading the Upright Record, and its contents as authentic which corroborate the Torah and Tenach and NT accounts and give much understanding of things left unsaid in them because they were already written in the "Upright Record";...

That's because I put the Bible over all other history books. I've said over and over I find Jasher and Enoch interesting reads. I've also admitted they may be based on authentic historical documents. That doesn't mean they're perfect!

But you have elevated them to being equal with scripture. That's why you believe in a floating Garden of Eden in the sky. I find that problematic as these other books sometimes contradict scripture.

For instance Jaser makes the mistake that Abram was born when Terrah was 70 years old. Scripture clearly indicates this not to be the case, and that Abram was born with Terrah was 130. This is corroborated in Genesis and in Book of Acts by Stephen. That tells me that Jaser is not inspired and is indeed capable of mistakes even if it is the authentic book of the upright.

Therefore, I judge Jasher by the Bible. Yes, I feel Genesis is superior to Jasher and Enoch. Looking at ancient historical documents to corroborate scripture is fine. Elevating them to equality with scripture is dangerous.
 
Upvote 0

yeshuasavedme

Senior Veteran
May 31, 2004
12,811
779
✟105,205.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
That's because I put the Bible over all other history books. I've said over and over I find Jasher and Enoch interesting reads. I've also admitted they may be based on authentic historical documents. That doesn't mean they're perfect!

But you have elevated them to being equal with scripture. That's why you believe in a floating Garden of Eden in the sky. I find that problematic as they sometimes contradict scripture.

For instance Jaser makes the mistake that Abram was born when Terrah was 70 years old. Scripture clearly indicates this not to be the case, and that Abram was born with Terrah was 130. This is corroborated in Genesis and in Book of Acts by Stephen. That tells me that Jaser is not inspired and capable of error even if it is the authentic book of the upright.

Therefore, I judge Jasher by the Bible. Yes, I feel Genesis is superior to Jasher and Enoch. Looking at ancient historical documents to corroborate scripture is fine. Elevating them to equality with scripture is dangerous.
You miss what I have said repeatedly, for some reason...
The Upright Record is "true history".
Enoch is "inspired".
Histories are not "inspired" for they are not "Thus saith YHWH". -Ask the Jews, they will tell you, history and wisdom are not "inspired".
Stephen's address is historically recorded by Luke and is truly what Stephen said, and Stephen was the first martyr, but Stephen did not corroborate the Torah! Stephen was wrongly informed about history as it is even recorded in Torah, and you can prove it for yourself by going to the Torah in your own Bible and checking the dates for yourself that prove that Israel was not in Egypt for 400 years!!!

So which is "inspired" and truth: Torah or Stephen's history which does not agree with Torah?


 
Upvote 0

Calminian

Senior Veteran
Feb 14, 2005
6,789
1,044
Low Dessert
✟49,695.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
You miss what I have said repeatedly, for some reason...
The Upright Record is "true history".
Enoch is "inspired".
Histories are not "inspired" for they are not "Thus saith YHWH". -Ask the Jews, they will tell you, history and wisdom are not "inspired".
Stephen's address is historically recorded by Luke and is truly what Stephen said, and Stephen was the first martyr, but Stephen did not corroborate the Torah! Stephen was wrongly informed about history as it is even recorded in Torah, and you can prove it for yourself by going to the Torah in your own Bible and checking the dates for yourself that prove that Israel was not in Egypt for 400 years!!!

So which is "inspired" and truth: Torah or Stephen's history which does not agree with Torah?



YSM we've been over this many times. No, neither Jasher nor Enoch are perfect historical accounts, or perfect theological accounts. You're simply believing a lie, and it is evidenced in many of the the silly things you believe, like a floating Garden of Eden.

What you show by your obsession of these others books, is how little you actually trust the Bible. They have replaced the Bible for you.

Now I can't say this does anything to your standing in Christ. Thankfully, perfect theology is not a requirement for heaven. But you're missing a tremendous blessing by not trusting scripture wholeheartedly. That's all I can really say at this time on this matter. I've entered these debates with you and showed you clearly why scripture is correct. Yet you never acknowledge it and fall deeper and deeper into strange beliefs. Sorry, I can't intelligently engage with someone like that. I'm just going to let you rant. I don't think anyone takes it serious anyway.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

yeshuasavedme

Senior Veteran
May 31, 2004
12,811
779
✟105,205.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
You miss what I have said repeatedly, for some reason...
The Upright Record is "true history".
Enoch is "inspired".
Histories are not "inspired" for they are not "Thus saith YHWH". -Ask the Jews, they will tell you, history and wisdom are not "inspired".
Stephen's address is historically recorded by Luke and is truly what Stephen said, and Stephen was the first martyr, but Stephen did not corroborate the Torah! Stephen was wrongly informed about history as it is even recorded in Torah, and you can prove it for yourself by going to the Torah in your own Bible and checking the dates for yourself that prove that Israel was not in Egypt for 400 years!!!

So which is "inspired" and truth: Torah or Stephen's history which does not agree with Torah?


Moses is the son of the daughter of Levi.
Levi had that daughter "at the gates of Egypt", as the Jewish histories other than the "Upright Record" state.

Jochebed, Moses mother and Levi's daughter was married to her nephew, and that counted Moses as one generation from Levi, in God's counting of Moses being the fourth generation from out of Abraham coming out of Egypt.
1 Isaac
2 Jacob
3 Levi
4 Moses.

Why does God count it that way? -Don't know, but the daughter married to the grandson of Levi caused the counting to go direct from Levi to Moses -and other genealogies do the same when there are such marriages..

Moses was 82 when Israel departed Egypt.
Being as how he was Jochebed's son, we would have Jochebed being a mother linking 400 hundred years minus the 82, to the Exodus from the going in....

So how old was Jochebed when she bore Moses?????
Her birth to Moses birth is 328 years, and you would believe that over the Torah account, itself, which adds up when checked to only 210 years in Egypt! Take away Moses' age at the Exodus and you have only 128 years from before his birth to the entrance of Egypt.
But wait! now go to Joseph's age at his death, and his age when Israel entered Egypt, and take away those years to see how long it was "bitter" for Israel in Egypt. You come out to a very much smaller length of time for bitterness in Egypt for the Israelites.
You cannot possibly make it four hundred years, so Stephan was correct in his salvation and about Jesus, but his history does not corroborate Torah.
Jasher and Torah agree, and corroborate one anopther.
 
Upvote 0

yeshuasavedme

Senior Veteran
May 31, 2004
12,811
779
✟105,205.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Moses is the son of the daughter of Levi.
Levi had that daughter "at the gates of Egypt", as the Jewish histories other than the "Upright Record" state.

Jochebed, Moses mother and Levi's daughter was married to her nephew, and that counted Moses as one generation from Levi, in God's counting of Moses being the fourth generation from out of Abraham coming out of Egypt.
1 Isaac
2 Jacob
3 Levi
4 Moses.

Why does God count it that way? -Don't know, but the daughter married to the grandson of Levi caused the counting to go direct from Levi to Moses -and other genealogies do the same when there are such marriages..

Moses was 82 when Israel departed Egypt.
Being as how he was Jochebed's son, we would have Jochebed being a mother linking 400 hundred years minus the 82, to the Exodus from the going in....

So how old was Jochebed when she bore Moses?????
Her birth to Moses birth is 328 years, and you would believe that over the Torah account, itself, which adds up when checked to only 210 years in Egypt! Take away Moses' age at the Exodus and you have only 128 years from before his birth to the entrance of Egypt.
But wait! now go to Joseph's age at his death, and his age when Israel entered Egypt, and take away those years to see how long it was "bitter" for Israel in Egypt. You come out to a very much smaller length of time for bitterness in Egypt for the Israelites.
You cannot possibly make it four hundred years, so Stephan was correct in his salvation and about Jesus, but his history does not corroborate Torah.
Jasher and Torah agree, and corroborate one anopther.
Calminian, which is correct: Stephen's history or Torah/Jasher's records on number of years Israel was in Egypt?
 
Upvote 0

Aman777

Christian
Jan 26, 2013
10,351
584
✟30,043.00
Faith
Baptist
Joshua0:>>There was plenty of women to choose from. Archaeology shows us that there were something like 56 settlements in the Tigris Euphrates River Valley 6,000 years ago at the time of Adam and Eve. They call this Mesopotamia.

Dear Josh, Are you saying that Noah left this area, floated around the world for 150 days, and then landed in the SAME area? Also, Where did the settlements come from 6k years ago, IF Adam was the first human?

Calminian:>>Exactly. Good point A-777.

Dear Cal, Have you noticed that Josh runs away from questions which he cannot seem to answer? He just posted that he had done the math and found that the world was 6k years old, and yet here he says there were 56 settlements in Mesopotamia 6k years ago.

I noticed that he disappeared for more than a week without answering these questions. I just replied to his latest post in another thread and suspect he will disappear again. How long have you exchanged posts with him? Just curious.

In Love,
Aman
 
Upvote 0

yeshuasavedme

Senior Veteran
May 31, 2004
12,811
779
✟105,205.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
...Terrah was 70 years old. Scripture clearly indicates this not to be the case, and that Abram was born with Terrah was 130. This is corroborated in Genesis and in Book of Acts by Stephen. That tells me that Jaser is not inspired and is indeed capable of mistakes even if it is the authentic book of the upright.

Therefore, I judge Jasher by the Bible. Yes, I feel Genesis is superior to Jasher and Enoch. Looking at ancient historical documents to corroborate scripture is fine. Elevating them to equality with scripture is dangerous.
So Calminian, is Stephen's speech inspired/truth and correct or is Torah record correct?
You must choose consistency in your rejecting Jasher as history and then claiming Stephen was "inspired history" when Stephen was not inspired in his history -nor is any history "inspired".

Stephen is proved in error on the time by a check of Genesis itself, which is "Inspired" -And Genesis does not -I repeat: does not make the case that Abraham was born to Terah at age 130!!! Genesis says Abram was born to Terah when Terah was 70 -which is what /the record of the Uprght/Jasher states!!

Does the book of Acts then become not inspired because Stephen was in error about the length of time Israel was in Egypt when checked out with the Torah record?
 
Upvote 0

Calminian

Senior Veteran
Feb 14, 2005
6,789
1,044
Low Dessert
✟49,695.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
So Calminian, is Stephen's speech inspired/truth and correct or is Torah record correct?
You must choose consistency in your rejecting Jasher as history and then claiming Stephen was "inspired history" when Stephen was not inspired in his history -nor is any history "inspired".

Stephen is proved in error on the time by a check of Genesis itself, which is "Inspired" -And Genesis does not -I repeat: does not make the case that Abraham was born to Terah at age 130!!! Genesis says Abram was born to Terah when Terah was 70 -which is what /the record of the Uprght/Jasher states!!

Does the book of Acts then become not inspired because Stephen was in error about the length of time Israel was in Egypt when checked out with the Torah record?

I've already had this debate with you won handily. Unless you believe Abram, Nahor, and Haran were triplets, your view does not work.

I explained it in light of Naoh's genealogy where he also mentions the sons born after his 500th year. That's all Terrah was doing.

Stephen was right in corroborating the book of Genesis on this matter. You and Jasher are wrong. I went into a deep explanation last time, and you refused to follow any of it. I don't engage with people like that.

But your rejection of scripture here does show the price of following after other books and putting them on par with scripture.
 
Upvote 0

Calminian

Senior Veteran
Feb 14, 2005
6,789
1,044
Low Dessert
✟49,695.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
...Dear Cal, Have you noticed that Josh runs away from questions which he cannot seem to answer? He just posted that he had done the math and found that the world was 6k years old, and yet here he says there were 56 settlements in Mesopotamia 6k years ago.

I noticed that he disappeared for more than a week without answering these questions. I just replied to his latest post in another thread and suspect he will disappear again. How long have you exchanged posts with him? Just curious.

In Love,
Aman
[/INDENT]

I don't know. I did engage with him on another thread and am hoping he sticks around. But I understand people get busy and distracted. I wouldn't read too much into it.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

yeshuasavedme

Senior Veteran
May 31, 2004
12,811
779
✟105,205.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I've already had this debate with you won handily. Unless you believe Abram, Nahor, and Haran were triplets, your view does not work.

I explained it in light of Naoh's genealogy where he also mentions the sons born after his 500th year. That's all Terrah was doing.

Stephen was right in corroborating the book of Genesis on this matter. You and Jasher are wrong. I went into a deep explanation last time, and you refused to follow any of it. I don't engage with people like that.

According to the Genesis account, Stephen is wrong on the history and the ages and the years -he read another corrupted history from the oral passed down verbally then written, and those records erred, having been corruptions when the Torah and true histories were not available to them in the dispersion.

It does not matter that Stephen was in error except that you need to not base your error on his errors.

Look at this:
Num 26:59 And the name of Amram's wife [was] Jochebed, the daughter of Levi, whom [her mother] bare to Levi in Egypt: and she bare unto Amram Aaron and Moses, and Miriam their sister.

So Levi is in Egypt, and Jochebed, Moses' mother, is born. -and Miriam is listed after Moses, though she is born before Moses, being his caretaker watching over him in the river: the same as Nahor and Haran are listed after Abram, in Genesis, though they were born before Terah was 70, and Abram born when he was 70, and also like Shem was born after Japheth, his elder brother, as Genesis says in one place, but listed before him, in a Genesis record.


Now if Stephen was correct in the history, and Jochebed was born in Egypt [see above Scripture] then you are making a claim that Jochebed was 328 years old when she bore Moses, for Moses was 82 when they came out of Egypt.

If you are, then you must say Genesis is not correct and is in error, because the Genesis account, when all the years are laboriously added up, come to 210 years in Egypt, and that makes Moses' mother, Jochebed the daughter of Levi, 128 yrs old when she bore Moses: and that is what the Upright Record says, for she was 127 when Amram took her back because Miriam prophesied that they would give birth to the deliverer of Israel...Amram had sent her away because the babies were drowned by the Egyptians.
 
Upvote 0

Calminian

Senior Veteran
Feb 14, 2005
6,789
1,044
Low Dessert
✟49,695.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
According to the Genesis account, Stephen....

This is all off-topic.

You're wrong. We've already had this debate. It's all been explained to you. I know you want to keep debating this. Unfortunately I'm bored with it at this point.

Jasher is not perfect history. It's errant. Nuff said.

If you keep crashing it, and trying to change the subject I'll have to ask the mods to intervene. If you really feel strong about this start a new thread.
 
Upvote 0

Fascinated With God

Traditional Apostolic Methodist
Aug 30, 2012
1,432
75
58
NY
✟31,259.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
I realize there are scientific dating methods that challenge the Biblical text, especially its timelines.
That is only true for events before Abraham. After Genesis 11 there is no disagreement.

And if you are willing to push the envelope a few thousand years there is nothing after Genesis 5 that gives a different timeline.
 
Upvote 0

yeshuasavedme

Senior Veteran
May 31, 2004
12,811
779
✟105,205.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
This was prompted by this response in a different thread.



But is this really true that Cain traveled a great distance and found his soul mate??

Just a couple things I noticed from the text of Genesis where this account is taken. Please note the following exhibits.

A) The passage never says Cain found a wife in Nod.
B) The passage never says Cain actually knew his wife in Nod.

Read for yourself.

Gen. 4:16 Then Cain went out from the presence of the LORD and dwelt in the land of Nod on the east of Eden. 17 And Cain knew his wife, and she conceived and bore Enoch. And he built a city, and called the name of the city after the name of his son—Enoch.​
(NKJV)

You'll notice there's nothing there about Cain finding a wife in Nod. In fact, there's nothing about him actually having relations with her in Nod. It merely says he knew his wife, and while context may suggest this took place in Nod, it's not definite. Take a look at how the NIV separates the paragraphs.

16 So Cain went out from the LORD’S presence and lived in the land of Nod, east of Eden.

Gen. 4:17 Cain lay with his wife, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Enoch. Cain was then building a city, and he named it after his son Enoch.​
(NIV)

Now in addition to that, exhibit C) Seth is said to be Abel's replacement
Gen. 4:25 And Adam knew his wife again, and she bore a son and named him Seth, “For God has appointed another seed for me instead of Abel, whom Cain killed.”
and exhibit D) he was born when Adam was 130 years old.

Gen. 5:3 And Adam lived one hundred and thirty years, and begot a son in his own likeness, after his image, and named him Seth.​

That would seem to indicate that Cain and Abel must have been quite old at the time of Abel's death, assuming they were born early in Adam's life. If that's true, both men may have been well over a century old at the time of Abel's killing.

Thus, it would follow Cain was already likely Married with children as was Abel. For are we really to assume that both men lived the equivalent of 2 modern lifespans and didn't take wives?

Now the genealogy this is taken from records that Adam and Eve had other children, both sons and daughters. Jewish tradition says they had 56 children. Maybe that's true and maybe it isn't, but for certain God commanded them to multiply. I would say 3 children in 130 years is quite unlikely.

Now all of this suggest to me that Cain was already married with children at the time he killed Abel, and that when he was banished he took his wife with him. I would also surmise that at that time, thousands of people were already on the earth from all the children Adam and Eve had. In fact, there were likely multiple generations from each of Adam's many sons. This would explain Cain's fear of retribution.

Now this is speculation, but it's based on the text. But then I came across what Josephus had to say on the matter. He was a jewish historian with much better historical sources than we have today. He was not inspired, but his historical accounts have proved very accurate and helpful.

According to his sources, after Cain and slew Abel, the following took place. (this blew me away)
God therefore did not inflict the punishment [of death] upon him, on account of his offering sacrifice, and thereby making supplication to him not to be extreme in his wrath to him; but he made him accursed, and threatened his posterity in the seventh generation. He also cast him, together with his wife, out of that land. And when he was afraid, that in wandering about he should fall among wild beasts, and by that means perish, God bid him not to entertain such a melancholy suspicion, and to go over all the earth without fear of what mischief he might suffer from wild beasts; and setting a mark upon him that he might be known, he commanded him to depart.

And when Cain had travelled over many countries, he, with his wife, built a city, named Nod, which is a place so called, and there he settled his abode; where also he had children. However, he did not accept of his punishment, in order to amendment, but to increase his wickedness; for he only aimed to procure everything that was for his own bodily pleasure, though it obliged him to be injurious to his neighbors. —Antiq. 1:58-60
It appears that the ancients came to the same conclusions I did. Cain already had a wife! Josephus continued.

He first of all set boundaries about lands; he built a city, and fortified it with walls, and he compelled his family to come together to it; and called that city Enoch, after the name of his eldest son Enoch.—Antiq. 1:62​

The ancients also believed that Cain already had a family, and that he later compelled them to join him in the city he built. Thus, they believed, and I suspect, that Enoch his first born was not procreated in Nod, but was compelled to come later to live in the city.

Now I'm not saying this is inspired history, but it does seem to be very reliable history and very compatible with the Genesis account, fitting nicely with many implications Genesis makes. For the Genesis account strongly implies Cain was somewhere just short of 129 years old at the time he killed Abel, given Seth's date of birth.

I found this all to be a blessing. This issue is probably one of the biggest stumbling blocks for skeptics and christians alike. A little careful reading, though, and everything seems to fall right into place.

Your using of Josephus as if it is true history so as to prove your own imaginations is quite telling, is it not?
Josephus wrote from his own imagination and from oral history, written after they lost the Manuscripts in the dispersion, which came to be only after God hid their prophets and covered their seers at the dispersion, and they went many years without a Word from God.

Josephus tried to be a good historian and we appreciate his writings, but he was limited, and he was exceedingly opinionated, and his imagination does not agree with the Word of God in this instance, for "nod" is not a land at all, and never was a land. nod is not a proper noun and means "wandering". "Cain went wandering in the earth, east of Eden".
 
Upvote 0

Fascinated With God

Traditional Apostolic Methodist
Aug 30, 2012
1,432
75
58
NY
✟31,259.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
Josephus tried to be a good historian and we appreciate his writings, but he was limited, and he was exceedingly opinionated, and his imagination does not agree with the Word of God in this instance, for "nod" is not a land at all, and never was a land. nod is not a proper noun and means "wandering". "Cain went wandering in the earth, east of Eden".
Interesting! נוֹד also appears in Psalms 56:8

New American Standard Bible
You have taken account of my wanderings; Put my tears in Your bottle. Are they not in Your book?

King James Bible
Thou tellest my wanderings: put thou my tears into thy bottle: are they not in thy book?

Holman Christian Standard Bible
You Yourself have recorded my wanderings. Put my tears in Your bottle. Are they not in Your records?

International Standard Version
You have kept count of my wanderings. Put my tears in your bottle— have not you recorded them in your book?

GOD'S WORD® Translation
(You have kept a record of my wanderings. Put my tears in your bottle. They are already in your book.)

Jubilee Bible 2000
Thou tellest my wanderings; put my tears into thy bottle; are they not in thy book?

King James 2000 Bible
You number my wanderings: put you my tears into your bottle: are they not in your book?

American King James Version
You tell my wanderings: put you my tears into your bottle: are they not in your book?

American Standard Version
Thou numberest my wanderings: Put thou my tears into thy bottle; Are they not in thy book?

Darby Bible Translation
Thou countest my wanderings; put my tears into thy bottle: are they not in thy book?

English Revised Version
Thou tellest my wanderings: put thou my tears into thy bottle; are they not in thy book?

Webster's Bible Translation
Thou numberest my wanderings: put thou my tears into thy bottle: are they not in thy book?

World English Bible
You number my wanderings. You put my tears into your bottle. Aren't they in your book?

Young's Literal Translation
My wandering Thou hast counted, Thou -- place Thou my tear in Thy bottle, Are they not in Thy book?
 
Upvote 0

yeshuasavedme

Senior Veteran
May 31, 2004
12,811
779
✟105,205.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Interesting! נוֹד also appears in Psalms 56:8

New American Standard Bible
You have taken account of my wanderings; Put my tears in Your bottle. Are they not in Your book?

King James Bible
Thou tellest my wanderings: put thou my tears into thy bottle: are they not in thy book?

Holman Christian Standard Bible
You Yourself have recorded my wanderings. Put my tears in Your bottle. Are they not in Your records?

International Standard Version
You have kept count of my wanderings. Put my tears in your bottle— have not you recorded them in your book?

GOD'S WORD® Translation
(You have kept a record of my wanderings. Put my tears in your bottle. They are already in your book.)

Jubilee Bible 2000
Thou tellest my wanderings; put my tears into thy bottle; are they not in thy book?

King James 2000 Bible
You number my wanderings: put you my tears into your bottle: are they not in your book?

American King James Version
You tell my wanderings: put you my tears into your bottle: are they not in your book?

American Standard Version
Thou numberest my wanderings: Put thou my tears into thy bottle; Are they not in thy book?

Darby Bible Translation
Thou countest my wanderings; put my tears into thy bottle: are they not in thy book?

English Revised Version
Thou tellest my wanderings: put thou my tears into thy bottle; are they not in thy book?

Webster's Bible Translation
Thou numberest my wanderings: put thou my tears into thy bottle: are they not in thy book?

World English Bible
You number my wanderings. You put my tears into your bottle. Aren't they in your book?

Young's Literal Translation
My wandering Thou hast counted, Thou -- place Thou my tear in Thy bottle, Are they not in Thy book?
Yes, those are "נוֹד", as in Genesis 4 "Cain went out from the presence of YHWH and "remained in the land, wandering"
 
Upvote 0

George95

CF Tech Master
Christian Forums Staff
Administrator
Community Manager
Site Supporter
Oct 31, 2012
19,007
2,031
30
✟1,563,295.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single

im2url.jpg

MOD HAT ON


Respect and become familiar with each forum's Statement of Purpose. Start threads that are relevant to that forum's stated purpose; submit replies that are relevant to the topic of discussion. Off Topic posts will be moved or removed.

Alright folks, let's stay on topic please and keep the thread going.



MOD HAT OFF
 
Upvote 0