DougI

I'm a product of a metaphor? Anyway, we did live as the Native Americans did. Your fictional character of Cain upset God because Cain didn't kill in the name of God which, according to the Bible, is the best way to kill people.

In my case - Sugar Cain


Doug I - an interesting proposition - do you think there was ever a pub in Israel called "The Name Of God"? You could literally get away with murder in there.

Boro Nut

Jubilees 03:06
This one will be called my wife because she was taken
from her husband."

Jubilees 04:33
And in the twenty-fifth jubilee Noah took a wife for
himself and her name was 'Emzara, daughter of Rake'el,

Fragments of the book of Jubilees was found
with the Dead Sea Scrolls and these scrolls are said
to have been written about 125 b.c.e.

In order to qualify as a "wife" she must be "taken"
from her husband. Emzara had three sons and if one
studies the chronology of Jubilees he will
discover that Shem was the youngest of the three and
that Emzara already gave birth to Ham and Japheth
before she was taken by Noah.

Jubilees 10:14 And he gave everything which he
wrote to Shem, his oldest son, because he loved him
much more than all his sons.

Shem was Noah's oldest son ... not Emzara's.

1.Actually it doesn't. Cain married one of his sisters. Don't forget that Adam lived for 930 years. A man can have a lot of children within that time. It was perfectly OK to marry within your family. Adam and Eve were created with perfect genes. Abraham's wife was also from his family. It wasn't until Moses that marrying within your family posed a health risk.

I didn't realize this point had already been brought up.

Jubilees 04:01 And in the third week in the second Jubilee, she
bore Cain. And in the fourth she bore Abel. And in
the fifth she bore 'Awan, his daughter.


Jubilees 04:10 And Adam knew Eve, his wife, and she bore him nine
more children.

A footnote by William Whiston, ISBN 0-913573-86-8, p 32, "The number of
Adam's children, as says the old tradition, was thirty-three sons and
and twenty-three daughters."

Jubilees 12:10 And Haran, his brother, took a wife in the third
year of the third week, and she bore a son for him
in the seventh year of that week. And he called him
Lot.

What happens in Jubilees is that Abram destroys Haran's temple and
Haran is killed. Abram then takes Sarai and Lot. The parallel is Cain slew
Abel and in Jubilees Abel is almost thirty years old. Obviously Abel had
a wife and Cain took this wife.

Jubilees was found amongst the Dead Sea Scrolls so the Church has
to admit to its authenticity, otherwise, the Church would claim that it
was written by a spurious author in the 8th century. Likewise, Jesus
was a living and breathing person surrounded by legend. He survived the
crucifixion and the gospels were written while he was still alive. Jesus
refers back to Jubilees and not to Genesis. The book of Jubilees should
be in the Old Testament as more authentic than Genesis.




[This message has been edited by offa (edited December 23, 2000).]

dougI, as a fellow atheist in Kansas, you really embarrass me. Can you contribute anything to a thread that is actually helpful? Also, when did we live as the native american's?

Finally, no one in addressing the metaphor. Cain is, metaphorically speaking, the foundation of our technological society, Able is the metaphor for the societies we replaced. The story can be seen to be god preferring the hunter gatherers to those who developed the plow, and thus division of labor, and technology, and so on. Really, Cain and Able are simply the tree of knowledge story again. Cain embraces the way of life that leads to the technology J curve we are still riding today. While Able is the innocent, the simple man of the earth, with no aspiration anything but his simple place therein. I am done with this, I found it to be fascinating the first time it was exposed to me this way, I guess no one else cares.

I don't mean to brush aside the metaphorical implications of the C & A story when I say that "no one today is descended from Cain (even assuming the tale is historical)." I find the pastoral/agrarian/technological symbolism of this and other stories to be intriguing/baffling.

I'm simply trying to remind folks that the Book Itself refutes the argument that a line of people now living trace their ancestry to Cain. As I understand it, Mormons believe (or until recently believed) that most non-whites carried the hereditary "mark of Cain." Smaller Christian-Identity groups have similar beliefs. Frankly, I'm amazed that they overlook the Flood Bottleneck.

Just because we're products of a scuzzbucket doesn't mean we have to become scuzzbuckets ourselves.

But, my dear HH. If you study what god thought of Cain. Genesis 4:1-17 you will see that god did not prefer the lifestyle that lead to the separation of labor and the division of land(agriculture). He wanted his people to live as shepherds(hunter gatherers) living far more in balance and harmony with nature, than the agriculturist, who stakes out, and protects land. Thus removing resources from the other species of the natural world. The agriculturist even hunts and slaughters other species that are a threat to his production. Current livestock owners are also guilty of this, but their production style is very business like, and doubtfully bears any resemblance to the shepherd work of Able. The growth of agriculture leads to the separation of labor because people are not forced to work only to feed themselves, they can do other work and barter for foodstuff. And this, my havochound, is the beginning of the technology J curve that we are riding at mach 12 right now. So I assure you, according to God in Genesis 4. You are a scuzzbucket, as are all of us. Wanna play PS2?