O
Ontheway
Guest
How do you understand the meaning and significance of the mark of Cain. (Genesis 3:15)
Was the mark a sign of God’s favor, or disfavor?
Was the mark a sign of God’s favor, or disfavor?
- Status
T
The_Old_Maid
Guest
I’ve heard three major theories on what the “Mark” of Cain would be if it were something we could see (as opposed to a change in mind, spirit, and soul).
One: God wrote on Cain’s forehead with Abel’s blood. It would never wash off. In this way, people could see that this was the man – but they also would see that God forbade anyone to touch this man.
*Two: *God gave Cain a horn or two. In this way, the animals would see that he was no better than they were. Not as good, in fact, for animals (mostly) do what they must. When the animals realized that Cain was no better than they were, they would lose their fear of Cain and attack him for food, etc. Horns would give Cain the ability to defend himself from the animals.
Three: God gave Cain the first dog. The dog would protect Cain from both beasts and man. Secular science has tried to domesticate wolves to make them into true dogs, but so far all they’ve gotten are wimpy wolves. This theory incorporates the notion that only God could have made the dog without any antecedent.
But why did God spare Cain? There is no small irony in God’s mercy. Cain, who resented God’s intervention toward Abel, now owes his life to God’s intervention.
The main theory in Judaism is that God spared Cain because He knew that Cain would become the ancestor of Noah’s wife. In this way, even Cain became the ancestor of the Messiah (whom we believe is Christ our Lord). Noah and his wife also are ancestors of us all.
I’ve noticed that some Christians treat the First Testament of the Bible in such a way that they don’t have a problem with Christ being descended from some of the worst sinners in the Bible – but they go into weeping hysterics when they realize that they are too!
One: God wrote on Cain’s forehead with Abel’s blood. It would never wash off. In this way, people could see that this was the man – but they also would see that God forbade anyone to touch this man.
*Two: *God gave Cain a horn or two. In this way, the animals would see that he was no better than they were. Not as good, in fact, for animals (mostly) do what they must. When the animals realized that Cain was no better than they were, they would lose their fear of Cain and attack him for food, etc. Horns would give Cain the ability to defend himself from the animals.
Three: God gave Cain the first dog. The dog would protect Cain from both beasts and man. Secular science has tried to domesticate wolves to make them into true dogs, but so far all they’ve gotten are wimpy wolves. This theory incorporates the notion that only God could have made the dog without any antecedent.
But why did God spare Cain? There is no small irony in God’s mercy. Cain, who resented God’s intervention toward Abel, now owes his life to God’s intervention.
The main theory in Judaism is that God spared Cain because He knew that Cain would become the ancestor of Noah’s wife. In this way, even Cain became the ancestor of the Messiah (whom we believe is Christ our Lord). Noah and his wife also are ancestors of us all.
I’ve noticed that some Christians treat the First Testament of the Bible in such a way that they don’t have a problem with Christ being descended from some of the worst sinners in the Bible – but they go into weeping hysterics when they realize that they are too!
M
mikekle
Guest
Anyone know when, where or how Cain eventually died? I thought he was cursed to walk the earth until Jesus returns.
T
The_Old_Maid
Guest
No, that was “the Wandering Jew.” Supposedly that was someone who mocked Jesus during His journey along the Via Dolorosa. The man was punished to wander the earth looking for Messiah. Since he had already seen Messiah [in Greek, *Christos] and did not know it, it effectively meant that he would wander the earth until Christ’s Second Coming.
Judaism records two versions of Cain’s death. Both are related to the purported way that Cain killed Abel.
In one version, Lemech and his son Tubal-Cain went hunting. Lemech’s eyesight was failing, and the boy was inexperienced. He pointed out to his father a set of horns that they mistook for a deer or something like it. Lemech shot Cain, his 8th-grandfather, thinking it was a creature. In his shock he waved his arms, striking and killing Tubal-Cain. Purportedly this is the meaning of Lemech’s verses in Genesis 4, the first man-made poetry recorded in the Bible. In this version, Cain killed Abel with something made of metal. (A part of his farming plow.) Since Cain used metal to kill, he died by metal.
In the other version, Cain killed Abel with a stone. Cain later built a city in the land of Nod, which would seem to go against the original punishment that he would wander the earth. Opinions vary as to whether God relieved Cain’s sentence of “wandering” as long as it remained an exile, or whether Cain disobeyed and built a city. In this version, Cain died when his stone house fell on him.
Extrabiblical sources are fairly consistent that Cain was about 860 years old when he died. The most famous of these is the book of Jubilees.
They also are fairly consistent that he had to die in the same year that Adam died. Some say a few months earlier, some say a few months later. The majority tends toward after Adam died.
Thus they purport that Adam was 70 when Cain was born.
Judaism records two versions of Cain’s death. Both are related to the purported way that Cain killed Abel.
In one version, Lemech and his son Tubal-Cain went hunting. Lemech’s eyesight was failing, and the boy was inexperienced. He pointed out to his father a set of horns that they mistook for a deer or something like it. Lemech shot Cain, his 8th-grandfather, thinking it was a creature. In his shock he waved his arms, striking and killing Tubal-Cain. Purportedly this is the meaning of Lemech’s verses in Genesis 4, the first man-made poetry recorded in the Bible. In this version, Cain killed Abel with something made of metal. (A part of his farming plow.) Since Cain used metal to kill, he died by metal.
In the other version, Cain killed Abel with a stone. Cain later built a city in the land of Nod, which would seem to go against the original punishment that he would wander the earth. Opinions vary as to whether God relieved Cain’s sentence of “wandering” as long as it remained an exile, or whether Cain disobeyed and built a city. In this version, Cain died when his stone house fell on him.
Extrabiblical sources are fairly consistent that Cain was about 860 years old when he died. The most famous of these is the book of Jubilees.
They also are fairly consistent that he had to die in the same year that Adam died. Some say a few months earlier, some say a few months later. The majority tends toward after Adam died.
Thus they purport that Adam was 70 when Cain was born.
T
The_Old_Maid
Guest
Oops. Cain was Lemech’s 4th-grandfather, not his 8th.
Since we’re in that family, there’s a belief in Judaism that Lemech took Adah and Zillah to wife out of the Seth-ite line. (See this compare and contrast exercise.)
Somewhere in the book of Tobit there’s a declaration that Noah married his kinswoman. Zillah’s daughter therefore would qualify as a kinswoman.
I don’t know if Zillah had Seth-ite blood or not, but after I got used to the shock, the notion of Na’amah as Noah’s wife seems to make a cogent case.
Since we’re in that family, there’s a belief in Judaism that Lemech took Adah and Zillah to wife out of the Seth-ite line. (See this compare and contrast exercise.)
Somewhere in the book of Tobit there’s a declaration that Noah married his kinswoman. Zillah’s daughter therefore would qualify as a kinswoman.
I don’t know if Zillah had Seth-ite blood or not, but after I got used to the shock, the notion of Na’amah as Noah’s wife seems to make a cogent case.
T
The_Old_Maid
Guest
Sort-of related: there’s another Cain thread on the other forum. Must be something in the water … 
A
Athanasiy
Guest
I heard the explanation of an evangelist, who is a muslim-hater who claimed that according to this Biblical verse the devil (and not God) hates women in Islam, and here it is mentioned about the women-hating religion of Islam.
This is what many pro-Israelis-minded fundamentalist evangelists say, who are also the followers of 'apocalyptic geopolitics.
As it is known, the fake religious arguments are being used widely today to demonise segments of the population – particularly when it comes to migrants… Muslims.
( and this is by the way the other side of the coin of the theopolitics spread by Isis which is based on the same cult of an apocalypse that needs to be brought about as soon as possible.”)
This is what many pro-Israelis-minded fundamentalist evangelists say, who are also the followers of 'apocalyptic geopolitics.
As it is known, the fake religious arguments are being used widely today to demonise segments of the population – particularly when it comes to migrants… Muslims.
( and this is by the way the other side of the coin of the theopolitics spread by Isis which is based on the same cult of an apocalypse that needs to be brought about as soon as possible.”)
A
Athanasiy
Guest
In addition to everything negative that exists in Islam, the idea of a submissive woman-mother is not a devilish idea.
About slavery of women in Islam can certainly be discussed, many women in Islamic countries today are heroically fulfilling their maternal duty at the level of our grandmothers and great-grandmothers, but to interpret Allah as the Devil is very risky, because in Islam there are both theologically positive and, of course, the theologically negative features.
But I do not see in this verse from the point of view of hermeneutics and exegesis the prophecy of a woman-hated Islam.
About slavery of women in Islam can certainly be discussed, many women in Islamic countries today are heroically fulfilling their maternal duty at the level of our grandmothers and great-grandmothers, but to interpret Allah as the Devil is very risky, because in Islam there are both theologically positive and, of course, the theologically negative features.
But I do not see in this verse from the point of view of hermeneutics and exegesis the prophecy of a woman-hated Islam.
O
Ontheway
Guest
This is very interesting, because my Muslim friend (female) also believes that what is happening in the Islamic countries is a war on women. She is hardly an evangelist, but is rather traditional in her Muslim beliefs.
A
Athanasiy
Guest
The abortive culture can also be called a war against women.
Nowadays, when people become masses of hedonistic clusters of eco-centrism,choose the culture of death and the vulgar content of life, оn the other side of the planet, vice versa, from a civilizational point of view, they lagged behind in time for several centuries, but from the point of view of naturalistic theology- the women there carry the cross of Christ, even without realizing it, and profess submission to the Most High also in Christian sense without even realizing it.
Certainly these women can be saved through Jesus. I do not want to say that Christian missionaries should not go to Muslim countries, but despite “the disfigurement of the political structures there” the women there profess a great deal of humility in front of the Almighty, I mean “in the sense of childbearing and motherhood.”
Not all of their countries have the same situation of course, but yes, - the early marriages when they forcefully marry children , labor exploitation of girls, assaults on a woman, deny of education for girls, mutilations of girls, zombies about inferiority of women, - all these
bitter facts of the truth can probably prove of satanic war against women.
- Status