Hey, if you want to stick the absolute factual basis of the Bible, then first reconcile these things:
1. Who was Cain’s wife? There is NO RECORD that she was born. You are adding your own thoughts to the Bible!
2. Which canon is correct? The Protestant, the Catholic, or the Orthodox?
3. Which translation (if any) is correct?
Once you get those down, then you can talk about the inerrancy of the Bible.
Personally, for me, I believe focusing on the “factual nature” of the Bible is like studying a single fallen leaf, and missing the entire forest. The message of the Bible is not who begat who, or that there were exactly 5000 fed (why not 4999, or 5001?) but that Jesus performed a miracle and fed an impossibly large number.
Focus on the message, not the words...
I had to break this into two posts so as to not lose my formatting. Post 1 follows
To answer your questions:
1. Who was Cain’s wife? There is NO RECORD that she was born. You are adding your own thoughts to the Bible!
I cannot understand your logic here. Are you assuming that because I take the Bible literally, according to the common uses of language, and in the same way that biblical characters, including Jesus and the apostles treated the Scriptures, that I have no basis for believing there was a wife for Cain to “take?”
There is NO RECORD you were born in the Bible, yet I do not understand that to mean you weren’t born. There is NO RECORD that Adah and Zillah were born in the Bible, but I believe they were.
Genesis 4:19 And Lamech took unto him two wives: the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah.
Now if the Bible said that Eve did NOT bear a daughter for Cain (or anyone else) to marry, you would have a point.
Because the Bible doesn’t record something doesn’t mean it DIDN’T happen.
2. Which canon is correct? The Protestant, the Catholic, or the Orthodox?
You can study the church councils and decide whether or not you accept the Apocrypha or not. These are the seven historical books largely accepted by the Catholic and Orthodox Church (as Scripture) and rejected (as Scripture) by the Protestant churches. So the Old Testament contains 39 books in the view of most Protestant churches, and 46 books in the view of most Orthodox and Catholic churches. The New Testament contains the same 27 books for all three communions.
Post 2
3. Which translation (if any) is correct?
This has already been discussed, but to reiterate:
Any legitimate translation based on the texts (copies of the original autographs) we have today are valid as the Word of God. This does not mean there are not bogus translations, there are. It simply means there is no appreciable difference between “a sower went forth to sow” and “a farmer went forth to scatter his seeds.”
The number of Jesus’ specially chosen followers is as well communicated if I say 12 apostles or doce apóstoles.
We can talk about inerrancy if you like.
Your logical fallacy, however, is apparent in your analogy. You speak of a forest, and not missing it by over-studying a leaf. However, my friend, it you do not have leaves, that are real, and do exist, and can be studied, or branches, or trees, then how can you have a forest?