The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum Cain vs. Abel

What do you think the reason was for God rejecting Cain's offering?

At first looking at this passage it would appear that the difference is between the sacrifices. It could be that Cain brought just some of his produce not the "firstling" of it. This could mean that it wasn't of the best quality. It could also mean that at this time God had instituted animal sacrifice as the only approved sacrifice. This of course was changed during the covenant at Sinai. However, I think that Cain's ultimate undoing was related to his lack of belief. In Hebrews Abel is referred as righteous (Heb. 11:4) so he offered his sacrifice believing what God had promised. Cain didn't.

The difference was between the sacrifices but also in the heart.Cain brought a fruit of the ground offering that was in gratitude to God for secular blessings.Abel brought a gratitude offering(minchah) and in addition a (mibbechoroth)first-born offering that acknowledged him as a sinner and professing his faith in the promised Messiah.Hebrews 11:4.

Explain to me from the text how Cain's sacrifice was for secular blessings.

This came from a Discipleship Training lesson recently where it was pointed out that Cain's offering is explained in Leviticus 2:1 as being a gratitude offering by which he testifies his belief in God as Lord of the universe and dispenser of secular blessings.

Sojourner,

Please clarify for me

1) whether you believe that Cain had anything that God could call gratitude in his heart at the time of his offering, and

2) how "his belief in God as Lord of the universe and dispenser of secular blessings" differs from the belief shared by the demons, and

3) in light of the above, how his offering could be reckoned a "gratitude offering" at all?

1-Most resources agree that both Cain and Able knew that there was a specific time set aside to worship with sacrifices being a part of said worship.I don't know everything Cain was thinking but since the sacrifice he chose to bring was lacking he must not have been all that grateful.
2-It differs not at all.Millions of people believe that God is real and if pressed will admit that He provides for their needs but they have no real relationship with Him.
3-I didn't give the offering it's name I only offered it as a point of conversation.
Do not people tithe every Sunday with a grudging spirit?I'd venture to say that if asked why they gave they might answer that it was in gratitude .

Here's my understanding of the passage and answer to the question. Note: although this will appear to be a reply to sojourner, it is not actually a reply to him... it just happens to be a convenient place to post my reply.

1. In Gen 3:7, we read that both Adam and Eve sewed leaves together; agrarian in nature. But God killed an animal(s) and clothed them with its skin, Gen 3:21. (cf. Lev 17:11; Zech 9:11; Mk 14:24; Heb 9:14-22; 10:4-14)
2. Several years had to have passed since the Fall and thus not only was the "day" (aka: Sabbath) acknowledged as a day of worship but also the regulation of that worship, i.e., an acceptable sacrifice unto the Lord. Thus all who were alive at that time knew that the offering had to be an animal; shedding of blood. Notice God's rebuke in v. 7 "If thou doest well [right], shall it not be lifted up? and if thou doest not well, sin coucheth at the door:...". Cain did not obey the command of God in regard to what offering was to be brought.
3. This can be seen from Heb 11:4 "By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain," which I believe "faith" is to be understood not only in regard to Abel's heart (gratitude and love) but also in obedience to God. True faith's motivation is love and its expression is in the keeping of God's commandments. (cf. Lk 6:46; Jh 14:15; 15:10-14; Gal 5:6; Eph 2:8-10; 1Jh 2:3-5)
4. The subsequent sacrificial system given to Moses on Sinai was essentially that which was practiced for centuries prior to its institution, albeit in greater detail and with a fuller revelation of its meaning. Both that which was practiced during the antediluvian and postdiluvian periods were typical, i.e., shadows of the final sacrifice of Christ which actually accomplished what they pointed to but were incapable of doing; satisfying the demands of the law and securing eternal salvation for all who believe. (cf Heb 5:9; 8:3ff; 9:6ff; et al)
5. Conclusion: Cain violated the "regulative principle of worship" as was revealed to him; one was to bring in faith (love & obedience) an animal sacrifice whereby blood had been shed. But Cain brought that which he had determined was acceptable. It is also possible (WARNING: speculation follows) that Cain was unwilling to go to Abel, his younger brother, for the purpose of securing an animal sacrifice since Abel was "...a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground." (Gen 4:2) One thing is certain, Cain hated his brother and thus he killed him.

That's my

Understanding that I have nothing against what you are saying here but seek further instruction to wit your comment quoted here.

So are you saying that the detailed teaching given in Leviticus and Deuteronomy regarding the sacrifices and what to bring were already known by Adam and his kin? Albeit in a simpler form. That they knew that besides bringing sin sacrifices they also must bring sacrifices for first fruits etc . . .

See this is what puzzled me regarding Sojourner's response that Cain somehow knew that he was to bring a "gratitude offering" to God. I would have thought at that time before the detailed instructions at Sinai that the regulative principle of sacrifice was for sin alone during the worship service. And that it was only at Sinai did God educate the people even more as to what complete worship was to be.

So if you could please elucidate I sit waiting to learn.

I probably should have worded that differently... obviously due to your question. No, I do not believe that those DETAILS were known by the Adamic family, i.e., the Levitical worship, etc. My point was that the sin offering was to be a slain animal, perhaps a specific type of animal and all parties were privy to that requirement. And this type of offering was essentially the same which God commanded of Israel on Sinai. Cain chose to ignore the requirement and thus his offering was rejected... for the two reasons; lack of faith=wrong motive and disobedience. I would not accept that Cain offered a "gratitude offering" because I don't see where the language, context nor other biblical evidence substantiates it.

Hope that clears things up at least in regard to my poorly written statement.

In His grace,

Yep that does the trick.

And in an effort to kill two birds with one stone, metaphorically speaking, Sojourner what Pilgrim clarified is what I see wrong with your reasoning concerning Cain's sacrifice. He wasn't giving a "gratitude sacrifice" for secular blessings he was in open rebellion.

Boanerges
Perhaps I missed it, but I didn't see any place where Sogourner indicated that Cain gave a "gratitude sacrifice" for secular blessings".

Tom

Yep you missed it now here is the actual quote:

Now granted he said "offering" now if your going have a shibboleth over word choice then fine Sojourner never said sacrifice. I said sacrifice, because I maintain what Abel did was a sacrifice of his firstling sheep/goat flock even though it is called an offering.

Boanerges,
No quibbling over words here, thank you for challenging my post.It's the thing I've found most rewarding since finding this site.When I'm right about something I can be rewarded in knowing people smarter than myself agree and when I'm wrong I don't get stoned, just firmly reprimanded, which I can handle.
I did my research and found that there are at least two commentaries that agree with the "gratitude sacrifice".If only I had been smart enough to find out who they were before opening my finger I would have held back.It was just a classic case of repeating something that you heard from someone that you deemed reliable.

sojourner,

The error made by those you read, I believe, is in a failure to recognize "progressive revelation". The great truths which we often take for granted from reading the New Testament were only known, if at all, in shadows and types, e.g., Abraham didn't know who the Messiah was to be nor much of the details of His atoning sacrifice. Yet, he had saving faith; that same faith which we have. In fact, if one puts all their trust in Christ Jesus, Paul says they are "Abraham's seed and heirs according to the promise" [given to Abraham] (Gal 3:29).

But, a gratitude offering wasn't instituted until Sinai as it was part of the ceremonial law given to Israel. But the sin offering began in the garden immediately after the Fall and continued until Christ because it was redemptive in nature. We must always be careful not to impose latter revelation upon those who lived before it was given outside of redemptive history. It's an easy mistake to make.

In His grace,