Topical Studies
What the Bible says about
Abel's Offering Pointed to Christ's Redemption
(From Forerunner Commentary)
|
Genesis 3:13-15
Abel brought an acceptable offering to God, while Cain—who must have heard the same instructions—did not. One possible explanation for Cain's inappropriate offering can be inferred from these verses. We recognize verse 15 as a prophecy regarding the Messiah to come, whom Satan would bruise yet ultimately suffer crushing defeat. But did Cain understand this? Could he have thought the "Seed"—the offspring—of the woman referred to him? After all, he was the seed of Eve. Along these same lines, when Seth was born, Eve gave him that name because "God has appointed another seed for me instead of Abel, whom Cain killed" (Genesis 4:25; emphasis ours). Her focus was still on her seed, and undoubtedly, the prophecy of the Seed who would "bruise the head" of Satan was still on her mind after her first two sons were precluded from fulfilling it. Is it possible that Cain saw himself as the great protagonist, the conqueror of Satan? Did Cain have a "Messiah complex," inserting himself into this prophecy? Did he assume that this prophecy must come to pass in his day, and thus, he must be the object of it? This is only a theory, but if it is true, it answers a great deal. If Cain believed that he was the promised Seed, it may explain the offering he gave. It was of the "fruit of the ground," meaning some sort of grain, pointing to his making a meal offering. The meal offering symbolizes a man's wholehearted commitment to his fellow man and is associated with the last six of the Ten Commandments. It is appallingly ironic, then, that following his offering, Cain coveted Abel's acceptance, killed his fellow man, dishonored his parents, and then lied to God by rhetorically asking, "Am I my brother's keeper?" (Genesis 4:9). He may have brought an offering that symbolized devotion to his fellow man, but his heart was far from being devoted to much of anything except himself. Additionally, in God's instructions, the meal offering could only be offered after the whole burnt offering was given, symbolizing a person's wholehearted devotion to God (parallel to the first four commandments). The lesson behind these two offerings is that a man cannot be truly devoted to his brother without first being fully devoted to God. To offer the meal offering without the burnt offering is saying, in effect, that one could have a good relationship with one's neighbor without the proper worship of God. The offerings teach that this is impossible, and the story of Cain demonstrates the result of trying. Moreover, before a person could offer either the burnt or the meal offering, he first had to offer a sin offering to acknowledge his sins and to make propitiation (in type). In the symbolism, just as trying to be devoted to one's neighbor without properly worshipping God first is futile, so is trying to be devoted to either God or man without first acknowledging sin and seeking atonement and forgiveness. Yet it appears that this is exactly what Cain was signifying with his offering. God's intent behind blood sacrifices was to remind people of sin and point to the need for a Savior. Abel fulfilled this by offering "of the firstborn of his flock." By not offering a blood sacrifice, Cain was essentially saying that he did not need to be reminded of sin or to consider a Savior. Did he act this way because he believed that he was the Savior? The Savior would not need to atone for his own sin. If he believed he was the Messiah, it would also explain his extreme reaction when God corrected him. If Cain had been poor in spirit, meek, or pure in heart, he would have taken the correction, repented, changed, and moved on. However, his angry reaction does not indicate a willingness to learn but only a desire to be "right." God's rebuke, then, would have come as quite a shock—after all, why should the promised Seed be rebuked? His reaction may indicate one whose dream had just been shattered, who has suddenly come face to face with the sinful reality about himself. Even then, it was a reality he was unwilling to accept, seen in the fact that he destroyed the other human witness and then lied to the Judge. These are the actions of a self-centered man who felt deeply threatened. Who he thought he was—his position, his image, his role—was threatened, causing him to respond so defensively.
David C. Grabbe
Cain's Assumption (Part Two)
|
|
Genesis 4:1-8
What caused Cain to be brutally angry and to look so sad and despondent? Was this merely a temper tantrum over his offering not being accepted? Was it jealousy because his younger brother found greater favor and acceptance in God's eyes? Why would an incident like this hold such tremendous gravity in Cain's mind? Why was the rejection of his offering so distressing to him—distressing enough that he was willing to commit murder—and then lie to the all-knowing God? Why did this event turn his world upside-down and cause him to lash out so violently? Interestingly, where Genesis 4:3 reads, ". . . in the process of time it came to pass," the most literal translation is, "it came to pass at the end of days," meaning "at an appointed time." It is possible, then, that this may have been a Sabbath or holy day offering. The account of Abel's faith in Hebrews 11:4 adds to the story: By faith Abel offered to God a more excellent [acceptable] sacrifice than Cain, through which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts; and through it he being dead still speaks. Romans 10:17 instructs that "faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." If Abel offered something by faith, it means he followed the words or instructions that came from God. The fact that Abel's sacrifice was "acceptable" while Cain's was not suggests a standard by which these sacrifices were judged. Thus, Hebrews 11:4 means that Abel was instructed on what sort of offering was appropriate, and by following those instructions by faith, his offering was accepted, and he was declared righteous. The fact that God rebuked Cain means that he, too, knew what was required but for some reason chose to ignore it. A couple of possibilities exist regarding what instructions Cain and Abel had been given to define what was acceptable and required. First, God may have instructed Adam, Eve, Cain, and Abel about the same sacrificial system He added to the Old Covenant in Moses' day. The Bible records that both Noah and Abraham made burnt offerings (Genesis 8:20; 22:2, 13), a specific class of offering that represents a man's wholehearted devotion to God. In addition, Jacob made a drink offering on the pillar of stone that he raised (Genesis 35:14). From these examples, some sort of understood sacrificial system undoubtedly existed long before the specifics were recorded in Exodus—Deuteronomy. A second possibility is that God did not instruct Adam and his family in exactly the same way as He did the Israelites but gave them enough to recognize the need for an animal sacrifice, whether in worshipping God or in symbolizing the future sacrifice of Christ to remit sin. From the examples prior to the Old Covenant, it is evident that they had some understanding of sacrifices, when they were to be made and what they symbolized. It is unlikely that men would have conceived the concept of offering animals or grain on their own, and even if they had, it is even more unlikely that God would have accepted any addition to the worship He specified. Such instruction must have come from God if He would accept it. We may not know exactly why Abel made the offering he did or precisely what Cain knew to do but ignored. Yet, we can generally understand what was happening by remembering why God instituted sacrifices in Moses' time: They were added to the Old Covenant to remind the people of their sins—of falling short of God's glory (Galatians 3:19; Jeremiah 7:22-24). Whatever the exact infraction, something about Cain's sacrifice fell short of bringing to mind his sin and his need for a Savior. Something in his sacrifice failed to point to the Son of God's work of redemption.
David C. Grabbe
Cain's Assumption (Part One)
|
|
Jude 1:11
"They have gone in the way of Cain" could be translated as "they have traveled down Cain's path." Cain holds the distinction of being the world's first murderer, but his killing of his brother came quite a long way down the path. To understand "the way of Cain," we have to go back to the head of the trail: And in the process of time it came to pass that Cain brought an offering of the fruit of the ground to the LORD. Abel also brought of the firstborn of his flock and of their fat. And the LORD respected Abel and his offering, but He did not respect Cain and his offering. And Cain was very angry, and his countenance fell. So the LORD said to Cain, "Why are you angry? And why has your countenance fallen? If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin lies at the door. And its desire is for you, but you should rule over it." Now Cain talked with Abel his brother; and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother and killed him. (Genesis 4:3-8) A couple of other scriptures touch on this incident. Hebrews 11:4 teaches us, "By faith Abel offered to God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, through which he obtained witness that he was righteous." In I John 3:12, the aged apostle states that Cain murdered his brother "[b]ecause his works were evil and his brother's righteous." "Evil" may seem like a strong word to describe an offering made to God—his only recorded "work" before the murder—but that is how John classifies it! Several Greek words can be translated as "evil," but the one John uses focuses on the effect or the influence of an act more than the act itself. In other words, it was good that Cain brought an offering and that he made it "in the process of time" or "at the appointed [or designated] time." Even so, it was evil in its effects because of what was missing. The fact that Abel made an offering "by faith" means that God had already taught them about sacrifices, and Abel obeyed. As Paul writes in Romans 10:17, "[F]aith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." The sacrifices, then, were not something Cain and Abel dreamed up. They were being held to a definite standard, which is why God was pleased with one and not the other. The brothers were not in doubt about what God required of them. On the contrary, one was faithful in his response, and the other believed he could worship God on his own terms. To understand what happened, we must refer to the instructions for the sacrifices found in Leviticus. In particular, a grain offering could not be offered without a whole burnt offering, and neither could be offered until a sin offering had first been made. God is specific in His instructions because of what the various offerings represent. Notice, though, that Cain's offering was of "the fruit of the ground," which indicates a grain offering without the offerings that were supposed to precede it. Abel, on the other hand, brought an offering from the firstborn of his flock, a description that reveals that Abel's offering was either a whole burnt offering or a sin offering. Whatever the case, Cain, at the very least, ignored God's instructions regarding an appropriate sacrifice, and thus, his offering did not please God. But when we consider what the various offerings represent, his carelessness becomes quite grievous. In short, the sin offering represents the sinless life of the Savior, given to pay a life-debt so that man might continue living. The whole burnt offering represents a man's wholehearted devotion to God. The grain offering represents a man's devotion to his fellow man. Putting this together, Cain's offering suggests that he was devoted to his fellow man, but his offering leaves out any thought of devotion to God, let alone atonement and reconciliation with Him. Cain, we might say, was the original humanist—he was focused on the human aspect over the divine, whereas the true path consists of love toward God and fellow man (Matthew 22:37-40). In a twist of terrible irony, when God rejected Cain's offering, he lashed out and killed the fellow man to which he had symbolically claimed devotion! On top of that, he was cursed to become a fugitive and a vagabond, always living apart from his fellow man (Genesis 4:12). In summary, the "way of Cain" includes religion and worship on one's own terms, with more faith in one's own righteousness than in God's. It also contains a humanistic bent that believes that we can have good relationships with others even without first being reconciled with God and wholly devoted to Him. It can involve works that may appear good on the surface but end up being evil in their effect or influence. The way of Cain is about shortcuts for the sake of expediency rather than submitting to the pattern that God has set forth.
David C. Grabbe
A Warning from Jude (Part One)
|
|
 |
The Berean: Daily Verse and Comment
Sign up for the Berean: Daily Verse and Comment, and have Biblical truth delivered to your inbox. This daily newsletter provides a starting point for personal study, and gives valuable insight into the verses that make up the Word of God. See what over 150,000 subscribers are already receiving each day.
Email Address:
|
We respect your privacy. Your email address will not be sold, distributed, rented, or in any way given out to a third party. We have nothing to sell. You may easily unsubscribe at any time. |
|
|
