Cain

Why Cain Was Rejected?

To Worship

†. Gen 4:3-4 . . In process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto Yhvh; and Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock; and of the fat thereof.

It's common for inexperienced Bible students to trip up on the nature of the offerings; in other words, they say Cain was rejected because his offering was bloodless and they attempt to justify their theory by citing the below:

†. Heb 11:4 . . It was by faith that Abel brought a more acceptable offering to God than Cain did. God accepted Abel's offering to show that he was a righteous man.

However, the focus in that passage is not really upon Abel's offering; but rather, upon Abel's character. He was a righteous man; hence God accepted his offering. Stay with me as I develop this concept because it is very crucial to successful worship.

The Hebrew word for the brothers' offerings is minchah (min-khaw') which means: to apportion, i.e. bestow; a donation; euphemistically a tribute; specifically a sacrificial offering (usually bloodless and voluntary)

Ancient Jews understood the brothers' minchah offerings to be a kind of "first fruits".

T. And it was at the end of days, on the fourteenth of Nisan, that Kain brought of the produce of the earth, the seed of cotton (or line), an oblation of first things before the Lord; and Habel brought of the firstlings of the flock. (Targum Jonathan)

A "first things" offering is a great honor to receive; giving credit where credit is due; recognizing one's God-given prosperity. It's sort of like dedicating the first paycheck of a new prayed-for job as an expression of gratitude and thankfulness for God's kindly patronage. According to the second chapter of Leviticus, both livestock and farm produce are acceptable for minchah offerings; which makes sense in societies where agriculture and animal husbandry are the primary professions.

One of the aspects of a minchah offering is that of tribute; which is a perfect description of the gifts that the magi presented to the young Jesus; whom they were led to believe was the ultimate king in the line of Davidic royalty.

Though the Bible doesn't say so, it's my guess that the magi presented Herod with tributes too. Tributes aren't eo ipso taxes. I give my wife flowers and a card on birthdays and anniversaries as tribute to her value to me as a personal companion and mother to my son; and my actions are totally voluntary.

You know, the providence of God doesn't get much press these days; especially in industrialized nations like the USA with all of its government provided free-bees, entitlements, bail-outs, and stimulus packages. God has a denigrating label for providence-challenged people.

†. Isa 1:2-3 . . Even the donkey and the ox know their owner and appreciate his care, but not my people Israel. No matter what I do for them, they still do not understand.

(chuckle) Donkeys and oxen aren't all that famous for their IQ's but in the Lord's opinion; the intelligence of those beasts excels the intelligence of providence-challenged people; and in reality, they're even dumber than Cain.

The Nature Of The Offerings

The Hebrew word for "firstling" has nothing to do with the quality of an animal, and everything to do with its age. The word is bekowrah (bek-o-raw') which is a word denoting primogeniture rather than quality; in other words, a bekowrah is a ewe's (or nanny's) firstborn lamb (or kid); regardless of gender. In point of fact, bekowrah is a feminine noun.

The Hebrew word for "the fat" is cheleb (kheh'-leb) meaning to be fat and/or fat as blubber. Cheleb is somewhat ambiguous in that it doesn't eo ipso indicate either blubber or a weight problem. It's a versatile Bible word that can also denote the choicest of something for example:

†. Gen 45:18 . . And take your father and your households, and come unto me: and I will give you the good of the land of Egypt, and ye shall eat the (cheleb)fat of the land.

I seriously doubt Joseph meant for his kin to subsist on blubber while they sojourned in Egypt.

"the fat thereof" we believe, is a reference not to the selected firstling's flesh, but rather, to the whole number of firstlings available for Abel to choose from; in other words; Abel selected the choicest of that year's firstlings.

Abel wasn't required to slaughter his firstling, nor was Cain required to incinerate his produce. No; those were minchah offerings; in other word: they had only to dedicate their selections to the Lord. You know, Christians dedicate things to God all the time; and moms and dads dedicate their children to the Lord all the time too as a matter of course. An outstanding example of minchah children in the Bible is Samuel. His mom Hannah dedicated her little firstling to the Lord before the lad was even born (1Sam 1:11). Anon, Hannah bore three more sons, and with them, two daughters. She didn't dedicate any of them though; just little Sammy.

Now, carry all that thought with you to Cain's offering. I sincerely believe that his offering was selected from the choicest of that year's first crop; just as Abel's offering had been selected from the choicest of that year's first lambs (or kids, whichever). The brothers' offerings were consistent with their professions and it only makes sense that they would dedicate the best of their respective professions' success in recognition of God's kindly patronage.

Respect Of Persons

Whether produce or livestock is the proper offering was not the issue. In making a determination regarding the gifts, God evaluated the men themselves first.

†. Gen 4:4b-5a . .The Lord respected Abel and his offering, but to Cain and his offering He paid no heed.

In the first chapter of the book of Isaiah, Yhvh's people are seen faithfully practicing the one true God-given religion of that day. They attended church, they offered the correct sacrifices and oblations, they observed all the holy days of obligation, they kept the Sabbath, and they prayed. But guess what? God rejected every last bit of their God-given practices: all of it. You know why? Because though His people were very religious, they were also very unrighteous; viz: their conduct was extremely unbecoming. Hence, the indictment against Cain, carried over against Yhvh's people too.

The Lord respected Abel, therefore He respected Abel's gift too. But although God very likely had been satisfied with Cain in the past, this time there was something wrong.

Cain was of a good family. He wasn't the product of poverty or an inner city barrio or dilapidated public housing. He wasn't in a gang, didn't carry a gun, didn't drink, smoke pot, gamble or chase women. He was very religious and worshipped the exact same god that his brother worshipped, and the rituals he observed were correct and timely. Cain worked for a living in an honest profession. He wasn't a crook, wasn't lazy, nor did he associate with an impious crowd. The man did everything a model citizen is supposed to do; yet he, and his gift, were soundly rejected; and the reason is very simple; Cain, at this time in his life, was in an unrighteous condition.

†. Hos 6:6 . . For I desire goodness, not sacrifice; obedience to God, rather than burnt offerings.

An unrighteous man's tithes and offerings are, eo ipso, oblations of sin.

†. Pro 15:8-9 …The sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination to the Lord, but the prayer of the upright pleases Him. The way of the wicked is an abomination to the Lord, but He loves him who pursues righteousness.

†. Pro 21:27 …The sacrifice of the wicked man is an abomination, the more so as he offers it in depravity.

Just exactly what it was in Cain's life that caused the Lord to lose respect for Cain isn't precisely stated; however, given the circumstances, it was very likely friction between him and his brother. Christianity's Christ taught that it is incorrect to worship God while the worshipper is at fault against their brother.

†. Matt 5:23-24 …Therefore if you bring your gift to the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar, and go your way. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift.

The Lord will urge Cain to rectify the problem; but no; he'll get all huffy about it instead.

†. Gen 4:5b . . Cain was much distressed and his face fell.

He was a whole lot worse than distressed. Cain was blazing mad. The Hebrew word for "distressed" is from charah (khaw-raw') and means: to glow or grow warm; figuratively (usually) to blaze up, of anger, zeal, jealousy. Cain is actually in a passionate rage over this and certainly in no mood for a lecture.

Central to Cain's problem is something very, very common in human nature: sibling rivalry.

At a local county fair here in Oregon a few years ago, a dairy family's two eldest sons entered cows in the competition. The youngest of the two won a ribbon, while the oldest won nothing. Was he happy about that? No, in point of fact, he went off by himself in a corner of his cow's stall and sulked. To be beaten by a regular competitor would have been okay, but to be beaten by his kid brother was intolerable. I don't know if he ever did get over that. In my estimation, Cain was not only angered by the rejection, but was humiliated by it as well; and he did not get over this turn of events any time soon.

†. Gen 4:6 . . And the Lord said to Cain: Why are you distressed, and why is your face fallen?

It's almost beyond belief how some people react to God. This man was actually mad at his maker. That can't be a good thing; but is so typical of people who regard God as a tyrant, a rival, an opponent; and a despotic, thoughtless bully. When His enemies finally appear before Him in judgment; I seriously doubt they'll be inclined to kneel or bow and talk to Him in soft respectful tones. No. They will be indignant, confrontational, insulted, and furious; and they will argue vehemently, pointing out where it is actually He who is the one in the wrong. At that time they will no doubt insist, as they do even now, that the Bible's God is a heartless monster who has no clue about the meanings of peace, love, and understanding.

†. Gen 4:7a . . If you do what is right, will you not be accepted?

There it is! The precise reason, in black and white, for Cain's rejection.

In Cain's (un)humble opinion, he always did what was right— at least what was right in his own mind. But man's maker is the final authority on right and wrong. If the Lord says something is right, or if He says something is wrong, then that's what it is. Those who accept His estimation (e.g. Abel) are the ones who live by faith.

So then: the Lord's focus wasn't upon the nature of Cain's offering after all; no, not even close; it was upon the man's not doing what is right. Nail that down because in regards to worship; it is a timeless concept, even for Christians.

The Principle

I think people tend to complicate Cain and Abel when the principle the narrative teaches is as simple, fundamental, and elementary as it is timeless; which is: when one keeps the Lord's commandments; then they abide in His love; and when one doesn't keep the Lord's commandments, they don't abide in His love.

†. John 14:23-24 . . If anyone loves me, he will obey my teaching. My Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him. He who does not love me will not obey my teaching.

†. John 15:10 . . If you keep my commandments, you shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in His love.

†. 1John 2:3-4 . . Hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.

†. 1John 3:22 . . Whatever we ask we receive from Him, because we keep His commandments and do those things that are pleasing in His sight.

The Voice

†. Heb 12:24 . . the blood of sprinkling that speaks better things than that of Abel.

The only "blood of Abel" that spoke in the book of Genesis was his own.

†. Gen 4:10-11 . . The Lord said: What have you done? The voice of your brother's blood cries out to me from the ground.

Christ's blood went into the ground too, at the foot his cross, and it was never recovered. The Lord's blood is still down here on the earth.

†. 1John 5:8 . .There are three that bear witness in earth: the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.

John was an eye-witness. He saw the Lord's blood spilled on the earth.

†. John 19:31-35 . .When they came to Jesus and found that he was already dead, they did not break his legs. Instead, one of the soldiers pierced Jesus' side with a spear, bringing a sudden flow of blood and water. The man who saw it has given testimony, and his testimony is true. He knows that he tells the truth, and he testifies so that you also may believe.

Anyway, back to the issue of the Lord's blood speaking better thing's than Abel's:

Though Abel was a righteous man (Heb 11:4) his blood was absolutely 100% powerless to ransom men's souls from the wrath of God. Nope, Abel's blood was a righteous man's blood, yes, but it was not an innocent man's blood, nor was his death a God-given, accredited sin offering; but rather, Abel's termination was just a common murder; but God forbid that anyone should regard the Lord's death as just a common murder.

†. Heb 10:29 . . Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will he be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, and counted the blood of the covenant by which he was dedicated a common thing?

Musicnot.wmf (1656 bytes) Confutatis