Cain or Abel?

By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: and by it he being dead yet speaketh.  Hebrews 11:4

Ah, the story of Cain and Abel.  After opening the Bible, one does not have to read very far before coming across it.  It is a story of sibling rivalry, of envy and enmity, and of eventual murder- fratricide to be specific-  it is the record of the first martyrdom, the first case in history in which a man would lose his life because of his faith. The story also provides for us a brief history of the first family, as well as insight into the early stages of sacrifice and offerings as part of divine worship.

Although this story is of great importance due to its historical contribution, it is even of greater value with regard to its spiritual significance, for this record sets forth the contrast between true and false religion, true and false repentance, inward and outward obedience, righteousness and unrighteousness, pride and humility, and light and darkness.  It is a commentary upon the workings of fallen human nature, how that nature is capable of pursuing the favour of God while maintaining deep-rooted rebellion against him, how it may strive to gain the approval of God while harbouring hatred toward those who indeed possess it.

Now the story of Cain and Abel, as it appears in Genesis 4:1-16, may be broken down into five parts: (1) the offerings of Cain and Abel, (2) God’s response to the offerings, (3) God’s admonition to Cain, (4) Cain’s response toward God and Abel, and (5) the final dialogue between God and Cain. 

The offerings of Cain and Abel

The Scripture tells us that in the process of time, or in the Hebrew “at the end of days,” both Cain and Abel brought an offering to the Lord.  Cain, being a farmer or “tiller of the ground,” brought an offering of the fruit of the ground, whereas Abel being a shepherd or “keeper of sheep,” brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof.   

Although we are all perhaps familiar with the fact that the offerings of the two brothers met with very different results regarding the Divine response, we may not however be completely sure as to why these results occurred.  The most accepted view is that Abel showed obedience in that he brought a blood sacrifice -for God now required sinful men to bring such an offering when approaching him- and that Cain demonstrated disobedience by neglecting to bring the prescribed sacrifice. Another view argues that this offering was not intended to be a sin offering, but rather was an offering of the fruits of their labours, and that the difficulty resided in the fact that Cain did not give the “first part” of his produce in the way that Abel did.

While I think that the more accepted, traditional viewpoint is the better of the two, it is true that the Scripture does not specify what type of offering this was to be.  The Scripture does however provide a very important distinction regarding the quality of the offerings, for it is said that Abel brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof, or of the richest part, while it is said of Cain that he merely brought an offering of the fruit of the ground.   There was nothing special about Cain’s offering; it was convenient and comfortable inasmuch as he had it readily available.  It was the only offering that Cain was willing to make, and an offering that he deemed as acceptable and “good enough”- and if “good enough” for him, then surely “good enough” for God as well. 

Now it is this attitude and mindset which first dwelt in Cain that not only defined his faith, but also has defined the faith of the falsely religious throughout history.  It is the attitude that has resided, and does yet reside in many who have professed to be followers of Christ who in truth are not- for there has always been, and always will be, those professing followers, who in evaluating their conduct, their faith, their spiritual commitment, and their spiritual experience, wrongfully conclude that because it is “good enough” for them it must be “good enough” for God as well.

As for Abel, he was of a different spirit altogether.  For when Abel considered bringing an offering to God, he was willing only to bring that which was dear to him.  He brought of the firstlings of his flock- not just any flock, but his flock.  He brought the firstlings which were the future of his flock, lambs that he had cared for and cared about.  He offered the richest part; he gave his best, yet it was no burden to him, for he loved God and cared about honouring him.  Unlike Cain, Abel would not be satisfied with “good enough”- for he was mindful of his state and considered the greatest of sacrifice to be an insufficient token of his appreciation for the grace and mercy of God.  Thus, Abel became the “father” of the truly religious, for his outward service to God was merely a reflection of his inward submission and conformity to the Spirit of God.

God’s response to the offerings

The Scripture is clear here: And the Lord had respect unto Abel and to his offering: but unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. God respected, or received Abel’s offering, but rejected Cain’s.  But the most important fact here is that the Scripture states that not only did God reject the offering, but that he rejected the one who offered it as well.  Contrariwise, in the case of Abel, both the offering and the one who offered were respected and received.  This then is the greatest truth communicated in this story: it is not the offering or outward service that makes a man acceptable or unacceptable, but rather it is the man’s true moral character that determines whether the offering is acceptable or not.   Is the man righteous?  So also is his offering.  Is the man contrary to God?  So also is his service.  As it is written, “The sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination to the Lord.”(Proverbs 15:8) 

Now consider Cain’s rejection.  Apparently “good enough” was not, and therefore Cain’s evaluation of himself and his offering was greatly flawed, and not at all in harmony with God’s evaluation concerning him.  And this also is the error of many modern evangelicals as well- they are willing to believe, to follow, to serve, to sacrifice- but only on their own terms, and yet they expect that God should fully receive them, as if they had done God some great favour by believing.   

Almost certainly there is someone who will take offense with this, who will say in essence: “God will accept us on any terms, though we may yet be unyielding and stubborn, unrepentant and unchanged- as long as we believe, it is good enough for God.”  But on the contrary, for who are you, O Cain, that you should dictate to God what is and what is not acceptable?  Shall the backslidden and compromised sit at the bargaining table with God and negotiate a more convenient salvation agreement?  I thank God that this will never be the case, that no matter how many “Cains” of the current church era stand together, justifying themselves and one another, fighting for the right to compromise and to yet be considered righteous, that they will never change the truth: for true faith still “offers to God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain.”

God’s admonition to Cain

Herein lies the true mercy and love of God: it does not consist in accepting that which is unacceptable, but rather in admonishing those which are unacceptable to do that which is right and proper, that they too might be received.  The “love message” of today portrays God as accepting men on any terms, whereas the true message of love found in Scripture reveals God as willing to receive all men, yet only on his terms. This was certainly the case with Cain.  Although God had no respect for Cain or his offering, he was yet willing to correct him and give him another opportunity to repent and do right. 

But Cain was outraged that God had disregarded his offering and that He had not received his compromised service, and the idea that God had preferred his brother- his younger brother- was too much for Cain’s proud, competitive, and jealous spirit to bear. I mentioned earlier that this was a story of sibling rivalry, but the rivalry and jealousy were entirely one-sided, for Abel was indeed righteous and bore the fruits of righteousness within his heart.

But Cain bore the fruits of darkness, and in this section of the story he is warned by God that those fruits will be multiplied if he continues in his present state, for sin lieth at the door, as it is written, and the powers of darkness are already set in motion to incite Cain into even greater transgression. 

Cain’s response toward God and Abel     

Cain’s response was one of impenitence toward God and hatred toward his brother.  He should have been ashamed for offering the way in which he did.  If this was an offering for sin, he should have been terrified- for this was a flat out rejection of the will of God regarding atonement.  But what is his response?  Grace is still being made available to him after his offering has been rejected, but he cannot receive it without repentance.  But repentance is loathsome to him for it involves being abased, it involves accepting that his religion is wanting, it involves acknowledging within himself that his brother is better than he, and possesses the favour of God which he knows himself to be without.  He cannot do it.  He will not do it.  He will not take the low place; he will not humble himself.

And there is Abel continually before his face, serving as a constant reminder of his failed service.  He cannot bear anyone being exalted when he is not, anyone being blessed when he is not, anyone pleasing God when he does not.  The thought that God prefers his brother above him fuels his enmity toward both God and Abel.

Now the falsely religious and impenitent do bear this same attribute of Cain. For when exposed whether by word, providence or pang of conscience as to their true spiritual state, rather than fly into an open clash of arms with God, they masterfully suppress their enmity toward him, deny that any such enmity exists, and turn their resentment toward those saints, who by their consecration to God do always serve as a source of unwanted conviction. And in this the spiritual descendants of Cain are manifest: they are those which oppose, resent, and despise them which are committed to offering a “more excellent sacrifice” or service than they, and are those which cultivate the poisonous roots of envy, pride, and rebellion within their souls.    

Now as the enmity of Cain escalated, a peculiar thing took place- Cain talked with Abel his brother, or as another version states, he, “told Abel his brother.”  It appears that Cain informed Abel of his dialogue with God.  But why would he confide in his brother whom he resented?   It is common for the unrighteous to alternate between a respect for the faith of the just and a resentment for them as well.  Consider some biblical examples of this paradox: Saul and David, Herod Antipas and John the Baptist, Ahab and Micaiah, etc…  

So what did Cain hope to gain from his discourse with Abel?  More than likely, his restless soul sought sympathy and reassurance.  THIS is the universal response of the impenitent.  When they sense within themselves that they have incurred the displeasure of God, and are conscious of his disapproval, they inevitably seek the sympathy, assurance, and approval of another- whether this be a brother, a friend, a fellow impenitent, or most likely an unsuspecting minister, who desirous of being an “encourager” of the downcast, unknowingly falls into the snare set for him, and gives his blessing and approval to him whom God has neither blessed nor approved.

But Cain did not find such sympathy and false assurance with Abel.  For when the Scripture states that he talked with Abel his brother, the word “talked” could be translated as “quarrelled”- for Abel could not give Cain such sympathy as he desired, for Abel, like God, was also offended with Cain’s irreverence and sinful ways.  This is something that the “Cains” of this world do not, and cannot understand: that their compromised religion is an offense to those who do not compromise, their painful treatment of God is painful to those which love him, and their impenitence is a grievous burden to those which know repentance.

Now when the “Cains” of this age are unable to secure sympathy and approval from the just, they resort to murder in whatever form they are comfortable with carrying out.  In the original account it was murder in the literal sense.  Throughout history, the number of “Abels” which have lost their lives in this way is beyond counting.  Yet the spirit of Cain may manifest itself in less violent ways as well- it may be satisfied with the murder of one’s reputation, the assassination of one’s character- a slower yet in some ways equally painful death. 

The final dialogue between God and Cain

After the murder of Abel, God poses the question to Cain: Where is Abel thy brother?  To which Cain responds: I know not: Am I my brother’s keeper? Observe the wickedness of his response.  It is a blatant lie to the face of his Creator.  It is filled with defiance and irreverence toward God.  The true nature of Cain is no longer hidden behind his insincere religious service, his wickedness is out in the open and he is revealed for the rebel and devil that he truly is, for who but a rebellious devil would dare answer the audible voice of God in such a manner, especially after the crime he has committed?

It also seems that this response bears some self justification.  It is not improbable that Cain felt that Abel in some way deserved the treatment he received.  After all, in the mind of Cain, Abel had treated him wrongly as well by neither approving of his religious service nor of his moral character.  The impenitent do always justify their malicious treatment of those whose only crime is that they disapprove of the religion of the unjust. 

But this self justification goes even further, for Cain’s statement suggests that he reasoned thus: if Abel is so special, if he is so dear to God, if he is righteous, then why is it that his Divine “Keeper” did not deliver him from such an end?  Even as the chief priests and elders, who also were of the same spirit, likewise reasoned: “If Thou be the Son of God, come down from the cross.  If He be the King of Israel, let him now come down from the cross, and we will believe him,” and again, “He trusted in God; let him deliver him now, if He will have him: for He said, ‘I am the Son of God.’”

But the fact that the righteous are often allowed to experience great suffering at the hands of the unjust, and that the righteous may at times appear to be without the help of God, in no way indicates that God has forsaken them, and certainly is no vindication of the impenitent and their wicked ways.  If the impenitent justify themselves by concluding that if their righteous opponents were truly just, they would not suffer so, then the impenitent are fully deceived- for the rewards of both the just and the unjust are not fully realized in this life.  

So it was with Cain and Abel.  The just had his life cut short, was robbed of the blessings that this life would have bestowed upon him, and received in this world treatment which he did not deserve.  Cain, on the other hand, lived out his life- though cursed and miserable- and never received in this world that which he truly deserved.  Yet Cain went out from the presence of the Lord, while his brother Abel was ushered into that same Presence.

Thus to conclude the matter, consider this to not only be the story of Cain and Abel, but also a question of Cain or Abel, a question as to what kind of faith do you truly possess.  Are you offering to God a convenient service, a disobedient service, or are you yielding to God from the heart?  Are you determined to defend compromise, or are you promoting a “more excellent” faith.  Do you carry on in an outward faith while silently harbouring envy, competitiveness, and enmity toward those who you find a thorn in your conscience, or do you know what peace of conscience truly is, being free from malice and envy?  Are you unable to rejoice when others are exalted and you are not, or are you content with being lowly?  These are the questions that determine just what type of faith you truly have.

And so bear with my little commentary on Cain and Abel.  Certainly the Cains of this world will not, yet I think that an Abel or two might, for my language is not foreign to them.  But to the rest who read may it be a candle that searches the innermost parts, and a voice that asks whether our religious service be that of, “Cain or Abel?”