By Barnabas Piper
In the story of Cain and Abel, two things stand out: one an obvious question and the other a subtle answer.
Here are two brothers, one a herdsman and the other a farmer. They each bring some of the fruit of their labors to God, but their offers elicit opposite responses. “And Abel also presented an offering—some of the firstborn of his flock and their fat portions. The LORD had regard for Abel and his offering, but he did not have regard for Cain and his offering.” (Genesis 4:4–5) So the obvious question is, “Why?” Why did God accept Abel’s offering but not Cain’s? This text doesn’t tell us. But that doesn’t mean the Bible is silent on the matter.
These offerings to God were made before there were any laws about sacrifices, so we know the rejection of Cain wasn’t because of some ceremonial misstep. The text in Genesis doesn’t say that Abel gave the best of his produce while Cain gave a subpar offering, so there’s no reason to think the rejection was based on quality. But the subtle answer can be seen as the passage plays out, and is made clear in Hebrews 11:4: “By faith Abel offered to God a better sacrifice than Cain did. By faith he was approved as a righteous man.” This was entirely a matter of the heart; Abel had faith in God, and Cain did not.
The Lord told Cain “Your brother’s blood cries out to me from the ground” (Genesis 4:10). But where Cain deserved condemnation, God showed mercy, allowing him to live and even placing a mark of protection on him (v.15). Cain’s line goes on to both thrive and decline. They bring forth significant cultural advances: metal work, music, livestock herding (vv.20–22), and so we see God’s image in them. But they also decline into rebellion and embrace their fallenness—polygamy, vengeance, and murder—utter disregard for God’s good design. Cain’s line offered no hope to humanity because of their lack of faith.
Instead, the Lord gave Adam and Eve another son, Seth, “in place of Abel” (v.25). Of course there is no substitute for a son, but there is a place for renewed hope. This line of offspring would be a people of faith who would “call on the name of the LORD” (v.26) and be God’s covenant people. This covenant would be one of blood, mediated by priests and sacrifices, until the line of Seth was fulfilled in Jesus, “the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood, which says better things than the blood of Abel. (Hebrews 12:24). Abel’s blood cried out for vengeance and justice, but the blood of Jesus, of the line of Seth, would bring about mercy and forgiveness and redemption. So even in this dark story of murder we find the foundation of faith and the foreshadowing of hope in Jesus.
Post Comments (0)