The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum Cain's Rejected Offering

Hi
I have been asked by someone who I am mentoring, what in particular it was about Cain’s offering that God rejected.
I have done some studying on applicable Bible passages such as:
Genesis 4:3-7 (ASV) As well as NT passages that say that Abel’s offering was one of faith, but Cain’s offering was not of faith. This of course is a great reason for God to have rejected Cain’s offering. However, although one could read between the lines and say that Abel’s offering was an animal offering and Cain’s wasn’t; which could indicate a sin offering. However we see in other OT passages that grain offering were also made.
As I search for indication direct from Scripture itself that Cain was instructed to make offerings to God in the same manner that Abel did; I haven’t found anything concrete that this was the case. Though, I will say that it makes the most sense.
If so, it would appear that Abel’s offering was done in the manner God instructed, while Cain’s offering was done by his own imagination (regardless of whether it was well intentioned or not), rather than as God directed.
As someone who believes in the Regulative Principle; this description of the matter seems the most plausible to me. However as it stands, I would like to be absolutely sure I am not missing something from Scripture before I get back to the person I am mentoring.
Do you have anything in mind that might help?

Tom

Tom,

I think you have it right. The acceptance by God in regard to Abel and His rejection of Cain was not due to their respective sacrifices/offerings but rather it was due to the condition of their hearts. Abel brought his offering in true faith; Cain did not. Abel's offering was an expression, the result of Abel's true worship... Cain's offering was only formalism.

The passage itself lends itself to this conclusion for it says, "And Jehovah had respect unto Abel and to his offering, but unto Cain and to his offering, He had not respect". The persons are mentioned first, making them primary and the offerings are mentioned second making them ancillary. The focus in the passage is upon the individuals and not upon the items of worship.

Secondly, there is no hint anywhere that God had commanded in what outward manner He was to be worshiped. All such details came much later. It would be an unwarranted mistake to read into the passage what isn't there by imposing God's later revelation onto it. I believe that the Holy Spirit's intent in including this passage is to impress upon us what is taught in the 1st Commandment; Who is to be worshiped and genuinely so (cf. Jh 4:24). The 2nd Commandment deals with How one is to worship the one true God.

Thirdly, there are other corollary passages which support the view that God's acceptance of Abel and the rejection of Cain was due to the difference of their hearts rather than the offerings which were brought. For example, there is 1Sam 16:7, "But Jehovah said unto Samuel, Look not on his countenance, or on the height of his stature; because I have rejected him: for Jehovah seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but Jehovah looketh on the heart." We see this same truth in Jer 17:10; 20:12 and Lk 16:15. And one other reference, which you mentioned is in Heb 11:4, "By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, through which he had witness borne to him that he was righteous, God bearing witness in respect of his gifts:..."

Thus, I have to understand this Genesis passage as teaching that acceptable worship of God must start from a heart which is filled with faith; a faith which sees no value in anything of self and all value, virtue, goodness, etc., as only in God from whom all things come to man. Too often, it seems that those who are given to defend the Regulative Principle of Worship, and rightly they should, focus all or most of their attention on the outward manner of worship and forget that the first principle of the Regulative Principle; God has commanded and thus requires that all who approach Him for worship must be those who have true faith; a denial of self and a total dependency upon Him for all things.

Pilgrim
As I look at the matter the way you and I see it. I cannot help but think about the Regulative Principle of Worship.
Mainly because I have heard people who don't hold to the Regulative Principle of Worship argue that it is an issue of faith, not what was offered in worship.
The context had to do with a debate between people who hold to the RPW and those who don't. Those who held to the RPW said both faith and right offering were needed for Cain and Abel’s offerings.
While the other side said that there is no indication in Scripture saying that anything other than a heart filled with faith that lead to God’s acceptance of Abel's offering and not Cain's offering.
At the time of that debate I had to sit back and be an observer, mainly because I held to the RPW, yet I wasn't seeing the issue the same way as the other people who held to the RPW.
Of course, I still believe that much of what we see in Churches today is not true worship. But, I don't think the story of Cain and Abel's offering is the argument to use to prove the RPW.

Tom

Agreed! As I have already mentioned, those holding to the RPW too frequently focus upon the "elements" of worship and not upon the "motive" of worship. Consequently, you hear arguments like you reported where those holding to the RPW violate sound biblical hermeneutics and fall victim to eisogesis. Grain offerings and other similar offerings which were not animal sacrifices were surely acceptable throughout the OT. Abel's offering was acceptable NOT because it was according to some undisclosed command given by God. But rather it was acceptable because it was offered in faith and thus Abel brought the "firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof". In the Hebrew, it actually says that Abel brought the fattest firstlings, i.e., the best of the best of his flock. Contrariwise, it is not said that Cain brought the best of his crop nor of his first-fruits. The reason was due to the antithetical dispositions of these two individual's minds and hearts.

Secondly, there is not even a hint that Abel brought a "sacrifice for sin" whatsoever. To insist that this was the real purpose in Abel killing an animal to present as an offering is to transpose that which is found in the expiatory sacrifices of the Mosiac law. These sacrifices brought by Cain and Abel were offerings of gratitude, albeit Cain's was only so perceptually and not actually.

Lastly, the RPW does NOT depend upon any necessity that the reason that Cain and/or Able brought an offering to God rests upon divine command. Both of these differing offerings flowed from each man's respective state of mind and heart. As I also mentioned above, there is more than ample biblical warrant to support the RPW. One must be faithful to the inspired text and not impose an unwarranted truth upon any passage which is unrelated to it. We must always seek to first understand the original INTENT of a passage before trying to seek to understand its MEANING. To err in the first most always guarantees we will err in the second. So again, faith is no less a necessary element of the RPW as is the expression of the RPW.