At this point in the Bible’s narrative, the focus narrows: no longer are we considering the great range of foundational truths of the first three chapters:-
the sovereignty of God;
the nobility of the human race;
the value of the material world;
the dignity of work;
the sanctity of marriage;
the entry of sin into the world;
the entry of death through sin;
the reality and severity of judgement;
the glory of grace in the promise of a Saviour.
Chapter 4 becomes more domestic. Now the die is cast and the story moves inevitably and tragically forward.
What a way we have come from 2:25! Do you remember? The man and his wife were both naked, and they felt no shame.
Now the first baby born is a killer, and the second is his victim. We have entered the world you and I know all too well. The description of Cain’s family with which this chapter ends is a microcosm of humanity, with its pattern of technical and artistic prowess and moral failure. The central event of chapter 3 is now working itself out in humanity, and because the problem is rooted in the heart of human beings, it affects everything – even the family. Perhaps especially the family: the more intense the human relationship the more obvious the effects of my selfishness, of sin: on marriage, family, sibling rivalry. Which of us is not aware of conflict in these areas of our lives?
There is a story of two brothers who were backpacking together across the foothills of the Himalayas when they were students. They came one night to a small village where they were warned that the next stretch of the mountain track was frequented by a tiger that had taken to man-eating. They set out nervously the next morning hoping for a lift, but as the day wore on no vehicle came along the track. At last, in the evening, they could just see the distant lights of the next village, when there came a blood-curdling roar from the jungle beside the track. Both brothers began to run furiously towards the village side by side. But then one of the brothers stopped. He started to take off his hiking boots, open his backpack and get out a pair of running shoes. The other brother shouted urgently to him, “Don’t be silly! You can’t outrun a man-eating tiger.” The first brother looked up and replied, “I don’t have to outrun the tiger. I only have to outrun you!”
So our first heading is:-
1. Two different brothers
Adam lay with his wife Eve, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Cain. She said, “With the help of the Lord I have brought forth a man.” Later she gave birth to his brother Abel. (v 1)
Notice Eve’s cry of delight – “Here is the offspring who will crush the serpent’s head and reverse the curse!” - as God had promised back in chapter 3, verse 15. But alas no! She was horribly wrong there. But she was right to acknowledge that children are God’s gift: “With the help of the Lord I have brought forth a man.”
Despite all the control medical science has given us, childbirth remains an experience of common grace – and a powerful reminder that we are not our own. WE belong to God and we owe our lives to God; and our children belong to God. We are not to appropriate them and behave as though we have a right to them, nor to regard them as our products. Family life goes wrong as soon as we forget that we do not have a right to have children; and, if we do have them, they do not belong to us. They belong to someone else.
Later she gave birth to his brother Abel. Now Abel kept flocks, and Cain worked the soil. In the course of time Cain brought some of the fruits of the soil as an offering to the Lord. But Abel brought fat portions from some of the firstborn of his flock. (vv 2-4)
Two different brothers, different in their work and their worship. This is all we are told. Nothing about their lives, nor about what prompted their offering, till we reach the puzzle of verses 4 and 5.
The Lord looked with favour on Abel and his offering, but on Cain and his offering he did not look with favour. So Cain was very angry and his face was downcast. (vv 4, 5)
Notice we are not told how the Lord looked with favour on Abel and his offering, and not on Cain and his offering; and, most puzzling, we are not told why. It seems unfair discrimination. There are two New Testament verses which shed some light on this.
We should love one another. Do not be like Cain, who belonged to the evil one and murdered his brother. And why did he murder him? Because his own actions were evil and his brother’s were righteous. (I John 3:11,12)
Notice that that verse does not directly comment on why Cain’s offering was rejected. It is only a comment on why Cain went on the murder his brother. But it does contrast the righteousness of Abel with the wickedness of Cain.
According to Genesis 4:5, God rejected Cain and his offering – so clearly Cain was in some sense objectionable to God. But it remains puzzling that Genesis does not state more plainly this link between Cain’s lack of righteousness and his rejection by God.
2. Two different sacrifices
By faith Abel offered God a better sacrifice than Cain did. By faith he was commended as a righteous man, when God spoke well of his offerings. And by faith he still speaks, even though he is dead. (Hebrews 11:4)
Here it is Abel’s faith that is the distinguishing factor. Faith listens to what God has said and acts on it. So, if Abel was acting in faith, he must have been acting on something God had said. Perhaps God had already indicated that the appropriate offering to bring to God was the sacrifice of an animal. Sin had entered the world and its penalty was death (separation from God) so the offering for sin must also entail death.
Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins. (Hebrews 9:22)
Back at chapter 3, verse 21, God had provided animal skins to clothe Adam and Eve, which must have meant the slaughter of animals. As skins were the proper covering for sinners (and not the fig leaves they’d clothed themselves with earlier in the chapter, 3:7), so animals (and not vegetables) were the proper sacrifice for sins (pointing us on to the Lamb of God who would die on the cross).
Moreover, after the curse pronounced by God in the previous chapter, the fruit of the ground would only be produced by the sweat and toil of man, so it symbolised human achievement. Perhaps Cain was offering a sample of his own horticultural achievement (like a gardener with his prize marrow), claiming that by his own effort he had overcome God’s curse on the ground, and asking God to accept him on the basis of what he had done. While Abel, on the other hand, offered a substitute life in the place of his own, acknowledging the full extent of his guilt and his inability to save himself.
Now this undoubtedly casts light on the passage. But it is not what the passage itself seems to be teaching us. After all, nothing has yet been said before this in the Bible about God asking for animal sacrifices rather than vegetable ones; and, later in the Old Testament, God does accept cereal offerings (i.e. the fruit of the ground). So we must ponder these verses some more if we are to get the main point. Perhaps you would re-read carefully verses 3-5.
No reason is given. It is a glaring omission. God’s acceptance of Abel is not portrayed as a reward for good behaviour or as an act of congratulation for correct religious technique. It does not say that Abel was better in any way. It is portrayed as an act of divine generosity, the sovereign choice of God.
If God accepts a human being, it is not because He must. It is because He chooses to do so. God did not have to accept either Cain or Abel. God cannot be manipulated, bribed or controlled by religious technique or moral performance. None of us has any hold over Him. We wish we did. Do you remember the story of the small boy writing a letter just before Christmas? ‘Dear God,’ he wrote, ‘I’ve been good for a whole month now, please let me get a mountain bike for Christmas.’ Then he stopped and thought, and he crossed out ‘month’ and wrote ‘week’, and then he crossed out ‘week’ and wrote ‘day’, and then he stopped again. He got up from the table, walked over to the Christmas tree on the other side of the room, where there was a little crib scene with model figures, and he picked up the figure of Mary thoughtfully and walked back to the table. He put it down on the table in front of him, and then he began a new letter: ‘If you ever want to see your mother again . . . .’ But no-one has any hold on God.
The Lord looked with favour on Abel and his offering, but on Cain and his offering he did not look with favour. (vv 4, 5)
Cain and Abel do not represent two different religious techniques. They do not even primarily represent a good man and a bad man relating to God. They represent two different religious attitudes: By faith Abel offered a better sacrifice than Cain. (Hebrews 11:4)
Faith is not a technique – it is the recognition that there are no techniques when relating to God. I cannot persuade Him to accept me. I cannot threaten Him. I cannot bribe Him. He is not a slot machine God, to whom I can present the right coinage (of repentance or confession or whatever) and then receive the chocolate bar of acceptance by Him automatically. I can only throw myself on His mercy. I hear His word and trust myself to it.
In fact, this Genesis passage is not about what caused God to accept Abel and reject Cain. It is about what resulted from that rejection. So let’s consider thirdly:
3. Two different responses
Look again at halfway through verse 5 and verse 6: So Cain was very angry, and his face was downcast. Then the Lord said to Cain, “Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast?”
Cain and Abel shared the same creed. They believed the same things. But Cain was very angry when his offering was not accepted. Now that shows us that it cannot have been a case of Cain offering something cheap and slipshod and lackadaisical, while Abel offered something careful and costly and sacrificial. Cain would not have been cross if he had been rejected on those grounds. His anger suggests that he had taken a lot of trouble over his offering. It had cost him time and money and energy. He is the religious person taking great trouble to approach God. It may be the ritualist through ceremonies or the moralist via good behaviour. But his approach to God is on his own terms. He would do certain things for God and then God would do certain things for him. And when it turns out that God does not play by man-made rules, he is indignant. He calls God arbitrary and unfair. How can we believe in a God who does not act according to our own religious notions?
The Cains of this world are very angry to discover that God insists on being God. He will not be controlled or manipulated by us. So Cain was very angry, and his face was downcast. (v. 5)
Hell is a very angry place. People there gnash their teeth because they are all convinced that they do not deserve to be there. God should not have done this to them. He should have acted according to their ideas about Him and behaved as they had decided He should. Cain was not a profane person. He was religious, but he was furious at God’s refusal to accept him on his own terms.
But notice God’s mercy:
Then the Lord said to Cain, “Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must master it.” (vv 6, 7)
There is a clear warning by God. Note the tense of verse 7. Sin is like a leopard ready to spring – it desires to have you, or as Moffat translates it, ‘It is eager to be at you’. We will never be free of sin’s attentions in this life. . . . but you must master it. We can always be freed from it. This is a conversation that God holds with all of us right through our life on earth. Even to you and me today He says, “Sin is trying to get you. Its desire is to have you, but you must master it.” It is a frightening thought, is it not? But notice who it is who is speaking – it is God Who says to us, “Beware of sin.” He is the One Who can master sin, and, with His help, we can overcome. The One who made us in the beginning, is the only One who can keep us safe from sin now and take us safe to heaven eventually.
Cain’s response is quite deliberate. If Eve was talked into sin by the snake, Cain will not have God talk him out of it. Now Cain said to his brother Abel, “Let’s go out to the field.” And while they were in the field, Cain attacked his brother Abel and killed him. (v 8).
If it was a deliberate sin, it was also an unconfessed sin. Then the Lord said to Cain, “Where is your brother Abel?” “I don’t know,” he replied. “Am I my brother’s keeper?” (v 9)
Cain’s response mirrors chapter 3, verses 9 and 10: But the Lord God called to the man, “Where are you?” He answered, “I heard you in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid.”
But Cain’s reply is much harder than Adam’s – a brazen lie – “I do not know” – followed by an impertinent witticism – “Shall I shepherd the shepherd? Am I my brother’s keeper?” There is no confession, just a denial of responsibility.
The Lord said, “What have you done? Listen! Your brother’s blood cries out to me from the ground. Now you are under a curse and driven from the ground, which opened its mouth to receive your brother’s blood from your hand. When you work the ground, it will no longer yield its crops for you. You will be a restless wanderer on the earth.” (vv10-12)
The Lord had seen and the Lord had heard. The ground had to drink Abel’s blood and its response is to lock up its fruit from Cain and to refuse him its shelter.
“Your brother’s blood cries out to me from the ground.” (v. 10) Blood is always spilt blood in the Bible – speaking of violent death – and it always cries to God for action: either vengeance, like Abel’s, or mercy, like a different blood that ran down from the shaft of a spear and spurted out round nails driven into human flesh – the blood of Jesus, the mediator of a new covenant Whose blood . . . speaks more graciously than the blood of Abel (Hebrews 12:24).
Cain said to the Lord, “My punishment is more than I can bear. Today you are driving me from the land, and I will be hidden from your presence; I will be a restless wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me.” (vv13, 14)
Notice there is no hint of penitence, contrition or repentance. Cain exaggerates in his guilt and fear – “Whoever finds me will kill me.” It is only remorse for the painful consequence for himself. It is self-pity, not true repentance. Perhaps that is why those in hell will weep as well as gnash their teeth, because they will be as full of self-pity as they are of anger.
Perhaps we need to ask ourselves how much real confession there is in us and how much self-pity at our continued sinfulness.
But the Lord said to him, “Not so, if anyone kills Cain, he will suffer vengeance seven times over.” Then the Lord put a mark on Cain so that no-one who found him would kill him. (v. 15) We are not told what that mark was, but it was the utmost that mercy could do for the unrepentant.
4. Two different lines (vv. 16-26)
So Cain went out from the Lord’s presence and lived in the land of Nod, east of Eden. (v. 16)
And his race dwells there still, building cities –
(Cain lay with his wife, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Enoch. Cain was then building a city, and he named it after his son Enoch. (v. 17) )
and amassing technical and artistic achievements –
Adah gave birth to Jabal; he was the father of those who live in tents and raise livestock. His brother’s name was Jubal; he was the father of all who play the harp and flute. Zillah also had a son, Tubal-Cain who forged all kinds of tools out of bronze and iron. Tubal-Cain’s sister was Naamah. (vv. 20-22)
But they were secular and godless, epitomised by the violence and promiscuity of Lamech:
Lamech said to his wives, “Adah and Zillah, listen to me; wives of Lamech, hear my words. I have killed a man for wounding me, a young man for injuring me. If Cain is avenged seven times, then Lamech seventy-seven times.” (vv. 23, 24)
In contrast, there is another line established at the end of the chapter:
Adam lay with his wife again, and she gave birth to a son and named him Seth, say, “God has granted me another child in place of Abel, since Cain killed him.” Seth also had a son, and he named him Enosh. At that time men began to call on the name of the Lord. (vv. 25, 26)
Seth is Abel’s replacement and this is the start of the line that will eventually reach the One who will crush the serpent’s head.
All of us belong to one or other of those two lines – the line of Cain or the line of Abel, characterised by our attitude to God: the attitudes we examined in verses 3 – 5. There are only two sorts of person – those who reckon to do God a favour (if they deign to acknowledge His existence at all); and those who seek God’s favour and throw themselves on His mercy. There are only the righteous who know themselves to be sinners, and sinners who think themselves righteous. And we are bound to ask ourselves to which line we ourselves belong. What are we trusting in our relationship to God? Self-reliance and self-confidence can slip back so easily into the Christian life. Having trusted in the gospel to save us, we must not look anywhere else to keep us going in our spiritual life – not to our Christian experience, our seniority, our status, our long record of church membership and church service. The Christian life is grace from beginning to end. It depends entirely on the unmerited favour of God. It is that which saves us and it is that which will see us through to the end. We can look foolish in spiritual terms when, having trusted Jesus to save us, we start to trust ourselves to maintain us. We can slip back from the line of Abel to the line of Cain.