Cain and Abel - God rejects produce? Genesis 4.

A question came up yesterday, during discussion of the story of Cain and Abel: why did God reject Cain's offering? Was God just being arbitrary, and isn't it unfair that just because Cain "worked the soil" that his offering wasn't good enough?

This is a great question, because it provides an opportunity to look at how to determine the answer. The first step is to observe the text carefully. More often than not, questions we have about a passage in the Bible are answered by a very careful reading of the text and its context. Here's the core passage:

Then she [Eve] gave birth to his brother Abel. Abel took care of the flocks, while Cain cultivated the ground. At the designated time Cain brought some of the fruit of the ground for an offering to the Lord. But Abel brought some of the firstborn of his flock – even the fattest of them. And the Lord was pleased with Abel and his offering, but with Cain and his offering he was not pleased. (Gen. 4:2-5a NET)

Perhaps the chief difficulty in understanding this passage is that it's so brief and spare. But we can make the following observations: Abel was the elder son. Abel was the shepherd, Cain the farmer. Cain's offering was "some of the fruit..." The offering was made at the designated time. Abel's offering was "firstborn and "fattest". And the distinction between the two offerings is made with the connecting word "but".

The word "but" really stands out. Is the writer making a distinction between the two individuals, Cain and Abel? Or is it a distinction between a "produce" offering and a "meat" offering? Or is it a distinction between the quality of the offerings? Or, finally, should the emphasis really be placed on "but"? Unless you can read the original language, it's a good idea to confirm your observations by looking at other translations of the account. One nice feature at the NET Bible site, http://net.bible.org/home.php, is that by clicking on a verse you get to see several translations on a single web page. The set of translations isn't as complete as those at other sites like the Bible Gateway, but will be sufficient for checking on the use of "but". Clicking on verse 4:4, it appears that "but" is the choice in the majority of the translations, but several use "also" as the connector. This isn't conclusive, so it's best to leave open the question of whether there's a contrast between the two offerings, or if this is just a way to say Cain brought an offering and so did Abel. (The translators' notes at the NET Bible tend to confirm that the contrast is between the quality of the gifts, but let's ignore that for the moment.)

However, these translations are all consistent in pointing out that Abel's offering was special -- firstborn and fat, while looking back at the description of Cain's offering there is nothing descriptive about what Cain has offered. In other words, this may have been only what was required at "the designated time." Knowing what we know of God, this is almost sufficient to answer the initial question in this way: "Cain's offering was perfunctory (at best), while Abel's was enthusiastic and "choice."

Certainly the behavior of Cain following rejection of his offering indicates that he had some sort of anger problem. But let's be as cautious as possible in understanding this passage. What else can we do to confirm our likely answer, short of reading what someone else has to say about it? I should point out here, that one of the reasons we may even think that this was an arbitrary choice on God's part, is because we have heard it taught that way.

Returning to our observations, is there anything in the passage that indicates that fruits of the field are inferior to an animal sacrifice? I have two thoughts in answer to that question. First, there is nothing pejorative in the passage that would indicate that. Second, in this sparse account, mention is made that Cain is the farmer, Abel the flock herder. Their offerings, therefore, are appropriate to their trade. This pretty much leaves us with two choices: God acted arbitrarily or Cain's offering was inferior in some way. And as hard a truth as this might be to take, God has every right to accept or reject the offerings as He sees fit.

One way of confirming the tentative conclusion we've reached through observation only, is to consult other portions of the Bible, letting it comment on itself. In Leviticus there are a lot of rules related to sacrifices, and what we can say from those rules is that: 1) sacrifices aren't always acceptable; and 2) grain is one of the sacrifices available under the law. This is confirmation that our two choices are correct: either God has arbitrarily rejected Cain's sacrifice, or it's inferior (and not because it isn't an animal).

At this point, in fact before this point, I would normally be content with my conclusion that Cain's sacrifice was inferior, that his heart wasn't right in making it and that he didn't bring the best fruits of his labor. A quick search for Cain at the NET Bible site, confirms this conclusion. The writer of Hebrews says in verse 11:4 -- "By faith Abel offered God a greater sacrifice than Cain, and through his faith he was commended as righteous, because God commended him for his offerings. And through his faith he still speaks, though he is dead."

It's good to have such clear confirmation of what we've learned through careful observation.

I have one final thought that I offer up for you to consider and respond to. God says to Cain in Genesis 4:6, "Is it not true that if you do what is right, you will be fine?" What does this tell us about the role our offerings to God play in our own life, and in our relationship to Him?