Cain and Able

Kipperhell

I have tried understanding the logic of Cain and Able and just can't seem to make any sense of it. God is meant to be able to understand our actions before we do them is a general piece of knowledge I was brought up with. The whole God sees us as children and can tell what our actions will be like an adult and a child.

So Cain and Able both make offerings. God turns down/dislikes Cain's and accepts Able's. God would surely know the outcome of his own actions at this point yet sets things in motion anyway.

What I have difficulty with is why God disregards Cain's offering and also why he would disregard Able's life.

In theory isn't Cain still walking the earth?

wolfsbane

Kipperhell wrote: »

I have tried understanding the logic of Cain and Able and just can't seem to make any sense of it. God is meant to be able to understand our actions before we do them is a general piece of knowledge I was brought up with. The whole God sees us as children and can tell what our actions will be like an adult and a child.

So Cain and Able both make offerings. God turns down/dislikes Cain's and accepts Able's. God would surely know the outcome of his own actions at this point yet sets things in motion anyway.

What I have difficulty with is why God disregards Cain's offering and also why he would disregard Able's life.

In theory isn't Cain still walking the earth?

If we only had the Cain and Abel incident to go on, it would be pure speculation to say why God did not accept his offering.

But we have all the rest of the Bible.

From that we can gather that the likely answer is that Cain did not believe in blood atonement and so only offered the fruits of his labours - that equates to self-righteousness.

Abel's sacrifice showed the need of blood atonement, a sacrifice substituting its life for the offender - that equates to trusting in Christ's righteousness.

Genesis 8:20 Then Noah built an altar to the LORD, and took of every clean animal and of every clean bird, and offered burnt offerings on the altar.

Hebrews 9:12 Not with the blood of goats and calves, but with His own blood He entered the Most Holy Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption.

As to the evil consequences of God's rejection of Cain's offering - the evil was Cain's, not God's.

No, Cain is not still walking the earth. Why do you think this is implied?

Kipperhell

Cain was in charge of growing crops and Able was in charge of the flocks. Cain gave God the fruits of his labour as did Able no suggested difference. I have never heard of any suggestion it was is self righteous belief that prevented him from giving a blood sacrifice. It sounds like an important bit of the story but I don't see how your quotes explain such an element.

Never suggested God was evil just that he knew the outcome of his own actions and never says to Cain his reasons. If I was to treat two children differently I would explain why.

I thought the Mark of Cain meant he was not welcome in heaven or hell and could not be killed.

postcynical

Kipperhell wrote: »

In theory isn't Cain still walking the earth?

You mean like Caine from Kung Fu?

Kipperhell

postcynical wrote: »

You mean like Caine from Kung Fu?

Where did you think they came up with the name? That is like saying Morpheus in the Matrix had no reference to Greek mythology.

lmaopml

Kipperhell wrote: »

Cain was in charge of growing crops and Able was in charge of the flocks. Cain gave God the fruits of his labour as did Able no suggested difference. I have never heard of any suggestion it was is self righteous belief that prevented him from giving a blood sacrifice. It sounds like an important bit of the story but I don't see how your quotes explain such an element.

Never suggested God was evil just that he knew the outcome of his own actions and never says to Cain his reasons. If I was to treat two children differently I would explain why.

I thought the Mark of Cain meant he was not welcome in heaven or hell and could not be killed.

I think the suggested difference is in the inference that Cain brought an 'offering' from his harvest, whereas Abel brought the very first offering of his flock, the very best he had to offer...! There is a symmetry here with the 'lamb' of God too....

I think the lesson is that if God has been good enough to speak direct to you, and asks you for something...because most of us go on 'faith' alone...then let it be the very 'best' you have to offer???

Kipperhell

lmaopml wrote: »

I think the suggested difference is in the inference that Cain brought an 'offering' from his harvest, whereas Abel brought the very first offering of his flock, the very best he had to offer...! There is a symmetry here with the 'lamb' of God too....

I think the lesson is that if God has been good enough to speak direct to you, and asks you for something...because most of us go on 'faith' alone...then let it be the very 'best' you have to offer???

It makes the story seem less likely as actual events to me if there is symmetry. As I recall God does not ask for an offering. As a parable it doesn't seem very clear why God would reject an offering without a clear reason. If you did so to a child you would expect jealousy and resentment. Maybe God needed murder to exist could be a comparable reading of the story .

I could see some people looking at the insistence of the best being offered to a church being a key element to the story for early religion. Why an all powerful being needs an offering is still a strange concept to me. I guess the story of Isaac cover some of it but ultimately why would the Christian God ever need/want a sacrifice? When did the requirement stop?

PDN

Kipperhell wrote: »

Why an all powerful being needs an offering is still a strange concept to me. I guess the story of Isaac cover some of it but ultimately why would the Christian God ever need/want a sacrifice? When did the requirement stop?

The requirement stopped when the sacrifice to end all sacrifices, and that which all other sacrifices foreshadowed, took place at Golgotha.

Kipperhell

PDN wrote: »

The requirement stopped when the sacrifice to end all sacrifices, and that which all other sacrifices foreshadowed, took place at Golgotha.

Or Calvary as most people would know it? So as the Jewish faith would not believe in Christ why did they stop? Being the predecessor faith I believe most Jewish faiths don't practice blood sacrifices. Obviously not so relevant as a Christian teaching but I don't recall anything being said about no need for blood sacrifices now the son of God has been sacrificed. So what is your basis or what did I miss?

homer911

Kipperhell wrote: »

Or Calvary as most people would know it? So as the Jewish faith would not believe in Christ why did they stop? Being the predecessor faith I believe most Jewish faiths don't practice blood sacrifices. Obviously not so relevant as a Christian teaching but I don't recall anything being said about no need for blood sacrifices now the son of God has been sacrificed. So what is your basis or what did I miss?

Jewish Sacrifices - Why they stopped and what happens now...

http://www.gotquestions.org/Jewish-sacrifices.html

Slav

I think God had no respect on Cain's offering exactly because He knew what would be his reaction. It was purely a pedagogical thing in order to reveal some truth about good and evil that Cain did not understand:

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." (Gen 4:6-7)

The Cain's problem was not that his sacrifice was not accepted, and not that he was angry at God and/or at Abel because of it. He just did not get the lesson that God taught him after that: if sin is at your door don't let it have you, don't hide it from God and don't hide yourself from the sin but rule over it. Cain chose not to be the master of the sin and the sin killed him and his brother.

Yellowblackbird

Kipperhell wrote: »

I have tried understanding the logic of Cain and Able

Everybodys current life is a product of their experiences, thoughts and actions in the past including their present incarnation. This bible metaphor is about accepting your current life. Cain was jealous of Ables success, his life (offering), he wanted Ables wife. Cain wasn't happy with his lot and had a murderous avarice to have something else. Cain represents a certain aspect of humanity.

Kipperhell

homer911 wrote: »

Jewish Sacrifices - Why they stopped and what happens now...

http://www.gotquestions.org/Jewish-sacrifices.html

Thanks great link and I must correct myself by missing the obvious indication what the ultimate sacrifice was. I guess you can't really say people sacrificed Jesus though as he was the one who did it. The logic seems to be that it stopped in Judaism and the Christian faith started later.

Slav wrote: »

I think God had no respect on Cain's offering exactly because He knew what would be his reaction. It was purely a pedagogical thing in order to reveal some truth about good and evil that Cain did not understand:

That is some tricky notion but it would clearly mean God was allowing and played a part in the killing. If you did this in many countries you could face legal charges for murder. Not saying God is accountable by man's laws but you can see the logic. What you are suggesting is God did it because it would p*ss Cain off and he knew it would to teach him a lesson which he also knew he wouldn't learn. In theory creating murder.

Yellowblackbird wrote: »

Everybodys current life is a product of their experiences, thoughts and actions in the past including their present incarnation. This bible metaphor is about accepting your current life. Cain was jealous of Ables success, his life (offering), he wanted Ables wife. Cain wasn't happy with his lot and had a murderous avarice to have something else. Cain represents a certain aspect of humanity.

As I said the parable could be make the best offerings in Church. Highly understandable if you are starting a church. The Able's wife theory is not in the bible but from other religious material. In the bible Cain is annoyed because of God's apparent favouritism no explanation so the rest is conjecture.

Slav

Kipperhell wrote: »

That is some tricky notion but it would clearly mean God was allowing and played a part in the killing. If you did this in many countries you could face legal charges for murder.

Really? Say, if a girl rejected attention of a lad and started dating his brother and that caused a tragedy...

Please do tell me what are these countries to avoid?!

Not saying God is accountable by man's laws but you can see the logic. What you are suggesting is God did it because it would p*ss Cain off and he knew it would to teach him a lesson which he also knew he wouldn't learn. In theory creating murder.

On a serious note, I think you missed the whole point of the story of Cain. It's just a lesson of Christian ascetics: if the sin is at your door your only option is to face it and rule over it; otherwise the sin will get you sooner or later and will kill you.

santing

There is another point overlooked in this discussion, the Bible says: "for Cain and his offering He had no regard." God did not regard Cain, and therefore also not his offering. Cain was already at odds with God before he offered. Why or how the text doesn't say. But it seems to me that Cain just went through the motions his heart wasn't in it.

Kipperhell

Slav wrote: »

Really? Say, if a girl rejected attention of a lad and started dating his brother and that caused a tragedy...

Please do tell me what are these countries to avoid?!

You can start with Ireland and follow the countries based on the British Legal system. Your synopsis of a girl and dating isn't the same for a key reason. God knows the events going to happen, if you know likely outcome of events and set them in motion and antagonise them you can be accused of manslaughter or murder. We assume man has enough understanding in such events but we are to beleive God does not.

Slav wrote: »

On a serious note, I think you missed the whole point of the story of Cain. It's just a lesson of Christian ascetics: if the sin is at your door your only option is to face it and rule over it; otherwise the sin will get you sooner or later and will kill you.

That is all well and good for a reading of what is meant but as it is described that that is not what is said. I am not even talking about a literal belief in events. Some believe, as mentioned above, God refused Cain's offering because he knew how Cain would react.

santing wrote: »

There is another point overlooked in this discussion, the Bible says: "for Cain and his offering He had no regard." God did not regard Cain, and therefore also not his offering. Cain was already at odds with God before he offered. Why or how the text doesn't say. But it seems to me that Cain just went through the motions his heart wasn't in it.

That seems contra to the view God loves everybody equally. Reading in-between the lines of bible like that can lead to some pretty diverse beliefs. It could be said he had no regard for Able as he set in motion events knowing it would result in his death.

I did also find out it appears the Mormon faith believe Cain to be still on Earth trying to dam souls.

Slav

Kipperhell wrote: »

You can start with Ireland and follow the countries based on the British Legal system. Your synopsis of a girl and dating isn't the same for a key reason. God knows the events going to happen, if you know likely outcome of events and set them in motion and antagonise them you can be accused of manslaughter or murder. We assume man has enough understanding in such events but we are to beleive God does not.

I did not know Common Law is so cruel! That lad tells his ex-girlfriend that he'd kill his brother if she continues dating him and here we go, the poor girl is now in big trouble!..

That is all well and good for a reading of what is meant but as it is described that that is not what is said. I am not even talking about a literal belief in events. Some believe, as mentioned above, God refused Cain's offering because he knew how Cain would react.

It would be hypocritical of Him not to refuse it: "If you do what is right, will you not be accepted?" (Gen 4:6)

IMO refusing Cain's sacrifice was the only right option in this case and it was the last hope for the brothers. If you have a better solution in mind for that situation then right here in this very thread you can tell God what He should do in similar cases. It won't bring us back Cain and Abel but at least it might save other lives and would save God from potential manslaughter charges in certain countries.

wolfsbane

Kipperhell wrote: »

Cain was in charge of growing crops and Able was in charge of the flocks. Cain gave God the fruits of his labour as did Able no suggested difference. I have never heard of any suggestion it was is self righteous belief that prevented him from giving a blood sacrifice. It sounds like an important bit of the story but I don't see how your quotes explain such an element.

Never suggested God was evil just that he knew the outcome of his own actions and never says to Cain his reasons. If I was to treat two children differently I would explain why.

I thought the Mark of Cain meant he was not welcome in heaven or hell and could not be killed.

The Bible does not tell us everything about each incident. It tells us here that God did not respect Cain or his offering, but not why. We can make an educated guess from the information we have in the rest of the Bible. Works-righteousness is an abomination to God, but trust in Him to provide righteousness is rewarded by salvation. Cain had the former, Abel the latter:
Romans 4:1 What then shall we say that Abraham our father has found according to the flesh? 2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” 4 Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt.
5 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, 6 just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works:
7 “ Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven,
And whose sins are covered;
8 Blessed is the man to whom the LORD shall not impute sin.”

No, the mark of Cain was merely to protect him while he walked this earth. He died in due time and now awaits the Judgement.

lmaopml

Kipperhell wrote: »

It makes the story seem less likely as actual events to me if there is symmetry. As I recall God does not ask for an offering. As a parable it doesn't seem very clear why God would reject an offering without a clear reason. If you did so to a child you would expect jealousy and resentment. Maybe God needed murder to exist could be a comparable reading of the story .

I could see some people looking at the insistence of the best being offered to a church being a key element to the story for early religion. Why an all powerful being needs an offering is still a strange concept to me. I guess the story of Isaac cover some of it but ultimately why would the Christian God ever need/want a sacrifice? When did the requirement stop?

It never stopped. Jesus Christ offers himself as the 'lamb' of God for each of us who have been given freewill to reject him, yesterday, today and tomorrow....He is always present! That's the symmetry...

A little biblical? Yes, I understand it is....but it's part and parcel of translating the old to the new...the thing is, we're still in the 'translating' phase....We don't 'know' everything. and most of us don't require to explain it....We just go on 'faith' and the important stuff that rings true...but it has to be 'true'! otherwise it's from the mouth out...

..but only God is the judge! and I know you might not like to accept that is how people feel....but the Christian way, is that 'God' alone is our judge, he knows us better than we know ourselves.....and, most likely he knew Cain and Able too....but gave them every 'chance' to conquer their own personal 'wills'?? I don't know, I don't know the mind of God....Just that he is good..