The story of Cain and Abel challenges all of us in terms of our worship. It is not enough to make offerings to God, not even to the true God, if they come from a heart that lacks faith and love for God. In this regard it is striking that most people ask “Why was Cain’s sacrifice rejected?” instead of “Why was Abel’s accepted?” Those two questions reveal two contrasting approaches to God: the approach of self-justification versus the approach of humble dependence upon divine grace. Self-justification expects God to be obligated to receive whatever we choose to offer, no matter how sketchily we go through the motions of presenting it. Grace realizes that even our best offerings are not adequate to present to a holy God, and it marvels that he would be pleased to receive such poor gifts as we have to offer, even though they be our very best.
Of course, the reality is that all of us offer deeply tainted worship to God, even as Christians. Our minds wander, our bodies fidget, and our hearts are given over to other idols, even as we are physically there, offering a half-hearted song and perhaps some money that we can easily spare. We should be profoundly thankful for Jesus, who came as a wholehearted worshiper, the fulfillment of David’s cry in Psalm 69, “Zeal for your house has consumed me” (Ps. 69:9; cited in John 2:17). Unlike our half-hearted worship, which so easily spills over into indifference or anger toward our brothers and sisters, his worship led him to the cross, where the temple of his body was destroyed for us (John 2:19). His blood, shed for us on the cross, cries out for mercy and acceptance by the Father toward all those who are in him, cleansing us from all our sins, including our dysfunctional worship (Heb. 12:24).
Who, though, is my brother? We are often overly enamored of the powerful and influential, those who control the world of technology and the arts, even though they bear the marks of Cain’s spiritual parentage rather than that of the line of promise. In our modern culture we are sometimes also overly enamored of cities, thinking that through them we can gain power to reach the wider culture with the gospel. The desire for influence and power often penetrates the church in our age, especially in more affluent countries. Yet the call to follow Jesus is often a call to leave the city, the place of worldly influence, and go outside its gates to the place of suffering and of the cross, the place of simple, heartfelt, dependent worship by men and women calling on the name of the Lord. As the writer to the Hebrews reminds us,
Of course, the poor, the weak, and the needy can be found in many places, and cities need the gospel too. Yet those who live in cities are not more precious to God than those who live in suburbs or rural towns and villages.Genesis 4
Cain sounds like the Hebrew for gotten
Hebrew will there not be a lifting up [of your face]?
Or to, or toward, or against (see 3:16)
Hebrew; Samaritan, Septuagint, Syriac, Vulgate add Let us go out to the field
Or My guilt is too great to bear
Nod means wandering
Seth sounds like the Hebrew for he appointed
4:1–5 The chapter starts on a positive note. Adam has sexual relations with Eve, and she gives birth to two sons, fulfilling her role as “the mother of all living” (3:20). Women were often involved in the naming process in the OT (cf. Gen. 29:32–30:24; 38:4–5; Judg. 13:24; 1 Sam. 1:20), though men also named their children (cf. Gen. 21:3; 38:3; Ex. 2:22). The firstborn child she names “Cain” (Gen. 4:1; Hb. qayin) because, she says, “I have gotten [qanah, “acquired, created”] a man with the help of the Lord.” The woman who was herself taken from the man (cf. 2:23) has now produced a man herself.
The reason given for Cain’s name suggests great rejoicing at his arrival, which is natural given that he was the first human to arrive in this way. Does Eve think that this son is perhaps the promised seed of Genesis 3:15? He is, after all, the oldest son, who follows in his father’s footsteps as a cultivator of the ground (4:2), and Eve attributes his arrival to “the help of the Lord” (v. 1). Eve calls this little baby a “man” (ʾish), like the man, Adam, from whom she herself was taken (2:22), suggesting his potential to be a second Adam, reversing the effects of the fall. Certainly her words are an expression of faith in the promise of God, even if she does not yet understand how long the redemptive process will take.
Abel’s name, on the other hand, sounds like “worthless, vanity” (hebel; the same word used frequently in Ecclesiastes, rendered “vanity”; e.g., Eccles. 1:2). There is no special rejoicing recorded over his birth, nor mention of the Lord’s help. The text simply says, “And again, she bore his brother Abel” (Gen. 4:2). To the casual observer Abel seems the disadvantaged one as the younger brother. After all, if the promised seed of the woman has already arrived in Cain, what need is there for Abel?
Each brother pursues a different calling. Cain, like Adam, works the ground (v. 2; cf. 3:23), while Abel keeps flocks of sheep (or perhaps goats; Hb. tson can refer to either animal). Their respective callings form the backdrop for the conflict that ensues. At some unspecified point of time the brothers bring offerings to present to the Lord from their respective produce, with Cain bringing a grain offering and Abel offering a lamb (4:3–4). We are not told where they bring these sacrifices; since there is no sanctuary in Genesis 4–11, they may simply present them on a suitable rock. But God reverses the natural order and accepts the offering of the younger brother, Abel, while refusing the offering of the older brother, Cain. Perhaps fire descended from heaven on Abel’s offering indicating God’s favor, while Cain’s was untouched (as in 1 Kings 18:38; 2 Chron. 7:1).
The reason God accepts Abel’s sacrifice while refusing Cain’s has been much debated. Some interpreters suggest that it is because Abel offers a blood sacrifice while Cain’s sacrifice is of grain. They point out that the Bible insists that “without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins” (Heb. 9:22). But that understanding fails to recognize that both offerings are specifically described as being minkhot, “tribute offerings” (Gen. 4:4–5). According to the law of Moses, a minkhah would very often be a grain offering—and this is how the ESV often translates the word (cf. Lev. 2:11). That is because the aim of the minkhah is not to seek forgiveness of sins but rather to acknowledge someone as overlord by bringing him a gift or, more precisely, tribute. In 1 Samuel 10:27, when Saul has been crowned king over Israel, it is reported that certain people “brought him no present [minkhah].” These troublemakers are reluctant to recognize Saul as their king, and they show it in their lack of tribute offerings.
So then, the offerings Cain and Abel bring to God are tribute offerings, acknowledging him as their king. But Abel, we are told, brings the very best that he has (some “of the firstborn of his flock and of their fat portions”; Gen. 4:4), whereas Cain brings “an offering of the fruit of the ground” (v. 3). There is a difference in heart attitude between Cain and Abel, expressed in the quality of the sacrifices they offer: it is not simply Abel’s sacrifice that God favors but Abel (v. 4). To put it another way, the writer to the Hebrews tells us that Abel’s sacrifice is offered in faith (Heb. 11:4). He offers a better sacrifice because he believes in God’s promise that one day there will be a Redeemer, and so gives of his very best, while, in contrast, Cain has no love for God; he is simply going through the motions of religion.
Cain’s reaction to God’s refusing his offering is significant: he becomes very angry (Gen. 4:5). “His face fell” indicates a feeling of rejection; acceptance is sometimes described as a person’s having his face lifted (cf. ESV mg. on v. 7; Job 11:15). Cain does not ask himself the question “Why did God not accept my offering?” He simply explodes with rage, as if God has no right to determine which offerings are acceptable and which are not—or which offerers are acceptable and which are not. Like his parents, he wants to decide for himself what constitutes good and evil when it comes to making offerings to God. He believes that God should gratefully receive whatever is given to him.
4:6–8 In the midst of Cain’s rebellion God gives him a second chance: he comes to Cain directly and asks, “Why are you angry, and why has your face fallen? If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door. Its desire is toward you, but you must rule over it” (Gen. 4:6–7). Once again, as in the garden, God approaches humans with questions designed to spark self-reflection. Rather than being angry with Abel (and with God), Cain should examine his own heart. If he had offered his sacrifice with the right spirit, his sacrifice—and he—would also have been accepted. The doorway to life through a relationship with God is still open to him.
However, the Lord also warns Cain of the danger facing him. Sin is depicted as a wild animal poised and ready to spring on the unwary Cain (v. 7; cf. 1 Pet. 5:8). This is the first time in Genesis that “sin” has been named, and it appears not merely as a wrong action on Cain’s part but as a powerful force that desires to take over his life. The parallelism of Genesis 4:7 and 3:16 is instructive: sin now fills the woman’s position in the equation. Through the fall mankind has now become “one flesh” with sin; like a nagging wife, it will not go away. Yet there is still time for Cain to recognize the danger, repent with godly sorrow, and resist sin’s power. The original mandate for man to have dominion over creation (1:26) has now become the struggle for man to have dominion over himself. To quote Romans 6:12, “Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, to make you obey its passions.”
As noted earlier, the progress of sin’s power is evident in Cain’s refusal to listen even to a direct appeal from God. He submits to sin’s power, and the results are fatal for his brother. He invites Abel out into the field, and there he kills him (Gen. 4:8). In the OT violent crimes committed in the field are regarded as premeditated, since they take place where there would be no witnesses to respond to cries for help. The deadly seriousness of sin is on full display. Anyone tempted to dismiss the original sin as a victimless crime, an offense against God rather than man, must recognize that breaking the earlier commandments inevitably ends with breaking the latter ones as well.
4:9–16 God then comes to Cain, as he had earlier come to Adam, and confronts him with a question inviting confession of his sin: “Where is Abel your brother?” (v. 9). Even though Adam made excuses for his actions, at least he finally told the truth and confessed his sin, as did Eve (cf. 3:12–13). Cain does neither. He first lies to God, saying, “I do not know,” and then attempts to evade his own responsibility for Abel, asking, “Am I my brother’s keeper?” (4:9). Having failed in its appointed task as the guardian (Hb. shomer; 2:15) of God’s sanctuary, now mankind shrugs off its responsibility as the guardian (shomer; 4:9) of one’s brother. But Cain’s pretense of innocence could hardly deceive the all-knowing God, who responds, “What have you done? The voice of your brother’s blood is crying to me from the ground” (v. 10). Alienated from the ground, which previously he had worked, Cain will from now on be a wanderer upon the face of the earth (v. 12). He will become a man without a place, an outcast from God’s presence, alienated from the ground from which his food comes and from his fellow man. Whereas Adam was indirectly cursed through the ground that he worked (3:17), the curse on Cain is direct and personal: “You are cursed” (4:11). The doctrine of judgment, denied by the serpent (3:4), is nonetheless real. Only the blood of Jesus, which cries out for grace rather than justice, can redeem those under the wrath of God (cf. Heb. 12:29).
There is no sign of penitence in Cain’s response to God—only anger and fear at the fate awaiting him (Gen. 4:13–14). He laments the forthcoming absence of God’s face (v. 14), yet he had done nothing to cultivate that relationship earlier by offering proper sacrifices from a broken and contrite heart or by resisting the pull of sin. Yet in his grace God does not allow judgment to take its immediate course. He puts a mark of his protection on Cain (v. 15) to keep him safe in a dangerous world, showing far more compassion on Cain than Cain had shown to his brother. Even the unbelieving murderer is to be afforded protection from revenge and anarchy and allowed to live out the full number of his days on earth. Cast out from the vicinity of Eden, Cain goes farther and further from God, away to the east, to the land whose very name means “wandering” (nod; v. 16)—an expression of Cain’s deep lostness.
4:17–24 In a sad parody of the optimistic beginning of Genesis 4 we are told that Cain “knew” his wife, who bears him a son. The son’s name is “Enoch” (Hb. khanok; v. 17), which comes from a verb meaning “to dedicate,” usually at the outset of a project (cf. Deut. 20:5; 1 Kings 8:63). There is nothing in the text to suggest that this Enoch is dedicated to the Lord in any way, however, and he serves primarily as a foil for the later Enoch, from the line of Seth, who will truly embody the meaning of his name (Gen. 5:18–22).
Since Cain has no center for his society in God, he founds a city to provide that center, forming an imitation of the sacred community that has been lost through his sin against his brother. There is already here an anticipatory contrast with Abraham: Cain seeks an earthly city, desiring to make a name for himself by founding a civilization and pursuing immortality through naming a city after his son (4:17). Abraham, however, is promised both offspring and a great name by God (12:2) yet spends his earthly lifetime as a wanderer here on earth, looking for a city yet to come, “whose designer and builder is God” (Heb. 11:10). From the outset there is a profound contrast between earth-centered religion and heaven-centered religion, between the true covenant community and the noncovenant imitation community.
The city is in a profound sense Cain’s natural territory; it is archetypally the place where no one is his brother’s keeper. Yet God’s grace can redeem even the city; the place that in Genesis 1–11 is the home of Cain’s descendants and the builders of the Tower of Babel becomes in Revelation 21 the new Jerusalem, where God dwells with his people, where we know God and are fully known by him, and where we live in intimate and untroubled fellowship with our brothers and sisters.
Intriguingly, advances in farming, in the arts, and in engineering are ascribed to Cain’s line (Gen. 4:20–22). The city concentrates human talent and insight, encouraging progress and development, even in a fallen world. Jabal is called the father of the nomadic shepherding lifestyle (v. 20), while his brother, Jubal, is the originator of musical instruments (v. 21). Their half-brother, Tubal-cain, originates metalwork of various kinds, while his sister, Naamah (“Pleasant”), earns a rare genealogical mention for a woman in Genesis, though we are not informed of any particular innovations on her part. The point is clear: Cain’s line is advanced in power, wealth, luxury, and artistic accomplishment—and likely beauty as well.
At the same time that the line of Cain contributes all these advances to mankind, it also declines rapidly in morals, as exemplified in Lamech, the seventh in Cain’s line. In addition to being the place of technological, artistic, and educational opportunities, the city is a place of moral decay from the beginning. It is Lamech who transgresses God’s design for marriage between one man and one woman through the introduction of polygamy (v. 23). It is Lamech who has access to the technology necessary to make deadly weapons and the vicious ruthlessness to use them. What is more, Lamech composes the first poetry since the fall, in order to glorify to his wives an act of gratuitous violence he commits—killing a child (yeled) for merely hurting Lamech (v. 23). In the process he turns God’s gracious withholding of punishment on Cain into the justification for his own outrageous personal vindictiveness, promising seventy-seven-fold judgment upon those who cross him (v. 24), thereby becoming the father of all genres of music that glorify sex and violence. The seventh of Cain’s line has developed the full measure of sin’s destructiveness. In diametric contrast Jesus teaches a model of seventy-seven-fold forgiveness of those who wrong us (Matt. 18:21–22).
Cain’s house comprehensively turns its back on God. His descendants are still living busy, productive lives, taking the gifts God has given them and using those gifts to build their own kingdoms and to establish their own forms of security and significance. They completely invest themselves in the progress and the pursuits of this world, and their course is determinedly set to the east of Eden. Despite this, however, they cannot escape the fulfilling of God’s purposes of the creation mandate, and their inventions and discoveries, intended to serve their own glory, will nonetheless help the progress of civilization under God’s sovereign plan.
4:25–26 God is not finished with humanity. In place of Abel God raises up another son to Adam and Eve, through whom his promise will ultimately bear fruit. The end of the chapter brings us full circle to the beginning, as “Adam knew his wife again, and she bore a son and called his name Seth” (“appointed”; Gen. 4:25). In this line lies the hope of the world. Seth is not simply appointed to be a replacement child for Abel. In naming him Seth Eve sees far more in him than that. She says, “God has appointed for me another seed [ESV: “offspring”], instead of Abel, for Cain killed him” (v. 25). Eve recognizes that the true hope of the world lies not in the rich, the powerful, the educated, or the artistic influencers—not in the descendants of Cain, in other words, for all their vaunted achievements—but in the seed of the woman, which was promised in Genesis 3:15. As long as that line survives, there is hope of salvation.
In contrast to the line of Cain, which is steadily increasing in decadence and immorality, the line of Seth preserves true religion, calling on the name of the Lord (Gen. 4:26). There is no pomp or circumstance in its worship; it seems to be simple and unadorned prayer and praise, presumably along with heartfelt sacrifices similar to the ones offered by Abel, acknowledging the Lord as God. It may look like nothing compared to the great City of Man, founded and developed by Cain’s line. The true remnant seems pitiably small and backward in comparison. It is probably significant that Seth names his son “Enosh,” which means something like “mere man” (e.g., 2 Chron. 14:11; Job 7:17). Seth is under no illusions about the weakness of his family line. But God’s strength is made perfect in human weakness (2 Cor. 12:9). In God’s own time he will bring the treasures and insights of all civilizations into the heavenly city, the new Jerusalem (Rev. 21:26). Technology and the arts can ultimately be redeemed because God is the ultimate source of all knowledge, insight, and beauty. On the last day even the spiritual descendants of Cain must bow their knees and confess that the seed of the line of Seth, Jesus Christ himself, is the Lord of all, to the glory of God the Father (Phil. 2:10).