In a nutshell, why wasn't it acceptable? Because he didn't offer a blood sacrifice? (I'm sure Adam and Eve would have passed that down to them). Because he didn't give the best of his crops? We know Cain's heart wasn't right. Is there any way of knowing specifically why his offering was rejected?
Cain's offering
- Thread starter drequeen
- Start date
Drequeen I sure they realised why God had requested a blood sacrifice. Able chose obedience. Cain trusted in the works of himself from the land harvest as sufficient. The Bible says there be no remission of sins without a blood sacrifice
That's pretty much where I was leaning. My only thought was, since he was a farmer, and if he gave the best of what he had with a pure heart, if that would have been sufficient. The verse in Hebrews makes it pretty clear, however.
Heb 9:22 "And according to the law almost all things are purified with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no remission".
The bible doesn't tell us exactly why Cain's sacrifice was not accepted and anything anyone wants to say as to why is just speculation and personal opinion, that being said I offer mine. Let us look at Genesis 4: 3-7.
3 And in the process of time it came to pass that Cain brought an offering of the fruit of the ground to the Lord. 4 Abel also brought of the firstborn of his flock and of their fat. And the Lord respected Abel and his offering, 5 but He did not respect Cain and his offering. And Cain was very angry, and his countenance fell.
6 So the Lord said to Cain, “Why are you angry? And why has your countenance fallen? 7 If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin lies at the door. And its desire is for you, but you should rule over it.”
The text tells us that Cain brought an offering of the fruit of the ground. Remember that the law was not given to mankind as of yet, even so there is a sacrifice of first fruits of the land as well as the blood. Notice what the text says about Abel, he brought of the first fruits of his flock. Abel went through and found the best he had and offered it to GOD, whereas it seems that Cain just grabbed some fruit or grain and brought that (Whatever). Now we look at verses 6 and 7. God asks Cain why he is angry and then says "If you do well, will it not be accepted? This suggests that it is not that he offered fruit or grain, but that he did not offer his best. I believe the next line gives the proof. God is still speaking to Cain..."And if you do not do well, sin lies at the door. And it's desire is for you, but you should rule over it." Since God said the offering would be accepted if Cain did well, then it is not because of what Cain offered but rather how he went about it. It is a matter of the heart. Abel gave the best he had because in his heart that is what God deserves. Cain just gave an offering, out of obligation not love. God told Cain he needed to have a better attitude and his offering would be accepted. Cain could have accepted God's words and made a better offering with a better heart, but instead he argued with Abel and sadly... killed him.
3 And in the process of time it came to pass that Cain brought an offering of the fruit of the ground to the Lord. 4 Abel also brought of the firstborn of his flock and of their fat. And the Lord respected Abel and his offering, 5 but He did not respect Cain and his offering. And Cain was very angry, and his countenance fell.
6 So the Lord said to Cain, “Why are you angry? And why has your countenance fallen? 7 If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin lies at the door. And its desire is for you, but you should rule over it.”
The text tells us that Cain brought an offering of the fruit of the ground. Remember that the law was not given to mankind as of yet, even so there is a sacrifice of first fruits of the land as well as the blood. Notice what the text says about Abel, he brought of the first fruits of his flock. Abel went through and found the best he had and offered it to GOD, whereas it seems that Cain just grabbed some fruit or grain and brought that (Whatever). Now we look at verses 6 and 7. God asks Cain why he is angry and then says "If you do well, will it not be accepted? This suggests that it is not that he offered fruit or grain, but that he did not offer his best. I believe the next line gives the proof. God is still speaking to Cain..."And if you do not do well, sin lies at the door. And it's desire is for you, but you should rule over it." Since God said the offering would be accepted if Cain did well, then it is not because of what Cain offered but rather how he went about it. It is a matter of the heart. Abel gave the best he had because in his heart that is what God deserves. Cain just gave an offering, out of obligation not love. God told Cain he needed to have a better attitude and his offering would be accepted. Cain could have accepted God's words and made a better offering with a better heart, but instead he argued with Abel and sadly... killed him.
Good morning, Dave F.;
Well said. I don't know why Cain had an attitude but it should give us all something to think hard about. I have good days but why did I not give the Lord my best - my wife, family, work, ministry, offering...
God bless you, brother.
Bob
Dave I have looked into what you have said and it not just be mere speculation and not personal opinion at least from what scripture tells us. Firstly animal sacrifices were in place long before the law was given. We only have to read at the very beginning with the fall . That God gave Adam & Eve Animal skins and not vegetation materials in Genesis 3:21 As throughout all the pages of our redemption blood sacrifice was required. As to the law. Sacrifices were in place long before the law was given we find just after the flood in Genesis 8: 20- 22 Noah offers up animal sacrifices again . We also find with Abraham and Isaac in exodus chapter 22 that it is another animal sacrifice that is required. .
You mention the first fruits as an argument that the sacrifices really had nothing to do with the sacrifice offered. What you may not realise is that first fruits didn’t come in into existence until after the exodus. We find that in Leviticus 23: 15-16. And Deuteronomy 26: 1-10 it was a remembrance of Israel’s sojourn in Egypt. Nothing is mentioned of vegetation sacrifices prior to that . Only Cains vegetation sacrifice which was solely rejected by God . Hebrews 11:4 clearly expresses that Abel’s animal sacrifice was superior and acceptable to God while Cains was rejected 
Last edited:
Hebrews 11:4 ESV
By faith Abel offered to God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain, through which he was commended as righteous, God commending him by accepting his gifts. And through his faith, though he died, he still speaks.
Yes, By FAITH Abel offered a MORE acceptable sacrifice than Cain. This is exactly what I am saying... it is a matter of how they went about it. Notice that it says a more acceptable meaning that Cain's sacrifice was given from a grudgingly heart, whereas Abel gave willingly. Go back and read again what GOD said to Cain about his sacrifice. "If YE do well..." it was about Cain not what he sacrificed. Should he have gone and taken a sheep from his brothers' flock instead of offering from his own work? Cain was a farmer and worked the fields, God is not against Cain for the work that he does. Verse 7 shows us it was Cain that was rejected more than his sacrifice because his attitude was not right.
Is it not rather a matter of God's promise, where faith takes hold of the promise? For without a promise from God there can be no faith? Even John 3:16 carries a promise from God.
John 3:16 (KJV) For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Hello, everyone;
I'm glad the matter of faith built upon God's promises was brought up. God's promises and our faith equate to a relationship with Him.
Romans 4:13,13 The promise to Abraham and his descendants, that they should inherit the world, did not come through the law but through the righteousness of faith. - RSV
In our relationship with Christ we don't go about our obedience or service to Him haphazardly, or, in Genesis Cain's lack of regard and personal heart to God when he offered the Lord the fruit of the ground.
God saw the attitude of both brothers, yet I could ask the question, why was God so mean to Cain, or, after God was pleased with Abel's offering, why didn't He protect Abel from being killed by his brother?
We can bring all kinds of "what if's" to the Scripture but may overlook the lessons God was presenting and that's the point of this passage in Genesis 4:3-7.
Bob
Good stuff.
Cain and Abel, the sons of Adam and Eve, “in the course of time” brought offerings to the Lord according to Genesis 4:3.
As you correctly pointed out, that is all we know! Clearly there are a lot of details missing from the earliest parts of the narrative.
And of course, because we are humans.....we love a mystery so we work to fill in what God left out.
There is probably no connection between Cain's giving of vegetation since he was the one who tilled, while Abel was the tender of the flock. Each was giving the very best fruits of their labor.
The most evident difference between the two sacrifices is that Abel’s offering was an animal (blood) sacrifice, and Cain’s was a vegetable (bloodless) sacrifice. There may be an additional implication that, while Abel brought “the best portions,” Cain simply brought some of his ordinary crops. Scripture does not give an indication, however, that either of these differences factored into God’s acceptance of Abel and rejection of Cain.
Now how did they know about a sacrifice would be a good question. I will give a few assumptions......
1. God told them to do it.
2. There mom and dad told them.
3. Familiarity. Since both were old enough to labor it is probable that many animals had been sacrificed to provide clothing for the whole family, and so animal sacrifice would already be somewhat justified in protecting them from the elements, and to hide their nakedness.
I would also add that as biblical history develops in the Book of Genesis, we find that all the ones with whom God was pleased came to Him by means of blood. Noah immediately offered up blood sacrifices when he left the ark. He was followed by: Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, all of whom were careful to approach God by means of blood. When Moses received the Law at Mount Sinai, the redemptive element of blood ran throughout the entire Law with its 613 commandments.
As YOU have stated, we do not know but what we do know for sure is that “the LORD looked with favor on Abel and his offering, but on Cain and his offering he did not look with favor” (Genesis 4:4–5).
Here is another clue......We also know that God looks on the heart of men as seen in 1 Sam. 16:7.
So we can know that there was something in Cain’s motivation and heart attitude, and possibly something in his performance, that made his offering unacceptable to God. It was obviously something that he was aware of and could remedy, since God tells him after the fact, “You will be accepted if you do what is right” in Gen. 4:7.
Abel, on the other hand, had the proper motivation, the proper procedure, and the proper relationship with God. That relationship was based on faith because we see in Hebrews 11:4 that “By faith Abel offered God a better sacrifice than Cain did”.
Ever since the beginning, people must come to God in faith. “Without faith it is impossible to please God” (Hebrews 11:6), and faith is evidently what Cain lacked. Can I prove that????? Not really but In Jude 1:11, we read, “They have taken the way of Cain,” a description that refers to lawless men.
This may be taken to mean that they, like Cain, disobediently devised their own ways of worship, and they did not come to God by faith. Cain’s offering, while acceptable in his own eyes, was not acceptable to the Lord. In some way, Cain had perverted God’s prescribed form of worship, and his heart was not right. He grew jealous of Abel, and he selfishly nursed his wounded pride.
Rather than repent at God’s rebuke, Cain became angry, and later, in the field, he killed Abel and brought judgment upon himself.
The apostle John gives us more insight into Cain’s heart in 1 John 3:12......
"We should not be like Cain, who was of the evil one and murdered his brother. And why did he murder him? Because his own deeds were evil and his brother’s righteous."
Those who belong to the evil one will have evil actions, and those with evil actions will naturally hate those with righteous actions. The evil in Cain’s heart was further revealed when the Lord asked him, “Where is your brother Abel?” to which Cain replied, “I don’t know. . . . Am I my brother’s keeper?”. In this response Cain tells a stone-cold lie and shows an amazing level of insolence.
When Jesus Christ died upon the cross, He became the substitutionary atonement for our sins. The blood of Christ “speaks a better word than the blood of Abel” (Hebrews 12:24). Both Abel and Christ were slain by wicked men.
his was something he produced his brother was something God produced much like works being judged by fire. wood hay stubble ==flesh gold silver previous stone if God
Can this same situation with Cain and Able and your explanation here be applied to Isaac and Esau. I always wondered why God preferred Isaac and Esau He did not prefer.
I never saw any outright rejection of God from Esau but maybe it's like you said, it was a heart issue and God saw that Esau did not have a heart for Him.
What was in Sauls heart before he became the apostle Paul?
According to Romans 3:9-12, none of us have a heart for God.
Romans 3:9-12 KJVS
What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin; [10] As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: [11] There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. [12] They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
I'll let Major comment on my take of this (since he brought it up).
Yea...blame the old man!
Romans 9:11-13.........
"For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth; it was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated."
Right here Paul emphasizes that God's choice of Jacob over Esau was made before they were born, underscoring the doctrine of election which unfortunately we can not discuss here.
This choice was not based on their works or merits but on God's sovereign will and purpose.
Also, in the Genesis account, the "word" hate is misused in the KJV. The phrase "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated" (Malachi 1:2-3) reflects a Hebraic idiom that conveys preference rather than emotional hatred. It signifies God's sovereign choice to work through Jacob to fulfill His covenant promises.
Why not? My wife does it all the time. (hehe)