Genesis 4:7. I have never liked how this verse is written in the KJV Bible, and have never liked how modern versions, some pastors, and other writers have tried to explain it. The KJV wording is hard to understand, but the modern versions haven't satisfied me to being good interpreters of these strange wordings either. God is speaking to Cain about the offering that Cain had given Him. His brother, Able, was a keeper of the sheep, while Cain was a tiller of the ground. Able had brought a blood sacrifice, a lamb, the firstlings of his flock, while Cain had brought the fruit of the ground (a cursed ground, 3:17). God accepted Able's offering, but rejected Cain's, and Cain was mad about that. God asked him why he was mad, and then we come to verse seven.
"If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him."
Many have said that "sin lieth at the door" means "There is a 'sin offering' readily available to Cain to offer. He can ask Able for a lamb, or buy one from him, and then offer it to God, then God will accept Cain and his offering." Others say that if Cain doesn't do well, that Cain will soon sin. "and unto thee shall be his (sin's) desire." They say this means Cain's sin nature will take over and cause him to sin against God. "And thou shalt rule over him (sin)." They say this means God is giving Cain a command to not sin.
Something inside me just doesn't buy this teaching I have heard for so long. Teaching at the church today on Hebrews 11, that mentions Able, I took my listeners back to Genesis 4 and shared this with them, and then told them I was going to teach it differently, and let them "Prove all things, hold fast that which is good." 1Th 5:21. This is how I then interpreted this verse.
I said this verse could be divided into two parts, and walked to one side of the room and said "Over here, God is saying to Cain "If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted?" That is a rhetorical question, with the answer being "Yes." If Cain does well, offers the required blood sacrifice, he would be accepted by God, case closed. I then walked over to the other side of the room and said "This is the second part of the verse, where it says "and if thou doest not well,". This part comes with three sub-parts: 1. "sin lieth at the door." 2. "And unto thee shall be his desire," 3. "and thou shalt rule over him.
I emphasize that there were two parts by standing on one side of the room while I was teaching on "If Cain does well", and standing on the other side of the room while teaching "If Cain does not do well." The first part is simple and easily understood. The second part is complicated, and is taught various ways; good ways, and bad ways. When "and thou shalt rule over him" is interpreted as being "just say 'no' to sin", the teacher has to jump back to the side of the room where he was saying what would be "If Cain does well." That demands a strained change in subject from where Cain is NOT doing well, back to the subject of how Cain would be accepted if he DID do well, that seems to have already simple been closed if Cain does well. Now if this verse truly is to be divided into these two categories: 1) doing well, and 2) not doing well, then when it says "and thou shalt rule over him (sin)" is in the category of NOT doing well, so it can't mean "just say 'no' to sin", for that would be doing WELL.
To understand how "and thou shalt rule over him (sin)" is actually something God would NOT like Cain to do, I used the following tactic of teaching. Instead of using sin, or the word "sin" in this verse, say we substituted a "baker" for "sin." What does a baker do? They bake food. Sin sins, a baker bakes food. Imagine a baker lying at your door. Obviously he doesn't plan on going away any time soon, or he would be standing. Eventually you will realize they are at your door. What does the baker want to do? They want to bake for you. They want you to take in what their baking produces. What does sin want you to do? It wants you to sin. "and thou shalt rule over him (sin/the baker)". That doesn't mean you want to send them away. It means you are going to tell sin how to sin, and the baker what you want baked! The first part of the verse speaks of what would happen if Cain DOES WELL. The second part of the verse speak of what happens of Cain DOES NOT WELL. Which is what?
He sins, because his sin natures moves him to sin. And if he is not doing well while he is ruling/directing his sin nature, what is he doing. He is not saying "No" to sin, he is telling his sin nature how to sin: "Rebel against God, be angry with God, refuse to bring a blood sacrifice, kill Able." Killing Able is exactly what Cain does in the next verse.
"If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him."
Many have said that "sin lieth at the door" means "There is a 'sin offering' readily available to Cain to offer. He can ask Able for a lamb, or buy one from him, and then offer it to God, then God will accept Cain and his offering." Others say that if Cain doesn't do well, that Cain will soon sin. "and unto thee shall be his (sin's) desire." They say this means Cain's sin nature will take over and cause him to sin against God. "And thou shalt rule over him (sin)." They say this means God is giving Cain a command to not sin.
Something inside me just doesn't buy this teaching I have heard for so long. Teaching at the church today on Hebrews 11, that mentions Able, I took my listeners back to Genesis 4 and shared this with them, and then told them I was going to teach it differently, and let them "Prove all things, hold fast that which is good." 1Th 5:21. This is how I then interpreted this verse.
I said this verse could be divided into two parts, and walked to one side of the room and said "Over here, God is saying to Cain "If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted?" That is a rhetorical question, with the answer being "Yes." If Cain does well, offers the required blood sacrifice, he would be accepted by God, case closed. I then walked over to the other side of the room and said "This is the second part of the verse, where it says "and if thou doest not well,". This part comes with three sub-parts: 1. "sin lieth at the door." 2. "And unto thee shall be his desire," 3. "and thou shalt rule over him.
I emphasize that there were two parts by standing on one side of the room while I was teaching on "If Cain does well", and standing on the other side of the room while teaching "If Cain does not do well." The first part is simple and easily understood. The second part is complicated, and is taught various ways; good ways, and bad ways. When "and thou shalt rule over him" is interpreted as being "just say 'no' to sin", the teacher has to jump back to the side of the room where he was saying what would be "If Cain does well." That demands a strained change in subject from where Cain is NOT doing well, back to the subject of how Cain would be accepted if he DID do well, that seems to have already simple been closed if Cain does well. Now if this verse truly is to be divided into these two categories: 1) doing well, and 2) not doing well, then when it says "and thou shalt rule over him (sin)" is in the category of NOT doing well, so it can't mean "just say 'no' to sin", for that would be doing WELL.
To understand how "and thou shalt rule over him (sin)" is actually something God would NOT like Cain to do, I used the following tactic of teaching. Instead of using sin, or the word "sin" in this verse, say we substituted a "baker" for "sin." What does a baker do? They bake food. Sin sins, a baker bakes food. Imagine a baker lying at your door. Obviously he doesn't plan on going away any time soon, or he would be standing. Eventually you will realize they are at your door. What does the baker want to do? They want to bake for you. They want you to take in what their baking produces. What does sin want you to do? It wants you to sin. "and thou shalt rule over him (sin/the baker)". That doesn't mean you want to send them away. It means you are going to tell sin how to sin, and the baker what you want baked! The first part of the verse speaks of what would happen if Cain DOES WELL. The second part of the verse speak of what happens of Cain DOES NOT WELL. Which is what?
He sins, because his sin natures moves him to sin. And if he is not doing well while he is ruling/directing his sin nature, what is he doing. He is not saying "No" to sin, he is telling his sin nature how to sin: "Rebel against God, be angry with God, refuse to bring a blood sacrifice, kill Able." Killing Able is exactly what Cain does in the next verse.
