Cain According To James

WebersHome said:

.
"Be discreet, stay alert. Your adversary, the Devil, prowls about like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour; whom resist, steadfast in the faith." (1Pet 5:8-9)

"the faith" isn't only a collection of beliefs, but includes a collection of practices, since according to James; a person of faith without practices might as well have no faith at all.

● Jas 2:17 . . Faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.

The demon world is a believing world; and it likely consists of better believers than your average rank and file pew warmer. But the demon world lacks piety; i.e. they are not devout.

For example: a devout Christian is someone who not only believes; but also behaves.

● John 14:15 . . If you love me, you will comply with what I command.

● John 14:21 . .Whoever has my commands and obeys them, he is the one who loves me.

● John 14:23-24 . . If anyone loves me, he will obey my teaching . . He who does not love me will not obey my teaching.

● John 15:14 . .You are my friends if you do what I command you.

Now, assuming for the moment that Cain's offering was correct; then why didn't God accept it? Well; before God snubbed Cain's offering, He first snubbed Cain.

● Gen 4:4-5 . .The Lord looked with favor on Abel and his offering, but on Cain and his offering he did not look with favor.

The reason given for Cain's rejection is an elephant in the middle of the room that quite a few Bible students seem content to ignore.

● Gen 4:7 . . If you do what is right, will you not be accepted?

Cain was a believer; that much is pretty obvious. But Cain's piety was flawed, i.e. his personal conduct didn't meet God's standards of behavior, viz: Cain wasn't devout.

FAQ: How could Cain possibly know God's standards of behavior without a written code to inform him?

A: Luke 11:49-51 says that Cain's kid brother Abel was a prophet.

FAQ: What does Cain's rejection have to do with me? I'm a Christian.

A: Cain's association with God was tainted by his conduct. That principle is a universal axiom; it governs everybody: Christians included; they are not exempt. When Christians do what's right, they get along with God just fine; but when they don't do what's right, they get the cold shoulder just the same as if they were a demon.

● 1John 1:5-6 . .This is the message which we have heard from Him and declare to you, that God is light and in Him is no darkness at all. If we say that we have fellowship with Him, and walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth.
_

Click to expand...

We have to be careful that we don't confuse Justification with Sanctification and end up preaching a gospel of works which brings the curse of God instead of His blessing.

Cain may have been a believer, but his offering as compared with Abel's shows that he was depending on the work of his own hands to find favour with God, while Abel sacrificed an animal which he did not produce by the work of his own hands. Even way back then, Abel showed his faith in the sacrifice he offered, that the favour of God to him was on the basis of his faith to offer the correct sacrifice. If we go right back to Adam and Eve, God killed an animal to clothe them with its skin. This is symbolic that blood had to be shed to cloth their nakedness. This started the system of animal sacrifice as an act of worship to God and to symbolise the cleansing of their sin, but it could only happen once a year. So Abel offered the correct sacrifice, while Cain didn't.

This is why it was Abel's line that carried through to Abraham instead of Cain's line. This symbolises that Abel's line is the line of faith without works, and Cains line symbolises the gospel of works that Paul said, in Galatians, brings God's curse instead of his blessing. As it happened to Cain, it happens to all those who depend on their on good works to achieve favour with God.

WebersHome said:

.
● Heb 11:4 . . By faith Abel offered God a better sacrifice than Cain did.

I'm going to edit the wording of that just a bit to bring out an important point.

"By faith Abel offered God a sacrifice"

The missing word "better" is a modifier; which serves to show that both men's offerings were sacrifices; only the quality of Abel's sacrifice was superior to the quality of Cain's.

Sacrifices should never be assumed always lethal and/or bloody. Take for example:

● Rom 12:1 . . I urge you, brothers, in view of God's mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices

● Heb 13:15-17 . .Through Him then, let us continually offer up a sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of lips that give thanks to His name. And do not neglect doing good and sharing; for with such sacrifices God is pleased.

Heb 11:4 also testifies that Abel's offerings were gifts. The very same Greek word is used at Matt 2:11 to categorize the treasures that the wise men left with baby Jesus.

Their gifts were not sin offerings; they were tributes: defined by Webster's as (1) something given or contributed voluntarily as due or deserved especially a gift or service showing respect, gratitude, or affection and (2) something (such as material evidence or a formal attestation) that indicates the worth, virtue, or effectiveness of the one in question

In other words "gifts" are acts of worship; which is the primary reason why Jehovah's Witnesses do not celebrate birthdays.
_

Click to expand...

I think we get the message.

Heb_11:4 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.

1Jn_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.

Jud_1:11 Woe to them! For they walked in the way of Cain and abandoned themselves for the sake of gain to Balaam's error and perished in Korah's rebellion.

Oscarr said:

Cain may have been a believer, but his offering as compared with Abel's shows that he was depending on the work of his own hands to find favour with God, while Abel sacrificed an animal which he did not produce by the work of his own hands.

Click to expand...

Abel did NOT produce his animal sacrifice with the work of his hands, but Cain DID produce his agricultural sacrifice with the work of his hands? Apparently, you've never been a farmer or rancher. I think my late father-in-law, who was both, would say you are making a distinction without a difference.

Cain certainly did not create his crops any more than Abel created his flocks. Neither the crops nor the flocks thrived without a great deal of care and attention.

You appear to be trying to use this particular myth to support a "once saved always saved" theology. I just don't think it can be made to do that. If the myth makes any sense at all - i.e., if the meaning isn't buried in ancient notions that we'll never understand - I believe the answer has to be what the OP suggests: the problem was Cain and the attitude he brought to his sacrifice, not the nature of the sacrifice itself.

AvisG said:

Abel did NOT produce his animal sacrifice with the work of his hands, but Cain DID produce his agricultural sacrifice with the work of his hands? Apparently, you've never been a farmer or rancher. I think my late father-in-law, who was both, would say you are making a distinction without a difference.

Cain certainly did not create his crops any more than Abel created his flocks. Neither the crops nor the flocks thrived without a great deal of care and attention.

You appear to be trying to use this particular myth to support a "once saved always saved" theology. I just don't think it can be made to do that. If the myth makes any sense at all - i.e., if the meaning isn't buried in ancient notions that we'll never understand - I believe the answer has to be what the OP suggests: the problem was Cain and the attitude he brought to his sacrifice, not the nature of the sacrifice itself.

Click to expand...

I don't think you understand the underlying principle of what happened between Cain and Abel, and why Abel's sacrifice was accepted by God and Cain's wasn't.

Cain's attitude had nothing to do with it, and to say it was for that reason is adding to God's Word that which isn't there. Cain got angry because his offering wasn't accepted and he killed Abel because he was jealous that God accepted Abel's offering and not his own.

You have to look at the principle and not split hairs over the content of their offering whether or not it was the result of their own efforts or not. That has little to do with it. You have to study the whole principle of the blood sacrifice for sin and remaining right with God that started with Adam and went right through to John the Baptizer, and that it was a foreshadow of the blood sacrifice of Jesus on the cross.

The first blood sacrifice was made for Adam and Eve, where God killed an animal for the first time and clothed them with its skin. The animal's blood had to be shed in order for Adam and Eve to be clothed. The animal had to be sacrificed.

This is why Abel's sacrifice was accepted - it was a blood sacrifice in which an animal was sacrificed. Cain's offering was not. The Scripture says that without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin. Adam's sin was remitted when God killed the first animal, and he made blood offerings for the rest of his life in accordance with the principle that God showed him. Abel followed in the way of his father, and therefore we say that the line of grace and mercy was the line of Abel, whereas the curse resulting from self-righteousness came from Cain.

By your use of the word 'myth' to describe the story of Cain and Abel shows a basic misunderstanding of what happened and why the story is in the Bible. If you think that God's inspired Word is a set of 'myths' then we don't have anything in common.

OR
Abel brought the best, first, and Cain did not bring the best. No proof in Scripture that I have ever seen that Cain's offering/sacrifice was rejected for this reason >>

Oscarr said:

This is why Abel's sacrifice was accepted - it was a blood sacrifice in which an animal was sacrificed. Cain's offering was not. The Scripture says that without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin.

Click to expand...

Oh, it can or may "fit" with the ideas in Scripture, God's Way, concerning blood,
but
might not be the case, as it is not stated.

yeshuaslavejeff said:

OR
Abel brought the best, first, and Cain did not bring the best. No proof in Scripture that I have ever seen that Cain's offering/sacrifice was rejected for this reason >>

Oh, it can or may "fit" with the ideas in Scripture, God's Way, concerning blood,
but
might not be the case, as it is not stated.

Click to expand...

When you link Adam and Eve being clothed with animal skins, and the blood offerings in the tabernacle and Temple, all foreshadows of the shedding of Christ's blood on the cross for our sin, then Abel's sacrifice as compared to Cain's comes into perspective.

Oscarr said:

When you link Adam and Eve being clothed with animal skins, and the blood offerings in the tabernacle and Temple, all foreshadows of the shedding of Christ's blood on the cross for our sin, then Abel's sacrifice as compared to Cain's comes into perspective.

Click to expand...

Perspective. i.e. opinion.

yeshuaslavejeff said:

Perspective. i.e. opinion.

Click to expand...

You are correct! It is perspective/opinion. God's perspective/opinion as He has outlined in His inspired written Scriptures.

WebersHome said:

NOTE: Dysfunctional families really ought to stay home on Sundays and watch football or mow the lawn instead of coming to church till they resolve their differences and can all put on an honest happy face when they're together in public.

Click to expand...

What if, as I've seen, most all of a congregation (grown-ups)(and sometimes many of the children)
have been taught to "not air their dirty laundry in church/public", and to come with a smile on their face , whether a church function, meal, service, whatever - "always LOOK happy" (heard this from a Mennonite also - it surprised me at first - she said the BEST thing in their family was when the left the group they were in, because everyone was so concerned more for what others thought about them than about what is true) ....

This is , yes, almost rhetorical.... but has anyone "prayed through"/ or stayed, and seen the adults in a group CHANGE, to do what is right ?

Oscarr said:

The first blood sacrifice was made for Adam and Eve, where God killed an animal for the first time and clothed them with its skin. The animal's blood had to be shed in order for Adam and Eve to be clothed. The animal had to be sacrificed.

Click to expand...

I think this is an assumption. The text states that "God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them." For all we know - prior to the fall, Adam and Eve could have been spirits as God is. Their "skin" could have been formed as a protection against all the disease and destruction that wasn't present until sin entered.