cain and abel, a story from pre-history?

[w00dy]

its only a thought i just had (and needs some expansion before i would believe it) but could the story of cain and abel, be an allorgorical tale of the destruction of neanderthal man (abel, the sheep header/hunter with a meat diet?) at the hands of the industrialist homo saipien (cain, tiller of the ground with a more ballanced diet and future city builder), over rights to use lands/culture clashes. you could follow this through to mean that mankind of today are set into two types (though i would think by now weve very heavily interbread so you cant really be a racist about it and point fingers at breeds(horrid term sorry) of people) the children of cain and the children of seth. those on the side of jesus, wanting to do/doing the will of god, who jesus calls family (seths decendants) and those who have no fear of god and would kill thier brother for there own benifit (cains' decendants). what do you think, are there any obvious holes in my thinking?

 

[jereth]

its only a thought i just had (and needs some expansion before i would believe it) but could the story of cain and abel, be an allorgorical tale of the destruction of neanderthal man (abel, the sheep header/hunter with a meat diet?) at the hands of the industrialist homo saipien (cain, tiller of the ground with a more ballanced diet and future city builder), over rights to use lands/culture clashes.

Interesting thought, but the problem I have with it is that it is reading scientific findings back into the Bible, which I don't think is an appropriate hermeneutic method. The author of this passage would have had absolutely no knowledge about neanderthals, and so you must postulate that God magically instilled these paleoanthropological details into the text -- something I'm not willing to do.

you could follow this through to mean that mankind of today are set into two types (though i would think by now weve very heavily interbread so you cant really be a racist about it and point fingers at breeds(horrid term sorry) of people) the children of cain and the children of seth. those on the side of jesus, wanting to do/doing the will of god, who jesus calls family (seths decendants) and those who have no fear of god and would kill thier brother for there own benifit (cains' decendants). what do you think, are there any obvious holes in my thinking?

Interestingly, we find a similar line of thought in 1 John 3:11ff. It's an example of typology.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Cain is a type of Lucifer/Satan.

Abel is a type of Christ.

 

[Assyrian]

I agree about the 1John 3:11 reference. It certainly shows that it is a legitimate biblical application of the story.

Neanderthals were a bit too far back, and predate the domestication of sheep. They would have been hunter gatherers rather than herders. But the story could reflect the conflict between farmers and nomadic herders. You bring up an interesting point. Is the story telling us that though there may be conflict and murder between farmer and pasturalist, they are brothers and should not seek revenge for past bloodshed? It's certainly something to think about.

As that great chorus puts it so beautifully 'the farmer and the cowboy should be friends'

 

[kenrapoza]

its only a thought i just had (and needs some expansion before i would believe it) but could the story of cain and abel, be an allorgorical tale of the destruction of neanderthal man (abel, the sheep header/hunter with a meat diet?) at the hands of the industrialist homo saipien (cain, tiller of the ground with a more ballanced diet and future city builder), over rights to use lands/culture clashes. you could follow this through to mean that mankind of today are set into two types (though i would think by now weve very heavily interbread so you cant really be a racist about it and point fingers at breeds(horrid term sorry) of people) the children of cain and the children of seth. those on the side of jesus, wanting to do/doing the will of god, who jesus calls family (seths decendants) and those who have no fear of god and would kill thier brother for there own benifit (cains' decendants). what do you think, are there any obvious holes in my thinking?

Hi W00dy! You definitely have an interesting thought. However, as has been mentioned, I think you are reading some modern theories into an ancient document and creating an anacronysm. I can't seem to follow any logical path that would lead to the conclusion that the story is a reference to the destruction of neanderthal man. It seems to me to be a foreign suggestion.

Genesis does a good job of developing a blessing/cursing motif and expanding it to show its effect on human society. They are seen as active in human development. I view the account of Cain and Abel a little more this way:

Though Cain began as a son of hope, his spiritual dullness led him to choose an occupation that lined him up with the curse of man delineated in Gen. 3:17. He is contrasted with his brother Abel who chose an occupation more in keeping with man's original commission as noted in Gen. 1:28. Cain's spiritual condition is seen once again when he makes a faithless offering to God. (Though it was bloodless, that is not always wrong depending on the type of offering - Leviticus chapter 2.) Cain knew he was wrong yet he still got angry when God did not accept his offering - another indication that Cain's real problem was one of the heart. As we know from 1John 3:12, Cain belonged to Satan. Abel made a blood offering to God in faith. Obviously he understood the gravity of sin and the fall of man, he took it seriously and wanted to please God.

The fruit of Cain's condition is seen in his descendants who spread Godless society. The story is polemical in nature. Also, the Israelites were a nomadic people who were pastoral in nature - they tended flocks because they didn't settle permanently to till the ground. Although you alluded to this yourself in your post.

I hope that some of what I wrote makes sense and I didn't misinterpret your post!

 

[DailyBlessings]

I find it curious that people might insist a prophet could not write about historical events he did not have knowledge about. Prophets write in the language of their times, but the topic of their conversation presumably comes from God, and therefore is bound by God's knowledge, not ours.
That said, I think the Cain/Abel story is probably a remnant creation myth explaining the presence of evil in the world, not the waning of our genetic cousins.

 

[Assyrian]

The problem is, when prophets tell us about historical events the accounts sometimes include seven headed monsters.

 

[DailyBlessings]

True that. But a seven-headed moster does not have to be represented in real life to have meaning in the context of the story and the time it was written in.

 

[Assyrian]

So when a prophet writes about history, the various characters and motifs do not have to be represented in real life to have meaning in the context of the story and the time it was written in.

 

[artybloke]

I find it curious that people might insist a prophet could not write about historical events he did not have knowledge about. Prophets write in the language of their times, but the topic of their conversation presumably comes from God, and therefore is bound by God's knowledge, not ours.
That said, I think the Cain/Abel story is probably a remnant creation myth explaining the presence of evil in the world, not the waning of our genetic cousins.

Where prophets say their words come from, and where they actually come from are not neccessarily the same thing.

 

[DailyBlessings]

Where prophets say their words come from, and where they actually come from are not neccessarily the same thing.

Very true indeed, and understanding a prophecy that has been given to you is yet another matter still. I just thought it was a curious point of contention to have in a discussion about the book of Genesis, which mostly consists of events the author could not have witnessed.

 

[JohnR7]

the destruction of neanderthal man

This passage may not answer your question, but I think it shows how God replaces one with the other.

Deut. 7:22
And the Lord your God will drive out those nations before you little by little;
you will be unable to destroy them at once, lest the beasts of the field become too numerous for you.