Why Was Cain’s Sacrifice Rejected by God?

[charity]

I know this is weird, but imo the biggest lack here would be to assume that literal offerings or sacrifices--the way we understand them now--are what are being discussed there

Hello @bbyrd009,

Why should we consider them to be anything other than literal, when it is a matter of written record?

In Christ Jesus
Chris

 

[CoreIssue]

Hello again, @CoreIssue,

On the contrary, if you believe that faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God, then God must have told them the acceptable manner of approach to Himself, otherwise Abel could not be said to have acted in faith, by offering a lamb. Neither would there be a just reason for not accepting the offering of Cain. God is just, and so He must have made both men aware of His will in regard to the offering of a sacrifice.

In Christ Jesus
Chris

Abel was under law conscience. So God had already implanted his guidelines in all of mankind. But that did not include animal sacrifices.

Many people throughout history who had never heard Mosaic law or the gospel found Christ's. That is outlined in Romans.

So you are repeating an assumption.

Word of God in the verse you provided means the Bible. They did not have a Bible.

 

[charity]

Abel was under law conscience. So God had already implanted his guidelines in all of mankind. But that did not include animal sacrifices.

Many people throughout history who had never heard Mosaic law or the gospel found Christ's. That is outlined in Romans.

So you are repeating an assumption.

Word of God in the verse you provided means the Bible. They did not have a Bible.

Hello @CoreIssue,

No, they did not have the written record that we have in God's Word, but we do, and we are called upon to believe what He says within it, and the record given concerning Abel is sufficient for us to know, that his offering was made on the ground of faith. He had believed God and acted upon it, that is faith obedience. For Cain to have had his offering rejected, is sufficient proof that he had not so acted.

So, no I do not believe that I am assuming anything, just believing what God has said, in His Word. Today we have God's Word written, but in the days of Cain and Abel, God revealed His will to them by the spoken word, and that is what they were called upon to believe and act upon.

Thank you.
In Christ Jesus
Chris

 

[farouk]

'For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven
against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men,
who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them;
for God hath shewed it unto them.
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen,
being understood by the things that are made,
even his eternal power and Godhead;
so that they are without excuse:'
(Rom 1:18-20)
Hi @CoreIssue,

The witness of the heavens in Romans chapter one, was sufficient in itself to provide ground for justice, without a word being spoken, simply by the evidence provided by creation. It was sufficient witness in itself of God's power and Godhead, without a spoken word. However, here in Hebrews we have evidence that both Abel and Cain knew the known will of God regarding sacrifice, and that Abel acted upon it by faith, which was proved by it's acceptance: but Cain obviously did not, for his offering was not accepted.

In Christ Jesus
Chris

Important verses there; shows that the Lord does indeed speak to the conscience; sinners are without excuse. The wonder of the Gospel is that God still sent His beloved Son as the Saviour to die at the Cross for sinners.

 

[bbyrd009]

Hello @bbyrd009,

Why should we consider them to be anything other than literal, when it is a matter of written record?

In Christ Jesus
Chris

Well I don't mean to say that you can't, ok, just that the literal story is written so as to hide wisdom from the wise, probably

 

[Phoneman777]

Just better add, it's not all the sacrifices I don't understand- I understand the sacrifice for sin and atonement , it's some of the other ones that I have not completely understood- from my prospective Jesus covered them all, so it's really understanding exactly what they were doing back then, and why.
In all my years of listening to sermons, I have never heard one on the sacrifices ( other than the sin offering ) !!
Rita

If the OT sanctuary sacrificial system - with all the meticulous details - teaches us anything, it’s the enormity with which God considers the sin problem.

 

[bbyrd009]

Important verses there; shows that the Lord does indeed speak to the conscience; sinners are without excuse. The wonder of the Gospel is that God still sent His beloved Son as the Saviour to die at the Cross for sinners.

Confronting No Son of Man may die for another's sins might go a ways to clarifying that too I guess

 

[charity]

Confronting No Son of Man may die for another's sins might go a ways to clarifying that too I guess

Hello there, @bbyrd009,

What verse are you considering there?

In Christ Jesus
Chris

 

[Lady Crosstalk]

Confronting No Son of Man may die for another's sins might go a ways to clarifying that too I guess

But Jesus was the Son of God, bbyrd. Yes, He called Himself "Son of Man" but then, that was a title for a prophet. However, His most important role for us was as the Son of God/Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. Without that, we all would be fire fodder.

 

[CoreIssue]

Hello @bbyrd009,

Why should we consider them to be anything other than literal, when it is a matter of written record?

In Christ Jesus
Chris

Literal according to who?

We have no idea how Abel and those before the flood did sacrifices. In fact with that one exception they were not talked about at all.

Abraham piled up stones to sacrifice animals on. They were called alters.

After all, in Israel the offering was on the altar in the Temple at Jerusalem The ark was in the holy of holies.

During the 40 years No Ark and we don't know how they did sacrifices.

Then there is the information about the temple in the wilderness, which was the tent covering the Ark.

The point being there were animal sacrifices, but the governing rules changed a lot.

So the ins and outs were not spelled out in all cases. So defining literal cannot always be done.

And for us today the exacting details really do not matter.

 

[CoreIssue]

But Jesus was the Son of God, bbyrd. Yes, He called Himself "Son of Man" but then, that was a title for a prophet. However, His most important role for us was as the Son of God/Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. Without that, we all would be fire fodder.

But Jesus was the Son of God, bbyrd. Yes, He called Himself "Son of Man" but then, that was a title for a prophet. However, His most important role for us was as the Son of God/Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. Without that, we all would be fire fodder.

Being Son of Man, meaning the lineage of Adam, was extremely important. Only a man could die for the sins of others. Being the son of man (Adam means man) shows Jesus paid for the sins of Adam his father.

Son of God, As is also called Adam, means the man Jesus was also created by God, his flesh, not his spirit. says the second person the Trinity indwelt the created flesh of the Son of Man, bringing a sinless nature into a man so that he could be a spotless sacrifice.

God could not die but man could. The sacrifice had to be human flesh, not the spirit God.

Lamb of God was a man, not God.

These are hard terms to understand. But understanding them is extremely important.

 

[CoreIssue]

Hello @CoreIssue,

No, they did not have the written record that we have in God's Word, but we do, and we are called upon to believe what He says within it, and the record given concerning Abel is sufficient for us to know, that his offering was made on the ground of faith. He had believed God and acted upon it, that is faith obedience. For Cain to have had his offering rejected, is sufficient proof that he had not so acted.

So, no I do not believe that I am assuming anything, just believing what God has said, in His Word. Today we have God's Word written, but in the days of Cain and Abel, God revealed His will to them by the spoken word, and that is what they were called upon to believe and act upon.

Thank you.
In Christ Jesus
Chris

You cannot apply Mosaic law or New Testament teachings to what happened with this issue.

Also a note, it is his word, not his Word. They have two very different meanings.

Bottom line here is you are assuming.

 

[farouk]

Just better add, it's not all the sacrifices I don't understand- I understand the sacrifice for sin and atonement , it's some of the other ones that I have not completely understood- from my prospective Jesus covered them all, so it's really understanding exactly what they were doing back then, and why.
In all my years of listening to sermons, I have never heard one on the sacrifices ( other than the sin offering ) !!
Rita

The resurrection is the fulfillment of the feast of firstfruits (1 Corinthians 15.20).

 

[Butterfly]

The resurrection is the fulfillment of the feast of firstfruits (1 Corinthians 15.20).

Thank you , that's helpful x

 

[farouk]

Thank you , that's helpful x

YW.

 

[Helen]

The resurrection is the fulfillment of the feast of firstfruits (1 Corinthians 15.20).

When you can rip yourself away from your ear piercing and tattooing threads..
you have some good thoughts..
Often you just post a scripture...but you should post your thoughts also, with you scripture...we are 'sold short' when you hold back.

 

[farouk]

When you can rip yourself away from your ear piercing and tattooing threads..
you have some good thoughts..
Often you just post a scripture...but you should post your thoughts also, with you scripture...we are 'sold short' when you hold back.

Ezekiel 16.12 shows that ear piercing and even nose piercing can be symbolic of the imputed righteousness of God.

Young men and women who tattoo Bible verses show they are being 'instant in season, out of season' (2 Timothy 4.2) in witness.

The 1 Corinthians 15.20 passage shows how the Lord Jesus in His Resurrection is the fulfilment of the feast of firstfruits; so how can anyone go back to being under the law instead?

 

[charity]

Literal according to who?

We have no idea how Abel and those before the flood did sacrifices. In fact with that one exception they were not talked about at all.

Abraham piled up stones to sacrifice animals on. They were called alters.

After all, in Israel the offering was on the altar in the Temple at Jerusalem The ark was in the holy of holies.

During the 40 years No Ark and we don't know how they did sacrifices.

Then there is the information about the temple in the wilderness, which was the tent covering the Ark.

The point being there were animal sacrifices, but the governing rules changed a lot.

So the ins and outs were not spelled out in all cases. So defining literal cannot always be done.

And for us today the exacting details really do not matter.

Hello @CoreIssue,

God has told us all we need to know, hasn't He? It doesn't matter that we do not know certain things. I just praise God for what He has revealed.

In Christ Jesus
Our risen and glorified
Saviour, Lord and Head.
Chris

 

[charity]

You cannot apply Mosaic law or New Testament teachings to what happened with this issue.

Also a note, it is his word, not his Word. They have two very different meanings.

Bottom line here is you are assuming.

Hello @CoreIssue,

I was not aware that we were discussing the law, or new testament teaching.

Also, for me there is no problem in using the capital letter, or not doing so, for God the Holy Spirit is the author of the written Word, and is the Living Word in the person of the Lord Jesus Christ.

You must think what you must about what I am doing, but I know what I am doing, in the sight of God, so I am not troubled by your opinion.

Thank you.
In Christ Jesus
Chris

 

[CoreIssue]

Hello @CoreIssue,

God has told us all we need to know, hasn't He? It doesn't matter that we do not know certain things. I just praise God for what He has revealed.

In Christ Jesus
Our risen and glorified
Saviour, Lord and Head.
Chris

I agree with that as I have said.

Sometimes it is interesting curiosity and sometimes I have no idea why people bogged down in certain things.