Genesis 4:3-8

CRITICAL NOTES.—

Genesis 4:7. Sin lieth at the door.] Rather: “A sin-offering is crouching at the door, or (more generally) opening”: e.g. “at the opening, or entrance, of thy brother’s fold.” This exegesis supplies a point of departure for the words which immediately follow, and which otherwise seem exceedingly abrupt. The connecting link may be shown by the following paraphrase:—“Though, in order to do well, thou must needs own thyself a sinner, and be indebted to thy brother for a sin-offering out of his fold; yet this will not destroy thy rights as firstborn: NOTWITHSTANDING, TO THEE shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him. Let not pride, therefore, deter thee from this better—this only proper—way. Let no obstinacy, no groundless fears, keep thee from thus doing well.” Much has been written on this passage, and many are the views of it that have been propounded; but, without dogmatising, we may express our pretty confident persuasion that no exposition so fully meets the case as the above.—

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.— Genesis 4:3

THE TRUE AND FALSE WORSHIPPER OF GOD

I. That both the True and the False amongst Men are apparently Worshippers of God. Both Cain and Abel came to worship God. The false come to worship God.

1. Because it is the custom of the land so to do. The sabbath morning dawns, and the world of mankind awakes to the religious service of the day. All classes and conditions of men are seen wending their way to the temple of God. They reverence not the day. They join not heartily in its worship. They are the slaves of custom. They are the creatures of habit. Hence you cannot distinguish the moral character of men by the mere fact of worship. Attendance to the outward ceremonial of religion is not an infallible index to their piety or heavenly aspirations.

2. Because men feel that they must pay some regard to social propriety and conscience. Men would feel if they did not bring the first fruits of their religious service to God that they were little better than heathens. This to them is a social propriety. They would not disgrace their characters by an avowed neglect of the sabbath, or by a rejection of all moral worship. They always attend church once a day. This is their sabbath etiquette. This silences their conscience, preserves their reputation, and constitutes them moral and respectable people. Hence they bring their firstlings to the Lord. These are the false worshippers of God, and with them the sanctuaries of the world are crowded. They are Cainites.

3. Because men feel that their souls are drawn out to God in ardent longings and grateful praises. These are the true worshippers of God. They are in the minority. They are followers of Abel. They gladly welcome all the means of grace. They joyfully present their firstlings to the Lord. They come to God in his appointed way. They are animated by the true spirit of devotion.

II. That both the True and the False amongst men present their material offerings to God. Cain and Abel not merely came together to worship God, but they also brought of their substance to the Lord. Cain brought of the fruit of the ground. Abel brought the firstlings of his flock.

1. The trade of each brother suggested his offering. This was most natural. The trades, the temperaments, and the abilities of men, generally determine their kind of religious service and devotion. The men of great intellect will take to God the firstlings of a splendid literature. The man of great emotion will take to God the offerings of an enthusiastic prayer. The man of great wealth will take silver and gold. The man of leisure will give his time. The man of genius will give his originality. The poor man will give himself. Hence there are few men who neglect to give some offering to the Lord.

(1.) Some take their offerings for parade. They never take small offerings that can be concealed. Their offerings always go in droves, that men may see them, admire them, and inquire about them. They have no true piety to inspire society with respect, hence they substitute ostentation, and a pretence of goodness in its place. They will give ten thousand pounds to build a church, when privately they would not give ten shillings to save a soul.

(2.) They take their offerings to enhance their trade. They want to be known as great church goers, as men of benevolent disposition. Thus they hope to increase their financial returns, and to strengthen their business relationships. Their offerings to God are nothing more than investments for themselves.

(3.) They take their offerings to increase their social influence.

(4.) They take their offerings with a humble desire to glorify God. These are the offerings of a true manhood. They are the outcome of a penitent soul. They only are acceptable to heaven. Thus as you cannot estimate the moral character of a man by his worship, neither can you by the material offerings he presents to the Lord.

III. That both the true and the false amongst men are observed and estimated by God in their worship and offerings.

1. The worship and offerings of the one are accepted. “And the Lord had respect unto Abel and his offering.” And why:—

(1.) Because it was well and carefully selected. Men should select carefully the offerings they give to God.

(2.) Because it was the best he could command. He brought the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. When men are searching their flocks for the Lord’s offering, they generally take the poorest they can find. The threepenny piece is enough.

(3.) Because it was appropriate His sacrifice preached the gospel, foreshadowed the cross.

(4.) Because it was offered in a right spirit. This makes the great point of difference between the two offerings. The grandest offerings given in a wrong spirit will not be accepted by God, whereas the meanest offering given in lowly spirit will be welcome to him. Thus the younger brother was the best. He was better than his name.

(2.) The worship and offering of the other was rejected. “But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect.” The men who make their religious offerings a parade, who regard this worship as a form, are not welcomed by God.

IV. That the true, in the Divine reception of their worship and offerings, are often envied by the false.

1. This envy is wrathful. “Why art thou wrath.”

2. This envy is apparent. “Why is thy countenance fallen.”

3. This envy is unreasonable. “If thou doest well, shalt thou be accepted.”

4. This envy is murderous. “Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him.”

SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON THE VERSES

Genesis 4:3. Sin, however it made man apostate from God, did not extinguish his worship of God.

God and nature teach parents to nurture children in the religion of God.
Set and stated times there have been for God’s worship from the beginning. The Sabbath.
From the fall of man God did teach their recovery by sacrifice.
Wicked ones, even the children of the devil, have made show of religion from the fall.
Hypocrites come without blood, even without sense of their own deserts and self-abasement, to serve God.
Sincere worshippers have been in the Church of God from the beginning.

THE SACRIFICES OF THE ANCIENT DISPENSATION

Genesis 4:4.

I. That from the earliest times, the only way of acceptable worship has been by sacrifice. It is impossible to account for the origin and prevalence of sacrifice, but upon the principle of divine appointment. We cannot suppose that this offering of Abel, so highly approved, was uncommanded. Analogy against it. In subsequent times God appointed the whole Jewish ritual. Tabernacle was erected after His pattern. It is not likely that God would leave fallen man without direction in this matter. There is no natural connection, to the eye of reason, between the sacrifice of a brute and the forgiveness of a sinner. Without shedding of blood is no remission.

II. The sacrifice which God accepts must be offered upon principles which God will approve. Abel gave of the firstlings. He offered his sacrifice in faith—in obedience to a divine institution—in dependence upon divine promise—in the exercise of devout affections. A better sacrifice than Cain—better as to the substance, better as to the feeling. Cain considered God as Creator, but Abel as Redeemer.

III. The order of divine procedure is to accept, first the person, and then the offering. The Lord had respect to Abel and his offering. Man first regards the gifts, and then the person according to the gifts, but God the contrary. The sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination to the Lord, but the prayer of the upright is His delight.

IV. The commencement of sacrifice with man’s sin, and the consummation of sacrifice in a Saviour’s death, plainly show that a system of atonement is incorporated with the whole train of Divine dispensation.

1. How important to ascertain our interest in the great sacrifice.

2. That the church on earth has always presented a mixed company, and has always been in a militant state. Cain worshipped in form, Abel in truth. The sheep and the goats, the wheat and the tares, will always be mingled till judgment.

3. How singular is the fact that the first man who died, died a martyr.

4. Let us all learn to scrutinize our motives in religious worship, as we know that God strictly observes them. He is not a Christian who is one outwardly, and circumcision is that of the heart.—(The Evangelist.)

Strange to say that the worship of God was the first occasion of difference amongst men.
God does not accept men according to the priority of their earthly birth.
Persons are accepted before duties can be.
No work of man can of itself find favour with God.

HISTORY OF CAIN AS A BEACON

Genesis 4:5.

I. That he was the first-born of the family of man. Who can describe the anxiety and wonder which his birth would produce? The birth of any child is both an interesting and momentous event; but the first, how especially so!

II. He was a worshipper of the true God. We know nothing of the history of his childhood. He recognised:

1. Proprietorship of God;
2. Bounty of God in His gifts;
3. His right to our homage. These were right. He was defective in faith.

III. He was distinguished for his industrious labour. Labour is honourable—healthy. It prevents temptations. Satan may tempt the industrious, but the idle tempt him. It is the real wealth of the commonwealth.

IV. He was the subject of the deadly passion of envy. God had respect to Abel, but not to Cain. His pride was wounded. Who can stand before envy. It sees no excellency in another. It corrodes the soul.

V. He was a murderer.
VI. He was an accursed vagabond.
VII. He was the subject of the Divine mercy and long-suffering.—(Dr. Burns.)

It is proper for hypocrites to be angry with God about his non-acceptance, but never with themselves for their ill performance.
The contrast between Cain and his brothers:—

1. Cain lives and Abel dies.
2. Cain’s race perishes; the race of Seth continues.
3. Cain the first natural born; Abel the first spiritual born.

The countenance an index to the moral sentiments of the heart.

Genesis 4:6. God takes notice of the wrath of the wicked against His saints, and reproves it.

The anger of Cain was probably in part occasioned by the fear that the acceptance of his younger brother before God, might lead to some infringement of the rights of the firstborn. In the next verse he is assured that this should not be the case.
The relations and duties of social life are not altered by a person being admitted into the family of God.

RELIGION OF NATURE AND THE RELIGION OF THE GOSPEL

Genesis 4:7. Cain and Abel, like Sarah and Hagar, may be allegorized: the former was a fair representative of natural religionists, the father of Deism; the latter the representative of those who embrace revealed religion. Cain’s religion, in common with many other false religions, had the following characteristics:—

1. It was a religion that had in it some good. It acknowledged the existence of Divine Providence, and human obligations. There are no religions, however false, which do not contain some elements of good. The evils far preponderate.

2. It was a religion of expediency. It was assumed to keep up appearances. There was no principle underlying it.

3. It was a religion which lacked faith. It concerned itself about the present, but was utterly blind to the future. No faith, no reality.

4. It was a religion abounding in self-righteousness. It ignored the existence of sin. It ignored the existence of a breach between man and his Creator.

5. It was a persecuting religion. It could tolerate no other views but its own. It soon stained its hands with blood; an example followed in subsequent ages. The religion of God is forbearing, that of man vindictive. Abel’s religion had also its characteristics:—

1. The religion of Abel embodied all the good that was in the other. Whatever is of value in Deism is found in Christianity.

2. It surpassed it even in its own excellencies. There is no mention of Cain’s being the best of the kind as of Abel’s. Christianity reveals the truth of Deism with clearer light, and holds them with firmer grasp.

3. It recognised the existence of guilt and its merited doom.

4. It was actuated by faith.

5. It was approved by God.

I. Natural Religion. This consists in “doing well.” Look at the principle on which it is founded. The principle is practical goodness. This principle is intrinsically excellent. Man was created to do well. It is to be desired that all men should act upon this principle. The world would be different if men were to. No need of police—prison. It is a principle to which none can object. Let us look at the standard by which it is to be tested. The standard is the moral law of creation. In order to do well, man must love God with all his heart, &c. There must be no omission. The act must be perfect. It must be a gem without a flaw. The motive must be good. The rule must be good. It must be done as God directs. Look at the reward, “Shalt thou not be accepted?” Such a religion will command the approval of the Almighty. It will secure immortality for its votaries. Had Adam continued to do well, he would have continued to live. This, then, is the religion of nature—is glorious. Have you performed its requirements? Think of sin—its nature—its effects—its ultimate consequences. How can we escape them? Ask natural religion. Will she suggest repentance? Will repentance replace things as they were—Reformation? This cannot alter the past. An offering—man has none to present—the mercy of the Eternal? God is merciful, but how can he show it to the sinner, in harmony with justice? Nature has no reply.

II. Revealed Religion. “A sin offering lieth at thy door.”

1. That revealed religion assumes that men are guilty. If there is no sin, there can be no need of a sin-offering; and if there is a sin-offering, it is presumed that there is sin. Men have not done well. They are sinners. They are liable to punishment.

2. That revealed religion has provided a sin-offering. Three kinds of sacrifices were offered by the Jews—eucharistic—peace-offerings—atoning. The last the most prominent. Type of Calvary. In the sin-offering there was a substitution of person—a substitution of sufferings—the acceptance of the sin-offering was accompanied with Divine evidence. This sacrifice is efficient.

3. That this sin-offering reposeth at the door. The atonement of Christ is accessible to the sinner—it rests with man to avail himself of it—men neglect it—God exercises great long-suffering—sinners cannot go to hell without trampling on the sacrifice of the Cross—they will be deprived of exercise if they neglect it.—(Homilist.)

Doing well unto God is only effected by faith in the Divine Mediator.
Guilt and judgment come speedily upon the head of the evil-doer.
Outward rule God sometimes gives to wicked ones over His saints.

Genesis 4:8. God’s convictions and reproofs upon the wicked often occasion greater hardness, and rage in sin.

It is usual for wicked men to disemble their rage toward God and His saints.
The simplicity of the saints often makes them a prey to the hypocrisy of the wicked.
Hypocritical enemies, though they be restrained for a time, opportunity reveals them.
Occasion, advantage, and privacy, make discovery of hypocrisy.
Nearest relatives escape not the violence of hypocrites.
The method of Satan is to draw men from envy to murder.
It is not merely from the influence of bad example, as many think, that vice and misery have so abounded in the world: before that could have effect, this crime presents us with as dreadful an instance of malignant passion as any age can afford; and as convincing a proof that it is from within—“out of the heart proceed evil thoughts and murders.”

THREE EXPERIMENTS AND THREE FAILURES

I. The Family idea won’t keep men right. Cain and Abel were brothers.

II. Religious Ceremonial won’t keep right. Cain and Abel both offered sacrifice.

III. Religious Persecution won’t keep men right. Cain killed his brother, but a voice cried against him. What will keep men right? The love of God through Jesus Christ [City Temple].

THE FIRST MURDER

I. It was the murder of one brother by another. We should have thought that the members of this small family could have lived on amicable terms with each other. We should never have dreamed of murder in their midst. See here:—

1. The power of envy.

2. The ambition of selfishness.

3. The quick development of passion.

II. It was occasioned by envy in the religious department of life. The two brothers had each presented their sacrifice; only Abel’s was accepted. This awakened the envy of Cain. Brothers ought to rejoice in the moral success of each other. Envy in the church is the great cause of strife. Men envy each other’s talents. They murder each other’s reputation. They kill many of tender spirit. You can slay your minister by a look—a word—as well as by a weapon. Such conduct is:—

1. Cruel.

2. Reprehensible.

3. Astonishing.

4. Frequent.

III. That it was avenged by Heaven.

1. By a convicting question.

2. By an alarming curse.

3. By a wandering life.

He, who, according to his mother’s hope was to have been the slayer of the serpent, becomes the murderer of his brother. It is well that parents are ignorant of the future of their children, or they would not entertain such bright hopes concerning them in infancy.