The Offerings of Cain and Abel
By: Victor T. Stephens
Copyright © 2007
All Rights Reserved Worldwide
Genesis 4:2-7: Now Abel kept flocks, and Cain worked the soil. In the course of time Cain brought some
of the fruits of the soil as an offering to the Lord. But Abel brought fat portions from some of the firstborn of his flock. The Lord looked with favor on Abel and his offering, but on Cain and his offering he
did not look with favor. So Cain was very angry, and his face was downcast. Then the Lord said to Cain,
"Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But
if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must master
it. (NIV)
On account of prejudgments and faulty interpretations, much debate has been made
concerning the type of offerings of Abel and Cain and why God accepted one while
rejecting the other. It is the opinion of some church leaders that Abel brought a tithe to
the Lord while others postulate that it was an offering of blood that God found
acceptable. This author disagrees with these two perspectives. This essay aims to provide
a counterclaim with a more accurate exegetical solution to this issue. Let's now engage in
a more in-depth analysis of each brother's offering.
"Now Abel kept flocks, and Cain worked the soil." (Verse 2)
Here we observe that Abel is a shepherd while Cain is a farmer. Both of these
occupations are reputable. Nowhere does the Bible indicate that Abel's vocation is
superior to Cain's. Now let's read the next two verses:
"In the course of time Cain brought some of the fruits of the soil as an offering to the
Lord. But Abel brought fat portions from some of the first-born of his flock. The Lord
looked with favor on Abel and his offering, but on Cain and his offering he did not
look with favor." (Verses 3,4)
In the above verses, Abel and Cain brought offerings corresponding to their occupations.
Appropriately, Abel, a shepherd, provided some of his flock; and Cain, a farmer, brought
some of his harvest. Take note of the distinctive details and clues: The text says that Abel
brought "fat portions from some of the first born....", whereas Cain brought "some of the
fruits...." Notice that Cain's offering is described without any elaboration. The
dissimilarity and implication between the two offerings is Cain's failure to bring some of
the better of his first ripened harvest; thus he probably gave average produce or spoiled
fruit. By contrast, Abel offered the best and choicest parts of what he had. Thus, the Lord
accepted Abel's offering while Cain's was repudiated.
For those who employ this account to support their tithing doctrine, it should be evident
that there is not a clue to the amount given by Abel and Cain; nor do we find anywhere in
the scriptures where "fat portions" of flocks are equivalent to a tithe. In ancient biblical
times, first-born and firstfruits are some of the first offspring of animals or humans and
some of the first premium ripened fruits, vegetables, and grains respectively. There is no
specific percentage regarding the giving of first-born and firstfruits. Let's now read the
last verse.
"If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right,
sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must master it." (Verse 7)
Coupled with verse four, some pastors use this verse to contend that God accepted Abel's
sacrifice on account it was an offering of blood for the atonement for sin while
concurrently alleging that God rejected Cain's offering because it consisted of vegetation.
While I agree that this perspective appears more equitable than the inference of tithing
advocates, with the former interpretive viewpoint being a non-divisive issue for this
author, it is nevertheless hypothetical in nature.
While it is true that God accepted animal sacrifices, grain and harvest offerings were also
acceptable (Leviticus, Chapter 2), though not for the atonement for sin. But, was Abel's
sacrifice actually a denotation of a sin offering? A lexical study of Hebrew terminology
will disclose that the words for "sin offering" is "hatta't" and "atonement" is "kpr". These
Hebrews terms are not used in the account of Cain and Abel. However, the Hebrew word
"minchah" or "minha" is used in the text which is applied in a broad sense to mean an
offering of animals or grain. That said, the writer of Genesis rejects the plausibility that
God repudiated Cain's offering on account it was bloodless.
The writer of Hebrews says that God found pleasure in Abel's offering because its quality
was a reflection of his faith (Heb. 11:4,6); a statement that is conducive to this author's
perspective. There are no scriptures in the New Testament that denounces Cain for
bringing a bloodless sacrifice. Some church leaders reference Hebrews 12:24 as further
evidence that Abel brought a blood sacrifice. However, this verse states "the blood of
Abel", not that of his sacrifice.
In contrast to Abel and his offering, the Lord rejected Cain's offering because its inferior
quality indicated that he had a lack of faith and possessed an evil and greedy disposition
(1 John 3:12, Jude 1:11). Abel loved the Lord with all his heart, giving his best; whereas
Cain was just going through the motions, lacking character and genuine faith. And
without faith, no one can be declared righteous (Gen.15:6).
Cain was cognizant of the quality of offering to bring. God clearly expressed that he
would be accepted if he gave the proper offering. Furthermore, the Lord warned him
about the adverse power of sin. Cain had a choice of opposing sin, or he could willingly
succumb to it and be destroyed. He hardened his heart, however, electing the latter rather
than rectifying the situation; and thus became very angry with God. Cain clearly acted in
disobedience, void of humility and displaying an attitude of arrogance towards the Lord.
As a result, he permitted himself to be mastered by sin. What follows is jealousy and
premeditated murder (Gen. 4:8).
From this study, the following key points should be highlighted:
1. The scriptural text specifically denotes Cain and Abel's profession.
2. Cain and Abel's tribute corresponds to their respective vocations.
3. The scriptural text specifically signifies Abel's offering as a firstfruits tribute, whereas
there is no such comment in reference to Cain's offering.
4. The scriptural text does not express Cain and Abel's offerings as one tenth of their
harvest and herd respectively.
5. The Hebrew terms "hatta't", meaning sin offering, and "kpr", meaning atonement, are
not used in the text.
6. The quality of Abel's offering, the best of his livestock (firstfruits), was a reflection of
his faith (Heb. 11:4).
7. Cain's refusal to bring the best of his harvest (the firstfruits) demostrated his lack of
faith, his greed, and his evil disposition (1 John 3:12, Jude 1:11), inducing him to be
mastered by sin.
In light of the scriptural text in its proper exegetical context coupled with the
aforementioned key points, we can conclude that Abel's offering was in fact a firstfruits
tribute rather than a sin offering. While this author can respect the latter hypothetical
perspective, a cloud of suspicion is generated over tithing proponents who teach and read
into the text what is not there. For a more in-depth analysis of tithing, feel free to read the
article, "A Closer Look at Tithing."