4:1 Now 1 the man had marital relations with 2 his wife Eve, and she became pregnant 3 and gave birth to Cain. Then she said, “I have created 4 a man just as the Lord did!” 5 4:2 Then she gave birth 6 to his brother Abel. 7 Abel took care of the flocks, while Cain cultivated the ground. 8
4:3 At the designated time 9 Cain brought some of the fruit of the ground for an offering 10 to the Lord.
1 tn The disjunctive clause (conjunction + subject + verb) introduces a new episode in the ongoing narrative.
2 tn Heb “the man knew,” a frequent euphemism for sexual relations.
3 tn Or “she conceived.”
4 tn Here is another sound play (paronomasia) on a name. The sound of the verb קָנִיתִי (qaniti, “I have created”) reflects the sound of the name Cain in Hebrew (קַיִן, qayin) and gives meaning to it. The saying uses the Qal perfect of קָנָה (qanah). There are two homonymic verbs with this spelling, one meaning “obtain, acquire” and the other meaning “create” (see Gen 14:19, 22; Deut 32:6; Ps 139:13; Prov 8:22). The latter fits this context very well. Eve has created a man.
5 tn Heb “with the
6 tn Heb “And she again gave birth.”
7 sn The name Abel is not defined here in the text, but the tone is ominous. Abel’s name, the Hebrew word הֶבֶל (hevel), means “breath, vapor, vanity,” foreshadowing Abel’s untimely and premature death.
8 tn Heb “and Abel was a shepherd of the flock, and Cain was a worker of the ground.” The designations of the two occupations are expressed with active participles, רֹעֵה (ro’eh, “shepherd”) and עֹבֵד (’oved, “worker”). Abel is occupied with sheep, whereas Cain is living under the curse, cultivating the ground.
9 tn Heb “And it happened at the end of days.” The clause indicates the passing of a set period of time leading up to offering sacrifices.
10 tn The Hebrew term מִנְחָה (minkhah, “offering”) is a general word for tribute, a gift, or an offering. It is the main word used in Lev 2 for the dedication offering. This type of offering could be comprised of vegetables. The content of the offering (vegetables, as opposed to animals) was not the critical issue, but rather the attitude of the offerer.