Chapter 4 shows the spread of sin from Adam's family to the larger society that his descendants produced. Not only did sin affect everyone, but people became progressively more wicked as time passed. Verses 1-16 show that the Fall affected Adam and Eve's children as well as themselves. Verses 17-26 trace what became of Cain and Seth and their descendants. Note that the chapter begins and ends with the subject of worship.
God had warned Adam and Eve about sin. Even so, Cain murdered his brother because God accepted Abel's offering but not his own. He denied responsibility for his sin and objected to the severity of God's punishment. God graciously provided protection for Cain in response to his complaint. Chapter 3 gives the cause and chapter 4 the effect.
There are structural and conceptual parallels between this pericope (section of verses) and the previous one (2:4-3:24).228
AScene 1 (narrative): Cain and Abel are active, Yahweh passive (vv. 2b-5).
BScene 2 (dialogue): Yahweh questions Cain (vv. 6-7).
CScene 3 (dialogue and narrative): Cain and Abel are alone (v. 8).
B'Scene 4 (dialogue): Yahweh confronts Cain (vv. 9-14).
A'Scene 5 (narrative): Yahweh is active, Cain passive (vv. 15-16).
Both stories conclude with the sinners leaving God's presence and going to live east of Eden (3:24; 4:16).
". . . though the writer of Genesis wants to highlight the parallels between the two stories, he does not regard the murder of Abel simply as a rerun of the fall. There is development: sin is more firmly entrenched and humanity is further alienated from God."229
4:1-8 Was Eve thanking God for helping her bear a son (Cain),230or was she boasting that she had created a man (Cain) as God had created a man (Adam, v. 1)?231The former alternative seems preferable (cf. v. 25).
Why did God "have regard"for Abel's offering and not Cain's (v. 4)? It was because Abel had faith (Heb. 11:4). What did Abel believe that Cain did not? The Bible does not say specifically. The answer may lie in one or more of the following explanations.232
1. Some commentators believed Abel's attitude reveals his faith. Cain's improper attitude toward God is evident in verse 5.233
2. Others say Abel's faith is evident in his bringing the best of the flock (v. 4) whereas Moses did not so describe Cain's offering (v. 3).
"He [the writer] characterizes Abel's offerings from the flocks as from the firstborn' and from their fat.' By offering the firstborn Abel signified that he recognized God as the Author and Owner of Life. In common with the rest of the ancient Near East, the Hebrews believed that the deity, or lord of the manor, was entitled to the first shareof all produce. The firstfruits of plants and the firstborn of animals and man were his. . . .
"Abel's offering conformed with this theology; Cain's did not. In such a laconic story the interpreter may not ignore that whereas Abel's gift is qualified by firstborn,' the parallel firstfruits' does not modify Cain's. . . .
"Abel also offered the fat' which in the so-called P' [Priestly] material belonged to the Lord and was burned symbolically by the priests. This tastiest and best burning part of the offering represented the best. Abel's sacrifice, the interlocutor aims to say, passed the test with flying colors. Cain's sacrifice, however, lacks a parallel to fat.'"234
Possibly Cain's bad attitude resulted in his not offering the best to God. In other words, both options 1 and 2 could be correct.
"Abel went out of his way to please God (which meant he had faith in God, Heb. 1:6), whereas Cain was simply discharging a duty."235
"We think the absence of firstfruits' for Cain in juxtaposition with Seth's firstborn' would not have been lost on the Mosaic audience.
"Both giver and gift were under the scrutiny of God. Cain's offering did not measure up because he retained the best of his produce for himself."236
3. Many believe that Abel realized the need for the death of a living substitute to atone for his sins, but Cain did not. If he understood this, he must have learned it by divine revelation that Scripture did not record explicitly.237
"Faith always presupposes a Divine revelation to which it is the response . . ."238
"Whatever the cause of God's rejection of Cain's offering, the narrative itself focuses our attention on Cain's response. It is there that the narrative seeks to make its point."239
God questioned Cain, as He had Adam and Eve (cf. 3:9, 11), to elicit Cain's admission of sin with a view to repentance, not simply to scold him. His father reluctantly admitted his guilt, but Cain tried to cover it up by lying. Cain was "much more hardened than the first human pair."240"Sin is crouching at the door"(v.7) probably means that the power and tragic consequences of sin could master the person who opens the door to temptation (cf. 3:16).
"The consequences of his reaction to God's correction are more far-reaching than the initial sin itself, for if he pursues sin's anger, it will result in sin's mastery over him. This is his decision. It is possible for Cain to recover from sin quickly if he chooses the right thing."241
The Apostle John revealed the reason Cain killed Abel in 1 John 3:12: ". . . his own works were evil and his brother's righteous."Abel's attitude of faith in God resulted in righteous works that produced guilt in Cain. The seriousness of Cain's sin is clear from God's repeated references to Abel as Cain's "brother"(vv. 9, 10, 11).
"If you want to find out Cain's condition of heart you will find it after the service which he pretended to render; you know a man best out of church . . ."242
Under the Mosaic Law, the fact that a killing took place in a field, out of the range of help, was proof of premeditation (cf. Deut. 22:25-27).
"Cain and his unrighteous offspring served as a reminder to Israel that its destiny was measured in the scales of ethical behavior."243
4:9-16 As in chapter 3, God came investigating the crime with questions (vv. 9-10). There the result was God cursing the ground and people generally, but here the result is His cursing Cain, another evidence that wickedness was worsening.
Cain's punishment consisted of his being banished from God's presence and unable to enjoy his family's company and the fruitfulness of a settled pastoral life (vv. 11-12, 14). He would have to wander from place to place seeking food rather than living a sedentary life.
"Cain is not being condemned to a Bedouin-like existence; the terminology is too extreme to describe such a life-style. Rather it seems likely that the curse on Cain reflects the expulsion from the family that was the fate in tribal societies of those who murdered close relatives. . . . To be driven away from the land' (cf. v. 14) is to have all relationships, particularly with the family, broken. Moreover, it is to have one's relationship with the LORD broken . . ."244
"Nomadism according to the Sumerian flood story is a plight from which the gods rescued man; according to the Bible a nomadic existence was a judgment imposed on the first murderer. This contrast fits in with the overall optimism of Mesopotamia which believes in human progress over against the biblical picture of the inexorable advance of sin . . . It would seem likely that the other human achievements listed here--farming, metalwork, and music--are also seen by Genesis as somehow under the shadow of Cain's sin."245
"Although most English versions read my punishment is too great to bear, the sense of the Hebrew word aodand the Lord's response to Cain's words in verse 15 suggest that Cain's words are not to be understood as a complaint about his punishment but rather an expression of remorse over the extent of his iniquity.'"246
Cain's sin resulted in his being "driven"out (v. 14; cf. 3:23). Note again that sin results in broken relationships and alienation, and alienation from God leads to fear of other people (cf. Job 15:20-25).
The commentators have interpreted Cain's "sign"or "mark"(v. 15) in a variety of ways.
1. Paralysis.This view rests on the meaning of the word used to translate "sign"in the Septuagint.
2. The word "Yahweh."This view originated in an ancient Jewish commentator's interpretation.247
3. A long horn growing out of the middle of Cain's forehead. This interpretation comes from another Jewish commentator,248and many medieval paintings represent it.
4. Some other identifying mark on his person, perhaps even his name. This view sees a parallel with other marks that identify and protect their bearers to which the Bible refers (cf. Ezek. 9:4; Rev. 7:3; 13:16-18; 14:1).249
5. A verification of God's promise to Cain.The text does not identify the sign, but it was some immediate indication that God gave Cain to assure him that he would not die (cf. 21:13, 18; 27:37; 45:7, 9; 46:3 with 21:14; 44:21). This view rests on the usual meaning of "sign"in the Old Testament (cf. Judg. 6:36-40; 2 Kings 2:9-12; et al.), which the Hebrew construction supports here.250
Whatever it was, Cain's mark served to protect him as well as to remind him and others of his banishment. "Nod"means "wandering,"so the very name of the place where he lived also reminded him of his sentence (v. 12).
"The ungodly here are portrayed as living on in the world (with a protective mark of grace . . .) without being saved. Their sense of guilt was eased by their cultural development and their geographical expansion."251
Cain was a man who did not care to please God. Because he did not, God did not bless him as He did Abel who was a man of faith. Cain's anger and jealousy over Abel's blessing brought disaster on himself. God has preserved his example to help us avoid it. Those who worship God must have as their goal to please Him rather than letting envy and hatred ruin their lives.
