Abel's Offering vs Cain's

[kaylagrl]

I told you guys, it's because God favors the smell of burning flesh over vegetation as a sacrifice. This is why many famous Christians burned their victims alive as a sacrifice. It is also why the hardcore Christian, Hitler chose to burn the Jews alive

Jews are God's chosen people. So murdering them is 100% opposed to the Bible. Hitler had enough knowledge to misuse the Bible and manipulate people. Hardcore Christian would have known the Bible says to bless the Jews and not to curse them.

 

[kaylagrl]

Gen 8:20-21

What's you POV on abortion? Just curious...

 

[Blik]

.


The Ten Commandments weren't given until Moses' day.
_

The ten commandments simply put into words how God created our world. As an example murder was not OK before Moses wrote the ten commandments.

 

[Webers.Home]

.

murder was not OK before Moses wrote the ten
commandments.

That's one. Where's the other nine given prior to Moses?

BTW: The prohibition against murder wasn't given until Noah came off the ark
(Gen 9:5-6). Seeing as how divine law isn't retroactive, then the prohibition
didn't apply to Cain.
_

 

[Webers.Home]

.
● Titus 2:9-10 . . Exhort servants to be obedient; showing all good faith that
they may adorn the doctrine of God our savior in every respect.

The koiné Greek word for "adorn" is kosmeo (kos-meh'-o) which means: to
put in proper order; viz: decorate

When women buy a pretty new dress, they usually get things to go with it;
things we call accessories; like a purse, shoes, stockings, necklace, earrings,
and/or a watch and a bracelet. In the old days, women usually bought some
gloves to go with their new dress too— thus they create an "ensemble"
which gives them a complete look rather than an unfinished look as if they
just threw the dress on to work around the house or run down to a nearby
convenience store.

Well, a Christian who's a Christian in label only is like a pretty dress without
accessories. In point of fact, they are quite basic: just a house-dress
Christian. In other words; faith without piety is like leaving the house for
work in the morning half dressed.

This touches on the very thing that hampered Cain's association with God.
Cain had religion, that much is evident (Gen 4:3), but he didn't have piety.
That much is evident too. (Gen 4:7)
_

 

[UnderGrace]

I'm just as into the truth as anybody else on this forum.

Elaborate on this "plan of redemption"

Are you stating your mind it open to truth?
Are you willing to put aside your more than obvious projection and presuppositions?

 

[UnderGrace]

I'm just as into the truth as anybody else on this forum.

Elaborate on this "plan of redemption"

It would seem my response should have been "Goodbye"

Good luck dealing with all your obvious anger.

 

[Word_Swordsman]

There was no law known to men against murder of Abel, as a warning not to commit it, so only a curse from God applied. No grace was available since the concept of faith in God and His word was not revealed. Consider that Adam had direct contact and knowledge of God in Person while in the Garden of Eden. God came down to stroll with Adam in the garden. If God had covered the issue of murder then, a breach of it by a son of Adam should have indicted the parent responsible for teaching it to the son. But there is no record of that, so must remain subject to the literal verses God allowed for man to read. We get no "law" in that case, only cursing. Later God coupled sin with cursing and blessings of the LAW given to Moses.

The only "law" that applied to Cain was eating of that tree of knowledge in the garden he had no access to. That knowledge would have instituted the laws and awareness of sins given to Moses much later.

God allowed His man to have privilege of discerning what is sin until Moses had to receive all the definitions of sin since man failed to respond correctly.

The curse of "death" as the only recourse reigned until the death of Jesus. Knowledge of future "new" sins had to accumulate until God grouped them all together in the LAW given to Moses, which made man aware of what sin is at least among the Jews. Man was incapable of predicting what sin was as far as God was concerned. That kept Gentiles immune to ordinances and other requirements of the Mosaic covenant the Jews were bound to. Paul explained they had their own laws to live and be judged by.

The Ten Commandments given to Moses did not present the creation by God. There is no mention of creation in it. Those were given to the created late. God began revealing details of His creation to men throughout the millennia following creation.

 

[UnderGrace]

Yet the LAW commanded offerings along the line Cain offered. So there was nothing evil about Cain's offering. It was out of order, the timing off. Hos should have come after a blood offering for sin, then his offering of praise and worship to follow. Many in the Church still don't have that figured out!

I would agree somewhat, it is not that the offering was evil, the offering may not have been of the best quality like Abel's

It states that Abel "brought fat portions from some of the firstborn." He offered some of what came first, the choicest part, as opposed to waiting until an animal had plenty of offspring.

It is unclear if Cain offered the best of what he had, but because the point is made on superior nature of Abel's it would seem Cain's did not measure up and perhaps Cain had been given instructions he did not follow, since the text shows he and God conversed (Genesis 4:9).

 

[dcontroversal]

That's a strange response from someone claiming to be a follower of Christ! Oral Roberts was not against Christ.
Mark 9:38-41 (KJV)
38 And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us.
39 But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me.
40 For he that is not against us is on our part.
41 For whosoever shall give you a cup of water to drink in my name, because ye belong to Christ, verily I say unto you, he shall not lose his reward.

If you are indeed a Christian you can absorb that comment with love.

You judge Oral Robert's spirituality? Be judged the same according to Jesus!
Matthew 7:2 (KJV)
2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

He might be one of your accusers at Judgement if you hold him in a false judgment for sure, and for any judgment at all. Preserve your blessing, brothers in Christ.

Your approach to the Cain and Abel offerings is more the side of Judaisers, requiring one must be a Jew to qualify to be a Christian, pleasing God through self offerings unto one's salvation. Even Moses failed to relate the Law to faith unto salvation. Not one of millions of blood sacrifices before that of Jesus produced one salvation.

The offerings of the two brothers evoked the need for the Law to make a spiritual difference between the two offerings, yet all that failed to save anyone eternally. The two men had no stated guidance. Therefore, as noted by Paul, there was no sin concerning the two offerings without law defining sin. They were simply not always accepted by God. Men without commandments had to act upon whatever seemed right in their own hearts. One pleased God and learned from that. Another failed to please God and hopefully learned what does. Cain didn't. That lesson applies to every generation of man, but has little to do with salvation in Christ, else salvation be of works. Abel was recorded and accounted for faith, though Genesis scripture doesn't indicate that. It records the voice of Abel's blood, which at the time was enough to reach God's attention.

Job didn't know of Christ. If he did, then all prophets after him were fools still seeking the truth. His knowledge was partial. If he received the truth of Christ in his time then he would be the greatest prophet instead of John the Baptist.

You obviously did not get the point....I could care less what Oral Roberts has to say.....the BIBLE.....NOT ORAL ROBERTS sets the standard for biblical truth........

And obviously you have never read JOB.....and it seems you have missed most of the O.T......you probably don't know JESUS either....HE said the whole O.T. testified of HIM....but hey...maybe if you quit following men and actually read and believe the bible your eyes will be opened......

I KNOW my redeemer LIVETH and I WILL see him with my OWN EYES AFTER the WORMS have EATEN MY FLESH<----JOB must have been delusional when he penned this.....

 

[cc4]

.


The Ten Commandments weren't given until Moses' day.
_

Genesis 26:5
"Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws."

Abraham keep the commandments. How could he do that? Becourse hes covernant was the same as Moses covernant.
And if you read books like the book of Enoch or the Testament of the twelve patriarchs etc etc, you will find that the does keep the law, even tho they are written before Moses.

 

[Webers.Home]

.

Genesis 26:5 "Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge,
my commandments, my statutes, and my laws."

Abraham married his half sister; forbidden by "my statutes and my laws"
(Lev 20:17)

Abraham also lied about his relation to Sarah; that too is forbidden by ""my
statutes and my laws" (Lev 19:11)

However; God's commandments, statutes, and laws weren't codified until
Moses' day so the curse upon violators as per Deut 27:26 didn't apply to
Abraham.

The fact is: we haven't a clue about the nature of the commandments,
statutes, and laws that God taught Abraham's other than what's recorded at
Gen 9:1-17, and of course none of that applied to Cain.

hes covernant

Abraham's covenants are recorded at Gen 15:1-21 and Gen 17:1-14
_

 

[Word_Swordsman]

You obviously did not get the point....I could care less what Oral Roberts has to say.....the BIBLE.....NOT ORAL ROBERTS sets the standard for biblical truth........

And obviously you have never read JOB.....and it seems you have missed most of the O.T......you probably don't know JESUS either....HE said the whole O.T. testified of HIM....but hey...maybe if you quit following men and actually read and believe the bible your eyes will be opened......

I KNOW my redeemer LIVETH and I WILL see him with my OWN EYES AFTER the WORMS have EATEN MY FLESH<----JOB must have been delusional when he penned this.....

When you speak to people, do you shout at them every other word? I find that obnoxious, especially when the shouter is wrong.

Did you know Jesus set up the idea of human shepherds called pastors and teachers, and called their positions "gifts" to the Church? Selah. They are there to minister to the shouters of ignorance. Selah. Those gifts have not passed away. Selah. Be at peace in the Lord Jesus Christ.

 

[dcontroversal]

When you speak to people, do you shout at them every other word? I find that obnoxious, especially when the shouter is wrong.

Did you know Jesus set up the idea of human shepherds called pastors and teachers, and called their positions "gifts" to the Church? Selah. They are there to minister to the shouters of ignorance. Selah. Those gifts have not passed away. Selah. Be at peace in the Lord Jesus Christ.

Cry me a river.....I did not shout and don't be so easily offended.....when crap hits the fan for true believers will you fold like a poker player with a pair of deuces?

 

[cv5]

Good point about "anticipating revelation" vs "progressive revelation".

As the never ending debate over James vs Paul here, many people tend to assume that, just because the Holy Spirit inspired James to write his letter to the 12 tribes of Israel, and the book happened to be placed by the HS after Paul's letters, they assume that James must have understood everything about Paul's letters before he wrote James. It is as if the HS inserted a "matrix-style connector" into James and uploaded all the understanding of Paul's gospel into his mind.

That is why when we encounter James 2 when James clearly stated that

24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

these readers do lots of "mental gymnastics" to somehow able to conclude that, "Oh James is not contradicting Paul and James still believed that justification is by faith only."

I mean, if that is what James really meant to say, why don't he just say that out, instead of leaving to readers to try to "fit Paul into James"?

Really? I fit Genesis into Revelation all the time.....

 

[Word_Swordsman]

There seems to be confusion on this topic. Not ever was eternal life had from sacrifice of animal blood and or flesh. There was temporary righteousness available, but not eternal salvation. Abel's sacrifice was "better" than Cain's, but not "the best sacrifice", but sufficient at his untimely death to assure him a place in Paradise until Jesus could get to the folks held there along with Abraham and other members of the faith family of Hebrews 11.

That of Jesus was both best and for eternity. Abel's sacrifice was rewarded with the same righteousness to be acquired through the Law of Moses, by obedience, by the blood of animals year after year, for past sins of the previous year continually. Then the process had to be repeated, while in Christ there is no repeating of His sacrifice. Abel and Cain would have had to do the same as Jews would do in the future under the Law.

If Abel's sacrifice was of eternal righteousness (right standing with God), then there would have been no improvement by Christ's death, and all people taking part in animal sacrifice would be saved without Christ. His sacrifice of an animal spoke to the coming provision of the Law. The Law then spoke forward to how the blood of Jesus would be applied.

Abel and Abraham were the notable figures of faith before and without the Law, which was based on both obedience and faith in the efficacy of the sacrifices and offerings. Abraham received limited commandments from God, such as offering Isaac, which is the earliest direct speaking to of Christ, the Son of God. There is no support whatsoever that Abraham or any before him had the commandments, laws, or ordinances God gave to Moses.

Those are the basics of "progressive revelation" experienced by those two men who lived their lives who did not know Jesus the Christ. They were aware of "God", having no scriptures to learn more from. What is recorded of them came from Moses and finished by Joshua, then picked up again after the resurrection of Jesus.

A whole 'nuther religion is wronglfully inferred from Cain and Abel, without throwing in Job.

 

[Word_Swordsman]

The ten commandments simply put into words how God created our world. As an example murder was not OK before Moses wrote the ten commandments.

Genesis 1-2 did that, with no mention of 9 of 10 Commandments, identifying only the 7th day God rested, but without a commandment for man to rest on that day.

 

[Blik]

Genesis 1-2 did that, with no mention of 9 of 10 Commandments, identifying only the 7th day God rested, but without a commandment for man to rest on that day.

Genesis 1-2 does not list everything there is to list about creation. It says nothing about the precision of the tides, yet that was part of creation. It tells only of the Sabbath yet the results of lying, stealing, and such was created. We are simply told God created all things.

There is and always has been only one way of salvation, or atonement for sins as the OT explains it and that is through Christ. It was not fully explained in the OT, but it was made clear to them that it required blood. Cain ignored that and used his own work of tilling the soil for sacrifice to obtain atonement for sins. Our work is still useless for salvation or atonement. The Lord's ways are simple and straight forward, this is a simple to understand scripture when we listen to the Lord.

It is explained in Leviticus 17: 11 For the life of a creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for one’s life.

 

[Guojing]

Really? I fit Genesis into Revelation all the time.....

It’s easy for you to do that because you are living in the age of grace, where the full salvation plan has now been revealed.

But James only had the Old Testament when he was writing his letter to the 12 tribes of Israel. He did not have the privilege that you had of understanding the same plan, That is what anticipating revelation means.

 

[cv5]

It’s easy for you to do that because you are living in the age of grace, where the full salvation plan has now been revealed.

But James only had the Old Testament when he was writing his letter to the 12 tribes of Israel. He did not have the privilege that you had of understanding the same plan, That is what anticipating revelation means.

Good grief! James wrote post Resurrection and therefore post arrabon of the Holy Spirit, of whom all and surely the NT writers partook. I think you do err Sir/Madame.