Cain and Abel

Cain was the first "Anti-Christ"---when he slew his brother---he in a sense and in his heart slew "Coming Messiah"---for Jesus said it Himself, "Even when you have done it to the least of these children, you've done it also to Me."

Multitudes of people, scripture tells us, are going "the way of Cain"----non-bloody, self-righteous works based method of salvation!

I'm telling you---friend---anything LESS or DIFFERENT than what Abel approached God with---is filthy rags and an abomonation before the nostrils of the Living God!

Brother David

 

I agree. Without faith it is impossible to please God.

 

So how does Cain's story apply to someone like myself who is already blood bought?

Are we to continue to live as Cain did living for self, sowing to the flesh? "God will not be mocked."

Or are we live as Abel did?

Jesus said in Matthew 10:38, "And he that taketh not his cross, and follow after me, is not worthy of me."

And then Jesus said in Matthew 16:24, "If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross and follow me."

2Cor 5:17, "he is a new creature, old things have passed away."

The world says (mixed in with Christianity today)
you can still remain the way you were before you were saved.

The Bible says in Galatians 2:20, "I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself up for me."

 

Pardon me, double post.

 

I am convinced the issue was a heart issue.

First, to answer the question of "blood," there is no evidence that this was a sin offering. In fact, the text is silent about the issue of blood. It was seem reasonable that Moses, writing at the dawn of the blood filled Mosaic covenant would have mentioned it, if that were the case. However, the Mosaic covenant does prescribe non-blood offerings in worship. It is entirely possible, and even probably, that Cain was well within the acceptable form of offering to God. It is important to notice that absolute lack of reference to the blood as the issue.

I think is it also misguided to suggest that Abel brought the first and best while Cain did not. As nice as that will preach, it cannot be found in the text. I would suggest that there is plenty in the text to preach without including something that is not there.

The following is taken from a message I preached on this passage several years ago. This is taken from the section on why God had no respect for Cain's offering while he did respect Abel's.