Preferential Treatment

So it came about in the course of time that Cain brought an offering to the Lord from the fruit of the ground.  Abel, on his part also brought an offering, from the firstborn of his flock and from their fat portions. And the Lord had regard for Abel and his offering;  Genesis 4:3-4  NASB

Offering – Why does God accept Abel’s offering but reject Cain’s?  You might think it’s because Abel’s offering is a blood sacrifice while Cain’s is merely produce from the land, but this explanation is mistaken.  Why?  Because the Hebrew term, minḥâ, is not exclusively a word about meat.  It also covers cereal, gift, oblation, and present.  So the type of sacrifice isn’t the issue.  In addition, this particular Hebrew word is a primary noun.  That’s unusual since most primary roots in Hebrew are verbs.  Could it be that the word is borrowed from another language?  Scholars suggest that the word entered the Hebrew vocabulary as early as the second millennium BCE.  The word does appear in Phoenician-Punic and late Egyptian where it is associated with sacrifice or offering.  Could it be that this ancient story used a loan word to describe the actions of the two sons?  Interestingly, Hebrew does not differentiate minḥâ from other words about sacrifice such as zebah.  In the Genesis text, minḥâ “refers to a ‘sacrificial offering’ in the broad general sense; indeed, one cannot yet strictly ascertain that it even constitutes a sacrificial term.  It probably refers to a ‘gift/offering to a superior,’ as the contemporaneous occurrences in the story of Joseph seem to suggest.”[1]  The claim of some exegetes that God rejected Cain’s offering because there was no blood sacrifice involved must be rejected.

So why did God reject Cain’s gift?  The issue is attitude and appropriate homage.  The text specifies that Abel brought the best of the best while Cain brought something from his total produce.  You will notice that Cain’s offering was not “first fruits.”  It was as if Cain met the obligation but only minimally (in his mind).  He fulfilled the letter of the law, so to speak, but without gratitude in his heart.  Abel, on the other hand, offered a true sacrifice, the first of this flock and the best part of the first.  Why did he do this?  Because his offering was given in grateful appreciation, not in the fulfilment of obligation.  God did not reject the minḥâ of Cain, that is, the physical property of the sacrifice.  He rejected the attitude in which it was given.  This is why God can instruct Cain to repeat the offering by presenting it with the appropriate degree of homage.

What do we learn?  Obviously, we discover that heart and hand are connected in the worship of God from the very beginning.  Yeshua’s comments on the same are not new.  The most ancient, and first story of sacrifice carries the same theme.  But we also learn that it isn’t necessarily the gift that matters.  It’s the willingness to demonstrate unbridled gratitude that counts.  First fruits is a sign of total submission and love for the Provider.  In contemporary terms, Abel teaches us that God desires and expects the honor of our best, whatever that might be.  This is not “atonement” theology.  This is recognition of God’s sovereignty and our created dependence.

Topical Index: minḥâ, sacrifice, Genesis 4:3-4

[1] H. J. Fabry, M. Weinfeld, minha, TDOT, Vol. VIII, p. 412.