Cain and Abel: About Rivalry and What Jesus’ Gift of Himself is Not

Cain and Abel: About Rivalry and What Jesus’ Gift of Himself is Not October 29, 2018
Abel offers a sacrifice to God while Cain looks on with rivalry in his heart.
A disgruntled Cain imagines he will never be able to keep up with Abel in the matter of giving gifts to God.

Rivalry looms large in human history. We make ourselves rivals with each other and with God. We even take rivalry into our gift giving, comparing one gift with another. My search for Scriptures that Jesus would have “opened up” for the disciples on the way to Emmaus lands on just such a rivalry. But Jesus, who gave himself on the cross, doesn’t interpret gift giving the way Cain does.

Episode 5 in Opening the Scriptures on the Way to Emmaus: Why Messiah had to Suffer. Introduction and links to other posts in the series here.

In the story of Cain and Abel we see that  one of Adam and Eve’s first children engaging in rivalry.

Abel is a keeper of sheep and Cain a tiller of the soil. Both of them decide to offer sacrifice to God Cain offers some fruit of the ground and Abel the firstlings of his flock. He chooses their fat portions as the Bible clarifies, in other words, the best parts. God looks with favor upon Abel’s sacrifice but distains Cain’s offering.

I remember a picture of this event in a book called “Bible History,” from my childhood religion classes. The smoke from Abel’s sacrifice goes straight up to heaven, and Cain’s smoke meanders lazily along the ground. That’s not in the Bible, but it’s a story so I guess it’s fair to add our own details.

Tradition interprets the distinction that God makes between the two sacrifices by saying Abel offered God the best that he had while Cain gave God something less than the best. That Cain gave less than his best is not in the story either. One has to wonder, anyway, why God would require the best. No such command is reported in this story. Indeed, I wonder why God would give a gift and require anything at all in exchange, if it’s really a gift. I’m looking for a deeper source of Cain’s sin than just being stingy.

Cain goes off and sulks, and God gives Cain some fatherly advice: “If you do well, will you not be accepted?” (Notice God doesn’t say Cain’s gift must match Abel’s, just that Cain should “do well.”) Soon Cain invites Abel out into the field, where he murders him.

Responding to a gift: a Cain Way and an Abel Way

I’d like to look in a new direction for motives in this story. When a human person gives a gift, it may be with no strings attached. That is, the person isn’t looking for anything in return. Still the recipient will often offer something in return. It’s not out of a sense of obligation. The original giving was a good thing and humans, being imitative creatures, will sometimes imitate something good. Could it be that Abel’s gift is of that sort, a free response to God, whose giving is without strings?

Meanwhile Cain is thinking in terms of obligation or even rivalry with God. Maybe giving something back to God would put him and God on an even keel? That’s another common way for a human to respond to someone’s gift. We don’t want to be “beholden.” We want to have accounts set right. We sometimes even get into a game of one-upmanship in the matter of giving gifts. A clue to Cain’s attitude is the murderous anger he feels toward Abel. He thinks of Abel (as well as God) as a rival and maybe one he can’t beat.

The spirit of rivalry makes sacrifices go wrong

What does this tell us about offering sacrifice to God? Clearly one thing is that it’s a religious practice that can go wrong. We can imagine we are paying off an obligation to God, either for things we have received or in reparation for sins we have committed. That makes us other Cains and God’s rivals. We’re looking for a way out of an obligation, and most likely the cheapest way.

Jesus didn’t settle for the cheapest way. A drop of his precious blood would have been enough, a teacher once told me, to satisfy God for all the sins humans had ever committed. That Jesus went overboard and gave not the minimum price but all he had, impresses us as an act of superabundant love—so I was taught.

Along the same line, I was taught that Jesus’ sacrifice was a continuation and a perfection of the temple sacrifices of the Old Testament. Those sacrifices were inferior, by comparison. They hadn’t been able to accomplish the complete reconciliation of humanity with God so priests had to repeat them over and over. Jesus’ “perfect” sacrifice sufficed, once and for all, and didn’t need to be repeated. But doesn’t this just make Jesus the perfect Cain. Jesus’ gift gift tops all the others and finally matches God’s own gift.

Surprising God

What if God doesn’t demand a price either for gifts given or for offenses taken? What if the gifts we give to God are truly gifts, not things God expects, but surprises for God? Could that even apply to Jesus’ gift?

A true gift to God is not an obligation we have to fulfill but a worry-free imitating of God’s overflowing goodness. I’m thinking God doesn’t expect Abel’s offering. It’s not taking anything away from God to imagine that God enjoys surprises. I’m thinking Jesus isn’t Cain at all. Jesus didn’t put closure to Old Testament sacrifices by doing them perfectly. Not every Old Testament sacrifice was of the repayment sort anyway. Jesus does something different. Jesus’ offering to God, through his whole life, was gift, not repayment.

If Jesus spoke about Cain and Abel on that walk to Emmaus, it was as much to tell what his suffering was not as to tell what it was. It wasn’t to satisfy God for anything. But what was it for, and what does Jesus’ suffering have to do with salvation? One clue comes with the next story that I imagine Jesus interpreting for the disciples.

"The same people that pushed for no fault divorce pushed for gay "marriage." It's been ..."

On the DOCAT, Youth Social Justice ..."
"There was a couple in my community (with kids) who got divorced and no one ..."

On the DOCAT, Youth Social Justice ..."
"But couldn’t you say exactly the same thing about no-fault divorce? Frankly, that seems to ..."

On the DOCAT, Youth Social Justice ..."
"SSM is an attack on the family, the basis of society; hence the Church considers ..."

On the DOCAT, Youth Social Justice ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • fractal

    Cain and Abel is a metaphor for the struggle between nomads who followed the herds, and the early agriculturalists, who were not wanting herds to trample their working fields.

    The real lesson I see in the parable, starts with the Garden of Eden.
    And the lesson is that the descendants ALWAYS PAY for the sins of their ancestors.
    Those who come before don’t clean up their mess, don’t make lasting treaties or negotiate in good faith with their neighbors.
    Then the children have to go to war, have tribal feuds etc…

    The allegory works for most of our problems.
    The elders sin; the future pays.

  • fritzpatrick

    The elders sin; the future pays. That’s certainly true concerning our sin of abusing the earth.

  • fractal

    Adam and Eve sins.
    Cain and Abel pays by inheriting original sin and being born into a world of woe.
    Worked then, also.
    What I don’t understand, is what God had against the Cain’s corn.
    Again, I think this is a metaphor with God taking the side of the herds-people.

    Have you ever notice that the younger son is usually favored in the Old Testament?
    Did you know that most gay men are younger sons—that most “oldest biological sons” are heterosexual?
    It is a statistical fact, and is theorized that women’s immune system reacts to the androgen hormones that the male fetus produces. So, with the subsequent sons, the immune system is ready and denatures some of that androgen hormone, which is foreign to the female body in such high amounts.
    Which causes that fetal brain wire up differently than their older brother.

    Could it be that the women of the Bible favored their younger sons, because they, like so many gay men, had close relationships with their mother?

  • fritzpatrick


  • fritzpatrick

    2 gay men that I know we’re very distant from their mothers.