Introduction: Genesis 4, the next chapter in human history, brings the first birth announcing the Messianic salvation and the first act of violence and death. The events give an idea of what human life will be like after the Fall; namely, a mingling of life and death. Birth and crime are intertwined. The structure of chapter 4 renders this tension through the form of its chiastic structure, alternating between birth and crime:
A. Birth from Adam and Eve: Cain and Abel
B. Crime: Cain
C. Birth: Legacy of Cain and Lamech
B1. Crime: Lamech
A1. Birth from Adam and Eve: Seth
The structure of Genesis 4 brings a number of lessons. God’s salvation finds its way through a series of contrasts between Cain and Abel, in their names and their behavior and their respective sacrifices, and even between Cain and Lamech. Although the crimes of Cain and of Lamech occupy the whole space, the chapter is framed with hope: it begins and ends with the Messianic promise. The chapter begins with the birth of Cain and ends with the birth of Seth. While the birth of Cain leads to failure and has a limited horizon made of human achievement and violence, leading to the Flood, the birth of Seth brings repair to the preceding failure and restores God’s plan of salvation, leading to the survival of humanity in history and to humanity’s salvation.
Part II: Commentary
The Birth of Cain
Eve associates the birth of Cain with the presence of YHWH. The woman is the first person who mentions the name of the Lord (YHWH). She believed that God Himself had come down and had become the very One she had given birth to: “ ‘I have given birth to a male child—the Lord’ ” (Gen. 4:1, ISV). This literal translation is justified on the basis of grammar, because the name of God (YHWH) is introduced by the same word, ’et, that introduces the name of Cain. In fact, all the personal names in this verse, Eve, Cain, and YHWH, are introduced by this particle. In addition, the phrase ’et qayin (“Cain”) parallels the phrase ’et YHWH (“the Lord”). These two phrases occur at the same place, concluding the respective proposition, thus echoing each other. Moreover, the use of the word ’et before “the Lord” marks a strong emphasis on the Lord.
This identification is just a hint of how Adam and Eve must have felt. Remembering the promise of Genesis 3:15, Eve may have been thinking that she had given birth to her Redeemer. Ellen White interprets this passage along these lines: “When Adam and Eve first heard the promise, they looked for its speedy fulfillment. They joyfully welcomed their first-born son, hoping that he might be the Deliverer.”—The Desire of Ages, p. 31.
Read Genesis 4:1, 2. Discuss the significance of the contrasts between the two brothers. Cain was born first, while Abel was born second. The name of Cain means “acquire,” “possess,” while the name of Abel means “vapor,” “ephemerous,” “vanity.” Cain speaks, while Abel never speaks. Also, compare their offerings (see below).
The Sacrifice of Cain (Genesis 4:3, 4)
While Cain chose to take his offering only from “the fruit of the ground” (Gen. 4:3), Abel “also brought” his offering (Gen. 4:4, NKJV). Thus, in contrast to Cain’s offering, Abel’s offering included a sacrificial animal as God commanded. Yet, while Abel complied with the divine instructions, Cain chose to ignore them. Also, a comparison of the two acts of offering reveals a slight nuance between them. While Cain offers “to God,” Abel just offers. The mention “to God” is absent from the description of Abel’s sacrifice.
This little difference is of profound significance, as it reflects two fundamentally different views of worship. While Cain thinks of his offering as his gift to God, Abel understands his sacrifice as a reminder of God’s gift to him. While Cain views his religion as an upward movement to God, Abel experiences it as a downward movement from God. This contrasting mentality also may explain another difference regarding how the offerings have been chosen. Abel’s offering was not, per se, a better offering than Cain’s. In fact, Cain’s fruit may even have been a better product than the sheep provided by Abel. The difference, however, was that Abel chose from the bekorot, the “first fruits,” the most precious product of the season, something that would be justified later by the Mosaic legislation (Exod. 23:19), whereas Cain took any fruit from the land. Against the background of the preceding chapters, each of the two offerings evokes something different. The fruit offering from the ground (’adamah) points to Genesis 3:19, which is associated with human effort and the perspective of death. The animal offering, on the other hand, points to Genesis 3:21 and gives the promise of the divine protection and the perspective of life. Cain’s offering was the expression of human work to reach God; Abel’s offering was the expression of humanity’s need for God’s salvation. Furthermore, Abel’s offering was related to the promise of the Messianic Lamb of Genesis 3:15, who would be sacrificed to save the world, whereas Cain’s offering was an empty ritual. Note the same contrast between the human clothing (Gen. 3:7), which uses the vegetal fig leaf, and the divine clothing, which uses the animal skin and implies the sacrifice of blood (Gen. 3:21).
The Crime of Cain
The use of the phrase wayyo’mer qayin, “And Cain said,” echoing the phrase wayyo’mer YHWH ’el qayin, “the Lord said to Cain” (Gen. 4:6, NKJV), indicates that Cain was supposed to respond to God. Yet, instead of responding to God by faith, Cain turns to his brother and kills him (Gen. 4:8). It is significant that Cain’s crime immediately follows this shift in dialogue from the failed vertical to the horizontal. The mechanism of the first religious crime is thus suggested. The crimes of the zealous ones are not committed because they feel they are right; the crimes of fanaticism and religious intolerance derive, on the contrary, from the failure to respond to God’s Word. When faith is replaced by human work and control, crime will follow. Cain killed his brother, not because Cain felt he was right and his brother was wrong but, on the contrary, because Cain was evil and his brother was righteous (see 1 John 3:12).
The Crime of Lamech
There also is a contrast between the crime of Cain and the crime of Lamech. Unlike Cain, Lamech took murder one step further. Lamech presented his killing as a positive and valuable act and literally boasted about it. While Cain chose to remain silent, Lamech, in contrast, wrote a song. Whereas Cain asks God for mercy (Gen. 4:13, 14), Lamech ignores God and instead subjects his wives to a litany of his prowess and his homicidal feat as a feat worthy of approbation. The same paradigm shift observed in Cain’s crime also can be traced here: the failure in the vertical relation (God-human) yields to a violent turning against the human other. In fact, Lamech moves to the opposite of forgiveness. He speaks of revenge, alluding to additional crimes in the future. Even his revenge is given considerable intensification. While Cain is avenged only seven times, Lamech requires an increase to 70 times 7 (Gen. 4:24). It is noteworthy that Jesus plays on the same intensification of the number seven to urge forgiveness (Matt. 18:21, 22).
The Birth of Seth
The repetition of the first phrase that introduced the birth of the firstborn Cain (Gen. 4:1) suggests a return to the beginning. In addition, the repetition of the word “again,” attached to the birth of Seth, echoes the “again” associated with the birth of Abel (Gen. 4:2). Thus, the word “again” reconnects the broken line of history at this point: Seth will replace Abel. This idea also is recorded in the name of the new son, Seth, which means “to put in the place of,” as Eve comments. Furthermore, the Hebrew verb shat, “appointed,” describing God’s “appointing” of the “seed” in Eve, is the same verb as the one that describes God’s “appointing,” “putting” (shat) “enmity” between the serpent and the woman (Gen. 3:15). Through this allusion to Genesis 3:15, the biblical author points prophetically to the salvation event as manifested in the divine incarnation of Jesus Christ.
Discussion and Thought Question: How does the birth of Seth point to Jesus Christ?
Part III: Life Application
Cain and Abel. What lessons of character can we learn from the contrast between Cain and Abel? Cain speaks while Abel is silent. Cain is first, Abel is second. Cain is violent, Abel is the victim. Whom do you identify with, and why? Why does Abel represent the martyrs of God (Rev. 6:9, Rev. 20:4)?
The Offering to God. What lessons of religion can we learn from the comparison between Cain’s offering and Abel’s offering? Which is more important: what we receive from God, or what we give to Him? Why is God’s Gift the only way to be saved?
Cain’s Anger. Read Genesis 4:6, 7 and Matthew 5:21–26. Why was Cain angry? Remember the last time you were angry, and analyze your anger, asking yourself the following questions: How does anger prepare the human heart for murder? How does Cain’s religious failure relate to his failure in his relationship with his brother? Why does religious zeal often lead to crime? What lesson of self-control can we learn from God’s injunction to Cain?
Lamech’s Crime. Compare the crimes of Cain and Lamech. How are they the same in degradation? How are they different in degree or intensification? What lesson can we learn from Lamech’s sensitivity to beautiful poetry and his son’s sensitivity to music? Does education in fine arts preserve us from wickedness? Discuss. What examples in history indicate the contrary?
The Birth of Seth. After Cain killed Abel, God raised up another righteous seed, Seth, through whom He might fulfill His purpose to redeem the world. What lesson does this change of plans teach us about the perseverance of God to save and His willingness to work with humanity in the face of our weaknesses and failures?
Adjust My Preferences
Welcome! Please set your reading preferences below.
You can access this panel later by clicking the
preference icon
in the top right of the page.
Key Text: Genesis 4:7
Study Focus: Genesis 4, Heb. 11:4, Rev. 6:9.
Part I: Overview
Introduction: Genesis 4, the next chapter in human history, brings the first birth announcing the Messianic salvation and the first act of violence and death. The events give an idea of what human life will be like after the Fall; namely, a mingling of life and death. Birth and crime are intertwined. The structure of chapter 4 renders this tension through the form of its chiastic structure, alternating between birth and crime:
A. Birth from Adam and Eve: Cain and Abel
B. Crime: Cain
C. Birth: Legacy of Cain and Lamech
B1. Crime: Lamech
A1. Birth from Adam and Eve: Seth
The structure of Genesis 4 brings a number of lessons. God’s salvation finds its way through a series of contrasts between Cain and Abel, in their names and their behavior and their respective sacrifices, and even between Cain and Lamech. Although the crimes of Cain and of Lamech occupy the whole space, the chapter is framed with hope: it begins and ends with the Messianic promise. The chapter begins with the birth of Cain and ends with the birth of Seth. While the birth of Cain leads to failure and has a limited horizon made of human achievement and violence, leading to the Flood, the birth of Seth brings repair to the preceding failure and restores God’s plan of salvation, leading to the survival of humanity in history and to humanity’s salvation.
Part II: Commentary
The Birth of Cain
Eve associates the birth of Cain with the presence of YHWH. The woman is the first person who mentions the name of the Lord (YHWH). She believed that God Himself had come down and had become the very One she had given birth to: “ ‘I have given birth to a male child—the Lord’ ” (Gen. 4:1, ISV). This literal translation is justified on the basis of grammar, because the name of God (YHWH) is introduced by the same word, ’et, that introduces the name of Cain. In fact, all the personal names in this verse, Eve, Cain, and YHWH, are introduced by this particle. In addition, the phrase ’et qayin (“Cain”) parallels the phrase ’et YHWH (“the Lord”). These two phrases occur at the same place, concluding the respective proposition, thus echoing each other. Moreover, the use of the word ’et before “the Lord” marks a strong emphasis on the Lord.
This identification is just a hint of how Adam and Eve must have felt. Remembering the promise of Genesis 3:15, Eve may have been thinking that she had given birth to her Redeemer. Ellen White interprets this passage along these lines: “When Adam and Eve first heard the promise, they looked for its speedy fulfillment. They joyfully welcomed their first-born son, hoping that he might be the Deliverer.”—The Desire of Ages, p. 31.
Read Genesis 4:1, 2. Discuss the significance of the contrasts between the two brothers. Cain was born first, while Abel was born second. The name of Cain means “acquire,” “possess,” while the name of Abel means “vapor,” “ephemerous,” “vanity.” Cain speaks, while Abel never speaks. Also, compare their offerings (see below).
The Sacrifice of Cain (Genesis 4:3, 4)
While Cain chose to take his offering only from “the fruit of the ground” (Gen. 4:3), Abel “also brought” his offering (Gen. 4:4, NKJV). Thus, in contrast to Cain’s offering, Abel’s offering included a sacrificial animal as God commanded. Yet, while Abel complied with the divine instructions, Cain chose to ignore them. Also, a comparison of the two acts of offering reveals a slight nuance between them. While Cain offers “to God,” Abel just offers. The mention “to God” is absent from the description of Abel’s sacrifice.
This little difference is of profound significance, as it reflects two fundamentally different views of worship. While Cain thinks of his offering as his gift to God, Abel understands his sacrifice as a reminder of God’s gift to him. While Cain views his religion as an upward movement to God, Abel experiences it as a downward movement from God. This contrasting mentality also may explain another difference regarding how the offerings have been chosen. Abel’s offering was not, per se, a better offering than Cain’s. In fact, Cain’s fruit may even have been a better product than the sheep provided by Abel. The difference, however, was that Abel chose from the bekorot, the “first fruits,” the most precious product of the season, something that would be justified later by the Mosaic legislation (Exod. 23:19), whereas Cain took any fruit from the land. Against the background of the preceding chapters, each of the two offerings evokes something different. The fruit offering from the ground (’adamah) points to Genesis 3:19, which is associated with human effort and the perspective of death. The animal offering, on the other hand, points to Genesis 3:21 and gives the promise of the divine protection and the perspective of life. Cain’s offering was the expression of human work to reach God; Abel’s offering was the expression of humanity’s need for God’s salvation. Furthermore, Abel’s offering was related to the promise of the Messianic Lamb of Genesis 3:15, who would be sacrificed to save the world, whereas Cain’s offering was an empty ritual. Note the same contrast between the human clothing (Gen. 3:7), which uses the vegetal fig leaf, and the divine clothing, which uses the animal skin and implies the sacrifice of blood (Gen. 3:21).
The Crime of Cain
The use of the phrase wayyo’mer qayin, “And Cain said,” echoing the phrase wayyo’mer YHWH ’el qayin, “the Lord said to Cain” (Gen. 4:6, NKJV), indicates that Cain was supposed to respond to God. Yet, instead of responding to God by faith, Cain turns to his brother and kills him (Gen. 4:8). It is significant that Cain’s crime immediately follows this shift in dialogue from the failed vertical to the horizontal. The mechanism of the first religious crime is thus suggested. The crimes of the zealous ones are not committed because they feel they are right; the crimes of fanaticism and religious intolerance derive, on the contrary, from the failure to respond to God’s Word. When faith is replaced by human work and control, crime will follow. Cain killed his brother, not because Cain felt he was right and his brother was wrong but, on the contrary, because Cain was evil and his brother was righteous (see 1 John 3:12).
The Crime of Lamech
There also is a contrast between the crime of Cain and the crime of Lamech. Unlike Cain, Lamech took murder one step further. Lamech presented his killing as a positive and valuable act and literally boasted about it. While Cain chose to remain silent, Lamech, in contrast, wrote a song. Whereas Cain asks God for mercy (Gen. 4:13, 14), Lamech ignores God and instead subjects his wives to a litany of his prowess and his homicidal feat as a feat worthy of approbation. The same paradigm shift observed in Cain’s crime also can be traced here: the failure in the vertical relation (God-human) yields to a violent turning against the human other. In fact, Lamech moves to the opposite of forgiveness. He speaks of revenge, alluding to additional crimes in the future. Even his revenge is given considerable intensification. While Cain is avenged only seven times, Lamech requires an increase to 70 times 7 (Gen. 4:24). It is noteworthy that Jesus plays on the same intensification of the number seven to urge forgiveness (Matt. 18:21, 22).
The Birth of Seth
The repetition of the first phrase that introduced the birth of the firstborn Cain (Gen. 4:1) suggests a return to the beginning. In addition, the repetition of the word “again,” attached to the birth of Seth, echoes the “again” associated with the birth of Abel (Gen. 4:2). Thus, the word “again” reconnects the broken line of history at this point: Seth will replace Abel. This idea also is recorded in the name of the new son, Seth, which means “to put in the place of,” as Eve comments. Furthermore, the Hebrew verb shat, “appointed,” describing God’s “appointing” of the “seed” in Eve, is the same verb as the one that describes God’s “appointing,” “putting” (shat) “enmity” between the serpent and the woman (Gen. 3:15). Through this allusion to Genesis 3:15, the biblical author points prophetically to the salvation event as manifested in the divine incarnation of Jesus Christ.
Discussion and Thought Question: How does the birth of Seth point to Jesus Christ?
Part III: Life Application
Cain and Abel. What lessons of character can we learn from the contrast between Cain and Abel? Cain speaks while Abel is silent. Cain is first, Abel is second. Cain is violent, Abel is the victim. Whom do you identify with, and why? Why does Abel represent the martyrs of God (Rev. 6:9, Rev. 20:4)?
The Offering to God. What lessons of religion can we learn from the comparison between Cain’s offering and Abel’s offering? Which is more important: what we receive from God, or what we give to Him? Why is God’s Gift the only way to be saved?
Cain’s Anger. Read Genesis 4:6, 7 and Matthew 5:21–26. Why was Cain angry? Remember the last time you were angry, and analyze your anger, asking yourself the following questions: How does anger prepare the human heart for murder? How does Cain’s religious failure relate to his failure in his relationship with his brother? Why does religious zeal often lead to crime? What lesson of self-control can we learn from God’s injunction to Cain?
Lamech’s Crime. Compare the crimes of Cain and Lamech. How are they the same in degradation? How are they different in degree or intensification? What lesson can we learn from Lamech’s sensitivity to beautiful poetry and his son’s sensitivity to music? Does education in fine arts preserve us from wickedness? Discuss. What examples in history indicate the contrary?
The Birth of Seth. After Cain killed Abel, God raised up another righteous seed, Seth, through whom He might fulfill His purpose to redeem the world. What lesson does this change of plans teach us about the perseverance of God to save and His willingness to work with humanity in the face of our weaknesses and failures?