Bible Study Cain and Abel – Muslim vs Jew

[Kane Ali]

Good afternoon Jim. I quoted a fraction of the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures. The part I quoted is essentially the part you wrote which states :“If you do well, will you not be accepted?". The entire passage is as follows:After some time, Cain brought some fruits of the land as an offering to Jehovah.4 But Abel brought some firstlings of his flock,+ including their fat. While Jehovah looked with favor on Abel and on his offering,+5 he did not look with any favor on Cain and on his offering. So Cain grew hot with anger and was dejected.*6 Then Jehovah said to Cain: “Why are you so angry and dejected?7 If you turn to doing good, will you not be restored to favor?* But if you do not turn to doing good, sin is crouching at the door, and its craving is to dominate you; but will you get the mastery over it?””
As you can see, the passages are saying the same thing with a little different verbiage which is the case with varying translations and versions. All and all, it conveys the exact same thing. Therefore, I tend to not get to wrapped up in different translations, rather the meaning of the message itself is what is most important.

Regarding my comment on Cain's motivation for offering sacrifice is in harmony with the fact that Cain's heart condition did not reflect that of a righteous man, but one of a wicked one. For if a wicked man still sacrifices to God, it is not out of faith. The faithful can not be wicked. Thus it is out of recognition of obligation. This is similar to the obligation the nation of Israel felt as their offerings began to displease God. I do hope I cleared up a little confusion and justified my comments.
Thanks for your questions and enjoy your day.

What translation says that?
The NKJV renders the passage as follows: Gen 4:3-7
And in the process of time it came to pass that Cain brought an offering of the fruit of the ground to the LORD. Abel also brought of the firstborn of his flock and of their fat. And the LORD respected Abel and his offering, but He did not respect Cain and his offering. And Cain was very angry, and his countenance fell. So the LORD said to Cain, “Why are you angry? And why has your countenance fallen? “If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin lies at the door. And its desire is for you, but you should rule over it.”

The passage does not support those conclusions.

jut sayin'

iakove the fool

 

[JohnDB]

Good afternoon Jim. I quoted a fraction of the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures.

That would be the issue.
It's not accurately conveying the original text as accurately as possible.
That because (if my memory serves me right) it's the Jehovah Witness' "special" translation.
You are going to need a different translation for use in these forums. One that more accurately translates the scripture into English.
I understand that there are many out there and that it gets confusing at times. Try NIV, NASB, TNLT, NESV, ESV, or even Good News Bibles.

And where you may not see the difference between what yours says and what ours says...it kinda led you down the wrong path.
God was still talking to Cain.
In Psalms David is quoted as saying that God doesn't hear the prayers of the unrighteous.
Cain offered his offering with a glad heart and clean hands. It was accepted. But God really liked Abel's sacrifice more.
Cain's offering was ordinary, customary, and standard... Abel's was outstanding.

God enjoyed both offerings...but Abel's was exceptional. All this at a time when everyone was hot after the Seed of the Woman.

 

[Jim Parker]

I quoted a fraction of the New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures.

I would be very skeptical of the New World Translation which is the product of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Jehovah's Witnesses. There are many very good translations available which have not been modified to fit the theology of the sect.

he entire passage is as follows:

Yes. That is at variance to all other translations. I see no reason to accept it.

All and all, it conveys the exact same thing. Therefore, I tend to not get to wrapped up in different translations, rather the meaning of the message itself is what is most important.

Language has meaning. Slight changes in language can produce extreme differences in the message conveyed. For example, at John 1:1 where the NWT reads "...and the word was a god." is not supported by the original Greek and is in conflict with every other Bible and orthodox Christian theology. So I respectfully disagree that the translation doesn't make any difference.

Regarding my comment on Cain's motivation for offering sacrifice is in harmony with the fact that Cain's heart condition did not reflect that of a righteous man, but one of a wicked one. For if a wicked man still sacrifices to God, it is not out of faith. The faithful can not be wicked. Thus it is out of recognition of obligation.

Those are not the only possible motivations. The motivation could be that the person wants to appear to be a believer because his social position requires the appearance of faith (like President Bill Clinton carrying a Bible to church) or other motivations. (Like the KGB agents serving as priests and bishops in the Russian Orthodox church during the Soviet era in order to spy on the believers.)

This is similar to the obligation the nation of Israel felt as their offerings began to displease God.

They only displeased God when the offerer was insincere. As Jesus told the Pharisees, "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you tithe mint and dill and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law, justice and mercy and faith; these you ought to have done, without neglecting the others." (Mat 23:23 RSV)
jim

 

[Kane Ali]

Good afternoon John, I'm not sure how you gathered from the Bible that God enjoyed Cain's offering. The NIV version renders the account in this manner:
4 And Abel also brought an offering—fat portions from some of the firstborn of his flock. The Lord looked with favor on Abel and his offering, but on Cain and his offering he did not look with favor. So Cain was very angry, and his face was downcast."

There is no version of the Bible where it states God "enjoyed" Cain's offering. It actually states the opposite. At the end of the day, I'm not writing to debate. I am offering encouragement to anyone seeking it.
Regarding Bible translations, I use several different translations when I speak or write to people. It solely depends upon what they would prefer as well as what would convey the message better. In this case several translations do. I would encourage you to examine the NWT for yourself and why it is consistent with the American Standard Version, the New International Version, as well as the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures depicted in the Septuagint. Before I respond to any comment, question or reply, I always pray first in order that my answers do not come from my own originality. Coupled with intense daily bible study and instruction, I am confident that my responses are accurately portrayed. Have a blessed day John. Should you have any more questions, I'd love to answer them straight from the Bible.

 

[Eugene]

Cain offered his offering with a glad heart and clean hands. It was accepted. But God really liked Abel's sacrifice more.
Cain's offering was ordinary, customary, and standard... Abel's was outstanding.

Morning JohnDB, I'd like to have your thinking on your post above if possible. I read where God had no respect at all unto Cain's offering.
Gen 4:4 And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD had respect unto Abel and to his offering:
Gen 4:5 But unto Cain and to his offering He had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell. Heb 9:22 . . without shedding of blood is no remission.

All this at a time when everyone was hot after the Seed of the Woman.

I'm not sure what you are referring to here. Thanks.

 

[Jim Parker]

Good afternoon John, I'm not sure how you gathered from the Bible that God enjoyed Cain's offering.

I didn't gather that.
Quite the opposite.

I would encourage you to examine the NWT for yourself

I have.
It supports the heresy that Jesus is less than Light of Light, True God of True God, of one essence with the Father.
Since it is blatantly heretical at that point, it seems to me that it imposes the burden of checking every verse against legitimate translations in order to use it - a waste of time.

iakov the fool

 

[Kane Ali]

Good afternoon Jim and thanks for your reply. Understand that versions of the original texts are just that "versions". For example, the English language changes over time and a word or phrase that may have meant one thing in the past, means something totally different today. Consider the word gay (mind you, I have nothing against anyone who is homosexual, nor do I discriminate). The word 30 years ago meant
"happy". Today it carries a completely different meaning. Therefore in order to maintain God's original message, an adjustment would have to be made. God's word never changes, yet our language does.
Yet I will use another translation of the Holy scriptures as I am well versed in several. No problem. I don't want to stumble anyone, nor cause any controversy regarding intent of communication. When I post I will use a different translation, depending on the query and what best conveys the answer.
I look forward to reading your response.

I would be very skeptical of the New World Translation which is the product of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of Jehovah's Witnesses. There are many very good translations available which have not been modified to fit the theology of the sect.

Yes. That is at variance to all other translations. I see no reason to accept it.

Language has meaning. Slight changes in language can produce extreme differences in the message conveyed. For example, at John 1:1 where the NWT reads "...and the word was a god." is not supported by the original Greek and is in conflict with every other Bible and orthodox Christian theology. So I respectfully disagree that the translation doesn't make any difference.

Those are not the only possible motivations. The motivation could be that the person wants to appear to be a believer because his social position requires the appearance of faith (like President Bill Clinton carrying a Bible to church) or other motivations. (Like the KGB agents serving as priests and bishops in the Russian Orthodox church during the Soviet era in order to spy on the believers.)

They only displeased God when the offerer was insincere. As Jesus told the Pharisees, "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you tithe mint and dill and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law, justice and mercy and faith; these you ought to have done, without neglecting the others." (Mat 23:23 RSV)
jim

 

[Kane Ali]

Jim, In order to not debate in this setting, I will gladly use different Bible versions and translations as I always have. Not a problem. Yet my original post regarding Cain's offering was based on truth and every translation and version I have read supports it. If I am mistaken, please send quote from the Bible so I can learn.

I didn't gather that.
Quite the opposite.

I have.
It supports the heresy that Jesus is less than Light of Light, True God of True God, of one essence with the Father.
Since it is blatantly heretical at that point, it seems to me that it imposes the burden of checking every verse against legitimate translations in order to use it - a waste of time.

iakov the fool

 

[Jim Parker]

Understand that versions of the original texts are just that "versions". For example, the English language changes over time and a word or phrase that may have meant one thing in the past, means something totally different today.

There has been no change in the English language which would support rewriting John 1:1 so that it teaches heresy rather than Christian orthodoxy.
I realize that Language changes over time. That is why I don't use the Late Middle English King James Version. I don't speak Late Middle English so I use a version written in modern English.

iakov the fool

 

[Eugene]

I would encourage you to examine the NWT for yourself and why it is consistent with the American Standard Version, the New International Version, as well as the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures depicted in the Septuagint.

Dear Kane Ali, in response to your suggestion above, Only scripture from accepted Christian bibles will be allowed to be posted on this board. The New World Translation and Book of Mormon are not considered Christian material on this site.

 

[Kane Ali]

As I've written earlier, I will gladly use other versions and translations of the Bible. No problem.

There has been no change in the English language which would support rewriting John 1:1 so that it teaches heresy rather than Christian orthodoxy.
I realize that Language changes over time. That is why I don't use the Late Middle English King James Version. I don't speak Late Middle English so I use a version written in modern English.

iakov the fool

 

[Kane Ali]

Good afternoon Eugene. As I've written earlier, I'd be more than happy to use other versions of the Bible. I do hope this puts the NWT issue to rest. I'm not here to debate Bible translations. I'm simply here to offer encouragement to those in need and to clarify where clarification is requested. To accomplish that, I can use many translations and versions of the Bible without considering the NWT. Lets move on from here.

Dear Kane Ali, in response to your suggestion above, Only scripture from accepted Christian bibles will be allowed to be posted on this board. The New World Translation and Book of Mormon are not considered Christian material on this site.

 

[ezrider]

Cain was a tiller of the ground. Abel a shepherd of the sheep. Abel understood that the Lord gave the increase, so Abel's offering was an offering of the Lord's work. Cain on the other hand tilled the soil with his own hand, and the offering that Cain gave was that of his own works and labor, which was not accepted before the Lord.

 

[JohnDB]

Morning JohnDB, I'd like to have your thinking on your post above if possible. I read where God had no respect at all unto Cain's offering.
Gen 4:4 And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD had respect unto Abel and to his offering:
Gen 4:5 But unto Cain and to his offering He had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell. Heb 9:22 . . without shedding of blood is no remission.

I'm not sure what you are referring to here. Thanks.

OK...
There's going to be translational issues with these passages to begin with. The Hebrew in these scriptures is highly metaphorical and lyrical in fashion.

And when corresponding scriptures are used in conjunction with this section often Talmudic stories are used...as in the Hebrews reference.
The Talmudic tale of what Cain said to Abel to get him into the field is the elephant in the room that not very many people can actually see. It is a work of fiction (as is all Talmudic stories) but so well known to everyone that it's used as a reference to illustrate points....kinda like that Jack and Jill story involving a well at the top of a hill. It didn't work out for the two of them... especially Jack.

The nuances of the Ancient Hebrew can go in a variety of ways if isolated sentence by sentence. (Which is the normal fashion scripture is translated)

But the poem as a whole with the theme of all the Patriarchs following the Law before it was ever written is often overlooked and unseen because we have since long forgotten and never lived under the Old Covenant.
Cain, after facing God for his transgression went and built a "Levitical" city of refuge for one accused of murder.
Long before the Law was written. Cain was never as "heathen" as he was described later.

Adam and Eve had been kicked out of the Garden. They have been promised by God a way back to the Garden by agency of "the Seed of The Woman" which will crush the head of/kill the "serpent".

Cain, Adam, and Eve are all hopeful that it will be soon. Cain (just like Ham) have a belief that it is them or their firstborn son.
When things don't go as they planned... trouble happens.

 

[Eugene]

"the Seed of The Woman" which will crush the head of/kill the "serpent".
Cain, Adam, and Eve are all hopeful that it will be soon. Cain (just like Ham) have a belief that it is them or their firstborn son.
When things don't go as they planned... trouble happens.

Brother JohnDB, a real problem I have with the thought of Cain looking to the Seed Jesus is that he is not listed in the genealogies of our Savior being replaced by Seth. I have little or no confidence in anything I have read in the Talmud; seemingly a book of religious occurrences to appease a people divorced by God. Cain may have not become savage, but had works to become a people listing Lamech, a wild man and other antediluvian kindred. Is there any place biblically showing Cain to have believed on Christ?

I read in 1 Jn 3:12 Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one,

And Jud 1:11 Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core.

 

[JohnDB]

Brother JohnDB, a real problem I have with the thought of Cain looking to the Seed Jesus is that he is not listed in the genealogies of our Savior being replaced by Seth. I have little or no confidence in anything I have read in the Talmud; seemingly a book of religious occurrences to appease a people divorced by God. Cain may have not become savage, but had works to become a people listing Lamech, a wild man and other antediluvian kindred. Is there any place biblically showing Cain to have believed on Christ?

I read in 1 Jn 3:12 Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one,

And Jud 1:11 Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core.

Both 1John and Jude are quoting/summarizing Talmudic stories.

But if you put yourself in Cain's shoes for a minute...

Parents tell you of wonderful stories about their days in the Garden and then how it all came to ruin.
You, wanting the Garden and wanting to please God, are hot for the Seed. you want to be the Seed. You understand nothing else. Your understanding about Jesus is completely absent.
Then as you make a suitable offering of doing just precisely as God had said to do you get upstaged by your younger brother. "How can I get back into the Garden when Abel is distracting God?". Especially with this sheep? Sheep are good for nothing but clothing...and his sacrifice of the best of them mean lousy wool... especially when in the Garden you don't wear clothes. God made much over this blood sacrifice well I can give him blood"

Then maybe we can get back to the Garden.

And sure Cain lost his birthright and blessings. He most certainly lost the Seed to be in his lineage. (He didn't know or understand that the Seed would be centuries later)

It's like when Noah cursed Canaan. Noah really wasn't cursing Canaan...he was relating truth about how Ham's attitudes were going to be the downfall of Canaan...that his best hope of getting into the Garden were dashed and it was going to be his fault.

And of course Lamech's famous lines were of contorted Law. He was all about revenge versus compassion. But it was of some kind of legal code based in part on what God said would happen to a person who killed Cain.

It's that twisting of God's words, confusion about the future and sin nature at work.

 

[twinc]

I have never yet had an answer - what was the mark of Cain and why was it necessary - twinc

 

[Free]

I have never yet had an answer - what was the mark of Cain and why was it necessary - twinc

The Bible doesn't say what the mark was that Cain was given. So you'll never get an answer for that. But the Bible tells us why it was necessary--so that no one would kill him.

 

[JohnDB]

There is an answer...
But I can't really say much except that it's a study for the elite.

 

[Eugene]

what was the mark of Cain and why was it necessary

To me the mark on Cain was God’s word. As the Jew rejecting Christ adhering to their works to become righteous, there remains the sevenfold admonition against any going against them.

Rom 11:23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.

Rom 11:24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree?

Rom 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved . .

Past this I have no idea what you’re asking.