Sin Is As Sin Does: The Blood Speaks
Genesis 4:4
Now the man had relations with his wife Eve, and she conceived and gave birth to Cain, and she said, "I have obtained a male child with the help of the Lord." And again, she gave birth to his brother Abel. Now Abel was a keeper of flocks, but Cain was a cultivator of the ground. 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.
The first people have been expelled and are now living out their mortal lives in the lands between. They are farming the land and likewise animal husbandry is their business. Adam and Eve produced children and the two we are aware of in this passage are Cain the farmer and his younger brother Abel the herdsman.
This is the first generation after the expulsion. Eve’s words at Cain’s birth are deliberate. Following from the idea of the curse and promise she received at the judgment, she interrupts that Cain is the fulfillment of that prophecy.
"I have obtained a male child with the help of the Lord."
She sees this child as something received from God, not merely produced by human effort.
Now we see the first recorded expression of worship. The contrast between the two is not primarily between farmer and herdsman. Both vocations are God-given. What seems to be the distinction is the intent.
When we look ahead into the New Testament in the book of Hebrews (Hebrews 11:4) we learn that by faith Able offered the more acceptable sacrifice. The text is careful. It does not say Cain brought less than the best, only that it records no such qualifier for him. It does record that Abel brought the firstborn and the fat; the portion later identified as belonging specially to God. Therefore the ground of acceptance is faith. Abel’s offering is the outward expression of a heart that treats God as worthy of the first and the best. And Cain’s offering, whatever its material quality, does not carry the same concern. It almost seems to me that he begrudgingly wants to make an offering. But he is concerned that it be accepted. Because we see that he has an emotional response to the incident.
Genesis 4:5
"but for Cain and his offering He [God] had no regard. So Cain became very angry and his face was gloomy."
The phrasing is deliberate. The Lord does not regard Cain, in fact He's critical of him, and He does not regard Cain’s offering. The person and the gift stand together. What is absent in the description of the offering is present in the description of the man. The very intensity of the emotional reaction reveals something about the heart that brought the gift. Cain is obviously an angry young man.
But even so, God is rejecting the man even as He disregards his offering. In fact God tried to guide him in his ways going forward with some wisdom about the nature of sin.
Genesis 4:6-7
Then the Lord said to Cain, "Why are you angry? And why is your face gloomy? If you do well, will your face not be cheerful? And if you do not do well, sin is lurking at the door; and its desire is for you, but you must master it."
The questions are not rhetorical dismissals; they are an invitation to examine the heart that has just been exposed. The anger and the fallen face are named and brought out into the open. This is how the Lord handles sin. Straightforward. Then the Lord places before Cain the real alternative lifestyle choice. This is guidance, not condemnation after the fact. The path of doing well remains open. Acceptance is still possible; the cheerful face is still attainable. Yet the warning is equally clear. Sin is not an abstract possibility. It is already present, crouching or lurking at the door, with a desire that reaches for Cain.
This is vivid language. The likes of which you will rarely hear anymore in our modern society. In fact, speaking about or exposing the truth about sin today is seen as violence by many. And you'll see a very Cain-like response from those who are caught up in the defense of their sinful conduct. What the narrative then records is that Cain does not master it. The next verse shows him speaking to Abel, and the one after that shows the murder in the field. Cain spills the blood of his brother on the ground and a new curse is born. The text is stark. There is no further description of the conversation, no record of Abel’s response, only the fact that Cain spoke and then the act itself. And God wants a confession out of Cain. This is why the Lord seeks him out and questions him about his brother.
Genesis 4:9-10
Then the Lord said to Cain, "Where is Abel your brother?" And he said, "I do not know. Am I my brother’s keeper?" Then He said, "What have you done? The voice of your brother’s blood is crying out to Me from the ground."
The Lord’s question is not framed as an accusation that already assumes the answer; it is an opening that still leaves room for Cain to speak truthfully about what he has done. But Cain refuses to acknowledge his sin.
Why do we refuse to face up to the choices we make? Especially in matters of life and death? Why do so many equivocate when pressed about their choices and the consequences of them?
Cain will not name what he has done.
"Am I my brother’s keeper?"
It's no different than saying:
"Am I responsible for a clump of cells in the womb, or the developing human body that is still not viable?"
With Cain it is the verbal refusal to accept responsibility for the life he has just taken. With modern society the verbal refusal is to accept the life itself. In the modern form the deflection is moved earlier. The verbal refusal is not merely "I am not responsible for what I have done," but "this is not yet a life for which anyone must give an account." It's as if Cain would have said today, "who is Able, who is my brother?" "Do I have a brother?"
So, we're Cain alive today, in our society, he could had made the claim: the category of brother is itself rejected before any duty can attach. In this manner of framing the situation there is no blood that can cry out, because there was never a brother whose blood could be shed. Today, you simply ignore the life that you choose to extinguish via an abortion procedure. That fetus's blood cannot cry out because you've decided that it's not real. The modern claim attempts to succeed where Cain’s words did not. By rejecting the category of brother (or of human life) at the outset, so that there is, by definition, no blood that possesses a voice. And since the fetus has no breath of life to speak, it has no voice to hear.
Our contemporary society tries to prevent the conditions of the unborn's life declaration from ever arising. An abortion isn't simply putting an end to a pregnancy, it is permanently silencing a as yet voiceless child.
Our culturally modern denial does not merely refuse responsibility after the fact, as Cain did; it seeks to ensure that the conditions under which a cry could be recognized never arises. And if an abortion abolitionist speaks for the executed child, we again see the emotional Cain-like response.
I wonder if anyone besides God in Cain's time spoke out about his actions. The text doesn't mention it, but I have to believe others had at least an opinion. The narrative’s focus remains tightly on the exchange between the Lord and Cain, and on the ground that now holds the blood.
I think we can see from this exchange that even if someone else spoke out against what Cain had done, his response would remain the same. same heart that would not master the desire when the Lord named it, and would not confess when the Lord questioned him, gives no indication that he would have yielded to anyone else. Sin is as sin does.
Amen 🙏🏼