| Subject: Cain's Offering |
Author:
Phil
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 09/27/02 9:34pm
In reply to:
Biff
's message, "Keep lookin'" on 08/ 1/02 2:19pm
These brothers were tested as Adam and been tested before them, to prove whether they would believe and obey the word of God. They were acquainted with the provision made for the salvation of man, and understood the system of offerings which God had ordained. The knew that in these offerings typified, and at the same time acknowledged their total dependence on God for pardon; and they knew that by thus conforming to the divine plan for their redemption, they were giving proof of their obedience to the will of God. Without the shedding of blood there could be no remission of sin; and they were to show their faith in the blood of the promised atonement by offering the firstlings of the flock in sacrifice. Besides this, the first fruits of the erath were to be presented before the Lord as a thank offering. The two brothers erected their altars alike, and each brought an offering. Abel presented a sacrifice from the flock, in accordance with the Lord's directions. "And the Lord had respect unto Abel and to his offering. Fire flashed from heaven and consumed the sacrifice." But Cain, disregarded the Lord's direct and explict command, presented only an offering of fruit. There was no token from heaven to show that it was accepted. Cain came before God with murmuring and infidelity in his heart in regard to the promised sacrifice and the necessity of the sacrifical offering. Cain chose the course of self-dependence. He would come in his own merits. He would not bring the lamb, and mingle its blood with his offetring, but would present {HIS} fruits, the products of {HIS} labor. He presented his offering as a favor done to God, through which he expected to secure the divine approval. Cain obeyed in building an altar, obeyed in bringing a sacrifice; but he rendered only a partial obedience. The essential part, the recognition of the need of a Redeemer, was left out. The New Testament declares: "By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain." Heb. 11:4. Abel grasped the great principle of redemption. He saw himself a sinner, and saw sin and its penalty, death, standing between his soul and communion with God. He brought the slain victim, the sacrificed life, thus acknowledging the claims of the law that had been transgressed. Through the shed blood he looked to the future promised sacrifice, Christ dying on the cross of Calvary; and trusting in the atomement that was there to be made, he had the witness that he was righteous, and his offering accepted. Abel chose faith and obedience; Cain, unbelief and rebellion. Here the whole matter rested.>>In your experience, which scriptures are most
>>bothersome to Christians?
>
>I realize you're looking for input from those who like
>to challenge Christianity, but perhaps, as a
>Christian, I can lend you a unique perspective.
>
>The verses you listed can present problems, at least
>on the surface. But a more thorough look casts light
>on them.
>
>>
>>For example:
>>Exodus 21:20-21(beating slaves is okay)
>
>Of course. As long as they don't die. One of my slaves
>scared me once. After I gave him a particularly good
>whippin', he laid there in a coma for four days! I
>thought I was in for it that time.
>
>Forgive my sarcasm. I've seen the slavery card played
>before, and it just doesn't hold much weight with me.
>It's a strictly cultural reference, almost equivalent
>to saying: "Everybody in the Bible wore sandals, so
>wearing shoes must be a sin." True the Bible does not
>prohibit slavery, but I contend that slavery was held
>in a much different context in that culture than in
>ours. Slaves were more like indentured servants. But
>the Bible does lay down strict guidelines to prevent
>the mistreatment of slaves.
>
>Let me put this to you: forcing prison inmates to work
>in labour camps is a form of slavery. Is it wrong?
>
>>II Thessalonians 2:11(God lied!)
>
>1) When I study the Bible, I come to the conclusion
>that God's commands may not define his actions, but
>rather the actions he desires his people to pursue.
>For example, he commands us not to kill, yet there are
>many occasions in the Bible when he takes the lives of
>people, or demands that their lives be taken. That is
>his right. As the creator of life, it is his decision
>to make. I see no reason why the same principle could
>not be applied to lying.
>
>2) In this particular case, it is clear why God allows
>a delusion to come upon certain people (I could state
>that this is not the same as lying, but it's likely to
>turn into a semantical argument that would take us
>around in circles). Back up to verse 8: "And then
>shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall
>consume with the spirit of his mouth..." and to verse
>10: "and with all the deceivableness of
>unrighteousness in them that perish...." So God is
>pulling a Solomon here, if you will, ordering with
>tongue in cheek that the child be split to separate
>the wicked from the righteous.
>
>>Mathew 13:31-32 (this one, as with many, depends on
>>the translation. BTW
>>the Orchid seed is much smaller than the Mustard seed)
>
>Interesting, but what's your point? I don't have the
>resources here to confirm or deny your statement, but
>even if it is true, there's many possible
>explanations. Perhaps his audience had never seen an
>orchid seed, and thus the mustard seed was the
>smallest in their frame of reference. Perhaps Jesus
>was actually holding several seeds in his hand at the
>time for the purpose of illustration, and the mustard
>seed was the smallest of those. Whatever the
>explanation, it does not change the point he was
>making.
>
>>Leviticus 11:6 (Rabbits do not chew their cud as this
>>scripture says, but
>>they do chew their feces...)
>
>Well, all the more reason they should be declared
>unclean!
>
>>All of Leviticus 11
>
>Redeemed by Acts 10:9-16.
>
>>Also, WHAT KINDS of biblical errors are most effective
>>in your dialogues with Christians?
>
>Speaking as a Christian, I've never encountered a
>Biblical error that was particularly effective in
>making me question my faith. Perhaps what's come the
>closest is the story of Cain and Abel (Genesis 4). I
>read and reread that story and I find no good reason
>why God would not accept Cain's offering.
>
>>
>>One more question, what is your favorite scripture/s?
>
>Interestingly enough, I can't say that I have one. In
>fact, it doesn't really make sense to me to pick a
>favorite scripture. It's like saying, "What's your
>favorite sentence in Huckleberry Finn?" Too many
>people look at the Bible as a collection of verses and
>chapters. But those divisions were added relatively
>recently for reference purposes. The Bible was meant
>to be read as we would read any other book.
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 