Does the Tanakh teach how Cain killed Abel? A simple case study of contextual analysis and probability.

When you ask most people does the Bible teach how Cain murdered Abel the typical response is no. However; by teasing out the literary knowledge lost to many we can get a deeper understanding of the final moments. It’s tucked away in the original language in two main ways.

The first is the easiest to pick out. It’s Cain’s name. In Hebrew his name is, קַיִן which is romanized as Qayin and it means spear. Concordance reference is H7013&7014. The second is a bit harder to stumble across. It comes from Genesis 4:8.


Genesis 4:8 NASB
8 Cain told Abel his brother. And it came about when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother and killed him.

The main word to focus on is “ and killed him” which is וַיַּהַרְגֵֽהוּ which is wrote as “wayyaharḡêhū” and it only occurs in three places in the entire Old Testament. Genesis 4:8 and the other two are about the same story. It’s when Benaiah killed a Egyptian with a spear. Thats in 2 Samuel 23:21 and 1 Chronicles 11:23.

So the reason why it’s probable that Cain used a spear to murder Abel is because his name itself means spear and the phrase used in Hebrew when Cain murdered able is also only used two other times and it’s when a man murdered another with a spear.

Also it’s cool that we can see a similar theme hyperlinking Christ with Abel. They were both innocent people murdered by others and each one had a spear thrusted into them. Each one was murdered by those pretending to honor God who were angry at the real submission the others was giving to God.

I always thought Cain killed Abel because of jealousy，your thought is a new idea.

Well I’m not denying why Cain killed Abel but hoping to help answer how. In films it’s traditionally this view that he did it from behind with a rock or something. But I feel scripture says otherwise and that it’s not something without clues.

When Cain looked at Abel's offering he might have taken it personal.

Abel took the first born of his flock and slaughtered them.

Cain could think "hey I'm the first born" why does he think I should be a sacrificial offering?

Then God favors Abel's offering.

Cain might think "God agrees that I should be killed?😠

Maybe you are right. The time of Babel that language is the same, but it has been changed by god. We can find many similarities in the language.
On second thought, Cain and the scribes and Pharisees do have many similarities。

Personally I think the story shows that Cain was upset because his offering was rejected. We can only assume based off of later verses that the offering should have been a sin offering since God accused Cain of sinning and said if he does well he will feel better.

Another commonly missed detail is the exact offering Cain gave. He gave “fruit of the ground” and that’s the first time it was mentioned. Previously, the food for Adam and Eve was fruit of the trees. So there is some
Kind of disconnect with fruit of the ground coming from Cain. Genesis says that the vegetation on the ground was for animals. So perhaps it was viewed that Cain was taking their food and offering it to God. Perhaps it was a crop that feed the livestock. So God found it as a mockery.

Just before this the ground is mentioned as being cursed. Even way up in Leviticus 27:30 it mentions giving god fruit of the trees. Could even be connected to the fact that mankind came from the dust ( dirt the ground) and perhaps it’s linking to fruit of the flesh in that abstract kind of way. Adam’s name means dirt essentially after all. Even in English the root word hum ( from below) is used for humans ( as from below like soil) , humus ( dirt) and humiliation ( to be brought low) as if you be like the ground.

This is all interesting, and I’ve thought about it but have not been able to really sit down and trace the patterns.

That's persuasive. I like it.

Cain as a verb

Verb קנה (qana) means to obtain, i.e. to acquire or in some instances to create.

That squares with Eve's statement when Cain was born.

“I have gotten a man with the help of the Lord."

Did they have spears?

Would they have had a need that was resolved by inventing the spear?

Cain probably had tools to till soil. But it would be odd to take one abroad to a field.

Cain was beginning a way of living that attempts to control the powers of nature. Trying to reverse the curse God placed on the ground. Growing grain and such organized artificially instead of gathering from where they naturally grow.

Abel wasn't attempting to control God's creatures. Cain was.
Abel went where ever the sheep needed to be. Abel became a wanderer for the sheep. He didn't remove them from their natural environment. He adapted his life to the sheep instead of making the sheep adapt to him.

I speculate.

Cains mindset is to reverse the curse God placed on the ground by organizing its produce. Placing it in an artificial environment. Cain had less respect for God and His creation than Abel.

I find it interesting that Cains punishment makes him a wanderer.

the obvious question is often the excellent question that's brushed by with assumptions -- they were eating only vegetables, not animals.
why would they make weapons?

even apocryphal Enoch puts an angel named Azazel as responsible for introducing weapons to mankind, which wouldn't be until Genesis 6.

Just a note on the name, Abel. It could mean Father God. In Hebrew Ab is Father *Abi is my father), and El is God, *Eli is my God.)

Cain was named Cain before Abel was born, and well before he killed Abel.....and Jesus was already dead when speared in the side by the Roman soldier.

Not saying I disagree, just pointing out the obvious....something to ponder and equally just a guess based upon the language and what happened....

a. Abel's blood cried from the ground unto God.

b. Abel was killed over jealousy

c. Abel offered shed blood which required slitting the throat of a lamb/sheep

It is possible that Cain murdered Abel with the very knife that Abel used to kill and offer the lamb.

Just a thought!

thanks for the great posts - a great study...

Cain's offering was an acceptable gift, the word itself, minchah is used 164 times as 'offering',
it's usually a grain-offering -
we suspect/maybe that the offering was acceptable to God, but Cain's heart/attitude was not right,
according to the conversation he had with God...
MAL. 1:13.
You said also, Behold, what a weariness is it! and you have snuffed at it, saith The LORD of Hosts;
and you brought that which was torn, and the lame, and the sick; thus you brought an offering:
should I accept this of your hand? saith The LORD.
this would certainly beg the question, did Cain bring the 'left-overs'???

who talks to God and turns around and kills his brother??? what wickedness!

1JOHN 3:12.
Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him?
Because his own works were evil, and his brother's righteous.

the number value of Abel's name is the same as for the word 'wisdom'...

Part of his name sounds like to obtain. But it’s not actually his name. It’s. Similar sounding root word. Eve says something similar about Seth as well.

https://biblehub.com/hebrew/7014.htm

If you go to the two reference marks it shows the play on the word for both phrases. It’s similar to obtaining, but way more similar to spear. Plus the phrase about “and kill him” in Hebrew really seems to tie it all together.

As for did they have spears at that time. When genesis was wrote, presumably by Moses, spears already existed. Moses would have used the words known to him, even though guided by the spirit, to write out the early hyperbolic ahistorical narratives of chapters 1-11.

Even when God was creating there wasn't plant growth because God wasn't sending the rain and He didn't do that because there was no man to till the ground.

That activity didn't put sweat on our brow though. I think it was what we would do naturally and it fulfilled our purpose in God.

Not sure if it's farming per say posthuman. Gardening is more accurate I think. One is pleasure the other well not so much. I think tilling before sin and death entered the world served the earth. After sin and death it became inherently self serving.

I think tilling the ground is human activity directed to it's end in God. I think it still can be but now the ground is cursed and our brow gets sweaty. We do it to survive.

I think its really funny all the assumptions that people make by what they read. And then kind of even more funny when other people just run with those assumptions and agree with them as if they are facts.

With that said, I would have answered that Cain hit Abel with a rock from behind. I would have said I thought I read it in the bible.

Then I would have been surprised when I didn't find it...

I have always considered the Cain/Abel story as a teaching about obedience of the Lord. A principle of the Lord is that we are saved by the blood, and in the OT that did not know of Christ the symbolic blood of Christ was used. Abel obeyed this, and sacrificed the blood for forgiveness of his sins, while Abel used produce from his own efforts.

Seeing that there is no command recorded in scripture given to them to make offerings, but there is in chapter 3 the shedding of blood making garments for their parents, I think it is a good inference that what they were doing was commemorating that significant event - a precursor to Pascha.
In that sense, yes blood for atonement is is an integral part. It's also kind of like firstfruits, which is in the law in the same season as passover, because it's mentioned that Abel brings of the first - a detail conspicuously not mentioned about Cains offering.

So if it's a commemoration of the making of the garments, about the most wicked thing Cain could do would be to bring fig leaves instead of a lamb - - and if a lamb is what was appropriate, it is an indication that a lamb is what was slain to make the tunic, and also that Cain was dependent on Abel to get these lambs since he was the one who tended flocks while Cain tended fields.
If that is true, you can see what kind of hatred he may have developed for his brother - to the end that he strikes the first shepherd instead of repenting from what he had done by the offering he brought.

This is another assumption that I wonder about.

The bible says Adam and Eve were clothed with skins but doesn't mention any kind of sacrifice or killing of any animal.

We just assume that because that is the only way WE could provide skins to Adam and Eve then that is the only way God could provide them.

It seems like an honest assumption based in good logic. Not sure why I stumble a little bit by it. Its one of those things where I wish we had 5 or 6 verses describing how Adam and Eve were clothed...