well ... you may have to "go into that here" in order for me to understand what you're saying.
It appears you're saying:
Abel brought his offeringthen in process of time, Cain brought his offeringthen God accepted Abel's offering but did not accept Cain's offering
or is it:
Abel brought his offeringGod accepted Abel's offeringin process of time, Cain brought his offeringGod did not accept Cain's offering
please clarify ... and explain why it is that Abel brought his offering before Cain even though in Scripture it appears that Cain brought his offering "and Abel, he also" ... from the way the record appears in Scripture it looks like they both offered pretty much at the same time ... thanks
https://hebrew.billmounce.com/BBH.1st.17.pdf
This chapter from Mounce should help you. If you look at an interlinear Hebrew-English text of Gen. 4, you should note which verbs have a waw prefix and which verbs do not. Where there is a perfect verb without a waw prefix, it is beginning a sequential chain of actions or states that includes the subsequent imperfect verbs with waw prefix. If a new perfect verb not having waw prefix is introduced into the narrative, the sequence is broken and the perfect verb without waw prefix is NOT temporally sequential to the previous chain, but begins a new temporal chain. followed by as many imperfect verbs with waw prefix as follow it.
You will see that Gen 4 verses 1, 2 and 3 give a single chain of waw + imperf3ct verb forms following the perfect verb from at the beginning, the verb "knew", in "And-Adam knew Eve..."Therefore all the verbs in vv 1-3 are temporally sequential.
But verse 4 has a perfect verb form without waw, so iit is NOT sequential to verses 1, 2 and 3. It happened not after, but some time before the last verb on the previous chain. So, Abel had brought his offering before Cain had.
Verse 5 introduces another perfect verb without waw, so is introducing a chain that is temporally disconnected from the previous chain in the narrative. "[God] did not respect...." This indicated that the narrative is jumping to a another event that was not narratively sequential to Abel's offering. The narrative is jumping back to the events of verse 3, making verse 4 parenthical to verses 1-3 and 5.
That is why I undertand Abel made his offering first and Cain took his lead lqter. It is cnjecture how Cain recognised that Abel's offering was accepted and his was not. My theory is by the productivity of their labours in the year following each of their offerings.