Search results

Genesis 4 happens to come immediately after Genesis 3. Genesis 3:21 for Adam and his wife the LORD God made tunics of skin, and clothed them.

you have heard it said, but I say unto you.. did Christ obey "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth"? did David and his men sin when they ate the shewbread?

i think you overlooked the part where i said they demonstrate He is the Messiah and that the Messiah is God being manifest among men. He sends those who say they are blind, yet see, to teach those who say they see, yet are blind. only God does this; only God gives sight to eyes that have never...

why is murdering his brother the shepherd, the response of Cain to God warning him to do what is right? because doing what is right involved his brother being necessarily alive. to do what is right, Cain needed the shepherd. and now we arrive at the thread topic. ;)

God tells Cain that if he did what is right, he would be accepted. therefore Cain did what was wrong. God did not give Cain further instructions on what is right, therefore Cain already knew what was right, and did wrong anyway. therefore Cain sinned with his offering. therefore God showed Cain...

on altars that were cleansed with blood. everywhere in scripture, the blood is a central theme. why would Genesis 4 be different?

it's the same God - my point in bringing up Leviticus is that He was very specific to Israel about the details of sacrifices and offerings. why would i think He was not specific about details of what was acceptable for Cain and Abel to offer? for example where do you have the idea that it is...

vegetables or fruit? exactly what fruit or vegetable did he bring before God? did God ever curse a fruit or a vegetable?

because God made coverings for Adam and Eve.

Abel's offering involved the shedding of blood, and Cain's did not. that is the difference between bringing fruit and bringing a spotless lamb before God.

does Leviticus say, offer whatever you have? or is it extremely specific about what is acceptable? God tells Cain to do well - Cain knows what offering is acceptable. And the text does not say Cain brought fruit that was not of the first of the harvest; it says Abel brought of the first of the...

i did not optimally phrase my earlier reply about an offering in which blood was shed. but the point is that blood was shed for the offering Abel brought, but not for that brought by Cain. 'without shedding of blood there is no remission of sin' is written - where do we suppose this comes from...

perhaps if it is restated: must one be capable of evil, in order to be free? :coffee::unsure:

Genesis 4:4 Abel also brought of the firstborn of his flock and of their fat. And the LORD respected Abel and his offering how do you get the fat out of a lamb without shedding blood?

no one who has any experience or innate desires has a will that is untouched and uninfluenced by them. :coffee::unsure:

my will was not truly free until Christ set me free :)

the aspect of first fruits in Genesis 4 is not unimportant, but the aspect of blood sacrifice cannot be ignored. it's something i have actually argued with my pastor about, ha! and i lost. i wanted to bring up first fruits, but he showed me that the offering of blood was the real key in the...

why does Abel offer blood?

so we are agreed, the Torah does command the ascribing of guilt/sin to someone on the testimony of two or three human witnesses - therefore you agree it is an incorrect statement to say someone is guilty of blasphemy if they call a man a sinner. this is the case in an objective, abstract sense...

you sure about that? Proverbs 20:11 Even a child is known by his deeds, Whether what he does is pure and right.