Ethical-Motivational
The author of Genesis never indicates the true motivations behind the sacrifices to God and the murder of Abel, however, more modern authors have provided different potential motivations.
One of the most significant moments of Genesis 4 is the murder of Abel by Cain. After each brother offers God a sacrifice to show their devotion and love toward him, Cain is ridiculed while Abel is praised. Cain is outraged by God's reaction and proceeds to kill his brother. While this event is significant to the story, there is not a clear explanation as to why Cain preformed such a sinful act. Biblical scholars including Rein Nautra and Gary Imbinder have attempted to explain this ambiguity within the text however, there is not one clear answer behind the motivation of Cain's actions.
The shame and jealousy Cain experiences after God rejects his sacrifice may be the motivation for Abel’s murder. When Cain’s sacrifices are rejected by God, he becomes very upset. God asks Cain, “Why are you angry? Why are you dejected? If you act rightly, you will be accepted” (Genesis 4:6-7). Cain did not live up to God’s expectations and is not proud of his actions. The shame and guilt Cain experiences after God rejects him may be the motivation for his violent actions toward Abel. When Cain’s sacrifice is rejected, his self-image is distorted. After attempting to live his life dedicated to pleasing God and being told by God he is not doing so, affects Cain deeply. Rein Nautra, author of Cain and Abel: Violence, Shame and Jealousy explores this concept further. Nautra states that, “acts of violence are affronts to self-esteem, affronts whose severity is experienced in direct proportion to the grandiosity of the originally imagined value of the self” (Natua 70). This point explains that Cain acted in a violent manner after being rejected by God in order to maintain his own self-esteem. The jealousy Cain feels towards Abel also play a role in his behavior. Feeling lesser than his brother inspires Cain to lash out against him. Not living up to his own self-image while his brother is given praise for his sacrifice could also explain Cain’s actions. Cain was rejected despite his love and devotion to God while Abel is well-received and loved by God. Natua explains that “Cain’s love implied that love is to be exclusive. But it turns out there are others who share in God’s love, and are even loved more, who are preferred.” (69). The jealousy that results from Cain’s rejection may have been the main motivation for the murder of Abel. Jealousy and shame are two factors that may have played a role in Cain deciding to murder Abel after being rejected by God.
Gary Imbinder’s compelling analysis of Cain’s sacrifice to God suggests the idea the sacrifice was provided through obligation rather than faith. This interpretation suggests that the sole reason for Cain’s sacrifice was to get something in return. Imbinder’s interpretation states, “I labor under your curse and will acknowledge you so long as you are instrumental to me”(Imbinder 2004, 191). This exposes the idea that the true motive dictating Cain’s actions that would be seen by God as disloyal and unfaithful. This viewed in contrast with Abel’s sacrifice demonstrates conflicting concepts of God as a burden and God as a savior. The way in which Cain and Abel view God is representative of their motivation in sacrificing to him. While Abel saw a sacrifice to God as thanks and praise, Cain saw it as a sort of exchange where he gives something to God with the expectation God will give something back. This illustration of Cain and Abel portrays the younger brother’s cause for sacrifice as, “paying his due” and a “selfless sacrifice” (Imbinder 2004,191). The omniscient God would have known each brother’s motivation for sacrifice and viewed Cain’s as ill-intended and Abel’s as favorable. His knowledge of this becomes evident when he rejects Cain’s offering of fruit of the ground and accepts Abel’s livestock.
Additionally, these motivations tie into what the two son’s lives represent on a larger scale theologically. Cain is intended to serve as a post-fall symbol and the result of what has come of Adam and Eve’s sin, whereas Abel is demonstrative of “pre-lapsarian innocence and harmony with God and nature” (Imbinder 2004, 190). This symbolism further explains why the motives for each brother’s sacrifice are defined as either a burden or a faithful duty. It suggests that inevitably Cain acted out of sin and Abel out of love. Essentially the analogy viewing Abel as pre-fall and Cain as post-fall grants each brother with a pre-destined future. This interpretation provides understanding of why God rejected Cain’s sacrifice beyond the disliking of what he had to offer. It demonstrates that Cain as a figure represented sin and was therefore motivated to act through sin. Abel was motivated by the goodness and grace that pre-existed the fall at the Garden of Eden. Imbinder interprets the intention of Cain and Abel’s story to express the consequence of original sin. It says Abel is, “too good to live in a world of fallen creatures” (Imbinder 2004,191). This further implies the effect of original sin; essentially saying those without it are unable to survive on Earth but will find everlasting life with God. It reveals an interesting perspective as to how each brother chose to sacrifice, and why God chose to either accept or reject their offering. By understanding the story of Cain and Abel in this way Imbinder believes the message of God’s action is to strive for the type of grace and loyalty that Abel encompassed and reject Cain’s persona of arrogance and obligation.
Potential motivations behind the actions of Cain and Abel in Genesis 4 have been interpreted many different ways. Each of these interpretations reflect the assumed code of ethics that each of the brothers followed providing explanation to why they chose their sacrifice in addition to their response to God’s reaction to their sacrifice. The motivation behind the series of events that occurred in the story of Cain and Abel vary which demonstrates the way in which biblical text is understood differently by various scholars.
The shame and jealousy Cain experiences after God rejects his sacrifice may be the motivation for Abel’s murder. When Cain’s sacrifices are rejected by God, he becomes very upset. God asks Cain, “Why are you angry? Why are you dejected? If you act rightly, you will be accepted” (Genesis 4:6-7). Cain did not live up to God’s expectations and is not proud of his actions. The shame and guilt Cain experiences after God rejects him may be the motivation for his violent actions toward Abel. When Cain’s sacrifice is rejected, his self-image is distorted. After attempting to live his life dedicated to pleasing God and being told by God he is not doing so, affects Cain deeply. Rein Nautra, author of Cain and Abel: Violence, Shame and Jealousy explores this concept further. Nautra states that, “acts of violence are affronts to self-esteem, affronts whose severity is experienced in direct proportion to the grandiosity of the originally imagined value of the self” (Natua 70). This point explains that Cain acted in a violent manner after being rejected by God in order to maintain his own self-esteem. The jealousy Cain feels towards Abel also play a role in his behavior. Feeling lesser than his brother inspires Cain to lash out against him. Not living up to his own self-image while his brother is given praise for his sacrifice could also explain Cain’s actions. Cain was rejected despite his love and devotion to God while Abel is well-received and loved by God. Natua explains that “Cain’s love implied that love is to be exclusive. But it turns out there are others who share in God’s love, and are even loved more, who are preferred.” (69). The jealousy that results from Cain’s rejection may have been the main motivation for the murder of Abel. Jealousy and shame are two factors that may have played a role in Cain deciding to murder Abel after being rejected by God.
Gary Imbinder’s compelling analysis of Cain’s sacrifice to God suggests the idea the sacrifice was provided through obligation rather than faith. This interpretation suggests that the sole reason for Cain’s sacrifice was to get something in return. Imbinder’s interpretation states, “I labor under your curse and will acknowledge you so long as you are instrumental to me”(Imbinder 2004, 191). This exposes the idea that the true motive dictating Cain’s actions that would be seen by God as disloyal and unfaithful. This viewed in contrast with Abel’s sacrifice demonstrates conflicting concepts of God as a burden and God as a savior. The way in which Cain and Abel view God is representative of their motivation in sacrificing to him. While Abel saw a sacrifice to God as thanks and praise, Cain saw it as a sort of exchange where he gives something to God with the expectation God will give something back. This illustration of Cain and Abel portrays the younger brother’s cause for sacrifice as, “paying his due” and a “selfless sacrifice” (Imbinder 2004,191). The omniscient God would have known each brother’s motivation for sacrifice and viewed Cain’s as ill-intended and Abel’s as favorable. His knowledge of this becomes evident when he rejects Cain’s offering of fruit of the ground and accepts Abel’s livestock.
Additionally, these motivations tie into what the two son’s lives represent on a larger scale theologically. Cain is intended to serve as a post-fall symbol and the result of what has come of Adam and Eve’s sin, whereas Abel is demonstrative of “pre-lapsarian innocence and harmony with God and nature” (Imbinder 2004, 190). This symbolism further explains why the motives for each brother’s sacrifice are defined as either a burden or a faithful duty. It suggests that inevitably Cain acted out of sin and Abel out of love. Essentially the analogy viewing Abel as pre-fall and Cain as post-fall grants each brother with a pre-destined future. This interpretation provides understanding of why God rejected Cain’s sacrifice beyond the disliking of what he had to offer. It demonstrates that Cain as a figure represented sin and was therefore motivated to act through sin. Abel was motivated by the goodness and grace that pre-existed the fall at the Garden of Eden. Imbinder interprets the intention of Cain and Abel’s story to express the consequence of original sin. It says Abel is, “too good to live in a world of fallen creatures” (Imbinder 2004,191). This further implies the effect of original sin; essentially saying those without it are unable to survive on Earth but will find everlasting life with God. It reveals an interesting perspective as to how each brother chose to sacrifice, and why God chose to either accept or reject their offering. By understanding the story of Cain and Abel in this way Imbinder believes the message of God’s action is to strive for the type of grace and loyalty that Abel encompassed and reject Cain’s persona of arrogance and obligation.
Potential motivations behind the actions of Cain and Abel in Genesis 4 have been interpreted many different ways. Each of these interpretations reflect the assumed code of ethics that each of the brothers followed providing explanation to why they chose their sacrifice in addition to their response to God’s reaction to their sacrifice. The motivation behind the series of events that occurred in the story of Cain and Abel vary which demonstrates the way in which biblical text is understood differently by various scholars.