In the previous post, we got our first glimpse of life outside the garden. And it was not all that pleasant. We saw how the first humans right away played favorites among their first two sons, privileging the first born, Cain, while treating the second born, Abel, as a nobody. We saw that the text issues a challenge to the practice of primogeniture and that in it God challenges Cain to reject the unjust privileges he gained simply by virtue of being the first born. We now proceed to look at Cain’s response.
Hebrew text:
8 וַיֹּ֥אמֶר קַ֖יִן אֶל־הֶ֣בֶל אָחִ֑יו וַֽיְהִי֙ בִּהְיוֹתָ֣ם בַּשָּׂדֶ֔ה וַיָּ֥קָם קַ֛יִן אֶל־הֶ֥בֶל אָחִ֖יו וַיַּהַרְגֵֽהוּ׃
9 וַיֹּ֤אמֶר יְהוָה֙ אֶל־קַ֔יִן אֵ֖י הֶ֣בֶל אָחִ֑יךָ וַיֹּ֙אמֶר֙ לֹ֣א יָדַ֔עְתִּי הֲשֹׁמֵ֥ר אָחִ֖י אָנֹֽכִי׃
10 וַיֹּ֖אמֶר מֶ֣ה עָשִׂ֑יתָ ק֚וֹל דְּמֵ֣י אָחִ֔יךָ צֹעֲקִ֥ים אֵלַ֖י מִן־הָֽאֲדָמָֽה׃
11 וְעַתָּ֖ה אָר֣וּר אָ֑תָּה מִן־הָֽאֲדָמָה֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר פָּצְתָ֣ה אֶת־פִּ֔יהָ לָקַ֛חַת אֶת־דְּמֵ֥י אָחִ֖יךָ מִיָּדֶֽךָ׃
12 כִּ֤י תַֽעֲבֹד֙ אֶת־הָ֣אֲדָמָ֔ה לֹֽא־תֹסֵ֥ף תֵּת־כֹּחָ֖הּ לָ֑ךְ נָ֥ע וָנָ֖ד תִּֽהְיֶ֥ה בָאָֽרֶץ׃
13 וַיֹּ֥אמֶר קַ֖יִן אֶל־יְהוָ֑ה גָּד֥וֹל עֲוֺנִ֖י מִנְּשֹֽׂא׃
14 הֵן֩ גֵּרַ֨שְׁתָּ אֹתִ֜י הַיּ֗וֹם מֵעַל֙ פְּנֵ֣י הָֽאֲדָמָ֔ה וּמִפָּנֶ֖יךָ אֶסָּתֵ֑ר וְהָיִ֜יתִי נָ֤ע וָנָד֙ בָּאָ֔רֶץ וְהָיָ֥ה כָל־מֹצְאִ֖י יַֽהַרְגֵֽנִי׃
Transliteration:
8 way·yō·mer qa·yin ’el- he·ḇel ’ā·ḥîw; way·hî bih·yō·w·ṯām baś·śā·ḏeh, way·yā·qām qa·yin ’el- he·ḇel ’ā·ḥîw way·ya·har·ḡê·hū.
9 way·yō·mer Yah·weh ’el- qa·yin, ’ê he·ḇel ’ā·ḥî·ḵā; way·yō·mer lō yā·ḏa‘·tî, hă·šō·mêr ’ā·ḥî ’ā·nō·ḵî.
10 way·yō·mer meh ‘ā·śî·ṯā; qō·wl də·mê ’ā·ḥî·ḵā, ṣō·‘ă·qîm ’ê·lay min- hā·’ă·ḏā·māh.
11 wə·‘at·tāh ’ā·rūr ’āt·tāh; min- hā·’ă·ḏā·māh ’ă·šer pā·ṣə·ṯāh ’eṯ- pî·hā, lā·qa·ḥaṯ ’eṯ- də·mê ’ā·ḥî·ḵā mî·yā·ḏe·ḵā.
12 kî ṯa·‘ă·ḇōḏ ’eṯ- hā·’ă·ḏā·māh, lō- ṯō·sêp̄ têṯ- kō·ḥāh lāḵ; nā‘ wā·nāḏ tih·yeh ḇā·’ā·reṣ.
13 way·yō·mer qa·yin ’el- Yah·weh; gā·ḏō·wl ‘ă·wō·nî min·nə·śō.
14 hên gê·raš·tā ’ō·ṯî hay·yō·wm, mê·‘al pə·nê hā·’ă·ḏā·māh, ū·mip·pā·ne·ḵā ’es·sā·ṯêr; wə·hā·yî·ṯî nā‘ wā·nāḏ bā·’ā·reṣ, wə·hā·yāh ḵāl mō·ṣə·’î ya·har·ḡê·nî.
NIV:
8 Now Cain said to his brother Abel, “Let’s go out to the field.” While they were in the field, Cain attacked his brother Abel and killed him.
9 Then the Lord said to Cain, “Where is your brother Abel?” “I don’t know,” he replied. “Am I my brother’s keeper?”
10 The Lord said, “What have you done? Listen! Your brother’s blood cries out to me from the ground.
11 Now you are under a curse and driven from the ground, which opened its mouth to receive your brother’s blood from your hand.
12 When you work the ground, it will no longer yield its crops for you. You will be a restless wanderer on the earth.”
13 Cain said to the Lord, “My punishment is more than I can bear.
14 Today you are driving me from the land, and I will be hidden from your presence; I will be a restless wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me.”
Study:
Rather than heed God’s warning about sin waiting to pounce on him, Cain took steps in the opposite direction. He invites Abel to the field where he proceeds to murder him. If he thought his troubles were at an end, he was seriously mistaken for God right away confronts him by asking him, “Where is your brother Abel?” Cain responds with the infamous question, “Am I my brother’s keeper?”
The irony cannot be missed. Just after being the one who killed Abel, Cain asks if he was supposed to protect Abel. If he did not think he was responsible for protecting Abel we can understand it. But not protecting someone does not imply directly harming them. I can imagine God saying, “No, Cain. You may not have been your brother’s keeper. But please tell me how that permitted you to be your brother’s killer.”
Matthew Eckel astutely recognizes that Cain’s response is “the bald bluster of a brutal murderer.”1 Eckel argues that the phrase ‘my brother’s keeper’ is to be taken in a pejorative sense when uttered by Cain rather than in a positive sense as we would normally understand. Cain was saying, “Abel is not some dumb animal. So why should he require someone to supervise him? Am I his shepherd?”
According to Erik Jones, this is the first record of a human lie because Cain knew where he had disposed off Abel’s body.2 However, note that God does not ask about Abel’s body, but about Abel. And since this is the first recorded death, Cain quite likely has no idea what happens to a person when they die. So when he says, “I do not know” he is telling the truth. He has killed his brother and has no clue where his brother now is.
God then tells Cain that he has violated the ground by forcing it to soak up Abel’s blood. As a result of this, the ground is going to rebel against Cain and make the already tedious task of cultivation even more difficult. And Cain will end up wandering, presumably because, as one who cultivates the ground, he will keep looking for land that can sustain intensive cultivation.
In his brilliant book, Ishmael, Daniel Quinn proposes that Cain and Abel are archetypes of humans involved in intensive agriculture and humans who are hunter-gatherers respectively.3 He proposes that Cain’s murder of Abel is representative of the way agriculturalists have displaced and decimated hunter-gatherers. This sort of archetypal reading of history and of the Genesis 4 text is plausible and should be kept in mind as we interpret this passage.
When he hears God’s judgment, Cain reacts in dismay. His punishment is too much for him to bear. But he draws a conclusion that is not warranted from what we have read earlier. He says that he would be hidden from God’s presence. How Cain came to this conclusion is unclear. God had approached him in grace before he killed Abel. God had once again confronted him after the murder. Even if this last confrontation was for judgment, the fact remains that God had not given up on Cain. He still wanted to maintain a relationship with him. However, Cain revealed that he was unable to understand God’s purposes. He takes punishment to mean condemnation.
Then Cain makes an interesting statement. He says, “Whoever finds me will kill me.” Till now, we have been introduced to Adam, Eve, Cain, and the now dead Abel. Where are these people who Cain is afraid of? A common way of dealing with this is to say that Adam and Eve had other children, not mentioned in Genesis. These would be Cain’s brothers and sisters. These siblings also procreated, leading up to a sizable group capable of taking vengeance on Cain.4
John Walton, however, argues that we should see Adam and Eve as archetypes of humans. They represent not only something that was done once, but what we continue to do even today. With this reading, Walton insists that there is no need to think of Adam and Eve as being chronologically the first two humans. They are simply two humans who were chosen by God to represent all humans. In this case, Cain and Abel too can be viewed in archetypal ways, as suggested by Quinn above. If we accept this way of interpreting the characters, there is no need to insist that Adam and Eve were chronologically the first humans. If that were true, then there were likely many other humans around who were not directly related to the ones described in Genesis 2, 3 and 4. This solves the problem raised by Cain’s fear of reprisal from those who would find him since the world at this time does not have only three people.
Of course, an archetypal view of Adam, Eve, Cain, and Abel raises other questions. Were the other humans also in the garden in chapter 2 or were only Adam and Eve there? Did the other humans know that Adam and Eve were their representatives or was that just some ad hoc decision on the part of God?
In my opinion, the first chapters of Genesis are not intending to give a history of the world or the human species. They are rather a collection of stories aimed at telling us where we have come from and what is wrong with the world. To force them to tell us about history is to violate their intent. From the manner in which God is referred to in the first four chapters of Genesis, it seems likely that there are three different sources – 1.1 – 2.3, in which only אֱלֹהִ֑ים (el-o-heem’) is used, 2.4-3.24, in which יְהוָ֥ה אֱלֹהִ֖ים (Yah-weh el-o-heem) is used, and 4.1-26, in which יְהוָ֥ה (Yah-weh) is used. It is likely that these were stand alone stories that were later connected by a redactor.
I would agree that Adam, Eve, Cain, and Abel are to be viewed as archetypes. However, I think Walton’s position of seeing them as historical raises more questions than it answers. I would much rather view these characters as symbolic of truths about humans. The way the names are associated with wordplays I think indicates this symbolic view and warns against trying to force history onto any of the characters.
Prayer:
Our heavenly Father. We thank you for the reminder that you pursue us even when we are in open rebellion against you. We thank you that your love for us never allows you to give up, but that you try to win us over. We thank you also that you issue us with warnings whenever we begin to tread a dangerous path. And now we ask you to continue to work within us with the power of your Spirit so that we will align our wills and desires to your desires and will. We ask all this in the name of Jesus. Amen.
1. Matthew Eckel. The Real Meaning of ‘My Brother’s Keeper’ (Accessed on 29 July 2019). ↩
2. Erik Jones. Am I My Brother’s Keeper? (Accessed on 29 July 2019)↩
3. Daniel Quinn. Ishmael. (New York: Bantam, 1995)↩
4. Eric Lyons. Does Genesis 4 Indicate that God Specifically Created Others Besides Adam and Eve? (Apologetics Press) (Accessed on 30 July 2019). There are many others who follow a similar argument.↩
Purposes Crossed 