I seem to detect two different strands of Reformed interpretation when it comes to the sacrifice of Cain. As I recall, Michael Horton in In the Face of God ties Cain's sacrifice into the promise of the Seed in Genesis 3 and the subsequent sacrifice-clothing of Adam and Eve. However, most other Reformed works that I turn to (and my reading isn't extensive in this area, just what I can get my hands on) seem to downplay that approach, and locate the "sin" in the inner disposition of Cain. It seems like Silversides, Candlish, Keil & Delitzsch, Calvin, etc., lean towards the "inner disposition" view.
What are your thoughts? Was Cain rejected because he refused to come to God through God's revealed way, namely, the promise and the sacrificial seals? Or was he rejected because he brought an acceptable offering (many point to the grain offerings in Leviticus, but I don't know if that's valid to read into Genesis 4) with an unacceptable spirit?
I realize it could be "both-and" in some way, but nevertheless, I'm wondering what the "Big Point" is, and how it relates to the "metanarrative" of Scripture. I confess that I find Horton's view to make far more sense, both canonically (e.g., the concept of sacrifice in Scripture and the necessity thereof) and contextually (it preserves the "flow" of Genesis as the account comes directly after the clothing of Adam and Eve and the expulsion from Eden).
I think the reference to Abel in Hebrews 11 could point either way, so I didn't bring it up. If you say "both-and", explain it a little bit (if you wouldn't mind) and go into detail.
So: Thoughts?
What are your thoughts? Was Cain rejected because he refused to come to God through God's revealed way, namely, the promise and the sacrificial seals? Or was he rejected because he brought an acceptable offering (many point to the grain offerings in Leviticus, but I don't know if that's valid to read into Genesis 4) with an unacceptable spirit?
I realize it could be "both-and" in some way, but nevertheless, I'm wondering what the "Big Point" is, and how it relates to the "metanarrative" of Scripture. I confess that I find Horton's view to make far more sense, both canonically (e.g., the concept of sacrifice in Scripture and the necessity thereof) and contextually (it preserves the "flow" of Genesis as the account comes directly after the clothing of Adam and Eve and the expulsion from Eden).
I think the reference to Abel in Hebrews 11 could point either way, so I didn't bring it up. If you say "both-and", explain it a little bit (if you wouldn't mind) and go into detail.
So: Thoughts?