REDEEMING THE BAD MEMORIES OF YOUR PAST SINS

A REACTION PAPER SUBMITTED TO:

Dr. Frank J. Catanzaro, III

in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for M 4346 Counseling and the Church

BY Ted D. Manby

SEBTS Box # 14043

Wake Forest, North Carolina

Introduction

Robert D. Jones, "Redeeming the Bad Memories of Your Past Sins, "The Journal of Biblical Counseling 22:1 (2003): 40-47. This article by Robert Jones addresses the debated issue of what to do with those bad things that occurred in our past from a biblical exegetical and theological basis. Pastor Jones courageously challenges pastors and counselors to forsake the unbiblical methods of teaching other to deny the past or to attempt to erase it. Then he sets the stage from the Scriptures to show a believer in Christ how to redeem those ugly memories into tools to be used to glorify God. Pastor Jones shows that the believer’s goal in dealing with memories is not to attempt to erase them or deny them. It is to transform them into tools for Christian growth, worship, and ministry. A biblical perspective that transforms and redeems our sinful past memories includes at least three realizations: 1) God was “in” my past. 2) My past might influence my present beliefs or conduct, but it does not determine them. 3) My memories are my interpretations of past events that can be reinterpreted in light of biblical truth.

Weaknesses

The author of this article has a wonderful grasp of Scripture and masterfully exegeted and clearly explained the meaning of all the texts in this article. However, on page 42 he writes: “Paul recalls his own call to ministry,” using terminology that is also used for the call of a pastor into the ministry in modern literature. I would suggest the adding of the word "as an apostle of Christ" after the word ‘ministry’ quoted above based on 2 Cor. 1:1; Eph. 1:1; 1 Tim. 1:1; Acts 26:9-23, 22:6-21, 9:1-22; 2 Cor. 11:5, 12:11-12; 1 Cor. 15:7-10. In this heatedly debated topic of “the call to the ministry” one will need to demonstrate from Scripture that a pastor’s call is the same as an O.T. prophet and an Apostle of Christ to use Paul’s experience as a pattern. Even more problematic is that Jesus visibly showed up at Paul’s call and audibly spoke from the bright light, issuing a call to salvation and ministry simultaneously. The only pastors I know who have made such claims to having a similar experience to that of Paul have also embraced unbiblical teachings and heresies, so I simply do not believe them. In this article on past sins, the addition of the above words would keep the author from being on one side or the other on this debate when his writing purpose is in a totally different area.

Strengths

"Redeeming the Bad Memories of Your Past Sins” removes one of the false stereotypes leveled at Nouthetic counselors. Biblical advice is not to live in denial, as suppressing the truth in the Bible is always sin (Rom. 1:18), but in reinterpreting events in light of biblical truth and using these redeemed memories to glorify God. Furthermore, Robert Jones wisely reminds us that our recollections of the past are actually our own interpretations of past events. Our minds do not contain video tapes that recorded the events from every possible angle. Our memories do not give us “bare facts, but interpreted facts.” Therefore, these memories can be reinterpreted through the lens of the Bible. This brings great hope and a proper reinterpretation using God’s true truth can often uncover the “good” God has brought out of even dark and painful events. Joseph’s words make this clear when he stated that what man had meant for evil, God had meant for good (Gen. 50:20). Also see Rom. 8:28-29; Num. 11; Psa. 78:11, 106:13; and Ezek. 16. Surprises I was surprised and thrilled to finally read someone who exegetes Phil. 3:13 correctly and to admit that a just-forget-the-past agenda is both misleading and insensitive to people who are suffering. The past Paul is referring to in this text does not include past sins or dark providences. “He recalls his past ways of trying to get right with God based not on Jesus, but on religious achievement.” Paul not only shows his instant recall and biblical use of his past sins in other texts (i.e. 1 Tim. 1:12-17), but also recalls traumatic and difficult events at a moments notice (2 Cor. 1:8-11, 7:5-7, 11:23-33). Evaluation The heart of the article is the author’s exegesis of 1 Tim. 1:12-17. This text shows us how to interpret our past sins in such a way that they can be redeemed by a biblical reinterpretation of them. A gospel-centered remembrance or our sins can have three benefits according to the above text.

First, redeeming our past will deepen our repentance with God and with man. This deep repentance will aid us in being more humble and will fortify our fight of temptation in areas of which we are now ashamed. Aware of our past sin and weakness, we can refuse to take even the first step again on that destructive path.

Second, a biblical interpretation of our past increases our gratitude to God for His amazing saving grace. The greater our awareness of our past depravity and rebellion against God; the greater our love for the One who saved us from the broad road that leads to death. To live in denial of our past causes us to loose this means for proper thankfulness and humility. Third, reinterpreting our past with the lens of the Bible expands our effectiveness in helping others with wisdom and compassion. We can comfort others with the comfort we ourselves have received from God. Likewise, we can testify of God’s power to deliver from sins that the world calls permanent illnesses, because God in His powerful grace has delivered us from these sinful choices and lifestyles. We can say like Paul said of the Corinthians, “Such were some of you.”

Conclusion

This article was a wonderful reminder and challenge to think biblically about my past. Especially helpful was his section on the biblical use of shame. Instead of taking the world’s methods of fighting shame, I can redeem it and use it to glorify God and to fight sin in my life. This is a very refreshing biblical truth along with the many other reminders of the benefits of redeeming our pasts as tools to bring glory to God.

DEPENDECE IN THE WILDERNESS: LIVING OUT OF PSALM 63

A REACTION PAPER SUBMITTED TO:

Dr. Frank Catanzaro

in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for M 4332A Crisis Intervention

BY Ted D. Manby

SEBTS Box # 14043 Wake Forest, North Carolina

SOUTHEASTERN BAPTIST THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY

FEBRUARY 4, 2004

Introduction

Jeff Newman, "Dependence in the Wilderness: Living out of Psalm 63, "The Journal of Biblical Counseling 22:1 (2003): 11-19. This article by Jeff Newman addresses difficult crisis experiences such as: financial ruin, betrayal, desertion by a spouse, the sorrow of seeing an adult child turn his or her back on God, chronic pain, the sudden death of a family member, and the terminal illness of a parent. Each of these crisis situations are listed as possible "wilderness" experiences that David and the Holy Spirit address in Psalm 63, and which the Son of David, Jesus Christ, fleshes out in His wilderness experiences in the four Gospels. Professor Newman gives a very helpful three step outline of what to do when the crisis hit which he takes straight from his exegesis of Psalm 63. It is: 1) Seek God Earnestly. 2) Reflect on God Continually. 3) Praise God Submissively.

Weaknesses

The author of this article did an excellent job with his flow, style, and transition in his introduction and conclusion. However, in the body of this work, when he is working through his exegesis of the text, his writing gets very choppy.I was forced to read and re-read out loud several paragraphs to grasp his meaning. This was due to the fact that a number of paragraphs lacked adequate transition. That being said, I could not find any other weaknesses in this article.

Strengths

 "Dependence in the Wilderness" is based on a single biblical text that is exegeted accurately and applied correctly. It is a very helpful reminder of how to respond biblically in the "wildernesses" of life. Professor Newman's outline and conclusions can be clearly seen in the text and he correctly carries each theme to the New Testament before applying it to his readers. Surprises Because I am also reading Ed Bulkley's book, Only God Can Heal a Wounded Heart, I was surprised that Newman would use wording almost identical to that found in Dan Allender's book, The Cry of the Soul: How our Emotions Reveal Our Deepest Questions about God (Colorado Springs, CO: NavPress), 1999, in his teaching on thirst and hunger for God and our need for dependence on God. Both Allender and Newman attended the same seminary, Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia, so that may explain some of the similar conclusions on the Psalms as well as the influence of Tremper Longman III on both men. But I can't help but wonder if Bulkley were reading this article, if he would not accuse Jeff Newman of selling out because he was using terminology first put in print by Bulkley's self-chosen enemy, Dan Allender. Evaluation Newman makes clear that "on every wilderness road, God wants us to grow in dependence on Him." For us to seek God earnestly, we must repent of our independence. We need to ask for God's forgiveness as we confess and forsake this sin. Furthermore, we should ask ourselves some key questions to determine our spiritual temperatures in the wilderness. We should ask: "Are the objects of my desires sinful?" And, "Do the non-sinful objects I crave diminish or replace my hunger for God Himself?" These questions reveal both sins to repent of and idols to destroy. He further teaches that our sinful responses during a crisis reveal that we are seeking after our own self interests more than we are seeking after the God revealed in Scripture. "Our anxiety, fear, anger, and bitterness in the wilderness reveal that hungers of our hearts that compete against our desire for God alone." Newman further explains that David provides a good example for us today in this text by fixing his thoughts on God's character and works continually during his wilderness experience. David belonged to God, and the creator God was his personal God. This focus lead David to worship God according to Who He is during this difficult time in his life. David learned and declared that God was his all in all, his everything, the only One who could satisfy David's soul. God is just, sovereign, and He loves David, so that he can be sure that God will one day make right every wrong. David could entrust his future to God. Likewise, David praised God submissively during the days of dark providences. He praised God in his thoughts, by his words, and through his acts of obedience. "Because David sought his God earnestly, reflected on Him continually, and praised Him submissively, God used the wilderness to continue His work of transformation in David's heart." In application of this text, the author shows us our need to evaluate our thoughts and conversations during the crisis times. We need to consider what we are focusing on -- the problem or the beauties of our God. Are we praising God during the dark days or are we worrying and complaining? We need to choose to repent for our part in making the wilderness appear in our lives when it is a result of our own sinful acts. When we ask God for forgiveness, this puts us in a posture to begin to gratefully focus and to praise Yahveh, our covenant God. We must then place our trust in God and His word for both our eternal destiny and for the difficult journey His hand has mapped out for us to reach that destiny.

Conclusion

This article was not so much new information as it was a very helpful and timely reminder of where I and other believers need to place our focus during crisis times. The natural response is to focus on the problem and then respond sinfully. The biblical response is the focus on God, to praise Him, to repent, and to trust Him during the wilderness times. Focusing on the problem only makes the problem worse. However, focusing and praising God reveals the need for repentance and deepens trust -- the very things necessary to respond Christ-like during the wilderness times in our lives. We display faith in God when we hunger and thirst for Him above all else. We display our indwelling sin when we seek our comfort and our way above all others. It was very refreshing to read this article that opens up and applies God eternal truth rather than putting forth the best guesses of man.

A Philosophy Statement for Counseling at Hillcrest Baptist Church

The bedrock presupposition of our church’s counseling philosophy is that all counseling must be biblically based with the goal of edifying the believer and glorifying God (1 Cor. 10:31).  Furthermore, all church counselors must deeply hold the proper convictions about the Bible in order to operate from a God glorifying biblical philosophy and methodology.  Likewise, the practice of our counseling ministry will be to not refer counselee’s to other counselors who are not deeply committed Christians who operate from a biblical world and life view (except temporarily in emergency life-threatening situations).  Counselor trainee’s will not only study the need for a direct confrontational approach towards the sins in the life of the counselee from the Bible, but will also be instructed in pre-counseling evangelism, proper Bible study and exegesis methods, Bible book studies, Old and New Testament Introductions and Surveys, and Biblical Theology.  Even though we will be discerning in referrals to other counselors, we will consistently seek to work with Christian medical doctors (who operate by a Christian world and life view) to eliminate physical causes or physical intensifications of a counselee’s problems.

The proper convictions about the Bible begin with a firm belief in its accuracy in every area that it addresses.  This position is stated clearly in the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy, which will be signed by each of our counselor's every two years.

The proper posture to the Word of God is a conviction of the verbal plenary inspiration of the text (2 Tim. 3:16, 1 Peter 1:10-12; 2 Peter 1:20-21).  Because the words are "God-breathed" we can be assured of their total accuracy and that the original texts contained no errors (inerrancy) concerning each area they addressed.  The God-Man Jesus declared that the smallest letter and part of letter of the Hebrew Scripture would all be fulfilled and he made argument based on the tenses of verbs (Matt. 5:17-18, 22:28-32).  Thus, the dynamic inspiration view (just the thoughts, not the words are inspired) is not an acceptable position, neither is the liberal errancy view (that there are many factual errors in the text).  Both of these views are less than Christian because they ignore Christ's own views on the accuracy of the Scriptures.

Because God is the source of the Scriptures and because the Holy Spirit superintended the human authors so that what they wrote was their words and at the same time the inerrant and inspired Word of God, the 66 books of the canon have authority.  When a Christian is made aware of a command or principle from the Bible that has not been fulfilled, annulled, or replaced, they are responsible and obligated to lovingly obey it.  Thus, when the counselor shares God's Words with the counselee from the texts of Scripture, if they are genuine believers, their only proper response is grateful and loving obedience.  His opinions and practices may serve as a model, but when the Bible addresses a subject, once that text is properly exegeted and applied, it becomes the binding authority over the feelings or past habits of the counselee.  All counselors should so handle God's Word that it becomes apparent that they surrender to its authority for all matters of faith and practice.

The Bible is also sufficient to meet the discipleship, sanctification, and growth needs of every Christian (2 Peter 1:3) as well as the salvation needs of every person (John 14:6, 17:17; Rom. 10:17).  The Word of God adequately deals with the problems and all of the underlying sins that men face in this world.  Biblical sufficiency does not mean that the Bible is exhaustive on every subject nor does it imply that the Bible is an adequate source of information for wiring diagrams or specifications for the repair of automobiles or computers.  That being said, however, in a world full of false thought systems and error, the Bible is the only trustworthy standard of God's true truth and it provides all the information necessary for salvation and all the principles necessary for successful Christian living.  Whenever the Bible addresses science, history, geology, anthropology, psychology, or geography it is the measuring stick for all pagan[1] or semi-pagan sources of this information.  When there is true disagreement based on accurate exegesis of Bible texts and proper reading of pagan sources, our presupposition is that the Bible is always correct and the pagan source is the one in error.  Likewise, methodologies that arise out of false thought systems should be rejected and replaced with ones based on Scriptural presuppositions.

The Historical Grammatical method of Bible research is the only acceptable option for our counselors.  Acceptance of Neo-orthodoxy or liberalism, with its destructive higher criticism and attack on the human authors of the Scriptures and the accuracy of the copies of the manuscripts we now have disqualify a person to be a counselor or counselor trainee at this church.  However, textual criticism of the Hebrew BHS or the Greek UBS text is encouraged to be practiced by all who have developed the skills to do so.  We believe that God’s preservation of His Word has kept us from loosing a single letter in the Old Testament or the New Testament (Matt. 5:17-18).  However, in comparing the manuscripts, we learn that some phrases or verses are recorded several different ways.  The original autographs only had one of those available options.  Thus, since we have 105% of the original autographs, the Bible student will need at times to choose possible reading “B” over reading “A” or accept the additional wording contained in one manuscript or accept an omission of words in another as best reflecting the original text through the process of textual criticism.  The goal is to establish the original text.

The presuppositions of all pagan approaches to psychology and psychiatry are inconsistent with the infallible revealed Word of God described above.  Therefore, trainees' trained in these approaches will need to demonstrate their acceptance of the Bible’s view of anthropology, soteriology, and bibliology.  The Bible teaches that mankind is the direct creation of God, and was not formed by evolutionary processes (Gen. 1-2).  The Bible also teaches that mankind rebelled against God at the Fall (Gen. 3).  Thus, each human person is born spiritually dead (Eph. 2:1-3) with a sinful human nature (Rom. 8:5-9; Cor. 2:14), loving sin (John 3:19), is totally depraved[2] (Rom. 3:1-7), with a proclivity to do evil (Gen. 6:5).  Therefore, every system that assumes the basic goodness of man, ignores the Sovereign creator God, encourages the rebellious independence and autonomy of man, and removes human responsibility for sin is a false foolish man-centered system at best, and could be a demonic inspired counterfeit system seeking to suppress the truth.

Non-directive counseling approaches are especially contrary to Scripture and non-productive even by pagan standards.  These methods and views are more open to Hindu and New Age philosophical influences and are the exact opposite of the methods used by God and His chosen leaders in the Bible when dealing with the problems of humans.  Likewise, medical model approaches can be used by sincere psychiatrists to place a Christian dangerously on mind influencing and addictive drugs that can both numb the conscience and take away the agency of the individual person.  Thus, Rogerian and Freudian methods must be evaluated from the Scriptures and must not be used by our counselors or our trainees.

The Bible teaches that every person is born a sinner and does not measure up to the standard of our Holy God (Rom 3:23).  Because the wages of sin is everlasting death in the lake of fire, every human needs a Savior to deliver him or her from his or her state of sin and death (Rom. 6:23).  The Lord Jesus Christ is the only Lord and Savior able to deliver sinners from the wrath to come (John 14:6).  All mature adults who are not saved through Christ, no matter how religious or “good” they are in the eyes of the world (Matt. 7:21), will spend conscious eternity in the lake of fire (Matt. 25:41-46).  Thus, it is imperative for each person to repent and believe the gospel (Mark 1:15, Luke 13:1-5, Acts 3:19, 17:30-1, 20:20-1, Rom. 10:8-13.  Also see B.F. & M. 2000, “IV. Salvation, A.”).  All counselors must have embraced (taken, received) Christ by repentance and faith (John 1:12-13), be born from above (John 3:3-8), and be witnesses for King Jesus.  Pre-counseling is direct evangelism of both those who admit they are lost and those who appear to be make-believing church members.  If in counseling it is discovered or seems apparent that the counselee is not saved, the counselor will return to the gospel message and press it home to the heart of this person while calling out to God in prayer to save them (Col. 4:3).

Because the Bible will be the counselors textbook, any conservative studies in the Bible, learning of the original languages, learning the proper methods of doing word studies, or courses in hermeneutics, exegesis skills, or in mastering the Bible’s content will always be encouraged.  The goal will not be acquiring degrees in such, but in developing greater competency in Bible knowledge, understanding, and application.

Counseling is under the discipleship ministry of our church with the goal of aiding believers in the process of sanctification and growth in Christ-likeness.  At its best, both sessions and homework will involve the counselee in intense discipleship.

           

---

[1] This student is not convinced that so-called "secular" studies are neutral or that a sacred / secular dichotomy is biblical.  Mountain climbing to the glory of God is a sacred activity, while sincere worship in a Mormon temple is nothing less than pagan idolatry.

[2] Total depravity here means radical and pervasive depravity of the whole man.  Mind, will, heart, strength, inner man, outer man, body, soul, spirit  -- every part and the whole of man all fell together and are corrupted by sin and man’s state of spiritual death.  It does not mean each person is equally wicked or as bad as they potentially could be given time and circumstance.

YAHVEH COUNSELING CAIN: GENESIS 4:1-15

Introduction

This student was called to a church leader's home in upstate New York about ten years ago.  One of this leader's co-workers was there and in crisis.  He was seriously considering murdering his wife and her new boyfriend.  He finally did make a few good choices and the murders did not occur. 

The crisis in the biblical text below had the best Counselor in the universe on the scene and at work.  However, the counselee would not listen to the truth and chose to continue with his plan to commit murder and to seek to cover it up.  Yet, his cover-up did not work.

Historical and Literary Analysis: Genesis 4:1-15

Genesis chapters three through eleven contain a number of different stories that have a singular theme:  The moral failure of mankind.[1]  After the fall of mankind recorded in Genesis chapter three, the next sub-section, chapters four through eleven, shows the continual downward spiral of mankind into sin and its consequences of even greater depravity and death. 

Indeed, the book of Genesis deals with origins, beginnings, and many first-time events.  Not only does it record God’s creative activity, but it also describes sin’s entry into the human race and man’s many reversals of God’s original order and creation.   Eve's lusts lead to her rebellion by eating the forbidden fruit, followed by her husband, who plunged the whole human race into sin.  Shortly after this event, anger lead to murder in the first family of sinners.  As the population grew, widespread depravity lead to God’s judgment in the flood and direct disobedience lead to God’s separating people groups by language at the tower of Babel.  Chapters’ 1-11 show man’s great need for salvation, and chapters 12-50 displays God’s plan of redemption of sinners being worked out in history.

Textual Analysis: Genesis 4:1-15

There is a significant textual variant in Genesis chapter four in verse eight.  The Septuagint (LXX) has the added a small discourse after the words: And Cain spoke to Abel saying, “Let us go out into the field” (see RSV).[2]  Most English versions accept and therefore translate the Hebrew text for this verse as the original rather than the LXX.  If this LXX addition is original or factual, it removes any doubt that this murder was premeditated.  However, the context and syntax of the Hebrew text seems to indicate this same idea without the adding of these additional words.  The Hebrew text makes sense without these additional words.  The other ancient translations are in support of the Hebrew text.  Thus, it is probably better to support the BHS Hebrew text as the original text in this instance.

Lexical Analysis: Genesis 4:1-15

The first key word in this Scripture section that needs further study is in verse four and is translated as: “firstborn, best, choicest, and female firstlings.”  The Hebrew term bekorah is a noun that has the nuances of firstborn or the right of the first-born.[3] The addition of this term in reference to Abel’s offering shows that it was qualitatively different than Cain’s. 

In verse five the text uses a word to describe Cain’s emotional state.  The Hebrew term charah is used, which usually means “to burn, be kindled, of anger -- (one's) anger was kindled, burned; he burned with anger.”[4]  Cain’s anger was raging like a burning fire against God and his brother Abel, and it showed on his face.

In verse seven the exegete may be concerned about three terms.  The term God uses for sin in this verse is not the term for rebellion or a high-handed sin, but the more common word for all types of infractions against God and His Law.  It is the Hebrew term chatat;, which is often translates as ‘sin’ or ‘sin-offering’ (“1. sin: a. against man. Elsewhere b. against God.”)[5]  The next term is the verb for the subject ‘sin.’ It is translated as ‘crouching, waiting, and lies.’  The Hebrew verb behind these English translations is ravats, which means “to stretch oneself out, lie down, lie stretched out.” It is used for the resting of domestic animals, and figuratively for the crouching of wild beasts and for the crouching of sin.[6]  The Hebrew term translated as ‘desire’ teshooqah,,, has the nuance of the “longing -- of woman for man; of man for woman; and of beast to devour.”[7]  Sin is pictured by these terms as a lion lying in ambush for Cain at the door of his dwelling.  Sin not only wants to eat Cain’s lunch, it desires to eat Cain for lunch.  The Devil is described in similar terms in the New Testament (1 Peter 5:8).

In verse nine Cain uses the term translated into English as ‘keeper.’  In the original it is a participle form of shamar, which means to “keep, watch, preserve, and have charge of, a garden, an ark, or property in trust; to tend a flock. It is also used in contexts to denote 'to keep, guard, captives; keep watch and ward.' The participle form often is used as watch, watchman, of city.”[8]

Structural Analysis: Genesis 4:1-15

This narrative section can be outlined as follows:

   I. Adam and Eve produce children

  II. The children mature and them worship Yahveh.

      A.  Cain offers a gift from his excess.

      B.  Abel offers his best.

 III. Cain becomes jealous and angry with God and Abel.

  IV. Yahveh intervenes and warns Cain.

   V. Cain makes a plan and kills his brother Abel.

  VI. Yahveh confronts Cain with his sin.  "Where is Abel? What have you done?”

 VII. Cain tells a lie and makes excuses.

VIII. Cain receives God’s judgment and ongoing consequences for his sin.

  IX. Yahveh shows mercy to Cain in judgment.

Rhetorical Analysis: Genesis 4:1-15

This section of redemptive history is a narrative section that is interspersed with discourse conversations.  The verses in Genesis 4:1-15 that are entirely narrative are verses: 2, 3, 4, 5, and 8. Likewise, the verses that are solely discourse are: 7, 11, 12, and 14.  Furthermore, the verses that contain both narrative and discourse in this section are: 1, 6, 9, 10, 13, and 15.  The verb forms in Hebrew clearly show the switches from narrative to discourse and there are a number of disjunctive nominal clauses that divide up this section.

Analogical Analysis: Genesis 4:1-15

The major cross references that aid in interpreting this periscope include the following:

Gen 4:25 “And Adam knew his wife again, and she bore a son and named him Seth, ‘For God has appointed another seed for me instead of Abel, whom Cain killed’” (NKJV).

Ex 20:13 “You shall not murder” (NKJV).

Jer. 7:8-11 “Behold, you trust in lying words that cannot profit. ⁹ Will you steal, murder, commit adultery, swear falsely, burn incense to Baal, and walk after other gods whom you do not know, ¹⁰ and then come and stand before Me in this house which is called by My name, and say, 'We are delivered to do all these abominations'? ¹¹ Has this house, which is called by My name, become a den of thieves in your eyes? Behold, I, even I, have seen it,” says the LORD (NKJV).

Matt. 5:21-22 “You have heard that it was said to those of old, 'You shall not murder, and whoever murders will be in danger of the judgment.' ²² But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment. And whoever says to his brother, 'Raca!' shall be in danger of the council. But whoever says, 'You fool!' shall be in danger of hell fire” (NKJV).

Grammatical and Syntactical Analysis: Genesis 4:1-15

Genesis 4:1-2 “Now Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain, and said, ‘I have acquired a man from the LORD.’ ² Then she bore again, this time his brother Abel. Now Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground” (NKJV). 

The grammar and syntax of these verses show that those who have assumed that Cain and Abel were twins were wrong.  The verbs are in a narrative sequence and show that Eve conceived and gave birth, then at a latter time, she conceived and gave birth again.  The verb “know” is used for the closest personal relationships on both physical and spiritual levels between individuals that love each other.  Eve names Cain in faith, hoping he will be the “seed of the woman,” her Messiah. When Abel was born, she was more discouraged, in that she gave him a name that means “vapor, breath, and emptiness.”  The term for “keeper” in verse two is the common term for shepherd that is used for the one who feeds and protects and is a synonym for the English term pastor.

Genesis 4:3-4 "And in the process of time it came to pass that Cain brought an offering of the fruit of the ground to the LORD. ⁴ Abel also brought of the firstborn of his flock and of their fat. And the LORD respected Abel and his offering," (NKJV).

After these two boys matured they began to worship Yahveh.  Cain was a farmer, Abel was shepherd.  The text does not address the issue of blood sacrifice.  Even in the Mosaic Law there was provision for grain offerings, and that type of offering is the same type and term that is used in verse three.  What the text highlights is that Cain merely brought an offering from his produce.  Abel, however, brought the best, the choicest, the first-born and the fat (the best of the best).  Thus, there was a qualitative difference in the offerings of the brothers.  The heart attitudes are displayed in this act.  Furthermore, Hebrews 11: 4 point to a difference in faith and righteousness.  “By faith Abel offered to God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, through which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts; and through it he being dead still speaks” (NKJV).  Yahveh was pleased with both Abel and his offering.

Genesis 4:5-7 ^“but He did not respect Cain and his offering. And Cain was very angry, and his countenance fell. ⁶ So the LORD said to Cain, ‘Why are you angry? And why has your countenance fallen? ⁷ If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin lies at the door. And its desire is for you, but you should rule over it’” (NKJV).

In these verses, Yahveh communicated in some way to Cain that his offering and heart did not please Him.  Cain responded with burning anger.  His anger showed on his face.  Yahveh confronted Cain’s unbiblical response.  God’s first question is to ask Cain why he is angry (see Jonah 4:4).  Cain’s sinful response and sour face were not justified or the proper way to solve the problem.  Yahveh instructs Cain that by doing right – according to His Word – he will have his offering accepted before God.  He warns Cain about the temptation before him (see Lexical Analysis above) and sin’s desire.  Cain needs to rule over his emotions and not surrender to sin.

Genesis 4:8-12 “Now Cain talked with Abel his brother; and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother and killed him. ⁹ Then the LORD said to Cain, 'Where is Abel your brother?' He said, 'I do not know. Am I my brother’s keeper?' ¹⁰ And He said, 'What have you done? The voice of your brother’s blood cries out to Me from the ground. ¹¹ So now you are cursed from the earth, which has opened its mouth to receive your brother’s blood from your hand. ¹² When you till the ground, it shall no longer yield its strength to you. A fugitive and a vagabond you shall be on the earth'” (NKJV).

Cain did not respond to Yahveh’s warning with obedience.  He surrendered to his fallen emotions and to sin’s temptation to lash out in anger and jealousy.  Sin not dealt with over time begets more sin (Jam. 1:14-15).  So, next in the story, Cain makes a plan.  He speaks with his brother and kills him – most likely in his field. He may have used farm tools to both shed Abel’s blood and to bury him. Yahveh confronts Cain again. He asks him, “Where is Abel?” In response, Cain lies and denies knowledge of Abel’s location. Then, Cain sarcastically asks if he is responsible to guard, protect and watch out for his brother.  The original construction implies he believed the answer was “No.” Next, God asks Cain, “What have you done?  God knew where Abel’s body and soul were, as well as what Cain had done. But, He lets Cain discover that his sin has been found out as well as offering him opportunities to respond correctly.  Cain’s sin bears life-long consequences.    

Genesis 4:13-15 “And Cain said to the LORD, ‘My punishment is greater than I can bear! ¹⁴ Surely You have driven me out this day from the face of the ground; I shall be hidden from Your face; I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond on the earth, and it will happen that anyone who finds me will kill me.’ ¹⁵ And the LORD said to him, ‘Therefore, whoever kills Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold.’ And the LORD set a mark on Cain, lest anyone finding him should kill him" (NKJV).

Cain has thought about the consequences of his sin a little too late.  Cain does not want justice to find him.  Yahveh responds to Cain with mercy.  The verb ‘avenge’ is a hophal imperfect, which puts it in the passive voice.[9]  Thus, God will be the one who will bring vengeance on any who successfully murder Cain.  God provided a sign to give evidence that He would protect Cain.  Bible students debate over the possibilities of a miraculous sign or a personal mark upon Cain’s body.  Regardless of what the sign was, Yahveh would keep His Word and bring a seven fold vengeance on anyone killing Cain.  There was only one family on the earth at that time – and the need was to be fruitful and multiply rather than to continue to take the lives of people made in the image of God.

Theological Analysis: Genesis 4:1-15

The proper response to the problem of God not respecting Cain’s offering would have been to get further instruction, to repent of half-heated worship, and to lovingly comply with God’s will.  Cain was not one who was given to obedience and dependence, but one deeply committed to autonomy and independence.  If Cain would have cried out to God, “I can’t do right,” God would have agreed with him and directed him to put his faith in the Messiah as Abraham would come to do (Gal. 3:6-9).  Cain was responsible for surrendering to sin in his life.  He was too proud to say, “I can’t master my emotions, and I can’t fight the temptation to sin.”  Cain needed his heart of stone removed and heart of flesh – a circumcised heart, from above – put in its place.  He needed to become a new creature with faith in God and repentance for sin.

God gave Cain a chance to repent by asking him where Abel was.  Cain responded by trying to cover up his sin with lies and excuses.  Cain was responsible to protect, guard, and watch out for his brother.  He felt it was not his responsibility, but he was very wrong.  God knows all things, and was full aware of what Cain had done.  He let Cain bear the consequences of his own sin for his entire life on the earth.  Furthermore, if Cain did not ever repent and put his faith in God, he is still paying for his sin in hell.

Conclusion

This crisis had the best Counselor available who perfectly shared the truth.  He gave Cain many opportunities to do the right thing, yet Cain continually chose to do the wrong thing instead.  If Cain would have followed God’s Word in faith and loving obedience, there would have been no crisis and the first death may have been by natural causes rather than murder.  Unfortunately, Cain was following his emotions, and they were both sinful and out of control.  Emotions are always untrustworthy for fallen sinners.  Yahveh wisely asked the right questions that provide an ongoing example for all future counselors in crisis situations.  He was not diverted by Cain’s lies or his attempts at covering up his horrendous sin.  Likewise, God’s mercy towards sinners who have really messed things up is also worthy of emulation by the Christian counselor.  Here is an example of sympathetic disagreement.

---

[1] Bill T. Arnold and Bryan E. Beyer, Encountering the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1999), 82.

[2] Derek Kidner, Genesis: An Introduction and Commentary, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1967), 75.

[3] Francis Brown, S. R. Driver, and Charles A. Briggs, The New Brown - Driver - Briggs - Gesenius Hebrew and English Lexicon  (New York: Christian Copyrights, Inc., 1983), 114.

[4] Ibid., 354.

[5] Ibid., 310.

[6] Ibid., 918.

[7] Ibid., 1003.

[8] Ibid., 1036.

[9] nacam verb hophal imperfect 3^rd person masculine singular nacam vb. avenge, take vengeance – the blood of his servants he avenged , in administration of justice against murder.  Blood at hands of; take vengeance for thee. Hophal: Be avenged, vengeance be taken (for blood).”  In Brown, Driver, and Briggs, Hebrew English Lexicon, 667, and in BibleWorks 6.0.

 

Works Consulted

Arnold, Bill T. and Bryan Beyer.  Encountering the Old Testament.  Grand Rapids:  Baker Books, 1999.

Belcher, Richard.  Doing Biblical Exegesis.  Columbia, SC: Richbarry Press, 1985.

BibleWorks 6.0, Computer Bible Research Software.  BibleWorks, LLC.  P.O. Box 6158 Norfolk, VA, 23508; available at http://www.bibleworks.com.

The Bible.  New King James Version.

Black, David Alan.  Using New Testament Greek in Ministry: A Practical Guide for Students and Pastors.  Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1993.

Brown, Francis, S. R. Driver, and Charles A. Briggs.  The New Brown - Driver - Briggs - Gesenius Hebrew and English Lexicon.  New York: Christian Copyrights, Inc., 1983.

Elliger, Karl and Wilhelm Rudolph, eds.  Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia.  Verkleinerte Ausgabe: Whrttemberg Bible Society, 1984.

Kidner, Derek.  Genesis: An Introduction and Commentary.  Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1967.