4:1 This is the first real mention of Eve, before it was just "wife." Now it mentions that "Adam knew Eve," In this connotation, it means they had intercourse. The result is Cain, the firstborn son.
4:2 Abel born after Cain. Both of them played different roles. Cain was a "tiller of the ground" while Abel was "shepard of sheep."
4:3-5 Both offer sacrifices related to their expertise. God respected Abel's offering but not Cain's. Abel's offering was the "firstborn of his flock and of their fat" while Cain's offering was from the "fruits of the ground." Why would God dislike one person's offering if they both provided from what they specialized in? From how it is worded, we can be sure that Abel's sacrifice was significant because it was the firstborn and fatty. Cain's sacrifice could be interpreted in different ways. "From the fruits of the ground" could imply that the fruits were from the plants nourished from the ground. This verse could also mean that the fruits he offered for sacrifice were the rotten fruits that had already fallen to the ground. Because the verse states that they are "fruits OF the ground" rather than fruits ON the ground, I assume the former interpretation where Cain offered good fruits from his work.
Also, this is the first instance of sacrifice we see in the Bible. Why do we need to sacrifice? It was never a decree stated by God to offer sacrifices. Are sacrifices man's way of trying to appease God, when before our fall our pure existence was enough to appease Him?
4:6-7 God confronts Cain and asks why he should be sad. God says that although you brought the sacrifice rightly, it was not divided properly. What does that mean? Where do we find sacrificial rules if this is the first instance? This next part of the verse states that Abel should find recourse in Cain and that Cain should rule over Abel. Why have the roles seemingly switched here? Also, when seeing sad Cain, God says, "Be still." This must mean controlling the fluctuations in your head and emotions.
4:8 Cain kills Abel in seclusion. They talked beforehand. I'm wondering if that was to entice Abel to come to the fields or if it was to discuss what had happened at the sacrifice. Also, I'm curious as it says that they were in the fields: does this mean garden fields (Cain's territory) or sheep fields (Abel's territory)?
4:9 God here asks a question again to man. Since God already knows what is happening, this might be the second instance of opportunity for repentence seen in the Bible. Instead of repenting, Cain replies with arrogance: "Am I my brother's keeper?"
4:10 This sounds almost poetic, "The voice of your brother's blood cries out to Me from the ground." This is the first instance of where we see death and the fact of life after death. If there was no life after death, then it would be impossible for Abel to cry out to God.
4:11-12 Cain is cursed, the grounds should be hard and it is no longer easy to garden.
4:13 I find it mature and humbling to see Cain recognize his position he found himself in, or that just might be despair: "My guilt is too great to be forgiven!"
4:14-15 Cain worries that since he has been driven out from the face of the Earth and sorrowful, he is in danger of being killed by whoever comes across him. Why should someone be condemned to death for being sorrowful? Maybe because they see the impurity of a person, which has no place in God's creation? But that doesn't make sense because the first people were impure for eating the forbidden fruit. God calms Cain's worries by giving Cain a mark that ensures that if anyone kills Cain shall face a 7x vengeance. This is the second instance we see the number 7, in this context it seems arbitrary, but it also appears in the 7 days of creation.
Side note: Cain is worried about someone finding him and killing him. By name, the only people we know are Cain, Abel, Adam, and Eve. Since Abel is out of the picture, that means there is only Adam and Eve. It wouldn't make sense that Cain would be worried about his parents trying to kill him. Also if Cain was just worried about his parents trying to kill him, I feel like he would have phrased his concerns differently. Which means that there must have been other people living at the same time. Where did these other people come from? I am assuming that Adam and Eve had other children that were not explicitly mentioned by name. Also, it was never stated that Cain was the firstborn from Adam and Eve.
Side note pt.2: The fact that God does not leave Cain for himself but imparts a mark on him that if anyone else were to harm Cain, they would be harmed 7x. This is another instance of love we see, unconditional love. Even when the child has committed murder, the Father still looks after him and wishes the best for him. Don't get me wrong, God might still be mad, and that is perfectly normal, but above that anger lies love.
4:16 Cain leaves the "presence of the Lord" and lives in Nod. So this. is the official leaving of Eden. First, man was in paradise in Eden. Then, man was cast out of paradise but still in Eden (?). Now man leaves Eden. I wonder what 'Nod' means. Also mentions that Cain leaves the presence of the Lord. This probably means that Cain left the physical presence of God, not God's omnipresent watch.
4:17 Cain knew his wife, wife is left unnamed. Cain had a son with his wife named Enoch. Cain built a city and named it after his son. I wonder what a "city" was like back then, especially with significantly fewer people. Also, if Cain built a city, then what happened to Nod? Is it rather the name of the land? I would think Nod is the name of the land and Enoch is now a city in Nod.
4:18 Statment of lineage: Enoch to Irad to Mehujael to Methushael to Lamech.
4:19 First mention of a man having two wives. Lamech has Adah and Zillah.
4:20-21 Adah bore Jabal, who was the father of the people who dwelled in tents and had livestock. Adah also bore Jubal who played instruments. This is the first instance we see animal farming and musical art. Art previously was comprised of God's work, while this example of music is human-derived.
4:22 Zillah bore Tubal-Cain who was a smith. Zillah also bore Naamah. Naamah is the only female offspring and the only one who was not given any role or title.
Side Note: When lineage is portrayed, it is always listed under the name of the Father. This shows patriarchal lineage. This statement is also supported by the mention of the contribution of each of Lamech's sons but not his only daughter.
4:23 Lamech speaks to his wives. Interestingly he says "wives of Lamech" rather than 'my wives.' Is this because of the grammatical structure of the language they used? He attests that he killed a man for "wounding" him and a young man for "hurting" him. It is as if Lamech is basing his authority on his ability to do cruelty. This might be the first instance of rule by fear. Although previously God had instructed man not to do things in fear of death, God did not leverage death so that man had no choice but to listen to His word. Lamech on the other hand is leveraging death for any form of denial to his requests. Lamech seems to be following the principle of if you do me harm then I will give it back to you manyfold.
4:24 Lamech states his status over Cain, stating that Lamech should have 77x avengement if Cain had 7x avengement. Lamech is probably basing this claim on the action of human harm. In Lamech's mind, the stronger and more able one is to inflict harm on other humans, the more power and divine retribution received from God. If God had loved violence and harm, why would God have offered man opportunities of repentence for both Adam and Cain? I think God does not focus on harm and power for one human over another (other than what was mentioned about Adam over Eve).
4:25 Adam and Eve bore another son named Seth. It's surprising that Adam and Eve are still around and able to produce children after many generations from Cain. Maybe the span of life was different back then. Seth is created in a position to essentially be Abel's successor of purity, rather than letting just Cain's lineage live.
Side note: Adam says that he finally has another seed aside from Cain and Abel. This statement provides evidence that Adam did not have any other sons. But that does not discount that Adam might have had many daughters that were not named. Otherwise, where did all the humans come from? If daughters were never named then that would follow the theme of the importance of men for lineage. But also if females were never named, then why was Naamah named?
4:26 Seth had a son named Enosh. It is stated that "he hoped in the Lord God and called upon His name." Who is "he" in this instance? Is it referring to Enosh or Seth? Since the comma is before "and" in the sentence, I am assuming it is Seth. Also this is the first explicit reference to prayer in the Bible. Interestingly, those descendants of Cain lived lives that were Earthly while those descendants of Seth seemed to have a Godly focus. For context, Cain's lineage was also raised in Nod while Seth probably never left Eden, where Adam and Eve were. So that is one argument for the nurture aspect of personality.
If Cain, Abel, and Seth were the only sons of Adam and Eve, then that would imply that Cain was afraid of being killed by a daughter of Adam and Eve. This is interesting because it contradicts the power of man over woman.
Cain's sorrow did not ask for repentance. The root of Cain's anger was grief at the disappointment and humiliation of his sacrifice not being accepted by God. The lesson that we must take from this is that we need to process our emotions and ground them. Leaving emotions unchecked can manifest themselves in different and malicious ways, both for others and for ourselves.
Why are sacrifices necessary?
Why was God not appeased with Cain's offering? What does it mean that Cain's offering was not "divided" properly?
Where did the other humans that are unnamed come from?
What did Seth call out to God for?
Help us to "be still" in times of sorrow and anguish.
Help us acknowledge our arrogance and shortcomings
Help us to unconditionally love, like you loved your creation.
Help us not to view the world through the lens of self-fulfillment but rather the fulfillment of your will.