Sometimes contrasting two ideas can be very instructive. Much can be learned about the nature of sacrifice in the biblical perspective from when God actually rejected the sacrifices of His people.
Compare Isaiah 1:2–15 with Isaiah 56:6, 7 and Psalm 51:17. What important lessons about sacrifice are taught here?
This tragic episode in Israel’s history was not the first time that God rejected a sacrifice; something similar happened near the beginning of salvation history, when Abel’s sacrifice was approved and acknowledged by God, and Cain’s was not. That early episode gives us another opportunity to contrast acceptable and unacceptable sacrifices. (See Gen. 4:3–7 and Heb. 11:4.)
In Isaiah’s time, Israel was going through the motions, mentally checking off religious boxes in a minimal attempt to appease God, all while living as they pleased. Their sacrifices were anchored in self, just as Cain’s were, and not in an attitude of surrender and submission to God.
It is the same spirit that animates the kingdoms of this world: the spirit of self-sufficiency. Cain would live as he pleased and render mere ritual to God on his own terms. One can only assume that he viewed God as an inconvenience, a roadblock to setting his own course, but he feared God just enough to go through the motions.
Abel, however, offered the sacrifice God had requested, the sacrifice that exhibited the promise God had made of a coming Messiah (Gen. 3:15): a lamb, pointing forward to the saving act of Christ at Calvary.
“Abel grasped the great principles of redemption. He saw himself a sinner, and he saw sin and its penalty, death, standing between his soul and communion with God. He brought the slain victim, the sacrificed life, thus acknowledging the claims of the law that had been transgressed. Through the shed blood he looked to the future sacrifice, Christ dying on the cross of Calvary; and trusting in the atonement that was there to be made, he had the witness that he was righteous, and his offering accepted.”—Ellen G. White, Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 72.
How crucial that we protect ourselves from simply going through the motions! How can each one of us experience what it means to depend totally upon the death of Jesus as our only hope of salvation?
Supplemental EGW Notes
The Lord was not ignorant of the feelings of resentment cherished by Cain; but he would have Cain reflect upon his course, and, becoming convinced of his sin, repent, and set his feet in the path of obedience. There was no cause for his wrathful feelings toward either his brother or his God; it was his own disregard of the plainly expressed will of God that had led to the rejection of his offering. Through his angel messenger, God said to this rebellious, stubborn man: “If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door.” “If thou doest well”—not having your own way, but obeying God’s commandments, coming to him with the blood of the slain victim, thus showing faith in the promised Redeemer, who, in the fullness of time, would make an atonement for guilty man, that he might not perish, but have eternal life. . . .
Thus the matter was plainly laid open before Cain; but his combativeness was aroused because his course was questioned, and he was not permitted to follow his own independent ideas. He was angry with God and angry with his brother. He was angry with God because he would not accept the plans of sinful man in place of the divine requirements, and he was angry with his brother for disagreeing with him.—“Cain and Able Tested,” Signs of the Times, December 16, 1886, par. 8, 10.
An important lesson may be learned from the history of the offerings of Cain and Abel. The claims of infinite justice, and the demands of God’s law, can be met only by the atoning sacrifice of Christ. The most costly offering that man may bring to God, the fruit of his toil, his physical and intellectual acquirements, already belong to his Creator. Man has nothing which he has not received. Neither material wealth nor intellectual greatness will atone for the sin of the soul. Cain scorned the idea that it was necessary to come to God with an offering of blood. In the same spirit many in our day refuse to believe that the blood of Christ was shed as a sacrifice for the sins of men. Although Cain chose to disregard the command of God, he brought his offering with great confidence. He looked upon it as the fruit of his own labor, and hence as belonging to himself; and in presenting it to God he felt that he was placing his Creator under obligations to him. . . . The great question should be, What can I do to meet the approval of God? not, How can I best please myself?
Abel trusted wholly in the merits of the atoning sacrifice of Christ. It was this faith that connected him with God. The promise of a Redeemer was dimly understood; but the sacrificial offerings cast light upon the promise. Cain had the same opportunity of learning and accepting these truths as had Abel. God did not accept one and reject the other without sufficient reason. Abel believed and obeyed; Cain doubted and rebelled. God is no respecter of persons, yet he will reward the obedient, and punish the disobedient.—“The Great Controversy Between Christ and His Angels and Satan and His Angels: Chapter 5—Cain and Abel,” Signs of the Times, February 6, 1879, par. 5, 6.
The above quotations are taken from Ellen G. White Notes for the Sabbath School Lessons, published by Pacific Press Publishing Association. Used by permission.