separator.

2. Sin here appears as having power to bar men's way to God. Much
ingenuity has been spent on the question why Abel's offering was
accepted and Cain's rejected. But the narrative itself shows in the
words of Jehovah, 'If thou doest well, is there not acceptance?'
that the reason lay in Cain's evil deeds. So, in 1 John iii. 12, the
fratricide is put down to the fact that 'his works were evil, and
his brother's righteous'; and Hebrews xi. 4 differs from this view
only in making the ground of righteousness prominent, when it
ascribes the acceptableness of Abel's offering to faith. Both these
passages are founded on the narrative, and we need not seek farther
for the reason of the different reception of the two offerings.
Character, then, or, more truly, faith, which is the foundation of a
righteous character, determines the acceptableness of worship.
Cain's offering had no sense of dependence, no outgoing of love and
trust, no adoration,--though it may have had fear,--and no moral
element. So it had no sweet odour for God. Abel's was sprinkled with
some drops of the incense of lowly trust, and came from a heart
which fain would be pure; therefore it was a joy to God. So we are
taught at the very beginning, that, as is the man, so is his
sacrifice; that the prayer of the wicked is an abomination. Plenty
of worship nowadays is Cain worship. Many reputable professing
Christians bring just such sacrifices. The prayers of such never
reach higher than the church ceiling. Of course, the lesson of the
story is not that a man must be pure before his sacrifice is
accepted. Of course, the faintest cry of trust is heard, and a
contrite heart, however sinful, is always welcome. But we are taught
that our acts of worship must have our hearts in them, and that it
is vain to pray and to love evil. Sin has the awful power of